Importance of American lend-lease to Soviet war effort in WW II?

[Sandman]

We can hypothesize and give our own estimates all day long, but before we can really go any further, I think what we need are production charts detailing Soviet production, Soviet consumption, and things of that nature.

I don't have ready access to those, but perhaps someone else does. I'll say right now, though, if the evidence indicates that the Soviet Union could have not only survived the war, but also been able to drive the Germans out of their vital areas in the Ukraine and elsewhere, then I'll go ahead and soften my stance. Fair enough?

Fair enough. I cannot be bothered to trawl through archives and whatnot, so this debate has ended.

[Ned]

Sandman, The article I posted does have production numbers for the USSR and Germany, by year, by category, and includes a separate tally for Lend Lease.

The USSR appears to have had enough of everything except for ammo.

[Ned]

Horrocks, The Soviet operation at Stalingrad was codenamed "Uranus." In researching info for this thead I found that the Soviets had a companion operation at the very same time code named "Mars." This operation was coducted by Sukov and was even larger, in turms of Soviet forces, than Uranus. It was directed against Army Group Center.

I understand that the Germans defeated "Mars" with aroung 500,000 casualties on the Soviet side.

So the losses of each side in the winter of '42-3 appear to approximately being equal.

But, Germany could not afford to loose men and material at the same rate as the Russians, could they?

[Sandman]

Sandman, The article I posted does have production numbers for the USSR and Germany, by year, by category, and includes a separate tally for Lend Lease.

It doesn't show all categories, unfortuately.

[David Floyd]

It doesn't show all categories, unfortuately.

It also doesn't indicate Soviet production potentials absent Lend Lease, nor does it indicate Soviet production, or several other factors.

The point is, I see no way to adequately resolves the debate, prove either side, without access to things like that. I happen to believe Lend Lease was indispensable to the Soviets, but if someone proves me wrong I'll be more than happy to admit it.

It's much harder to argue, though, that in a straight Germany vs. Soviet Union war, no Lend Lease, no Western Allies, etc., that the Soviets would have won.

[Serb]

Originally posted by David Floyd
And what exactly was the Soviet Union shipping the US? I can't think of any natural resource, and they certainly weren't shipping us military equipment or food. So what was it, precisely? Air?

GOLD. Daimons anything what had value for you.

Of course, this assumes that Moscow would have been retaken. I don't necessarily agree that it would have been, especially if Typhoon succeeded in wiping out all of the defenders, rather than just most, leaving the new conscripts no veterans in their ranks.

You forget about one very important thing. You portray Moscow battle smth like this: "Germans come and wiped out 7/8 of Moscow's deffenders, then cold weather starts and Germans decided to retreat." This total bullsh*t.
They los ONE MILLION SOLDIERS. Can you understand this? O N E M I L L I O N.

Before you'll post your "bad weather bs. vol.2"
- No, they didn't lost this million because of cold, bad Russians killed them on battlefeild.

[David Floyd]

You forget about one very important thing. You portray Moscow battle smth like this: "Germans come and wiped out 7/8 of Moscow's deffenders, then cold weather starts and Germans decided to retreat." This total bullsh*t.
They los ONE MILLION SOLDIERS. Can you understand this? O N E M I L L I O N.

Before you'll post your "bad weather bs. vol.2"
- No, they didn't lost this million because of cold, bad Russians killed them on battlefeild.

Correct. And I would hazard to say that part of the reason for this was the weather, for which they were ill-prepared. YOU try fighting in sub-zero temperatures with little winter gear, and see how well you do (even against a pretty sub-par enemy, such as the 1941 Red Army).

You've said before that the Red Army would have stopped an earlier German push on Moscow, regardless of weather. To you still hold this position?

[Propaganda]

Yes, Lend-Lease was important. Most of our industrial and agricultural capabilities had been destroyed by the surprise attack. Thus, we needed the food, clothing and ammunition to keep the soldiers strong and ready for the counter-offensive.

Hypothetically, however, if Stalin had reacted towards Germany's enroachment upon our boarders and had, at the very least, mobilized the troops for a possible confrontation, well, I'd say the war would have gone differently, in that it would have ended sooner, but could have possibly cost us some of the land that we gained. Quite possibly, a few million Soviet citizens could have been sparred, as well.

[Serb]

Nu nakonez to nashego polku pribilo. A to ya uzhe zaebalsa v odinochku ot tzarya Davida otbivatsya. Blyat tupoi, no upertyi mali. Hui che dokagesh. Zaebal uzhe v nature, blin.

Yes, Lend-Lease was important.

There is a big difference between important and critical. David is saying that without lend-lease SU would never won this war, that Russians were doomed without US aid, that Americans saved our asses and won WW2.

Most of our industrial and agricultural capabilities had been destroyed by the surprise attack. Thus, we needed the food, clothing and ammunition to keep the soldiers strong and ready for the counter-offensive.

Not most. The losses were big, but majority of factories were evacueted.

Hypothetically, however, if Stalin had reacted towards Germany's enroachment upon our boarders and had, at the very least, mobilized the troops for a possible confrontation, well, I'd say the war would have gone differently, in that it would have ended sooner, but could have possibly cost us some of the land that we gained. Quite possibly, a few million Soviet citizens could have been sparred, as well.

No one knows what could happen in this case.

[Myrddin]

It would have been very different if the USSR had managed to strike the first blow, and it has been argued that Stalin was planning this but lost out by a few weeks

[JCG]

That's the Suvorov thesis, if I remember correctly...However, apparently there are several flaws in its argument, from the net critiques I've checked....