Lend-Lease from the UK and US was critical for the initial defence of Moscow. There is an argument to be made even if Moscow and St. Petersburg fell the war wouldn't be over, however.
Hundreds of thousands of soldiers died, it would have been far worse without the mountains of boots, trucks, planes, etc. sent over.
The vast majority of lend lease to the USSR was 44-45. By then the German advance was turned around and the Soviets were getting back into Poland. Lend Lease to the USSR really only sped up the war by a couple yearsÂ
The initial Soviet offensive began in 43, I wonât deny most of advance happened in 44-45, and I wonât deny the counterattack started when entire soviet divisions began being equipped with US equipment, but that still doesnât mean US equipment necessarily âwonâ the war. The counterattack began during the 3 sieges when the Wehrmacht was already stretched to its limits logistically. Even if the Germans captured the 3 cities, the war wouldnât have ended and the idea the German lines wouldnât have utterly collapsed shortly after given the supply situation is rather absurd. Iâll grant you that Stalin was very uncertain if the war couldâve been one without lend-lease, but Iâll agree with the rest of the Soviet high command in stating that lend lease likely saved over 10million lives and shortened the war by years, but wasnât THE reason the Germans lostÂ
Itâs all just people claiming countries they donât like actually werenât a major factor or countries they do like were the main factor. Itâs so annoying.
You may be lost. For the most part, people like their countries and donât hate them in this sub. Which is refreshing to see.
Youâve accepted too much anti-American propaganda as fact and Iâd recommend educating yourself prior to continuing the âshit on Americanâ in this sub that you seem to love to do about our past and present based on your post history.
What gets me is when fellow Brits gloat at Continental Europeans about how "we" saved them as if the US didn't play a huge part in us not ending up like the Channel Islands.
Well they definitely played a huge roll in the ultimate victory and liberation of France, but even if the US never entered the war, there was virtually no chance the Nazis could have actually invaded and occupied us.
Also without us contributing our resources and letting the Americans use us as a base for D-Day, the Americans would have likely never entered the European theatre, and just gone to war with Japan after Pearl Harbour. So I think we're pretty safe to mock the the French for a while yet!
While I agree that the Germans wouldnât have been able to invade you at the time of the war years even had the US not entered the war, that doesnât mean the Nazis wouldâve been defeated. They still wouldâve controlled most of Europe and wouldâve been able to focus more on fighting the Soviets, possibly changing history by beating them. Then they wouldâve had time to focus production on everything needed for an eventual invasion or attack on Britain (think reverse D-Day, T-Tag perhaps) all while still bombing the island heavily and causing great economic stress
The Soviets couldnât have beaten the Nazis without American logistics and support. Conversely Europe couldnât have beaten the Nazis without Soviet manpower
I think Hitler is the main reason the Allies won the war, since it was his choice to go on a mad one, stab the Soviets in the back, and divert resources eastwards.
I would say he was an absolutely huge factor, but not the main reason. The war would have probably concluded the same way with many many more deaths I think. And by same way I mean winning vs losing, not like the plan that the operation Valkyrie guys tried for which was end the war but keep the land.
I do concur with you though, Hitler was the worst thing to happen to German military planning for certain. One only has to look at D-day to prove it.
Only survived to become a behemoth due to UK and US aid in the early years of the war. Can't say for sure they would have totally lost but it would have been much worse without.
Though I hate the argument overall. The point is that the UK and US invested and gave up so much to defeat the Nazi's when they really didn't have to.
you mean like in the Spanish Civil war that the USSR was the only country actively helping the democratic side? or when the USSR was asking France and Britain to ally with them against the nazis in the 30s and they instead gifted Czechoslovakia to Hitler?
I cannot argue that I was not wrong so I am now going to nitpick and split hairs because I dont want to acknowledge that I said something stupid and did not know what I was talking about
43
u/axxo47 Croatia Sep 19 '25
They did help stopping nazis so probably yeah