they always will
1 Like
There is a very good video by TIK that discusses this very issue - first 9 minutes or so.
The key takeaway is when do ppl think the Soviets actually “stopped” vs “defeating” the Nazis and subsequently when the Nazis were on the back foot, to what extent did it accelerate victory?
If you focus on the stopping/preventing the Nazis from winning, well that was effectively in derailing Barbarossa - so the Soviets had effectively no help from the allies. The trickle of stuff that arrived from the UK was insignificant.
If you focus on the strategic point of inflection and the assumption of the initiative which most ppl attribute to the Stalingrad event line - then you can argue that the British contribution is helpful in buying time for Soviet Industry - particularly the medical supplies, the radio equipment, wire, rubber and aluminium contributions from the UK.
If you focus on the accelerated defeat of the Nazis post the failed Zitadelle Offensive in’43 and particularly when Operations Kutuzov and Rumyantsev go effect to set the conditions for Operation Bagration in '44, then arguably the vast volume of US supplies kicking in from '43 onwards, and in particular trucks/jeeps to avail the Soviets with strategic mobility is something that one can argue played a significant part.
Bottom line accepted by historians is that the Soviets would not have lost without lend lease. Lend lease certainly helped them win.
2 Likes
I have no idea why he even pinged me btw.
1 Like
well, point stands.
inspite of my pf ( which… i made it for the memes tbh. i guess i could explain, but would be boring and quite dumb )
there’s no point in downplaying other sides and the effort made by everyone in stopping the much more evil germans.
which… i find it esilerating that i have to point this out.
but yeah, it’s not all only the ‘glory russia’ as not the only ‘glorious sam’.
there’s always more to it 
@ErikaKalkbrenner @Serpiko82 @Scav_Sergei @Josephs_Piano @gastanofrizzi @116344108
Allied bombing was not as effective as is commonly believed. The German military industry grew and reached its peak in the summer of 1944 (!). No Allied bombing could prevent this. This is my last post in this thread. I don’t want to get involved in this stupid and provocation dispute anymore.
kinda late for that innit
because, yes, militars personell their selves pointed out that allied bombing was not effective as only 25% of the targets were hitted.
but the same could be said about many others tactics.
propaganda it’s there to serve it’s purpose of overstating and/or downlpaying ( if not convincing ).
which you are kinda swimming innit rn.
it’s like i’ll start speaking of the glorious italian navy and how many ships they destroyed and such, how coordinated it was, and how " brilliant " ( spoiler allert, none of that was true. )
but as it’s… quite a propagande,
it’s up to you to believe what you want or not, but it’s not always necessary infonding your idea onto the others.
hence, in this case memes. they are there for satire purpose. which in this case, did actually worked.
because there are still people like you that believes that the land lease was pointless.
when in reality… it was not.
( otherwise the russian their selves would not have agreed and payed for that stuff ).
i think.
but i’ll give you this one,
no need for going further.
Also why do you bother me? I don’t participate in this discussion.
hey, at least, here is your shitstorm 
( over a meme 
how truly low we have fallen )
1 Like
5 Likes
Because the entire forum need be bored with “soviet fact” wo no one care, you posted hello! And he start pin you forever and ever
6 Likes
Tbh they don’t have to hit the targets. Morale damage + deffending from air raids was yet another thing that germans had to spend their limited resources on.
2 Likes
yes, that is correct.
but majority of the arguments lays on the fact that they are not precise.
1 Like
Fun fact: 100% of bombs dropped successfully hit the ground.
2 Likes
… when you have numbers.
2 Likes
i mean, not the ones dropped in water 
2 Likes
There’s still ground at the bottom.
And a pineapple house.
3 Likes
covenant disagree, wy no both?
2 Likes
Cursed video time!
(Google Drive, because YT thinks laughing at Nazism is “hate speech”.)
As always the logistics were more important than the weapons, and logistics are what serious analysts look at - only fanboys think otherwise.
It wasn’t the tanks and a/c that were the most important - it was the food, the trucks and the railway engines - without them the USSR would have had very bad logistic - it already took months to assemble forces for Bagration, Uranus and every other major operation - without lend lease transport it would have taken years.
as for $ amounts - what the Soviets needed was relatively cheap - food, trucks and rail engines.
The western allies also needed ships - especially in response to Stalin’s insistence on an invasion of Europe, and they were fighting on a 2 front war also against Japan, supplying China via horrendously expensive airlift and fighting in the Mediterranean, all of which had to be supplied by sea.
To belittle the $9 billion aid sent to the USR is venal and pathetic.
Indeed this is probably true - but “not losing” might have come at a cost of extra months (ast least maybe years) of fighting with conmensurate additional cost in lives
Interestingly 1 country actually had a positive Lend Lease balance at he end of the war - the USA owed New Zealand more than New Zealand had received - due to New Zealand having relatively small armed forces, but being a (small) agricultural powerhouse that exported large amounts of food - manpower in New Zealand was kept “at home” for this purpose.
1 Like