Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Leisure and Society
Society
History & Genealogy
How much did the lend lease affect the Eastern Front?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Panzerkamfwagen" data-source="post: 61580844" data-attributes="member: 376848"><p>My thesis was that without the western Allies, Russia would not have been able to stand up to the Germans, and I believe it because of three reasons. </p><p></p><p>An army marches on its stomach. Without the trucks, for instance, the Russians can't move the shells up to their artillery as well. That also makes things more difficult for them to mass artillery once they reach the Polish frontier because they can't move their shells around as well. The Germans and the Russians also used different gauges of railroad. </p><p></p><p>During the battle before Moscow, lots of the tanks that the Russians had were lend-lease from the western allies, so those certainly played a role.</p><p></p><p>Also, the Soviet Union was barely able to feed itself. Look at the famines that plagued it before and immediately after World War 2 when they weren't receiving any food aid from the allies. The Germans also occupied much of the agricultural land of the USSR, so without that food, the Soviet Army probably starts to starve.</p><p></p><p>If the UK had sued for peace after the Battle of France, and then the Germans also don't have a need to send forces to Africa or tie down hundreds of thousands of men in France and Norway. </p><p></p><p>Any one of those things, the Soviet probably could have overcome, but I don't think they could have overcome all three of them.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Panzerkamfwagen, post: 61580844, member: 376848"] My thesis was that without the western Allies, Russia would not have been able to stand up to the Germans, and I believe it because of three reasons. An army marches on its stomach. Without the trucks, for instance, the Russians can't move the shells up to their artillery as well. That also makes things more difficult for them to mass artillery once they reach the Polish frontier because they can't move their shells around as well. The Germans and the Russians also used different gauges of railroad. During the battle before Moscow, lots of the tanks that the Russians had were lend-lease from the western allies, so those certainly played a role. Also, the Soviet Union was barely able to feed itself. Look at the famines that plagued it before and immediately after World War 2 when they weren't receiving any food aid from the allies. The Germans also occupied much of the agricultural land of the USSR, so without that food, the Soviet Army probably starts to starve. If the UK had sued for peace after the Battle of France, and then the Germans also don't have a need to send forces to Africa or tie down hundreds of thousands of men in France and Norway. Any one of those things, the Soviet probably could have overcome, but I don't think they could have overcome all three of them. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Leisure and Society
Society
History & Genealogy
How much did the lend lease affect the Eastern Front?
Top
Bottom