USA WW2 Lend Lease




 
--
 
July 13th, 2015  
JOC
 
 

Topic: USA WW2 Lend Lease


Just to get some good old controversy back into the forum I propose a new topic. Did Hitlerís rather rash decision to declare war on the USA in Dec of 1941 cost him the war? I say yes because there was no way he was going to defeat the USSR, Britain and the USA simultaneously.
Shortly thereafter the USSR defeated Germany for the 1st time in the battle of Moscow with only minimum lead lease. However the USSR suffered severe defeats shortly after the Moscow victory and still teetered on the brink. Lend lease greatly strengthened the USSRís ability to wage war. 1st and foremost they became mobile with American made 6 wheelers, along with food, radios, aircraft, jeeps, etc. Eventually as a result of the lend lease trucks they became more mobile than their German opponents. Also unlike Stalin who could focus his entire war machine against one enemy, Hitler had to fight in Africa, the Atlantic, and the air war over Germany, man the Atlantic wall and wage war against partisans. A US supplied British common wealth continued to be a major thorn in Hitlerís side. So before US troops could take part in the war against Hitler the US was insuring that the USSR did not fall and that Britain could continue to wage war and siphon off German military resources from the Eastern front.
July 13th, 2015  
lljadw
 
I have several objections ,ONE exemple : saying that Hitler's DOW on the US costed him the war,implies that without this DOW,he could/would win the war,which it is not so .

Besides: war with the US was inevitable,even without the DOW of 11 december 1941.
July 13th, 2015  
JOC
 
 
It is likely that the US would get involved eventually, however many - most US citizens wanted the war to stay with Japan. Hitler's DOW on the US gave the US a reason to use the larger part of its economic and military resources earlier against the greater treat Germany.
At this early point it was not at all clear weather the USSR would survive. In my opinion this was not decided until the Soviet victory at Stalingrad. Even then things seesawed a bit until the defeat at Kursk.
How well would the USSR have fared w/o lend lease and w/o the siphoning off of German resources to fight the British Common Wealth?
Even with lend lease “which was amping up in 41, early 42” the Germans recovered from the defeat at Moscow and dealt the USSR major blows at Kharkov and the Izyum salient. They then went on to advance to the Volga and nearly to the Caspian Sea. Admittedly they were logistically stretched. By the time of the Stalingrad battle lend lease was pouring in.
Most Historians agree that lend lease substantially strengthened Great Britain and the USSR in their fight with Nazi Germany.
--
July 14th, 2015  
MontyB
 
 
A large part of the uncertainly came from the underestimation of the Russians ability to fight and an over estimation of Germany's ability to conquer.

In areas Russian forces right from the start of the campaign fought extremely well and caused large numbers of German casualties and conversely 150 miles from the start point the German offensive was beginning to fail.

There is no doubt that lend lease helped the Russian war effort but it did not change the outcome of the war in any theatre.

As for Hitlers declaration of war, all bringing the US into Europe did was stop the Russians from having to drive to the English Chanel.
July 14th, 2015  
I3BrigPvSk
 
 
One of the most essential and the most significant resource the lend-lease provided the Soviet Union with was oil, their own oil resources at that time could never provide the enormous military machine with fuel. This oil reached the Soviet Union from Iran and it was a part of the lend lease.

Food was another essential resource the lend-lease provided with when the majority of the agricultural parts of the Soviet Union was either destroyed (by the Russians as well) or occupied. The Germans could not harvest anything significant either. The people residing in the agricultural parts were either killed, wearing uniforms, or worked in the war industry which had regrouped to the Urals.
July 14th, 2015  
JOC
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by I3BrigPvSk
One of the most essential and the most significant resource the lend-lease provided the Soviet Union with was oil, their own oil resources at that time could never provide the enormous military machine with fuel. This oil reached the Soviet Union from Iran and it was a part of the lend lease.

Food was another essential resource the lend-lease provided with when the majority of the agricultural parts of the Soviet Union was either destroyed (by the Russians as well) or occupied. The Germans could not harvest anything significant either. The people residing in the agricultural parts were either killed, wearing uniforms, or worked in the war industry which had regrouped to the Urals.
This is very true. Lend lease freed the USSR from much of it's requirement to feed itself and it's Red Army. This allowed the USSR to use it's resources "often women" to focus more on war waging industries such as the making tanks and guns.
It is interesting about the oil, as Germany came close to taking the main Caucus oil fields. However they fell short, due in part to some poor planning as forces were sent to the Stalingrad meat grinder. A battle that served the Soviets well.

As for the Soviet victory being "a matter of time" I disagree. The Germans controlled ~ 40 % of the population of the USSR and much of the main agricultural, Industrial regions of the USSR as well. Had they taken European Russia so to speak the war would essentially have been over.
Although Germany faced logistical and manpower issues the Soviets teetered on the brink of collapse until the Stalingrad victory. Perhaps the main thing that pushed the Soviets peoples so hard to fight was that the Germans intended that they should perish. I do believe the forces drained to fight the allies and the lend lease that poured in did tip the balance in the USSR's favor.
July 15th, 2015  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JOC

As for the Soviet victory being "a matter of time" I disagree. The Germans controlled ~ 40 % of the population of the USSR and much of the main agricultural, Industrial regions of the USSR as well. Had they taken European Russia so to speak the war would essentially have been over.
Although Germany faced logistical and manpower issues the Soviets teetered on the brink of collapse until the Stalingrad victory. Perhaps the main thing that pushed the Soviets peoples so hard to fight was that the Germans intended that they should perish. I do believe the forces drained to fight the allies and the lend lease that poured in did tip the balance in the USSR's favor.
Then you are over looking the fact that the Germans were overstretched, losing strength and at or beyond the capacity of its logistics while the Russians we still gaining strength and falling back on its logistics bases.

I would suggest that at no stage in the war did the Germans actually have the capability to conquer Russia (its only hope was an early capitulation based on demoralising the Soviets) and certainly after November 1941 it had no way to avoid defeat.

One thing on oil and its availability to the Russians was that they had begun to develop the fields in Western Siberia by the start of WW2 and by the time of Case Blue were producing about 40% of the Caucasian oil fields so Russia would not have been deprived of oil at any stage.
from the book...

The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money & Power by Daniel Yergin

Quote:
All the nine drilling offices, oil-expedition and oil-construction trusts as well as various other enterprises with their staffs were transferred to an area near Kuybishev, (Russia Federation in Tartarstan near the Ural Mountains north of Kazakhstan). This city soon came to be known as "the Second Baku".


Despite the severe frost the drillers started searching for oil and thanks to day and night working, the Bakuis in the region of Povolzhye increased the fuel extraction in "Kinelneft" trust that first year by 66% and by 42% in entire region of Kuybishev. As a result, five new oil and gas fields were discovered and huge oil refinery construction projects were undertaken, including the first pipe line between Kuybishev and Buturslan was built that same year.
July 15th, 2015  
lljadw
 
Already before the decision to undertake Fall Blau, the German economic experts had warned that it was uncertain that the SU would collaps if it lost the Caucasian oil .

The SU arrived in Berlin while it produced only 60 % of its prť war oil .

While before the war,oil was more important for the SU than for the other European countries, during the war it switched to coal and wood .
July 15th, 2015  
lljadw
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by I3BrigPvSk
One of the most essential and the most significant resource the lend-lease provided the Soviet Union with was oil, their own oil resources at that time could never provide the enormous military machine with fuel. This oil reached the Soviet Union from Iran and it was a part of the lend lease.

Food was another essential resource the lend-lease provided with when the majority of the agricultural parts of the Soviet Union was either destroyed (by the Russians as well) or occupied. The Germans could not harvest anything significant either. The people residing in the agricultural parts were either killed, wearing uniforms, or worked in the war industry which had regrouped to the Urals.
1)This is not correct : the LL oil was only a few procent of the Soviet oil production during the war ,which was some 100 million ton.Besides only a small part of it was used for the military (13 %)

2) This also is not correct : the inhabitants of the SU succeeded to feed themselves:source : The Bread of Affliction P 238
July 15th, 2015  
JOC
 
 
At the D-Day 60th Anniversary ceremonies in Caen last year, Russian President Vladimir Putin described American lend-lease to the then-Soviet Union as the first stage of a "second front." This was a remarkable admission.

Remember Marshal Georgi Zhukov was not allowed to say publicly what he said privately — that without American lend-lease, Russia's triumph over the Wehrmacht would have been impossible.

The USSR was supplied with ~ 70,000 trucks alone via lend lease. Not to mention valuable food and rations, medical supplies, oil, and much more.

We sincerely honor the memory of the killed British and American seamen who despite the dangerous situation at sea. despite the fact that they faced death every mile of the way, supplied us with some of the materials under the Lend-Lease agreement. -G.K. Zhukov
 


Similar Topics
My problem: "In my town they believe about USA and Nazi Germany"
WW2 if the USA hadn't entered the war
What 5 - 10% Lend Lease Meant to USSR in WWII
Could USA defeat USSR before the WW2 begun??
Can USA really win a big war?