i need help please!!

[davidtrott]

i think that the red army was absolutely necessary to win the war. Russia was able to substain most of the war effort by itself, the lend and lease aid started to have some effect only during the summer of 1942, when the american trucks helped russian logystics, without those helps, the war would have been longer but the outcome would have been the same. Truth is the russian economy in the 1930s grew by 8 times..and this allowed russia to compete and finally defeat germany.
I will have to give an oral presentation in 2 weeks and try to back this position and i wonder if somebody can give me some hints, possibly some websites where i can get some information with references possibly
thank you all
davide

[Balamut]

Thank you, my dear man, for acknowledging this.

[limey_defence]

The aid started helping straight away. Why is it everyone is either all about only the Reds won the war, or only the Allies did.
The Soviets were needed to win the war, but without the Western supplies, tanks, trucks and planes the Red Army would have been crushed before 1942. If the British hadn't attacked in May 1941, Barbarossa would have started then, avoiding the Russian winter.

And only in the Summer 1942? Where do you get this from? Since hundreds of British tanks went out in 1941, and were sent almost straight to the field. And since Russias tanks were getting wiped from the earth, these were NEEDED.

Where did the Soviet industrialisation come from? France, Britain, America and Germany. In 1936 the Soviet Union weren't even in the top 6 for the most industrial nation. America were first, Britain were second and Germany were third.

Without that help, Russia would have been finished. So, you aren't going to be able to back that up without just sticking to Soviet Cold War propaganda which is, obviously, flawed.

[AnarchistPatriot]

Originally posted by limey_defence
The aid started helping straight away. Why is it everyone is either all about only the Reds won the war, or only the Allies did.
The Soviets were needed to win the war, but without the Western supplies, tanks, trucks and planes the Red Army would have been crushed before 1942. If the British hadn't attacked in May 1941, Barbarossa would have started then, avoiding the Russian winter.

And only in the Summer 1942? Where do you get this from? Since hundreds of British tanks went out in 1941, and were sent almost straight to the field. And since Russias tanks were getting wiped from the earth, these were NEEDED.

Where did the Soviet industrialisation come from? France, Britain, America and Germany. In 1936 the Soviet Union weren't even in the top 6 for the most industrial nation. America were first, Britain were second and Germany were third.

Without that help, Russia would have been finished. So, you aren't going to be able to back that up without just sticking to Soviet Cold War propaganda which is, obviously, flawed.

True, but I do not think that it was necessary for Russia to win the war.

It has been thought by many Russians at the time that Nazi rule would be no worse than Stalin. I don't think Hitler was a good person but he was really no better than Stalin. In fact, that so many Russians served in Hitler's army attests to the fact that many Russians considered one no worse than the other.

[limey_defence]

The Soviet Union would have lost without Western help. The West would have never beaten Germany without the Soviet Union.

Something everyone seems to fail to realise.

[Krajinaforce]

Originally posted by limey_defence
The aid started helping straight away. Why is it everyone is either all about only the Reds won the war, or only the Allies did.
The Soviets were needed to win the war, but without the Western supplies, tanks, trucks and planes the Red Army would have been crushed before 1942. If the British hadn't attacked in May 1941, Barbarossa would have started then, avoiding the Russian winter.

And only in the Summer 1942? Where do you get this from? Since hundreds of British tanks went out in 1941, and were sent almost straight to the field. And since Russias tanks were getting wiped from the earth, these were NEEDED.
-------------------------------------------------

Oh not again with your British WW2 fairytales. Trucks don't win the war; supplied western planes were all inferior to German ones except P-39. British tanks made a difference? Soviets were losing battles and ground in 1941. I am sure they could have achieved the same loss without your tanks.
Operation Barbarossa was postponed to June 22 because Hitler wanted to attack Yugoslav Kingdom first in April 1941. Germans admitted themselves this was the reason.


Where did the Soviet industrialisation come from? France,
Britain, America and Germany. In 1936 the Soviet Union weren't even in the top 6 for the most industrial nation. America were first, Britain were second and Germany were third.
-------------------------------------
Oh please if we go by that logic who invented what first it could be a long discussion.


Without that help, Russia would have been finished. So, you aren't going to be able to back that up without just sticking to Soviet Cold War propaganda which is, obviously, flawed.
--------------------------------------
I wish Nazis never attacked Eastern Europe in the first place. That way there would be a lot more Slavs alive today. While Britain and Western Europe would still be to this day under German rule. British royalty would be speaking German like they used to and USA army would never have dared to approach Europe to face 3 million killed German soldiers deployed on eastern front plus all other German allies. Britain and North Africa would have been long time overrun and there would be no way for Americans to launch air attacks on German infrastructure.

[limey_defence]

Welcome back, I've missed such easy prey. Where are the fairey tales, I cannot see them. The closest thing would be from your posts.

I can't help but giggle at your point that trucks don't win wars. This is an obvious and fatal mistake on your part, it is accepted by everyone that the American trucks to the Red Army were the most important piece of equipment the Soviet were given.
This is an obvious lack of knowledge on your part because those 500,000 trucks completely mobilised the Red Army. And in modern warfare, one such as World War 2, mobilisation is the way to victory. Mobilisation is not achieved through foot soldiers or horses. It is achieved on the internal combustion engine, the tank, the half-track, the truck. How could an infantry division keep up with the tank division if it is not truck borne? If the infantry cannot keep up with the tanks how can they sieze the victories of the tanks? If they cannot sieze the victories of the tanks who is going to hold land gained by the tanks? If no one is going to hold the land, how is a breakthrough going to be achieved by the tanks? If no breakthrough is achieved, how is total victory going to be achieved?
If you want to keep the tanks at infantry pace how are you going to utilise the tanks biggest advantage, speed? If you aren't going to use speed how are you going to avoid positional warfare of World War 1?

To get a better understanding of the idea of mobilisation read Achtung! Panzer! by Heinz Guderian (1937).

On to the planes, it seems you have a lack of knowledge in that department also. The RAF alone sent out 3000 Mk.IIB and IIC Hurricanes in 1941 and 1942. Of which were able to dogfight with the Bf-109E and Fs in that time. How is this known? Well the Hurricane Mk. I was the mainstay fighter of the Battle of Britain and achieved victories over the Bf-109s just as the Spitfires did. With the Mk.II they had an easier time. The Mk. IIC having four 20mm cannons instead of the usual eight .303cal machine guns. On top of that Mk. IV and Mk. IID were given in 1942 and 1943 although in limited numbers were very successful ground attack, and tank busting aircraft with two 40mm cannons under the wings. All variants saw a lot of service in the war and all were very good in their roles. They were very easy to handle and rookie pilots good fly them like experts, something the Soviet Airforce was very happy about.
Also in the years 1941-1943 the Soviet Airforce had the pleasure of 1,300 Spitfires (Although I do not know which Mks) of which were superior to the Bf-109E, Fs and Gs the latter being if the Soviet were given Mk. V or above.

Don't blame the aircraft because Soviet pilots were too inexperienced or poorly trained to fly them. When you see a Spitfire dogfighting with a Fw-190 or Bf-109G and coming out on top, when in RAF colours. Then hear of a Soviet piloted one being shot down by a Brewster Buffalo of the Finnish airforce you begin to wonder the Soviets let fly those things.

The tank one is pretty simple, without those tanks given by Britain and America the advance by the German forces would have been faster, meaning victory. Even then I've seen pictures of a full platoon of Mk.II Matildas, battle hardened, driving along in the Ukraine in 1945. Delivered in 1942, didn't they last a long time.

If you have read another book called Panzer Leader (again) by Heinz Guderian. Who on several occasions met Hitler and discussed the future plans of war. You would understand that Hitler and Germany did not want to attack Yugoslavia. The reason this occured was because of Mussolinis private war, after losing from a British counter-attack in May 1941, Germany had to postpone the Soviet invasion to quell the resistance. This was NOT something Hitler wanted, and something Hitler was very angry about.

It wasn't a case of who invented what, it was a case of who gave the Soviet Union what. Tools, skilled workers, machines and designs were all given to the Soviet Union by those countries mentioned. Just accept it and avoid looking like a fool.

That's a nice little ending, I fail to see how you come to that conclusion though. As history quite clearly shows Germanys first defeat was over the English Channel. In that time Britain with a mere 704 aircraft defended against the onslaught of the Luftwaffe with 3,700 aircraft. Britain had been defended, it had survived and it had won. No amount of men could have got Germany across the Channel without air superiority, something it did not have.