Are there any credible historical sources, that could clarify

That's probably an extremely complicated examination of billions of different factors

How do you imagine a historical source that deals with an imaginary scenario?

I mean, you have imbeciles elevating Ambrose, Beevor to Gospel status, even though their writings are full of nonsense, lies, obfuscation and fabrications.


There is no objective truth when it comes to politics.

OP here.

Problem is, Soviets have been hiding their industrial output info. Especially due to Cold war. Online you have a lot of "opinions", but ... Well it's a question I'd love definitely answered, but I have no clue how to get there.

>>34949488
Yes there was no opportunity for Hitler to win after Moscow counterattack that happened before Lend Lease

>>34949492
Have you got a good sauce on Beevor being iffy? I've heard it before and need some sauce.

File: russian multi-tool.jpg (115KB, 700x466px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 700x466px

>>34949497
That's the basic problem where the Soviets obfuscated the validity of lend lease equipment and their own industrial output as it would have been seen as deleterious to the state image. And when you're a gommie, the state image is basically the only thing keeping the shambles together.

Just in my own opinion, the arrival of equipment from the UK in 1941 basically let the USSR see 1942- 1941 was a fucking unparalleled disaster militarily for the gommies because they'd lost over 20k tanks (and a staggering amount of casualties) between June and December and by the end of December they where down to under 700 tanks to hold back the hun from Moscow. So the tanks, rifles, aircraft they got where actually the only thing left really which was something they could use. Every casualty is lost equipment- rifle, ammo, transport etc.

A lot is made of the fact that stuff like tanks where "inferior" to the KV or T34: but the simple fact is, soviet engineering and industry was fucking primitive, literally 5 years before something like a tractor was considered basically witchcraft and they where literally going from medieval knuckle draggers to mind 20th century in about the span of 15 years. Not much is usually said about the lend lease aircraft, stuff like a Spitfire or Hurricane was literally a game changer in some cases compared to their domestic garbage.

So yep, it did have an effect

>>34949542
Oh my fucking God, the meme history at its finest.

USSR didn't even have 20 000 operable, deployed tanks in 1941, you dipshit.

Hurricane was a crap plane in 1941.

You imbeciles do realise that a beaurocratic monstrosity such as USSR kept every single detail noted?

They didn't hide their industrial output, they didn't hide Lend-Lease shipment, they dind't belittle them, in fact, they praised some of them. Things like 6-pounder Valentine, P-39/63, Jeep, trucks, rubber, SHERMANS.

You can literally find official, declassified data on each and every chassis, gun, tank, rifle pruduced in USSR during war

>>34949552
>Hurricane was a crap plane in 1941

blocks your path

>>34949535
Every single writing about Balkan and Ostfront affairs is crap.

Avoid every Western scholar who wrote without using or consulting declassified Soviet archives and especially a one as criminal as Beevor who wrote fiction inspired by historical events.

>>34949556
It is a 1936 design stretched to its limits. Late 1941 is long past its zenith.

Simple fact.

>>34949488

There are not, the politburo spent decades trying to downplay its effect in the minds and historical literature of half the world, and the other side never had any reliable data for USSR capabilities at the time. Anything you'll find is purely hypothetical.
But it's generally accepted the USSR logistics would be extremely hard pressed to stretch to its western borders while remaining able to support a decently sized offensive, reaching Berlin would be completely impossible. At the same time, there would be a shortage of ordnance that would prevent the Soviets from utilizing artillery at even a fraction of the scale they used to.

>>34949568

Where do you people get these hilarious ideas from?

Top scoring Soviet aces flew P-39/63, tank aces wrote books on Sherman and Valetine service, American trucks and Jeeps were highly praised, Guards Mechanized used Shermans FFS.

Shortage of ordnance? US didn't manufacture Soviet ammo.

>>34949488
My understanding is that Russia still would have won but would have been vastly slowed down in their advance.

Lend lease to the USSR was a mistake. Much more of Europe could have been liberated if the soviets were still trying to push into Poland.

>>34949488
To be fair, most of the defeat can be blamed on Germany alone, for fighting multiple fronts, engaging in crazy grandiose plans and yes, attacking Russia in the fucking winter.
without land lease the war would probably take a couple years more to end but hardly would be any different

>>34949591
>US didn't manufacture Soviet ammo.

US provided a large fraction of the raw materials used to do so, you fucking retard.
Smokeless powder, nitrocellulose, TNT, toluene, dynamite, picric acid, steel etc.

>>34949488
Khrushchev's memoirs are most often cited, as he gives both his and Stalin's opinion; that they would have lost w/o allied aid. You won't find a truly credible source, however, because we simply don't have all the information.

>>34949542
Regarding the numbers we do have, this short paper from Mark Harrison is worth a read;

https://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/staff/mharrison/public/lendlease.pdf

Harrison is an Oxford educated economist and historian, with a focus on military accounting and the Soviet economy. He does a very good job explaining why it's impossible to make a definitive statement one way or the other.

>>34949605
Last German advance was stopped by mid-November 1941

Furthermore, German advances up until then were accelerated when temperatures dropped and autumn mud froze.

Learn real history. The timing of Barbarossa was not a coincidence.

Spring and late summer/autumn rains and mud in a country with bad infrastructure and different railway gauges meant a disaster for an army relying on several million horses for logistics.

>>34949512
Wasn't lend lease going on since 1938?

>>34949616
I am just going to ask you when did first shipments of those items reach USSR and in which quantity, and then score by pointing out the numbers and use of Soviet artillery before that date.

Could the Vietnamese have won the war without support from Russia and China?

>>34949542
Oh look, it's baby hour, this is going to be fun.

>>34949622
so you are saying it was a super smart move from Germany to attack in winter
is that you, Hitler?

>>34949637
>be zipperhead
>Get BTFO out of your own country by American GIs
>have to ask chinks and gopniks for help
No

>>34949645

The attack started in June you dipshit.

>>34949645
>attack in winter
What are you talking about? The initial attack on Russia was in the summer. They thought they would smash them before winter set in, hence the lack of winter uniforms

>>34949651
>Get BTFO out of your own country by American GIs
That never happened though. The american GIs got BTFO out of someone elses country, accomplishing none of their goals

File: IMG_1543.jpg (72KB, 656x435px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 656x435px

>>34949645
Actually, Operation Barbarossa was originally meant to take place 5 weeks prior to when it actually took place,

However Hitler and the Germans were forced to intervene in Greece after mussolini's botched attack, lest the British intervene and use Greece as a staging ground.

So in sum, due to mussolini's massive fuck up, The Germans lost 5 crucial weeks which they could have used to defeat Russia and win the war

>>34949616
No, you utter imbecile, the only raw materials they provided were rubber and leather. And no, not one single gram of smokeless or explosive in raw format has ever been delivered, only in the ammo for the weapons provided by them. Come on, this is public knowledge, don't be a total conservative.
>>34949592
Nope, they made the initial reaction at Moscow and Stalingrad a bit easier, but nothing more than that - by the Kursk defensive of 1943 LL was simply a footnote in the overall equipment usage of the Red Army.
The only place in which it has kept some importance has been in rear echelon trucks and that's about it.

>>34949668

Actually the US accomplished all their goals in 73
Then Nixon got impeached and the Democrats intentionally sabotaged everything so they could be "right" about Vietnam.

>>34949670
Lol, this is another myth.

Barbarossa was planned and the date set before Maritsa. Forces employed in Greece were not even meant to be used in Barbarossa initial onslaught, because the armored pincer from Romania was abandoned.

You lose.

It was postponned due to climate, rains and mud.

Russian planes were made of American aluminium. Everything came from America.

File: IMG_0868.jpg (120KB, 750x864px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 750x864px

>>34949680
I really hate commiecrats

>>34949662

The Germans had the uniforms made, they just couldn't deliver to them frontline troops in need.
Because they had to deliver food, water and ammo.

And they had to rely on horses and few railway hubs.

They expected to accomplish their goals before cold, dig in, restock, resupply.

>>34949626
>>34949631
The US and UK supplied traditional loans in 1941. $1 million from the Brits and $2 billion from the US. These were only later converted to Lend-Lease credits.

Remember that Russia was nearly as desperate for aid at the start of WWI as they were in WWII, and it was the same sort of loans that destroyed their gold reserves and wrecked their economy.

>>34949694
I wasn't arguing that.

The posters here spout meme history and myths and then fail to produce a single credible piece of evidence and coherent arguments to back them up.

File: IMG_1548.jpg (59KB, 668x332px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 668x332px

>>34949687
>wrong
http://www.iwm.org.uk/history/operation-barbarossa-and-germanys-failure-in-the-soviet-union

>>34949710
This link is supposed to do what exactly?

>>34949718
>On 18 December 1940 Hitler issued Führer Directive 21, an order for the invasion of the Soviet Union. The German military plan called for an advance up to a hypothetical line running from the port of Archangel in northern Russia to the port of Astrakhan on the Caspian Sea – the so-called 'A-A line'. This would bring the bulk of the Soviet population and its economic potential under German control.

>After a five week delay while operations in Greece and Yugoslavia were completed, Operation 'Barbarossa' - named after the all-conquering Medieval Holy Roman Emperor Frederick I - was launched on 22 June 1941. Over three and a half million German and other Axis troops attacked along a 1,800-mile front. A total of 148 divisions - 80 per cent of the German Army - were committed to the enterprise. Seventeen panzer divisions, formed into four Panzer Groups, formed the vanguard with 3,400 tanks. They were supported by 2,700 aircraft of the Luftwaffe. It was the largest invasion force to date.

File: 1465535868463.jpg (1MB, 1557x1285px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1557x1285px

>>34949488

>>34949727
That article is a simplyfying "common knowledge" crap written by an ignorant compiler.

Let me produce the actual facts backed up by archives:

Weisung Nr.20 (Unternehmen Marita viz Greece) 13th December 1940

Weisung Nr.21 (Unternehmen Barbarossa viz Russia) was written on 18 December 1940. It gave 15 May 1941 as kick off.


The delay to 22 June 1941 was due to ground conditions (rainy, mud) being deemed unfavourable.

The forces that were pre-ocuppied with Maritsa
(12th Army and 1 Pz. Division) were not even meant to be part of Barbarossa, even in Februrary, because Prut and Dniester were deemed too great an obstacle for armoured pincer from there. The rest of forces that took part in Balkan Campaign were in Poland by May.

Germans executed both plans, and had set the date for Barbarossa fully knowing what forces they would have at disposition. Also, the pace of German advance was not dictated by soldier count, but by logistics and weather.

File: WWII USSR would have surely won alone.png (159KB, 1245x521px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 1245x521px

>>34949488
British aid to USSR was also notable.
American + British tanks to Soviet Union total 12 000 and 18 000 aircraft.

>>34949542
yes only for comunists the state image is the only thing keeping shambles together... only russian make up numbers.. what a retard...ok not a retard.. you said in your own opinion so its ok... you need to read more, hurricane was shit by 1941 and the spitfires they got were fubars, they did use em for inspiration in the Yak series tough...

And your belief that russians where ignorants peasants is a sad pathetic excuse for your lack of knowledge on them.

>>34949563
And yet compared to Russian planes in the period it had already had it's kinks worked out and was supremely functional. The Russian Air Force had lost all semblance of air power after 70% of their planes had been destroyed at that point. The Lend-lease planes, were leaps and bounds better than their current efforts and gave them a chance to continue fighting despite their losses, learn from British designs, and ramp up production of the new quality planes they did have so they became an effective fighting force.

>>34950450
To be fair, a good number of their people who weren't ignorant peasants had been labeled kulaks and suffered the fate you'd expect. They had specialists and such but their industry really was still growing and picked up during the war. Plenty of their manufacturing power was less than a decade old, and only really took off with the war.

>>34950393
might as well also count if japan didn't get embargoed by the usa

>>34950450
>were
>implying past tense

Russians are and have always been nothing more than filthy, ignorant peasants, fit only for use as farm laborers and breeding stock.