> Most people think that nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki was what made Japan surrender unconditionally, not the loss of Manchuria. Most people have never even he

> Most people think that nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki was what made Japan surrender unconditionally, not the loss of Manchuria. Most people have never even heard of the battle of Manchuria. Japan were already putting out feelers for a peace before either, they new they couldn't win by then. They'd already had cities destroyed by conventional weapons, the nukes weren't that big a deal. > I'm sorry, that is simply not correct. The Lend-Lease pipeline was in full operation by early 1942, well before the tide turned at the Battle of Stalingrad in early 1943. In fact, the Germans moved on Stalingrad specifically to disrupt the Persian Corridor portion of the Lend Lease operation. First of all, much of the early contribution was british and Canadian rather than American (http://www.historynet.com/did-russia-really-go-it-alone-how-lend-lease-helped-the-soviets-defeat-the-germans.htm http://www.historynet.com/did-russia-really-go-it-alone-how-...). Lend lease was under way but no where near the total contributions (https://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/BigL/BigL-5.html https://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/BigL/BigL-5.html), chart 6 has a yearly breakdown. The biggest effect was that it allowed the USSR to counter attack after Stalingrad because they didn't have to throw everything into defending the city.