3 ms·

> the USSR's side was largely propped up by the US lend-lease program This is an oft repeated lie we tell ourselves. US contribution to USSR's military product

> the USSR's side was largely propped up by the US lend-lease program This is an oft repeated lie we tell ourselves. US contribution to USSR's military production was less than 1%. And by the time our "help" reached the soviet union, the soviets had already beaten the germans. The battle of moscow ended in January 1942. That's when ww2 in europe was over. The rest was brutal clean up duty by the soviets. > Without such support, the USSR would have faced the same problem that Germany did: a critical inability to properly supply their front-line troops. Firstly, germany's problem was lack of oil. Not the number of trucks. Secondly, The soviet military industry was the largest in the world until we joined the war and their military production was never affected. And the soviets had tons of oil. Only second to the US. The lend-lease history saving the soviet union is propaganda. If we had stayed neutral in ww2, the soviets would have beaten the germans. Other than stalin giving up, there was no way for germany to beat the soviet union. Look at the stats.

thrw_pa1 9y ago
> US contribution to USSR's military production was less than 1% Even most blatant Soviet propaganda put that into 4%. Marshal Zhukov said that Lend-lease was critical to Soviet victory. And that was from a man who took Berlin. Just a few facts: for USSR lend-lease accounted for 30% of trucks, more than half of aviation fuel and about 93% of railroad equipment. So it's definetely not a propaganda.
- eighthnate 9y ago
  > Even most blatant Soviet propaganda put that into 4%. Does it? 4% is still nothing. > Marshal Zhukov said that Lend-lease was critical to Soviet victory. So did stalin. Politicians, generals, etc say a lot of things. Especially about "free" stuff. > Just a few facts: for USSR lend-lease accounted for 30% of trucks, more than half of aviation fuel and about 93% of railroad equipment. Facts you just made up? > So it's definetely not a propaganda. 4% to 93%. Sounds a lot like propaganda.

thrw_pa1 9y ago

> US contribution to USSR's military production was less than 1% Even most blatant Soviet propaganda put that into 4%. Marshal Zhukov said that Lend-lease was critical to Soviet victory. And that was from a man who took Berlin. Just a few facts: for USSR lend-lease accounted for 30% of trucks, more than half of aviation fuel and about 93% of railroad equipment. So it's definetely not a propaganda.

eighthnate 9y ago
> Even most blatant Soviet propaganda put that into 4%. Does it? 4% is still nothing. > Marshal Zhukov said that Lend-lease was critical to Soviet victory. So did stalin. Politicians, generals, etc say a lot of things. Especially about "free" stuff. > Just a few facts: for USSR lend-lease accounted for 30% of trucks, more than half of aviation fuel and about 93% of railroad equipment. Facts you just made up? > So it's definetely not a propaganda. 4% to 93%. Sounds a lot like propaganda.