The Most Important Battle Of WW2

They were vital early on, very vital.

OK
They could care less, after all all the men were out fighting so it was only the weak and old left. The industries would of course get the priority of food so no impact there.
yes the industry manned by the weak and the old who needed to be fed , after the USSR had lost its "breadbasket" to foriegn occupation . So how do you feed the workers when your wheat fields are in enemy hands ?http://www.geocities.com/mark_willey/lend.html
Oh yes , you get 34 million dollars worth from your friend .

SuribachiNot once the Americans came into the war.
It predated that , 4 stackers , Greenland , Iceland , lend lease(back to 4 stackers) , W. Atlantic escorts(neutral of course)......Though as G. Cube mentioned , it was a war of technology , and big thanks go out to the Poles who supplied an Enigma machine to the British (via the French) long before the episode with the submarine (that was turned into a film ~D ) .
Intelligence can be the key to any victory , when the battlefield is thousands of miles wide then accurate intelligence is the decisive factor .

As I said, the priority of food would go to the industry, it would run on. And the breadbasket of the west was that, a basket of surplus by the time of the war, gone was the famine of the early 30s (things were learned from that). As well as a major population center. It counts both ways.
Remember that entire new cities were constructed in the east, best known is perhaps Tankograd (guess what they made there), with outlying villages and communal farms to feed them. Those that would suffer were the rural population not tied into this sceme of things. But as I said, the leadership couldn't care less about them if the prize was victory, and it would be.

best known is perhaps Tankograd (guess what they made there),
Bugger all without the raw materials .

Now you make it sound as if Russia had no resources ready. Of course it did. The Urals and Caucasus were crampacked with mines of all sorts. Damn even the deep Siberia was producing stuff. Remember Stalin's little stunt in the early 30s? You know the one where his export of grain killed off millions of peasants? Well that upped the industry to the point it had at the outbreak of war, that was retained and increased. Now Stalin wasn't one to like to go to the big bad imperialistic capitalists. Damn no, he wanted to produces as much at home as possible. Well that came in handy later on.

It wasn't as if they were sitting on their hands going "What are we going to do now, the Germans have taken our food." They had options... Bad options, but options.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

best known is perhaps Tankograd (guess what they made there),
Bugger all without the raw materials .

---

I don't know how to break this to you but Russia has raw materials. You make it sound like we are talking about the Arabian desert without the oil.

The Lend-Lease aid was very helpful to the Russians, but it didn't win the war. We sent it because they were fighting and it was a way for us to use our resources against Germany even when we were not in direct combat with the Germans.

Russia has immense oil, mineral, food, and industrial power and we helped them at a time of crisis with Lend-Lease.

BTW, they were shipped 5 million tons of food. Thats a lot of food but only a small portion of what a nation the size of Russia needed. Maybe 90 days of food. Very helpful yes.

The great part of the food sent was the simple fact that it was already packed and ready. THAT made it a good help, the Russians then could send it whereever they needed it. If I'm not mistaken the Russian soldiers loved the American canned beef. But if they can come to love it they can't have been eating it too much (you get tired of the same food over and over).

Lets say that a human needs 1kg of food each day, it sounds like a lot, but really it isn't that far off if you worked hard labour such as at a farm or in heavy industry back then. Now lets assume there were 100 million Russians (there were more but bear with me). So we end up at a daily rate of 100 million kg of food, that is 100,000 tons of food each day. That adds up to 50 days worth of food they got through lend and lease.
Added alltogether I think my figures are fair. There were more 'free' Russians but then there was all those who didn't eat 1 kg each day.

So as I said, it was a very nice and obviously beloved help, but not a critical one beyond the desperate days of 41.

I don't know how to break this to you but Russia has raw materials.
Yes , but in some categories of raw materials over 50% of what the Russian industries used during the war was supplied by America , more than a third of all the artillery rounds used by Russia was supplied by America , over 75% of their motor transport was supplied by America .

Are you saying that the US made specific constructionlines for Russian shells? 76.2mm, 100mm, 122mm and 152mm shells, all different from all US sizes. I find it hard to believe that the US had whole factories whose sole purpose was to make Soviet weapons.
If that was the case, then it begs the question, why didn't they go all the way and have a few factories build T-34s instead of sending Shermans. It would make more sense.

In 1941.Russian army wouldnt have survived without western ammo,tanks,airplanes and food.There was lots of US weaponry in Soviet army because lend and liese program.Russia had all the raw materials it ever needed,but it diddnt have manufacterd materials,because its armys equipment was almost destroyed.If you read my post in this thread before.The Germans wouldnt had to have won the battle of atlantic because their land forces were few kilometres away from the Murmansk Arghangel railroad,the only railroad that served the only over year harbour in Ice Sea over the Year.

If that was the case, then it begs the question, why didn't they go all the way and have a few factories build T-34s instead of sending Shermans. It would make more sense.
Why ? Retooling an entire tank production plant would be too expensive and time consuming , Retooling a few machines in an ammunition production facility with excess capacity is a far smaller oreration , though they did send slightly more 76.2mm armed Shermans than 75mm armed ones(2095/2007) . Plus sending finished tanks is a waste of valuable cargo space due to the large empty space inside the construct , it was far more efficient to send the raw materials for building 40,000 T34s instead .

Kageshuma , wasn't there some Aliied political pressure put on one of the axis powers co-belligerents specifically concerning offensives against that rail line ?

You are right Finish forces could have cutted that railroad line if they would have wanted to cut it.Same thing goes with attack on Leningrad.Finish didnt fire a shell in Leningrad.In winter 1941 only supply line to Leningrad was by iceway on Lake Ladoga under Finnish "noses",but Our military did nothing to haras it.The supreme commander of Finnish military Marshall Mannerheim,who btw served in Russian military in WWI as Cavalry General.Understood that it wouldnt be sane to occupy Lenigrad,because it had 5 million people living it.The same amount as in whole Finland.Finish strategy in WWII was all about survival.Finland didnt want in general German victory,but it didnt want also a Soviet occupieng us.It was all about balancing. :bow:

Quote:

---

Finland didnt want in general German victory,but it didnt want also a Soviet occupieng us.It was all about balancing.

---

Finland was a horrible ally, stabbed the Germans in the back when they were down. :no:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

Finland was a horrible ally, stabbed the Germans in the back when they were down. :no:

---

Yes.you are right Panzer.Even threw German forces out of Lapland.We are bastards and proud of it. ~;)But you must like what Finnish volunteers did in Viking Division?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

I don't know how to break this to you but Russia has raw materials.
Yes , but in some categories of raw materials over 50% of what the Russian industries used during the war was supplied by America , more than a third of all the artillery rounds used by Russia was supplied by America , over 75% of their motor transport was supplied by America .

---

Thats nonsense and Kraxis has pointed out why.

Lend-Lease supplied 317,900 tons of explosive materials which was essential to helping in the production of Soviet artillery. Most of the shells you are talking about were supplied for western equipment such as the 20mm shells for the P-39 Aircobra fighter. 1.2 million rounds were supplied for this.

The 76mm armed Sherman was not compatible with the Russian 76.2mm shell. Those tanks were sent because the Russians considered the 75mm woefully underpowered, which by the way was absolutely correct.
I would like some proof that there was production of Russian shelltypes in the US. For instance an image of crates saying "Contains 122mm shells" ect ect. Anything beyond a list that says certain chemicals were sent (which by the way lacks cordite, the main explosive of artillery).
I find it hard to believe that whole factories would be dedicated to the Russian wareffort, since everything else I have seen has been either compatible equipment (equipment used bythe US itself) or general equipment (Jeeps, locomotives, food, rolled metal plates and so on). The US worker would be furious that he would be working for the SU while his own boy was fighting and dying in Europe or the Pacific. He would not like that his work would not be able to help his boy directly, but rather help communists, whom he certainly didn't trust.

http://www.battlefield.ru/lendlease/index.html
:book: This is a Russian source. Maybe you'll find it helpful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PanzerJager

Finland was a horrible ally, stabbed the Germans in the back when they were down. :no:

---

Well then, let me heartily applaud Finland for their actions :bow:

PJ, when are you going quit this ridiculous WW2 germany hero worship and realise that Germany losing was a good thing?

The Germans lost. They deserved to lose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Franconicus

http://www.battlefield.ru/lendlease/index.html
:book: This is a Russian source. Maybe you'll find it helpful.

---

Interesting. No mention of prepared ammunition, but about 29,000 tons of explosives were sent in the first year. Hardly soemthing that would sideline the Russian industry. Vital when there was nothing to be had, but this is a low amount.
In all that site confirms my position. But it must be said that it is not very detailed. But it is surprisingly positive towards the help sent, not something I would expect from a Russian.

As I see it there were four battles that were important during WW2.


Battle of Britian. This to me is the first of the important battles of WW2. Britian at this time was the only remaining power opposing Hilter's Germany. If Britian would of surrendered or negotated a peace with Hilter the course of the war for the allied side would of been different. For instance without England being in the fight would Germany felt it necessary to declare war on the United States? Would the United States have fought in Europe at all without England being in the War?

Stalingrad - The stupidity of Hilter being involved in controling the Army began to show its ugly head and the German Army was never able to get him out of running the battles ever again. This battle in essence broke the right arm of the German war effort. One that they could of recovered from in time if Hilter would of realized he had no ability in managing such a large scale battle - but since he was an egomanic and a despot to boot - which was good for the world - he continued to mettle in military affairs. This followed shortly later by the battle of Kursk - doomed Germany to defeat on the Eastern Front. Aided a little by the allied invasions in Italy and later on France.

Pearl Harbor - without Japan attacking Pearl Harbor it would of been difficult for FDR to get the United States into the war against Germany. Isolationist were still a major factor in American politics at the time.

Guadacanal - Midway. These two battles happened close to each other and are important for the same reason. Guadacanal showed the Americans that they could defeat the more experienced Japanese Army on the ground - where Midway crippled the Japanese Navy and placed them on the defensive.

However as the most important Battle of the war I voted for the Battle of Britian because it was the first of the series of battles and without Britian's victory there - the possiblity of a different conclusion for the Battle of Stalingrad is very likely. Considering the loss of German aircraft in that battle. Aircraft that could of possibly closed off the re-inforcement avenues of Russian soldiers into the city. etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by discovery1

Didn't the Japanese develope some ballons that would be relased, drift across the pacific, and release their bombs based on a timer? I think at least a few were launched, although the winds were wrong and they unloaded their payloads in uninhabited areas.

---

Correct - the ballon bombs were a bust for the Japanese. Those that did get to the West Coast exploded in un-important and often un-inhabitied areas.

Nice analysis Redleg. :thumbsup:

By Mount Suribachi

Quote:

---

PJ, when are you going quit this ridiculous WW2 germany hero worship and realise that Germany losing was a good thing?

---

How does that relate to this thread? Personal attacks belong in the backroom.

BoB wasn't exactly a British victory more like, not a German victory. But the results stay the same.

If the Germans had just realized that they only needed local air superiority then it would likely have been very different.

Anything beyond a list that says certain chemicals were sent (which by the way lacks cordite, the main explosive of artillery).
Lacks Cordite ? the list of chemicals has very large amounts of the 3 ingredients of a 2 stage propellant like Cordite , it also has very large amounts for other 2 stage , single stage and triple stage propellants

I would like some proof that there was production of Russian shelltypes in the US.
OK I will see if I can find the appropriate site again and post a link , I will also try to find the one that details small arms ammunition maunufacture facilities in the US specifically producing Russian calibre bullets .

Most of the shells you are talking about were supplied for western equipment such as the 20mm shells for the P-39 Aircobra fighter. 1.2 million rounds were supplied for this.
Sharrukin ,that would be the M54 37mm shells for the P-39 .

There are many factors in the eventual downfall of the Germans in WWII but I am surprised that no one has mentioned the capture of an Enigma cipher machine.

I voted for Perl Harbor, it really brought the American citizens support into the war effort and not just the armed forces.

My 2 cents…
I think that WWII was the last time that Americans used the volume of troops to win a war. We thru so many cheep Sherman tanks at the Germans I am surprised they lasted as long as they did. The Germans definitely had a better military, veteran troops, superior equipment, ships/u-boats, etc. but they just had too many enemies. Basically the world minus Japan, who really didn’t help them much if at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

Just a little nitpick here: Germany declared war on the US after Pearl Harbour. If they hadn't, we would have only gone to war against Japan.

---

Then you misunderstood the statement. Without Japan attacking Pearl Harbor the United States would not have entered the war. Germany would not have declared war on the United States - nor the United States declaring war on Germany.

I am surprised that no one has mentioned the capture of an Enigma cipher machine.
Yesdachi , its back there in post #71
it was a war of technology , and big thanks go out to the Poles who supplied an Enigma machine to the British (via the French) long before the episode with the submarine (that was turned into a film ) .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Yesdachi , its back there in post #71

---

sorry, i must have missed it. Didn’t get much discussion but still pretty important, knowledge is power. ~:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

Not to nitpick again, but you made the statement sound like that was the necesarry excuse to go to war with Germany.

---

It was the necessary event to go to war with Germany. The United States while supporting England and Russia was not willing to go to war with Germany. Only with the attack on Pearl Harbor by the Japanese was the necessary public opinion swayed to bring the United States into the war. Futhermore Germany helped it along by declaring war on the United States before we declare war on Germany.

Not once did I use the word excuse - now did I?

Without Pearl Harbor - FDR did not have the politicial power to bring the United States into the conflict on the side of England.

Just as a matter of proof - try explaining the two years of the European conflict that we set out of - while one of our WW1 allies were over-ran by Germany and our other Ally had to place themselves almost bankrupt to get us to supply them with equipment.

Historical Fact - without Pearl Harbor the United States would of set out the European Conflict. Why - because it had come down to at that time two powers that we detested at the time - Facism and Communism. Back up material

http://www.worldwar2database.com/html/usa.htm

Quote:

---

The American public did not share his (FDR's) sense of urgency. The European War seemed far away. The American public blamed the Europeans for their war. China, while forgotten during the invasion of Poland, the Fall of France, and the Battle of Britain, seemed to most Americans to be the war America should fight, if America had to fight at all

---

http://www.threeworldwars.com/world-war-2/ww2.htm

Quote:

---

But as the war in Europe continued, America's leaders were attempting to get America involved, even though the American people didn't want to become part of it Roosevelt, the presidential candidate, was promising the American people that the Roosevelt administration would remain neutral should he be re-elected.

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_2

Quote:

---

Hitler made the declaration in the hopes that Japan would support him by attacking the Soviet Union. Japan did not oblige him, and this diplomatic move proved a catastrophic blunder which gave President Franklin D. Roosevelt the pretext needed for the United States joining the fight in Europe with full commitment and with no meaningful opposition from Congress. Some historians mark this moment as another major turning point of the war with Hitler provoking a grand alliance of powerful nations who could wage powerful attacks on both East and West simultaneously.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

Well, uh, yeah. I know all that. I'm just saying that if Germany hadn't declared war, we would've stopped at Japan.

---

Which is exactly what my statment meant - which you tried to nitpick. The attack of Pearl Harbor caused the United States to enter the war. Everything that happened after that - the Germany declaring War - the United States entering the war in Europe was all based upon that action.

the goverment did wanted war, didnt they?