The USA didn't play the biggest role in winning WWII

Why is the pacific war even considered apart of world war 2? Should we count the invasion of manchuko too

During the Yalta Conference,Roosevelt and Stalin have argued about the involvement of the Lend-lease,Roosevelt claimed 12,while Stalin claimed 7%.

>Most of the machines weren't suited for the cold Russian climate

Soviet tankers loved the M4 and considered it to be of equal quality to the T-34. They thought it was reliable, easy to work on, had good crew layout and optics, was well armed, and had good construction quality.

During the Battle of Moscow 15-20% of Soviet fighters were Hurricanes or P-40s. The Leningrad front was almost entirely of those types. Likewise the P-39 and P-47 were widely used during the war, along with B-25 bombers and C-47 cargo aircraft. Soviet pilots considered western aircraft to be easy to fly, competitive with Soviet/German designs and well built.

But the majority of the aid was not entirely tanks and aircraft: 400,000 trucks from the US allowed the Soviet military to deploy fully motorized infantry units. The Allies supplied the USSR with 1900+ rail locomotives during the war while domestic production was under 500 during the same period. Likewise rolling stock was around 10,000 lend-lease vs 1000 domestic. They received enough telephone cable to wrap the equator one or two times. Sugar from the Bahamas and Idaho sugar beets was about a quarter of yearly production in the USSR. Ammunition and explosive fillers accounted for half of Soviet ordinance.

Oh, it absolutely did. Both directly and indirectly.

But the Soviet union fought a much harder war at a greater cost.

>le jews control america meme

This is the only real answer

>mfw it's true

Did you forget the part where Japan declared war on the UK, USA and The Netherlands?

Like, liquid assets? I thought trains and shit were included in lend lease.

People always forget that the US was fighting two wars, against the Germans in North Africa and Europe, and against the Japs in the Pacific. No other nation had to fight as widely as the USA, and no other nation provided as much vital support as the US.

Nothing happened in the Western front during 1941-1944 until D-Day.

Yes, but they got to ruin half of Europe and most of Asia as a result, so it's kind of even.

Nothing happened on the Western Front before D-day,plus at that point,the Russians have already taken care of 80% of the German army on the Eastern Front.

> nation provided as much vital support as the US

Did you defeat 80% of the German army on the Eastern front in less than four years of time?

Don't get me wrong,the initial tanks and planes were high quality,but most of the trucks weren't suited for the climate and a good portion of the ammunition and explosives were deadly for the users,least of unreliable because they were badly packaged and transported.

>400,000

More like 100000,

> 1900+ rail locomotives during the war while domestic production was under 500 during the same period

1500* and you do remember that the Soviet Union had to fight off the bulk of the German army and transport all of their industry to the south in order to protect it from German aerial bombardment?

>rolling stock was around 10,000 lend-lease vs 1000 domestic

Wasn't it originally 8500 to 3000?

>The Israeli-American lobby is a meme.

Triple thick kek

>le /pol/ things he won't banned meme

Russia is correct and Americans got btfo by the numbers alone. Shut up about this, especially since none of you imbecils actually fought in the war anyway, who are you to interpret anyone's suffering at that time? Look at russian losses alone.

That said, thank you for liberating us to the real heroes. Russians, Americans and all allies in general who actually did something besides discussing victory claims online.

t. a German

>I ignore historical fact

>t. a cuck
ftfy

Russia were the true defeaters of Germany.

HMM WHO DO WE TRUST
>retard on the internet making wild claims without citations
or
>Soviet military archives that say he's fucking wrong

Did the invasion of Italy never happen? Was it a fever dream?

Was the USA even in WW2?

you guys realize germany declared war on fucking everyone and hadn't exactly given great though to their endgame

Who do you think funded the Russian war effort? Without American support Russia would have been beaten like in WW1.

Lol.

Have you been watching the Disney Channel again, Tyrone?

Look up lend-lease, you retard. Russian logistics heavily relied on American support. Without that, they could have never mobilised their resources properly and would have been taken out before they could even begin to fight back.

Nah. Lend lease was pretty minor to the Ruskies war effort.

Stop watching Disney, son.

This. Has no one listened to the tapes of Hitler discussing the eastern front with Mannerheim? He says himself that he didnt expect the russians to have so many tanks, trucks, ect and didnt believe the first initial reports when he got them.

but no, kids are oikophobes who get their history from call of duty games and the russian level is the hardest so they won it all by themselves pretty much

Friendly reminder Germans considered American troops to be cowards that broke easily when under fire.
>provide some material aid to Soviets
>Soviets grind it out in a conflict of epic scale and win
>rush in an barely defeat second-line German troops mostly because of overwhelming advantage in numbers (and everything else)
>WE WON WW2 ALONE
Amerishits are so deluded.

>land-lease 101
Even russian files bag to differ user. So when both Russians, Allies and Axis say it was significant then it was significant.

But yes, you have your own unique kind of truth that works in your universe.

provide those "russian files"

>Friendly reminder Germans considered American troops to be cowards that broke easily when under fire.

oh look, more retarded millennial call of duty meme history.

You're already backpedalling from "the USA funded the USSR's war effort" to "it was significant", which is a much less, ahem, significant claim.

Keep backpedalling some more to "it helped a little bit" which is the factual truth if you don't get your history from the Disney Channel, lad.

see
Hitler himself said the biggest surprise from the eastern front was their number of tanks which just seemed to materialize out of no where. You are retarded if you think lend-lesse wasnt a major factor in Russia winning in the eastern front

>conspiracies are wrong meme

Tyrone, you have no idea what you are talking about. A tiny percentage of Soviet tanks came from lend-lease. If you had said trucks and jeeps you might have had a point I could agree with, but you didn't.

I can't believe so one with so little knowledge was lecturing me on....

>lend-lease 101

>On the whole the following conclusion can be drawn: that without these Western shipments under Lend-Lease the Soviet Union not only would not have been able to win the Great Patriotic War, it would not have been able even to oppose the German invaders, since it could not itself produce sufficient quantities of arms and military equipment or adequate supplies of fuel and ammunition. The Soviet authorities were well aware of this dependency on Lend-Lease. Thus, Stalin told Harry Hopkins [FDR’s emissary to Moscow in July 1941] that the U.S.S.R. could not match Germany’s might as an occupier of Europe and its resources.-Boris Sokolov

Oh right.

Switching from specific claims about tanks from the USA to taking credit for all the Brit supplies to the USSR as well and talking about fuel and ammunition instead?

And using a single quote from July 1941, what about a month into Op Barbarossa and specifically from an emissary from Russia to the USA seeing what stuff he could blag from the USA?

You truly are shit at history, Tyrone.

El oh el alamein

>The Allies supplied the USSR with 1900+ rail locomotives during the war while domestic production was under 500 during the same period. Likewise rolling stock was around 10,000 lend-lease vs 1000 domestic.
this bit always gets me mad because it ignores the 30k locos and like 500k cars the soviets had already

>military records that say he's wrong

(Citation needed)

>Even russian files bag to differ user

>and talking about fuel and ammunition instead?

yeah, fuel isnt important at all in a war effort.

>And using a single quote from July 1941

Boris was born in the 50s, and hes an historian, not an emissary lol. Get some reading comprehension

>You truly are shit at history, Tyrone.

you are the one claiming lend lesse was this unimportant little thing and that OMG RUSSIA STRONK! childish view of history you get from call of duty.

>yeah, fuel isnt important at all in a war effort.

No one said that.

>you are the one claiming lend lesse was this unimportant little thing

Actually we started this discussion with you claiming the USA funded the entire Russian military effort.

Keep backpedalling. I'm glad we have moved all the way back to you making petulant strawman arguments. It seems like you are learning a bit of history here.

Russia was on the very cusp of losing. Point blank. The Germans were getting incredibly close to overtaking the Russian industrial areas, and if that happened, then the USSR's already overworked and underfed army would have been fucked. Without that extremely timely US Lend-Lease aid, Russia loses Moscow and their factories in the Nizhny-Novgorod (Gorky) region would come under fire. So, let's recap:

-Britain's war effort was almost entirely propped up by Lend-Lease.

-USSR did do an enormous amount of fighting, but if the Eastern Front was the 2014 NBA finals, then Russia was Lebron and DWade, and America was Ray Allen saving their ass with a clutch three. USA sent as much food to the Russians as we supplied to our own Expeditionary Force in Europe. That is an exceptionally large amount of resources.

-USA beat Japan single-handedly

-USA beat Italy, with help from some fantastic British fighting

-USA bombed the ever loving hell out of Germany

Who played the largest role in WW2??? Germany of course. followed by the USA and close behind is Russia.

Imphal and Kohima

How about this you immature fucks. Accept the fact that WW2 was a collective effort. No nation could have won against the axis alone. It wasn't a dick measuring contest to see "who did the most". Practically "my dad can beat up your dad" mentality. Fuck this board, it's horrible and we all know it. An amazing idea ruined because no one wants to accept different points of view and just say "le go back to pol ;))))". This board belongs on Reddit

>An amazing idea ruined because no one wants to go back to pol

FTFY

Twisting my words eh? Well just to let you know what I mean is whenever someone holds a different opinion they just get told to go back to pol. Why am I even explaining this

>Without that extremely timely US Lend-Lease aid, Russia loses Moscow and their factories in the Nizhny-Novgorod (Gorky) region would come under fir
The lend-lease that saved Moscow was of British origin.

Americans didn't send much until spring 1942.

However Soviet counter-offensives later in the war would have to be much smaller-scale ones rather than what they actually did.

>Without that extremely timely US Lend-Lease aid, Russia loses Moscow and their factories in the Nizhny-Novgorod (Gorky) region would come under fire
US Lend-Lease was not extended to the Soviet Union until October 1941.
The only materiel support supplied under Lend-Lease to the USSR the 2nd half of '42 was signals equipment.
Materiel supplied under Lend-Lease did not was not substantially in evidence in Soviet operations until '43

>USA beat Japan single-handedly
As a reminder see Australia also contributed to Pacific operations.
-USA beat Italy, with help from some fantastic British fighting
You seem to have forgotten the Poles and the Indians, French, Australians and New Zelanders amongst others.

Germans were at Moscow's doorstep until the winter of 42. Wtf are you talking about.

>Americans didn't send much until spring 1942.

Well gee when you get attacked in December of 1942 it takes a few months to get production going.

Fun fact: Comintern policy in the US between 1938 and June 1941 was to support anti-war movements in the US and to discourage war with Germany, especially after Stalin's alliance with Hitler. Anti-fascist propaganda was stopped, the communist party did not criticize Germany's actions, and France and the UK were declared to be waging a "imperialist war."

Same with the French commies, they actually worked AGAINST the Resistance until the day Operation Barbarossa happened, like typical self-hating cucks would. Then of course after that it's all we wuz le revolution.

>Nazi germany ruined europe

that's why they're conspiracies, dipshit

b a c k t o / p o l /
a
c
k
t
o
/
p
o
l
/

>What is the British in Burma
Learn some non 'murican History lad

>only usa fought on the pacific
>Chinese did nothing
>Brits and the Commonwealth nations did nothing
>Dutch did nothing

Is this really what they teach Americans?

>the soviets played the biggest role in world war 2 as i learned from call of duty

>i dont like your opinion go back to /pol/ :^(
>this board is for leftypol's Veeky Forums incursions only pls leave :^(

if you weren't a paranoid /qa/ggot you'd realize he was mocking people who believed that

everyone in this thread is wrong

Soviet downplayed Lend Lease to try and claim they won WW2 on their own.
Americans try to overplay Lend Lease because America #1

According to non party members like Zhukov Lend Lease was critical in winning the war. Lend Lease provided hundreds of thousands of tons of food and the Russians still faced hunger problems by 1945. Lend Lease made up 50-100% of soviet war materiel in more specific areas like refined metal alloys, high octane fuel for aircraft, or transport. Studabaker trucks were so common in the USSR the Germans gave them a nickname.
Lend Lease provided no men. The Soviets still had to make use of all this themselves.

Downplaying lend lease is dumb when the best General of the war says it was absolutely necessary.
Overplaying Lend Lease is dumb because Soviet blood was still the main thing that won the East.

>Overplaying Lend Lease is dumb because Soviet blood was still the main thing that won the East.
but the allies (primarily Americans) invading Normandy won the east.

/thread

The US destroyed Japan's ability to actually wage war. Completely sinking the navy more or less on their own, taking out by far most of the air force. Completely eradicating the Japanese merchant marine. Carpet bombing Japan itself flat.

The contributions on the mainland were very important, but don't forget the US also participated on the mainland too.
Australia more than pulled their weight in the opening year and the British did the best with what they had. The Nationalists fought with fanatical fury, but fuck the commies.

They had a huge role in winning the war.
It is less heroic though, when you consider the facts that they had years to prepare for the war (and make money off it) before jumping in, and not because their allies were in danger, but because they got forced into it by the Japanese.

I'm thankful they were there, and their war efforts were essential. But stop with the heroic ego's, their troops had to experience one year of the trenches compared to the allies four years of hell, which they could have alleviated much sooner.

TLDR; Americans jumped in, their soldiers and armories untouched by the destruction going on around them, got a pretty sweet deal in comparison to the rest of Europe, and then in keeping with the American spirit they claim that they did all the work.

>conspiracies are real meme

No one decided to fucking post the actual numbers so here you fucking go you manchildren

whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/pearl/www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6315/lend.html

>Friendly reminder Germans considered American troops to be cowards that broke easily when under fire.
>LISTEN TO THIS THING I MADE UP GUYS
Why bother coming to a history board if you're this ignorant

Dumbass

They played the biggest role in the western allies coming out ahead, rather than most of Europe being taken by the Russians.

I just hate it when Americans act like they won the war single-handedly. I think the people who claim it are trying to get some personal sense of importance with misguided nationalistic chestpounding.

>The Nationalists fought with fanatical fury, but fuck the commies.

See OP's related pic.

The nationalists fought with fanatic fury by keeping a good portion of their army inland instead of sending them to fight conquered areas because Chiang saw Mao's massive recruitment of those who felt disenfranchised by both the nationalists and the Japanese (whom both indiscriminately murdered civilians) and wanted to keep troops to fight them and relied on America's eventual entrance into the war. The whole reason you said fuck the commies is because you find modern China disagreeable. The descendants of everyone who had to resist and fight and spill blood against Japanese oppression LIVE in CHINA not what remains of the nationalists if you do basic fucking maths. If you call that fanatic fury kys pseud

>Europe starts destroying itself
>"omg wtf America pls help"
>America jumps in and wins the war
>"stfu mang u just wanted to steal the glory"

>WW2 was an important war

*tips*

I've read it as well.
The Americans were so effective because they were good with combined arms. If the Americans were attacking you could expect to get the living shit bombed out of you, then shelled, then facing off against a better supplied enemy. Germans weren't that impressed by American infantry.

>british
you mean indians.

Fucking hell, this discussion again. Its pretty clear the soviets wouldn´t have been able to win without lend and lease and american war involvement. They wouldn´t have been able to kickstart their massive war industry and wouldn´t have been able to fed their people. If america would have been fully isolationist the war would have quickly turned into a fluid stalemate in the east due to german problems in logistic and overstretched lines. The soviets on the other wouldn´t have been able to start the massive offensives they did in rl. Even if they would have been able to reconquer some ground, the germans just would have destroyed the infrastructure and agriculture so that the soviets would have only gained more people to feed and more precious industry used on rebuilding infrastructure.

I haven´t even accounted for the different strategic and political situations the germans would have been in. Without the lurking US invasion on the western front there would have been more german forces available and the german high command could have implemented a more conservative strategy without tthe reckless offensives of 42 and 43.

It would have ended with a favorable peace agreement for the germans where they get the baltic states and parts of or the whole ukraine.

Something to disprove all the ayy lamo lend and lease was unimportant because the us machinery wasn´t adapted to the russian climate:

> 1.75 million tons of food

>Roughly 17.5 million tons of military equipment, vehicles, industrial supplies, and food were shipped from the Western Hemisphere to the USSR, 94% coming from the US. For comparison, a total of 22 million tons landed in Europe to supply American forces from January 1942 to May 1945.

> 2,670,371 tons of petroleum products (gasoline and oil) or 57.8 percent of the High-octane aviation fuel

>4,478,116 tons of foodstuffs (canned meats, sugar, flour, salt, etc.), 1,911 steam locomotives, 66 Diesel locomotives, 9,920 flat cars, 1,000 dump cars, 120 tank cars, and 35 heavy machinery cars. Provided ordnance goods (ammunition, artillery shells, mines, assorted explosives) amounted to 53 percent of total domestic production

Oh and there also was british lend and lease.

tl,dr: The soviets wouldn´t have been able to prevent widespread malnutrition and their industry wouldn´t have been able to produce the massive ammount of war material it did because they would be more focused to produce shit like special machine parts, lokomotives, boots etc.

>same thing happens 20 years later

>then after, america has to babysit western europe for the next 40+ years from the USSR

>"fuck american pigs!"

>Actually we started this discussion with you claiming the USA funded the entire Russian military effort.

no i didnt

>just doubling down on your bullshit meme history when called out on it

The american interventions were the first step of reaching hegemony in europe in the wider process of building an american empire. To make this happen they had to prevent the rise of a german hegemony ober europe which would have been achieved in WW1 and could have been achieved in WW2 if america had choose isolationism. The americans followed the british tradition when the slow downfall of the empires began and after they secured the americas they started to expand in other geopolitical rooms were british power was in decline.

After WW1 GB and france still had enough power to implement a peace that was favourable to them. Also the american population wasn't willing to accept an imperial/hegemonial role. After WW2 the americans were the only ones left that were able to create and maintain a new political order because due to geography and clever leaderships they were the only nation that didn't suffered terrible losses and they got the most out from WW2 (hegemony in europe and the pacific). Ofc the soviets gained a lot but the price they had to pay was much higher and they got the worst part of europe.

Churchill having no more liking for the USSR than he had for Nazi Germany; prior to the US entry into the war this was pretty much the scenario the British & Commonwealth forces were anticipating.
Having secured North Africa the aim was to push steadily up though Italy 'Hitler's soft Underbelly' and 'win the peace'.
The concentration on North Africa and Italy was continued too even with the US entry, until sufficient troops and equipment had been amassed for a direct assault through France in 1944.

>Nothing happened on the Western Front before D-day...

So we're just going to ignore the Africa campaign?

Watch this
youtube.com/watch?v=pBTRSFgS9_w

>Western degeneracy
>Posts weeb shit that exists mainly as a product of western ideas.

>hurr if they were actually good they wouldn't need an airforce or any supplies, infantry alone win wars and do the most damage, trust me I have a playstation
How's the new Battlefield look bud?

The British bases that America sold to the USA such that Japan wouldn't take them? Honest question.

Yes Britain leased bases in the Atlantic and the Caribbean to the US so that the Japanese, who weren't at war with the British at the time, wouldn't take them. It really makes you think.