Muh lend lease

>muh lend lease
>muh trucks
>Russia would've lost without muh trucks
Why do Americans do this?

Because Stalin said so himself. Next.

Because it is true maybe? if Germany and Soviet were 1v1 they would get btfo'd so hard.

>soviets were literally using American tanks until '45

Really makes you think

Because Stalin himself, along with several other top Soviet leaders and commanders, admitted that the Soviets would have lost without lend lease, you stupid fucking frog poster. According to fucking Nikita Khrushchev:
>I would like to express my candid opinion about Stalin’s views on whether the Red Army and the Soviet Union could have coped with Nazi Germany and survived the war without aid from the United States and Britain. First, I would like to tell about some remarks Stalin made and repeated several times when we were "discussing freely" among ourselves. He stated bluntly that if the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war. If we had had to fight Nazi Germany one on one, we could not have stood up against Germany's pressure, and we would have lost the war. No one ever discussed this subject officially, and I don't think Stalin left any written evidence of his opinion, but I will state here that several times in conversations with me he noted that these were the actual circumstances. He never made a special point of holding a conversation on the subject, but when we were engaged in some kind of relaxed conversation, going over international questions of the past and present, and when we would return to the subject of the path we had traveled during the war, that is what he said. When I listened to his remarks, I was fully in agreement with him, and today I am even more so.

>inb4 refutation consisting of Soviet propaganda and 56er memes

Most Americans don't even know what lend lease is. Why generalize?

>OP makes same shit thread like everyday

Two reasons
1. The classic “MURICA FUK YA” BS where everything in history has to be because of Americans.
2. So edgy teenagers can fondle themselves over the idea that “THE NAZIS WOULD DEFINITELY HAVE WON IF THE SOVIETS DIDNT CHEAT” and fantasize over a German victory.

imagine thinking Nikita Khrushchev was a reliable source about what Stalin thought

1v1 = german victory

This is fact u soviet bootlicker

t. Tankie

>dude you’re a commie lmao

Germany lost once blitzkrieg failed. That was before lend-lease.

I said tankie, not commie you retard

Not a commie a commie asslicker, being a commie is ok but sucking the commies' cocks for historicity benefits that's... gay

No Germany lost when it overstreched and let a lot of its men in france and greece, yugoslavia, etc. If there was only the russian front the blitzkrieg would have been successful.

>if they had a bit more troops they would win!!! I know it!!!

>implying the soviets didn't win because of numbers

The Germans slightly outnumbered the Russians in troops at the onset of Barbarossa

You mean the onset where they were successful?

alright you want to go for 1-1 USSR versus G*rmany autistic alternate history? fine, then remove all foreigners such as Finns

>Germans outnumber the enemy in the beginning
>they are massively succesfull
>eventually they have to deploy troops to North Africa, Italy etc. thus losing number advantage
>soviets gain number advantage and start winning

really makes you think huh

Maybe because it was a preemtive strike and the germans couldn't afford the soviets building up the manpower which they eventually did with brutal compulsion when the germans were advancing

Hahaha the small finn nation arousing commie complexes because they got raped by a few finn skisnipers

WW2 "what-if" discussions should be banned

Denying of the foreign allied help by commies should be banned

But what if Germany developed nuclear weapon in 1941?!?!! Think about it?!?!

FPBP

>
>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>
>

>leftists
how are they somehow worse than protestants?

...

If you think that lend lease changed anything, you are illiterate nigger
t. David Glantz

shut up, negře

Why is there never any nuance in these threads? It's always either Soviets get crushed without Lend Lease, or the Germans still lose completely without it. Nothing in between like a negotiated peace or a stalemate since the Germans never had the logistical capability to reach and take Moscow, but the Soviets couldn't push the Germans out of their territory and follow them without Western resources and equipment.

because thats simply immposible, this was a race war between Whites and Germans, not some pathetic 19th century conflict over insulted king's ass

>a negotiated peace
Would Stalin ever accept doing that? I feel like this would have all resulted in Germans and Soviets going at it again a few years later.

>WW2 "what-if" discussions should be banned
Anything about WW2 should be banned. /pol/shits are ruining everything with their constant Naziboo and Stalinboo shit. You can't have a normal discussion about this period.

If it was something like Brest-Litovsk Stalin would have to wait a while before he's in any position to go to war.

Glantz is a revisionist

t. Hans Schlomo Muttew