The myths of WWII (Eastern Europe)

"They bore the blunt of the German army and required Germany to expend the majority of its manpower and resources."- As always Kenny you take parts of my words and piece them together to try and make it sound like something that supports your cause while distorting mine. I believe the first sentence said that the Soviets bore the blunt of the entire German military. And I do believe that I also said that without russia the US most likely would not of been able to establish a bridgehead in Europe. I gave credit to no one. I simply stated that the US was vital to the winning effort and those quotes you mention are my support. Again for BOTH OF YOU. Try to spend less time attacking people and more time supporting your claim. So far the only supporting evidence you have shown is numbers that say "hey the US only produced this much in 1941, so how did they give this much?" "maybe you should check your sources. Im not doubting them but please tell me the exact primary source your figures are coming from? Is it a summary report of all the factories that porduced these weapons? or is it just a person writing something they saw on another piece of paper? I told you my site got its info from a sargeant Mike J. that had found Russian manifests after the collapse of the soviet union. That would be my primary source. Not the site itself that simply relayed the message.

 

"22,800 armored vehicles (tanks, half tracks, etc.), including more than 12,000 tanks. 40% of these arrived in 1941 when the USSR most needed them" This means that 40 percent of the 22,800 total armored vehicles that went to the USSR arrived in 1941. This means that 9120 armored vehicles (tanks, half- tracks, etc.) arrive in the USSR in 1941. It did not say how many tanks, half tracks and so on. This was another person from another forum on another site btw. If you doubt his numbers then take it up with him. I presented 3 different sources that said similar things and somebody else on anotehr site posted similar things. The only thing you have shown is production numbers and did not even post the link. As far as I know your only giving us production numbers from a certain region or maybe just the US military production numbers, or perhaps a Lend Lease number that was dated for production and not shipping. Please spend more time supporting your claim then trashing ours.

 

I never said anyone in this thread has said it yet or on this site.

Again I have not said on this site it is a general statement of what I have experienced in general including face to face with people.

I will say this for a third time, my explanation was not about what was delivered but was in response to LJAd asking if someone can explain to him how a miniscule amount of aid delivered in 1941 can be of any importance when compared to the huge amount delivered over the period 1941 to 1945.

It was an example of how when times are desperate a small amount may save the day, I was not trying to put it into a real context with actual figures. It was an example to explain how it could have made a difference not how it did.

 

According to the link you gave earlier about lend lease figures on the CMH Online site, the USSR were given priority over the US forces for equipment the Soviets required. Initially a 1 billion dollar credit was granted when this was reached it was extended by another billion dollars at the same terms as the first which Stalin agreed to.

 

Another myth: the Soviet Rank of Commisar was abolished in October of 1942. There was no such rank after that.

 

To my knowledge the commissar was being phased out in 1943. By 1944 they played no part.

 

"For want of a shoe, the horse was lost. For want of a horse, the rider was lost. For want of a rider, the battle was lost. For want of a battle, the kingdom was lost..................


This is silly.
The same can be said for any small bit of equipment.
One track pin can seriously effect the working of a tank.
Can we say then the German worker who made connecting pins for the Tiger tank track was the most important person in Tiger tank actions in WW2?
I mean without his track pins they would never be able to leave the factory......................... "
This is completely far from relevant to the claims made.
I will put this as simple as possible. Lets say your one factory in the USSR during the summer of 1941. You have 10 assembly lines in your plant.
Scenario A (what really happened with lend lease): Kommisar " We have lost alot of equipment so far to the invasion. We are currently depending on our pre war stockpiles to get us by untill production can increase back to pre war levels. We have _____, _____, and _____ expected to arrive from lend lease by the end of the year. So you can concentrate all your production on weapons." Factory Owner "Okay 5 of my lines (50% of total factory production) will make T-34's 2 Lines (20%) will make artillery pieces. 2 more lines will make small weapons and 1 line will be for light vehicles. With these resources allocated I can give you 50 T-34's, 20 artillery pieces, 20 orders of small weapons, and 20 light vehicles a month."

 

Scenario B (without lend lease) Kommisar "We have lost alot of equipment so far to the invasion. We are currently depending on our pre war stockpiles to get us by untill production can increase back to pre war levels. You will have to produce _____, ______, and _____." Factory Owner "Okay I can use 2 lines for T-34's, 2 lines for artillery, 1 line for small arms, 1 line for equipment, 2 lines for light vehicles, 1 line for communications equipment, 1 line for ammunition." I can give you 20 T-34's, 20 artillery pieces, 10 orders of small arms, 40 light vehicles, 10 orders of equipment, 1000 km. of telephone wire, and 10000 rounds of ammunition."
Conclusion to make up for the aid that would not come at the end of 1941 and prevent the russians from running out of their stockpiles this factory output will lose 30 T-34's a month and 10 orders of small arms a month. Now all factories will have to cut into capacity to make up for this lack of aid. So multiply these number by a couple thousand or so however many factories existed in russia. The numbers change to a point that russian and German strategy would be completely different. Yes russia would still have numerical advantage over Germany. However the numbers are far closer like this. NOTE: This doesnt account for all the factors that can further slow down production within factories (breakdowns, change over times, etc.)

 

It can not be any more simple than this. It is simple economics. You only have so many resources to build a variety of things. Decisions must be made to produce the right quantity of these various products. Notice car companies do not produce all of their vehicles ,and parts. Take GM for example. the cars are bult in Detroit. Their motors at a company called Dynamig in mexico, their electronics at a company called efftec in Flint. If the detroit plant had to produce all of these parts and assemble them itself then it would not be able to meet demand. Same thing happened in the USSR. It did not have to produce the materials it was sent. So it could allocate IC to produce more weapons. Yes russia had stockpiles to lsat through 1941. But would their industry be able to replace all the things they lost as quickly as they did with lend lease? Probably not. This is what i mean by lend lease filled the gap in soviet production in 1941.

 

Your right.
It is simple.
'You' have an overwhelming desire to claim some (if not all) of the credit for the Soviet effort.
To this end you construct ever more fanciful scenarios where it can show how much of a debt everyone owes you.
'We saved your ass' writ large.

 

I have given from WWII total the numbers of US tanks that were sent in 1941 to the SU
You used these figures to prove that without the US LL in 1941,the SU was lost,thus from your POV these were US deliveries
Also,on WWII it is stated that less than 22800 vehicles arrived(what's the only thing that counted),and,that the 22800 is the number for the WHOLE WAR.22800 in 1941 is absurd ,look at the US tank production in 1941
If you want to prove that the US LL from the Pacific Route in 1941 was vital,you must give reliable figures about the US LL from the Pacific Route in 1941,and not unreliable figures about the USLL for all routes for the whole war .And,till today,you onle have given the latter .
Btw(I have said it already):it would not be bad to look at your figures befores posting them ,because your last "source" is giving 5.5 million boots (you know the mythical boots that always are appearing in LL discussions),while your first one (who ended with the statement that H.Hopkins was a Russian spy),is giving 16 million boots.It could be a typo,it also could be that neither knows what the exact figure is ,what,given their unreliability,not would be surprising .
Also you could ponder at the following :in 1941 (=1/8 of the LL period),the total tonnage of LL was 2.6 %,and,also in 1941,the US tank production was less than 5 % of their war total,and,yet,40 % of the armoured vehicles that were sent to the SU,were sent in 1941? Are you still thinking that this is logical,probable ?

 

Do you have a proof for"same thing happened in the USSR"?.A claim is not enough .It is not because to day,a lot of the production in the US is boarded out (was it in 1941?)that in 1941, the same happened in the SU.

 

mkenny

leaving all other things aside, maybe you can help with a conversation I had many years ago and could not satisfactorily answer.

Someone was claiming the Germans destroyed around 16000 soviet railway engines and 165000 rolling stock in the first two years.

The only figures I could find with my limited knowledge of the subject were 1000 engines captured in the initial stages of Barbarossa (500 useable).
I decided to try some research on Soviet rail infrastructure. Info on armoured trains and track laid were fairly common on books I had access to and could verify what I found online some giving certain sites some credence on other parts. When I looked at rolling stock and engines I found difficulties though finding anything I could say was reliable and complete.
From what I gleaned (going through each model and the production of each that I could find) I could account for around 15000 steam locos built between 1890 and 1942 with the most numerous during WW2 having left production in 1930 IIRC (somewhere around 10000 built between 1890 and 1930) this included what I found about US trains provided to the Tsars forces.
Likewise most cargo rolling stock seemed to be in the 20 ton class 2 axle, with a relative few going up to the 40-60 tonne 4 axle class and most of those being specialist.
I read many comments that the Soviets under pressure to meet targets and deliver equipment etc often overloaded these wagons (perfectly understandable in the situation).

Do you have any resource I could look at, book, film, net to give me a better insight, I found no info for attrition (enemy or old age) losses to the Germans or in the Baltic States. Some mention of the winter war tying up 20% of Soviet rail stock and Bagration requiring 450000 wagons.

French, German, US and British I can find.

 

I would doubt that in 1941 production was much boarded out in the US,or delocalizated;I don't think there was something as Nafta in 1941,because there would be a lot of opposition of the AFL/CIO,and these could prevent the election of a lot of people at Capitol Hill.

 

I suspect that some people (living a.o. in Ohio) are taking it for granted that the SU was in 1941 something as an underdevelopped country,that could not sustain the attack of Germany without US help .Something as :"if the nazis could nor defeat the commies,it was because the commies got the help of Uncle Sam" .Or "a capitalist economy is more efficient than a communist economy, thus , if capitalist Germany could not defeat communist SU, it was because capitalist US was intervening".
I think this is questionable (an euphemism), because,in 1940, capitalist Germany defeated capitalist France and expelled capitalist Britain in 6 weeks,at a weekly cost of 25000 men, while in 1941, capitalist Germany did not defeat communist SU in 10 weeks, although it (=Germany) lost weekly 40000 men .Now,to say that this is proving that communism was more efficient than capitalism, also would be questionable (=an euphemism).

The assumption that the SU had to be rescued in 1941 by Uncle Sam, has as origin chauvinism and ignorance.

 

1)during the war, Britain got 31000 million $ of LL,the SU 11000 million,thus the ratio is almost 3/1.
2) In 1941,Britain got (that's the only thing that's counting,not what was appropriated) 1000 million $ LL
3)Britain got in 1941 as LL 100 aircraft,800 tanks,500 trucks(Btw:that's much less than it got from the cash and carry act=things that were paid by Britain)
4)the SU got 182 tanks,I have no figures about aircraft and trucks
5)of the 1 billion $ Britain got in 1941,29O million $ were food
6)While the total for the SU was 360000 tons,Britain got for food only, :1 million ton
7)Between march and june , Britain got 100 % of LL,after 22 june,it got less %,but,IMHO,it is not so that it got less in value/tons .
8)I have not seen proofs that after 22 june,Marshall or Churchill got messages that they could not get certain amounts of goods,because these would go to the SU .
9) Sadly enough,there is no information about how much %of the US military production in 1941 was sent (as LL)to Britain /the SU exception for tanks :US production :4052,to Britain (as LL):800,to the SU (as LL):182
10)The goods Britain paid for, were more important than the goods Britain got as LL (in 1941),this is proving the relativity of the importance of LL in 1941 for Britain
11)And,as LL for Britain in 1941 was bigger than LL in 1941 for the SU,it is (IMHO) debunking the claim that LL for Russia in 1941 was vital,because,in last resort,Britain could do in 1941 without LL,while it could not do without the goods it paid for,thus,if LL was not vital for Britain,why would it be vital for the SU ?(always in 1941)

 

I forgot :the source is British War Economy

 

The amount of lend lease sent to the UK also includes stuff that was sent for forwarding on to other countries and was not intended for Britain, why it was dome this way I do not know but it was. This included stuff to the other Allies, Turkey and the USSR (mainly fuel from the middle east sent via persia iirc, Britain sent the fuel and the US sent replacements via lend lease which are shown on inventories but not actually to be paid for)
The Lend Lease tables also do not show what was sent in reverse lend lease to the US from British Commonwealth sources.

The whole lend lease subject is such a complicated mess with hardly any real information available, what there is is rarely broken down by year or route let along monthly scales.

Hence the reason it is such a hotbed of fact flinging and claims that someone else's facts are wrong because they don't agree with such and such.

As a little note it took roughly 6 months for lend lease to start arriving in the UK after the act was signed, up till then apart from the old destroyers Britain had to pay for the goods it received. With the USSR it was roughly the same in that meaningful amounts did not start arriving until early 1942 (that is not to say that nothing received before then either from Britain, which sent its its own badly needed equipment or from the US, was not desperately needed or vital, just that the numbers from the US were small compared to what would come later).

 

The Germans had a "capitalist" economy in 1940? Since when? Or, better yet, in which alternate universe?

 

First off Germany was not a capitalist economy. So please take some classes on that. Secondly, LL was vital in 1941. You are imagining a world where i say everything arrived at the same time. Im saying everything sent and produced in 1941 (stuff that would arrive from 1941-1942 or whenever soviet production would get back to its pre war levels) was vital to the soviet war effort because in 1941 its its production initially fell because of the invasion and russia relied on its pre war stock pile that was quickly running low. The US filled this gap. Go ahead and say Britain helped too. Britain was simply moving things to russia because of what it was also getting from the US. Im sorry if US production was only _____ in 1941. Does this not mean that the US had pre war stockpiles as well? In fact most of the early LL was not new equipment. Unless you consider M3 Lee's to be the latest things coming off US lines in 1941. I would say your statements are far more ignorant than mine. And lastly, once again I never said the communists were doomed without the US. I said simply that the US def tilted the favor to the allies. (Or simply that Germany really had no chance once the US entered the war.) that does not imply or mean anything else you want it to.