What if the Allies DID NOT Lend-Lease the USSR?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 окт 2024
- This may be controversial, but the Allied lend-lease to the Soviet Union prevented the country from collapsing, right? Well, not really, as this has been debated over for years.
One side says that the Lend-Lease didn’t contribute a lot to the Soviet war effort but acknowledge it would have delayed a Soviet victory by 12-18 months.
The other side claims that if the allies didn’t lend-lease the soviets, the country could have capitulated. This was apparently admitted by Stalin himself and his top generals.
▬ LINKS ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Discord Server - / discord
Patreon - / membership
RUclips Membership - / @rewriting-history
Book - www.amazon.com...
▬ Chanel Description▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
This channel is a haven for those who crave intellectual stimulation and love to ponder the profound "what ifs" of history. Join our passionate community of history enthusiasts, where engaging discussions and insightful commentaries fuel our collective imagination.
Subscribe now and embark on this enthralling adventure with us. Prepare to question, wonder, and discover as we navigate the corridors of time, peeling back the layers of history to reveal a tapestry of alternate paths and captivating possibilities.
Welcome aboard, fellow explorers of alternative history. Let's rewrite the past together!
▬ Contents of this video ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
00:00 - Video Intro
Did you like the video? If you want to support me further, check out my Patreon! - www.patreon.com/rewritinghistory/membership
I dont have money :(
@@SerboHungarianMapping Average Balkaner
@@rewriting-history Fr
@@rewriting-history I’m broke, and I am American 💀.
@@PrussiaAustriaConfederalall too familiar
The Soviets would have definitely had a much more difficult time.
Yes, exactly if you noticed though as supplies increase the soviets do better and better. They start winning at the end of 41-42 at Moscow. I find the battle of Kursk the most interesting because Stalin had a heads up exactly where they would attack. Even with over a million troops and plenty of time to prepare they still lost a million men to the Germans 200,000 thats insane. Russia couldn't afford to lose anything. The trucks gives them insane mobility fast. The inside information from Britain saved them at Kursk if they wouldn't have known I dont think they would have won.
I think we're seeing a similar dynamic today with Ukraine.
When the USA drags its feet providing supplies for Ukraine, other countries tend to increase their donations to cover the difference.
In WW2 it was mainly the UK and Canada that could provide support to Russia. Today there are many countries giving supplies to Ukraine, not just one or two.
Even Estonia is helping where possible, and they have a small country with a small GDP. Percentage-wise, some of their contributions have been large.
@@faithfulservantofchrist9876Buddy, Lend-Lease was launched after the Battle of Moscow.
@@Жидкий-к5ч Despite this opposition, Roosevelt and his Congressional supporters prevailed, and on March 8, 1941, HR 1776, the Lend-Lease Act (subtitled “An Act to Promote the Defense of the United States”), passed through a final vote in the Senate. On March 11 the president signed it into law.
The Battle of Moscow was a military campaign that consisted of two periods of strategically significant fighting on a 600 km sector of the Eastern Front during World War II, between September 1941 and January 1942
So March in 1941 is before September 1941 if I understand the calendar properly.
Now for the win
The United States began sending supplies to the Soviet Union in August 1941, shortly after Nazi Germany's invasion in June. The supplies were part of the Lend-Lease Act, which was passed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt on March 11, 1941. The act allowed the US to lend or lease war supplies to any country deemed vital to the defense of the US, and the aid to the Soviet Union was intended to help them defeat the Nazis.
I firmly believe if not for the United States sending vehicles, Gas, weapons, tanks, airplanes and food that Russia would have been defeated. Trucks to supply troops is the ability to move men and supplies faster than you can be encircled. Kursk would have been a loss if they didn't know for months ahead of time.
@@Жидкий-к5ч I don't know if my comment was deleted so I will try again
The United States began sending supplies to the Soviet Union in August 1941, shortly after Nazi Germany's invasion in June 1941. The supplies were part of the Lend-Lease Program, which allowed the US to lease or lend war supplies to countries deemed vital to US defense. The US sent millions of tons of supplies to the USSR between October 1941 and July 1945, including:
Weapons, Machine tools, Steam locomotives, Tractors, Gasoline, Clothing, Footwear, Food, Felt boots, and Non-ferrous metals. Good 👍
I think Poland should get less from the Pomerian territories, and get like 60% of Silesia instead, since many Poles lived in Silesia...
I understand that, but we really cannot know how the Allies would have compensated Poland
@@rewriting-history allies would prefer to give poland territories with polish minorieties instead of near fully german pomerania
@@rewriting-history they probably would have given Poland Silesia, as Silesia had more industry and more poles, they wanted to weaken Germany
@@PrussiaAustriaConfederal we know what the allies would have done. The Americans wanted Poland to get east Prussia and upper Silesia. That’s it
@@ddggfcff most likely here, I get why they gave part of East Prussia back, just to annoy the Germans and Soviets
The premise is wrong, lend lease staved off a Soviet collapse because of the radios, rubber and food. Just because it reached its peak in 1944 doesn’t mean it didn’t have a massive effect in 1942 and 1943 , in 1943 the soviets nearly collapsed due to the hunger situation after losing ukraine, the soviets would have most likely fell into statement after Stalingrad
I understand that, but many people have many opinions. Go to the poll that I showed in the video and just see how one side believes the USSR would totally capitulate, and the other says that they will still win.
This is a big debate, and it's not fair to say that it's wrong, as the people are 60/40 split on this issue.
@@rewriting-history it’s not opinions it’s facts
@@jaccocu7213its opinion
@@Names1234-v4g no
@@jaccocu7213it is an opinion.
And if it’s not, then prove it and explain why it’s correct and definitely true
MY BROTHER FROM ANOTHER MOTHER
Ayoooo we got him! Bit early for you to sleep :D
Am I the only one that noticed France owned Sardinia and Italy owned Corsica at 16:06
Bruh how did I miss that
@@rewriting-history You also missed that Armenia, Gerogia and Azerbaijan were not included in the soviet union at 1:14 and 3:19
The Soviet Union still would have won but the death toll would have been, honestly I don't know how much higher, especially if you factor in starvation from their agriculture completely collapsing. So, it saved many Soviet lives no matter how you look at it.
Soviet can't won do you know that ussr was going to fall in 1941 but usa saved them
Before 1944 most of the lend lease was economic or infrastructural. Such as food, processed gasoline and high-octane aviation fuel, trucks (an absolute ton of them without which the offensives of 44 and 45 would've been impossible), rubber radios. etc. It's heavily speculated that the lend lease prevented the USSR from collapsing economically which if that happened would have lead to capitulation or a civil war.
Great summary of my video!
@@rewriting-history the ability of the soviets to win stalingrad was planes and fuel for said planes. There was a very fine line in this history, let alone taking away the lynch pin of soviet resistance. Their trucks, planes, tanks, and even food.
Those poor people would have starve to death, because when Germany invaded, they burned their crops and killed the livestock, and it was just horrible!!! Stalin didn’t help because he disappeared for four or five months and had already purged thousands of his officers a couple years before and the officers in the field were scared to death to do anything because they didn’t wanna be killed also
The lend-lease wasn't crucial for Soviet survival, but it was crucial for Soviet offensives. The Soviets wouldn't reach Berlin. They might not even reach Prussia.
You said it pretty well in the video.
You said it even better: The lend-lease wasn't crucial for Soviet survival, but it was crucial for Soviet offensives.
Damn it I wish I could think of that and put it in the video. Such a good quote and it's so damn accurate!
Which would then make it crucial for soviet survival as they would lose certainly lose Ukrainian and the caucuses, they would be losing their primary sources of food and fuel which they would not be able to take back
This would destroy the soviet economy and food supply which would force them to either completely capitulate or come to terms with the germans
It was crucial for their survival. Especially all the food and fuel they received which they really needed after Germany took Ukraine
@@dragoe7441 they captured Ukraine and belarus before lend lease became a huge factor for soviet offensives into Poland like bagration
@@brandoasan5639 Even soldiers facing starvation and severe shortages can hold off attacks from an overextended enemy, especially when they know that surrender or defeat means certain death.
What if Germany allied China instead of Japan and allied the Balkan Nations ( Greece was pretty good friends with Germany whilst Yugoslavia wanted to be left alone) instead of Italy. 2 scenarios in 1 Vid
That's a cool one, but I'm slightly moving away from WW2 content, still will save it and use it later
@@rewriting-history Cold War?
@@rewriting-history How about the Middle Ages. Like What if the Bulgarians became Byzantium
That wouldn’t make a lot of sense.
@@1mol831 it dont have to be to make much sense
The thing a lot of people forget is that if Lend-lease wasnt sent, the Soviets would have to produce everything sent themselves. So yes, the Soviets did produce tens of thousands of tanks and planes, but that's because the U.S. and Britain sent them so much that all they had to produce was tanks, planes, guns, and ammo. Keep in mind also that in the early years nearly 90% of Soviet Industry was disrupted as it was moved east to safety. So if the Soviets had to produce all of that equipment, those huge tank armies would not have existed.
Yes, exactly my point and what I said in the video. These bigger armies cannot get supply
Dont agree, you forget that soviets already had already those huge tank armys before, they have the recourses to produce insane amounts of tanks with all the factorys put behind the urals, exspecialy the T 34 wich was very cheap to produce(they cut corners for that tank, but yeah)
@@Skibidi24997 They could only produce the huge amounts of tanks because they didn't have to produce trucks, farm equipment, or other items generously donated by the Allies.
@Skibidi24997 most of those huge tank armies from before the war were gone by the beginning of 42, the soviets had lost if I remember right a 1/3rd of their tank force in the first few months. It wasn't until 44 that those huge tank armies were rebuilt with allied lend lease.
@@Skibidi24997 soviets lost 20 500 tanks of their 22 000 tanks by the end of 1941. And replacing those loses wasnt possible only until may-september 1942 because those ural factories had to be build up again, workers had to be transported and housed nearby and supply lines of metals and other material had to be established. Without lend lease trains, railway tracks, trucks, metals like aluminium nickel and other and without food or medicine for the civilians there would be no production established
This alternate timeline is great for Eastern Europe , except for the USSR, and that thumbnail is just perfect.
I'm so glad that you liked the ending and the thumbnail!
No
“Except for the USSR”
Oh no! Anyway…
You discuss war material but an overlooked component of Lend-Lease (and one that Stalin considered arguably more important than war materials) was food. By 1945 (with Lend-Lease mind you), outside the central government, army and key war industries, the Soviet population was severely malnourished. Absent US foodstuffs via Lend-Lease, the Soviet population would rapidly approach famine, especially since the granary of the USSR - Ukraine - was ravaged by the war.
He starved the people anyway. Had the Germans set up anything for the Russian and Ukrainian people they would have switched on kass
Perfect thumbnail 😂😂😂😂
It is very creative, I know :D
@@rewriting-history yep
Two main problems I have with this:
One, the allies promised way before it was even certain that they would win, that they wouldn't lose any terretories, so if the Allies liberated all of Germany, I think they would have restored her 1936 borders.
Two, there is no chance for the monarchie to be resored in Yugoslavia after the war. When Peter II feld the country and set up his government in exile in Britain, he eventually even endorsed Titos Partisans as the legitamate government to discredit the Chetniks. The Partisans actually had so much power, that they liberated the country almost entirely by themselves. Had the Soviets not arrived earlier, they would have taken longer for sure, but Tito would have vertainly held onto power and they would probably also aid the Albanian partisans afterwards, who they were closely aligned to, creating two communist allies in the Balkans. They would probably be somwhat cooperative with Stalin, as he wouldn't have the power to risk subjugating them, but I think Tito would eventually still somewhat open up to the West.
(Shortest Yugo enjoyer rant)
No explanation for this video, because you did make a community post poll about this. Amazing video anyways!
Thanks for that! I guessed that my whole audience and like 10,000 votes know better than me
@@rewriting-history You will see my explanation on the community post about the Allies not aiding the Soviet Union, but that heart and reply was fast!
A huge factor on why the Soviet union did not get a lot of supplies in 1941 was the fact that Hitl did not attack until June 1941 and it will take a couple of months to send supplies
At 3:11, Utah looks thicc
You're welcome!
Well... Awesome scenario, but this German borders are disgusting. 😂
Bordergore at it's finest! Glad you liked the scenario!
Can you do next "What if the USA didn't do the Marshall plan" ?
It will be very interesting by the geopolitic point of view !
Yes, I will do a lot of cold war content next
@@rewriting-history Thank you !
@@rewriting-history oh can't wait!
They'd all be speaking Russian and eating wallpaper paste. Not a bad thing at that.
As an Indian, this is an interesting idea, and I wonder if communism would be unpopular in other countries or more popular?
I bet more unpopular, so the whole Cold war dynamics would be changed
@@rewriting-history actually, yeah. Maybe China would not become communist, and things such as Vietnam would change. But Bulgaria is not communist 👌so good for you
most likely soviets lose more land and people, and maby alies liberate more lands instead of the soviets
Exactly what is going to happen in the video
i expect d day fail as Germany's get more division and oil as they get to baku and Stalingrad gambit fail for Russia.😂
I don't think the Soviets would get any of Korea. I think the US would take all of Korea.
The Soviets are in a much weaker position here. Even when they invade Japanese territory it's does less damage than otl.
It's entierly possible, I just cannot know, even the European front is flawed I would say
This ending imo is much better(speaking as a romanian)
And Romania has a consititutional monarchy,aka not authorian(with the exception that Catol II become slightly authoriam and anti sematic but that would most likely stop after ww2)
Also Romanian South Dobrogea!
@@rewriting-history yeah
I didn't say the reason why it's better so I don't think you ahould really of said that
@@Woah9394most civilized balkans conversation
I think that literally nothing would've changed and Soviet Union would still occupy most of eastern europe and east Germany.
Even if you're right, then this makes for a boring video, as I can just tell you what actually happened. There is no alternate history material in what you believe. hence even if you're right, I cannot do a video on your point
I personally think that the USSR would have not capitulated because Stalin would have put everyone on the front
He could put "everyone on the front" but there won't be food to feed them. The USSR had a lot of important food shipments from lend-lease. Ukraine was THE major food producer for the USSR before WWII. Guess who occupied most of it for a lot of WWII, namely in the critical years of the war?
in our time they were plans to make peace with Germany the US stop that by sending more supply's to the USSR in this timeline I see the USSR making peace if that happiness those solders in the east can be sent to the west to stop the British and US from landing in France Germany can still get oil from the USSR seeing they would be the ones trading with them Germany could demand that from the peace deal
I imagine the Hungarians would surrender before the Germans (they already tried to in our timeline) or make a separate peace that would allow them to retain the Hungarian portions of Czechoslovakia and transylvania... if not both than one of them. Which would probably just be transylvania
I do think it's more possible, yes
what's up, I noticed a error on the map. in 2:15 (I dont know if there is in the others aswell) the soviet union doesn't have Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia.
and also 17:00 you switched sardinia and corsica
Mapping errors, they happen.
@@rewriting-history I know, It wasn't mean to offend, keep It up
Squidward 2 Rise of Glazing Act One:The Black Legion of Thanos Dickriders is formed and Glazing is on the Rise and With it on the Rise King of Glazing Paul Heyman Gets More Power his Plan is to get Everyone to be a Glazer and Glaze With him,the Black Legion of Thanos Dickriders is dealing with Lakers Remnants With the Remnants losing they turn to Paul Act 2:Paul Heyman still Waits to Gain More Power Squidward Reform Bikini Bottom the Other Members of the Black Legion of Thanos Dickriders Try to get More Members with the Black Legion of Thanos Dickriders split Paul Heyman with a Massive Army Strikes Winning Many Battles Act 3:The Black Legion of Thanos Dickriders Form a Plan to Attack Paul the Plan is Send all Troops to one Front and get to the Highplace of Glazing the Plan Succeds and they get to the Highplace They Battle Paul Heyman the Battle is Close with many Member of the Black Legion of Thanos Dickriders Being Wounded with Paul Heyman Almost Winning But Squidward Wins in the End Post Credits Scene: Caseoh is Planing on his Planet to Eat
Wtf
@@rewriting-history 🗿🗿🗿
Lot of the land lease was dehidrated food whinout it there would be probably a famine
Yes, but there was one guy in the comments saying it didn't do anything. There are some people who say not a lot would change and an extra street would go to the west in Berlin. I support your position, but this debate is really heated...
3:19 why doesn’t the USSR own the caucus nations?
Because I forgot to color them in, sad
Germany keeping Silesia but losing Pommern in unrealistic. Given that Germany keeps Königsberg, Germany should have Pommern too, and Poland would have gotten Silesia
I am no expert, so Poland getting a bit of both is possible.
@@rewriting-history woah thanks for replying. Well just looking at the map, Germany keeping Pommern and Königsberg and Poland getting Silesia makes more sense, otherwise it kinda looks like hoi4 borders 😅
It would maybe delay the Soviets for like 1 and a half years at most. The reality is Stalin is too delusional to Surrender and Germany doesn't have the Supplies and Good enough Logistics to actually keep advancing. The Only thing that would actually change is the Capability of Soviet Offensives. Which would be really bad. Soviet Defense isn't very likely to be majorly affected.
Assuming that the Air War above Western Europe and Germany was in Germany's favor throughout 1942-early 1945 with the Germany industries and oil production facilities will not be affected at all. The Germans would had been able to resupply their troops at Eastern Front at will and the chances would be that V-1 and V-2 rockets would be launched against Soviet industries from Western Russia. The same could not be said for the Soviets, without adequate supplies namely food, clothing, shoes, radio, medical supplies and reliable gun powder , it will not matter if they had excellent defensive position if they cannot hold it since they are so hungry, cold, with no communication with high command, no hope of reinforcements and means to take care of their wounded, they will be forced to capitulate.
Tito's partizans littilary menaged whole war all on their own with mynor help from Cominternt at end of the War...
I know, but this time the Allies would liberate Yugoslavia before Tito rises to power. The Chetniks can be the ones to liberate Yugoslavia this time. Don't forget that I predicted the Allies would successfully land in Greece in 1943
Yugoslavia would still be communist as communist fighters under Tito fought against Italy and Germany and managed to nearly retake the country on their own so they’d probably end up communist not a monarchy
Hello Bulgarian bro! What about you make a video about what if Germany won the battle of Kursk? (If you havent already)
Hello, I have not made such a scenario, but even if Germany won, they would still lose WW2, so not a lot would change. Still, thanks for the idea!
@@rewriting-history but remember that if Germany got Kursk then there would be a stalemate for 1 year. So perhaps the allies would be able to reach the Vistula river! And the Soviet could maybe get Romania and Eastern Poland. Well if you dont want to, that cool, thanks for all the videos you made anyways!
Yo no soy fan de la Unión Soviética pero sin la ayuda de la URSS,nosotros en Europa estaríamos todavía bajo el nazismo
Mucha gente cree que no por la propaganda que se hizo desde décadas,pero es así
Check whos in charge in your nations economy. if its not your people, its foreign financiers. only crime they did was stand up to that. So they are free, sovereign like the "axis of evil" is today. And the US president has dementia
Without the germans invading first instead of how the ussr had planed it, the world both here in europe and in the middleast would be alot worse
1:14 The USSR somehow lost the Caucasian countries and Warsaw was displayed further east before that scene.
Why do you assume western allies would achieve the same results in D-Day in such scenario?
One of the many reasons of D-Day success was that germans didn't manage to deploy as much troops to western front because most were bussy trying to maintain the desperate situation of collapsing eastern front in 1944.
The lend lease main contribution to eastern front was felt in late 1943 and 1944, when Soviets started operation bagration, which destroyed deffensive lines of german troops, throwing german general staff into panic, sending more troops into front line of the east, which resulted in worse deffense on the atlantic beaches and italian campaign and let Wallies to win and establish breach head in France. Are you just relying on feelings and vibes?
But none of that even matteres because why would Soviets even try to continue the war if western allies just abandon them like that? Like Stalin could've just put a massive effort in peace talks with the germans when they would start getting upper hand and convince either Hitler or his generals. German government was already starting to gert desperate and losing faith in Hitler, there even was attempted coup against Hitler which wanted a seperate peace with who ever could give them a seperate peace.
Soviets and Germans could've just sued for Status quo ante bellum and return back to 1941 borders and let Germans deal with treaterouse allies with full might of freed eastern front troops alone.
In real world, Stalin was already getting tired of Churchil not oppening a new front in 1943 and demanding for new offensives. This put Churchil into massive panic and trying to assure Stalin that they still weren't ready and it will come soon. He knew that Soviets could've just gave up and negotiate a seperate peace, leaving the whole Reich for them to deal with.
The Allied victory in WW2 was a collective effort of all participants and their sacrifices and this is what led to victory and liberation of europe from a genocidal regime.
This is a very bad and uninformed video.
Sorry that you didn't like it, but I went over a big period of history in just 20 minutes. I cannot explain everything about the lend lease and all the military operations after it in just 20 minutes. I am not going to spend hours on that, so this is the best I could do in that time.
I understand your points, but you need to consider and realise that I do this mostly for entertainment. If I do the most realistic thing possible, then absolutely nothing changes, apart from like one neighborhood from Berlin going to the west, instead of to the East.
> In real world, Stalin was already getting tired of Churchil not oppening a new front in 1943 and demanding for new offensives.This is simply not true. When the British asked Molotov if the Western Allies should open up a new front in 1943 in exchange for reducing the lend lease to the USSR (since this early D-Day would've required a lot of equipment), the Soviets adamantly refused. They needed the lend lease even if it meant D-Day being delayed.It may not be absolute proof that the USSR was close to capitulation at that point (even with all the lend lease!), but it is still evidence pointing to that direction.
What if the great purge never happened
Nice one! will save it for later!
I have a video idea "what if Četniks (monarchist movement in Yougoslavia) won WW2 instead of Partizans love your videos
I don't know what would change in that case... Also glad you like the videos!
Sometimes history would be slightly better if it went another way then how it did.
Or it can go a lot worse. Depends on where you live
Good video as always! Keep it up!
Thanks, will do!
You arè greatly underestimating why the lend lease was important for the western allies too. There are huge consequences for them if the USSR falls. All those soviet resources would be going to Germany. Which means far more German production. Whole army, air and navy divisions would still have been in tact. D day the way it was carried out would have had to be much larger. Germany would have been able to provide even more resources and military aid to Japan and Italy. I think I heard somewhere that Churchill was glad the Soviets had been dragged into the war.
16:41
Considering the German people inside of Pommerania I see it more likely Oberschlesien (also pretty polish) and the Polish, East Prussian territories are given instead of pommerania. Therefore Germany would likely have a little military base in Königsberg like Russia has today in Kaliniengrad.
But maybe I'm also German biased idk 😅
I agree, it was a mistake on my part. Still the treaty is at the end and it doesn't matter in any way, as the video was already over
LOVE YOUR CONTENT! Thanks For this ❤❤❤❤
Thanks for watching!
Good video what if Ukraine kept its nukes instead giving it to Russia?
I thought of making it into a short, but not a lot would happen
stalin be like; WHAT?! HELP ME!!
The comments section is technically just a bunch of nerds interacting with each other
Thing is. Leningrad falls and then the front collapses
2:07 Erm Well Actually Britain Owned Hong Kong And Malta You Forgot.
They are pretty much invisible on this map
2 remarks.
1. Besides operational stuff, literally whole factories including lathes, mills and stuff were sent to the Sovjets. Don't forget that.
2. If the US hadn't sent the stuff to the Sovjets, they would have used it themselves; which would have changed and sped up the whole D-day and following invasion.
Which specific factories were sent to the USSR?
Babe wake up I pissed my pants.
I meant Rewriting history uploaded
huh
They wouldn’t have had any of the bearings for their tanks or any of their armor, their trucks, even their T34 chassis were made in the United States. Those chassis were used in the US Stewart tanks, I don’t know what you’ve been fighting with. If it wasn’t for the trucks that were sent there never would be fuel at the front lines. It’s not even an argument.
"They wouldn’t have had any of the bearings for their tanks or any of their armor, their trucks, even their T34 chassis were made in the United States" Seriously, they wouldn't have it at all if it weren't for Lend-Lease?
Have you thought about doing more conclusion based scenarios rather than divergence based scenarios? What I mean is a scenario where there is a certain conclusion, through whatever series of events that you see most likely, that occurs, and what you think would result as a response to it. Example is Germany winning WW2. There would have to be a massive series of divergences to allow for that to happen, rather than a few such as those required for videos like these (One diplomat doesn't get replaced). These other types of scenarios allow, or even necessitate to give context, a narrative explanation of history. You may like this to experiment.
I have thought about it, but my audience isn't super interested in this. Conclusion based scenarios are slightly more boring, and I can make a whole video of alternate history, but have a conclusion at the end. There is no need for a whole video, I think
If you don’t think lend lease was vital for the soviets then just watch Zvalid what if the USA joined Germany it’s amazing in depth and mentions what specific units they are using in theory and the video is long yes but is a lot better then this vid.
I just tried to answer a question, I am glad you liked his video more than mine tho :)
I think without Lend-Lease Stalingrad and Leningrad would have fallen in 1942 and in 1943 Moskow would fall. After that Germany would be able too entrench for sucessful defense in east and west until a peace treaty could be achieved.
Nonsense
Can you make a what if the axis won world war 2?
In the future I might
Bulgarian relations to Yugoslavia, Greece, and Romania: 🤬🤬
Probably others have also pointed this out but here I go. On your world map the USSR doesn't control the Caucasus. Little mistake, no biggy.
Like your videos btw!!
Glad you like them! Yeah it's a minor mistake due to mapping, but it's no big deal. It's hard as I work with multiple maps and if I make a change on one, I have to carry it out to the other. Such mistakes happen because of that
I lost the Bet.
Sad
Without the loan lease, Stalin would have had to play more on the formed Anders Army and take advantage of it, which would have caused Stalin to have to renounce Eastern Poland, perhaps after World War II it would have resulted in the rebirth of the Republic of Poland from the times of the greatest power and the USSR. Greater difficulties in reconstruction after the war: After the end of the war, The USSR would have to deal with greater difficulties in rebuilding the country and economy. The lack of lend-lease support could result in a longer period of economic and social stagnation after the war.
Could you do a video on if Japan annexed the German colony in New Guinea after the first world war?
I can, but I don't see what would change
@@rewriting-history My thought was that if the Japanese owned this territory then in WW2 they would be able to capture more territory in Australia and be able to set up air fields witch would lead to more pressure on Australia witch could lead to the Australians to focusing their military on the Japanese so the Italians would capture Tobruk and push the British back faster so the African front could continue onto 1943 the USSR would also be slowed down about half a year thanks to the Germans not focusing on Italy. So by the time Belin was captured in our time, the USSR would capture Warsaw, and in early 1946 D-day would take place and the Germans would collapse in 1946 but the USSR would capitulate Hamburg and Munich then the USSR would invade Japan and the war drags into 1947 but the Soviets get more of Germany, Austria and the Korean Peninsula now that I think of it this idea is pretty stupid so I'll probably just delete this comment
Kind of like what the Germans U-boats and surface fleet was doing to the arctic convoys.
So what if the U-boat campaign was successful in the Atlantic in starving Britain out of the war?
The US also sent 2000 locomotives to the USSR.
1966 to be precise, some of it after the capitulation of Germany. The first deliveries of locomotives took place in November 1943 (6 pcs.). 88% of the locomotives arrived in the last year of the war after the war. On the day the war broke out, the USSR had 27-29 thousand locomotives
What if Kiev Rus' fended off the mongol invasion?
In my view without the lend lease in 43 and 44 the mass soviet offensives would have not been possible or at best greatly reduced. My guess is by the time Berlin falls the soviet would just be reaching Warsaw. The allies if they are not aiding the soviets likely do not agree on the division of europe at least to the same favor the soviets got.
Yeah I generally agree because the amount of pressure Germany was under was way too much to handle after so long which would allow the Soviets to make some gains without lend lease.
You're assuming allies themselves can get anywhere
Germany would win by late 1942 or early 1943
Whall we have what if ideas
-Roosevelt won 1912 (Which might led to multi party idk)
-FDR Didnt die in 1945
-JFK didn't die in 1963
-RFK didn't die in 1968
-Vietnam war escalated
-South won vietnam war
You are absolutely underestimating the USSR. Without lend lease the front would not just stay static. American trucks helped, but it's not like the Soviets would have nothing without them. They made their own trucks, not as much and they weren't as good, but they could make them. And they had horse logistics, which wasn't as good but it's better than nothing on the Russian steppe, and Germany got pretty far with horses. The Soviets would keep making slow gains from 1943 onwards. The more important question is whether the Soviets would make peace with Germany. If the West wasn't helping, they may negotiate to get their core territories back, then Germany could send everything from the East over to the West. You're overlooking very important things.
The Germans got as far as they did when they were partially motorized, aka the first year of operation Barbarossa, and then they ran out of fuel reserves in november, and nearly completely stalled. The Soviets barely produced any of their own trucks because of the ones they were receiving from the US, and if they had to build their own, those are resources that need to be redirected to do that. The important things the soviets received were things you don't think about, because they didn't think about it either and as a result barely produced, if didnt produce any at all, like shoes, trucks and food. The Soviet Union was on the verge of a massive famine that was partially relieved by shipments of shelf stable foodstuffs from the US, (virtually no civilians got any, but they were able to get the domestically produced food that the soldiers wouldnt need due to the american food shipments). I don't think the Soviets would have lost without the lend lease, but I don't think they would have been able to advance as fast as they did without it. They would have been in the same if not a little worse of a supply situation as the Germans were after 41, and like the Germans would only be able to advance in one sector of the front at a time, and not the entire front like the initial stages of Barbarrosa, or the Soviets after Stalingard.
The problem is, it's not the Soviet people we are under estimating, it's the Soviet logistics system that we are criticizing. Their trucks were copies of Ford Trucks that were designed for American roads, all of their modern pre-WW II factories were designed by American sand Europeans and most of the factory equipment were either American built or copied. The vast majority of Soviets were either under nourished or malnourished even before Operation Barbarossa and Stalin's Pre- WW II 5 year plans were economically and agriculturally disastrous. You also have to remember, the Western Allies especially UK were already doing strategic bombing since 1941 and with the Americans in late 1942 forcing German anti aircraft 88s and their skilled crew to be moved back to Germany. Without the Air War over Western Europe, the Germans would had a much better logistics system than what they actually had due to the Air War.
You do understand that without the Pacific War, the United States could had brought their entire Pacific Fleet and their carriers, the entire Marine Corp and MacArthur's armies as well as the entire British and Commonwealth troops to bear, right? You should also understand that the B-29s would be also available to the ETO and that means the Atom Bombs would be in play. Remember, the Pacific theatre of Operations was were all the troop transports, landing craft and specialized ones were found. Also, the most modern aircraft carriers, fast battleships, modern WW II cruisers and destroyers. What it meant was that the Western Allies can land in June 6, 1944 not only in Normandy but in Holland and even Northern Germany or Denmark in massive numbers with overwhelming firepower and air dominance. Imagine having Marine Corsairs, Navy Hellcats along with Mustangs, Spitfire and Hurricanes flying overhead fighter protection with Navy Dive Bombers over the beaches of Western Europe. Tell me, what would happen to Germany if the combined Pacific and Atlantic Fleet of the US and British Navies were able to have naval dominance over the North Sea as well as to enter the Baltic Sea and the Germans would be forced to deal with both land based aircraft including B-29s and carrier based aircraft supported by the Iowa class battleships, Atlanta class cruises and Destroyers everyday?
In my opinion the lend lease prevented the fall of moscow or stalingrad and/or leningrad.
Yes, I mentioned that with Stalingrad falling in 1943 (more likely)
Studebaker trucks and Spam got the Soviet Red Army to Berlin.
Fake, in 1943 5% of all trucks in the front was american, in 1944 20% of all trucks where american. It was an important help, but it was not decisive for soviet victory.
People on both sides overcomplicate this debate. The effect of lend lease happened in several phases and all are very much contributed to soviet victory. In 1942 LL did not reach its peak, but it gave the soviet war economy breathing room to organize itself and speed it up by filling critical bottlenecks. Others have argued it was absolutely critical in the 1942 german campaign in the caucasus, soviet forces here were effectively cut off and without the persian corridor would have collapsed. Its role in 1943 was also important, as it allowed soviet forces to absorb more losses and keep the momentum going, otherwise 1943 would have been much more of a back and forth.
wow, this was surprisingly one of the most interesting scenario's you've covered so far. i'm eating up your videos like cake. love ur work!!
Glad you like them! I also really appreciate you liked this one so much!
The us was sending much needed materials by August.
The Lend-Lease program had several phases, including:
Pre-Lend-Lease: June 22, 1941-September 30, 1941, when supplies were paid for with gold and other minerals
First protocol period: October 1, 1941-June 30, 1942, when the UK manufactured and delivered supplies with US financing
Second protocol period: July 1, 1942-June 30, 1943
Third protocol period: July 1, 1943-June 30, 1944
Especially those first shipments that were sent months after Germany declared war. Without those initial shipments, ussr wouldn't have Factories up as fast as they did in later stages.
The Soviet Union suffered significant damage at the beginning of World War II, including the destruction of many buildings and infrastructure:
Buildings
6 million houses, 82,000 schools, 43,000 libraries, and 6,000 hospitals were destroyed
Infrastructure
98,000 farms, 32,000 factories, and thousands of miles of roads and railways were destroyed
Industrial capacity
By 1943, the Soviet Union had lost two-thirds of its industrial capacity to the Nazi advance
Bombing
German bombers struck the industrial centers of the Volga region, including Gorky, Yaroslavl, and Saratov, in preparation for a major offensive operation in 1943
This is what english spoken in Cyrillic sounds like.
I always wondered what that sounded like
0:42 these figures show the FINANCIAL contributions. In 1944, the financial value of the aid was so high because by then, the allies were delivering vehicles and complex machines, which had become very expensive over the course of the war. Meanwhile, in 1942, the allied contribution was mainly food and raw materiels, which were pretty cheap because the US could buy from the entire american hemisphere. These contributions weren't that large in financial terms, but they were much more consequential, because they allowed the soviets to draft millions of men that would have otherwise been needed on the farms and mines. Without lend lease, the soviet union would have run out of manpower in March of 1943 instead of May 1944. Ergo: No counter offensive into Ukraine, no Operation Bagration. The eastern front would have remained stagnant after Stalingrad. As someone else said in the comments: Lend-lease was not necessary for Soviet Survival, but without it, there couldn't have been any offensives.
The good timeline
Unless you're Bulgarian
I think tito will rule Yugoslavia cuz peter allows Tito to rule the nation rather any types of government
Dope video to listen while breakfasting
Thanks for listening! Hope you liked it!
It will be more interesting to do video WHAT IF USA DID NOT SUPPORT 3RD REICH whole war. Full official trade until 1942 ban and then trade through Mexico, Venezuela, Spain and other countries including large amount of delivered oil. Not to mention US assets in Germany that were not bombed because of US bussiness shares in companies like IG Farben.
Nice
Glad you liked it!
I feel that it would be difficult to give Pomerania and South Prussia to Poland as the Soviets would not be there to ethnically cleanse East Germany in this timeline, also, especially since the Prussians were some of the most bitter Germans towards Poland.
This analysis have a really large flaw. It basically assumes that all of the lend lease was weapon-systems. This was not the case. While the heaviest part was weapon system, the most important part was components and machine tools.
Its worth saying that the first shipment was army boots, uniforms, rifles, grenades MRI and other really basic stuff. Russian soldiers was literally going barefoot in the snow prior to the first shipment. This was a problem because the moral of the barefoot soldiers was really low. The first shipment came to Moscow weeks if not days before the city would have collapsed. This allowed them to fully equip thousands and thousands of soldiers in a matter of days.. Is might have save Moscow or at least shortens the battle of the city considerably.
In the battle of Stalingrad it was even more important. Everyone knows the story about the tanks driving out of the factory to the battlefield. But hardly anyone knows why. When you think of it, it makes no sense. Who come they had a huge stock of T34 just sitting around.
Well, they didn´t.. The tanks was almost finished, but lacked one component. The engines. Now it happen to be so that the engine was licensed from France, and UK had the ability to produce the same engine. While a engine is pretty heavy, its nothing compare to a full tank. This allowed USSR to quickly just mount finished engines in finished tanks.
Why they didn´t have engines was pretty simple. There engine plant was overrun. And also there rifeling plant.
And here is the most important and less understood part of the leand lease. The machine tools. While the machine tools was not many tons, they where the most expensive and also most important part. Think of machine tools as a flat pack factory. So the western allies simply shipped over a new rifling factory as well as a new engine production factory. Well they actually shipped several factories of each type. For instance they shipped a whole ford truck factory. That factory was producing trucks all the way into the 1980s.
So while the trucks, tanks and planes was he most obvius part, and probobly the heaviest. it was by far not the most important
You're exaggerating about the Red Army's shortage of boots. The Russians never experienced a shortage of clothing and uniforms. On the contrary, the Germans tore off the greatcoats and boots of dead Red Army soldiers because of their better quality.
@@Жидкий-к5ч and here we got the mandatory communist propagnada.
Do you live in a communisr country?
@@matsv201 Schizo.
What If The Americas were never exploited
then america would have to be just put under observation like another prime directive trope?
I guess this is the first post.
Wouldn't do shit, tbh. After the end of the war the USSR had a bigger land army than all the Allies combined and had the most mechanised army in the world. I don't think this is due to American lend-lease
It isn't, but this is the one side of the debate, which makes it so interesting. The community just cannot agree on this question
No. Just having a big army doesn’t mean you automatically win. The Russian supply system was built on trucks and railways from the allied forces.
@@txd0mask idk man, that won them the war, didn't it? Besides that they produced a lot of tanks and the tanks were actually not that bad. IS-2, T-44 and T-34-85 all were actually comparable with the German Tigers and Panthers but unlike the Germans, the Soviets had the numbers to defeat their enemy.
Yugoslavia would still have liberated itself with the Partizans, it's the only country that did so with virtually no assistance.
00:00 Bruh! Why is Georgia independent half the time?
Mapping mistakes do happen... What can I say
@@rewriting-history Do not get their hopes up or down.
I personally think that a lot of people severally under estimate how important trucks are in war.
War most of all isnt won by the weapons, equipment and bravery, those win battles but logistics wins wars. Logistics determines pretty much anything in war, the strategy and tactics. But this also means the same for the enemy. If Russia would have consistently had a lack of trucks, then German strategy would have been different, and likely they would target differently regions to break trough or target for bombings.
(below TLTR :: He suggested the Russians go in trench warfare at one point. I say its over then and there and Germans would win war in mater of a few weeks than. WW2 tanks and planes would undo any trench warfare in a instant.)
I also doubt the Germans would get into a trench war with the Russians, even if they set up those trench lines while Germans are advancing, once the Germans hit those i very much doubt there plan would be to also shift over to trench warfare... And to be clear if you go into trench warfare trucks are still very important for logistics. So why would the Germans accept to shift to that? They can just use more modern war machine to breakthrough at a few locations and start attacking them from behind, this would cause entire Russian line to flee as trench's are notoriously bad once you get attacked from behind. Any risk of Russians advancing at the trench lines where there are no Germans is also not really a risk, cause why set up an entire trench network and pull back to it, if you are just going to advance and leave whole sections empty, plus as said with a lack of trucks they would have no real means to advance anywhere of consequence either before they would be intercepted by the faster moving Germans.
So incase of your prediction of the Russians going into Trench war, i think that would be the moment the Germans would have won in a very short period. As over such a stretched out defensive line the depth of it would be completely lacking, and this worked in world war 1, cause tanks where really bad and once they started to get better that pretty much ended the war. But in world war 2 even at the start Tanks would have been able to race over them... like literally race, not to forget how much more accurate and powerful artillery had become and than there are planes... I mean real planes not ww1 things but ww2 things like dive bombers and planes able to carpet bomb you, or drop bombs that would instantly turn any area in a small crater.. and lets not forget the worse part... paratroopers, going right back to ... Trench's notoriously bad!!! when enemy is also behind you.
Naw. Even as things went there was debate about driving to Moscow. Patton famously said that we might as well fight immediately because 2022 was on the way. If we had the extra kit AND a much better position, there's no way we'd have quit.
We could have won WW2 but we didn't bother. The USSR was NOT a real ally, but a lipsticked pig. Looking around and saying "no totalitarian pigs enslaving half of Europe around here, just gorgeous women" doesn't make it so. Lend Lease enabled the cowardly decision to functionally lose WW2, turning it into the disastrous Cold War.
You must look at Red Army losses during the war. Low estimates of the Red Army is 14 million KIAs and 3 million MIAs in addition, with some estimates total 23 million Red Army losses. These losses were occurred with all the lend lease aid that arrived. Without lend lease aid, the above losses would have been much higher to the point the USSR would have to agree to a settled peace. Also, you must consider the increase in LL aid each year as a reason for the USSR to keep fighting.
On 14 February 2017 at a hearing of the Russian State Duma a presentation by legislator Nikolai Zemtsov, a member of the non-governmental organization Immortal regiment of Russia, maintained that documents of the now defunct Soviet Gosplan indicated that Soviet war dead were almost 42 million (19 million military and 23 million civilians). In 2017 the Russian historian Igor Ivlev put Soviet war dead at 42 million people (19.4 million military and 22.6 million civilians). According to Ivlev, Soviet State Planning Committee documents put the Soviet population at 205 million in June 1941 and 169.8 million for June 1945. Taking into account the 17.6 million births and 10.3 million natural deaths, leaving almost 42 million in war-related losses according to his research. The details of Ivlev's calculations were first announced at a parliamentary readings about the number of losses of the USSR during the Great Patriotic War.[78][79] Ivlev's figures are endorsed by the Russian civic organization Immortal Regiment and have been discussed in the Russian media recently.[13] Ivlev has published a summary of his arguments on the Russian website Demoscope Weekly. According to Ivlev's calculations based on the number of Soviet Communist party and Komsomol members conscripted, military dead and missing were 17.8 million. V. E. Korol-Korol estimated overall Soviet war dead at 46 million including military dead of 23 million. He claimed that the official figure of 8.7 million military dead was "groundless", based on battle accounts from across the Eastern Front. Korol held that the official figures of Krivosheev were an attempt to cover up the disregard for human life by the military leaders under Stalin. Korol cited Soviet authors writing during the Glasnost era that put wartime losses much higher than the official figures; In 1990 General I. A. Gerasimov published information from the Russian Military Archives database that put losses at 16.2 million enlisted men and 1.2 million officers. Korol also cited historian-archivist Iu. Geller who put losses at 46 million, including military dead of 23 million. and A.N. Mertsalov's estimate of 14 million military dead based on documents in the Russian Military Archives.
There's something not mentioned in this video about a very critical part of the historical lend-lease: Food shipments to Russia.
Ukraine was the breadbasket of the USSR. Suddenly most of it was occupied by the Axis powers. Food production by the USSR plummeted. Farming was still manpower intensive for the Soviet Union, but guess what was sucking away manpower? Military conscription.
The Allies were sending lots of food to Russia. The USSR in particular asked the United States for meats, fats, oils, butter, etc. The US sent lots of powdered foods suitable for shipment across the world. Canned meats, powdered milk and eggs, dried vegetables, and more.
Historically with this lend-lease support, the Soviets were able to make sure the children and armed forces were fed well enough. Anyone outside these two categories and not integral to war effort was pretty screwed.
No lend-lease? No food aid for the USSR. People can talk about T-34 tank production all they want. But you need food to keep a country and war effort going. If you want to see what happens when food runs low for an army on a wider basis, look into the Imperial Japanese Army in WWII.
HINT: The greatest killer of Japanese service men in WWII was not combat. It was starvation.
Doesn't matter if Stalin continues fighting if the soldiers don't, and without food, they wouldn't fight.
If they don't fight, Germany can reasonably take Leningrad Stalingrad and Moscow, they nearly did anyways, if that happens, political turmoil revolts and mutinies cause the USSR to collapse at least in terms of fighting the Germans. There is no turning the tides.
Basically Russia loses the same way it did in WW1
I believe the premise of your video is incorrect. The Lendlease program staved off the collapse of the Soviet union in 1942. During that time what the Soviet union needed most was clothing food medicine. Ammunition and transport trucks and equipment just because it didn’t reach the peak until 1944. Didn’t mean it didn’t have a profound effect. On Battles such as Stalingrad in 1942. Where the medicine used to save Soviet lives after mass charges were all manufactured and made in the United States. Most of the clothing that the Soviet soldiers were wearing was made in the United States. And the ammunition for the rifles what rifles they had. Was made in the United States.
It’s actually really simple without the supplies from the lend lease program and the northern convoys to bring those supplies into Russian ports in Severodvinsk and others you would likely still have the mass charges but instead they would be mostly naked Russian soldiers with no medicine to keep them alive after they were wounded and a handful of rounds for every 20 rifles
More than half of all soviet explosive materials were supplied by lend-lease.this includes ammunition propellant. 50% less ammuntion is crippling. The vast majority of soviet aviation fuel and aluminium was also lend lease.
People look at tank numbers and plane numbers and even truck and train numbers and think lend lease wasn't important to soviet survival because the Soviets could have just diverted tank production to make up for these heavy equipment. But what they don't realise is the Soviets simply didn't have the raw materials to build planes on their own in numbers during the war, nor did they have the chemical industry to make proper fuel or explosives for bombs. This is crippling.
Even in 1942 and 43 the stuff they did send was rather critical. you need to break down and say of the stuff they sent early on how much did it help or not. Saying well most of the aid arrived after the soviets were wining is not a sound argument, because if the material aid in 42 43 was a critical latch key. and they'd be F'd without it. then the 1944 matters would be irrelevant. I heard soviets got lots of trucks socks boots etc. among lots of other things. maybe you'd say oh socks and boots aren't a big deal. well try fighting in the cold with cardboard on your feet. how much of your army would freeze to death or become a frostbitten casuallty. sure maybe the russans had the manpower replenish but could also have stalled the push back.
The real question is if the USSR could have held onto their main logistical hub Moscow for reinforcements from the east during the battle for Moscow when almost all their tanks at that time were British tanks provided through lend-lease. If Moscow had fallen then even IF Lend Lease had begon there would not have been a reliable way to get the LL supplies to where they needed to be from Iran or Murmansk. Not even going to mention that Lend Lease provided most of the trains and aircraft fuel. Without Lend Lease it would add another 2-3 years to combat on the eastern front and due to food shortages it may still result in a defeat of of the USSR. It would tie up enormous amounts of German resources though in the east potentially allowing for an early liberation of western Europe.
The boarders of east and west Germany would have been different would be a realistic expectation. It would have also likely gone into July 1945 before Germany surrendered fully assuming D day still was successful. All Germany might have effectively been what would become West Germany but that is getting into speciation.
Think its a mistake to discount the lend-lease of the initial ~14-18months. The situation at both leningrad, stalinggrad and moscow was not characterised by a massiv sovjet advantage. For leningrad and stalingrad it say the fight was very close and so, it is not unreasonable to say that the last few percentages of resources available to the USSR were the deciding ones at that point in time. I am still in agreement with the notion that it would not have caused the USSR to capitulate outright.