Re: 1 in 20 UK schoolchildren thought Hitler was coach of a German football team
- From: "deemsbill@xxxxxxx" <deemsbill@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 11:11:14 -0800 (PST)
On Nov 17, 1:38 pm, Nebulous <j...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 02:55:33 -0800 (PST), "deemsb...@xxxxxxx"
<deemsb...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 17, 2:35 am, Nebulous <j...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:56:48 -0800 (PST), "deemsb...@xxxxxxx"
However the argument that we (US of A, UK, whatever) never provided
any support for the Russians is clearly forgetting that the suppies
provided by the convoys did make a noticeable difference.
Neb-
Lend Lease amounted to 7% of the USSR's total war production. adam
is right that the vast majority didn't arrive until after Stalingrad,
but some had. I've also pointed out several other areas where the US-
UK-Etc were helping to take the pressure off of them by Stalingrad.
PQ 16 - arrived Murmansk May 30th 1942
Battle of Stalingrad - started 17th July 1942
http://www.armed-guard.com/ag79.html
"Stalin sent an urgent message to Churchill in May of 1942 in which
he said, "I am fully aware of the difficulties involved and of the
sacrifices made by Great Britain in the matter (the Russian
convoys). I feel, however, incumbent upon me to approach you with
the request to take all possible measures in order to ensure the
arrival of the above-mentioned materials in the USSR in the course
of May as this is extremely important for our front."
The situation reached a climax that month. Dozens of Russian-bound
ships were waiting in Iceland, and Churchill approved a much-debated
plan to sail a convoy--pQ16, of 34 ships--in the latter part of that
month. "The operation is justified," he said, "if half gets
through."
There was Stalin's own assessment of the importance of these convoys
to Russia's ability to hold back the German invader. It is no
exaggeration, in the light of history, to say that the convoys kept
the Russians in the war. The Russian front was no less important to
the winning of the war than the Normandy landings or the invasion
of Okinawa."
Actually, the Russian Front was arguably MORE important than
the others. The Soviets destroyed the Wehrmacht. Everyone else helped
a bit.
Most Soviet Lend Lease was supplies. We supplied enough rations to
feed every Soviet soldier once per day...in fact, the Soviets referred
to the rations as "Second Fronts". We also supplied close to a million
miles of waterproof telephone cable and tens of thousands of field
telephones, thousands of radio stations, and over 200K trucks. The
Soviet truck fleet was almost all LL in origin.
All of this enabled the Soviets to produce weapons rather than
support/suppplies. The rations allowed them to take more men off the
farms and put them into uniform or weapons' factories. Did Lend Lease
make the difference in victory/loss? Probably not, but it did help
them immensely.
At least one aeroplane!!
http://www.brooklandsmuseum.com/index.php?/explore/hawker-hurricane-i...
Neb
We supplied them with a good number of airplanes and tanks, but
they were a drop in the bucket compared to Soviet production. The real
value of LL was the supplies and support material. The problem with
sending weapons, was they didn't have the same ammunition...which
meant we also had to send ammunition. Also, spare parts because the
Soviets weren't manufacturing spares for Hurricanes, P-39s, Shermans,
etc. Then the proper ammo and parts had to get to the proper units,
etc. The Soviet supply and maintenance systems were stretched enough
without adding more complications.
The Soviets apparently loved the P-39 while the UK and US had
little use for it. Also, the Soviets grouped nearly all the Shermans
together into Tank Corps they used to exploit breakthroughs. That's
because Soviet tanks broke down about every 50 miles while the
Shermans usually went over twice as far between breakdowns.
.
- References:
- Re: 1 in 20 UK schoolchildren thought Hitler was coach of a German football team
- From: Adam Whyte-Settlar
- Re: 1 in 20 UK schoolchildren thought Hitler was coach of a German football team
- From: deemsbill@xxxxxxx
- Re: 1 in 20 UK schoolchildren thought Hitler was coach of a German football team
- From: Adam Whyte-Settlar
- Re: 1 in 20 UK schoolchildren thought Hitler was coach of a German football team
- From: deemsbill@xxxxxxx
- Re: 1 in 20 UK schoolchildren thought Hitler was coach of a German football team
- From: Nebulous
- Re: 1 in 20 UK schoolchildren thought Hitler was coach of a German football team
- From: deemsbill@xxxxxxx
- Re: 1 in 20 UK schoolchildren thought Hitler was coach of a German football team
- From: Nebulous
- Re: 1 in 20 UK schoolchildren thought Hitler was coach of a German football team
- From: deemsbill@xxxxxxx
- Re: 1 in 20 UK schoolchildren thought Hitler was coach of a German football team
- From: Nebulous
- Re: 1 in 20 UK schoolchildren thought Hitler was coach of a German football team
- Prev by Date: Re: 1 in 20 UK schoolchildren thought Hitler was coach of a German football team
- Next by Date: Re: Re teaching of creationism... It is not just the Americans....
- Previous by thread: Re: 1 in 20 UK schoolchildren thought Hitler was coach of a German football team
- Next by thread: Re: 1 in 20 UK schoolchildren thought Hitler was coach of a German football team
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|