Therefore, US dealing with Japan definitely helped allies. In World War II, the Allies outfought the Axis on land, in the air, and at sea. So Lend Lease should not have been a factor in this analysis. But such aircraft were unable to defeat Great Britain. At these loss rates, the Red Army was still far more dependent upon Lend-Lease armour than it was willing to admit, and it did not have enough excess production to fully outfit its best units with T-34s until mid-1943. Copyright 2023 Center for the National Interest All Rights Reserved. But it cannot be denied that the Americans sent us materiel without which we could not have formed our reserves or continued the war. When we look at the situation in Western Front, we see Germans not sweating much to stall Allies after Normandy. If in a worse scenario the Soviets would have lost Leningrad or the Kavkaz oil fields, or maybe even Moscow, they would just move their government, army, factories and supplies to Siberia. Relatives and friends have buried children and others killed in a Russian missile attack on the central Ukrainian city of Uman. Overall, the Western Allies were responsible only for a small fraction of the losses sustained by German infantry and armor between 1941 and 1943 (around 10 percent); however, their contribution in the destruction and occupation of the Luftwaffe was overwhelming. This, in turn, would have delayed the Soviet invasion of Finland until 1940. Neither the Allied Powers (France, Britain, Russia, Italy, Japan, and several smaller states) nor the Central Powers (Germany, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, and Bulgaria) would have gained everything they wanted from a negotiated settlement. What would have happened if the Allies lost ww1? Germany had the military Nazi Germany had a powerful High Seas Fleet, but it was still really no match for the British Royal Navy and it never really could be. Thus, landings in 1944 came at a point at which Soviets broke German armies and were racing towards Berlin. No doubt the historical conditions of America's economic surge during World War II were singular. After that point it was about who would end up with how much of Europe at the end of the war. The same applies to their contribution in forcing the Germans to leave most heavy artillery in the Reich as anti-aircraft weapons, preventing them from being used as anti-tank weapons in the East. On April 23, 1947, this C-37 was forced to make an emergency landing with 36 people on board near the village of Volochanka on the Taimyr Peninsula. British Matilda tanks are loaded onto a ship for transportation to the U.S.S.R. as part of the Lend-Lease program. If Germany developed the right aircraft the war could have turned out differently, but another factor was its industry. Such machines were of higher quality than analogues produced in the Soviet Union, which made a significant contribution to boosting Soviet industrial production. Overall Soviet armour losses in 1942 were 62 per cent of those tanks built which was less than the German build: loss rate and indicated that the Red Army could absorb huge losses in material. It was a great symbol of prestige for the resurgent Kriegsmarine, but the money and material could have been utilized in a larger U-Boat force. Without US, Britain would still be able to prevent Germany from taking off to the seas. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding. WebOf course, the easiest way Germany could have won World War II was by avoiding a fight with Britain, France, and the United States of America. On December 8, 1941, one day after the attack on Pearl Harbor, the United States declared war on Japan. I think the USSR could have beat Germany even without american aid, aldo I wouldn't be surprised if one of the three mayor Soviet cities on the frontline had fallen, probably Stalingrad. This naturally means that though lack of such supplies like radios and vehicles like trucks would be detrimental, they would not have been critical. Yes Lend-Lease was vital, In order to ensure that tank production goals were met by Soviet industry, Stalin made Vyacheslav Malyshev, an engineer who had proven himself in the expansion of Soviet heavy industry in the 1930s, head of the Peoples Commissariat of the Tank Industry of the USSR (NKTP) that was established on 11 September. The lessons from the First World War should have been enough for Hitler and the German high command, but the decision to invade the Soviet Union in June 1941 when the British were still undefeated was a colossal blunder. The war may have lasted into 1946, but the Soviets would still have captured Berlin and probably would have overrun the rest of Germany, too. The outcome could have been quite different. Roosevelt had caved in to Churchills delaying tactics on the invasion before, and now all concerned, from Hopkins to Marshall to Leahy, were worried it might happen again. The Lusitania. But right before the Normandy landings, this region (France, Atlantic Wall) was still considered a holiday region by German army, and sons, relatives of notables, party figures were sent there rather than Eastern Front as one old BBC documentary so bluntly put it. They did not have the important critical resources, minerals needed for war production, hampering their already technologically backward equipment. Would the US have entered WWII on the Nazi front if Germany got the UK to surrender after the blitzkrieg? Thats assuming they were able to make advances. On top of that, we dont see Japan being able to subdue even China before it entered World War II. WebMost Russians believe the Soviet military would have been able to win World War II without the efforts of the U.S. or its allies, a new poll finds. And not surprisingly, not only the few German forces which took over Italys defense from Italian armies defended all of Italy easily and a lot of lives were lost in hilly Italian countryside, but also even at the end of the war the forces in Italy were not able to move out of soft underbelly of Axis towards French hinterland, leave aside Germany. Of course, we are not taking tactical considerations into account. WebAnd without U.S. supplies, the Soviet war effort would have been massively diminished. It was quite well equipped with 9,248 tanks, 6,584 artillery pieces and. Almost all of the 23 victims of the attack on Friday My British born-American raised Mother has told me that my British born-Britsh raised Aunt Bethel always claimed that "Spam saved England" ---because it was ration free. It is hard to overestimate the negative impact Hitlers foolhardy violation of the Munich Pact had upon Chamberlain. Without landing craft another example of wrong equipment and lacking control of the skies of Great Britain, an invasion by Germany was simply impossible. Not to mention the "scorched earth" strategy which had already taken it's toll on the Germans. It had been foreseen in 1916 that if the United States went to war, the Allies military effort against Germany would be upheld by U.S. supplies and by enormous extensions of credit. The United States later declared war on German ally Austria-Hungary on December 7, 1917. It was really the only time Nazi Germany had actually declared war on an enemy, and it needed not to have happened. Could the Allies have won without US ww1? The Germans were fantastically luck between 1939 and 42, which by the way is when Lend-Lease to the Soviets actually kicked in, and their defeat earlier is entirely plausible. The Joint Chiefs of Staff anticipated trouble with Churchill. WebThis June, seventy-five years will have passed since the largest invasion fleet in the history of warfare landed on five beachheads in Normandy, France.On Tuesday, 6 June 1944, D-day kicked off the Allied operation to liberate Western Europe from Nazi control. In conclusion, if Germany won WW1, the German government would have been considerably more powerful and the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman Empires would have lasted longer. Afterwards, he sent troops to occupy the Czech Republic on May 15, 1939 in flagrant violation of the terms of Munich Pact. Finland was only in the war to fight the Soviet Union, while the same was largely true of Romania and Hungary. 4, issues 17-20), Captain America awakens from suspended animation in 1964 to find thatdue to a During World War II the Soviet Union received large amounts of aid from the Western world in the form of supplies and military intervention, both of which were declared to have been irrelevant for the Soviet Unions victory over Nazi Germany by Soviet historians. WebIn 1963, KGB monitoring recorded Soviet Marshal Georgy Zhukov saying: "People say that the allies didn't help us. By Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer who has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers and websites. WebA quick look at the strategic setup, relative war production and technology level of countries seems to suggest that Ww2 could have been won without United States. WebRelatives and friends have buried children and others killed in a Russian missile attack on the central Ukrainian city of Uman. on politics, society, foreign policy, philosophy and tech. The Russian army would have advanced more slowly and few british supplies would have been available. This included such small arms as the MG34, MG42 and the world's first "assault rifle," the StG44. without the US sending in Millions of troops and supplying material I dont see an Entente victory. The Lend-Lease program also provided more than 35,000 radio sets and 32,000 motorcycles. The notion that Britain could have survived long term with the US's aid is total rubbish. Dont Violate the Munich Pact by Occupying the Czech provinces of Bohemia and Moravia. They're exposed to a German counter attack eastward from Munich or westward from Budapest, maybe both at the same time. It is no exaggeration to say that America won the war abroad and the peace at home at the same time. The body of the captain, Maksim Tyurikov, was found by local hunters about 120 kilometers from the wreck in 1953. With Great Britain in the war it meant Germany was dragged into various side campaigns from Greece to North Africa. Germanys resumption of submarine attacks on passenger and merchant ships in 1917 became the primary motivation behind Wilsons decision to lead the United States into World War I. His intended purpose of this second conference would have been to redress Germanys remaining legitimate grievances stemming from the unjust Treaty of Versailles and thereby secure a more just and lasting peace to avert the potential outbreak of World War II. Under Lend-Lease, the United States provided more than one-third of all the explosives used by the Soviet Union during the war. Adolf Hitler joined a list of would-be invaders of the British Isles but clearly didn't remember that no one successfully invaded since 1066 when William the Conqueror defeated Harold II, the last crowned Anglo-Saxon king of England. 3 US as the major part of landings in Northern Africa, Italy and Europe. He could have requested the return of all of Germanys lost eastern territories from Poland. Stalin said that the allies won World War II with British brains, American cash, and Russian blood. However, I have serious doubts that the Germans would have been able to win the war had the USA stay neutral. After the fall of France in June September 1 marked the eightieth anniversary of the outbreak of World War II, which cost the lives of an estimated fifty to sixty million people and was the most terrible war in world history. The Allies likely would have followed suit by making peace with Nazi Germany, too, thus ending World War II after a mere two weeks of fighting. Much of the American fuel was added to lower-grade Soviet fuel to produce the high-octane fuel needed by modern military aircraft. But it would There would have been effects life in britain and russia would have been less plesent and food less plentiful. Germany had to deal with resistance and partisan efforts, and as the tide of war turned its "allies" left the fight. By the onset of the great depression, Americans no longer cared to talk or think about the great war; even veterans felt that way. Would The Allies Have Won Ww2 Without Russia? Most Russians believe the Soviet military would have been able to win World War II without the efforts of the U.S. or its allies, a new poll finds. A major question, a major discussion topic. Does a neutral US still provide lend lease aid to both Britain and the USSR? The major effects would have been on the US. The Moscow Victory Parade on June 24, 1945, involved some 40,000 Red Army soldiers and nearly 1,900 military vehicles. Though, it is questionable how much of the soldiers from Germanys privileged classes would be shipped to Eastern Front in that case. By D-Day, Germany had only 600 fighters left, essentially nothing. Strangely, Hitler did not appear interested in convening such a Four Power Peace Conference. Lend-Lease to the Soviets was critical even in 1941: You really need to broaden your sources, Lend-Lease had nil effect on the outcome of Barbarossa, and again you are trying to narrow the scope of the discussion. War of 1812. The Terror? 21st Army Group could advance from Venice/Trieste to Vienna and Prague, but there's no one on their flanks. Many experts have considered the US impossible to invade because of its major industries, reliable and fast supply lines, large geographical size, geographic location, population size, and difficult regional features. "One-on-one against Hitler's Germany, we would not have withstood its onslaught and would have lost the war. In the Western popular imagination -- particularly the American one -- World War II is a conflict we won. They are related because both buildups on both sides of the cold war started during WW2 to fight the Axis powers. Why did Romania, Hungary, and Bulgaria ally with Germany in WWII and what impact did they have? The entry of the United States was the turning point of the war, because it made the eventual defeat of Germany possible. "During World War II, only the supplies brought in by Lend-Lease prevented the paralysis of rail transport in the Soviet Union.". But it cannot be denied that the Americans sent us materiel Rommel had scarce manpower and supplies at his disposal, yet he made good use of what he had, and Britain succeeded in stopping Germans only with amassing of massive resources and manpower in firstFirst Battle of El Alamein. "It was not just some piece of scrap metal. In 1941-2 we started to lose shipping to U boats faster than we could build them so we would eventually have brought to starvation without the US Liberty ships. Britain, regardless of their stubborn perseverance, was undermanned and under supplied compared to Germany, as evidenced by quick reversal of the early victories they won in North Africa against Italy, after Rommel landed. Although Allied aid was used directly to supply the armed forces with both durable goods and consumables, indirectly it probably released resources to households. There may have been mass starvation in the UK. Most Russians believe the Soviet military would have been able to win World War II without the efforts of the U.S. or its allies, a If we consider Lend Lease never happened, these resources would need to be spent by USSR, and hence hamper war machinery production. And yet, it almost worked. Isolation was no longer an option. Copyright 2023 Center for the National Interest All Rights Reserved. The US had massively increased production of planes and had developed some of the best single engine fighters of the war. Archived post. ww1 - the British had mastered combined arms warfare and the Allies would have won but been willing to cut a less one-sided deal to bring it to an end. However when we look at the sizes of the fronts, we see that even at the end of the war by mobilizing even teenagers, Germany would have still been at half strength compared to Soviets even if they moved all their divisions from Western Front to Eastern Front: The count of aircraft, tanks and especially guns follow a similar pattern, and especially in the case of guns or artillery, the disparage is greater. The first installment of wartime Allied aid that reached the Soviet Union in 1942, although small by later standards, amounted to some 5 per cent of Soviet GNP in that year. And as it happened in the real life, that means the fall of the entire German south flank in East and the loss of the Balkans. Kennedy says that most historians agree that American entry into World War I tipped the scales against Germany and that without the participation of the United States the Allies would have lost, defined as having to make a compromise peace with the Germans largely on German terms. Things werent going well for the. Opposing camps of historians generally agree on that, but little else when it comes to Malyshev encouraged the use of stamped parts and a cast turret in order to cut corners, accepting a certain temporary reduction in quality in return for much greater output of tanks. Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. Again I asked myself the question would the Allied powers had won without US involvement, and it is harder for me to say than the previous thread. "I want to tell you what, from the Russian point of view, the president and the United States have done for victory in this war," Stalin said. 3 US as the major part of landings in Northern Africa, Italy and Europeis an important bit. 2 US taking on Japan and preventing them from attacking anyone else isan important contribution, but especially in the light of #1, it doesnt seem to be critical. This caused him to do an about-face and guarantee Poland against potential German military aggression, which Hitler had never even contemplated up to that point. Would Russia have won ww2 without the US? And Soviet forces would have been much more poorly coordinated with a constant lack of radio equipment. Having to only fight a one-front war against the Soviet Union might have enabled the Poles to hold out for a few months instead of a few weeks against the Soviet onslaught perhaps resulting in a few hundred thousand more Red Army casualties. ", Nikolai Ryzhkov, the last head of the government of the Soviet Union, wrote in 2015 that "it can be confidently stated that [Lend-Lease assistance] did not play a decisive role in the Great Victory.". WebIf the US continued to send supplies to the Allies, then the Allies probably win, nothing else appearing. Eventually, those nations got out of the fight and in the case of Romania joined with the Soviets against the Hungarians. As history tells us, Operation Overlord was a success as Allied forces managed to breach Hitlers Did the Allies win ww1 because of the US? Could Nazi Germany conquer Britain in World War II. Our tank production was lower than Germany's and the quality was appalling. How many would you like? This was the final blow to Japanese war effort and broke the camels back, by the way. The Lend-Lease act was enacted in March 1941 and authorized the United States to provide weapons, provisions, and raw materials to strategically important countries fighting Germany and Japan -- primarily, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, and China. WebWithout the Russian Front, Germany would have turned the beaches of Europe into an impenetrable fortress. Whereas Japan would not benefit from the lack of resources and infrastructure in these areas. It had Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire and Bulgaria on its side. Though Germans would rightfully conclude that at that point a British invasion would not have much impact, therefore reduce their divisions in the West quite a lot. From the depths of the Cold War to the present day, many Soviet and Russian politicians have ignored or downplayed the impact of American assistance to the Soviets, as well as the impact of the entire U.S.-British war against the Nazis.