Military Review

Allies of the USSR in the Second World War deserve a kind word and a good memory!

266



On May 9, every self-respecting Russian-language website or online publication devoted at least one, or even several articles to Victory Day over the fascist invaders. Of course, the authors who published their materials on “VO” also acted, and this is absolutely correct. However, as they were read, a very strange thought crept into my head and grew stronger: “Something is going wrong!”

And even more than that: “Something is very wrong!”

Seventy-two years ago, the most terrible war of all that mankind had ever known died down. We know that in it fought the armies of many countries divided into two camps. The backbone of one of them was constituted by the Axis countries - Fascist Germany, Italy and Japan not far from them. At the head of those who blocked their path, stood the USSR, Britain and the United States.

Of course, the focus of the power of our enemies was fascist Germany, at the head of which stood Adolf Hitler. There is no doubt that it was the USSR that bore the brunt of the struggle against Hitlerism, and that it was the Country of Soviets that left Germany in the dust. But still - not alone. We were helped by our allies, which in those years the USA and Great Britain became for us. Yes, their contribution to the Victory is much more modest than ours. Yes, they all together did not drink even a tenth of that bowl of misfortunes and sufferings that fell to the lot of our grandfathers and great-grandfathers. Still, many Englishmen and Americans helped us in our struggle, they also suffered torment and grief, many lost their loved ones in that war, many lost their lives for the victory.

Without a doubt, in spite of all the bombing of the Luftwaffe, the British settlements did not receive even a thousandth of the destruction suffered by the Soviet cities and villages. British correspondent Alexander Werth, who visited Stalingrad after the battle, was deeply shocked by what he saw. Later he wrote:

"All the destruction of London can fit in one block of Stalingrad."


Of course, this was an artistic exaggeration, but not to say too big. But does the grief of an English mother, whose child died from a Nazi bomb, differ in some way from the grief of a woman of Stalingrad, whose share was the same loss?

We are talking about the fact that the losses of the United States and Britain cannot be compared with those that the USSR underwent, and this, no doubt, is true. US lost killed 405 thousand people. According to the figures given by Winston S. Churchill, the armed forces of Great Britain, taking into account the soldiers from India and the Dominions, have lost their dead and missing - 412 240 people. Another 30 thousand people lost the English merchant and fishing fleet, and in addition 67 100 people died civilians. Thus, the total losses of the British Empire were 509 340 people, according to other data - only 450 000 people. In other words, our main allies lost less than a million people in World War II.

Of course, these figures are completely lost against the background of 27 millions who died in the USSR. But on the other hand ... imagine a large city, such as Volgograd, Krasnodar or Saratov. With its numerous and long streets, wide squares, high, apartment buildings, traffic jams in the mornings, dozens and even hundreds of thousands of families gathering for dinner in their apartments in the evenings ...


Center Saratov


And suddenly - there is nothing of that. The city, which was recently full of life, is empty, all its inhabitants, until the last man, are dead.

This is the price paid by Britain and the United States for victory in World War II. It is disproportionately smaller than what the Soviet Union gave, but nevertheless it is very, very great. And, no doubt, worthy of the memory of grateful descendants. Their descendants, of course, but also ours with you, because we fought together against a common enemy.

Here lies the Soviet soldier Ivan, originally from Yaroslavl, struck by a fragment of a German projectile during the crossing of the Dnieper. Death overtook the fighter when he had just stepped onto the shore occupied by the fascist invaders, but he still firmly squeezes his rifle, from which he hit the enemies during the crossing. And here - the body of George from Minnesota, lying three steps away from the surf line of Omaha Beach - a machine-gun burst pierced his chest, interrupting his life, but weapons he did not let go of his hands either. Tell me, dear readers of "VO", what is the difference between Ivan from Yaroslavl and George from Minnesota? Both of them were ready to fight for their country, for their ideals, for what they believed in. Both of them stood in order to stop the brown plague with a weapon in their hands. Both did not flinch in battle. Both gave their lives for the victory over the terrible enemy. So how did it happen that only one of them was worthy of our memory, gratitude and admiration?

Allies of the USSR in the Second World War deserve a kind word and a good memory!

Landing on the Dnieper and in Normandy


Of course, it is possible (and necessary!) To say that the Allies opened the second front only in 1944, when the fall of Nazi Germany was in fact foreshadowed. Of course, it is possible (and necessary!) To say that the coast of France was defended by relatively inexperienced divisions, which on the eastern front would become a lubricant for the T-34 tracks, but even they were able to hold back the Anglo-American technology, far superior to them host You can (and should!) Say a lot more. But tell me, what is the fault of that same George from Minnesota, who lies with a shot through chest on the wet sand of Omaha Beach? What did he do wrong? Too late to help? So it was not for him to decide. Not too skillfully fought? So they did not teach, but he did not have time to learn. In the fight against Nazism, he gave the second most important value that he had - his own life. And his honor will be with him forever.

Even during the existence of the Soviet Union, surprising metamorphoses were known, to which he subjected history World War II European and American agitprop. How not to remember "the Polish army took Berlin, and the Soviet helped." Here take the victory of the Soviet troops in the battle of Moscow. Which, generally speaking, was the first major victory over the Wehrmacht, since from the very beginning of World War II, that is, with 1939 r, neither the British, nor the French, nor the Polish, and generally no troops of Western (and pro-Western) countries did not inflict a single German something noticeable defeat. Neither on the scale of the corps, nor on the scale of the division, and indeed, even on the scale of the regiment somehow did not work out very well. The Red Army near Moscow put an entire group of armies to the brink of destruction ... And, in fact, predetermined the defeat of Germany, because it was precisely as a result of the heavy defeat of the Center group that all hopes of a quick victory over the USSR covered themselves with a copper basin. The war became protracted, and in a conflict of this kind, the Axis countries, having far fewer resources than the Allies, could not count on success. And this victory of Soviet weapons ... simply unworthy of mention. So, some kind of nonsense, they piled aside with the corpses, but General Frost intervened. Here Stalingrad is another matter, here the Soviets have achieved something. Although this local success, of course, pales against the background of the Great American Victory in Midway and is completely insignificant in comparison with the achievements of the allied forces in Africa. The fascist backbone, of course, was broken by the brave American marines and commandos during Operation Overlord, and the Soviet army at that time was entertaining itself by raping millions of German women in the territories it had seized. How could it be otherwise? Of course, fascism is very bad, but after all, both Stalin and Hitler are tyrants, dictators, one can say twins ... in general, one field of berries, and indeed the differences between a communist and a fascist are purely cosmetic. And only the power of the combined Anglo-American troops saved Europe, exhausted by the war, from the grin of communism. After all, if not for the Allied forces, the red rink would have swept across Europe right up to the English Channel ...

Anyone, even a little bit familiar with the history of the person, like an oxymoron will cause nothing but the desire to twist his finger at his temple. But, as the French say: "Slander, slander, something will remain." When a lie is repeated for decades, people begin to believe in it.

However, when the author of this article read the materials on Victory Day on the "VO", then at some point he felt himself in the role of an average European or American. Why? Yes, because, oddly enough, our authors did not find a single kind word for allies who had fought with us. On the contrary! The sacred (we will not be afraid of this word) holiday was used ... for “two minutes of hate” (Orwell, if someone had forgotten) in relation to everything western:

"The defeat of Hitler's Germany and its allies thwarted the plans of the masters of the West to enslave the whole of humanity and establish complete domination over it."


Or this:
“The essence of the Western world is the constant robbery, the redistribution of the resources of all mankind in their favor. The West is a world parasite, a vampire ghoul who cannot exist without robberies, invasions and seizures of someone else’s “living space”.


But what about over 800 thousand. John, Jack, Sam and Eugene, who died fighting with arms against the Germans, Italians and Japanese? How is lend-lease? Yes, nothing. Our authors did not have a kind word for them, and indeed there was nothing of this, and this is the end of it. During the Second World War, the West tried to resolve the issue of the destruction of the Russian nation, and if it somehow distinguished itself in military operations against the fascists, it was only the barbaric bombardment of the civilian population of the German and Japanese cities.

Doesn't this remind you of anything?

In fact, of course, our relationship with the West has never been easy. As, incidentally, among the western countries among themselves. To a certain extent, of course, “thank you very much” for this you need to say England, which, as you know, “has no permanent allies, but only permanent interests”. The fact is that, beginning about a century from the sixteenth, England gradually took shape as the strongest maritime power that held world trade under control. This made her super-rich, and, of course, a tasty target for those who would like to take her place.

With the world's most powerful fleetEngland was afraid of only one thing - the unification of Europe, because it was such a Europe that would have the resources to undermine its sea power and land an army directly on the territory of Misty Albion. Accordingly, for centuries the essence of British politics was to form a coalition of weaker European powers against the most powerful with the money that it received from the trade in overseas goods. And the British, in general, didn’t care what kind of power would be the strongest at any given moment, there was nothing personal for them. Has Spain raised its head? Fourth Alliance and War. Has France intensified? England immediately begins to put together and finance anti-Napoleonic coalitions. Is Russia showing “excessive” activity in European politics? Crimean War. Germany, late for the division of the world, is hungry for redistributing the colonies in its favor and is building a powerful fleet? Well, the Entente is being created ...

But what is interesting is that when the nightmare of England nevertheless came true, and Europe found itself under the rule of a single ruler, then for Russia it never ended in anything good. Strictly speaking, Europe was united twice; Napoleon Bonaparte and Adolf Hitler did it. After that, the Russian Empire and the USSR experienced the most terrible invasions in their history, which our ancestors had to stop with great blood.



But then World War II died down, and the era of British dominance was forever in the past. Yes, just changed? In general, nothing - the USSR became an ultimatum-powerful superpower, unequivocally the strongest in Europe. It’s not that a separate country, but all European countries didn’t even have a shadow of a chance to stop the USSR, if it had come to their senses to wet their tracks tanks in the salty waters of the English Channel. And the United States came to the role of England - the same “island” (only bigger and further away), the same ultimatum-powerful fleet, corresponding to the multi-state standard (that is, stronger than that of all other powers combined) and the same possibilities for controlling sea trade, what were the UK once. And now - the continuation of the "old song in a new way" - under the auspices of the superpower and inaccessible to the Soviet tank armada of the USA, an alliance of the weakest states against the strongest - NATO against the USSR - is formed again and the world is slipping into the arms of a new war, this time - a cold ...

In other words, Russia and the United States, as well as Western countries, share a lot. But what is interesting is that the same thing can be said about almost any European country. How much blood between Germany and the same France? After all, they fought in the era of the Napoleonic wars, and in the first and second world war, and many times earlier. The question arises - how then, having a history full of struggle, they managed to become allies during the Cold War?

The answer is quite simple - practicality and expediency. In the event of a Soviet invasion, neither Germany nor France could stand alone against the Soviet army, but in alliance with each other, and with other European countries under the auspices of the United States, they could. The main thing is how to demonize these incomprehensible Russians, so that they look much worse than the usual, in general, the enemy ...

But we do not at all strive to become another European nation. We recognize many achievements of Europe, but for a long time we don’t want to blindly copy European structures in Russia. We believe that our position at the junction of European and Asian civilizations, our very uneasy history, will allow us to finally form a new structure of society in which the merits of the eastern and western paths of development will organically merge. But in this case, we simply cannot afford a “black and white” vision of the world (here we are good elves, and there are evil orcs — enemies). We cannot afford to divide the world into an "empire of good and an empire of evil." We should look at those around us with a much wider view than they look at us.

In other words, we must see not only what separates us, but also what unites us. Or at least once united. We must remember All.

We should not forget that in the composition of the Great Army of Napoleon, which on the night of 12 June 1812 passed through the Neman and entered the Russian Empire, tens of thousands of Austrians and Prussians served. But we also just need to remember that in the monstrous battle of Leipzig, which received the name “Battle of the Nations” in historiography, in which almost 600 thousand soldiers came together on both sides (by the way, Borodino had about 250 thousand) and which finally broke the power of Napoleonic France, the Austrians and Prussians fought shoulder to shoulder with the Russian troops. And, by the way, also the Swedish ones, with whom we, generally speaking, also had everything.

We will remember the monstrous bombardment of Dresden and other cities in its senselessness, when hundreds of American "Fortresses" and English "Lancaster" destroyed civilians by tens and hundreds of thousands of people. But we will also remember the feat of the VT-8 squadron, performed by its pilots in the Battle of Midway.


American deck torpedo bombers


Its commander, John Waldron, the grandson of the Sioux leader, wore an Indian knife next to a service Colt and was an experienced pilot. But the rest of the squadron pilots were just reservists called up a few months ago. Deck aviation In 1942, the United States did not even get close to the power that allowed the Japanese Air Force to destroy it with almost no loss on its part. Before the "turkey hunt" - the destruction of the Japanese carrier-based aviation in the battle of the Mariana Islands, there were two more bloody years of the naval war. And in 1942, even finding previously discovered Japanese aircraft carriers was a very difficult task for American pilots.

Captain-Lieutenant John Waldron had no illusions about the capabilities of his subordinates. Therefore, he “comforted” them with the fact that the hunter's instinct would lead the squadron to the enemy and ordered to follow him. And then, when the Japanese were found, he ordered a pistol shot to move closer to them, and only then - to attack. Only in this way could one expect that inexperienced reservists would be able to hit torpedoes at someone.

This may seem surprising, but Waldron really led his squadron - fifteen TBD "Devastator" torpedo bombers - to the Japanese aircraft carriers. But alas, only torpedo bombers, because their fighter cover got lost somewhere in the clouds (according to other data, it is not so lost that, but seeing what forces to deal with, did not decide to fight, later formally justifying the absence of a signal to attack). Anyway, the American torpedo bombers had no chance - not only did they have to break through the strongest anti-aircraft fire of the Japanese warrant, the wings of the Zero fighter jets were already spread over them ...

And, nevertheless, the torpedo bombers did not hesitate to lay down on the combat course. They flew in some 50 feet (about 15 meters) above the waves directly onto the aircraft carrier Kaga. “Zero” crashed down on them, striking the light fuselages with machine-gun bursts, but they went forward. A fiery hell struck out of dozens of artillery mounts in their faces — they still went ahead. “Devastaytory” died one by one, until only one plane remained of the entire squadron, and then he, shot down, crashed into the waters of the Pacific Ocean. The VT-8 squadron died almost at full strength in a hopeless attack on not only superior, but also overwhelming enemy forces. But not a single American pilot retreated, did not leave the battlefield, did not turn off the combat course.

From 45, the man of her crews survived only one ensign (midshipman) George Gray.



At the moment when his plane hit the water, he was thrown out of the car - he was injured, but he managed to grab the cushion of the airplane seat, which served as a life buoy. Later, at night, he managed to use a life raft, from which he was later removed by an American destroyer.

Here, someone can, of course, remember that it was the US policy that provoked the Japanese to enter the war, and if not for the oil embargo, coupled with the obviously impracticable American ultimatum, then perhaps Japan would not have attacked Pearl Harbor, and then Waldron's squadron would not have to die. But I will answer that all the pre-war domestic and foreign policies of Japan led this country to war, and the question was only whether the descendants of the samurai would attack - the USSR or the USA. Let me also remind you that if it were not for the "provocations of the Americans", then our country, quite possibly, would have had to fight on the Far Eastern Front as well.

We must not forget the contempt with which Chamberlain rejected offers of assistance to the Soviet Union when Stalin tried hard to create an Anglo-French-Soviet alliance capable of stopping fascist Germany. We will not have any special illusions about Winston Spencer Churchill, who, when asked why he suddenly began to support the Bolsheviks so zealously, with whom he had fought so fiercely for so long, replied with the most famous phrase:

"If Hitler had invaded hell, I would at least sympathetically respond to Satan in the House of Commons."


But we should not forget the indomitable spirit of another person who bore the same last name as the British Prime Minister: John Malcolm Thorpe Fleming Churchill.



Yes, he was a fair crank - went to battle with an English war bow and Scottish broadsword, and one of his favorite phrases was:

"Any officer who goes into battle without a sword is armed wrong."


But once he, serving in the forces of special operations during the landing at Salerno, came across a German mortar platoon. Churchill alone (!) Captured the 42 (!!) of the German, forced them to collect all his weapons, including mortars, and brought them in that form to the disposition of British troops. In another operation, during the attack on the island of Brac, his detachment was forced to engage in battle with superior enemy forces. They fought to the last, and all British commandos died. Only Churchill, stunned by a grenade, miraculously survived and captured.

So what do you think? He began with the fact that he managed with the help of newspaper shred and hell as a mined candle butt to set fire to the plane in which he, as a prisoner of war, was carried to the rear. To the Germans, he said nothing, he said that the cause of smoking was one of the pilots in the cockpit ... Then, after entering the prison camp, he tried to escape, was caught, but eventually managed to escape, having passed 150 kilometers on his own two feet along the German rear to the front line. And he continued to fight with the Nazis.

We will remember the reluctance of the British to open a second front in Europe, the American atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But let's not forget about the supply of Lend-Lease high-deficit aviation fuel, explosives, cars, which the USSR produced in insufficient quantities and which our armed forces needed so much. We will remember the American stew, which has saved many people from malnutrition, and someone from starvation. And, of course, about the British sailors who remained forever in the icy waves of the Norwegian and Barents seas, who gave their lives so that we could get all this through the polar convoys.

We must remember everything - both the bad and the good. And on Great Victory Day we should have put aside the memories that divide us from the United States and the countries of the West, but to remember with a kind word more than eight hundred thousand Americans, British, Indians, Australians, New Zealanders and many, many others who put down their heads in the fight against German and Italian fascism, as well as Japanese militarism. Because 9 May is the day of our common triumph over a strong and terrible enemy.

“But why remember this now?” A different reader will ask: “After all, the world is again on the threshold of the cold war, and indeed it is already coming. The United States and the West again, as before, see us as an enemy, again demonizing us in their media, spreading the myths of "these terrible Russians." And if so, why don't we answer them the same? ”

Yes, because our grandfathers and great-grandfathers did not do this to their enemies, and here is a simple example. Fascist Germany went through our lands with fire and sword, flooding them with the blood of millions of Soviet people. Bullying of civilians, violence against our women was not reprehensible for them. They came here as a race of gentlemen, in order to destroy us as a nation, leaving the pitiful remnants of the "minority" to serve the "true Aryans." And when, in 1944, the mighty, rising from the ashes of the defeats of forty-one, the Soviet army with irresistible force approached the borders of the "thousand-year-old Reich", there was hardly any person in it who was not directly or indirectly affected by the Nazi invaders.

But did the Red Army come to avenge? Not. She was going to liberate (!) The German people from the yoke of fascism. That is, despite all that the Nazis were doing in the occupied territories, our servicemen were expected to have the right behavior towards civilians in Germany. Of course, anything happened, because when war-weary people who constantly risk their own lives turn out to be among those whose relatives and friends just forced our soldiers to lead such a life, killed their wives, parents, children ... But for violence against the peaceful population in the Red Army was shot, despite past achievements. In contrast to the command of the United States and England, who couldn’t even come to punish their soldiers, say, for the same rape ... Have mercy, it's just the Germans!

One of the exploits of the Red Army was precisely that, having crushed fascism, it did not sink to its level. Our grandfathers and great-grandfathers really turned out to be BETTER both of their opponents and their allies, and this is a subject of particular pride for our people.


Soviet soldiers feed residents of Berlin


We must remember this lesson taught to us by our ancestors. No matter how hard our opponents do, we must not stoop to their level. Because if we do this, then what will we be better than them?
Author:
266 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 210ox
    210ox 14 May 2018 06: 16
    +9
    Andrei, thanks for the wonderful article. By the way, according to the rumors “the very Churchill” from “that same bow” still failed one Hitler .. And you definitely need to remember .. About the good, and the bad too.
    1. Reptiloid
      Reptiloid 14 May 2018 06: 37
      +3
      The article tells about various events. thank
      . From time to time there have been articles about various military operations far from Europe during WWII. Ilya Polonsky wrote on this subject
      1. Andrey Yuryevich
        Andrey Yuryevich 14 May 2018 06: 48
        +11
        Yes, Andryukha ... for our gold, they helped pretty well. Yes by today's standards, consider mercenaries. well, plus selfish interests. however, before that they helped Hitler. dubious "allies."
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          14 May 2018 09: 59
          +8
          Quote: Andrey Yurievich
          for our gold, they helped pretty well

          For what gold :)))
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 14 May 2018 11: 50
            +8
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            For what gold :)))

            Some still believe that in the war for Lend-Lease paid in gold. sad
            1. Alex_59
              Alex_59 14 May 2018 13: 13
              +12
              Quote: Alexey RA
              Some still believe that in the war for Lend-Lease paid in gold.

              With Lend-Lease, in general, everything is bad. The number of myths around the topic is amazing. In this case, as a rule, there are two polar points of view - we would have managed without Lend-Lease and generally this is not help but nonsense, and the second - we would not have won without Lend-Lease. Meanwhile, information on deliveries and their distribution by periods is no longer a secret.
              The Allies began more or less normal deliveries, which could have had a serious impact on the course of hostilities since 1943. Rather, from 1943-44 year, t. To. in the USA at that time the reporting period was a year from July to July. The most difficult years of the war of delivery were scanty, this is especially true for the first year of June 1941-July1942. And I believe that it was during this period that the fate of peace and war was decided. There were still many years of war and defeat, but the foundation of victory was already laid - this is the end of the blitzkrieg and the evacuation of industry. And this was done almost without outside help. Therefore, the question of whether we won without allies should be answered positively — we would have won.
              But after the 1943 year of the USSR, which experienced a severe shortage of a number of products, it still really needed help. And the main value of Lend-Lease was not ready tanks or planes, but engines, gasoline, rubber, chemistry, gunpowder and other materials. And here we should add the statement “the USSR would have won without Lend-Lease” by the statement that with the help of the allies the USSR did it much faster. And once faster, the war lasted a little less than it could. And this already means that hundreds of our soldiers did not die, because every day of the war is hundreds of dead soldiers. And thank you allies for this.
              By the way, Lend-Lease deliveries continued after September 1945. Emnip until the end of the calendar 1945 year.
              1. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 14 May 2018 14: 23
                +6
                Quote: Alex_59
                The Allies began more or less normal deliveries, which could have had a serious impact on the course of hostilities since 1943.

                On the southern route - since the fall of 1942.
                Quote: Alex_59
                The most difficult years of the war of delivery were scanty, this is especially true for the first year of June 1941-July1942. And I believe that it was during this period that the fate of peace and war was decided.

                The reason for this lies largely in the field of banal logistics. Alas, before the war, neither the USSR nor the neighboring countries counted on their transport infrastructure for Lend-Lease deliveries.
                Northern route: Arkhangelsk port had to be completely reconstructed. Nevertheless, problems with the export of convoys continued to persist in 1942.
                Southern route: a normal road through Iran was built only by 1943.
                Eastern route: everything rested on the possibilities of the Far Eastern Shipping Company and the throughput of the Trans-Siberian Railway.
                Quote: Alex_59
                And the main value of Lend-Lease was not ready tanks or planes, but engines, gasoline, rubber, chemistry, gunpowder and other materials.

                Not only. I met data that the supply of finished weapons and equipment through Lend-Lease allowed us to free approximately 350-380 thousand workers from their production. In addition, these deliveries allowed our industry to produce something else: the same GAZ, instead of all-wheel drive 2,5 tons of trucks, could produce the SU-76.
                1. Alex_59
                  Alex_59 15 May 2018 06: 56
                  0
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  The reason for this lies largely in the field of banal logistics.

                  And I did not say that the Allies specifically did not make deliveries. There are a number of reasons. And one of the main ones, of course, is that logistics has not been established. The flywheel is not yet untwisted.
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  Not only. I met data that the supply of finished weapons and equipment through Lend-Lease allowed us to free approximately 350-380 thousand workers from their production.

                  Well, everything is complicated here. For the same tanks, the share of allied supplies is simply drowning amid the production volumes of their tanks. On planes, too, in principle. But for raw materials and equipment, equipment - on the contrary. A number of USSR products did not really produce at all, living only on supplies from outside. Any optics, electronics.
                  It’s also difficult for workers. Free up working hands ... Well, for example, there is a factory that collects tanks. 100 tanks per month for example. Then the allies send us their finished tanks. 5 per month for example. So what? Will this enable 5% of the working time of workers at the tank assembly plant to load with the assembly something else? Not. It’s better if 100 tanks do the same and 100 of our + 5 imported ones goes into the army. And with narrow specifics, like aircraft, it’s even more difficult. It’s so easy not to transfer a worker with experience plumbing to assembling some diesel engines on an airplane. It is clear that the help of the Allies made it possible in a number of industries to redistribute labor, but how many exactly and how exactly, I don’t presume to count something. This is a brain explosion.
                  1. Alexey RA
                    Alexey RA 15 May 2018 09: 52
                    +1
                    Quote: Alex_59
                    Well, everything is complicated here. For the same tanks, the share of allied supplies is simply drowning amid the production volumes of their tanks.

                    Duc ... the devil - he is in the details. How many LTs did we have with frontal armor 60 mm? wink Deliveries of the same "Valentines" covered the regular demands of the army team "give us LT, and with armor" without distracting their factories for the production of this miracle.
                    Quote: Alex_59
                    On planes, too, in principle.

                    And here it is not so simple. Hospital average - Yes. But if you take the same YES or, worse, MTA, then there the percentage of foreign cars was quite high. What to do - the IL-4 already looked rather pale in 1941 and was suited for the role of the same torpedo bomber. And the "cobras" have taken root pretty well.
                    Quote: Alex_59
                    It’s also difficult for workers. Free up working hands ... Well, for example, there is a factory that collects tanks. 100 tanks per month for example. Then the allies send us their finished tanks. 5 per month for example. So what?

                    Well there is us factory. Collects SPGs and BAs. And suddenly hop - ned Lend-Lease. And we urgently need somewhere to take a new plant for the production of these self-propelled guns and BA, with all personnel and machine tools, since the original plant should return to the production of GAZ-63 mod. 40 and GAZ-64.
            2. Aviator_
              Aviator_ 14 May 2018 22: 48
              +2
              And what was on the sunken English cruiser "Edinburgh"? Is it really not a payment for a land lease, but a "gold party"?
          2. Division DON-100
            Division DON-100 14 May 2018 14: 31
            +11
            Andrey from Chelyabinsk (Andrey) Today, 09:59 ↑ New
            For what gold :)))
            For the "insignificant" such a yellowish bullion. An article about "good" allies was stuffed, which in fact are not good and certainly not allies.
            Why didn’t you, dear, write about how the United States fed Hitler the whole war, almost until 1945? Or do you have NO such data? But what about Hitler’s “economic miracle”, when from poor, starving Germany, paying reparation to everyone who was lazy to demand them, she suddenly turned into an industrial monster and so vividly gained such potential in six years that she only had enough a couple of years to completely eat ALL Europe with giblets?
            WHY did you not ask this question? The gut is thin? And you don’t have to snot about the “free” Lend-Lease ... If my memory serves me right, then
            After the collapse of the USSR, the Russian Federation signed bilateral agreements with the former republics on the “zero option”, according to which the Russian Federation assumes all the debts of the USSR. In exchange for this, the former republics of the Soviet Union refused to share the assets of the USSR. So, on April 1993, 21, the Russian Federation assumed the debts of the USSR, including commitments under Lend-Lease. Debts were divided into government debts (Paris Club) and debts to banks (London Club). The US Lend-Lease debt was finally paid and closed as part of the settlement with the Paris Club on August 2006, XNUMX.
            So tell tales to someone else about “free”, otherwise I’m right off the bat about how much the American business altruistic has shut up ... laughing
            1. NF68
              NF68 14 May 2018 15: 10
              +3
              Quote: DON-100 Division
              Why didn’t you, dear, write about how the very USA fed Hitler the whole war, almost until the 1945 year? Or do you have NO such data?


              Share this data if you have one. And do not forget about the minerals that the Germans got in Europe. Especially about oil, tungsten, nickel, molybdenum, copper, tin, chromium, zinc:


              not a big addition related to the issues of providing the German military industry with the necessary materials. This can be judged by the table which indicates how many materials were allocated to meet the needs of the ground forces, the Luftwaffe and Kriegsmarine for the first quarter of 1942.

              Unfortunately, the table is far from complete. It does not contain data on molybdenum, tungsten, nickel and other materials.



              When compiling this table, the author of the book used archival documents (OKW / WiRüAmt / Ro II, Überblick über Rüstungsmaßnahmen v. 3.1.1942, BA-MA, RW 19 / 1922.). This table does not include the needs of transport units, the reserve of the Wehrmacht and a number of other departments to which not a significant amount of materials was allocated.



              Source: Guntram Schulze-Wegener Die deutsche Kriegsmarine Rüstung 1942-1945 (Armament of the German Navy in the 1942-1945's)
              1. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 14 May 2018 19: 20
                +1
                Quote: NF68
                And do not forget about the minerals that the Germans got in Europe. Especially about oil, tungsten, nickel, molybdenum, copper, tin, chromium, zinc

                For additives to the armor it would be nice to ask the Turks. They even traded in the 1943 with the Allies and with the Axis.
                1. NF68
                  NF68 14 May 2018 20: 59
                  0
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  Quote: NF68
                  And do not forget about the minerals that the Germans got in Europe. Especially about oil, tungsten, nickel, molybdenum, copper, tin, chromium, zinc

                  For additives to the armor it would be nice to ask the Turks. They even traded in the 1943 with the Allies and with the Axis.


                  As far as I remember, Turkey supplied Germany with chrome or ore from which the Germans received chrome, without which the Germans would have been bored. The Germans didn’t have enough of this chrome anyway, but for the Germans it was at least something. The Germans got tungsten from Portugal and from somewhere else, but without uninterrupted supplies of iron ore from Sweden, the Germans and WWII could not have started. In 1943, the Germans received 43% of all their steel from Swedish ore. Moreover, this steel was the best in quality of what the Germans could get during the WWII.
                  1. sabakina
                    sabakina 14 May 2018 21: 51
                    +4
                    NF68, about European oil can be more detailed? I’m already intrigued .... But I came across a photo of the Shell railway tank with a swastika!
                    1. NF68
                      NF68 15 May 2018 16: 36
                      0
                      Quote: sabakina
                      NF68, about European oil can be more detailed? I’m already intrigued .... But I came across a photo of the Shell railway tank with a swastika!


                      It is possible and in more detail:



                      Only in this table is the oil produced / received by the Germans indicated.

                      1-column-year
                      2-th column-the amount of oil received by the Germans in thousands of tons,
                      3-th column is the amount of synthetic liquid fuel produced by the Germans in thousands of tons. This also includes diesel fuel. I did not come across any detailed data on this subject, but in one source it was indicated that in the 1942 year the Germans received approximately 500 000 tons of synthetic diesel fuel. As for aviation gasoline, 92% of all aviation gasoline that the Germans produced during WWII was synthetic gasoline.

                      Dietrich Eichholtz: Geschichte der Deutschen Kriegswirtschaft. Akademie-Verlag, Berlin 1985, Band 2, S. 354.

                      You can still watch 12-ti volume edition of "History of the Second World War":

                      http://militera.lib.ru/h/12/index.html

                      True, there is indicated a smaller amount of all liquid fuel that Germany received than in the German source indicated by me above.

                      Data on the provision of WWII liquid fuel to the Red Army can be found here:

                      http://www.mysteriouscountry.ru/wiki/index.php/%D
                      0%9C%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D0%90%D0%BB%D0%B5%D
                      0%BA%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%B9_%D0%90%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D
                      1%81%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1
                      %87/%D0%9C%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0
                      %B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0
                      %BF%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%
                      BA%D0%B0_%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BD%D0%
                      BE%D0%B3%D0%BE_%D1%85%D0%BE%D0%B7%D1%8F%D0%B9%D1%
                      81%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%B0_%D0%A1%D0%A1%D0%A1%D0%A0/VI.
                      _%D0%93%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%8E%D1%87%D0%B5%D0%B5_%D0%B
                      4%D0%BB%D1%8F_%D0%B1%D1%83%D0%B4%D1%83%D1%89%D0%B
                      5%D0%B9_%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B9%D0%BD%D1%8B

                      http://www.mysteriouscountry.ru/wiki/index.php/%D
                      0%9C%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D0%90%D0%BB%D0%B5%D
                      0%BA%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%B9_%D0%90%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D
                      1%81%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1
                      %87/%D0%9C%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0
                      %B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0
                      %BF%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%
                      BA%D0%B0_%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BD%D0%
                      BE%D0%B3%D0%BE_%D1%85%D0%BE%D0%B7%D1%8F%D0%B9%D1%
                      81%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%B0_%D0%A1%D0%A1%D0%A1%D0%A0/%D0
                      %9F%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B6%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%
                      B8%D0%B5_%E2%84%961._%D0%9F%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%
                      BE%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BB_%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%
                      89%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D1%83_%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1
                      %87%D0%B0%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0_%D0
                      %A3%D0%A1%D0%93_%D0%A0%D0%9A%D0%9A%D0%90_%D0%BF%D
                      0%BE_%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%83_%
                      D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B5%D0%BD%D
                      0%B8%D1%8F_%D0%B8_%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BF%D1%8B%D1%82%
                      D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B0%
                      D0%B1%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B7%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0_%C2%AB%
                      D0%AD%D0%BA%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0_100%C2%BB

                      http://www.mysteriouscountry.ru/wiki/index.php/%D
                      0%9C%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D0%90%D0%BB%D0%B5%D
                      0%BA%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%B9_%D0%90%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D
                      1%81%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1
                      %87/%D0%9C%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0
                      %B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0
                      %BF%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%
                      BA%D0%B0_%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BD%D0%
                      BE%D0%B3%D0%BE_%D1%85%D0%BE%D0%B7%D1%8F%D0%B9%D1%
                      81%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%B0_%D0%A1%D0%A1%D0%A1%D0%A0/%D0
                      %9F%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B6%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%
                      B8%D0%B5_%E2%84%963._%D0%9E%D1%82%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%
                      82%D1%8B_%D0%BE_%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1
                      %80%D0%BA%D0%B5_%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0
                      %B8%D0%B7%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BD%D0%
                      BE%D0%B9_%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BD%D0%
                      BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8_%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%
                      BF%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%8F%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D0%BD%D0%
                      B0%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE_%D1%
                      85%D0%BE%D0%B7%D1%8F%D0%B9%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%B
                      0
                      1. Alexey RA
                        Alexey RA 15 May 2018 18: 17
                        0
                        Quote: NF68
                        Data on the provision of WWII liquid fuel to the Red Army can be found here:

                        Or here:
                        Appendix No. 4. 1941 Liquid Mobilization Mobilization Plan.
                        http://militera.lib.ru/research/melia_aa/pril4.ht
                        ml
                        Extremely entertaining reading - for example, the fact that the main consumer of diesel fuel in the Red Army was not tanks, but ChTZ-65. Or that ground forces consumed 25-35% of all B / KB-70 gasoline requested by the Red Army.
              2. YELLOWSTONE
                YELLOWSTONE 14 May 2018 22: 17
                0
                in Europe there was no oil that was suitable for motor oil
                the Germans had all duralumin varnish imported; in the USSR it was not supplied from Brazil
                Swedes Turks Portuguese Portuguese Spaniards French engaged in resale which was several times higher than their own consumption, and no one imposed a continental blockade in the WWI or with Napoleon
            2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              14 May 2018 15: 16
              +9
              Quote: DON-100 Division
              For the "insignificant" such a yellowish bullion.

              THAT is the fact that both Lend-Lease and pre-lease deliveries went without payment, you don’t know.
              Quote: DON-100 Division
              Why didn’t you, dear, write about how the United States fed Hitler the whole war, almost until 1945?

              Probably because they did not stuff it? :))))
              Quote: DON-100 Division
              But what about Hitler’s “economic miracle” when, from a poor, starving Germany, paying reparation to everyone who was lazy to demand them, she suddenly turned into an industrial monster

              What about teaching a little materiel? For example - where exactly did the feet of the economic miracle of Germany grow from?
              Quote: DON-100 Division
              WHY did you not ask this question? The gut is thin?

              I wondered. And I know perfectly well that the replicas "The Foschist Sword was forged in the USSR, USA, England, Planet Nibiru, underline the necessary" is worthless.
              Quote: DON-100 Division
              And you don’t have to snot about the “free” Lend-Lease ...

              You know, I’ll answer you culturally. Lend-Lease was FREE. But according to the rules of Lend-Lease, we had to return the equipment that was put on Lend-Lease and which survived at the time of the end of the war. But if we wanted to keep this equipment at home after the war, then we had to buy it. There was no need to pay for equipment that died in battles.
              Therefore - advice. Before there, how to write about guts and snot, study the story.
              1. Division DON-100
                Division DON-100 14 May 2018 15: 36
                +7
                Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                You know, I’ll answer you culturally.
                You can and not culturally, I'm not proud ...
                Lend-Lease was FREE.
                laughing laughing laughing Yeah, and American business turned out to be holier than the pope and worked for nothing ... Only one question arises from me, but did you even talk about the economy, let alone the capitalist one? And one more question, how did the USA after the Second World War become the largest holder of gold reserves? Probably also in their holy spirit gold from Europe to Fort Knox brought them?
                Therefore - advice. Before there, how to write about guts and snot, study the story.
                Before giving such advice, it would not be bad for you to study history, or at least elementary logic yourself!
                And then Hitler out of the blue “without any help” on the part of world capital showed the world a “German economic miracle”, and the USA became so rich on “free” supplies that for some unhappy 30 years, if we count from the beginning of the WWII, they began to third-rate country world hegemon.
                If your logic is not good, then not everyone is like that ...
                1. Merold
                  Merold 14 May 2018 15: 45
                  +4
                  Quote: DON-100 Division

                  And then Hitler out of the blue "without any help" on the part of world capital showed the world a "German economic miracle",

                  Well, why "without any help" from the outside?
                  From December 1939 to the end of May 1941, Germany imported from the USSR oil products 1 million tons per 95 million German marks, grain (mainly fodder) - 1,6 million tons per 250 million marks, cotton - 111 thousand tons per 100 million marks, oilcake - 36 thousand tons for 6,4 million marks, flax - 10 thousand tons for 14,7 million marks, timber - 41,3 million marks, nickel - 1,8 thousand tons for 8,1 million marks, manganese ore - 185 thousand tons for 7,6 million marks, chromium ore - 23 thousand tons for 2 million marks, phosphate - 214 thousand tons for 6 million marks, as well as other goods.
                  Germany’s needs for strategic raw materials and food were not fully covered by internal and occupational resources, and supplies from the USSR became a significant help.
                  https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Германо-советское_т
                  org_ agreement_ (1939)
                  1. Division DON-100
                    Division DON-100 14 May 2018 16: 00
                    +9
                    Merold (Andrey) Today, 15:45 ↑ New
                    Well, why "without any help" from the outside?
                    That’s why I “love” our liberals, because of their ability to find dirt even where it is not.
                    What did you actually try to say with your libel? That the Soviet Union traded with Nazi Germany? So not only the USSR was trading with her. And then, what did the USSR have to do? Stalin knew perfectly well that war was inevitable, and in conditions of isolation the USSR was ready to trade even with the devil, if only to have time to rearm. Or do you think that we should have met Hitler with a pitchfork as the Russian Empire met WWII?
                    All your shortcomings are visible to the naked eye, all your gestures to elevate the role of the United States and its sixes and all your attempts to downplay the role of the USSR are simply ridiculous. However, you don’t pull on a clown either, so a cheap pro-American woman with low social responsibility, no more.
                    Worthless is not your smart comments. negative
                    1. Merold
                      Merold 14 May 2018 16: 32
                      +4
                      Quote: DON-100 Division
                      Merold (Andrey) Today, 15:45 ↑ New
                      Well, why "without any help" from the outside?
                      That’s why I “love” our liberals, because of their ability to find dirt even where it is not.

                      Well, what kind of dirt is this? These are facts and they are.

                      Quote: DON-100 Division

                      What did you actually try to say with your libel?

                      You did not confuse?
                      Pasquil (obsolete. Pashquil from German. Pasquill, from Italian. Pasquillo) - an essay containing caricature distortions, slander and vicious attacks, the purpose of which is to insult and compromise any person, group, party, social movement, etc. [1] .


                      Quote: DON-100 Division
                      So not only did the USSR trade with it:

                      Right. Only by your "logic" is it possible for one, and the other scum.

                      Quote: DON-100 Division
                      Or do you think that we should have met Hitler with a pitchfork

                      I believe that those who complain about the late opening of the second front should at least ask themselves: what did the USSR do when England entered the war with Hitler?
                      Quote: DON-100 Division

                      All your shortcomings are visible to the naked eye, all your gestures to elevate the role of the United States and its sixes, and all your attempts to downplay the role of the USSR are simply ridiculous.

                      Can I quote "on the exaltation of the role of the United States and its sixes"? Why?

                      Quote: DON-100 Division
                      However, you don’t pull on a clown either, so a cheap pro-American woman with low social responsibility, no more.
                      Worthless is not your smart comments. negative

                      I like to discuss with a serious and adult interlocutor.
                      1. already a Muscovite
                        already a Muscovite 15 May 2018 02: 40
                        0
                        Quote: Merold
                        I believe that those who complain about the late opening of the second front should at least ask themselves: what did the USSR do when England entered the war with Hitler?

                        It was you who should have wondered why the USSR did not enter the war with the Reich together with Small Britain. Better yet, ask yourself why Britain did not declare war on the USSR. She should have been under an alliance agreement with Poland. And yet, for your overall development: 08.12.41/XNUMX/XNUMX - The United States declared war on Japan.
                        11.12.41/2/XNUMX - Germany and Italy declared war on the United States. On the same day, the United States declared war on Germany. WWII has already been going on for XNUMX years. Here the corporal just stupid. Do not announce
                        he is a US war, everything could have turned out quite differently.
                  2. Alexey RA
                    Alexey RA 15 May 2018 11: 39
                    +1
                    Hehehehe ... but you can still remember that Japan back in 1943 extracted oil in Northern Sakhalin. In the Soviet North Sakhalin, half of the oil-bearing areas of which since the 20s were developed by the Japanese.
                2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                  14 May 2018 15: 50
                  +6
                  Quote: DON-100 Division
                  Only one question arises from me, but have you even heard about the economy, let alone the capitalist one?

                  Yeah. I’m still the CFO, so for a second :))))
                  Quote: DON-100 Division
                  And then Hitler out of the blue "without any help" on the part of world capital showed the world a "German economic miracle"

                  I can only repeat one more time to you - study the "economic miracle" of Germany. In principle, it’s not so difficult for me to tell, but it’s a long time, and wasting time on a person who knows history extremely rudely and is also rude at the same time - do I need it, what do you think?
                  Quote: DON-100 Division
                  and the USA is so rich on "free" supplies that for some unhappy 30 years, if you count from the beginning of the WWII, they have become a world hegemon from a third-rate country

                  wassat Nothing that in terms of industrial production, the United States was the first country in the world at the end of the 19th century?
                  1. arturpraetor
                    arturpraetor 14 May 2018 15: 53
                    +3
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    In principle, it’s not so difficult for me to tell, but it’s a long time

                    Is it possible in a separate article? Taking hi I mean, I would love to read something that is different from the popular conspiracy on this topic.
                  2. Division DON-100
                    Division DON-100 14 May 2018 16: 12
                    +5
                    Andrey from Chelyabinsk (Andrey) Today, 15:50 ↑
                    Yeah. I’m still the CFO, so for a second :))))
                    Wow, what a coincidence I imagine. Now tell me as a financial director to a financial director, here you have production, you have to purchase raw materials, electricity, gas, related components and more, pay employees a salary and incur a bunch of small expenses. As a result, you released products with a cost of $ n000000, you sell them at a price of $ 0,00, that is, how do you convince everyone here FOR FREE ... The question is, where do you get the money to purchase the next production cycle? As, "financier" are you our homegrown?
                    If you are a financial director, then I’m scared to think how your company works there ... laughing Maybe it’s easier for you to retrain, otherwise our economy is at the fifth point because of such financiers so far.
                    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      14 May 2018 16: 28
                      +6
                      Quote: DON-100 Division
                      Wow, what a coincidence I imagine.

                      I am sorry, but I have to note that you are lying. Or, since I graduated, economics studies have failed below the plinth.
                      Quote: DON-100 Division
                      As a result, you released products with a cost of $ n000000, you sell them at a price of $ 0,00, that is, how do you convince everyone here FOR FREE ... The question is, where do you get the money to buy the next production cycle? As, "financier" are you our homegrown?

                      What a horror :)))) Well, you probably overslept the history of the economy. But could you even think with your head?
                      It is clear that enterprises received hard currency for their products, and the US budget paid for it. And then already these products left for free for their intended purpose - to England, the USSR, etc. That is, the enterprises did not work for free, and making ends meet reduced the budget, for a second, of the world's first economy at that time.
                      Quote: DON-100 Division
                      Maybe it’s easier for you to retrain, otherwise our economy is at the fifth point because of such financiers so far.

                      Let me give you another reason to leave ladies in me - I currently do not work, if I work - I would not have time for articles. Rude on, I do not mind :)))))
                      1. Division DON-100
                        Division DON-100 14 May 2018 16: 40
                        +4
                        Andrey from Chelyabinsk (Andrey) Today, 16:28 ↑
                        I am sorry, but I have to note that you are lying.
                        What does this follow from?
                        Or, ever since I graduated, economics studies have failed below the plinth.
                        What are you? And does this person write to me who wrote this?
                        It is clear that enterprises received hard currency for their products, and the US budget paid for it. And then already these products left for free for their intended purpose - to England, the USSR, etc. That is, the enterprises did not work for free, and making ends meet reduced the budget, for a second, of the world's first economy at that time.
                        Aw, "financier", and where does the American budget get the money? Are not the taxes from the very enterprises?
                        Well, what a great specialist in economics, enlighten me from what kind of income the budget of any country is formed?
                        I’m even afraid to imagine where such economist-financiers were taught? And this person will teach me how to poke around my nose?
                        Tell Kees as an artist to an artist, do you know how to draw ?! laughing laughing laughing
                        Before you teach someone, you yourself need to understand at least a little bit in the essence of the issue. Or didn’t they tell you about the formula: money-goods-money, but did they tell you about Adam Smith?
                        Let me give you another reason to leave ladies in me - I currently do not work, if I work - I would not have time for articles.
                        And thank God, otherwise I'm afraid to imagine where such "financiers" can lead us.
                        P.S. He gave correspondence to his employees to read, the work of the financial department is paralyzed, everyone is lying on the tables and neighing like horses, you made us the end of the day and paralyzed the work of the financial department ...! laughing laughing laughing
                    2. Merold
                      Merold 14 May 2018 16: 37
                      +1
                      Quote: DON-100 Division
                      Andrey from Chelyabinsk (Andrey) ↑
                      Yeah. I’m still the CFO, so for a second :))))
                      Wow, what a coincidence I imagine. .

                      Personally, I did not doubt it.
                  3. yehat
                    yehat 14 May 2018 16: 35
                    +3
                    I'm still CFO

                    the main function of the financial director now is to take loans from banks)))
                    so the position does not say anything about your qualifications
                    1. Division DON-100
                      Division DON-100 14 May 2018 16: 49
                      +3
                      yehat (Sergey) Today, 16:35 ↑
                      the main function of the financial director now is to take loans from banks)))
                      so the position does not say anything about your qualifications
                      Well, I would not talk about all the directors like that, but in the case of Andrey from Chelyabinsk, you are right at 200 percent! With such aplomb such nonsense to write, it must be able to.
                      Neither I nor my employees have heard more nonsense about the economy. You see, they made products, and the US budget allocated money for them, and where did the US budget take money, is that a question of questions? And this nonsense is borne by a person who is supposedly a financial director ... It is clear why our economy is at the fifth point after that!
                      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                        14 May 2018 17: 15
                        +5
                        Quote: DON-100 Division
                        What does this follow from?

                        Of your complete illiteracy in economic matters, of course.
                        Quote: DON-100 Division
                        Aw, "financier", and where does the American budget get the money? Are not the taxes from the very enterprises?

                        Sure. But not only them - ALL enterprises, and this formed the revenue side of the budget. And the repurchase of equipment by Lend-Lease formed part of the expenditure side of the budget, and far from the biggest :))))
                        Quote: DON-100 Division
                        . Gave read correspondence to his employees,

                        These are the basics that any economist knows, so if they laugh, then don’t need me :)))))
                        Quote: DON-100 Division
                        You see, they produced products, and the US budget allocated money to them for this, and where did the US budget take money, is this a question of questions?

                        And what, in your opinion, means does the US buy weapons today? Or France. Or England. Or are we? :))) If this is a “question of questions” for you, then what do you know about the economy at all?
                        Or do you think that the Lend-Lease for the United States was an unbearable burden and the whole country poked on it around the clock? :)))) I hasten to disappoint - the cost of it amounted to less than 15% of the total US military spending in those years
                      2. Division DON-100
                        Division DON-100 14 May 2018 17: 27
                        +3
                        Andrey from Chelyabinsk (Andrey) Today, 17:15 ↑ New
                        Of your complete illiteracy in economic matters, of course.
                        He thinks every other is a freak in spite of himself ... (L. Filatov)
                        Do not you ignorant writing complete nonsense, talk about my literacy. I, in contrast to you, are the acting financial director, and you write all sorts of nonsense here about paying Lend-Lease from the US budget. At the same time, you still haven’t answered what kind of secret income the budget is formed from. Not respected, it is certainly ridiculous to blame your opponent for what you yourself are to blame. Do not write nonsense, do not make smart people laugh.
                    2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      14 May 2018 17: 27
                      +4
                      Quote: yehat
                      the main function of the financial director now is to take loans from banks)))

                      refinancing the loan portfolio is the most important task (without this, the enterprise will be covered with a copper basin) but by no means the only one. I note that "the financial director is the one who takes loans" well ... from a laborer I, in principle, am ready to hear that.
                  4. Kuroneko
                    Kuroneko 14 May 2018 16: 43
                    +3
                    Andrey, welcome.
                    As for the words, the DON-100 Division is right, he is right, speaking of the closest cooperation of the banking and industrial circles of the USA with the Third Reich until the very end of the Second World War: http://planet-today.ru/geopolitika/item/86833-op
                    obede-rossii-i-zapade-chast-2-ssha-vse-luchshee-g
                    itleru
                    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      14 May 2018 17: 18
                      +1
                      Quote: Kuroneko
                      As for the words of the DON-100 Division, he is right in speaking about the close cooperation of the banking and industrial circles of the USA with the Third Reich until the very end of World War II

                      Hello to you, too!
                      I looked at the article, but right, it's such a childhood :))))) Well, do not be offended. What it says is refuted at times.
                      1. Kuroneko
                        Kuroneko 14 May 2018 18: 14
                        +2
                        No offense. Especially fellow countrymen.
                        Half there really - well, takoe ... But there are real historical facts. But with your (noble, hih) Don, was the flame just about the economy? Well, the United States (like England) really poured big money into the German economy. Plus technology (although the USSR also collaborated with Germany in this regard, which should also not be forgotten). And not just like that. Germany is an economic miracle (after the Zimbabwe-like Weimar Republic) without really feeding I couldn’t.
                      2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                        14 May 2018 18: 48
                        +1
                        Quote: Kuroneko
                        Germany (after the Zimbabwe-like Weimar Republic) could not really accomplish such an economic miracle.

                        The fact of the matter is that the Weimar Republic was not nearly Zimbabwe like :)))) However, you have provoked me, maybe I’m going to write something on this :)
                  5. sabakina
                    sabakina 14 May 2018 22: 01
                    +3
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    Quote: DON-100 Division
                    Only one question arises from me, but have you even heard about the economy, let alone the capitalist one?

                    Yeah. I’m still the CFO, so for a second :))))
                    That's it, Arctic fox Chelyabinsk! I don’t know how to Ivan Dulin, but Mikhalych needs to make legs from there.
              2. Bakht
                Bakht 14 May 2018 17: 11
                +2
                Lend-Lease was FREE.

                Not certainly in that way. There was nothing free. All deliveries were to be paid after the war. Those who died were not subject to payment.
                In this regard, the question - what exactly was the cruiser Edinburgh carrying and why? And according to some sources, he was carrying 5,5 tons of gold (according to some - 10 tons).
                The issue of payment for Lend-Lease lasted several decades. The USSR did not pay everything even under Brezhnev (that is, in the 80s). But still paid ....
                1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                  14 May 2018 17: 49
                  +3
                  Quote: Bakht
                  All deliveries were to be paid after the war.

                  not this way. They should have been returned. Or paid
                  Quote: Bakht
                  In this regard, the question - what exactly was the cruiser Edinburgh carrying and why?

                  Firstly, there were pre-lender deliveries that needed to be paid. Secondly, there were deliveries that Americans did not carry out on Lend-Lease (there were lists of products) and which we purchased.
                  1. Bakht
                    Bakht 14 May 2018 18: 05
                    +3
                    But still, payment had to be made. I am against the chilling of land lease. He helped a lot. In addition to tanks and aircraft, there were many items without which war could not be won. These are rare earth metals and fuel additives. The aircraft still flew high-octane gasoline. And the armor of a tank of cast iron can not be welded. These are radio stations and food. Even the barbed wire.
                    But to say that without land lease would not have won the war is not entirely correct. A. Mikoyan knew the subject much better than you and me. And he said, "Without a land lease, we would have fought for another 2 years."
                    Payment? Well, the USSR paid for something there. Or underpaid. For example, the besieged Leningrad lost more people in the winter of 1941-42 than England and the USA during the whole war. More than 1 million people. The problem is not gold or dollars. The problem is that the West does not make human sacrifices in ledgers.
                    1. Alexey RA
                      Alexey RA 14 May 2018 19: 23
                      +2
                      Quote: Bakht
                      But still, payment had to be made.

                      Only for civilian vehicles left after the war. Moreover, the USSR first cut the amount of payments by a third, and then managed to delay this payment so much that it paid the bills of 1945 in dollars of the 80s-90s. And it was already completely different dollars ... smile
                      Quote: Bakht
                      But to say that without land lease would not have won the war is not entirely correct.

                      Let's just say that the price of Victory would be even more bloody. Even in the real life of the USSR in 1945 he completely chose a mobile reserve: according to statistics from the regions of the Urals, where in 1942 it was possible to “shave” the corps, in 1945 a battalion was hardly recruited. And according to uv. M. Svirin, most of the 1945 draftees in the military enlistment offices were diagnosed with dystrophy.
                      Divisions of 5000 people near Berlin did not appear from a good life.
                      1. Bakht
                        Bakht 14 May 2018 20: 03
                        +1
                        As for the mob reserve, you need to shovel a lot of statistics. In 1942, there were also divisions of 4-5 thousand people. For a completely different reason. The regular structure of the division did not change. So talking about divisions of 5 due to the mobility reserve is incorrect.
                        The normal reserve is 10% of the population. It was thought so. But the data does not match. The USSR mobilized up to 30 million with a pre-war strength of 170 million. Here we must take into account women and re-conscription in the liberated territories. The staff of the RKKA infantry division at the end of the war was approximately 10 thousand people.
                  2. The comment was deleted.
                  3. sabakina
                    sabakina 14 May 2018 22: 11
                    +3
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    Quote: Bakht
                    All deliveries were to be paid after the war.

                    not this way. They should have been returned. Or paid
                    .
                    What the heck? I’m not a financial director, but a driver, and I understand that you combine finished products in the form of tanks, planes, cars and steam locomotives with aluminum, molybdenum, etc. Yes, the equipment is destroyed - do not pay, not destroyed - return or pay. And did they give everything else for nothing? No, well, how stupid did the find directors go!
                    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      14 May 2018 23: 22
                      +4
                      Quote: sabakina
                      No, well, how stupid did the find directors go!

                      No, not stupid :))) And those who know the story.
                      Quote: sabakina
                      And did they give everything else for nothing?

                      Yes, everything else was given for nothing. It was supposed to pay only for what would remain after the war. That is, if the same stew was eaten during the war - there is no need to pay for it. And if there is a reserve left, then it must be returned. in practice, I think, pinched.
                      Will we apologize for the "stupid"? laughing
                2. Senior seaman
                  Senior seaman 15 May 2018 16: 01
                  0
                  Colleague, you just do not be offended, but the Lendliz program is American, and the Edinburgh British cruiser.
                  Here from England, we really bought military equipment.
                  1. Bakht
                    Bakht 15 May 2018 18: 04
                    0
                    The cruiser is English, but we don’t know where the gold went. It is possible that in the States.
              3. Mavrikiy
                Mavrikiy 14 May 2018 18: 33
                +3
                Andrey from Chelyabinsk (Andrey) Today, 15:16 ↑
                I wondered. And I know perfectly well that the replicas "The Foschist Sword was forged in the USSR, USA, England, Planet Nibiru, underline the necessary" is worthless.

                Wondered - and it pleases.
                But did the Foschist Sword forge itself, or did Hitler forge its handles?
                There is no blue, said A, say B.
                Hitler's sword was forged by England and the United States. Yes, and at the same time we otkovali, what a sin to conceal, so that was something to dismiss. And glory to Stalin that the sword did not fall out of our hands.
                1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                  14 May 2018 18: 50
                  +5
                  Quote: Mavrikiy
                  Hitler's sword was forged by England and the United States.

                  Yes. And the Sun revolves around the Earth and the United States is controlled by reptilians from the planet Zog ....
                  1. Alexey RA
                    Alexey RA 14 May 2018 19: 29
                    +3
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    Yes. And the Sun revolves around the Earth and the United States is controlled by reptilians from the planet Zog ....

                    Do not confuse: Earth is controlled by the ZOG, and ZOG is controlled by reptilians from Nibiru. smile
                    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      14 May 2018 19: 38
                      +4
                      Quote: Alexey RA
                      Do not confuse: Earth is controlled by the ZOG, and ZOG is controlled by reptilians from Nibiru.

                      Right! I sprinkle my flat green head with ashes and go to write new instructions for the goyim ....
              4. ARES623
                ARES623 14 May 2018 20: 06
                +4
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                Therefore - advice. Before there, how to write about guts and snot, study the story.

                In addition to Lend-Lease deliveries, there were direct purchases in excess of supply volumes. Rather, at first they bought, and when there was nothing to pay, they gave on credit. And not only to us, but also to our closest allies, that is, the British. That is why during the war the British paid the Americans even with their overseas possessions. Only Germany was not included in the list of Lend-Lease countries, with it until the end the United States traded for money and gold. As an adviser, I recommend you familiarize yourself with the history of the cruiser Edinburgh, on which 465 Soviet gold bars with a total weight of 5536 kilograms drowned.
                Regarding all this help, you should not start any snot about forgotten American services, because the whole war began with the United States. Hitler and his whole party were impoverished than the church rat, until American benefactors overturned the cornucopia over him. The rise of German industry was directly and indirectly financed by Anglo-American bankers. Plus, Hitler was given to Czechoslovakia, from which the industrial power of Germany immediately grew by about 50%. "And here is the body of George from Minnesota, lying three steps from the surf line of Omaha Beach" is nothing more than a retribution of the American people for the actions of short-sighted politicians. And if Georges and Jones did not agree to lie on the bloody Omaha or Utah, then they would have to fight at full height and lie in Mudanjyan or near Khingan. So all US prezies, not only Trump, were engaged in "profitable" deals. With Churchill, I think, everything is clear. As he was a villain, so he remained the whole war. And he became an ally of the USSR involuntarily, otherwise, in the event of an unsuccessful result for the USSR, Hitler drowned Churchill under the Tower Bridge. So the opinion is that
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                Lend-Lease was FREE.

                pure fiction, the deepest error. We paid a lot more for him than we should. Moreover, the reckoning ended in the 21st century. The result of the war was the concentration of 75% of the world's gold reserves in the United States and the impoverishment of everyone else. Even today they would start a war in Europe, but they are afraid of the consequences of the use of nuclear weapons. Two world wars fabulously enriched the United States. So, of course, it is necessary to remember our allied actions, but without fanaticism. By reporting the entire history of events.
              5. Aviator_
                Aviator_ 14 May 2018 22: 51
                +2
                Once again: what kind of gold was at Edinburgh?
                1. Mavrikiy
                  Mavrikiy 15 May 2018 16: 12
                  +2
                  Well, did he stick to the "holy man"? There, the policeman is standing.
                  Remembered! Sent for storage in England, and maybe further, Fort Knox. There are such locks, such protection .... Won and China has already received colored tungsten from there. Tomorrow us, for friendship.
            3. kig
              kig 14 May 2018 15: 38
              +6
              No need to cry, or even straight off. Since they began to quote, why didn’t they indicate this:

              delivered materials (cars, various military equipment, weapons, raw materials, other items) destroyed, lost and used during the war are not subject to payment (Article 5); [3]
              property transferred under Lend-Lease property remaining after the end of the war and suitable for civilian purposes will be paid in full or in part on the basis of long-term loans provided by the United States (mainly interest-free loans);
              in case of interest of the American side, non-destroyed and not lost machinery and equipment should be returned after the war in the USA.


              And by the way, not only the USSR and Russia remained in debt. We quote further:

              The amount of debts of Great Britain to the USA amounted to 4,33 billion US dollars, to Canada - 1,19 billion US dollars. The last payment of $ 83,25 million (in favor of the United States) and $ 22,7 million (Canada) was made on December 29, 2006. [.

              Proceed? Further there about France and China, they also should have stayed. Why did you miss them? Some sort of selectivity in your quotes ... and in general, anyone can see what Lend-Lease is and make up their own opinion.
          3. avt
            avt 14 May 2018 14: 59
            +4
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            For what gold :)))

            Well, at least that the Germans drowned on the cruiser. wassat But in general, of course, yes. Lend-lease is called a dinner-bed. And it’s not even a matter of military equipment, on which by the way the corps under the command of Krivoshein (the same one that accompanied Guderian’s parade from Brest) entered Berlin. A huge role in preserving the lives of our soldiers was the supply of gunpowder, high-octane gasoline, colormet and machine tools.
            Quote: Alex_59
            By the way, Lend-Lease deliveries continued after September 1945. Emnip until the end of the calendar 1945 year.

            The US was pledged to enter the USSR war with Japan. From here, minesweepers and tank landing ships appeared at the Pacific Fleet. At least, T-26 tanks on it seemed to have driven the seizing ports and SU for the paratroopers.
            1. yehat
              yehat 14 May 2018 16: 40
              +5
              Lendlis did not fundamentally change anything, but it allowed reducing the war for the USSR by at least a year, and saving at least half a million soldiers, providing important resources for supplying aviation and blitzkrieg - communications, transport, fuel, aluminum, rubber, machine tools, canned food, etc. d. I must say that a year without war is also a serious demographic plus fertility.
              Plus, during the lend-lease there was a significant exchange of technologies, which gave a significant impetus to the pro-war growth of the USSR.
              1. Bakht
                Bakht 14 May 2018 17: 20
                +4
                Lend-lease has changed a lot. Let's say 400 thousand cars. Of these, about 300 thousand famous Studebakers (how many divisions became mechanized?) The Red Army of 1943-1945 became motorized thanks to Lend Lease. The same famous "second front" and an egg beggar. Without which there would be nothing to feed the country. Also, locomotives, which in 1942 the USSR produced as many as 9 pieces. Maximum in 1943, as many as 43 pieces. Lend Lease gave 1900 steam locomotives. Several thousand wagons and a huge number of rails. I wonder how the yellow was restored. network of liberated territories? Or carts were brought to the front in carts?
                Lend Lease did not win the war. But greatly helped her win.
                Particularly important were the supply of tanks and aircraft in the fall of 1941. Then Lendlizovskih tanks in the battle of Moscow in the army was more than 20%.
                1. yehat
                  yehat 14 May 2018 20: 04
                  +1
                  in the battle of Moscow there was a moment when it was defended by the only combat-ready tank brigade of half the composition, so the share of tanks is a virtual thing))
                  besides, Lendliz combat equipment was mainly equipped with units of the 2nd and 3rd stage, and they suffered minimal losses by definition.
                2. Senior seaman
                  Senior seaman 15 May 2018 16: 07
                  0
                  Dear colleague. The devil is in the details. 400 thousand cars (in my opinion even 480 thousand), this is a lot. EMNIP 40% fleet, and if by capacity, then even more. But ... these numbers are for 1945 year. And let's say in the summer 1944 is only 130 thousand. That is also a lot, but never 400 thousand.
                  1. Bakht
                    Bakht 15 May 2018 18: 27
                    0
                    If possible, indicate where you can find a breakdown by year. Students were supplied mainly through Iran.
                    until 1943 this path was almost closed. Perhaps you are right. The main supplies were in the second half of the war. But the Red Army began to advance in the summer of 1943. She received mobility only in 1944.
                    1. yehat
                      yehat 15 May 2018 18: 33
                      0
                      during the battle of Kursk, the Red Army did not have a single motorized division. And at the end of 44, half of the infantry divisions became either motorized or mechanized or mixed horse-moto furs, and those that did not, had a fleet of vehicles more than by the standards of 41 years. And most importantly - the artillery became motorized, the rate of expenditure of ammunition by artillery during the onset of Zhukov increased by 5 times, and in critical operations up to 10-15 times from 41 years. This is what has seriously changed by the end of 43 years. (ammunition - 42nd year)
                      the infantry took support from the Wehrmacht self-propelled guns - analogues of stug - su-76, su-85, redone t28, etc.
                      and very often the assault groups were equipped with 1 tank + towed cannon or self-propelled guns. All this was impossible without a dramatic increase in the fleet:
                      Studebakers, Dodge 3/4, Jeeps, trophy trucks, lorry
                    2. Senior seaman
                      Senior seaman 12 July 2018 10: 50
                      0
                      colleague, here are the numbers https://warspot.ru/12297-studebeker-avtomobil-pob
                      edy
                      not too detailed, but how rich
                      1. Bakht
                        Bakht 12 July 2018 13: 32
                        +1
                        Thanks for the info.
                        I wrote "RKKA 1943-1945 years became motorized thanks to Lend Lease. "
                        It seems that Mellentin had a phrase that the Red Army of the second half of the war became mobile thanks to American trucks. Trucks played no less role than tanks. It became possible to carry out deep operations, to respond quickly to the situation at the front.
            2. Alex_59
              Alex_59 14 May 2018 23: 35
              0
              Quote: avt
              The US was pledged to enter the USSR war with Japan.

              This is not about that. The matter is that deliveries continued when Japan was no longer there. In October 1945go for example.
          4. Serge Gorely
            Serge Gorely 15 May 2018 16: 39
            +3
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Quote: Andrey Yurievich
            for our gold, they helped pretty well

            For what gold :)))

            And what did you forget about the main ally - Great France? Without Normandy and Neman, we have no money ... And how many fascists did the valiant French women put out of action with a trip?
        2. victor50
          victor50 16 May 2018 09: 01
          +2
          No matter how our opponents get hungry, we should not stoop to their level. Because if we do this, then what will we be better than them?
          Quote: Andrey Yurievich
          Yes, Andryukha ... for our gold, they helped a lot. by today's standards, consider mercenaries. well, plus selfish interests. however, before that they helped Hitler. dubious "allies."

          In my opinion, the main thing in the article is this: “No matter how our opponents get hungry, we should not stoop to their level. Because if we do this, then what will we be better than them?” And God grant us wisdom to abide by this rule.
      2. Safevi
        Safevi 14 May 2018 09: 30
        +7
        Thanks to the author. Alas, such articles are rare on the site.
    2. 210ox
      210ox 14 May 2018 11: 14
      +2
      And I want to correct the Author ..... Churchill's name was Jack .. and the nickname "Mad Jack"
      Quote: 210ox
      Andrei, thanks for the wonderful article. By the way, according to the rumors “the very Churchill” from “that same bow” still failed one Hitler .. And you definitely need to remember .. About the good, and the bad too.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        14 May 2018 11: 18
        +1
        Quote: 210ox
        .. Churchill's name was Jack ... and the nickname "Mad Jack"

        Full name - John :)))) Remember John Arbuthnot "Jackie" Fisher :)))
        1. Aristarkh Lyudvigovich
          Aristarkh Lyudvigovich 14 May 2018 12: 54
          +8
          Andrei hi Thanks for the interesting article. The allies also helped us and deserve a good memory. Add a photo.
          1. Reptiloid
            Reptiloid 14 May 2018 13: 12
            +4
            There was a long time ago an article on a site about small countries that supported the USSR by sending medicinal products for the health of soldiers and goods. Volunteers, in my opinion, too. This is Tuva, Mongolia, Yemen ..... I could not find.
            1. Mavrikiy
              Mavrikiy 15 May 2018 10: 28
              +1
              Quote: Reptiloid
              There was a long time ago an article on a site about small countries that supported the USSR by sending medicinal products for the health of soldiers and goods. Volunteers, in my opinion, too. This is Tuva, Mongolia, Yemen ..... I could not find.

              And you won’t find it. The article flashed like a fallen leaf. This is not interesting, here is a land lease!
              But if you look closely at hundreds of thousands of horses (500 thousand heads of horses +700 thousand heads of cows), short fur coats, boots ....
              1. yehat
                yehat 15 May 2018 11: 04
                0
                Mongolia helped a lot
                even some help came from tea conchist China.
            2. Pissarro
              Pissarro 15 May 2018 20: 26
              0
              Mongolia is the only country that has provided real and very substantial assistance from the first day of the war. Thank you so much, and not to those who raised Hitler with loans and sent east in Munich, and then, when everything had already been decided, he began to help. Yes, we reached the borders of the union before they landed in Normandy. They tore their piece of Europe so that we did not get too much. Here is the whole price of their help
          2. avt
            avt 14 May 2018 15: 41
            +1
            Quote: Aristarkh Ludwigovich
            Add a photo.

            By the way, the light tank, very beloved by our tank crews, especially when the caliber of the cannon was slightly increased, a relative of the distant mech-drive fought on it and the T-34, so it really set it higher — it was more comfortable to work except for the cannon.
            1. yehat
              yehat 14 May 2018 16: 44
              +4
              Valentine was a very messy car. Matilda 2 was better. t34 was much better.
              the only tank that really performed well is the Sherman.
              even tankers loved to draw. The tank is sloppy, but the crew on it often could survive even if the car was hit.
              1. avt
                avt 14 May 2018 18: 41
                +2
                Quote: yehat
                Valentine was a very messy car. Matilda 2 was better.

                It would be better if they wouldn’t be deleted from the list for delivery, and Valentines asked even when the same Shermans went, there simply wasn’t a similar light car, especially when the fifty dollars ended and it’s not very big series, and the T-60/70 was not standing nearby .. By the way, the Shermans are "demanding in maintenance, but with an aglitsky gun abruptly t-34-76.
                Quote: yehat
                t34 was much better.

                It became better when they brought production to mind and set 85 mm, then, by the combination of technical characteristics and the criterion of price-quality, he became the legendary car of his time.
                1. yehat
                  yehat 14 May 2018 20: 06
                  +4
                  T34-85 actually fought since the end of 43 years in significant quantities.
                  and the most intense battles took place with t34-76 and he with a modernized tower-nut
                  and other improvements were definitely better than valentine.
                  1. avt
                    avt 15 May 2018 07: 51
                    0
                    Quote: yehat
                    and the most intense battles took place with t34-76 and he with a modernized tower-nut
                    and other improvements were definitely better than valentine.

                    well, like this
                    That’s what I can’t stand most in people, duck is stubbornness. Stubbornness is the first sign of dullness.
                    Compare the performance characteristics of cars and then you will know which car to compare with. ,, Valentine ", well, this is once again the last, took the place of the Ginsburg’s“ fifty dollars "- T-50. But you can continue to compare even with the IS-3
                  2. Mavrikiy
                    Mavrikiy 15 May 2018 10: 50
                    0
                    What do you want to prove?
                    That the T-34 is better than the lightweight Valentine with 135 hp and 25 km / h on the highway, then this is a certain kind of people is not provable. Himself fished out the T-34, downplayed and sent to compare with the IS-3. How liberal.
              2. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 16 May 2018 10: 04
                +1
                Quote: yehat
                Valentine was a very messy car. Matilda 2 was better.

                Of the currently available armaments of the Red Army, tank equipment should be the American medium tank Sherman M4A2 with artillery. armament in the form of a 76,2 mm cannon of high power and the Canadian light tank "Valentine" MK-9 with a 57-mm tank gun limited rollback ...
                The indicated tank models compare favorably with the domestic ones in terms of ease of operation, significantly increased overhaul life, ease of maintenance and current repair, and at the same time their armament, armor and mobility make it possible to solve the whole range of tasks put forward by armored forces ...
                © Marshal BTV Fedorenko (head of the ABTU of the Red Army and commander of the BTiMV of the Ground Forces)
                Quote: yehat
                t34 was much better.

                Ahem ... and is it nothing that the T-34 is a medium tank, and the Valentine was considered easy? wink
          3. Kuroneko
            Kuroneko 14 May 2018 17: 50
            +3
            Quote: Aristarkh Lyudvigovich
            Andrei hi Thanks for the interesting article. The allies also helped us and deserve a good memory. Add a photo.

            Valentines are great tanks. But only for us.
            But if you look, then the British shoved them to us according to the principle "here you are, God, that we are not worth it." It’s just that the Red Army (and our tankers) they really came in (the Americans shoved the “Aerocobras”, which were considered to be very worthless, which we also suddenly started playing). They were going to quickly turn off the Valentines production back in the 42nd, only thanks to our insistent demands on their deliveries and continued to do it right up to the 44th year.
            1. Amurets
              Amurets 15 May 2018 00: 03
              +2
              Quote: Kuroneko
              It’s just that the Red Army (and our tankers) they really came in (the Americans pushed the “Aero Cobras” that were unnecessary to them and were considered very worthless,

              Well, the first Aero Cobras and Kittyhawks were shoved by the British, refusing their deliveries in our favor. Studebaker VS-6 was also not a standard machine for the US Army and EMNIP was in service only with the U.S. KMP.
              "On the GMC Studebaker they left what was standardized (general type of frame, suspension, wheels, etc.), but used a different engine - 95-horsepower Hercules JXD, Timken axles (albeit in part "GMC" were the same "Timken", because "theirs" were also not enough), other suspension and transmission units.The cab from the civilian "Studebaker" of the "M" series was put on the truck (by the way, very comfortable, stylish and modern for its time ) and revised the plumage, the plumage of the "Studebaker" was made more functional, simple and strict.At the same time, the exterior of the "Studebaker" with rectangular L-shaped wings and a more streamlined and practical cockpit was at that time the most functional and convenient for service. , most importantly, on the Studebakers a lower-valve 5,24-liter engine with a lower compression ratio was installed, instead of the GMC-270 with a working volume of 4,42 liters. Therefore, this truck, as not quite standard, was it was decided to send the allies to the army, includingincluding the USSR. So, by the will of many whims and coincidences, the brave army trucks "Studebaker-US6" not only appeared in the automotive world, but also appeared in the Land of the Soviets, which then clashed in mortal combat with the Third Reich. M. Sokolov. "Car attack on the USSR. Trophy and lendleut cars."
              1. Kuroneko
                Kuroneko 15 May 2018 17: 46
                +2
                Quote: Amurets
                Well, the first Aerial Cobra and Kittyhawks

                May I have a moment of nostalgia?
                http://peskarlib.ru/sergey-alekseev/kobrik-i-kitt
                ihauk /

                A story from childhood, damn it. Maybe someone also remembers him. ^ _ ^
            2. yehat
              yehat 16 May 2018 12: 01
              +1
              aerocobra did not "play"
              and they had serious flaws due to the location of the engine and accident rate during take-off and landing. It was just that these were aircraft manufactured without deficit - all-metal, with good communications and a powerful engine, and this was enough to be appreciated.
        2. 210ox
          210ox 14 May 2018 14: 26
          0
          Well hi This does not change the meaning.
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          Quote: 210ox
          .. Churchill's name was Jack ... and the nickname "Mad Jack"

          Full name - John :)))) Remember John Arbuthnot "Jackie" Fisher :)))
  2. Gardamir
    Gardamir 14 May 2018 06: 28
    +7
    Speaking of kind words. The author tell about the operation "Unthinkable".
    1. Uncle lee
      Uncle lee 14 May 2018 07: 41
      0
      Quote: Gardamir
      Operation "The Unthinkable."

      I would call the "Unthinkable"!
    2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      14 May 2018 08: 59
      +7
      Quote: Gardamir
      The author tell about the operation "The Unthinkable."

      In short, this was the case. Churchill suggested that the Anglo-American headquarters lose such a plot - the Russians do not stop at defeating Germany and want to move on, so they must be stopped by the joint Anglo-American-German forces. The Americans turned a finger at the temple, and refused to participate in it, but the British generals were forced people, and what they were ordered to do would be done. Held a headquarters game, delivered a verdict. If we discard their political reverence towards Churchill, the conclusion sounded something like this - if the Red Army did not stop, they would smear the Allies into a thin pancake and after a month they would wash their boots in the Atlantic. Churchill was upset, but in the future he built his policy accordingly.
      1. avt
        avt 14 May 2018 15: 48
        0
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Reply Citir

        I have not heard of this, but what really bothered them was the huge leftist, almost communist movement on the rise in almost the whole West. In Greece, they simply crushed brutally by force, even in Belgium, shaved men brought tanks and soldiers to the streets with one hint of a demonstration. Well, in Italy, they worked thinner than the US. They took and, as in the capture of Sicily, connected children and not anyone, but Vito Genovese and others of his caliber. They quietly beheaded - multiplied the current and potential leadership by zero, leaving those ... well, not very violent - analogues of the current Simonenko in Ruin , just like the FBI during it in the USA Communists exactly after the victory of the Bolsheviks after the 17th. So here it’s more likely the sum of factors and the military proper is not even in third place. Well, if in the top ten.
      2. Kuroneko
        Kuroneko 14 May 2018 17: 22
        +1
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        In short, this was the case.

        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        If we discard their political reverence towards Churchill, the conclusion sounded something like this - if the Red Army did not stop, they would smear the Allies into a thin pancake and after a month they would wash their boots in the Atlantic. Churchill was upset, but in the future he built his policy accordingly.

        Also wrong. The conclusion sounded more like this: a quick victory is impossible. And even with most favorable during the operation, the Anglo-Americans (well, the undefeated Germans) receive another protracted war, the outcome of which is unpredictable.
      3. ARES623
        ARES623 14 May 2018 20: 15
        +2
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Churchill invited the Anglo-American headquarters to lose such a plot - the Russians do not stop at defeating Germany and want to move on, so they need to be stopped by joint Anglo-American-German forces

        And this despite the fact that shortly before that, the WC plaintively whined in front of the ITT whether the spacecraft could carry out an offensive operation to weaken the Germans on the western front. The Germans didn’t “cram” them (the allies) in the Ardennes. It was necessary to take a breath ...
      4. Aviator_
        Aviator_ 14 May 2018 22: 54
        0
        Churchill had no future after the summer of 1945.
    3. BAI
      BAI 14 May 2018 09: 22
      +8
      Soviet agents also helped put an end to Churchill's plan. Thanks to the Cambridge Five, the operation was learned in Moscow on June 29, that is, two days before the X-hour, Soviet troops changed their locations and grouped to repel the strike. In addition, the officers of the British headquarters from the very beginning did not believe in the success of the company and dissuaded Churchill from the venture. Against the attack on the Soviet Union, the American military unexpectedly rebelled.
      A prominent scholar of this period, a professor at the University of Edinburgh D. Erickson wrote that Churchill’s plan helps explain, “why Marshal Zhukov unexpectedly decided in June 1945 to regroup his forces, received an order from Moscow to strengthen the defense and study in detail the deployment of troops of the Western Allies. " The Red Army unexpectedly changed its deployment. This somewhat cooled the hot heads of the Allies and forced them to wait for an attack on the USSR.
      Later, the plan had to be completely abandoned - in July 1945, Churchill was defeated in the elections and resigned as prime minister. Churchill’s course of confrontation with the USSR, no doubt, was one of the reasons for the conservative party losing the parliamentary majority in the 1945 elections and Churchill’s loss of prime minister.
      According to opinion polls, in 1945, about 70 percent of the British were friendly towards the USSR.

      By the way, the USA still needed the USA for the war with Japan.
      The operation plan is here.
      http://www.coldwar.ru/bases/operation-unthinkable
      . Php
  3. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 14 May 2018 06: 54
    +9
    The article will probably raise the morale of the European and American. Or maybe it would be worth remembering how much the "allies" pulled with the 2nd front while waiting for who will still prevail? And all this time, Soviet soldiers and our civilian population died. Yes there were allies, there was a Lend-Lease, but today the West rewrites history for itself where there is no place for either the USSR or Russia.
    1. Division DON-100
      Division DON-100 14 May 2018 14: 42
      +7
      Gennady hi , so the calculation is that the article is in the spirit of Kolisurengoy! Like, let's remember that we were not alone with Hitler at war. I have already unsubscribed above about what I think about the “allies” and their “help”.
      One can only ask how the Amerszos managed to cash in on "free" help so much that by 1945 they had gathered almost the entire gold reserves of Europe. Once the author carefully avoided this issue. And then he (the author) will be surprised where such "Kolysurengoy" come from ...
      1. Departure
        Departure 14 May 2018 20: 20
        +2
        The Americans profited not only from this. Do not forget that they took into their hands all the advanced designs of the Nazis, a complete package of an almost-made atomic bomb together with scientists, got a train with ss documentation, including the priceless Anenerbe archive, transported many war criminals and doctors to the USA killers with the materials of their research. The heads of the laboratories of Detachment 731 were transferred from Japan to the USA, where they also continued their work. The Americans knew that work on the AO was in its final stages and could not miss the chance to capture such a valuable trophy. This explains the rush and unpreparedness with which they fell on the coast. Allies, they are. And of course, not underestimating the role of Lend-Lease, it is worth noting that the capitalist will never lose his profit by putting a small print on the contract item that needs to be paid. Then, someday, not everything, but pay.
        1. Mimoprohodil
          Mimoprohodil 14 May 2018 20: 54
          +1
          Quote: departure
          Do not forget that they took into their own hands all the advanced developments of the Nazis, a complete package of an almost-made atomic bomb together with scientists, got into their own hands a train with ss documentation, including the priceless Anenerbe archive
          Have you reviewed REN-TV?
    2. Merold
      Merold 14 May 2018 17: 27
      +4
      Quote: rotmistr60
      Yes there were allies, there was a Lend-Lease, but today the West rewrites history for itself where there is no place for either the USSR or Russia.

      Already your ears fade from people like you. Tell us, what is the West rewriting today and what was different yesterday?
      You can not? Why?
      1. Glory1974
        Glory1974 14 May 2018 20: 23
        +3
        Tell us, what is the West rewriting today and what was different yesterday?

        Well, for example, Stalin was a friend and ally, and now is presented as a bloody tyrant on a par with Hitler.
        1. Merold
          Merold 14 May 2018 20: 35
          +1
          Quote: glory1974
          Tell us, what is the West rewriting today and what was different yesterday?

          Well, for example, Stalin was a friend and ally, and now is presented as a bloody tyrant on a par with Hitler.

          And there are links to both?
          1. Glory1974
            Glory1974 14 May 2018 20: 39
            0
            And there are links to both?

            Are you kidding or serious? Seriously, what exactly are you interested in?
            1. Merold
              Merold 14 May 2018 21: 05
              +1
              Quote: glory1974
              And there are links to both?

              Are you kidding or serious? Seriously, what exactly are you interested in?

              When was Stalin a friend and ally, and when did they begin to rewrite history? Well, you do not just write it like that, but have examples of both?
              1. Glory1974
                Glory1974 15 May 2018 19: 29
                0
                When was Stalin a friend and ally, and when did they begin to rewrite history?

                During the Second World War, Churchill considered Stalin an ally, after the war he delivered a Fulton speech that marked the beginning of the Cold War. Give you a link to the Fulton speech?
  4. apro
    apro 14 May 2018 07: 07
    +3
    It must be remembered that with the so-called allies we fought three different wars, each one of our own. And we had different goals.
  5. Merold
    Merold 14 May 2018 07: 18
    +8
    Plus article. It has been infrequently recently that people in Russia like to remember who helped the USSR defeat Hitler.
  6. AlexS
    AlexS 14 May 2018 07: 39
    +10
    If not for the “allies” of the war, there would have been no war at all. And the Jones fought for not our interests, much less for our civilians, most of whom died from these Western barbarians ...
  7. parusnik
    parusnik 14 May 2018 07: 40
    +12
    A blessed memory to all those who died in that war, fighting with a variety of Nazis and damn those who unleashed it ... The ruling elites, England, USA, France ..
    1. Merold
      Merold 14 May 2018 07: 58
      +3
      Quote: parusnik
      A blessed memory to all those who died in that war, fighting with a variety of Nazis and damn those who unleashed it ... The ruling elites, England, USA, France ..

      Thank you for the serious analysis of the situation.
    2. Alex_59
      Alex_59 14 May 2018 08: 35
      +1
      Quote: parusnik
      The ruling elite, England, USA, France ..

      I am begging you. But the Germans, Italians, Japanese - whose limp sheep forced? Direct mass sunset of consciousness, turbidity in several nations. So they didn’t want to fight, they didn’t want to ...
      1. parusnik
        parusnik 14 May 2018 11: 28
        +3
        No need to beg, at the end of the sentence, the ellipsis is worth it .. You can continue. But this three did a lot to unleash WWII, Americans raised Germany with dough, helped create and restore economic potential, the British turned a blind eye to Germany’s violation of arms agreements .. And France , silently smoked on the sidelines ... By the way, there is a version that during the "Strange War" - France, England, Germany tried to agree on joint military operations against the USSR. Again, it was not the peoples who decided, they decided for them.
  8. Alex_59
    Alex_59 14 May 2018 07: 51
    +8
    In general, of course, it is correctly spelled. With agitation, our authorities went over completely, and for the first time on this 9 of May I had the unpleasant feeling that this was not my grandfather’s loitering. He would not have been delighted with the crowds of virgins in crookedly dressed uniforms with silicone lips, from stickers on cars, from so many St. George ribbons, about shouts about the greatness and invincibility of our army against the background of the real situation outside the paving stones of Red Square. The same strategy fits into complete disregard for allies who are now not very allies. The author has not mentioned China yet - also our ally, by the way, and in terms of the total number of population losses, he almost lost us more.
    A complete mess is going on in the world. Each for himself and creates what he wants. Nobody wants peace and friendship. Our respect for our former allies is unrequited love. Remember, but is it worth the 9 of May? On the other hand, our own authorities are now making such a fetish and even cranberry out of May 9 that it can be useful to dilute it with an adequate kind word about the allies. In short - what to do is not clear. Already I want to do nothing at all and leave on the 9 of May in the forest, to the river and quietly, silently sitting, looking at the water.
    1. Merold
      Merold 14 May 2018 08: 01
      +4
      Quote: Alex_59
      In and for the first time this May 9th I had the unpleasant feeling that it was not my grandfather’s mockery. He would not have been delighted with the crowds of virgins in a crookedly dressed uniform with lips pumped up with silicone,

      My grandfathers certainly would not understand how the Commander-in-Chief can take a parade while sitting. About the girls in the "nightie" on Red Square, I’m not even talking.
      1. parusnik
        parusnik 14 May 2018 11: 34
        +3
        how can the Commander-in-Chief take a parade while sitting
        ... only popcorn in hand is not enough ...
        1. Michael79
          Michael79 14 May 2018 15: 06
          +4
          Hm. It seems like Glavkom was sitting next to him and with veterans ... And if he stood, then they would have to stand the whole parade. Stir your brains a bit before reproaching. Believe me, the organizers of the Parade, however, have a brain, and at this level they, at least, are forced to use it))). Do not consider yourself the most intelligent and attentive.
          1. Merold
            Merold 14 May 2018 17: 36
            +3
            Quote: Mikhael79
            Hm. It seems like Glavkom was sitting next to him and with veterans ... And if he stood, then they would have to stand the whole parade. Stir your brains a bit before reproaching. Believe me, the organizers of the Parade, however, have a brain, and at this level they, at least, are forced to use it))). Do not consider yourself the most intelligent and attentive.

            I do not know how old you are and what you remember in your life. I’ll tell you what I remember.
            And I remember the same Leonid Ilyich, who in the last years of his life stood on his bending legs the whole parade on Red Square. Because there was combatant. But the current one, no.
            I also remember, for example, that there were no rehearsals of the parade before and the same tanks traveled around Moscow without blocking traffic among the traffic stream. These were the professionals!
            So don’t tell me about the brain, okay?
    2. Glory1974
      Glory1974 14 May 2018 20: 26
      +1
      The same strategy fits into complete disregard for allies who are now not very allies.

      On our anniversary dates, we invite everyone to Moscow to the parade. The former allies also came. So no one ignores them. On the contrary, they are more actively working with ordinary people from foreign countries, but politicians naturally on their own wave.
  9. sigdoc
    sigdoc 14 May 2018 08: 43
    +10
    The policy of the allies brought Russia to the brink of complete destruction, what the Soviet citizens had to endure in the besieged Leningrad and the soldiers on the front the allies never dreamed of. The author did not remember that during the Battle of Stalingrad the Allies divided the colonies in Africa, and the second front was not opened to help the USSR, but to stop the advance of the Red Army to the west of Europe.
    1. Merold
      Merold 14 May 2018 08: 47
      +3
      Quote: sigdoc
      The policy of the allies brought Russia to the brink of complete destruction, what the Soviet citizens had to endure in the besieged Leningrad and the soldiers on the front the allies never dreamed of. The author did not remember that during the Battle of Stalingrad the Allies divided the colonies in Africa, and the second front was not opened to help the USSR, but to stop the advance of the Red Army to the west of Europe.

      And if, for example, the United States did not wage war with Japan and the USSR would have to fight on two fronts, rather than transfer divisions from the Far East to the Western Front?
      1. sigdoc
        sigdoc 14 May 2018 17: 07
        +2
        That the Japanese would have raked a few years earlier, the Japanese knew perfectly well that to win at sea they had more chances than on land. The core of the war effort - Manchuria is too vulnerable because located too close to the borders of the USSR and the troops of the Far Eastern Front. Therefore, everything happened as it happened.
  10. Loess
    Loess 14 May 2018 08: 49
    +7
    The author suggests remembering only the good in our relations with the Anglo-Saxons? What for? To once again assure the people that the West wishes us exclusively good, and we are all not so grateful? And why not remember how the Anglo-Saxons handed over to Czechoslovakia to Hitler? Let us recall the “strange” war that began after the German invasion of Poland. Let us recall the expeditionary force assembled for shipment to Finland and not having time to get there before the end of the war, recall the plans for the bombing of oil fields in Baku.
    But tell me, what is the very George of Minnesota to blame for, which lies with shot chest on the wet sand of Omaha Beach? What did he do wrong? Too late came to the rescue? So it was not for him to decide.
    Of course, George from Minnesota is not to blame and it was not up to him to decide against whom to fight and whose bullet would shoot him in the chest. Only when the author writes that there were no good words for the allies, he forgets to mention that no good words were found for those allies who had the opportunity to make decisions, and not about ordinary soldiers. And you can even remember the Polish army of Anders, which formed, equipped and armed the USSR at the beginning of the war to the detriment of its front-line units and which left Iran to fight the Germans in the ranks of the Anglo-Saxons, you can recall the cancellation of convoys after the defeat of one of them, you can recall how they shot down our aircraft on the contact line in Germany in the 45 and the pilots of the attacking fighters were the same "Georges from Minnesota" ... I remember, after all, the behavior of the allied states, and not their individual representatives. Otherwise, you can agree to the extent that Kolyasurengoy was right with the words of the Nazis innocently killed in the vastness of our country ...
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      14 May 2018 08: 52
      +3
      Quote: Less
      it was not his fault and it was not up to him to decide against whom to fight and whose bullet would shoot him in the chest. Only when the author writes that there were no good words for the allies, he forgets to mention that no good words were found for those allies who had the opportunity to make decisions, and not about ordinary soldiers.

      Check out the VO materials for May 9th. There was no good word for anyone
      1. Loess
        Loess 14 May 2018 08: 55
        +6
        Because it was about the allies as a whole, and not about their individual representatives.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          14 May 2018 09: 16
          +2
          Quote: Less
          Because it was about the allies as a whole, and not about their individual representatives.

          That is, a dozen or two (by force) people of the US government who really made decisions are the allies as a whole, and 405 of thousands of dead Americans are some of their representatives? :)))
          1. Loess
            Loess 14 May 2018 09: 35
            +5
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            That is, a dozen or two (by force) people of the US government who really made decisions are the allies as a whole, and 405 of thousands of dead Americans are some of their representatives? :)))

            These ten or two decision makers made decisions in the interests of the United States, and by no means in the interests of the bleeding USSR, which was their ally and, accordingly, 405 of thousands of dead Americans died exclusively for the interests of the United States, and not because of a noble urge to help the ally. When the Anglo-Saxons fiasco in the Ardennes, Stalin ordered the advance of the Soviet troops two and a half weeks ahead of schedule, to save the Allies. Accordingly, the troops launched the offensive, being prepared for it much worse than they could. These are the actions of an ally. Can you give a similar example from the western allies of the USSR? Or can you give an example that our former allies praised Stalin on Victory Day?
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              14 May 2018 09: 58
              +2
              Quote: Less
              These ten or two decision makers made decisions in the interests of the United States, and by no means in the interests of the bleeding USSR, which was their ally and, accordingly, 405 thousand dead Americans died exclusively for the interests of the United States, and not because of a noble urge to help the ally

              Naturally. I will tell you even more - the armed forces of any country are fighting precisely for her, this country’s interests, and nothing else. Which does not cancel allied relations, in cases where the interests of the countries coincide. This is called - help :)))) The United States didn’t take the position "Russians are fighting for their country, so why would we help them?" Do not get up. But in fact, the Lend-Lease and the fact that the United States grappled with Japan helped us, and the second front also helped, albeit not to the extent that it should.
              Quote: Less
              When the Anglo-Saxons fiasco in the Ardennes, Stalin ordered the advance of the Soviet troops two and a half weeks ahead of schedule, to save the Allies

              Yes. True, not at 2,5 weeks, but less, but - it was.
              Quote: Less
              Can you give a similar example from the western allies of the USSR?

              let's recall the supply of British-made weapons to the USSR at the end of the 1941-42 years and remember what England had at the front then (especially in Africa). After all, they really tear themselves from themselves.
              Quote: Less
              Or can you give an example that our former allies praised Stalin on Victory Day?

              On Victory Day - not really, but they have not celebrated for a long time. And so - the same Chechill praised Stalin very much from his memoirs
              1. Loess
                Loess 14 May 2018 10: 14
                +3
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                Chechill praised Stalin very much from his memoirs

                If Chercell is not mistaken in connection with Hitler's invasion of the USSR, the phrase also belongs: if Hitler invaded hell, I would say a few good words about Satan.
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                let's recall the supply of British-made weapons to the USSR at the end of the 1941-42 years and remember what England had at the front then (especially in Africa). After all, they really tear themselves from themselves.
                This was not free help, besides, during the period you indicated, England did not conduct military operations in Europe, but in Africa ... Well, you will agree against the backdrop of events on the Soviet-German front that the scale of operations in Africa resembles fuss in the sandbox. Look at least at the number of troops involved in this theater from both sides.
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                Yes. True, not at 2,5 weeks, but less, but - it was.

                I may be mistaken, but the transfer was from 30 to 12
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                the fact that the US grappled with Japan helped us
                The USA grappled with Japan again not for the help of the USSR, but because the Japanese attacked them and it was Japan’s choice with whom to fight, with the USA or with the USSR.
                1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                  14 May 2018 10: 55
                  +2
                  Quote: Less
                  If I am not mistaken, Churchell in connection with Hitler's invasion of the USSR also has the phrase

                  Which I cited in the article
                  Quote: Less
                  This was not free help.

                  Just - free. Deliveries of English weapons were free for us at that time.
                  Quote: Less
                  and in Africa ... Well, agree against the backdrop of events on the Soviet-German front, the scale of action in Africa resembles fuss in the sandbox.

                  Yeah. But only at that time England could say that it didn’t have, and in the period we are talking about, England just raked the most rattles in Greece and Africa. In general, England needed to arm the army in the metropolis, because it could not repel the invasion, if the Germans somehow managed to land, England needed to urgently restore and replenish the defeated forces in Africa, but England completely sent arms to the USSR.
                  Quote: Less
                  The USA grappled with Japan again not for the help of the USSR, but because the Japanese attacked them and it was Japan’s choice with whom to fight, with the USA or with the USSR.

                  Not quite so :))) First - the United States imposed an embargo on oil supplies to Japan, after which it began to consume its strategic reserve. And here Japan had 2 choices - to fight to seize oil sources, or to compromise with the United States. However, the United States rolled out such an ultimatum, which Japan obviously could not accept, and this, of course, meant a war.
                  Japan attacked, yes, but it was very specifically provoked.
                  1. Loess
                    Loess 14 May 2018 11: 20
                    +2
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    Japan attacked, yes, but it was very specifically provoked.

                    Don't you find strange help to an ally in a war? To provoke a state located on the borders of an ally waging a difficult war, instead of helping an ally in a war with a direct adversary.
                    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                    In general, England needed to arm the army in the metropolis, because it could not repel the invasion, if the Germans somehow managed to land, England needed to urgently restore and replenish the defeated forces in Africa, but England completely sent arms to the USSR.

                    Hitler, having captured all of Europe, could not land in meiropolis, and then having transferred the main forces to the eastern front, he suddenly frightened the British with a landing in the metropolis? For two years, was Britain at war at that time, together with the colonies controlled vast territories and population and could not form an army? Or they didn’t need it, huh? Regarding the free of charge, you have already written about the Edinburgh cruiser below.
                    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      14 May 2018 13: 36
                      +3
                      Quote: Less
                      Don't you find strange help to an ally in a war?

                      I do not find. The United States could easily reorient Japan toward the USSR — instead, they oriented it toward themselves. And yes, before Japan entered the war, the USSR and the USA were not allies
                      Quote: Less
                      Hitler, having captured the whole of Europe, could not land in meiropolis, and then having transferred the main forces to the eastern front, he suddenly frightened the British with a landing in the metropolis?

                      “Could not” is a loose concept. “I didn’t try” - that will be right.
                      Quote: Less
                      Was Britain already at war for two years at that time, together with the colonies controlled vast territories and population and could not form an army?

                      Sorry, but I have the feeling that you don’t know the history of those times from the word “completely”. Before the war, the British had a very small army. When it began, they strained their best and secured a more than 400th expeditionary force to France. The Germans ate it in the 1940th. In dunkirk, people were saved, but not weapons and equipment. Total - by the winter of 1940-41, the British had soldiers, but had no weapons. They had to buy rifles in the USA!
                      At the end of 1940, the situation was perfectly characterized by such an episode - Chechill personally and individually distributed anti-tank guns along the coast. During an inspection of one of the brigades located in the most dangerous direction, the brigade commander gloomily informed Churchill that he had only 4 anti-tank guns and 5-6 shells for them. He asked the Prime Minister for permission to fire a projectile at each gun, so that the calculations would at least know how it works. Churchill forbade, and said that it was necessary to shoot at foschistye tanks, letting them closer.
                      Quote: Less
                      Regarding the free of charge, you have already written below about the cruiser "Edinburgh".

                      Have you read the answer? The United States paid gold for dolandlizic deliveries, as well as later what the USSR bought and what was not part of the Lend-Lease program. But England sent us its weapons and equipment at the most crucial moment for free.
                      1. Loess
                        Loess 14 May 2018 16: 07
                        +2
                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        “Could not” is a loose concept. “I didn’t try” - that will be right.

                        In this case, the same is true for the Allies regarding the opening of a second front in Europe.
                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        I do not find. The United States could easily reorient Japan toward the USSR — instead, they oriented it toward themselves. And yes, before Japan entered the war, the USSR and the USA were not allies

                        And what are the real prerequisites for the Japanese attack on the USSR? But besides just to attack, just to attack? A strong adversary, sparsely populated territories, oil fields are still unknown, the ongoing war in China, why attack? But there is a powerful fleet, which sooner or later must find application. It is more logical here that the US wants to defeat Japan in a one-on-one battle, while other potential players are engaged in a war in another part of the world.
                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        Sorry, but I have the feeling that you don’t know the history of those times from the word “completely”.

                        Where is the logic? The war in China has been burning for several years, and sooner or later it will touch the British colonies in Indochina and directly in India, Europe is moving with great strides towards a big war, everyone is actively arming, building up armed forces, and one of the key players is not even trying to create an efficient army? As if I’m sure that in the coming years there’s no need to fight. The USSR is persistently trying to conclude a military alliance against Germany, but is refused. In the 39th, Britain entered the war and the 41th still does not have such an army ... And for some reason they are not concerned at this time with the question of who will protect the metropolis in the event of a German landing on the islands ...
                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        distributed anti-tank guns by the coast

                        In our 41 time, we distributed tanks and planes individually on belligerent fronts, only this was due to losses on the battlefield, and not because for some reason the country was not preparing for war.
              2. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 14 May 2018 12: 10
                +6
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                Yes. True, not at 2,5 weeks, but less, but - it was.

                In fact, Stalin, on the contrary, delayed our advance by 3-4 days - due to the weather. Moreover, if we take the same memoirs of Katukov, then there is no rush in them - the front plan of the operation was ready before the crisis in the Ardennes, and the planned advance of tank armies to the bridgeheads began on New Year's Eve.
                Moreover, by Christmas, the German offensive in the Ardennes had stopped - and von Rundstedt even requested permission to withdraw tank formations - until they were surrounded by the Allies.
                The myth of a premature offensive was launched by Stalin in Yalta - in order to put pressure on the Allies in matters of the post-war structure of Europe: "We have done so much for you - now it's your turn". And then he crawled under his memoirs - for refuting the official point of view was fraught ...
            2. Merold
              Merold 14 May 2018 10: 05
              +2
              Quote: Less
              Or can you give an example that our former allies praised Stalin on Victory Day?

              The fact that the former allies remember with whom they fought side by side and keep a memory of this is evident even from these photos.

              Show me similar Russian photos. Did not find? Why?
              1. Loess
                Loess 14 May 2018 10: 25
                +2
                firstly, I didn’t look for it, and secondly, we had to return the equipment delivered under Lend-Lease to the Allies after the end of the war, if it survived the battles ... or pay for it.
                1. Merold
                  Merold 14 May 2018 10: 52
                  +1
                  Quote: Less
                  secondly, we had to return the equipment delivered under Lend-Lease to the Allies after the end of the war, if it survived the battles ... or pay for it.

                  And how was it to be done “honestly”? Keep it free and ask for more?
                  firstly not looking

                  And you try, and I'm sure you will definitely find it. Russia does not forget good.
                  1. Loess
                    Loess 14 May 2018 11: 08
                    +2
                    Quote: Merold
                    Russia does not forget good.

                    photo above is not enough for you?
                    Quote: Merold
                    And how was it to be done “honestly”? Keep it free and ask for more?

                    Quote: Merold
                    Show me similar Russian photos. Did not find? Why?

                    What to photograph if something that did not burn out at the fronts was returned to the "producing countries"? What remains is restored and exhibited in museums for all to see. Or have you never heard of Lend-Lease Museums? Are only photos from the Internet important to you?
                    1. Merold
                      Merold 14 May 2018 11: 21
                      0
                      Quote: Less
                      Quote: Merold
                      Russia does not forget good.

                      photo above is not enough for you?

                      Carriage yard. Restoration technical center. More than enough.
                      What to photograph if something that did not burn out at the fronts was returned to the "producing countries"?

                      Have modern Dryings (as in the photo with Rafale) also ended?
                      Or have you never heard of Lend-Lease Museums?

                      Who did not hear about the famous museum in the Moscow school No. 1262 occupying a whole class.
                      Do not forget to remind everyone around the world that "Russia does not forget good."
                      1. Loess
                        Loess 14 May 2018 11: 30
                        +3
                        Do you offer modern "Sushki" repaint in the national colors of other states and call it memory? In my opinion this is nonsense or, at best, a farce. It is excusable to those who have nothing to show in museums. And we have in every more or less large settlement there are monuments to the heroes of that war. But this is with us, as you have not been given to me. And about the good - this is your phrase, then you remind her.
                    2. Merold
                      Merold 14 May 2018 12: 06
                      0
                      Quote: Less
                      Do you offer modern "Sushki" repainting in the national colors of other states and call it memory? In my opinion this is nonsense or, at best, a farce.

                      "Repainting in the national colors of other states." fool


                      Quote: Less
                      It is excusable to those who have nothing to show in museums.

                      Yak-3 in Le Bourget.


                      Write more.
                    3. Alex_59
                      Alex_59 14 May 2018 12: 52
                      +3
                      Quote: Less
                      What to photograph if something that did not burn out at the fronts was returned to the "producing countries"?

                      There is a book on Lend-Lease cars by EMNIP Kochnev. You should read it, there is a lot about it. Cars after the Second World War were not very willing to return and it was such a focused policy. Something was returned, but a huge number of cars were specially demobilized and sent to remote corners of the country, working for the national economy. Thousands of cars. Their habitat regions are mainly the Urals and central Siberia.
                      After the war, the USSR negotiated with the United States over the restoration of the Soviet economy and lending by the United States. Not successful negotiations. In addition, it became known that the cars returned to the USA were utilized in ports by special presses and already loaded into ships leaving for the USA in the form of scrap. The observers were shocked by this - living cars, Americans in short supply in the USSR were crushed by the press. The Americans returned to deep water and drowned the torpedo boats returned through Lend-Lease in the Far East. Under these conditions, taking into account the great shortage of vehicles and the difficult situation of the USSR economy, they decided to hide the equipment, and to tell the Americans that it was lost in battle. And to be honest, I’m not ashamed of it.
      2. faridg7
        faridg7 14 May 2018 14: 39
        +3
        Andrei, the article is certainly not bad, and you’re right, I didn’t find a good word for “allies”. Yes, the Allies also fought, they also suffered losses, though not to compare with ours, but these are losses. However, in my opinion, these losses do not at all redeem the fact that the Second World War was the result of precisely their policy. This English and French action and conspiracy led to the outbreak of war in Europe. But weren't they carefully working out plans for the defeat of Soviet oil-bearing regions? as far as I remember, almost everything was ready for this operation. Didn’t they wage a “strange war” in Europe, when, in accordance with the treaties, they had to crush the Reich people in their den, when the Nazis attacked Czechoslovakia? Yes, they didn’t give a tiny bit to the world and the Soviet Union for their crimes.
  11. Wilderness
    Wilderness 14 May 2018 09: 08
    +4
    The article is good, but here’s the title .... May 9 we celebrate Victory Day in World War II, which was waged by the Soviet people, reflecting the aggression of world fascism. The USSR is the only and undisputed winner of it. There were two allies: Mongolia and Tuva (correct if I am mistaken). Lend-lease made a serious contribution to the victory, no one ever disputed this, but this was not help, but business — the USSR paid for everything in gold.
    At the same time, another war was going on: 2 world, typical dismantling of the imperialists, divided markets, loot and colonies (as well as in 1MV and possibly in 3MV).
    Yes, the modern rulers of Russia (as a typical imperialist country) are more impressed with participation in the WWII than in the people's liberation war (the more so the modern RF, such a strain of forces, as in the Second World War, will float upside down in the first months of the conflict). Therefore, there is a kind of substitution of concepts - count how many times in his speeches on May 2, Putin replaces the term WWII with 9MB.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      14 May 2018 09: 15
      +2
      Quote: Wilderness
      The article is good, but here is the name ....

      The name was redone by moderators. We decided that it would be better. I originally wrote "On the Allies of the USSR in World War II and Our Relationship to Them".
      Quote: Wilderness
      The USSR is its sole and undisputed winner. There were two allies: Mongolia and Tuva (correct if I am mistaken).

      Actually, there were several more, including the USA and England :)))
      Quote: Wilderness
      Lend-lease made a serious contribution to the victory, no one ever disputed this, but this was not help, but business — the USSR paid for everything in gold.

      ??? Lend-lease was not paid, all the more - in gold. Gold paid for pre-delivery deliveries. Plus, according to the rules of Lend-Lease, the country that received the property should have returned it after the war, if it was not destroyed in battle or otherwise used. The USSR paid gold for property that it did not want to return
      1. Wilderness
        Wilderness 14 May 2018 09: 34
        +4
        England and the United States did not participate in the Great Patriotic War, they had another war of their own, in which the United States won, oddly enough! The enemy was just the same. In general, the practice of substitution began in the late USSR, but for 45 years there was a medal "For Victory over Germany", a medal "For Victory over Japan", but there was no medal for participation in 2MB.
        Regarding Lend-Lease, it is quite possible you are right. Only here the cruiser "Edinburgh" was carrying a little gold not as a replacement for ballast ingots, and I heard he was not the only one.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          14 May 2018 10: 56
          +3
          Quote: Wilderness
          Only here the cruiser "Edinburgh" was carrying a little gold not as a replacement for ballast ingots, and I heard he was not the only one.

          Sure. But it was a payment for long-term supplies.
          1. Amurets
            Amurets 14 May 2018 11: 58
            +1
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Sure. But it was a payment for long-term supplies.

            Not only. The equipment of the plants and a number of other deliveries were carried out through Amtorg and the People’s Commissariat of Foreign Trade.
  12. ALEA IACTA EST
    ALEA IACTA EST 14 May 2018 09: 16
    +1
    Powers defended their interests, each in its own way.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      14 May 2018 09: 22
      +4
      Quote: ALEA IACTA EST
      Powers defended their interests, each in its own way.

      Naturally. But at the same time, our enemies coincided and we fought together
  13. vladimirvn
    vladimirvn 14 May 2018 09: 28
    +1
    The article is correct, but not timely. The truth is the same is harmful when they say it out of place and at the wrong time. In the 41st when the Nazis arrived, among them there were the same workers and peasants and loving fathers. But this did not make it any easier for us. Let's follow the example of Kolya from Urengoy to commemorate ALL who died in that war, as it is fashionable now in Europe.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      14 May 2018 11: 42
      +2
      Quote: vladimirvn
      The article is correct, but not timely

      Judging by the indignation of a number of readers, it is very timely. That is, propaganda is doing its job - many even ordinary soldiers of the allies have been denied the right to respect and memory. Yes, here to take you, at least
      Quote: vladimirvn
      In the 41st when the Nazis arrived, among them there were the same workers and peasants and loving fathers. But this did not make it any easier for us.

      You managed to equalize the fascists who came to our land with allied soldiers.
      1. vladimirvn
        vladimirvn 14 May 2018 16: 27
        +1
        Thank you, they were once told. And not only thanks. And a few years later they became enemies. And in Korea, Vietnam and further on the list, our people were already killed.
  14. Rey_ka
    Rey_ka 14 May 2018 10: 49
    0
    But on the other hand ... imagine a large city such as Volgograd, Krasnodar or Saratov

    As far as I know now Krasnodar has already exceeded 1.5 million
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      14 May 2018 11: 20
      +2
      Quote: Rey_ka
      As far as I know now Krasnodar has already exceeded 1.5 million

      Well, God give them health, one and a half :))))
  15. Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 14 May 2018 11: 44
    +3
    In fact, Waldron’s squadron was originally supposed to go without fighter cover. It was Lindsay's arrangement with the Gray fighters, and Massey had her own fighter cover in the form of Thatch fighters.

    On each of the aircraft, the strike was planned independently. On the “Hornet” (which torpedo was led by Waldron) and “Enterprise” (the torpor which was led by Lindsey), it was decided that the fighters of the wife should cover the main striking force of the dive bombers. For according to the experience of the Coral Sea, it was dive-bombers who suffered the main losses. On “Yorktown” (which Torcy was led by Massey), on the contrary, fighters were given under the command of Thatch to the torpers.
    At Enterprise, there was still an unofficial arrangement between torpers and fighters that if everything was bad below, then the fighters under Gray’s command would help the torpers with a “Come on down Jim” signal transmitted at the combat frequency of VF-6.
    And then the naval mess began.
    Enterprise Group:
    To begin with, Gray's fighters went into the air with radio stations tuned to the frequency of the BVP TF-16, and not to the combat frequency of the VF-6. Then Gray took Waldron's group for Lindsay - and went over them to the goal. As a result, Gray appeared first over the target - and began to patrol around the dive entry area. Fuel for this was enough for him for only half an hour - and at 10:00 he headed for the Enterprise. At 10:05, Lindsay transmitted the signal “Come on down Jim” - but Gray had already gone home. However, even if he had stayed, he would still not have responded - for he simply would not have heard the signal due to the difference in frequencies.
    Hornet Group:
    Waldron brought his torpers right on target. The ambush is that for this he quarreled with the group commander, so that the Hornet dive fighters and fighters went "nowhere."
  16. The comment was deleted.
  17. hhhhhhh
    hhhhhhh 14 May 2018 12: 03
    0
    It is not us who we don’t want to celebrate on May 9, but they refuse to recognize Victory Day.
    1. Merold
      Merold 14 May 2018 17: 16
      0
      Quote: hhhhhhh
      It is not us who we don’t want to celebrate on May 9, but they refuse to recognize Victory Day.

      Germany


      United Kingdom

      USA

      Israel
      1. hhhhhhh
        hhhhhhh 14 May 2018 19: 50
        +1
        This is our Soviet people say. We have a Victory.
  18. zoolu350
    zoolu350 14 May 2018 13: 07
    +3
    An article in the spirit of the cat Leopold: “Guys, let's live together”, let's understand and forgive them. Enough. It is this (if the destruction of the Russians breaks off that they will forgive) and makes the owners of the Fed and their slaves come to us again and again, bringing death, pain and destruction. The vicious circle must be interrupted.
    1. hhhhhhh
      hhhhhhh 16 May 2018 08: 33
      0
      Let's understand IBM, which supplied the camp management with calculating machines. But now we know for sure the number destroyed in the camps.
  19. turbris
    turbris 14 May 2018 13: 24
    +2
    Everything, of course, is correctly written in the article, with the exception of one “BUT” - it’s not us, but they refuse to celebrate victory over Nazi Germany with us. Of course, we remember both the help and the heroism of the Allied soldiers in a joint struggle with the enemy, and what about them? Numerous attempts to deauw the role of the Red Army in the victory over fascism are very alarming, the younger generation in these countries is practically disoriented and believes that the United States and allies won this war. Former allies very quickly after the victory turned into enemies and are now imposing sanctions against whom? Against the winner of fascism, against the liberator of Europe and the whole world from fascism? And so many years of the Cold War, which continues even now, it somehow does not favor any joint activities.
    1. hhhhhhh
      hhhhhhh 16 May 2018 08: 34
      0
      Let's forget the plans for Operation Unthinkable
  20. arturpraetor
    arturpraetor 14 May 2018 13: 48
    +5
    Oh, dear colleague, I'm afraid this is another voice crying in the desert. What you offer is too complicated, because it implies the presence of many shades of gray, and black-and-white thinking is much simpler, and here it is also necessary to separate states and their peoples, which in the understanding of people from the CIS are generally inseparable things. .. But it's all so complicated, why think and suffer when there are simple answers?
    Ah, nafig - I thought something else to write, but you can write a lot of things, but it will be useless ... As everyone chooses moral guidelines for himself, so everyone chooses for himself how to relate to his former and current allies. This is either the fruit of their own reasoning and conclusions, or soaked in mother’s milk and the spirit of propaganda. There are more cases of the second, alas, at all times.
    You could have written nothing at all, but nevertheless decided to support your message - you are not the only one, dear Andrei, remember EVERYTHING, and not just selective facts or convenient inventions hi
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      14 May 2018 16: 43
      +4
      Quote: arturpraetor
      Oh, dear colleague, I'm afraid this is another voice crying in the desert.

      Not really, but close to this - however, someone should :))))) You look, someone will think :)
      Quote: arturpraetor
      What you offer is too complicated, because it involves the presence of many shades of gray, and black-and-white thinking is much easier

      Enough to read the comments :))))))))
      Quote: arturpraetor
      Could write nothing at all, but still decided to support your message

      Thank you, dear colleague! drinks
  21. Bashibuzuk
    Bashibuzuk 14 May 2018 14: 21
    +2
    Well, such an article can be expected. And the thing is not even the right article or not. This is a good article, BUT .... leading away from the topic into emotions. And this approach is fundamentally wrong.
    I really feel sorry for the shot Jeremy from Minnesota, really.
    But I am even more terribly and offended by the girl Tatyana, who kept a diary in Leningrad. If you remember, there were lines - today my mother died, .... today she died ....., today she died ....
    You imagine - Died of hunger. FROM HUNGER!
    Well, who on the scales of fate will "pull" more weight - the girl Tanya or the military-liable Jacob?
    I don’t know how anyone, but for me there is no dilemma here.
    Andrey wanted to cover too much in such an article, too much.
    And I have no doubt that if it had not been for the shameless defamation of Russia over the past few years, then there would not have been such pathos that the author is afflicted with. It just wouldn’t be.
    And there would be a joint Victory Parade, as they did several years ago. Have you forgotten all?
    As for gold for Lend-Lease ...... well, who can tell how much gold Edinburgh was transporting? And why did he take it somewhere? And in what year did you carry?
    And, why only a couple of years ago, we were proudly told that, they say, Russia. paid off for Lend-Lease deliveries. Fig se ... free land lease. for which the grandchildren had to pay.
    And, really, the respected author does not know that in addition to the convoys PQ .... there were also convoys - QP!
    Attention - a question - but what did these same QP convoys carry, where, how much? Who accompanied them? And did he accompany at all? How many sailors died in these "reverse" convoys? Lend-lease on the contrary, no?
    The Soviet Union provided base airfields for US strategic bombers when they freely bombed the cities leaving the Soviet occupation zone. He provided - and didn’t say a word - well, they say, guys ... you wouldn’t bomb the Wehrmacht, instead of Dresden. They were silent ... and even provided the regime of maximum favors.
    And the fact that the Americans. spit on all sorts of agreements, we went through our zone of occupation, the Soviet - on the subject of Americanization, is all the secrets of nuclear technology also empty?
    And what about aviation raids on facilities, nuclear missile research, but having the risk of falling into the hands of the USSR whole? Also - swallowed .... cases of friendly fire, in Yugoslavia and Austria, our Kozhedub, who overwhelmed a couple of "blind" American pilots.
    Something strange, some kind of policy comes out, allied.
    The dead are remembered. They fought honestly - they remember. And speaking of the "sinister plans of the West" - they do not mean at all that it is Jack from Illinois and "... Jones Johnsen, whose home is Wisconsin .." hatched vicious plans to hit Rokossovsky or Stalin.
    So ..... Lend-Lease is one thing, the soldiers who fought are a little different, the military fraternity is the third, and the “insidious plans of international mercenaries” are from another opera.
    I think so.
    And, even in the reports, at least this year, and only a few years ago there were more of them - the British sailors of the convoys proudly demonstrated Soviet awards. And awards - already - to Russia. When was the last time they were awarded, remember?
    ...
    We do not expect to be carried on our hands. There’s nothing for us, but it’s all the same to our grandfathers. BUT...
    at least they didn’t try to turn it into ".. rogue isolates who only did that they raped the 4th million Germans ...".
    So far, I think, Ivan from Texas heroically hollowed the Das Reich division.
    ...
    I stand on this.
    Как
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      14 May 2018 18: 53
      +2
      Quote: Bashibuzuk
      So ..... Lend-Lease is one thing, the soldiers who fought are a little different, the military fraternity is the third, and the “insidious plans of international mercenaries” are from another opera.
      I think so.

      I agree. And on Victory Day from the memories of the former military fraternity no harm would have happened. However, they didn’t remember
  22. NF68
    NF68 14 May 2018 15: 04
    +1
    Interesting article. While the interests of the allies and the USSR coincided, the allies helped the USSR as they could.
  23. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 14 May 2018 16: 09
    +1
    What the Countryman does not do, he does everything wrong. (cartoon)
    But what is interesting is that when the nightmare of England nevertheless came true, and Europe found itself under the rule of a single ruler, then for Russia it never ended in anything good. Strictly speaking, Europe was united twice; Napoleon Bonaparte and Adolf Hitler did it. After that, the Russian Empire and the USSR experienced the most terrible invasions in their history, which our ancestors had to stop with great blood.

    How can this end well for Russia, if England also financed the revolution in France and raised Hitler purposefully, for a throw to the USSR?
    "The defeat of Hitler's Germany and its allies thwarted the plans of the masters of the West to enslave the whole of humanity and establish complete domination over it."

    What is wrong with what I’m not satisfied with?
    “The essence of the Western world is the constant robbery, the redistribution of the resources of all mankind in their favor. The West is a world parasite, a vampire ghoul who cannot exist without robberies, invasions and seizures of someone else’s “living space”.
    But what about the more than 800 thousand. John, Jack, Sam and Eugene, who died fighting with weapons in their hands against the Germans, Italians and Japanese? What about land lease? No way.

    There is the West, and there are insects that the West is ready to throw into the furnace of war, not hundreds of thousands, but millions.
    Look out the window, you are weeping, all the same, the Americans and the British bomb, shoot and kill millions, Vietnam alone is worth something. Victims of the exam and liberalists have reached Chelyabinsk. Oooo, Navalnyashki.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      14 May 2018 16: 15
      +1
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      What is wrong with what I’m not satisfied with?

      You will not understand:))))
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 15 May 2018 10: 06
      0
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      How can this end well for Russia, if England also financed the revolution in France and raised Hitler purposefully, for a throw to the USSR?

      Why grow Hitler for a throw to the USSR, if by the end of the 30s, according to our estimates, the coalition forces of the countries of the "sanitary cordon" and Japan were enough for the USSR? Or is it such a cunning plan of suicide - to feed a country dreaming of revenge for the last war, and then give it the resources of Eastern Europe and the USSR?
      Reich helped restore completely different people and for a completely different one. Someone urgently needed new markets and colonial empires were not needed at all. wink
      1. yehat
        yehat 15 May 2018 11: 07
        +2
        no, you are mistaken.
        Reich raised England, because it is her method - to fight with the wrong hands.
        But she was mistaken in how Hitler and his entourage behaved. In the end, they paid for this with the final collapse of the British Empire, and gnawed at the United States.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 15 May 2018 13: 15
          +1
          Quote: yehat
          no, you are mistaken.
          Reich raised England, because it is her method - to fight with the wrong hands.

          Why either or? wink In the cultivation of the Reich, both limes and Yankees were noted (the same IG Farben was actively sponsored by DuPont).
          One needed a counterbalance to France on the continent - for without Germany the whole system of checks and balances collapsed. which island gentlemen loved to play so much. And others ... others needed a redivision of the world. And for this to happen, a war in Europe is needed - a long and difficult war, as a result of which both winners and losers would fall into insignificance, lose colonies, incur debt and become Yankees vassals.
          1. strannik1985
            strannik1985 15 May 2018 14: 49
            0
            Outrageously, the FVL wrote that even the French were noted in the restoration of the Reich, the so-called financially active capital. Interestingly, hiccup investors in 1939-1945?
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 15 May 2018 18: 19
              0
              Quote: strannik1985
              Outrageously, the FVL wrote that even the French were noted in the restoration of the Reich, the so-called financially active capital.

              Well, you remember the famous quote from Dannig about what the capitalist is ready to do for profit. smile
            2. yehat
              yehat 15 May 2018 19: 01
              0
              capitalism is not one. Different interests pursue conflicting interests there.
      2. Mavrikiy
        Mavrikiy 15 May 2018 17: 42
        0
        Alexey RA (Aleksey) Today, 10:06 ↑
        Turn on the head. Poland Finland and Sprats + Japan + Turkey will cope with the USSR.
        Nat, ne can handle it. And if, with the help of the whole world, and eeeee ...., then England will not be allowed close. Finland - to the Urals, Poland, well, from time immemorial they traveled to Siberia, the Slovenes tea. And Turkey - Kazakaz (with oil), Astrakhan (with oil) and Kazan are ours too, yes! Che we will write about Japan? While the money gives for a victorious war, cheers. But on the continent, when they merge into allies who defeated the lion, they are no longer beaten puppies, but rather evil jackals.
        The symbol of world evil was needed (the Moor has done his job, the Moor may die).
        You forgetfulness missed the global crisis, what a nuisance. By investing in Germany and the USSR, England and the United States saved their industry and themselves. Not hundreds, but thousands of factories over a dozen years. And the interests of England and the United States were opposite .... Although yes, the Allies. We and the USA are funny. Stalin was smart, and life experience ... fiercely hated England, but an ally.
    3. NF68
      NF68 15 May 2018 16: 42
      0
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      How can this end well for Russia, if England also financed the revolution in France and raised Hitler purposefully, for a throw to the USSR?


      The British were raised Hitler and they did this not to confront the USSR, but in order to have in Europe a counterweight to France whose army in the 30 years was considered the most powerful in Europe. As a result, the British themselves played out a swarm of holes for the French ..
      1. Mavrikiy
        Mavrikiy 16 May 2018 05: 48
        0
        And the Americans did not grow Hitler?
        France and Germany weakened in civil strife would have become the prey of the terrible and terrible Stalin (then no one could have imagined how much France rotted). Therefore, they raised giants for destruction. Weak Hitler would not fight, it needs to be strengthened. If you do not pump up Stalin, the USSR will be under Germany and where England is on the continent, and they wanted to be the foremost in our territory.
        1. NF68
          NF68 16 May 2018 17: 10
          0
          Quote: Mavrikiy
          And the Americans did not grow Hitler?
          France and Germany weakened in civil strife would have become the prey of the terrible and terrible Stalin (then no one could have imagined how much France rotted). Therefore, they raised giants for destruction. Weak Hitler would not fight, it needs to be strengthened. If you do not pump up Stalin, the USSR will be under Germany and where England is on the continent, and they wanted to be the foremost in our territory.


          The contribution of the Americans was not so serious as the British. This British allowed Germany to gradually abandon the previously imposed restrictions on Germany, and not the Americans. At the beginning of the 1930's, no one had taken the USSR seriously and no one had specially prepared Germany for the role of a counterweight to the USSR. After, when Hitler completely got off the brakes in front of WWII, in France and BI they would not be very opposed to push their foreheads against Stalin and Hitler, but only Stalin and Hitler did not need this. Hitler had good reason to make claims in the first place BI. Hence the large-scale plans of Germany for the development of the Navy, as a result of which the Luftwaffe and the ground forces of the Wehrmacht were deprived. Soon after the start of the WWII, Germany was forced to once again adjust its plans for the development of the Navy, as a result of which the development of the submarine fleet was put to the forefront when it refused to build a large number of large surface ships.
          1. Mavrikiy
            Mavrikiy 17 May 2018 05: 24
            0
            Mdayayayayayaya.
            You recall, in WWI, Germany fought with France? If England is afraid of France and not Germany, what prevented it from rolling France into a thin pancake? England through freemasons pacified Germany, just as Russia was withdrawn from the war. Where is the logic?
            And France grew up on reparations from Germany and England did not expect this (nonsense, England always calculates everything, traders. Although she finds an old woman, she sometimes finds diarrhea).
            England, as a colonial power, did not like colonial power number two. But France, especially after the revolutions, always followed into the wake of England. I think the value of the French soldiers was very well represented, time was getting to know, in 120 years.
            Mussolini about his soldiers - "my paper soldiers", about the French would say: "My brave cardboard tigers."
            The USA pumped Germany to break the British Empire, "and they did it!" I do not think that England would look favorably on the revival of the German surface fleet, and the United States would give the go-ahead.
            1. NF68
              NF68 17 May 2018 15: 17
              0
              England has always adhered to the principle of creating a counterweight to the most powerful country in Western Europe. When England was profitable, she fought along with France-WWI, the Crimean War, and when the interests of France did not coincide with the interests of England, England entered into alliances with other countries and fought against France. For example, at the beginning of the 19 century, when Napoleon was pacified by a choir. If BI helped Germany destroy France in WWII, then BI would have destroyed one of the warring parties and the winner in this confrontation would have become a potential opponent of the BI itself, which the BI did not need. The British made a big mistake with Hitler. And that happens. In the 1917 year, BI and France took Russia out of the war, since by this time it was already clear that Germany had run out of steam and the need for cannon fodder had disappeared. After the completion of the WWII, BI and France did not want to share with Russia, so they organized an ecstatic mess in Russia.

              As for the United States, I do not argue here. The United States also used Japan to destroy the BI.
              1. Mavrikiy
                Mavrikiy 18 May 2018 16: 53
                0
                You do not get excited, but think.
                England vs Napoleon. But where did he come from? England and nothing?
                England destroyed the French monarchy (without consulting anyone), and Napoleon turned out.
                And what about the interests of England?
                England destroyed the Russian Empire (WWI, if you remember), received the RSFSR and also united with all. Having received eggs from Hitler, I realized that I was in a hurry again and did not think up the options.
                England always lost in the current moment, but in the long run .... If you count the USA as dinosaurs, and England as its cerebellum ......
                1. NF68
                  NF68 18 May 2018 20: 04
                  0
                  The French monarchy was not badly destroyed by the French themselves. The British wisely used this business for themselves. How can you prevent your most dangerous competitor from falling apart at this time? Earlier, England eliminated Spain as the most dangerous competitor at that time. Napoleon, like Hitler later, is a mistake that few people manage to avoid. Everything can’t be perfect even with the British. By and large, England began to lose only with the WWI, and before that the British always had a good time succeeding, even if not by 100%.

                  Judge for yourself. From the end of the 19 century, Germany began to develop very noticeably rapidly catching up with BI. For France, Germany was also a dangerous competitor. And France and England as it should have been quicker to deal with this competitor until he thoroughly pressed the BI and France on the world market. And since the interests of BI and France in this case coincided, the 2 experienced cheaters were temporarily united. And they turned a feint as a result of which Russia in this confrontation with Germany became something like cannon fodder. Do not forget that BI was almost always a sworn "friend" of Russia. Not even 10 years had passed since the end of the Russo-Japanese War, where BI even helped Japan a lot, but despite this BI in 1914 still attracted Russia to its side in the war, before which Russia did not have as many as BI and France have contradictions with Germany. Now, Great Britain is no longer the cerebellum of the United States, but something like a submarine mongrel, which at the present time can only put stinky heaps along the route it is moving on.
  24. Lunar daemon
    Lunar daemon 14 May 2018 16: 11
    +1
    The words of the author, about the help and "victims" of the allies, are touching. In some places, these words even sound convincing, only if you do not dig a little deeper. In fact, the help and support of the Allies does not deserve a hundredth of the respect that the author shows in the article.
    To begin with, it was a forced temporary alliance for both Britain and the United States. As the saying goes: the enemy of my enemy is my friend. In fact, the Allies hated our country no less than the Nazis, and their main task was to create the conditions for Germany and the USSR to kill and destroy each other for as long as possible.
    There has always been a lot of controversy about Lend-Lease. To begin with, the delivery was paid, and the USSR paid for them with pure gold. In the most difficult time of the war, that is, 41-42 years, the help was insignificant - the allies supplied what they themselves were worthless, for gold, so that they would kill each other more. At the end of the war, under the Lend-Lease agreement, all delivered equipment that did not die in the battles should be returned back to the supplier. But since the Allies didn’t need this control unit, all of these aircraft and the auto industry were pushed by bulldozers right at the place of acceptance, in front of ours.
    The author’s words about military successes are all the more bad. Yes, the Battle of Stalingrad was as crucial a battle on the Eastern Front as Midway was in the Pacific theater of operations. Only here, in terms of losses, they are not nearly comparable ... In the Battle of Stalingrad alone, the Red Army destroyed more Nazis than the USA destroyed during the whole war! Author, go to Mamaev Kurgan, and standing on this grand burial ground tell as tearfully as 44 American pilots died when the best Japanese aircraft carriers were sunk, miraculously stumbled upon them at the very moment when there were so many planes, fuel and bombs on their decks, that it was enough to throw just a match. How many times I reread the chronicles and the history of the Pacific war, and the Japanese, and not the yankee villains, always evoked unambiguous sympathy ...
    In conclusion, I want to say that, unlike the Allies, the Red Army did not purposefully destroy the enemy’s civilian population. What is the difference between the mentioned destruction of Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden and other cities without military objectives, from the atrocities of the Nazis? Nothing! Moreover, the Nazis did not even hypocrite, and did not cover up their wild atrocities with chatter about democracy, freedom, equality, etc.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      14 May 2018 16: 40
      +2
      Quote: Lunar Daemon
      To begin with, it was a forced temporary alliance for both Britain and the United States. As the saying goes: the enemy of my enemy is my friend. In fact, the Allies hated our country no less than the Nazis, and their main task was to create the conditions for Germany and the USSR to kill and destroy each other for as long as possible.

      There is such a point of view. Alas, it’s completely wrong - that is, it can be assumed that Chamberlain was thinking about something like this, but in the USA - definitely not
      Quote: Lunar Daemon
      To begin with, the delivery was paid, and the USSR paid for them with pure gold.

      (heavy sigh) to begin with, the Lend-Lease was FREE, and it touches me how many people who take aplomb to talk about history do not know the common truths.
      The USSR paid only for Lend-Lease deliveries, purchases that were not part of the Lend-Lease program (they went along the foreign trade line) and, finally, they paid for the fact that AFTER the war they wished to keep it (Lend-Lease meant that everything that wasn’t destroyed in battle, it is necessary to return it back, it is clear that this did not apply to the stew and so on, but to the equipment - very much).
      Quote: Lunar Daemon
      The author’s words about military successes are all the more bad.

      The fact that the author describes not “military successes” but Western propaganda speaks about them either that you cannot read, or that the article was read diagonally.
      1. Lunar daemon
        Lunar daemon 14 May 2018 17: 29
        +2
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        The USSR paid only for Lend-Lease deliveries, purchases that were not included in the Lend-Lease program (they went along the foreign trade line)

        Of course, the “Free” deliveries began when the gold ran out, the Russians and the Germans had not yet completely killed each other ...

        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        There is such a point of view. Alas, it’s completely wrong - that is, it can be assumed that Chamberlain was thinking about something like this, but in the USA - definitely not

        The main leaders of the allies were Churchill and Roosevelt. Churchill my words are fully extended. Roosevelt certainly looked softer, but he hardly believes in his sympathy for the USSR. But Truman, the more so was a rare villain ...

        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        The fact that the author describes not “military successes” but Western propaganda speaks about them either that you cannot read, or that the article was read diagonally.

        Well, why ... Reading your tenderness to the "heroes" of the allies, it is difficult to understand where propaganda is here and where it is not. I am not inclined to divide the parties into elves and orcs, but the fact is that our so-called "allies" were ghouls and villains are no better than the Nazis. Your wonder why they sing so few praises, it looks strange ... and somehow unpleasant.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          14 May 2018 19: 00
          +2
          Quote: Lunar Daemon
          Of course, “Free” shipments began when gold ran out

          Absolutely false statement. History must be taught, not fantasized.
          Quote: Lunar Daemon
          The main Allied leaders were Churchill and Roosevelt.

          Listen, well ... I’m already lacking patience, honestly. Before the war, Churchill was NIKEM, his level is about the same as that of a State Duma deputy today. He was returned to power when the war began and for the way England behaved in the pre-war period, he is not responsible. Moreover, Churchill shouted with all his might that Hitler should be hit on the head, and not agreed with him long before Munich.
          Quote: Lunar Daemon
          I’m not inclined to divide the parties into elves and orcs, but the fact is that our so-called “allies” were ghouls and villains are no better than the Nazis

          and here it is
          Quote: Lunar Daemon
          Reading your tenderness to the "heroes" of the allies

          That is, those English and American guys who died in battles with the Germans and Japanese are no better than the Nazis.
          I will say that this is personally you no better than those who yell that the Soviet soldiers were no better than the Nazis. You are the same for sure.
          1. Lunar daemon
            Lunar daemon 15 May 2018 12: 18
            +1
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Listen, well ... I’m already lacking patience, honestly. Before the war, Churchill was ANYONE

            And aren't we talking about the war with you? You always refer to your Chamberlain, but what important decisions did he make when the cannons spoke and the music became silent?

            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            That is, those English and American guys who died in battles with the Germans and Japanese are no better than the Nazis. I will say that this is personally you no better than those who yell that the Soviet soldiers were no better than the Nazis. You are the same for sure.

            Andrei, you always translate the conversation about the war into an emotional and lyrical channel: English and American guys are no better than Japanese and German guys, who just as often didn’t voluntarily, and without particularly malicious intent, carried out orders - shot prisoners, women raped, looted when the authorities did not see, in general, fought for the interests of their homeland ... Therefore, in topics affecting the war, it is better to lower the lyrics, and talk about these same interests of countries and empires.
            And these interests of our allies were and still are imperialistic and hateful. The United States was enriched in both world wars, and participation was limited to little blood when the outcome of the war was already obvious. You can certainly say that Melitaris Japan, treacherously attacked the Peacefully Sleeping Garden in Hawaii, but you yourself know that the Japanese had no choice. The United States has always forced other countries to respond accordingly with its sanctions and political swindles.
            The Nazis considered Britain to be more equal, they wanted to share with them spheres of influence and coexist. Europe from the English Channel to the Urals - the Reich, and the overseas colonies and naval dominion of Great Britain ... But the British won greed and they did not want to give up their European positions. And the British policy was always the same - not to allow the rise of strong states in the sphere of their influence, therefore the German Reich was as hated by them as the USSR.
          2. yehat
            yehat 15 May 2018 13: 26
            +2
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Before the war, Churchill was ANYONE

            Churchill before the war was a major figure in the Admiralty - one of the most prestigious institutions in the country. These people influenced the policy of the country, and you say-was nobody)))
            study history and less believe everyone knows
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              15 May 2018 16: 12
              0
              Quote: yehat
              Churchill before the war was a major figure in the Admiralty - one of the most prestigious institutions in the country.

              Was not. He was returned there at the very beginning of WWII
            2. Senior seaman
              Senior seaman 15 May 2018 16: 25
              0
              Churchill before the war was a major figure in the Admiralty - one of the most prestigious institutions in the country.

              Yeah, the first sea lord in WWI. And in principle, it really was before the Second World War.
              And in the 1929 year, the Tories lost the election and Churchill became an ordinary deputy, and again the 3 of September 1939 returned to the Admiralty.
      2. Kuroneko
        Kuroneko 14 May 2018 17: 34
        +2
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        There is such a point of view. Alas, it’s completely wrong - that is, it can be assumed that Chamberlain was thinking about something like this, but in the USA - definitely not

        I agree, but only partially. The United States was mainly worried (well, as always) how to make more money, since such a freebie in the form of World War II had turned up again (although it had not turned up, it had been prepared for a long time). The destruction of the USSR at that time, the USA really didn’t really care (here we must remember that it was the USA that was the first among the world powers to recognize the USSR, having also established numerous economic ties). Those. - loot, loot, and again loot. Cooperation with Nazi Germany throughout the Second World War - from the same opera. "Nothing personal, it's just business."
        But England, or rather, its “helmsmen,” is Sir Winston Churchill (well, Chamberlain too ... though what does he have to do with this, if we are talking about Second World?) - they really hated the USSR with all the fibers of their colonial-capitalist souls. ^ _ ^
      3. zoolu350
        zoolu350 14 May 2018 17: 42
        0
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        There is such a point of view. Alas, it’s completely wrong - that is, it can be assumed that Chamberlain was thinking about something like this, but in the USA - definitely not

        School, or rather its owners of the Fed, thought about this in the first place and WWII was conceived by them with the goal:
        1. Destroy alternative centers of human development (USSR and Japan);
        2. "Grab" colonies of excess Empires (Melkobritanskoy and French);
        3. Vparivaniya all his green cut paper and the establishment of control over world trade (Breton-Wood).
        1. Kuroneko
          Kuroneko 14 May 2018 18: 05
          +1
          Quote: zoolu350
          3. Vparivaniya all his green cut paper and the establishment of control over world trade (Breton-Wood).

          Well, about that - it's doubtful. You consider them too Great Combinators. I am sure that this goal was not originally set (otherwise Breton-Wood would have happened at sunset of the First World War). It’s simple - they saw how the “pot is cooking”, they thought - why not, since everything is successfully developing itself? Those. it is rather a passing (albeit critically important) "bonus".
          But paragraph 2 is a historical fact. See the conversation between Churchill and Roosevelt on his yacht (on terms of US assistance to the UK). After that, she became number two in the Anglo-Saxon world.
          Point one is controversial too. In relation to Japan. Ideally, Japan was to become an ordinary battering ram against the Soviet Far East (fortunately, Hassan and Khalkhin-Gol had happened before, so the Japanese knew that on land - except for China and Manchuria - they did not shine).
          1. zoolu350
            zoolu350 14 May 2018 18: 12
            +1
            The owners of the Fed are the Greatest Combinators (in a bad sense) on the planet, and Russia unfortunately has no Lenin and Stalin Level Leaders to resist them.
            Japan proposed its concept of world order in Asia. This is certainly not the level of the USSR, but the owners of the Fed destroyed countries for less.
            1. Kuroneko
              Kuroneko 14 May 2018 18: 51
              +1
              Quote: zoolu350
              Japan proposed its concept of world order in Asia.

              I wonder which one? Yes, I myself will answer. The Japanese are the highest race and beyond jurisdiction, all the rest are half-slaves and must work for the glory of the Emperor - for the benefit of the great Zipang.
              Even modern Japan remains largely in the grip of this paradigm (and clanism has not disappeared, even in relation to its own “untouchable caste” - burakumins - https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Burakumin). Well, all the foreigners are generally gaijins, not even the second, but the third grade. "Long-nosed devils."
              In short, I dare to believe that I know a little more about Japan and the Japanese (since I’ve been a long-time fan-saber-translator, so I delved deep enough into the culture and history of this nation).
              1. zoolu350
                zoolu350 14 May 2018 20: 45
                0
                You see, you know everything. That's right: Japanese 1st grade, other Asians 2nd grade, others understandable. As you can see, there is no place for the Fed owners in this scenario.
                1. Kuroneko
                  Kuroneko 15 May 2018 17: 54
                  +1
                  Quote: zoolu350
                  As you can see, there is no place for the Fed owners in this scenario.

                  Kakbe is true, but ... contrasts somehow badly with your earlier statement:
                  Japan proposed its concept of world order in Asia. This is certainly not the level of the USSR

                  This is not a world order (but just, I recall, a certain "Great East Asian Domain co-prosperity "- co-prosperity, yes, yes =), and with the level of the USSR this neo-slavery system (or rather, dreams of reviving the shogunate - but on the scale of a whole geographical region) is simply blasphemous to compare.
                  If not right - correct.
                  1. zoolu350
                    zoolu350 17 May 2018 18: 27
                    0
                    I'm correcting. Japan wanted to establish its own world order in Asia. The scale in comparison with the USSR is quite small, but it is also directed against the USSR, which explains why the owners of the Fed looked at the “art” of the Japanese in this direction through their fingers, until the Japanese spoke out frankly against them.
                    1. Kuroneko
                      Kuroneko 18 May 2018 17: 07
                      +1
                      One question (you just don't seem to be catching up with one small fact, comparing an elephant with a pug, and even comparing them as something more or less similar): USSR also wanted to establish neorabism with your world order? Apparently, it was precisely for this that he maliciously built hospitals, schools, high-tech production plants (not just processing ones), and power plants for his slaves?
                      For some reason, the Baltic States smelled very strongly.
                      PS Once again, I remind you of the key message of the previous post (well, for those who are in the tank):
                      and with the level of the USSR this neo-slavery system (but rather, the dream of reviving the shogunate - but on the scale of a whole geographic region) is simply blasphemous to compare.
                      1. zoolu350
                        zoolu350 19 May 2018 03: 34
                        0
                        You are pushing for the difference in the ideological attitudes of the USSR and Japan. Talk about the fact that there and there YOUR views on the FUTURE (Humanity in the USSR, Asia in the Japanese). I have already agreed with you about the scale. The USSR for the owners of the Fed, of course, was more dangerous for the owners of the Fed, because it extrapolated its ideas to the WHOLE world. Of course, the ideology of the USSR is much more humane and progressive than that of Japan. Close the question?
      4. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 15 May 2018 10: 18
        0
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        There is such a point of view. Alas, it’s completely wrong - that is, it can be assumed that Chamberlain was thinking about something like this, but in the USA - definitely not

        Chamberlain as prime minister was thinking about something completely different - about where the Empire’s armed forces (including the efforts of the Chancellor of the Treasury Chamberlain) found themselves at the fifth point amid very bad news from the Reich. In principle, one could only hope for the fleet - for the Air Force was a collection of samples. which would have looked nice somewhere in the early 30s, and the army ... Britain had practically no army (especially after the defeat of armored forces in the late 20s). And if the Chancellor of the Treasury Chamberlain constantly advocated for a reduction in military spending, then Prime Minister Chamberlain immediately began to increase them sharply. In fact, what Churchill fought in the early years he inherited from Chamberlain.
        1. yehat
          yehat 15 May 2018 11: 18
          0
          Germans could be beaten by France alone. She had the strength. So the quality condition of the army of small Britain cannot be directly blamed on Chamberlain.
          He is to blame for something else - in the Munich agreement, in the guarantees of Poland, which were not undermined by the forces of the empire and a number of other dirty deeds. His position on the war in Spain is very ambiguous.
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 15 May 2018 13: 26
            +1
            Quote: yehat
            Germans could be beaten by France alone. She had the strength. So the quality condition of the army of small Britain cannot be directly blamed on Chamberlain.

            The problem is that France did not want to fight alone with the Reich (it seems that the French suspected the British of something smile ) And Britain until 1939 simply could not put anything to help the French.
            Quote: yehat
            He is guilty of another - in the Munich agreement

            Munich has one reason - Chamberlain desperately needed time to restore the Empire’s Armed Forces. He desperately did not want to fight on colonial tanks and antique biplanes with the Wehrmacht and backlashes.
            Quote: yehat
            in the guarantees of Poland, which were not riveted by the forces of the empire

            Here it is - Britain gave a blunder. It is worth agreeing with Shearer:
            It is possible to insure a powder factory if safety rules are followed, but insuring a factory full of crazy people is a little dangerous.
    2. YELLOWSTONE
      YELLOWSTONE 14 May 2018 22: 14
      +1
      if it weren’t for American motor oil, the Germans would not be able to fight the USSR in the fall of 1942
    3. yehat
      yehat 15 May 2018 11: 12
      0
      Well, the Japanese do not need to idealize.
      I am a big fan of studying the culture of Japan and its history, but ...
      for all the demonization of the Reich and Hitler, they could not keep up with the Japanese in matters of genocide of the local population. Read what monument South Korea recently opened, which, in comparison with China, got off VERY easily.
      The battle between the USA and Japan is a battle between two villains, and each of them has its own code of honor, its own merits, which does not make it a lesser villain.

      Both Japan and the United States were very cruel to the civilian population.
      The Japanese bombed Nanjing, with exactly the same goals the United States bombed ALL major cities in Japan,
      including 2 nuclear bombs and still planned over time 5 (did not have time to prepare materials).
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 15 May 2018 14: 01
        +2
        Quote: yehat
        Read what monument South Korea recently opened, which, in comparison with China, got off VERY easily.

        Probably because the locals actively collaborated with the Japanese and even served in the IJA.
    4. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 15 May 2018 14: 00
      +1
      Quote: Lunar Daemon
      Author, go to Mamaev Kurgan, and standing on this grand burial ground tell as tearfully as 44 American pilots died when the best Japanese aircraft carriers were sunk, miraculously stumbled upon them at the very moment when there were so many planes, fuel and bombs on their decks, that it was enough to throw just a match.

      These 44 pilots did not drown anyone. They did not even reach the drop distance. Moreover, the same Waldron went on the attack clearly knowing that he would not have cover and that Zero would meet him at the target.
      Just as the Avengers from Midway did not drown anyone (all shot down), the B-26 from Midway (half shot down), the "slow but deadly" from Midway (one third shot down). They also went on the attack without cover - all the fighters were occupied in the island’s air defense, where most of them died (one third of the wildcat and 2/3 of the buffalo).
      But their business was not in vain. ©
      Because of the incessant raids, the Japanese were unable to release a second wave of enemy aircraft found - the decks and deck crews were engaged in the rotation of fighter cover units 1 and 2 DAV. Moreover, already to repulse the attack of torpers, Nagumo was forced to use fighters to cover the second wave, which further delayed its readiness. In addition, low-altitude torpers pulled all Zeros to low altitudes, so Big E and Yorktown dive bombers who came up at high altitude attacked like at a training ground (but even here the Enterprise almost screwed up when both squadrons were slow but the deadly "mistakenly started to approach the same goal).
      Quote: Lunar Daemon
      How many times I reread the chronicles and the history of the Pacific war, and the Japanese, and not the yankee villains, always evoked unambiguous sympathy ...

      Well, yes - the Japanese are such kawaii nyashki:
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 15 May 2018 18: 31
        0
        Quote: Alexey RA
        Just as the Avengers from Midway drowned no one (all were shot down),

        Amendment - 5 out of 6 Avengers were shot down.
      2. yehat
        yehat 15 May 2018 19: 14
        0
        according to the then Japanese, such an execution is an honor
        but they could just give it to pigs for eating, as they did with the Chinese and Koreans.
        or trampled - there was such an execution - they laid down under the platform and just walked on it,
        and a couple of days later the platform was removed and the bodies were thrown away. In general, no one could compare with the Japanese in the variety of brutal methods of killing defenseless civilians -
        even the atrocities in the USSR, the Baltic states, from the observation of whose work the ss-sheep turned out,
        could not grow up to true gurus.
        nevertheless, it is worthwhile to understand that everyone acts from his own concepts of morality and evaluation of what is good and what is bad.
  25. intuzazist
    intuzazist 14 May 2018 17: 45
    +4
    So how did it happen that only one of them turned out to be worthy of our memory, gratitude and admiration?
    ---------------------------------
    Our Ivan died defending his land and our government did not contribute to the development of fascism in Germany! And their John died due to the fact that the moneybags of their countries dreamed of destroying Russia and simultaneously stuffed their pockets! On their territory, 90% of housing and 100% of industry in the occupation zone were not destroyed! Ivan’s relatives were starving and tearing up the veins restoring the country! And John’s relatives enjoyed the wealth received from the selected countries! This is not a big reason in a different attitude to the dead soldiers ...........................
  26. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    14 May 2018 17: 47
    +2
    Quote: DON-100 Division
    Do not you ignorant writing complete nonsense, talk about my literacy. I, in contrast to you, are the acting financial director, and you write all sorts of nonsense here about paying Lend-Lease from the US budget. At the same time, you still haven’t answered what kind of secret income the budget is formed from. Not respected, it is certainly ridiculous to blame your opponent for what you yourself are to blame. Do not write nonsense, do not make smart people laugh.

    And for the complete lack of argumentation, the opponent started a tantrum :))))
    And about the formation of the budget, by the way, I answered you, but since I haven’t been able to repeat it the first time, the revenue part of the budget is generated from taxes from citizens, from enterprises and other sources of state income. What, and is it too complicated for you? Or do you think that in the United States the arms manufacturing companies are the only ones, and no one else paying taxes exists?
  27. Tomato
    Tomato 14 May 2018 18: 18
    +4
    I have long suggested introducing a minimum IQ test when registering. Stupid, ignorant people are very annoying.
    They all write that they paid in gold for Lend-Lease. These .... individuals are not able to type the appropriate phrase in Yandex, and read about the conditions. People, why do not you respect the community of this resource, and infuriate your cretinism?
    2. The myth of US economic assistance to Germany also walks. Until Germany became an aggressor, they collaborated. Why not? As with the USSR. Who built the majority of plants in the USSR?
    With the beginning of the 2nd MVD, the United States withdrew from the "act of neutrality" and began to assist England. All cooperation with Germany was terminated. Yandex to help. https://www.e-reading.club/chapter.php/90209/22/D
    enic _-_ Desyat% 27_let_i_dvadcat% 27_dneii.html
    By the way, the USSR provided economic assistance to Germany until June 22, 1941.
    As for the 2 fronts? And why England and the United States should have opened it at all, proceeding from the goals of the Comintern - to foment a world revolution.
    Well, 4. We somehow forgot that the Allies landed in Italy back in 1943. And the fact that the battle for the Mediterranean has been going on since 1940, when we drove trains with strategic raw materials to Germany, is generally indecent to recall.
    1. Kuroneko
      Kuroneko 14 May 2018 18: 24
      +2
      Quote: Tomatoes
      By the way, the USSR provided economic assistance to Germany until June 22, 1941.

      Clarification: I did not provide assistance, but led mutually beneficial economic cooperation (that is, trade). Such things must be distinguished!
      Or is the same Lutts also worth considering as "economic help" from Germany in favor of the USSR? ^ _ ^
      As for the 2 fronts? And why England and the United States should have opened it at all, proceeding from the goals of the Comintern - to foment a world revolution.

      In connection with this saying, your phrase
      I have long suggested introducing a minimum IQ test when registering.

      becomes as topical as possible. No offense. Just stating a fact.
      PS
      Well, 4. We somehow forgot that the Allies landed in Italy back in 1943. And the fact that the battle for the Mediterranean has been going on since 1940, when we drove trains with strategic raw materials to Germany, is generally indecent to recall.

      It is indecent (for a liberoid) to recall the Munich conspiracy (normal people remember it). And the Molotov-Ribbentropp Pact is a forced reaction to it. So why not buy the same Lutzov in 2 years of the world, paying for it with unprocessed raw materials?
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        14 May 2018 18: 51
        +2
        Quote: Kuroneko
        Or is the same Lutts also worth considering as "economic help" from Germany in favor of the USSR? ^ _ ^

        Given that they first gave us a loan, for which we bought a bunch of everything, and then we repaid this loan by supplying raw materials, and before the start of the war we did not manage to repay it and remained in the black - who knows :)))))))
        1. Kuroneko
          Kuroneko 14 May 2018 19: 01
          +1
          The main advantage, I think rather, is that they "Luttsov" even lit up the "suppliers" even as a stationary marine art battery. ^ _ ^
          Which does not negate my theses and real perplexity about a person writing about minimal IQ and at the same time, in the same post, issuing nuclear pearls like
          As for the 2 fronts? And why England and the United States should have opened it at all, proceeding from the goals of the Comintern - to foment a world revolution.

          And about the loan ... There is an idea that it was also issued due to the merits of the USSR in pulling Germany in the field of application and development of armored vehicles.
          1. Tomato
            Tomato 14 May 2018 21: 55
            +1
            My dear, so you explain that you are so outraged? What is contrary to the truth? Try to articulate.
            Have you ever wondered why Bulgaria and Romania took the side of Germany? Well, try to build a logical chain. Given that some IQ is still upsetting. I will clarify the question:
            Who did Romania and Bulgaria consider the greatest evil for themselves, and why?
            1. Kuroneko
              Kuroneko 15 May 2018 15: 41
              +1
              Can I ask a counter question about Bulgaria? At the same time, check your IQ.
              Yes, Bulgaria has consisted more than once (and still is) in coalitions hostile to us, but when did Bulgaria fight with Russia?
              (I can tell you: there was a separate episode during the First World War - but just what separate, and exactly what episode).
              PS Last year’s refusal of Bulgarian tankers at NATO exercises to shoot at targets painted in the colors of the flag of the Russian Federation is another reminder to you about Bulgaria. Bulgarians were the only ones who had the courage to refuse. But even the Greeks - it would seem, "little brothers", and indeed the Orthodox! - shot back as if nothing had happened. And no protests.
              1. Tomato
                Tomato 15 May 2018 17: 31
                0
                Bulgaria fought against other countries, freeing Germany from this work.
                As for the targets ..... sorry, this is in the emotional field.
                Like the Serbs, the soul with Russia, but the economy with the EU.
                1. Kuroneko
                  Kuroneko 15 May 2018 18: 05
                  +1
                  So still, I repeat the question a second time: when did Bulgaria fight with Russia? (except for the prompt I indicated) And how does this compare with the allegedly indicating your same post?
                  Whom Romania and Bulgaria considered the greatest evil for themselves, and why?

                  Everything is clear with the Romanians, naturally. And they from the ordinary infantry Vanka their soldering of lead and shrapnel received in full.
                  I note that with some supposedly "allies" Russia and enemies are no longer needed.
                  On the other hand, Bulgaria is an enemy kakbe ... But the enemy is always only in words, not in deeds. For if you do not want to, but have to submit to what is unacceptable to you, it is better to simply imitate a hectic working activity. At least outwardly.
                  So who better?
                  I was simply hurt by your thoughtless words about Bulgaria (and no, I’m not Bulgarian - I just remember history well and evaluate countries according to their real affairs, and not according to the political statements of the passing elites).
                  1. Tomato
                    Tomato 15 May 2018 19: 31
                    0
                    Did I talk about "fought". You have translated the topic. I said Bulgaria between the USSR and Germany chose Germany.
                    Bulgaria was ally Hitler, not the USSR. And this is clear. It was in the wake of the politics of the 3rd Reich, and not the USSR. And you are spreading thought through the tree.
          2. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 15 May 2018 11: 07
            +1
            Quote: Kuroneko
            And about the loan ... There is an idea that it was also issued due to the merits of the USSR in pulling Germany in the field of application and development of armored vehicles.

            In fact, it was Germany that was pulling the USSR in the field of application and development of armored vehicles. The same T-28 was created taking into account familiarization with German "tractors". And the instructors at Kama were Germans.
            1. Kuroneko
              Kuroneko 15 May 2018 15: 57
              +1
              Quote: Alexey RA
              In fact, it was Germany that was pulling the USSR in the field of application and development of armored vehicles. The same T-28 was created taking into account familiarization with German "tractors".

              Lolshto? 0_o '
              The legs (or caterpillars) of the T-28 grow from the Vickers A6 tank (Vickers 16-ton). Englishman. Or do you practice an alternative story according to the Solovyov method?

              The history of the T-28 began in 1930 with a visit to Great Britain by the Soviet procurement commission led by S. Ginzburg, whose task was to acquire the most advanced models of armored vehicles and send them to the USSR for study and use in organizing their own armored production. One of the tanks that were particularly interested in the commission was the latest Vickers A6 medium tank at that time, better known as the 16-ton Vickers. However, the Vickers company refused to sell the finished model of the tank due to its secrecy and put forward the following conditions for the acquisition of the machine to the Soviet side:
              --- A one-time payment of GBP 20 (about 000 gold rubles) for acquaintance with the design and development of tanks of this type.
              --- An order from Vickers for 10 tanks of this type at a price of 16 pounds (000 rubles in gold) for a tank without weapons.
              --- Further order from the company Karden-Lloyd tankettes Mk.VI and Vickers light tanks Mk.E.
              Such conditions were considered unacceptable by the Soviet delegation, and it was decided to abandon the acquisition of the A6 and instead create a tank of this class on its own using the experience gained in studying the A6 in the UK.

              Well and after: https://www.aviarmor.net/tww2/tanks/ussr/t-28.htm (really Mnogabukaf!)
              1. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 15 May 2018 20: 01
                0
                Quote: Kuroneko
                Lolshto? 0_o '
                The legs (or caterpillars) of the T-28 grow from the Vickers A6 tank (Vickers 16-ton). Englishman. Or do you practice an alternative story according to the Solovyov method?

                No - I prefer to read Colomian:
                Materials about the 16-ton Vickers and Grostraktors inspired the creation of a new Soviet tank, which later received the T-28 index.

                According to the results of the survey of the "grossstraktor", our specialists wrote that:
                suspension elements of "Grostractors" in a modified form can be used in the new three-tower tank T-28
            2. Kuroneko
              Kuroneko 15 May 2018 16: 10
              +1
              And more:
              However, the history of the Mk.III tank could have a more interesting continuation. In 1930, the deputy chief of the UMM of the Red Army S. Ginzburg, visiting the Vickers company, found an unusual three-turret tank at her training ground. Apparently, it was Mk.III E1 (judging by the surviving figure), which was being tested at that time. This machine is very interested in Ginzburg, who expressed a sincere desire to purchase it. However, the British, emphasizing secrecy and priority needs for their own army, refused the Soviet representative this request. Then Ginzburg had to go on a trick - in a conversation with company representatives, he said that an agreement with the British military department had already been reached and he only wanted to know more about this car before sending it to the USSR. Thus, information was received about the British "16-ton" tank and its sketches were made.

              German "tractors"? Three times HA!
              https://aviarmor.net/tww2/tanks/gb/medium_a6.htm
      2. Tomato
        Tomato 14 May 2018 21: 50
        +3
        1.
        Quote: Kuroneko

        1
        Kuroneko (Kuroneko Chii) Today, 18:24 ↑
        Quote: Tomatoes
        By the way, the USSR provided economic assistance to Germany until June 22, 1941.

        Clarification: I did not provide assistance, but led mutually beneficial economic cooperation (that is, trade). Such things must be distinguished!
        Or is the same Lutts also worth considering as "economic help" from Germany in favor of the USSR? ^ _ ^
        For some reason, the United States stopped "mutually beneficial cooperation since 1939.
        2. Also no offense, "Lenin set the main task for the new Comintern: the struggle for the world dictatorship of the proletariat." I simply state. right again.
        3. It is indecent for a representative of Putin's Witnesses to exhibit such ignorance. And the Munich agreement was a necessary measure. No one wanted to fight. So what?
        I repeat the question again. With whom has the USSR led “mutually beneficial cooperation” since the start of 2 MB? Another question - the USSR helped England? Not??? So why these weird rebukes?
        1. Romulus
          Romulus 15 May 2018 11: 40
          0
          Quote: Tomatoes
          strange rebukes?

          Oleg .. everything is true that we know and everything that is not true .. ?? (no mat)
          feel
        2. Kuroneko
          Kuroneko 15 May 2018 16: 26
          +1
          Quote: Tomatoes
          And the Munich agreement was a necessary measure.

          And here is more detailed!
          Forced by what? (by the way, the “mutually beneficial cooperation” with the United States, which ended in 1939, and the Munich conspiracy from the autumn of 1938 are the same logical chain ... it’s just that the puppeteers went wrong)
          We ask, we ask! I feel, more than one masterpiece pearl will sound from you.
          Quote: Tomatoes
          With whom has the USSR led “mutually beneficial cooperation” since the start of 2 MB? Another question - the USSR helped England?

          Not. Traded - yes. Helped - no. In the same way as it did not economically help the Germans. Regular trading (and, as Andrei from Chelyabinsk ironically remarked, the balance with them was more likely in our favor).
        3. Kuroneko
          Kuroneko 15 May 2018 16: 49
          +1
          PS
          Quote: Tomatoes
          It is indecent for a representative of Putin's Witnesses to display such ignorance.

          By the way, since the 96th year I have voted for Zhirinovsky, and continue in all elections. Putinism blame other interlocutors. Well, about ignorance (and whose it is) - we will figure it out, I hope. = 3
          1. Tomato
            Tomato 15 May 2018 17: 33
            0
            For Zhirinovsky - this is still normal. I'm so (ashamed to admit) a vile liberalist. How the earth wears me I look in the mirror, I want to strangle.
            1. Kuroneko
              Kuroneko 15 May 2018 18: 13
              +1
              Quote: Tomatoes
              I look in the mirror, I want to strangle.

              The toad will ever do everything herself. ^ _ ^ And strangles, and strangles. And even a mirror.
              Especially sternum ... ugh, chest. Yes. Angina pectoris.
  28. Kuroneko
    Kuroneko 14 May 2018 19: 16
    +3
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    The fact of the matter is that the Weimar Republic was not nearly Zimbabwe like :)))) However, you have provoked me, maybe I’m going to write something on this :)

    ABOUT! So, it was not in vain that he trampled the clave. I wait, sir.
    And also for a bigger revelry paragraph. Can?
    Imagine modern Ukraine, which already has about 2 trillion bucks in debt (parallel - predatory indemnities of the Versailles Peace). A new Fuhrer comes to power - and everything turns upside down in one moment! Instead of degradation of industry and living standards, their jump was unprecedented, stormtroopers (anti-terrorist operation heroes) were driven in full swing, the national idea was being strengthened (Muscovite - by gilyak =), people were flourishing, the country was hosting the Olympics, becoming the economic and industrial muscle of Europe ... Well, military, esno. Mortars "Hammer" become the best mortars in its class. Etc.
    And most importantly, everything - their forces!
    Enraged enough? Indeed, today's Ukraine is not Zimbabwe, but rather closer to the Weimar Republic.
  29. NordUral
    NordUral 14 May 2018 19: 43
    0
    I pay tribute to the English and American people for their contribution to the victory over the common enemy!
    But ...
    Of course, these figures are completely lost against the background of 27 millions who died in the USSR. But on the other hand ... imagine a large city, such as Volgograd, Krasnodar or Saratov. With its numerous and long streets, wide squares, high, apartment buildings, traffic jams in the mornings, dozens and even hundreds of thousands of families gathering for dinner in their apartments in the evenings ...

    Center Saratov
    And suddenly - there is nothing of that. The city, which was recently full of life, is empty, all its inhabitants, until the last man, are dead.
    This is the price that England and the United States paid for victory in World War II.

    But ...
    And now, author, imagine 27! Stalingrad! And right up to the Volga, burnt and enslaved small and big cities and villages of Belarus, Ukraine and the RSFSR! It is impossible to compare and contrast! And there’s nothing to say about the United States, they didn’t understand anything, I mean the people, what is the war with Germany to death. Therefore, the world is now the way we see it.
    1. Kuroneko
      Kuroneko 14 May 2018 19: 48
      +1
      Quote: NordUral
      And there’s nothing to say about the United States, they didn’t understand anything, I mean the people, what is the war with Germany to death. Therefore, the world is now the way we see it.

      Wrong. People - he understood completely (the era of the zombie creature had not yet arrived). The top / elite - no. For the latter, this was yet another “medium-intensity hot spot” (and at the same time, a hen laying golden eggs — the British egg was forcing Britain to open its previously closed colonies for general trade in exchange for military assistance — that is, the transition from colonialism to neocolonialism).
      "Because the world is now the way we see it." (c)
    2. Romulus
      Romulus 15 May 2018 11: 48
      +2
      Quote: NordUral
      Now

      - Calm down .. Let’s let the Urals question, you are northern ..
      And that Iosifovich Vissarionovich - did not spit on these handouts (at that time, rotten imperialism)
      It is in the 60s he became rotting wassat
      Chichas you stripped the vest - commendably (a mixture of cheers and idiots commies) .. it would be boring for you to come here - stupid laughing
  30. nekromonger
    nekromonger 14 May 2018 21: 11
    0
    helped with their interest - and welded.
  31. Soul of time
    Soul of time 14 May 2018 21: 55
    0
    The author of the article writes that after reading the scribble on the network by May 9, he noticed that something was going wrong. judging by this article of his, he believes that "something is wrong" means "the USSR alone won the war."
    There is such a point of view. But only stupid youngsters and especially stubborn hooray patriots profess it. Most people know the history of war more or less.
    "We must remember everything - both the bad and the good."
    We remember. And the good that the author described in his article. And the bad that he did not describe.
    For instance. Lendliz was paid not by something, but by gold. We enjoyed our stalemate. The second front was not opened until the West faced a real threat of the seizure of Europe by the USSR. And this led to much greater losses on our part than to saving lives by landlizings. And much more can be remembered that the author bashfully shut up.
    Yes, the USSR did not alone deal with Germany. But the USSR brought the main burden of its war alone! and apparently it can be assumed that we alone would have ended the war.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      14 May 2018 23: 31
      +4
      Quote: Soul of Time
      For instance. Lendliz was paid not by something, but by gold.

      Listen, well, I'm a patient person, but it's some kind of horror :)))) EVERY opponent writes about the fact that Lend-Lease was paid in gold, answer everyone ...
      Lend Lease was NOT paid in gold. Dot. Study, damn it, the Lend-Lease agreement itself, well, or read something more useful on it. Gold paid:
      1) Pre-delivery deliveries (moreover, England was affixed for free)
      2) Overland supply (that is, if we wanted to buy something that was not on the list of property that the Americans agreed to transfer by Lend-Lease)
      3) If after the war we didn’t want to return the property that we had left (spent and lost in the battle does not count), then we had to pay for it
      Quote: Soul of Time
      The second front was not opened until the West faced a real threat of the seizure of Europe by the USSR.

      You still read about the possibilities that the United States had in 43. And think about what would happen if they landed with what they had in Europe.
      1. Bigbraza
        Bigbraza 15 May 2018 04: 41
        +4
        Better yet, let them read about US ground forces in 1941 and think ... although no, they are unlikely to be able to think ...

        Andrew, I do not want to impose with the advice, but he decided long ago for himself - never argue with fools and mediums. I read a little "correspondence" under the article - I understood how right I am :)

        Thanks for the article.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 15 May 2018 11: 22
          +2
          Quote: BigBraza
          Better yet, let them read about the US ground forces in 1941 and think about it.

          Oh yeah ... The deployment of the US Armed Forces in 1939-1942 is a song without words ... censored. Suffice it to say that the base for the deployment of the U.S. army was 3 counting divisions, half of which were based in overseas territories (exactly half because in the overseas divisions a third of the l / s was from local, so it should not be included in the calculations). Half of the army before the Roosevelt reforms began belonged to coastal artillery. And so that life did not seem honey, Roosevelt from the second half of 1940 began to rake out the arsenals of the army and intercept its orders, sending them to Lend-Lease supplies. This led to the fact that in early 1941, generals from the army aviation almost raised a riot - when they found out that all new B-17s would leave the Island Empire. As a result, a gentlemen's agreement was reached: to divide new orders 50/50 - half the army, half Lend-Lease. True, after this, Roosevelt immediately began to rob army warehouses on the pretext that the army would soon have new supplies, so that he would give the junk from the warehouses to Britain.
          And on this basis the Yankees managed to deploy as many as 1941 divisions by December 51. The quality of these troops was appropriate - according to the results of the exercises of the end of 1941, the USA had armed people, but there was no army. The only somehow prepared units for December 1941 were the US group in the Philippines and 2 divisions in Oahu.
        2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          15 May 2018 17: 45
          +1
          Quote: BigBraza
          Better yet, let them read about the US ground forces in 1941 and think ...

          The funny thing is - everything was invented for them. We take David Rolf’s “Bloody Road to Tunisia” and read ... In fact, EVERYTHING is described there. The border units of the Red Army in 1941, against the background of those Americans, look like absolute geniuses of strategy and tactics. That is, in 1941 we had an army, despite its certain shortcomings. The Americans had flaws in 1941, but the army didn’t have
      2. Kuroneko
        Kuroneko 15 May 2018 17: 17
        +1
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        You still read about the possibilities that the United States had in 43. And think about what would happen if they landed with what they had in Europe.

        But the United States did. Back in the 42nd. Thanks to my friend Churchill (who so early help for the USSR and the clear drain of positions in Europe in favor of the United States) were like a sickle in the balls.
        Yes, then the Yankees would really wash themselves with blood (but there would be something to be proud of without rewriting history). And one figs, the front would open. But ... there was one such "sir" ... Moreover, he agreed with the "devil's agreement" (Atlantic Charter): http://www.obraforum.ru/lib/book2/138.htm
        Well, how can such a nanny meet?
      3. Pissarro
        Pissarro 15 May 2018 21: 09
        0
        Call it what you like, but the fact is that Russia finally paid for the “free” Liz land in 2006, 61 years after the war
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          15 May 2018 21: 48
          +1
          Quote: Pissarro
          but the fact is that Russia finally paid for the “free” Liz land in 2006, 61 years after the war

          Not for a free Lend-Lease, but for those cars / planes and so on and so forth that we left to ourselves after the war. Could return, then nothing would have to pay.
          And about 61 years ... You, apparently, imagine it so that for all 61 years the country, tearing itself, paid a land-lease? laughing I hasten to disappoint - the USSR first cut payments by a third, and then extinguished them per hour on a teaspoon
        2. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 16 May 2018 10: 12
          +1
          Quote: Pissarro
          Call it what you like, but the fact is that Russia finally paid for the “free” Liz land in 2006, 61 years after the war

          Yeah ... that's just the amount of payments finally agreed only in 1972 - cutting it from 1,3 billion to 722 million dollars. The USSR paid 48 million - and stopped paying. We continued to pay only in the 90s. During this time, inflation gobbled up the dollar by more than 10 times compared with WWII. smile
  32. Soul of time
    Soul of time 14 May 2018 21: 58
    0
    Well, according to the beloved by many Churchill.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=147JomiRe4A
  33. Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 15 May 2018 09: 57
    +1
    Quote: Bakht
    As for the mob reserve, you need to shovel a lot of statistics. In 1942, there were also divisions of 4-5 thousand people. For a completely different reason. The regular structure of the division did not change. So talking about divisions of 5 due to the mobility reserve is incorrect.

    He understands what’s the matter ... if for a month and a half quiet before the most important operation of the war, the command cannot replenish the divisions, even in the direction of the main attack, to at least 2/3 of the regular strength and is forced to break through the enemy’s defenses with divisions of 4,5-5 thousand people. with companies of 90-100 fighters - this suggests that the country has almost no reserves to replenish.
    1. yehat
      yehat 15 May 2018 11: 28
      +2
      the issue is not the availability of reserves, but the efficiency of their use.
      what's the point of replenishment when almost a million soldiers were laid near Rzhev?
      what is the point of replenishment, when near Kiev, Smolensk and several other boilers
      more than 2 million personnel (far from just soldiers)?
      And the German offensive in the Caucasus - 10 divisions surrounded almost immediately.
      And how many soldiers died to no avail on the Nevsky Piglet?
      And how terrible were the battles in the Crimea? I recall that heroism is usually the correction of the idiotic mistakes of others. And mass heroism is, accordingly, an attempt to fix a gigantic cant.
      One tank brigade Katukova was able to do more than 3 tank mechanized corps.
      therefore, replenishment to a full payroll should not be taken as an axiom,
      here the analysis should be more complicated.
      My grandfather, as part of an infantry regiment, was able to stop the German advance near Balaton,
      and under the Ardennes a similar attack could not be stopped by the mechanized divisions of the Americans.
  34. Antares
    Antares 15 May 2018 11: 40
    +2
    Great article! Thanks Andrew!
    I congratulated the soldiers and citizens of the anti-Hitler coalition. I will repeat it now. Thanks you.
    Read a familiar episode
    George (George H. Gay), who managed to bring his plane down, survive under the fire of Japanese fighters storming it, and then survive on the liferaft for more than a day. The flying boat "Catalina" saved him. Given that early in the morning on the same day, of the six latest squadron of the latest torpedo bombers belonging to Grumman TBF Avenger, the Japanese shot down five, and the latter returned to the Hornet with severe injuries and a killed radio operator gunner, it could be stated that the VT-8 squadron stopped exist. 20 planes were lost, 45 pilots, navigators and shooters were lost.
    There were several reasons for the death of the 8th torpedo-bearing - and above all, this was the absence of a fighter cover, held at high altitude. In addition, the vast majority of squadron pilots were reservists, only recently drafted from the reserve. They had embarked on a combat course in advance and walked toward them, not folding, until they were shot down. The torpedo crews fulfilled their duty to the end, and the chronicle has preserved their faces to this day and the take-off of the clumsy “Devastators” from the deck ...
    Here they are on the video.

    At that time, the Americans were harassed by setbacks, and they tried hard and hard.
    Until they said a weighty word SBD Dauntless dive
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 15 May 2018 19: 12
      0
      Quote: Antares
      Given that early in the morning on the same day, of the six latest squadron-owned torpedo bombers Grumman TBF Avenger, the Japanese shot down five, and the latter returned to the Hornet with severe injuries and a killed radio operator gunner

      Not on the Hornet, but on the Midway. Pilots receiving the new Avengers flew to Pearl Harbor a day after the departure of their AB and worked from the atoll.
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 15 May 2018 19: 36
      0
      Quote: Antares
      There were several reasons for the death of the 8th torpedo-bearing - and above all, this was the absence of a fighter cover, held at high altitude.

      The VT-8 had no fighter cover at all!
      That part of it, which worked from the atoll, went without fighters - they were left to cover the base.
      And that part of it, which worked with the AB, also initially had no cover - all the fighters were assigned to cover the dive-bombers. Moreover, after the departure, Waldron spat out with the group commander, who stubbornly led the “Hornetists” away from the enemy - and went to the Japanese in splendid isolation.
      The only group of torpers who had cover was the Yorkthown Torpers. However, this did not help them much - for at the time of their approach to the goal, the Japanese had already raised 42 Zero into the air. A third of them tied six Tech fighters, and the remaining began to shoot Devasteytory.
  35. Normal ok
    Normal ok 15 May 2018 13: 18
    0
    cars that the USSR produced in insufficient quantities and which our armed forces so needed

    One of my grandfathers, was during the Great Patriotic War, commander of the bus. And although he could not stand Americans all his life)), but he spoke very well about their cars.
    1. Kuroneko
      Kuroneko 15 May 2018 17: 21
      +1
      Quote: Normal ok
      And although he could not stand Americans all his life)), but he spoke very well about their cars.

      "Dad is your Studebaker ?!" (c) classic
      ^ _ ^
  36. NF68
    NF68 15 May 2018 20: 48
    0
    Quote: Alexey RA
    Quote: NF68
    Data on the provision of WWII liquid fuel to the Red Army can be found here:

    Or here:
    Appendix No. 4. 1941 Liquid Mobilization Mobilization Plan.
    http://militera.lib.ru/research/melia_aa/pril4.ht
    ml
    Extremely entertaining reading - for example, the fact that the main consumer of diesel fuel in the Red Army was not tanks, but ChTZ-65. Or that ground forces consumed 25-35% of all B / KB-70 gasoline requested by the Red Army.


    Submarines of the Navy of the Red Army also consumed a lot of diesel fuel. The combined arms armies of the Red Army before the Great Patriotic War and in the initial period of the Great Patriotic War were subordinate to units of army aviation. Therefore, aviation was allocated gasoline to the ground forces.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 16 May 2018 10: 15
      0
      Quote: NF68
      The combined arms armies of the Red Army before the Great Patriotic War and in the initial period of the Great Patriotic War were subordinate to units of army aviation. Therefore, aviation was allocated gasoline to the ground forces.

      KB-70 was needed for the army team not so much for aviation as for old tanks. T-35, T-28, BT, and T-26 consumed exclusively B-70 / KB-70 aviation gasoline, no worse than Baku or Grozny.
      1. NF68
        NF68 16 May 2018 17: 53
        0
        Quote: Alexey RA
        Quote: NF68
        The combined arms armies of the Red Army before the Great Patriotic War and in the initial period of the Great Patriotic War were subordinate to units of army aviation. Therefore, aviation was allocated gasoline to the ground forces.

        KB-70 was needed for the army team not so much for aviation as for old tanks. T-35, T-28, BT, and T-26 consumed exclusively B-70 / KB-70 aviation gasoline, no worse than Baku or Grozny.


        Tanks with gasoline engines, of course, something also needs to be refueled. And Grozny gasoline, as far as I know, was better than Baku. From the oil produced in the Grozny region, it was possible, if the necessary equipment was available at the refinery, to obtain high-octane gasoline with an octane number reaching under 100 units.
  37. Omsk
    Omsk 16 May 2018 15: 04
    0
    Quote: Tomatoes
    I have long suggested introducing a minimum IQ test when registering. Stupid, ignorant people are very annoying.
    They all write that they paid in gold for Lend-Lease. These .... individuals are not able to type the appropriate phrase in Yandex, and read about the conditions. People, why do not you respect the community of this resource, and infuriate your cretinism?
    2. The myth of US economic assistance to Germany also walks. Until Germany became an aggressor, they collaborated. Why not? As with the USSR. Who built the majority of plants in the USSR?
    With the beginning of the 2nd MVD, the United States withdrew from the "act of neutrality" and began to assist England. All cooperation with Germany was terminated. Yandex to help. https://www.e-reading.club/chapter.php/90209/22/D
    enic _-_ Desyat% 27_let_i_dvadcat% 27_dneii.html
    By the way, the USSR provided economic assistance to Germany until June 22, 1941.
    As for the 2 fronts? And why England and the United States should have opened it at all, proceeding from the goals of the Comintern - to foment a world revolution.
    Well, 4. We somehow forgot that the Allies landed in Italy back in 1943. And the fact that the battle for the Mediterranean has been going on since 1940, when we drove trains with strategic raw materials to Germany, is generally indecent to recall.

    Of course, Ikyu let me down, but because of my stupidity and limitedness I can’t keep silent.
    Active US assistance to Germany (or rather, not the US but North American companies) has already been dealt with in VO in great detail earlier. Including the supply of the Standard Oil oil corporation and its branches through the German concern I.G. Farbenindustri, as well as the supply of tungsten, synthetic rubber and a variety of components for the automotive industry, supplied by Henry Ford. This is what was supplied while Hitler had already declared war on the United States. financial and technical assistance to Hitler was also laid out on the shelves for the revival of the country and the army. There is no point in returning to this. If the facts were not convinced, then it is useless for them to prove further.
    Question to the author of the article. In general, the help of the Allies has never been hushed up. The emphasis was on the fact that
    and without this help they could have won. And to compare the American soldier who died for the interests of his country at the Pacific theater of war and our soldier who died in the battles (Brest, Mogilev, Kiev, Smolensk and further on the list) in order to preserve his people seems a bit wrong to me. Too different goals. If the USA has expanded its world superiority, then the USSR faced the question of survival.
    As for Lend-Lease, writing about its gratuitousness is tricking and hiding the obvious. For lend-lease, loans were allocated that needed to be repaid. And why did not address the issue of reverse Lend-Lease. In particular, 32 thousand tons of manganese and 300 thousand tons of chromium ore were shipped from the USSR, the value of which in the military industry was extremely great.
    And to write that the USSR smoked quietly on the sidelines and traded with Hitler when other countries were actively fighting with it, this is a direct spit in our ancestors. England and France ran into what they were actively preparing for others. Or were we supposed to help her, while the English bombers were preparing to bomb Baku? The conclusion of a pact with Germany is an unconditional victory for our diplomacy. Let's not forget that we were expelled from the League of Nations for the Finnish, and the United States imposed a ban on trade with us. And in these conditions, the conclusion of an agreement with Germany was the only way out. However, this is also in the past year understood.
    In general, thanks for the article. Maybe one of the youth accidentally reads and sees that the USSR was an ally of the United States and England, and not Germany.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      16 May 2018 19: 52
      +1
      Quote: Omich
      Active US assistance to Germany (or rather, not the USA but North American companies) has already been dealt with in VO in detail

      If you are talking about something like the Samsonov level, then yes, I understood. But to read such "showdowns" - do not respect yourself.
      Quote: Omich
      There is no point in returning to this. If the facts were not convinced, then it is useless for them to prove further.

      The problem is that the facts as such - the cat wept, and those that are - are bloated to heaven.
      Quote: Omich
      Question to the author of the article. In general, the help of the Allies has never been hushed up.

      I did not blame this "us". My article deals specifically with the materials of VO on May 9
      Quote: Omich
      And to compare the American soldier who died for the interests of his country at the Pacific theater of war and our soldier who died in the battles (Brest, Mogilev, Kiev, Smolensk and further on the list) in order to preserve his people seems a bit wrong to me. Too different goals. If the USA has expanded its world superiority, then the USSR faced the question of survival.

      If you seriously think that an English or American soldier died for "world superiority", then your IQ is really lower than the baseboard, forgive me.
      I will not even argue with the fact that the ruling elites of the USA and England could have similar aspirations, but their rank-and-file soldiers did not fight for this at all. They were just sure that they were fighting for the freedom of other countries - in Europe and avenge the unprovoked attack of Japan.
      Quote: Omich
      As for lend-lease, writing about its gratuitousness is tricking and hiding the obvious. For lend-lease, loans were allocated that needed to be repaid.

      Read the comments on the article. I will be banned for spam if I explain 100500 times that the Lend-Lease was free, and we paid only for the Dolendizov, Super-Lendz and those Lend-Lease deliveries that we wanted to keep after the war.
      Quote: Omich
      And why did not address the issue of reverse Lend-Lease.

      Due to the fact that the cost of direct Lend-Lease is more than $ 10 billion, and the cost of reverse Lend-Lease is about $ 2,2 million.
  38. zena-iva
    zena-iva 18 May 2018 13: 44
    +1
    On December 14, 1945, the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the United States will issue a directive stating, among other things, that: "The most effective weapons that the states can use to strike at the Soviet Union are the available atomic bombs."
    On November 3, 1945 (that is, just two months after the surrender of Japan), a report of No. 329 from the Joint Intelligence Committee was submitted to the United States Chief of Staff. The first paragraph of this document read: “To select approximately 20 targets suitable for strategic atomic bombing of the Soviet Union.”
    The American Troyan plan called for a massive airstrike in the USSR. Bombs were supposed to fall on 20 Soviet cities, on which the aggressor planned to drop 300 nuclear and 20 thousand conventional bombs.
    In 1948, "Chariotir" was developed, according to which 70 Soviet cities were to be attacked, it was planned to drop 200 atomic bombs on them. The Cold War threatened to go into the "hot phase".


    The United States could not enter the confrontation with the USSR without international support, so April 4, 1949, the creation of NATO was announced. Thus, more and more countries were involved in the anti-Soviet coalition, respectively, both the number of warheads and the scale of the alleged aggression grew.
    Finally, on December 19, 1949, the Joint Chiefs of Staff approved the Dropshot plan, according to which a large-scale operation of NATO forces could begin on January 1, 1957, with the bombing of 100 Soviet cities by 300 atomic bombs and 250 thousand tons of conventional bombs.
  39. victorrat
    victorrat 18 May 2018 19: 43
    +2
    Yes, of course, something about our allies was omitted. It is not right. Since it would be necessary to recall their bombing of our airfields and units "by mistake". Their contents are 600 000 Germans next to the weapons depots in 1945 for the offensive on the USSR. Their plan for bombing the USSR with nuclear bombs. As they twice asked Stalin to launch an offensive earlier, because their warriors did not know how to fight. Their plans to land in Yugoslavia to prevent the USSR from advancing to Germany. Their support for Hitler, separate negotiations, the rescue of Nazi criminals and much more that remained beyond the bounds of the article. And also, how Stalin was asked to pay for a land lease.
  40. Gepirion
    Gepirion 30 May 2018 11: 50
    0
    Well, a special thanks for the description of some events. But in fact, the feeling that the author replaces the concept of what is dangerous. Firstly, on May 9, we celebrate not victory in WW2, but victory in the Great Patriotic War. As such, the Allies did not take part in it. I agree that one should recall the foreigners who fought along with the Red Army. Secondly, the cry for the Jones and Smiths is nothing more than the cry of Yaroslavna, because shortly before the Second World War, these Jones and Smiths came as invaders to the empire torn by civil war and were ready to rob and kill the Russians. Actually, after reading the article, there is one question for the author, why should we recall, and even more so write about temporary allies on the day of victory in WWII? Why do these unnecessary reconciliations?
  41. Scaffold
    Scaffold 13 June 2018 12: 53
    0
    Andrey, thanks for the good article! And about swearing at Lend-Lease - well, what to expect from the generation of the exam? That they translate the term lend-lease and receive a “loan / lease”? Or what will they read about the fact that the Americans initially introduced Lend-Lease at all not for the USSR? Too complicated for modern internet experts.
  42. Biodred
    Biodred 6 August 2023 13: 25
    0
    M-yes, licked - so licked. Nothing that the same "allies" organized the Second World War? And ordinary Joe from Dakota or Utah died on the coast of Normandy for the next step on the path of the Anglo-Saxons to world domination? The USSR lost 27 million people, and in each of these deaths, the fault of the nagliks and pindomrazes is much greater than that of Hitler. For Hitler is just a tool. And in fairness, Roosevelt and Churchill should have been judged in Nuremberg.