Lend-Lease. Calculations and calculations

“Suppose you have two apples in your pocket.” Someone took one apple from you. How many apples do you have left?
- Two.

- Think carefully.
Pinocchio wrinkled - thought so cool.
- Two…
- Почему?
“I will not give Nectus an apple, even though he is fighting!”
A.N. Tolstoy. Golden Key, or The Adventures of Pinocchio


Lend-Lease Supplies. Second material Lend-Lease Supplies clearly fell to many readers of "VO" "sickle in one place." No wonder 460 comments were made to him, more than to the article - to the cry of the soul “Do not touch Stalin”. And what commentators didn’t resort to any tricks in order to prove the unprovable in principle. One wrote that “The message of the Soviet government ...”, published in the newspaper Pravda, an organ of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, is “propaganda material” and therefore is not a source. Someone wrote that we could buy something there from other countries. And, of course, there were a lot of people who sang hosanna to Mongolian horses, contrary to the words of their beloved Stalin that the Second World War was a “war of motors”. What surprised me even more was the strange calculations of many commentators who tried to downplay the value of supplies with their help. Although, it would seem, here is a simple afrimetic at the kindergarten level: Pinocchio had two apples, Pierrot gave him two more. And that will be? There will be EXACTLY HALF, but not a third of this total number of apples. Because two and two are FOUR! So with the supplies! And it is obvious that for a number of indicators, if we compare what was produced during the war years and delivered, we will have 50 and more than percent. But our people are cunning, they add up the supply data with what has been produced, and are looking for interest on this total amount. The result is a third! A reception typical of Soviet propaganda ("and they also hang blacks!"), But it does not work today. It would be more correct to add to pre-war stocks produced during the war years, right? But then from the pre-war stocks it is necessary to subtract all that was lost at the beginning of the war. And this is not история Lend-Lease, and the history of the Second World War in full. And, as you know, in our country the fundamental multi-volume work “The Great Patriotic War of the 1941-1945 of the Years” was prepared in 12 volumes, and, in theory, all this should have been, but ... what is not, isn’t. By the way, the quality of this work was already described at VO, as well as how this study should have been supposed. But, unfortunately, it did not. So you don’t need to do casuistry, as well as demonstrate your ignorance to the whole world, but you just need to think a little. It is clear that it is a pity to part with the thought suggested from childhood that “we are great, we are powerful, more than the sun, higher than a cloud”, but it will be necessary. Moreover, the greatness of a nation is not at all determined by the number of people killed in the war, nor by the number of weapons produced by it. The USSR had much more in the 1991 year than in the 1941, and nevertheless, all this iron did not save him from death. It is important to learn from the past in order to adequately respond to the challenges today, and trying to make the past better than it is is an absurd undertaking. Well, now let's turn to more specific subjects, namely, to the issue of paying Lend-Lease.


Distribution of food packages for Lend-Lease in Moscow. 1945 year (RIA "News")


As many as three routes of military assistance


However, before we recall some interesting details. For example, there were not one supply routes, but three at once: the Pacific, trans-Iranian and Arctic. In total, they accounted for 93,5% of all supplies. However, none of them was completely safe. Moreover, those same planes, which were driven across Alaska and Siberia “on their own,” very often died simply by drinking, both on our side and on the American side. Well, due to weather conditions, of course. And again, no one was preparing for such a massive transportation. Neither we nor our allies were ready for them. Ports were not equipped, there were no piers, cranes, warehouses, railways. The same Vladivostok was four times more than Murmansk and almost five times more than Arkhangelsk handled cargo, although it is precisely about the fact that convoys stopped sending us along the northern route in 1943, most of all. Yes, they stopped there, but deliveries sharply increased in other directions. By the way, there was practically nothing to supply from the very beginning. The entire US army at the beginning of the war accounted for 330 tankswhy send something? And these are just quantitative indicators, you can’t even talk about qualitative ones: duralumin aircraft are in any case better than wooden ones, this should be obvious even to a layman.

What did they pay for with gold?


Well, now back to the issue of payment. Let me remind you that in the "Message of the Soviet Government ..." printed in Pravda, deliveries from the UK are indicated for the period from June 1941 to 11 on June 1944, but in the end they continued in May of the 1945. Why since June? Apparently, negotiations on supplies began literally immediately after the German attack on the USSR. In complexity, four million tons of military cargoes were delivered to our country, including also foodstuffs and various medicines. It is believed that the total value of armaments delivered from the UK to the USSR was 308 million pounds, and food and raw materials - this is 120 million pounds. Under the Anglo-Soviet agreement of 27 on June 1942, all military assistance provided by Great Britain to the Soviet Union during the war was completely free. TOTALLY FREE, I stress. But it must be borne in mind that until this date, that is, from 22 June 1941 year to 27 June 1942 year, that is, exactly exactly a year, the USSR paid for all supplies from the UK, paying for them both in gold and at the expense of its foreign exchange reserves . The cost of all these deliveries for this period of time today can be estimated in 55 tons of gold, which was transported from the USSR to England by ships of the British Navy. One of these "golden ships" is the British cruiser "Edinburgh", on board of which there were 5500 kg of gold, it was sunk on 2 on May 1942 of the year during its transportation.


The Belfast cruiser belonged to the same series as the Edinburgh cruiser, but, unlike the latter, the first was much more fortunate


Unique operation


As you know, during a unique operation on the bottom of the Barents Sea in 1981, it was possible to raise 431 a bar of gold weighing 5129,3 kg. Then the gold was divided in accordance with the agreement of the parties and the ownership of the goods in the following respect: 1 / 3 - went to the UK, 2 / 3 - received the USSR. Rescuers were paid 45% of the value of all the gold they saved. Five years later, in September 1986, the lifting operation was continued. From the day, 29 ingots weighing 345,3 kg were recovered. Nevertheless, five ingots weighing 60 kg still remained lying in the depths of the Barents Sea. Divers simply could not find them in the dark through the rusted ship, which was also flooded with a thick layer of fuel oil. Since the Soviet press reported that the ship was transporting gold in exchange for a land lease, the idea that land lease was paid for in gold was firmly rooted in the minds of Soviet citizens. Ignorant people still think so, however, in fact, “Edinburgh gold”, as well as all other gold received from the USSR to England from 22 June 1941 year to 27 June 1942 year, has nothing to do with Lend-Lease supplies . This is the most common trade when people pay for the goods they purchase. We emphasize once again - deliveries from England to the USSR during this time, this is not a Lend-Lease!

Lend-Lease. Calculations and calculations

Edinburgh during sea trials


Once again to the question of sources


In order not to repeat and not again refer to Pravda, I want to inform you that the “Resolution ...” indicated in it was then printed in the next edition: “Foreign Policy of the Soviet Union during the Great Patriotic War. - T.2: Documents and materials 1 January - 31 December 1944. - M: OGIZ, Gospolitizdat, 1946. - C.142-147. Any reader of VO can find this book on the net and look at these pages. All the figures given from the article are in it. That is, we are talking about the fact that in the USSR all this information was. However, as I already noted, there was freedom of speech and freedom not to use it! In the same newspaper, Pravda, dated April 5 of 1942, in the editorial devoted to the victory in the Battle of the Ice, there is not a word that the Teutonic Knights drowned in the lake. Not a single one! "Truth" does not lie! But then all the others (and no one bothered them with this) simply excitedly talked about how they were drowning and how many of them, worthless, there were thousands. And some, including even already completely new textbooks for the school, still repeat this nonsense. It was also with information about Lend-Lease. For people who know and for the same West, whose opinion the USSR valued, we had all the necessary information. But "out there." And for the "commoners" there was a massive flow of information in which the truth was lost, like a needle in a haystack. And it didn’t hurt, you could use it. This is indicated, incidentally, even by the readers of VO. Well, at that time, nobody would just print such material with links even to the State Political Publishing House! No wonder nobody used them even in memoirs!


Unloading another convoy in the Murmansk port


For the price of the gold standard of 1944 of the year!


But we continue to consider the issue of prices and payment. After England, we look at supplies from the United States, and here it turns out that aid under the Lend-Lease of the USSR corresponds to no less than 50 000 tons of gold (based on the 1944 gold standard, which is almost twice as much as the modern total gold reserves of all the leading countries of the world (including the USA itself). Moreover, under the terms of the Lend-Lease agreement, the USSR was not supposed to pay for supplies of the USA during the war years, as well as to pay for materials spent during the war, machines and other things were subject to payment. equipment that simply cannot be I was to return back - for example, the equipment of oil refineries. The amount of payment for all this was to be determined only after the end of the war.

We him, they ... us!


By the way, it is very interesting that the aggregate tonnage of Lend-Lease assistance sent from the USA to the USSR was approximately equivalent to the total grain shipments from the USSR to the USA from 1930 to 1940 a year inclusive (there are 19,5 million tons of grain worth 200 million dollars). That is, at first we fed them, and received in exchange for bread and fur of pedigree horses, tractors, machine tools and factories, and then ... then they supplied us with everything that we urgently needed during the war years. Such a relationship between our countries has always been a very close economic connection, which, by the way, even today, despite all the sanctions on a number of indicators of trade, exceeds 50% of the sales volume line. Although, in general, for Russia as a whole, the United States in terms of total turnover is only partner No. 6 with a share of only 4,2%. Like, by the way, in the 30 years! But then it was not so with tractors, but now ... with titanium. Well, progress is evident.


Unloading Matilda tanks in the port of Arkhangelsk


Well, about how the USSR, and then Russia paid for the Lend-Lease, you will learn from the next part.

PS Usually I don’t trust the materials published in “live magazines” too much. But this one seemed very interesting to me. And since the respected public reading VO usually does not bother reading such publications as Voprosy istorii, USA and Canada, History of the Russian State and Law, Homeland, and VIZH, I highly recommended to read the material here hence.

To be continued ...
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

439 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Amurets 1 October 2019 05: 25 New
    • 14
    • 2
    +12
    However, before we recall some interesting details. For example, there were not one supply routes, but three at once: Pacific, trans-Iranian and Arctic. In total, they accounted for 93,5% of all supplies. However, none of them was completely safe.
    I want to add that with the help of the Japanese, the Germans tried as much as possible to impede supplies along the Pacific route. Almost all straits were closed: the Sangarsky, Laperuzov, Korean or Tsushima straits of strategic importance. The Japanese detained and drowned our steamboats. In this way, not only in the Arctic, but also in the Pacific, they tried to disrupt Lend-Lease supplies.
    PS I forgot to add that the Iranian route would not have taken place had the USSR not entered its troops in Iran. "Therefore, the Iranian operation - a joint British-Soviet operation of the Second World War to occupy the territory of the Iranian state under the code name" Operation "Consent" (Eng. Operation Countenance), which ran from August 25 to September 17, 1941, remained among the "blank spots" "Of this war." Https://topwar.ru/11507-operaciya-soglasie.html
    1. WILL 1 October 2019 06: 34 New
      • 35
      • 14
      +21
      The author has a peculiar understanding of this topic, and there are arguments for that!
      And let's think about whether the Allies had another option ???
      To do this, one question must be answered ... how long would England last if the Soviet troops, according to Hitler’s plan, were defeated and thrown back "beyond the Urals"?
      How would the US battle for the Pacific go ... if the freed forces of the Nazis (with the potential of a united Europe, and a half-captured USSR) took part in it? IMMEDIATELY prompt the answer - NO !!!
      The British would not have lasted a year ... and most of this time would have taken preparation for this operation ... well, and then the landing, on the contrary, and the FULL PREPARATION of Great Britain, and local collaborators, would have actively helped the Nazis.
      The Japanese - with the support of Hitler ... would squeeze the Pacific Ocean from the United States (with the occupation of everything all the way to Australia) and the hostilities would be transferred to the United States .... I do not think that they would last very long. The divisions of the Wehrmacht with their combat experience and coherence ... would roll out to dust - ALL participants! Which they proved in 1944, bloodless and with a smaller number - regularly inflicting disparate tactical defeats on the Allies ... That was exactly what the Soviet Fighters and Commanders (under the leadership of the GKO and Stalin) eliminated by diverting the German troops to the Eastern Front ... at the cost of their LIFES!
      There are things and actions for which you can only pay in two ways - BLOOD AND GOLD. We paid in BLOOD. The Allies - paid as much as possible GOLD (in the figurative sense, by airplanes, tanks, gasoline, food ... to a lot more than that) but not the BLOOD of their soldiers!
      1. Maki Avellevich 1 October 2019 07: 48 New
        • 18
        • 10
        +8
        Quote: ANIMAL
        The British would not have lasted a year ... and most of this time would have taken preparation for this operation ... well, and then the landing, on the contrary, and FULL PREVENTION of Great Britain,

        with what fleet would the Germans defeat the British?
        and even if they were smashed in some miraculous way, they would have to desent on the English shores from submarines.
        1. tihonmarine 1 October 2019 10: 05 New
          • 7
          • 1
          +6
          Quote: Maki Avellevich
          with what fleet would the Germans defeat the British?
          and even if they were smashed in some miraculous way, they would have to desent on the English shores from submarines.

          This would not have happened before the summer of 1942, and by that moment the defense of the British coast had been strengthened, and Hitler needed to build a huge number of landing ships, but the Reich industry worked for the army. A delay before the 1943 year would not have led to success. Yes, and all this is "anyhow yes, if only beans grew in the mouth", just speculation without a real basis.
          1. your1970 5 October 2019 13: 31 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            It seems to me alone that the first photo NOT made in the USSR?
            Faces, clothes, a badge on a jacket, the general background ... somehow everything doesn’t fit very well psychologically ...
            Our only thing is the cap
            1. tihonmarine 5 October 2019 14: 09 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: your1970
              Our only thing is the cap

              Cap, badge of the deputy (flag), four pioneer ties and a haircut for boys with a boxing machine, but photos for propaganda, all are clean.
              1. your1970 5 October 2019 14: 23 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                everything was the same in other countries - scout ties (ours were absolutely not original here), badges, jackets
                Cap? It’s not quite visible there that this cap is similar, but it may well be some kind of flat headdress.

                In general, I have a feeling that the photo is mounted from 4 different:
                1) top-jackets, building, trees
                2) a man in a cap
                3) two women, a table and children - the left side
                4) the child and someone's elbow - on the right
                Someone knows how to use programs that determine the combination of different photos ??
                However, maybe I find fault, and all this is a consequence of the rough retouching of that time ....
                1. tihonmarine 5 October 2019 15: 19 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: your1970
                  However, maybe I find fault, and all this is a consequence of the rough retouching of that time ....

                  You do not quibble, you look at things realistically, but you also agree that something is wrong. But even so, the icon is visible, rather parliamentary, which means this is a beautiful propaganda photo with ties (not tied up but on a clip) and most likely someone from amers or jimmy. Any help required its advertising. And rather, this photo went around the whole of America and Britain. After all, besides Lend-Lease there was a lot of help from individuals and organizations (Rachmaninoff example) Why did Lend-Lease and the second front slip. Help the Yankees and Jimmy could begin to provide a month after the start of the war, BUT ..... ???
        2. Alekseev 1 October 2019 15: 43 New
          • 8
          • 2
          +6
          Quote: Maki Avellevich
          let's think about whether the allies had another option

          Naturally ... Nobody would help us if this help did not meet the interests of the USA and Great Britain. They were afraid of the corporal.
          But, at the same time, help with Lend-Lease was extremely important for us.
          Of course, for propaganda purposes, she was somewhat silent. Scribes in the press voiced that they sent tanks, they say, God forbid, 10%, the planes are also from that produced in the USSR.
          But here G.K. Zhukov said (as reported by the KGB), "... But it cannot be denied that the Americans drove us so much material without which we could not build up our reserves and could not continue the war ..."
          Indeed, they supplied a lot of strategic materials, up to half of gunpowder and explosives, 425 thousand cars, equipped with steam locomotives and wagons, without them there would have been nothing to carry artillery and transport huge volumes of military cargo necessary to ensure the grand offensive operations 1943-1945 years. The volumes of supplied food and high-octane gasoline were also great.
          The deliveries of high-tech equipment were important: machine tools, locators, communications ...
          So, we must agree with G.K.Zhukov, we could not have waged such a war as it was, of course, without supplies from the USA (mainly) and England.
        3. zenion 2 October 2019 17: 24 New
          • 2
          • 3
          -1
          I wonder how the Romans got on foggy Albion? Was there really no strait at that time? Or did the Romans drop from the underwater trireme? Many forget the policy of the United States and Naglia - to give weapons to both, and let them kill each other as much as possible. Russia and the United States were saved by the USSR under the leadership of Stalin. But the USSR lost the war to Hitler under the leadership of the Marked One. Now in the area that Hitler wanted to capture, there was a situation Hitler dreamed about and warned Stalin - a raw materials appendage to the colon, an appendix.
          1. Maki Avellevich 5 October 2019 07: 28 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Quote: zenion
            I wonder how the Romans got on foggy Albion? Was there really no strait at that time? Or did the Romans drop from the underwater trireme?

            do you imagine the greatness of the fleet of semi-wild tribes inhabiting Britain 43 years of our era?
            the landing of the first legions in Kent for Vespasiyan was a children's walk.
            1. Town Hall 5 October 2019 08: 00 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: Maki Avellevich
              the landing of the first legions in Kent for Vespasiyan was a children's walk

              Vespasian?
              1. Maki Avellevich 5 October 2019 08: 05 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: Town Hall
                Quote: Maki Avellevich
                the landing of the first legions in Kent for Vespasiyan was a children's walk

                Vespasian?

                for you Titus Flavius ​​Vespasian
                1. Town Hall 5 October 2019 08: 19 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  The conquest of Britain was carried out under the command of Aulus Plautius under the emperor Tiberius Claudius. Vespasian was only the commander of one of the 4 legions of the invasion
                  1. Maki Avellevich 5 October 2019 08: 21 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: Town Hall
                    Vespasian was just the commander of one of the 4 legions of the invasion

                    wrote about it - "landing of the first legions[i] [/ i] in Kent for Vespasian "
                    the essence of the answer was that the natives could not oppose their fleet to the Roman
                    1. Town Hall 5 October 2019 08: 28 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      I understood the essence of your comment. I didn’t understand why it was Vespasian. He was neither the first nor the main. to be completely accurate, the first legions that landed in Kent were Caesar's legions 100 years before)
                      1. Maki Avellevich 5 October 2019 08: 30 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: Town Hall
                        to be completely accurate, the first legions that landed in Kent were Caesar's legions 100 years before)

                        there is intelligence and there is colonization.
                      2. Town Hall 5 October 2019 08: 35 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        The paradox is that the understanding of the importance of the fleet for the British came after they became French (Normans)
    2. Avior 1 October 2019 07: 53 New
      • 9
      • 10
      -1
      Of course it was.
      For example, from 1943, after Stalingrad, all supplies were stopped, then by the time the Soviet troops reached the border of the USSR, somewhere in the year 1947, the country would be exhausted, like Germany, the Allies would liberate Europe, and the whole post-war history would go differently.
      But supplies continued until 1945, which allowed the USSR to partially compensate for the damage caused by the war.
    3. Serg65 1 October 2019 07: 55 New
      • 10
      • 0
      +10
      Quote: ANIMAL
      Allies - paid as much as possible GOLD

      Alexei, a simple question ... how much did their gold save our blood?
      1. WILL 1 October 2019 08: 18 New
        • 9
        • 4
        +5
        How to answer it? Probably - a lot!
        And how much of their Blood saved their Gold?
        1. Serg65 1 October 2019 08: 58 New
          • 11
          • 3
          +8
          Quote: ANIMAL
          And how much of their Blood saved their Gold?

          Germany attacked the USSR. By and large .. well attacked and attacked, well, and you are fighting there among themselves ..... who should whom? The 41st, 42nd, the Soviet military industry on wheels goes to the evacuation .... aircraft, tanks, Stalin almost himself distributed on the fronts. What do you think in the battles near Moscow of Matilda and Valentine, was it better than nothing?
        2. Avior 1 October 2019 09: 07 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Given the fact that Hitler did not want to fight them, that is another question ......
      2. tihonmarine 1 October 2019 10: 08 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Quote: Serg65
        simple question ... how much did their gold save our blood?

        Human life cannot be appreciated by any gold.
        1. Serg65 1 October 2019 10: 10 New
          • 8
          • 1
          +7
          Quote: tihonmarine
          Human life cannot be appreciated by any gold.

          I agree, thanks to this Lend-Lease for the saved lives of Soviet soldiers and officers!
          1. tihonmarine 1 October 2019 10: 45 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Quote: Serg65
            I agree, thanks to this Lend-Lease for the saved lives of Soviet soldiers and officers!

            This is of course a difficultly assessed and timely help for the country and the army. Especially food for the army.
            1. Serg65 1 October 2019 11: 34 New
              • 11
              • 2
              +9
              Quote: tihonmarine
              This is of course difficult to assess and timely assistance for the country and the army.

              My father is 95 years old, may God grant him health, he was called up in 1942, in 43 he went to the front. Passed with battles from Smolensk to Elba. Still recalls American stew, English boots, Studebaker and Dodge.
              1. vvvjak 1 October 2019 12: 48 New
                • 17
                • 0
                +17
                Quote: Serg65
                Still recalls American stew

                Americans delivered 650 thousand tons stews. If roughly estimated it is 1 kg. per fighter per month, even if the rest of the population is not taken into account. And everyone remembers about it. But the Mongols (whom the author of the article remembered so derogatoryly) delivered 500 thousand tons. meat, but no one remembers it, no one shouts "without the Mongols," kirdyk "
                1. Serg65 1 October 2019 13: 06 New
                  • 10
                  • 1
                  +9
                  Quote: vvvjak
                  nobody remembers about him

                  Vladimir, the meat went into the common cauldron, and the stew was given for four, along with a can that was written in "American" letters, there were no inscriptions on the meat, and from where did the fighter who had caught a piece of meat in the pot know that it was from fraternal Mongolia?
                  1. vvvjak 1 October 2019 14: 24 New
                    • 6
                    • 0
                    +6
                    I apologize for the harsh statement, did not want to offend your father or you. I understand that a person’s memory is selective (it is better to remember something that is sharply bad or good, K. Simonov wrote well about this in the book “Such Different Days of the War”). My grandfather also fought, so he recalled how they ate the horse meat of the Zenith horse that had been killed by the shrapnel. Only later did he realize that he loved only horses more than me (that’s how they spent time in my childhood - my grandfather, I and the horse "Schoolboy"). Do not take my “comment” to your account, it’s more for the sake of objectivity.
                    1. Serg65 1 October 2019 14: 57 New
                      • 5
                      • 0
                      +5
                      Quote: vvvjak
                      I apologize for the harsh statement

                      Everything is fine is life ..
                      Father often recalls how he took off his warm cloaks from killed Germans ... right with his feet ... it’s cold in boots to stand at the post. God forbid such an experience!
                2. tlauicol 1 October 2019 13: 42 New
                  • 5
                  • 13
                  -8
                  The Mongols sold the meat, the Americans presented it - that’s the whole difference. In the hardest time for us
                  1. Nagaibak 1 October 2019 14: 10 New
                    • 6
                    • 4
                    +2
                    tlauikol "Mongols sold meat, the Americans gave"
                    Did the Mongols sell meat?))) Where did you read this?)) Did they give the Americans?)))) Have they ever given anything ... to someone?)))
                    1. tlauicol 1 October 2019 17: 05 New
                      • 3
                      • 4
                      -1
                      For example, "Mongolia in the Second World War"
                    2. Nagaibak 1 October 2019 18: 23 New
                      • 8
                      • 0
                      +8
                      tlauikol "For example," Mongolia in the Second World War ""
                      As far as I know, for example: "Horses were delivered from Mongolia on a planned basis, at a conditional price, mainly offsetting the Mongolian debts of the USSR." Maybe the same story happened with meat. They have at the end of the war because of pumping out resources .. of the same meat in general, hunger began. The USSR had to send help to the Mongols.
                  2. ccsr 1 October 2019 17: 10 New
                    • 2
                    • 2
                    0
                    Quote: Nagaibak
                    Did the Americans give it?)))) Have they ever given something ... to someone else?)))

                    They also in the most difficult days of the war profited from us, as F. Golikov testifies in his memoirs:
                    The situation was aggravated by the fact that the deal with the conclusion of a loan agreement was hardly progressing. And the question of the speedy execution of such an agreement has become increasingly important for us. Already at that time, receiving the first batch of American aircraft, we were forced to pay for them in cash. It is appropriate to recall here that G. Hopkins after a conversation with I.V. Stalin on July 30, 1941 in Moscow, answering a question from correspondents about paying for American materials, said that in this regard, he was sure that there would be no difficulties and there would be no delays. In practice, the situation was not as simple as G. Hopkins represented it in Moscow ... Moreover, there was sufficient reason to expect that the American side would put forward the supply of a number of goods from the Soviet country to the United States both in wartime and as an indispensable condition for a loan agreement. and after the war. Even when our homeland was going through hard days, some American officials were inclined to demand from us information about how much chrome ore, manganese and other strategic materials could be delivered from the Soviet Union to the United States in the post-war period.
              2. A good one 1 October 2019 13: 48 New
                • 8
                • 4
                +4
                Quote: vvvjak
                Quote: Serg65
                Still recalls American stew

                Americans delivered 650 thousand tons stews. If roughly estimated it is 1 kg. per fighter per month, even if the rest of the population is not taken into account. And everyone remembers about it. But the Mongols (whom the author of the article remembered so derogatoryly) delivered 500 thousand tons. meat, but no one remembers it, no one shouts "without the Mongols," kirdyk "

                Come on, we all remember. Do not exaggerate so, this is not good, there was help and it went purposefully. An extra piece will never be superfluous.
                1. WILL 1 October 2019 13: 54 New
                  • 7
                  • 0
                  +7
                  Viktorovich, This is We - we still remember! We - Our Fathers and Grandfathers - WINNERS ... we saw in the Living, and they searched out stories from THEM! ... And the Children and Grandchildren, OUR ...
                  You look at the history books ... THEY with such an Education that they will remember?
                  1. A good one 1 October 2019 15: 32 New
                    • 6
                    • 5
                    +1
                    Quote: ANIMAL
                    Viktorovich, This is We - we still remember! We - Our Fathers and Grandfathers - WINNERS ... we saw in the Living, and they searched out stories from THEM! ... And the Children and Grandchildren, OUR ...
                    You look at the history books ... THEY with such an Education that they will remember?

                    Alex, my friend! If only each of us would have the sacred that our grandfathers and great-grandfathers gave us as an inheritance, indifference to the side, initially on the ground, that is, in our families, we need to bring this to our younger generation and, by our own example, an officer who gives and who has given a debt to his homeland on his life path hi
                  2. Den717 1 October 2019 20: 53 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    Quote: ANIMAL
                    And the Children and Grandchildren, OUR ...
                    You look at the history books ... THEY with such an Education that they will remember?

                    What are you doing? Or are your children orphans and grow up in boarding schools without communicating with you?
                2. vvvjak 1 October 2019 14: 06 New
                  • 3
                  • 0
                  +3
                  Quote: Not bad
                  Come on, we all remember. Do not exaggerate so, this is not good, there was help and it went purposefully. An extra piece will never be superfluous.

                  Yes, I will not exaggerate. So just a little erupted statement. They are more related to the author of the article than to the commentator "Serg65" (now I apologize to him).
                  1. A good one 1 October 2019 15: 35 New
                    • 6
                    • 5
                    +1
                    Quote: vvvjak
                    Quote: Not bad
                    Come on, we all remember. Do not exaggerate so, this is not good, there was help and it went purposefully. An extra piece will never be superfluous.

                    Yes, I will not exaggerate. So just a little erupted statement. They are more related to the author of the article than to the commentator "Serg65" (now I apologize to him).

                    I wish you good health hi
              3. Avior 1 October 2019 16: 19 New
                • 6
                • 2
                +4
                the Mongols did not deliver, but sold. that there are two big differences.
                if the Americans did, everyone would scream that they profit from the war ....
            2. tihonmarine 1 October 2019 13: 00 New
              • 10
              • 0
              +10
              Quote: Serg65
              My father is 95 years old, may God grant him health, he was called up in 1942, in 43 he went to the front. Passed with battles from Smolensk to Elba. Still recalls American stew, English boots, Studebaker and Dodge.

              My father at the end of the 1944 year after being wounded, as a local was sent to the Manchurian border by the commander of the artillery and mortar division. The guns of the 20 years and even the times of the 1 World War are dressed in uniforms from hospitals on the western front, the officers of the “kirzachi” have ranked boots with windings instead of shoulder straps of rags with tin asterisks. People staggered from hunger. Everything went to the front. When the officers began to give doppayek, a kilogram jar of American stew and American spirit bread in a loaf, people ate everything at once, and whoever had a bowel twist, reaching a fatal outcome. I had to give out in the cafeteria a day for 150 grams and a piece of bread. There, the man did not need anything, just put something in his mouth. So thanks to Lend-Lease and the Americans, yet once upon a time we were allies.
              1. Sanichsan 2 October 2019 17: 56 New
                • 0
                • 1
                -1
                Quote: tihonmarine
                So thanks to Lend-Lease and the Americans, yet once upon a time we were allies.

                tell me, IMF, you also say thank you for loans in the 90s?
                my grandfather also fought and praised Aerocobra and American rations, but he fought and he had no time to think why he had to fight. Now many archival documents are available and the picture is formed extremely unsightly ...
                tell me honestly, you will also thank your neighbor for the fire extinguisher sold during a fire if you know that it was he who set fire to your house? request
        2. A good one 1 October 2019 13: 41 New
          • 6
          • 5
          +1
          Quote: Serg65
          Quote: tihonmarine
          Human life cannot be appreciated by any gold.

          I agree, thanks to this Lend-Lease for the saved lives of Soviet soldiers and officers!

          Indeed, they helped us and secured ourselves for a long time, we thought all this for extermination, but no, it was we who survived. yes
          1. Serg65 1 October 2019 13: 55 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Quote: Not bad
            we thought all this for extermination, but no, it was we who survived

            Viktorovich, this is a secondary issue ... the main thing is that they survived! yes
  2. vvvjak 1 October 2019 09: 02 New
    • 13
    • 5
    +8
    Quote: ANIMAL
    The author has a peculiar understanding of this topic, and there are arguments for that!

    It is what it is. In my opinion, it’s time for the author to “tie up” the author with “Land Lease” - the “smart” readers of VO have already realized that without him the USSR is a “khan”. Now it is imperative to cover the issues: "corpses were dumped," "general frost," "the Pact on no attack as the root cause of 2MB," etc.
  3. Alexey RA 1 October 2019 10: 23 New
    • 9
    • 5
    +4
    Quote: ANIMAL
    To do this, one question must be answered ... how long would England last if the Soviet troops, according to Hitler’s plan, were defeated and thrown back "beyond the Urals"?

    It would have lasted as long as the United States needed to create a land army. The plans of the Allies of the development of 1940-1941. the presence or absence of the USSR does not play a special role.
    Quote: ANIMAL
    How would the US battle for the Pacific go ... if the freed forces of the Nazis (with the potential of a united Europe, and a half-captured USSR) took part in it?

    I directly see the tank groups of Kleist and Guderian marching along the bottom of the Pacific Ocean to capture Oahu.
    Quote: ANIMAL
    The British would not have lasted a year ... and most of this time would have taken preparation for this operation ... well, and then the landing, on the contrary, and the FULL BREAK of Great Britain

    The only landing period when the Germans could theoretically win was in the summer of 1940. Then, everything, first autumn storms, and then the FDR unwound the Lend-Lease flywheel, pumping runway No. 1 with equipment (and personnel - American army officers were allowed to "volunteer" without firing )
    Quote: ANIMAL
    The Japanese - with the support of Hitler ... would squeeze the Pacific Ocean from the United States (with the occupation of everything all the way to Australia) and the fighting would transfer to the United States ...

    With what support from Hitler? What can an army do with a fleet?
    1. Beringovsky 1 October 2019 15: 00 New
      • 7
      • 2
      +5
      It would have lasted as long as the United States needed to create a land army.

      The United States did not even create this army by 44. What would the Anglo-American invasion forces do if three-quarters of the Germans were not on the Eastern Front but under their nose?
      1. Alexey RA 1 October 2019 15: 59 New
        • 4
        • 4
        0
        Quote: Beringovsky
        The United States did not even create this army by 44.

        Created by 1943. This year, the United States has already fought on two fronts.
        Quote: Beringovsky
        What would the Anglo-American invasion forces do if three-quarters of the Germans were not on the Eastern Front but under their nose?

        Everything is according to pre-war plans: an air attack on the Reich economy + knocking out the weakest Axis player - Italy.
        And one more thing: for some reason you forget that no one in the Reich planned to leave a huge mobilized army after the victory over the USSR. On the contrary, in order to continue the war, it was planned to demobilize the army by half - otherwise the same shipbuilding program would suffocate from a lack of free hands, and the agriculture needed workers to overcome the beginning hunger (no one wanted a repetition of the “1918 backstab”). In real life, in May 1942, the shortage of workers in the Reich was 25% of the needs. So the 200 German divisions of the Allies did not shine.
        1. Beringovsky 1 October 2019 17: 08 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          Created by 1943. This year, the United States has already fought on two fronts.

          You did not give the number of these "troops" in Europe. It’s only Captain America and Rambo doesn’t care how many enemies around them, 10 or 100.
          Reality is not Hollywood.
          Everything is according to pre-war plans: an air attack on the Reich economy + knocking out the weakest Axis player - Italy.

          Let's say. Only now they would have met with a completely different enemy, both in quantity and in quality. You should not compare the selected German units that fought near Moscow and Stalingrad with a mob of cripples, people with disabilities and children from the Hitler Youth on the Western Front. In addition, pretty well demoralized by the summer of 44.
          Otherwise, the Anglo-Americans in 44m would face the fate of befell the Anglo-French in 40m.
          In real life, in May 1942, the shortage of workers in the Reich was 25% of the needs.

          In the "real" Germans found a wonderful way out of this - millions of workers from the occupied territories. If they defeated the USSR in 41, they would have had no problems either with workers, or with food, or with oil, or with mineral resources, or with industry — the Soviet would have come in handy. So they could easily save 200 divisions. I'm afraid I would be strengthened at the expense of collaborationists from the USSR.
          And there, Turkey and Iran would act on the side of the Reich.
          So in this case, the amers would have to think not about the invasion of Europe, but about how to save themselves. And the Germans could not be in a hurry with England.
          1. Alexey RA 1 October 2019 17: 41 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Quote: Beringovsky
            You should not compare the selected German units that fought near Moscow and Stalingrad with a mob of cripples, invalids and children from the Hitler Youth on the Western Front.

            So first would be Italy. And there was no rabble from cripples in real life. But, nevertheless, the Allies quite fought for themselves.
            And after the front had risen in Italy, preparations for Overlord and Dragoon would begin. In truth, in real life the forces attracted to Overlord were an overkill. And in the alternative they would be enough.
            Quote: Beringovsky
            If they defeated the USSR in 41, they would have had no problems either with workers, or with food, or with oil, or with mineral resources, or with industry - the Soviet would have come in handy.

            Yeah ... it would be useful as in real life when coal was imported to the Donbass.
            Moreover, no use of Soviet industry (except mining) by the Germans if successful barbarossa was not planned - the USSR was to become a source of food and raw materials, and the urban population had to either die out of starvation or move to the village.
            Herr Thomas did not build rainbow illusions and clearly stated that this plan can only be realized if the current agricultural system is preserved, including mainly in the form of collective farms (if you start extensive experimentation with the forms of ownership, you can drive past the 1941 harvest with songs) and severe non-economic coercion regarding the seizure of grain. It also says that when implementing this plan, millions of indigenous people are expected to starve to death, but the Reich should not be bothered, since the occupied territories are required as a source of raw materials, not a highly developed industrial area, and the peak of mortality will be in industrial areas that and so are not able to provide themselves with agricultural products.
            © D. Shein
            1. Sanichsan 2 October 2019 18: 03 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: Alexey RA
              So first would be Italy.

              problem. There were no problems with Italy until Rommel arrived, and in the situation described, it would not be the expeditionary force that would arrive, but a full-fledged German army with all of this. Allies would lose heaven, and then land and sea.
              1. Alexey RA 3 October 2019 13: 48 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Quote: SanichSan
                problem. There were no problems with Italy until Rommel arrived, and in the situation described, it would not be the expeditionary force that would arrive, but a full-fledged German army with all of this.

                If Rommel will command, then nothing will change. The army will even rise earlier than the corps - in North Africa the effective amount of forces is determined primarily by the infrastructure on the theater of operations. To supply the army, a front-level rear will be required - to bring from the ports to the front line everything that the Italians deliver there.
                In real life, Rommel cried for a lack of supply housingreceiving an average of 1500-2500 tons of supplies per day in African ports. For comparison - army group Paulus demanded 1000-1200 tons daily.
                1. Sanichsan 3 October 2019 14: 10 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  In real life, Rommel wept for a shortage of hull supplies, receiving an average of 1500– 2500 tons of supplies daily in African ports. For comparison, the Paulus army group demanded 1000-1200 tons daily.

                  you went to Africa laughing we kind of about Italy wink I cited Rommel as an example to show that even with the problems of supply and staff shortages, he drove the allies in the desert quite successfully, but we are talking about a landing in Italy with no eastern front. all German forces were transferred to a dangerous landing site. German aviation is not a miserable waste left over after 1943, but a real force dominating in the air. German artillery, as near Stalingrad, is capable of bombarding any offensive with shells. how long will the allies survive on the shore under such conditions? my opinion is that even less than in Norway in 1940.
      2. naidas 1 October 2019 20: 28 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Quote: Beringovsky
        if three-quarters of the Germans were not on the Eastern Front but under their nose

        By April 1944, the total number of the Wehrmacht was 7 v / s, of which 849 (000 Germans) on the Eastern Front, 3 in Norway and Denmark, 878 in Western Europe, 000 in Italy, 2,460,000 in The Balkans.
        It is quite comparable in the east and west, but rather the quality of the troops was different.
  4. Pedrodepackes 1 October 2019 11: 06 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    Quote: ANIMAL
    There are things and actions for which you can only pay in two ways - BLOOD AND GOLD. We paid in BLOOD. The Allies - paid as much as possible GOLD (in the figurative sense, by airplanes, tanks, gasoline, food ... to a lot more than that) but not the BLOOD of their soldiers!

    and what do you mean by this that there was no Lend-Lease and the author is wrong?
  5. intuzazist 1 October 2019 15: 31 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Have you forgotten about the blood of the civilian population !!!!!! And material losses in the territories are terrible ......
  6. Alex_59 1 October 2019 15: 37 New
    • 3
    • 4
    -1
    Quote: ANIMAL
    how long would England last if the Soviet troops, in accordance with Hitler’s plan, were defeated and thrown back “beyond the Urals”?

    The total GDP of the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition without the USSR was twice the GDP of the axis countries. The Germans in any situation merged, the question is only sooner or later and at what cost of loss.
    It would be possible to win only by applying some unprecedented and ingenious scheme of military operations, capable of leveling the incredible economic superiority of the Allies and quickly developing this success into victory. Something like Pearl Harbor with immediate sequel. But in the situation in which they all taxied by the end of the 1941 year (surprise was lost, blitzkrieg failed), even without the USSR they were inevitable defeat.
  7. naidas 1 October 2019 20: 18 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Quote: ANIMAL
    And let's think about whether the Allies had another option ???

    Of course, to ban American firms from trading and supplying Hitler with raw materials and equipment. Get out of the ITT board of directors Walter Friedrich Schellenberg and Kurt von Schroeder and other Nazis from American firms.
    https://topwar.ru/35451-lend-liz-dlya-gitlera.html
    And then in the USSR there are goods, technology and production in Germany. You fight among themselves for a longer time. And then you will help us with the Japanese. (Some of the American generals estimated the naval war with Japan more than 40 billion in six months), but do not forget to pay for the American products.
  8. 1970mk 4 October 2019 15: 39 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    You have the same iron logic))) But tell me, if you didn’t hammer on the day of the capture of Paris (5 days before the surrender of France), he called the German ambassador and made him an official statement admiring the brilliant successes of the German Armed Forces?
  9. karabass 7 October 2019 17: 08 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Yes, that would be exactly so, and then in 1946 the atomic bombing of the most important cities of Japan and Germany, and what would the German troops then do in the Urals?
  10. zenion 29 December 2019 16: 50 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Lendlease supplies resemble boxing. This is when the boxer sat on a chair, for a couple of minutes, he was fanned with towels and given water to rinse in his mouth. If the USSR had not survived, it would have been like the movie Vaterland, when two countries remained and Hitler came to the United States to dictate his terms of peace. Although the USA and the West were preparing Hitler for war with the USSR, after Germany captured so many countries her appetite flared up. Appetite comes with eating. In addition, the USSR paid with gold, rare metals and technology. USSR tanks, metal samples for tank building, and gunpowder recipes ordered were sent to the USA. But there were such gunpowders that the Americans did not get, and they were offended.
  • Pedrodepackes 1 October 2019 11: 03 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Quote: Amurets
    I want to add that with the help of the Japanese, the Germans tried as much as possible to impede supplies along the Pacific route.

    yes, it was like that, the Americans promised us this route to deliver some cosmic amount of grain, under which the formation had already begun in the 41st year, if I’m not mistaken, 10 cavalry hulls, but the Japanese, mercilessly sinking American ships, thwarted these deliveries and deployment divisions had to be postponed. In the 45th Stalin remembered this.
  • Same lech 1 October 2019 05: 39 New
    • 12
    • 5
    +7
    Vyacheslav asks interesting questions what
    but to the storyline of the whole article, I would say that the USSR ultimately paid for the lives of its soldiers and officers for Lend-Lease, bearing the brunt of the war with Hitler Germany on its shoulders ... and the United States and England it was more profitable to help the USSR at that time than to participate in bloody battles with the Nazis.
    1. Blackmokona 1 October 2019 06: 28 New
      • 7
      • 5
      +2
      Well, he paid with blood if he was fulfilling a mercenary agreement and in return for supplies he would have attacked Germany. But the USSR was attacked and he fought back.
    2. Avior 1 October 2019 07: 54 New
      • 8
      • 0
      +8
      The USSR would have fought in any case, for him it was a matter of life and death.
  • 210ox 1 October 2019 06: 26 New
    • 10
    • 7
    +3
    I don’t want to either downplay or exaggerate the importance of these supplies. I would have managed without them. But the Americans and others in our situation would have failed.
    1. maden.usmanow 1 October 2019 06: 59 New
      • 3
      • 11
      -8
      And how did the Union end up in
      such a situation
      ?

      It was necessary to beat the Nazis first in 40, when all the forces of the Wehrmacht were in Europe.
      Or in 39, when after the ragrom of the Poles, the Germans did not have ammunition.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Military Builder 1 October 2019 07: 25 New
        • 5
        • 1
        +4
        Quote: maden.usmanow
        And how did the Union end up in
        such a situation
        ?

        It was necessary to beat the Nazis first in 40, when all the forces of the Wehrmacht were in Europe.
        Or in 39, when after the ragrom of the Poles, the Germans did not have ammunition.

        I would know a ransom, I would live in Sochi. Well, the last 30 years, tirelessly, have been sorry for the "world community", for the fact that we are such and such totalitarian, drowned out democracy in Europe.
        1. tihonmarine 1 October 2019 11: 08 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: Military Builder
          for the fact that we are so-and-so totalitarian, quenched democracy in Europe.

          And "extinguish" should be.
      3. tihonmarine 1 October 2019 10: 16 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: maden.usmanow
        It was necessary to beat the Nazis first in 40, when all the forces of the Wehrmacht were in Europe.
        Or in 39, when after the ragrom of the Poles, the Germans did not have ammunition.

        We are always smart in hindsight (I would know a buyback, I would live in Sochi).
      4. Pavel57 2 October 2019 10: 40 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        It was necessary to beat the Nazis first in 40, when all the forces of the Wehrmacht were in Europe.
        Or in 39, when after the ragrom of the Poles, the Germans did not have ammunition.


        And get the union of the Anglo-Saxons and Germany. An example of Finland is not enough?
        1. Andrey Zhdanov-Nedilko 4 October 2019 09: 32 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Sorry, but these are all alternative inventions! It could not be in reality in 1939-40 the union of Germans and Anglo-Saxons. The Anglo-Saxons could bomb the Baku oil fields, but no more.
    2. stalki 1 October 2019 07: 36 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      I don’t want to either downplay or exaggerate the importance of these supplies. I would have managed without them. But the Americans and others in our situation would have failed.
      for sure, "you want to live not so heated"
    3. L-39NG 1 October 2019 08: 43 New
      • 8
      • 3
      +5
      From the report of the chairman of the KGB Semichastny to the first secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU Khrushchev. About Marshal of the Soviet Union, four times Hero of the Soviet Union, former deputy of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief Stalin - that is, about Zhukov. The report contained the words of Zhukov about American aid during the Great Patriotic War, apparently said in a narrow circle:
      “... The Americans drove us so much material, without which we could not form our reserves and could not continue the war ... We got 350 thousand cars, and what kind of cars! .. We didn’t have explosives, gunpowder. There was nothing to equip cartridges. The Americans really helped us out with gunpowder and explosives. And how much they drove us to sheet steel. How could we quickly set up tank production if it weren’t for American steel help. And now they present the matter as if we had all of this in abundance. ”

      Or: Marshal G.K. Zhukov in post-war conversations with the writer K.M. Simonov said: "Speaking about our preparedness for war from the point of view of the economy and the economy, we can not ignore such a factor as subsequent assistance from the Allies. First of all, of course, on the part of the Americans, because the British in this sense helped us to a minimum. When analyzing all aspects of the war, this cannot be discounted. We would be in a difficult situation without American gunpowder, we could not produce as much ammunition as we needed . Without US "Studebakers" we have nothing to what it would be to carry our guns. Yes, they are largely generally provide our frontline vehicles. Production of special steels required for the most different needs of the war, was also associated with a number of US supplies. "

      And in his Memoirs and Thoughts, Zhukov writes that American Lend-Lease aid did not play any special role during the war.

      Politics writes a story.
      1. Avior 1 October 2019 09: 06 New
        • 6
        • 1
        +5
        And who would print his memoirs if he wrote the opposite?
        1. chenia 1 October 2019 10: 37 New
          • 8
          • 2
          +6
          Quote: Avior
          And who would print his memoirs if he wrote the opposite?


          Zhukov is guilty of the disaster of 1941. and Simonov hung up noodles about the unpreparedness of our industry, and the importance of LL indirectly justifying itself (in a memoir, of course, they would not have missed this).

          If we talk about the value of LL, then we take the numbers. The USSR received 26% LL for the entire war, Britain 60%.
          moreover, in July 1943 we received only 8-9% (of the total subsequently) Britain-35-38%.

          Britain fought until November 1942 with FOUR by German divisions (Crete and the operation "Jubilee" are fleeting. where 2 light divisions defeated superior forces, and German disabled people (Dieppe) were hollowed out by Canadians in a couple of days - we do not take into account).

          Until May 1943, Britain was already at war with five German divisions (GG division, by the way, is not a full complement). And at that time already with the Americans and the fighting French.
          At the same time, the British included both Poles and troops of the colonies and dominions.

          [b] This is all I need, if the decisive role of LL is, then why didn’t it work with the British, who at that time received it FOUR TIMES MORE and having their own undamaged industry, dominions and colonies. Or not a horse feed.
          [/B]

          Or, nevertheless, the case is not LL (by the way, I have nothing against this help, but thanks).
          1. Avior 1 October 2019 10: 52 New
            • 6
            • 1
            +5
            The fact that England and Germany fought at sea, you, as I understand it, do not take into account.
            But in vain. A very expensive pleasure is naval warfare.
            Materials and resources require in huge quantities ...
            1. chenia 1 October 2019 15: 09 New
              • 3
              • 1
              +2
              Quote: Avior
              that England and Germany fought at sea,


              Sound the sea battles.
              The British fleet was more than an order of magnitude superior to the German.
              1. Avior 1 October 2019 16: 14 New
                • 5
                • 0
                +5
                Did I write something about the battles?
                Tirpitz stood the whole war against the wall, and the convoys were forced to escort whole squadrons.
                And the fact that it was superior, both money and materials for maintenance required much more
          2. Pedrodepackes 1 October 2019 11: 29 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            Quote: chenia
            The USSR received 26% LL for the entire war, Britain 60%.

            you can’t measure everything with a common percentage, in Great Britain, for example, there was no food base, before the war it received 3/4 of food from the colonies, there was no fuel, raw materials, and they baked bombers like pancakes. We were mainly supplied with finished products and in some ways they exceeded our production by two to three times. If, for example, we didn’t have supplies for explosives and gunpowder, then what would the Red Army shoot, and we had only one capsule factory (if the director of the factory in Murom did not lie), and those capsules without imported varnish worked once, the same picture on aluminum (engines for the T-34 and aviation), railway transport ....
            1. chenia 1 October 2019 15: 04 New
              • 3
              • 1
              +2
              Quote: Pedrodepackes
              in the UK, for example, there was no food base; before the war, it received 3/4 of the food from the colonies,


              Britain in ideal conditions could prepare for war - from the announcement to the start of real hostilities EIGHT months.
              It was possible to rebuild the economy, to accumulate resources, to prepare the army.

              Quote: Pedrodepackes
              If, for example, we didn’t have supplies for explosives and gunpowder, then what would the Red Army shoot, and we had only one capsule plant


              Yes, you are right, BUT before the Battle of Kursk this is a minuscule.
              1. Pedrodepackes 1 October 2019 16: 16 New
                • 2
                • 1
                +1
                Quote: chenia
                before the Battle of Kursk this is a minuscule

                Before the Battle of Kursk, we fought with old reserves, our universal cannons F-22 (if the name was not mistaken) were designed for World War I shells.
                Quote: chenia
                Britain in ideal conditions could prepare for war

                retroactively, it’s good to evaluate preparation now, and who told you that Britain was not ready for war, only the question: what kind of war should it be preparing for? Who then knew about the blitzkrieg? The Germans, for example, were also not ready for a war with the USSR, no, they were ready for a blitzkrieg, but it won out how it happened with a blitzkrieg. And the British and the French hoped to sit behind the Maginot line.
          3. tihonmarine 1 October 2019 11: 31 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            Quote: chenia
            Zhukov is guilty of the disaster 1941 g. and Simonov hung noodles about the unpreparedness of our industry,

            Even in a simple accident there is no one guilty, and you found here in an instant. More than 70 years have passed already, when the whole world studies and writes (although it is no longer necessary to write, the world does not write history, but what it needs). So you yourself will begin to delve into the editions, accessible documents and you will understand how many “black holes” and spots in the history of WWII. Here, at least for example (my opinion, but not general) Black spots 1. Why Lend-Lease more or less began to work fine with 1943 year. 2. Long delay with 2 front. 3. Casablanca Conference without our participation. 4. And last but not least, the Act of Unconditional Surrender of Germany. Everybody knows everything, read, saw, comprehended., But my opinion is that they are not negotiating something, and there are reasons for that.
            1. chenia 1 October 2019 15: 18 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: tihonmarine
              you are here in an instant found.


              Of course, he is not alone (Meretskova, by the way, was correctly pressed), but he is one of those who decided to write off their jambs to the top party leadership.
              The main cause of the disaster is the extremely low degree of BP in the Red Army. especially in technically equipped troops (aviation, BTV).
              And here the General Staff, the People’s Commissariat and the generals at the level of the commanding districts are also to blame.
              1. tihonmarine 1 October 2019 17: 27 New
                • 0
                • 0
                0
                Quote: chenia
                The main cause of the disaster is the extremely low degree of BP in the Red Army. especially in technically equipped troops (aviation, BTV).

                With this, it was still possible to fight and fight not bad, even commanding a platoon, I knew that I had retired, took up a position, dug in and was ready to repel the enemy. Well, the second time and the third, but on the fourth I will begin to advance. But I will not scrub. In the meantime, they give us pokes and fighters in their own skin will understand how to fight. Look deeper for the root; husk and dry leaves lie on the surface.
                1. chenia 1 October 2019 19: 05 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  You can’t fight with it at all. This showed the number of prisoners in 1941 (40% of the total, and this is for half a year) and the Moscow battle when the Germans were confronted by divisions (Siberian) with at least 4 months of training.
            2. Sugar Honeyovich 1 October 2019 16: 39 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Quote: tihonmarine
              1. Why Lend-Lease more or less began to work normally since 1943.

              Question No. 0: victory due to Lend-Lease or Lend-Lease due to victory?
              Quote: tihonmarine
              2. Long delay with a 2nd front.

              From there.
              1. naidas 1 October 2019 20: 44 New
                • 0
                • 3
                -3
                Quote: Sugar Honeyovich
                Question # 0

                Answer No. 0: getting nishtyakov and gingerbread. Hitler's factories and technologies, USSR goods. America money from Germany through neutral countries, help with Japan and payment for goods from the USSR.
                1. Pavel57 2 October 2019 10: 45 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  And the factories for the production of gasoline and the USSR received.))))
                  1. naidas 2 October 2019 22: 32 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: Pavel57
                    And the factories for the production of gasoline and the USSR received

                    There is a slight difference, as I suppose the USSR paid for its production of plants before the war (and did not fight the Americans), and the Americans carried out orders for Hitler in their factories during the war.
                    Yalomir Schacht in an interview with American doctor Gilbert during the Nuremberg trials will say: “If you want to indict industrialists who helped rearm Germany, then you must indict yourself. The Opel automobile plant, for example, did not produce anything other than military products. Your General Motors owned this plant ... As you know, the Nuremberg Tribunal found J. Mine not innocent.
    4. L-39NG 1 October 2019 10: 17 New
      • 9
      • 4
      +5
      "But the Americans and others in our situation would not have been able to cope." This is too categorical.
      Britain defended its freedom during the Battle of Britain. And it was in 1940, more precisely 13. 8. 1940-31. 10. 1940. During this time alone, the “invincible” luftwaffe lost more than 1800 aircraft and said goodbye to the halo of “invincible”.
      These circumstances forced the German high command to “postpone,” or rather abandon plans (operation Seelöwe) for the invasion of British territory.
      1. chenia 1 October 2019 15: 27 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        Quote: L-39NG
        Britain defended its freedom


        Bombs were dropped on Vietnam in more than WWII, NU AND !!!

        This is to the fact that you won’t win a war simply by bombing (I answered it just in case).

        Quote: L-39NG
        and said goodbye to the halo of the "invincible."


        So they could not get to Moscow, although the infantry stood at two tens of kilometers.
        1. Avior 1 October 2019 16: 24 New
          • 4
          • 1
          +3
          Tell the Serbs.
          If cities, ports and so on were bombed in Vietnam, like in WWII, Vietnam wouldn’t have to give up, just a Stone Age would have come.
          1. chenia 1 October 2019 18: 53 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            Tell the Germans.
            In 1944, the peak of German military production coincided with the peak of massive Allied bombing.
            And on the fronts?
            And if we exclude the betrayal of the generals (they clearly understood that they were clearly losing in the East and had already decided who to lie for) the Wehrmacht then in Normandy in 1944, Dunkirk would have happened again.
            And the Serbs can tell you that the military component, in a strange way, suffered little (which surprised the NATO members). And NATO (even if not all) fought against them with the connivance (or even betrayal) of that Russian government.
            And with some help, either Vietnam or Korea happens.
            These are the facts.
            1. Avior 1 October 2019 20: 06 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              In 1944, the peak of German military production coincided with the peak of massive Allied bombing.

              according to the plan, 1,5 thousand Tiger 2, released 0,5.
              An accident? I don’t think ....
              This is to the fact that you won’t win a war simply by bombing (I answered it just in case).

              Is that the Serbs?
              1. chenia 1 October 2019 21: 05 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                Quote: Avior
                Is that the Serbs?


                What about Israel? When the Soviet Union decided to get into the Arabs (although the fuck they were needed).
                Different weight categories and absolute superiority. Bind incorrectly ..
                And if without help, without options.
                It’s strange. You could have guessed it yourself.
          2. naidas 1 October 2019 20: 53 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Avior
            If cities, ports and so on were bombed in Vietnam,

            During 1965, massive bombing of the US Air Force took place on the territory of the DRV: railways and highways, civilian industrial facilities (including the construction of the first stage of a large thermal power plant in Wangby with the help of the USSR), there was also a targeted destruction of agricultural crops, that dumped chemicals. Large groups of US Air Force aircraft raided Hanoi. In addition, U.S. aircraft bombed dams on the Zyong River in the Dongan and Zialan area, and dropped 700 bombs on dams on the Tralee River.
            US Air Force General Curtis LeMay-My recipe for solving the problem is this: Tell them honestly that either they [the DRV government] will draw their horns and stop their aggression, or we will bomb them back into the Stone Age. And we will push them into the Stone Age not by land forces, but by our air or sea power.
      2. naidas 1 October 2019 20: 45 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: L-39NG
        "Battle of Britain"

        And how many German infantrymen died in this battle?
        Are you sure that you can capture territories with airplanes?
    5. Beringovsky 1 October 2019 10: 30 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      I totally agree.
      In general, it's time to raise the question differently. We had to fight not with Germany alone, but with almost all of Europe.
      The contribution of European countries was enormous; without it, Germany would have lost the war very quickly.
      It is necessary to calculate this contribution, then the story with the land lease will look in a completely different light.
    6. Alexey RA 1 October 2019 10: 53 New
      • 10
      • 4
      +6
      Quote: 210ox
      I do not want to either downplay or exaggerate the value of these supplies. I would have managed without them.

      Probably yes. But a lot of blood. For it would have been necessary to find somewhere 40% of the gunpowder (for 1944), half copper, half aluminum, all high-octane, all four-wheel drive trucks, as well as oil refineries, machine tools for tank and aircraft factories, equipment factories and much more about which usually amateurs forget to consider tanks and airplanes.
      Considering that even with Lend-Lease, the USSR’s mobility potential was practically exhausted by 1945 (it was difficult to replenish infantry divisions to 40-50% of the state for the assault on Berlin), without Lend-Lease the situation with infantry completeness would be even worse. And with the pace of the offensive, too.
      Buy the missing? Yes, the USSR can. But then the question arises - how to deliver?
      On the northern route, you need an escort, which in real life was provided by USN and RN. Our Federation Council, purely technically, cannot cover ships beyond the Bear’s meridian. Plus, the problem with the tonnage - the USSR simply does not have that many ships.
      On the southern route, you need to create a transport corridor through Iran from scratch. In real life, even the British could not cope with this - they had to first attract "cousins", and then generally transfer all the work to them. And again, the problem with the tonnage.
      On the Far East route, everything seems to be fine. It was only in real life that the USSR, having concentrated on the Far East the main forces of its merchant fleet, was able to lift only one third of the shipments with its tonnage. And another two-thirds went to ships received under Lend-Lease. And freight on the Far East is impossible - on the way to Vladivostok you need to go through Japanese waters, in which the ships under the flag of the Allies will simply be sunk.
      Quote: 210ox
      But the Americans and others in our situation would not have coped.

      You judge the then Americans through the prism of opinions about modern Americans. The then Yankees were quite on the level - and with heroism they were all right.
      1. naidas 1 October 2019 21: 24 New
        • 3
        • 4
        -1
        Quote: Alexey RA
        The then Yankees were quite on the level - and with heroism they were all right.

        Of course, the Senate Commission (1943) determined the patriotism of the Americans and the amount of US investment in Germany at $ 1 billion and the control of 278 German joint-stock companies.
        For example: Standard Oil regularly supplied the Hitler army with various fuels, and it supplied synthetic rubber and various raw materials to the industry. During World War II, not a single Standard Oil tanker was sunk by German submarines.
        -American "ITT" traded until the end of the war with Germany, Italy, Japan
        -The Opel automobile plant, for example, produced nothing but military products. It owned the General Motors plant.
        -GM and Ford, with the help of subsidiaries, controlled 70% of the German car market. Those companies “quickly retrofitted production to become suppliers of military equipment for the German army,” GM and Ford provided 90% of the armored 3-ton semi-trucks and more than 70% of medium and large Reich trucks.
        GE’s conspiracy with German steel company Krupp influenced US military efforts and brought it to a New York court. Hitler received 12 pounds of tungsten carbide for the same price as the US government paid for 1 pound.
        - Under the terms of cartel agreements, American firms had to inform their German partners of all the technical innovations of interest to them. So, the Bauschand Lomb company willingly provided Zeiss with US military secrets and only asked to keep all information secret.
        -Kodak is not only a film strip, there was also a cinema machine on every Luftwaffe fighter, which helped German pilots fix and further analyze the situation, but also set up the production of detonators
        -Coca-cola invented a new drink specifically for the Nazis: Fanta fruit soda.
        -IBM created machines to keep statistics on oil supplies, manage bank accounts and monitor train schedules for death camps.
        -The company Random House (American edition), part of Bertelsmann AG, was engaged in the publication of Nazi propaganda
        1. Pedrodepackes 2 October 2019 07: 59 New
          • 2
          • 2
          0
          Are you printing this nonsense again?
    7. Pedrodepackes 1 October 2019 11: 13 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      Quote: 210ox
      But the Americans and others in our situation would not have coped.

      they couldn’t have such a situation, at least geographically, the United Kingdom in the 40th year found itself in a similar situation, possibly even worse (the ground army is lost, the treasury is almost empty, against it, as the patriots love to write, ALL EUROPE and plus USSR) however survived.
  • Fitter65 1 October 2019 06: 32 New
    • 13
    • 3
    +10
    ... the same planes that were driven across Alaska and Siberia “on their own” are very often died just by drinking, both from our side and from the American. Well, due to weather conditions, of course.
    Well, because of the booze, according to Comrade. Shpakovsky, nevertheless, is much more likely than due to weather conditions, but due to technical malfunctions, not one has crashed, everything is drunk, everything is drunk ...
  • Pessimist22 1 October 2019 06: 33 New
    • 9
    • 1
    +8
    Thanks to the allies for deliveries.
  • svp67 1 October 2019 06: 58 New
    • 9
    • 3
    +6
    like the USSR, paid for Lend-Lease
    Mostly the blood, the blood of their soldiers and citizens. Saving the lives of soldiers of Britain and the USA, grinding the main forces of Germany on its territory
    1. Pedrodepackes 1 October 2019 11: 15 New
      • 4
      • 4
      0
      Quote: svp67
      Mostly the blood, the blood of their soldiers and citizens.

      and who are you blaming? The one who supplied or the one who ineptly disposed of the supplied equipment and materials?
      1. Kote Pan Kokhanka 1 October 2019 20: 42 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        And what about the accusations? This is a banal statement of facts!
        Read Roosevelt’s speech “On the fire hose” !!!
        1. Pedrodepackes 2 October 2019 07: 56 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka
          This is a banal statement of facts!

          what facts? Are we fighting for US interests? The Soviet people fought for the freedom and independence of their homeland, on their territory, giving millions of lives for it, and without Lend-Lease this blood would have been even greater. What does it have to do with it
          Quote: svp67
          USSR paid for land lease
          Mostly the blood, the blood of their soldiers and citizens.
      2. svp67 2 October 2019 06: 06 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: Pedrodepackes
        and who are you blaming?

        Adolf Hitler and the entire ideology of Nazism
        1. Pedrodepackes 2 October 2019 07: 57 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          Quote: svp67
          and who are you blaming?
          Adolf Hitler and the entire ideology of Nazism

          Well, where is Hitler with Nazism and where is the Lend-Lease?
          1. svp67 2 October 2019 11: 03 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            Quote: Pedrodepackes
            Well, where is Hitler with Nazism and where is the Lend-Lease?

            In this case, in Europe, from 1941 to 1945, they met
            1. Pedrodepackes 2 October 2019 11: 21 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: svp67
              ...they met

              Well, in principle, you are right, from opposite sides.
  • carstorm 11 1 October 2019 07: 18 New
    • 6
    • 4
    +2
    I never understood and never understand this topic at all. when the world war begins, one’s side will have to be taken sooner or later. and the bigger and stronger the state, the faster it needs to be done. to fight or to supply it does not matter. side must be taken. because at some point, interests overlap and they won’t help what could be fatal. and in the case of the states, this is a separate song. after the end of the second world states in one form or another, half of the world economy began to belong. Lend-Lease is primarily the development of the US economy. a country in the territory of which there were no military operations. a country in which all competitors were simply destroyed in some form or another. Pak Americana began in the year 45. damn on some military orders industry has grown 2.5 times since 40 years. there is no question of who and whom owes or owes anything in light of the fact that it is the Second World War and Lend-Lease itself that are the engines of the wild upsurge of the USA and its economy and what it is now.
    1. Krasnoyarsk 1 October 2019 08: 05 New
      • 8
      • 7
      +1
      Shpakovsky in his repertoire - speculation, insinuations, biased selection of facts, all readers of VO are stupid, narrow-minded people. There is nothing to comment on in this article - it’s empty like a donut hole, and in the previous one there are so many mistakes that its analysis would take more space than the article itself.
    2. Avior 1 October 2019 08: 18 New
      • 2
      • 7
      -5
      when the world war begins, one’s side will have to be taken sooner or later.

      And which side did the USSR take in 1939?
      1. carstorm 11 1 October 2019 08: 32 New
        • 8
        • 1
        +7
        his own. and only his own. there could not be another.
        1. Avior 1 October 2019 09: 04 New
          • 4
          • 3
          +1
          And the Americans, it turns out ours.
          If they had accepted theirs, then no Lend-Lease would already exist in 1943.
          Like Soviet soldiers in Europe.
          And there would be a bloodless war of the USSR.
          1. carstorm 11 1 October 2019 09: 48 New
            • 5
            • 3
            +2
            and what does it change? They chose the side of the winner and this is right for them. the only thing is that this is an ordinary business project in which there was a benefit for them. I do not say that it is good or bad. it just is. and I don’t think it’s right to consider land-lease assistance. it is a business and only a business that has developed in certain circumstances. even sooner an investment. competitors are being destroyed in the world, their industry is rising. everything turned out as it happened.
            1. Avior 1 October 2019 10: 08 New
              • 5
              • 3
              +2
              more - what's the business?
              give away goods for huge amounts for free?
              and how did they guess in 1941 who would be the winner in 1945?
              even if you guessed it, what was the point of helping the USSR defeat the Germans faster? on the contrary, logically they had to drag out the maximum so that the Germans and the USSR would weaken each other as much as possible.
              1. naidas 1 October 2019 21: 29 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                Quote: Avior
                logically, they had to drag out the maximum, so that the Germans and the USSR would weaken each other as much as possible.

                So it was.
                1. Avior 1 October 2019 22: 37 New
                  • 2
                  • 0
                  +2
                  yeah. only Lend-Lease assistance grew every year
                  1. naidas 2 October 2019 22: 23 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    Quote: Avior
                    only Lend-Lease assistance grew every year

                    still, after the Battle of Stalingrad had happened, the winner and the loser became obvious. Would you start to invest heavily as before in a bankrupt? (Especially the cream was collected). But the USSR could be heated, which they did, and even demanded money for goods .
            2. Alexey RA 1 October 2019 10: 58 New
              • 9
              • 4
              +5
              Quote: carstorm 11
              and what does it change? chose the side of the winner and this is right for them

              Yeah ... in the fall of 1941, the USSR was simply a clear winner.
              Quote: carstorm 11
              and I don’t think it’s right to consider land-lease assistance. it is a business and only a business that has developed in certain circumstances.

              A cool business is to help a country for free, which is also your main competitor. smile
              1. strannik1985 1 October 2019 15: 47 New
                • 1
                • 1
                0
                Why did someone decide that the USSR is the winner according to the plans of the Allies and the USA in particular? We recall the words of Truman's opponents (and the Third Reich is the undoubted geopolitical opponent of the United States) exterminating each other, giving the Americans time to deploy and train a mass land army. If the Reich defeats the USSR in 1941-1942, this will mean the collapse of American claims to supremacy in Europe; without a vacuum cleaner on the Eastern Front, the landing has no prospects.
                1. Avior 1 October 2019 16: 25 New
                  • 3
                  • 1
                  +2
                  Truman in 1941, nobody called him anything, he did not decide.
                  1. strannik1985 1 October 2019 21: 22 New
                    • 2
                    • 0
                    +2
                    He only expressed the opinion of the American political elite. Helping Germany at that time against all logic.
                    1. Avior 1 October 2019 22: 39 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      no, he said that if the USSR were to win, Germany should be helped, if Germany was the USSR. And let them exterminate each other.
                      USSR help in 1943 for the United States, also against any logic
                      1. strannik1985 2 October 2019 04: 44 New
                        • 2
                        • 0
                        +2
                        And then he added that in any case, he would not want Germany to win, that is, Germany was considered stronger than the USSR, and in fact this is still relevant in 1943.
                      2. Avior 2 October 2019 07: 31 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        But he did not say that he would like to see Stalin in the victors.
                        But in reality, US assistance did not fit into this concept.
                      3. strannik1985 4 October 2019 04: 46 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Because the USSR at that time was weaker, it was trite mistake in the pace of economic recovery after the war.
                2. tlauicol 2 October 2019 03: 33 New
                  • 3
                  • 0
                  +3
                  what about ending truman's quote?
                  "and let them kill each other as much as possible, although I do not want under any circumstances to see Hitler in the winners."
  • Maki Avellevich 1 October 2019 08: 37 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Quote: carstorm 11
    I never understood and never understand this topic at all. when the world war begins, one’s side will have to be taken sooner or later. and the bigger and stronger the state, the faster it needs to be done. to fight or to supply it does not matter.

    Imagine that your ally in the war is at the same time a potential adversary for you in the future.
    Is there any reason for this ally to win the war in a place with you but as bloodless as possible?
    of course cynical but in reality so many people play
  • tlauicol 1 October 2019 07: 35 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Learn the story about the purchase of free Aerocobra from the link - this is something of course. I have been looking for the answer to this question for a long time: where did the citizens get that kind of money and where did they go?
    1. Avior 1 October 2019 08: 17 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      In the link, by the way, there is no explanation where the money came from.
      Even 121 thousand with a salary of 400-600 rubles, a considerable amount.
      1. Town Hall 1 October 2019 08: 35 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Quote: Avior
        In the link, by the way, there is no explanation where the money came from.
        Even 121 thousand with a salary of 400-600 rubles, a considerable amount.

        "Was there a boy" (c)
        1. Avior 1 October 2019 08: 56 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          It cannot be ruled out either.
          Although it may have been.
          I had to read how this could be done.
          During the war there was a big difference between government prices and market prices, inflation was huge.
          Moreover, there were even commercial stores, like ours in the 80s, at very different prices.
          On the collective farm they wrote out some grain or other liquid products, paid for it at the state price, and sold it at the market price.
          And it was not just about grain.
          A three-liter jar of honey in the market could reach up to 1000 rubles.
          The difference with the state price was huge.
          So the possibility of relatively lawfully obtaining such an amount was, in principle.
          But not for everyone, essno.
          1. Town Hall 1 October 2019 09: 03 New
            • 1
            • 4
            -3
            It’s possible to collect the amount with a stretch. Buying a plane from the state that the state got for free in order to give it to the state again is very similar to an advertisement from the Citizens series, buy bonds of the State Loan
            1. Avior 1 October 2019 09: 31 New
              • 3
              • 1
              +2
              No, of course, it was impossible to buy.
              Yes, and it is unrealistic to collect the amount - what I wrote above was done for a specific action to “buy” a tank or aircraft.
              There was another option for individual farmers - the same beekeeper, for example, could not be a collective farmer, but an individual farmer, such were also.
              But the taxes on them were so high that it was rather difficult to believe in the collected amount.
              In any case, as a mass phenomenon.
              But the fact that from above one way or another they “pushed” under a specific action of propaganda is quite possible.
          2. Olgovich 1 October 2019 09: 34 New
            • 2
            • 6
            -4
            Quote: Avior
            On the collective farm they wrote out some grain or other liquid products, paid for it at the state price, and sold it at the market price.
            And it was not just about grain.
            A three-liter jar of honey in the market could reach up to 1000 rubles.
            The difference with the state price was huge.
            So the possibility of relatively lawfully obtaining such an amount was, in principle.
            But not for everyone, essno.

            The topic has been discussed more than once: naturally, no one could buy anything on a wage.
            The most famous case-beekeeper sold a barrel of honey in the market and bought .... an airplane
            1. Alexey RA 1 October 2019 11: 15 New
              • 6
              • 0
              +6
              Quote: Olgovich
              The most famous case-beekeeper sold a barrel of honey in the market and bought .... an airplane

              Ferapont Golovaty. In 1942, he sold 200 kg of honey in Saratov, contributed 100 rubles to the Defense Fund, and thus bought the Yak-000. In 1, the family raised another 1944 rubles - and bought a second fighter, the Yak-100.
              To the question "where does the collective farmer get so much honey":
              Two daughters are working with me on the collective farm, daughter-in-law and brother. We have earned over a thousand workdays over the past year. For the triple overfulfillment of the honey collection plan, I, as a collective farm beekeeper, received a lot of honey as an additional payment. All this earned by the intense collective farm labor I contribute to the construction of a new aircraft.
              1. Olgovich 1 October 2019 11: 26 New
                • 3
                • 5
                -2
                Quote: Alexey RA
                To the question "where does the collective farmer get so much honey"

                200kg for an apiary is a bit. But he was on the market, fabulous money
                1. Beringovsky 1 October 2019 13: 20 New
                  • 2
                  • 2
                  0
                  Olgovich
                  200kg for an apiary is a bit. But he was on the market, fabulous money

                  You want to say that in the Stalinist USSR any person could earn fabulously openly and legally fabulous money ?! Entrepreneurship ?! But what about the fists, the NKVD, repression, the fight against speculators ...
                  Olgovich, I will not recognize you belay
                  1. Olgovich 2 October 2019 11: 01 New
                    • 2
                    • 2
                    0
                    Quote: Beringovsky
                    You want to say that in the Stalinist USSR any person could earn fabulously openly and legally fabulous money ?!

                    On the plane, they made money. And no more ...
              2. Avior 1 October 2019 16: 32 New
                • 1
                • 1
                0
                This is a retelling of the official version. It was necessary for the people to explain where the collective farmer got so much money.
                Other farmers also gave honey barrels to workdays? Or strictly to him under the propaganda action?
                5 people, 1000 workdays.
                200 per year per person.
                Not a little, but not a lot. When working six days should get about 300 working days per year.
                1. Alexey RA 1 October 2019 18: 03 New
                  • 3
                  • 0
                  +3
                  Quote: Avior
                  This is a retelling of the official version. It was necessary for the people to explain where the collective farmer got so much money.
                  Other farmers also gave honey barrels to workdays? Or strictly to him under the propaganda action?

                  Let's just say, the beekeeper in the village at that time was akin to a highly skilled specialist in industry in the late 30s (the ones that are). Could simple collective farmer allow yourself this:
                  by the second half of the 30s, the farm had two cows and 22 hives

                  They couldn’t let Ferapont go even by the stage: arrest, 10 months in prison - and back to his village.
                  However, judging by the official version, there was a lot of propaganda there, starting with the organization of the sale of honey and direct access to Israel by Solomonovich Levin.
          3. tlauicol 1 October 2019 09: 37 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            Who could buy a can of honey for 10 salaries? Or a scarf? Especially in five minutes in the village?
            1. Avior 1 October 2019 10: 04 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              There were probably categories like that.
              The military, for example, had large payments for downed planes and more.
              Most did not receive them, they went to the account, but some still snatched it, sent it home.
              Salaries were then about 400 rubles, but in the village they were not practically at all, they were given products, and by no means always liquid.
              It is clear that campaigning is simple with a scarf.
  • rocket757 1 October 2019 07: 43 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    What was, it was !!! Neither forget nor belittle anything! It is unworthy and harmful to history.
  • nivander 1 October 2019 08: 05 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    not for "commoners"
  • Plantagenet 1 October 2019 08: 23 New
    • 9
    • 0
    +9
    “I must say that since the second half of the 42 year, food has improved: the Americans began to send food, and a stew appeared in the dining room on Ilyinka. That's what the American stew saved us then! After the baland and millet porridge - stew, heavenly bliss! They called her “Second front”: after all, neither in the 42, nor in the 43 were the allies even opened the second front, which we were all waiting for - so, but at least we had an American food supply. I felt that I had the strength I am increasing every day; although I was thin as a skeleton, I began to appear on my cheeks there is a blush - the young body took its toll. Of course, all the same, there wasn’t enough food, malnutrition was constant, but there was already a turning point for the better. "

    Georgy Ilyich Mirsky “Life in three eras”
    1. Beringovsky 1 October 2019 09: 51 New
      • 5
      • 4
      +1
      That's what saved us then - American stew!

      Maybe Mirsky was personally lucky. Only in the "common cauldron" of this stew was almost not noticeable. My grandfather received two cans during the whole war. And that’s all.
      It's simple, 600 thousand tons is about 2 grams per day per person. You will earn a lot on this, will you fight?
      1. Alexey RA 1 October 2019 11: 24 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        Quote: Beringovsky
        It's simple, 600 thousand tons is about 2 grams per day per person. You will earn a lot on this, will you fight?

        About 240 thousand tons were delivered stews. Daily rate of delivery: 150 grams of meat or 112 grams of stew. A total of 2 142 857 142 daily rates were set. Based on the calculation of the 1418 days of the war, the “second front” could daily replace domestic meat for 1 troops.
        1. Beringovsky 1 October 2019 13: 34 New
          • 3
          • 5
          -2
          Based on the calculation of the 1418 days of the war, the “second front” could daily replace domestic meat for 1 troops.

          And what else to feed the holy spirit, or what? Let's count the whole composition and it will turn out already at 15 grams per Red Army man. But besides half a tablespoon of stew a day it would be nice to eat something else, wouldn't it?
          And why should you count solely on the army, forgetting about the rest? Those who worked in the rear did not have to feed or what? Explain.
          And at the same time, we will calculate the contribution of the German allies to the provision of food for the soldiers of the Reich and think - and how much would Germany have fought without it?
          1. Alexey RA 1 October 2019 16: 27 New
            • 6
            • 1
            +5
            Quote: Beringovsky
            And what else to feed the holy spirit, or what? Let's count the whole composition and it will turn out already at 15 grams per Red Army man. But besides half a tablespoon of stew a day it would be nice to eat something else, wouldn't it?

            That is, the United States had to feed the entire Red Army? belay
            Lend-lease deliveries removed a quarter of the army’s meat supply from the neck of our agricultural food industry - this is already good.
            Quote: Beringovsky
            And at the same time, we will calculate the contribution of the German allies to the provision of products for the soldiers of the Reich

            And let's count.
            In particular, from the USSR, in any situation and any mood of the local population, it is expected to receive 2.5 million tons of grain, which the USSR promised Germany from the 1941 harvest and which are already included in the Reich's food balance (without them in any way), 3 million tons of grain per army food (if you drag it from the Reich, there is not enough rail capacity) and about 2 million tons more for Germany’s obligations to Romania, Hungary and others. Total approximately 8 million tons of grain.
            © D. Shein.
            The allies of the Reich themselves ate around Germany. Moreover, so that the Reich did not find food to lure Spain to its side - for one of the main conditions for its entry into the war was Germany's substitution of food imports from America. Franco, who was already insecure in his chair (for the Reds he was a strangler of the republic, for part of the Phalanx - a filthy liberal), was not going to wait for the hunger riots as well.
  • Avior 1 October 2019 08: 23 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    I would like to slightly correct the author.
    At the time of the outbreak of the war, the price of gold was about $ 1 per gram (about $ 30 per troy ounce), the US Lend-Lease in the USSR amounted to $ 11 billion (it was also the opposite. For $ 2 million), that is, 11 tons of gold.
    At the beginning of the war, the global gold reserve was only 25 tons ....
  • 3x3zsave 1 October 2019 08: 30 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Colleagues nevertheless remember the saying: "Empty flight is a loss to the country!" And it became interesting to me, but what, did the convoys go empty back?
    1. Avior 1 October 2019 08: 58 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      As a rule with ballast with ballast, sometimes with goods for sale. After all, foreign trade was independent of lend-lease, and the USSR sold goods to the States.
      There was very little reverse Lend-Lease yet, mostly ore.
      1. 3x3zsave 1 October 2019 09: 07 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Thank you!
        Can you tell me where you can get more detailed information? hi
        I read about foreign trade, but there is no reverse lend-lease.
        1. Avior 1 October 2019 09: 25 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          I once saw an article on this topic for a long time, but due to the insignificance of volumes, they are usually not very interested in it, they just write about 2 million rubles about the supply of ore and other materials and services (ship repair, possibly).
          1. bubalik 1 October 2019 09: 41 New
            • 4
            • 0
            +4
            Avior (Sergey) Today, 10: 25
            3x3zsave (Anton)
            hi
            ,,, yes, little is written about this.
            In the order of return (reciprocal) supplies, the Soviet Union shipped 300 thousand tons of chrome ore, 32 thousand tons of manganese ore, a large amount of platinum, gold, wood, furs and other goods totaling 2,2 million to the United States. The USSR also provided the Americans a number of services, in particular, opened its northern ports, took on partial support for the allied forces in Iran.

            ,,,, US Secretary of Commerce J. Jones:
            “By deliveries from the USSR, we not only returned our money, but also made a profit, which was far from a frequent case in trade relations regulated by our state”
            1. Avior 1 October 2019 09: 47 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              What is your quote about? about regular trading or reverse lease?
              these are two big differences
              1. bubalik 1 October 2019 09: 53 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                ,,, I won’t lie, I don’t know request but most likely in the framework of trade relations?
                1. Avior 1 October 2019 10: 18 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  far from a frequent case in trade relations

                  I think so.
                  that is not a land lease.
          2. 3x3zsave 1 October 2019 09: 44 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            When it comes to Lend-Lease, the phrase “supply volumes” is always used. However, $ 2 million tanks are not comparable with ore for the same amount in terms of tonnage. What’s called: what will we count, in boas or parrots?
            1. bubalik 1 October 2019 09: 49 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              ,,, so what to compare sad
              In 1947, the United States valued the USSR’s debt for deliveries of $ 2,6 billion, but a year later, the amount was reduced to $ 1,3 billion. ,,, and the USSR’s supplies of $ 2,2 million.
              1. Avior 1 October 2019 09: 59 New
                • 3
                • 0
                +3
                this is not for the deliveries themselves, but for that part of the Lend-Lease that the USSR wanted to keep, and not return to the Americans after the war.
            2. Avior 1 October 2019 09: 54 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Moreover, I’m not sure that the tanks and ore were carried by the same ships.
              And what to consider? If the volume of reverse lend-lease is such a small number of maols, anyone is interested in understanding the details.
              If loading ships on return trips, then most went empty, with ballast.
              If you want exactly in numbers, then you need to dig very deeply on trade; it is known that they sold, for example, in the USA during the war, furs, caviar and some other luxury goods.
              But they will load the ship scantily.
              But part of the ore, for example, could be sold, or timber, or some other dimensional materials. Then the ship can be loaded ...
              But articles on trade are much less than on land lease.
              Many do not know at all what it was and all deliveries attribute the reverse Lend-Lease.
              1. tlauicol 1 October 2019 10: 25 New
                • 2
                • 2
                0
                100 tons of ore and 100 tons of tanks, machine tools or radio stations are two different things. Then 40-50 g of metal will come out of a ton of ore, the Yanks themselves must still process it by building factories, and send the extracted metal back with armor, shells or microcircuits. Transportation is also at their expense. There reverse some pennies
                1. 3x3zsave 1 October 2019 11: 00 New
                  • 1
                  • 1
                  0
                  Ivan, hi my question was purely academic in nature, without any economic, political, surrealistic, exestential (necessary substitute) background. The indicated by you is obvious and does not meet with objections from my side.
                2. Mordvin 3 1 October 2019 11: 33 New
                  • 1
                  • 1
                  0
                  Quote: Tlauicol
                  Transportation is also at their expense.

                  And I came across such infa. The Americans counted everything exported and brought in at their ports. Those. if the Germans drowned something along the way to the USSR, then the Americans considered the goods sent and payable, and if the Germans drowned our goods, they did not count. I don’t know how true it is, but if so, then they are still scammers.
                  1. Avior 1 October 2019 16: 40 New
                    • 1
                    • 1
                    0
                    No, they thought only that they brought it. Delivery was on them.
                    but there were not as many losses as it seems.
                    According to the Arctic convoys, the losses were big.
                    But through Iran and the Far East - and this is three quarters of the supply - the losses were small.
                    1. Mordvin 3 1 October 2019 16: 48 New
                      • 2
                      • 0
                      +2
                      Quote: Avior
                      No, they thought only that they brought it. Delivery was on them.

                      Perhaps I did not check this info, I just got on one site, and there is enough garbage on the Internet.
                      1. Avior 1 October 2019 17: 28 New
                        • 3
                        • 0
                        +3
                        yes, this is almost as widespread as the allegation that Lend-Lease during the war was paid in gold.
            3. bubalik 1 October 2019 11: 54 New
              • 5
              • 0
              +5
              Anton, there is such information. hi






              1. bubalik 1 October 2019 12: 04 New
                • 4
                • 0
                +4
                ,,, but for export




                1. bubalik 1 October 2019 12: 17 New
                  • 5
                  • 0
                  +5
                  ,, but that was taken directly to the United States.




                  1. bubalik 1 October 2019 13: 22 New
                    • 4
                    • 0
                    +4
                    ,,, supplies to Britain.






                    Archive: RSAE F.413, Op.12, D.9539, L.1-51
                  2. 3x3zsave 1 October 2019 13: 23 New
                    • 2
                    • 0
                    +2
                    Thank you, Sergey! Source - "Handbook of Foreign Economic Operations for 1941-45."?
                    1. bubalik 1 October 2019 13: 39 New
                      • 3
                      • 0
                      +3
                      3x3zsave (Anton) Today, 14: 23
                      ,, yeah wink
                      I read a book - she is a reliable friend!
                      I want to find the answer to the questions.
                      I want to find the answers.
                      1. 3x3zsave 1 October 2019 14: 00 New
                        • 2
                        • 0
                        +2
                        "The encyclopedia lies like a gray gelding,
                        I read it enthusiastically
                        Encyclopedia is lying, and I believed her, believed
                        And everything that was stated there, I considered the truth. "(C) laughing
                      2. bubalik 1 October 2019 14: 16 New
                        • 3
                        • 0
                        +3
                        And we are told that the leg is shorter than the hypotenuse,
                        And I tell you - enough, I'm tired of this burden.
                        smile
                      3. 3x3zsave 1 October 2019 14: 22 New
                        • 2
                        • 1
                        +1
                        "How to drown a dog,
                        Sometimes the tank stop
                        Learn at school, learn at school, learn at school! "
                2. bubalik 1 October 2019 17: 18 New
                  • 2
                  • 0
                  +2
                  ,,, with furs is more or less clear, but where did the USSR export so much tobacco to from the USA what
                  1. 3x3zsave 1 October 2019 17: 33 New
                    • 3
                    • 1
                    +2
                    See the movie "Jack Vosmerkin - American" laughing
                  2. bubalik 1 October 2019 17: 48 New
                    • 2
                    • 0
                    +2
                    3x3zsave
                    Today, 18: 33
                    laughing set off good
                3. Alex013 1 October 2019 18: 15 New
                  • 3
                  • 0
                  +3
                  Sergey, thanks for the information, interesting. And about tobacco - Central Asia, probably, and now they are growing high-quality in Kyrgyzstan.
                4. 3x3zsave 1 October 2019 18: 52 New
                  • 3
                  • 0
                  +3
                  In those years - mainly, Azerbaijan.
                5. Alex013 1 October 2019 19: 03 New
                  • 3
                  • 0
                  +3
                  Most likely it is. A shag and in the Middle lane and in the Volga region, but this is a little different
  • bubalik 1 October 2019 12: 54 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    what shall we consider

    And in parrots I’m much longer (C)laughing
  • The comment was deleted.
  • hohol95 1 October 2019 10: 22 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    But on this question then this and only the most general information - strategic materials and raw materials were brought back. Forest and gold.
    And the role of Great Britain is incomprehensible. The equipment supplied by the British was also supplied according to the rules of Lend-Lease?
    1. Cartalon 1 October 2019 14: 01 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      It seems like the article says by what rules shipments were made from the UK
      1. hohol95 1 October 2019 16: 09 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        I became completely inattentive! hi
  • sergo1914 1 October 2019 08: 31 New
    • 22
    • 3
    +19
    That's honest. No humorous programs are needed to cheer up in the morning. There is a respected author who does not let you get bored. To begin with, the author’s surprising position was amusing: “here is a lease-lease, there is not a lend-lease”. Feels old school. But still simple. There is the United States Protection Act, enacted by the US Congress on March 11, 1941. There, in black and white: conditions:
    - delivered materials (cars, various military equipment, weapons, raw materials, other items),
    destroyed, lost and used during the war are not payable (article 5);
    - property transferred under Lend-Lease, remaining after the end of the war and suitable for
    civilian purposes, will be paid in full or in part on the basis of those provided by the United
    States long-term loans (mainly interest-free loans);
    - in case of interest of the American side, not destroyed and not lost equipment and
    equipment must be returned after the war in the USA.
    Still simple. But the readers are dumb. And so it goes.
    And since the respected public reading VO usually does not bother reading such publications as Voprosy istorii, USA and Canada, History of the Russian State and Law, Homeland, and VIZH, I highly recommended to read the material from here.

    But we are not touchy. Where can we ... in the Kalashny row.
    Well, the cherry on the cake.
    GREAT BUT AN INTEGRABLE HISTORY OF EVERYTHING AND EVERYTHING in his article leads a funny photo


    With signature
    Unloading Matilda tanks in the port of Arkhangelsk

    A dumb reader wrinkles his forehead and thinks tightly of where he saw this photograph. No, we didn’t read “USA and Canada,” but ...
    Oh you mother honest !!!
    Taylor (Lt), War Office official photographer - this is photograph H 14786 from the
    collections of the Imperial War Museums.
    British Tanks 1939-45 Matilda tanks being loaded onto ships at Liverpool docks for shipment
    to the Soviet Union, October 17, 1941.



    And then the dumb reader recalls that in serious work it is customary to identify the materials used. Name. Where is the picture taken. Who took the picture. When. Link to the source. But why? We will gobble it up anyway.
    PS All other materials of the author are also reliable?
    1. Avior 1 October 2019 09: 01 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      From the photo it’s clear, loading British tanks in the USSR, and not unloading.
      And what about the first part of the author’s wrong, didn’t understand?
    2. Vikxnumx 1 October 2019 12: 02 New
      • 5
      • 4
      +1
      And the author put the supplies from the USA to Germany out of brackets ...
    3. Kenxnumx 1 October 2019 18: 38 New
      • 5
      • 3
      +2
      Your nitpicking is funny. Perhaps the caliber did something for you personally - you should not transfer it to the forum, for which the caliber is of great value. Yes photo - loading in Liverpool on the PQ-2, which unloaded in Arkhangelsk and what. A sufficiently large number of resources refers to this photo precisely as unloading in Arkhangelsk, and if the caliber was mistaken, it was in good faith, and did not want to mislead you. And about the fact that Lendliz needs to be clearly distinguished from purchases - the caliber is right. In Britain, the equipment was actually PURCHASED
    4. Alceers 2 October 2019 08: 19 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Quote: sergo1914
      PS All other materials of the author are also reliable?

      No, they are all of the same quality. Evil ... the reality of the aged weather vane of the anti-communist, Russophobe and Hitlerophile.
  • dimasik-nl 1 October 2019 09: 04 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    And now we are waiting for an article from the author, how the USSR helped Britain and the United States survive by defeating the Nazis with the help of lend-lease.
    1. Kenxnumx 1 October 2019 18: 39 New
      • 4
      • 2
      +2
      This does not negate the fact that Lendlis decided on the supply of the Red Army. USSR victory alone is extremely doubtful
  • Operator 1 October 2019 09: 13 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    The most interesting thing about Lendlis is the volume of deliveries during the most crucial and at the same time the most uncertain period of the 1941-42 years, and not starting from January 1943 of the year (liquidation of the Stalingrad boiler), when it became clear whose victory would end the war.
    1. Avior 1 October 2019 09: 19 New
      • 5
      • 3
      +2
      German industry until 1943 worked in peacetime, as if there was no war.
      And only after Goebbels talk in the Berlin gym about the total war stirred.
      So Hitler had more than reserves, there was no predetermination after Stalingrad.
      Not to mention how much longer this could go on.
      1. Beringovsky 1 October 2019 10: 47 New
        • 7
        • 2
        +5
        German industry until 1943 worked in peacetime, as if there was no war.

        This is absolutely untrue, that is, a lie.
        The economy of a country waging such a war simply cannot operate in a "peacetime regime."
        It is not simple lieThis is an absurd, absolutely stupid lie.
        PS In addition, almost the whole of Europe worked for the German war machine (except for Great Britain, of course)
        1. Avior 1 October 2019 11: 20 New
          • 4
          • 2
          +2
          Yes, it shouldn’t.
          however, that is exactly what worked.
          it was on this that the support of Hitler by the Germans rested; war did not affect Germany.
          The Germans still needed to be convinced that they needed restrictions, due to the fact that the war was going on.
          Goebbels did just that.
          Total war is the requirement of the moment. We must put an end to the bourgeois attitude that we have so often seen in this war: wash my back, but so as not to wet me! ... We are in great danger. And the efforts with which we will meet her must be equally gigantic. The time has come to take off the like gloves and use our fists .... We can no longer use our military potential at home and in that significant part of Europe that we control with carelessness and not at full strength. We must use all our resources, and as quickly and carefully as possible from an organizational and practical point of view.

          We do not intend to weaken the military potential of Germany by measures that maintain a high, almost like in peacetime, standard of living for a particular class, and thereby endanger our military economy. We voluntarily give up a large part of our standard of living in order to strengthen our war effort as quickly and thoroughly as possible. This is not an end in itself, but a means to an end. After the war, our social standard of living will be even higher. ... events have shown that we need to work much more than we have worked so far to finally turn the war in the east in our favor.

          So, for example, it is unacceptable that some men and women spend weeks relaxing at resorts and sanatoriums, taking away places from soldiers on dismissal or from workers entitled to leave after a year of hard work. This is unacceptable, and this must be put to an end. War is not a time for entertainment. Until it ends, we will find the deepest satisfaction in work and battle. Those who do not understand this themselves must be taught to understand this, and if necessary, forced to. For this, the toughest measures may be required.

          For example, it doesn’t look very beautiful when we pay great attention to propagating the theme “Wheels must spin for victory!”, And as a result, people refrain from unnecessary trips just to see how unemployed pleasure seekers get more space on trains . The railway serves to transport military goods, as well as people involved in military affairs. Only those who need a break from hard work deserve a vacation.

          Speech delivered at the Berlin Sports Palace on February 18, 1943. The reaction to Stalingrad.
          After the Germans got there in the face, the Nazi elite realized that it was time to close nightclubs. But the Germans themselves still needed to be convinced of this ....
          1. Beringovsky 1 October 2019 14: 00 New
            • 7
            • 0
            +7
            You confuse propaganda with reality.
            When a country, instead of personal cars, washing machines and pots with pans, produces tanks, planes, shells and other things in huge numbers, this is not a “peace time regime”.
            When a country sends ten million men to the trenches, feeds, dresses, shoes, treats, etc. - This is not a "peacetime regime."
            And night clubs are like that, a trifle. In the USSR, movies in clubs were also played, and even comedies from peacetime. So what?
            1. Avior 1 October 2019 16: 42 New
              • 2
              • 1
              +1
              And who said that instead?
              Instead, they began to do this only in 1943, after Stalingrad
    2. Kenxnumx 1 October 2019 19: 48 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Here you are wrong. In 1941- early 42gg, the Red Army had very considerable reserves, including in the rear districts and still huge mobile reserves. But from 42-43, when German industry got on a war footing, we needed the very machines, materials, refineries, technologies, etc., to withstand the growing industry of Germany
      1. Operator 1 October 2019 20: 11 New
        • 3
        • 2
        +1
        Even if the Red Army had any reserves in the rear districts, the planned procedure for its supply explicitly provided, incl. supplies of equipment and ammunition from the industry, which was partially lost in 1941-42, partially got on wheels, partially deployed in unsuitable places, and only the rest of the planned output of the necessary products.

        It was then that Lendlis was needed, which was not there. Even you were forced to point out that the pre-war reserves of the USSR were exhausted at the beginning of the 1942, which coincided with the occupation of the Lower Volga and the North Caucasus by the Wehrmacht, the destruction of the Stalingrad industrial center and the end of the year of the lend-lease along the most efficient Arctic route.
        1. Kenxnumx 1 October 2019 20: 19 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          And by the way in 1942 they put quite a lot as much as they could.

          But the Arctic route was not the most effective, both in weather conditions and in terms of counteraction.
          1. The Far East (via Vladivostok) - 8 tons (244%);
          2. The Persian Gulf (through Iran) - 4 160 000 tons (23,8%);
          3. Northern Russia (via Murmansk) - 3 tons (964%);
          4. The Soviet North - 681 tons (000%);
          5. The Soviet Arctic - 452 tons (000%).
    3. voyaka uh 2 October 2019 22: 06 New
      • 3
      • 5
      -2
      The British tanks arrived just in time: by the start of the counterattack near Moscow.
      And they made up a significant part of the tanks of the Red Army.
      After all, the factories transferred to the Urals have not yet had time to restart the production of tanks.
      And the first British fighters joined the Soviet air defense in early 1942.
  • Olgovich 1 October 2019 09: 56 New
    • 4
    • 3
    +1
    it would seem that here is a simple afrimetic at the kindergarten level: Pinocchio had two apples, Pierrot gave him two more. And that will be? There will be EXACTLY HALF, but not a third of this total number of apples. Because two and two are FOUR! So with the supplies! And it is obvious that according to a number of indicators, if we compare what was produced during the war years and delivered, we will have 50 percent or more. But our people are cunning, they add up the supply data with what has been produced, and are looking for interest on this total amount. The result is a third!

    the fact is that Pierrot gave ONE apple to two Pinocchio: supplies of gunpowders amounted to only 50% of one hundred percent produced in the USSR. Those. THIRD of used.

    accordingly, only every THIRD shot was imported, and not every second, as the author mistakenly claimed in the first article.

    This is just arithmetic.

    There is, however, an addition: not only ready-made gunpowders were supplied according to Lendlis, but also COMPONENTS of gunpowders: alcohol, glycerin, centralizer, etc. part of the Soviet-made gunpowders were made on imported raw materials.
    1. Avior 1 October 2019 10: 16 New
      • 5
      • 2
      +3
      Remember how Marshak’s story ended with a nail missing from the forge?
      There was no nail -
      Horseshoe

      Gone.


      There was no horseshoe -
      Horse

      I was limping.


      The horse limped -
      Commander
      Killed.

      The cavalry is defeated -
      Army
      Running

      The enemy enters the city,
      Captive not sparing
      Because in the forge
      There was no nail.

      Lend-lease primarily provided the problem areas of Soviet industry - all sorts of relatively inexpensive components in total cost that the Soviet industry, which was undergoing evacuation, could not master.
      Some write that almost all Soviet explosives of the times won were made using various imported components.
      I don’t know, however, it is all that significant part for sure. And so on many points.
    2. Pedrodepackes 1 October 2019 11: 37 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Olgovich
      There is, however, an addition:

      there is another addition to the supplied equipment was ammunition in the form of equipped ammunition and shells, also a significant part of the supplies.
    3. Alexey RA 1 October 2019 12: 01 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      Quote: Olgovich
      the fact is that Pierrot gave ONE apple to two Pinocchio apples: the supply of gunpowders amounted to only 50% of the hundred percent produced in the USSR. Those. THIRD of used.

      Not everything is so simple. ©
      The fact of the matter is that in calculating deliveries on Lend-Lease, we just liked to take not purely Soviet production, but the total volume as the reference base (100%) produced and received THE USSR. Which summarized, including Lend-Lease.
      Agree that the phrase "the share of Lend-Lease aluminum from the total amount of aluminum produced and obtained by the USSR was 55%"from the point of view of propaganda it looks much better than the phrase"under Lend-Lease the USSR received 1,2 times more aluminum than it produced itself". Despite the fact that the absolute numbers in the first and second case are the same.
      In short, our secretary general came to the finish line among the leaders, and the president of the USA - the penultimate smile
      1. Foul skeptic 1 October 2019 17: 13 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        The fact of the matter is that in calculating Lend-Lease deliveries, we just liked to take not purely Soviet production, but the total volume of the USSR produced and received as the reference base (100%).

        Because the total amount produced and received is the amount available. Namely, such a criterion for statistical accounting makes sense. Therefore, such a principle (quotient from the general) was used not only for Lend-Lease accounting, but for any statistical purposes and in any countries. Incorrect calculation of the interest of the author of the article does not cancel this. And it has nothing to do with propaganda.
      2. Olgovich 2 October 2019 11: 05 New
        • 0
        • 2
        -2
        Quote: Alexey RA
        Not everything is so simple. ©
        The fact of the matter is that in calculating Lend-Lease deliveries, we just liked to take not purely Soviet production, but the total volume of the USSR produced and received as the reference base (100%). Which summarized, including Lend-Lease.
        Agreethat the phrase "the share of Lend-Lease aluminum from the total amount of aluminum produced and obtained by the USSR was 55%" from the point of view of propaganda looks much better than the phrase "according to Lend-Lease USSR received 1,2 times more aluminum than it produced myself. " Despite the fact that the absolute numbers in the first and second case are the same.
        In short, our secretary general came to the finish line among the leaders, and the President of the United States - the penultimate


        I agree, that's right.
  • Dooplet11 1 October 2019 10: 24 New
    • 5
    • 1
    +4
    You can’t talk about quality ones: dural planes are in any case better than woodenThis should be obvious even to a layman.

    Far from anyway. Therefore, a layman is better off not writing. Because it is not at all obvious to experts.
    1. Dooplet11 1 October 2019 10: 52 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Is wooden mosquito better or worse than duralumin Bf-110? Many experts will say that is better. hi
      1. Kenxnumx 1 October 2019 18: 40 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        The exception that confirms the rule.
        1. Dooplet11 1 October 2019 19: 17 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Is wooden La 5 better than duralumin Brewster? Or also an “exception”? And what is meant by "better"? Economically? Technologically? Technically?
          1. Kenxnumx 1 October 2019 19: 43 New
            • 1
            • 2
            -1
            The better La-7 compared to La-5. And La-9 compared to La-7. Here is the answer to your question. Aluminum is lighter and stronger. Other things being equal, this is an advantage.
            1. Dooplet11 1 October 2019 21: 13 New
              • 3
              • 0
              +3
              Correct answer. Which says that duralumin is better with reservations. That "other" are equal, for example. Not "anyway." There are different cases.
              Aluminum is lighter and stronger (wood?)
              - Not true. the tree is lighter. wink
    2. brat07 4 October 2019 02: 48 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Dooplet11
      You can’t talk about quality ones: dural planes are in any case better than woodenThis should be obvious even to a layman.

      Far from anyway. Therefore, a layman is better off not writing. Because it is not at all obvious to experts.

      For some reason I remembered our "night witches."
      But they flew on the 2, which was "wooden".
      "Night Witches" flew on Polikarpov's biplanes, or Po-2. The number of combat vehicles increased in a couple of years from 20 to 45. This aircraft was originally created not for fighting at all, but for exercises. There wasn’t even a compartment for aerial bombs in it (shells were suspended under the “belly” of the aircraft on special bomb racks ”). The maximum speed such a machine could develop is 120 km / h. With such a modest weaponry, the girls showed miracles of piloting. This is despite the fact that each Po-2 carried the load of a large bomber, often up to 200 kg at a time. Pilots fought only at night. Moreover, in one night they made several sorties, terrifying the enemy’s position. The girls did not have parachutes aboard, being literally suicide bombers. In the event of a shell getting into the plane, they could only die heroically. Places reserved for technology under parachutes, pilots loaded bombs. Another 20 kg of weapons was a serious help in the battle. Until 1944, these training aircraft were not equipped with machine guns. Both the pilot and the navigator could control them, so if the first one died, his partner could bring a combat vehicle to the airfield.
      1. Dooplet11 4 October 2019 08: 06 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        For some reason I remembered our "night witches."
        But they flew on the 2, which was "wooden".

        Yes, in terms of "price / quality" Po-2 turned out to be a very effective nightlight. Plus, using nightlights made of wood and percale, how much duralumin saved for tank diesels ?! So what about the obvious benefits in all cases Mr. Shpakovsky “slightly” bent over a dural plane in front of a wooden one.
  • hohol95 1 October 2019 10: 28 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    USA. USA. USA!
    And Great Britain on, what rules supplied us with the equipment?
    Sometimes already used categories (Tetrarch, Hempden, Hurricane, Spitfaer, Tomahawk and Kittyhawk).
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 10: 40 New
    • 6
    • 3
    +3
    Quote: ANIMAL
    but not BLOOD of your soldiers!

    Smart people what to say. If possible, it is better to pay with money than with blood. Human blood is not water!
    1. hohol95 1 October 2019 11: 03 New
      • 5
      • 1
      +4
      Of course. It is easy to surrender and sit on parcels from the Red Cross. Instead of bloody battles!
      Losses of England (United Kingdom of England, Scotland and Northern Ireland)
      Far East, 1941-1945: 5,67 thousand were killed, captured - 53,23 thousand
      Western Front, 1940: 11,01 thousand killed, 41,34 thousand captured
      North Africa, 1940-1943: killed - 13,4 thousand, captured - 10,6 thousand
      This does not include Australians, Indians and other African soldiers who fought in combat units for Great Britain or in parts of their armies (Australia).
      1. Alexey RA 1 October 2019 16: 33 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: hohol95
        Of course. It is easy to surrender and sit on parcels from the Red Cross. Instead of bloody battles!
        Losses of England (United Kingdom of England, Scotland and Northern Ireland)
        Far East, 1941-1945: 5,67 thousand were killed, 53,23 thousand were captured.

        Yeah ... it was especially easy to sit in captivity in the Far East. The Japanese, on the other hand, were such nonsense - they only thought that they would abide by the 1929 Geneva Convention. smile
        In addition, most of the prisoners are Singapore. After the crossing of the Japanese to the island, it was no longer possible to defend, but there was nowhere to evacuate.
        Quote: hohol95
        Western Front, 1940: 11,01 thousand killed, 41,34 thousand captured

        And here, not Dunkirk, but Le Havre spoils the statistics. The southern part of the BEC that had gone there was pressed to the sea and surrendered. Nobody evacuated her.
        1. hohol95 1 October 2019 16: 57 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          So, who explained to the British commanders the specific attitude of the Japanese towards the prisoners?
          They believed in the power of various conventions - and the Japanese "demons" broke all their ideas about the place of a white man in the East!
          In addition, most of the prisoners are Singapore. After the crossing of the Japanese to the island, it was no longer possible to defend, but there was nowhere to evacuate.

          British commanders did not succeed in defending Singapore!
          1. Alexey RA 1 October 2019 18: 11 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            Quote: hohol95
            British commanders did not succeed in defending Singapore!

            You would see the forces that defended him ... third grade - not marriage.
            That's what uv wrote. Eugene Pinak about the British and Indian army in Malaya.
            Available forces:
            6 Indian and 2 Australian infantry. brigades + 3 divisions (9 and 11 Indian, 8 Australian divisions) and 1 corps (3 Indian) sets of parts (incomplete). In addition to them, there was still the equivalent of 4 brigades in the form of garrisons of Singapore, Penang and airfields, but these troops (except 3 English and 1 Indian battalion in Singapore and 1 Indian battalion in Penang) were militias that did not have serious combat value.

            Completeness:
            ... there wasn’t enough weapons (for example, only 1 Indian infantry battalion of 20 was staffed by state), and what was, was by no means the first grade (for example, almost all the anti-tank forces in Malaya were captured Italian 47-mm guns Delirium). In addition, the acquisition of new weapons also meant the reorganization of the unit (the states of the units with the "old" and "new" weapons were noticeably different) with the corresponding tactical retraining. How these perturbations affect the combat effectiveness of the unit is not necessary to say.

            Preparation of L / C in general (isn't it - a very familiar picture wink ):
            The unusually rapid growth of the British and Indian armies (in the beginning of 1939 the first was 7, and in the second 4 divisions - by the end of 1941 there were 36 and 15, respectively) led to a shortage of qualified command personnel. This especially affected the Indian parts. The fact is that they, like all units with a low level of education and recruitment initiatives, very much depended on the quality of the officers. With the commander who thoroughly knew their language, customs and needs, these soldiers worked miracles - the trouble was that the best officers were sent to Africa and the Middle East. However, the officers of the "peacetime" level of training was also insufficient due to the fact that combat training was not uniform and to a large extent theoretical. And the soldiers until the widespread introduction at the end of 1942 a single so-called. “Combat training” did not have a standard training system at all - only general directives that the commander of each regiment depot could carry out at his discretion.

            Special preparation for a specific theater:
            ... British troops simply did not know how to fight in the jungle. This seems surprising, but, for example, the officer’s directory of the mid-20s does not contain the word “jungle” at all, although everything is described, from organizing a camp in the mountains to the weight of an 18-pound gun. In addition, of the 12 conditional brigades, only 2 were in Malaya for more than a year, of which only 1 (12th Indian) was a field unit. The rest at the beginning of the war were in Malaya for several months and prepared for action in the jungle according to their own understanding and, naturally, in the "appendage" to carry out other tasks (for example, the 11th Indian Division was simultaneously preparing for the offensive according to the Matador plan and preparation for the defense of northern Malaya).

            Reinforcements:
            But if these troops even went through acclimatization to local conditions, then reinforcements (17 Indian and 18 English divisions) were even deprived of this luxury. Moreover, the 17th Indian division consisted of recently formed battalions, half and more of which consisted of recruits that had only undergone basic individual training, i.e. was actually unworkable. And the Australian replenishment, aimed at replenishing the loss in the combat units, _in general_ did not undergo combat training.
            1. hohol95 2 October 2019 08: 33 New
              • 1
              • 1
              0
              Thank you for such a detailed answer! It remains only to regret the "miserable" British soldiers and soldiers from the colonies and dominions! And the officers who led them are slightly "scolded"! To officers Gen. WB headquarters "reprimand"! And continue to hoarse discuss business in the native Red Army ....
              1. Alexey RA 2 October 2019 11: 03 New
                • 2
                • 1
                +1
                Quote: hohol95
                And continue to hoarse discuss business in the native Red Army ....

                Oh yes ... you look at the state of the armed forces of the other Allies at the time of their entry into the war in each of the theater of operations - and you understand that the Red Army is not particularly distinguished from their background (French BTV and their use are generally one in one of our MK -40). Some even got into the war with virtually no ground forces. smile
                1. hohol95 2 October 2019 14: 56 New
                  • 2
                  • 0
                  +2
                  If in all the problems and "troubles" of the country and the army JV Stalin was to blame, who is responsible for the "mess" in the armies of the French Republic, Great Britain, the USA?
                  It only seems to me that they are not looking for the guilty, as we are mating with the opposition in various forums. They eventually won and POINT. And why at first they lost the battle no one is interested. There is a victory - we will calm down on this.
                  They did not have civil wars. The destruction of the economy of the countries was not. The French and British had great losses for WWII, but the Germans had no less. People were in colonies and dominions.
                  At the “worst”, the allies had hot Polish lancers!
                  What did they miss in the years 1939-1942? Strength of mind?
                  1. Alexey RA 2 October 2019 17: 30 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    Quote: hohol95
                    If in all the problems and "troubles" of the country and the army JV Stalin was to blame, who is responsible for the "mess" in the armies of the French Republic, Great Britain, the USA?

                    Like who? Of course, I.V. Stalin. smile
                    Indeed, it is clear to all progressively-minded free people that if it weren’t for him, all the countries of the world would unite in a single outburst against the brown threat ... although, wait a minute - how did the threat from Germany appear again? Who credited the restoration of the military-industrial complex of the Reich and signed agreements with the Reich that contradict Versailles? Who through the fingers looked at the malicious violations by the Weimar Republic of the Treaty of Versailles? Who needed a counterweight to France on the continent? And who - the big and long war in the Old World? laughing
                    Quote: hohol95
                    They did not have civil wars. The destruction of the economy of the countries was not.

                    But they had parliaments, elections and eternal populism. There, Winston Churchill, as Chancellor of the Treasury, cut the military budget so much that when his successors tried to bite him off a little more, a rebellion broke out in the fleet.
                    The result of 15 years of WBR parliament’s policy towards the army and the Air Force was that even the “peacekeeper” Chamberlain, after getting acquainted with the state of affairs in the armed forces, was forced to expand his party’s policy by 180 degrees and begin to hastily restore what was destroyed.
                    Quote: hohol95
                    What did they miss in the years 1939-1942? Strength of mind?

                    To the French, yes. Even the victory in WWI broke the nation - the losses were too big.
                    But the British did not have a couple of years to restore the Empire’s armed forces, destroyed by their own politicians.
                    1. hohol95 2 October 2019 17: 47 New
                      • 2
                      • 1
                      +1
                      Who credited the restoration of the military-industrial complex of the Reich and signed agreements with the Reich that contradict Versailles? Who through the fingers looked at the malicious violations by the Weimar Republic of the Treaty of Versailles? Who needed a counterweight to France on the continent? And who - the big and long war in the Old World?

                      RSFSR, USSR, I.V. Stalin!
                      I am 100% sure that they believe in it in Europe and the USA!
                      To the French, yes.

                      In one of the books I read about such a case - In France, the owner of the orchard drove out ROTU soldiers because of the danger of defeating this garden while resisting the advancing Germans!
                      Rota threw down her weapon and scattered who where. They saw no reason to protect such people! P could have shot this bourgeois ...
                  2. strannik1985 2 October 2019 19: 05 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    They did not have enough brains. First, everyone who moved military science in France and England lagged behind the Germans in the development of the Schnelle troupe, and then to politicians, when they decided to sit behind the Maginot Line and surrender Poland to the Germans.
                    1. Alexey RA 3 October 2019 14: 01 New
                      • 2
                      • 0
                      +2
                      Quote: strannik1985
                      At first, everyone who moved military science in France and England lagged behind the Germans in the development of the Schnelle troupe

                      Rather, not those who moved military science, but those who made decisions about the concept of army development. Just with the theoretical achievements of the Allies, everything was fine - only they didn’t get to practice or they got extremely weakened.
                      The French were able to form full-fledged tank divisions - but there were few of them, plus those. to whom these divisions blueed, did not know how to apply them. Pulling a division battalionally is easy. Throw into battle, not giving time to concentrate after the march - too. To tear motorized infantry from the division and use it as infantry - there’s nothing to do. In short, the French command, in whose hands the tank divisions fell, did the same for them what our command did with the MK in June-July 1941.
                      The British in terms of armored science were also leaders (Fuller). By the end of the 20s, it came to mechanized artillery ... but a crisis struck - and all plans for expensive independent armored formations went to dust, and everything froze on stage "stretch legs for clothes".
    2. sergo1914 1 October 2019 12: 15 New
      • 7
      • 1
      +6
      Quote: kalibr
      Quote: ANIMAL
      but not BLOOD of your soldiers!

      Smart people what to say. If possible, it is better to pay with money than with blood. Human blood is not water!


      How could this be realized in June 1941? Give Hitler money? He came for territories and resources. For the Germans. In order to destroy the majority of the population. You already say, but do not talk.
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 10: 43 New
    • 1
    • 8
    -7
    Quote: sergo1914
    We will gobble it up anyway.

    Of course, but isn't it?
    1. Beringovsky 1 October 2019 14: 11 New
      • 5
      • 2
      +3
      Of course, but isn't it?

      Judging by the growth of Stalin’s popularity, it’s exactly not.
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 11: 04 New
    • 4
    • 12
    -8
    Quote: sergo1914
    that in serious work it is customary to identify the materials used. Name. Where is the picture taken. Who took the picture. When. Link to the source.

    And who is doing that in VO? Sometimes photos are not signed at all. At best, it says who or what is written on it. And if it takes place with others, why should I try to hang my head out. No one will appreciate it anyway.
    1. sergo1914 1 October 2019 12: 17 New
      • 7
      • 1
      +6
      Quote: kalibr
      Quote: sergo1914
      that in serious work it is customary to identify the materials used. Name. Where is the picture taken. Who took the picture. When. Link to the source.

      And who is doing that in VO? Sometimes photos are not signed at all. At best, it says who or what is written on it. And if it takes place with others, why should I try to hang my head out. No one will appreciate it anyway.



      Caught on forgery. But I don’t care. I am a historian. I can.
    2. BAI
      BAI 1 October 2019 13: 17 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      And if it takes place with others, why should I try to hang my head out.

      How's the lawyers? Other people's crimes are not an excuse for their own. If someone (in this case, the author) takes up a moral assessment of some events and social phenomena, then he himself must be morally flawless. Otherwise, the classic question arises: "And who are the judges?"
      1. kalibr 1 October 2019 13: 58 New
        • 3
        • 5
        -2
        The caption is not a moral assessment, is it? Moreover, if it is not evaluative, but purely informational in nature.
        1. BAI
          BAI 1 October 2019 22: 24 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Moral is the attitude towards error. Well, they would admit - but in the source that I used, there was a mistake, in good faith was mistaken for someone else's fault. Thank you for correcting. And why stand in the pose of the righteous? Now this is a moral characteristic - persists in wrongness. Agree, when you are right, I support you, despite the ideological differences.
    3. Kenxnumx 1 October 2019 18: 42 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      It’s good that they didn’t ask you for a blood test of the photographer and his marital status. Do not pay attention.
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 11: 08 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    Quote: Avior
    And what about the first part of the author’s wrong, didn’t understand?

    ALL!
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 11: 09 New
    • 5
    • 3
    +2
    Quote: sergo1914
    PS All other materials of the author are also reliable?

    It’s easy to check how you checked the photo!
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 11: 13 New
    • 5
    • 6
    -1
    Quote: sergo1914
    that in serious work it is customary to identify the materials used. Name. Where is the picture taken. Who took the picture. When. Link to the source.

    And who is doing that in VO? Sometimes photos are not signed at all. At best, it says who or what is written on it. And if it takes place with others, why should I try to hang my head out. No one will appreciate it anyway.
  • Operator 1 October 2019 11: 14 New
    • 3
    • 4
    -1
    Quote: Avior
    German industry worked in peacetime until 1943

    Not to mention that this is not true, your statement does not correspond with mine: the USSR until February 1943 of the year, landlis was urgently needed for completely different reasons - loss of production capacity in the west of the country and incomplete deployment of production capacity in the east of the country.

    Only after the Anglo-Saxons realized that the USSR had overcome the industrial and food crisis and could defeat Germany on their own, they increased their economic assistance through lend-lease several times and moved on the edge of the European theater of war (in the Mediterranean) - in order to have reinforced negotiations from the USSR, of course.
    1. Avior 1 October 2019 11: 32 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      Corresponds to reality and correlates.
      Since 1943, Germany tried to sharply increase the output of military products, and partially it succeeded.
      So far from everything was as predetermined as you wrote.
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 12: 43 New
    • 3
    • 5
    -2
    Quote: Olgovich
    only 50% of the one hundred percent produced in the USSR.

    Look not at percentages, but at NUMBERS IN TONS!
    1. Foul skeptic 1 October 2019 16: 38 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      But our people are cunning, they add up the supply data with what has been produced, and are looking for interest on this total amount.

      And what does the trick have to do with it? This is just arithmetic. So they find the percentage of the total.
      Look not at percentages, but at NUMBERS IN TONS!

      Well let's see. And we will solve the problem for the elementary classes
      Explosives: 558 thousand tons produced; delivered 295,6 thousand. tons; 53%.
      Now let's think about what this or that indicator means in practice. Half of the gunpowder and explosives used during the war - Lend-Lease delivery. This means that every second bullet and every second shell, bomb or torpedo, hand grenade or mine produced their intended action due to ... supplies.

      Did you write this? You will not deny?
      558 + 295,6 = 853,6 thousand tons
      295,6 thousand tons delivered under Lend-Lease is 34% of available (used during the hostilities) 853,6 thousand tons.
      I would also like to complete your words
      Although, it would seem, here is a simple afrimetic at the kindergarten level
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 12: 54 New
    • 4
    • 4
    0
    Quote: VIK1711
    And the author put the supplies from the USA to Germany out of brackets ...

    What does it have to do with it? And Which US government delivered to Germany?
    Quote: tihonmarine
    Why Lend-Lease more or less began to work fine with 1943 year.

    Because the relevant agreement was not signed, the settlement procedure was determined and production and logistics were not established.
    1. Beringovsky 1 October 2019 14: 20 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      Because the corresponding agreement was not signed, the settlement procedure was determined

      It took as much as 2 (!!!) years ?!
      Come on laughing
      1. Alexey RA 1 October 2019 16: 52 New
        • 6
        • 0
        +6
        Quote: Beringovsky
        It took as much as 2 (!!!) years ?!
        Come on

        And you try to pass 100 tons per month through a country whose ports and roads provide transit of about 000 tons per month. smile
        The first year the British tried to engage in logistics in Iran. But even they could not increase throughput by an order of magnitude. First I had to call for help from the Americans, and then generally transfer Iran under their responsibility. It took the Americans a year after which the share of the Trans-Iranian route in LL deliveries increased to one third (in total, for the entire war through Iran, 23,8% of the LL volume came).
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 12: 57 New
    • 5
    • 8
    -3
    Quote: sergo1914
    I am a historian. I can.

    The one who does nothing is not mistaken. And what difference does it make to you - loaded or unloaded? Or is the boy the main thing in the picture? Delivered Matilda? Delivered! Tired of already giving her photo from the TRUTH. So wipe yourself, my dear. You have enough of that.
    1. sergo1914 1 October 2019 14: 33 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      They loaded or unloaded ... in Arkhangelsk or Liverpool ... Indeed, what difference does it make.
    2. sergo1914 1 October 2019 14: 57 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Quote: kalibr

      The one who does nothing is not mistaken. And what difference does it make to you - loaded or unloaded? Or is the boy the main thing in the picture? Delivered Matilda? Delivered! Tired of already giving her photo from the TRUTH. So wipe yourself, my dear. You have enough of that.


      It would seem that the author should apologize to the readers for the mistake made, and not offer to wipe themselves and gobble up what is. Or in VO some other ethics?
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 12: 58 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    Quote: sergo1914
    How could this be implemented in June 1941?

    It was impossible for us. But it’s quite ... Are you talking about something yourself? Compare the incomparable. Oh well...
  • BAI
    BAI 1 October 2019 13: 32 New
    • 12
    • 1
    +11
    In fact, the debate about the role of Lend-Lease is strange and slightly tired.
    1. History does not know the subjunctive moods. Lend-lease was also in the volumes requested by the USSR (with some adjustments).
    2. Any help during the war is both useful and necessary. At a minimum, I must say thanks that she was, and not to twist her nose: they asked for a Mercedes, but they gave a Cossack.
    3. Lend-lease saved hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of the lives of our soldiers (maybe, including the life of my father). Denying this is stupid, therefore its importance and significance are indisputable.
    4. By June 22, 1941, the USSR had the most tanks and aircraft in the world. According to the plan for the deployment of mechanized corps, by 1943 there should have been 30 T-000s. And this plan would be implemented without any Lend-Lease. Own forces. Those. and without Lend-Lease they would have won. But with more losses, and for more time.
    5. It is high time to understand - the victory was JOINT. GENERAL EFFORTS. WHO IS AS POSSIBLE. We can’t say that they won thanks to Lend-Lease. We can not say that the contribution of Lend-Lease is negligible.
    1. tlauicol 1 October 2019 13: 53 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      Without LL, the plan for tanks would not have been fulfilled, and it’s not just about machine tools for tank building. Airplanes, metals, cars, steam locomotives, etc., sent in lll free up a lot of resources and people for other tasks, for example. Tank building
    2. Avior 1 October 2019 16: 17 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      By June 22, 1941, the USSR had the most tanks and aircraft in the world. According to the plan for the deployment of mechanized corps, by 1943 there should have been 30 T-000s. And this plan would be implemented without any Lend-Lease. Own forces.

      so they didn’t do it on their own ....
    3. Alexey RA 1 October 2019 17: 17 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: BAI
      4. By June 22, 1941, the USSR had the most tanks and aircraft in the world. According to the plan for the deployment of mechanized corps, by 1943 there should have been 30 T-000s. And this plan would be implemented without any Lend-Lease. Own forces.

      It is unlikely. If only because in 1942 birth pangs would again begin by staging a new tank in exchange for the T-34. For the T-34 was still in according to the results of the mileage test in 1940 was recognized as not meeting the requirements for a medium tank. smile
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 14: 16 New
    • 5
    • 3
    +2
    Quote: ANIMAL
    Well, the arguments are matched!

    The main arguments from the newspaper TRUTH for 11 June 1945 year. And the official data that was produced by us ... The history of the Second World War in 12 volumes.
    1. 3x3zsave 1 October 2019 16: 16 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Sergey "bubalik" cited another document. But all do not care. Alas.
      1. Undecim 1 October 2019 17: 50 New
        • 4
        • 2
        +2
        But all do not care. Alas.
        This is a consequence of the prolonged use of history for propaganda purposes. History is no longer perceived as such, only as an ideological sketch. The result is not a discussion with the aim of finding the truth, but a polemic (srach), where one of the parties should certainly win and impose its point of view on the other. And here the documents are far in the background - the main thing is to shout louder, show pressure, inflate the mistakes of the opposite side, replace the discussion of the topic with a discussion of personal qualities. In short - victory at all costs.
        Regarding the article - I can’t bring the author in plus. One should either write seriously on such topics or not write at all.
        1. 3x3zsave 1 October 2019 18: 15 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          The definition of the concept of "controversy", in this case (and, unfortunately, many others) is very correct, akin to the original interpretation of the word "symposium". The genuine resentment of the author’s irreconcilable opponents is touching, expressed in one sentence: “Here the people have gone! I would like to cite as an example yours and Shpakovsky's many years of debate on various topics that have never gone into the paranoid phase, but spat, for
          Quote: Undecim
          In short - victory at all costs.

          “There will be no war. But there will be such a struggle for peace that there will be no stone on stone from the world”
  • marline 1 October 2019 15: 14 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Wonderful article.
    It’s called “Lend-Lease. Calculations and Calculations”, but only from all calculations and calculations - “simple afrimetics at the kindergarten level” - counting apples.
    Also in the article there are digits copied from Wikipedia, but what are there digits ... phrases !!! ...
    The main thing, after all, is to write in a postscript for solidity: “Questions of history”, “USA and Canada”, “History of the Russian state and law”, etc. etc., and in the text, maybe Wikipedia will pass, right, Vyacheslav Olegovich?
    And of course, like a cherry on a cake - your own opinion and sparkling remarks of a respected historian!
    And you, dear readers of VO, eat it all and do not choke ...
    1. kalibr 1 October 2019 15: 46 New
      • 5
      • 3
      +2
      [quote = merlin] The main thing is Vadim that such materials encourage discussion, that people are already starting to search for information, compare, analyze, and this develops the mind, right? As for the list of magazines, then ... this is once again a reminder that they are and you can find a lot of interesting things in them if you wish. There would be a desire, right? Therefore, everything that you wrote does not make much sense. Site rules regarding% novelty were not violated, and more from a popular science article is not required.
      1. marline 1 October 2019 16: 10 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Quote: kalibr
        The main thing is Vadim, that such materials encourage discussion, that people themselves begin to search for information, compare, analyze, and this develops the mind, right?

        Vyacheslav Olegovich, you have mixed up a bit - this is not a curriculum for students of the PhD program, here are comments on the article and, the right to write a list of competencies that are designed to develop, deepen and other blah blah blah ...
        Quote: kalibr
        As for the list of magazines, then ... this is once again a reminder that they are and you can find a lot of interesting things in them if you wish. There would be a desire, right?

        Self-Service List? Very nice, right ... but too much ...
        Quote: kalibr
        Therefore, everything that you wrote does not make much sense.

        Do you also respond to your scientific opponents with their comments?
        Quote: kalibr
        Site rules regarding% novelty were not violated, and more from a popular science article is not required.

        You see, in addition to administrative rules, there is also the moral content of scientific ethics. After all, you passed the minimum candidate, you should remember ...
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 15: 53 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    Apologizing for such trifles is simply ridiculous, Sergey! You should just point out a mistake when they simply point out to me, I always admit it, but your aggressive tone, your desire to hurt you in every possible way, and baseless accusations completely relieve me of the need for any kind of apology.
    1. sergo1914 1 October 2019 22: 22 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: kalibr
      Apologizing for such trifles is simply ridiculous, Sergey! You should just point out a mistake when they simply point out to me, I always admit it, but your aggressive tone, your desire to hurt you in every possible way, and baseless accusations completely relieve me of the need for any kind of apology.


      In fairness, I support your articles on modeling, I’m trying to help expand my knowledge about the current level of development of this industry. Despite your bloated FGP and the modestly declared position of the “Father of Russian Modeling”. Well, and in those cases when you are caught in your articles on inconsistencies and you, instead of a normal discussion, become like a bazaar woman ... Alas. Here I am not with you. Well, a separate topic is “anti-Sovietism” and “anti-communism” nomenklatura nourished by the party apparatus ... It's ridiculous, after all.
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 15: 55 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    [quote = Beringovsky] [/ quote] It took as long as 2 (!!!) of the year ?!
    Okay laughing
    C'mon, but so much. Ports, moorings, bridges, roads, warehouses are not built in one day.
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 16: 00 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    [quote = Beringovsky] Beringovsky (Alexey) Today, 14: 11
    0
    Of course, but isn't it?

    Judging by the growth of Stalin’s popularity, it’s exactly not.

    This is an inaccurate photo caption. Which does not affect the content of the article. No way at all. And where does the growth of Stalin's popularity? But in Monaco the Grand Prix is ​​held ...
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 16: 24 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    Quote: merlin
    Do you also respond to your scientific opponents with their comments?

    There is no scientific, but you are not "scientific", so what is it about?
    1. marline 1 October 2019 16: 37 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      Quote: kalibr
      There is no scientific, but you are not "scientific", so what is it about?

      All about decency, Vyacheslav Olegovich.
      1. kalibr 1 October 2019 16: 41 New
        • 4
        • 4
        0
        Just do not become in a pose. I would also understand if you had a solid list of your own publications behind your back. And so ... it's funny to me to read it. It seems to me that I once answered similar ... and I repeat: today 90% of materials are rewriting of materials from different sources. Compilation, if you like. There is so little original, unique information that you can say it is not at all. Therefore, we are talking exclusively about the manner of presentation and points of view that are offered to readers, as well as encouraging them to independent, expanded search for "their" information. It seems to be clearly written?
        1. marline 1 October 2019 17: 51 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Quote: kalibr
          Just do not become in a pose.

          What are you talking about, Vyacheslav Olegovich?
          Quote: kalibr
          I would also understand if you had a solid list of your own publications behind your back.

          I will tell you a terrible secret - this list is available. I won’t bring it, because I’m sure that you won’t even be able to read the title of the articles without errors — nevertheless, these are natural sciences, not humanitarian ones close to you.
          Well, to be honest, I do not strive for publicity.
          Quote: kalibr
          today 90% of the materials are rewriting materials from various sources. Compilation if you want.

          Yes, for God's sake, Vyacheslav Olegovich.
          The claim concerned sources, or rather, the source of your inspiration (Wikipedia, if you call a spade a spade).
          Even rather the inappropriateness of using this source, Ph.D.
          Quote: kalibr
          It seems to be clearly written?

          Very clear. Here are just such explanations were not required from you.
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 16: 38 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    Quote: merlin
    here are comments on the article and, the right to write a list of competencies that are designed to develop, deepen, etc. blah blah blah ...

    It is your opinion. But I have our own. That's when we all read more than one of your articles here, we will see, so to speak, the level of competencies, then - please learn. In the meantime ... not worth it. And do not write about the minimum. it was in 1983-85. so long ago that what I was there I don’t remember ...
    1. marline 1 October 2019 17: 57 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: kalibr
      That's when we all read more than one of your articles here, we will see, so to speak, the level of competencies, and then - please learn. In the meantime ... not worth it.

      "First get it !!!" - This is such a sweet and pathetic argument that, really, is ridiculous.
      Would you still, Vyacheslav Olegovich, promise "to calculate my IP and fill the face"
      Quote: kalibr
      And do not write about the minimum. it was in 1983-85. so long ago that what I was there I don’t remember ...

      Apparently, this is really so ... Let's hope that this is not senile in you.
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 16: 51 New
    • 4
    • 3
    +1
    Quote: 3x3zsave
    3x3zsave (Anton) Today, 16: 16
    0
    Sergey "bubalik" cited another document. But all do not care. Alas.

    Because, Anton! By and large, this is not the case. One is hurt that someone has his own opinion different from his own and dares to express it; others that he argues for it reasonably, the third does not like it ... the ending is in the "Ii" and "grandfather is a Polish general." Well, there are other points ... like "the Chukchi is not a writer, but a critic." Therefore, the fact that he cited is interesting only for 20% of readers (although this is good!), And the rest will continue the "comments" in the same spirit.
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 17: 00 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Quote: BAI
    BAI Today, 13: 32

    By the way, perhaps the best comment for today. Thank!
    1. BAI
      BAI 1 October 2019 22: 31 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Yes please. I am always for objective research, regardless of their authorship. Nobody canceled our ideological differences.
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 17: 05 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    Quote: A vile skeptic
    Did you write this? You will not deny?

    Why should I deny it? That is,% of their total must be sought, although half of the output is delivered, right?
    1. Foul skeptic 1 October 2019 17: 32 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      That is,% of their total must be sought, although half of the output is delivered, right?

      Yes
      1. kalibr 1 October 2019 17: 35 New
        • 3
        • 4
        -1
        Let's say! But even then, it turns out a lot: every third! And in principle, this is a very high indicator, is not it? Not 5, not 8, not 10, but THIRD! Is this not enough for you?
        1. Foul skeptic 1 October 2019 18: 03 New
          • 4
          • 2
          +2
          Let's say!

          Vyacheslav Olegovich, but what does it mean - let's say? ))) As if you were doing a favor)) Then it’s not for me, but for mathematics))
          And in principle, this is a very high indicator, is not it?

          High.
          Is this not enough for you?

          Why should this be enough for me? Or a lot? Some of my message can be regarded as a value judgment?
          Let me ask you three questions?
          1)
          we had all the necessary information. But "out there." And for the "commoners" there was a massive flow of information in which the truth was lost, like a needle in a haystack.

          Don't you think that your articles are part of such a stream? They wrote about every second, and for the mass layman it is already every second, and not every third. Clap, and the truth is lost. In one article - one, in another - another, in the third - some more.
          2)
          Although, it would seem, here is a simple afrimetic at the kindergarten level

          A reception typical of Soviet propaganda ("and they also hang blacks!"), But it does not work today.

          You often mention the Pareto law in messages and refer yourself to 20%. And why did you decide that you are in 20%?
          3) Your way of replying to messages without using the "Reply" button and replying to one person in more than one message, but splitting it is a way to get more comments?
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 17: 51 New
    • 4
    • 4
    0
    Quote: sergo1914
    that in serious work it is customary to identify the materials used. Name. Where is the picture taken. Who took the picture. When. Link to the source.

    Sergey, I can’t help but draw your attention to this again. And you should go to the next branch, where there is material about Peter 3. There are many portraits, and there are a lot of things under them, but here under one picture "Simon Todorsky" is written only this and all that does not meet your high standards. Come and see, but at the same time point the author to ... In my opinion, the lack of further information under this picture does not spoil the article itself. But objectivity requires, right? And it turns out double standards, huh? And it’s always ugly!
    1. 3x3zsave 1 October 2019 18: 58 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Ryzhov, by the way, messed up in a previous article with one illustration.
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 18: 41 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Quote: A vile skeptic
    You often mention the Pareto law in messages and refer yourself to 20%. And why did you decide that you are in 20%?

    How many questions Timur. But curiosity, when it is healthy, is a good thing. Let's start with this one. Why to 20- in the field of journalism and writing is understandable. I have been working in this field since the 1977 of the year, the author of 40 books in the USSR, the Russian Federation, England and Germany, many of which have received an assessment from the Russian State Humanitarian Fund. Articles written with 1977 ... a lot. That is, you can learn, right? Although from the point of view of knowledge of mathematics or the availability of capital - I’m in 80 and then at the very bottom! About the button ... I didn’t think about it, it’s just so convenient for me. Regarding everything else ... I always thought that the most valuable thing is when the material not only provides information, but also encourages its own searches, makes people think and analyze. Yes and no of her, absolutely reliable and objective information. And "let's say" ... yes, a word crossed my mind, and wrote it. I work now, and periodically as I get tired, I come here. This makes me more diverse, as the Duke of Beaufort said in his novel Twenty Years Later. Are you satisfied
    1. BAI
      BAI 1 October 2019 22: 34 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      But the academician Lysenko, the whole academician - does he belong to 20 or 80%? What are the criteria to determine?
  • Alexander Greene 1 October 2019 18: 41 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Quote from Shpakovsky: "I was even more surprised by the strange counts of many commentators who tried to downplay the value of supplies with their help. "

    Shpakovsky, do not disgrace with mathematics.

    The value of deliveries is determined from the total quantity received from domestic industry and from the USA. For example, the front needs 100 tanks, the USSR produced 60 units, this is 60% of the required, the United States supplied 40 units, this is 40% of the necessary.

    And when you divide 40 by 60 or vice versa, then you compare the deliveries with each other, i.e. determine how many percent of the US deliveries are ours - 66,66% or ours - from US -150%.

    Ask one of the accountants.
  • Alexander Greene 1 October 2019 18: 57 New
    • 4
    • 3
    +1
    Lend-lease or an old song about the "main", so I had to repeat

    Shpakovsky in his role, as he always tries to shock readers with yet another “revelation,” now he is again trying to exaggerate the role of Lend-Lease in the victory of the USSR over fascist Germany. But since at the institute he did not understand until the end of dialectics; he uses the metaphysical method to evaluate all events. And the situation must be watched in dynamics.

    The help of the Allies, of course, was, thanks to them for this, but it did not play a decisive role in the most difficult moments of the war of 1941-1943. Deliveries increased gradually, and their main quantity fell on 1944-1945, when the USSR itself increased its power.

    Yes, the first foreign tanks appeared in November 1941, but it was only a few vehicles, i.e. help at that time was a few percent

    At the most decisive moment, the share in aviation, in tanks and in other weapons was scanty. In total, during the war, Lend-Lease deliveries of tanks amounted to 12,3%, self-propelled guns to 7,8%, the share of aircraft was 13%, and artillery was only 2,7%. , small arms approximately - 0,75%. of the total quantity produced in the USSR in 1941-1945.

    There were serious deliveries of cars, Lend-Lease equipment in the Soviet fleet amounted to 64%. but they also forget that this figure is the final for the entire war. In the early years of the war, the number of automotive vehicles was low - therefore, Mongolian horses were needed, because for example, in 1942, imported cars made up only 0,4%, this is only in the final stage of the war by January 1945 their share was 30%. The peak of gunpowder supplies was also at the end of the war. A similar picture with all other supplies.

    See the summary chart, there, even for the main types of deliveries, the share of Lend-Lease products in the total volume of production and deliveries to the USSR does not exceed 28%. In general, the share of Lend-Lease products in the total volume of materials, equipment, food, machinery, raw materials, etc., produced and delivered to the USSR. Usually estimated at 4%.

    http://rnns.ru/116299-lend-liz-mify-i-realnost.html

    1. Nycomed 1 October 2019 19: 31 New
      • 3
      • 3
      0
      "In general, the share of Lend-Lease products in the total volume of materials, equipment, food, machinery, raw materials, etc., produced and delivered to the USSR. Usually estimated at 4%."
      Who is “usually rated”? The famous "backbone" A.A. Ascension So he dug this digit from somewhere, or rather: he took it from the ceiling at the personal and very urgent request of the “father of the peoples”. But, even this "deflection" was not put to his credit. He finished badly.
      1. Alexander Greene 1 October 2019 21: 38 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        Quote: Nycomed
        "In general, the share of Lend-Lease products in the total volume of materials, equipment, food, machinery, raw materials, etc., produced and delivered to the USSR. Usually estimated at 4%."
        Who is “usually rated”? The famous "backbone" A.A. Ascension So he dug this digit from somewhere, or rather: he took it from the ceiling at the personal and very urgent request of the “father of the peoples”. But, even this "deflection" was not put to his credit. He finished badly.


        4% is a very real figure. Do you really think that on sea vessels with an average displacement of 6-10 thousand tons during the war years they could bring more products to the USSR than our entire industry did during this time?
        1. Avior 1 October 2019 23: 00 New
          • 4
          • 1
          +3
          Sea vessels have been the main vehicle for several centuries.
          And the products are different.
          If the States made ballistic gunpowder, then in the total weight of the M-13 shell it occupies a smaller part. Only without it, the shell does not fly.
          And without brake bands made of special steel weighing several kilograms, the T-34 tank weighing under thirty tons does not travel.
        2. Nycomed 2 October 2019 07: 47 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          And I do not say that anymore. Just 4% is an absurd figure. I already noted where it came from.
          1. Alexander Greene 2 October 2019 08: 18 New
            • 3
            • 1
            +2
            Quote: Nycomed
            And I do not say that anymore. Just 4% is an absurd figure. I already noted where it came from.

            The fact is that the Soviet side, when calculating the share (4%), proceeded from the volume of deliveries actually received by the Soviet Union. American data is based on the number of goods shipped, excluding their losses along the route.
            Kimball, when explaining this discrepancy, calls the figure of 7% acceptable.
            (Herring GC Op. Cit. P. XIV-XV, 286; Goldsmith RW Munitions Output in World War II // Military Affairs. 1946. Vol. X. N 1. P. 75.)
            1. tlauicol 2 October 2019 09: 58 New
              • 3
              • 1
              +2
              Nonsense. 7%, 4%. For such a difference, the Germans would need to sink half of the cargo, i.e. all of Northern LL and half of the Pacific. Both numbers are sucked out of the finger.
              The lover of round numbers and the author of these 4% after the war generally spanked - he was also a science fiction accountant
              1. Alexey RA 2 October 2019 11: 37 New
                • 2
                • 0
                +2
                Quote: Tlauicol
                Nonsense. 7%, 4%. For such a difference, the Germans would need to sink half of the cargo, i.e. all of Northern LL and half of the Pacific.

                Not certainly in that way. To get the difference between 4% and 7%, the Germans needed to drown all the northern convoys and somehow destroy almost all supplies through Iran. Because half of the LL went through Vladivostok and Siberia, where there were no Germans, and Japan, although it was undesirably neutral, could not have a significant impact on transportation. smile
                1. tlauicol 2 October 2019 11: 41 New
                  • 1
                  • 1
                  0
                  The same eggs drinks science fiction and linden
                  1. kalibr 2 October 2019 12: 20 New
                    • 2
                    • 3
                    -1
                    What do you want? The communist writes the same thing, but they are not used to manipulating numbers.
                    1. Alexander Greene 2 October 2019 20: 19 New
                      • 2
                      • 1
                      +1
                      Quote: kalibr
                      What do you want? The communist writes the same thing, but they are not used to manipulating numbers.

                      Already who would say, you have filled up the whole forum with fakes. Whatever you touch, you distort and turn everything around.
              2. Alexander Greene 2 October 2019 20: 11 New
                • 2
                • 2
                0
                Quote: Tlauicol
                For such a difference, the Germans would need to sink half of the cargo,

                So it was. All figures on Lend-Lease are overstated, Americans consider how many goods were sent, and they do not take into account how much they did not reach the recipient. And there were also such cases when only the aircraft fuselages were loaded onto one ship, only the wings on the other, and if ships with either fuselages or wings were killed along the convoy path, the surviving parts of the aircraft were left without proper use.
                Quote: Tlauicol
                The lover of round numbers and the author of these 4% after the war generally spanked - he was also a science fiction accountant

                But his American colleague remained. with its 7%, and this figure is also not so great.
                1. tlauicol 3 October 2019 04: 52 New
                  • 2
                  • 2
                  0
                  What nonsense! Did the Germans drown 1500 vessels of the northern convoy, and even half of the Pacific? And ours threw out aluminum wings as unnecessary? Do not read this fantasy at night
                  1. Alexander Greene 3 October 2019 19: 14 New
                    • 2
                    • 3
                    -1
                    Quote: Tlauicol
                    Do not read this fantasy at night

                    Well, so far only you are fantasizing, and I talked about what happened. All Lend-Lease tables indicate the amount of goods shipped from the United States and not received by the Soviet Union. Part of the cargo died along with the ships sunk by the Germans. Losses of northern convoys, for example, are estimated from 15 to 60%. Only in the crushed convoy PQ-17 went to the bottom of 3350 cars, 430 tanks, 210 aircraft and 99316 tons of other cargoes.

                    Convoys without losses began to reach Soviet ports only in December 1944. On other routes, there were less cargo losses, but they also were. In the Pacific Ocean, for example, the Japanese drowned our vessels, German planes in the Caspian, and US planes flying through Kamchatka often did not fly or crash when landing.
                    1. tlauicol 4 October 2019 03: 49 New
                      • 3
                      • 2
                      +1
                      Enough to lie already: 85 transports per one and a half thousand arrived died. In the east and alsib, the losses are generally miserable - about a hundred aircraft for 8000 and several ships.
                      You lied brother
                      1. Alexander Greene 4 October 2019 19: 20 New
                        • 1
                        • 2
                        -1
                        Quote: Tlauicol
                        You lied brother

                        So lied?
                        From the statistics of the northern convoys (S. M. Monin “Lend-Lease Roads”): 811 out of 98 vessels were killed, and 40 vessels did not reach the Soviet ports, they returned. Losses in the Pacific Ocean, only the Far Eastern Shipping Company lost 1941 vessels in 8, 1942 in 4, 1943 in 8, 1944 in 6, and 1945 in 2. At the same time, one should not forget that transport is different for transport, one has 6 thousand tons of displacement, the other 16 thousand tons, or even more. Submarines hunted for large vehicles.

                        And not all the equipment delivered under Lend-Lease was used by the army and navy. For example, out of 202 torpedo boats delivered to the USSR, 118 did not have to take part in the hostilities of the Great Patriotic War, since they were put into operation after its completion. All 26 frigates received by the USSR also entered service only in the summer of 1945. A similar situation was observed with other types of equipment.
            2. Nycomed 2 October 2019 14: 55 New
              • 2
              • 2
              0
              Absolutely right! The calculation method is different. And to determine, by and large, and combine all this at present, is not possible. But, I repeat again: 4%, this is complete nonsense!
              1. Alexander Greene 2 October 2019 20: 20 New
                • 1
                • 2
                -1
                Quote: Nycomed
                But, I repeat again: 4%, this is complete nonsense!

                How many do not repeat "nonsense", the figure of 4% of this does not change.
                1. Nycomed 2 October 2019 20: 40 New
                  • 1
                  • 1
                  0
                  For God's sake! You want to believe in this, obviously, the holy number for you is 4%, believe me, I'm not going to dissuade you. I was glad to talk! wink hi
    2. Kenxnumx 1 October 2019 20: 01 New
      • 5
      • 2
      +3
      That is, without Lendliz. Our planes flew a third less often. But in fact, three times because gasoline additives came from there, and in fact, five times less, because American refineries made this same gasoline. And we would have had much less aircraft without American aluminum by how many times. And tanks, by the way, are also without the same aluminum (V-2 engines). But even what they did as it was brought to the front without steam locomotives and cars. And where would the connection be without wires and American copper. And it would have fired half as often without gunpowder. That is, you can easily reduce the combat strength of the Red Army by half (optimistic) without Lendliz. or even three.
      1. chenia 2 October 2019 10: 41 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: Ken71
        That is, you can easily reduce the combat strength of the Red Army by half (optimistic) without Lendliz. or even three.


        Brilliant math.
        If so, then Britain (for example), which received four times more aid in LL in July 1943 than the USSR (we basically received LL after the summer of 1943) should also defeat four times as many German divisions.
        And until May 1943 they fought with just five German divisions (until November 1942 with four) with varying success (in May already with 15 divisions), moreover 2,5 years.
        What is there not to observe the proportion?
        Or is it not just LL? although we recognize the help is significant and has saved many of our lives.
    3. Alexey RA 2 October 2019 11: 33 New
      • 4
      • 1
      +3
      Quote: Alexander Green
      Yes, the first foreign tanks appeared in November 1941, but it was only a few vehicles, i.e. help at that time was a few percent

      And how many tanks at that time near Moscow had 60 mm armor? It’s not worth equating Valya and T-40/60, although both of them belonged to LT. smile
      Quote: Alexander Green
      In total, during the war, Lend-Lease deliveries of tanks amounted to 12,3%, self-propelled guns to 7,8%, the share of aircraft was 13%, and artillery was only 2,7%. , small arms approximately - 0,75%. of the total quantity produced in the USSR in 1941-1945.

      So Lend-Lease was not supposed to replace domestic production. His task was to expand the bottlenecks of our defense industry.
      Therefore, the average temperature in the hospital, taking into account the morgue, does not show anything - you need to look at specific areas where the LL equipment has gone. And then suddenly it turns out that almost all of the Navy’s mine-torpedo aircraft moved to the A-20. Long-range aviation actively changed the IL-4 to the B-25. Deliveries of “Valentines” made it possible to abandon the production of domestic light tanks and switch to the production of SU-76.
      In addition, you should not limit the Lend-Lease only equipment.
      Without Chilean copper and LL outfitting factories, the switch to the 85-mm caliber of the T-34 would not have been possible. Our industry simply could not provide the guns with ammunition (the sleeve of the 76 mm gun model 1902/1930 weighed 830-850 g, the shell of the anti-aircraft gun caliber 85 mm weighed 2,85-2,92 kg). The pre-war situation would be repeated when all attempts to introduce a mass instrument of the caliber of 85 mm or 95 mm came across a wall of "no copper." For those same 52-Ks, by the beginning of the war in a year they were able to make only 1 BC per barrel.
      Without LL gunpowder, there would be no offensive in 1944. 40% of gunpowder this year is LL revenues. And I'm not talking about components for the production of gunpowder, for some of which the dependence on LL was 100%.
      Aluminum - more than half came in LL. No it - we leave all plans to facilitate the design of fighters.
      High octane. And the refineries obtained by LL.
      Quote: Alexander Green
      In the early years of the war, the number of automotive vehicles was low - therefore, Mongolian horses were needed, because for example, in 1942, imported cars made up only 0,4%, this is only in the final stage of the war by January 1945 their share was 30%.

      Everything is correct. Only if in 1944 there will be no all-wheel drive vehicles, then the Red Army will then advance at the pace of that same 1942.
      How to ensure the supply of supplies to tank armies and corps on broken roads? What equipment should be provided for contingent advanced detachments of combined arms armies, which in real time attacked on a par with tankmen (greetings to the Germans arr. 1941). How to carry artillery so that it keeps up with the mechanic units and advanced detachments?
      Quote: Alexander Green
      In general, the share of Lend-Lease products in the total volume of materials, equipment, food, machinery, raw materials, etc., produced and delivered to the USSR. Usually estimated at 4%.

      Well, yes, what is the delivered seed grain against the background of the entire Soviet harvest. And the fact that without this grain there will be no harvest — we will tactfully omit this particularity.
  • Nycomed 1 October 2019 19: 15 New
    • 5
    • 3
    +2
    Good article! The author wishes to continue further. Always interested in this topic. I will wait to continue with impatience. Thank! Yes, and another wish: do not pay attention to those comments that already exist and those that will still be. Do you understand what kind of comments I'm talking about?
    1. Den717 2 October 2019 07: 11 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Nycomed
      Always interested in this topic. I will wait to continue with impatience.

      If you are interested in this topic, I recommend reading at least V. Falin's “Second Front”. The springs and "help" mechanisms are opened deep and accessible enough. No article will give this.
      1. Nycomed 2 October 2019 17: 11 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        You know, on this subject I have a book by V.I. Ryzhkov, former Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR. "The Great Patriotic War: Lend-Lease", published in 2012. 400 pages, not very large font. So: even a person who, even in Soviet times, could receive ANY data from top secret archives inaccessible to anyone, could not clearly determine the percentage or monetary value of the Lend-Lease assistance provided USA and UK USSR. So that, it will always be a question. It is unfortunate that we have practically no studies of American and English historians translated into Russian. And I’m sure that this topic (“Lend-Lease”) is still of great interest there. And you say that someone "put everything on the shelves." It is impossible to implement, at least - now ... Alas ... hi
        1. Den717 2 October 2019 17: 25 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: Nycomed
          And you say that someone "put everything on the shelves." It’s impossible to do

          Where did you find me about the shelves? It was "Deep enough and accessible," and these are two big differences ...
          Quote: Nycomed
          I could not clearly determine the percentage or monetary equivalent of the Lend-Lease assistance provided by the USA and Great Britain to the USSR.

          The point is not so much in numbers and percentages as in goals and motives. And they put more on a tank or less on a plane, is there a big difference in this? It is much more important to understand why, before major battles - near Moscow or in Stalingrad, these supplies were sharply reduced? Why didn’t the PQ-17 reach? Why didn’t Churchill want to go to Normandy? ..... If you read Ryzhkov on this subject, then obviously you will not find anything new in VO. Not that format.
          1. Nycomed 2 October 2019 18: 11 New
            • 0
            • 2
            -2
            Excuse me, please! In no case did I personally want to offend you hi And you know perfectly well about the fate of PQ-17 without my remarks. The main thing is that you do not consider the fate of this convoy through the prism of V.S. Pikul. And Churchill, along with Amer, decided to “land in Normandy” only when the “Battle for Atlantie” was won, when it was already possible to import soldiers, weapons, equipment, ammunition, fuel, ammunition in huge quantities to England, t .e. all that would be necessary during such a large-scale operation. And for this it was necessary to "clean" this path from the German "wolf packs." What the British, together with the Americans did. Excuse me. request
            1. Den717 2 October 2019 18: 53 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Quote: Nycomed
              In no case did I personally want to offend you

              I am not offended at all. However, I note that judging by your thoughts on PQ and Normandy, you will find a lot of new and interesting with Falin. Including the answer to the main question - why did the Americans include us in the Lend-Lease. Falin was a major figure in the USSR, including the head of the intelligence unit. Well, as a remark from experience - of course, the first persons (Ryzhkov and his peers) have a huge amount of information, but their assistants have an even larger and deeper volume. For they collect, sort, evaluate, and pack it for large bosses. And V. Falin, just one of those. Read, you will not regret it.
              1. Nycomed 2 October 2019 19: 11 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Convinced. Discard the year of publication, the publisher, and the full title of the book. Already intrigued! belay
                1. Den717 2 October 2019 19: 18 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: Nycomed
                  Throw off the year of publication

                  Valentin Falin. Second front. 2016 Centerpolygraph. Hammer in the search engine - immediately jump out.
                  1. Nycomed 2 October 2019 19: 40 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    Thanks, look! hi
        2. Sergej1972 5 October 2019 20: 41 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Only, probably, N.I. Ryzhkova.
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 19: 18 New
    • 2
    • 4
    -2
    Quote: Alexander Green
    And when you divide 40 by 60 or vice versa, then you compare the deliveries with each other, i.e. determine how many percent of the US deliveries are ours - 66,66% or ours - from US -150%.

    Nothing like this! Everything is taken from books: For example, this one: “The USSR received 622,1 thousand tons of railroad rails (56,5% of its own production), 1900 locomotives (2,4 times more than produced during the years of the war in the USSR) and 11 075 wagons (10,2 times more), 295,6 thousand tons of gunpowder and explosives (53%), 387,6 thousand tons of copper (82,5%), 328,1 thousand tons of aluminum (125%), 3 million 606 thousand tires (43,1 %), 610 thousand tons of sugar (41,8%), 664,6 thousand tons of canned meat (108%). The data are contained in the books of Russian historians V. Krasikov “Victories that didn’t happen” and B. Sokolov “The role of lend-lease in Great Father war 1941-1945 gg. "Wikipedia has a scheme - links to its data №32,34. So I didn’t even count anything, but looked at the contents, authors, cross-references and gave this information. By the way, now there is 12-volume history of the Second World War ... look there ...
    1. Alexander Greene 1 October 2019 22: 51 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Quote: kalibr
      (56,5% from own production),

      And in the last Lend-Lease publication, you missed this note and assured us of something else. .
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 19: 27 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    Quote: merlin
    "First get it !!!" - This is such a sweet and pathetic argument that, really, is ridiculous.
    Would you still, Vyacheslav Olegovich, promise "to calculate my IP and fill the face"

    Why do I need your IP, or your face, I do not need to beat anyone, how are you there ... I see that you are trying to prove something to me, but do not try. I want to laugh, laugh. Because I know perfectly well that the world belongs to young people, that is, to you, but I also know that your opinion in this particular case does not play any role, because the opinions of anonymous people have no price!
    1. marline 1 October 2019 20: 04 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      Quote: kalibr
      Your opinion in this particular case does not play any role, because the opinions of anonymous authors have no price!

      Beautifully told stupidity.
      Tell me, does your memory still store such an expression as a “black opponent”? Does his opinion also play no role?
      PS: I am very flattered that my opinion is invaluable to you.
  • kalibr 1 October 2019 19: 31 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    Nycomed Today, 19: 15 I understand! It is difficult to part with myths inspired from childhood. There will be one more material about Lend-Lease, the latter, specifically on reckoning. Watch out!
    1. BAI
      BAI 1 October 2019 22: 44 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      And in this article will be an American assessment of Lend-Lease? For example, this one:
      Senator George, Chairman of the Finance Committee, explained why you should spend money on a Lend-Lease program:
      [USA] now spend about 8 billion a month. If it were not for the preparations that we made in these months, having won time, the war, I am sure, would have continued for a year longer. We spend up to 100 billions of dollars a year on war, and besides, we could lose a huge number of lives to the country's best sons. Even reducing the war by only half a year, we will save 48 billions of dollars, spending only 11 billions, and the blood of our soldiers, the tears of our mothers, cannot be estimated at all ...

      It seems land lease was a very profitable business. There was no smell of charity and fraternal help.
    2. Alexander Greene 2 October 2019 08: 38 New
      • 2
      • 2
      0
      Quote: kalibr
      It is difficult to part with myths inspired from childhood.

      There are no difficulties. It’s just now that suddenly it has become fashionable to exaggerate the role of Lend-Lease, to overestimate the numbers. This is done not by chance, but in order to finally revise the results of the Great Patriotic War.
      Rarely has anyone found the truth and soberly approaches assessment
      Here, for example, is a document cited by historian Isaev
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LRvLQkATZEкол-во ленд-лизовских автомобилей в КА:


      January 1, 1942 - 0 thousand
      January 1, 1943 - 22,0 thousand
      January 1, 1944 - 94,1 thousand
      January 1, 1945 - 191,3 thousand
      as of May 1, 1945 - 218,1,4 thousand

      Throughout the war, the spacecraft used 1.052.410 cars (incl. 272.605 as of June 22, 1941), of which 312.600 were received by Lend-Lease.
      1. Alexey RA 2 October 2019 11: 53 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        So it again morgue average hospital temperature. If we take the same Isaev, he wrote that the mobility of the advanced detachments of the combined arms army in the offensives of the Red Army at the end of the war, which was comparable with the mechanized units, was provided precisely by Lend-Lease.
        Designated by the state to service the transportation of ammunition and other supplies, the 41st automobile regiment of the 5th shock army consisted of 127 Ford trucks and 476 Studebakers. For the transport of the advanced detachment of the 94th Guards. the infantry division assigned 77 Studebakers to the infantry division, and 266 Studebakers to transport the advance detachment of the 61th Infantry Division (Colonel Esipenko).
        © Isaev. Berlin-45.
        There are no all-wheel drive vehicles - everything, the infantry is behind, the motorized infantry of the mechanized units for the most part, too, the artillery drags at its 3-5 km / h behind agricultural tractors, and only tanks and tank landing are rushing ahead.
        1. Alexander Greene 2 October 2019 20: 47 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Quote: Alexey RA
          So this is again the average temperature in the hospital, taking into account the morgue.

          Where do you see the "average temperature"? 1941, 1942 the most difficult years - by zeros. The USSR then survived when the German war machine was stronger than ever. and only when the ridge near Kursk was broken, revival, Lend-Lease began, but by this time all the factories of the USSR had increased their productivity several times.

          The nomenclature of Lend-Lease supplies was intended to fill up the bottlenecks in the supply of our army. No one says that this is not necessary, but to exaggerate this help is also not necessary. Those who participate in this chorus of voices are in the same company with such monsters as "Kolya from Urengoy."
          1. Alexey RA 3 October 2019 14: 45 New
            • 2
            • 2
            0
            Quote: Alexander Green
            Where do you see the "average temperature"?

            Yes, in the same table of the availability of vehicles.
            If only because most of the domestic trucks are one and a half. Three-ton ZIS-5s were produced in such quantities that before the war it was not enough for the army, even taking into account the full mobilization of n / a. And the three-axle ZIS-6 was not enough even for PARM and other special vehicles - Fedorenko in his 1941 report directly wrote that the supply of the army of workshops was limited precisely because of a lack of chassis. And since October 1941, the production of ZIS-6 was completely discontinued - and the army was left without three-axle chassis with a carrying capacity of 3 tons. Even the BM-13 had nothing to bet on.
            At the same time, 6 × 6 and 6 × 4 trucks with a recommended payload of 4 tons were driving Lend-Lease. There were no analogues in the USSR - even the experienced pre-war GAZ-63 had a load capacity of only 2,5 tons.
            Quote: Alexander Green
            1941, 1942 the most difficult years - by zeros. The USSR then survived when the German war machine was stronger than ever. and only when she broke the ridge near Kursk, revival began, Lend-Lease

            This is not a revitalization of Lend-Lease. This is finally a joint effort that we and the Allies were able to establish logistics - so that the ships of the new convoy did not meet the cargo of the convoy of the previous one in the port. Only in 1943 were they able to break through the routes through Iran - even the Americans took more than a year to raise the infrastructure from scratch. Only in 1943 were they able to equip the Far East shipping company with Lend-Lease ships - the ships available to the USSR could raise only a third of the volumes traveling along the Far East route.
            Quote: Alexander Green
            but by this time all the factories of the USSR had increased their productivity several times.

            Ten wheelbarrows will not replace the dump truck.
            By the way, sets of “screwdriver assembly” cars delivered to the USSR on LL were also recorded in domestic production.
            Quote: Alexander Green
            Nobody says that this is not necessary, but it is also not necessary to exaggerate this help.

            It is difficult to exaggerate all four-wheel drive trucks, half aluminum and copper, two-thirds of high-octane gasoline and from 20 to 40% of gunpowder.
            Quote: Alexander Green
            Those who participate in this chorus of voices are in the same company with such monsters as "Kolya from Urengoy."

            You are still talking about cringing before the West and "eat Russian fat!" forgot to write. smile
            1. Alexander Greene 3 October 2019 18: 37 New
              • 1
              • 1
              0
              Quote: Alexey RA
              You are still talking about cringing before the West and "eat Russian fat!" forgot to write.

              I didn’t forget, I just didn’t want to offend you ... but, excuse me, they themselves asked for it ...
              Your comment will surely appeal to “Kolya s Urengoy” and his teachers, and your reverence
              Quote: Alexey RA
              .... we and Сoyuzniki ...
              their owners will especially like it; in it one feels a divine blessing before them.
  • The comment was deleted.