Could the Axis have won World War 2?

[Imperializt Russia]

Critically, the US provided the USSR with tens of thousands of logistical trucks, and tens of thousands of US-built Mosin rifles.

Given time the Russians could easily produce the number of trucks sent by the Russians and I do not think the rifles did that much, by 1943 most soldiers in the Russian army were armed with sub-machine guns such as the PPSH-41 and same with the trucks, the Russians could produce the same amount the US gave them. I think the US helped but their help was not vital.

The US sent half a million trucks and jeeps to the USSR.
Not to mention seven thousand tanks and eleven thousand fighter aircraft.

[Sdaeriji]

Critically, the US provided the USSR with tens of thousands of logistical trucks, and tens of thousands of US-built Mosin rifles.

Given time the Russians could easily produce the number of trucks sent by the Russians and I do not think the rifles did that much, by 1943 most soldiers in the Russian army were armed with sub-machine guns such as the PPSH-41 and same with the trucks, the Russians could produce the same amount the US gave them. I think the US helped but their help was not vital.

By the end of the war, two thirds of the logistical truck strength of the Red Army was US made. Sure, the Russians might have been able to eventually produce the amount of trucks equal to what they received from the US, if they wanted to extend the war another two or three years.

[Sdaeriji]

Given time the Russians could easily produce the number of trucks sent by the Russians and I do not think the rifles did that much, by 1943 most soldiers in the Russian army were armed with sub-machine guns such as the PPSH-41 and same with the trucks, the Russians could produce the same amount the US gave them. I think the US helped but their help was not vital.

The US sent half a million trucks and jeeps to the USSR.
Not to mention seven thousand tanks and eleven thousand fighter aircraft.

And two thousand trains, to supplement the 100 or so the USSR built themselves during the war.

[Sdaeriji]

The Lend-Lease program did help the USSR get back on its feet, though the USSR had it going good after 1942-43. If I remember correctly.

Lend-Lease helped but without it the USSR would still have won, it would have taken longer but by say 1948 they would have won

The USSR suffered 20 million deaths during the four years they participated in the war. Another three years would have meant another 10 to 15 million deaths, conservatively.

[Imperializt Russia]

Lend-Lease helped but without it the USSR would still have won, it would have taken longer but by say 1948 they would have won

The USSR suffered 20 million deaths during the four years they participated in the war. Another three years would have meant another 10 to 15 million deaths, conservatively.

Well, less so. By the end of the war, Russian tactics were becoming much more coordinated and effective and obviously the Germans were being beaten back on the western front too.
Likely, the Russians may not have reached Berlin - or at least, Berlin may have remained in West Germany.
Who knows, Germany may never have been partitioned.

[Tule]

No.

Itay's military was ineffective practically everywhere it went and needed German assistance, so it can be discounted completely.

Germany tried unsuccessfully to capture Britain and gave up in 1940, despite the fact that it wasn't conducting any extensive military operations in any other part of Europe.

Then they tried to invade the Soviet Union in 1941, when it wasn't conducting any extensive military operations in any other part of Europe at that time either.
By the time the West finally invaded Normandy in 1944 the Wehrmacht was getting steamrolled on the Eastern front and had lost Romania.

Even if Germany had let Britain and the Soviet union alone, it would still have lost since Stalin spent the whole 1930's preparing for war with Germany. He was spending one third of the Soviet GDP on the military in 1940, the Soviet leadership had learnt from the mistakes of the Winter war and accelerated the mechanization of the already quite mechanized Red Army after Germany annexed France and Poland.

The "Miracle Weapons" Germany was developing were a massive waste of money. The V2 project alone cost Germany the equivalent of 40 billion dollars in todays money, did not result in any fielding of rockets until 1944 and killed less than 3000 people. They issued their first and ineffective miracle weapon in 1944!

Germany was screwed from the beginning.

[Zorga]

Mistake One, Invasion of Poland (Caused Brits and France to Declare War on Germany)

Mistake Two, Bombing of English Cities (If they kept bombing the RAF airfields, the RAF would be non-existent and and invasion would have been possible)

Mistake three, Bombing of Pearl Harbor (Yamamoto siad it himself; "I feel as if we awoke a great sleeping giant", talking about the potential of American Industry)

But by far the biggest mistake of all;

The Invasion of the USSR. If the Germans would've not invaded the Soviet Union, then World War Two was defiantly winnable. Opening the war on two fronts was the worst thing Hitler ever decided.

So in my opinion, yes the war could've easily have been won by the Axis. They had the technology, the tactics, the strength, and greater numbers but because of stupid leadership and retarded moves, it thankfully, destroyed the Axis and everything that was with it. If the axis also would've won, the cold war might have not happened as well.

[Imperializt Russia]

No.

Itay's military was ineffective practically everywhere it went and needed German assistance, so it can be discounted completely.

Germany tried unsuccessfully to capture Britain and gave up in 1940, despite the fact that it wasn't conducting any extensive military operations in any other part of Europe.

Then they tried to invade the Soviet Union in 1941, when it wasn't conducting any extensive military operations in any other part of Europe at that time either.
By the time the West finally invaded Normandy in 1944 the Wehrmacht was getting steamrolled on the Eastern front and had lost Romania.

Even if Germany had let Britain and the Soviet union alone, it would still have lost since Stalin spent the whole 1930's preparing for war with Germany. He was spending one third of the Soviet GDP on the military in 1940, the Soviet leadership had learnt from the mistakes of the Winter war and accelerated the mechanization of the already quite mechanized Red Army after Germany annexed France and Poland.

The "Miracle Weapons" Germany was developing were a massive waste of money. The V2 project alone cost Germany the equivalent of 40 billion dollars in todays money, did not result in any fielding of rockets until 1944 and killed less than 3000 people. They issued their first and ineffective miracle weapon in 1944!

Germany was screwed from the beginning.

In fairness, Hitler demanded the V1 and V2 be deployed against London rather than military targets IIRC.
Took quite a bit of goading before he greenlit bombing the port at Antwerp.

[Vistulange]

Lend-Lease helped but without it the USSR would still have won, it would have taken longer but by say 1948 they would have won

The USSR suffered 20 million deaths during the four years they participated in the war. Another three years would have meant another 10 to 15 million deaths, conservatively.

The problem is, the USSR had a lot of bodies to throw at the Germans. That's basically the problem with attrition warfare. In fact, for the first four years of the war, the main Soviet doctrine was "throw MORE troops at a problem until it goes away".

In fairness, Hitler demanded the V1 and V2 be deployed against London rather than military targets IIRC.
Took quite a bit of goading before he greenlit bombing the port at Antwerp.

...wasn't it extremely difficult for a V1 or V2 to hit anything smaller than London?

[Tule]

No.

Itay's military was ineffective practically everywhere it went and needed German assistance, so it can be discounted completely.

Germany tried unsuccessfully to capture Britain and gave up in 1940, despite the fact that it wasn't conducting any extensive military operations in any other part of Europe.

Then they tried to invade the Soviet Union in 1941, when it wasn't conducting any extensive military operations in any other part of Europe at that time either.
By the time the West finally invaded Normandy in 1944 the Wehrmacht was getting steamrolled on the Eastern front and had lost Romania.

Even if Germany had let Britain and the Soviet union alone, it would still have lost since Stalin spent the whole 1930's preparing for war with Germany. He was spending one third of the Soviet GDP on the military in 1940, the Soviet leadership had learnt from the mistakes of the Winter war and accelerated the mechanization of the already quite mechanized Red Army after Germany annexed France and Poland.

The "Miracle Weapons" Germany was developing were a massive waste of money. The V2 project alone cost Germany the equivalent of 40 billion dollars in todays money, did not result in any fielding of rockets until 1944 and killed less than 3000 people. They issued their first and ineffective miracle weapon in 1944!

Germany was screwed from the beginning.

In fairness, Hitler demanded the V1 and V2 be deployed against London rather than military targets IIRC.
Took quite a bit of goading before he greenlit bombing the port at Antwerp.

True, but remember that the V2 had a Circle of Equal Probability of 4 kilometers. The Rockets were landing in the Port of Antwerp, and the downtown, and the suburbs.

[Lemanrussland]

The US sent half a million trucks and jeeps to the USSR.
Not to mention seven thousand tanks and eleven thousand fighter aircraft.

And two thousand trains, to supplement the 100 or so the USSR built themselves during the war.

Those trucks amounted to about 2/3 of the total Red Army inventory by the end of the war, too. We also sent rations (most famously, tins of Spam), and lots of other stuff like telephone cabling, aircraft of various types, tanks, petrol, and clothing.

I can't remember the figures, but I read an interesting article about the role of Spam in the war, about how many pigs were slaughtered, and what percentage of the total calories taken in by the average soldier was from Spam consumption. It was quite an interesting read.

[The Huskar Social Union]

And two thousand trains, to supplement the 100 or so the USSR built themselves during the war.

Those trucks amounted to about 2/3 of the total Red Army inventory by the end of the war, too. We also sent rations (most famously, tins of Spam), and lots of other stuff like telephone cabling, aircraft of various types, tanks, petrol, and clothing.

I can't remember the figures, but I read an interesting article about the role of Spam in the war, about how many pigs were slaughtered, and what percentage of the total calories taken in by the average soldier was from Spam consumption. It was quite an interesting read.

Probably the most interesting spam ever was and ever will be.

[Calisu]

If Germany hadn't turned to fight a two front war against Russia they would have succeeded in taking all of Europe.

[Imperializt Russia]

In fairness, Hitler demanded the V1 and V2 be deployed against London rather than military targets IIRC.
Took quite a bit of goading before he greenlit bombing the port at Antwerp.

True, but remember that the V2 had a Circle of Equal Probability of 4 kilometers. The Rockets were landing in the Port of Antwerp, and the downtown, and the suburbs.

There's only so much you can do with a 1940s gyroscope manufactured by malnourished peasant children.

[Wolfenia]

Yes, if change a lot of things

Same thing goes for WWI and the Napoleonic Wars, and the norman invasion, and any war ever.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

Quoting all of the posts in question would be a pain, so I'm just going to go point-by-point here:

-The US sent the Russians eleven thousand AIRCRAFT. About 1/4 were bombers/support craft. I should add that majority of the fighters sent to the USSR were P-39 Aircobras, which the US regarded as not worth maintaining. Of course, the Russian pilots thought they were great and proceeded to make excellent use of them despite the US not supplying them with armor-piercing ammunition for their cannons.

The Russians didn't really NEED help with fighters by 1943, though. The La-5 and Yak-9/3 were some of the best fighters of the war, while the Il-2 remains the most produced military aircraft EVER.

-By far the most common trucks on the eastern front were of Soviet make. The ZIS-5 and GAZ AA (which were, admittedly, local copies of vehicles built by American companies,) accounted for about two million vehicles. The total number of US vehicles delivered was about 400,000, including smaller vehicles (namely jeeps.) The Soviets produced about 100,000 of their own jeep-like vehicles.

-The Soviets didn't produce many locomotives during WWII because most of the train plants were converted to tank production. However, they had something like 3,000-5,000 prior to the war (numbers vary depending on source.)

-Continuing the war doesn't nessecarily mean the USSR would suffer equivalent casualty rates. About 1/2 to 1/3 of the USSR's military losses in the war were sustained in Operation Barbarossa (+4,000,000 captured/dead.) Casualty rates decreased as the war went on and Soviet commanders were either replaced with competent people or gained enough experience to be effective. The breaking of German air dominance in late '42/early '43 also greatly decreased Soviet casualty rates. Further, given the ever-dwindling supplies of German materiel late in the war, and the fact that they were down to throwing old men, the mentally disabled and elementary school kids at the Russians when they got to Berlin, I think it's safe to say that the casualties would have been mostly on the German side if the war had gone on.

-The majority of Soviet troops were not armed with SMGs, although they did use them a lot as they developed their shock warfare doctrine. The main infantry armament of the Soviet Union remained the Mosin-Nagant until the end of the war, although I believe they started producing a shortened version in '43.

-While the western ally tank deliveries to the USSR were certainly useful, they weren't always universally loved. The M3 Lee was (apocryphally) referred to as the 'coffin for seven brothers.' They did approve of the Stuart, though.


tl;dr:
There are a lot of misconceptions about Lend-Lease, and people tend to either overestimate its contributions or discount them entirely. The truth is somewhere in between, and it's actually rather difficult to say how the Soviets would have done without it. There are simply too many variables involved.

[Grand Russian Federation]

The only way they could have won is if the Soviet Union had not industrialized/Whites won the Russian Civil War. Otherwise, the same result as real life.

You realized that the Soviet Union didn't really start beating back the Germans until 43 when every man, woman, and child in the country armed themselves with a weapon and threw themselves at the Germans. Literally.

It was also the weather which made the Eastern Front hell.

What does this change? At all?

Industrialization = moar guns, tanks, and aircraft.
Hitler also forgot to bring his winter coats to the Eastern Front.

If Hitler was not stupid, he could've won. Luckily, he was an idiot.

My hope for humanity won't be coming back anytime soon, and anyways, why are we discussing how they could've won, you know, SOMETHING THAT WON'T CHANGE BECAUSE IT'S IN THE PAST. We have more pressing problems.. Ebola, Ukraine, the USA spying on its people, etc etc.

[Lemanrussland]

Quoting all of the posts in question would be a pain, so I'm just going to go point-by-point here:

-The US sent the Russians eleven thousand AIRCRAFT. About 1/4 were bombers/support craft. I should add that majority of the fighters sent to the USSR were P-39 Aircobras, which the US regarded as not worth maintaining. Of course, the Russian pilots thought they were great and proceeded to make excellent use of them despite the US not supplying them with armor-piercing ammunition for their cannons.

The Russians didn't really NEED help with fighters by 1943, though. The La-5 and Yak-9/3 were some of the best fighters of the war, while the Il-2 remains the most produced military aircraft EVER.

-By far the most common trucks on the eastern front were of Soviet make. The ZIS-5 and GAZ AA (which were, admittedly, local copies of vehicles built by American companies,) accounted for about two million vehicles. The total number of US vehicles delivered was about 400,000, including smaller vehicles (namely jeeps.) The Soviets produced about 100,000 of their own jeep-like vehicles.

-The Soviets didn't produce many locomotives during WWII because most of the train plants were converted to tank production. However, they had something like 3,000-5,000 prior to the war (numbers vary depending on source.)

-Continuing the war doesn't nessecarily mean the USSR would suffer equivalent casualty rates. About 1/2 to 1/3 of the USSR's military losses in the war were sustained in Operation Barbarossa (+4,000,000 captured/dead.) Casualty rates decreased as the war went on and Soviet commanders were either replaced with competent people or gained enough experience to be effective. The breaking of German air dominance in late '42/early '43 also greatly decreased Soviet casualty rates. Further, given the ever-dwindling supplies of German materiel late in the war, and the fact that they were down to throwing old men, the mentally disabled and elementary school kids at the Russians when they got to Berlin, I think it's safe to say that the casualties would have been mostly on the German side if the war had gone on.

-The majority of Soviet troops were not armed with SMGs, although they did use them a lot as they developed their shock warfare doctrine. The main infantry armament of the Soviet Union remained the Mosin-Nagant until the end of the war, although I believe they started producing a shortened version in '43.

-While the western ally tank deliveries to the USSR were certainly useful, they weren't always universally loved. The M3 Lee was (apocryphally) referred to as the 'coffin for seven brothers.' They did approve of the Stuart, though.


tl;dr:
There are a lot of misconceptions about Lend-Lease, and people tend to either overestimate its contributions or discount them entirely. The truth is somewhere in between, and it's actually rather difficult to say how the Soviets would have done without it. There are simply too many variables involved.

Curious, where are you getting your information in regards to trucks?

Wartime production of trucks in the SU only amounted to around 200,000 vehicles, not millions. Out of those, 150,400 were consumed by the military.

The Red Army started the war with 270,000 trucks, and received 745,000 throughout the war. 150,000 were of domestic production (as mentioned earlier), 221,500 were drafted from civilian sectors like industry and agriculture, 60,600 were captured from the enemy, and 312,600 were delivered by Lend-Lease.

https://fat-yankey.livejournal.com/32078.html

Millions of those vehicles were produced throughout their entire production runs, yes, but that's not relevant as far the war goes. LL trucks helped the Red Army immensely in the second and third period of the Great Patriotic War (19 November 1942 - 9 May 1945). Without them, the strategic offensives conducted by the Red Army in that period would have probably been much shorter and shallower, with fewer encirclements and deep penetrations.

I think the reason LL is so contentious was because of the falling out that occurred between the SU and Western Allies during and after the war. I think it's important, when discussing the impact of LL, to account for the fact that the majority of aid came to the SU after the hardest battles. By the time of Stalingrad only 5 percent of the total LL assistance sent during the war had been received by the SU. It's important to keep a balanced perspective on such things. Too many people take it personally and feel obligated to defend their nation's honor or something.

[Saiwania]

Lend-Lease helped but without it the USSR would still have won, it would have taken longer but by say 1948 they would have won

Without Lend-Lease, the USSR might not have made it to Berlin before the US and western allies did. That is all that would really matter.

Stalin's dreams of a communist eastern Europe thwarted. Feeling the Soviet disappointment of failing to exact their revenge would've been spectacular. The Soviet Union would've gotten all of the negatives of waging war but none of the glory from victory, nothing could be sweeter. Germany would've turned out just as well as Japan did with no Soviet occupation at all, and a ton of suffering avoided.

[The Grey Wolf]

Mistake One, Invasion of Poland (Caused Brits and France to Declare War on Germany)

Despite declaring war, Britain and France were rather reluctant to actually launch a military operation, thus starting "the phoney war." Germany was the one who put an end to the stalemate with the invasion of France.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

Quoting all of the posts in question would be a pain, so I'm just going to go point-by-point here:

-The US sent the Russians eleven thousand AIRCRAFT. About 1/4 were bombers/support craft. I should add that majority of the fighters sent to the USSR were P-39 Aircobras, which the US regarded as not worth maintaining. Of course, the Russian pilots thought they were great and proceeded to make excellent use of them despite the US not supplying them with armor-piercing ammunition for their cannons.

The Russians didn't really NEED help with fighters by 1943, though. The La-5 and Yak-9/3 were some of the best fighters of the war, while the Il-2 remains the most produced military aircraft EVER.

-By far the most common trucks on the eastern front were of Soviet make. The ZIS-5 and GAZ AA (which were, admittedly, local copies of vehicles built by American companies,) accounted for about two million vehicles. The total number of US vehicles delivered was about 400,000, including smaller vehicles (namely jeeps.) The Soviets produced about 100,000 of their own jeep-like vehicles.

-The Soviets didn't produce many locomotives during WWII because most of the train plants were converted to tank production. However, they had something like 3,000-5,000 prior to the war (numbers vary depending on source.)

-Continuing the war doesn't nessecarily mean the USSR would suffer equivalent casualty rates. About 1/2 to 1/3 of the USSR's military losses in the war were sustained in Operation Barbarossa (+4,000,000 captured/dead.) Casualty rates decreased as the war went on and Soviet commanders were either replaced with competent people or gained enough experience to be effective. The breaking of German air dominance in late '42/early '43 also greatly decreased Soviet casualty rates. Further, given the ever-dwindling supplies of German materiel late in the war, and the fact that they were down to throwing old men, the mentally disabled and elementary school kids at the Russians when they got to Berlin, I think it's safe to say that the casualties would have been mostly on the German side if the war had gone on.

-The majority of Soviet troops were not armed with SMGs, although they did use them a lot as they developed their shock warfare doctrine. The main infantry armament of the Soviet Union remained the Mosin-Nagant until the end of the war, although I believe they started producing a shortened version in '43.

-While the western ally tank deliveries to the USSR were certainly useful, they weren't always universally loved. The M3 Lee was (apocryphally) referred to as the 'coffin for seven brothers.' They did approve of the Stuart, though.


tl;dr:
There are a lot of misconceptions about Lend-Lease, and people tend to either overestimate its contributions or discount them entirely. The truth is somewhere in between, and it's actually rather difficult to say how the Soviets would have done without it. There are simply too many variables involved.

Curious, where are you getting your information in regards to trucks?

Wartime production of trucks in the SU only amounted to around 200,000 vehicles, not millions. Out of those, 150,400 were consumed by the military.

The Red Army started the war with 270,000 trucks, and received 745,000 throughout the war. 150,000 were of domestic production (as mentioned earlier), 221,500 were drafted from civilian sectors like industry and agriculture, 60,600 were captured from the enemy, and 312,600 were delivered by Lend-Lease.

https://fat-yankey.livejournal.com/32078.html

Millions of those vehicles were produced throughout their entire production runs, yes, but that's not relevant as far the war goes. LL trucks helped the Red Army immensely in the second and third period of the Great Patriotic War (19 November 1942 - 9 May 1945). Without them, the strategic offensives conducted by the Red Army in that period would have probably been much shorter and shallower, with fewer encirclements and deep penetrations.

I think the reason LL is so contentious was because of the falling out that occurred between the SU and Western Allies during and after the war. I think it's important, when discussing the impact of LL, to account for the fact that the majority of aid came to the SU after the hardest battles. By the time of Stalingrad only 5 percent of the total LL assistance sent during the war had been received by the SU. It's important to keep a balanced perspective on such things. Too many people take it personally and feel obligated to defend their nation's honor or something.

The Soviet Economy and the Red Army by Walter Scott Dunn. His figures indicate that the USSR produced ~100,000 trucks per year through the war, with US trucks primarily being used for front-line service and Russian trucks being used as supply/logistics vehicles. I was counting total production figures, yes, as I wasn't sure how many made it up to wartime. Considering the trucks in question had been in production since the early 30s, it seemed reasonable to assume a good portion of them were still around.

Dunn's figures are as follows:

Year/Domestically produced/Lend Lease
1941 / 100,000 / 10,000
1942 / 70,000 / 50,000
1943 / 80,000 / 100,000
1944 / 100,000 / 130,000

This would give a total of 350,000 built domestically and 290,000 imported. Add in the soviet trucks already in service and LL accounts for about 1/3 of Soviet logistical trucks. I believe Dunn is only counting trucks in these figures, not smaller vehicles.

I certainly agree that the Lend-Lease program was effective and helped the Soviets immensely. But given the nature of the war, I would maintain that Germany was bound to lose any war with the Soviet Union eventually unless they somehow secured an alliance with somebody with access to the strategic resources and manpower they needed.

[Blakk Metal]

Critically, the US provided the USSR with tens of thousands of logistical trucks, and tens of thousands of US-built Mosin rifles.

Given time the Russians could easily produce the number of trucks sent

By that time, Russia would have surrendered.

[Dracoria]

While reading on the issue of oil in WWII, I came upon something perhaps more important than most of the vehicles supplied via Lend-Lease: fuel and equipment to produce more. All those tanks, planes, and support vehicles needed gas and oil to operate. Roughly half the lend-lease petroleum products went to the USSR, especially high-octane gasoline needed to run the Lend-Lease planes (Soviet and captured German aircraft were made to operate with lower-quality fuels, which were also sent). Not to mention the ships and convoy defense for much of the trip, to get that fuel and equipment to its destinations. Further, the US and Britain supplied equipment and technology to expand Soviet extraction, refining and transportation capabilities, which in the long run would turn out to be as important or moreso than the initial petroleum products were.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

While reading on the issue of oil in WWII, I came upon something perhaps more important than most of the vehicles supplied via Lend-Lease: fuel and equipment to produce more. All those tanks, planes, and support vehicles needed gas and oil to operate. Roughly half the lend-lease petroleum products went to the USSR, especially high-octane gasoline needed to run the Lend-Lease planes (Soviet and captured German aircraft were made to operate with lower-quality fuels, which were also sent). Not to mention the ships and convoy defense for much of the trip, to get that fuel and equipment to its destinations. Further, the US and Britain supplied equipment and technology to expand Soviet extraction, refining and transportation capabilities, which in the long run would turn out to be as important or moreso than the initial petroleum products were.

Lend-lease gas, as far as I've been able to find, was largely only for lend-lease goods. Soviet tanks ran almost exclusively on diesel (which was why the US sent them most of their diesel-powered M4 Shermans.)

[Roski]

http://www.history.com/news/history-lists/5-attacks-on-u-s-soil-during-world-war-ii

Did anyone know about this?