Why did it fail?

There was never a point during the war where the Soviets didn't outproduce what they received via lend-lease. Arguably the trucks were the most important thing received, but even then you have to take into account the estimated 400,000 "trucks" weren't just trucks, but also staff cars, jeeps, etc. Also like 1% of that shit arrived during lend-lease, if that.

during Barbarossa*

So close.

Attached: 1660939745572249.png (1088x998, 172.3K)

Gott war nicht mit ihnen

Attached: rusemoschool-1499109090454298628-20220302_224713-vid1 (video-converter.com).webm (464x848, 1.5M)

i still believe hitler should've authorize the attack on Moscow instead of diverting troops to the south. I know Germans needed oil but PR victory over taking Moscow can't be understated. perhaps use the victory to peace out somehow.

The problem with this is that all of the Allied powers were bankrolled by American money and equipment, but only the Soviet Union with its massive manpower pools could destroy Nazi Germany. If Hitler hadn't attacked the USSR and instead made the USSR an enemy of the Allied Powers by joining sides with him, then Hitler would have surely won the war--and Stalin would never have made himself an enemy of everyone, the Axis and the Allies, that would surely mean the USSR's destruction. So the fantasy from Nazicels that "Stalin would have attacked anyway" is delusional. He never would have done so until the conclusion of the current war--and a Cold War would have followed, of which the USSR would have lost to Nazi Germany like they lost to NATO

Attached: Baby Hitler.jpg (515x484, 134.45K)

Stalin and STAVKA assumed the Germans would try for Moscow in 1942 so they put most of their formations opposite Army Group Centre, which is the reason why Case Blue went as well as it did, until it didn't.

Other way around.

Turkey and the Japs both promised to declare war on the Soviets if the Germans took Stalingrad.

Hitler literally sacrificed both manpower and material for the meme of taking Moscow.

They cut through hohols because they were incompetent and then got their ass handed to them when they got to Russians.

I TRIED SO HARD
AND GOT SO FAR
BUT IN THE END
I COULDN'T GET MOSCOW

I WENT SOUTH
TO LOSE IT ALL
BUT IN THE END
WE'RE AGAIN IN WEIMAR

I have already heard that under Lend-Lease, the Soviets received 50% of everything that they fought and lived on. Soon it will be 90%.
Although I am not against the importance of lend-lease, exceptional. But I think the Americans would have sent help to the Poles and France and ensured their victory, but something did not work out.

kek

i thought soviet focused on defending the south due to the fact that their food and oil were there.

never heard of such agreements.

It was too slow.

Attached: 1653263196420.jpg (1024x1024, 255.22K)

>MFW Putler's war with Ukraine has gone better than Hitler's failure in the USSR

Attached: Daisy Pog.jpg (706x768, 45.17K)

Has it really though?

Attached: 1654175434653.jpg (600x1132, 83.79K)

The war is not over yet

You have to name specific items. Fifty per-cent of everything isn't true in the slightest, but it may be true for a couple of specific things they weren't producing, but probably could have produced if they really needed it. Trains are always brought up a lot, and 2000 locomotives sounds like a lot when you fail to realize the Soviets used 30,000 of their own trains and almost 2 million railcars to move over 1900 factories to Siberia and Central Asia (all while under attack and with no lend-lease).

It really has.

Attached: no coconuts.jpg (756x715, 340.32K)

STAVKA thought the Germans exhausted their ability to conduct successful strategic offensives, and they were half right.

tpbp
based
OP is a glowie look his flag
>cayman islands
thats vpn

Have they achieved even a single cauldron aside from Mariupol?

cope rooskie

Also soviets before the war had a lot of imported American technologies