Where do you stand on lend lease chromeboomerang?


The lend lease question comes up a lot as to whether it enabled Russia to survive or not, Some like Keegan, think it was vital in the Soviets being able to continue to successfully operate later in the war and eventually win.

Others, including Alan Clarke and David Glantz, say that lend lease was very helpful in shortening the war, but did not decide it.

Glantz says "Lend-Lease aid did not arrive in sufficient quantities to make a difference between defeat and victory in 1941-1942''

According to Glantz, had Stalin and his commanders been left to their own devices, it "might have taken 12 to 18 months longer to finish off the Wehrmacht," but "the ultimate result would probably have been the same.

I'm inclined to go along with Glantz.

Even by the time the Wehrmacht's second offensive was defeated at Stalingrad, lend lease hadn't fully kicked in according to Clarke.

He says the help really started bearing fruit in the second part of 1943 following Kursk. At that time it was fairly obvious as to the direction of the war.