Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-110.20.227.171-20141127105940/@comment-3428312-20141214171609

Lordganon wrote: Those same generals also thought that the Soviets could have beaten the Germans by themselves - and so did their political leaders.

Once again, GB: There is no truth that assumption of yours. Both about their manpower, and logistics. The only point in the war where the numerical advantage was not in favor of the Soviets was the first couple months after the invasion, when they were just starting to mobilize. These numbers went up at the same rate even while the Germans were launching their second major offensive in the south. All the western trucks did was allow for a faster advance. I've never once stated that the Soviets had a smaller army then the Germans. I have, however, pointed out that said army was rapidly running out of men by the time the war ended. I've cited numerous that confirm this, and to suggest otherwise is patently false and ignorant of all historical research upon the matter by those who make it their profession to do as such.

This also goes for your attempt to downplay the role of American equipment, which goes against just about every honest textbook that covers this era. A simple google research will show such startingly facts as that 1/3 of the daily food ration of a Soviet soldier orignated in America, most of the Red Army's locomotives and rolling stock were American, and nearly every supply truck was of American manufactor. Large numbers of other, direct fighting equipment was supplied along with a large quantity of fuel to operate them. Without this significant contribution, the USSR's offensives of 1943 and onwards would've been impossible, resulting in them being forced to seek terms.