"Send Us Tanks" - Stalin Asks for American Assistance | The Strange Alliance Part II

[@stekarknugen9258]

Extremely interesting stuff, such things as these you will never learn in a TV documentary because 15 minutes is too much of the time when they want to show exploding tanks and Hitler screaming at his generals etc. etc. instead.

[@pawelpap9]

You can always read a history book, but it may take longer than 15 minutes.

[@daniels_0399]

@@pawelpap9 You gotta pick your authors carefully, or at least realise that history is not what happened, but what we know happened based on the sources available. With books it is easier to fall for the "Well he's a historian so he must know what he's talking about" . You'd be surprised to see how much bias some historians have, and you don't notice that until page 200 when you read stuff like "The Germans in this sector repetedly repelled numerically superior soviet human wave attacks by poorly organised drunken Soviet conscripts" . Some may even take that for a fact and it births myths.

[@charlessnortley4519]

I really wish i could time travel an be a fly on the wall during the time of tribulations.

[@ebolalegion]

The photographer who took the photos of Stalin standing with Hopkins @ 02:25 was Margaret Bourke-White, a pioneering photogapher/photojournalist who came to prominence with Time-Life magazine. She visited the USSR several times throughout the 1930s to photograph the work being done in the Five Year Plans and she would write of this meeting in her autobiography - "I had seen so many giant statues of him that I had come to think of him as a man of superhuman size. I looked instinctively toward the ceiling, then lowered my eyes and saw Stalin. He was standing very stiff and straight in the center of the rug. His face was gray, his figure flat-chested. He stood so still he might have been carved out of granite. There was nothing superhuman about his size. My own height is five feet five, and Stalin was shorter than I am. My first reaction was "What an insignificant-looking man!" Then, in the next minute, I decided there was nothing insignificant about Stalin. Many correspondents and others I had talked with wondered whether Stalin made his own decisions or was merely a figurehead. One look at that granite face, and I was sure that Stalin made all the decisions. I was struck by his wide, Mongolian cheekbones which gave an illusion of size. I was surprised to see that he had pockmarks. He wore boots and a plain khaki tunic. I noted he was the only person I had seen in the Kremlin wearing no medals. As I began working, I tried to draw Stalin into conversation through the Kremlin interpreter. I mentioned having photographed his mother while she was still living, in Tiflis. At this disclosure, the Kremlin interpreter exclaimed with astonishment, "His very own mother! His real mother!" But Stalin spoke never a word. His rough, pitted face was as immobile as ice. I asked him to sit down, hoping that would make him more relaxed, and when he didn't, I repeated my request through the interpreter. Stalin showed no inclination to oblige me. I was desperate to find something to make that great stone face look human. Then a little thing happened to help me. As I sank down to my knees to get some low viewpoints, I spilled out a pocketful of peanut flashbulbs, which went bouncing all over the floor. The Kremlin interpreter and I went scrambling after them. I guess Stalin had never seen an American girl on her knees to him before. He thought it was funny, and started to laugh. The change was miraculous! It was as though a second personality had come to the front genial and almost merry. The smile lasted just long enough for me to make two exposures, and then, as though a veil had been drawn over his features, again he turned to stone. I went away thinking this was the most determined, the most ruthless personality I had ever encountered in my life." - pg. 183 - 184 in "A Portrait of Myself" by Margaret Bourke-White

[@Armageddon4145]

Thanks a lot for this great feedback! These precisions are most welcome. We already paid tribute to Margaret in the previous video (part I) explaining that most of the Moscow photos were taken by her. But this testimony is really interesting and we shall include it in our next release!

[@Diwana71]

Harry Hopkins was the First Western and US envoy to reach Moscow in July - August 1941, the Dark Days of the Red Army retreat on every front. Hopkins as envoy of President FDR brought letter to Stalin saying please speak to Harry Hopkins as if you are speaking to me. Stalin never forgot the visit of Harry Hopkins to Moscow as Hopkins had flown through the teeth of death to reach Moscow. And so Harry Hopkins was the only other person in the room, when the Big Three met later in the War at Tehran or Yalta, other than US President Roosevelt or British Prime Minister Churchill that Stalin used to walk upto meet as a mark of respect. Stalin never forgot the Hopkins's visit to Moscow in 1941.

[@maxn.7234]

On top of that, Hopkins had suffered from stomach cancer and had surgery the year prior. He was chosen for the job despite his dire health because he was a trusted hardcore communist sympathizer, as was Roosevelt.

[@billd.iniowa2263]

Whoa, great reporting! I knew this new format was going to be a winner. But I never dreamed I'd be hearing the top officials' mindset and opinions like this. Excellent work folks, keep it up!

[@Armageddon4145]

Thanks Bill!

[@RGC-gn2nm]

Really enjoy these. Imagine staring Stalin down and shaking his hand today.

[@Diwana71]

No. Harry Hopkins was too much of a gentleman to play staring down games. He was a fervent anti-Nazi and a good man. That's why FDR chose to send him rather than any British Aristocrat or American Reactionary who were dime a dozen even then.

[@peterthorell586]

He died 1953 in mars.

[@captainsponge7825]

@@Diwana71 a soviet spy, not a gentleman... goddamn delusional you are man.

[@rajeshkanungo6627]

@@captainsponge7825 Sources? I know that there were Nazi supporters in the US who branded him a traitor; their goal was to side with the Nazis against Stalin.

[@jacksons1010]

@@rajeshkanungo6627 Take a look at the “conservapedia” article on Harry Hopkins and you’ll see just how deranged the American right has become. My guess is Captain Sponge believes this nonsense and is not worth your time.

[@Diwana71]

Only time ever Stalin would ask for US Army deployment on Russian soil. These were dark days. It was never mentioned again.

[@TheProjectVoid]

asked, Yes Forced in 1919 also

[@browngreen933]

Stalin must have thought he was dreaming to have a fairy godmother in the form of Hopkins and President Roosevelt. Amazing!

[@jasonharryphotog]

Production was needed

[@jasonharryphotog]

@Al 72 committed to the end of it all

[@alexmason2659]

@@jasonharryphotog Stalin even admitted if it weren't for the machines of the US they would have lost

[@GunnyKeith]

Thanks Brad & Anton. Great video as always

[@ahmetben8812]

These videos are so good. As commented one of the earlier video: "criminally underrated channel "

[@Armageddon4145]

Thanks!

[@browngreen933]

American lend lease to Russia began way earlier than I previously thought.

[@rozkaz661]

Incredibly interesting, thanks for uploading this

[@Armageddon4145]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@kdfulton3152]

Thank you 🙏 Anton! Another great story from history! I would have loved to have been a fly on that wall when Hopkins and Stalin met.

[@Armageddon4145]

That's for sure KD! It would have been interesting to have even more details. But I'm glad you enjoy this series because I really like working on this topic. And there's much more to tell... Overall there will be at least as many episodes as in StalData's other series.

[@kdfulton3152]

@@Armageddon4145 I’m with ya here to Anton.

[@bcgames4054]

Another excellent presentation of inside-the-history. Thank-you!

[@mikesnyder1788]

Very informative program, as usual. I am a big fan of Harry Hopkins who, after serving our nation at so many levels, died in 1946, less than one year after the death of President Roosevelt.

[@stevecoscia]

Informative video. Vasily Grossman's "Life and Fate" quote at the end nicely summarizes Stalin's perception of Allied politics. Really enjoyed this video.

[@Armageddon4145]

Thank you Steve. If you enjoy this series you'll sure be appreciating the upcoming video on Margaret Bourke-White and the coverage of Soviet Russia from an American perspective.

[@stevecoscia]

@@Armageddon4145 Looking forward to the upcoming video. Thanks for the message. About 5 years ago, I read Life and Fate and thought it was the best novel of the 20th century. Subsequently, I read every Grossman book and essay that was translated into english. Not easy reading, but worth the effort. Thankfully, Grossman's Stalingrad book was translated two years ago.

[@bret9741]

One of the most interesting videos on ww2 in a long time.

[@Armageddon4145]

Thanks Bret.

[@HowlingWo1f]

Amazing, I hope there will be more follow up videos like this.

[@martialmusic]

Well done. Thank you

[@nomcognom2332]

Utterly good video! Liked it!

[@badglue4223]

wonderful done!

[@jasonharryphotog]

These videos give great insight

[@nickdanger3802]

See: Food and other strategic deliveries to the Soviet Union under the Lend-Lease Act, 1941-1945

[@alejandrocasalegno1657]

Almost lost, but very important information..................very good Anton!!!!

[@Michael-Philip]

Churchill once said " if Hitler invaded hell, I would side with the devil"

[@yoyo1899]

So he did.

[@paduapeted49]

Yes very interesting indeed. Shows the extent of Allied strategic planning against Hitler already at this very early stage. Stalin was clearly no defeatist - not even immediately after the shock of the German invasion.

[@keithcooper6715]

Good HISTORY - Excellent ! - Thank You

[@Armageddon4145]

Glad you enjoyed it

[@markprange4386]

4:22 Downtown Stalingrad.

[@mrvk39]

Great video! Everything that History Channel fails to be! I really like Life and Fate quote in the end - i think it ties in very nicely with the analysis of this video of Stalin and motivations of allies.

[@Armageddon4145]

Yes! Thank you!

[@oat138]

Very interesting.

[@danilorainone406]

harry and churchill waiited outside stalins office in an elaborate lobby,sculptures paintings mable flooring wood trim on many doorways,,harry said to churchill;'say minister,,which door do you think he'll come out of?' responded sir winston,,,,'well I should think he will come up through the floor in a puff of smoke!!"

[@Diwana71]

Fantastic Account.

[@leonidkurtich8177]

Most of the Soviet armaments were Soviet made. Lend-lease represented a small percentage and came later. By 1941 Soviet Union was an industrial country. Lend-lease helped, but it wasn't as critical to Soviet victory as it's made out to be.

[@antrim7008]

Correct. I’d say lend-lease was instrumental for Bagration and the swift work they made of the German defensive line, but it certainly didn’t win them Stalingrad or Kursk.

[@Armageddon4145]

All this is correct of course. The details of Lend-Lease will yet be developed in subsequent videos in this series, this is just the beginning.

[@nickdanger3802]

Zhukov gave an assessment of metal supply in the USSR. His remarks given in 1963, which were stored in the Central Archives of the Russian Defense Ministry, are listed below: «Right now they say that the Allies never helped us... But you cannot deny that Americans drove many materials, without which we would not be - 119 - able to form our reserves and could not continue the war ... And how much steel they supplied! Could we quickly establish the production of tanks, if not for American aid? And now they show it in a way that we had plenty of sources.» histrf.ru/uploads/media/default/0001/12/df78d3da0fe55d965333035cd9d4ee2770550653.pdf

[@nickdanger3802]

@@antrim7008 M3 light and medium tanks were used at Kursk. Where did 100 octane AV gas for US aircraft come from?

[@slavarodu5062]

Leand lease was crucial but not in a form of food, military equipement or weapons, but in a form of trucks which soviets had big lack of.

[@markprange4386]

6:49 Japan permitted shipping between the US and Vladivostok.

[@user-uy1rg8td1v]

Another stupid failure on the behalf of the Axis. If Germany and Japan had better coordination, Japan could have attacked Russia before Germany. Drawing away Russian units from the west to the east and making it easier for Germany to achieve its critical objectives which could have been the straw that broke the camel's back. Afterwards, Germany and Japan could divide up Russia as they saw fit.

[@markprange4386]

@@user-uy1rg8td1v: In 1939 Japan sampled combat with Russia, and didn't want any more.

[@dwarow2508]

@@user-uy1rg8td1v And Japan would have been demolished by the 3 million soviet troops standing at the Japanese border. The USSR did not move units from the far east to the west until 1943. The USSR was nowhere close to surrender or collapce during ww2.

[@aa2339]

They even missed the LCI’s used by the Soviets for the invasion of Sakhlin under Project Hula.

[@vuktodic1356]

This was something everyone asked but because japan already got their asses beaten up in 1939 they did not try that again so us ships could sail to vladivostok and give weapons to ussr japan did not dare to attack them to not provoke ussr because at the time they did not have power for 2 fronts they were fighting adding one more would destroy them

[@maps9]

it would be good to compare the size of shipped with the size of production in the USSR in a percentage..

[@Armageddon4145]

Stay tuned for next episodes with more details on the Lend-Lease.

[@maps9]

@@Armageddon4145 , thanks

[@dwarow2508]

About 4%

[@НатальяТерехова-е7щ]

Сделайте русские субтитры, пожалуйста! Заранее спасибо!

[@Armageddon4145]

Сложно. Может в будущем отдельный канал.

[@paduapeted49]

"Make Russian subtitles, please! Thank you in advance!" (Translated by Facebook ;) )

[@paduapeted49]

"Complicated. Maybe in the future a separate channel" ;)

[@krispirtsios8654]

Interesting observation by the American ambassador to Moscow. The Russian soldier may seem inept in fighting offensive battles but when it comes to defending their homeland it's very different. Very prophetic words.

[@georgekaragiannakis6637]

initially that was correct by with Operation Uranus the Russians proved their offensive capability and indeed from 1943 onwards they were continuously on the offensive with the exception of Kursk. How else could they have beaten the Germans. Remember Operation Bagration.

[@rodripuertas]

do we have the data of the lend lease items arriving per month to the URSS?

[@Armageddon4145]

More details on this in the next video from this series...

[@browngreen933]

Sounds good! Stuff I've wondered about for a long time.

[@jasonharryphotog]

It was a lot of everything

[@pawelpap9]

You can find detailed information in numerous history books. You know, these things made with paper that do not require electricity to read but I have to warn you there are no moving pictures.

[@maps9]

@@Armageddon4145 , it would be good to compare the size of shipped with the size of production in the USSR in a percentage..

[@scottnieradka6836]

I find it remarkable he said he was willing to give tank designs to america for production. Was this the t-34? How serious was this offer and do you know why wasn't it pursued?

[@troubleboy]

They gave t-34 to US for evaluation and testing, and US decided it was not that good, which the early t-34 was.

[@scottnieradka6836]

@@troubleboy even compared to what the us had in 41? And im being naïve here with benefit of hindsight, but if they evaluated it ,why didnt they adapt its innovations and slap a radio in it. Im curious how evaluation broke down. I can guess, but would love any sources you know of.

[@troubleboy]

@@scottnieradka6836 just google US testing t-34, you'll find it.

[@scottnieradka6836]

@@troubleboy fair enough. ty.

[@scottnieradka6836]

Its amazing that the report draws some well founded observations, and then historically botches the conclusions " Despite the advantages of the use of diesel, the good contours of the tanks, thick armour, good and reliable armaments, the successful design of the tracks etc., Russian tanks are significantly inferior to American tanks in their simplicity of driving, manoeuvrability, the strength of firing [reference to speed of shell], speed, the reliability of mechanical construction and the ease of keeping them running."

[@shafur3]

When we were friends

[@Armageddon4145]

at least more than now

[@leandronovaes3836]

The material aid from the western allies represented 4% of all equipment used by USSR. It was important, but not a game changer.

[@calc1657]

The aid was a 'game changer' because of the type of aid given. Percentage of equipment is not a useful barometer, here.

[@koj2698]

If that %4 are radios fuels and trucks that you have no substitiue for it can change the game. There are many equipments so percentage doesn't make sense there. You need to measure effectiveness of aid, not quantity.

[@bozo5632]

Most of the 4% arrived after the Wehrmacht was already broken. Lend-Lease was helpful, not decisive.

[@deason2365]

Because soviet figures can be trusted the way German figures can

[@Lex5576]

The Russians didn't think too highly of our Sherman tanks. But they loved our Studebaker deuce and a half trucks. A lot of Russian built Zil utility trucks were patterned off lend-lease Studebaker and Dodge trucks, and were made for a good number of years. They were just modified to handle the punishment of countless Russian winters and wet weather.

[@gabrielarchange4680]

Very interesting insight into the dictator

[@bolobalaman]

I miss this era when for a brief time, we truly unite against common evil

[@Armageddon4145]

Very true indeed.

[@moistmike4150]

At the point when Harry Hopkins shook Stalin's hand in Moscow, the dictator had, a few years earlier, already murdered 2 million of his subjects, with millions more suffering and dying en masse in his Siberian Gulags. Stalin was a mercilous and hideously evil man at his core, almost on a par with Hitler. The Slavic peoples bore both the burden of his ruinous leadership and the horrific occupation of the Germans. American and British production may have been essential to winning the war, but it was only via an ocean of Slavic blood which allowed us to do it.

[@Armageddon4145]

Sad but true.

[@danilorainone406]

neat history book, of hopkins role and work houghton and miflin publishers 1946,I have the book with a mimeograph copy of the note stalin wrote in russian supplies he needed,aluminum 20MM cannon antiaircraft and millions of shell rounds

[@drvmmudalagirigowdagowda3726]

It is common that every man will one or the other hand it during the great war. They were under terrible tension & Pressures

[@RogerThat787]

Stalin was a short short man.

[@tomortale2333]

ABOVE..SO WAS CHURCHILL N TRUMAN ALLL 3 OF EM VERY SHORT...HITLER TOO

[@anadikundu1508]

Yes, USA and UK supplied the needed materials but the battle against the beastly Fascist forces were carried out by the glorious Red Army with the support of every SOVIET people.

[@Armageddon4145]

That's beyond doubt for sure.

[@randyhavard6084]

Lend lease to the Soviet Union is played down and made to sound like it didn't help them at all against the Germans, but it must have been pretty important for Stalin himself to give the list of things he would like to receive.

[@Armageddon4145]

Sure.

[@briannundahl1530]

We sent them all sorts of supplies that were never paid for.

[@mohammedsaysrashid3587]

Too nice historical channel especially about Soviet side during 2WW in clearly explaining situations in Eastern wars lines .I dislike all totalitarian status . through looking at this video i felt Stalin was clever ,realistic ,believable interviews he introduced to his American Guest & US side was trusted of its Huge abilities about what occurred after 2WW

[@Armageddon4145]

Glad you found it informative.

[@davidrasch3082]

War machines like tanks and aircraft require frequent maintenance and spare parts by trained mechanics. This conundrum was part of the downfall of the mechanized German units.

[@andreasleonardo6793]

Nice video about relationships between USA & USSR during 2WW years how stalin wanted US military helping especially anti aircrafts machines and tanks. how stalin trusted US authority through his sagacity presence of US troops on USSR territories but refused presence of British troops in south of Russia stalin trusted US but his bad sense to wards British ( his evaluation about British was correct

[@dnickaroo3574]

Stalin got on better with Roosevelt than Churchill. Roosevelt found Stalin did not say very much at first. Churchill got up to go into another room, and FDR said: "There goes the old Imperialist". Stalin laughed openly, and talked quite freely after that.

[@goldie44451]

It’s because from the perspective of the British, the Soviets started world war 2 by assisting the invasion of Poland, and did nothing to assist France or the British until they themselves were invaded.

[@JeffSmith-pl2pj]

I'm surprised he trusted us at all after the Germans stabbed him in the back. It might have been a good idea for us to take him up on his offer to have us fight in Russia. We might have gotten entire German armies willing to surrender to us rather than be at the mercy of justifiably vengeful Russians.

[@dnickaroo3574]

In his Speech in July 1941, after the German Invasion, Stalin says that the Soviet Union would get help from friends in Europe and America. He received varying reports of the date of a Nazi Invasion, but (in the account I read) he did not attack first, because that would make help from the US less likely.

[@fvo911]

The US should have sent its workers and troops to Russia to fight shoulder to shoulder against the Nazis and open the second front later with the UK.

[@nickdanger3802]

They could not feed their own people, how were they to feed more people? Food and other strategic deliveries to the Soviet Union under the Lend-Lease Act, 1941-1945 histrf.ru/uploads/media/default/0001/12/df78d3da0fe55d965333035cd9d4ee2770550653.pdf

[@vuktodic1356]

Adding more troops is not a solution wesrern allies planed to leave germany and soviets to beat up each other but by 1944 it became obvious that soviets will gona tear apart germany in two so western allies landed in normandy which split germany forces which is more effective in many things

[@fvo911]

@@vuktodic1356 что за дурость....

[@goldie44451]

It’s just that Russia was hell on earth to fight in. The worst winters were seen in those years.

[@MiKeMiDNiTe-77]

Stalin and Hitler had a lot in common what they didn't have in common was facts and figures. Hitlers men gave him reports on statistics Stalin knew and kept a record of exactly how many tanks how many aircraft they had/ needed.

[@peterparsons7141]

Read Stephen Kotkin’s book “ waiting for hitler”,, really enlightening...it’s part 1 ... second part pending... amazing information gleaned from newly available archives from this period... if yer interested in what really transpired read Kotkin’s book.

[@markwarnberg9504]

Good video, never knew the Russian T34 tanks were made in USA, I always thought they bougth Sherman tanks, always wondered why they were never filmed on the Russian side, maybe war propaganda and the fact that Stalin never paid back on the Lend Lease agreement. So much that was never said in history class.

[@bozo5632]

AFAIK / pretty sure USA did not make any T34's.

[@jacksons1010]

@@bozo5632 No T-34’s were built in the USA. America delivered over 4,000 M-4 Sherman tanks to Russia, and there are photos if you search for them. I recall at least one such lend-lease tank is operational and seen in Victory Day parades in Russia.

[@dnickaroo3574]

The Soviet Union bought an American tank about 1929 (It was never adopted by US Army). It was smuggled into the USSR as a tractor (its tracks were advanced for that era). Over the years, the T-34 developed out of this prototype. PS: I believe that the Soviet Union did pay back for the Lend Lease. I saw a discussion where some Russians were writing about this.

[@bozo5632]

@@dnickaroo3574 I'm not sure about an American tank, but USSR did buy stuff from UK. (Carden-Lloyd?)

[@markwarnberg9504]

@@dnickaroo3574 From what I can find out Stalin never did pay back the debt, thus Cold War.

[@julianmarsh1378]

Stalin got his American tanks, about 6000 Shermans, for the most part. But the Soviets found them inferior to their own tanks. Still, they were able to use them in quiet parts of the front, thereby freeing up their own tanks for more active duty.

[@nickdanger3802]

Source for "they were able to use them in quiet parts of the front" Red Army M4 commander Dmitriy Loza interview on line

[@danielaramburo7648]

Did the Soviets get bazookas from the US?

[@nickdanger3802]

3,000 Rocket, 2.36", M1 & M9 page 4 ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/ref/LL-Ship/LL-Ship-3A.html

[@fvo911]

Yes, we did.

[@floro7687]

The Soviet held the Sherman tank in low estime!

[@Armageddon4145]

Yes that's right. Yet at this time anything was good to get.

[@nickdanger3802]

@@Armageddon4145 When someone says to me that this was a bad tank, I respond, "Excuse me!" One cannot say that this was a bad tank. Bad as compared to what? iremember.ru/en/memoirs/tankers/dmitriy-loza/

[@MaloGuillaumeLeCoat]

@Al 72 Well yes but actually no for the Sherman, even if it was a weak tank it was cheap to built in mass. And the T-34 (especially T-34/85) were huge in numbers but still very good even against Panzers

[@captainsponge7825]

it was much better than anything the soviets ever had...

[@dnickaroo3574]

The Germans were surprised that their tanks were no match for the T-34 in 1941. Guderian suggested that they copy a T-34, but Germany stayed with petrol rather than diesel. Germany produced the Tiger and Panther tanks in 1943 to counter the T-34.

[@daniels0376]

Could you maybe post your sources? To someone who doesn't know where you took your info from, it seems like you're just making an essay of opinion

[@Armageddon4145]

Aren't they on the title screen?

[@dwarow2508]

I mean in all of ww2, allied tanks didn't even make up 10% of soviet tanks, so...

[@vuktodic1356]

Well they did make more tanks than ussr british empire with usa did produced some 150 k tanks soviets only 120 k

[@dwarow2508]

@@vuktodic1356 No not really. The USSR produced over 145 000 tanks in ww2. All of thr allies combined produced 106 000 tanks

[@vuktodic1356]

@@dwarow2508 www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_combat_vehicle_production_during_World_War_II&ved=2ahUKEwiFpZ2zoZfuAhVECRAIHYeCDO4QFjAAegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw12wDu8ghNOi3BwIEUjRX1X&cshid=1610484301752 I mean this is wikipedia but there are many more sources that preety much give exact same numbers for production of some things like t 34 or is 2 or kv 2 and they are basically same meaning this is most accurate exact number so i dont think that soviets produced that many tanks they did have i think it was 11000 tanks before septembar of 1939 and got about same amount trough lend lease so maybe combined with production that could be close to 145 k but i dont think that they produced that much in that same time as they basically lost some good part of their industry in 1941 so they never could make much more than 120 k

[@nickdanger3802]

@@dwarow2508 "Undoubtedly the T-34 went a long way to enabling the USSR to be ultimately victorious, but the price was huge with approximately 44 900 T-34s (82% of total production) being irrecoverably lost." www.operationbarbarossa.net/the-t-34-in-wwii-the-legend-vs-the-performance/#Conclusions%20Regarding the T-34’s Overall Performance as a ‘War Winner’

[@kpaxchocho3327]

​@@vuktodic1356where do you get all of this false information

[@volvo1354]

in other words, Stalin was brilliant

[@jasguy2715]

Personally I feel we should not have given any aid to Stalin. Hitler and Stalin were both bad that but I think Stalin was somewhat worse than Hitler. We should have let the Soviets and the Germans go at it with each other and knocked themselves out. both of their countries would have been seriously weakened and better for all of us in the long run.

[@maxn.7234]

This was actually the mindset of the average American in 1940. Most people saw communism and Nazism as odious ideologies and would have preferred to let them fight until the bitter end without the US taking any side. The US had no strategic interest in the European theater but Roosevelt was a communist sympathizer who violated the US Neutrality Act by supplying the USSR and dragging the US into a war against Germany.

[@aa2339]

The GM trucks were great, but the Soviets built better tanks. They could’ve just sent the blue prints for the T-34’s and sent them critical spare parts instead.

[@nickdanger3802]

The vast majority of T34s built during the war had a two man turret. The T34/85 did not start production until early 1944.

[@vuktodic1356]

T 34 was not really ment to be quality because tank was expected to work some six months and after that you go to factory and take another one so thats why tank was simplified so production could be highef

[@deason2365]

I would have to disagree

[@bryanhurd9955]

Stalin did not like american tanks

[@gabrielarchange4680]

SEND US TANKS!!!! gets M3s & M5s in 1943. IS THIS SOME KIND OF CRUEL JOKE!?

[@edgehodl4832]

Also, wasn't usa selling weapons and ammo to hitlers army at same time? Usa was doing business on both sides

[@Armageddon4145]

Not to Hitler's Germany.

[@nickdanger3802]

From September 1939 to June 1941 the USSR sold oil, wheat and manganese ore to Germany while Germany conquered half of Poland (USSR the other half), Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Yugoslavia, Greece and Crete and lay siege to Britain with U boots and bombers. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov-Ribbentrop_Pact

[@Tunoi_Veil]

not even close.

[@vuktodic1356]

I think thex were sending oil to vichy france to keep their economy running in 1940 but not germany directly

[@user-jq2iz9zn4p]

No。Roosevelt did not sell arms to Hitler。

[@Diwana71]

Grossman 's account is tainted. No need to explain more on it. Read Gromyko. Or Molotov. Or Harriman.

[@stevelenores5637]

A measure of what Stalin thought of Russia's chances was the fact he was constantly drunk during much of the 1941 German invasion.

[@browngreen933]

Probably how he kept his nerve and what kept him going.

[@jasonharryphotog]

I’m sure Churchill was the same

[@browngreen933]

@@jasonharryphotog I'll bet you're right...and Roosevelt chain smoked.

[@Diwana71]

What nonsense???

[@pawelpap9]

Stalin virtually didn’t drink. He liked sweet Georgian wine in small doses. But he liked listening to drunken conversations of his party colleagues and army generals. He had very good memory so there was no need to take notes.

[@skipintroux4444]

General Patton: “We defeated the wrong enemy”.

[@Armageddon4145]

Does that mean Nazi Germany was actually not an enemy for him?

[@arvopohja7693]

Didnt he said: " we butchered the wrong big".

[@dwarow2508]

Not a really meaningfull quote

[@vuktodic1356]

Quote that has no sense with reality he was basically killer he was only general that wanted japan to get nuked out of 7 generals he was the only one there are many crimes like killing pows by americans who were under his command No wonder pig died later that year he deserved it by thinking germany was good guy here and soviets were not fighting for their survival they like attacked germany but germany defended themselfs

[@arvopohja7693]

@@vuktodic1356 soviets werent good either. Impossible to say which one is worser. They both ended up to launch ww2 together.

[@briannundahl1530]

Russia was in serious jeopardy and Stalin keep throwing men into the blender untill it stopped and Stalin would have lost if the American liberty ships didn't keep the supply's coming. A lot of mariners lost their lives mostly from German u-boats and some from construction flaws in the hull design that had to be reinforced. You make such a claim about what if? World war two ended because the United States engaged in combat after December 7 1941. If we did not assist any country Russia would have lost. Now I'm not saying anything bad about Russian people who were very brave and knew they would most likely die in combat fighting a enemy who had a upper hand in the beginning with superior weapons. They fought with what they had and their biggest advantage was time because Germany was too far stretch out to sustain Hitler's goal. A lot of Russian died for one fundamental flaw which happened to be a paranoid killer named Stalin. In the beginning of Barbarossa it would be like fighting guns with bows and arrows. The USA was never going to submit to Hitler no matter how dangerous the risk was just like Stalin so you say we owe Russia keeping us safe from Hitler is seriously incorrect. If the USA didn't supply Russian army or air force then Hitler would have defeated Stalin. The Russian lives lost to German army is in tens of millions and it seems to me a low estimated count but regardless it was at the expense of bad leadership. The lessons of WW2 won't be repeated by any powerful country and one of those was lagging technology. The next big war will be extremely high tech and the smartest one will win. I really hate when people don't recognize our contribution to other countries making clams that are speculation because it didn't happen like Germany conquers America.

[@dnickaroo3574]

Nazi Germany had lost the War after the Battle of Stalingrad Feb 1943; the Battle of Kursk in July 1943 made it a sure thing. Germany was unable to make a major offensive after that. From late 1944, Germany had to withdraw Forces from the Western Front in an attempt to slow the Soviet advance. The difference in losses of both Armies is not very large. Most Soviets killed in WW2 were civilians (the Nazis classified the Slavic Rus as "untermensch" to be exterminated or enslaved). It was because of these racial Nazi policies that Stalin insisted on the Nuremberg Trials.

[@OverTheTop85]

First time viewer. Found you through Razorfist. He said you did great videos on WW2 and other issues. So I stopped by! God F-ing Speed good sir. I will be a continuous viewer of your channel now

[@Armageddon4145]

Thanks a lot sir!

[@ruskyhusky69]

8:16 Very important message here - Yes, Landlease was a huge help, and saved millions of lives. However, Stalin was agitating for American troops to help on the ground - to fight Germany directly on Soviet ground. As we all know, it hasnt happened. Only 3 years later, in 1944, there were finally american troops in europe...

[@jasonharryphotog]

Events in the Pacific , Africa and Western Europe all needed dealing with too

[@pawelpap9]

The US fought on two major fronts. Both had supply lines crossing oceans. The USSR only on one front conveniently located on its own territory and it was war Stalin instigated in 1939.

[@jasonharryphotog]

@@pawelpap9 i don't know but it was a rough time for the everyday people those who started, it was others who ended it. KAPUT

[@nickdanger3802]

@Al 72 "The Treaty of Versailles is to blame for having inaugurated a period in which financial calculations appear to destroy economic reason." Hitler 1933 www.americanforeignrelations.com/E-N/Loans-and-Debt-Resolution-Hitler-repudiates-the-versailles-treaty-and-reparations.html

[@dwarow2508]

@@pawelpap9 It did not find on any major front until 1944. The USSR had the largest and bloodiest front in history to deal with, thanks to a war the west failed to prevent