Don't right. All armies that were on 22 June 1941 on border was fully equip. They were also well equiped with automatic weapons like svt-40 and AVS (there is plan to make svt-40 main weapon of infantry, but with start of war you need more cheap and simpler weapon). Germans captured that stuff in big amounts.
Also don't forget that Western Part of SU was it's main factory and food territory and when these territory were occupied SU lost many factories and food. You momentally remembered how SU tranlsate remain factories on Ural (very uniq and specific operation in case when war already going, you can read about this https://warspot.ru/4492-velikaya-otechestvennaya-problemy-tankovyh-zavodov ).
They werent agriculturaly prepared in that sense. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
What I meant "economically" was in terms of agriculturally, enough , self sufficient, nourished country which Russia was not yet. Industrially, well they were Industrialized because of the "Five Year Plan".
Weapons yes, self sufficient. Food, not really.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_Soviet_Union
Look to end of the 2nd Paragraph!
Yes, casualties were big, but don't forget about "one small tiny detail" all germans plans also went out from graphic. All goals that were initially planned were achieved with late. Blietzkrieg failed. Here is source https://warspot.ru/515-nemetskoe-porazhenie-1941-goda (or you can read this book Stahel D. Operation Barbarossa and Germany’s Defeat in the East. N.Y.: Cambridge University Press, 2009. – 483 p.). War never will be win if your plans failed, you can ask Hannibal about that (he defeated romanian legions, died almost 20% of all mans who can carry weapon in Roma empire, but war was failed and Karfagen was destroyed). The same sitauations with Germans.
Lend Lease - in 1941 it was almost null, it reach full strength in 1943 (in millions dollars). Pay attention how increased Non-war equip from 1943.
Year Military equip Non-war equip
1941 29,5 0
1942 723,7 639,6
1943 1291,1 1674,8
1944 1060,4 2368,7
1945 732,9 639,1
I did not say this treaty alone helped Soviet Union. I said they were economically behind. Not Industrially behind. There had been occurences of famine and mass Starvation in Soviet Union before the war that contributed to their War effects. They won not because they were industrialized only, but because Stalin for one was aware of a future conflict with German and two he knew he had to make Soviet Union industrialised also to do so. Unfortunately he could not also pursue economic goals, so he forced Ukraines to give them all their food, "Collectivization" policy to provide Soviet Union with enough food. Although that was short term.
Blitzkreig was not a failure, but the Operation Barbarossa was. Blitzkreig was a very efficient tactic, but that does not always guarantee a win, does it?
Opening a second front was stupid of Germany because of Hitlers ambitious goal "Lebensraum" foreign policy. Said this on the comment before, so check it if you are interested as to how it lead the weakening of Germany, in short form.
Not right, too. What you call useless allies? All allies division if not showed so excellent battle score as germans, but they free the same amount of germans divisions from work about to control captured territory, keep flangs on secondary fronts e.t.c. Or you think you don't need all of that? And also there is old quotaion "There are no bad soldiers, there are only bad commanders". If germans couldn't use them as effective as yours - it's only them fault. I read memories one german artillery officer in Stalingrad, that pointed on very high discriminitaion to ally soldiers from germans (say hi to german race theory and propaganda, all slavic nations are second-sort even if they your allies), they also got outdated weapons and bad supplies as result very low combat effectivness. But as one old books say "Better have one bread than don't have two" or "Better is enemy to good".
Italy was entirely lagging behind. Fought too many wars before WW2 exhausting their resources. Had a huge budget deficit. Still had WW1 equipment and tanks that were pretty bad.
Japan had the infantry but not the vehicles. Reasons why they were successful around Asia is because the other neighbouring countries were ill prepared and taken by surprise. Taken by surprise meaning, just declare war without declaration.
Both Italy and Japan had their own ambitions leaving Germany kind of doing all the heavy lifting work. They were allies, but no cooperative ones. They all had their own ambitions, which resulted in parting away. The only supporter Germany had really during the War was Italy. Although Italy was militaristically poor. Invasion of Africa, they could not do it without Germans help. Some more elements be spilled but I would rather if you could take the time to check some things.
Simply their ambitions, egos, fascist ideology lead to all their downfall! That is true indeed.
Also wrong, after Halhin-Ghol Japanese didn't want fight against SU. Than started war with USA and all hypothetic plans about Japanese invasion were wiped out. From where in december 1941 arrived in Moscow fresh Siberian divisions in your opinion? It was part of forces that helded to prevent hypothetic Japanese invasion.
Please, when you in next time wanted point out on "historic books" or "historic moments in movies" show you sources and also read some more. As one german general said (and i very love this quotation): "If you only know war from your side - you know only half part of truth".
I did leave some things out. The only reason why is because I only told half of the story. You can not exactly expect all details within this small 1 page summary can you?
Of course I could give more, but why should I?
Clarify Japanese thing. I did leave out the fact the Japanese made a so called "secret non-aggression pact" with the SU. Reasons why Japan did so, it to continue their Conquest in Manchuria China. Their cult of being the so called so Masters of Asia. Wanted to fulfill their dreams similarly to the way both Italy and Germany did. The Fear factor (because of the worry having to spread out its forces and were required to sustain against the strong German forces) was true until the non-aggression pact was signed by the Japanese with Russia. It is called the "The Soviet–Japanese Neutrality Pact" 1941 April.
I can continue but I would like to take breaks every now and then too.
I do recommend this Movie "Bitter Harvest" and it is definitely way better than Enemy at the Gates. You will enjoy it, that is for sure. It is more historically accurate and I think it was based also on a true story. There is no better movies than it being based on true story.
https://www.basedonatruestorypodcast.com/57-behind-the-true-story-of-bitter-harvest/
Watch this trailer and you will recieve an interesting insight on both Ukraine and Russia during the 1930s.
1 Book example I have read "Causes and Effects of 20th Century Wars" amongst others. If you want more examples, I can give you. They are books, I assure you. Wikipedia also but books are better.
I do applaud however on the things you have mentioned and the details. No hard feelings. I may get some details left out which is natural for anyone writing this long.
I appreciate also for you share of history knowledge and interest
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
