I never said the US did not supply Russia or the UK - I commented that from the informative video someone supplied, the VAST majority of the spend was on US forces with the Pacific being the MOST costly & US forces in Europe being the second most costly - combined, a VAST majority on the USs own forces.
Considering that the Normandy Landings began on June 6th 1944 & Russian forces had first invaded Germany on June 22nd 1944 (with 1.6 million troops - over 3 times the German forces and in fact more forces than Germany had in TOTAL), exactly how do you doubt their ability to win. Because it doesn't fit your egotistical view?
Don't forget - Stalin had more or less given up on an invasion from the west. His entire staff expected the west to allow Russia to do all the fighting.
North Africa was an important campaign for exposing the southern flank. No US forces were involved. Sicily and Italy itself were simply fought to open a new theatre of campaign - and anyway half way through the Italians changed sides in 1943. So it was German troops doing the fighting. But ut was a sideshow.
So it might have been QUITE possible to leave Russia to it. After all, it's the largest nation on earth and does have a huge number of natural resources and as I mentioned, were not slow to take over ANY resources they overran. Not needing to feed or otherwise care for POWs (and their injured soldiers) did make logistics a lot more simple. Little has changed as we see in Ukraine. A person is simply seen like a rifle or a duck board or a piece of rope. It's used until destroyed and then it's replaced. That's why such heavy losses didn't concern their leaders.
But Russia already runs from the pacific to the Baltic so extending it would not seem as daunting to them as it would to most nations.
It's hardly a secret that even before 1945, top US military staff saw Russia as the REAL enemy. The enemy that could not be beaten with simple force of arms. Many argued that while the US had the bomb, it should use it. Not a secret:
The dangerous competition instigated by the US prompted Soviet Russia to beef up its nuclear capabilities and dragged both countries into the vicious circle of the nuclear arms race. Unfortunately, it seems that the lessons of the past have not been learnt by the West and the question of the...
canadiandimension.com
Even when Russia developed nukes, they had no delivery system so by 1952 the US could have sent 'dry' thermonuclear weapons via B47 or B52, We are concerned of fallout but don't forget, Russia carried out 110 above ground tests in the area termed 'the polygon' and 214 at Novaya Zemlya including the 50Mt Tsar bomb.
I'm not defending that action... but I honestly wonder what Stalin would have done if presented with a 'superweapon' no other nation had. They scrambled for chemical weapons and biological weapons (resulting in the Sverdlovsk anthrax leak.)
