You can believe what you want but I hope you understand that historians do not generally support your idea of what happened. Even American historians of the Eastern Front like David Glantz, argue that without Lend-Lease the USSR still defeats Germany, but later and at greater cost. So again yes, Lend-Lease trucks, food, fuel, rail equipment, aluminum, machine tools, and communications gear were incredibly valuable. They improved Soviet logistics, saved lives, and likely shortened the war by up to a year or more. But that is not the same as saying Lend-Lease was the decisive factor in victory (because it wasn't).

By the time Lend-Lease really kicked into gear at major scale, the Nazis had already failed at Moscow, been crushed at Stalingrad, and lost the strategic initiative after Kursk. The USSR had also already relocated much of its industry beyond the Urals, outside German reach, and was producing the bulk of its own tanks, artillery, aircraft, ammunition, and small arms. Lend-Lease helped the Red Army advance faster and more efficiently, from 1943 onward, but the claim that the USSR could not have reached Germany without it is just nonsense.