Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/6/2009 11:19:08 AM   
Culiacan Mexico

 

Posts: 8348
Joined: 11/10/2000
From: Bad Windsheim Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sulla05
... I do believe that a correctly done defensive war in the east could have bled the Soviets so bad that a negotiated peace comes into play. With the opening of the Soviet archives we now know how close to the bottom of the barrel the Soviets were in 1945.
By some accounts, the Soviet did offer to come to terms with the Germans at different time during the war... but the terms were never acceptable to Hitler.

Hitlers minimum goal was the destruction of the Soviet State; and that was never open to discussion by the Communists... unless the Soviet Military was completely destroyed..., which would eliminate the need for discussion.


Note: by some account in May of 1943 the Soviets were offering peace for a return to the pre-August 1914 borders or perhaps the October 1939 lines. Hitlers response was to question what advantage is it to let the Soviet advance that much further to German without a fight?


_____________________________

"If you love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lig

(in reply to sullafelix)
Post #: 91
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/6/2009 11:24:30 AM   
Culiacan Mexico

 

Posts: 8348
Joined: 11/10/2000
From: Bad Windsheim Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 06 Maestro
...I fully realize that the massive outputs attained later in the war could not have been achieved until the importation of foreign labor was taken seriously...
I think this is one areas that needs to be directly tied together:

A nice Nazi policy = reduced (historical)production. A German player can't play nice, but still used massed slave/forced labor.


_____________________________

"If you love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lig

(in reply to 06 Maestro)
Post #: 92
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/6/2009 4:01:59 PM   
06 Maestro


Posts: 3989
Joined: 10/12/2005
From: Nevada, USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Culiacan Mexico


quote:

ORIGINAL: 06 Maestro
...I fully realize that the massive outputs attained later in the war could not have been achieved until the importation of foreign labor was taken seriously...
I think this is one areas that needs to be directly tied together:

A nice Nazi policy = reduced (historical)production. A German player can't play nice, but still used massed slave/forced labor.



Forced labor wasn't required early in the war. In some areas, such as air frame plants, there could have been a surplus of German labor simply by hiring women-they did eventually.

Keep in mind that switching to a 72 hour work week was a policy that could be initiated and reascended w/o considering the construction of new facilities or foreign labor. In Germany's case, it should have resulted in a 20% increase in critical production areas 3 and 1/2 years before they actually instituted it.

Perhaps if I present the idea in a different manner it would make some sense. What if Hitler refused to switch to the 72 hour work week in '43, how would this affect the war effort? One thing is that production would have been about 17% less than what was actually achieved. That may not sound like very much to some, but for 1943 that would amount to over 4000 a/c alone. There would have been a very high number of AFV's which would not have been built either-well over a thousand not including infantry carriers.

In view of the precarious position of the German military by late '43, It seems very likely that w/o the added production that the defeats would have been larger and faster. The obvious result of this is that Germany would have been defeated sooner than it actually was without the added production gained from the longer work week. Industrial output (or lack of) has tangible results on the battlefield.

Much of the late war industrial output was going to occur even without the 72 hour work week, but again, 20% is 20%-even more when you figure the earlier opening of new plants.

_____________________________

Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies.

Thomas Jefferson


(in reply to Culiacan Mexico)
Post #: 93
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/7/2009 1:49:12 AM   
IronDuke_slith

 

Posts: 1595
Joined: 6/30/2002
From: Manchester, UK
Status: offline
quote:

All extra aircraft and tanks do is stretch the available POL further. Instead of getting to the outskirts of Moscow, the extra tanks and aircraft only really ensure that the Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe are stopped after Kiev.


quote:

ORIGINAL: 06 Maestro
True-to a certain extent. However, one needs to analyze the cost of an entire divisions that requires supply and support while it is missing (or critically short of) its primary weapon system which makes it mission capable. An armored divsion which still had 14,000 men, 1,500 trucks, but 25 tanks is a huge and wasteful drain on the supply system. With 100 more tanks and 500 more men, the added costs to keep that division supplied would be minimal-especially when you consider its added capabilities-which would be several times more than the depleted division.


Well, General German policy would probably have used several thousand new Panzers to build major new formations. This would have required finding the extra trucks and vehicles which would have required POL that wasn't simply available.

On the more specific point, your example is still increasing the Panzer Regiment's POL requirements by 300%. Given most German Units in Army Group Centre were hand to mouth with supply most of the time, adding hundreds of new vehicles would have caused more problems than it solved.

The point was that Hitler wasn't allowing the maufacture of spare parts. Only one new tyre per month per 16 vehicles was being sent to motorised units. Failures to convert the railways were causing excessive usage of trucks to haul fuel and ammo and causing further drop out rates. (AGC lost about a third of its trucks within the first month).

Cranking up tank production just produces new toys without the logistical wherewithall to keep them mobile and armed in the field. Fuel itself was only taking Tanks forward less than half what it should because the vehicles were guzzling fuel in the poor road and ground conditions.

The Germans couldn't sustain what they had. Tripling the number of tanks would just have made it worse.

quote:

The same rational holds true for air units. To maintain a base that is meant to sup[port a hundred a/c, but there are only 20 to keep going is not the most productive way to do things.


As above, I don't see the Luftwaffe launching many more sorties with many more aircraft. Ultimately, it's sorties, not gross numbers of aircraft available that count.

quote:

ORIGINAL: IronDuke
Also, with regards munitions. Given the German logistical situation, extra munitions didn't help because the Germans couldn't lift them to the front anyway.


quote:

This is largely true from the late summer of '41 well into '42. By the spring of '42 the rail system had been repaired well enough so that operational shortages should not have occurred (until jumping forward again another few hundred miles). (side note, this raises the grand strategy for the '42 campaign-many though that by standing on the defensive-(except for Leningrad and Sevastopol)- for a year would pay off better than attempting another big push when things were just starting to go right-supply wise-no small consideration).


But by January 1942, Germany was essentially beaten. It was of crucial importance that the problems occurred in 1941 when they stood a slim chance. Also, given the pol situation, the strike into the Caucasus was inevitable.

quote:


The same applies to the trucks. Germany lacked the raw materials to make rubber. They simply would not have been able to produce enough tyres to equip 20000 or 50000 new trucks even if they had had the fuel to fill them up. 20000 was also not enough. The Wehrmacht marched into Russia with thousands of French Civilian vehicles that were simply not up to the job. Any serious programme should have concentrated on upgrading the truck fleet, not necessarily augmenting it.
Regards,
IronDuke


quote:

There were very good stocks of strategic materials at the start of the war-Goering was actually a very sharp chap in that regards. It is true that rubber was a looming problem, but one that was eventually overcome with synthetic rubber. The supplies could have handled the added production for a few years


I disagree. The Germans were hopelessly short of rubber and the spare tyre situation illustrates that. Even at full speed, the synthetic rubber production was simply nowhere near enough. Further raw materials became short when russia was invaded because she was Germany's sole source of some materials (eg, Manganese).

quote:

Shift work and the 72 hour work week could not have bee that difficult to implement-after all, the Brits did it immediately, Speer was able to get it rolling quite quickly after the demise of Todt. (in fairness, Todt did start the program for non Luftwaffe factories a few months before his accident).


The German issue was not just production, though, but the archaic practices and cottage industry that characterised it's industries. Much of German industry was made up of numerous small firms supplying a little each at widely dispersed locations. Ramping up family firms to three shifts per week would not have been easy, particularly since three was a shortage of skilled labour.

The key was rationalisation and mass production, which was not solved nearly as simply.

Secondly, the real issues for German production were not just primarily around labour, but around resources and methods. Put simply, they could have put everyone in the Reich onto Tank production in 1941 and not made a single extra vehicle. The problem was the Reich didn’t produce enough coal. Lack of coal meant that steel production was difficult to ramp up (much of what was ramped up in 1942 went to Ammunition production not tanks.) In other words, there was a limit to how many tanks Germany could make because she didn’t have inexhaustible supplies of steel.

This was the real bottleneck for German production. Speer did force through some improvements and they fuelled the economic growth, but many of Speer’s improvements came not through ramping production up or instituting a 72 hour week, but simply making what was already happening more efficient by building new mega factories or cutting down the number of vehicle types that needed to be manufactured.

There was a very definite limit to how far Germany could go on her coal production figures, particularly as 1943 and British bombing of the Ruhr gathered pace. After initial heavy raids early in 1943, German production of steel fell by 200 000 tons per month. As the Allies shattered the ruhr's transport infrastructure and shut down steel production and coal production, they nearly brought the Reich to its knees before switching targets and giving them some breathing space.

quote:

As for the fuel situation; there was no strategic shortage which would effect primary operations.


I disagree. The Germans were fundamentally afflicted by POL shortages right from the start. Fuel was very short within Germany during Typhoon. The Germans simply couldn't get it from anywhere. It affected everything from operational movement for the Heer to sortie rates for the Kriegsmarine to pilot training for the Luftwaffe.

quote:

I have seen statements that there were fuel shortages in France during the 1940 campaign-these were due to poor staff work rather than any strategic shortage of fuel.


It was largely a logistical problem. One the Germans overcme by flying fuel to the spearheads or being lucky enough to capture French stocks. To be fair, this was a very short campaign.

quote:

It was not until late in '42 before fuel was becoming critically short for primary operations. This is not to say that Germany was not acutely short in a strategic sense, but they had more than enough in 1941 for Barbarossa-even if there were another several thousand more tanks and a/c.


They had issues during Barbarossa. By August, fuel was getting short and the situation was exacerbated by the logistical apparatus and operational tempo. Wherever the Germans paused following an encirclement, Motorised troops used massive amounts of ammo beating off Russian counterattacks trying to get into the pocket and stopping breakout attempts from troops inside the pocket. This meant ammo took priority for deliveries and building up any kind of fuel surplus was impossible.

quote:

Hitler had told Todt that he wanted a thousand tanks a month after the French campaign-he was told it was impossible. It clearly was not.


It was impossible, simply because the Germans lacked the resources to build them and the production centres to assemble them. German tank production did significantly rise, but it took the building of major new factories (most notably at Linz in Austria) to achieve this. These factories simply didn't exist in 1940.

Tanks need dedicated production facilities organised in a modern industrially efficient way. Speer developed that but it was out of reach in 1940-42 and hampered significantly after 1943 by British bombing.

quote:

The Luftwaffe would have had to start looking into better ways to train much larger numbers of pilots, as they did later in the war. Fuel was certainly a big consideration in training the force. Had the cutbacks begun earlier, and accelerated the improvements in ground training, a much larger (and high standard) German Air Force would have been available by 1942.


But they didn't train pilots better at the end of the war. The number of hours German pilots got in training was steadily cut to the point the only reasonably trained pilots coming out of the schools in 1944/45 were bomber converts who already knew how to fly. Fuel was the key consideration in training the force and they simply didn;t have nearly enough.

quote:

Again, I think that a simple stroke of a pen ordering the 72 hour work week would have given enough material to make a significant difference in Barbarossa. By 1942, the differences would have been rather huge-especially in the air.


As above, I disagree as I don't see where the Reich would have got the coal, modern facilities or steel to make a significant difference to production that early, and even if they had, I don't see the logistical apparatus in the field being good enough to keep these extra vehicles moving.

quote:

On a related point; Goering wanted the new Volkswagen factory to be put under the Luftwaffe sphere right at the beginning of the war. This was Germany's biggest factory. Had he received control of that plant, resource consumption by the Luftwaffe would have expanded drastically. Goering had no qualms about that-and he was the guy who should have knon better than anyone in Germany. Luckily for the allies, Hitler decided to give it over to Army orders-but it sat idle for a very long time.


Goring was a fool. Milch was the driving force behind aircraft production and produced wonders on a shoestring by early 1943. Also, resource consumption expanding is only possible when excess resources are available to consume.

quote:

Compared to British prewar planning, the Germans were far behind the curve. The Brits (even under Chamberlain) had made real plans for turning all automotive plants into a/c factories. The appropriate executives were all informed so that the plan could commence as soon as required. They planned to double production in the first year, and double iot again in the second year-quite ambitious-and nearly completed.


The Germans steadily improved, but never got to grips with the central issue which was lack of resources. Britain had the empire and lend lease. America was the world's pre-eminent industrial giant. Russia threw everything into production in a way only a communist dictatership could and reaped the benefits, although we should note Soviet troops were moved by American trucks. The Russians produced thousands of tanks a month because they didn't have to produce everything.

Regards,
ID

_____________________________


(in reply to 06 Maestro)
Post #: 94
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/7/2009 10:51:50 PM   
Endsieg

 

Posts: 92
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Status: offline
Back to the original question of the OP....yes, they could have won if they had acted like "Russians" and "jihadis" instead of just "Germans" (= only moderately murderous )

Sarin, VX, etc..., anyone? on Moscow, say Oct 30,41, several tons from He111s....cool mod, eh?

(in reply to IronDuke_slith)
Post #: 95
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/7/2009 11:01:27 PM   
GaryChildress

 

Posts: 6830
Joined: 7/17/2005
From: The Divided Nations of Earth
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Endsieg

Back to the original question of the OP....yes, they could have won if they had acted like "Russians" and "jihadis" instead of just "Germans" (= only moderately murderous )

Sarin, VX, etc..., anyone? on Moscow, say Oct 30,41, several tons from He111s....cool mod, eh?


The Nazis were only "moderately murderous"? They were the ones who caused the whole world war. I would think that qualifies as being plenty murderous.

_____________________________


(in reply to Endsieg)
Post #: 96
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/7/2009 11:10:50 PM   
Endsieg

 

Posts: 92
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Status: offline
I said "Germans" Gary, dear, that you need to say Nazis means you got trolled, ....but OK, you cant help it, Groucho.


(in reply to GaryChildress)
Post #: 97
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/7/2009 11:56:23 PM   
pasternakski


Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress
The Nazis were only "moderately murderous"? They were the ones who caused the whole world war. I would think that qualifies as being plenty murderous.

Well, Gary, it seems that Endsieg here was merely trying to clarify things for us ... cool mod, eh?

Like a breath of fresh air ... or sarin ... or VX ... or ...

_____________________________

Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.

(in reply to GaryChildress)
Post #: 98
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/8/2009 12:32:45 AM   
GaryChildress

 

Posts: 6830
Joined: 7/17/2005
From: The Divided Nations of Earth
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Endsieg

I said "Germans" Gary, dear, that you need to say Nazis means you got trolled, ....but OK, you cant help it, Groucho.




Well are you then comparing Germans to Russians or Germans to Bolsheviks or what? You seem to say the Russians are more "murderous" than Germans. If you compare Germans to the Bolsheviks then sure. If you compare Bolsheviks to Nazis then I don't see where one is any more or less "murderous" than the other.

_____________________________


(in reply to Endsieg)
Post #: 99
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/8/2009 1:05:52 AM   
GaryChildress

 

Posts: 6830
Joined: 7/17/2005
From: The Divided Nations of Earth
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pasternakski


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress
The Nazis were only "moderately murderous"? They were the ones who caused the whole world war. I would think that qualifies as being plenty murderous.

Well, Gary, it seems that Endsieg here was merely trying to clarify things for us ... cool mod, eh?

Like a breath of fresh air ... or sarin ... or VX ... or ...


Well I apologize if I misunderstood but it looked to me like Endsieg is saying Russians are more murderous than Germans. Sorry if I misunderstood something. The post was rather cryptic toward the end.

_____________________________


(in reply to pasternakski)
Post #: 100
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/8/2009 4:54:03 AM   
Mus

 

Posts: 1759
Joined: 11/13/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

This is an offshoot of a discussion in the War in the East forum. Basically the question is, could the Germans have defeated the Soviet Union in WW2? I'm inclined to believe the answer is "no". Well...with a possible exception. If the Germans had taken Moscow in '41 with Stalin in it maybe the Soviet Union would have collapsed and sued for peace. Otherwise it seems to me that Germany lacked the resources in manpower and material to fight a war with the USSR all the way through.


In this hypothetical do-over could Germany make ANY policy adjustment necessary to ensure victory?

If so, I believe they could have easily won. Discarded their racial disdain of Slavic peoples, cast themselves as the liberators of people suffering under the yoke of Communist oppression.

It really WAS a rotten edifice as Hitler claimed, the problem was the Nazis were so cruel and barbarous during Barbarossa that they drove many people who hated Communism and Communist rule to resist the Germans wholeheartedly.

So I guess Im saying that GERMANY could have defeated the Soviet Union. I dont think the Nazis could. The ideological/propaganda measures needed to have easily defeated the Soviets in 1941 would have made them not be Nazis as we know them.

< Message edited by Mus -- 7/8/2009 5:00:46 AM >


_____________________________

Mindset, Tactics, Skill, Equipment
Diligentia, Vis, Celeritas

(in reply to GaryChildress)
Post #: 101
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/8/2009 2:22:55 PM   
pasternakski


Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress
Sorry if I misunderstood something. The post was rather cryptic toward the end.

No, Gary, it's not you. I was just taking one of my miserably inept stabs at the silliness of the post, that's all. And I doubt that the original was acute enough to aspire to anything approaching the complexity needed for "cryptic."

_____________________________

Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.

(in reply to GaryChildress)
Post #: 102
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/10/2009 6:12:52 AM   
Cmdrcain


Posts: 1161
Joined: 8/21/2000
From: Rebuilding FLA, Busy Repairing!
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sulla05

Half of Lend Lease material came through Pacific ports in Soviet ships. So a drop in the Artic convoys could have made a large impact.




Do Remember too that stuff coming into Pacific ports had to be moved across Russia
so a cut in Atlantic route supplies and the time to move any from pacific ports would have had a great impact.




_____________________________

Noise? What Noise? It's sooooo quiet and Peaceful!

Battlestar Pegasus

(in reply to sullafelix)
Post #: 103
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/10/2009 6:20:09 AM   
Cmdrcain


Posts: 1161
Joined: 8/21/2000
From: Rebuilding FLA, Busy Repairing!
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

I think the game is pretty well strapped with historical conditions. No USA entry is probably outside the scope of the game. Basically the question becomes, could Germany have defeated the USSR given existing historical constants. I don't think giving a 72 hour work week in '41 to the Germans is even in the scope of the game. Things like limited production and having to fight on two fronts are pretty much a given. Could Germany have defeated the USSR given those constraints?

My inclination is "no". Therefore a German player should not be capable of total victory in the game. The question becomes what should constitute victory for the German player. I think giving an instant victory objective like taking Moscow in '41 and maybe the oil fields in the Caucasus would make the game interesting and give the players something to desperately fight over. Simply fighting over who gets the most victory points in the end sort of seems tame to me.




No USA entry goes further then limiting supplies to USSR, without USA in.... there been likely No widespread Big Bomber bombing of germany with the b17...B29...b24...
so Germanys industries would been less crippled...


That Bombing had an effect... I would guess Grigsbys game has germany with shortages in production later in war to sim the effect of western allies bombings.



_____________________________

Noise? What Noise? It's sooooo quiet and Peaceful!

Battlestar Pegasus

(in reply to GaryChildress)
Post #: 104
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/10/2009 6:34:06 AM   
Cmdrcain


Posts: 1161
Joined: 8/21/2000
From: Rebuilding FLA, Busy Repairing!
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sulla05

What I meant by my uboat statement was for Germany to not even worry about a surface navy. I never understood why the Germans even bothered with a surface fleet with the huge lead that Britain had. Think how many uboats you could make out of the Bismarck and Tirpitz. I'm saying that with a bit of tongue in cheek but you get my drift.




German Pocket battleships and such were meant for a breakout into the ocean and to raid convoys, never meant as a fleet to take on british etc combat surface forces.

Bismarck, etc actually concerned Britain as they could have wrecked damage on Convoys... or forced britain to use warships... Battleships etc to convoy..

Such warships would been greater vulnerable to Uboats... having to move at 10-15knts..



_____________________________

Noise? What Noise? It's sooooo quiet and Peaceful!

Battlestar Pegasus

(in reply to sullafelix)
Post #: 105
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/10/2009 6:49:34 AM   
Cmdrcain


Posts: 1161
Joined: 8/21/2000
From: Rebuilding FLA, Busy Repairing!
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Culiacan Mexico


The Germans wanted war with the US (a country they had a particularly low opinion of), they just lacked the fleet at the time. Japan's actions gave them an instant fleet.

At the time, the Germans felt this was a great coups. Hindsight shows it to be something less.




Yes... the idea Americans were mongrels, weak... etc...

Silly Hitler.... A nation that beat the british Empire...
for independence... Fought a nasty war between each in Civil war... Fought and beat the Mexicans... Fought and beat spain... Fought and helped beat Germany in WWI...
a Nation that was Huge... well out populationed Germany... had a TWO OCEAN navy...
and a great industrial base... Hitler just had no clue how the Car factories etc could convert to building tanks, trucks, jeeps etc..


I think there were germans who understood how dangerous USA was... but telling that to a megla manic insane person like hitler was to sign own death...

Oh and we were not "cultured" even British, Snobby french etc had impression americans weren't Cultured...because we gave up being ruled by kings and we made individualism a great thing... so we uncouth "savages" were not a threat... LOL...






_____________________________

Noise? What Noise? It's sooooo quiet and Peaceful!

Battlestar Pegasus

(in reply to Culiacan Mexico)
Post #: 106
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/10/2009 2:59:00 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Culiacan Mexico

]The Germans wanted war with the US (a country they had a particularly low opinion of), they just lacked the fleet at the time. Japan's actions gave them an instant fleet.

At the time, the Germans felt this was a great coups. Hindsight shows it to be something less.


Hitler's action is usually cast as an impulsive act of irrationality and little else. One explanation given though is that he had received Intel that suggested strongly that Roosevelt was going to declare war on Germany within days of the declaration against Japan. Armed with this knowledge, Hitler opted to beat him to the punch figuring that war was going to happen regardless. Given that the US was openly aiding Germany's enemies with war material and that there was a more or less undeclared shooting war going on in the Atlantic, it doesn't end up being as irrational an act as at first glance. This doesn't mean I don't still consider it an error on Hitler's part, but I do also acknowledge that its a view based on hindsight.

What ultimately hurt the Axis far more than the protocols of war was the simple fact that the Axis Alliance was dysfunctional.

_____________________________


(in reply to Culiacan Mexico)
Post #: 107
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/10/2009 3:00:54 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
So was the other Alliance. To an almost absurd degree.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 108
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/10/2009 3:03:36 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
If your referring to the Allies, i'd disagree. The Allied nations had their problems, but ultimately they were able to work together towards a common goal. (The western allies at least)

The Axis nation's essentially fought their own seperate wars and were defeated seperately.


< Message edited by Nikademus -- 7/10/2009 3:04:58 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 109
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/10/2009 3:05:21 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
I do.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 110
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/11/2009 1:05:05 AM   
ezzler

 

Posts: 863
Joined: 7/4/2004
Status: offline
What I meant by my u-boat statement was for Germany to not even worry about a surface navy. I never understood why the Germans even bothered with a surface fleet with the huge lead that Britain had. Think how many u-boats you could make out of the Bismarck and Tirpitz. I'm saying that with a bit of tongue in cheek but you get my drift.

You need to remember the German fleet was given the go ahead as priority of all the services in 1937/8. Germany hoped to form proper military alliances with Italy and Japan. Then the Royal Navy and French Navy would have a big problem.
The RN could not have fought Japan,Italy and Germany successfully after the fall of France.  Not saying that the Germans shouldn't have concentrated on U-Boats but they were planning for a surface ship, blockade breaking, commerce raiding war with their allies.
Imagine the real horror felt by the RN the day of Pearl Harbour when they realised that they had to patrol the worlds oceans , having just lost the US pacific fleet. The nightmare scenario that they had been warning about since Japan ceased being an ally.

The other point to the German navy is it was not necessarily being built to fight the British or French. It needed to be large enough only to beat the Poles and the Soviet Baltic fleet and keep the sea lanes to Norway and Sweden and Finland open.

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 111
RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? - 7/14/2009 7:21:58 AM   
Cmdrcain


Posts: 1161
Joined: 8/21/2000
From: Rebuilding FLA, Busy Repairing!
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

Hitler's action is usually cast as an impulsive act of irrationality and little else. One explanation given though is that he had received Intel that suggested strongly that Roosevelt was going to declare war on Germany within days of the declaration against Japan. Armed with this knowledge, Hitler opted to beat him to the punch figuring that war was going to happen regardless. Given that the US was openly aiding Germany's enemies with war material and that there was a more or less undeclared shooting war going on in the Atlantic, it doesn't end up being as irrational an act as at first glance. This doesn't mean I don't still consider it an error on Hitler's part, but I do also acknowledge that its a view based on hindsight.

What ultimately hurt the Axis far more than the protocols of war was the simple fact that the Axis Alliance was dysfunctional.




I'd say if that were true then Hitler and Germans really had no clue as to how our Govt really worked.

Roosevelt could have ASKED for a declaration but only CONGRESS cab declare a war.

The idea Roosevelt was all himself able to declare war if hitler thought that (and probably did...cause being a dictator he would think the man in charge could do like he did)

If so Hitler did not grasp that Roosevelt would have had to ASK for it and with the angry mood vs japan, not necessary a sure thing, if Hitler had been smart he would have denounced the attk while USA was at peace... ;) lessening the possibility that Congresws would go along with Roosevelt request

I still think it would not been a sure thing in those times...
yes USA was helping Britain because there were americans that
backed doing so, but there was both a rage and a fear due to Japans action, fear especially on west coast.

So Congress might have rebuffed Roosevelt deciding since japan had actually attacked USA, the priority should be there and a request might have backfired in that congress might have after rebuffing passed legislation to ensure war materials went to fighting Japan...basically could have curtailed help to britain.


Hitlers action.... was the greatest gift to the allies, I think Churchill said something when hitler did it sorta like "we will win now for sure or such in some other words but Hitlers action instantly gave Roosevelt the ability to fully go vs germany and do his germany first.


Hitler basically ensured Germanys defeat.





_____________________________

Noise? What Noise? It's sooooo quiet and Peaceful!

Battlestar Pegasus

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 112
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.094