RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message

Randomizer -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/1/2009 8:43:29 PM)

This is potentially one of those hugely toxic Internet discussion points but the thread has remained fairly civil to date so here goes another $0.02

The O.P. question is essentially flawed since the Germans had no reason to attack Russia but the realities of Nazi idealogical dogma made a war in the east inevitable.  Therefore one should not try and separate nazism and all the baggage that came with it and so speculation about being nice to conquered cultures and giving even an illusion of liberation must also be flawed.  Nazism was what it was and many in the occupied areas of the Soviet Union preferred the devil they knew (Stalin) to the invading new guy (Hitler) that a divide and conquor strategy or internal destabilization was highly unlikely.  Nazi political doctrine made political defeat of the Soviet Union virtually impossible particularly when there was no political movement competing within the Soviet system.  Stalin's purges and police had seen to that.

There was of course, always a chance that Stalin would give up the western parts of the Soviet empire to save the Party and what was left of the country but I would submit that that particular window of opportunity was very brief and mooting it to the Politbureau and STAVKA may well have resulted in Stalin's ouster (purely speculative).

Somebody earlier commented to the effect that conquering Russia would have been "easy" provided certain pre-conditions were met.  Whether ruled by czars or commissars, occupying Russia has never been "easy" as any number of oriental potentates or western oligarchs could attest to from past attempts.  Nazism sowed the seeds of its own defeat in Russia as elsewhere and a good thing too.

If on the other hand, one wants to indulge one's self in alternate historical fantasy a la Harry Turtledove, carry on and enjoy.

Best Regards



sol_invictus -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/1/2009 9:00:10 PM)

I wouldn't completely rule out the possibility that the Nazis could have brought themselves to "liberate" the Soviet lands. I could easily see a Nazi installed Quisling-type puppet state erected in the Ukraine. They did it elsewhere. Make no mistake, I don't imagine a benevolent throwing off of the Soviet chains. The Romans learned centuries before that it was much easier to rule conquered people with a veneer of self-government.



sullafelix -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/1/2009 9:45:11 PM)

We sometimes are blinded by Napoleons and the Germans invasions of Russia and don't see their long history. WWI in the east shows us exactly what can happen in any country as long as the timing is right. Just as so many people point out wrongly that England has only been successfully invaded once. The nazi reasons for the attack are always stated as just the racial and land issue. But I'm sure their were many Germans who would have thought invading Russia and conquering communism was a good idea just like Patton.

The fantasy scenario in question is almost exactly what the Germans did in WWI politically and militarily. Had Germany not been beaten by the western allies who knows how the eastern part of Europe would have turned out.



Randomizer -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/1/2009 9:54:03 PM)

Good point Arinvald but...

Don't forget that Quisling already had an existing party apparatus in place whereas the Great Terror and forced collectivization had eliminated any cohesive resistance in the Ukraine.  In all the Nazi divide and conquor schemes, organized locals had quickly put a pro-Nazi regime in place but there were no organized locals left in the Soviet Union.  Also in the West there was generaly far fewer nazi racial superiority issues in dealing with the defeated nation's potential pro-nazi leadership pool.

Nazi dogma required all Slavs to be reduced to a status of slavery akin to the helots of ancient Sparta.  Nazism itself was far too inflexable to start making doctrinal exceptions and we are talking about a political movement that even forbade its party member scientists' from using "Jewish science" (read quantum physics) in their atomic research.

Best Regards



Randomizer -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/1/2009 10:06:44 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sulla05
But I'm sure their were many Germans who would have thought invading Russia and conquering communism was a good idea just like Patton.

The fantasy scenario in question is almost exactly what the Germans did in WWI politically and militarily. Had Germany not been beaten by the western allies who knows how the eastern part of Europe would have turned out.

Without nazism the reasons for mid-20th Century Germany to fight Russia fall away entirely. Even assuming some relatively benign German political movement had of settled the political problem of Poland by military means, the Soviet Union in 1941 constituted Germany's biggest trading partner and source of raw materials. Without the anti-Bolshevik rhetoric of the Nazi Party Germany had no reasons to fight and the Soviets had no need of their anti-fascist paranoia.

In the fantasy alternate world you can cook any and all cause and effect that you desire but the initial poster's question perhaps should have been "could the Nazis have defeated the USSR". I believe that the answer to that one is an unambiguous no.

Best Regards



Cmdrcain -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/1/2009 10:11:34 PM)

My View is Germany could have beaten USSR only and if only they had forced Britain to terms and so not been doomed in a two front war

Even through Britain was pretty much out of it after the collapse of France, once USA entered war...Britain was an island where the forces could build up on...
which brings another blunder... Hitlers declaring war on USA rendered it unnecessary for roosvelt to push for a declaration on germany.

If Hitler had not been insane... he would not have declared... that would have had roosvelt trying declare on germany when it was japan that had attacked the USA proper, I doubt congress would have declared on germany in face of japans bombing, the hue and cry would been to war on japan and forget europe
with germany having NOT declared on USA.

There wouldn't been a germany first...there would been a Japan ONLY war effort...as far as britain...working with them in pacific..

If There had been no entry of USA vs Germany...if it were USA-Japan only... Britain might have ended up deciding that Hitler  couldn't be removed from europe and made an accomodation...especially if Churchillsgovt had fallen.

With free reign to fight a ONE FRONT war only...germany would have had the  aility to have at the least over run USSR to the Urals...

At that point resuming japan still  had its way in Pacific with USA still gearing up,   USSR would have had to move assets from pacific areas to urals... and Japan could have moved against USSR in the pacific... its Navy was basically what fought USA...most of its army was in china, Burma and manchuka..
a weakened...weakening USSR especially one that loses moscow and all West of Urals...  would have had japans army
hungry especially for the resources in pacific USSR..

That would have surely triggered a collapse of USSR into bits and pieces....

THEN the USA would have started worrying of Germany especially if without allied bombing of Reich their jet and rocketry progressed..

Hitlers blunders.attking and a 2 front war while britain was uncowed...declaring war on USA needlessly...
and japan not attking USSR...doomed Germany...

A sane and capable German leader would not have done such





06 Maestro -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/1/2009 10:47:12 PM)

Some good points there, Cmdrcain

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cmdrcain
... Hitlers declaring war on USA rendered it unnecessary for roosvelt to push for a declaration on germany.


No doubt, Roosevelt would have continued to agitate (secretly) for war with Germany until he got what he wanted. This could have made for some fabulous tales. To make things a little more difficult for Roosevelt; Hitler could have publicly denounce the Japanese attack at Pearl as cowardly and offered condolences. To take this alternate world a little further (could have happened with better insight[;)])-how about Germany declaring war on the Japanese for their dishonorable actions against the good people of America?

quote:


If Hitler had not been insane... he would not have declared...


He was advised against doing that. Germany could have easily ignored Japans problems as Japan ignored Germany's problems. Hitlers position was that Germany was already at war with the US-and had been for a year. He had no idea how bad a real war could get with the US. Somehow, he was under the impression that "Americans only know how to make refrigerators and razor blades".





quote:


A sane and capable German leader would not have done such

Therein is the greatest problem that The Germans had. He was a genius in some ways, quite ignorant and arrogant in other ways and a burned out drug addict bordering on complete lunacy towards the end.



Charles2222 -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/1/2009 10:59:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Helpless

quote:

soldier equaled, on average, the german soldier, and comrade Stalin made sure of that with the 30's -and- 40's purges.


From all the faulty statement, let's take this one.

While I agree on the first part of the statement about the quality, the reason given is just.. not correct.

Let's first take some numbers:

In 1937 form 144300 of all officers 11034 were "purged", i.e. not restored in their ranks until the 1940, which is 7.7%. In 1938 6742 out of 179000 commanders were "purged" - 3.3%. I'm not justifying purges, many talented commander did suffered, but 6% is not the decisive factor in quality of officers, not speaking the quality of soldiers.

The real cause of the bad quality was the "explosive" growth of RedArmy
Rank\1936\1941
Colonels\1714\4788
Lieutenant Colonels\-\7246
Majors\5501\20430
Captains\14369\47710
Sen.lieutenants\26082\50619
Lieutenants\58582\147320
Jun.lieutenants\-\95797
Totals\106247\373910

So in 4 years officers Corps grew 3 times! No doubts that country which suffered from World War, Civil War, etc, where mandatory 7-year elementary education was first time implemented in 1928(!), couldn't prepare that many "good" officers in time. The same reasons were behind quality of soldier and the Army as such.

Btw, German had superiority not only versus Soviets. Can't miss the opportunity to repost formulas from Zetterling's Normandy book.

[image]http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/upfiles/13846/088CEF7F1C2D44CAB3299B266AD030A6.jpg[/image]


When we speak of purges, we speak of murder in the case of the Soviets. You would almost never use the word purge in relation to any discipline the germans praticed on their upper ranks. About the closest you would come would be the treatment of the SA leadership during the Night of the Long Knives. anf of course they weren't proper army anyway.



Charles2222 -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/1/2009 11:08:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SeaMonkey

I'm going to keep this simple as everyone here has presented superb points about operational and strategic perspectives.

Simply, it was Germany's failure at diplomacy.  Specifically allowing the USA to get involved with their(Germany's) DoW, I believe on Dec. 10, 1941.  That and inconjunction with not pursuading Japan to attack USSR from the East.

Conclusion:  After France fell, Germany had the capability to keep UK on the ropes for an extended period of time through greater prosecution of Donitz's Uboat strategy and better use of the Luftwaffe, BoB was a mistake.

  Murmansk and Vladivostok (lendlease entry ports) could have been cut off.  As presented in an earlier post, the Italians should have been left in NA to wither on the vine.  Later, in any consequential invasion of the northern Med area by UK, the foray could have easily been contained.  No need for Balkan intervention or the subsequent invasion of Greece or the airborne assault on Crete.
In fact it would present an even greater opportunity to "bleed" the UK.

The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was a diplomatic success for Germany, but later that success was not fully taken advantage of, especially the fuel aspects.  You can imagine what that extra energy would have done.

Could Germany have subjugated the entire USSR?  Perhaps not, but I feel truly confident that the USSR could have been made to sue for peace and Germany would have gotten some very nice accomodations.  So good in fact, that the UK could have been taken out after the signing of the armistice.

All the while the USA sits on the sidelines with FDR's regime chomping at the bit to get in, but the American Congress and people keeping up a thorough roadblock to not subsidize the British Empire.

In my mind the DoW by Hitler was no big deal, and probably scored him a few points with his allies. The USA would either be neutral or at war with germany. The fact that Japan thrust them into war, made war with germany academic. Within two months, probably much less, the USA would had DoW to germany if germany didn't beat them to it. I'm not sure that germany waiting for a delayed DoW from the USA might not bought germany a little more time or not, but once the USA was in the war, it was inevitable they would be at war with germany. If the USA cared at all for containment of the Reds, that was a very strong secondary reason for going to war with germany.



sullafelix -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/1/2009 11:16:35 PM)

Well all I can say for fantasy scenarios is that France and England seriously considered bombing the oil fields in southern Russia to deny oil to Germany. As far as reasons for war up until WWI and really much more WWII war was not looked upon as something so horrible or in need of reason. When the war started to really go against them the Nazi's even tried some of the things that were brought up. They promised autonomy and tried to enlist as many Russian prisoners of war as they could. A few of these troops fought against the allies on D-Day, although for obvious reasons not very well. Had D-Day not taken place in 1944 it's also possible that Stalin might have excepted a separate peace.  Many ideas that seem now to us as pretty far out were wandering around peoples brains at the time. The Morgenthau plan and Himmler's very real belief ( to him ) that the allies would deal with him and cut a separate peace are just two of many.




Randomizer -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/1/2009 11:21:44 PM)

I am at a loss as to why any thinking person in the 21st Century would be developing fantasy scenarios for Nazi victories.  But that's just me...

Best Regards.



Charles2222 -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/1/2009 11:46:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cmdrcain

My View is Germany could have beaten USSR only and if only they had forced Britain to terms and so not been doomed in a two front war

Even through Britain was pretty much out of it after the collapse of France, once USA entered war...Britain was an island where the forces could build up on...
which brings another blunder... Hitlers declaring war on USA rendered it unnecessary for roosvelt to push for a declaration on germany.

If Hitler had not been insane... he would not have declared... that would have had roosvelt trying declare on germany when it was japan that had attacked the USA proper, I doubt congress would have declared on germany in face of japans bombing, the hue and cry would been to war on japan and forget europe
with germany having NOT declared on USA.

There wouldn't been a germany first...there would been a Japan ONLY war effort...as far as britain...working with them in pacific..

If There had been no entry of USA vs Germany...if it were USA-Japan only... Britain might have ended up deciding that Hitler  couldn't be removed from europe and made an accomodation...especially if Churchillsgovt had fallen.

With free reign to fight a ONE FRONT war only...germany would have had the  aility to have at the least over run USSR to the Urals...

At that point resuming japan still  had its way in Pacific with USA still gearing up,   USSR would have had to move assets from pacific areas to urals... and Japan could have moved against USSR in the pacific... its Navy was basically what fought USA...most of its army was in china, Burma and manchuka..
a weakened...weakening USSR especially one that loses moscow and all West of Urals...  would have had japans army
hungry especially for the resources in pacific USSR..

That would have surely triggered a collapse of USSR into bits and pieces....

THEN the USA would have started worrying of Germany especially if without allied bombing of Reich their jet and rocketry progressed..

Hitlers blunders.attking and a 2 front war while britain was uncowed...declaring war on USA needlessly...
and japan not attking USSR...doomed Germany...

A sane and capable German leader would not have done such




I personally don't believe that. I think war with germany, for the USA, was inevitable. Within 2 months, germany would have had a DoW from them if germany didn't DoW on them first. The USA couold get away with neutrality until they were attacked, but once they were attacked, there was no reason to sit back and let europe stay nazi, perhaps even lose England, or the other alternative was all of europe (except england perhaps) becoming Red. Japan and germany being allies didn't help the USA staying neutral with germany very likely either. The fact that the USA was already helping england to a considerable degree before 12/7/41, put them technically at war with germany anyway, but each side kept ignoring the uboat sinkings and help the british were getting. If the USA had really stayed neutral, then perhaps Hitler wouldn't had declared war. The USA was doing all it could to get involved in the european war and still be looked at by some as neutral. I'm not sure if Hitler wanted to show the japanese friendship by honoring their pact as more of a motivation than the USA getting him angry. That's why I say the USA would had declared war pretty soon, because they were practically at war with germany as it was anyway. Even if Japan didn't attack, germany might had still resorted to a DoW with the USA at some point, simply because they weren't behaving very neutral and if time progressed it would probably only got worse. I guess if Japan didn't attack, maybe Hitler was waiting on reports that the USA had actually put armies in england before he would DoW.



sullafelix -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/2/2009 12:34:38 AM)

Well nothing I have writen is something that I'm just pulling out of my hat. They were all suggestions that were in the minds of the major players at the time or was brought up to them verbally or in memo form.

This is also a gaming forum and not a history one. If Gary Grigsby's new game was advertised as " you can play the Germans but you will lose no matter what you do ". I don't think it will get many buyers. I and we have just brought up historical possibilities that luckily did not happen.

My honest military opinion is if Manstein was given a free hand in 1943, and there was a lot of talking with people trying to make him the army head at that time, he could have bled the Soviets dry and forced a separate peace.



stuman -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/2/2009 9:29:27 AM)

No.



06 Maestro -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/2/2009 10:27:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Randomizer

I am at a loss as to why any thinking person in the 21st Century would be developing fantasy scenarios for Nazi victories.  But that's just me...

Best Regards.


Well, you could start a thread to discuss how the Alied powers could have avoided bungling the war for so long. After all, they did have overwhelming advantages in every category.

Its all interesting-but that's just me.



sol_invictus -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/2/2009 2:43:03 PM)

Of course all of these suggestions have assumed that Germany invaded Russia simply on Hitler's whim. It was assumed by Hitler and quite a few other people that war between Germany and Russia was inevitable and that Germany needed to strike while the iron was hot. It was assumed in Germany that Stalin was only playing nice and throwing resources at Germany to buy time for Russia to prepare for the inevitable war. Stalin was a bit too clever since he assumed that the western powers would bleed themselves while Russia built up its strength so as to come in afterwards and reap the spoils. Stalin was horrified by the swift German victories in the west.

In hindsight; assuming the German operations in the Balkans; it would have been better for Germany to have postponed the invasion of Russia by a year and conclude the war with Britain or at least to severly weaken their position as much as possible. Hitler should have given Franco whatever he demanded for German access to Gibraltar. With Britain's easy access to the Med blocked Italy's situation would have eased quite a bit and Egypt in dire peril. After this disaster the British government may have sought a deal. If not, at least the situation in the west could have been stabilized in preparation for next year's Russian invasion.

This is assuming of course that the Battle of Britain didn't occur and that Germany didn't declare war against the US. Germany could have then launced its invasion of Russia in '42 earlier in the year as soon as the wet season was over and could have captured Moscow. At that point a reasonable peace offer could have been extended. If no agreement could be reached then a second years campaign could have seized Leningrad and the oil fields. I am fairly sure that Stalin either would have been removed after this or he would have made a deal as long as Hitler was willing to be reasonable.

So I guess that many of us can agree that if Hitler were not Hitler then it was certainly a possibility that Germany could have pulled it off.



SeaMonkey -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/2/2009 3:09:48 PM)

Now all we need is a game that can accurately portray this possibility with extensive diplomatic and military events based on the players' decisions.  One that, given an indefinite execution of variables by both sides, can lead to a configuration where the Axis dominate the Eastern Hemisphere and the Allies the western.  Could this be construed as an Axis victory?

And then......????



Lützow -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/2/2009 3:35:18 PM)

There are several theoretical scenarios I can think of. Considering the Hitler assassinate succeeded and Roosevelt/Churchill accepted a particular capitulation, we could have send all our troops to eastern front and enforce a stalemate there. Another possibility had been, if scientists as Heisenberg and Hahn accomplished the German nuclear bomb in due time. Afaik in the end it did merely rely on the lack of 'Schweres Wasser'.



Terminus -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/2/2009 4:51:47 PM)

Good Grief...[8|]



Helpless -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/2/2009 6:22:38 PM)

quote:

I am at a loss as to why any thinking person in the 21st Century would be developing fantasy scenarios for Nazi victories. But that's just me...

Best Regards.


Quoted for truth.

Of cause it is matter of taste, but it's all reminds me a "bored cat occupation" [:)]




GaryChildress -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/2/2009 9:49:20 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Randomizer

I am at a loss as to why any thinking person in the 21st Century would be developing fantasy scenarios for Nazi victories.  But that's just me...

Best Regards.


The original impetus of this thread was a discussion in GG's War in the East forum where some of us were trying to come up with what the victory conditions would be appropriate for the game. Apparently the creators have not yet come up with the victory conditions for the grand campaign so the thread turned into a suggestion thread where it was originally a question.

My take on things was that any set of victory conditions whereby the German player "wins" would be complete fantasy. Germany was doomed to lose from the start. However, since victory is going to necessarily be some arbitrary confabulation I was in favor of giving the German player victory if he takes Moscow in the first year of the war or if he holds the Soviets from taking Berlin by a certain deadline in the last year. Of course these are purely artificial goals just to make a game out of it but since the game is supposed to be realistic and because my conclusion was the Germans couldn't possibly win IRL, I figured my victory conditions were no more fantasy than Germany conquering the USSR.

Some people responded to the thread that defeat for the Germans was not necessarily a foregone conclusion so I thought I'd bring the topic up in the general forums since it was getting a little OT for the WitE discussion. Any insight gained here may be grist for the discussion of victory conditions for WitE.



06 Maestro -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/2/2009 10:05:20 PM)

Ah, Gary. This can become even a more hotly disputed subject than the actual historical possibilities.[;)]

There are the two opposing views; to win, one must actually win-or to win, one must simply do better than was the historical outcome.

I prefer the latter.

Although I do not agree that Germany was doomed to loose (at least not before Dec '41), the odds are heavily against it to triumph. So, if a game is to accurately depict a situation where one side is not able to achieve total victory overall, then there needs to be some method to decide on victory other than total victory. How to achieve these marginal victories criteria will be a fun subject-enjoy.




Mike Parker -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/2/2009 11:08:02 PM)

I think what Gary is getting at though Maestro is that if one is to have a game, many folks that play this game would like to have a fair metric for determining a victor.

Games such as Chess for example are perfectly balanced, with only an advantage to the white side by virtue of the first move.  In that game, it is very fair to say the victor is the one that checkmates the opposing king, and of course there are many draw possibilities.  It is further helped by the tonnes of historical data showing what the effect is of white's first move vis a vis probability of winning this fair game.

Now a game of WWII on the eastern front that is even giving lip service to history just plain won't be fair.  It would be foolhardy to then try and have your victory conditions for it be beating the opposing side into submission, as we know this is HIGHLY unlikely for the Axis to achieve, while not too unlikely for the Soviets.  We also should not count on any sort of historicity factor for such a game like we have in chess either, since well chess has a very accurate rating system to gauge skill level, and matches between said rated opponents that have them alternating sides.  It is unlikely any game we design would achieve such rigorous data in the lifetime of the game (not impossible just unlikely) so its not likely we could come up with something that said the Axis win 4.75% of the time and the Soviets 95.25%.

So what we do is postulate what goals to set for each side.  Ideally those goals are set so that two players that are both competent and equally skilled would each enjoy a 50% winning percentage with each side.  Hence since I think we can agree the Soviet side in any reasonable game would 'do better' prima facia that the victory conditions should on its face be 'easier' for the Axis.

Now then actually doing this is going to be pretty darn hard!  For me, I don't care so much about victory conditions and such, I just like to play.. I would be happy with a game like War in the East, and feel very satisfied at the end for just the play itself.. but I know most folks will want a way to tally up who wins.  I don't envy the folks trying to come up with that, and at the risk of sounding smug I will predict that no matter what they come up with, after players play the game, they themselves will begin to adjust the victory conditions to more closely mimic the results they see.



EdinHouston -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/3/2009 12:09:23 AM)

I think its extremely unlikely that Barbarossa could have succeeded. The huge supply problems arising from the distances involved, coupled with the fact that the Soviet army was much bigger and stronger than Germany thought, made it very very difficult for Barbarossa to succeed.

Now, could Barbarossa have succeeded under different assumptions, ie, dont aim for a 3 month victory, but accept that a 1942 campaign would be required too? IMO possibly, but still not likely. But certainly the Germans could have dug in after the Kiev victories and waited for spring, rather than launch the Moscow offensive and get their army mauled. But of course, its questionable that Germany would have invaded in the first place if they had known that a single season campaign couldnt succeed.

Obviously if Germany had pursued other policies towards the non-Russian ethnics, and indeed, treated the Russian prisoners better to encourage their surrender, then that could have changed the whole situation... but its hard to see NAZI Germany doing that. And a different political regime in Germany wouldnt have been in that war in the first place.

I am not even convinced that Germany could have defeated Russia even in a one-front war, the caveat being that the Soviets needed Lend-Lease in order to devote so much of their industry to weapons and such. With no Lend-lease, their military production would have been much lower, which in turn would mean that Germany's prospects in a long war would be better...



ezzler -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/3/2009 6:56:05 PM)

There are many good points and theories here. Some are a little misguided, like Germany gearing up for war earlier. Well, in 1939 the 98k rifle, the staple of the army was cut to 0% production. As were mortar bombs for the 50mm. There just weren't the raw materials to make anymore.
The Germans low point for materials came in spring '39.

The main issue though is that the Germans performed as well as a veteran War in the East player, while the USSR behaved like a WIF newbie who has just opened the box. Still the USSR won.
AND..
Nothing happens in isolation. The Allies would have altered their strategies accordingly if the axis was doing better. Like those arguments that the Me262 could have won the air war in 1942 if produced in great numbers. Only if the Allies didn't react., didn't target the airfields, didn't fly in group instead of squadron strength, didn't rush through their own jets etc etc.



sveint -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/3/2009 7:33:37 PM)

Invariably in these discussions Germany is allowed to correct mistakes... while the Soviets are not. If the Soviets are allowed to do things better, just like Germany, there is absolutely no way Germany could have won. Just imagine properly deployed Soviet forced during the first few months of the war.



Greybriar -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/3/2009 7:43:35 PM)

If. The biggest word in the English vocabulary. [;)]



GaryChildress -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/3/2009 7:50:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ezz

The main issue though is that the Germans performed as well as a veteran War in the East player, while the USSR behaved like a WIF newbie who has just opened the box. Still the USSR won.



This sort of lends to my hypothesis that the Germans couldn't win. No matter how many hundreds of thousands of prisoners they took, no matter how many tanks they destroyed in battle or aircraft they destroyed on the ground the USSR had relatively inexhaustible resources in material and manpower compared to Germany. They had more oil, more minerals and more people. Plus the supply lines for the Germans just grew more tenuous the further they advanced and the Soviets were not going to roll over and die no matter how miserably the Germans defeated them on the battlefield or how much territory they took. It was a fight to the bitter end. Basically it comes down to numbers and the Soviets had greater numbers of everything.



GaryChildress -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/3/2009 7:51:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sveint

Invariably in these discussions Germany is allowed to correct mistakes... while the Soviets are not. If the Soviets are allowed to do things better, just like Germany, there is absolutely no way Germany could have won. Just imagine properly deployed Soviet forced during the first few months of the war.


This is an excellent point. Well stated.



06 Maestro -> RE: Could Germany have defeated the USSR? (7/3/2009 7:53:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ezz

There are many good points and theories here. Some are a little misguided, like Germany gearing up for war earlier. Well, in 1939 the 98k rifle, the staple of the army was cut to 0% production. As were mortar bombs for the 50mm. There just weren't the raw materials to make anymore.
The Germans low point for materials came in spring '39.


Come on now. If Germany had shortages of strategic materials in 1939, the war would have been over much, much sooner than it was. Germany had in fact created huge stocks of strategic materials which they may fall short of if cut off by blockade. Critical materials did not run short until well into 1944. This resulted in weaker chargers being built into AA rounds and portions of a/c being made of substandard material. In 1939 Germany acquired the Skoda Arms works from Czechoslovakia a and the weapons from same. This was when the new German Army was able to standardized their infantry rifles-which meant getting rid of several old German made types as; 1. they weren't as good as the new Czech Rifles, 2. they had more ammo (billions of rounds) for the Czech rifles. There were also military hardware of every type that was immediately included into the German forces From Czech sources.

quote:


Nothing happens in isolation. The Allies would have altered their strategies accordingly if the axis was doing better. Like those arguments that the Me262 could have won the air war in 1942 if produced in great numbers. Only if the Allies didn't react., didn't target the airfields, didn't fly in group instead of squadron strength, didn't rush through their own jets etc etc.


While I agree with this in principle, it does not always fit the reality. Simple case in point; why didn't Germany institute the 72 hour work week as did the UK. The Allied powers were doing everything they could to increase production-they could not do anything else-especially GB-they were tapped out on labor. Therefore, there would not have been any added production from GB, the USA or Russia if Germany had increased its production.
The only major power that could have very easily experience a major production increase earlier in the war was Germany. Italy had real strategic shortages of critical materials that could not be overcome, and Japan had industrial capacity limitations that would take years to overcome. Germany, on the other hand had the material, the factory space, and although a little short on labor in 1940, a peace time work week that could have been modified -at the stroke of a pen.


The higher production still would not guarantee a German victory, but it most certainly would have had a major impact on the war. And that impact would have had very significant effects on the Allied powers ability to gain an advantage against Germany on any front. This is the number one error by Germany in the whole war-not gearing up right at the beginning.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.875