What if Germany waited to invade Poland...
What if Germany waited to invade Poland...
And smashed into Russia, Even as Ribbentrop was negotiating with Molotov concerning the non-aggression pact! None of the Western allies cared about Russia, America hates communism, England flatly refused Stalin's treaty advances, That is the only reason a German-Russian pact came to exist anyway. Take away the Invasion of France and all the "Final Solution" garbage, and Germany has the largest nation in the world today!
History never seems to teach men, only justify their ambitions
Re: What if Germany waited to invade Poland...
How do you want to invade Russia without invading Poland before??Ironman wrote:And smashed into Russia, Even as Ribbentrop was negotiating with Molotov concerning the non-aggression pact! None of the Western allies cared about Russia, America hates communism, England flatly refused Stalin's treaty advances, That is the only reason a German-Russian pact came to exist anyway. Take away the Invasion of France and all the "Final Solution" garbage, and Germany has the largest nation in the world today!
http://www.panzergrenadierregiment63.de.vu
http://www.3ss.totenkopf.de.vu
Die Dummheit des Menschen und das Universum sind unendlich; wobei ich mir beim Universum nicht ganz sicher bin! (Albert Einstein)
http://www.3ss.totenkopf.de.vu
Die Dummheit des Menschen und das Universum sind unendlich; wobei ich mir beim Universum nicht ganz sicher bin! (Albert Einstein)
Sorry, i should have offered a plan, but it was late. Army Group South under Generalfeldmarshall Gerd Von Runstedt, Attacked from Czechoslovakia into the Ukraine and Caucasus Mountains.This invasion force could have been the largest. Generalfeldmarshall Fedor von Bock could have attacked primarily from East Prussia with his Army Group Center. Secret negotiations could have been made with Poland to grant Germany a corridor to invade, although i don't recall Hitler asking Belgium for permission in his invasion of France! A massive invasion from Finland on Leningrad, an air assault similar to the Greek invasion, the possibilities are abundant. The point of the invasion must be to take Moscow, kill the head and the body will follow. The German army fighting in Russia and ONLY Russia, one front, they would have taken Russia quickly! Had they come as liberators and not slaughtered the Russian people, Germany would have plenty of "Living room" today.
History never seems to teach men, only justify their ambitions
I don't think the Poles would have wished to find themselves surrounded by Germans - and how long would it be before they were next? It seems unlikely they would have granted "access rights" for an invasion of Russia.
It's also doubtful that the Finns would have attacked Leningrad. The Winter War wasn't until November 1939 and they would have had no motive to attack the Russians. Even when the Finns did have a motive two years later, they only advanced as far as their pre-war border and stopped. Mannerheim refused to advance on Leningrad.
I don't understand your motives in having the Germans attack the Russians in the first place. You state that the Germans could have come as liberators and then you state that they would have had their "living room today", which implies they were planning on staying around as conquerors. Which is it?
It's also doubtful that the Finns would have attacked Leningrad. The Winter War wasn't until November 1939 and they would have had no motive to attack the Russians. Even when the Finns did have a motive two years later, they only advanced as far as their pre-war border and stopped. Mannerheim refused to advance on Leningrad.
I don't understand your motives in having the Germans attack the Russians in the first place. You state that the Germans could have come as liberators and then you state that they would have had their "living room today", which implies they were planning on staying around as conquerors. Which is it?
Cheers,
Patrick
When I was single, I had three theories on raising children. Now I have three children and no theories.
Patrick
When I was single, I had three theories on raising children. Now I have three children and no theories.
Good point Patrick. My point was merely a "What if", alternate history based on what actually happened. The fact is, Germany did invade Russia,thats not just a whim of mine.Hitler wanted "living room" and hated communism, it was just a matter of time before invasion. The Ukrainian populace saw Germany as liberators, anyone was better than Stalin in their eyes, So, Germany would have been both liberator and possesor of the Soviet Union. As for your thoughts on Poland, they are valid, but, they were going to have Germans "around" regardless.
History never seems to teach men, only justify their ambitions
- Herr Doktor
- Contributor
- Posts: 252
- Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2002 8:26 pm
Hello Ironman:
In any case, did the army groups and resources you reference exist in sufficient numbers/experience to have successfully carried out Barbarossa in 1939?
And what does the Germany of today need with "living room?"
HD
The Germans were seen as liberators at first. However, as time went on the Ukrainian population came to experience the same things other populations were subjected to in the East, and the Germans lost their support.The Ukrainian populace saw Germany as liberators, anyone was better than Stalin in their eyes, So, Germany would have been both liberator and possesor of the Soviet Union.
In any case, did the army groups and resources you reference exist in sufficient numbers/experience to have successfully carried out Barbarossa in 1939?
But this does not take into account the very nature of National Socialist Germany, which held that (among other things) the slavs were an inferior breed and not deserving of equal treatment. Slavery and slaughter was all they were considered due.Had they come as liberators and not slaughtered the Russian people, Germany would have plenty of "Living room" today.
And what does the Germany of today need with "living room?"
HD
Herr Doktor:
Your points are well taken, My point once again is not so much what the Germany of today "needs", but what the Germany in 1939 wanted. This is what i believe may have worked, had Hitler focused entirely on the Soviet Union and not war with the west. Hitler's thoughts on the Slavs and their destiny in the Reich are well documented, just enough education for them to do rudimentary labor for agricultural purposes and nothing more, death to the lame, mentally ill and homosexual. Hitler's demonic racism led to the downfall of a fine German people, who bled and died for a lie. I find it ironic that here in the U.S., we have neo-nazi skinheads who idolize A.H., yet truth be told, had they lived in the time of the Reich, most of them probably would be jammed in a boxcar, headed to a deathcamp. Sorry about the diatribe, I hate Hitler, but respect the German people. Oh, about the Numbers and experiance of the Army groups to carry out Barbarossa in 1939, only eight months later they had conquered France and driven the Brits back to England, i believe they could have easily defeated the leader purged Soviets.
Respectfully,
Ironman
Your points are well taken, My point once again is not so much what the Germany of today "needs", but what the Germany in 1939 wanted. This is what i believe may have worked, had Hitler focused entirely on the Soviet Union and not war with the west. Hitler's thoughts on the Slavs and their destiny in the Reich are well documented, just enough education for them to do rudimentary labor for agricultural purposes and nothing more, death to the lame, mentally ill and homosexual. Hitler's demonic racism led to the downfall of a fine German people, who bled and died for a lie. I find it ironic that here in the U.S., we have neo-nazi skinheads who idolize A.H., yet truth be told, had they lived in the time of the Reich, most of them probably would be jammed in a boxcar, headed to a deathcamp. Sorry about the diatribe, I hate Hitler, but respect the German people. Oh, about the Numbers and experiance of the Army groups to carry out Barbarossa in 1939, only eight months later they had conquered France and driven the Brits back to England, i believe they could have easily defeated the leader purged Soviets.
Respectfully,
Ironman
History never seems to teach men, only justify their ambitions
I know it's only fantasy, but Czechoslovakia haven't common border with USSR or Soviet Ukraine in 1939.Ironman wrote: Army Group South under Generalfeldmarshall Gerd Von Runstedt, Attacked from Czechoslovakia into the Ukraine and Caucasus Mountains. Fedor von Bock could have attacked primarily from East Prussia with his Army Group Center.
Also East Prussia haven't common border with Russia. Please check historical maps.
Part of this scenario included Poland granting transit rights to German troops. Why Poland would allow this is not explained.I know it's only fantasy, but Czechoslovakia haven't common border with USSR or Soviet Ukraine in 1939.
Also East Prussia haven't common border with Russia. Please check historical maps.
Hmmm... well, as long as we're fantasizing, how about we expand this scenario so that I can make millions selling arms to both sides and end up with Veronica Lake, Betty Grable and Lana Turner as my girlfriends!
Cheers,
Patrick
When I was single, I had three theories on raising children. Now I have three children and no theories.
Patrick
When I was single, I had three theories on raising children. Now I have three children and no theories.
- Herr Doktor
- Contributor
- Posts: 252
- Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2002 8:26 pm
Hi Ironman:
I agree that Germany would have had a much greater probability of winning in Russia had there only been one front. But Russia is so vast, with such huge resources of men and material, that I wonder if Germany would have succeeded even under the best of circumstances? Losing Moscow would have been a tremendous blow but I am not convinced the loss of Moscow would have ended all further resistance.
Another thing to consider is the timing of Barbarossa in '41. I wonder what would have happened had the Germans not been forced to bail out the Italians first, which forced the Russian offensive timetable forward into June? Even starting the offensive a few months earlier could have put the Germans at the gates of Moscow in the fall, rather than the winter...
Hindsight is 20/20, yes?
HD
I agree that Germany would have had a much greater probability of winning in Russia had there only been one front. But Russia is so vast, with such huge resources of men and material, that I wonder if Germany would have succeeded even under the best of circumstances? Losing Moscow would have been a tremendous blow but I am not convinced the loss of Moscow would have ended all further resistance.
Another thing to consider is the timing of Barbarossa in '41. I wonder what would have happened had the Germans not been forced to bail out the Italians first, which forced the Russian offensive timetable forward into June? Even starting the offensive a few months earlier could have put the Germans at the gates of Moscow in the fall, rather than the winter...
Hindsight is 20/20, yes?
HD
There are lots of reasons why this would not have worked, but the biggest is that Germany had no fuel for such an invasion. It was only the oil they captured during their surprisingly quick invasion of France that even allowed them to seriously think of attacking Russia. Before Barbarossa, Germany's main source of oil was from Russia, as part of the deal for splitting Poland. Germany had little oil reserves or production before the war started, and the coal liquefaction plan was still a decade away from making enough to support an army.