"If Hitler had not attacked Russia?" Topic

Does Stalin invade? How successful are the Soviets if the DO invade Germany? Does the US join the war or stay neutral?

Good questions all.

But you must also ask, or answer, does Japan still attack the US in late 1941? And is Hitler still nuts enough to declare war on USA immediately thereafter?

Seems to me that if Hitler gets several years of being at war only against the British, he can get a LOT of economic and political integration accomplished within the areas already conquered: France, Benelux, Denmark, Norway, half of Poland.

I do think war with Stalin was inevitable eventually -- but it might easily have been years later.

Thank God Hitler DID attack when he did.

Not to mention, re-enforce Rommel with Panzergruppe Guderian and there goes Suez and maybe India.

First Why would Stalin invade? Technically he and Hitler are allied. Second I'm under the impression that he wasn't really
ready when the Germans invaded, so he surly wouldn't be up to invading.
Finally why would the U.S. get involved? They were neutral, and didn't get involved when Hitler Invaded Russia.

Actually, there was a Russian war plan that called for an invasion of German-held Poland – Zhukov was in favour – but Stalin believed (correctly) that the Red Army was not yet up to it

The Japanese attack on the US was to secure long-term access to resources, so I suspect would have occurred even if Hitler had not attacked Russia in 1941

If Hitler had been able to control himself and take Raeder's advice to pursue a Mediterranean strategy, it would have been bad news all along – imagine how well Rommel would have done with even a fraction of the resources that went in to Russia – and then imagine what would have happened if, after consolidating their gains and dominating the Med, the Germans had attacked Russia with no enemies at their back – bad news for the good guys

The Third Reich goes bankrupt. With the invasion of France the Germans have a big problem – lots of people (industry) to supply and fuel and no oil or raw materials.

The invasion was an economic requirement.

KAM

But if Germany takes Egypt and controls (with Italy) the whole Med, as well as the western part of the Continent, they have a huge base. Yes, shortages of oil and other raw materials -- but also the ability to draw down stocks from conquered nations. There'd have been millions in some degree of want, yes, but Germany LAST and the Nazi warmacihne last of last.

And if they have Suez, how far away is exploitable oil?

On the other hand a lot of the T-34s were on the Romanian border so it makes you wonder if Stalin was thinking of "accquiring" some oil fields.

Hitler could not have not invaded Russia. It was what he was all about.
He was annoyed with Britain, but had no desire to acquire the British Empire.

As pointed out, Stalin had a plan to attack in 1942 so war was inevitable. Assuming Japan goes ahead, and there is no reason to think they wouldn't, Germany could have theoretically supplied their ally with critical technology via the Soviet Union that might have been a game-breaker.

There is no honor among Hitler and Stalin types, so it was just a question of when and who started it. The treaty was just a convenience at the time. It just worked out that if Hitler had to attack he chose the best time since the Soviet army was in disarray and re-equipping.

I seem to remember that Stalin was truly shocked that Hitler had invaded Russia and that it took him several days to get over that shock. To me that would indicate that Stalin wasn't intending on war with Hitler so soon. There would have been a war between them, sooner or later.

I think that the later Hitler waited the more likely it would be that Stalin would 'solve' this problem himself with a march to the west. If Hitler waited he would have been stronger, but so would have Stalin!

But that said, it would have been interesting to see how Zhukov and Rommel would have locked horns.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had armor plating?

Alternate history sketch:

No Barbarossa '41.
Germans release fuel to operate the Italian battle fleet. Germans turn the Luftwaffe loose in the Mediterranean.
Germans send more troops to Afrika.
Axis closes the Mediterranean to Allied convoys.
Axis campaign in the Balkans takes Jugoslavia, Greece.
Axis paratroops take Crete, Malta.
Axis breaks through in North Africa, invades Egypt.
Arab revolt breaks out in Egypt, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq.
Axis liquidates British and French empires in the Near East, links up with Arab revolutionaries, gains access to Iraqi oil and Kirkuk-to-Haifa pipelines.
Germans build U-boats and put their backs into the Battle of the Atlantic. The UK strangles.
Japan attacks the US in December 1941.
Germany declares war against the US.
Germany extends the Battle of the Atlantic to the US East Coast. U-boat shells Coney Island.
Soviet Union, seeing Germany fully engaged in the west, opportunistically invades Deutsches Reich, blitzing Rumania and Poland.
German mechanized and air forces, supported by their friendly rail net, defeat Soviet offensives and counter-attack deep into Eastern Poland and Ukraine.

From there on, much tougher choices for the Atlantic powers about how to relieve the British Isles, keep Japan out of India, return to Europe. Perhaps from there a long, grim war to a stalemate with the Nazis.

Short answer … Germany wins … 75% of all of the Reich's loses occured on the Eastern Front …

"Everything I undertake is directed against the Russians. If the West is too stupid and blind to grasp this, then I shall be compelled to come to an agreement with the Russians, beat the West and then after their defeat turn against the Soviet Union with all my forces."

There was a biography written by a member of the Luftwaffe who was stationed on the front with Russia prior to the German invasion. It was decades ago that I read it, but he talked about watching the front lines develop, the Russians obviously getting ready for an invasion. So that was why when Germany invaded they took out all of the armor on the western half of Russia. The Russians were preparing for a war, but had not yet reached the point where they could supply the units they were moving west in preparation.

Or at least, that is what my feeble memory recalls of a book written by a pilot on the front lines.

What this question fails to grasp is that for Hitler and his minions, the invasion of Russia was their principal objective all along. Hitler didn't want to fight the Western powers -it was a war he would have gladly avoided-, but he WANTED to build an Eastern empire at Russia's cost. All his plans envisioned a gigantic empire of German farm-soldiers, who would oversee the slave labour of millions of Slavic helots. Hitler was totally convinced that the Western allies intervention was part of a Jewish conspiracy. We know that was the idiotic fantasy of a madman, but for him Russia was both an enemy and an opportunity.

He wouldn't have been Hitler. He needed the resources of the Ukraine, the Donbas and the Caucasus to fuel his economy. Autarky only works if you have the resources. The Third Reich was based on theft on a titanic level. Combined with his disgusting racial/social views that further justified theft, mass murder and enslavement, he was driven to attack the USSR.

David Glantz (and others) have done serious research that has discredited the "Stalin was about to invade" canard.

A better question would be what if he'd treated the Ukraiians with some decency.

But then if he'd either left Russia alone or been half-way decent, he wouldn't have been a Nazi.

The Japanese only attacked once they realised the Soviets were going to be busy. If Stalin is twidlding his thumbs, Japan couldn't afford the possibility of him invading Manchuria.

So if Japan stays out of the war, that frees up a lot of Empire resources.

Also, eventually, we had a viable A-bomb project and the Germans didn't….

So long-term, probably lucky for the Gemrans they got reckless.

Now… if the USA stays out of the war, the UK develops nukes on its own (assuming we can stay in the war long enough to develop them). And no tech share with the USA.

Which has all kinds of interesting post-war possibilities, if only on the share price of Boeing.

"Or at least, that is what my feeble memory recalls of a book written by a pilot on the front lines."

That might have been 'I Flew for the Fuhrer' by Heinz Knocke. He observed that the the Russians were clearly preparing to attack Germany, whereas of course Manstein, as he drove all over their formations in Latvia, declared that they were clearly not preparing to attack Germany.

Why on earth would Stalin attack Germany? particularly, why on earth would the USSR, with vast oil reserves, want the oilfields at Ploesti? although they clearly wanted more of Rumania.

The various pre-war wargames covering scenarios involving attacks on East Prussia etc are covered in some detail in Bryan Fugates 'Thunder on the Dneipr', really quite interesting before he launches off into mad conspiracy theory land. All armies conduct planning games however, and a game does not translate as intent.

Anyway, if Hitler does not invade Russia, they are free to conduct an aero-naval war against the UK as well as reinforcing the various Mediterranean adventures, although an Axis invasion of Turkey might have made the USSR somewhat nervous.

A more likely outcome is that postulated in SS-GB, a sort of 'Cold War' between the USSR and Nazi Germany while Britain goes under. Stalin was far too busy dealing with real or imagined internal dissent to worry about foreign adventures, notwithstanding Cold War propaganda about Soviet intentions. I suppose thyemight have com eot blows eventually.

It is hard to imagine a world in which Hitler does not wish to end the menace of Jewish-Bolshevik communism, nor acquire lebensraum im osten, nor to 'reduce' the population of Slavic untermensch to manageable levels. He wouldn't have been Hitler without his fundamental bitterness and hate.

IRL it was Germany who declared war on the USA, not vice versa. If the USSR attacked Germany, it is hard to see why Hitler would decide to attack the USA:)

Soviet Union invades German held lands in 1942. Get beat up and fall back looking for help.

Sounds like an Axis and Allies game.

I don't think war between Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia possible to avoid. The question was only when and who would throw the first punch.

A Human "What if Eleanor Roosevelt had armor plating?"

She did.

basileus66 "What this question fails to grasp is that for Hitler…"

Okay, so change the question. What if Peter Hitler (his little known brother, see Family Guy YouTube link ) takes over after accidentally killing his brother, and the strategy changes?

I'm really using Hitler as shorthand for Nazi Germany here, so let's not get into some existential question about what he would have done, and if I framed it badly, I apologize, but rather about Germany's capabilities.

Lord

I understood your question. What I meant is that you can't separate Nazi Germany from Hitler's Germany. In 1941 at least, all Nazi leadership shared the same vision, i.e. an Eastern empire. Ok, maybe Goebbels (and Ribbentropp, who was enamored of his agreement with the USSR), who wanted to delay the attack until 1943, is the exception. Everybody else, wanted to attack the USSR.

I am as fond as anyone else of exploring counterfactuals, but to be engaging (to me, mind you) they should be based on actual possibilities. In this particular case, I can't see the Nazis avoiding an attack on the USSR based on Reason.

By the way, I don't believe that the Nazis actually grasped how powerful USA and USSR were. They were convinced that both societies were rotten to the core, by the influence of Jews. I know, I know… anybody with a mild ability to reason would have been able to understand the faulty logic of that reasoning… But the truth is that Nazism was an ideology that lacked both reason and logic.

Best regards

In that case, we'e only really got the models of various boardgames to go on. In both 'Hitlers War' and 'Third Reich' the Sovs automatically declare war in 1942, having completing the reorganisation of their Army and not having lost 40% of their productive capacity and 10 million casualties in 1941. The 1942 countermixes, assuming no losses in 41, are also fairly impressive for the Sovs in 'The Russian Campaign' and 'Russian Front'.

I've only ever seen a 42 DOW in IIIR and HW, and this generally doesn't go well for the Axis, as even though the Germans have a relatively short front to hold, the Sovs have even less distance to go until they are sitting in the middle of Berlin. The just don't have the stratgic depth to hold up a major offensive, they need 500 miles and they've only got 200 before losing major political, communications and industrial centres. They could go for an upfront crust defence, but that plays into the Sov strengths of prepared assault.

This all sound rather like WW3 in West Germany doesn't it…

basileus66 "Lord I understood your question. What I meant is that you can't separate Nazi Germany from Hitler's Germany"

All right, that I can go with, and is interesting enough to derail my own thread to talk about it.

Could Nazi Germany have existed without Hitler? I think so. He may have been the most charismatic, but there were plenty of other men with similar ideas who'd have been happy to take over, and not all of them quite as nuts.

"But the truth is that Nazism was an ideology that lacked both reason and logic."

Proudly so I would add.

Lord

In my opinion, it wouldn't. Or to be more precise, without Hitler Nazi Germany wouldn't have been Nazi Germany, but (in the case they would have managed to win the elections without Hitler) an authoritarian state, just like other that were common in Europe in the Interwar period.

Hitler was central to Nazi party, as we know it. Without him, is dubious that they would have won the 1933 Elections. He shaped what they were, how they thought and which were they believes.

Best regards

"But the truth is that Nazism was an ideology that lacked both reason and logic."

Proudly so I would add.

Indeed! They truly HATED intellectuals, reason and critical thinking.

IIRC, in first edition Axis and Allies Germany gets an economic victory on turn 3 by blitzing into Palestine.

So there! ;-P

basileus66 "Hitler was central to Nazi party, as we know it. Without him, is dubious that they would have won the 1933 Elections. He shaped what they were, how they thought and which were they believes."

He was not alone in that. Rosenberg, Goebbels, Himmler all contributed to the ideology. Goering was a popular war hero. Feelings toward Jews and the Allies were at a pretty low ebb.

Do you really think that Hitler was the lynch pin of it all?

Do you really think that Hitler was the lynch pin of it all?

Yes. He was who bound together the conflicting personalities of the Goebbels, Rosenberg, et alii. Without him, the Nazis would have probably split in different smaller parties, and never would have been able to win 1933 elections.