Stalin would have simply massed troops on the eastern borders/front and rolled across the line at a time of his choosing with a vastly superior force that couldn't be stopped.First, what additional details can you shed on this fascinating possibility? Are there any books, recent, or old, that explore this? Frankly, in my view this is a more pivotal point than the decision to resume the Russian war in 1942 and secure Stalingrad.
Second, feel free to speculate on what had happened HAD Hitler followed through on this very reasonable recommendation by his generals.
Hitler is history’s most gigantic, whining, super-pussy. I have NEVER EVER EVER ONCE read of an enemy action that did NOT infuriate him. His fag ass little panties got in a wad about 30 times a day. NO enemy action, short of capitulation, ever did anything but infuriate him. What a douche.
sprechen Sie Deutsch ?
I am of the opinion that absent a significant technological breakthrough on the part of the Germans, this would not have changed the outcome of the war. Yes it might have lengthen the war by allowing the Germans more time for fortifications. But Russia would have come after Hitler and ground down and pinned down his divisions on the eastern front. Once you pick a fight with a bear, the fight aint over till the bear says it is.
Now had Hitler not invaded Russia, that could have been an entirely different story.
If you get a chance, I think you would enjoy reading Fatherland, by Robert Harris
Not much difference. After the 1st year, the germs were pretty much on the def in Russia anyway, maybe not fully dug in in def positions, but the offensive was shot. The end would have come later, maybe giving Adolph a shot at experiencing being on the wrong end of a split atom.
The things which almost happened but didn’t, could be seen as glimpses into how God’s overall plan deals with men’s (and demons’) sinful spirits, especially when the men are heavily bent on evil.
Hitler’s furor (and the furor of demons behind it) was caused to defeat itself, from that point of view. Of course it double-sucked for Hitler, he wrapped himself in evil then found inability to get satisfaction thereby, but it was a relative mercy for the rest of the world.
If Hitler had taken this advice, it is likely North Africa / El Alamein would have not happened the way they did. Patton and Monty would have been in N. Africa a long time.
This also guarantees that D Day would not have happened. Assuming some of the Russian front resources were deployed on the coast of France, the entire invasion would have been infinitely more difficult.
Then again, Rommel would have probably still been in North Africa, so someone else would have been in charge of setting up the coast of France defenses. Like I said, it would have changed every thing!! And certainly lengthened the war, if not changed the ulitmate outcome. And who knows what Stalin would have done to take advantage of it? We benefitted from Hitler and Stalin beating each others brains out for 2-3 years before we landed in France - how would Stalin have used Hitler and the Americans beating each others brains out first?
There’s a book by William Forstchen and Newt Gingrich called 1945 which had a somewhat similar alternate history. In that one Hitler is in a coma (he was in a plane wreck, around that time) in December 1941. The people in charge while he was out didn’t declare war on the U.S. and took a more rational approach on the Eastern Front. Thus the U.S. never got involved in the European war, and stuck to simply curb stomping the Japanese in short order. Europe was left a Nazi Reich with only the U.K. still free after they sued for peace.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1945_(Gingrich_and_Forstchen_novel)
It was a pretty good book, but we’ve never seen the sequel, which is annoying since it was a bit of a cliffhanger.
Then there is the desire of Winston Churchill to invade the Balkans, push north between the German armies and Russian armies to deny Russia access to Eastern Europe.
Anyone got anything on these weird tales?
I happen to think the war outcome would have been totally different. Hitler’s biggest problem in 1942, when his war fortunes began to reverse, were that German troops were spread to thin. Books make lots of hay about Rommel’s Afrika Corps but it was a fairly small force. Had Rommel had another 20 divisions he truly could have invaded and taken over Egypt and the Holy Land, prevented an easy North Africa landing by the Allies. Turkey would have signed an agreement with a resurgent Germany. Once these gains were secure, Hitler would have had to secure his back along the Russian, front, to be sure, but the defensive war would have been far less debilitating than the offensive war in 1942 that lost the Sixth Army.
Stalin would have simply massed troops on the eastern borders/front and rolled across the line at a time of his choosing with a vastly superior force that couldn't be stopped. Or, had they attacked Siberia AFTER Stalin moved the forces, they would have made significant gains in Russia.
Any serious student of WWII understands that if any of at least a hundred events or decisions by Axis leaders that could have EASILY gone the other way had in fact gone the other way, the Allies would not have won the war.
There were many proponents to a defensive strategy in Russia within the High Command, most notably Guderian.
He advocated withdrawing behind, and fortifying a line along the Dnieper River, to Narva. This would have preserved the forces, and supply.
His “Mobile Reserve” strategy would have put the Armored Divisions in the East on rail cars, ready to move to wherever a threat presented itself, while the Mech Divisions would be the local reserve, holding any breakthrough until the heavier divisions arrived.
Hitler rejected it. There was just too much pressure to secure the oil in the Caucuses, and the nickel/iron/coal in the Russian Southwest (Rostov to Donetsk). Speer and the Industrialists pushed hard for this.
Had Guderian’s plan been followed, it may have preserved significant forces, because Stalingrad and Kursk wouldn’t have happened. The 1943 Italian campaign could have turned out very differently, had two more Air fleets, and several Mech/Armored divisions been available.
Could it have changed to eventual outcome of the war? Probably not, as resources were always the Achilles heel of Germany. But it could have kept the Finns in the game a lot longer, and extended the war until more nukes were ready.
Hitler would have been dead in another 12-18 months anyway, if reports of his health are to be believed. What would be the end result after that is anybody’s guess.
There's also a problem with the idea of a "defensible line" in Russia. The original grand strategy behind Barbarossa envisioned a defensive line stretching from Archangel in the Artic down to Azerbaijan in the Caucusus..the so-called "A-A" line. This assumed that the major Soviet cities..from Murmansk, to Leningrad, Moscow, down to Stalingrad..would be conquered. They envisioned large armored forces, backed by the Luftwaffe..patrolling the vast Russian interior. I've read a synopsis of the plan..it's fascinating to see the German mind at work..but it wasn't realistic.
Slightly off topic, but for those who enjoy alternative history, I stumbled across a fascinated novel.."Dominion" by C.J. Sansom. It's set in England in 1952, 10 years after Chamberlin agreed to an armistice with Hitler. The Fascists run the government, Oswald Mosley's a big deal...and Churchill's the leader of the rebellion. A good read..worth looking for.
Probably, IMO, the first, and actually the best alternative history was by CS Forester..best known for the Horatio Hornblower saga. He wrote several volumes of short stories exploring what if Hitler had succeeded in invading England
The best alternative fiction was the movie, “It Happened Here”, made on a shoestring budget, it did a good job of looking at what a Nazi occupation of England would have been like.
Consistent with your scenario, Admiral Rader advocated that Germany seize Gibraltar, the Med and North Africa, and Egypt, then extend their forces down the east coast of Africa and interdict the flows of Mid East oil and Allied supplies to Russia, and sever England’s lines of communication with India. This would have accrued substantial gains for Germany and Japan, potentially to the point of knocking Russia out of the war. If so, Germany’s position as supreme in Europe would have been secure.
My central point is to show that the outcome could have been different in many, many ways, up until the breakout from Normandy.
Germany did make mistakes early in the war until they were unable to invade and knock out England. Then they invaded Russia with a wounded, but not yet out England. They had overwhelming victories in Russia early. If they had treated their occupied countries better and not had shooting squads and such, they might have garnered more support from the people of Eastern Europe and even Russia. It would have made the partisan effort earlier. But then again we are talking about a murderous dictatorship here.
Also, Stalin threated and countermanded his military leaders into making bad military decisions. As the war went on, his listened and gave more decision making to his generals, in which they made good decisions. Hitler, OTOH, did the opposite and usurped more and more decision making with very setback from his generals, forcing them into unattenable positions. By Stalingrad, Hitler was in effect reporting to himself 4 times.
When the Soviets learned through espionage that Japan was not going to declared war on them (of which they were supposed to do), they moved much needed men and supplies to defend Moscow (Vyazma) and repelled the Germans. And knowing that allowed them to concentrate on the Eastern Front. Still even after Stalingrad, the Germans were on the offensive until the summer of 1943 with the Battle of Kursk. At the same time, the Western Allies had secured North Africa and were landing on Sicily. NONE OF THESE ALLY victories were a sure thing, even in 1943. EVEYTHING WAS IN DOUBT. However, after these setbacks, the Axis only offered a few offensives.
Until D-Day in the West, or more even Operation Cobra, the breakout from Normandy, and the securing of France, could one say that the end was in sight. That now put immense pressure on Germany on the Western Front; in which their resources were needed in the East.
Germany's last offensive in the west, the Battle of the Bulge, could have changed things, but in this writer's opinion, they underestimated Ally resolve. And underestimated our Air Force, which would have pounded them into dust as soon as the snow storm cleared, much like the Falaise Gap.
So my best guess is by late 1943 and to mid 1944 did we have idea that we would be victorious.
Mind you, we still were waging a 2 front war, the other in the Pacific against Japan. Despite Midway and the Coral Sea wins, the long battle for Guadalcanal ended in the beggining of 1943, and our navy was now big enough to mount the upcoming island hopping campaigns. Again, up until 1943, Japan still occupied most of the Pacific.
The fascination with “Alt.Hist” is to play the game of “what if!” To my mind, there was nothing that could save The Axis or give it victory following the declarations of war from Pearl Harbor. The USofA had such total manufacturing, resources and financial dominance as to be unstoppable once engaged.
Where there was a real cusp was probably Hitler’s decision to start the hot war with the Polish Invasion. Most of the military and particularly the German Navy was still ramping-up. A delay of 3 years could have meant a starved Great Britain even without an invasion. If you have that, maybe Spain joins the Axis and closes the Med and you have a real communication and logistics problem.
Yet there were always counter currents in play. Hitler became convinced of Soviet weakness following the Purge Trials and by his own prejudices. His success at the Sudetenland gave him thought that he could get away with another chomp in Poland, especially since it was as a PARTNER with Soviet Russia, which brought him that much closer to Russia and Balkan Oil!
Things we tend to forget is how brittle expansive dictatorships can be. Nazi Germany was mobilized and had an enormous economic problem with so many men in the military yet not on a total war footing. IIRC, Germany did not go for full woman employment (full mobilization) until around 1942-3! This causes inflation and with the epic examples from the Weimar Republic, there may not have been a comfort zone for waiting another 2-3 years for best conditions. Also, waiting does give that time to your enemies as well.
Just my $0.02 worth!
leads to this: http://www.americanheritage.com/content/big-leak?page=8
Starts: http://www.americanheritage.com/content/big-leak?page=1
Spiritual lessons:
Hitler was infected with the Victim Entitlement of the devil, the very same thing Communism appealed to.
Seeing himself unfairly treated by not having the worship and power of his Creator, who alone is worthy of it, the devil determined in his infamous "I will" assertions,
"I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:" "I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High." (Isaiah 14:13-14)
This was the original "occupy" and "share the wealth" movement.
However, the devil was not worthy of such (overcoming saints will be rewarded by sitting with Christ in His throne, Rv. 3:21, though they really deserve Hell apart from Christ and God's grace) nor all-mighty, and thus the Lord pronounced,
"Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit." "They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;" (Isaiah 14:15-16)
It gets worse, but meanwhile the Lord uses the devil to provide a choice for man, btwn light and darkness, for of what use is choice unless there is that to choose btwn, and which manifest what a soul really wants.
"I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:" (Deuteronomy 30:19)
The next event thus is that of the devil telling Eve that she also is a victim, as her Creator did not "share the wealth" with her, that knowledge it was best for her not to have, but the devil worked to convey that God was being selfish and malevolent (thus atheists today charge the same), and therefore Eve should by disobedience gain what should have been hers. But what she gained was to her loss, and Adam went along with it as a sheep.
Communism also appealed to the victim mentality, and which often has some truth to it in some injustice, but when one focuses on it, not handling it with grace and objective thankfulness, but becomes resentful and jealous, then the result is not principled dissent, but wounded and vengeful spirits that are easily seduced by those who present themselves as their saviors but who are devil in disguise, which end up making the "victims" worse off in real terms than they were before, whether it be cults, Communism, or Democrats.
Back to pagan Hitler, seething with resentment which needed a target, then it became the Jews, and nations that oppressed a militaristic Germany, and infected that nation with the same. This translated into lust for power, to subdue all under him, for this is how the devil works to see his will be done, and his kingdom come.
To the damnation of all who hear and heed him and are deceived thereby.
"And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever." (Revelation 20:10)