Replies

You referenced Patton. In the later days of the war, he wanted to ally with Germany and attack USSR. That is what I was referencing.

I have never heard that he wanted an alliance with the Germans. Please supply a reference. I was referring to Patton's conclusion that the Soviets were as much or more of an enemy than the Germans, which was true.

You are making the assumption that without US support the USSR would have continued to fight the Nazis, tying up 90% of the Wehrmacht so we wouldn’t have to fight them.

No. I am making the observation that with 90% of the Wehrmacht tied up all the way to the Urals and tied down fighting the Russians at their rear should they retreat, we could have got to Berlin before they did. Their supply lines would be WAY extended with minimal infrastructure to bring the troops and equipment back in a big hurry.

This would have given them all the oil and other resources they needed, especially since troops released by the collapse of the Red Army could have been diverted to Middle East, squashing the Brits and taking over all of North Africa and to Iraq.

They would have had to get that oil back Germany and process it into fuel. You are pretending that we would have allowed either.

IMO a more likely scenario is the USSR collapsing in 1942, with the Germans taking control of as much of it as they wanted, probably over to the Urals.

I doubt it would have been that fast. The Russians defended without much of anything in the way of material assistance from the US for the first six months as the US wasn't yet in the war. Nor had our manufacturing systems been converted to wartime production, which took another year. the Germans hadn't even got to Stalingrad before August. I don't buy your scenario. I have the Germans tied down in Russia until mid-1943, at least.

They would then have had two years to build the defenses of Fortress Europa.

They did anyway, but they were busy.

By mid'43 we were cranking up the long-range bombing program, which, admittedly, was not terribly effective at first. But one does not have to be terribly accurate to do serious damage to an oil refinery or rail yard. So I just don't see them putting together the transportation to move the Wehrmacht and all its munitions and equipment back to France in time with the remains of the Russian army at their heels.

Now the war would still have ended in 1945, when we nuked Berlin, and arguably that would have been a better outcome than what actually happened. But without nukes we could NOT have defeated a Germany Army unencumbered by the Eastern Front.

I just don't see them "unencumbered," ever. The Russians are a tenacious bunch, as they proved at Stalingrad.