Soviet Attack on Nazi Germany in 1942

[Beauhooligan]

Whoa whoa full stop.

The view of the Soviet Union as an evil menace started on December 30, 1922 when the treaty of union was signed. Everyone hated their rotten guts for repudiating czarist debts, making peace with the Germans, and that whole "we're going to export our revolution beyond our borders" thing but who's counting? Everyone and their grandmother was terrified of the Bolsheviks, right-wing extremist movements like Mussolini's blackshirts and others would NEVER have gotten where they were without that kind of cult of fear and uncertainty that pervaded the Interwar Period, a good deal of which was attributable to the revolutionary regime and the devastation the Great War had wrought upon the traditional order of things. Nations don't just intervene in a massive civil war right on the heels of what was by then the most devastating conflict ever waged in human history, that is not suspicion, that's outright hatred of the new regime.

Normalizing economic and trade relations was not necessarily a sign of trust, it was just a period of "well we don't have much trade because of that whole Depression thing going on so let's pal around with the people who are only marginally affected by it" this rapprochement was primarily economic in motivation, and doing something as simple as recognizing the Soviet Union as a nation despite it being 12+ years old is not the most encouraging sign of a new era of Soviet-Western cooperation.

I agree wholeheartedly. In the case of Stalin it was a matter of not overturning a precariously perched applecart, and with Mussolini it was a simple choice, ally with Hitler, or be overrun by the fucking Nazis. An attack on Nazi Germany by Stalin's Soviet State in '42 would have been impossible. The Soviets didn't have the strategic vision, the tactical know how or the logistical command and subject wherewithal to accomplish such a feat.

 

[Snake Featherston]

I don't see why Germany would move towards a land-sea focus. The Battle of Britain ended well before Hitler decided to invade the Soviet Union, and Germany was never go to be a naval power anywhere and lacked the capacity to quickly invest in naval construction. Sure they would be focusing on Africa more, but a lot of production would be going towards preparing the armies in Poland, Romania, Hungary, and East Prussia to either defend against a Soviet attack or launch an evental invasion. Only minimal German forces would be in North Africa, and the Luftwaffe would be split between North Africa, Germany, and the East. So there would still be a lot of focus on tactical aircraft and land forces along with other things.

They can't beat the British in North Africa in a fashion that will win them the war, so they have no choice. It's an instance of necessity as the mother of invention.

 

[Henriksson]

and with Mussolini it was a simple choice, ally with Hitler, or be overrun by the fucking Nazis.

No, it was more like a clumsy attempt at reaping the spoils of a falling France.

 

[Julian]

The real question will be how much of the Red Army gets chewed up in the initial thrust, how far they get, if they get knocked back and if Germany managed to knock the UK out of the war by the time Stalin attacks. The fall of Singapore and Egypt combined very well might have been enough to see a Prime Minister Lord Halifax make peace. Churchill certainly feared that was the case.

A one front war in 1942 with Stalin viewed as the aggressor by Europeans would change things quite a bit. Vital supplies to keep the German war effort going would suddenly be open to them and we would see the USSR and Germany bleed each other white. When the US and UK are done with Japan they might re-enter the fray in Europe.

Egypt could never be taken by the Germans. Too many logistics problems, and British forces were far too large. Rommel struggled to hold his own just fighting in Libya, and by the time he got to El Alamein German forces were at the breaking point. More resources would only prolong the fighting. Also, the Western Allies would literally never supply Germany with anything. They hated Germany and wanted it eliminated as a threat. The idea that they would be gamey enough to play the two off ignores the fact that both FDR and Churchill were pretty big about sticking to their ideals.

I agree wholeheartedly. In the case of Stalin it was a matter of not overturning a precariously perched applecart, and with Mussolini it was a simple choice, ally with Hitler, or be overrun by the fucking Nazis. An attack on Nazi Germany by Stalin's Soviet State in '42 would have been impossible. The Soviets didn't have the strategic vision, the tactical know how or the logistical command and subject wherewithal to accomplish such a feat.

The Red Army of 1942 would be a lot different than its 1941 counterpart. STAVKA would be headed by men like Zhukov, Timoshenko, and Vasilevsky, and logistic planning was being vastly improved. Even in 1941 the lessons of the Winter War vastly improved Soviet logistics. I agree that tactics are always going to be behind the Nazis, but they will have a competant officer corps, large numbers, and a lot of high quality weapons.

They can't beat the British in North Africa in a fashion that will win them the war, so they have no choice. It's an instance of necessity as the mother of invention.

But it's not as if they'll realize that until it's too late. Hitler was never a realist and would continue pushing resources into North Africa. Not as much as you suggest, but a large amount. However the majority of resources will be directed towards German forces in Poland and Romania.

 

[jmc247]

Egypt could never be taken by the Germans. Too many logistics problems, and British forces were far too large. Rommel struggled to hold his own just fighting in Libya, and by the time he got to El Alamein German forces were at the breaking point. More resources would only prolong the fighting. Also, the Western Allies would literally never supply Germany with anything. They hated Germany and wanted it eliminated as a threat. The idea that they would be gamey enough to play the two off ignores the fact that both FDR and Churchill were pretty big about sticking to their ideals.

First off this POD represents a more cautious Nazi Germany then OTL one that wouldn't be gung-ho to declare war on the US after Pearl Harbor. Secondly there are alot of countries in the world other then the UK to trade with if the embargo comes down. Finally in 1941 British forces in North Africa were weak enough to be forced out even by adding 200 tanks to the German force sent down. By mid-1942 when he OTl got to El Alamein it was too late as the British forces were too strong at that point and sure it was logistically impossible for those who argue taking the whole Middle East could have occurred. But, not Egypt alone in 1941 given how weak and poorly led the 8th Army was at that point in time.

 

[Julian]

First off this POD represents a more cautious Nazi Germany then OTL one that wouldn't be gung-ho to declare war on the US after Pearl Harbor. Secondly there are alot of countries in the world other then the UK to trade with if the embargo comes down. Finally in 1941 British forces in North Africa were weak enough to be forced out even by adding 200 tanks to the German force sent down. By mid-1942 when he OTl got to El Alamein it was too late as the British forces were too strong at that point and sure it was logistically impossible for those who argue taking the whole Middle East could have occurred. But, not Egypt alone in 1941 given how weak and poorly led the 8th Army was at that point in time.

No, those extra 200 tanks would completely overwhelm German logistics. Rommel was perennially low on fuel and supplies even with the meager forces he had at his disposal IOTL. Adding more vehicles, especially ones that will consume his precious fuel stores even faster, will only make the German defeat come faster. Also I don't see how Germany wouldn't declare war on the United States; that goes against Hitler's entire belief that the United States was weak and needed to be defeated by Germany. Hell, there was already a de facto state of war between the two, so by 1943 the United States will almost certainly be at war with Nazi Germany.

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

If Germany focuses on the UK first one can assume the Germans will have also taken the time to try to turn the border between the Soviet half of Poland and German half of Poland a DMZ on steroids. I am sure they would have for Romania as well.

Why? The Nazis are planning on attacking the USSR eventually, they just want to handle one front at a time. Building huge defensive lines when you expect the border to be further out by the time they're completed is silly.

Would they build some fortifications? Sure. But nothing like the (Korean) DMZ

 

[jmc247]

No, those extra 200 tanks would completely overwhelm German logistics. Rommel was perennially low on fuel and supplies even with the meager forces he had at his disposal IOTL. Adding more vehicles, especially ones that will consume his precious fuel stores even faster, will only make the German defeat come faster. Also I don't see how Germany wouldn't declare war on the United States; that goes against Hitler's entire belief that the United States was weak and needed to be defeated by Germany. Hell, there was already a de facto state of war between the two, so by 1943 the United States will almost certainly be at war with Nazi Germany.

By that same token this pod would be ASB because I don't see Hitler waiting for Stalin to strike first. That isn't to say there aren't ways to make it non ASB, but all of them involve a more cautious German leadership.

Also you forget every time the Afrika Korps over runs a place like Tobruk they get a large amount of British fuel and in this timeline the main theater of war for Germany will be Africa so more fuel gets shipped as well.

 

[Julian]

By that same token this pod would be ASB because I don't see Hitler waiting for Stalin to strike first. That isn't to say there aren't ways to make it non ASB, but all of them involve a more cautious German leadership.

Also you forget every time the Afrika Korps over runs a place like Tobruk they get a large amount of British fuel and in this timeline the main theater of war for Germany will be Africa so more fuel gets shipped as well.

The German leadership would be cautious about invading the Soviet Union because it doesn't want t two front war, while it wouldn't care about fighting the US because the US would be a Western power which in Hitler's mind was already supporting his enemies, while the Soviet union appeared both weak and compliant with German wishes. As for your second point, it didn't help them IOTL, did it? In fact fighting over port cities like Tobruk consumed more fuel and ammunition than other major combat actions.

 

[eltf177]

One question, what would be the gasoline situation in 1942, in terms of oil fields and refinerys. All that new equipment won't run if you don' have the fuel.

 

[Henriksson]

One question, what would be the gasoline situation in 1942, in terms of oil fields and refinerys. All that new equipment won't run if you don' have the fuel.

Are you asking about the Soviet fuel situation? In 1939, they stand for 10.6% of the world's oil production. The Western Hemisphere has more than 75%, and the rest are as follows:

Iraq & Persia (Iran) accounted for 5.4%
the NEI (Dutch East Indies) 2.7%
Romania 2.4%
the British Empire (Malaysia, Burma, and British Borneo) 2.0%

So, I don't really think the Soviet Union will have much problem with fuel compared with the Axis, as it was only really Romanian oil they could use.

 

[eltf177]

Are you asking about the Soviet fuel situation?

Yes, the Soviet. But what about refinerys to process the crude oil? I would assume by this time the Germans have their synthetic oil program running.

 

[Snake Featherston]

I agree wholeheartedly. In the case of Stalin it was a matter of not overturning a precariously perched applecart, and with Mussolini it was a simple choice, ally with Hitler, or be overrun by the fucking Nazis. An attack on Nazi Germany by Stalin's Soviet State in '42 would have been impossible. The Soviets didn't have the strategic vision, the tactical know how or the logistical command and subject wherewithal to accomplish such a feat.

By 1942 they most certainly would have, as the absolute and only reason the Germans delay is to try to knock out the British before the invasion to be absolutely sure. A sea and air war in Germany's peacetime economy in wartime is something with very different requirements from self-imposed extremely limited resources. The Soviets have the strategic advantage, numbers are solidly on their side, they will have qualitative advantages together with quantitative advantages.......and the Germans' racist ideology means this will catch them by a far worse surprise than Barbarossa did the Soviets, and the only thing that'll preserve them is a modern army is too big to be destroyed in one campaign or one offensive.

 

[Julian]

By 1942 they most certainly would have, as the absolute and only reason the Germans delay is to try to knock out the British before the invasion to be absolutely sure. A sea and air war in Germany's peacetime economy in wartime is something with very different requirements from self-imposed extremely limited resources. The Soviets have the strategic advantage, numbers are solidly on their side, they will have qualitative advantages together with quantitative advantages.......and the Germans' racist ideology means this will catch them by a far worse surprise than Barbarossa did the Soviets, and the only thing that'll preserve them is a modern army is too big to be destroyed in one campaign or one offensive.

Though that's sort of the point of deep battle; the enemy isn't to be destroyed in one single operation, but a series of operations designed to overwhelm the enemy and reduce the strategic depth between cities like Berlin and the Red Army's positions. Operation Bagration didn't destroy the Heer, but it inflicted such heavy losses that a subsequent series of operations easily broke through in over sectors and overwhelmed the defenders.

 

[Snake Featherston]

Though that's sort of the point of deep battle; the enemy isn't to be destroyed in one single operation, but a series of operations designed to overwhelm the enemy and reduce the strategic depth between cities like Berlin and the Red Army's positions. Operation Bagration didn't destroy the Heer, but it inflicted such heavy losses that a subsequent series of operations easily broke through in over sectors and overwhelmed the defenders.

Even so the concept at this point is better-developed than what the Soviets have to execute it. German weaknesses and poor positioning at the start can't alter themselves in any sense to exploit this offensively, but it's a weakness that the Soviets have literally all the time in the world to repair.

 

[Urban fox]

If Germany focuses on the UK first one can assume the Germans will have also taken the time to try to turn the border between the Soviet half of Poland and German half of Poland a DMZ on steroids. I am sure they would have for Romania as well.

The real question will be how much of the Red Army gets chewed up in the initial thrust, how far they get, if they get knocked back and if Germany managed to knock the UK out of the war by the time Stalin attacks. The fall of Singapore and Egypt combined very well might have been enough to see a Prime Minister Lord Halifax make peace. Churchill certainly feared that was the case.

A one front war in 1942 with Stalin viewed as the aggressor by Europeans would change things quite a bit. Vital supplies to keep the German war effort going would suddenly be open to them and we would see the USSR and Germany bleed each other white. When the US and UK are done with Japan they might re-enter the fray in Europe.

The Germans wont get jack-shit from the USA, anyone who thinks otherwise is utterly deluded. They can pretty much steal things from the nations they've overrun but thats about it.

Also as Snake has pointed out the fact that the Nazis viewed the Soviets as sub-human is a key factor here. The Nazis didnt think they needed to produce 1000 tanks a month or gear up for total-war, because they were Germans and therefore superior. And so didnt need to bother.

As for the border the German record on building static defense lines was rather poor, and they wouldnt have the time or resources to build up a decent defence line.

The Soviets will also hit the Germans with an army (that with mobilization & an extra year of flat-out arms production), that is double it's OTL stregnth in 1941. Plus they could still raise millions more troops without straining their manpower pool. While the German army had already peaked and could only raise more troops because Germany press-ganged millions of slaves from the occupied nations.

 

[BlairWitch749]

The Germans wont get jack-shit from the USA, anyone who thinks otherwise is utterly deluded. They can pretty much steal things from the nations they've overrun but thats about it.

Also as Snake has pointed out the fact that the Nazis viewed the Soviets as sub-human is a key factor here. The Nazis didnt think they needed to produce 1000 tanks a month or gear up for total-war, because they were Germans and therefore superior. And so didnt need to bother.

As for the border the German record on building static defense lines was rather poor, and they wouldnt have the time or resources to build up a decent defence line.

The Soviets will also hit the Germans with an army (that with mobilization & an extra year of flat-out arms production), that is double it's OTL stregnth in 1941. Plus they could still raise millions more troops without straining their manpower pool. While the German army had already peakedand could also raise more troops because Germany press-ganged millions of slaves from the occupied nations.

That VERY large Soviet instrument, would at the same time be super blunt; even with the reforms, there is still dead wood in the middle and upper ranks of the officer corps; the rank and file, and nco's are unblooded (whereas their German counterparts are almost universally veterans); and the luftwaffe has a major advantage in pilot quality/experience and a technical advantage in their aircraft which would see them inflict monstrous casaulties once they sweep away the red air forces fighter cover

the net result to the soviets is still better than getting disembowled in 1941 barbarossa; but the initial offensive wouldn't go far and would take tremendous losses

 

[Julian]

As for the border the German record on building static defense lines was rather poor, and they wouldnt have the time or resources to build up a decent defence line.

Untrue actually, Model did a great job building a series of defensive lines in the Orel Salient prior to Kursk which allowed him to bleed the Soviet counterattack white while expertly retreating from the salient, saving his forces from what could have been a total disaster.

That VERY large Soviet instrument, would at the same time be super blunt; even with the reforms, there is still dead wood in the middle and upper ranks of the officer corps; the rank and file, and nco's are unblooded (whereas their German counterparts are almost universally veterans); and the luftwaffe has a major advantage in pilot quality/experience and a technical advantage in their aircraft which would see them inflict monstrous casaulties once they sweep away the red air forces fighter cover

the net result to the soviets is still better than getting disembowled in 1941 barbarossa; but the initial offensive wouldn't go far and would take tremendous losses

I could actually see the intiial operations ending up like Svechin predicting in the 1920s; essentially becoming attritional conflicts rather than series of operational maneuvers. With superior strategic position the Red Army would have little trouble grinding up German divisions with superior equipment and numbers. Tactics would be a lot better than in 1941-43, but still would be executed by an inexperienced officer corps; the reforms would have actually eliminated a lot of those officers who were Stalin's cronies mainly because 1. Stalin hated incompetence and 2. Men like Timoshenko and Zhukov were able to convince Stalin that many of his sychophants were incompetent and needed to be removed. Stalin did actually listen to their opinions and often agreed if it suited him, especially when it came to military reforms (Though there were plenty of speedbumps).The officer corps would still be more experienced than IOTL 1941, and there would be a lot more trained officers. A lack of officers with good training was a key reason to why the Soviets failed tactically throughout the early war, especially against a superior opponent. So yeah,it wouldn't be as one sided as Rzhev, but it can't be a Bagration either. Probably something like the Lower Dnieper and Poltava Offensives; very costly and achieving limited operational gains but nonetheless victories, if bloody ones.

 

[Snake Featherston]

That VERY large Soviet instrument, would at the same time be super blunt; even with the reforms, there is still dead wood in the middle and upper ranks of the officer corps; the rank and file, and nco's are unblooded (whereas their German counterparts are almost universally veterans); and the luftwaffe has a major advantage in pilot quality/experience and a technical advantage in their aircraft which would see them inflict monstrous casaulties once they sweep away the red air forces fighter cover

the net result to the soviets is still better than getting disembowled in 1941 barbarossa; but the initial offensive wouldn't go far and would take tremendous losses

Again, this assumes the Germans are facing the UK and trying to take them out first. If they're fighting with a peacetime economy in wartime, they can't mass-produce enough artillery and armor to handle this, and I repeat that their racism will make the surprise far worse, particularly if Hitler pulls a 1944 and refuses to believe it no matter what. The Soviets also have the advantage of truly being able to pave their road to victory over a bridge of corpses. The Germans *can* survive the initial offensive, no question, but when their armored formations are blown to Hell by T-34s and the Stalin Organs are sending those veterans fleeing into the path of an offensive whose simple scale wrong-footed them utterly and completely all this is a great big heap of nothing. It's the inversion of Barbarossa, and Hitler's regime doesn't have what it takes to win a defensive war and we know from OTL how it handles the best-case scenario in an offensive one.

 

[Julian]

Again, this assumes the Germans are facing the UK and trying to take them out first. If they're fighting with a peacetime economy in wartime, they can't mass-produce enough artillery and armor to handle this, and I repeat that their racism will make the surprise far worse, particularly if Hitler pulls a 1944 and refuses to believe it no matter what. The Soviets also have the advantage of truly being able to pave their road to victory over a bridge of corpses. The Germans *can* survive the initial offensive, no question, but when their armored formations are blown to Hell by T-34s and the Stalin Organs are sending those veterans fleeing into the path of an offensive whose simple scale wrong-footed them utterly and completely all this is a great big heap of nothing. It's the inversion of Barbarossa, and Hitler's regime doesn't have what it takes to win a defensive war and we know from OTL how it handles the best-case scenario in an offensive one.

Hitler would be nearly as bad as he was 1944, if anything much closer to his 1940-41 mindset. He let his generals do their own thing a lot of the time and actually made some fairly good calls, particularly restraining Guderian who had unrealistic ideas about what his armored forces could achieve.