Soviets beyond Berlin

Would it be plausible to say that the Soviet Union could have rolled past all of Germany and go on to liberate France and Italy before the British Empire, US, and Free French liberated these countries?

And if the Soviet Union could have liberated France and Italy before their allies could have gotten there, could Stalin have made a deal with the US and Britain to annex Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, and Albania in return for giving Germany and Italy up to the Western Powers?
 
Would it be plausible to say that the Soviet Union could have rolled past all of Germany and go on to liberate France and Italy before the British Empire, US, and Free French liberated these countries?

The consensus on this forum appears to be that logistics would prevent them from doing so.

And if the Soviet Union could have liberated France and Italy before their allies could have gotten there, could Stalin have made a deal with the US and Britain to annex Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, and Albania in return for giving Germany and Italy up to the Western Powers?

Why would Stalin want to annex all of those countries? They served him perfectly well as satellites. Giving up Germany and Italy just so that he can add even more discontent minorities to the USSR seems like a ridiculous plan. Of course, actually attempting to keep all those territories would make the USSR suffer from a rather terrible case of imperial overstretch..
 
What I never understand with this idea is that once Germany is defeated, France and the Low Countries are automatically 'liberated', unless the Nazis somehow manage to establish a government-in-exile in an occupied country. Not to mention that the Germans would almost certainly have removed basically all their occupation forces already in defence of their homeland. I simply can't see what impetus or justification there is to continue, especially since once Germany falls it wouldn't be impossible for the Allies to roll in and reestablish the governments-in-exile in their home nations.

But in terms of actual contribution to the thread: I suppose the Soviets could at least push all the way to the western borders of Germany (and into Alsace-Lorraine and the Netherlands, if they were annexed into Germany during the war and were under sufficiently tight Nazi control) and possibly through Austria and into northern Italy. But for the reasons I mentioned above I couldn't see them in France in any strength, because at this point the WAllies could probably have made their way across the Channel with a minimal invasion force, since I can't envision any truly significant German forces in France when Germany is almost entirely overrun.
 
Its possible if D Day had failed i suppose. But that would probably as far as the whole of Germany and the north of Italy.
 
If the Ardennes offensive hafd better suuccess or had not been launched at all with the reseves committed being used to defend the Rhine instead then maybe the Red Army could havet aken much miore German territory.
 
If the Ardennes offensive hafd better suuccess or had not been launched at all with the reseves committed being used to defend the Rhine instead then maybe the Red Army could havet aken much miore German territory.


I'm no expert but I'm pretty sure that those reserves were ear marked for the East before Hitler was convinced the the Allies could be broken in one offensive.
 
There's also the added complication of the post-war boundaries and spheres of influence being predetermined by conference and agreement.

Of course, I guess your POD could be before those conferences.
 
Better Soviet preparations in 1941 would go along way towards ending the war years earlier. At least having border forces prepared in advance and have the country be on a war footing would prevent the initial disasters along the border. Retaining it's initial pre-war armies at least semi-intact would allow the STAVKA to utilize them more effectively rather than having to rely on poorly organized armies with little artillery or logistic support like it did in July-October 1941. Of course the Red Army's divisions, corps, and armies were still unwieldy, especially with commanders who had no idea how to handle them. But, if they were actually prepared for combat and had proper reserves and logistic support, they still could have performed far better than what forces the Red Army fielded IOTL. So while still beaten and bloodied the Red Army could emerge from the border battles with a semblance of an actual army, and thus perform far better in combat along the Dvina, around Smolensk, and in the Ukraine.
 
Would it be plausible to say that the Soviet Union could have rolled past all of Germany and go on to liberate France and Italy before the British Empire, US, and Free French liberated these countries?

No. In fact, obviously not. Stupendously obviously not.

Because for Soviet forces to reach France, they have to pass through Germany. That means the German army and Nazi state are destroyed first. And it would all be destroyed.

The Germans under Hitler did many stupid things, but they were not stupid enough to leave a huge occupying army in France while Soviet forces are storming Berlin.

Suppose Soviet forces reached eastern Germany before western Allied forces even landed in France. The Germans would strip France of German garrisons to reinforce the defenses of the homeland, leaving only the absolute minimum behind.

Unless the western Allied forces were completely paralyzed and cowardly, they would invade France which would be defenseless. Even if Britain and the U.S. were paralyzed, there would come a point where the French Resistance could defeat the remaining Germans.

The Germans might even withdraw all their forces in much of France, leaving it completely open to the Resistance and western Allied forces. This is what happened in Greece in 1944.

Beyond that: suppose Berlin, Vienna, Munich, and Hamburg have fallen to the Soviet army. What are the German troops in France going to do? Answer: surrender to the first Allied forces other than Soviet to show up.

This covers France and the Low Countries. In theory, Soviet forces could bypass Germany to invade Italy. But it would make no sense for Soviet forces to batter their way across multiple mountain ranges to get to Italy while ignoring the far more dangerous enemy directly to the wide-open west.

On top of this, the western Allies were in far better position to attack Italy than the Soviets. The western Allies liberated half of Italy while the Soviets were fighting to clear the Germans from Russia and Ukraine.

A slightly more plausible scenario could follow if the U.S. did not enter the Hitler War. The Soviets do crush Germany, but Britain, by itself, hasn't been able to muster a serious invasion force. When Germany collapses, the French Resistance seizes control; and a large element of the Resistance was Communist affiliated (the Partisans et Francs Tireurs).

The Soviets racing across Germany enter France and insure that their Red allies take power, somehow preempting the nearby British. Something similar happens in Italy.

Even this is improbable, because it assumes extreme weakness and paralysis of Britain.
 
The only way I see this is: Japan does not attack the United States. United States remains neutral, but provides massive lend lease (more than OTL to Soviet Russia and Britain). Britain does not have the strength to do more than liberate North Africa so with the extra Lend Lease help Britain focuses more on the bombing campaign.

Britain doesn't have the strength to really invade anywhere but without far east commitments can threaten the Germans enough that they still maintain large garrisons in the west (to twart Dieppe style raids if nothing else).

An American volunteer air corps is set up with some Bomber pilots going to Britain and some fighter pilots to the Soviets (like the flying Tigers). American engineers and such techincal people go to the Soviet Union to volunteer their services.

Even though the Germans have been pushed back all the way to Berlin. Hitler refuses to evacuate France and Italy fearing the loss of prestige and resources (if OTL he didn't evacuate Norway or even Kurland its not a stretch).

A final Soviet offensive in the summer of 1945 crushes the German armies and there is nothing to prevent the Soviets from going as fat west as they want to go.

Communist partisans in Italy and France are emboldened and the Soviets with their deep operations experience, send an armored corps each to Paris and to Milan (backed by Parachute troops) and form rival communist goverments before British or Free French can arrive.

Britain is too weak to do anything about this, she has landed weak forces in Cherbourg and Brest and Calais to dominate the Channel and occupied Sicily and Crete in the med.
 
Come to think of it, the only way I can see the Soviets genuinely getting all of Germany and even having the possibility of rolling into France, Italy and the Low Countries means removing the WAllied ability to quickly move into these places: Britain (since no way could America muster up a trans-oceanic invasion force that fast). Which means either a subjugated and neutral Britain, or...

Sealion. :eek:
 
All of Germany, perhaps, in the right situation and with the right set of Nazi mistakes and right decisions on their part. Germany + Italy + France? Not outside the far end in realism terms of the ASB subforum.
 
No, because advancing so far east would mean much greater german losses before. And that would mean western europe would be thinly held, making it ripe for Wallied invasion.

What is (somewhat) possible are greater Soviet advances in Germany and Austria. Combined with Yugoslav partisans possible greater advances in Italy Iron curtain is further west than OTL but overall same countries are on their respective sides (maybe austrie ends up on the eastern side)
 
Top