Why do people on this site unanimously agree that a Nazi European victory via defeating the USSR in Fall Blau and ceasefire with west is impossible?

[Post]

That's the problem, the German plan was based on the assumption that:

destruction of the Soviet armies near the border = the destruction of the entire red army in European Russia as a cohesive armed force full stop,

this to be swiftly followed by the pollical and economic collapse of the USSR, and then some mopping to to do

Yes, I agree, the German plan was flawed*. Since that was already mentioned (by you actually), I didn't feel the need to explicitely mention it, it's implied by the second sentence you bolded.

* I think they were on a high after winning in France in 6 weeks when they couldn't do it in WW1 in 4 years, so they figured they could do to Russia in WW2 in 6 weeks what took them 3 years in WW2, not considering that the political situation in Russia was vastly different. Also it didn't help that beforehand they broadly announced their intention to annex Russia and enslave the population.

 

[Crueldwarf]

Why july? I'd say either after the encirclement in Kiev proved not to be the knock out blow, or after operation Typhoon failed.

Because by the end of July Germans failed to decisively defeat the Red Army in the border regions (which was their primary goal) and by that time Soviets launched their mobilization effort into the full gear and so 'decisive defeat of the Red Army' within any single operation became entirely impossible. When Germans finished off the South-Western Front at Kiev, Soviets were replenishing their losses faster than Germans could inflict them in strategic terms.

When Germans took Smolensk, they already missed their best shot. Everything after that was simply deciding on how slow or how fast they will loose.

 

[BobTheBarbarian]

Because by the end of July Germans failed to decisively defeat the Red Army in the border regions (which was their primary goal) and by that time Soviets launched their mobilization effort into the full gear and so 'decisive defeat of the Red Army' within any single operation became entirely impossible. When Germans finished off the South-Western Front at Kiev, Soviets were replenishing their losses faster than Germans could inflict them in strategic terms.

When Germans took Smolensk, they already missed their best shot. Everything after that was simply deciding on how slow or how fast they will loose.

It's also interesting that Japanese Army intelligence specifically cited the Battle of Smolensk as the point where they concluded the German-Soviet war was likely to be a long one. This was one of the factors that led to them not invading Siberia in the summer/fall of 1941.

 

[Post]

Because by the end of July Germans failed to decisively defeat the Red Army in the border regions (which was their primary goal) and by that time Soviets launched their mobilization effort into the full gear and so 'decisive defeat of the Red Army' within any single operation became entirely impossible. When Germans finished off the South-Western Front at Kiev, Soviets were replenishing their losses faster than Germans could inflict them in strategic terms.

When Germans took Smolensk, they already missed their best shot. Everything after that was simply deciding on how slow or how fast they will loose.

I see your point.

Considering that up to Smolensk everything went fairly smooth for the Germans, you might as well say that they lost when they started Barbarossa, because I don't see much room for improvement. Even though a lot of people (not just in Germany) expected the USSR to lose in 6 weeks, in hindsight that was never going to happen, given the amount of land the Soviets could trade for time.

 

[Crueldwarf]

I see your point.

Considering that up to Smolensk everything went fairly smooth for the Germans, you might as well say that they lost when they started Barbarossa, because I don't see much room for improvement. Even though a lot of people (not just in Germany) expected the USSR to lose in 6 weeks, in hindsight that was never going to happen, given the amount of land the Soviets could trade for time.

Nah, there are few things that could go their way before that point. For example Stavka ordered mobilization far beyond anything that was predetermined by pre-war planning. So if Stalin didn't push for that and instead allowed things go as they were pre-planned (either of complacency or even despair) then Soviets would loose a lot of tempo in mobilization process which would possibly allow the German to keep the advantage throughout the entirety of 1941 and so to speak snowball through anything Soviets would throw at them.

But again, Germans basically did as good as they possibly could perform, while Soviets could actually get it much worse than OTL.

 

[Captain Homicide]

This was one of the factors that led to them not invading Siberia in the summer/fall of 1941.

What are the other factors?

 

[wcv215]

What are the other factors?

Siberia didn't have the (developed) resources they needed to continue the forever war in China.

 

[BobTheBarbarian]

What are the other factors?

The war in China and the US/Dutch oil embargo. The oil embargo was on 1 August - on 9 August it was formally agreed to concentrate all resources and planning toward attacking the Western Allies and SE Asian countries.

 

[Anarch King of Dipsodes]

Then can't the Nazis somehow force the USA and UK...

Nazi Germany has no way to force the US to do anything. Nor, by 1942, any way to force the UK to do anything. By the time optimal FALL BLAU could have broken the USSR (early 1943), the US/UK had already taken over all of North Africa except Tunisia. Germany is encircled in Europe.

...to accept the inevitable and go for a ceasefire?

What is inevitable? The USA and UK have a lot more resources, people, and industry than Germany and its allies. It would be possible for USA and UK casualties to be so high that continued war against Germany became politically impossible. But hardly inevitable.

 

[Trevayne]

Even if Russia collapses and the US and Britain decide not to invade Europe, what keeps them from continuing to bomb Germany? More to the point, what keeps Germany from becoming a radioactive parking lot by the late 1940s?

 

[CaptainCalvert]

Even if Russia collapses and the US and Britain decide not to invade Europe, what keeps them from continuing to bomb Germany? More to the point, what keeps Germany from becoming a radioactive parking lot by the late 1940s?

Quite so.
And running an evil European empire when your enemies have free access to and within the Med won't be quite so easy. Sure it will take another year or so for allied air dominance to set in without the soviets also taking out Luftwaffe resources, but once it does, the entire coastline becomes at risk.

As for the Italian fleet, that has minimal fuel and without Tunisia to supply, it doesn't really have a purpose other than anti-invasion duties, which isn't easy.. Once Siciliy, Crete and other islands are allied airbases, it won't be safe in southern Europe. Politically Mussolini will be very vulnerable, even if defection is off the menu.

 

[LongVin]

Very implausible but not impossible. The problem is Germany is literally fighting against the entire world.

I think a few factors could lead to Germany victory of sorts though. But all of these come prior to Fall Blau.

1. No winter war. The soviets learned just how bad their military was during the winter war and kicked off a bunch of reforms. If Stalin's paranoia kicks in maybe he decides the war isn't worth it because it could antagonize both the west and Germany and he'd rather have trading rights. Or, he diverts his attention to some perceived internal threat first before dealing with Finland. Now, we have no army reforms.
2. No German declaration of war on the US. Once Pearl Harbor happens a countdown starts for direct American intervention in Europe, Hitler merely accelerated it by declaring war 5 days later. Let's say Hitler decides a war between the US and Japan is good for him and distracts the US. While intervention was polling high by this time there would still need to be something to trigger a direct US intervention. Without the declaration of war by Germany they could buy themselves a few more months before a US declaration.
3. Hitler needs to be a little bit more pragmatic. Stalin would have been amicable to a negotiated peace. Hitler wasn't. If he listens to some smart advisors about how to handle a peace he might be able to get the soviets out of the war. Maybe they convince him that they need to gradually expand and can't grab all of European Russia in one shot, or that they could cripple the soviets by just taking a few strategic areas and then the next war will be easier.

With this in place it might prove too costly to try to completely crush Germany for the west and a peace could come about.

Another factor which could help but probably won't happen without serious changes would be:

Internal resistance against Stalin - if there was an actual resistance against Stalin that tries to seize power it could cause enough chaos that completely screws over the war effort.

 

[CaptainCalvert]

Very implausible but not impossible. The problem is Germany is literally fighting against the entire world.

I think a few factors could lead to Germany victory of sorts though. But all of these come prior to Fall Blau.

1. No winter war. The soviets learned just how bad their military was during the winter war and kicked off a bunch of reforms. If Stalin's paranoia kicks in maybe he decides the war isn't worth it because it could antagonize both the west and Germany and he'd rather have trading rights. Or, he diverts his attention to some perceived internal threat first before dealing with Finland. Now, we have no army reforms.
2. No German declaration of war on the US. Once Pearl Harbor happens a countdown starts for direct American intervention in Europe, Hitler merely accelerated it by declaring war 5 days later. Let's say Hitler decides a war between the US and Japan is good for him and distracts the US. While intervention was polling high by this time there would still need to be something to trigger a direct US intervention. Without the declaration of war by Germany they could buy themselves a few more months before a US declaration.
3. Hitler needs to be a little bit more pragmatic. Stalin would have been amicable to a negotiated peace. Hitler wasn't. If he listens to some smart advisors about how to handle a peace he might be able to get the soviets out of the war. Maybe they convince him that they need to gradually expand and can't grab all of European Russia in one shot, or that they could cripple the soviets by just taking a few strategic areas and then the next war will be easier.

With this in place it might prove too costly to try to completely crush Germany for the west and a peace could come about.

Another factor which could help but probably won't happen without serious changes would be:

Internal resistance against Stalin - if there was an actual resistance against Stalin that tries to seize power it could cause enough chaos that completely screws over the war effort.

I was agreeing with this post up to the amicable peace comment.

Once Barbarossa is launched, the man who wrote Mein Kampf and spoke of Lebensraum and has broken every treaty is no longer someone to be negotiated with.
Even without this backstory, I can't see Stalin accepting peace terms based on German Ukraine and Baltic plus millions dead or captured and threat of more whenever Hitler next gets bored.

 

[TDM]

Yes, I agree, the German plan was flawed*. Since that was already mentioned (by you actually), I didn't feel the need to explicitely mention it, it's implied by the second sentence you bolded.

* I think they were on a high after winning in France in 6 weeks when they couldn't do it in WW1 in 4 years, so they figured they could do to Russia in WW2 in 6 weeks what took them 3 years in WW2, not considering that the political situation in Russia was vastly different. Also it didn't help that beforehand they broadly announced their intention to annex Russia and enslave the population.

Right but that is the point the plan failed largely because it was flawed, and they really don't have much of a plan B or really many options for creating a workable one*. The point I made about logistics is important for that. As crueldwarf says their initial plan working (which in turn is inherently based on their assumptions about the red army and the USSR being correct) is their best shot and once it's gone their chance of another shot let alone a victory dwindle.

One thing I will also say my post talked about the German failures, but as crueldwarf points out it not just German failures it's also Soviets responses to all this. I often instantly lead with German failings and weaknesses in this threads, but there are two sides to this and Soviet responses are very important too! It's just some of the most important responses are happening away from the immediate front lines of May/June. So while it can be tempting to look at the Soviet responses only in terms of the fighting going on at the front, there's more going on than that


I think your point about German attitudes after France is very relevent to all this as well!


*this is partly why the plan for a single thrust to Moscow get dusted off in Aug/Sep

 

[Lee-Sensei]

Hitler's best chance of winning was to avoid invading the Soviet Union or to try and get a Brest Litovsk style peace when Germany still looked invincible in 1941.

 

[Post]

2. No German declaration of war on the US. Once Pearl Harbor happens a countdown starts for direct American intervention in Europe, Hitler merely accelerated it by declaring war 5 days later. Let's say Hitler decides a war between the US and Japan is good for him and distracts the US. While intervention was polling high by this time there would still need to be something to trigger a direct US intervention. Without the declaration of war by Germany they could buy themselves a few more months before a US declaration.

Thing is though, with the US at war with Japan, US military production is going into overdrive. For the war in Europe, the US themselves couldn't contribute much until Torch happened. The US will pour resources into the USSR and UK regardless if they're at war with Germany (lend-lease with the USSR already started before Pearl Harbor). Which in the end will mean there's barely a delay with US operations in Europe.

So even if Hitler doesn't declare war with the US, it won't buy him much time. In fact it may cost him time, because it butterflies Operation Drumbeat, and it gives the chance to get the US their ASW together before they join the war with Germany.* Meanwhile I'm pretty sure the US starts escorting convoys all the way to the UK. So it's possible the tide against Germany in the Atlantic will turn sooner than OTL. At least they'll miss most of the second happy time.

And as @CaptainCalvert posts, Stalin (and other Russians) won't be inclined to believe Hitler who already had been on record wanting Lebensraum and to enslave the Russians.

* May be a bit doubtful though. However it's important to note that one of the reasons of the slow response to Operation Drumbeat was a lack of escorts, which is one of the reasons convoys weren't deployed early on. There were also other reasons (for instance not wanting to dim the lights of coastal towns, King's hesistance to take the RN's advice).

 

[Post]

Nah, there are few things that could go their way before that point. For example Stavka ordered mobilization far beyond anything that was predetermined by pre-war planning. So if Stalin didn't push for that and instead allowed things go as they were pre-planned (either of complacency or even despair) then Soviets would loose a lot of tempo in mobilization process which would possibly allow the German to keep the advantage throughout the entirety of 1941 and so to speak snowball through anything Soviets would throw at them.

I have my doubts about the last part. Wouldn't a reason the tempo of mobilization was sped up because progress of the Germans was faster than expected? Because I don't feel that the Soviets plans accounted for the Germans being knocking on the gates of Moscow and Leningrad in october/november. And even if they did, seeing it actually happening is a lot scarier than seeing a plan about it.

Apart from that, no plan survives contact with the enemy, and desperate times call for desperate measures. So when the Germans advance fast, the Soviets will throw everything they can into the game and speed up their response to the max.

 

[alspug]

For the Germans to defeat the Soviet Union the following are absolutely essential.

1: Germany needs a secure source of Oil that can supply somewhere above 240,000 barrels per day. this being twice the amount they could produce and is still likely not enough.
2: Germany needs to have a full truck production capability that can make enough trucks to provide the logistics for a 6 million man army.
3: Germany needs to have The Panzer 1 and 2 discontinued in 1938. Panzer III needs to be built from scratch with a 50mm cannon of at least L50 preferably L60.
4: Germany needs breakthrough tanks slightly larger than the Panzer IV with L43 or L48 from the begining.,
5: The German armed forces need to have no SS or luftwaffe divisions taking resources away and issuing conflicting orders.
6: The German High Command needs to focus on taking the Caucaus in order to stop the Soviet Union having Oil.
7: Moscow is more important than Stalingrad or Lenningrad as it's rail connections hold the country together.
8: Killing civilians anywhere in occupied Europe because of Religion or ethnic origin must not happen. This gives Germany a large workforce and better yet the Ukraine seperatists will join the Army.

 

[David Flin]

For the Germans to defeat the Soviet Union the following are absolutely essential.

1: Germany needs a secure source of Oil that can supply somewhere above 240,000 barrels per day. this being twice the amount they could produce and is still likely not enough.
2: Germany needs to have a full truck production capability that can make enough trucks to provide the logistics for a 6 million man army.
3: Germany needs to have The Panzer 1 and 2 discontinued in 1938. Panzer III needs to be built from scratch with a 50mm cannon of at least L50 preferably L60.
4: Germany needs breakthrough tanks slightly larger than the Panzer IV with L43 or L48 from the begining.,
5: The German armed forces need to have no SS or luftwaffe divisions taking resources away and issuing conflicting orders.
6: The German High Command needs to focus on taking the Caucaus in order to stop the Soviet Union having Oil.
7: Moscow is more important than Stalingrad or Lenningrad as it's rail connections hold the country together.
8: Killing civilians anywhere in occupied Europe because of Religion or ethnic origin must not happen. This gives Germany a large workforce and better yet the Ukraine seperatists will join the Army.

That, especially 8, makes them Notzis.

 

[GarethC]

There's scope for the Soviets to lose by making worse decisions, but not for the Nazis to win by making better ones.