WI Hitler didn't invade the Soviet Union?

Chui

I was wondering about this earlier today. Not knowing as much about history as some of the fine folks here, I couldn't come up with much.

So what if Hitler had enough sense not to pick a fight with Stalin in 1941, and didn't waste all of that time planning Barbarossa? Does he overrun England instead? Does the U.S. join the fight sooner to help England?

I leave it in your hands, as I always enjoy reading what you guys come up with.
 
Well the thing was the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany were mortal enemies despite anything the M-R pact could have changed, which was just a diplomatic maneuver to isolate Poland.

Germany and the Soviet Union were on a path to war and everyone knew it. Stalin thought the Germans would attack only after defeating the allies completely in 1942, and he was wrong. As the Germans advanced into the USSR they were surprised as to the extensive front line stockpiles and preparations made for an attack in Werchmact Occupied Poland.

They were on a collision course, and it was better that the Germans be on the attack. If the Russians had rolled into Poland with their Army and the Germans spread out fighting the Allies you would have the Soviets in Berlin within 2 years, even with the Famous German Elastic Deffensive*though only tactically in most cases* the house of cards would come crashing down.

In essence they had to go to war sometime, and it was better that Germany be the one to attack and sooner, because the Soviet Army was rapidly building. Barbarossa was the best change for the Werchmact to crush Stalin, and waiting would have only made it even more difficult.
 
The werchmact needed alot of things for the invasion to go better on the logistical front.

1-Standarization. Having 100 different Panzers may look awesome, but the fact is that its very difficult to replace the parts of 100 different panzers, If the track of Panzer A breaks and you are driving Panzer B it stucks to be you, since you are now the commander of an immobile artillery peace.

2-Trucks. Supplying the German Army in Norway was bothersome, and France was annoying, the Soviet Union was a nightmare. First of all there were no roads, which led to the infamous trails of mud. Basic weight distrobution meant that the German Tracts needed to be wider, which they were not, the Germans infact were at times so resistent to adopting some soviet innovations that they would simply pave roads rather then make trucks with wider tires. This is compounded with the fact that THEY DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH OF THEM.

3- Winter Clothes: self explanitory.

4- Goals: The Werchmact was split on what the goals were. Some thought Moscow, others wanted the Soviet Army decimated without focus on territorial gains, others wanted to win the war via attrition by bombing them to shreds, others wanted to steal resources such as Ukranian Grain and OIl of the Caucuses for Germany. Having a scitzophrenic high-command does not help.

When you take those 4 simple rudimentary causes and ask yourself "Why did the Germans Last so long?" then you get a true appreciation for the Tactical Beauty of the German Army.
 
Considering lebensraum at the expense of "Slavic untermenshen" was one of Hitler's pillars of National Socialism I think it'd take an entirely different Hitler. Assuming he's patient enough not to invade in '41 (unlikely at best) he'll invade later, and the longer he waits the worse it will be for him.

You'll need a different German leader. That said, if no Russian invasion things are far, far, FAR better for Germany, possibly victory in Africa and/or a negotiated settlement. I saw a Hitler Assassinated TL where Goering avoids invading the SU and manages to establish a negotiated peace with the western allies.

But with Hitler in charge I think you'd need the intervention of myotis celestia or at minimum orbital mind control lasers.
 
Germany and the Soviet Union were on a path to war and everyone knew it. Stalin thought the Germans would attack only after defeating the allies completely in 1942, and he was wrong. As the Germans advanced into the USSR they were surprised as to the extensive front line stockpiles and preparations made for an attack in Werchmact Occupied Poland.

I don't think it's clear at all what Stalin was thinking. He played his cards fairly close to his chest, but his actions usually suggest a man who is fairly cautious. A major offensive to conquer Europe doesn't seem his style.
 

Redbeard

Banned
I was wondering about this earlier today. Not knowing as much about history as some of the fine folks here, I couldn't come up with much.

So what if Hitler had enough sense not to pick a fight with Stalin in 1941, and didn't waste all of that time planning Barbarossa? Does he overrun England instead? Does the U.S. join the fight sooner to help England?

I leave it in your hands, as I always enjoy reading what you guys come up with.

Hitler apparently thought that conquering the Soviet Union was a matter of "kicking in the door and the whole house comes down!"

As we know that ended up being far from the truth, but I'm afraid leaving SU would not have helped Hitler. In 1941 the Red Army was in transition/expansion into a force of over 500 Divisions. On top of the effects of the purges etc. that left the Red Army very vulnerable by mid 41, but if left alone will have a decent chance to complete the transition/expansion.

So instead of 150-200 understrength and confused Divisions Hitler risk facing 500 well led and well equipped Divisions!

It is of course a good question what Stalin would have done, if left alone. Some think he would have stayed put like he did in the 30s ("Socialism in one country etc.), but I'm not so sure of that. With the army expansion in place, he would for the first time have had a creditable capability to steam-roll the European continent, and anyone with a capacity has to be taken serious.

This should not be seen as somekind of apologism on Hiltler's behalf - Hitler and his intelligence services had no clue about what was happening in SU, and only attacked because they were a bunch of scumbag racists with a wet dream about "Lebensraum" - but sometimes being paranoid doesn't mean they are not coming to get you...

Regards

Steffen Redbeard
 

Redbeard

Banned
The werchmact needed alot of things for the invasion to go better on the logistical front.

1-Standarization. Having 100 different Panzers may look awesome, but the fact is that its very difficult to replace the parts of 100 different panzers, If the track of Panzer A breaks and you are driving Panzer B it stucks to be you, since you are now the commander of an immobile artillery peace.

2-Trucks. Supplying the German Army in Norway was bothersome, and France was annoying, the Soviet Union was a nightmare. First of all there were no roads, which led to the infamous trails of mud. Basic weight distrobution meant that the German Tracts needed to be wider, which they were not, the Germans infact were at times so resistent to adopting some soviet innovations that they would simply pave roads rather then make trucks with wider tires. This is compounded with the fact that THEY DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH OF THEM.

...

Ad. 1: What 100 panzers are you thinking of? If you want an example of anti-standardisation it would be the British - what a profound confusion of marks.

I actually think the German programme was a good example of extreme ultilisation of a few standard designs. Pz IV was in production for the whole war and the production lines that couldn't produce new and heavier designs were kept at work by transforming old designs like Pz 38 or PzIII into very useful assaultguns/Panzerjäger.

The Americans stuck to M4 for standardisation issues, but ended up with weakened crew confidence and anyway wasn't that standardised. Just look at the very different engine configurations or entirely different hull production methods. Not to mention the M3/M5 light tank programme - what a waste.

Ad.2 I doubt if producing more trucks would have helped the Germans. First there is the problem of providing fuel - we need some substantial PoDs to get enough fuel for a couple of 100.000 extra trucks. And even if the fuel had been there, there wont be roads to go on in Russia. I would much rather recommend a large scale horse breeding programme providing the Wehrmacht with a couple of million sturdy Russian peasants horses. The main logistic problem wasn't getting supplies from Germany to the railheads in Russia, or from the railheads to the Army/Corps/Divisional supplypoints - but to the frontline units. Here trucks would have been of limited utility, but horses and waggons would be splendid.

When that is said I of course agree that it must have been a nightmare to keep all the various types running - often confiscated in occupied countries and with limited acces to spare parts. But considdering that it worked surprisingly well.

A prewar programme for producing 4x4 or half-track trucks instead of commercial types would of course ahve been helpful, but I think the biggest effect would simply have been in allowing the Wehrmacht to plan for a winter campaign. In the winter 41/42 the wehrmacht practically got stripped of all mechanical equipment because no frost resistant lubrication/oil was available, and hundreds of thousands of experienced men were lost.

Regrads

Steffen Redbeard
 
If Hitler didn't invade there would probably be Soviets in Berlin by 1943.
Just because Hitler wouldn't have declared war wouldn't mean he would not have a two-front war. Even undeclared he would have to have a large force of occupiers and troops just standing around to scare Stalin away.
Instead of destroying all the soviet planes on the ground the massive soviet air force would be the one doing the preemptive strike.
 
If Hitler had chosen not to attack while facing Britain in the West, he'd probably have done so after some peace agreement had been reached. Hitler, and the Nazis in general, always thought of Eastern Europe as Germany's "vital space" or Lebensraum, from which to harvest food, raw materials and slave labor. It was also Hitler's lifelong dream to eradicate bolschevism, so we can be sure that sooner or later he would have made the decision to attack the USSR.

On the other side of the border, the Soviet were not up for peaceful cohexistance either. Sure, they had and important trade partnership with the Reich: they traded oil, grains and other raw material for german machinery and designs; actually, the German war machine would have run out of essential supplies were it not for such trade. But Hitler had never made it a secret that he believe the Reich's right to dominate Eastern Europe and its inferior peoples. Nor were german divisions stationed on the shared border a sign of trust.

Others have speculated that if the USSR was to launch an attack on Germany, the Reich would have quickly fallen to the soviets. I don't think so. During operation Barbarossa, the German war machine was defeated by three fatal errors: the skizophreny of the German High Command, a serious underestimation of soviet potential, and strategic choices regarding the composition and deployment of armored divisions. Nontheless, the Wermacht was able to push the russians back to Moscow, inflicting upon them heavy casualties and chatastrophic loss of land, especially agricultural land in Ukrain. All that, with outstretched supply lines and an extremely primitive transportation system, as many have pointed out.

Imagine Germany fighting the same war, only with much shorter supply lines and a background of railroads and decently paved roads, and without the Russian winter. Add to that the morale boost from fighting in defense of the Fatherland against the communist invader. The Soviet potential might have crushed the Reich, but not as quickly and easily as some have speculated.
 
I was wondering about this earlier today. Not knowing as much about history as some of the fine folks here, I couldn't come up with much.

So what if Hitler had enough sense not to pick a fight with Stalin in 1941, and didn't waste all of that time planning Barbarossa? Does he overrun England instead? Does the U.S. join the fight sooner to help England?

I leave it in your hands, as I always enjoy reading what you guys come up with.
Well, my father told me that Hitler wanted to invade the Soviets mainly for oil. That and being a nutjob.
 

trajen777

Banned
I always looked at Hitler and the invasion of the SU was based aound avoiding the WW1 SITUATION of lack of resources and starvation. If Hitler had the resources of the euro USSR under control. oil - Food - resources - no one at his back - he could have focused on Air -Anti ship - North Africa - resources and cut the army way bask as to numbers.

Success in Russia was lost by many things - but the opportunity in 1941 to win was very close. After the winter of 41 there was no chance.

To Win

1. Embrase the population " Free the peasants" propaganda - i fthey could not stomach that :
2. Go for Moscow -- the only time in the war they had a numeraical advantage in a front - with this hub taken in late July - russian forces were cut in a north - south force with their ability to mobilize reinforcments hampered.
3. With Moscow taken they could have driven south behind the USSR forces. The southern USSR forces could make a decision withdraw past the Volga or be cut off - etiher way a bad situation for the USSR.
 
Imagine Germany fighting the same war, only with much shorter supply lines and a background of railroads and decently paved roads, and without the Russian winter. Add to that the morale boost from fighting in defense of the Fatherland against the communist invader. The Soviet potential might have crushed the Reich, but not as quickly and easily as some have speculated.

At the wars start the Soviet Air Force numbered 11,537 planes in comparison to 4,389 german planes. Most of the Soviet Air Force was destroyed on the first days of Barbarossa because they were parked on runways very close together out in the open. If Stalin attacked first in 1943 as was planned Air superiority would likely be in Soviet hands. While the Russian mobilization from 1939 to 1941 increased troops by 140% this was only of European Russia. The Far Eastern manpower pool was not even tapped yet.

The germans feared the Russian steam roller and tried to take that out when Russia wasn't ready yet. by 1943 Russia would be at the peak of their power.
 
Most of the Soviet Air Force was destroyed on the first days of Barbarossa because they were parked on runways very close together out in the open. If Stalin attacked first in 1943 as was planned Air superiority would likely be in Soviet hands. While the Russian mobilization from 1939 to 1941 increased troops by 140% this was only of European Russia. The Far Eastern manpower pool was not even tapped yet.
Sure, but the results all of this potential could have achieved in 1943 depend largely on key strategic choices: those regardin armoured divisions and the air force. Will the soviets field the excellent models they had by 1944 in our timeline? will they create combined arms groups? will their training programs be able to provide the necessary ground support crews for the air force? will their armoured warfare doctrine develop into a modern one?
 
No Barbossara

If Hitler did not fight Barbossara he would spend more time secretly building up Germanys armed forces and would eventually, lets say in 1941 invaded Britain, and America would help Britain and Germany would have lost the war.;)
 
Top