An often neglected part of the BoB was that the RAF light bombers were continuously attacking the Luftwaffe's airfields in France and Holland throughout the Battle, though in much smaller numbers per attack than the Germans were doing to the RAF. It was Blenheims by day, and Blenheims and obsolete Battles bombing at night, whilst the Wellingtons, Whitleys and Hampdens were carrying out the strategic night-bombing further afield.
No Eastern front. What next?
- Thread starter The Basket
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Germany will lose because Germany has no way of defeating the British Empire.
. Hitler naively banked on the British asking for a truce after the Battle of France because he simply had no other options. U-boat blockade? Tried that in WW1, didn't work out so well. And the Kriegsmarine is too tiny to invade Britain, let alone try and invade the overseas Empire. Churchill was correct in pointing out that WW2 with Occupied Europe was simply a repeat of the Allied blockade of the Central Powers from WW1, it's just the front is now the French coast. In WW1, once the frontlines stabilised, the rest of the War was the Allies blockading Germany into submission. The Germans in 1940 still cannot produce enough war material to win, and Hitler has the constant worry that Stalin is going to pick his time to invade via Poland or Finland or both, or - worse still - Stalin will invade Romania and seize Germany's oil supply. As for the USA, they are climbing out of the hole from the Great Depression, and Roosevelt was only too happy to take foreign income from arms exports to the Allies. Lend-Lease was actually a way of increasing that income, just on a long-term basis. Roosevelt has no intention of joining the European war, and if Hitler hadn't declared war on the USA it is probable that the USA would have just fought the Japanese. But, the USA presented a massive industrial base for the British that was untouchable by the Germans.
So Germany cannot defeat the Empire, which has safe production facilities in the Empire and USA, out-of-range of any German bombers, whilst their own industrial base is being hit every night by the RAF. Germany also does not have enough essential supplies like tungsten and oil. So the longer the War goes on the worse it gets.
Yes, but you need to completely ignore the realities of 1940/41 to expect Stalin to supply oil to the Japanese. The Soviets and the Japanese are facing off in Mongolia, and the Soviets are hoping to get their Communist chums in China to take control, which means the Chinese Communists are also fighting the Japanese. No way is Stalin ever going to sell oil to the Japanese! The Japanese were completely reliant on the USA for oil in 1941, which is why Roosevelt's move to licence oil exports was such a blow. Roosevelt did not intend to provoke a war, he just hoped it would give him leverage over the Japanese. If the Japanese don't go to war, they risk losing China, and the Japanese Imperial system just cannot cope with any form of lost face.
But the Soviets and the Nazis are always going to be looking for the opportunity to stab the other in the back. Hitler beat Stalin to the punch, but it meant going to war at least two years too early for the German industrial plans. If Hitler had waited, the Soviets would have invaded Poland by 1942.
True, but just as the Germans have no means of defeating the British Empire in 1940, the Germans have no way of defeating the Soviet Union without actually invading Russia, which brings us back to the same insurmountable industrial and logistical problems. Suppose the Soviets invade in June 1941, and the Germans fight them to stalemate, they still have to fight all the way to Moscow, they just now have further to go and in less time before the Russian winter. And all the time the Soviet factories, safe behind the Urals, are churning out war material at a much higher rate than Germany can even if the RAF weren't also hitting them nightly. Net effect, Germany still loses.
Last edited:
It's not just about attacking the Slavs. Hitler and many Germans viewed the Baltic territories occupied by Russia and Poland in 1939 as historically European and, in some cases, occupied German land. Whilst Hitler wanted to expand beyond those disputed lands for Lebensraum, he also saw it as reversing injustices forced on Imperial Germany at the end of the Great War. But the Lebensraum concept was not Hitler's invention, it was around from 1890, and first gained popular support amongst the German public in 1901, long before the advent of Nazism.
Last edited:
swampyankee
Chief Master Sergeant
- 3,954
- Jun 25, 2013
The Baltic states were under Russian control from far farther back in time than 1939, i.e., Latvia from 1710, Lithuania from 1795 (and it was never German), and Estonia from 1710.
- Thread starter
- #45
The Basket
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,712
- Jun 27, 2007
War starts in 1944.
Wehraboo dream come true.
Panthers and Tigers all over the place.
Me 262s blocking out the sun.
Sturmgewehr in every hand.
A Bismarck in every port.
A Nazi in wonderland
Wehraboo dream come true.
Panthers and Tigers all over the place.
Me 262s blocking out the sun.
Sturmgewehr in every hand.
A Bismarck in every port.
A Nazi in wonderland
Sorry, just some "nit picking" 
Actually, USSR did sell crude oil to Japan. Both directly (there were tanker shipments) and indirectly - allowing Japan to use its concession rights in North Sakhalin. Volumes were very small compared to total needs, of course.
As for production rates of German industry untouched by bombing and Soviet industry as it was, I do not know how to compare them. For example, in real history, aircraft production USSR vs Germany was about 1.4:1. How to calculate the share of German production wasted by Allied raids (not just by destruction but also by interruptions, de-housing, civilian casualties, etc.), is it possible at all?
At that time, the Soviets helped both, Communists and RoC, yet stabbing the latter in the back occasionally, as in Xinjiang. The final choice in favour of Mao was not made yet.
Actually, USSR did sell crude oil to Japan. Both directly (there were tanker shipments) and indirectly - allowing Japan to use its concession rights in North Sakhalin. Volumes were very small compared to total needs, of course.
The industry behind the Urals is frequently mentioned in Eastern Front discussions. But that industry was not enough for the Soviet war effort and there were many troubles with the factories relocated or set up from scratch. The relocation was a difficult and lengthy process which disrupted production in both quantity and quality and overloaded logistics system in 1941 and 1942. Actually, it was the industry west of the Urals which helped the Red Army the most until 1943.
As for production rates of German industry untouched by bombing and Soviet industry as it was, I do not know how to compare them. For example, in real history, aircraft production USSR vs Germany was about 1.4:1. How to calculate the share of German production wasted by Allied raids (not just by destruction but also by interruptions, de-housing, civilian casualties, etc.), is it possible at all?
michaelmaltby
Colonel
"... Suppose the Soviets invade in June 1941, and the Germans fight them to stalemate, they still have to fight all the way to Moscow, they just now have further to go and in less time before the Russian winter."
You have introduced the 'unknown' dimension, if such a scenario occurred: Stalin struck FIRST and Germany successfully parried the blow, the Soviet Regime under Stalin would lose all credibility ... and likely collapse. Getting to Moscow by Winter won't be the issue, now. IMO.
You have introduced the 'unknown' dimension, if such a scenario occurred: Stalin struck FIRST and Germany successfully parried the blow, the Soviet Regime under Stalin would lose all credibility ... and likely collapse. Getting to Moscow by Winter won't be the issue, now. IMO.
- Thread starter
- #48
The Basket
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,712
- Jun 27, 2007
Soviets very dependent on lend lease but if them the bad guys and Hitler the good guys then we be giving P-40 to.the Luftwaffe instead.
So no lend lease for the Soviets so that's gonna put a crimp in it.
So no lend lease for the Soviets so that's gonna put a crimp in it.
"Patience, Mein Furor, patience! Remember what your analyst said about the benefits of delayed gratification? I know you can't wait to kick Poland's ass, but just think, when our plan is complete, we can kick THE WHOLE WORLD'S ass!"
"Scheisskopf! I already kicked da schrinck's ass, screwed her too! Gestapo has her now. Now I'm ready to kick some SERIOUS ass!!"
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #50
The Basket
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,712
- Jun 27, 2007
Are we talking about Germany in the first war or the second? Maybe Germany delayed to long from 1918.
They had plenty time to get invading.
They had plenty time to get invading.
MIflyer
1st Lieutenant
"The USSR was communist and the Third Reich was fascist. "
BOTH are forms of socialism. In a communist country you have Tractor Factory No.4 and in a National Socialist country you have BMW or whatever. Otherwise, no difference.
BOTH are forms of socialism. In a communist country you have Tractor Factory No.4 and in a National Socialist country you have BMW or whatever. Otherwise, no difference.
Except, in a Fascist country you often have vestiges of capitalism, in the form of privately owned (even if government directed) industrial conglomerates.
In a true communist state, the only thing resembling capitalism is the occasional backyard garden plot. Despite its name, China is almost closer to fascism than communism.
Read up on the Deutschbalten (literally "German-Balts") for the history of the people that Hitler and many Germans considered ethnic Germans in the Baltic states, including Latvia and Estonia. They started settling the area in the 12th century as part of the Ostsiedlung expansion eastwards.
Maybe Tigers, but the Panther was the direct result of meeting the T-34. No War until '44 means no Panther and lots of dead Nazis trying to defeat T-34s with Panzer IIIs.
Maybe not Me262s, but possibly hordes of Heinkel He.280 jet fighters. It's almost a shame that Heinkel didn't get the He.280 into production as it was a very advanced design for the day. It even looks pretty for an early jet! But the Nazis saved the Allies with their usual inefficient efficiency.
Possibly the Gewehr 41 seeing as the Germans had info on the Garrand trials, and the Soviet SVT-38 from the Finnish Winter War. Then again, the troops didn't rate the Gewehr 41, so they probably wouldn't thank Hitler for waiting if that was the rifle they got!
Maybe.... if they waited until 1964!
Nah, Stalin would have rolled in from the east by 1942, latest, and it's highly likely the rest of the European powers would have done nothing as long as Stalin stopped at engulfing Germany. Bit of a Nazi nightmare, really!
Why? Or more to the point, from whom? Stalin had been so ruthless in his purges pre-War that there was simply no-one left to oppose him and take control. He had weathered abandoning his socialist comrades in the Spanish Civil War without a murmur of dissent from the International Soviet, then he had faced no fightback on the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, and had escaped criticism for the farcical performance of the Soviet forces in the Winter War. I'm not sure who you think was going to orchestrate a coup? AFAIK, even when the Wehrmacht was knocking on the gates of Moscow there was no internal attempt to overthrow Stalin.
Last edited:
I'd call it "adding value to the conversation", sir.
I'd definitely agree. I suppose I didn't phrase correctly the more relevant point about the move behind the Urals being that Geroing did not have a strategic bomber arm to allow him to strike at the Soviet war industry, so the Soviets had a lot less to worry about than the German industrialists in the Ruhr. The Soviets did have plenty of issues, but having to defend against and recover form incessant strategic bombing was not one of those problems.
Ooh, super-large-can-of-worms discussion! In some cases, production went through the roof, especially when Milch really got into his stride, and 1945 Germany was found to have stashes of Bf109s and FW190s, but no fuel and no ammo for them, and very few trained pilots. It was more the lack of balance in Germany industry by 1945 that was the problem, as shown by the lack of fuel and ammo. That was partly because every good Nazi had learned to keep his head down and thrashed away at producing what he was told to produce, be they Bf109s or cooking pots (one German warehouse was discovered by the Yanks with 120,000 sets of unused infantry food utensils), just so they were safe from the Gestapo.
Thank you, Sir. Agree on the low priority of the German bombing to the Soviets. There were exceptions, but they could not be compared to the situation in Germany, indeed.
I'll abstain from touching this can of fat worms for now. Maybe later, when I read again Milch's biography and some books about Speer from my wishlist.
OK, slightly different scenario - Hitler starts the War, everything goes to Hitler's plan up until the end of the Battle of Britain, but in the winter of 1940, Stalin decides to attack the Japanese in a follow-up to the Battles of Khalkhin Gol. Instead of facing 174 Soviet divisions, Hitler now faces half that force on the Polish front. Does Hitler:
(a) Take the respite from the threat of a Soviet invasion to continue the air campaign against Britain in the spring of 1941, keeping his ground forces in France.
(b) Honour the terms of the Tripartite Act and move to attack Soviet Russia in the spring 1941.
(c) Invade neutral Ireland (Unternehmen Grün) with the hope of getting a back-door route to invade Britain, or at least give him bomber bases to attack Britain from the west.
And, does Britain or the USA aid Japan, or help the Nationalists under Chiang Kai-shek fight both Japanese and Soviets?
Personally, I go for (b) because Hitler had such a hatred and fear of the Soviet Union.
Winter 1940/1941, I presume? An exact month or even a week matters. In December, it's still Plan Otto without the dates. In February, it is Barbarossa with a date of May 15. I'm not sure that Germany is ready to strike earlier than May, especially taking into account developments in Balkans and in the Mediterranean.
So, b) is more likely, in my opinion, but it does not happen much sooner than planned in real life.
I wonder why Allies should help Japan in 1941... And Nationalists were assisted by the Soviets in 1941, no reason to fight against each other.
As for the idea of the Soviet attack on Japan in that period. It is interesting, yet there should be some background and valid reasons. I don't recall any hints of the Soviet intentions to move deeper into the Far East after the Khalkin Gol.
For the sake of a more open discussion, let's suppose it is before the plans for Barbarosa have been finalised. If we wait until Barbarosa has already been decided then Hitler has already made the decision for option (b). Does his fear/hatred for the Soviet Union over-rule his caution?
Could Hitler wait for the late spring or try to rush units that have been refitting in Germany to attack Russia, or does he have to wait until the spring before he can assist Japan?
IIRC, the Italians didn't attack Greece until 28 October 1940 and didn't get into real trouble until the Greek counter-attack in March 1941, so let's assume the Italian incompetence hadn't come to light just yet.
My suggestion would be Stalin decides to take advantage of the stalemate in the West to clear his rear of the Japanese threat, giving him North China's coalfields and the steel factories then being held by the Japanese. It would open the possibility of subverting all of China into a Soviet puppet, and a second possible land invasion routes against Imperial India. History suggests Stalin was convinced he was free to maneuver as he wished in 1941 as he completely ignored the warnings of a German invasion. If Stalin got bogged down in China, would the West help their one-time ally Imperial Japan?
