Russians didn't need Allied help for victory

[Garyt]

So, barring the creation of unrealistic scenarios, like the British make peace with Germany after Dunkirk, there was never going to be a situation where there was no help from the allies

Ah, but that is not the point nor the initial question. The question was "Did the Russians need Allied help for victory", not whether or not one thinks it realistic for the Russians and Germans to be going at it without the US/GBR helping the Russians.

So the only real way to get to that crucible is to have GBR and Germany make peace, and prior to Barbarossa. Anything else indicates Allied help for the Russians. Even an occupied England is help for the Russians.

As far as Russian Naval Forces at the Start of the war, I'd give the advantage to the Germans.
Battleships - 3 old Battleships for Russia, 3 New ones for Germany including the Tirpitz.
2 Pocket Battleships for the Germans
Cruisers - 7 For Russia, of which 3 were of post WW1 construction - German 2 Heavy Modern Cruisers, 6 Light Cruisers of post WW1 design, though only about 1/3 were "modern" IMO.
Destroyers - 49, 46 of post world war Vintage. I'm thinking the Germans were at about 35, but these were larger beefier destroyers that packed a heavier punch.
Maybe 175 E Boats for Germany? To 250 or so Russian Torpedo Boats.
Subs - Surprisingly, the Russians may have had a few more subs than Germany at this time, though I think it was close, and this is merely a guess but I'd think the German subs would be of better quality and/or more modern.

I think I'd have to go with the German Navy on this one. The Battleships I'd have to say are a huge advantage to the Germans, You have the Tirpitz and 2 Scharnhorst classes against pre WW1 Battleships with 12" guns and 10" armor, which was not of good quality merely due to it's age.

And if we want to add the "What if" Russian ships, including battleships, we need to add the Graf Zeppelin and the "H-Class" Battleships for Germany. I'd rather restrict it to what was actually built. Russia could not complete the Battleships in WW2 because other needs were more pressing - without Allied support, these needs would even be MORE pressing. If anyone is going to build more substantial vessels, it would be Germany, unhindered by US or British attacks on factories or more importantly, the US and Britain would not be draining resources the Germans could use against Russia.

 

[GrauGeist]

The original point, was that it is (and has been) an ongoing notion that the Soviet Union beat Germany without help from the Allies in the "great patriotic war". There are some schools of thought that the United States was actually assisting Germany and offered no help to Britain or France but was only involved as far as making "imperialist gains" to promote "it's capitalist ideologies" on Europe.

There is an infinite amount of possibilities regarding "what could have happened...if..."

But in looking at the situation from the start:
IF Germany was able to treat with Britain after carving up Poland
IF Germany did not invade westward towards France
IF Germany had not been pulled into Italy's mess in North Afrika
IF the United States was not pulled into the European sphere and remained neutral

Then Russia would have certainly been in a world of trouble.

Also, it was mentioned that Rommel *only* had two divisions in North Afrika, yes...but he was able to do quite a bit with those mere two divisions. Imagine him unleashed during Operation Citadel with more equipment, better supplies and a solid air cover...

Also, among the figures posted about Germany's production figures and I haven't seen any mention about Czech AFV production output, which accounted for a good deal of German armor.

 

[parsifal]

Actually rommel was in effective control of 17 divs but more importantly, more than 30000 trucks....more than the entire allocation to Army group north. 5 of the 17 divs were german , and nearly the entire mobile formations of the italian army. Technically the italians were under their own command structure, but in reality those in North Africa were under the command of DAK, who could also reasonably be extrapolated to include various overseas italian forces in this scenario. These arrangements placed at Rommels disposal 21st Panzer, 15 Panzer, Ariete, Littorio, later Centauro Armoured Divs, Gruppo Malletti (a poorly formed and organized armoured group that was in the process of reorganizing in 1940), Trieste and Trento Mot Divs (one lost its trucks historically), 164 Light, 10th Bersagliri Motorized formations. His Infantry included Ramcke brigade, Folgore airborne, 7th airborne, a mountain Div (in Crete), 27th 61st, 62, "Pavia", 136th Gio Fascisti Divs 3-4 divisions in Sicily (for the invaskion of Malta)Armoured Divs, 4 divs destroyed in O'Connors offensive, a further 5 divs in Abysynnia that were destroyed, including the Duca Aosta Grenadiers, an elite Italian group that fought with distinction at Keren. In Greece the Italians had committed 10 divs eventually. There were hordes of light tank battalions in both NA and Greece.

This is by no means a complete list, just a taste of the forces committed to the southern front in 1941-2, and which reasonably can be allocated or expected by Rommel. It amounts to nothing, however, because the starting premise is broken. Germany was allied with the Soviets in 1939, and this allowed the Germans a free hand in Poland and vital economic assistance in 1939-41. without that the Germans are unlikely to attack in Poland. If Poland is not attacked, Germany does not go to war againt the West. The romanians remain allied to France, Hungary remains aligned to Italy. Germany is starved of half her oil. If the Germans attack any of these eastern european nations it can be expected the west will give gurantees to them like they did for Poland, and we are back where we started...except that Germany loses most of what friends she has, because most of these nations have trade arrangements with the Germans and economically is in big trouble because she loses about 80% of her foreign trade.

It is an unrealistic scenario to surmise a war between Germany and Russia without a war with the west. One scenario is that Germany attacks Poland without a non aggression pact. Almost certainly Poland will be overrun, but there is no trading relationship with Russia and the british blockade of germany turns her economy south almost immediately..Germany did not have the economic depth that she had in 1914....and this means the blockade has nasty and immediate potential except if continental trade is maintained....the war would be over by the end of 1940. Once at war, the British and french made their terms very clear, and capitulation just want on the cards. there were several attempts made at mediation after Poland, they all got nowhere .

So, if we are assuming a DoW between Russia and Germany 1939 to 1941, with the wst not involved, it has to be early....1939, at the latest, and it will have to go around Poland, and have no friends like Finland Romania and Hungary. There is no injection of resources as occurred after the fall of France, and the low countries. If we assume that France is attacked and overrun, then we are back againwith a hostile Britain fighting as she did....no change to the scenario. There are no conceivable scenarios that create a mechanism for an early British capitlation. we can wave the magic wand and say "oh the scenario demands it" Okay, but it was never going to happen.

So we are back at this point in 1939, where Germany attacks the Soviets 1n 1939. Cant go through the Baltic States, they are still independant, if attacked by Germany, they will alienate a still living Poland, Finland etc and risk involvement by the west. Leaves the area on the southern side of the Gulf Of Finland next to Leningrad. no ports of any significance, constricted waterways, Germans have a lift capability not exceeding 2 divs, amphibs into enemy controlled waters, mine infested, and reserves of 40 divs in 1939. Cant be done.....

I repeat, it is simply inconceivable that Germany could go to war with the Soviets alone. In any event, there would be quid pro quos if it was attempted, and none of them favour the germans. germany hoistorically attacked the Russians under the most favourable conditions that she could organise, and still could not defeat the Soviets. They simpoly did not have the resources to do so. Bernard Montgomery once said....only a fool would attempt to conquer Russia from western Europe. he knew what he was talking about

 

[stona]

I believe Montgomery said something like that in response to Churchill's feeling out of the British Staff about an attack on the Soviet Union in 1945, something that was both ludicrous and scuppered by a complete lack of interest from the Americans. The sentiment is just as valid.

Victor Suvorov has written pretty much the same thing, but with an entirely different agenda

Cheers

Steve

 

[Garyt]

I repeat, it is simply inconceivable that Germany could go to war with the Soviets alone. In any event, there would be quid pro quos if it was attempted, and none of them favour the germans. germany hoistorically attacked the Russians under the most favourable conditions that she could organise, and still could not defeat the Soviets. They simpoly did not have the resources to do so. Bernard Montgomery once said....only a fool would attempt to conquer Russia from western Europe. he knew what he was talking about

What you are saying may indeed be accurate - I am not doubting that. But it is irrelevant.


Lets look at the start of this thread:

An interesting survey by the news agency RT (Russian Times) shows that a majority of Russians feel that Russia was able to defeat Germany without Allied help.

Whether or not it would be a likely prospect that Russia would fight Germany without Allied help is again, not the issue. It is who would win.

And I would think based on the above survey, the idea was is that Germany is not fighting the Allies. So however unrealistic you may feel this premise to be, it is what the survey is based upon. So we have to assume that in some way at the start of Barbarossa, Russia was alone, they other powers had not entered the war or had made peace with Germany.

 

[parsifal]

The survey is a mirror of what often arises from political motivation, but its up to us, to make military sense of such a hypothetical. under what circumstances can germany attack Russia without going to war with the west.....not "under what circumstances can we ignore the wests existence, and let germany go to war with the Soviets, AS IF THE WEST DOESNT EXIST. The premise does not assume that, does not say that, and is a nonsequita argument as a consequence and its then up to us to make military sense out of what might arise. The conclusions that we can draw are, most likely that Germany cannot avoid conflict with the West, and secondly if she does go to war against the Soviets, how can she prosecute it. since she cannot attack Poland without triggering a war with the west, the options are limited. Any other conclusion has as much relevance as Alice In Wonderland.

The survey does not even consider these cold realities. i know its "fun" to try and think up the Nazi wet dream of how to defeat the Soviet Union, but as an ex analyst, ive been trained to analyse a military situation, including those that start from a politcal premise, and make sense of it. The premise that Germany could attack Poland simply cannot arise in any reasonable scenario. Its a fairy tale in other words

There is no better situation than the one presented to hitler June 1941, with one or two minor tweaks, such as no invasion of Yugoslavia or Greece

 

[parsifal]

Now, within the realistic context of the 41 scenario, there are options available to the Germans that get them a better outcome than historical. Barbarossa was a bad plan because it failed to concentrate against a vital target. In the hundreds of wargames that ive played for this situation, the best option is to use an unfolding fan concept. Capture leningrad, pouring all of the resources possible, continue a steady push along the Minsk/Smolensk/Vyazama axis. After the fall of Leningrad, which vitally must be taken in three weeks, or not at all, the heer can begin to push onto Moscow from two directions. moscow needs to be captured by the end of october, with adequate rail links. then the heer hunkers down for the winter and takes its medicine. If it can last the winter, it should be able to push to the Dnieper and construct a defensive line there. A stalemate will usually ensue from that point until '44, when the allies are in position to do something in the west. But with a stable eastern front, the Germans can afford to fight better in the west, and can sometimes fight the war to a draw.

The best they can hope for

 

[tomo pauk]

If I'm reading this right - Ukraine will be spared in 1941 in case main push is against Leningrad?

 

[parsifal]

Yes. In 1941, more than 50% of the emergency formation raised by the Red Army came from the Moscow MD followed by the Leningrad MD. The Ukraine raised relatively few formations, and most of its industries were on the move to the east and urals.

In 1941 its the least important of the three main target areas. later in the war it had long term importance, but less so in 1941

 

[Garyt]

I suggest a new thread be started which actually deals with the topic per the initial post. We can call it

"Russians didn't need Allied help for victory"

 

[parsifal]

The initial post brings to light a survey and the current Russian national sentiment. Its a political statement in other words. Clearly, it is not really based on any empirical assessment....its a reflection of the Russian national jingoism and nationalism more than anything. Every nation suffers from this kind of "own nation" centricity. Not of a great deal of use or interest. Trying to dress that up as a serious military discussion doesn't make any sense. We generally have discussions that try to analyse the military and political realities. The military and political realities are that Germany could not avoid a war with the west if it wanted to fight the Russians, and the Russians had no interest in fighting the Germans until they themselves were attacked.

If the Germans aren't involved in any war with the west, then there is no war with Poland. There is no access or limited access to Rumanian and Hungarian oil. I assume no access or co-operation with the west, and no access to overseas markets. If that is not the case, then it becomes a war of western Europe and the US versus the Russians, which is a completely different dynamic.

Germany without oil, without direct land access is doomed to defeat. Germany with military access must, by definition be at war with the west. this is inescapable. Dress it up how ever you like, under whatever heading you choose, these are the intractable constants of the equation

 

[tomo pauk]

Yes. In 1941, more than 50% of the emergency formation raised by the Red Army came from the Moscow MD followed by the Leningrad MD. The Ukraine raised relatively few formations, and most of its industries were on the move to the east and urals.

In 1941 its the least important of the three main target areas. later in the war it had long term importance, but less so in 1941

Ukraine was overrun in 1941 (Kiev fell in late September), so not much of the emergency formations could be raised there? The Ukraine having far more people to call under arms than Leningrad MD?
Would the Ukraine-based Red Army, VVS and Navy do anything in that scenario? What about Hungarians and Romanians? Soviets leaving the Germans to have the Romanian oil?

 

[parsifal]

Ukraine had more people and greater potential, but simply did not raise as many formations as the more central MDs in 1941. Ukraine included some significant areas not captured until 1942 as well as the ones that fell quickly.

If the Hungarians and Rumanians are in, some german troop will be needed to maintain a defensive line behind the Dnestr and then across the Lublin gap to the Pripet. Would need to leave 17A and 11A in the sth but 1 Pzgrp, and 6A could be redeployed . When they arrive the Italian Expeditionary force would be sent to the Lublin area.

This is sufficient to maintain a good defensive position

Soviet Players generally do attempt an offensive in the Sth, but almost always it fails....badly. Smart ones stay defensive and try to get reserves back to Moscow. Hard to get units to Leningrad, because of the distances, and the different rail gauges in the Baltic states. The delay in the redeployment is what the German forces are counting on. it gives them momentum to take the two key objectives. its not a failsafe plan, you need a degree of luck as the german, but its a better option than being spread allover the place....

There are a couple of things that make operations in Russia exceedingly difficult....distance, frontages, lack of infrastructure, weather, both heat and cold and rain and snow. its a world of extremes. where simplicity is superior to complexity, where things seldom work as they are intended, life is cheap, and frequently lost.

 

[tomo pauk]

Are the Soviet players also allowed to re-deploy their forces differently than historically? Can they attack German recon planes prior 'Barbarossa'? How well the northern venue can support greater influx of German assets?

There are a couple of things that make operations in Russia exceedingly difficult....distance, frontages, lack of infrastructure, weather, both heat and cold and rain and snow. its a world of extremes. where simplicity is superior to complexity, where things seldom work as they are intended, life is cheap, and frequently lost.

Agreed all the way.

 

[parsifal]

Different simulations have different arrangements. those working closer to the Kriegspiel principles (the german methods for gaming operational plans like the schlieffen plan) are rigid, and dont allow for a great deal of flexibility in matter like initial deployment. Others, based on more modern forms of simulation allow for a greater degree of flexibility. Situations like Barbarossa arent gamed out professionally anymore....there isnt the need, but there are many commercial sims, some PC based, others more traditional, that do a decent job of accurately depicting the limits and capabilities of both sides

in my opinion the best simulations are those that work on the principle of trade offs. Because the Axis held the strategic initiative, they get to choose the extent of flexibility in their set up deployments....they can choose to be close to the historical setup, in which case the Soviets are also limited in their choices. The Axis can choose to vary their deployments, and the Soviets, to a limited extent can vary their setups as well. The Germans have greater freedom, but they dont get carte blanche to begin as they like. i think thats the best compromise. historically the Germans were able to deploy with good knowledge of the Soviet positions, but there were limits. some units had to be kept back from the frontier for instance, or they risked being detected by the Russians. There were limits in deployment into places like Romania and finland that then germans had very limited control over.

When we were undertaking operational simulations at the Tac warfare school the referees would discuss simulation parameters and try and explore a given situation from as many realistic angles as possible. Gaming a situation out is of great advantage to understanding how systems can work, and today the military rely mostly on computers as the predictive modelling tools. Such analysis is only as good as the assumptions behind it and the assumptions necessarily trace back to the best information available. Sometimes its an extrapolation....a guess

A simulation covering such a huge topic as the Russian front is necessarily done at a fairly broad brush scale. The most detailed scale I played is divisional regimental scale, which is pretty broad brush. You just cant go lower than that, even so, there 6-8 participants per side, so it gets pretty intense at times.

 

[fastmongrel]

In a survey released today 107% of Russians asked by the FSB thought that Putin was doing an excellent job with the economy.