What if: Hitler didn't attacked Russia?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

al49

Tech Sergeant
1,552
338
Dec 16, 2009
Milan, Italy
I don't know if the above thread already exist but, in any case, I think it could be an interesting mental exercise to think what could have happened if Germany would have used these resources to conquer Egypt and reach M.E. fields from there.
It's up to you now.
Cheers
Alberto
 
With Soviet Union providing the oil, and the bulk of the army not consuming it, there is no need for Germans to go beyond Suez channel. Germany wins.
 
I agree with Tomo. However, would like to point out that according to my opinion war between Germany and Soviet Union was inevitable. It would happen sooner or later.
 
imalko said:
...war between Germany and Soviet Union was inevitable. It would happen sooner or later
Click to expand...
All good what-ifs require concessionary thinking
alot of variables to play with

i. D-Day landings would have proven significantly more problematic if not unfeasible in their historic form
ii. Malta would likely have been squashed and the gateway to N Africa flung open
iii. Any extended non-belligerence pact between Germany and the USSR might have been complicated by the activities of her Axis partner in the USSR's east; would Germany's non-aggression necessarily secure Japan's?

If the USSR are prepared to pump raw materials into Germany's war effort then the war of attrition, whilst probably still not winnable, has become an order of magnitude more difficult. Stalin naively believed that the pact between Germany and the USSR made them practically invincible, if he could be seduced into full-scale commitment there's every chance the war could have gone the other way; the Soviet war machine, unlike the US war machine, didn't have to ferry its hardware across the Atlantic and THEN stage it into Europe from UK bases.

The question there would be whether the Nazis wanted W Europe saturated, out of necessity, with Communist troops, easy to bring in, good luck with getting them out.
 
It was inevitable, yes, but if Hitler had postponed his invasion of Russia, that would have given Rommel the time/material needed to take N.Africa, Goering to defeat England, and consolidate Germany's hold on Europe. Then they would have had all the oil they needed, and only a single-front war to fight (with England out, the Atlantic would have been German, making a cross-oceanic invasion from the US a VERY difficult proposition). The US would have had to contend with that (there were plans in place, and even offices already set up, for a British-govt-in-exile back in '40-'41...just in case), as well as the Pacific war. Any war in Europe, had Hitler conquered Britain, would have had to come over through Russia...which would have put everyone back on a WWI-style stalemate, two massively huge armies straining against each other on one front.

That's my early-morning-pre-caffeine assessment.
 
In fact the Russians were preparing to do exactly that. The target was to have been Rumania....wonder why. This explaions the preponderance of Soviet armour in the South at the the time of barbarossa. The Soviets were planning to undertake their attack some time in 1942
 
I agree with the posts above. A nazi-Soviet conflict was inevitable on idealogical grounds rather than any geo- political ones. Having said that the nazis "living space" was always in the east and the natural antipathy of the two political systems can't be overestimated.
Steve
 

To start a war against Germany over Romania? For what?
Natural resources? Russia had plenty of those, would never start a war for oil. Doesnt make any sense.
Political? Were there any commmunist movements in Romania at the time? To the best of my knowlege they were practically non existent.
Ethnical? There is more differences between Russians and Romanians then between Mexicans and Canadians.
Territorial? The Soviets had already returned Bessarabia as a result of Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. No further territorial claims were considered.

Would Stalin ever attak Germany first? He in fact was more practical then he seems. Ideology has always been a priority in SU but not a good enough reason to go to a war against a superior enemy. There should have been something else.
Germany on the other hand had much better motives (besides ideological factor) to go to the East: living space, resources, slave labor, etc. The war would've erupted earlier or late, no doubt. The Soviets were lucky to win two years. Had Barbarossa been planned for 39', who knows, we all would probably speak German now.
 
The Germans were just as ill prepared for war against Russia in 1939 as the Russians were. Even Hitler knew he could not attack Russia in 1939.
 
Last edited:
HMMM.. I think that if there was not a russian /german conflict, the russians would have probably clased with the japanese in manchuria , ( which they did in 39) and this may have led to a large russian army entering china.

However I dont think stalin would leave the west russia in a weak position , there is a theory that if the Germans had not invaded russia, pushed through north africa, into india and link with the japanese.

Germany would have gained support from arab nations and perhaps india seeking its independence from the British empire, thus also surronding russia on all sides...
 

I fully agree with you and I think that we, born after the end of WW2, are all lucky that Hitler decided to start what was the beginning of his end. (As well as the end of Mussolini)
Alberto
 
DerAdlerIstGelandet said:
The Germans were just as ill prepared for war against Russian in 1939 as the Russians were. Even Hitler new he could not attack Russia in 1939.
Click to expand...
Yep, plus he had no other armies (Finnish, Romanian, Hungarian, Italian) to make up the numbers. And if we assume he went through Poland to invade SU, that means UK France at war.
 
No tomo - it is in '39 or '40 - post M-R Pact. I'll find a date/details and post but the action was what prompted the Romanians to ally with Hitler.

MM
 
The reason for attacking Rumania was about establishing a strong presence in the balkans. Stalin was seeking to establish political control over Europe, and traditionally the starting point for that was through dominating the balkans. Thats why the balkans was known as the "backdoor to Europe". Stalin wanted to gain political influence over the Germans and prevent them from dominating the whole of Europe. The fact that it was a gross overestimation of Russian capabilities is irrelevant really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

What is a Quonset Hut?
Replies
14
Views
792
HP52
H
W
What effect would a cross channel tunnel have on WW2?
Replies
17
Views
870
Airframes
A
Imagine if the Germans had Panthers of this quality of components and construction
2
Replies
24
Views
3K
Spits2
S
WHAT OUTFIT DOES THIS PATCH INDICATE
Replies
5
Views
1K
Dana Bell
D
Indiana tank, aircraft and what not museum
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
WARSPITER
Menu
Log in
Register