Wich was the worst nation in the war? (1 Viewer)

I'm not a fan of French bashing.

Read about Verdun or Napoleon or the fact that American independence was based on French support.

They got it wrong in 1940. they paid for it,

The Germans and the Japanese were the wrong'uns who tried to conquer the world and got devastated for their trouble.

Hitler, in my opinion, made a fatal mistake by invading Russia in 1941. Had he finished England first, so Americans wouldnt have a brigehead to open the Second Front in Europe, he would have gotten a chance to defete the USSR later on.

Soren said:

Entering the Soviet Union was btw no mistake, the Germans could've easily taken the USSR if it again hadn't been for a number of disasterous decisions made by Hitler

Click to expand...

Easily taken the USSR? Look at the map my friend. In a war with Russia you can achieve some tactical superiority like taking industrial centers or even capturing its capital city but that doesnt mean the war is over.

In 1941/42 the soviets relocated their industrial potential from the european part of the country to the east behind Ural mountains 2000 miles away from the front line, built hundrieds of new factories in Siberia increasing military production by several times each subsequent year.

Have you heard anything about guerilla war in German's rear? There were tens or even hundreds of thouthands men aged from 12 to 70 who took weapon and fought for several years non-stop.

This war for Germany could have lasted for 5, 10, 15 years... until the last German soldier was killed. Hitler took a risky gamble with some illusive goals. It's not even clear what he was hoping to achieve there...

hi stasoid

i find found Sorens haughty dismissal of Soviet resistance and the sheer scale of the country and the problems that causes any invader, quite breathtaking. However, given a different approach to the campaign, it may have been possible to extract a negotiated peace or truce from the Soviets in 1941 or 1942. However, this could at best be temporary, and certainly does not vindicate the decision to go into Russia in the first place. This, was without a doubt in my mind, a blunder of the first magnitude. And the proof of this is in the result....germany's defeat can be directly traced back to her decision to invade the USSR

parsifal said:

hi stasoid

i find found Sorens haughty dismissal of Soviet resistance and the sheer scale of the country and the problems that causes any invader, quite breathtaking. However, given a different approach to the campaign, it may have been possible to extract a negotiated peace or truce from the Soviets in 1941 or 1942. However, this could at best be temporary, and certainly does not vindicate the decision to go into Russia in the first place. This, was without a doubt in my mind, a blunder of the first magnitude. And the proof of this is in the result....germany's defeat can be directly traced back to her decision to invade the USSR

Click to expand...

Hitlers invasion of USSR was political as well as racial. Hitler was the enemy of Jews and Communism and it was the prize of living space too.

The Germans would have done far better if they promised the Soviet people bread and freedom.

Mass murder, starvation and slavery isn't exactly vote winners.

The time it took the Germans to be at the very gates of the city Moscow only serves to illustrate how easily Germany could've won if it hadn't been for Hitler's disasterous decision not to send his troops wintercloths. This idiotic decision by Hitler completely stalled the offensive and hundreds of thousands German soldiers froze to death, and the ones who managed to survive had their combat effectiveness drastically reduced as they both had to fight the cold and Soviets at the same time. That was the break the Soviets had been looking for.

Had Hitler sent his men their winterclothing Stalingrad would've fallen before the end of 42 and a strong foothold had been established, and then the German army could concentrate on capturing the oil fields of the Caucasus region, which undoubtedly would've followed suit soon after.

With the Caucasus oil fields captured the war would've been over for the Soviets as the Germans from then would've established a sound supply route and were now well supplied with fuel oil to power their drive further into the Soviet Union.

Stalin knew all this and therefore had already made plans at how to establish a peace settlement with the Germans during the battle of Stalingrad, being only days away from surrendering the city when the Germans were in control of over 90% of it.

The time it took the Germans to be at the very gates of the city Moscow only serves to illustrate how easily Germany could've won if it hadn't been for Hitler's disasterous decision not to send his troops wintercloths. This idiotic decision by Hitler completely stalled the offensive and hundreds of thousands German soldiers froze to death, and the ones who managed to survive had their combat effectiveness drastically reduced as they both had to fight the cold and Soviets at the same time. That was the break the Soviets had been looking for.

Had Hitler sent his men their winterclothing Stalingrad would've fallen before the end of 42 and a strong foothold had been established, and then the German army could concentrate on capturing the oil fields of the Caucasus region, which undoubtedly would've followed suit soon after.

With the Caucasus oil fields captured the war would've been over for the Soviets as the Germans from then would've established a sound supply route and were now well supplied with fuel oil to power their drive further into the Soviet Union.

Stalin knew all this and therefore had already made plans at how to establish a peace settlement with the Germans during the battle of Stalingrad, being only days away from surrendering the city when the Germans were in control of over 90% of it.

Yeah, they could have done lots of things, but they didnt, why, because they were ineptly led...hence they are front runners for the crown worst country of WWII

PS. The only way this can be disproved, is if someone concedes that there were limits to German military capability

I agree with Basket. From what I've read, when the German armies "liberated" vast areas of the USSR the populace actually greeted them as saviours. It was only when the follow-up occupation forces came in and terrorized them that the partisans emerged. If this is true, then that may have been a even bigger blunder than military objectives.

I dont give the "Russian Alliance" theories much more credence than Sorens "Aryan Supremacy" c*ap. Hitler had made plain his intentions regarding Russia and the Russian peoples since Mein Kampf, and they made the Holocaust look like a picnic in the park. Fundamental to the Nazi creed was the idea of Living Space, guess whos living space that was. It was the Ukraine and beyond. guess what the plan was right from before even the Nazis were in power, to exterminate the current peoples to make way for this living space drivel. To turn that on its head at the last minute was akin to trying to make a lion go vegetarian, it just aint gonna happen boys

I agree with you Pars but if that wasn't the creed - the subhuman Slavik races - would making peace with the populace in a common fight against the Soviet regime have been a better outcome? Just curious.

well yes, in those terms it would have been a different outcome, but the argument is non-sequita, because without the living space creed, i dont think the war would have occurred in the first place

True. I have that human condition called "What if?". But you are right.

I'll try and put the question this way...how would the Americans react if all of a sudden the Canadians said they wanted Kansas, but they will be real nice to you if you do? Do you think the Ukrainians, or the byelorussians are any less attached to their real estate. Sure they hated Stalin, and the Soviets, but at least Stalin had let some of them stay there, whilst I am no friend of the communists, I doubt that the Nazis would have behaved better, even when they actually try to be nice

I think what some people are failing to realize that just because Moscow was taken does not mean the Russians would have been defeated.

Russia is a vast country and had more resources in manpower than the Germans had. The Russians would have simply packed up their government and their factories (which they did do at times) and would have moved farther east.

I too beleive that the Germans could have defeated the Russians however. Would it have been easy as some people like to believe? Hell no...

Would it have been quick? Hell no, it would have lasted for years and years.

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:

Would it have been quick? Hell no, it would have lasted for years and years.

Click to expand...

Years that the Germans didn't have. They were prepared for a short kind of war when they started in 1939. It turned out to be different and the Germans couldn't last that long. I don't believe they would have had the resources to go on for many years more, while I do believe the Russians could.

I pretty much agree with you. I think some people underestimate the Russians. They were not the best army but there were a lot of them and the vast amount of land was on there side.

I've always had a gut feeling that no matter if Moskow or Stalingrad or any other piece of the country was taken, it was just too vast. Like Adler said, it would have lasted years.

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:

I pretty much agree with you. I think some people underestimate the Russians. They were not the best army but there were a lot of them and the vast amount of land was on there side.

Click to expand...

Exactly and the Russian leaders were pretty much willing to sacrifice lives as much as needed. It's hard to fight that.

I think the admiration many have for the German army comes from the fact that given the size of the country and the resources they had, they still could fight that long against the rest of the world. No one would have won in that situation and few would have lasted as long as the Germans did. But i think whatever way you look at it, the Germans could never win in the end. Even if the Germans would have "won" like Soren claims, it would only have been a temporarily one. It would have cost them a lot to keep the conquered country under control and with the war going on in the west and the US entering the war, they still would have run out of breath in the end.

When you look at all the parts of the equation, the weather, the limited manpower of the wehrmacht, the vast amounts of manpower for the Russians, the attrocious performance of the German leadership, the distances, the weather, the inate fighting abilities of the Russians, and their ability to put up with intense hardship, the limits on the logistical network that the Germans could put into the theatre, the poor road network, the increasingly better Soviet training and technique etc etc, it is hard for me to accept that the Germans had any chance of winning the war. I believe that the Germans may well have been able to take Moscow, but this would have meant a quid pro quo somewhere else, such as the Russians not losing 667000 men in Kiev....The late capture of Moscow would in the finish have probably been a major disaster for the Germans, dwarfing the losses at Stalingrad. The Germans were concentrating three armies for the capture of that city, not one, and when you read the estimates (made by Gehlen) of the reserves the Russians had behind the city (albeit, many incompletely equipped), and the help that would have been rushed to the Soviets by the allies if Moscow had fallen, the full magnitude of the difficulties faced starts to hit home

My stepfather was a machinegunner at Stalingrad. He was shot by a Russian sniper in the arm, using a dum dum bullet. He was saved by a Ukrainian Hiwi, who picked up the MG 42 and proceeded to kill scores of his own countrymen . After he was done, the Hiwi dropped the gun, and just walked off, never to be seen again. Max (my stepfather), if he heard what Soren has to say on this subject would want to publicly flog him. In the opinion of my stepfather, the Russians are one of the most malaigned armies in history. He thinks they are thoroughly dangerous and professional, and some of the best close assault troops around. He is extremely critical of the German leadership.

I dont agree with everything my stepfather has told me, but his exeriences and observations should not be dismissed.

I believe that the Germans put in a very good performance in Russia, and that any other army would not have been able to endure what they endured. But I also can see no real evidence to support this notion that the Germans could have defeated the Russians in any true sense of the word

Germans would be gaining the Russian resources as they advanced as well though.