AR15.Com Archives
 Another WWII 'what if' for the armchair history analysts
TexasSmooth  [Member]
4/22/2009 4:48:52 PM
I know we have many of them here (I'm one of them ) so here's one I've wondered about for some time.

Suppose Hitler never invaded the Soviet Union and as of late 1941 the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact is still in effect.

The question is: Would Stalin have violated this treaty as Hitler did?

My thoughts on this would be no, he would not have, but I would think Russia would probably seize the opportunity to offer war supplies to one side or the other...maybe both...for financial gain. Perhaps after the war had been going for several years, the Soviets might jump in on the side of whom they perceive to be the victor in hopes of additional territorial gain.

Paid Advertisement
--
Ameshawki  [Member]
4/22/2009 5:46:09 PM
Hard to see a communist Russia and fascist Germany living side by side for long. Plus it would have negated the whole German lebesraum (sp?) (living space) thing.
4v50  [Team Member]
4/23/2009 12:05:39 AM
Stalin would have attacked when he felt up to the task. Trouble is, whenever Stalin would build up the army, his paranoia would have him purge all the high officers.
lew  [Team Member]
4/23/2009 5:48:02 PM
Originally Posted By Ameshawki:
Hard to see a communist Russia and fascist Germany living side by side for long. Plus it would have negated the whole German lebesraum (sp?) (living space) thing.


"Lebensraum"

There's no room for folks like Stalin and Hitler to coexist for any length of time. The USSR would have invaded.
SecurityPolice  [Team Member]
4/27/2009 4:53:21 PM
The USSR was in no position to invade Germany because Stalin had purged the high ranking officers of the military in the late 1930’s. Therefore there was no leadership in the Soviet Military. Furthermore, one must remember that Hitler accused the Communist for setting the German Reichstag on fire. Hitler started WW2 by the means of blaming the Communist Party of Germany with treason and linking it to the USSR. I personally believe that Hitler never wanted to invade France and fight the British but had to when both countries declared war on Germany after the invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939.
omega62  [Life Member]
4/28/2009 1:26:59 AM
Originally Posted By SecurityPolice:
The USSR was in no position to invade Germany because Stalin had purged the high ranking officers of the military in the late 1930’s. Therefore there was no leadership in the Soviet Military. Furthermore, one must remember that Hitler accused the Communist for setting the German Reichstag on fire. Hitler started WW2 by the means of blaming the Communist Party of Germany with treason and linking it to the USSR. I personally believe that Hitler never wanted to invade France and fight the British but had to when both countries declared war on Germany after the invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939.


There is no question that Hitler did not want to fight the British. He said it himself, many times, that he regretted that.

His real aims had always lain in the east, to obtain "lebensraum" for the German volk among the rich agricultural lands of the Ukraine.

As to the Soviet Union violating the Nazi-Soviet Pact, there is no question that Stalin would have attacked Germany sooner or later, had Germany not attacked Russia first. THAT war was inevitable.

paddymurphy  [Team Member]
4/29/2009 3:33:43 AM
I believe Stalin would have invaded. Interestingly the creators of Hearts of Iron (world war 2 strategic pc game) agreed. If Germany does not invade the USSR sometime in 1942 the USSR invades. It really sucked the first time it happened cause I was not expecting it.
Jhawker  [Member]
4/30/2009 10:26:09 PM
Stalin would have invaded Germany without a doubt. There is no honor among thieves and hitler and stalin WERE thieves. (and more)
neoinarien  [Member]
5/3/2009 3:38:43 PM
+1 on what basically everyone else has said
Gobshyte  [Team Member]
6/3/2009 3:58:51 AM
Stalin wasn't ready for the German army to invade as early as they did and that is clear from the way he was swept aside right through 1941 and into 1942.
If, however, the tables had been turned over the English channel and the Luftwaffe had succeeded in capturing air superiority from the RAF, culminating in a successful 'Operation Sealion', then 'Operation Barborossa' would have been delayed enough for Stalin to complete his bolstering of his western army and would have been on an almost equal footing with Hitler.
Stalin had already committed almost half his number to the defence of his eastern border from the Japanese attack that he felt inevitable which is why the Berlin-Moscow pact was so important to Stalin in the first place.
With an equal amount of men and defending his Mother-land it would have turned into a war of attrition between the two powers and would have resulted in a stalemate with no conceivable outcome other than a stand off.
With the allies gone in France, Hitler would be able to pour another 2 million men and their resources into the eastern conflict and with Japan's dwindling war effort against the British in the south east Asian sub-continent and the Americans push further west in the Philippines, meaning their sight was elswhere on self preservation, Stalin could do exactly the same onto his defensive border with the Germans.
This, ultimately with the defeat of Japan in 1945, would have been the new setting for the cold war. Both armies would only dig in as they reached an impasse.
Wartime rocket technology would not have ended up in allied hands as it did and the new super powers would be staring at each other over a trench lined European border with two men fanatical enough to attritionally destroy the other.
ClemY  [Member]
6/5/2009 7:06:41 AM
My understanding is that when Hitler stepped off east with Operation Barbarossa, Stalin was 10 days to two weeks from stepping off heading west. The reason the Germans motored so quickly through the Russians following the invasion was because the Russians were preparing to invade and weren’t in defensive positions. They were doing things like unloading tanks from flatcars and making other preps for invasion.

Hitler and Stalin really were much like Al Capone and Bugs Moran: two gangsters intent on controlling the same areas.
raizer  [Member]
6/23/2009 4:30:03 PM
I have studied this war for years and was able to get my ba in the russo-german conflict
there is a great trilogy out by richard evans and his final book-the 3rd reich at war is out now and its a great read. Russia was not ready for any offensive ops in 41 (or defensive ops HAHA) they needed another 2 years to refine their commo ops and train up their warrior leaders in advanced operations...their total debacle against finland proved this...in fact Hitler and his general staff gleaned important insights into how weak the sovs actually were by examining the fight with the finns...but Stalin would have pushed over the polish line in 43-count on it...he had the superior manpower, the superior natl resources and
the acceptable organization and training that 2-3+ years would have provided to wage an offensive war vs germany.

So hitler went in first and in not knocking out the bear in late '41, he lost the war. Germany could not compete with the sovs making x10 in tanks and x25 in aircraft (and the tanks were better) not to mention the huge quantities of good stuff US and the Limeys were sending joes way... the germans got close in 41 but once Zuhkohv took over in front of moscow and pushed the germans back-transforming the blitz into a war of attrition-it was game over man-why dont we put her in charge!!
MP7A1  [Team Member]
6/27/2009 3:31:20 AM
Well, IMHO Stalin would have invaded Germany in time. Probably with the same outcome. Hitler rolled the dice on the inevitable. He almost won the bet.
arty6pd  [Team Member]
6/29/2009 12:37:30 AM
Originally Posted By TexasSmooth:
I know we have many of them here (I'm one of them ) so here's one I've wondered about for some time.

Suppose Hitler never invaded the Soviet Union and as of late 1941 the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact is still in effect.

The question is: Would Stalin have violated this treaty as Hitler did?

My thoughts on this would be no, he would not have, but I would think Russia would probably seize the opportunity to offer war supplies to one side or the other...maybe both...for financial gain. Perhaps after the war had been going for several years, the Soviets might jump in on the side of whom they perceive to be the victor in hopes of additional territorial gain.



Stalin, I think, would have been too busy playing Churchill, then, later, Roosevelt. I dont think the communists or the nazis would have gotten along together at all. Stalin was as much of a megalomaniac as Hitler.
Ironnewt  [Member]
7/12/2009 10:19:35 PM
One of the interesting thingd that could have occurred would have been an on schedule invasion of the USSR. It was delayed to assist the Italians and their screw up in the Balkans/SE Europe. Had the invasion gone off as scheduled and some of the 'Monday Morning Quarterbacking' not occurred, Moscow might have fallen. If the Japanese had invaded in the far East that would have put Stalin on a 2 front war. Something to think about. But then again if your aunt had balls she would be your uncle.
Smead  [Team Member]
7/14/2009 4:07:59 AM
Should have concentrated on knocking out England before turning East...invade in 1942, still before Stalin would have been ready to hit Germany.
raizer  [Member]
7/19/2009 5:52:52 PM
wouldnt have mattered
the russians were making 1000 t34s a month in late 41-even after the evac of their industry...in one month in 43, the sovs made more t34s than the total number of tigers that the germans made through out the entire war-and they made more t34s in 3 months than germanys entire war time production of panthers
Its all about resources: steel, fuel (germs had none cept in hungry and austria-which the allies bombed into dust) and manpower- sovs had it all and no blitzkrieg lighting war was gonna trump all those resource factors
tnolley  [Team Member]
8/17/2009 5:33:31 PM
If Germany hadn't invaded, Russia would be constantly watching the progress of the rest of the war. Germany and the USSR had a non-aggression pact - not an alliance. There is a huge difference between the two.

If Germany was winning, Russia would have been wondering how strong their pact was. If Germany was losing, Russia would realize that they needed to ally themselves with the Allies.

To me, this question becomes: How would Germany having a secure eastern border have affected the outcome of the war in Europe?

Paid Advertisement
--