Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Had Germany been victorious and succeeded in capturing the USSR do you think the allies would have sued for peace? Could they even have a chance at winning? And could you see a cold war type taking place between the U.S and Germany?
Had Germany been victorious and succeeded in capturing the USSR do you think the allies would have sued for peace? Could they even have a chance at winning? And could you see a cold war type taking place between the U.S and Germany?
Forget the US even - Did GB sue for peace before Barbarossa for that two year period when the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany had a treaty? Even after France fell they soldiered on for a year before Barbarossa, winning the Battle of Britian.
What did Winston Churchill tell the house of commons in a speech in June 1940?
That's your answer.
While I agree with Mr Dd714 (had the Nazis invaded Britain, the Brits were ready for a guerilla-type resistance which would likely have made Iraq look tame --there was a colloquialism among the British homeguard: "You can always take one with you."), Hitler's not-so-sagacious decision to declare war on the United States two days after Pearl Harbor sealed his fate, but I believe the resolve of the British citizenry would have made a total, unconditional victory impossible, just a reversal of 1918.
If, for whatever reason, the Nazis were able to win at Stalingrad and/or Kursk, and Hitler had not pursued an invasion of theBritish Isles in return for a peace treaty, we might have seen a Kalte Kreig; an eventual standoff between the United States and Germany, with the two remaining powers possessed of nuclear weapons. Even assuming that Hitler had eventually been deposed, that would have been a far more dangerous outcome than what actually happened.
While I agree with Mr Dd714 (had the Nazis invaded Britain, the Brits were ready for a guerilla-type resistance which would likely have made Iraq look tame --there was a colloquialism among the British homeguard: "You can always take one with you."), Hitler's not-so-sagacious decision to declare war on the United States two days after Pearl Harbor sealed his fate,
His fate was sealed in 1939 in declaring a war he just could not win. It was further sealed in 1940 when he was checked by the Brits in the west and then in Dec 1941, not by the USA declaring war, but by the Soviets hitting him with battering ram at Moscow. From then onwards the German economy just could not cope with sustaining a long term war.
I do know the US strategy would have changed if the USSR had fallen. They were going to raise 200 to 300 divisions if the USSR fell and have more of their troops as ground troops instead of so many in the navy and air force. But when the USSR held out and even starting pushing the Germans back they felt 95 divisions and all of the added units would be enough ground troops so they did put 6.3 million troops in the navy and air force. They knew when the USSR had not fallen that they were fighting about 70% of the German army. Could the US and Britian have defeated Germany if they had taken the USSR ?? Thats a good question. Ron
Had Germany been victorious and succeeded in capturing the USSR do you think the allies would have sued for peace? Could they even have a chance at winning? And could you see a cold war type taking place between the U.S and Germany?
The war would have ended several years later and the US would have had a much higher casualty count. The allies would have won, regardless. Perhaps Russia would have been much less belligerent in the aftermath and the cold war averted.
The Germans would have found themselves bogged down in a guerrilla war in Russia that would have tied down much of their army. This Resistance is what happenned in all the occupied lands. While the Resistance could not defeat the Germans the harrassment sapped their army and prevented them from mustering the full strength that could have made the difference between victory and defeat or a more orderly retreat that could have preserved their strength.
One BIG difference the fall of Russia would have made is that there would have been no landings in North Africa or Itally as these were done largely to relieve the pressure on the Russians. Instead, since there would have been no need to dissipate our strength on secondary fronts we would have continued the build-up of forces in Britain and landed in Normandy a year earlier. The Germans would have put up a stronger front and would have been pushed back more slowly but in the end Berlin would probably have fallen about the same time it did. Japan might have held out a couple of years longer (just my guess).
Communism in Russia would have been destroyed and would never have come to be in Eastern Europe, China, Korea, or Viet-Nam. America would have returned to its traditional isolationist role while Britain would have resumed at least some of its status as a world power--more by default due to America's withdrawal than a resumption of Empire. England, France, Belgium, and the Netherlands would have lost their overseas colonies the same way they did anyway.
The Germans would have found themselves bogged down in a guerrilla war in Russia that would have tied down much of their army. This Resistance is what happenned in all the occupied lands. While the Resistance could not defeat the Germans the harrassment sapped their army and prevented them from mustering the full strength that could have made the difference between victory and defeat or a more orderly retreat that could have preserved their strength.
One BIG difference the fall of Russia would have made is that there would have been no landings in North Africa or Itally as these were done largely to relieve the pressure on the Russians. Instead, since there would have been no need to dissipate our strength on secondary fronts we would have continued the build-up of forces in Britain and landed in Normandy a year earlier. The Germans would have put up a stronger front and would have been pushed back more slowly but in the end Berlin would probably have fallen about the same time it did. Japan might have held out a couple of years longer (just my guess).
Communism in Russia would have been destroyed and would never have come to be in Eastern Europe, China, Korea, or Viet-Nam. America would have returned to its traditional isolationist role while Britain would have resumed at least some of its status as a world power--more by default due to America's withdrawal than a resumption of Empire. England, France, Belgium, and the Netherlands would have lost their overseas colonies the same way they did anyway.
First the Germans were stronger, but then Russian angry, and became stronger, the Germans lost
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What if Operation Barbarossa had succeeded?
