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.
Say by some miracle Germany had been able to successfully win the battle for Moscow, take it over, Stalin were killed, do you think that would have been something that Russia could not have recovered from, or do you think they still could have, leading to what eventually happened at the end of WWII albeit much more difficult?
Difficult to say as history can play out in a number ways, however it would have been difficult since the western part of the Soviet Union was the center of power, while Ukraine was the bread and basket of the country.
Difficult to say as history can play out in a number ways, however it would have been difficult since the western part of the Soviet Union was the center of power, while Ukraine was the bread and basket of the country.
I think that the most important was Azerbaijan, because 71% of all oil was mined in Azerbaidjan, especially since Ukraine was already occupied by Germany. And if the USSR had lost Azerbaijan, Germany would have most likely won, because without fuel the Soviet army would have lost aviation, tanks and transport.
Quote:
Originally Posted by YuMart
Say by some miracle Germany had been able to successfully win the battle for Moscow, take it over, Stalin were killed, do you think that would have been something that Russia could not have recovered from, or do you think they still could have, leading to what eventually happened at the end of WWII albeit much more difficult?
I think Germany would not have enough resources to capture Moscow, The USSR successfully evacuated the military industry in Siberia, the USSR was receiving military and food aid from allies.
Say by some miracle Germany had been able to successfully win the battle for Moscow, take it over, Stalin were killed, do you think that would have been something that Russia could not have recovered from, or do you think they still could have, leading to what eventually happened at the end of WWII albeit much more difficult?
It is worth noting that the USSR in 1941 did not have any established protocol for an orderly transition of power. Stalin was not merely ruthless. That's not enough. He was a masterful administrator, adept manipulator, and shrewd in his ability to read others. Since, list most dictators, he pared out those he perceived to be a threat, he left the structure of the state in such a condition that without his individual presence it would suffer greatly. And Stalin in his paranoia took this practice to an extreme even by the standards of paranoid dictators. Ironically, for all the horrors that Stalin's rule entailed, he was probably most critical to the survival of the state after he had recovered from the whatever funk - mental breakdown, emotional collapse, whatever - that he sunk into for a few days after June 22, 1941.
It is not that the USSR would be doomed without Stalin. After all, it wasn't doomed when he finally died in 1953. But when the Germans were invaded, he was younger and more vital and had not yet removed himself from day-to-day operations to the extent that he would later. Also, a suddenly-empty position at the top during not just war but when vast swaths of the nation were occupied, would be very difficult to fill without a bloody struggle for power. For what more could the invading Germans ask for than for Stalin to be a corpse with his various lieutenants - and everyone else who fancied himself Vzhod - fighting to replace him? And there was no obvious successor, just a group of second-tier apparatchiks with little political fiefdoms that would all be pit against each other, while the rudderless-state succumbed to the German onslaught.
Indeed, it's hard to figure who might emerge to replace him. Zhukov? He certainly had power. But he was a military man, and beyond his useful ability to read Stalin and having a personality which allowed him to thrive under the difficult conditions Stalin created for subordinates, he had no particular political talents. Molotov was no national leader, which Stalin recognized and why is why he survived the purges. Beria was universally loathed and could never have assembled the ruling coalition necessary as a precursor to taking complete power. And though by that time Khrushchev was walking the halls of power, he was a tier or two below the would-be contenders. Worse still, all of the potential replacements, while lacking the might to seize the mantle, had large enough bases to contest the matter.
When people imagine a conflict, they usually think of it is being to the last bullet, and he who has the most and best bullets will win. That's now how conflicts work. They endure until one side folds. Forcing the Stalin-centric Soviet regime to find a new leader with the enemy at the gates is a perfect recipe for the Soviets to collapse and throw in the towel.
What one can say is that the death of Stalin would probably go better for the Soviets during the time you specify, the Battle of Moscow, than earlier. Say, for example, that a terrified Stalin, cowering in his dacha when the delegation arrived after the invasion to beg him to return to the seat of command, thinks he's about to be arrested and eats a bullet. In fact, numerous participants at that meeting reported that Stalin initially appeared to fear that he was about to be deposed. In my opinion, that would be even more disastrous, and might bring German to the gates of Moscow earlier, in better weather. And while the post-Stalin factions fought for power.
Say by some miracle Germany had been able to successfully win the battle for Moscow, take it over, Stalin were killed, do you think that would have been something that Russia could not have recovered from, or do you think they still could have, leading to what eventually happened at the end of WWII albeit much more difficult?
You have two situations here: 1.) Fall of Moscow, and, 2.) Death of Stalin. For #1 that's no problem - the USSR had already made plans for evacuating and relocating the capital, and destroying it if need be. As in the Napoleonic period, the loss of Moscow did not mean the loss of the war, as Russia has plenty of room to retreat. #2 gets a bit more complex as paranoid Stalin had no plans for a successor or the shift of a power. It would be a power struggle, but it doesn't mean the Soviet Union would collapse. More than likely a military leader like Zhukov would come on top. War with Germany would continue.
I think that Hitler didn't quite understand how huge the USSR was, and how many resources it was necessary to control even 10% of the territory of the USSR. And in this war Germany did not have a chance to win from the very beginning. Yes, at first Germany was lucky at the beginning of the war and USSR had a big losses,but first, if all this was for the most part because of internal problems in the USSR: political repressions of 1934-1938, political intrigues of Stalin which led to the fact that the Soviet Union "overslept" the attack of Germany But potential (and assistance from the United States and Great Britain also made a significant contribution) of USSR allowed to recover after big losses of first years of WW2.
The capture of Moscow would have had propaganda value to the Germans. Beyond that the capital and other manufacturing facilities would have been moved as far eastward as possible to escape capture by the Nazis.
Stalin's death would have had no lasting impact on the war. Remember the Soviet Union characterized this conflict as the Great Patriotic War. A struggle for sheer survival. Even with the elimination of the Stalin cult a new leader would have emerged to push the country toward victory.
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.
