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.
So hypothetically speaking lets say that Germany did not invade Poland in 1939 and instead just the Soviet Union did by it'self and so would France and Britain have intervened or would they have still been wary of Germany and just let the Soviets invade, conquer and take over Poland ??
The reason the UK declared war on Germany was the terms of the Polish-British Common Defense Act. It basically stated that they would intervene if Poland was attacked by another European power, referring to Nazi Germany and not the USSR. The French had a similar pact, but neither did much of anything for Poland - not that there was much that could be done.
There is no way in hell England and France would have declared war on the USSR at the same time, lest the Nazis and USSR find a reason to enter a formal alliance to fight against the Allies. Without any other support at the time, England and France would have been ground into dust against the collective forces of the USSR and Germany.
Instead, British and later American intelligence agencies thought it best to allow Hitler to invade the USSR and let Stalin bear the brunt of the Axis army. This made fighting in the West much easier and at the same time neutralized Stalin's desire to "liberate" and annex all of mainland Europe into the USSR.
If the UK and France had collectively declared war on the Soviets at the same time as they did Germany, world history could have taken a sharp turn for the worse..
O.k. i should have thought about what most have stated before i started this thread in that if they had declared war on the USSR they would have been crushed by them and Germany simultaneously. Anyway i enjoyed everyone's thoughts about it as i'm glad i started it .
I was pondering about why France and Great Britain declared war on Germany for attacking Poland on sept 1, 1939 and yet not on the Soviet Union for attacking the same country from the east on sept 17, 1939 and by oct 6 both Germany and the Soviet Union had conquered and took Poland for themselves. I thought they both guaranteed to come to Poland's defence no matter who attacked that country back then.
I think that the British guaranty for Poland was against German aggression. At the time the guarantee was given, the Soviet Union was a nominal ally with Britain and France against Germany. Part of the reason the alliance fell apart and the Russians signed a pact with the Germans was that the Poles refused to allow the Russians access to their country to push back the Germans if they invaded. While the British gave the guaranty, only the Russians were in a position geographically to directly help the Poles. The British and the French could only have attacked Germany from the west, and they declined to do even that.
The answer is pretty simple, actually. They barely had the will to fight Germany, and were surely in no position to take on another major power. The French folded in a few weeks once their actual fighting with Germany started, and the British were forced to quickly retreat beyond the protection of the English Channel. To think they could have taken on Russia too is too much to contemplate. We were lucky that Hitler attacked Russia because we barely beat him even with the Russians on our side.
Don't forget that Russia also attacked Finland in 1939 and absorbed the Baltic States in 1940. The US in particular was outraged by Finland attack, but characteristically provided little effective help. The Finnish foreign minister commented at the time that "the sympathy of the United States was so great that it nearly suffocated us."
But the thinking was the Germany was the greater threat and I think that was correct.
In some respects, the question of Allied intervention in the Finnish-Russian conflict needs to be viewed in the context of the strategy developed by the Allies in the aftermath of the invasion of Poland. It called for employing the idea of “distant war”. What that meant was that the Allies would seek out other fronts where Germany could be confronted, and in doing so, hopefully forestall any German moves westward into the Low Countries or France. Almost immediately, Churchill, as First Sea Lord, put forth the notion that Scandinavia would be an ideal front for the execution of the “distant war” plan. The belief was that a strong show of force in the region by the Allies would make it less likely that Norway or Sweden would feel pressured to throw their lot in with the Axis.
To that end, in September of 1939, Churchill proposed a plan known as "Operation Catherine". It called for a large force of Royal Navy vessels to be sent into the Baltic to operate against the Kriegsmarine. The hope was that German naval ships would be either bottled up in port by the superior British fleet or destroyed in battle should they try to come out. At the same time, the British would intercept and stop all vessels carrying vital ore from Sweden to Germany. The operation was to be launched in either late 1939 or early 1940. A supplementary plan, "Operation Wilfred”, was also put forth by Churchill in November 1939. The idea was to mine the territorial waters of Norway and force Norwegian ore vessels heading for Germany, into international waters where they would be detained by the Royal Navy. In the case of “Operation Catherine”, lack of time and simple logistics made the plan unworkable, so it was shelved. With “Wilfred”, though the Allies felt it imperative to cut Germany off from two of her primary ore suppliers, they knew the plan was inherently risky. Both Sweden and Norway enjoyed a very lucrative mineral trade with Germany. The fear was that should the Royal Navy interfere in any way, the two countries may well be driven into the German camp instead of away from it. Unwilling to chance it, “Wilfred” was also put on indefinite hold.
The Russian invasion of Finland in December of 1939 seemed to offer the Allies another chance to establish a Scandinavian front against Germany. The League of Nations formally expelled the Soviet Union over its’ actions and called for all other member states to assist Finland in fending off the Russians. Britain and France offered immediate support, but much like the case of Poland, they were just hollow promises. Yet, the belief was that since Russia was seemingly an ally of Germany, an attack by Russia on one of their neighbors might well push the remaining Scandinavian countries to seek Allied protection. Since the Baltic was controlled by both Germany and Russia and Finland’s northern ports were iced in, the only way to actually get troops or supplies to Finland would be by traversing Norwegian or Swedish territory. This seemed like an ideal situation for the Allies. They did not believe that Norway or Sweden would conceivably block the passage of vital aid to Finland under the circumstances. And once both countries allowed access to their territory, the Allies would have their foot in the door, enabling them to “persuade” the Norwegians and Swedes to accept further Allied “assistance”. Immediate plans were formulated to raise an Allied expeditionary force that would be landed in northern Norway at Narvik, then cross over into Finland via Sweden. Much to the Allies surprise, Norway and Sweden made it clear they would have no part of any Allied operation aimed at assisting Finland, due to fears it would anger Germany.
The continued reluctance of both countries to join the Allied side and concerns they would either be pressured to join the Axis or be occupied by Germany outright, caused the Allies to consider taking unilateral action to prevent Germany from getting their hands on the mineral wealth of the two countries. France put forth a plan to send a large expeditionary force into northern Norway to occupy both the Norwegian ore mines as well of those of Sweden. The British were very keen on this idea and were willing to join in with the French. The British then had second thoughts and decided to approach Norway and Sweden with the plan, offering it up as an idea to help the countries “protect” the mines from possible German seizure. As one would imagine, they politely declined the Allies transparent offer of aid. The plan was resurrected two more times, once in late January 1940, and then again in mid February 1940. This time the expeditionary force was to be landed in Finland, then move into Norway and Sweden and take of control of the mines. The same stumbling blocks remained so the idea was abandoned.
The last hope of getting the Scandinavian countries to sign on to the Allied cause arose on February 23, 1940. Finland made a formal request to the governments of Sweden and Norway to allow foreign troops to transit through their countries so they could assist Finland in their fight with Russia. Both governments turned down the request. On the 1st of March, Finland asked Britain and France to send 50,000 troops and 100 bombers to help them so they could continue to resist the Soviets. Neither Britain nor France could realistically provide this degree of help. Instead, they asked for permission from Norway and Sweden to send a smaller expeditionary force through their territory to help out Finland. Again, both countries declined. With no assistance forthcoming from the Allies, Finland was forced to begin peace talks with the Soviet Union on March 5, 1940 to end the Winter War. By March 13th, hostilities between the two countries officially ceased.
A large scale buildup of German troops along the German-Danish border, and increased German naval activity in the Baltic, signaled to the Allies that an invasion of Denmark was imminent and that German action against Norway was likely to follow. Deciding that the situation was so critical that they could no longer wait for Norway’s permission to act, Churchill’s plan to mine Norwegian waters, “Operation Wilfred” was finally given the go ahead and mining commenced on April 8th. At the same time, Churchill’s plan to send an expeditionary force to Norway was also approved. This force consisting of British, French, and Polish troops was hastily assembled at the Royal Navy base at Scapa Flow for transport to Norway. The hope was to land in central and northern Norway, and assist the Norwegian Army in holding those areas should the Germans land troops there. The simultaneous invasions of Denmark and Norway on the 9th of April and the landing of Allied troops on Norwegian soil on April 14th marked the beginning of the Allies disastrous “Norway Campaign”. Despite initial success in inflicting heavy losses on German naval assets in Norwegian waters, the expeditionary force never managed to accomplish the same against German land forces. The subsequent launch of the Blitzkrieg against the Low Countries and France on May 10th, made the Allied position in Norway untenable. By May 28th, the Allies decided to abandon Norway to the Germans and withdrew the expeditionary force.
The failure of the Norway Campaign brought all hopes of opening a Scandinavian front and prosecuting a “distant war” against Germany to an end. Norway would remain occupied until the Germans surrendered in May 1945. Sweden managed to remain neutral, and the valuable ore from both countries continued to fuel the German war effort. Failure of the Allies to assist Finland against the Soviets, resulted in the Finns choosing to become nominal members of the Axis until September 1944. The Norwegian debacle also brought down the Chamberlain government in Britain. And the strangest twist of all; the architect of the failed Scandinavian front and Norway Campaign, Winston Churchill, was rewarded for his efforts by being selected to succeed Chamberlain as prime minister.
To that end, in September of 1939, Churchill proposed a plan known as "Operation Catherine". It called for a large force of Royal Navy vessels to be sent into the Baltic to operate against the Kriegsmarine. The hope was that German naval ships would be either bottled up in port by the superior British fleet or destroyed in battle should they try to come out. At the same time, the British would intercept and stop all vessels carrying vital ore from Sweden to Germany. The operation was to be launched in either late 1939 or early 1940. A supplementary plan, "Operation Wilfred”, was also put forth by Churchill in November 1939. The idea was to mine the territorial waters of Norway and force Norwegian ore vessels heading for Germany, into international waters where they would be detained by the Royal Navy. In the case of “Operation Catherine”, lack of time and simple logistics made the plan unworkable, so it was shelved. With “Wilfred”, though the Allies felt it imperative to cut Germany off from two of her primary ore suppliers, they knew the plan was inherently risky. Both Sweden and Norway enjoyed a very lucrative mineral trade with Germany. The fear was that should the Royal Navy interfere in any way, the two countries may well be driven into the German camp instead of away from it. Unwilling to chance it, “Wilfred” was also put on indefinite hold.
m
Tony T
I'm assuming then that if they had implemented either Operation Catherine or Operation Wlfred in 1939 then the Germans would have probably never invaded Norway???
I'm assuming then that if they had implemented either Operation Catherine or Operation Wlfred in 1939 then the Germans would have probably never invaded Norway???
Is that you conclusion also ???
Just pure speculation of course, as much of this is, but I believe they still would have for a couple of reasons...
First, they would have still needed the ore for their war industries.
Secondly, the Norwegian ports were viewed as invaluable for Germany's long-term goals of shutting supplies via submarine warfare from the west to the USSR and between the US and the UK.
Just pure speculation of course, as much of this is, but I believe they still would have for a couple of reasons...
First, they would have still needed the ore for their war industries.
Secondly, the Norwegian ports were viewed as invaluable for Germany's long-term goals of shutting supplies via submarine warfare from the west to the USSR and between the US and the UK.
I wonder if GB's navy could have stopped the invasion by 1940 if the plans were implemented in 1939 like Tony T stated. I'm not sure but was Germany's invasion of it's forces transported by sea or by air?
This was a great question. I also wondered the same thing and i'm still not sure if it was really answered. I wonder if there are any records of what the British or French governments actually thought about the Soviet invasion of Poland. Is there any actual documentation.
I'm assuming then that if they had implemented either Operation Catherine or Operation Wlfred in 1939 then the Germans would have probably never invaded Norway???
Is that you conclusion also ??? I'm not sure but was Germany's invasion of it's forces transported by sea or by air?
As far as “Operation Catherine” goes, this was really nothing more than an overheated fantasy of Churchill’s. It called for either two or three “R” class battleships, one aircraft carrier, five cruisers, and two destroyer flotillas, to sail into the Baltic and take control of it. In the instance of the “R” class ships, these were obsolete, pre-world war one vessels armed with 15 inch guns, that would be radically altered and enlarged to become what some have referred to as “armored turtles”. At the point in time that Churchill proposed this plan, Germany had no ships that could match up with them, largely because the “Bismarck” and “Tirpitz” were still incomplete. If this temporary superiority could be exploited quickly, Churchill reasoned that it would turn out to be a game changer.
What Churchill and those in the Admiralty that supported the idea failed to grasp was the danger to these ships, no matter how heavily armored, to constant German air attack. Operating in the confines of the Baltic with no friendly base to turn too, would have made the “turtles” sitting ducks for the Luftwaffe. Another issue was that no matter how good the ships looked in Churchill’s imagination, turning them into reality would have seriously stretched British shipbuilding skills to their limits. Not to mention the enormous cost and the materials required that could be better used elsewhere.
In respect to “Operation Wilfred”, historically speaking, when “Wilfred” finally commenced the day before the German invasion of Norway, the minefields set by the British failed to impede the ships carrying German troops into Norwegian waters. So the minefield certainly didn’t live up to at least one of it’s intended purposes.
Looking at both cases, it seems unlikely that either plan really would have turned the tide of war as Churchill believed they would. Too much was predicated on the belief that Germany would sit by and do nothing, which was hardly a reasonable assumption. I think it’s pretty clear based on history, that when Hitler wanted something, he went after it. And in the case of Norway, once he decided he was going to have it, he would have figured out how to get it, regardless of what the British might have done to try and stop him.
What Churchill and those in the Admiralty that supported the idea failed to grasp was the danger to these ships, no matter how heavily armored, to constant German air attack. Operating in the confines of the Baltic with no friendly base to turn too, would have made the “turtles” sitting ducks for the Luftwaffe.
I never thought about the Luftwaffe in this scenario until you mentioned it here Tony ... as that makes perfect sense about what the Germans would had done if Churchill had deployed his navy across the baltic sea.
Thanks as always Tony
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.
.
