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.
By 1942, hadn't the Soviets pretty well blunted the Wehrmacht's drives eastward and gone over to the offensive from the Baltic to the Black Sea?
The total surprise of the hundreds of previously unknown armor and infantry divisions that Stalin was able to throw against the Germans, coupled with Hitler's ignorant mishandling of his own army (e.g., his willingness to waste crucial weeks punishing the Yugoslavs prior to launching Barbarossa, the greediness he showed by trying to capture Moscow, Leningrad, and the Rumanian oilfields simultaneously, his unwillingness to permit the relief columns to punch through the encircling Russians at Stalingrad in time to save what was left of his Sixth Army), would seem to have spelled doom to the Reich --- regardless of when the Western Allies were able to muster their forces to invade Europe (nearly two years later, when the Soviets were well on their way to overrunning East Prussia and bludgeoning Army Group Center and the other Wehrmacht formations into submission on the eastern front).
Surely the Red Army might have taken longer than four years to conquer Germany, but were the contributions of the Allies really critical to that outcome, or did they simply bring it about sooner?
Apologies if this has already been addressed in previous posts. Thanks in advance for comments.
Thats a tuff one to call. You have to figure that if the USSR fought the Germans without the western allies Germany could have put more divisions againt the Soviets which could have made a difference. I believe they would have taken Moscow as they would have attacked a few weeks earlier if they did not help the Italians. Ron
Location: Finally escaped The People's Republic of California
11,317 posts, read 8,658,778 times
Reputation: 6391
By the time of D-Day, the Soviets definatley had the Nazi's on the retreat. I think the Soviets would have whipped Germany without the Western Front being opened.
I think the real question is how well would they have done without American supplies, and around the clock bombing of the German infrastructure. I think they would have ultimatley won, but it might have dragged the war on another year or two.
The question really is - could Hitler whipped Russia without having the western front to worry about. The answer is no, as Napoleon found out before him. Just too much land, and the enemy was too stubborn. Germany would have had to advance to the Pacific, and still have to worry about subjegating an occupied land.
Would Russia have had suffient resources to have advanced to Berlin without Germany being at war with the west? Maybe not. It's not just the D-day front, but North Africa, the Atlantic Sea Campaign, the bottled up navel fleet, the Battle of Britian, the manpower needed to occupy the western countries, and as someone mentioned the strategic boming of their infrastructure (oil and munitions), etc. In turn, Russia got lots of mechanized equipment from the west. It could have well resulted in Germany overextending it's lines and unable to advance further (well, that's actually what happened), and Russia not having the combined arms mechanized armor and air power to engage in prolonged attacks to push back Germany, and ended up in some sort of WW1 war of attrition.
No. With out the west, the Soviets would not have been capable of destroying the Luftwaffe or the Kreigsmarine. That was something only America was capable of doing. The hydro facility in Norway that the Germans needed for their A-bomb project would not have been destroyed by the Tommy commandos.
And most importantly 3/4 of the Soviet Military lorries that were built in the west would have not been there. This would have left the Soviets fending off the Germans with horse drawn carts and locomotives. A throwback to the 19th century. It would have been total disaster for the USSR.
No. With out the west, the Soviets would not have been capable of destroying the Luftwaffe or the Kreigsmarine. That was something only America was capable of doing. The hydro facility in Norway that the Germans needed for their A-bomb project would not have been destroyed by the Tommy commandos.
And most importantly 3/4 of the Soviet Military lorries that were built in the west would have not been there. This would have left the Soviets fending off the Germans with horse drawn carts and locomotives. A throwback to the 19th century. It would have been total disaster for the USSR.
I don't know if the Soviets would have ultimately prevailed but if the didn't I don't think that it would have been for the reasons that you've stated. The German atomic bomb project was on the back burner as the Nazi pursued other projects, even with the destruction of the heavy water facility in Norway, they were still years from building a deliverable weapon.
As for the Luftwaffe, it is really silly to actually say that ONLY the Americans could take on the Germans air forces. The Soviets built some pretty impressive aircraft the ***-3 in particular could more than hold its own against the Me-109 and Soviet pilots were not shabby. As for the German Navy? Pretty irrelevant considering the geography for the Soviet Union.
Oh, and about those horse drawn carts, most of the German Army on the Eastern front relied on horses to move equipment. To say nothing of the fact that they worked better than mechanized vehicles in the mud and snow. By the way, seeing how the Soviets were so backwards, where did that T-34 tank come from?
Anyway...
The qualification for me is could the Soviets have held the Germans and then pushed them back without the material provided by the U.S. Canada (who always seem to get left out of these discussions) and Britain. That's the key component that makes me question the Soviet ability to win WW2 on their own.
I don't know if the Soviets would have ultimately prevailed but if the didn't I don't think that it would have been for the reasons that you've stated. The German atomic bomb project was on the back burner as the Nazi pursued other projects, even with the destruction of the heavy water facility in Norway, they were still years from building a deliverable weapon.
As for the Luftwaffe, it is really silly to actually say that ONLY the Americans could take on the Germans air forces. The Soviets built some pretty impressive aircraft the ***-3 in particular could more than hold its own against the Me-109 and Soviet pilots were not shabby. As for the German Navy? Pretty irrelevant considering the geography for the Soviet Union.
Oh, and about those horse drawn carts, most of the German Army on the Eastern front relied on horses to move equipment. To say nothing of the fact that they worked better than mechanized vehicles in the mud and snow. By the way, seeing how the Soviets were so backwards, where did that T-34 tank come from?
Anyway...
The qualification for me is could the Soviets have held the Germans and then pushed them back without the material provided by the U.S. Canada (who always seem to get left out of these discussions) and Britain. That's the key component that makes me question the Soviet ability to win WW2 on their own.
With out fighting the west, the Nazi's would have had plenty of time to persue an Atomb bomb. They would have got it done in 1947 if they were only fighting Russia. And they would have had V2's and V3's to deliver them.
The Luftwaffe was a menace over the skies of Europe. It was not until the sky was filled with b24, b-17, and p51 mustangs that the Luftwaffe met it's fate. The Soviet Union was not even capable of bombing Germany for most of the war. In fact, the Luftwaffe often used the Eastern Front as training ground for new fighter pilots, before they faced superior pilots that flew in the west.
As for the horse drawn carts Germany had: Exactly. That was the myth of the blitzkreig. It was a sharp daggar with an inside filled with mashed potato. And when all was said and done, they got steam rolled.
As for the t34, that speaks about Soviet production and lack of trucks. They were able to produce t34's en masse largely because they converted most of their tractor factories into tank factories. The USSR was a backward nation known for making tractors, not cars and trucks. This is why they had to rely heavily on the west for trucks. It is also noticable in the differnce in design of American and German tanks (which ran on gas), vs Soviet desil tanks (their tractors were desil too).
With out fighting the west, the Nazi's would have had plenty of time to persue an Atomb bomb. They would have got it done in 1947 if they were only fighting Russia. And they would have had V2's and V3's to deliver them.
The ecology-minded Third Reich would never have used an atomic bomb.
Nazis did not embrace what they considered to be "jew science" [like the
Manhattan Project.]
I don't think there is a correct answer to the question. It's merely speculation as to what might have happened but the West and the Russians allies did make a difference. Lend Lease was a very useful tool for the Russians as they threw their outdated armor and airplanes at the experienced Germans. The losses were incredible. Lend Lease made up for some of the lost equipment and it gave the Russians time to move their military production out of reach of German bombs.
Here's decent article on the subject: Did Russia Really Go It Alone? How Lend-Lease Helped the Soviets Defeat the Germans
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.
