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.
I could be wrong, but didn’t the Russians only develop one from espionage on the U.S? I honestly don’t know the history of that. But did they ever actually independently discover it? Or did they just fill in the gaps or steal the solution outright?
The espionage group from Cambridge known as the "Cambridge Five" supplied substantial and important technical information to the Russians. There's an interesting movie Red Joan about an additional Cambridge scientist who provided stolen documents to the Soviets. She was a grandmother when uncovered and was a spy for forty years.
Although debated, Barbarossa is sometimes said to be delayed because of Germany’s invasion of Greece (alongside the worse than normal spring flooding) where they were fighting the British commonwealth after Italy’s stalemate.
If Barbarossa starts 4 weeks earlier, the Russian winter probably wouldn’t have closed in so catastrophically and the soviets would have had even less time to rally for the critical battle at Stalingrad.
Again, this scenario assumes “no help” from the British or Americans.
Napoleon was in Moscow.
Russia was too big for Hitler, he did not have sufficient resources to do it. May be if he had different attitude toward Russian population... From technical point of view Russian arms were more suitable for Russian conditions.
Nazis were fighting wars on two fronts across two continents and were giving the Soviets hell. even then. if they had focused first on the eastern front, I think they defeat them. Also, fighting in Russia during the winter wasn't smart. Still, Russia was way too ill-prepared and I'm sure their was citizenry who resented Stalin and would have plotted against him.
How much of that logistic advantage was built on American and British bombing weakening Germany’s industrial base and tying resources down in northern Africa and the Battle of Britain? Was the invasion of Italy effecting German forces? In other words, Italy withdrew the 8th army forces from Russia to Rome in 1943. Not to mention German forces committed to northern Italy.
And I already mentioned the forces received from
The East from Siberia and tying down Japan.
You still think the Germans lose Stalingrad if they’re freed up in Italy and Western Europe, have access to Northern Africa, no longer have 1000 bomber runs leveling their cities, AND the Japanese are tying up Russian forces in a potential second front or just the threat of a potential front?
my thoughts exactly! Not having to fight multiple enemies would enable Germany to redeploy much of their resources to the eastern front. Moreover, doing so may have helped the Germans win access to Russian oil fields, thereby, lessening the need to have Rommel in Africa seeking petroleum.
Short answer, the Nazis would have developed the atom bomb and used it liberally on Russia.
In a conventional war, it would have eventually been a stalemate. I don't think the Germans could have successfully occupied Russia over any appreciable length of time.
The question is how much of Russia did Hitler really want? I say he wants mostly European Russia and Black Sea access. I think the soviet states that are now independent countries would have become allies knowing hey get rid of Stalin. East Russia, they manage with Japanese help because Japan gets access to Asian oilfields and no longer worry about U.S sources. Probably if Japan and Germany had both focused on taking Stalin down, Japan doesn't attack the U.S. because Japan has a new reliable energy source.
Just shaking my head. Yes, Russian had more OUTDATED tanks and airplanes. What good were they, if fuel supplies, repair stations, ammunition were "strategically" located several hundred kilometers away and became unavailable, when military action started? When, say, fortifications had turrets installed, that would not match available machine guns? Or, parts for weapons will not match what was used? Take that "firewood and water" and start tossing it at the enemy? Do you have any idea, how widely spread sabotage was in the Red Army before war? It is IMMENSE bravery of the people, who managed to sacrifice their lives and stop the GERMAN GRINDER (and, really, it was the ENTIRE Europe force) with what was available, to figure out, who is the internal foe, rid of all of them, create new, patriotic and smart cadre, and turn the war around.
Wikipedia my...., what a "reliable and nothing but the truth" source....
Just shaking my head. Yes, Russian had more OUTDATED tanks and airplanes. What good were they, if fuel supplies, repair stations, ammunition were "strategically" located several hundred kilometers away and became unavailable, when military action started? When, say, fortifications had turrets installed, that would not match available machine guns? Or, parts for weapons will not match what was used? Take that "firewood and water" and start tossing it at the enemy? Do you have any idea, how widely spread sabotage was in the Red Army before war? It is IMMENSE bravery of the people, who managed to sacrifice their lives and stop the GERMAN GRINDER (and, really, it was the ENTIRE Europe force) with what was available, to figure out, who is the internal foe, rid of all of them, create new, patriotic and smart cadre, and turn the war around.
Wikipedia my...., what a "reliable and nothing but the truth" source....
Maybe you can shake your head hard enough so you can actually refute what I said in response to you and your ridiculous point about the timing of the western allies second front?
But the point the person was making was if America wasn’t involved, it would be a race between Germany and Russia to create a bomb. Who cares what American leadership thinks then?
It wasn't just 'Americans' that created the 'bomb', it was a joint effort by many, in fact I believe some of the scientists envolved where actually German, here is a list of the most prominent scientists involved:-
J. Robert Oppenheimer - USA
Edward Teller - Hungarian
Leo Szilard - Hungarian
William Penney - British
Enrico Fermi - Italian
Ernest Orlando Lawrenceo - USA
Otto Frisch - Austrian
Niels Bohr - Danish
Felix Bloch - Swiss
James Franck - German
Emilio Segrè - Italian
Klaus Fuchs - German
Hans Bethe - German
John von Neumann - Hungarian
This is just a small sample of the scientists involved in the Manhatten Project, as you can see a real 'multi-national' effort.
The question is would it have been just as bad if the Russians had 'the bomb' before the Germans and Allies?
It wasn't just 'Americans' that created the 'bomb', it was a joint effort by many, in fact I believe some of the scientists envolved where actually German, here is a list of the most prominent scientists involved:-
J. Robert Oppenheimer - USA
Edward Teller - Hungarian
Leo Szilard - Hungarian
William Penney - British
Enrico Fermi - Italian
Ernest Orlando Lawrenceo - USA
Otto Frisch - Austrian
Niels Bohr - Danish
Felix Bloch - Swiss
James Franck - German
Emilio Segrè - Italian
Klaus Fuchs - German
Hans Bethe - German
John von Neumann - Hungarian
This is just a small sample of the scientists involved in the Manhatten Project, as you can see a real 'multi-national' effort.
The question is would it have been just as bad if the Russians had 'the bomb' before the Germans and Allies?
in 1945 Soviet troops were a few days from anywhere in Europe. They did not need a bomb, US used bombs to stop Soviets in China in 1945.
Just shaking my head. Yes, Russian had more OUTDATED tanks and airplanes. What good were they, if fuel supplies, repair stations, ammunition were "strategically" located several hundred kilometers away and became unavailable, when military action started? When, say, fortifications had turrets installed, that would not match available machine guns? Or, parts for weapons will not match what was used? Take that "firewood and water" and start tossing it at the enemy? Do you have any idea, how widely spread sabotage was in the Red Army before war? It is IMMENSE bravery of the people, who managed to sacrifice their lives and stop the GERMAN GRINDER (and, really, it was the ENTIRE Europe force) with what was available, to figure out, who is the internal foe, rid of all of them, create new, patriotic and smart cadre, and turn the war around.
Wikipedia my...., what a "reliable and nothing but the truth" source....
Russian tanks were much better than German in 1941, they required 4-5 longer periods before overhaul and service, better designs , had good new airplanes, even trained German pilots before June 1941.
The way Red Army behaved in the beginning smells like high command betrayal.
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.
