URSS could have won WWII by itself
- Thread starter Varda
- Start date
Why not tell us why you think that Russia could have done that? You want us to discuss something that we don't understand why you would think that they could of. If you would please share with us why you think they could have won alone then do so , that way we can discuss why you are wrong and point out where you are wrong. Thanks.
Don't forget that Russia wasn't attacked first at the start of WW2 so Russia didn't enter the war until much later after many other countries were already at war with Germany.
I'll bite.
USSR (Right?) against Germany, Alone for the entirety of 1941(summer) to ...finish?
Germany wins, absolutely. Barbarossa is a success because Germany wasn't forced to fuck around with operation sealion and building Uboats and adventures in north afrika.
In short Russia gets the full capabilities of the German armed forces thrown against it along with (and more importantly if you really know how operations work) ALL the high commands attention to it. A full year of planning. The east front is given all initiatives until Russia is destroyed.
Russia owes everyone else(starting with the British Commonwealth and friends, and then the U.S in 1942) as much as we owe them for victory in WWII.
USSR (Right?) against Germany, Alone for the entirety of 1941(summer) to ...finish?
Germany wins, absolutely. Barbarossa is a success because Germany wasn't forced to fuck around with operation sealion and building Uboats and adventures in north afrika.
In short Russia gets the full capabilities of the German armed forces thrown against it along with (and more importantly if you really know how operations work) ALL the high commands attention to it. A full year of planning. The east front is given all initiatives until Russia is destroyed.
Russia owes everyone else(starting with the British Commonwealth and friends, and then the U.S in 1942) as much as we owe them for victory in WWII.
Germany didn't want to go to war with Russia to start with.
superstring01
Moderator
Mmmmm. Yeah she did. The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was a ruse--for both nations--from the beginning. It merely was a tool to buy each player enough time to prepare for war. The Germans merely needed less time.
~String
Hitler could only get a hardon after he attacked Russia finally. It was in his book. 99% of Germany did not want war with Russia, true, but then their opinion didn't matter did it?
Actually from what I recall it was that Russia was amassing its troops along the Eastern front of Germany which looked like it was about to attack Germany and that is when Germany attacked Russia.
Yup and that was exactly what Germany wanted. Instead of wisely using the captured lands of East Poland, Baltics and even their own massive Pripyat Marshes and land as a massive warning /bufferzone...they massed up their professional army close to the border and promptly lost it, Blitzkrieg style when most of it was encircled in the first few days. Then they had to rebuild their army while the German Army had to drive over all the massive land. they could have started the fight farther back - been prepared - negated surprise and force the Germans to fight early on with long supply lines.
But Stalin was getting played like a fiddle by Hitler right up until Barbarossa started.
But Stalin was getting played like a fiddle by Hitler right up until Barbarossa started.
spidergoat
Valued Senior Member
Possibly, but it would have lasted much longer, and there is still the question of Japan.
My opinion is, with more resources at their disposal and more planning and more Strategic and Operational initiative for Germany, Russians would be only fighting a guerrilla war from Siberia by Jan 1942. Yes they could deal with partisans at that point no problem. Also Japan would have probably thrown in at that point and started closing up the east.
There are some fundamental differences between Napoleon's failure and Hitler's. "Russian winter" does not sum it up.
There are some fundamental differences between Napoleon's failure and Hitler's. "Russian winter" does not sum it up.
Well, the thread title says they could have won WWII alone, not just defeated Germany. So since USA and China and British Empire are apparently out of the picture, USSR would have to contend with the entire Axis on its own - so I'd expect Japan to invade their eastern flank after locking up China.
There's also some serious question of how "WWII" would even come about without involving more of the Allies than the USSR, in the first place. Germany somehow leaps over eastern Europe and directly attacks USSR? OP needs some refinement to be serious.
Despite Russia's vast industrial and military improvements during the course of the war, Germany's raw industrial production still outmatched them virtually 'til the very end. The biggest reason Germany had trouble matching Russia's quantities of tanks and weaponry was because it focused its efforts on developing fancy new weapons systems instead of perfecting the mass manufacturing of existing systems, which is what the Russians tended to focus on with systems like their famous T-42 tanks.
I've read that the USSR, for all its seemingly endless supplies of resources, labour and troops, was damn near exhausted of its supplies by the end, and the only reason it didn't collapse was because they were able to recruit fresh troops and labour from the territories they liberated as the Germans withdrew. Without the western, Italian and North African fronts for Hitler to worry about, and no western aid or assistance to the Soviet Army, Stalin didn't stand a chance despite all the stupid mistakes on the German side. For all the glorification of the naval war between the US and Japan, I've heard something like 90% of America's military industrial resources were actually spent on the war in Europe.
I've read that the USSR, for all its seemingly endless supplies of resources, labour and troops, was damn near exhausted of its supplies by the end, and the only reason it didn't collapse was because they were able to recruit fresh troops and labour from the territories they liberated as the Germans withdrew. Without the western, Italian and North African fronts for Hitler to worry about, and no western aid or assistance to the Soviet Army, Stalin didn't stand a chance despite all the stupid mistakes on the German side. For all the glorification of the naval war between the US and Japan, I've heard something like 90% of America's military industrial resources were actually spent on the war in Europe.
If it wasn't the Western Front and the Africa Campaigns, Nazi Germany would have had the strength to take down USSR's industrial and political centers, they came damn close.
You guys have to remember that if the other allies did not participate, Hitler would have a more concentrated force to deal with the soviets. There was also no way that the USSR could have beaten Germany ALONG WITH Italy and Japan.
You guys have to remember that if the other allies did not participate, Hitler would have a more concentrated force to deal with the soviets. There was also no way that the USSR could have beaten Germany ALONG WITH Italy and Japan.
Actually I think Italy would have gotten in the way more than helped, they probably would have been charged with securing the southern flank and they probably would have found a spectacular way to screw it up. Some real idiots were running that show under Mussolini, their ability to screw the pooch was legendary. Germany and Japan though, they would have rolled the Russians up like a carpet. I've read that Hitler was quite upset when the Japanese drew the US into the war instead of going after the eastern USSR (which would have also solved Japan's oil shortages after America cut them off).
Well thanks for bringing up such an interesting topic while you were hammered
