The Nazis



luvulongtime said:
don't invade Russia, mass produce the panzer mk4 instead of wasting resources on the panther and tiger would have been 2 decent ideas




and the Mongols under Genghis and Alexanders companion cavalry
Click to expand...


agreed on the panzer iv, but if he does'nt invade in 41 he'll find the bear knocking on his door in 42
 
Scotty said:
agreed on the panzer iv, but if he does'nt invade in 41 he'll find the bear knocking on his door in 42
Click to expand...



no way they struggled to overwhelm the Finns the Red Army was purged to fuck. remember it's easier to defend than attack the Jerries would have held them easily if they'd attacked
 
luvulongtime said:
no way they struggled to overwhelm the Finns the Red Army was purged to fuck. remember it's easier to defend than attack the Jerries would have held them easily if they'd attacked
Click to expand...

all the soviet defensive lines would have been finished by 42, the purges were all done, and quantity has a quality all of its own

whether it would have worked is the question..

ask yourself why Hitler decided to attack in 41, there are lots of reasons but one of them is he knew his army was'nt going to get much bigger or better than the 130 divisions or so that he had for Barbarossa and he was certain that if he waited a year those 175 russian divisions would have been 300 russian divisions in 42
 
E M P I R E said:
They also could've taken Moscow if Hitler hadn't been so determined to take Stalingrad and halted the advance and diverted his lads south. If Moscow fell then who knows.
Click to expand...
There were loads of variables on the eastern front. In all honesty the one I think would have gave the germans most chance of victory was to sack off leningrad and moscow. Take stalingrad and the caucuses oil fields then sit in for winter. If they'd done that the soviets wouldn't have had any oil to put their tanks on the battlefield in spring.
 
Aituk7 said:
There were loads of variables on the eastern front. In all honesty the one I think would have gave the germans most chance of victory was to sack off leningrad and moscow. Take stalingrad and the caucuses oil fields then sit in for winter. If they'd done that the soviets wouldn't have had any oil to put their tanks on the battlefield in spring.
Click to expand...

sack off Leningrad - yes

but if you take Moscow you cripple the Soviet rail network which makes it much more difficult for the Soviets to shift around troops, etc which makes your job much easier

and i'll point out again the distances involved mean you aint getting to the Baku oilfields in just one campaign season (plus i've just been reading an AH story where the germans attempt to do that after bullying Turkey into the axis which mentions that it was snowing in the Caucasus in late August)
 
Might have had a chance if Hitler didn't make his subordinates compete with each other so much, e.g there were about 10 different code breaking departments which would have had a lot more success if they had cooperated with each other. If the regime had been less brutal, less elements of the Abwehr & the Wehrmacht would have passed on info to the Allies.
 
Skellington said:
Prior to the war, Stalin had been convinced that an invasion would come from the West. It had happened repeatedly through Russia's history, and in the Russian Civil War the western powers had supported the Whites.

He dragged the country forward through industrialization and collectivisation programmes, with some brutal results. But if he hadn't had the foresight to do this Russia wouldn't have been in any position to repel the Germans and they would have won on the Eastern Front.
Click to expand...

Think some of it comes back to how backwards Russia was in WW1?

It's a while since I read it so might be a bit off, but Antony Beevor in Stalingrad reckons that when reports were coming in about the Germans attacking from the West one of the reasons the Russians were so slow to react was because Stalin flat out refused to accept that Hitler would go against their pact.
 
What if Hitler stopped after annexing Austria and the Sudatenland?
Would the Russians eventually invade Germany and if so would we have sided with the Nazis?
Would there have been an uneasy cold war peace between the Nazis and Soviets?
Would the Japanese still have provoked the USA into war?
 
Richy Fingers said:
Nah. The Russians overwhelmed them.

Just think, only half a million Brits died during WW2, where as 27 million Russians died. 11 million of those were soldiers.

We and the US like to think we won the war but really it was the Russians literally throwing themselves at bullets. Without them attacking from the East, Germany would have steamrollered Europe.
Click to expand...
Hitlers main mistake
Add that to the unforgiving climate
 
Horatio Moustache said:
Think some of it comes back to how backwards Russia was in WW1?

It's a while since I read it so might be a bit off, but Antony Beevor in Stalingrad reckons that when reports were coming in about the Germans attacking from the West one of the reasons the Russians were so slow to react was because Stalin flat out refused to accept that Hitler would go against their pact.
Click to expand...

thats one of the strange things - we had warned him, his own spies had warned him..yet he still chose to ignore everyone

in fact, german panzers going east passed russian shipments heading west at the opening of Barbarossa
 

Back
Top