Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: rogo727

I respect your point of view.

ORIGINAL: rogo727

Frankly that's why I love history. There is always a debate. Different points of views.

ORIGINAL: rogo727

Lol I have no response to that corporal errrr sargent Steiner!

ORIGINAL: parusski

ORIGINAL: wodin

I also believe Russia at some point would have invaded Germany.

The problem was Germany wasn't ready to take on Russia in '41. They had squandered the Luftwaffe over Britain and needed time to replace loses from the previous campaigns, plus their tanks where not upto the mark to take on Russian tanks, maybe in '43 they'd have been far better prepared, however if Russia was building up for an attack in the near future they might not have had that amount of time.

I feel though if they had held off for a year or so and given Rommel more support instead in Africa and they managed to push up through Iraq\Iran things would have been different as they'd be close to their furthest point they got to in the attack against Russia with probably far fewer casualties. Russia would have been in a tricky position then from the West and South. The Germans may have brought Turkey into the War on their side aswell at that point. I'm sure Hitler was peeved with Japan for attacking the USA instead of helping him with Russia, as soon as they did that even in this scenario he would be in trouble no matter what.

I think you are correct that Russia would have invaded Germany. Hitler was only seeing want he wanted over the Japanese attack on America. He wanted to embarrass Roosevelt, in his speech declaring war on the U.S. Hitler said:

"National Socialism came to power in Germany in the same year as Roosevelt was elected President…While an unprecedented revival of economic life, culture and art took place in Germany under National Socialist leadership, President Roosevelt did not succeed in bringing about even the slightest improvement in his own country."

Hitler also thought, foolishly, that America would go after Japan first, diverting it's shipping to the Pacific. Apparently he thought this would make his war in Europe easier.

These things just give you a glimpse into Hitler's way of thinking, which is in indicative of how he thought of Russia.

If Hitlers gambles hadn't pulled off so well as they did in Poland and the War in the West maybe he wouldn't have ended up thinking he was a military genius and his Generals where on the whole incompetent. His messiah complex hindered Germany from '42 onwards, you could say it got in the way in the first winter in Russia aswell. I's all if's and but's and you have a dominoe effect if you change an event.

ORIGINAL: british exil

If Hitler had not been so obsessed with his Ayran idealogies, the people living in the east were worth nothing in his point of view, then he might have seen the benefits of using the men in his "freed" territories, the Baltic states and Ukraine would have been more than willing to fight against the Soviet forces.

But due to his complex he felt it better to make a possible ally into a competent partisan force. Depleting forces to protect the rear areas.


Hindsight is always nice, but I'm sure if he had listened to his generals, history as we know it, would have been different.

Mat

If Hitler had not been so obsessed with his Ayran idealogies, the people living in the east were worth nothing in his point of view, then he might have seen the benefits of using the men in his "freed" territories, the Baltic states and Ukraine would have been more than willing to fight against the Soviet forces.

.....but I'm sure if he had listened to his generals, history as we know it, would have been different.

Warspite1

quote:

If Hitler had not been so obsessed with his Ayran idealogies, the people living in the east were worth nothing in his point of view, then he might have seen the benefits of using the men in his "freed" territories, the Baltic states and Ukraine would have been more than willing to fight against the Soviet forces.



True, but as with Hitler's decision to invade the USSR, it was never going to happen; its like wondering what would have happened if Hitler had used Jewish scientists to help with his rocket and nuclear programs....

I'm not sure I agree with that line of thinking. There were some top quality generals of course, but I do not think the General Staff was the "paragon of virtue" that some make out. After all, as just one example, if Hitler had given a free reign to his generals in May 1940 - and the plan they wanted to use - how would the war in the west have panned out, with no attack through the Ardennes?

ORIGINAL: parusski

Warspite1

quote:

If Hitler had not been so obsessed with his Ayran idealogies, the people living in the east were worth nothing in his point of view, then he might have seen the benefits of using the men in his "freed" territories, the Baltic states and Ukraine would have been more than willing to fight against the Soviet forces.



True, but as with Hitler's decision to invade the USSR, it was never going to happen; its like wondering what would have happened if Hitler had used Jewish scientists to help with his rocket and nuclear programs....

The Baltic States and Ukraine would have been hugely beneficial(in my brilliant opinion) to Germany. But Hitler despised ALL slavs. Case closed.

I'm not sure I agree with that line of thinking. There were some top quality generals of course, but I do not think the General Staff was the "paragon of virtue" that some make out. After all, as just one example, if Hitler had given a free reign to his generals in May 1940 - and the plan they wanted to use - how would the war in the west have panned out, with no attack through the Ardennes?

True as far as it goes. But if Hitler had allowed Bock, Hoth and Guderian to move on Moscow several weeks earlier then things might have turned out differently. I think the only time the war in the east was even close was through August 1941.

.......But Hitler despised ALL slavs. Case closed.

But if Hitler had allowed Bock, Hoth and Guderian to move on Moscow several weeks earlier then things might have turned out differently. I think the only time the war in the east was even close was through August 1941.

Maybe. Like you, I think the Germans had a very small window of opportunity - but even then I'm not sure the Germans could have won given their strategic mistake of leaving Britain undefeated before turning east...

ORIGINAL: nate25

All right, what I want to know is this:

Who gave Steiner the books to crib lines out of?

Everyone knows he loves to hang out with the Russophiles over at the WitE forums.

Lot of revisionist history being read over there. [:)]

ORIGINAL: nate25

Well you obviously don't realize how important horseshoes were the Wehrmacht, or the ability to issue them to each individual gun team or kitchen wagon as we see fit.

And every body knows the NKVD border regiments were issued tables with fixed legs, not folders. [:)]

ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy

I am currently reading Operation Barbarossa. One thing I am not clear on is why Hitler attacked Russia in the first place. If anyone can enlighten me I'd be grateful.

The book is detailed but seems a little biased. It makes the Germans seem like a bunch of infighting buffoons and I know that even though they had their issues they were not as incompetent as the book makes them out to be.

The Stalin purges of 37. Dang, that was brutal! [X(]

Could the Russians have been fought to a standstill much farther from Berlin? Yes.