Posted: Sat May 26, 2001 9:47 pm
Extremely interesting topic. Suvurov's The Icebreaker is a very interesting work on this topic, good for weapons and curious decisions even his historical arguments are a mixture of falsehood, distortion and extremely interesting facts and arguments.
Walter Post is better at arguing the case (if you read German) and some other people also argue the case.
My conclusion having read all the literature I can get my hands on is that the key issue is why did Stalin ally with Hitler to conquer Poland with the probable answer being to trigger the German French/British war so that when they were exhausted he could attack the Germans and wipe them out making European communism at least triumphant.
Fits diplomacy, weapons production, and communist theory.
That plan fell apart with the quick German victory in France.
After that the Soviets put the first echolon of their army in an attack position (thus easily surrounded and destroyed by the germans) with masses of tanks and planes at the front of the front.
But were they going to attack? That I do not know and no conclusive evidence has yet been offered to say they would. Only the disposition of their forces with Suvorov arguing they could not have survived the winter without attacking (one of his most interesting points).
Maybe, maybe not. But if Hitler had of invaded England, or sent large amounts of forces to North Africa, Malta, Gibralta, from July 1941 the Soviets would have been ready to attack with a massive advantage in forces, armaments etc.
Matt Buttsworth
PS - I am not a supporter of the prevenative war thesis as nothing indicates Hitler new about these plans, weaponry, dispositions etc. The Germans were astounded by the quantity of troops, weapons they captured in the first weeks of the war and before that had dismissed the Russians as poorly led, poorly armed and easily conquered.
If the Germans did beat the Russians to the punch by a couple of weeks it was a matter of pure luck.
I can give the sources for anyone interested in this topic. Most are in German. MB
Walter Post is better at arguing the case (if you read German) and some other people also argue the case.
My conclusion having read all the literature I can get my hands on is that the key issue is why did Stalin ally with Hitler to conquer Poland with the probable answer being to trigger the German French/British war so that when they were exhausted he could attack the Germans and wipe them out making European communism at least triumphant.
Fits diplomacy, weapons production, and communist theory.
That plan fell apart with the quick German victory in France.
After that the Soviets put the first echolon of their army in an attack position (thus easily surrounded and destroyed by the germans) with masses of tanks and planes at the front of the front.
But were they going to attack? That I do not know and no conclusive evidence has yet been offered to say they would. Only the disposition of their forces with Suvorov arguing they could not have survived the winter without attacking (one of his most interesting points).
Maybe, maybe not. But if Hitler had of invaded England, or sent large amounts of forces to North Africa, Malta, Gibralta, from July 1941 the Soviets would have been ready to attack with a massive advantage in forces, armaments etc.
Matt Buttsworth
PS - I am not a supporter of the prevenative war thesis as nothing indicates Hitler new about these plans, weaponry, dispositions etc. The Germans were astounded by the quantity of troops, weapons they captured in the first weeks of the war and before that had dismissed the Russians as poorly led, poorly armed and easily conquered.
If the Germans did beat the Russians to the punch by a couple of weeks it was a matter of pure luck.
I can give the sources for anyone interested in this topic. Most are in German. MB