Russian historians have been arguing about this for years, and will go on doing so, as the truth is hard to uncover, and the most important archives in Russia are still not open to the public. In any case, militarily, the Soviets were in no condition to attack in '41. Suggesting Stalin had a different strategic "plan" for Europe that was more offensive-minded beyond the purely defensive one assumed in the west, is one thing, but suggesting the Red Army could attack in '41 is another matter entirely. Their Army wasn't on "alert", it may have been in "offensive" postions, but Red Army doctrine at the time was always an offensive minded one, so the Red Army being in an "offensive posture" doesn't really prove anything. And other facts suggest something else, say for example the fact that German reconnaisance planes were continuosly over-flying the Soviets but they did nothing about it, allegedly by order of Stalin. Now if you were planning an attack, the last thing you would do is allow the defender to get a good look at your forces and their dispostions. As far as the Germans were concerned, they saw no threat from the Soviet forces facing them, and if there was a plan to attack Germany, they never heard of one.Originally posted by JustAGame:
We now have evidence that Stalin was already moving his own forces to the border for his own invasion in July of 41.
Most importantly though, it is not Stalin's actions that are important here, it is Hitler's actions that are important, as you are trying to imply Hitler acted in "self-defense" when attacking the USSR, and there is no evidence that I've ever heard to substantiate that. In hindsight, we know from what Hitler has said that war with the USSR was inevitable, and the aggressor would be Germany, His comtempt for "Slavs" was almost as bad as his hatred of Jews. Mein Kamphf proves that. Whatever Stalin's plans were, and whatever position, offensive or defensive, the Red Army was in, this war was a war of aggression started by Hitler. What is also in hindsight now, is the extreme unlikelyhood that Germany could win the war in the East, at least after the German advance in '41 was halted before Leningrad and Moscow.
At this point, Hitler is criticized for diverting a large portion of the invading armies away from Moscow.
And rightly critisized. Look at a map, the southern regions are huge and would leave forces there under threat of being out flanked to the north. In fact what we're talking about here is largely what happened in 1942, and that year ended with a Soviet counterattack to the north that destroyed one army at Stalingrad, and forced the Germans to start retreating from the southern Caucases to avoid being cut off. History proves Hitler wrong, he never could have held the south if he allowed the Soviets to hold Leningrad and Moscow to the north.
Had his high command been less stubborn and undisciplined and followed the plan, who knows who would have won.
I know who would have won, the Soviets. Allowing the Soviets to keep the two most important cities to Soviet industry while running off to the south and trying to hold a vast amount of space in a time of mobile warfare against an enemy that was numerically equivalent was folly.
The original plan was genius in all respects.
Hardly.