|
Post by TheGoodMan19 on Jun 22, 2020 21:06:20 GMT
79 years ago, Germany and her allies invaded the USSR. The opening page of one of the darkest chapters in human history.
Could it have worked? There was no real endgame. The A-A Line (Arkhangelsk to Astrakhan) or the Urals is usually the objective for the Nazis. But would hte Soviets have fought on from Siberia? Could they have carried on the war? Even with support from the US. Supplies would have come through Vladivostok, provided the Japanese allowed it. Certainly, it wouldn't have lasted. As Alexander, the Mongols, Napoleon et al found out, it was easier to take lands than keep them.
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Jun 23, 2020 12:42:11 GMT
To be fair to Alexander, he died with his empire intact.
To the chagrin of his generals, he planned to transfer population from the east to west and vice versa in attempt to harmonize the different cultures of his empire and went and married a Babylonian princess to make himself more acceptable to his subjects.
The real problem was that he didn't set up a proper system of succession and if the legend is true, he decided that his empire should go to the strong which caused years of war between Alexander's generals.
As for the question in the subject, Germany had no chance of winning a war of attrition with the Soviet Union. They had more manpower, more equipment and more oil so the only chance is to win a quick war. Maybe starting the invasion earlier, be prepared for winter, achieving all three goals of Barbarossa. Maybe if Richard Sorge was unable to provide the intelligence that Japan wasn't planning to attack Siberia thus forcing Stalin to keep the Siberian reserves in the East.
Or maybe if Japan puts pressure on Soviet Union while Germany attacks. So there is a lot of ifs.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jun 23, 2020 18:08:21 GMT
If you mean could it have resulted in another quick victory for Germany, then probably not. Too ambitious.
However, if the disaster at Stalingrad had been avoided, and the Germans had gone into defensive mode in '42, who knows? At the least it might have led to a longer war but with similar results. Germany came out with jets, rockets, etc. toward the end. Some say they even had flying saucers operational. They had a submarine that could make 22 knots surfaced or submerged, reload all of its six torpedo tubes faster than their older sub could reload one of its five, and it was almost undetectable. 150 were built but only four were at sea when Germany surrendered. Allied countries grabbed them up and pressed them into their own postwar sub forces. It wasn't too little but it was too late. Personally, I think that pissing away the Sixth Army at Stalingrad (and part of the Fourth Panzer Army in an unsuccessful relief attempt) contributed to the German capitulation in '45. One more year might have made a difference.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Jun 23, 2020 19:02:56 GMT
If you mean could it have resulted in another quick victory for Germany, then probably not. Too ambitious. However, if the disaster at Stalingrad had been avoided, and the Germans had gone into defensive mode in '42, who knows? At the least it might have led to a longer war but with similar results. Germany came out with jets, rockets, etc. toward the end. Some say they even had flying saucers operational. They had a submarine that could make 22 knots surfaced or submerged, reload all of its six torpedo tubes faster than their older sub could reload one of its five, and it was almost undetectable. 150 were built but only four were at sea when Germany surrendered. Allied countries grabbed them up and pressed them into their own postwar sub forces. It wasn't too little but it was too late. Personally, I think that pissing away the Sixth Army at Stalingrad (and part of the Fourth Panzer Army in an unsuccessful relief attempt) contributed to the German capitulation in '45. One more year might have made a difference. Yeah and they're wacko.
|
|
|
Post by TheGoodMan19 on Jun 23, 2020 20:21:32 GMT
To be fair to Alexander, he died with his empire intact. To the chagrin of his generals, he planned to transfer population from the east to west and vice versa in attempt to harmonize the different cultures of his empire and went and married a Babylonian princess to make himself more acceptable to his subjects. The real problem was that he didn't set up a proper system of succession and if the legend is true, he decided that his empire should go to the strong which caused years of war between Alexander's generals. As for the question in the subject, Germany had no chance of winning a war of attrition with the Soviet Union. They had more manpower, more equipment and more oil so the only chance is to win a quick war. Maybe starting the invasion earlier, be prepared for winter, achieving all three goals of Barbarossa. Maybe if Richard Sorge was unable to provide the intelligence that Japan wasn't planning to attack Siberia thus forcing Stalin to keep the Siberian reserves in the East. Or maybe if Japan puts pressure on Soviet Union while Germany attacks. So there is a lot of ifs. Alexander's empire was intact because he died so young. It was already getting shaky in the west when Alex was in the East, the Spartans rebelled. And the macedonain army had had enough.I think it would have been pulled apart, even if he had lived another 30 years (his never ending campaigns would have wrecked the empire during his lifetime anyway). Maybe if his son and been a carbon copy, but how many Alexander's have come around. Empires like that, multi national states that were thrown together in a few years, can't last. The Mongols wisely divided up Genghis Khan's empire.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jun 24, 2020 1:44:15 GMT
If you mean could it have resulted in another quick victory for Germany, then probably not. Too ambitious. However, if the disaster at Stalingrad had been avoided, and the Germans had gone into defensive mode in '42, who knows? At the least it might have led to a longer war but with similar results. Germany came out with jets, rockets, etc. toward the end. Some say they even had flying saucers operational. They had a submarine that could make 22 knots surfaced or submerged, reload all of its six torpedo tubes faster than their older sub could reload one of its five, and it was almost undetectable. 150 were built but only four were at sea when Germany surrendered. Allied countries grabbed them up and pressed them into their own postwar sub forces. It wasn't too little but it was too late. Personally, I think that pissing away the Sixth Army at Stalingrad (and part of the Fourth Panzer Army in an unsuccessful relief attempt) contributed to the German capitulation in '45. One more year might have made a difference. Yeah and they're wacko. Dr. Carol Rosin said that Dr. Von Braun told her the Nazis had a flying saucer program, although he was restricted to rocketry and wasn't allowed to know anything about it.
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Jun 24, 2020 9:28:32 GMT
If you mean could it have resulted in another quick victory for Germany, then probably not. Too ambitious. However, if the disaster at Stalingrad had been avoided, and the Germans had gone into defensive mode in '42, who knows? At the least it might have led to a longer war but with similar results. Germany came out with jets, rockets, etc. toward the end. Some say they even had flying saucers operational. They had a submarine that could make 22 knots surfaced or submerged, reload all of its six torpedo tubes faster than their older sub could reload one of its five, and it was almost undetectable. 150 were built but only four were at sea when Germany surrendered. Allied countries grabbed them up and pressed them into their own postwar sub forces. It wasn't too little but it was too late. Personally, I think that pissing away the Sixth Army at Stalingrad (and part of the Fourth Panzer Army in an unsuccessful relief attempt) contributed to the German capitulation in '45. One more year might have made a difference. Yeah and they're wacko. Those rumors probably started with the multiple sightings of foo fighters by allied pilots. Although it was confirmed that both Japanese and German pilots saw the same phenomenon.
|
|
|
Post by Morgana on Jun 24, 2020 10:33:14 GMT
To be fair to Alexander, he died with his empire intact. To the chagrin of his generals, he planned to transfer population from the east to west and vice versa in attempt to harmonize the different cultures of his empire and went and married a Babylonian princess to make himself more acceptable to his subjects. The real problem was that he didn't set up a proper system of succession and if the legend is true, he decided that his empire should go to the strong which caused years of war between Alexander's generals. As for the question in the subject, Germany had no chance of winning a war of attrition with the Soviet Union. They had more manpower, more equipment and more oil so the only chance is to win a quick war. Maybe starting the invasion earlier, be prepared for winter, achieving all three goals of Barbarossa. Maybe if Richard Sorge was unable to provide the intelligence that Japan wasn't planning to attack Siberia thus forcing Stalin to keep the Siberian reserves in the East. Or maybe if Japan puts pressure on Soviet Union while Germany attacks. So there is a lot of ifs. You're right that Alexander's Empire was intact when he died, but he married a Persian Princess, not a Babylonian one. In fact, he married two. His wish was to bring harmony to all the different peoples of his Empire. Most people think he married Roxane out of love, or lust because she didn't come from an important family. I've often thought 'if only'. If only he had chosen a successor or a protector for his child until he reached a majority.
|
|
|
Post by TheGoodMan19 on Jun 24, 2020 20:06:09 GMT
To be fair to Alexander, he died with his empire intact. To the chagrin of his generals, he planned to transfer population from the east to west and vice versa in attempt to harmonize the different cultures of his empire and went and married a Babylonian princess to make himself more acceptable to his subjects. The real problem was that he didn't set up a proper system of succession and if the legend is true, he decided that his empire should go to the strong which caused years of war between Alexander's generals. As for the question in the subject, Germany had no chance of winning a war of attrition with the Soviet Union. They had more manpower, more equipment and more oil so the only chance is to win a quick war. Maybe starting the invasion earlier, be prepared for winter, achieving all three goals of Barbarossa. Maybe if Richard Sorge was unable to provide the intelligence that Japan wasn't planning to attack Siberia thus forcing Stalin to keep the Siberian reserves in the East. Or maybe if Japan puts pressure on Soviet Union while Germany attacks. So there is a lot of ifs. You're right that Alexander's Empire was intact when he died, but he married a Persian Princess, not a Babylonian one. In fact, he married two. His wish was to bring harmony to all the different peoples of his Empire. Most people think he married Roxane out of love, or lust because she didn't come from an important family. I've often thought 'if only'. If only he had chosen a successor or a protector for his child until he reached a majority. It was bound to happen. His successors, the infant Alexander IV and the mentally unstable Phillip III wore just pawns for the Macedonian nobility and Alexander's generals. And were thrown away after their usefulness. Too many Alpha males in that Empire.
I've often wondered if the empire wouldn't have been ripped apart with revolts even before Alexander died. I could see a Ptolemy or a Cassander trying to get a leg up on his rivals before Alexander died.
|
|
|
Post by Morgana on Jun 25, 2020 10:07:21 GMT
You're right that Alexander's Empire was intact when he died, but he married a Persian Princess, not a Babylonian one. In fact, he married two. His wish was to bring harmony to all the different peoples of his Empire. Most people think he married Roxane out of love, or lust because she didn't come from an important family. I've often thought 'if only'. If only he had chosen a successor or a protector for his child until he reached a majority. It was bound to happen. His successors, the infant Alexander IV and the mentally unstable Phillip III wore just pawns for the Macedonian nobility and Alexander's generals. And were thrown away after their usefulness. Too many Alpha males in that Empire.
I've often wondered if the empire wouldn't have been ripped apart with revolts even before Alexander died. I could see a Ptolemy or a Cassander trying to get a leg up on his rivals before Alexander died.
You are probably right. Roxanne murdered his Persian wives, one of whom was pregnant with Alexander's child, so her son would inherit the throne, but he was killed later, as was Roxanne, by Cassander.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jun 25, 2020 10:39:25 GMT
Those rumors probably started with the multiple sightings of foo fighters by allied pilots. Although it was confirmed that both Japanese and German pilots saw the same phenomenon. Foo Fighters were described as orbs of light.
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Jun 25, 2020 10:56:27 GMT
Those rumors probably started with the multiple sightings of foo fighters by allied pilots. Although it was confirmed that both Japanese and German pilots saw the same phenomenon. Foo Fighters were described as orbs of light. I know. But the expression "flying saucer" as description of certain UFO sightings only became popular after Kenneth Arnold famous sighting.
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Jun 27, 2020 3:35:59 GMT
I suppose the only way it could've worked out at all whatsoever for the Nazis was if it had scared Britain enough into appeasement. That would've required the 2 big alternate history events - taking Moscow & ignoring Stalingrad for valuable resources.
Having said that, America was well on her way towards helping the Soviets via Lend-Lease yes? Not sure any course of history would stall that much.
Still, it's fascinating on a modern warfare scale that Barbarossa proved how far into 20th century USSR the most powerful military machine could get... and still fail spectacularly within a few years. Antony Beevor's WWII book covered it all quite well, describing just how far the Germans had advanced geographically from Berlin... & yet they were on fumes without a hope in hell.
|
|
|
Post by TheGoodMan19 on Jun 27, 2020 3:56:11 GMT
I suppose the only way it could've worked out at all whatsoever for the Nazis was if it had scared Britain enough into appeasement. That would've required the 2 big alternate history events - taking Moscow & ignoring Stalingrad for valuable resources. Having said that, America was well on her way towards helping the Soviets via Lend-Lease yes? Not sure any course of history would stall that much. Still, it's fascinating on a modern warfare scale that Barbarossa proved how far into 20th century USSR the most powerful military machine could get... and still fail spectacularly within a few years. Antony Beevor's WWII book covered it all quite well, describing just how far the Germans had advanced geographically from Berlin... & yet they were on fumes without a hope in hell. Been reading David Stahel's amazing books about the opening of the "Great Patriotic War". Several in a series, up to Operation Typhoon: Hitler's March on Moscow; October 1941. It still amazes me that the Red Army could take so much of a pounding in the opening phases of Barbarossa and still keep fighting. The inexhaustible manpower of the USSR is both remarkable and tragic.
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Jun 27, 2020 4:03:28 GMT
I suppose the only way it could've worked out at all whatsoever for the Nazis was if it had scared Britain enough into appeasement. That would've required the 2 big alternate history events - taking Moscow & ignoring Stalingrad for valuable resources. Having said that, America was well on her way towards helping the Soviets via Lend-Lease yes? Not sure any course of history would stall that much. Still, it's fascinating on a modern warfare scale that Barbarossa proved how far into 20th century USSR the most powerful military machine could get... and still fail spectacularly within a few years. Antony Beevor's WWII book covered it all quite well, describing just how far the Germans had advanced geographically from Berlin... & yet they were on fumes without a hope in hell. Been reading David Stahel's amazing books about the opening of the "Great Patriotic War". Several in a series, up to Operation Typhoon: Hitler's March on Moscow; October 1941. It still amazes me that the Red Army could take so much of a pounding in the opening phases of Barbarossa and still keep fighting. The inexhaustible manpower of the USSR is both remarkable and tragic.
Truly. 196 million ppl in 1941... & nearly all of them were either ready &/or told to die for the motherland.
|
|
|
Post by TheGoodMan19 on Jun 27, 2020 4:12:23 GMT
Been reading David Stahel's amazing books about the opening of the "Great Patriotic War". Several in a series, up to Operation Typhoon: Hitler's March on Moscow; October 1941. It still amazes me that the Red Army could take so much of a pounding in the opening phases of Barbarossa and still keep fighting. The inexhaustible manpower of the USSR is both remarkable and tragic.
Truly. 196 million ppl in 1941... & nearly all of them were either ready &/or told to die for the motherland. After the horrors inflicted on the nation from 1914 on. The Great War, the Civil War, Collectivization, the Holodomor, the Purges. All that and then to eliminate 27,000,000 people, I can't imagine.
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Jun 28, 2020 19:48:24 GMT
To be fair to Alexander, he died with his empire intact. To the chagrin of his generals, he planned to transfer population from the east to west and vice versa in attempt to harmonize the different cultures of his empire and went and married a Babylonian princess to make himself more acceptable to his subjects. The real problem was that he didn't set up a proper system of succession and if the legend is true, he decided that his empire should go to the strong which caused years of war between Alexander's generals. As for the question in the subject, Germany had no chance of winning a war of attrition with the Soviet Union. They had more manpower, more equipment and more oil so the only chance is to win a quick war. Maybe starting the invasion earlier, be prepared for winter, achieving all three goals of Barbarossa. Maybe if Richard Sorge was unable to provide the intelligence that Japan wasn't planning to attack Siberia thus forcing Stalin to keep the Siberian reserves in the East. Or maybe if Japan puts pressure on Soviet Union while Germany attacks. So there is a lot of ifs. Alexander's empire was intact because he died so young. It was already getting shaky in the west when Alex was in the East, the Spartans rebelled. And the macedonain army had had enough.I think it would have been pulled apart, even if he had lived another 30 years (his never ending campaigns would have wrecked the empire during his lifetime anyway). Maybe if his son and been a carbon copy, but how many Alexander's have come around. Empires like that, multi national states that were thrown together in a few years, can't last. The Mongols wisely divided up Genghis Khan's empire.
yeah pretty much bet if Alexander hadn't died he likely would've been assassinated possibly.
|
|
|
Post by TheGoodMan19 on Jun 28, 2020 19:57:32 GMT
Alexander's empire was intact because he died so young. It was already getting shaky in the west when Alex was in the East, the Spartans rebelled. And the macedonain army had had enough.I think it would have been pulled apart, even if he had lived another 30 years (his never ending campaigns would have wrecked the empire during his lifetime anyway). Maybe if his son and been a carbon copy, but how many Alexander's have come around. Empires like that, multi national states that were thrown together in a few years, can't last. The Mongols wisely divided up Genghis Khan's empire.
yeah pretty much bet if Alexander hadn't died he likely would've been assassinated possibly. Alexander, like Genghis Khan and Napoleon, was helped by his subordinates. He had some damned good generals backing him up. Selecius, Ptolemy, Hephaestion et al. The Macedonian conquests are viewed as a one man show. The Mongols had Jebe, Batu, Subutai. Subutai might have been the greatest commander of men in battle in history and few know his name.
|
|
|
Post by OldAussie on Jun 22, 2021 0:47:42 GMT
now 80 years ago - and is it hindsight, or was the result inevitable?
|
|
|
Post by TheGoodMan19 on Jun 22, 2021 17:18:32 GMT
now 80 years ago - and is it hindsight, or was the result inevitable? Hitler certainly knew about M. Bonaparte and his sticky end in Russia but he thought that Napoleon wouldn't have failed if he was motorized. And Hitler missed a huge opportunity in not cultivating the warm feelings of the minorities, especially the Ukrainians. But Hitler wasn't all about warm feelings.
An aside, whenever I watch a documentary about the rise of Hitler, you see the great crowds of military men. At Nuremberg, marching beside the Arc de Triomphe, all the stuff before Barbarossa. And wonder how many of them didn't live to see 1945
|
|