What do you mean here?
A great number of the divisions from the Eastern Siberian, Far Eastern, Transbaikal, Siberian Military Districts participated in the Great Patriotic War, the Battle of Moscow included (16th, 24th Armies, parts of 30th Army).
What do you mean here?
The thread proceeds (my bold & underline)....Terry Duncan wrote: ↑24 Nov 2019 13:09A series of posts by MarkN were removed by this moderator for repeated personal attacks. MarkN, if you are unable to reply without resorting to incivil remarks, please do not reply to posters you clearly hold in low regard. Senior staff take a very dim view when a succession of posts from a single thread start to fill up the section for removed posts, so this is likely to end badly. If you feel a poster is posting something that is incorrect, you can always offer actual evidence to refute it rather than calling it nonsensical garbage.
Terry Duncan
Poster ljadw has made the claim that the reason Nazi Germany attacked the Soviet Union was to prevent having to go to war with America. A decision he links directly and quite specifically to the events and choices made at a GOP convention in August 1940.ljadw wrote: ↑22 Nov 2019 15:43No : it failed, but this does not mean that it was the wrong strategy .HistoryGeek2019 wrote: ↑22 Nov 2019 15:30If the SU was not a threat to Germany (which I agree with), then attacking the SU was the wrong German strategy.
In August 1940 (GOP convention ) the Germans knew that war with the US was inevitable,and the outcome of such a war was a well-known fact . The only possibility to prevent such a war was to eliminate Britain . Very quickly .
As the Germans could do nothing against the US ( and doing something was not wise ) ,and as they could do nothing against Britain that would force Britain to give up, the only possibility was to eliminate the USSR,hoping that this would strengthen the Japanese position vis-á-vis the US and that Britain would than give up .
The chances for Barbarossa to succeed were less than 1%, but it was all that remained, unless waiting til Spaatz and Harris would destroy the German cities .
I was really talking about easier access to the caucusus for tbe germans than having to slog it overland. Plus easy access to Syria, Palestine etc
No, but you can pull out a "Pyke" and turn 90% of the Soviet oil infrastructure into smoke.
Is that even necessary? Can FDR declare war on Germany just because IF Germany simply declares neutrality?T. A. Gardner wrote: ↑24 Nov 2019 17:14
Japan attacks Pearl Harbor and opens a Pacific War. Some version of that is likely to happen regardless of events in Europe.
Germany declares war on Japan. Hitler offers the US help in defeating Japan. Doesn't matter if he can deliver, it's the thought that counts.
The problem with Germany remaining neutral is it gives FDR an opening to continue supplying Lend-Lease as well as the possibility of war with Germany. Germany declares war on Japan right after Pearl Harbor and says they'll help the US defeat Japan leaves FDR in a political cross.JAG13 wrote: ↑24 Nov 2019 18:58Is that even necessary? Can FDR declare war on Germany just because IF Germany simply declares neutrality?T. A. Gardner wrote: ↑24 Nov 2019 17:14
Japan attacks Pearl Harbor and opens a Pacific War. Some version of that is likely to happen regardless of events in Europe.
Germany declares war on Japan. Hitler offers the US help in defeating Japan. Doesn't matter if he can deliver, it's the thought that counts.
Even with L&L, Germany will take Egypt since there is no Russian distraction and has plenty of LW assets plus Vichy and Iraqi (likely Iranian as well) support, on top of that Turkey is likely to switch sides and at least allow German passage to Iraq, they wont fall on a sword for the UK...
Where would the Germans get the forces to attack the Caucasus via Turkey ?And how would they supply them ?corbulo wrote: ↑24 Nov 2019 18:34I was really talking about easier access to the caucusus for tbe germans than having to slog it overland. Plus easy access to Syria, Palestine etc
1 Such a Pyke is questionable
Ending L&L would be nice, but I doubt Hitler could stomach betraying an even nominal ally in such a public way...T. A. Gardner wrote: ↑24 Nov 2019 19:37
The problem with Germany remaining neutral is it gives FDR an opening to continue supplying Lend-Lease as well as the possibility of war with Germany. Germany declares war on Japan right after Pearl Harbor and says they'll help the US defeat Japan leaves FDR in a political cross.
Imagine the opposition in Congress: "Our boys are fightin' the Japs and what is our President doin? He's sending our best tanks and planes to the British to fight the Germans who are our allies against those dirty b@$+ards! I say we impeach the SOB!"
Well, you get the idea. With Germany as an ally against Japan, wanted or not, FDR is in a political bind. He can't support sending equipment to fight the Germans and is forced into neutrality. This in turn leaves the British terribly short on material to fight the Germans.
All that's needed for a "perfect storm" is public opposition to finishing Germany rises in Britain as a result and the British agree to a negotiated peace. Italy would have little leeway but to follow suit. An Anglo-Italian war would end badly for Italy.
The object here is for Germany to end hostilities in Europe on their terms, not defeat and occupy Britain or British territory they really don't want or need. That gives the Germans the breathing room to rebuild their economy, retool their military, and have another go in 10 to 15 years rather than try to grab the whole pie in one bite. That is essentially what Stalin and Russia did. Small bites over a longer period. It worked well for the Soviet Union.
I just do not think anyone would take such a declaration of war seriously,T. A. Gardner wrote: ↑24 Nov 2019 17:14My favorite, however remotely possible is this:
The war goes as it did in Europe up to the Fall of France. The Germans / Hitler focuses on defeating Britain and shoring up his position in the East while making nice with Russia. The Germans also do as much as they can to keep America from entering the war. They actively try to sway American public opinion towards staying out of the war in Europe.
Japan attacks Pearl Harbor and opens a Pacific War. Some version of that is likely to happen regardless of events in Europe.
Germany declares war on Japan. Hitler offers the US help in defeating Japan. Doesn't matter if he can deliver, it's the thought that counts.
Now, the problems for the British and Americans are:
Lend-Lease is dead. Britain isn't getting any help to fight the Germans from the US. It's now politically infeasible. Without US equipment, the British most likely lose Egypt particularly given that the Germans aren't involved in Russia. In an air war alone, Britain will suffer much heavier casualties than they did with a concurrent US air war going.
The U-boat war goes better for Germany because the US won't particularly help now.
Britain still loses in the Far East as things really won't have changed there much in this scenario.
The US is going to defeat Japan and do it in pretty short order since they have no war in Europe to fight.
All Germany needs is for Britain to be willing to negotiate a peace settlement to win. That happens, and Germany takes a breather while they get ready for round three in the 50's or 60's.