I just want to say, for all the discussion of 'could they have...' it's important to remember that Germany was never going to conquer Russia, it was a stupid (racist) idea to get Hitlers 'lebensraum' and take out Stalin's 'Jewish Bolshevist' nation (heavy on the eye-roll there). Keep in mind that Germany didn't even get Moscow, which Napoleon had actually managed to (mostly) do, and Napoleon still lost for the same reason that Germany would have regardless -- they did not have the logistical ability to support an army in an area the size of Russia. Partisan/army elements would absolutely pick apart a logistical train that long, which Germany couldn't have done any way. We have to remember Germany wasn't an actual mechanized army, it was entirely dependent on horses, and to try to use horses to haul ammunition/food/clothes/medical supplies/artillery shells/etc ~1500 kilometres from Germany to Moscow alone would be insane, especially with the millions of men and women the Soviet union had constantly attacking you.
The entire invasion was never going to work, and people give the idea it could have worked way too much credit. And this is all assuming no other nation would step in either; it's entirely on the 'nobody is in an alliance anymore' sort of fantasy world. This failed for the exact same reason that the Russian invasion of Ukraine has -- they planned for a short, easy war, because their entire ideology requires that they underestimate their foes at every available opportunity.
I like how passionate you are about this one detail about history. And, honestly? I would read your book about it. Lol
Thanks, I appreciate that :)
One aspect that is often overlooked is how reduced in strength the German forces were at the start of Barbarossa. Sure, they took Poland and France very quickly, but they suffered enough losses that Barbarossa started at reduced strength, and once the initial maneuvers of the invasion were over Germany was pretty much running on fumes manpower-wise.
and once the initial maneuvers of the invasion were over Germany was pretty much running on fumes manpower-wise.
And, ironically, fuel-wise
once the initial maneuvers of the invasion were over Germany was pretty much running on fumes manpower-wise.
Germany's main problem wasn't manpower (at this point), it was materiel. Germany's generals (mostly) wanted to go as quickly as possible to mitigate this. The problem was their ancient supply train running on ~350,000 ('supply trucks') and 2.75 million horses. In their glee to send the army attacking everyone they could around themselves to fuel their extremely inefficient economy with more loot, they got into a cycle of needing to be fast, but having no reserve of fast moving vehicles to facilitate that.
And to be clear, I am not a 'pro-Russia' person, I've just read everything I could on the issue, and I've never read a way for Germany to get out of Russia that didn't involve them making zero mistakes.
I'm just extremely wary of people saying 'Nazi Germany could have won if...' and the reason would require them to not be fascist and racist, and we start to sort of legitimize Nazi Germany. The fact was they were always going to pick stupid fights, because fascist governments always do. And they idea that they could somehow *hold *Russia while also constantly picking fights with everyone else is insane.
Seriously, they had an awful economy, their logistical train was terrible, the leader of each area would just outright lie about their capabilities (see Goering's Stalingrad Airlift)
If you want to talk about what 'Nazi Germany could have won if...' how about: - If they didn't expend time, resources, and their own souls making literal mobile gas chambers for the civilians of the Soviet Union ('Accordingly, it was a partially secret but well-documented Nazi policy to kill, deport, or enslave the majority of Russian and other Slavic populations and repopulate the land west of the Urals with Germanic peoples, under Generalplan Ost (General Plan for the East) The Nazis' belief in their ethnic superiority pervades official records and pseudoscientific articles in German periodicals, on topics such as "how to deal with alien populations."; if they didn't alienate every single ally they could have had by invading smaller neighbours as a stop-gap for their crumbling finances; if they weren't constantly fighting Partizans and Resistance members (thanks Grandma!); I read (but can't find the article) that British Intelligence credits Nazi Germany's sadism and want for torture as key reasons the Nazi's lost the information war, as their Information networks were terrible.
So yes, anyway, there wasn't a way it was going to work unless they un-became Nazi Germany.
Some Germans wanted to ally themselves with Poland and fight against Soviet Union together. Without Germany attacking Poland, France and United Kingdom would have not entered the war and history might have gone very differently.
It is true, if they hadn't done Nazi things and had actual allies they could have done better, for sure.
We get into how you define victory over USSR. He thought the state would collapse, the infamous "kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will fall down". Then they would doubtlessly ethnic cleanse.
There was a difference between Napoleon's and Hitler's strategy. Napoleon went straight for Moscow like an arrow, ignoring everything else. He got it, but then what? Hitler saw that and knew that didn't work, so he launched a broad invasion on the North, Central, and South all at once. The goal was a total collapse, so that there wasn't much left to do military activity (not on any significant scale like with tanks and planes). Course there were other problems with that.
Another thing to note is people keep saying that if ideology didn't gimp the war effort, the Nazis would've won. However, the ideology was the whole reason the war even happened in the first place.
Exactly. It's Fascism 101 - you invade anyone smaller than you to get slaves/money/etc, you pick scapegoats to blame for any issues you have, and you steal everything not nailed down, and then you move on to the next place. Eventually you pick a fight you can't win, and then you lose.
Part of them losing that fight was two of my grandparents, and I'm kinda pissed we're dealing with them again. So I want to reinforce: If a country goes fascist, this shit is coming. Nazi Germany was never going to win anything with an ideology that flawed.
Also yes the eastern front was absolutely a hell death grinding machine for the soldiers of the red army its wayyyyy overblown how they just used soldiers as cannon fodder and with no sense of tactic. Probably a result of anti communist propaganda after the war
The "meat grinder" narrative was intentionally pushed forward by the west, as they were only strategic allies with the USSR. In an ideal scenario (for the west), the USSR would have collapsed alongside Nazi Germany. As a result, the "orc horde" narrative was based in racism.
In reality, the Soviets and the Nazis hated each other far more than any other side (with the exception being the Chinese, Koreans, and other Asian countries against Imperial Japan), the fighting was far more brutal and on a much grander scale.
Not only that, but they were also defeated by the cooperation of different nations that would let anyone join if they wanted.
So the Nazis were literally defeated by diversity and inclusivity.
I have been involved in "big business" at several times in my life, someone actually gave me authority to build teams and create projects. I discovered that there are different schools of thought about what makes the "perfect team" to work on a project, and most managers go through the hiring process in mind of getting candidates that all are the same, all have the same personality, skillset and background, under the belief that homogeny makes for a more harmonious, predictable team.
Not me fam. I painted goddamn abstract art with a pallet of people. I got the most diverse teams I could, I got outspoken, angry black mothers alongside timid, pasty nerds alongside combat vets alongside immigrant chefs.
It took constant "babysitting" to make sure everyone was getting along and understanding each other, but we kicked ass. It's an amazing feeling putting together a team that can handle changes and can provide input on things you never thought of and who actually care about the results. Not only did we succeed at every challenge, I made lifelong friends and learned new things every day.
Diversity and inclusion is literally being used like a slur lately and it burns me. Diversity of backgrounds and perspectives is one of the most valuable strategic assets you can have around you. The people who surround themselves with people who already agree with them and have nothing new to add may pass challenges, but if you want to defeat challenges, you need a spectrum of perspectives.
Fights one war
It was kind of a big one, though.
And pretty successful hat they stopped at a certain point
There would be no way to stop. The German economy was really messed up by the Nazis. They essentially had no exports because they were producing mainly materiel for the war and were under an embargo anyway.
That means they had no way to get money besides literally taking it from conquered countries. The problem is, you can only loot once. This created a vicious cycle where they became more isolated and needed to conquer even more.
Honestly, before nukes existed, the Nazis could have been defeated by an embargo. But it would have cost more lives. Invading Germany saved lives and the nukes saved even more lives in Japan.
"If they hadn't done all those things, they would have won."
Biggest one so far!
Not to glorify nazis, but arguable they fought a whole bunch of wars against most european countries and won all of them until they came up against some big ones.
Arguably their biggest mistake was trying to fight both world superpowers at once, in the USSR and Great Britain backed by the US. I can't imagine how they thought that would go well, but thank fuck they did, cause I wouldn't want to see the world they envisioned.
Operation Bruhbarossa
Not how wars work alliance against alliance, that's the point of an alliance.
If you had the UK, USA, France, and Russia/USSR against you, you were fucked. Same applied to world war 1.
It would be the same today in a parallel universe where Russia were allies of the west.
Yea they brought it up on themselves lmao
If you had the
UKUSAFrance, and Russia/USSRagainst you, you were fucked. Same applied to world war 1.These people were building like an entire fucking ship per day. They averaged almost one whole aircraft carrier per month. Germany was running their cars on wood gas. Absolutely no chance. Would have been more costly in terms of casualties without the USSR, but 1940s USA was unbeatable, especially with their untouchable production base
Meh. Don't get me wrong, the USA joining world war 1 was the final nail in the coffin and likely cut the war short by a lot (and made it a slam dunk for the allies, instead of a pyrrhic victory), but compared to, say, Canada or Australia (not to mention the UK and Russia that both lost as much, if not more men than France) they basically didn't fight. They joined very early and were invaluable in holding french territories throughout the war, which is why they both suffered more losses than the USA even though their militaries (and populations) were way smaller.
WW2 USA was an absolute juggernaut though
Very true, it's how we crushed the Japanese, too. They were almost literally clearing neighborhoods for reclaimed metal and wood, converting entire towns into production facilities and even with that, they paled in comparison to the productive giant of the Goblino. Their zeroes might take 3 planes out of ours, and we would replace them three-fold and with more experienced pilots. They were forcing young pups into dilapidated old craft at the risk of great military disgrace to Kamikaze us because they knew they had no better options. The horrors we faced in the Pacific were truly abject, but it still would have been remarkable to be a wallflower back then and see the collective gusto that we managed to pull together, and all while still maintaining a perfectly functional economy with a massive swathe of our workforce overseas. I read somewhere that the US was using not more than 20% of our manufacturing capacity towards munitions and craft, and even then we were absolutely devastating the Axis.
Had the USSR capitulated to the Germans, there was a real risk that the UK would follow as the German war machine could refocus its efforts. India would likely have fallen soon after to the Japanese. At that point, the German production base, which was already heavily geared up, would have access to all the resources it could possibly need, and the US would have had serious trouble defeating them. It would be a race to the A-bomb and who could produce them the fastest most likely, although it's questionable how effective the weapon would be with a consolidated Luftwaffe without a continental power keeping them busy.
Without the British, intelligence efforts against Germany would have significant issues. It's possible that the USSR would capitulate due to this.
Without US lend-lease, the USSR would have capitulated as well, and with only the British standing against Germany hope would have been lost.
The German war machine was extremely powerful. It could not keep going forever of course, and in due time they would have failed. But had any major power not been in the war, Germany could likely have consolidated enough power to avoid successful invasions from overseas powers.
The US Confederates also lost 1 war.
So did the modern Japanese (also hugely racists).
I'd argue the Japanese didn't just fight one war, though. They at least managed to trounce the Russians.
Once. They explicitly had no interest in fighting the USSR regarding anything out of Manchuria because they knew it would ruin them.
Arguably Japan won in 1907, 1918, and in 1938ish but there was a lot of partisan activity in China.
Arguably Japan one in 1907, 1918, and in 1938ish...
I would argue they three.
To be fair, they did take on… the world.
Jojo Rabbit (2019)
Jojo Betzler: What's going on out here?
Yorki: The Russians, Jojo. They're coming. And the Americans from the other way. And England and China and Africa and India. The whole world is coming. Help me with this ammo.
Jojo Betzler: And how are we doing?
Yorki: Terribly. Our only friends are the Japanese. And just between you and me, they don't look very Aryan.
Hitler being played by a Māori was too funny.
Propaganda is helluva drug.
A lot of their success is due to their tactic of rushing into the enemy without any care for supply lines and logistics. This often worked to their advantage but most of those early wins were not sustainable in the long run. It gave the impression that they were more powerful than they actually were.
Leeroy jenkins is a short term solution
The baddie germans were the Leroy Jenkins of WWII, just charging in and expecting shit to work.
Didn't work out well when the sovvies clapped their cheeks all the way back to Berlin
Haha yeah
Wonder who this reminds me of
Belgium 100% won that war
Tbf they did good for most of it
They fought most of the rest of the world all at once and it was pretty touch-and-go there for a bit.
If Hitler had died of a meth overdose in early 1940 I could see the universe of 'The Man In The High Castle' coming to pass.
As it stands, meth heads gonna meth, and he decided fighting on 2 fronts was fine.
I mean, the only reason they lost was because they decided to fight Russia in the winter and Japan attacked the US too early, meaning Germany had to fight on two fronts.
Germans might have won if they kept with their "one at a time" strategy. What a different (even worse probably, if you can imagine it) world that would be.
They lose in every timeline. The US would have nuked them.
That's a pretty good point that I haven't considered before.
In about a quarter of the timelines, the US would have joined them.
The Manhattan Project, which lead to the creation of nuclear weaponry, was only started in 1942, which was after the Pearl Harbor bombing in 1941. It was started as a response to entering World War II, not as a precaution. Had Pearl Harbor not been bombed, it is doubtful the Manhattan Project would ever have been started. The US seemed to not want to get involved until Japan forced their hand, so it is likely the US would have remained outside of the conflict had Japan not attacked.
Had the US remained untouched by World War II, and assuming Germany somehow gained control of every country in Europe, Asia, and Africa, it is doubtful the US would have had enough time to complete the Manhattan Project. And even if they did, what would it gain them by nuking Germany? At that point Germany would already control half the globe. Surely they wouldn't nuke German occupied countries and catch millions of innocents in the crossfire? The only thing they would realistically be able to do is try to keep Germany on the Eastern Continents and heavily fortify Alaska.
Look, all things considered, the actual history is probably pretty good compared to the nightmareland that could have been if Germany wasn't so self-absorbed.
Operation barbarossa started at the height of summer. The reason the winter fucked them so hard is they refused to prepare for it in meaningful way such as sending winter uniforms for the soldiers. In many ways the nazis were incredibly incompetent.
Yes. I think it probably had to do with their stubborn viewpoint. They thought they were the best. They thought they were an unsinkable ship. And when people do that, they start making careless mistakes. Its really quite silly they did literally nothing to prepare for the winter front, or at least try to postpone invading Russia until after winter had passed.
But I suppose the final version of events turned out alright, all things considered. They're almost entirely gone now and that's what matters.
It would've given the USSR more time to prepare
