sad thoughts on poly posters

[DarkCloud]

Why? Because he knew how to build a rocket that could carry a 1-ton payload a few hundred miles, impact mithin a few thousand yards of where you wanted it to, and do so at speeds which prevented enemy intecept.

That doesn't seem bad.

But Frogger, the Russians didn't really push the Germans until later... Of course they pushed them out of Russia soon enough, but closer to the German supply routes (they were cut off IIRC) the Germans would be better prepared to meet the good russian generals. It would ahve been a hard fight. I agree. It could go either way.

If stalin or Hitler went crazy, the tide could have easily turned. I agree. But I still don't think Russia could have decisively crused Germany. Pushed them back past Ukraine, yes, but mroe than that is questionable.

[Capt Dizle]

The USA supplied the USSR with 6,430 planes, 3,734 tanks, 104 ships and boats, 210,000 autos, 3,000 anti-aircraft guns, 245,000 field telephones, gasoline, aluminum, copper, zinc, steel and five million tons of food. This was enough to feed an army of 12 million every day of the war. Britain supplied 5,800 planes, 4,292 tanks, and 12 minesweepers. Canada supplied 1,188 tanks, 842 armoured cars, nearly one million shells, and 208,000 tons of wheat and flour. The USSR depended on American trucks for its mobility since 427,000 out of 665,000 motor vehicles (trucks and jeeps) at the end of the war were of western origin.

Take that revisionists!

[Six Thousand Year Old Man]

Originally posted by DarkCloud

That doesn't seem bad.

But Frogger, the Russians didn't really push the Germans until later... Of course they pushed them out of Russia soon enough, but closer to the German supply routes (they were cut off IIRC) the Germans would be better prepared to meet the good russian generals. It would ahve been a hard fight. I agree. It could go either way.

If stalin or Hitler went crazy, the tide could have easily turned. I agree. But I still don't think Russia could have decisively crused Germany. Pushed them back past Ukraine, yes, but mroe than that is questionable.

I disagree. Russia had too much men and materiel - they were bound to win eventually just on that basis. Much like the Japanese having less production capacity than the US. It might have taken longer, yes, but they would have won.

[DarkCloud]

But jimmy, history is important, if you know what was and why, then you can conjecture what might be and what might happen later because the human persona is the same but the outlook changes... everything is relevant.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by DarkCloud

That doesn't seem bad.

But Frogger, the Russians didn't really push the Germans until later... Of course they pushed them out of Russia soon enough, but closer to the German supply routes (they were cut off IIRC) the Germans would be better prepared to meet the good russian generals. It would ahve been a hard fight. I agree. It could go either way

How so? The Germans were already collapsing from overextension. There was no going back; they'd pissed away their advantages (highly trained and well-equipped units + technological superiority) and the Russians were much, much stronger than they'd been prior to Barbarossa. Russian factories were hitting full stride, the army had been restructured to undo the damage of the purges of the 30s, even their air force was beginning to be able to contend against the Luftwaffe. The Germans had to occupy all of Europe; even without the British+US threat on the coasts (minimal in 1942) they had to leave people there to fight rebellions. They were trying to do this with a population which was running out of people of fit age for military service, and they were running out of oil, iron ore, etc.

Even had they managed to take the ME, it was ridiculously far away from their bases of supply...

[Capt Dizle]

I do want to say that the world should never forget the enormous sacrifice of life in WW2, and let me point out the russian people in particular. America's contribution of material might have been key in victory but pales in comparison to the significance of the blood sacrifice made on the eastern front.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by jimmytrick
The USA supplied the USSR with 6,430 planes, 3,734 tanks, 104 ships and boats, 210,000 autos, 3,000 anti-aircraft guns, 245,000 field telephones, gasoline, aluminum, copper, zinc, steel and five million tons of food. This was enough to feed an army of 12 million every day of the war. Britain supplied 5,800 planes, 4,292 tanks, and 12 minesweepers. Canada supplied 1,188 tanks, 842 armoured cars, nearly one million shells, and 208,000 tons of wheat and flour. The USSR depended on American trucks for its mobility since 427,000 out of 665,000 motor vehicles (trucks and jeeps) at the end of the war were of western origin.

Take that revisionists!

Please give the figures prior to mid-1942. The war might have dragged on for a few years past 1945, but the end of the German empire was already on the horizon.

IIRC, by 1943, the Germans were producing 1000 tanks every month. The USSR was producing 2000. End of story.

[nationalist]

If the U.S. was not involved in WW2, the Japanese would have been free to attack the U.S.S.R. form the East. The Soviets would have been crushed between two superior forces. A war between the Nazis and Soviets would have been much closer, especially if the Nazis had managed to defeat the Brits before attacking. The Nazis had the peoples and industry of Western Europe under their control. Given an oppurtunity to truly marshal their potential powers, I think that the Nazis would have prevailed over the Soviets. Then it would have been America's turn to be crushed, whether it wanted to fight or not. Hitler always envisioned the final struggle to be between the U.S. and Germany for the mastery of the world.

[David Floyd]

The USA supplied the USSR with 6,430 planes, 3,734 tanks, 104 ships and boats, 210,000 autos, 3,000 anti-aircraft guns, 245,000 field telephones, gasoline, aluminum, copper, zinc, steel and five million tons of food. This was enough to feed an army of 12 million every day of the war. Britain supplied 5,800 planes, 4,292 tanks, and 12 minesweepers. Canada supplied 1,188 tanks, 842 armoured cars, nearly one million shells, and 208,000 tons of wheat and flour. The USSR depended on American trucks for its mobility since 427,000 out of 665,000 motor vehicles (trucks and jeeps) at the end of the war were of western origin.

Take that revisionists!

Bingo - without Lend-Lease, Russia would not have won.

Frogger, at the time of Operation Typhoon, there was so little Russian armor left that there were entire brigades equipped with US and British tanks.

Soviet forces were almost totally reliant on US motorized vehicles in order to move, and their railways were highly reliant on US track and railcars. The US also gave the Soviets tons and tons of mundane items - everything from boots to barbed wire. Without Lend-Lease, Russia would have had to produce all of these items, and would have not been producing NEARLY 2000 tanks a month in 1943.

[David Floyd]

If the U.S. was not involved in WW2, the Japanese would have been free to attack the U.S.S.R. form the East. The Soviets would have been crushed between two superior forces.

I've got two thoughts for you:
1)Battle of Nomonhan
2)State of Japanese armor

Even the stripped down Far East Military District in Winter of 1941 would have whipped the **** out of the Japanese Kwangtung Army.

[Capt Dizle]

Thats a good point David, Zhukov may have won WW2 by beating the Japs with modern armored tactics. Had Stalin been forced to fight on 2 fronts.....

[nationalist]

David,

The Nomonhan situation may have turned out differently if the Soviets were already fighting the Nazis. Who knows what would have happened if the Japanese would have waited until Barbarossa to engge with the Soviets. At the very least the Kwangtung Army would have been better armed than it was in RL.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Frogger


?

How so? Europe dithered, but so did the US (and for 2 years longer, too). At least the UK and France had the decency to make up their minds before they'd actually gotten a bloody nose...

It's rather academic, lots of what ifs and should have beens. However, the French were fully capable of dealing with the Nazis in 36 or 37 by themselves. They chose not to.

In 38 the Czechs, French and British would also have made short work of the Nazis. The Czechs wanted to. British and French pressure convinced Benes(?) to cave. Munich was the bloody nose for the French and British.

The bottom line was the French and British people did not want to fight a war on their own door steps, until it was too late. Too late was after the Germans had integrated the excellent weapons of the Czech army into the Panzer divisions, and had had another year to equip their mechanized and air forces.

So then the American people still didn't want to fight. Why should they have? Europe was an awefully long way away from them in 1939. The French Army was the largest and was regarded by many as the best. Very few people had any kind of inkling at that time of the interesting things 'Fast' Heinz Guderion had devised to do with armoured forces.

So yes, the US was very slow to enter the war. However, they did not live in the same world in 1939 as they did in 1945.

[David Floyd]

The Nomonhan situation may have turned out differently if the Soviets were already fighting the Nazis. Who knows what would have happened if the Japanese would have waited until Barbarossa to engge with the Soviets. At the very least the Kwangtung Army would have been better armed than it was in RL.

Nomonhon had nothing to do with the military situation in Western Russia. It had to do with traditional Japanese generals trying to use out-of-date tactics with antiquated armored vehicles against a superior commander using much more up to date armor and tactics.

And the power and armament of the Kwangtung Army went down, as troops were bled off to fight in China and the Pacific. Eventually, all that was in the Kwangtung fortifications were some of the worst formations in the IJA, with little or no air support, and poorly led. Why do you think the Soviets had such an easy time in Manchuria in 1945?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Frogger
The Sovs would have won WWII without US+UK help, IMO.

The turning point for the war in the East was in mid-1942, when American supplies were a second-order concern, and American contribuion to the actual fighting was almost non-existent.

Two words. Pish and tosh.

The outcome in the East was nowhere near certain in 1942. When the Germans began moving in the South the Russians marched east. They kept marching east for as far as they dared. The furthest they dared was the Volga. Just east of the Volga and there were no more North South lines of communication. The USSR would have been cut in 2 for all intents and purposes.

If the Germans had been solely intent on the USSR and if the USSR had not received the aid they did, there is no question that either Moscow would have fallen in 1941 or the Volga line lost in 1942. Either case would have meant the end for the ability of the Soviets to ever 'win' the war by themselves.