At what point did German defeat in WW2 become inevitable?

[techumseh]

I guess so.

[ravagon]

Don't miss the importance of the presence of Georgi Z. in the equation either. He was perhaps the one Red Army General with the hard-headedness and the clout required to stand up to Stalin and prevent that nitwit from throwing away the Rodina's best men and tanks as soon as they came on the line.
Up until Zhukov showed up in the European theatre Stalin had a very similar mindset to Hitler - no retreat and just attack, attack, attack with everything you have as soon as you have it.

I'd vote for the battle of Britain - think of all of those hundreds of thousands of guns and men protecting German and occupied cities from allied airpower rather than duking it out with the Red army ...
Not to mention the 60-odd divisions left behind spread through Western Europe in case of a D-day scenario.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
Hitler was the embodiment of good old fashioned European superstition and bigotry transplanted into the 20th century.

What was specifically 'European' about the bigotry?

If anything, Hitler's bigotry stemmed from an ingrained Christian anti-semitism, not a specifically 'European' anti-semitism.

As I recall the good ol' boys of the Klan were none too keen on Jews either, and America (and Australia) had its fair share of 'scientific' racists pursuing nonsensical Social Darwinist theories.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Germany committed 90% of its forces against the Soviets. I don't think another 10% would have made the difference if the USSR was being propped up. It wasn't the allies military contributions that helped bring down the Germans, but the fact they supplied the Soviets. If it was just a straight up fight between the West and Germany, we'd be speaking German today.

I've heard it was more like 85%, but either way it's a vast majority. But I completely disagree about anyone speaking German. It's one thing win a particular battle or war and quite another to take a primarily land power like the Germans and start invading England / The U.S., just as it was difficult for the primarily sea powered Anglo-Americans to put together a viable second front on the continent while fighting the IJN in the vast Pacific.

I agree that the war was in the bag for the Allies as soon as the Germans declared war on the U.S. (while losing the battle of Moscow). A review of the relevant data seem pretty conclusive on this point. Of course no one at that time had access to the relevant data, and it is possible (remotely) that some combination of improbable coincidences could have sapped allied morale enough so that they threw away their otherwise inevitable victory.

[Patroklos]

only second-rate officers going into logistics, etc. They actually had to halt the offensive one third of the way through France to regroup, repair, etc. Nobody then looked at a map of Russia and made the appropriate comparisons. They'd won an outstanding victory. This lack of logistical reform - the Wehrmacht was still largely horse drawn - guaranteed their getting mired down by the distances involved while invading the Soviet Union.

Not a shed of truth in this statement. Rather the German excellance in logistics is what they were primarily known for in that day. Anyone remember the German General Staff whose primary funtion was joint logistics? This was the area where the MAJORITY of the talent was concentrated.

There was only one offensive halt of any signifigance during the blitz, and that was outside the beachhead at Dunkirk. The reason for that halt had nothing to do with logisitcal failure, but was an order from Hitler in spite of the opposition to the move by his Generals.

I just finished reading Guderian's autobiography and there is no mention of any logistical problems beyond ordinary bumps that you will always have. Similarly Colonel von Luck's auto not only mentions few problems, but his cobat group went straight from the Eiffel mountains along the Channel coast and then straight down to La Rochelle without stopping for more than a day.

It is true that horses accounted for most of Germany's transport, but it was like that for the entire war. This is a direct consequense of the pre-Nazi treaty limitations not logisical failure. And it acutually helped the Germans when fuel became short, as the Germans were never wanting for food in WWII.

[Sikander]

The use of animal traction was a source of constant supply limitations on the Russian front. Not only was it slow (with operational effects such as lost opportunities to encircle the enemy, or conversely escape), but a horse only has a fraction of the range of a truck (ie it's load potential is quickly consumed by its own fodder as it moves away from the rail line). It was a huge negative factor on German operations, albeit one whose cause and remedy was far outside the scope of the logistical officer to solve.

[Saras]

von Mellenthin in his "My Panzer Battles" goes as far as saying that had they had a sufficient number of tracked transports the fate of the eastern campaign would be very different.

[Patroklos]

I do not contend that the horses were not slow, but in any case it was not the cause of a non existant operational halt during the opening of the Western Front.

And imagine how slow the Eastern forces would have moved with tracked vehicles with empty fuel tanks in 43. The average infantry division for Germany used half the fuel of an American unit, and they were still experiancing fuel shortages contantly. Doubling the fuel consumtion of divisions that move slowely anyways would not have helped anything. Not to mention the loss of production in other areas to build more tracked vehicles. I think the Germans prioritized correctly in the 30's.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by techumseh
Pure speculation.

But logically based. If the USSR has to fight on two fronts, it's fubared.

The one scenario where Germany doesn't lose is if Japan decides to risk America holding a knife to their throat, seize Indonesia and not attack Pearl, and attacks the USSR. Between Germany and Japan, the USSR goes down to defeat. No way Roosevelt gets Congress to authorize a war on Japan or Germany.

Without the war to rescue America's economy, we go Communist or fascist in the 1940s, and considering the Soviet defeat, probably the latter.

[Saras]

Now THAT'S loonie commiespeak che

[Kuciwalker]

Yeah

[techumseh]

It is a bit of a stretch. In fact there were two factions of Japanese militarists, the Strike North Faction, which favored an attack on the Soviets, and the Strike South Faction, which favored an attack on Britain, the Netherlands, and possibly the US.

The Strike North Group was given a chance to prove it's case by the incursions at Nomohan and Khalkin Gol. The Soviet rout of the Japanese forces led to the triumph of the Strike South Faction within the Japanese government and subsequently to Pearl Harbor.

Stalin knew of the decison to attack the western powers before he transferred the Siberians to the German front. But the German offensive on Moscow was stopped BEFORE they were committed to the Soviet counter-offensive. So who's to say? As DS says, it's all speculation.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Saras
Now THAT'S loonie commiespeak che

You don't know how close we were to revolution in the 1930s.

[mrmitchell]

When Ted Striker entered the war.

Would it not be the greatest twist of all time if it had been an 90 year old WWII veteran posting Turkish chicks and hollering "I'd hit it" every time someone mentioned a female?

Without the war to rescue America's economy, we go Communist or fascist in the 1940s, and considering the Soviet defeat, probably the latter.

And when we go fascist, what happens to Roosevelt's image? Right down the crapper, I bet.

German defeat in WW2 was not inevitable until the very end--to put down a point where it was inevitable is as if to say the heroic efforts beyond normal call of duty after that point were not necessary...

[Q Classic]

Yeah, I think the German defeat was inevitable once they bombed Pearl Harbor. Those Deltas are quite... well, you know.