Russian Front, WW2 (2 Viewers)

[lancer]

Have to remember, that at this time, mid 1941, the US is not at war and trying desperately to stay out of the war in Europe, regardless of our lending assistance to GB. Our immediate concerns were in the Pacific and would probably have remained so to a large extent had not Hitler made the idiot decision to declare war on the US after Pearl Harbor, thus making it politically possible to say "Germany first". -- Al

 

[Mitch]

The date of the invasion of USSR was actually given to britain by Herman goering also but was not believed by Stalin who thought it was an attempt by the british to draw the russians into the war.

Britain nearly went to war with USSR over Finland it was very close. It is ironic our need to declare a war for poland (what really did we get out of that???) but, we let slovakians hang out to dry. I have always struggled to find the reason not the ones that were given. I think the declaration of war was more an expression and realisation that we had finally, realised only militarily could the germans be stopped from their expansion in europe.

Imagine had the UK declared war on the soviets for their aggression against Finland the complexities it would have caused had germany then invaded USSR.
Mitch


.

Another complexity is that Britain declared war on Germany for invading Poland, but basically ignored the Russian invasion of Poland in 1939. There is probably an interesting discussion there. Each country basically makes decisions that are in its own interest. And not just to do good in general.

 

[Mitch]

The biggest mistake Hitler made. Instead of watching how the US reacted totally foreseeable in terms of the japs (declaring war) it was still a huge move to then declare war on germany. I think it would still have been difficult to take the US people into a two front/continent war. he makes it a no brainer for the US.

For me, the stupidist military and political decision of the 20th century
Mitch

Have to remember, that at this time, mid 1941, the US is not at war and trying desperately to stay out of the war in Europe, regardless of our lending assistance to GB. Our immediate concerns were in the Pacific and would probably have remained so to a large extent had not Hitler made the idiot decision to declare war on the US after Pearl Harbor, thus making it politically possible to say "Germany first". -- Al

 

[lancer]

The date of the invasion of USSR was actually given to britain by Herman goering also but was not believed by Stalin who thought it was an attempt by the british to draw the russians into the war.

Britain nearly went to war with USSR over Finland it was very close. It is ironic our need to declare a war for poland (what really did we get out of that???) but, we let slovakians hang out to dry. I have always struggled to find the reason not the ones that were given. I think the declaration of war was more an expression and realisation that we had finally, realised only militarily could the germans be stopped from their expansion in europe.

Imagine had the UK declared war on the soviets for their aggression against Finland the complexities it would have caused had germany then invaded USSR.
Mitch


.

Now I have a headache. What, exactly, could GB have done for Finland by declaring war on the USSR? The complexities of such a declaration are staggering. -- Al

 

[lancer]

The biggest mistake Hitler made. Instead of watching how the US reacted totally foreseeable in terms of the japs (declaring war) it was still a huge move to then declare war on germany. I think it would still have been difficult to take the US people into a two front/continent war. he makes it a no brainer for the US.

For me, the stupidist military and political decision of the 20th century
Mitch

Bingo. As I said in some other thread in a similar discussion, without Hitler's declaration of war against the US, the US fights Japan first and foremost, leaving Europe to it's own problems. Maybe something occurs down the road that allows Roosevelt to declare war on Germany, maybe not. Hitler made such a quandary a moot point. Thank goodness. -- Al

 

[Mitch]

Churchill the cabinet and generals were seriously close to the declaration of war for what the soviets were doing against Finland the ally of germany. Had we done so our troops etc would have had to sail to Finland and fight the russians that way as we were blocked by germany our enemy through europe. It is a great early war nightmare scenario as what would have happened if germany deployed troops to aid the finns???? the head just spins at the thought

This has been a great discussion so far as its much more interesting than the western front which, really gets most of the coverage. Thanks for starting it
Mitch

Now I have a headache. What, exactly, could GB have done for Finland by declaring war on the USSR? The complexities of such a declaration are staggering. -- Al

 

[Combat]

Now I have a headache. What, exactly, could GB have done for Finland by declaring war on the USSR? The complexities of such a declaration are staggering. -- Al

There is a new book out called "Finland's War of Choice." I haven't read it yet - just started. But from the English perspective they have generally viewed a unified continental power as a threat. Whether Napoleon, Hitler or anyone else. The Germans emerged as the greatest threat in the 30's and 40's due to their proximity and aggressiveness. The Russians being the lesser evil. I recall reading somewhere that Britain also had incentives to enter a conflict in Finland as a pretext to block the supply of iron ore to the Germans from Sweden.

 

[lancer]

Churchill the cabinet and generals were seriously close to the declaration of war for what the soviets were doing against Finland the ally of germany. Had we done so our troops etc would have had to sail to Finland and fight the russians that way as we were blocked by germany our enemy through europe. It is a great early war nightmare scenario as what would have happened if germany deployed troops to aid the finns???? the head just spins at the thought

This has been a great discussion so far as its much more interesting than the western front which, really gets most of the coverage. Thanks for starting it
Mitch

This scenario ALMOST leads to Hitler's dream of a western crusade against the USSR. Britain, Finland, and Germany against the commie hoards. Ouch! My ears are bleeding. {eek3} Then throw in a Japanese incursion in the east against the Russians. BOOM! Now my head has exploded. {sm2} -- Al

 

[Mitch]

The attempt to take Narvik and other actions in Norway were a desire to stop the flow of iron ore from Sweden but, also there was a thought of using it to supply the Finns with arms etc. Al it very nearly was but, we saw the russians as more palatable than the germans at that time.

Combat.. I have the book on order its supposed to be very good
Mitch

 

[lancer]

The attempt to take Narvik and other actions in Norway were a desire to stop the flow of iron ore from Sweden but, also there was a thought of using it to supply the Finns with arms etc. Al it very nearly was but, we saw the russians as more palatable than the germans at that time.
Mitch

As said, the lesser of two evils. And considering that Nazi Germany was hell-bent on conquest for living room and would not be mollified, it was the wiser decision. -- Al

 

[lancer]

Great point, Combat. I had forgotten about Stalin's paranoia in regards to his intelligence sources. He did not believe Hitler would betray him and the treaty they had signed, figuring, as you say, it was deliberate disinformation trying to drag him into the war. Despite all the warnings, Stalin only believed what he wanted to believe. -- Al

It is worth noting that Stalin did finally listen to at least one of his intelligence agents, Richard Sorge, a member of the GRU (Central Intelligence Administration), based in Tokyo, working as a German correspondent. Sorge had warned Stalin of German invasion plans 4 months prior to the invasion but had not been heeded. Sorge later supplied crucial information about Japanese intentions in Manchuria, ie., that the Japanese had no intentions of pressing the Russians in the east. This allowed Stalin to move the elite Siberian troops (some 8 tank brigades and 34 divisions) from the eastern front to the threat in the west, as winter closed down the German offensive. These reinforcements were used in the Soviet counteroffensive that opened on December 6, 1941. Sorge was caught by the Japanese in October,1941 and hanged on November 7, 1944. Sorge was awarded the decoration "Hero of the Soviet Union" in 1964. At least the USSR recognized his important contribution, even if a little late. -- Al

 

[PanzerAce1944]

As many of us know, Germany was very eager to surrender to U.S. or British forces as opposed to the Russians. If General Patton had things his way he would have sided with the Germans and gone staight after Stalin's throat !!!! Look at the cold War and how long it lasted. It would have made for a very interesting scenario. {sm3}

 

[lancer]

As many of us know, Germany was very eager to surrender to U.S. or British forces as opposed to the Russians. If General Patton had things his way he would have sided with the Germans and gone staight after Stalin's throat !!!! Look at the cold War and how long it lasted. It would have made for a very interesting scenario. {sm3}

Good thing Patton didn't get his way, eh? That scenario would have been a mess of the first order. How would anybody of the western Allies have been able to justify military action against their Russian allies, who had just lost 20 million people helping to defeat Nazi Germany? Anyone really believe the American or British people would have supported such action at that time, just after the bloodbath just concluded? Not to mention the military problems involved. Another great "what if" scenario. -- Al

 

[Currahee Chris]

How would anybody of the western Allies have been able to justify military action against their Russian allies, who had just lost 20 million people helping to defeat Nazi Germany? Anyone really believe the American or British people would have supported such action at that time,

Didn't seem to stop the Russians from proxying the North Koreans and Chinese into war with the UN in 1950........:wink2:

 

[lancer]

Didn't seem to stop the Russians from proxying the North Koreans and Chinese into war with the UN in 1950........:wink2:

Big difference between 1945 and 1950. Post war ideologies already at work by 1950 were not yet at the fore in 1945. Regardless of what Stalin might have wanted to do and what he would do, post-war, I don't think the western allies were ruthless enough to turn on their Russian allies in the aftermath of beating Nazi Germany. A little time would change things. -- Al

 

[Blowtorch]

The discussion started about Russian bravery, treatment of POW's, and the outright brutality of the Eastern front. (snip)...and how the German troops might have carried this influence to the Western front and the fight against the Western Allies.

http://www.amazon.com/Eastern-Front...=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1323288099&sr=1-2
http://www.amazon.com/Retreat-Hitle...=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1323288335&sr=1-1
http://www.amazon.com/War-World-Nia...=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1323288444&sr=1-6


These are three books which discuss the brutality in the east, but I don't know of one that really does it justice. The subject got overlooked in the 50-60s due to the Cold War & the USSR becoming the new enemy, and continued to be overlooked as political correctness came into vogue. We know all about PC at Treefrog.

The German & Red armies were fighting like savages from the get go-but there were exceptions on both sides; it really depended on the individual-or really the presence of an individual with honor & rank to stop the atrocities. Generally speaking, there exists a cultural proclivity towards brutality in areas that weren't Romanized in antiquity, such as central & eastern Europe. Add to that the racial indoctrination the Germans had going through their heads during the victory fever of 1941-2 and of course the Reds were fighting for their very existence; it didn't help matters that Stalin hadn't signed the Geneva Convention so there were few legal restraints in place. The closest the West came to those brutal conditions were Marines vs. Japanese in the Pacific.

Even in recent times there was savagery going on in the Balkans during the Bosnian crisis. Things I doubt any of us could imagine until reading for the first time. In WW2 after June 22, 1941, the Poles & Ukrainians were hacking each other, Partisans, Germans, farmers, Reds, were all butchering each other. If you look in German language history books you are more likely to see photos of barbarism. In an English language book, you'll see a token hanging or firing squad. Oh, much more interesting things look place in the east.