could Germany win against the commies if they weren't bombed to oblivion by the Allies and without Lend Lease aid to the USSR?
>>16885580Quite simply yesIf Britain didn't stick it out they were fucked
Nah they were fucked when Barbarossa didn't defeat the Sovs within days like they thought it would.
>>16885580No. USSR wins in '47. Land-lease peaked in 44, when war was decided for more then a year and Allied bombing did jack shit to throttle Nazi production - it peaked in 1944.USSR =/= Russia in 2024
>>16885582I think all the north African assets and most of their air force might have been useful for that little venture anon
>could germany win if they didn't start the war their ideology required them to startyeah probably
>>16885584They'd still encounter the same logistical and weather issues
>>16885584>all the north African assetsAt its peak, the DAK was 2 panzer divisions and 1 infantry division.>>16885584>most of their air forceBottlenecked by logistics and airfields
>>16885585the commies would eventually try to invade western europe so it wasn't only their fault
>>16885587Just because that was peak deployment at one time doesn't mean they didn't have hundreds of thousands of losses down the drain>>16885586They wouldn't have the same logistical issues because their navy wouldn't be confined entirely besides U-boats, and again more air assets including for supply
>>16885580Yes, without lend-lease, allied bombing campaign and north african campaign diverting german forces and resources away from east Germany would have defeated Soviet Union.
>>16885580>could Germany win against the commiesno. the western front didnt even exist for 95% of the entire war, it was literally russia vs germany, and russia won. all the conquered lands were completely fucking unstable, total andabsolute hate for the germans, resistance movements everywhere. the germans were supposed to lose and get partitioned - and thats it, period.
>>16885591>North Africa>Italy>Europe>Millions of boots>Millions of tonnes of food>Almost all soviet railway cars>Thousands of tanks>Thousands of airframes>Radios>Radar systemsXaxa we not need silly western dogsShut the fuck up retard
>>16885583I see, because it peaked in 44 it had no effect at all in 42 and 43
>>16885590>north african campaign diverting german forces and resources awaycan wehraboos please stop with this meme, its just too funny.the african front didnt redirect shit - in fact, when poor rommel begged berlin for more supplies, this is the reply he got:>dude why are you even still there? the allies have total absolute control over the med sea, and we need everything to advance on the urals, just shut up erwin: (
>>16885592what about all of that? russia won WW2, it was pretty much a 1v1, germany vs russia, and russia won. everybody else can get a participation trophy if you want.
>>16885593Don't you see, soldiers don't need clothing, food, boots, ammunition, trucks, railway transports, combat vehicles, entire factories and logistical chains from evil western nazis, that's why soviets did so well before lend lease and the arctic convoys started...I hate these niggers so much, they seethe because fucking BONGOLOIDS are the reason their subhuman populace didn't get what they deserved
>>16885593Lend lease from USA first arrived in late 42-43. LOL it's even on wikipedia retard.
>>16885580No. Could the Soviets have won against the Nazis if they didn't have Lend-Lease and the Allied bombing campaign? Maybe. At the very least the war would drag on for several more years and all of Eastern Europe would be totally levelled. Whether any winners would emerge from the ruins is anyone's guess.
>>16885596>that's why soviets did so well before lend lease and the arctic convoys startedthey really did - the biggest german defeat in WW2, the battle of moscow, took place when lend lease wasnt even an idea yet.
>>16885593they used allied weapons during the battle of moscow anon...
>>16885600are you sure about that?
>>16885599>Battle of Moscow>Biggest defeatJust no
The lend lease meme and the F-15 being a response to the MiG-25 oorah meme are the two most annoying things right now. Did lazerpig do a video on lend lease recently? Fuck I hate all of you. Learn actual history from actual books instead of just regurgitating memes you saw in a youtube video to each other to sound smart.
>>16885597Bong arctic convoys started in 41 and bailed the soviet retards out of deep shit you idiotWhy are morons so insistent an army can run with no boots and empty bellies?
>>16885599technically true but they did receive weapons before Lend Lease, something like 300 british tanks took part in the battle of moscow.
>>16885599See >>16885604
>>16885601yes, the brits sent them tanks in 41
>>16885599Almost 80% of tanks defending Moscow were British made.
>>1688560280% of wehrmacht died there in the battle of moscow, literally everybody with experience from both WW1, Poland and France, got killed under Moscow. Everything after the battle of moscow was just beating a dead horse.
>>16885609>80%Absolutely ludicrous, source me your retarded hair brained information because that is categorically, easily proven falseJesus Christ you tankie niggers are insane
>>16885608did it come to you in a dream?
>>16885610ok cool prove it.i love being proven wrong. its very educational.
>>16885612>About 4 million in Barbarossa alone>About 200k lost at Moscow>200k/4mil =/= 80%Holy shit you are retarded, as expected from a subhuman snow nigger
>>16885613are you implying every single german was at moscow lol. jesus christ, /his would eat you dumbasses alive.
>>16885614>80% of wehrmacht died there >literally everybody with experience from WW1, Poland and FranceYou should end your own life, lying disingenuous subhumanSource me your 80% figure dumb cunt
>>16885610>>16885615>easily proven falsedo it.
>>16885580no chance. Germany didn't have the resources and manpower to win against USSR. Urban combat buckbroke them at every bigger city, piling dead bodies they couldn't replace.
>>16885616I just did, maybe read what you write subhuman ESL newfagStill coping that buck toothed limeys saved your pathetic failed state
>>16885617resistance movements in the entire rest of europe fucking up german infrastructure was also a huge factor. germans lost their country the moment they invaded Poland. it had to be the dumbest fucking idea anybody has ever had.
>>16885616Even soviet sources for the men at Moscow alone (not what you said) put the figures far below 50%Why are you like this?
all these years and people still don't get the point of lend-lease. It was extortion. Stalin threatened to ragequit if nobody helped him. So yes, Germany would have won without Lend-Lease, because Stalin would have surrendered.
>>16885618>I just didyou did? i think i missed all the citations and sources bro.can you post them again? >ESLwhy are butthurt homosexuals using this as an insult?everybody in europe who isnt british is ESL, lmao.
>>16885589What does navy have to do with anything? The Soviets didn't have naval supremacy until 1944-1945 when it didn't matter anyway
>>16885593>After Barbarossa>After Leningrad>After Moscow>After Stalingrad>Guys, lend-lease was totaly crucialFuck me
>>16885619> p-polandlike France, Poland was a cakewalk. Attacking USSR was the suicidal move.
>>16885621>if you don't help us we'll be overrun and exterminatedhow the FUCK IS THIS EXTORTION YOU DUMB SHITHEEL
>>16885624westerners begging for a participation trophy in WW2 has to be the most pathetic thing i ever seen.
>>16885621delusional
>>16885625no, wrong.starting WW2 at all was a suicidal move, defeating france and poland in a month doesnt matter. they lost the moment they started WW2.
>>16885627> westernersIt's just murikans. Their ego is not satisfied with Japan alone. They want a piece of big boy Hitler as well.
>>16885622>Prooobs>PrrrrroooooobsRussian subhuman fails to provide his own still I see>Zetterling & Frankson 2012, p. 253.>Mercatante (2012). Why Germany Nearly Won: A New History of the Second World War in Europe. Abc-Clio. p. 105. ISBN 978-0313395932.>Stahel, David (2013). Operation Typhoon: Hitler's March on Moscow, October 1941. Cambridge University Press. p. 45. ISBN 978-1107035126.>Stahel, David (2011). Kiev 1941. Cambridge University Press. p. 339. ISBN 978-1139503600.>Glantz, David M. (2001). Barbarossa: Hitler's Invasion of Russia 1941. Tempus Publishing Ltd. p. 141. ISBN 978-0739417973.>"1941". Archived from the original on 25 October 2012>"BOEHHAЯ ЛИTEPATУPA --[ Иccлeдoвaния ]-- Mягкoв M.Ю. Bepмaхт y вopoт Mocквы, 1941-1942". militera.lib.ru.None of this, even bloated soviet stats put the figures anywhere near 80% you stupid vodka sucking subhuman cunt>>16885623>What does a navy have to do with logistical supply???????>Why does it matter when the soviets didn't have naval supremacy and were riding off the coattails of the powers that saved their wretched existence I dunno, maybe read the OP dumbass
>>16885624>We don't need millions of tonnage of food, boots, winter clothes, railcars, ammo, radar, vehicles and even entire factories
>>16885629> hindsight is 20/20It was the loses on the eastern front that sealed the deal. Germany barely had any loses before that.
>>16885595zigger brownoid cope
>>16885631Nigger, the Germans could and did supply through the Black Sea and Gulf of Finland.>were riding off the coattails of the powers that saved their wretched existenceWtf are you talking about? The Allies didn't protect the Soviets from the German navy
>>16885631am i supposed now to find a library somewhere in the world that has any of these books?lol.
>>16885634mutt negroid cope
>>16885583what an absolute retard take.
>>16885633its not about the losses.germans fate was sealed the moment they started ww2. just rampaging around the world blowing shit up while calling everybody subhuman monkeys is not a recipe for a success.
>>16885632For survival?No.For halting Nazis?No.For wrapping things up in 47?No.For speeding things up and 5 mln less casualties?Yes.
>>16885636>Ask for sources>Be given sourcesCope, where's your 80% subhuman krokadil rotten monkey?>>16885635Nigger britain used it's assets to protect and provide the arctic convoys skirting round, they also used their assets to keep most of the German assets locked down in ports or just outright rekd their shitThat is significant you fucking idiot
>>16885641>my source is BOOK number BOOK BOOK on the page 285 ISBN is BOOKwhoa, what a source.
>>16885636>he doesn't know how to use libgenesis or any other book downloading servicengmi anon
>>16885640Insane levels of copeGoing well now that big daddy westerners arent bailing your subhuman failure of a populace out now isn't it?
>>16885643then go ahead and post screenshots here.dont expect me do you your work.
>>16885645anon it would literally take two minutes to get them. you cannot convince me you've graduated high school if you think this is a hard thing.
>>16885644USSR =/= Russia in 2024L2read
>>16885642>The russian retard fears the books and GoogleJust cause you can't mix them with antifreeze and consume it doesn't mean you should be afraid of it, snow nigger monkeyHow's the AIDs treating you?
>>16885646>anon it would literally take two minutes to get them.then spend 2 minutes and post it here.
>>16885583>>16885640Soviets were already running out of manpower by 44'. Romania switching sides and conquering poland literally saved the soviets as they could mass conscript their populations. If they didn't do this in 44' and let's as 45 as well they literally wouldn't have had enough troops to continue.
>>16885650>Soviets were already running out of manpower by 44'
>>16885641>to protect and provide the arctic convoysNigger, there are NO arctic convoys in this scenario. The Germans easily secured the Black Sea and the Gulf of Finland and the Soviets couldn't do jack shit about it until at least 1944. The German logistics in the USSR was mostly on land anyway and the absence of Allies doesn't fix shitty mud roads, different railway gauge, partisans blowing up trains, general lack of oil and transport vehicles etc
>>16885647Yeah, Russia in 2024 isn't being bailed out by white people, that's why they're failing so miserably on their own border against the poorest nation in europe
>>16885650>as they could mass conscript their populationsWtf are you smoking?
>>16885652Yes, and in a situation with NO arctic convoys and NO RN and USN globally fucking shit up, the Germany has a whole lot more naval assets they can use both liberally and safelyTo think that it would make 0 difference logistically is actually insane
>>16885639> just rampaging around the world blowing shit up while calling everybody subhuman monkeysso, USA post Cold War?It's all about the loses. Faggots never learn until their asses get utterly destroyed. Worked for Napoleon, worked for Hitler, worked for Imperial Japan. > France was easy, let's go for USSR now!Wrong move. And Germany paid the price - millions of dead, split, broke and devastated.
>>16885616He did, you just got btfo Gupta, pay attention.
>>16885655Are you gonna tell me how the Germans could supply their troops through the White Sea or what?
>>16885580.tldr, no.>not enough fuel>not enough metal>not enough food>narrow and short sighted doctrine>poorly streamlined industry>poorly specified equipmenttheir entire plan is hoping the enemy capitulates to a sucker punch
>>16885656>so, USA post Cold War?no, america didnt ruin europe with 5 year long carpet bombing and murder 50+ mln people.
>>16885657he did? with what?
>>16885658If only there were numerous port cities throughout the Baltic...If only most German assets werent tied down in the war in the Atlantic...
>>16885661With the information that made you pathetically stop replying to meGonna prove how the battle of Moscow wiped out 80% of the wehrmacht yet or you just gonna carry on injecting yourself with AIDs ridden needles, faggot
>>16885662the kriegsmarine was basically just a bunch of uboat ninja assassins, its not like it could do anything else besides torpedoing unarmed cargo ships.
>>16885660we'll see how Ukraine war goes. Cluster munitions and carpet bombings are not so different. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, for now.
>>16885664Because everything else got BTFO by Britain, who in this scenario are not in the fucking warJesus Christ
>>16885663but you didnt post any information proving anybody wrong.
>>16885662The Baltic was under total German control though>If only most German assets werent tied down in the war in the AtlanticWhat assets? Cargo ships? Lmao, you don't need u-boats for logistics. Do I have to remind you once again?>The Germans easily secured the Black Sea and the Gulf of Finland and the Soviets couldn't do jack shit about it until at least 1944
>>16885667Yes I did >>16885631These are easily looked up online, you just can't handle being wrong about such a subhuman claim that you're sticking byEven the fucking soviets themselves thought your claim to be wrong and retarded
>>16885580No, they never had a snowballs chance in hell.ww2 was a war of economy and some shit ass nation who thinks piss is beer and horse carts are a "modern, mechanised force" post ww1 couldn't win.Only USA was outproducing every country in the war combined by end of ww2.
>>16885651>>16885654Soviets literally armed 2 million romanians after they switched sides. As part of the axis romania couldn't arm these people because of lack of equipment. Soviets had equipment galore but literally couldn't find men to equip them with.
>>16885668Naval fire support is unimportant?Safer shipping is unimportant?Large parts of the German surface fleet were stuck around the world being picked apart by britain
>>16885667Approximately 686,000 German casualties had been suffered by October 30—in a testament to the Red Army’s considerable and underappreciated capacity for inflicting grievous punishment on the Wehrmacht.t. Why Germany Nearly Won686k is not even close to 80% of the german forces (1.1m to 1.9m), that's actually a more optimistic number than wikipedia gives for the entire battle of moscow and it's still not even close.please go back to your hut ivan
>>16885669>still didnt post anything actually proving me wrongyou didnt even see these sources you posted, huh.
>>16885672I repeat:>The Germans easily secured the Black Sea and the Gulf of Finland and the Soviets couldn't do jack shit about it until at least 1944
>>168856601 million dead in Iraq, 4 million dead during GWOT, 38 millions refugees/displaced from the wars.Credit where credit is due: it wasn't Europe this time, at least not until Ukraine.
>>16885673700k losses out of 1,1 mln is how much %? not 80%, thats for sure, but its still an extermination of the wehrmacht. the vatnik was ALMOST right.
>>16885674>>still didn't post anything actually proving me wrongKek>>16885675I repeat>Safer shipping is unimportant >Naval fire support is unimportantWhy are you ignoring most assets being unavailable for Baltic support, do you think saturation of assets is a negative or something? Do you think additional naval fire support or greater countering of soviet anti shipping wouldn't have helped whatsoever?
>>16885677considering soviet numbers are generally seen as laughable at best, no he's not.
>>16885666the only thing britain BTFO'd in WW2 is themselves and the bismark.
>>16885671>Soviets literally armed 2 million romaniansSource?
>>16885677>Use the most grossly inflated death figures not even the soviets believe>Use the most under inflated amount of German assets deployed>Still not enough for the vatniggers claimShut the fuck up retard
WW2 hypotheticals are always like>Alright could this guy win the boxing match if his opponent had one hand tied behind his back, his shoelaces tied together, and I get a third arm
>>16885680Kek those buck toothed limeys are the only reason the soviet shithole continued to exist
>>16885671I call bullshit. This sounds like some romanian fart sniffing.
>>16885609>80% of wehrmacht died there in the battle of moscow
>>16885686Tankie subhumans are full of surprises
>>16885678Who did they need support from? The Red Fleet was destroyed or sitting in ports, the Allies couldn't pass through the straits. The Germans absolutely dominated there even in our timeline
>>16885679>>16885682>>16885686but you just said germans lost 700k veterans out of 1,1 mln during the battle of moscow.
>>16885689no, anon. i quoted one of the sources mentioned that you demanded a quote from. have you been hit irl before for this sort of behavior? if not you really should be.
>>16885683this. "my team didn't win decisively enough""my team could totally win, if only..."etc. etc...
>>16885690so you quoted a source that proves the vatnik right?
>>16885688>What is LeningradAll those air assets from the battle of Britain, combined with all those naval assets lost to the RN worldwide might have been a little bit of use eh>>16885689No I didn't, I posted 5 different sources, and even the most inflated death toll with the smallest deployment figures (actually more like 2 mil) don't come near 80%You are a lying, retarded subhuman Let's not forget your original claim wasn't even that, it was 80% of the wehrmacht (which would mean as a whole) including ALL of their veterans somehowYou are, and always will be an embarrassing monkey
>>16885692Read his claim againRead the source againStop being a stupid vatnigger cocksucker
>>16885692i'm not sure if you're one of those really annoying people everyone dislikes and this is some sort of emotional power thing for you, or if you're an actual moron who genuinely doesn't understand what he's reading.
>>16885690> it wasn't 80%, it was ONLY 70%is it autism? or you forgot to take your meds? or both?he has a point, you don't. deal with it.
>>16885693What Leningrad? Are you implying it was supplied through the Gulf of Finland? Or that the presence of ships and planes would miraculously make Hitler order to assault the city?
>>16885696you have to be underage. there's no way you're an actual adult who graduated from high school.
>>16885580Depends on what you mean by "win".Capture Moscow and seize western russia? yes, but it would be a very tense peace with a LOT of resistance to occupation.Conquer the entire USSR? no.
>>16885696It's not 70%, you clearly cannot or will not do mathematicsThe least viable source that inflated even soviet figures doesn't even come close to 80%You should kill yourself seriously
>>16885700>posted a title of a book, didnt post whats in it>"just do it yourself bro">yeah ok the germans losses were fucking gigantic and the wehrmacht got massacred but but but but>it wasnt precisely 80% according to the source i wont screenshot!ok!
>>16885580Logisticians gave Hitler a deadline by which he needed to reduce the tempo of combat and free up both manpower and materiel on the eastern front. Hitler flat out ignored them, believing, in the most fundamental way, that he and his army could manipulate reality with magic powers. That really needs to sink in whenever you consider anything about the German war effort. He, and his followers, believed that they could manifest victory regardless of material reality. You can, in no way, think Hitler's grasp on reality, and things like logistics, demographics and economics, would IMPROVE if he was riding high on near total victory. If anything, he would have massively overcommitted and suddenly found himself completely out of supplies, fighting the entire red Army on their doorstep; which they would, and did, accomplish on foot.
>>16885697>Geez why would naval assets and air assets help siege a city?>Especially one where air assets were in short supply????Are you just being obtuse now? The ability to chew down the soviet air force more would have allowed naval assets to pound the city a whole lot harder than it was
>>16885700you first.screeching on the internet isn't much of a life anyway
>>16885683yeah nigga that's how hypothetics works
>>16885701>Made a claim>Can't substantiate it (because it is wrong by all accounts)>Seetheslmao you are actually useless, another victory for me it seems>>16885704Kek so why are you still screeching and shilling some subhuman rat who can't readFyi, if we use German statistics it's not even 10%
>>16885703>On 21 September 1941, German High Command considered how to destroy Leningrad. Occupying the city was ruled out "because it would make us responsible for food supply". The resolution was to lay the city under siege and bombardment, starving its population.
>>16885707Shame they didn't have the air and naval assets available to actually destroy the city then?Once again are you saying saturating assets that wouldn't have been available otherwise (like irl) wouldn't have made any difference whatsoever to their course of action?
>>16885706>Can't substantiate ityup, so post screenshots from your sources.
>>16885708Since neither of us operate any actual numbers I'd say yes, it wouldn't have mattered. There'd have been more civilian deaths and that's it.
>>16885709Heres all the German army group lossesStill lmaoing at your pea brain, mongoloidhttps://web.archive.org/web/20121025022023/http://ww2stats.com/cas_ger_okh_dec41.html
>>16885580No, the Soviet Union was just too big and the Germs and their allies were just too few. While the war probably would've lasted until the late 40's or even the 50's if the krauts did really good, it was simply a matter of time before they cracked under the pressure.
>>16885706> n-no, you> a-another victoryit's autism, confirmed
>>16885580If it wasn't for the Battle of Britain breaking the back of the Luftwaffe then German air power would have all but scrapped the Red Army during Operation Barbarossa. Especially during Mud Season when air power is the only thing not bogged down. Note that while the T-34 has sloped armor, the armor is thinner and more brittle than normal, making it vulnerable to HE from dropped bombs and Mine shells. Likewise, without the Brits holding North Africa then Operation Barbarossa would have had more fuel to drive the Red Army even harder. We should also note that LL came in right as Russia was evacuating it's industry. Many of the key T-34 production facilities were built using US made materials and used US made machinery.
>>16885580>all the artillery and fighter defense is directed to the eastern front instead>USSR doesnt get any high-octane fuel for their planesthey would've won.
>>16885580No, they genuinely simply did not have the logistics network required to occupy that amount of land, nevermind the effects of fighting a land war against a peer military. Best case scenario they split the occupied territories into client states, but that fucks over any plans for Lebensraum because for a client state to operate it still requires some amount of autonomy, and that means you can't just evict the entire population. The German war effort in the eastern front was thoroughly dead by the time they failed to reach the Baku oil fields, and if we're being honest the Soviets would've sabotaged the fields as much as possible if they thought they were going to lose it anyway.However make no mistake, the Soviet Union would not have existed as we'd known it without the lend lease and allied help though. They likely would've collapsed a lot earlier than 1991 if any of this were to happen.
>>16885715also if we extend "lend lease" to all the aid and tech USSR got from the west for almost 20 years prior to ww2, they would've crumpled in 1941 already.
>>16885717why stop there? what if the allies actually allied with Germany? the USSR would fall for sure!
>>16885718We can go even further, imagine if the Allies and Germany invaded the RSFSR en masse in 1919, then they'd definitely fall!
>wehraboos already screaming "muh puccian war with Ukraine..."I won
>>16885719Germany had its own fair share of problems in 1919
>>16885580>plough through Poland, no biggie>lose a fuckton of air transports over low countries when you probably could just have Panzer™ed straight through them>Panzer™ the fuck out of the BEF and French army>lose hundreds of pilots and planes trying to destroy the RAF>fail, lose hundreds of pilots and planes because terrorbombing worked once, surely it'll work again>start spending vast amounts of resources, manpower and material bailing out the Italians in the Balkans, Greece and Africa>fuck it, Barbarossa Time
>>16885580Mongoloids and bunkertroons can seethe all they want, g*rmans would be the ones doing the mass rapings
>>16885723>My horrible shitty national group is better than your horrible shitty national group!I wish I could go back in time to convince Bomber Harris to keep bombing the Germans after the war ended, and to convince Truman to nuke the Soviets. I wish terminally online retards simped for real civilizations instead of failed states all the time.
>>16885722>lose a fuckton of air transports over low countries when you probably could just have Panzer™ed straight through themUsing the luftwaffe was absolutely the right play. The New Dutch Waterline involved flooding everything that wasn't near a fort and likely would have stopped an armored push (which was already way behind schedule) dead in its tracks.
>>16885580If we're talking lend lease only, than the first year wouldn't be much different, the USSR certainly woudn't be so soon on the offensive afterwards though because, as per tradition, their logistics were a clusterfuck and the shitloads of trucks and locomotives did really help them.If UK were out of the picture entirely (due to a peace accord or something) than it would be a different matter, USA not joining in, lots of freed resources, and one could even argue barbarossa starts earlier because one of the reasons for the Balkan campaign (besides Italy dropping the ball hard) was securing the flank from bongs.
>>16885580Define "win" first.Could Nazi Germany have pushed the Soviets all the way to the Arkhangelsk–Astrakhan line? No, that was a complete fantasy.Could they have taken Moscow? No.Could they have convinced Stalin to sue for peace? Yes and Stalin was actually willing to consider that as late as 1943, but a precondition for that was a complete German withdrawal back to the 1941 borders (essentially abandoning all of their conquests), and this was something Hitler was completely unwilling to consider.
>>16885724Where did i imply i was pro-German? Meds
>>16885580It's, honestly, pretty equal fight>German logistics still suck gigantic ass all things considered, like the tempo of the offensive, all the different environments, the seasons, the partisans, etc. that gets even worse if they could commit all their forces with the unchanged state of preparedness>German need for rare metals, alloy materials and fuel, especially that needs refining, won't get magically get solved even if they would manage to capture Caucasus, unless it would be completely intact and with unmolested refineries, pipelines and rails that connect to Europe>Soviets are still moving their existing factories and industrial base to Ural and lots of it is historically located there anyway like Magnitogorsk and that shit gets expanded>USSR still has 200 million populationStill a lot of aspects that need revisitingWhat about Japan, Italy, and all the other Axis allies? Will they commit to Barbarossa as well now that they're not bound by the Allies? Do Russians get to make new friends? What happened to Africa and Levant in this scenario? Is Iran unoccupied?I'd say in general, the Germans take like 2/3rds of the USSR that's in the European continent, maybe even Moscow, but are either pushed back to near the Ukraine borders and/or the Caucasus, until the front stabilizes and both sides are completely exhausted in both manpower, even the Soviets, and supplies
>>16885727>Could they have taken Moscow? No.I think that without Lend-lease and allied bombings they could have taken Moscow, but at a huge cost that would have killed all momentum and left them unable to push further.
>>16885728>Mongoloid>BunkertroonI see you.
>>16885580Worst case (for Europe/Germany) would be the Soviets cannot push Germany past Eastern Ukraine, Belarus and to the border of the Baltic'sThe Western front would still likely tie up too many resources for them to actually destroy the Soviets
>>16885731Why did he do it bros?
>>16885729OPs question is misleading. It implies that momentum changed because Germany was getting bombed or because of lend lease. If we look at when the tide officially shifted at the battle of Stalingrad, we can see that this was in the earliest of stages on lend lease and that at this point, Germany still had full continental supremacy. Anyone who looks at economics which is what is actually a determining factor in winning of conventional wars would deduce that Germany lost the fight the moment they failed to get Soviets to capitulate. Even the moment they started operation Barbarossa. The futher they went into soviet territory, the worse off they got
>>16885671>Soviets literally armed 2 million romaniansThey didn't. In fact they caoutred and disarmed about 100k Romanian soldiers after the coup in Romania happened and the new government switched sides.t. Romanian
>>16885656>so, USA post Cold War?We weren't the ones suicide bombing people and beheading randoms for no reason.
>>16885673Don't forget 1.9m is the highest estimate for wehrmacht personnel at the battle for moscow. All in all ca. 18m served in the wehrmacht for its entire 10 year existence. That anon claimed 80% of the wehrmacht died there.
>>16885730The Germans were unable to take Moscow because of1. The weather2. Being at the extreme end of their logistical chainLend-Lease and the bombing campaign against Germany proper were still in their infancy by December, 1941 and had virtually no impact on how the Battle of Moscow played out.The Germans may have reached the city, but as March, 2022 shows, there's a difference between reaching the enemy's capital and actually taking it.
>>16885737>That anon claimed 80% of the wehrmacht died there.80% of german casualties occured on the eastern front.
>>16885580Maybe. Soviets buckling without lend lease is more likely, but in general they were fighting pretty brutally during and even with Lend Lease. The most likely outcome is the civvies buckle first
>>16885612>>16885614>>16885615You stupid fucking faggot,Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat
>>16885647The USSR during this time period would have more in common with the Russia of now than not. Both had just suffered massive restructures, lost huge swaths of population and were a fraction of their previous industrial capacity
German supply line is still shit on its own and subject to allie air raids.
Maybe, but that's not how it went. You could spend a lifetime obsessing over the past, over wars that have been decided. There are lessons from history, but there are also conflicts present and future yet to be decided, even on this soil. Very real and present, physically relevant to our lives.For example, some are still struggling to accept the decisive outcome of Afghanistan, others are already applying the lessons learned against the zionist government.
>163 posts in>no mention of the moral boost lend lease provided>no mention of stalins own cracked psyche>no mention of britains economical war of slurping up the free markets resources from non aligned countriesNo western allies means way more than just one less front and no material. It also means that stalins worst fear came to pass and that hitler did not go after brittain. It also means that hitler has an easier time to gather more anti-communist volunteers from the occupied countries (and beyond) as soldiers. War is more complex than just comparing numbers, especialy when you look into how stalin made multiple peace offerings and the desperation behind the red army. Would finland stay loyal to germany in that scenario, with no fear of western support for russia bachfiring on them?Would the subject peoples of the commies be as willing to form resistance cells when it's just moskow vs berlin?What about the fighting men of the red army, how are they fed with ukraine gone?
>>1688573980% of all german casualties happening on the eastern front =/= 80% of the wehrmacht dying in Moscow
>>16885633The should've had 20/20 hindsight, WW1 was a couple of years behind. Monkte's plan and his fellow shits was proven way to hard to implement when everyone else was keeping their game at their peak and Britain had no intentions of backing down from another continental war.
>>16885727>Could they have taken Moscow? No.they couldnt take moscow because hitler 2 months prior had ordered army group central, which was tasked to go for moscow, instead turn south and help army group south in kiev first and only later resume the push for moscow. this gave the soviets time to prepare moscow for defense. and this happened after the yugoslavian campaign had already delayed operation barbarossa by 2 months. it was never planned to run into rasputitsa season and then winter warfare.
>>16885580Easily. Just like they could have easily defeated the western allies if the Soviet Union had stayed put.Hell, if Japan had stuck to the plan and attacked the soviets with chinese aid instead of expanding Manchuria, the axis could still have won.The longer the war went on, the more Hitlers retardedness / sabotage (dependingon which story you believe) was ignored by the military. They started using assault rifles and machine guns despite his "they gunna waste me ammunitions" bullshit, shifted from muhstrongpointz to defense in depth and started allying with slavs instead of using them for forced labor. A few years more, and Germany would've had atomic bombs and aircraft carriers, no matter how much Hitler was against those.Besides, how many countries can you think of that face the entire rest of the world, get defeated, and immediately go for a second round?
>>16885635>The Allies didn't protect the Soviets from the German navythey literally were. why do you think the germany navy couldnt just blockade murmansk? it sure wasnt soviet ships chasing german ships into norwegian fjords
>>16885749
>>16885749>how many countries can you think of that face the entire rest of the world, get defeated, and immediately go for a second round?carthage?
>>16885582Barbarossa was the conquest of the largest landmass in the shortest possible time up to that point in history. Without lend lease the USSR would have fallen in 1941.
>>16885707they could not take leningrad because they had run into successful soviet counter attacks north and south of lake ilmen. had army group north massed troops to take leningrad the soviets would have used the opportunity to strike the german lines in the north. it wasnt planned to leave leningrad behind. the goal for army group north was to cut off the railway to murmansk and take the port of archangelsk.
>>16885745this nigga knows shieeet
>>16885595>just going to pretend the Pacific Ocean doesnt exist
>>16885701>make insane claim>get proven wrong almost immediately>backpeddal, deny and mealy mouth like a giant womanEntire Wehrmacht was killed in France by George Washington, but he sent their corpses to the moon after meat spinning on Hitler's soon to be moon bound body. Prove me wrong.
>>16885580Yes, the Communists admitted it privately after the war. They would have lost without the lend-lease.
>>16885595>being this retarded
>>16885580absolutely, russians were only capable of going as far as they did because they were getting bankrolled by the allies and the germans were fighting a multiple front war, if it was 1 vs 1, russia would be nothing but a memory, as it should
i don't think they could take all Russiaafter the revolution, bolsheviks made consistent increasing in industrial productionBut for Shure Germany would had extended their country over eastern europe.Many say it was a logistics problem. Seeing how modern day German army is spending money, looks that they made homework.Dozens of thousands of vehicles and more to come. news say they will provide logistics for NATO.
>>16885580Depends, if allies enforced blockade (as I think they would), germany would run out of oil before smoking russia out of siberia.
>>16885580Germany wins if the US doesn't intervene. Germany loses if the US intervenes.It's quite literally that simple.Stalin said so, zhukov said so, other high profile soviet officials said so, the logistical statistics indicate it would be so.
>>16885580Yes, easily
>>168855801v1 Axis vs USSR yeah Axis would probably win. But the war was never a 1v1, and the axis would never have a total victory. Vatniks love to downplay allied contributions to the war as if lend lease was the only thing they did and it only happened after the war was won or some shit but it's a very stupid argument to make.
>over a thousand heavy bombers are lost over germany carpet bombing their industry, civilian infrastructure, and logistics>vatniks think this doesn't count for much because they lost an equal number of men in a poorly supported mass assault on a fortified position in bumfuck nowhere belarus that accomplished nothing
>>16885765I'd argue that the outcome of the war actually hinged on the US election. A president that wasn't hellbent on interventionism would have changed everything.Japanese get to buy as much oil as they want? No pacific war. President doesn't care about europe? No lend lease and no direct involvement in europe.Germany definitely isn't getting shit beyond the urals, but the soviet union effectively no longer matters. Germany isn't conquering the british isles, but the brits are going to have to come to an agreement.
>>16885767>Japanese get to buy as much oil as they want? No pacific war.Eh, that's iffy. American sentiment was strongly anti-japan regardless of the party due to their war and brutality on westerners like the dutch and british. Japan always felt the southern strategy would push them into war with America regardless of oil and I can't see them avoiding the Philippines given their track record.Europe though yeah that's different, but I don't consider Japan part of the axis anyways. >Germany definitely isn't getting shit beyond the urals, but the soviet union effectively no longer matters. Germany isn't conquering the british isles, but the brits are going to have to come to an agreement.I agree with the theory that oil drove a lot of the decisions of Germany in the war, especially with regards to the Soviets. Hitler gets a lot of criticism for diverting troops away from moscow but to be honest the Soviets also seemed to value the caucasus oil more than Moscow too. No oil from the US and no oil from baku might be enough to change things.
>>16885585illiterate
>>16885699>Conquer the entire USSRwhy the fuck would they do that?
>>16885716>Lebensraumthis was never real you gullible fucks
>>16885768At the very least, I imagine US "economic cooperation" with japan means the starting date for the pacific war gets pushed back far enough that it may only start after the war in europe is decided.
>>16885580Yes and no. They could certainly have militarily defeated the USSR, but then they would have added millions of russians to their population, which constitutes a loss.
>>16885588There is a somewhat credible hypothesis (by a soviet historian no less) that the reason for the unexpectedly quick success of the initial phase of Barbarossa (aside from Commie incompetence) was because the Soviets were forward deployed in preparation for offensive operations. Basically the first German artillery and airstrikes fell on the assembly points. It would also explain the lack of defensive depth or fortifications in general on the part of the Soviets, as well as why everything was as close to the border as possible. This in a military environment which had just repeatedly demonstrated how quickly tanks and aircraft could punch a hole in a front line. Soviet policy was to jump in and aid whichever side was about to lose in order to extend the length of the conflict and bleed out both the Democracies and the Germans for a discount; in summer of 1941, Britain was at a pretty low ebb and losing ground in the Mediterranean which the Soviets could reasonably believe was a last chance to enter before a total British defeat could allow the Germans to focus their full and undivided attention upon the east.
>>16885768>Eh, that's iffy. American sentiment was strongly anti-japan regardless of the party due to their war and brutality on westerners like the Dutch and BritishWhen were they at war with the Dutch and British before WW2? Both the Dutch and the British joined the US embargo of Japan. If the US was totally neutral in the matter, Japanese fears could have been allayed.
>>16885774This is one of those theories where, it's 100% true that the Soviets really did want the Krauts and Bongs tied up in France and bleeding each-other for years, before finally launching a carefully prepared invasion of Germany's defenceless eastern lands; but we can't really say for sure whether the leadup for Barbarossa was preparations for that kind of thing or not.At the very least, I'd say that preparing to invade was in Stalin's character, so I buy the theory, even if the force deployment at that exact moment wasn't actually prepping for an immediate invasion.It could also have been soviet retardation.After all, during the chaos of 'Barb, whole Soviet armies were ordered to attack through swamps, or ditch their field guns and go on foot (the trucks to haul the guns hadn't arrived yet).
>>16885580no, bombings did not have that much of a strategic impact beyond forcing the luftwaffe to focus more on defense which while helpful to Russia wasn't a game changer, Germany pretty much exhausted far to much of its own resources in the initial push well before the allies started making big plays in Europe with 42 being the last time they could really attempt a push which just ended with the disaster at Stalingrad, everything after that was just Germany delaying the inevitable, what is more realistic is the Soviets collapsing several decades earlier since irl they needed to demobilize asap just to get people working on farms again to prevent a giga famine, with the war going on longer in this case there is no way to prevent that and thus the Soviets suffer even more irreversable damage
>>16885580Yes. They did that once already just 20 years earlier with their B-team when vatniks were alone against them For comparison sake without the burger idiots feeding them they lost 40% of their food production when germans captured ukraine. That alone would have created a general famine sweeping across all fronts/rears by late 1942 latest
>>16885727>Could they have taken Moscow? No.yeah they could. It did not happen because the strategic reserves were allocated for case blue as adolf had a obsession with Baku. Without burgers food/ammo/wheels/trains/factories ziggers were sitting ducks that at best could only hope with reactive stalemate on over extended german lines. As they way more garbage motorized then germans were without burger aid. Non existent in fact as the trucks in particular were extremely shit copies of old burger Ford trucks
>>16885734>we can see that this was in the earliest of stages on lend lease and that at this point,bullshit. Finns in the very early stages of continuation war were reporting american canned food in the hands of vatniks. They were definitely getting things much earlier vatniks just try to obfuscate things by only talking about lethal stuff like calibers while downplaying the crucial stuff they absolutely suck dicks at- logistical aid
>>16885723as if, vatniks like to project yet war time accounts about individual german soldier behavior compared to the steppe plague is like night and day. >barbarossa starts>german platoon moves through village>Lt asks local house owner (single woman) to let his soldiers sleep for the night in her barn>pays her even a symbolic sum of german marks (money)>leaves in orderly fashion next day>later vatniks come crashing through as german retreat>woman (wisely) hides in forest>comes back. barn burned down>they used his woodstove oven as a toilet>windows smashed in/house looted many such cases. SAD!
>>16885714eh. air power was not even that decisive back in those days. Besides luftwaffe did own the skies on the eastern front anyway throughout most of the campaign and used vatniks as target practice for their more junior pilots
>>16885659all you listed is exactly the defects pidor union had without allies bailing them out
>>16885780You're right, approximately ~2% of lend lease did arrive before 1942 so we'll include that
Here's a good questionAssuming no lend leaseCouldn't the USSR have just bought what it needed from the other nations anyway?It's not like there was some embargo on the USSRTrade exists
>>16885781Yes, German soldiers only ever treated the occupied population with kindness
>>16885580yes, the luftwaffe got fucked solely by the anglos and america due to fighters being sent west to fight the bombers and the stupid attempts to bomb england, and without western trucks their troops would have starved at the front
>>16885594He got reinforced constantly but everything went to the sea, as late as the tunisian campaign he was still receiving reinforcements. But the real drain on german resources was the atlantic wall and italy. By 1943 germany had 9 million mobilised men but only 2,5 million were in the soviet front
>>16885785Bought with what? They were poor as shit and when ukraine went and with the scorched earth most soviets were starving in 1942. All the raw materials they needed for the war industry, their steel was shit, their refined fuel was shit, they had almost no shipping to do trade with anyway.
>>16885789>their steel was shitYou pick one to mention specifically and it's steel? LL steel was equal to only 5% (1.3 mil tons) of USSR productionI guess they made that 5% go a long wayAt least say rubber, nickel, aluminium, or copper; something that made up a high percentage.
>>16885672What naval fire support could the kriegsmarine have given in this scenario that was not given historically?Given we know from our timeline how stupidly the Germans lose their capital ships, I'm not entirely sure how losing the Blucher to a Soviet torpedo instead of a Norwegian one changes much on that front. If the Soviet air force is weakened enough the Germans have the air superiority they want to bring their ships heavy guns to bear on Leningrad consistently, then they already don't need the heavy guns. The Pacific campaign shows how limited heavy naval bombardment can be in jungle, let alone an urban environment.
Mmm ahh the naval fire support that helped turn the tide of the eastern front, I can see it now
>>16885791Ackshually Blucher was sunk by a cannon
>>16885791>>16885789>>16885788y'all are forgetting disease and it showshttps://youtu.be/KTTfCJQhmzM?si=8_SUgh3P-WJAlPZ7
>>16885611No, in well recorded histories that you can get from any reputable library.
>>16885580>could germans win if they didn't losesources point to maybe
>>16885608What you're trying to say is 80% of HEAVY tanks (which was because the grand majority of tanks were light and medium)Try to remember facts correctly before contributing to the discussion
>>16885796How would you feel if you hadn't had breakfast yesterday?
>>16885796better than ask again l8r.always the brits
>>16885580If they can secure oil fields there is a good chance, so the question is if all the ressources they burned in Britain/Africa and what they had to garrison the atlantic wall is enough to achieve that.Im curious how we achieve the "not getting bombed" part in your scenario.Was germany allowed to annex poland and was now facing the soviets with France/Britain just watching, did France try to protect poland and fell along with it?Because French/Czech industry are going to play an important role.
Most likely no.Anons who keep saying yes because Lend-Lease peaked in late 1943 are forgetting a key factor.And that is not whether Germany can win, but whether the Soviet state can survive.Think about this: if the Soviet Union is entirely alone, facing the full force of German industry and occupied Europe, the Soviet state economy will be strained to breaking point in order to maintain the military.The Soviet union was already starving during the war because the state was plundering the civilian sector for military material. They needed to compensate for the losses in 1941 so they took whatever tractor or home radio they could find. Millions of men had to be mobilized, men who cannot produce but still has to eat.And I have facts to back this upIn 1945 the Soviet Union was completely exhausted from the war. Their reserves were depleted. They couldnt take any more casualties. It is estimated that nearly 90% of everyone born in 1923 had died. The Soviet Union had to immediately demobilize after the war to get their men back into civilian life in order to prevent a disaster. In 1946 a famine broke out as a result from the strain of the war, up to 2 million starved to death.So the key argument in OP scenario is endurance.Now keep in mind that those who say Germany still couldnt win because of Lend-Lease only becoming significant later, also omitting the fact that the vast majority of German production and cosumption was dedicated to fight the western powers. Nearly 50% of Germanys total munition production was single engine aircrafts, specifically to defend German airspace from allied bombing. 5-10% of Germany munition production was anti-air guns, again to defend German airspace. The Navy took an additonal 10%, again against the west. Plus the entire frontline in Africa and Italy.All of this would now be dedicated towards the USSR.It is true that the USSR would likely win at Moscow and even Stalingrad on their own accord, but the question is again endurance
>>16885733Faustian spirit.
>>16885580Probably, but Germany is not going to get to the Soviet border without eating Poland first, so conflict with the Allies is inevitable.
>>16885878>Most likely no.You mean yes
>>16885904Yeah that was a silly mistake I realized the moment i posted.Unfortunately 4chan has no quick edit function.
>>16885648Great leader is too far to hear these concerns.
>>16885580They were too retarded for that; even capturing the resources and industries of the whole continental Europe prior to the attack (and employing the armies of a bunch of OTHER European countries...) wouldn't be enough.Let alone a real - hypothetical - Germany v USSR kek.
>All this unhinged seething about russiachrist you faggots are easily led.
>>16885584>just throw even MORE men at the stretched supply lines quagmire!
>>16885580No.Only thing that MIGHT have saved them is the UK not having a navy. Simply because most countries hated the USSR enough that they would be open to trade. The USSR would have always been victorious based on the simple reality that Nazi Germany was a inherently doomed state entirely sustained by loot and plunder incapable of building anything. >>16885753>Without lend lease the USSR would have fallen in 1941.No, the point is they DIDN'T fall in 1941 and then the land lease kicked in.
>>16885758No, they admitted it in public DURING the war. Which is why it's largely untrustworthy. >>16885766>>over a thousand heavy bombers are lost over germany carpet bombing their industry, civilian infrastructure, and logisticsWhat logistics? What industry? What civilian infrastructure? They literally had to loot most of that from the Czechs to not collapse in 1939.
>>16885753>Barbarossa was the conquest of the largest landmass in the shortest possible time up to that point in historyWill they didn't have bloody trucks and tanks in 1500 now did they, of course it was faster so what
>>16886098>They literally had to loot most of that from the Czechs to not collapse in 1939Is this some bizarre claim that Germany had no industry in 1939
>>16885878>but whether the Soviet state can survive.The problem with that is that the Nazis had largely pushed things too far. It was pushed from a relatively simple question of "Is the Nazi State going to be able to replace the government in Moscow?" to the far more serious matter of "Are the Nazis going to murder every single person in East Europe?". The former was achievable, not as achievable as what they should have done (Repeat the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk), but achievable enough that it might have worked out. The latter was never going to happen simply because Hitler's racial ideology was objectively false and when you push things to the absolute extreme like that simple material factors win out every time.
>>16886105>Is this some bizarre claim that Germany had no industry in 1939They had no industry able to maintain a army, let alone a modernized industrialized state at the same time. Hitler largely gambled everything, as in he literally took a insane amount of loans he intended to repay by plundering Europe, into building up a military juggernaut. Then they failed to actually build a military industrial complex worth a damn, so their only choice was to steal some from the Czechs to not economically collapse.
>>16886111So the claim here is that the majority of "German controlled" military industry was in Czechoslovakia
>>16885580>if WW2 hadn't have happened could Germany have wonis what you're askinganyway if the Allies hadn't bombed Germany Germany would have engaged in a policy of scorched earth on the USSR which was what the plan was for most of the cities. This would have denied the Soviets, and more importantly the Germans, a base from which to get food, and there's a whole lot of USSR.It's doubtful that there could have been a significant German incursion into the Urals, and the war as a whole wouldn't have lasted past the late 40s due to it being a quagmire. And even then, if for some reason the Western Allies had decided on "Japan first," Germany would have faced the full brunt of atomic warfare.Germany wouldn't have been likely to win a war in the USSR under any circumstances.
>>16886106Well Hitler did have reasons for his rationale.The Wehrmacht had been battle tested in France with outstanding success.The Red Army had been battle tested in Finland with abyssmal failure.Memory from 1917 tells the Germans that the Russian state begins to disintegrate when faced by just a smaller portion of the German military. The communist regime was regarded as artificially holding together a house of cards of people and nations within the USSR.When Hitler said "we only need to kick in the door, and the whole rotten structure will come crashing down", this is what he meant. History and recent experience of State failure´under pressure and Red Army poor perfomance, and the recent Russian civil war now only loosely held togehter.Hitler was also being fed catastrophically inaccurate military intel by his incompetent command, which also motivated his decision to attack. The Red Army according to German command only had 150 divisions, when it reality, they had over 300, and three echelons of defence all the way to Smolensk.What the Germans failed to anticiapte was just how well the communists had managed to consolidate their power in Russia and it's centralized government, while also shifting the nation from a near complete agricultural economy to an industrial one in a very short timeframe (at a very high cost of human lives). Industrialization and farm collectivization, social and military purges from farmers and officers hadstrengthened the states hold and ultimately become decisive to prevent a social and economic collapse when the USSR was strained by the pressure of invasion to a far greater extent than in ww1. These traumas and hardship forced on the Soviet people in the interwar period had also strengthened the people to endure extreme circumstances far better than their western counterparts.1/2
>>168862392/2According to Mark Harrison, German successful invasion cut Soviet GDP by 1/3 and the bulk of their population for manpower. Soviet citizen overall living standard dropped by over 50% as the civilian sector was being squeezed in order to bolster the military costs. Mortality rate rose. Civilian production and industry such as coal, electricity and consumer goods also dropped significantly as war production rose.So again, OP question is heavily centered on how far the civilian sector can bear and for how long since the disproportion of civilian and military employment and production only grew, and since no Lend-Lease and no Allied war effort will only prolong and intensify German military efforts in Russia.Harrison writes:"between 1940 and 1942 the number of soldiers and war workers supplying the war effort rose by nearly 14 millions. But since at the same time the total size of the workforce fell by 32 millions, the result was to cut the number of workers supplying the needs of the civilian economy by a staggering 46 millions. As a result, when more resources became available in 1943 and 1944 they were probably used more to relieve the strain on the civilian economy than to increase the war effort"In 1942, Soviet GDP was 70% of that of Germany, but still outproduced Germany in munitions and fielded a larger army, this was because the USSR was better at mass-production, while German production was still heavily artisan, thus the USSR could organize more with less. Germany also invested more cost into research new weapons, rockets, jets etc.Nevertheless, the Soviet state foundation was already at breaking point in 1942 and it does puzzle historians how the Soviet people managed to stomach the situation. Ruthless state control also effectively quelled defeatism and encourage patriotism.
>>16886243Do you visit these kind of threads so often that you have pasta at the ready
>Memory from 1917 tells the Germans that the Russian state begins to disintegrate when faced by just a smaller portion of the German militaryAre we just going to ignore the ~4.5mil Austro-Hungarian losses
>>16886158I think OPs question is to give Germany the circumstances of complete peace in the west (while having achieved their continental occupied territory? Not sure, OP doesnt specify his scenario), thus Germany has no threat of either economic blockade or atomic warfare. Their backs are clear and their hands are free to mobilize their entire nation for a war with the USSR, whom will recieve no aid from the western powers.
>>16886247This was something I just wrote and then divided the text into two parts between 2000 word limit, before actually posting.
>>16885582Lend-Lease had already taken effect before Barbarossa ended. Just because most of the sheer volume didn't come until 1943 and after doesn't mean there weren't crucial materials being delivered in 1941.
>>16886247You ask the same idiotic wehraboo questions over and over again and you complain that you get the same answers. kekNo you retard, people won't start agreeing with you just because of your stubbornness.
>>16886243>and it does puzzle historians how the Soviet people managed to stomach the situation.Victory at Stalingrad in early '43 to halt and reverse German advances, brutally effective leadership, and a population well used to suffering
>>16886292The 2% of lend lease that arrived in 1941 must have been incredibly effective
>>16886262I ignored most of German allies commitment in both ww1 and ww2 mostly because word limit hinders the ability to include every little detail and context.In terms of ww1, the Germans were on roughly 30% and the Austrians at roughly 50% in their allocation of forces to the eastern front, with the Germans playing the most significant key role in preventing the majority of Russian offensives.
>>16886304>every little detail and context.I can see how Austria Hungary might be considered just a "little detail" of the WW1 Eastern Front, my mistake
>>16885588>Soviets were gonna invade Germany memeEven Stalin knew the Red Army was a massive fuck up after the Winter War and had no chance. Also he was firmly a socialism in one country kind of guy.
>>16886264under the weird circumstances of the Western Allies making peace with Germany with Germany still keeping the Eastern conquests? probably not still
>>16886298Too many anons are stuck up on the quantity and not quality. Remember that.The most significant aspect of Lend-Lease was quality.While food aquired through Lend-Lease was only 2% of Soviet domestic food production, it doesnt represent the quality of that food. They were recieving high-protein spam and meat instead of bread which should be mentioned because fat can be a critical factor in food consumption and the Soviets didnt produce much of it. Those 2% suddenly thus becomes 40%.Same with material. While you are citing tonnage as insignificant, those can still be absolutely vital pieces of quality goods the Soviets themselves cannot produce such as stereoscopic rangefinder.A stereoscopic rangefinder might a much lesser proportion to the amount of tanks the Soviets can produce, it is still the absolutely most vital part of a tank and many times the ultimate deiciding factor if a tank can destroy or be destroyed.Of that Lend-Lease, nearly ALL of Soviet source of aluminium came from Lend-Lease, so without it, you wouldnt have any Soviet domestic aircraft production. Lend-Lease also included explosives.I should probably say that I share your position, that the battle for Moscow was won on Soviet shoulders, I also just dont think the discussion should be so distorted. These ww2 discussion always takes a radical position where anons keep arguing that ww2 was won entirely through Lend-Lease, with other anons arguing that the Soviets won entirely on their own. No one wants to reach a middle-ground for some reason.
Total amount of land-lease was about 5% of USSR cumulative GDP during the war.
>>16886323No idea, OP doesnt specify the playing field for his scenario.Another assumption would be that Germany is allowed to take Austria, Czechoslovakia and Poland without intervention, and then launch their invasion.But then you'd still be altering significant porportion of German resources since they have no occupied France, whos confiscated trucks were vital in the Barbarossa offensive.
>>16886314I could make a similar post about Italys contribution in ww2 and claim that their commitment was significantly more than Germany in terms of men mobilized and casualties taken in for example the Balkan and North African campaign before the Germans arrived.I wouldnt because it's dishonest.
>>168862951943 is relatively late tho. The real remarkable success of Soviet endurance came with the catastrophic defeats in 1941.
>>16886341>Too many anons are stuck up on the quantity and not quality.While I don't entirely disagree, it's fairly silly to argue it was quality that won Stalingrad or even Moscow. Not to say the entire war came down to just those two conflicts, in fact the reason why Stalingard was so noticeable was Operation Uranus. Which I think did use a decent chunk of Land Leased tanks, but still.
>>16886239>The Wehrmacht had been battle tested in France with outstanding success.Yes and no. I think the mistake he made was ironically the same mistake the France made themselves when they decided not to invade Germany in 1939: They underestimated themselves. Yes, France was hardly a military juggernaut but most of it's mistakes came down more to a failure of leadership than a difference in equipment. >Memory from 1917 tells the Germans that the Russian state begins to disintegrate when faced by just a smaller portion of the German military.The issue there is that in 1917 part of the reason WHY the Russian state started to disintegrate is because the communists got involved. Outside of that, the Germans in world war one were not trying to conquer Russia, let alone genocide the entire slavic population. Hell, part of the reason why the communists eventually took over is because they were the only ones willing to cut their losses and just hand over Ukraine and Belarus to Germany. > OP question is heavily centered on how far the civilian sector can bear and for how long since the disproportion of civilian and military employment and production only grew, and since no Lend-Lease and no Allied war effort will only prolong and intensify German military efforts in Russia.Well, part of the issue with that question is that it assumes the Axis was just Germany and that Germany was ONLY Germany. Remove the Czechs from the equation, and Germany essentially has no military. Remove the oil trade with Romania from the picture, and Germany might as well be showing up with toy tanks and paper planes. At the same time, remove the UK navy from the picture and the USSR is probably fucked beyond help just because Germany can now freely trade with anybody.
>>16885781German women were quite inviting to soviet troops.
>>16886385I think it's why the land lease on it's own is fairly secondary. Did it help the USSR? Sure, I doubt they would have won in 1945 without it. At the same time however, It's also fairly obvious that it helped the allies more. No fucking way Italy or Normandy would have been anything short of a total unmitigated disaster without the USSR taking up this much pressure. Literally millions of British and Americans would have most likely perished in both operations. The most likely outcome to no land lease is either a totally exhausted USSR and Nazi Germany making peace based on the principle that they literally no longer have the resources to do anything, or a total soviet victory that sees them walking all the way to Paris. Meanwhile, the most likely outcome to no allied involvement is no war at all just because Poland is still there serving as a effective buffer state to both.>Hitler was also being fed catastrophically inaccurate military intel by his incompetent command,Come the fuck on. They can't be both incompetent and also battle tested at France. At worst they were lying or overconfident.>and it does puzzle historians how the Soviet people managed to stomach the situation.It really doesn't, anon. It's fairly hard to consider surrender when your enemy openly talks about a war of extermination. See also: Sino Japanese war 1 vs 2. Post Nanking the situation had simply grown too dire for anybody in China to seriously consider anything other than fighting to the other man. And, for all of it's horror, The Second Sino Japanese war was noticeably LESS violent than Operation Barbarossa.
>>16885774>>16886317the USSR used Germany as some kind of "shock troop" in Eastern Europe. It probably didn't went how Stalin planned (like losing 27 million people), but it made much easier to conquer EE without big resistance movements against them. That's why they sent them resources during the non-aggression pact.
>>16885580Yes.>Inb4 muh battle of Moscow They were still using Western equipment, and if the subhuman horde wasn't armed, fed, fueled, and armored by America then it would have given the Germans time to reconsolidate. We should have listened to Patton. Daily reminder that "Studebaker" is still slang in Russia for a large truck.
>>16886403are you sure it had nothing to do with satellite states being set up to ensure that the West couldn't invade Russia again, like what the Nazis and their allies literally did?
>>16885781Pretty much.
>>16886154Yes. France was literally invaded with repainted Czech tanks. Everything they built was largely a total failure, and most of the production that mattered came from places outside Germany proper.
>>16886426>Everything they built was largely a total failure
>>16886411>Daily reminder that "Studebaker" is still slang in Russia for a large truck.You lying little slime. You can type in google right now "cтyдeбeккep", "штyдeбeккep", "cтyдep", "штyдep" and find no discussions on forums involving it in the context of general truck, only as a specific model.You other claims hold the same fucking ground as this one.
>>16886401>Come the fuck on. They can't be both incompetent and also battle tested at France. At worst they were lying or overconfident.Nope you are comparing apples to oranges.Germany army was tactically superior but we are speaking of military intel and military deception which is an entirely different ballgame and here the German command was incompetent. One, they had a catastrophic inaccurate intel on the enemys intention virtually all the time, from Overlord to Bagration. They had a catastrophic inaccurate intel on enemy resources, from Battle for Britain to Barbarossa.This is in stark contrast to the allies who were virtually completely aware of Germanys intentions literally reading their codes, and often overestimated the German resources rather than underestimating.Which brings us to point number two: deception. The Germans were catastrophic at miilitary deception. Both allied and Soviet offensives achieved complete surprise in their major offensives, from Uranus to Torch.Meanwhile the Germans failed to hide most of their major offensives. Barbarossa for example was completely known to the Soviets, down to the last minute of the offensive.The Soviets failed to act on this intel because of one mans ignorance, but it doesnt relieve the Germans from the fact that they completely failed in their deception, and this was further repeated at Case Blue where the Soviets aquired the compelete details of the German offensive, and at Citadel where the Soviets recieved complete detail of the German offensive.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_military_deception
>>16886434I stand corrected. It looks like that was an unsourced forum post I used. I sincerely apologize for spreading fake news. Doesn't change what Zhukov and Krutschev said, doesn't change the fact that lend-lease was a mistake, and that the past 80 years have proven Hitler's assesment of the russian "people" to be correct.
>>16886401You cant even spell lend lease. You keep calling it land lease. Your entire fucking post instantly becomes retarded from this alone, especially since you expect us to listen to your bullshit speculations based on nothing but normie narrative bullshit about how god almighty the wehrmacht is.Shut the fuck up and lurk instead of posting.
>>16886453Dumb error, to be sure. At the Same time however, it doesn't discredit every point I make and claiming as much is a intellectual fallacy. >based on nothing but normie narrative bullshit about how god almighty the wehrmacht is.Where? My point is not "Wehrmacht good", it's closer to "US and UK army bad". Which, yes, they were mostly shite.
>>16886426Panzer III was still superior to Panzer 38tThe problem was that Panzer III existed only in double digit numbers because Germany did not expect world war in 1939.Wikipedia also tells me that Wehrmacht swelled by roughly 40% from confiscated Czech armanent, which is significant but not the majority (and wikipedia could be wrong).But I still share your position that seizing the Czech state was vital for Hitler, hence why he did it despite knowing it was going to make Britain mad as hell and then cry about the military assurance to Poland.
>>16886447>soviet officials patted westcucks, offering lip service and their participation trophy>arrogant westcucks took it as face valueRead the room, bucko.
>>16886465>Western armies mostly shiteThank you for your idiot input retard. I cant wait to hear you defend it with your normie factless bullshit. Sadly this thead will be archieved before we get that discussion going.
>>16886427The MG42 was largely a failure and only saw real success after it was moved out of Germany.
>>16885580>could German win against the commies if they didn't plunder the gold reserves of every country they had previously conquered, if they had mobilized a wartime economy before they lost the Battle of Moscow, if they hadn't mobilized 2/3 of their armaments industry and replaced them with Slav and Jew slave labourers and if their ideology that motivated them into starting the war allowed them to establish puppet regimes in former Soviet states instead of starving the population to death/mass executing them???sure let's play fantasy football if you want to OP
>>16886465And no, calling it land lease so vehemently shows that you have no fucking clue what the fuck you are talking about so your credibility is lost there and then. Whos fucking land is being leased?It's like me calling wehrmacht the fucking bundeswehr. Imagine making a fucking effort-port about my alt-history conclusions while continously calling them bundeswehr. Do you think my opinions are bullshit then? I most likely would.Shut the fuck up.
>>16886470>Panzer IIIProbably the best tank to come out of Germany, though even the Germans argued the Soviet Tanks were better amusingly, but also one of the few real major successes and fittingly enough developed very early on (With a lot of the design ideas being older than the Nazi state). Most of what was actually build when the Nazis really took over was infamous for being unreliable. >Wikipedia also tells me that Wehrmacht swelled by roughly 40% from confiscated Czech armanentI think that is correct, though I would argue that a lot of what was stolen was VERY vital regardless especially during the Battle of France and Poland.
>>16886475You're brown.
>>16886476>I cant wait to hear you defend it with your normie factless bullshitLike? In general most normies think pretty highly of the USA army. Either way, actually read about Operation Normandy and their efforts in Italy. They kicked a guy whose back was turned and somehow still almost lost.
>>16886491>calling it land lease so vehemently shows that you have no fucking clue what the fuck It's one letter, christ. >Whos fucking land is being leased?Whose lend is being leashed? >It's like me calling wehrmacht the fucking bundeswehr.No, it's you calling the wehrmacht the wehrmecht. >Do you think my opinions are bullshit then?No, because I'm not a intellectual coward and I could argue actually argue against any point you can make. You cannot, thus you must try to discredit me elsewhere. Common tachtic employed by those of low intelligence.
>>16886477Sauce? If it was a shit design it wouldn't have continued to be used/developed well after the war.
>>16886500>t.
>>16886514>Shit designIt was mostly just fairly impractical for the war that was being fought. You can argue it's merits as a gun, and I'm sure you could, but for the actual war effort it largely proved to be a failure compared to Soviet, American, and British guns.
>>16886385>The issue there is that in 1917 part of the reason WHY the Russian state started to disintegrate is because the communists got involved.No, starvation and mass-desertion happened before the February revolution, and that revolution happened before the bolsheviks got involved. In fact no one really paid much attention to the communists during the February revolution. The wheels were already coming off in late 1916 from the state pressure of the war.So again I "defend" Hitlers rationale even if the outcome turned out to be completely wrong. Most allied nations anticipated a Soviet collapse in 1941 as well when the speed of the German offensive was revealed.>Well, part of the issue with that question is that it assumes the Axis was just Germany and that Germany was ONLY Germany.This is a fundemental problem in the discussion since OP never outlined any specifics in his alt-history scenario so we dont know what the stakes are, what resoiurces are available, or what the situation looks like. If we are supposed to assume Germany won their war with Britain and thus retains occupied territory, or if we are supposed to assume Germany never even remilitarized the Rhineland.If Germany is still blockade by the RN or if Germany has complete access to the global market with good international standing.No idea, OP made a poor shitpost and here we are 270 replies later still trying to make sense of it.
>>16886505What in the flying fuck is "Operation Normandy"?
>>16886512Ok.See >>16886534
>>16886530>No, starvation and mass-desertion happened before the February revolution, and that revolution happened before the bolsheviks got involved. In fact no one really paid much attention to the communists during the February revolution. The wheels were already coming off in late 1916 from the state pressure of the war.Russia in 1914 was a feudal agrarian shithole that underwent a rapid industrial transformation under Stalin coupled with agrarian reform and massive infrastructure expansion. Both you and Hitler are retards for thinking both situations are remotely comparable.
>>16886547>Both you and Hitler are retards for thinking both situations are remotely comparableI dont think that considering I am the one who wrote >>16886239You took my post out of context of the discussion we were having.
>>16886530>No, starvation and mass-desertion happened before the February revolutionI agree, but I said part of the reason for a reason. Ultimately however, I think that was is crucial is that the threat of a German invasion was literally the least important thing. Which is why the people that won were the group that decided to call the war. >So again I "defend" Hitlers rationale even if the outcome turned out to be completely wrong.I would defend it better if his actual goals were more sensible. Unironically, if he had invaded, Occupied Ukraine and Belarus, and then tried to sue for Peace, then it would be a different situation. >No idea, OP made a poor shitpost and here we are 270 replies later still trying to make sense of it.Well, fair enough. I'll say this much though, I don't think Germany could have won World War 2. As in, any of the events post 1939 were a largely foregone conclusion and, frankly, it's FAR more plausible that they instead suffer a dramatic military defeat and lost the war early on than they could have won it.
>>16886534Me confusing Overlord with Normandy.>>16886543Remaining of my points are still accurate and you can't challenge them because you are far stupider than me. Try again, subhuman.
>>16886560You're confusing a lot dont you? Most of it is basic knowledge too.Three strikes your out boy. Put some more effort into your next effort-post especially when you intent do challenge the established consensus among historians but you cant even get the names right.It doesnt help your credibility does it?
>>16885716Lebensraum was like a few pages in the mein kampf. Germany wanted a defendable border with the soviet union, maybe the urals, maybe the volga.
>>16886572>Three strikes your out boy. That's one strike for you, then. >Put some more effort into your next effort-postTwo strikes>especially when you intent do challengeThree strikes, you're out. >It doesnt help your credibility does it?*Does itNeither does this, btw, assuming you are doing it deliberately. Because it doesn't sound that much worse than your previous posts and you still haven't actually challenged a single argument.
>>16886580So, all the habitable land where 80% of the population live.
>>16886558When I said I defend Hitlers decisions, I meant it from his perspective and not my own. He knew what he knew and even Britain anticipated a Soviet collapse in 1941. Little was known about what Stalin had actually managed to ahcieve because the USSR during the interwar period was similar to our modern North Korea in terms of global communication, interaction and communication.I agree thos that his goals were unrealistic, mostly on the basis of victory fever and also ideological autism which often clouded German judgement and decisonmaking.I think the number 1 problem most historians have with Barbarossa was that the Germans didnt come as liberators, that this is what they should have done. Even if they had lost the war, it would still have been significantly harder for the Soviets to retake lost territory and push to the Oder river in central Europe, had the Germans set up independent states and armed the population within occupied USSR.
>>16886581I'm not going to challenge your argument because you're a dumb fucking nigger and only recieving (you) from me. Hope it makes you feel special.Take your Operation Normandy and repeatedly phrased Land Lease and shove it up your faggot asshole.
>>16886624>I'm not going to challenge your argumentBecause you are low intelligence and can't argue against them, yes.
>>16886603>Britain anticipated a Soviet collapse in 1941.Did they? I ask because I remember reading they were expected a Soviet VS German war in 1943 and wanted to use that to to Liberate France.
>>16886627Because I am not dumb enough to be baited into a low effort off-topic discussion at the end of the thread post limit before being archieved you dumb fucking cunt.You couldnt even get the basic facts right and then you expect a debate. You get the shitposting you deserve fucking pajeet-
>>16886642>I am not dumb enough Wrong.>You couldnt even get the basic facts right and then you expect a debate.If I'm doing as poorly as you claim, a simple wikipedia page could be used as a argument.
>>16885580Its possible the Nazis could have survived longer or whatever, but they aren't going to win this whole war to the death thing.
>>16886633https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predictions_of_the_collapse_of_the_Soviet_Union>Military observers around the world watched closely. It appears that most of them shared Hitler's opinion, expecting that Germany would win, destroy the Soviet system, and establish a Nazi New Order in Europe.[citation needed] Very few American experts thought the Soviet Union would survive.[12] >The German invasion began on 22 June 1941. Subsequently, the United States Department of War advised Franklin D. Roosevelt that the German army would conquer the Soviet Union within one to three months.[13] In July 1941 the American general staff issued memoranda to the American press that a Soviet collapse was to be expected within several weeks.[14] British analysts held similar views, believing that Germany would win within three to six weeks without heavy losses.[15] Just saw "citation needed" so meh I suppose. It's wikipedia so I am prepared to surrender my position, but it largely confirms what I've read in literature too. This is why USA went for the "Germany first" policy, because there were fears that Germany could still win in Europe.However, you are also correct that the British wanted Germany to fight the Soviets as a means to win the war. It was just the apparant overwhelming success of Barbarossa quickly set pessimistic mood among British leadership, but then again in war its better to assume the worst?
>>16885584>>16885590The Nazis are already belligerently occupying half of europe, with more to come as they push further east. The north african theater is the least of their manpower problems.
>>16886646Except you didnt even post a wikipedia article you went straight for the shitposting so you get shitposting in return.Hope it's been productive.We can keep going if you want more (you)s
>>16885580The Nazis probably could have won if they weren't Nazis. Plenty of people in eastern europe hated the commies and viewed the Nazis as liberators. Only to find out the Nazis are just as bad or worse than the commies. Its been said many times but the Nazis as liberators stand a much better chance than the Nazis as colonizers.
>>16885580The Russian military has been historically pathetic. The answer to whether a country could defeat Russia one to one is always a resounding yes. I thought that has became obvious in the past 2 years.
>>16885580yes, and if they began at a more reasonable time then easily.The USSR received 90% of its shells from the US.The USSR made basically no progress against Germany without grand battery artillery. If you reduce that to a tenth of what they had there is just no way they could win.their tanks, infantry, and aircraft were all propped up by their colossal artillery advantage. without that advantage the Germans categorically sweep the field every single time.
>>16885580This thread..........again.....Could Germany have won general.
>>16885582nonsensical when Stalin's requirement for further offensives in the East was a Normandy landing.The West barely had the USSR attacking WITH Lend Lease and non-stop pressure from the air.>>16885583>Lend-Lease tanks constituted 30 to 40 percent of heavy and medium tank strength before Moscow at the beginning of December 1941.[71][72]Lendlease was working as early as November 1941.>>16885597see above, nearly half of their heavy and medium tanks were from Lend Lease in 1941.>>16885624>>16885627If Vatnigs are so tough, why did they try to Surrender in early '44?
>>16886687>only to find out they were bad or worse[citation needed]
>>16886106>Hitler's racial ideology was objectively falsewhere?
>>16886868>They killed 20 million civilians.>By... uh, accident.
>>16886890The part where Germans lost and the inferior people proved to be superior to them.
>>16886832>The answer to whether a country could defeat Russia one So, what, your argument is Russia suffers from inverse conversion of Ninjutsu. Napoleon lost because he brought the Polish along?
>>16886860You mean the lend lease tanks that didn't save them in Moscow? The ones that mostly just got destroyed by the Germans before they started using actually good home made tanks?Wow, good argument.
>>16885580Even Finland would have won against USSR if they didn't have Allies and Lend-Lease.
>>16886909>They killed 20 million civilians.>source>vatnig>>16886913>lostThe political state of Germany isnt a race.However numerous German BVLLS demonstrated their superiority by slaughtering many times their number of untermensch.Many such Germans are alive today while many more untermensch are not.Hitler's Racial view was proven correct.>>16886930They were critical in defending moscow.Also laughable youd consider 50% of the USSR airforce and 90% of their ammunition to be irrelevant.How do you see the USSR winning the war if their shell reserves are cut by 90%?
