Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Tukhachevsky and other brilliant leaders are not killed by Stalin

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Tukhachevsky and other brilliant leaders are not killed by Stalin

    Tukhachevsky was among the best strategists in the world. Stalin threw away his most valuable resource when he murdered Tukhachevsky and hundreds of very talented leaders.
    The mighty Soviet army was left with few experienced and brilliant leaders at the onset of WW II.
    Like Churchill and Hitler during the war, Stalin took strategic decisions far beyond his ability with disastrous consequences.
    Just like Hitler gave incompetent people like Göring, Himmler, Göbbels, Keitel much more power than he gave to extremely competent leaders, so did Stalin give much power to the incomeptent Voroshilov, Buddyony, Beria, Krushchev, etc,

    Assuming that Stalin does not kill Tukhachevsky and lets him lead the army with full powers throughout WW II and listens to his advice about the actions to take regarding Germany, This is what I think would happen:

    Tuchachevsky knows very well that the LW and MW are formidable in January 1939 and growing rapidly, but he also knows that Germany cannot fight on two fronts. So the best strategy is to let Germany invade all of Poland alone, in order to see the tactics, armament, strategy, etc, and to avoid provoking the allies.
    Tuchachevsky suggests the sale on credit of 500 I-16s and I-15s, 1,000 of the oldest tanks and 10,000 cannon and ammunition to Poland in January 1939, so as to bleed Germany as much as possible durang the invasion of Poland.

    When Germany proposes to invade Poland together, Tukhchevsky recommends Stalin to refuse, on the grounds of the non aggression treaty with Poland and fear of a war with the allies for which the USSR is not ready, but to agree to a non aggression pact with Germany, so that Germany can attack the west after defeating Poland.

    T. also accelerates the production of modern fighters and the replacement of the 2 blade propellers of the I-16 with the new 1,100 hp engines with 4 blade propellers. He also convinces Stalin of the urgent need to buy 100,000 American trucks and to increase Soviet truck production in order to attack Germany when its forces are busy in France.

    Germany loses 180,000 vehicles, 700 planes and tanks and 100,000 men during the invasion of Poland and runs out of ammunition, so the invasion takes 4 months to be completed.

    During the invasion of Poland, Tukhachevsky welcomes any Polish pilots or troops or German desertors escaping from Hitler and offers them the choice to join the red army with the hope of recovering Poland from Germany in the near future.

    As soon as Germany invades France T. stops delivering grain, oil, chromium, manganese, etc, to Germany and prepares his army to liberate Poland and capture East Prussia, Czechoslovakia and Austria.

    On May 20, when Germany is about to defeat the allies, the USSR invades Poland with 2 million men, 10,000 tanks and planes, 250,000 trucks and 35,000 cannon.

    T. also convinces Romania (France's ally) to invade Czechoslovakia and then Austria in order to save France.

    Hitler is shocked by the Soviet and Romanian attack and has to send planes and tanks to the east, providing a respite and hope for the allies.

    When Italy sees Germany attacked from all sides, it decides to join the allies, invade Austria (Mussolini has long coveted the Tirol) and send 500,000 men and 600 planes and tanks to France.

    Poland, Czechoslovakia, Austria and East Prussia fall within a month and Germany quickly runs out of tanks, oil, ammunition, etc, fighting on several fronts. Hitler and the Nazis and Keitel are removed from power and replaced by Brauchitsch, who soon sues for peace. WW II ends on July 25, 1940
    Last edited by Draco; 27 Sep 12, 01:33.

  • #2
    1 Czechoslovakia was our ally and our major supplier of armaments .
    2 It is not obvious from your OP if it is occupied by Germany or not
    (I assumed it was not because the Czech part was included in Germany and Slovakia set up as puppet state )
    3 Assuming that it it was occupied by Germany as in real timeline, the Romanian armed forces at that time were not able in shape or form to stand up
    to the Germans, let alone mount offensive operations against them as in late 1944 or 1945. It would be fruitless attempt in which our guys would be used as cannon fodder by the soviets.
    Last edited by 1st cavalry; 27 Sep 12, 02:27.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Draco View Post
      Germany loses 180,000 vehicles
      Perhaps you meant horses...

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Skoblin View Post
        Perhaps you meant horses...
        irc the Germans had some 120,000 trucks at that time in their army, if you include staff cars and motorcycles it might lose that much but it would effectively mean demotorization .

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by 1st cavalry View Post
          1 Czechoslovakia was our ally and our major supplier of armaments .
          2 It is not obvious from your OP if it is occupied by Germany or not
          (I assumed it was not because the Czech part was included in Germany and Slovakia set up as puppet state )
          3 Assuming that it it was occupied by Germany as in real timeline, the Romanian armed forces at that time were not able in shape or form to stand up
          to the Germans, let alone mount offensive operations against them as in late 1944 or 1945. It would be fruitless attempt in which our guys would be used as cannon fodder by the soviets.
          Czechoslovakia is obviously occupied by Germany. Puppet Slovakia takes part in the invasion of Poland, which inflicts heavy losses in its army.

          It is perfectly feasible for the powerful and well trained Romanian army (in real life Romania invaded the USSR with more cannon than Germany during Barbarossa, over 8,000 Vs.7,400) to invade poorly defended Czechoslovakia, Poland and Austria with 20 divisions supported by Soviet tanks, planes & troops and it makes perfect sense to do so in order to save France, its ally and to stop Germany in its tracks while it is most vulnerable. Many Czechs would join the Romanian-Soviet forces in the fight against Germany. Without Czech, Polish and Austrian industry, food, oil, etc, Germany has an increasingly difficult time fighting on several fronts.
          Romania had already fought Germany in WW I and had experienced, capable officers, who would coordinate well with Tukhachevsky and the Polish Generals who had fled to Romania and the USSR.
          Last edited by Draco; 27 Sep 12, 10:06.

          Comment


          • #6
            T. also sends 500 tanks, 200 planes, 1,000 cannon and 4 divisions that arrive in Calais and Boulogne on May 20, 1940 (the day he invades Poland).
            When Churchill sees Hitler busy on several fronts and vulnerable he decides to send 60% of the fighters in Britain to the continent to join the fight and most of his destroyers to cover the coast with their artillery and urges France to send most of her fleet to do the same.

            After learning of the Soviet invasion of Poland, East Prussia and Czechoslovakia and the arrival of Soviet tanks in France on May 20, 1940 at 20:38 Hitler has a nervous breakdown.
            Last edited by Draco; 27 Sep 12, 10:34.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Draco View Post
              The mighty Soviet army was left with few experienced and brilliant leaders at the onset of WW II.
              I think you fail to understand the true reason for the shortage of leadership in the Red Army. The purges were 10% of the problem. 90% of the problem was the massive expansion of the Red Army in the late 30s and 1940 without a corresponding increase in NCO and officer training.

              Comment


              • #8
                Without the purges and with T. in charge there is much more emphasis on quality than on quantity of army personnel.
                T. knows that plane and pilot quality will be far more important than the size of the army, that 6 mobile, well trained and equipped divisions with 1,000 planes in the far east are enough to stop the Japanese army with its poor tanks and that a mobile army of 3 million men with 10,000 modern planes are more than enough if they engage Germany when it is busy in the west.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by 1st cavalry View Post
                  irc the Germans had some 120,000 trucks at that time in their army, if you include staff cars and motorcycles it might lose that much but it would effectively mean demotorization .
                  Germany lost 100,000 vehicles in Poland in real life, despite the Soviets invading much of the country. Without the Soviets and with more Polish tanks and planes (supplied by T.), Germany runs out of ammunition and the invasion drags on, so losses are much greater and Germany has to rely on horses. Hitler made a really stupid mistake in invading Poland with so little ammo and few vehicles and was saved only by Stalin, but T. is much smarter and uses the Polish army to his advantage and lets Hitler bleed profusely.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Draco View Post
                    Czechoslovakia is obviously occupied by Germany. Puppet Slovakia takes part in the invasion of Poland, which inflicts heavy losses in its army.

                    It is perfectly feasible for the powerful and well trained Romanian army (in real life Romania invaded the USSR with more cannon than Germany during Barbarossa, over 8,000 Vs.7,400) to invade poorly defended Czechoslovakia, Poland and Austria with 20 divisions supported by Soviet tanks, planes & troops and it makes perfect sense to do so in order to save France, its ally and to stop Germany in its tracks while it is most vulnerable.
                    This is delusional, in fact i'm not sure you even know what cannon means.

                    We had 2,160 light guns, 492 heavy guns, 200 antitank guns, 4,758 regimental guns and 691 AA guns .
                    The germans had 7836 10,5-cm howitzers ,3802 15-cm howitzers,403 21-cm guns and deployed for barbarossa only 7184.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      from wiki:
                      A cannon is any piece of artillery that uses gunpowder or other usually explosive-based propellents to launch a projectile. Cannon vary in caliber, range, mobility, rate of fire, angle of fire, and firepower; different forms of cannon combine and balance these attributes in varying degrees, depending on their intended use on the battlefield. The word cannon is derived from several languages, in which the original definition can usually be translated as tube, cane, or reed. The plural of cannon is also cannon, though more commonly in America, cannons. In the modern era, the term cannon has fallen out of common usage, replaced by "guns" or "artillery" if not a more specific term such as "mortar" or "howitzer". In aviation, cannon generally describes weapons firing bullets larger than 0.5 inches (12.7 mm) in diameter.

                      By far most artillery, tanks, trucks, planes and men were in France at the time, and ammunition and fuel were being used rapidly there, so the Romanian and Soviet forces would enjoy clear superiority in all areas in Czechoslovakia, Austria, Poland and East Prussia. It would take weeks for the Germans to counter attack and by then it would be too late on all fronts. Hitler knew he didn't stand a chance in hell fighting just France and the USSR simultaneously, much less Britain, Romania, Italy, etc,

                      Without the purges and with T. representing the red army and with the USSR selling armament to Poland before the invasion, the USSR is not avoided by the allies and a secret treaty between France and the USSR is possible.

                      In real life, Romania was forced to become Germany's ally and supplier after France fell only by Stalin's pointless invasion of Bessarabia. But it was far more likely to remain France's ally and to join in the fight against Germany in 1940.

                      Hungary and Yugoslavia may remain neutral or seize the opportunity to invade Austria or Czechoslovakia in order to capture some territory. Lithuania may remain neutral or invade east Prussia to gain some territory. No country whatsoever is likely to join Germany against so many enemies.
                      Many WM generals may even surrender or withdraw their troops, instead of continuing a thoroughly hopeless war.
                      Last edited by Draco; 28 Sep 12, 12:09.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Draco View Post
                        Germany lost 100,000 vehicles in Poland in real life, despite the Soviets invading much of the country. Without the Soviets and with more Polish tanks and planes (supplied by T.), Germany runs out of ammunition and the invasion drags on, so losses are much greater and Germany has to rely on horses. Hitler made a really stupid mistake in invading Poland with so little ammo and few vehicles and was saved only by Stalin, but T. is much smarter and uses the Polish army to his advantage and lets Hitler bleed profusely.
                        no actually they lost about one tenth of that number but since numbers do not seam to be your strong point , answer this :
                        why would Tukhachevsky want to help the polish who kick his ass back in 1920?
                        I am disregarding the (im)possibly to send our best divisions in Czechoslovakia while leaving a open border for the soviets in the east because, sorry I cant find any other way to say this : We were not that dumb .

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Why would Stalin want to help the Germans who kicked Russia's ass in 1916? Why would Britain join forces with the France it has fought for centuries for the Crimean war? Why would Mussolini join his WW I enemy?
                          Because countries do what they deem best at the time and Germany is T.'s worst nightmare and the best way to defeat it is to strengthen the poles (which will be seen with good eyes by the French) and keep the French afloat.
                          No good strategist would waste an excellent but poorly equipped army, instead of using it to weaken a formidable enemy and gain good standing with other countries.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by 1st cavalry View Post
                            no actually they lost about one tenth of that number but since numbers do not seam to be your strong point , answer this :
                            why would Tukhachevsky want to help the polish who kick his ass back in 1920?
                            I am disregarding the (im)possibly to send our best divisions in Czechoslovakia while leaving a open border for the soviets in the east because, sorry I cant find any other way to say this : We were not that dumb .
                            You knew you couldn't oppose the USSR, that's why dumb or not in real life you allowed them to take Bessarabia. Besides, if T. keeps no troops facing Romania and sends his forces to attack Germany there is no reason to keep Romanian troops on that side.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Morbid fascination strikes again.

                              The complexities of Central and Eastern European politics developed over centuries seem to have passed by Draco.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X