Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Treaty of Brest-Litovsk and WWII?

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

  • Treaty of Brest-Litovsk and WWII?

    If the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk had not been revoked at the end of WWI, would this have made much difference to WWII?

    Would WWII be less likely to start if Germany had all that extra territory?

    If WWII did start (along the same lines as it did), would it have made much of a difference to the outcome?

    Would the extra resources available to Germany, and the less resources available to the USSR make a difference?

    Would that mean the German invasion of the USSR starts closer to Moscow making it much more likely to be captured?

    Thanks

  • #2
    What do you think?

    Take a look at the map of the areas surrendered to Germany under the treaty and then ask yourself those questions again. The answer should be pretty clear,
    The Purist

    Words ought to be a little wild, for they are the assault of thoughts on the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by The Purist View Post
      What do you think?

      Take a look at the map of the areas surrendered to Germany under the treaty and then ask yourself those questions again. The answer should be pretty clear,

      I think it could have been a game changer. Germany would have had access to heaps more resources and the USSR much poorer. I also think Moscow would have been much more likely to have been captured (or perhaps become the alternative Stalingrad).

      However I'm also aware that even the loss of Moscow probably wouldn't have forced the USSR to capitulate, and I'm also very aware that my understanding of the Eastern front is very superficial and there may be very good reasons (that I am unaware of) why it wouldn't have made a major difference, or even made German success less likely.

      Comment

      Latest Topics

      Collapse

      Working...
      X