Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Russia stays neutral

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

  • Russia stays neutral

    During the beginning of the winter war, (Finland) France wanted to reinforce the Finns. This could have lead to the USSR being an belligerent against the Allies. Now I think we would have lost WW2 if the Russians joined the Axis powers.

    But what if the Russians just stayed neutral?

    If Hitler knew that the Russian were angry with the west would he attack them?

    If Stalin kept shipping Germany oil and the other resources of war, would the strategic air war have worked?



    What do you think?

    Credo quia absurdum.


    Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

  • #2
    Maybe WW3 would have started the day after WW2 ended, if they had.

    I don't see this alliance working very long. Remember, the only treaty Stalin didn't break was the one that Hitler beat him too it with Barbarossa.
    "Why is the Rum gone?"

    -Captain Jack

    Comment


    • #3
      Yeah but if France and England had fought Russia over Finland that would be a real game changer.

      The question still remains, do you think we could have won without Russia?

      Credo quia absurdum.


      Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Bwaha View Post
        Yeah but if France and England had fought Russia over Finland that would be a real game changer.

        The question still remains, do you think we could have won without Russia?

        nope. i don't believe the US would have been ready to accept the losses necessary to beat the Axis. with no US involvement, Britain for all her qualities and fighting spirit, would have sued for peace.
        Keep working, millions on welfare depend on YOU.

        Comment


        • #5
          Well Russia was planning on invading Germany in late 1941. But had they stayed neutral GB would be screwed.
          A wild liberal appears! Conservative uses logical reasoning and empirical evidence! It's super effective! Wild liberal faints.

          Comment


          • #6
            Not necessarily, Lets say that Japan brings the US in on time and Hitler DOWs the US. Without shipping material to Russia the Brits are doing fine. So if the Brits aren't hurting as far as food or the tools of war, would Overlord would have worked?
            Credo quia absurdum.


            Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

            Comment


            • #7
              The entire German army concentrated in France? Dude that's like 5000 Panzers and 5 million men. Not to mention the strong Luftwaffe presence there would be.
              A wild liberal appears! Conservative uses logical reasoning and empirical evidence! It's super effective! Wild liberal faints.

              Comment


              • #8
                Russia on germanys side for 6 years of the war,it would have been a win for germany and russia.

                germany would have alll those extra men to man there equitment and oil to move the german army.

                Comment


                • #9
                  ^ in my opinion that would have been the best scenario ...and US shud have sided with germany

                  world powers USA , germany and USSR ( and i hope the russians got rid of the asiatic part of USSR )


                  btw anyone read Mr Buchanans
                  's book "how west lost the world "

                  awesome analysis of why US intervention in both WWs was useless and only served to weaken the western world

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I don't like Stalin, but I don't think he is an idiot. Other issues aside I think he knows the nazis are enemy #1. At best he fluctuates but in the end must side against hitler. What that means for the west is worse than what we got historically, but still better than nazi domination.

                    You really don't think hitler would have kept a treaty do you?

                    Regards,
                    Dennis
                    If stupid was a criminal offense Sea Lion believers would be doing life.

                    Shouting out to Half Pint for bringing back the big mugs!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Exorcist View Post
                      Remember, the only treaty Stalin didn't break was the one that Hitler beat him too it with Barbarossa.


                      Read some history books, man - not just the "Red Primer for brain-dead wingnuts".
                      www.histours.ru

                      Siege of Leningrad battlefield tour

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Destroyer25 View Post
                        Well Russia was planning on invading Germany in late 1941. But had they stayed neutral GB would be screwed.
                        Any solid proof to this statement? I'm sure you can come up with a good conspiracy theory, though.
                        www.histours.ru

                        Siege of Leningrad battlefield tour

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by ShAA View Post
                          Any solid proof to this statement? I'm sure you can come up with a good conspiracy theory, though.
                          He probablly has a complete collection of nazi propaganda documents as his proofs. Elsewhere Buchanans book is cited as well.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Carl Schwamberg View Post
                            He probablly has a complete collection of nazi propaganda documents as his proofs. Elsewhere Buchanans book is cited as well.
                            Don't cha know the German side is always to be trusted cause they have a reputation for meticulous record keeping? They even recorded the intentions of the Soviet leadership
                            www.histours.ru

                            Siege of Leningrad battlefield tour

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by ShAA View Post
                              Don't cha know the German side is always to be trusted cause they have a reputation for meticulous record keeping? They even recorded the intentions of the Soviet leadership
                              And Buchanan's accuracy is unchallengable as well

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X