Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

WWII: Russia stays out

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

  • WWII: Russia stays out

    This is just a thought I had. Everyone knows the Germans attacked Russia in 1941. At the same time I ask: if they hadn't, wouldn't Stalin eventually done the same crosswise?

    Two related questions:
    1. Was it possible that the Soviet Union as it existed, could have avoided entrance into WWII. is there a scenario, or two, where Stalin does not pounce or get pouched by the Germans?

    2. If not, what would it have taken to keep the Soviet Union out of the war in it's entirety? If necessary make the Civil War end in White victory if you must (although this largely eliminates the fear of Communism Hitler rode on into power), but let's play the game shall we? Can't wait to hear thoughts.
    How many Allied tanks it would take to destroy a Maus?
    275. Because that's how many shells there are in the Maus. Then it could probably crush some more until it ran out of gas. - Surfinbird

  • #2
    To keep the USSR out of the war you'd have to change things in Germany because the drive eastwards wasn't motivated by the desire to rid Europe of Bolshevism but to 'cleanse' the land for settlement by the Germanic peoples and take control of vital strategic assets. Let's not forget that German ambitions in Eastern Europe date back centuries, Hitler just tapped into those. But if we imagine that Hitler dies and someone more west-orientated takes over then what? The German economy is still a basket case and with nothing much of a war to fight the German people won't tolerate restrictions on their purchasing for too much longer. In short, either some kind of peace settlement or a new invasion are the only options.
    Signing out.

    Comment


    • #3
      The Red scare was the lesser pillar of the nazi political base. Racism, Aryan superiority, & the Jewish scare was the underlying foundation. Hitlers doctrine of exterminating the Slavic peoples for German living space is one illustation of this. The Bolshivik menace was one of several secondary items. It was usefull in rallying conservative businessmen, fearfull old ladies, and others sympathetic to the anti Red line.

      In that context it does not matter much what sort of government or social system develops out of the Russian empire. If Jewish Bolshiviks" wont do the Jewish Russian bankers, or Degenerate Slavic Aristocrats will serve. The US in no shape or form had a Communist government then, so Hitler refered to the US population as racially mongrel and controlled by Jewish businessmen.

      a couple years ago there was a thread here speculating on the outcomes if Russia had developed in several different directions.

      A. Russian Empire survives, still ruled by a coalition of the aristocracy and the business class.

      B. The Czar & aristocrats lose power entirely and a popular democracy develops in the 1920s, perhaps socialist, perhaps business dominated, perhaps alternating like France or Britain & the US.

      C. A Facist party comes to dominate as in Italy Spain or Hungary.

      In case A & B it is very likely the Russian government will be able to negotiate a alliance with France & Britain in 1938 or 1939. While the Poles wont like the idea of Russia as a ally they are likely to change their attitude as German tanks come knocking on Warsaw door steps in 1939. having Russian in the fight from the start complicates life for Germany.

      A Facist Russia is more likely to make the same error as the Communist government in 1939, making a alliance with Germany.

      Comment


      • #4
        Having read through most of The Coming of the Third Reich and a lot of discussion forums, I'm well aware that for the insiders, both of you are right, it was racial and lebensraum. But for the average German VOTER, it was definately Reds and Versailles. Hitler's political life was tied to anti-communism until he had the power to do whatever he pleased.

        But that's not my question. Hitler, madman as he was, could not have invaded Russia without the help of the military, not in just warfare, but for not offing his @$$ before Babarosa. I think it might have been possible to scare the military into not attacking or focusing on the British. Those arguments are not hard to make given the size of the Red Army in 1941. But I suspect, and I've never been alone in this, that Stalin had a taste for conquest and was waiting for Nazi weakness to strike.

        We can imigine Britian not in the war and especially a US not in the war (almost all of these scenarios are BAD), but I am wondering if the big show of WWII, the Ostfront could have been avoided. Maybe not, even I'm hard pressed to think of war without Russia either being dragged in or jumping in for spoils.
        How many Allied tanks it would take to destroy a Maus?
        275. Because that's how many shells there are in the Maus. Then it could probably crush some more until it ran out of gas. - Surfinbird

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Carl Schwamberg View Post
          The Red scare was the lesser pillar of the nazi political base. Racism, Aryan superiority, & the Jewish scare was the underlying foundation. Hitlers doctrine of exterminating the Slavic peoples for German living space is one illustation of this. The Bolshivik menace was one of several secondary items. It was usefull in rallying conservative businessmen, fearfull old ladies, and others sympathetic to the anti Red line.

          In that context it does not matter much what sort of government or social system develops out of the Russian empire. If Jewish Bolshiviks" wont do the Jewish Russian bankers, or Degenerate Slavic Aristocrats will serve. The US in no shape or form had a Communist government then, so Hitler refered to the US population as racially mongrel and controlled by Jewish businessmen.

          a couple years ago there was a thread here speculating on the outcomes if Russia had developed in several different directions.

          A. Russian Empire survives, still ruled by a coalition of the aristocracy and the business class.

          B. The Czar & aristocrats lose power entirely and a popular democracy develops in the 1920s, perhaps socialist, perhaps business dominated, perhaps alternating like France or Britain & the US.

          C. A Facist party comes to dominate as in Italy Spain or Hungary.

          In case A & B it is very likely the Russian government will be able to negotiate a alliance with France & Britain in 1938 or 1939. While the Poles wont like the idea of Russia as a ally they are likely to change their attitude as German tanks come knocking on Warsaw door steps in 1939. having Russian in the fight from the start complicates life for Germany.

          A Facist Russia is more likely to make the same error as the Communist government in 1939, making a alliance with Germany.
          A Fascist Russia is rather hard to imagine given the huge number of impoverished peasants, workers who worked and lived in atrocious conditions and a virtual absence of the middle class which was Hitler's social base. A dictator could've probably come to power with such an agenda but it's hard to imagine the social base he could've relied on.

          You're quite right in saying it wouldn't have mattered whether the Bolsheviks had to come to power or not. The plans of the German General staff for the WWI envisioned "driving the Slavs to the Urals" and denying Russia access to the Baltic sea. Practically the same stuff as what Hitler planned with his Archangel-Astrakhan line as where the Barbarossa campaign had to end. I suppose it would be safe to assume the whole Nazi period in Germany was simply good old German nationalism in a radicalised form. At least in terms of its solution of the "Eastern question".
          www.histours.ru

          Siege of Leningrad battlefield tour

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by ShAA View Post
            You're quite right in saying it wouldn't have mattered whether the Bolsheviks had to come to power or not. The plans of the German General staff for the WWI envisioned "driving the Slavs to the Urals" and denying Russia access to the Baltic sea. Practically the same stuff as what Hitler planned with his Archangel-Astrakhan line as where the Barbarossa campaign had to end. I suppose it would be safe to assume the whole Nazi period in Germany was simply good old German nationalism in a radicalised form. At least in terms of its solution of the "Eastern question".
            The literature of the German nationalists certainly bears that out. If they dont write of racial extermination they write of cultural destruction. That is the replacement of existing Slavic languages, religion, art, academics with German or west European equivalents. The concept of the "Drang nach Osten' (Drive to the East) emerges long before 1914.

            There is a large body of German' writing from that era which takes a tolerant course, accepting other cultures, but those writers were not nationalists, nor did they retain influence as the facist ideas penetrated Germany in the 1920s.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by ShAA View Post
              A Fascist Russia is rather hard to imagine given the huge number of impoverished peasants, workers who worked and lived in atrocious conditions and a virtual absence of the middle class which was Hitler's social base. A dictator could've probably come to power with such an agenda but it's hard to imagine the social base he could've relied on.
              Intially I agreed with this, thinking a Facist party would find its base only in the workers and industry owners of the cities. Now i recall how comrade Mao adapted Marxist theory to rural China, and how the nazis used the ideal of the sturdy German farmer in their propaganda. Appealing to the rural voters in Germany was logical then as Germany had only recently crossed the boundary where 50% of the population now lived in the urban areas. In the early 1930s cose to 40% of Germanys population either were rural or still considered themselves of the land. The US had been undergoing the same transition almost simultaneously & comparisons of the social/political changes in the two cultures is interesting.

              Strictly following the Italian model would have not worked & Russian Facism would have had to develop its own unique ideas to gain power.

              Comment


              • #8
                What hasn't been addressed is....

                Let's say that Lenin, is assinated in exile, by some neutral stooge (or so it seems).

                The Czar sees the error of his ways and appoints a Committe of the People (maybe Rasputin has a "vision" of the future). This Committe and the Czar openly work together to help the people.

                Vast and expansive changes are made and an inward looking foreign policy (i.e. Don't attack me and I won't attack you...). Putting the people and the nation over everything else (and a secret "disappearing" of any dididents) with an apparent see we are now like the English type of stance with the Aristocracy. Could this have impact on the theory of Russia not in the war?
                In Vino Veritas

                Comment


                • #9
                  Dongar,

                  I see where you are going, but not sure Nikki II is the guy who can take Russia there. For myself, I am convinced no Communism eliminates the possibility of a Secend World War, as without the real and present danger of Moscow, Hitler would have been unable to secure the support the middle classes as any thought of a Communist uprising unaided by an established Marxist regime would be laughable.

                  If the Czar wanted to work with anybody, his best bet would be to allow semi-free elections for a new Duma, and work with the relatively nutral Constitutional Democrats. But how and when? Historically the Czar was too 'honor' driven to make peace with the Germans in 1915, and never made peace with them despite his disentigrating position. If the Czar could have made a relatively lenient peace, maybe with age would the wisdom to make peace with Constitutionalism. But again, the whens of that scenario are key.
                  How many Allied tanks it would take to destroy a Maus?
                  275. Because that's how many shells there are in the Maus. Then it could probably crush some more until it ran out of gas. - Surfinbird

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Thank you Wolery, but I was also trying to say that without Communism there is no real reason for Hitler to fear Russia. Nicholas would be more like the British royals with no real power, other than ceremonial.

                    Czar Nicholas, however, was never creditied with an overabundance of intelligence that I have ever read. I was just giving a possible what if...

                    If Nicholas did listen to advisors then things may have turned out very differently.
                    In Vino Veritas

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Many years ago I read a short SF story about a time traveller who appears in Nazi German with several tons of gold. He proves that WWII would cost far more than gained to Hitler...so is offering the gold instead of war to meet the Nazi demands. Hitler kills the time traveller and keeps the gold and goes to war anyway.
                      So, IMHO Hitler was the key as to who would be brought into WWII in Europe...no other leader had a real choise.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        A good point, however a non-threatening Russia may not have been on Hilers plate (at least for a while maybe). A communist Russia who had aggitaters arrested in Germany posed a real threat to security. Thus, had to be dealt with.

                        But, what's done is done, and this thread is too I think...
                        In Vino Veritas

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Before the thread goes dead, I would like to point out Hitler's dream was not defeating communism, but exterminating most Slavs and turning the rest into serfs. Mind you this was not completely Hitler's idea, but in the anti-Christian far right romanticly inclined German Nationalists had no real way to gain power, Hitler did.

                          Hitler would have attacked Russia regardless of it's political system. My point, is that Hitler is only electable if the people fear the Communists more than he and the reasonable parties failed utterly to secure the peace inside Germany. Hitler was by no means a given even in a world with the USSR, but without it, Hitler doesn not stand a chance amoung the middle class voters who in this world, clung to him out of fear of losing everything they had.
                          How many Allied tanks it would take to destroy a Maus?
                          275. Because that's how many shells there are in the Maus. Then it could probably crush some more until it ran out of gas. - Surfinbird

                          Comment

                          Latest Topics

                          Collapse

                          Working...
                          X