The allies still would have won.
The axis would have won the war.
The bringer of cheese.
If the soviets had never joined WWII, would the allies still have won?
Lets just imagine, for a seond, that Operation Barbarossa had never happened, and that Hitler had never invaded Russia.
What would of happened? Would we have still won the war? IF we had won it, how much more costly would it have been?
Personally, I believe that without the Soviets, the allies, would never have been able to overcome Germany.
Anyway, what do you think?
90% of teens would die today if facebook was destroyed. if you are one of the 10% that would be laughing, copy and paste this to your signature.
My Political Profile.
Under the patronage of Gertrudius!
Praeses
Re: If the soviets had never joined WWII, would the allies still have won?
You never know?
Though the war would last much longer.....and the cost of war for Germany would eventually make things harder. It would be a much longer war thats for sure.
"Therefore I am not in favour of raising any dogmatic banner. On the contrary, we must try to help the dogmatists to clarify their propositions for themselves. Thus, communism, in particular, is a dogmatic abstraction; in which connection, however, I am not thinking of some imaginary and possible communism, but actually existing communism as taught by Cabet, Dézamy, Weitling, etc. This communism is itself only a special expression of the humanistic principle, an expression which is still infected by its antithesis – the private system. Hence the abolition of private property and communism are by no means identical, and it is not accidental but inevitable that communism has seen other socialist doctrines – such as those of Fourier, Proudhon, etc. – arising to confront it because it is itself only a special, one-sided realisation of the socialist principle."
Marx to A.Ruge
The bringer of cheese.
Re: If the soviets had never joined WWII, would the allies still have won?
Thats true, but in my mind, I'm sure that the axis would of won, considering the sheer military might/money they put into the Russian invasion.Originally Posted by dogukan
Of course, it all depends on whether the axis could of beaten the Allies before the Americans could have become fully involved with the war (Including the time it took to mobilize its troops and such).
Of course, whatever the outcome the war would have become much more costly.
90% of teens would die today if facebook was destroyed. if you are one of the 10% that would be laughing, copy and paste this to your signature.
My Political Profile.
Under the patronage of Gertrudius!
Comes Domesticorum
Re: If the soviets had never joined WWII, would the allies still have won?
Well, Japan would be defeated, but not Germany, especially when Germany had no oil supply problem...
Ducenarius
Re: If the soviets had never joined WWII, would the allies still have won?
considering 80% of Hitler's forces were fighting the soviets i would find it doubtfulIt's rather hard to guess, though. I don't really know the capabilities of USA, but the british and french wouldn't have a chance.
Protector Domesticus
Re: If the soviets had never joined WWII, would the allies still have won?
Points at the oil from the Middle East that the Germans would have gotten after they would conquered Middle East and North Africa.
Germany's goal was a United Europe under German leadership not conquering USA.
Ducenarius
Re: If the soviets had never joined WWII, would the allies still have won?
Then why did they declare war on USA in the first place?
Protector Domesticus
Re: If the soviets had never joined WWII, would the allies still have won?
Because they were supplying UK with goods and still pretended to be neutral,they declared war to sink the US ships not to conquer USA.
What makes you think the Arabs wouldn't trade with them?
The Allies were preparing to ask for peace in case the Normandy invasion failed,they barely lost 1 million compare to the 12 or USSR.
Germany wanted a United Europe under German leadership and without the help of USSR they would have got it.
Last edited by ShockBlast; November 26, 2009 at 08:34 AM.
Re: If the soviets had never joined WWII, would the allies still have won?
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Ordinarius
Re: If the soviets had never joined WWII, would the allies still have won?
They had to because Japan was their ally and Hitler wasn't going to screw them over...
Comes Domesticorum
Re: If the soviets had never joined WWII, would the allies still have won?
Except the oil now would not come from Middle East, but from Caucasus.
Primicerius
Re: If the soviets had never joined WWII, would the allies still have won?
I agree!........but I think if the Germans would remove Hitler ... They would certainly won the war!
The biggest problem for Germans was Hitler and his war tactics!
Civitate
Re: If the soviets had never joined WWII, would the allies still have won?
Well a German invasion of Britain was impossible, but it also would have been very difficult if not impossible for the British to invade Europe. What we would have had was probably a big, long running stalemate with lots more bombs and what not.
Under the Patronage of Jom!
Praefectus
Re: If the soviets had never joined WWII, would the allies still have won?
I'm not an expert on maritime warfare, but I have always wondered about this 'impossibility'.
What was to stop Hitler from taking the resources that he would otherwise spend fighting the USSR, and build a bunch of boats. Then load the 80% of free soldiers (otherwise tied up in Barbarossa) on these boats, and attack Great Britain.
Once landed, there would be a very good chance of defeating the British army.
Maybe losses would be extremely high, but 'impossible'....?
Spirit Cleric
Re: If the soviets had never joined WWII, would the allies still have won?
Bear in mind the Soviet border would still have to be garrisoned and since the USSR was a large threat, it would be a pretty big garrison. Then there's the problem that Germany didn't have air superiority or naval superiority over Britain. Doesn't matter how many soldiers you have if you can't get them across without them being heavily mauled by the RAF and RN along with all the units deployed defending the coasts if they get that close.
flaxen haired argonaut
Re: If the soviets had never joined WWII, would the allies still have won?
Pretty long thread so I don't know if this has been addressed, but it was absolutely possible, and likely. There was a plan for it, and while the Battle of Britain put the kibosh on it overall, it really came down to one single air engagement during that battle. Or even more so, one the early warning radar saved Britain from invasion.
Basically both air forces were punch drunk, took a lot of losses. A last major offensive designed to cripple the Brits was seen on radar and gave them just enough time to scramble the remaining force, and eventually beat back the German attack, while also crippling the Luftwaffe just long enough for the RAF to recoup with help from the US.
Had that attack succeeded, the RAF would have become a non factor, and an invasion would have happened, in theory. What would have happened before that, is anyone's guess. Maybe the US helps reinforce the RN...
The fascists of the future will be called anti-fascistsThe best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity
Civitate
Re: If the soviets had never joined WWII, would the allies still have won?
Its true that radar basically won us the air war. However, even if the Luftwaffe completely crippled the airforce there was still no chance of them invading Britain with the Royal Navy in the way.
Saying that, even if the lost control of the skies, it would only have been over South-East England. They had plans to withdraw to Northern England if they had to, which was out of range of German fighters. From there they could still attack any Germans attempting an invasion in the south, or attempting bombing raids. Basically, loosing the Battle of Britain would not have spelled the defeat of the RAF let alone Britain. As long as the Royal Navy still stood, there was no way for Germany to actually carry it out.
Operation Sealion (The name of the German plan) was also never really realistic. Hitler's attention was soon diverted to the USSR after the Battle of Britain, and either way Hitler arguably never saw it as a realistic plan, but more a bluff in the hope that Britain would capitulate. The RAF took many recon photos over Northern Europe and saw what appeared to be invasion barges. In reality these were mostly modified canal boats taken from Amsterdam that had absolutely no chance of successfully crossing the English channel.
Again, its unlikely that even if an invasion was attempted that it would be successful, even without the RAF. In fact, in the 1970's a massive reconstruction of Operation Sealion took place, using actual German war plans along with British and German generals from the time. In the exercise (Which assumed that Britain was defeated in the Battle of Britain), the Germans got no further 15 miles in land with very heavy casualties, and just 90,000 men ashore when, 2 days after the 'invasion' the Royal Navy arrived destroying German supply lines and forcing the German 'army' to surrender.Had that attack succeeded, the RAF would have become a non factor, and an invasion would have happened, in theory. What would have happened before that, is anyone's guess. Maybe the US helps reinforce the RN...
So again, assuming the Germans got across the English Channel unopposed and had air superiority in South East England, they probably wouldn't have been able to defeat Britain.
Even if they did take London, Churchill and the Royal Family had plans to move the Government to Canada to continue the war. There was also a secret army formed that basically consisted of blokes who were trained in guerilla warfare, acting in groups of 8-14 and in charge of a local area. They were given a hidden base, gin rations and enough food rations for 2 weeks (They were not expected to survive more then 2 weeks. They were effectively suicide squads). They also had cyanide pills should they be captured and they didn't have any information on any other units outside of their area so if they were captured they would give nothing up.
There was also defensive lines built up and down the country. You can still see bunkers dotted about hte countryside. Basically, if the Germans had got ashore, we weren't giving up easy.
Under the Patronage of Jom!
Campidoctor
Re: If the soviets had never joined WWII, would the allies still have won?
I agree. Germany had very well-trained troops, but British troops could rival them in many cases. With good troops and equipment, the British could've held out. Even if Germany began making headway into England, all the RN would have to do is attack the supply convoys going to-and-from Germany. The German army would eventually run out of supplies and capitulate, possibly easily.
flaxen haired argonaut
Re: If the soviets had never joined WWII, would the allies still have won?
The best chances for germany were early on because of Dunkirk, but Hitler scrapped Sealion. Im not arguing that Germany ultimately succeeds, but that they could have in fact landed enough of a force to lead into a prolonged engagement.
Although it was more than a half century ago, it was still modern warfare. Had that one single attack succeeded, the Germans could have kept the RAF in such a state that they would not have been a factor. You then have Luftwaffe vs the RN. Could the Luftwaffe have harassed the RN leaving from Scapa Flow, to the level that they are able to inflict significant losses, let alone keep supply lines open?
Aside from that, the major portion of the infantry force was going to come from the air, in the form of paratroopers. The ultimate plan would have been very similar to the allied plan, but with the early landing force being nothing more than a decoy. Something to simply draw mustering British land forces to the coast. After seeing the size of the paratrooper force, the Brits would have then surely reinforced inland, while the rest of the amphibious force follows.
The key to all of this, as in any modern war, is air superiority. The fact that military historians and universities still debate this, shows that it was indeed possible. Even without air superiority:
In wargames conducted at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst in 1974, which assumed the Luftwaffe had not yet won air supremacy, the Germans were able to establish a beachhead in England by using a minefield screen in the English Channel to protect the initial assault. However, the German ground forces were delayed at the "Stop Lines" (e.g. the GHQ Line), a layered series of defensive positions that had been built, each a combination of Home Guard troops and physical barriers. At the same time, the regular troops of the British Army were forming up. After only a few days, the Royal Navy was able to reach the Channel from Scapa Flow, cutting off supplies and blocking further reinforcement. Isolated and facing regular troops with armour and artillery, the invasion force was forced to surrender
The fascists of the future will be called anti-fascistsThe best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity
Praeses
Re: If the soviets had never joined WWII, would the allies still have won?
Besides, who knows Soviets wouldN't declare war anyways? In a much prepared way.
"Therefore I am not in favour of raising any dogmatic banner. On the contrary, we must try to help the dogmatists to clarify their propositions for themselves. Thus, communism, in particular, is a dogmatic abstraction; in which connection, however, I am not thinking of some imaginary and possible communism, but actually existing communism as taught by Cabet, Dézamy, Weitling, etc. This communism is itself only a special expression of the humanistic principle, an expression which is still infected by its antithesis – the private system. Hence the abolition of private property and communism are by no means identical, and it is not accidental but inevitable that communism has seen other socialist doctrines – such as those of Fourier, Proudhon, etc. – arising to confront it because it is itself only a special, one-sided realisation of the socialist principle."
Marx to A.Ruge
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
