Panther131 Posted January 11, 2001 Share Posted January 11, 2001 Interesting how we can obsess (or think) about the what if's in war. I have to agree with Wolflord, in that germany lost her chance at winning the war when hitler blundered in not taking the oil fields, and not taking the mother of russia herself, Moscow in mid 1941. If this had happend history would be different. Its hard to imagine what hitler was thinking in stoping just short of complete victory of russia at that time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesy Posted January 11, 2001 Share Posted January 11, 2001 Do you really think that Russia would have capitulated with the loss of Moscow? I agree fighting a two front war, and no less one front that is enormous in size was lunacy. What country has that type of logistical capability. The US did a fine job in fighting a two front war, with one front (PTO) that was incredibly geographically challenged. Somebody noted that Germany's Industrial output maximized in 1944. Japan's key wartime production occurred in 1944 as well. But witout the means to get them or maintain them at the front, its useless. Perhaps, if Japan had entered the war against Russia they would have forced Russia to maintain many of the Siberian Units in the east, making fewer available units in the west...just my .02 cents ------------------ "Lack of weapons is no excuse for defeat" - Lt. General Renya Mutaguchi, Commanding General, Japanese Fifteenth Army, 1944-1945 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Heidman Posted January 11, 2001 Share Posted January 11, 2001 I think taking Moscow in 1941 could have forced Stalin to a negotiated peace in 1942. Look at a pre-war map of the USSR. Hell, look at a modern map of Russia. Moscow is the rail and road hub for most of the country. Without Moscow, north-south travel and logistics becomes almost impossible, and east-west only slightly better. The best scenario for a German "victory" is a negotiated peace with the UK after the Fall of France. Not totally improbable. This would result in no Battle of Britain, greatly decreased siphoning of resources into the U-Boat program, a much stronger Luftwaffe for the Barbarossa campaign, and (possibly most importantly) no time and resources wasted on the invasion of Greece. It is not hard to imagine a UK peace resulting in a Barbarossa with a stronger Wehrmacht, a much stronger Luftwaffe, and an extra 4 to 6 weeks of compaigning in Russia/Ukraine instead of the Balkans. The UKs lonely stand against Hitler in 1940-1941 is more important than many realise. Jeff Heidman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts