Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

2 WW 2 vanity questions
6-4-12

Posted on 06/04/2012 7:00:24 PM PDT by InvisibleChurch

I have 2 questions regarding WW2. 1: Had Hitler been assassinated years earlier, would the war have lasted longer because better military minds might have held more sway or would the leaders have decided to cut their losses and surrendered? 2: Would the holocaust come to an end or would it have continued?


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-74 next last
Just wondering. Thanks.
1 posted on 06/04/2012 7:00:28 PM PDT by InvisibleChurch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

That depends on who came to power after Hitler.


2 posted on 06/04/2012 7:04:20 PM PDT by VietVet (I am old enough to know who I am and what I believe, and I 'm not inclined to apologize for any of)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

That depends on who came to power after Hitler.


3 posted on 06/04/2012 7:04:31 PM PDT by VietVet (I am old enough to know who I am and what I believe, and I 'm not inclined to apologize for any of)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

That depends on who came to power after Hitler.


4 posted on 06/04/2012 7:04:48 PM PDT by VietVet (I am old enough to know who I am and what I believe, and I 'm not inclined to apologize for any of)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

That depends on who came to power after Hitler.


5 posted on 06/04/2012 7:04:57 PM PDT by VietVet (I am old enough to know who I am and what I believe, and I 'm not inclined to apologize for any of)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch
I was reading “Devil's Guard,” the memiors of an SS partisan-hunter, and wondering the same thing. I imagine that Guiderin (sic?) and/or Rommel would have taken control and negotiated for an acceptable peace with the western allies, but continued the war with Russia, perhaps with western aid. As for the holocaust, I dunno. It was pretty well underway and would the gestapo have stood by and let it end if the new German leaders wished it to? I think that the average German citizen, those who knew of it, were probably ashamed and would have been relieved to see it ended.
6 posted on 06/04/2012 7:06:24 PM PDT by Copenhagen Smile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch
Depends on the time-line. If he's whacked before the Russian invasion by Germany, They fight.

If he's killed after that winter vacation the Krauts took in Russia, they sue for peace, and everything stops, IMHO ............................................ FRegards

7 posted on 06/04/2012 7:06:35 PM PDT by gonzo ( Buy more ammo, dammit! You should already have the firearms ... FRegards)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

Actually, the power of the Reich lives on only now it’s called islam.


8 posted on 06/04/2012 7:08:13 PM PDT by evad (STOP SPENDING, STOP SPENDING, STOP SPENDING. It's the SPENDING Stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

Years before when?


9 posted on 06/04/2012 7:10:26 PM PDT by arrogantsob (Obama must Go.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gonzo

The question is, what does Stalin do? He wanted Europe...I don’t think he would have been too thrilled with just letting Germany be.


10 posted on 06/04/2012 7:10:31 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

Once the process starts it won’t stop until some limit is reached. The invasion accelerated the Soviet mobilization for total war and the economy was in its service. Plus, Stalin had been humiliated and practically immobilized by the attack which he was being warned about by many sources including the US. He had to have been pretty pissed at Hitler for showing him to be as much a fool as Chamberlain.


11 posted on 06/04/2012 7:15:16 PM PDT by arrogantsob (Obama must Go.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: VietVet

It more depends on how early they got him. He had charisma and the longer he was able to forge his popularity, the more powerful the Nazis became. Take him out early—no Nazis and no war. Ya think?


12 posted on 06/04/2012 7:17:24 PM PDT by Misterioso (The man who lets a leader prescribe his course is a wreck being towed to the scrap heap. - Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: evad

Fortunately Islam does NOT have the power of the Reich. If it had we would be in deep shiite. Nazism essentially lost because it did not have the numbers to overwhelm Russia. Islam has little more than numbers, very few brains.


13 posted on 06/04/2012 7:17:28 PM PDT by arrogantsob (Obama must Go.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

Adolph Galland, who was the commander of the Luftwaffe fighter command and was also a 100+ victories ace had some interesting things to say about Hitler.

Before he became probably near insane, Hitler had a very good military mind. Galland said he often made the right call over the objections of his generals.

Somewhere along the way he became so inflexible that he was harming them greatly. For instance when they wanted to use the ME-262 as a fighter Hitler countered them and insisted in it being a blitz bomber. They could have had it nearly a year earlier as a fighter and it might have made the difference.

Galland said even there Hitler was not entirely wrong as you will not win a war on defense but also if your cities are being bombed into non existence you would be far better off destroying those bombers before trying to take the offensive again.

If another member of the inner circle of the Nazi party had taken over, I think they would have continued the death camps.

I think if Admiral Doenitz who really did take over for Hitler was in charge, they would have been stopped and Doenitz would have tried for peace but it probably was just not possible until Germany had been defeated.


14 posted on 06/04/2012 7:17:43 PM PDT by yarddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: arrogantsob

Years before his suicude, say if he was killed after the invasion but before the defeat of the russian invasion.


15 posted on 06/04/2012 7:18:28 PM PDT by InvisibleChurch (i a m t h e m a r g i n o f e r r e r)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: arrogantsob

Germany was very close to forcing Stalin’s ouster....my thought is, if Moscow was taken, there would have been a revolt that resulted in Stalin’s overthrow, and perhaps even the emergence of Vlasov, as the de facto leader of Russian resistance. Vlasov was an opportunist, he only collaborated with the Nazis to buy time, in the hope that Stalin was deposed.


16 posted on 06/04/2012 7:20:57 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch
I think you would have had to have gotten a number of top Nazis to bring things to a halt...Goering,Himmler,Goebels,Donitz among others.
17 posted on 06/04/2012 7:28:52 PM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Bill Ayers Was *Not* "Just Some Guy In The Neighborhood")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

The war would have been shorter. If someone had taken over, he would have wanted to end the war because Germany was doomed by the Spring of 1942. Many Germans knew that. That is when the huge bombing of Germany started. The US would have won the war even if Germany had better jet fighters. We had the BOMB.


18 posted on 06/04/2012 7:46:49 PM PDT by Ecliptic (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

as a multi std infested megalomaniac, the likely answer is better strategic minds(who were in place) would have been promoted before the set backs so on balance removing Hitler before 1943 would have been a net negative. The question to ask is once the usa entered would a rational power sue for peace? The winning of he cold war was in fact the Russians suing for peace with out the paper work.

Back to ww2. Hitler’s strategic blunders. dis-allocation of resources and waste of experience/knowledge, with in a confined industrial base, all makes a boxed in advisory.

So a deranged leader with unlimited power, literally playing live chess vs professional warriors.

I wouldn’t change anything, you might get a competent, strategic leader, non infested, and willing to stick with the ruskies.

I morn the deaths, but look at not just ww2 but 1951-1980.


19 posted on 06/04/2012 7:47:44 PM PDT by waynesa98
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ecliptic

I saw on another thread here today, a good point, one of the reasons Hitler emerged was that WWI was never fought on German soil, they were spared for the most part the horrors of war, and it gave credence to the “stabbed in the back” line.

Now if the same thing happened again, where Germany was allowed to surrender without experiencing the horrors of war, would it have created an environment that would have allowed another fanatic, like Hitler to rise again?


20 posted on 06/04/2012 7:50:28 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

1. I would say no. If anything a new ruler may have stepped out of the way of the generals causing the war to last longer. I.E. not leaving Paulus stuck in Stalingrad till the last man and many other “fortress” orders.

2. The holocost would have continued. The upper ranks of the Nazis were ate up with antisemitism. Antisemitism was also not merely hatred of the Jews, it was a belief that they caused Germany to lose the last war and secretly controlled everything. Hitler certainly did not create antisemitism, it was quite healthy before he joined the Nazi party.


21 posted on 06/04/2012 7:52:54 PM PDT by When do we get liberated? (A socialist is a communist who realizes he must suck at the tit of Capitalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

Those are very interesting questions, imponderable in some respects. My opinions:

1: Had Hitler been assassinated years earlier, would the war have lasted longer because better military minds might have held more sway or would the leaders have decided to cut their losses and surrendered?

Depends on how many years earlier. Without Hitler or someone like him who was a sparkplug, a warhead, as it were, Germany might have never developed the ultra nationalist leanings, (maybe mandates would be a better word) that led them to seek territory and conquest and persecution of the Jews (and other ginned-up outcast groups) out of the terrible depression it was going through from the late 20’s into the 30’s. Germany was badly humilated in WW1 and the after-effects of losing the war and particularly the oppressive reparations it was forced to endure might have led it into much more of a meek stance. One can imagine that only a few programming switches had to be flipped for Germany to go warlike, but without the fiery charisma of a Hitler, it may well have never developed as it did. Now if Hitler had been assasinated AFTER the Nazi party came to power, and after the Nazi regime had established itself and above all, started the war, then the German march to war might have been a lot more successful. As is, they ran over most of Europe. I believe that few historians would argue that the Nazis in large part defeated themselves with the overreach into Russia in 1941.

2: Would the holocaust come to an end or would it have continued?

The holocaust was a massive national project but it was founded upon the ultra nationalism sparked by Hitler and arguably was so audaciously evil that perhaps only a Hitler might have imagined it and worked to pursue it as a reality.

So most of my answer is, it would depend upon where things sat at the moment Hitler had been assassinated. If it was 1940, the war might have been more successful for Germany. Before the Russian adventure, Germany really had had few setbacks. Maybe Germany “lost” the Battle of Britain, but that was merely failing to achieve a goal. It started and ended and chewed up some pilots and some planes. No doubt, it was a negative to their morale. But once they decided they “lost”, the bleeding stopped and they turned their attention elsewhere. Russia and the battle for Russia was a cancer that ate up more and more German resources over time. Furthermore, it activated the Russian military against Germany and that might have never happened had Germany left Russia more or less alone.


22 posted on 06/04/2012 7:56:03 PM PDT by Attention Surplus Disorder (A conservative, a liberal and a moderate walk into a bar. Bartender says "what'll it be, Mitt?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

Prior to Hitler attacking Russia, Russia was an Axis power.

Communism likely would have spread throughout most of Europe before the US would have had any justification to intervene.

Assassination isn’t the solution for solving international disputes as long as national politics placed the leaders into power. National leaders might conveniently focus the thinking of a body politic with one or a handful of people, but the real conflicts involve bodies of people and how they think as a group.


23 posted on 06/04/2012 7:59:01 PM PDT by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

There were a number of times some of his generals plotted to remove him. There was one plan that was to occur right before they invaded Poland. There would have been no war and no holocaust.


24 posted on 06/04/2012 8:09:33 PM PDT by gorush (History repeats itself because human nature is static)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch
As a student of WWII, it's my opinion that the only organization that was capable of ridding Nazi Germany of Hitler was the military. Given that, combat operations would have been much more successful since Hitler was, at best, a completely inept commander. The issue of the concentration camps is not so clear. Had the military been successful in orchestrating an actual coup d’etat, part of the “Valkyrie Group's” plan was to arrest Himmler and a large portion of the Nazi party apparatus, so I think the murder of the “undesirables” would have ceased.

Most of the Wehrmacht officers were professionals and were at odds with the political elements of the Nazi government. This is only speculation, but it does pose interesting, “what ifs”.

25 posted on 06/04/2012 8:11:55 PM PDT by cgchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch
As a student of WWII, it's my opinion that the only organization that was capable of ridding Nazi Germany of Hitler was the military. Given that, combat operations would have been much more successful since Hitler was, at best, a completely inept commander. The issue of the concentration camps is not so clear. Had the military been successful in orchestrating an actual coup d’etat, part of the “Valkyrie Group's” plan was to arrest Himmler and a large portion of the Nazi party apparatus, so I think the murder of the “undesirables” would have ceased.

Most of the Wehrmacht officers were professionals and were at odds with the political elements of the Nazi government. This is only speculation, but it does pose interesting, “what ifs”.

26 posted on 06/04/2012 8:13:06 PM PDT by cgchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Attention Surplus Disorder
The German defeat in the Battle of Britain directly led to Operation Barbarossa. Hitler believed that the UK’s only hope was the Soviet Union intervening in the war. He saw knocking out Russia leading to Britain's eventual surrender. Hitler stated this theory consistently in the formulation and lead up to Barbarossa. The source for this is Ian Kershaw’s two volume biography of Hitler.
27 posted on 06/04/2012 8:23:04 PM PDT by gusty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch
I believe the Hitler assassination question depends on WHEN he was killed.

If he had been killed after invading the USSR, it would have made no difference. The remaining German leadership may have surrendered w/o Hitler's insistence on a fight to the death, ending the war sooner rather than later. The German military knew the war was lost after Stalingrad.

If Hitler had been assassinated before invading the USSR, Germany may have beaten Britain, giving Germany North Africa & the Middle East, all that oil, & no opponent at its back as it invaded East. Hitler canceled the invasion of Britain to prepare to invade the USSR.

With Britain out of the war, antagonism between Germany & the US would have decreased. With a dead Hitler, Germany might not have declared war on the US in Dec. 1941, if ever. With no base of operation (Britain) in Europe, FDR may have been satisfied to remain neutral in Europe while fighting the Japanese. A US war in the Atlantic would have been considerably more difficult with Britain & probably Ireland in German hands.

German generals had begged Hitler to wait a year before invading the USSR, to rearm & rebuild the German military. Hitler's premature invasion East probably cost him the war.

The Holocaust would have likely continued w/o Hitler as the Nazis would retain power after Hitler, & war production depended on slave labor.

28 posted on 06/04/2012 8:24:04 PM PDT by Mister Da (The mark of a wise man is not what he knows, but what he knows he doesn't know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gorush

Actually the general’s plot was before the planned invasion of Czechoslovakia, which France and the UK through inept diplomacy made unnecessary.


29 posted on 06/04/2012 8:25:02 PM PDT by gusty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Attention Surplus Disorder

Britain was at least neutralized to the point where they were no threat to take on Germany, until the US entered the war. So it made sense for Hitler to turn attention to Russia, before Stalin could complete his buildup, which was slated to be around 43-44. That’s why Stalin was so hesitant to do anything that might provoke Hitler, he was trying to buy as much time as he could.


30 posted on 06/04/2012 8:28:39 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Mister Da
If assassinated after Barbarossa, I agree it would have made no difference in Germany's eventual defeat. I believe the factor not considered is that the US and UK would not have signed a separate peace with Germany. Germany's complete surrender was the only acceptable outcome for the Western leaders, Churchill and FDR.
31 posted on 06/04/2012 8:30:01 PM PDT by gusty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: yarddog
Before he became probably near insane, Hitler had a very good military mind. Galland said he often made the right call over the objections of his generals.

I don't think he had a good military mind but instead he just presumed his enemies were weak and indecisive. Early on in rearmament, the Rhineland, Austria and Czechoslovakia he was right. But I don't believe that he was perceptive so much that he was a one trick pony who believed that he was the only wolf in the world of scared sheep. He even believed that the American war effort would fall into chaos and we would sue for peace when FDR died.

32 posted on 06/04/2012 8:30:18 PM PDT by KarlInOhio (You only have three billion heartbeats in a lifetime.How many does the government claim as its own?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: gusty
which France and the UK through inept diplomacy made unnecessary.

Hitler was ticked at what happened at Munich, he had been denied his chance to show off the Nazi military, which he was itching to do.....so he knew he had to make the demands on Poland so severe, that there was no way that the Allies were going to acquiesce next time.

33 posted on 06/04/2012 8:31:19 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio

I believe what is meant by Hitler’s right call is the Battle of Moscow. The German generals wanted to retreat in response to the Soviet counter offensive, while Hitler demanded they remain in their positions and fight. Hitler’s call led to the blunting of the Soviet offensive. In hindsight a retreat would have led to a complete rout of the German forces in front of Moscow.


34 posted on 06/04/2012 8:35:44 PM PDT by gusty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

Wasn’t there more then forty known plots to assassinate Hitler? Some as far back as 1939? Not to forget. Many times during his parades through German towns people had the chance to shoot him. Would killing Hitler have prevent the holocaust? Only if he was killed before it started. When did the nazis start killing so called mentally retarded people? Not to forget forced sterilization. He would have to been killed before 1935 to prevent the holocaust. If not earlier.


35 posted on 06/04/2012 8:38:02 PM PDT by DMG2FUN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

Correct, he felt cheated. The generals did not want to go to war in 38. However long standing hatred for Poland among the military, even more so than Hitler, saw no opposition to the invasion of Poland in 39.


36 posted on 06/04/2012 8:39:39 PM PDT by gusty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch
Interestingly enough, and despite repeated pleas, Eisenhower refused calls to kill Hitler simply because he believed a more competent General would replace him and the war would last longer.

In 1943 Stalin had an assassination squad in Berlin, which he recalled, for the same reason!

37 posted on 06/04/2012 8:45:19 PM PDT by I cannot think of a name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: I cannot think of a name

It wouldn’t have mattered who replaced Hitler, Germany did not have the economic wherewithal to win the war. It’s economy could not compete with the United States alone. I do not have the figures handy, but even the UK’s economy was outproducing Germany. They were doomed from the start.


38 posted on 06/04/2012 8:52:07 PM PDT by gusty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: gusty

“It wouldn’t have mattered who replaced Hitler, Germany did not have the economic wherewithal to win the war.”

Correct

However that idiot Hitler didn’t realize that. He was throwing every resource into the battle they had, actually believing a victory was possible.

The concern was that if one of the competent generals took over, he might go for a stalemate to drag the war out until the public demanded an end. And it might have worked. Don’t forget that the English turned Churchill out even before the war ended. Even in this country people were starting to ask, “when will our boys come home?”


39 posted on 06/04/2012 8:57:34 PM PDT by I cannot think of a name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: DMG2FUN
Would killing Hitler have prevent the holocaust?

In his speech of September 1, Hitler named his line of succession in this order: Goering, then Hess. But I suspect Himmler would make his move as well, and certainly if Himmler gains power, the Holocaust would indeed not be stopped.

40 posted on 06/04/2012 8:58:02 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

“....if Moscow was taken....”

One of my rules of life: Don’t invade Russian, just don’t.


41 posted on 06/04/2012 8:58:34 PM PDT by jocon307
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

If wishes were horses....beggers would ride.


42 posted on 06/04/2012 9:01:37 PM PDT by spokeshave (If Obama is Lenin....and Van Jones is Trotsky.....where are Stalin....Mao....Pol Pot?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch
The variant I always wonder about is this:

What would have happened if Japan had attacked the Soviet Union instead of the United States?

The only thing standing in the way of the Germans taking Moscow in December 1941 was Zhukov's Siberian troops.

43 posted on 06/04/2012 9:04:39 PM PDT by Hoodat (Because they do not change, Therefore they do not fear God. -Psalm 55:19-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hoodat
What if Superman grew up in Nazi Germany, instead of America?


44 posted on 06/04/2012 9:07:08 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: gusty

Interesting. I did not know that Hitler tied Russia to Britain in any tangible way. I have not read a lot of secondary material about the war but I consider myself more than modestly informed as to the overall history. I would have never thought what you state.


45 posted on 06/04/2012 9:21:20 PM PDT by Attention Surplus Disorder (A conservative, a liberal and a moderate walk into a bar. Bartender says "what'll it be, Mitt?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

The Germans would have sued for peace and less Jews would have died.


46 posted on 06/04/2012 9:32:11 PM PDT by TomasUSMC ( FIGHT LIKE WW2, FINISH LIKE WW2. FIGHT LIKE NAM, FINISH LIKE NAM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

“Britain was at least neutralized to the point where they were no threat to take on Germany, until the US entered the war.”

Agreed.

“So it made sense for Hitler to turn attention to Russia, before Stalin could complete his buildup, which was slated to be around 43-44. That’s why Stalin was so hesitant to do anything that might provoke Hitler, he was trying to buy as much time as he could.”

To me, Russia was a giant egotistical overreach and questionable endeavor from the very beginning. True, Hitler could not claim that he had conquered the world without a victory over Russia. But IMHO, had Germany never touched Russia, Germany could have conquered everything else with the [possible] exception of the US. Russia was a backwards nation, primarily agrarian. Hitler could have just monitored Russia and delayed attacking until he perceived....something properly judged as a peril. Suppose Germany honored the Ribbentrop pact, divided up Poland and let Russia have some minor countries for the asking. There is no question that the two of them hated each others guts, there is no question that Hitler was desirous of obtaining the Romanian oilfields and that could be a point of serious contention between the two countries, but what I am saying is that someone as smart and cunning yet not as conquest-obsessed as Hitler could very well have avoided war with Russia. The 1000+ mile supply lines were an elementary issue that should have been a point of concern, but Hitler had rolled over everything else, so in overreach fashion, he probably figured why not? Attacking Russia was a strategic blunder that’s easy to call in hindsight, but I don’t think it was all that unpredictable. Had Hitler just paused and consolidated for a few years into 1943 with no Russian invasion, IMO Germany might not have been defeatable in Europe.


47 posted on 06/04/2012 9:34:20 PM PDT by Attention Surplus Disorder (A conservative, a liberal and a moderate walk into a bar. Bartender says "what'll it be, Mitt?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Attention Surplus Disorder

If Hitler didn’t attack Stalin, Stalin would have inevitably attacked Hitler. Granted Stalin was counting on Britain, France and Germany duking in out in the West in a war of attrition....with the Soviets swooping in and taking out the weakened armies.


48 posted on 06/04/2012 9:37:53 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

You sound like you’ve studied background material on this a lot more than I have, but I can’t help thinking and thus opining that if Germany had essentially left Russia alone, played nice, and just consolidated into 1943, tossing Russia a few small countries as bones, Russia would not have gotten onto war footing, at least to the extent that they did once under attack in Barbarossa. Imagine Germany 1943 with no Russia invasion. Two years of consolidation and industrial buildup. Invincible. Stalin would attack such a juggernaut? Now Russia has the 1000 mile supply line?

I agree they hated each other. But I have never regarded Stalin as being all that eager to militarily attack Germany.


49 posted on 06/04/2012 9:50:27 PM PDT by Attention Surplus Disorder (A conservative, a liberal and a moderate walk into a bar. Bartender says "what'll it be, Mitt?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch
Hitlers power was in his personality. His was the ultimate’’cult of personality''. Goebbels was a charismatic figure in his own right and a very forceful public speaker. However, personally I think with Hitler out of the way and the other leaders like Goering and Himmler put under arrest the German General Staff and The Werhmact along with the German Navy and Luftwaffe would have negated the SS and sued for peace.
50 posted on 06/04/2012 10:35:03 PM PDT by jmacusa (Political correctness is cultural Marxism. I'm not a Marxist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-74 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson