If Operation Barbarossa wasn't launched, Would've Nazi Germany won WWII?

[skadiboy]

---

nice topic mga higala... naa raman diay ni akong g pangita ;P

[erwin_rommel]

The Americans and U.K. were instrumental in that...

1. They provided good intel from their respective agencies, OSS and MI6 (SIS). They did a good job of revealing a lot of German warplans, and also broke the Enigma code via Ultra.

2. Their mere existence helped the Eastern front because it meant Hitler could not consolidate all his forces in the East.

3. The British were owning the Afrika Korps during and after 1942, after El Alamein. Because the German forces were generally out of fuel.

4. The RN sunk the Bismarck, and its sistership Tirpitz in 1944 (by RAF). It is correct that had the Bismarck made it to the Atlantic, it would have caused problems for the British and Americans. But this ship is overrated, the British had more than enough capital ships that could match the Bismarck. particularly Nelson class HMS Rodney and King George V class BBs (there were 3 of them operating in the Atlantic then)

5. Lend-Lease.

6. Speeding up the conclusion of the European theater in the war (but not necessarily changing the outcome)

It is not mere "luck" that the Nazi were undersupplied, logistics wins wars. I don't know why you use that word loosely. The Nazis were technologically superior but they lost because they could not produce enough. You cannot fuel a warmachine with "technological advances". Dili na luck, because if it is, in that case, Nazis were lucky that Stalin was too busy purging his Armed Forces prior to Hitler breaking the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, the Nazis were lucky that Stalin was too busy with his expansion in the south before it broke into war, and the Nazis were lucky that the Soviets had practically ceased most of its research during Stalin's five-year plan (and Russia had an abundance of researchers). No matter how you look at it, it is a gravely poor miscalculation on Hitler's part when he chose to stall Barbarossa.

the british flagship HMS hood was sunk by the bismarck in less than 15 mins. rodney and king george maybe a good match but they are slower compared the bismarck. they couldnt out run the bismarck in the atlantic. hitting the bismarck's rudder is only 1 out 100 chance according to historians but the the last plane hit it. you need luck to get that 1% chance. is being hit 400 times and still standing still considered overrated? i doubt those british battleships could take that amount of punishment. even the rodney became wornout due to constant firing during the battle and needs to be repaired even if wasnt hit by the bismarck.

[unagikabayaki]

I had a book once (I lost it) about the Bismarck chronicles. I believe its only weakness was the upper deck, not armored (i think wooden floor lang) then the Brit plane believe to have targeted that weak spot and hit the ammunitions storage of Bismarck

[street_of_no_return]

Had Hitler focused on the aircraft advancements and not so on his prided Panzer Division...i think that could have changed history

true Hitler could change history but still he would end up losing to the Allies. Unless the German have A bomb too.

[elvandesantos]

I had a book once (I lost it) about the Bismarck chronicles. I believe its only weakness was the upper deck, not armored (i think wooden floor lang) then the Brit plane believe to have targeted that weak spot and hit the ammunitions storage of Bismarck

bismarck was hit by HMS prince of wales sah iyang oil tank... retreating for two days british deployed its aircrafts.. one "luckily" hit its steering gear which hammed her steering capability. 2 accounts how it sank. one was torpedoed by another plane the other was the germans scuttled the ship..

this is if my memory serves me right. d kaau ko hilig mobasa histories gud hahaha

[trollolol]

wala ko kasabot unsay point nimo ani



germans were almost successful in both russia and north africa until they were caught by the winter in russia and the dwindling supplies against the increasing supplies of the british due to the help of the americans in north africa. the british were lucky because they were in a separate island unlike france. they were also lucky that they were able to sink the bismarck before it went to the atlantic. that bismarck could have caused havoc to the royal navy and terrorize their US supply lines which is their lifeline during that time

My point is you are so quick to use luck as a basis of argument. Following your logic about how lucky the UK was in terms of geography, how lucky do you gather were the Germans the USA was an ocean away?

First off, USSR fought rather well later on. Its quite impressive how they turned the tide of the Eastern Front. But Germany was also fighting on all sides. And about 'the hero of WWII' status. I don't think so. First, they were fighting on one front. Unlike the rest of the Allies which were in Africa, Burma, China, South East Asia, the Pacific and the Atlantic Ocean and of course, Europe. Second, they never liberated any country. They took over it and imposed Communism that lasted in the 1980's and had terrible repercussions to this day, like in Bosnia.

Lastly, American contribution was not exaggerated it was widespread reality even the Soviets were lend-leasing American tanks like the M4Shermans, M3Lees, and aircraft like the DC-3.

List of equipment supplied to Soviet Russia by USA in World War II.

Aircraft.............................14,795
Tanks.................................7,056
Jeeps................................51,503
Trucks..............................375,883
Motorcycles..........................35,170
Tractors..............................8,071
Guns (Artillery)..................................8,218
Machine guns........................131,633
Explosives..........................345,735 tons
Building equipment valued.......$10,910,000
Railroad freight cars................11,155
Locomotives...........................1,981
Cargo ships..............................90
Submarine hunters.......................105
Torpedo boats...........................197
Ship engines..........................7,784
Food supplies.....................4,478,000 tons
Machines and equipment.......$1,078,965,000
Noniron metals......................802,000 tons
Petroleum products................2,670,000 tons
Chemicals...........................842,000 tons
Cotton..........................106,893,000 tons
Leather..............................49,860 tons
Tires.............................3,786,000
Army boots.......................15,417,000 pairs

Those numbers look impressive... impressive to the uninformed. That represents only a mere fraction of the aid that was given to the UK. Aid to the USSR started arriving in 1942 after the initial German push into Soviet territory. By 1944 the soviets were producing on their own in ratios that outnumbered German production by 600 %. By the time the USSR was the bad dog in Europe T34s were the best tanks running around town and not those over priced sherman coffins. Sure the Americans gave aid that much is undeniable but was it substantial enough to be relevant (relevant in the sense that without it the USSR would have lost) in the Soviet effort? No.

They liberated countries from Nazi rule. liberated = freed so your argument is flawed.

The fronts the allies fought on were like playgrounds. LOL it is stupid to say that the USSR was lucky it was only fighting on one front when it was fighting 80% of the Wermacht. No where else was the rate of casualties higher. The battles in Africa looked good from a technical perspective because they weren't as brutal. The japs wielding their asian sized p3nises weren't as formidable as the Germans.

[flanker]

Now my question is, if this operation wasn't launched, and Germany maintained the Alliance with Russia until they eliminated France, UK and the US- Germany would've won this war, right?

Yup it was the beginning of the end of the Nazi when they blitzkrieg'd the Soviet Union. Most of their resources were poured on that operation. The battle of Stalingrad is the turning point of the war.

It was the reason the Allied forces decided to invaded the beaches of Normandy.

In the American books/media it was the D-Day (Normandy) that won the war in reality it was the Soviets who destroyed the Nazis.

[street_of_no_return]

Yup it was the beginning of the end of the Nazi when they blitzkrieg'd the Soviet Union. Most of their resources were poured on that operation.

The Nazi dont have much option cuz the USSR are stopping (not 100% maybe 60-70%) the supply of raw materials. Nazi cant survive the war without those raw materials from Russia so they decided to invade USSR to have full control of the raw materials that mother Russia possess

If Nazi could only ask assistant from JAPAN, USSR will bend its knees to the Axis , the thing is, the USSR and Japan had the agreement or Treaty of neutrality. I think that saved USSR from being erase from Humanity.. haha

[æRLO]

Had Hitler focused on the aircraft advancements and not so on his prided Panzer Division...i think that could have changed history

The Luftwaffe was stronger than the RAF as well as leaps ahead of the Soviet Airforce. The Me 262 had seen combat in 1944.

the british flagship HMS hood was sunk by the bismarck in less than 15 mins. rodney and king george maybe a good match but they are slower compared the bismarck. they couldnt out run the bismarck in the atlantic. hitting the bismarck's rudder is only 1 out 100 chance according to historians but the the last plane hit it. you need luck to get that 1% chance. is being hit 400 times and still standing still considered overrated? i doubt those british battleships could take that amount of punishment. even the rodney became wornout due to constant firing during the battle and needs to be repaired even if wasnt hit by the bismarck.

again the Bismarck class was the prize of the Kriegsmarine, and it was possibly the best ship of the line back then. But the ship has been romanticized over and over again that it has become overrated. No matter how you look at it, Germany's "formidable" large warships were swarmed by too many less-sophisticated warships--quantity beat quality (even though the British warships were high-quality). Germany did not fully pursue the advancement of aircraft carriers, which could have changed the course of the Atlantic naval campaign, as it did in the Pacific.

OnT- I stick to my point, the Nazis could have won had Hitler used his "lost" four-weeks into Operation Barbarossa. He could have taken Moscow if he stuck to the plan--but he didn't. Instead he allowed the operation to go into the winter, where his 6th Army was destroyed in Stalingrad, and several others suffered significant losses. Relatively, The Nazis relied in speed, and the Soviet Union relied on numbers. You cannot call the allies "lucky" for taking advantage of Germany's weakness, like not being able to replace every man lost as quickly as the Americans or the Soviets can, as the German's also exploited the Soviet's inability to mobilize fast enough.

[erwin_rommel]

My point is you are so quick to use luck as a basis of argument. Following your logic about how lucky the UK was in terms of geography, how lucky do you gather were the Germans the USA was an ocean away?

had britain been in the same geographical location with france, the germans will destroy them in weeks if not days just like france. they are not as big as russia. france was a world power during that time but has no answer to the blitzkrieg onslaught.

The fronts the allies fought on were like playgrounds. LOL it is stupid to say that the USSR was lucky it was only fighting on one front when it was fighting 80% of the Wermacht. No where else was the rate of casualties higher. The battles in Africa looked good from a technical perspective because they weren't as brutal. The japs wielding their asian sized p3nises weren't as formidable as the Germans.

if rommel's forces were deployed in the eastern front, that may had created a difference. his unconvetional tactics could surprise or confuse the russian forces. he is not like other generals that were afraid to defy hitler's orders if necessary.