Page 1 of 14 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 209

Thread: invade Russia at the end of ww2?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    154

    Default invade Russia at the end of ww2?

    Patton wanted to, but now it seems that would have been a big mistake. Although Russia turned out to be our enemy, we solved it peacefully, that is without any actually fighting. But if we had invaded Russia at the time, we couldve prevented the Cold War, and the almost devastating nuclear war that wouldve resulted from war with Russia. Im sure during the Cold War people were regretting not invading Russia during ww2. What do you guys think?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    In a Commonwealth Country
    Posts
    700

    Default

    On top of the problem of exhaustion of troops, lack of public support and the need to continue fighting in the far east, there was a hell of a lot of land between the western allies and the defeat of the red army.
    Per Ardua ad Astra - fixin\' and mendin\' branch

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NYC USA
    Posts
    694

    Default

    there would be enormous amount of problems fighting the red army. the public wouldn't support the war at all.

    Plus, the russians had stronger armored divisions and infantry then the americans. Its very unlikely that we could succeed in defeating the russians.

    Mostly likely, we would've been pushed back to france.

    but then, if you factor in the nuclear bombs....

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    154

    Default

    i agree with the fact that there would be no way that the public would support war with russia, but russia had lost 8 million men in ww2, compared to our 400,000. it would be a tough fight, and each side would lose millions of men but you have to think that the US would win it. we could bomb russian manufactoring plants, from our bases in europe and they couldnt touch our manufactoring. + the US had nukes and the russians did not.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NYC USA
    Posts
    694

    Default

    well, if your putting it at a population persepective, russia had a population of an estimated 200 million people. The united states had 140 million people. 12 million russian soldiers and 17 million civilians died. The average life expectancy for the average russian citizen was in the 40s.

    there are 170 million russan people at the end of the war. if half of the civilians were men, then the male population would be 80 million left out of the orginal 100 million men. With the lower life expectancy, there would be more men of feasible military age then in the US.

    us male population 70
    russian male pop 80

    and, many of the manufacturing plants in russia are deep into siberia, and unreachable by our planes. IE that's one of the reasons why the german's could not defeat russia. the german bombers could'nt reach the factories in the deep east, even though at that point germany had conquered 40 percent of industrial russia.

    well, with the nukes in mind, then we would end up radioactive zones all throughout germany and it would be highly hazardous for our troops to get through. not a pretty situation.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    154

    Default

    well the real reason the germans were thrown out of russia is because they, as napolean did, got their supply lines way over extended and they couldnt protect them. so, with the supply lines cut off from the troops the troops were basically trapped, which is what happened to napolean. in fact when napolean invaded, he counted on raiding towns for food once he got deeper into russia. but, russian citizens killed their own cattle and starved themselves to keep napolean from being able to feed his army. pretty incredible.

    now back to the topic, your right russia wouldnt have 8 million soldiers less then the americans. although the russians would have no allies, and the americans would probably have the british. plus, we had well established bases throughout europe, and the germans had brought hell upon russian cities already previously in the war.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    1,419

    Default

    I think that if we had invaded Russia during WW2 we would've been beaten during the harsh Russian winter, like the Germans. Occupations never work, well that's long term at least.




    The Axis Project - 101st Airborne
    "Captain Sobel, What is the god-damn problem?"

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NYC USA
    Posts
    694

    Default

    some of the reasons why germany lost the war in russia: Hitler's meddling, 3 to 1 population/production supremacy of the russians, lack of fuel, russian winter, and (strategic opportunies, men, and material wasted at) stalingrad.


    German supply lines, while occasionaly disrupted, especailly in the end, were never cut. There was enough food to not resort to foraging even until the battle of Berlin. ammunition, while not aways plentiful, was delievered until the end.

    The main supply that germany had major problems with was the lac k of fuel, which came up in late 1943 when russia took rumania from the germans( about 85% of germanies fuel source) and crippled the germans for good.

    The Russians also had well established bases( throughout EAstern europe). and about russian cities being battered, russia rapidly rebuilt their industry in the war, and , by 1945, was already producing comparable numbers ground forces equipment to the US. and, even worse, russian tanks were superior to american ones.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NYC USA
    Posts
    694

    Default

    and, all this stuff about the winter, yes, the winter is harsh. but the german army coped successfully with it after the disaterious first russian winter. Its not really fair to compare napoleon times with ww2 technology.

    THe main things that made winter hard for the germans were stupdi! lack of clothing, and proper grease to keep their artillery/tanks/engines/small arms from freezing up and becoming useless.

    After the first year, proper winter clothing/weapons greases were issued, so the germans coped wiht the winter as well as the russians did.

    if there would be war b/w the us and russia, the russian winter would not pose such an appreciable threat; Im sure the allies would have seen certain needs forecoming, and not make the same mistakes that the germans made in the first year.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    154

    Default

    your right the fight wouldve been hard-and probably a loss for the americans. although, we wouldnt have to invade russia directly right off the bat. we could attack their bases in eastern europe, then once we had a firm grasp on all of europe attacked them. i think that a US lead invasion would be alot more sucessful then the german was because the US hopefully would have learned from german mistakes.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    3,855

    Default

    You lot are forgetting a very fundamental thing here, your thinking armies and not what you should be thinking, Logistics.

    The US literally fed and clothed the Soviet Army as well as supplying over 500000 trucks.

    What would the Soviets do without all this?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    154

    Default

    they would probably get beaten badly at first in the war. but as the war went on, they would have been able to rebuild from ww2 and start producing again. they would probably always be short on food, but the russians are famous for perserverance.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NYC USA
    Posts
    694

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ww2fanatic1944
    your right the fight wouldve been hard-and probably a loss for the americans. although, we wouldnt have to invade russia directly right off the bat. we could attack their bases in eastern europe, then once we had a firm grasp on all of europe attacked them. i think that a US lead invasion would be alot more sucessful then the german was because the US hopefully would have learned from german mistakes.
    Well, you forget that russia was insanely unprepared for the german "Blitzkreig". In the first half year, millions of soviet soldiers were killed/captured. most Russian tanks were tin cans and destroyed with ease. a lot of the russian infantry were poorly armed.
    But by 1945, the soviet high command had adapted, and could reverse hard attacks (Kursk) and exploited them. The russians had new powerful armor, lke the JS-3, that could be built in larger numbers then german materials.

    i

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Bucharest - Romania
    Posts
    3,302

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hosenfield
    The main supply that germany had major problems with was the lac k of fuel, which came up in late 1943 when russia took rumania from the germans( about 85% of germanies fuel source) and crippled the germans for good.
    Wrong info mate! Romania until 23rd of August 1944 fought together with Axis (Germany) and after 23rd of August fought together with Allies (USSR) for the reasons shown by me in "Other military units" section, "Romanian military" thread.
    Regimentul 38 "Neagoe Basarab"
    Divizia 10 Infanterie


    101st Airborne

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NYC USA
    Posts
    694

    Default

    thanks dani, i'll take a look

Page 1 of 14 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Germans invading Russia
    By Brishen in forum 2006 Archive Room
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 02-17-2006, 05:10 PM
  2. What if Germany didnt invade Russia ?
    By T-34s_Are_Cool in forum 2006 Archive Room
    Replies: 100
    Last Post: 01-12-2006, 05:51 PM
  3. Leon Degalle's Interview.
    By Hosenfield in forum 2005 Archive Room
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-28-2005, 12:10 AM
  4. Was fabricated "Aryan" history an excuse to invade
    By IRONMAN in forum 2005 Archive Room
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-29-2005, 11:35 AM
  5. Why did Germany invade Poland starting WW2?
    By Commando Jordovski in forum 2005 Archive Room
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 08-09-2005, 09:22 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •