>>2010 My personal opinion on the subject matter is that the Germans could not have won, regardless of lend-lease happening or not. The chance to achieve their strategic goals (to force the Soviet Union to surrender unconditionally) was lost after 1941, a time in which lend-lease hadn't picked up speed. After 1942 any chance of knocking out the SU through martial means was definitely gone. By that time lend-lease had come into effect, but you have to keep in mind that the German army's edge had been dulled so much, that their offensive would not have achieved much, regardless of the extra soviet material and supplies.
However, I really don't want to belittle the aid of the western allies. The Russians lacked high-octane fuels, ball bearings, locomotives and even boots, and diverting resources to produce that would have taken its toll on the war effort. But I really doubt that the Germans ever had any chance of winning, regardless of the aid that the SU received.
>>2650 >dat pic ayyyyy, you actually believe that shit?
>My personal opinion on the subject matter is that the Germans could not have won
They could have won very easily after the fall of France, they could have won in many ways and on many separate occasions. I'll separate it into the two main points.
>Limited war goals against SU.
Instead of going for full conquest just impose a Brest-Litovsk style treaty. The Soviets would have accepted easily after about 6 months.
>Put Albert Speer in charge of production ASAP before 1944.
Before Speer German production was so incompetent it wasn't even funny. It was mostly different branches squabbling over who got the most resources. A quote from ''Why the Allies won'' below.
>This widening gap was not a result simply of the possesion of great quantities of manpower and raw materials. In the Soviet case 8 million tons of steel and 90 million tons of coal in 1943 were translated into 48,000 heavy artillery pieces and 24,000 tanks; Germany in the same year turned 30 million tons of steel and 340 million tons of coal into 17,000 tanks and 27,000 heavy guns.
>They were preparing to leave Moscow and fight back from behind the Urals should the need arise.
Of course they would, because the options were either that or accept full annexation by Germany. The Soviets thought they were fucked after disasters like Minsk and Kiev, they would've definitely given up some territories if it meant the survival of the state.
You do realize that slavs only differed from jews in that they were not to be collected in holiday camps by the nazis, right?
Hundreds of thousands of Czechs, Poles and other slavs were used as slave workers towards the end of the war. Ironically the permanent exclusion of slavs made accepting volunteers or HiWis (willing helpers) a pain in the ass for army units; they had to declare them as cossacks or similar ethnicities considered pure by the national socialist racial standards.
>>3641 >They could have won very easily after the fall of France I specifically talked about the war in the east, sorry for expressing myself unclearly
>Instead of going for full conquest just impose a Brest-Litovsk style treaty. The Soviets would have accepted easily after about 6 months. 6 months after the start of Op. Barbarossa, the soviet winter offensive was in full swing, inflicting heavy casualties on the German armed forces and pushing them back especially in the Moscow region. Why would they choose to surrender, when they had just gained their first strategic victories? I get where you are coming from, however you have to keep in mind that the collapse of Russia in WWI was an internal process, something that the Soviets could suppress very easily (just look at the siege of Leningrad). Additionally it was way easier to convince the Soviets of continuing the struggle, since the Germans were planning to genocide them all.
>Albert Speer It is widely accepted that the German arms industry was shit until Speer came along, but even if you supplied the Germans with infinite amounts of materiel they would have started getting very specific resource shortages (mainly oil). Another factor that is often overlooked is that the Germans were scraping the bottom of their manpower reserves before the war in the east even began. They would have been bottlenecked by something.
>>3987 >what is Generalplan Ost? >inb4 "it's fake lol"
Thread replies: 24 Thread images: 7
Thread DB ID: 68678
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at email@example.com with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.