So lets say the Italians decide to concentrate on defeating the Brits in North Africa rather than make trouble in Greece. Consequently Barbarossa is launched as planned in May 1941. Supposing everything pretty much goes OTL(I would appreciate any contrary arguements)we see the Germans launch Operation Typhoon in Mid-August rather than late September. What happens next?
Barbarossa Six Weeks Earlier
- Thread starter danwild6
- Start date
Interesting points, do you have any info on Luftwaffe strength increases between April and June 1941?
As described in any account of typical Russian weather patterns, the Heer is up to it’s armpits in mud in a country with no roads. Allowing the Red Army to get it’s act together much sooner and perhaps avoid so many encirclements, due to the Germans being slowed by these mud-related transport problems.
To answer another point raised. Italian focus on the Med is irrelevant, as their fleet would .simply be unable to challenge the Royal Navy. Even if the Italian admirals weren’t too scared to leave port. Also Italy cant support more troops in Africa simply due to suppy problems caused by lack of ports.
That thread was not based on a six-week early jump-off and some very good arguments against your view carried the day in that thread anyway.
Well wasn't it the fact that the Italians needed German help in Greece combined with a Yugoslav coup that led to the invasion in the first place?
Your idea seems logical, but from what I've read, Hitler wanted Leningrad gone. Not captured, but razed to the ground, and then some. Wiped off the map forever.
As for the thread subject overall. Take Moscow? Perhaps. Might even topple Stalin's regime. But conquer all of Russia? Naw, too big to fail. The Russians would have land and numbers on their side, and if they were willing to drag the war on for more than a decade, attrition would become an ally.
Graehame
Banned
The only "good argument" that carried the day was the eventual use of atomic weapons by the US vs Germany in late '45. Other than that, I regard my view as unassailable. It is absurd to think that logistics that did not prohibit an 800-mile campaign across terrible terrain in the wrong direction would prohibit a 200-mile campaign across better terrain in the right direction.
Your view is only unassailable insofar as you ignore German weaknesses and Russian strengths, insisting as all Axis-wankers tend to do that German armies can go everywhere unopposed and sweep all before them if only they had followed *insert alternate plan* in *insert year/campaign season*.
Totally ignoring the fact that the Soviets had plans of their own and will react to any German movements and will not simply stand around going DUURRRR as *insert city name/region* is taken.
This is a weird psychosis on AH. I can only assume this affliction exists because some people have been force fed anti-Russian propaganda for decades and now believe any negative bullshit vis-à-vis the U.S.S.R/Modern Russia at face value. And also because stalhelms just look soooo cool.
Totally ignoring the fact that the Soviets had plans of their own and will react to any German movements and will not simply stand around going DUURRRR as *insert city name/region* is taken.
This is a weird psychosis on AH. I can only assume this affliction exists because some people have been force fed anti-Russian propaganda for decades and now believe any negative bullshit vis-à-vis the U.S.S.R/Modern Russia at face value. And also because stalhelms just look soooo cool.
Last edited:
I've read different views on the subject, scattered through several WI books... the Germans would be worse off because of the mud... the Russians would be worse off because they wouldn't have so many men in place, fewer T-34s on hand... maybe both sides would be worse off...
Riain
Banned
For me the definitive argument about the start date for Barbarossa is that some divisions slated to advance in the first wave didn't get their transport allocation until as late as 10 days before the start of Barbarossa. The Gernmans won't have much luck in May if their first wave divisions aren't going to get their trucks and other motorised transport for another month. I just can't be past the statistic that Britain built 215,000 trucks in 1940-41 but Germany with it's 50% larger economy and vastly larger Army and vastly smaller navy built less than 170,000 trucks in 1940-41.
usertron2020
Donor
Your view is only unassailable insofar as you ignore German weaknesses and Russian strengths, insisting as all Axis-wankers tend to do that German armies can go everywhere unopposed and sweep all before them if only they had followed *insert alternate plan* in *insert year/campaign season*.
Totally ignoring the fact that the Soviets had plans of their own and will react to any German movements and will not simply stand around going DUURRRR as *insert city name/region* is taken.
This is a weird psychosis on AH. I can only assume this affliction exists because some people have been force fed anti-Russian propaganda for decades and now believe any negative bullshit vis-à-vis the U.S.S.R/Modern Russia at face value. And also because stalhelms just look soooo cool.
Don't feel so bad. Russia's not alone on this. So too the Abominable Sea Mammal TL's (Royal Navy? WHAT Royal Navy? They cannot withstand our irresistible Handwavium Torpedoes!
), American Civil War TL's (Why suh, a Southerner is worth TWENTY Yankees!), and even Imperial Japan WWII TL's (Banzai! We will finish them at Midway! And then take Fiji-Samoa, New Caledonia, Ceylon, Imphal, Chung-King, the Aleutians, Alaska, Northern Australia, Southern Australia, New Zealand, the Christmas Islands, Johnston Island, Palmyra Island, Hawaii, the Panama Canal, San Diego, Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and so on, and so on).Graehame
Banned
URBANFOX & USERTRON2020
I note that each of you takes refuge in generalities & ad hominem arguments without even addressing what I said. I repeat-- it is patently ridiculous to argue that logistics that did not prohibit an 800-mile campaign across terrible terrain in the wrong direction would somehow prohibit a 200-mile campaign across better terrain in the right direction. I'll go further, & tell you that it's equally absurd to think that logistical considerations that prohibit a 200-mile German offensive somehow don't prohibit a 500-mile Russian one. You insist the I'm ignoring Russian capabilities, when in fact you're the ones who are ill-informed. The Russian capabilities that existed in 1943-- or even 1942-- were unheard-of in 1941.
I do not believe the Wehrmacht could go anywhere & do anything. In Sep & Oct of 1941 they were near the end of their rope-- but they did have enough steam left for a final spurt to Moscow. As proven by the fact that even after capturing Kiev, they still got to Moscow by early December. Even after giving the Russians 6 critical weeks to regroup. But in Sep & Oct there were no Siberian reserves on the ground, most of the regular formations had been chewed to bits by the Wehrmacht, & there were damned few T-34 tanks.
...all of which I've repeatedly said before.
I note that each of you takes refuge in generalities & ad hominem arguments without even addressing what I said. I repeat-- it is patently ridiculous to argue that logistics that did not prohibit an 800-mile campaign across terrible terrain in the wrong direction would somehow prohibit a 200-mile campaign across better terrain in the right direction. I'll go further, & tell you that it's equally absurd to think that logistical considerations that prohibit a 200-mile German offensive somehow don't prohibit a 500-mile Russian one. You insist the I'm ignoring Russian capabilities, when in fact you're the ones who are ill-informed. The Russian capabilities that existed in 1943-- or even 1942-- were unheard-of in 1941.
I do not believe the Wehrmacht could go anywhere & do anything. In Sep & Oct of 1941 they were near the end of their rope-- but they did have enough steam left for a final spurt to Moscow. As proven by the fact that even after capturing Kiev, they still got to Moscow by early December. Even after giving the Russians 6 critical weeks to regroup. But in Sep & Oct there were no Siberian reserves on the ground, most of the regular formations had been chewed to bits by the Wehrmacht, & there were damned few T-34 tanks.
...all of which I've repeatedly said before.
Don't feel so bad. Russia's not alone on this. So too the Abominable Sea Mammal TL's (Royal Navy? WHAT Royal Navy? They cannot withstand our irresistible Handwavium Torpedoes!
I was beginning to feel lonely too. Seeing the Germans winning any battle they focused on and blaming the weather or terrible luck for every failure is a little tiresome sometimes. I joined this forum over a month ago and it's everywhere.
It is often overlooked how lucky the Germans often were.
Who would have known that the Allies would have done nothing and watched as the Nazis absorbed Austria and Czechoslovakia?
Who would have known that the French wouldn't press home an offensive in September 1939 when there was little to stop them pushing into Germany?
Who would have known that The French supreme commander in 1940 would base himself in a Chateau that HAD NO TELEPHONE.
Who would have known that the British would send troops to Greece instead of finishing off the Italians and the newly arrving Afrika Korps in January and February 1941.
Rommel as a POW in February 1941 anyone?
During Barbarossa the Russians ignored British warnings and they were even told the DAY of the attack. What if they had listened?
Germans had lots of luck. When the luck ran out they started losing.
yourworstnightmare
Banned
No, an art show in Austria won't topple the USSR. Oh, sorry, I was still bashing that stupid documentary.
There is an appallingly bad book called "Moment of destiny: One day in Oran" which I strongly do not recommend.
The author posits an understanding at Oran instead of gunfire, whereby North Africa goes Free French. Italy loses Libya very quickly and drops out the war (unlikely) and Germany does not react.
With no Balkan campaign, Germany is able to attack the Soviet Union on 1st March 1941! And then conquer all of the European Soviet Union by November.
I wrote to the author stating his 'scenario' would likely lead to a Soviet French Republic by 1943 as Germany had tipped its hand, yet wasn't able to move in March 1941. Author did the usual 'handwaving' stating his scenario was realistic. Load of rubbish.
Last edited: