First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
Post Reply What do you think would happen if Russia was never involved in WW2
18767 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M / London
Offline
Posted 4/15/15
Personally I think that if Russia wasn't involved, Germany would've Taken over Europe and probably won the war due to their weaponry which was too advanced at the time e.g V2 Rockets and the famous Tiger tanks which outmatched any other tank at the time in head on battles. If Russia were not involved, the Eastern Front armies would've solely reinforced the armies in the West, decimating them.

But what is your prediction? What would happen?
20192 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / The Heroes Associ...
Offline
Posted 4/15/15 , edited 4/15/15
The Nazi's would have won.

If the upper echelon of the Nazi Party were not so focused on taking Stalingrad they could have focused on the allied fronts in their battles against the U.S and England and most likely utterly defeated them.

The Nazi's mainly lost due to the amount of wasted man power and financial losses in their attempt to invade Russia as they were convinced Russians were a bunch of country hicks. They were sorely mistaken when they were ravaged by the Red Army soldiers that had nerves of steel that prevented them from retreating and giving up.

Posted 4/15/15 , edited 4/15/15
All the Nazis really cared about after 1943 or so was genocide of Jews. It was clear they were losing badly, and Hitler only cared for the continuation of The Final Solution.


After a while, the Germans didnt care if they won or lost, so long as they killed as many Jewish people as they could.
599 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Connecticut
Offline
Posted 4/15/15


Russia's accomplishments in WW2 is very understated, especially here in the US. This is because Russia took some of the greatest losses during the war, and were somewhat of an "ally" to Hitler during the invasion of Poland.

However, it was Russia that occupied Berlin LONG before the US troops reached there. In fact Truman was so terrified of the military power of the Soviet Union, that his decision to use the atomic bomb on Japan, had more to do with preventing Japan turning into another Germany, where Stalin would have control over portions of the country. Many believe the bombs were dropped because of how fierce the Japanese army was, but it was pure propaganda. Japan was already on the verge of defeat, Truman just wanted to show off the US military might to scare off the Red Army. (which was pointless because Russian spies acquired the secrets to developing nuclear power any way)

Many people don't realize that before the WW2, there were more government officials who supported fascists governments like Germany, Italy and Spain at the time, rather than the communist government that was taking hold in Russia and China. I think this is the main reason why Russia, to this day has such a negative portrayal in our history and our media.
49109 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/15/15
Deutschlandlied.
49109 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/15/15

Mugen417 wrote:



Russia's accomplishments in WW2 is very understated, especially here in the US. This is because Russia took some of the greatest losses during the war, and were somewhat of an "ally" to Hitler during the invasion of Poland.

However, it was Russia that occupied Berlin LONG before the US troops reached there. In fact Truman was so terrified of the military power of the Soviet Union, that his decision to use the atomic bomb on Japan, had more to do with preventing Japan turning into another Germany, where Stalin would have control over portions of the country. Many believe the bombs were dropped because of how fierce the Japanese army was, but it was pure propaganda. Japan was already on the verge of defeat, Truman just wanted to show off the US military might to scare off the Red Army. (which was pointless because Russian spies acquired the secrets to developing nuclear power any way)

Many people don't realize that before the WW2, there were more government officials who supported fascists governments like Germany, Italy and Spain at the time, rather than the communist government that was taking hold in Russia and China. I think this is the main reason why Russia, to this day has such a negative portrayal in our history and our media.
Can you show a first person source for Trumans alleged terror of the Soviets that led to his authorization for dropping of nuclear weapons on Japan.

3111 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
44 / M
Offline
Posted 4/15/15
Keeping the Soviets out of the war would likely have little effect on the eventual outcome. The Germans had no hope of forcing the Channel against the Royal Navy, and the tactical-centric Luftwaffe failed abysmally as a strategic instrument. The Kreigsmarine surface assets would again be fated to being bottled up, the Ubootwaffe hunted down and exterminated. The handful of Tigers would still face thousands of mediocre Shermans churned out by the American industrial juggernaut. The pinprick effect of the first generation SRBM A4 rockets would still be countered by the RAF incinerating German cities in thousand bomber raids at night and the USAAF pounding industrial, transportation and POL targets by day, with escorting Mustangs, Thunderbolts and Lightnings battering the Jagdwafffe out of the sky.

The continental invasion might have been later and would have been far more expensive, but the results would be the same. The Germans were fighting outside their weight class, and akin to the Japanese, they bargained on the prospect of a short war, where their carefully husbanded tactical excellence was hoped to win a swift capitulation of smaller enemies and others would be so dazzled as to sue for terms. This demonstratively did not happen. The German war machine was sputtering from the start. Even losses in Poland shocked the OKW. By the time they considered that this might be a long, strategic war, it was already far too late. So the Wehrmacht went to battle with horse carts and panzers running on empty against the global resources of the British Empire and untouchable and seemingly inexhaustible Americans. It wasn't a good plan.
24574 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
33 / M / Baltimore, MD
Offline
Posted 4/15/15
It's an interesting thought experiment, one which is hard to know the final outcome as so many different variables are at play here.

To have the Soviet Union out of WWII (remember, Russia was a part of the Soviet Union at that time and not an independent nation), we would have to assume the Soviets and Axis powers stuck by their 1941 neutrality/peace agreement. If that's the case - we get a very different scenario than others which could be discussed as that is the most realistic of outcomes.

This now assumes the Nazis would end after invading/taking only half of Poland and did not continue to pursue any ventures further east. It's fairly unreasonable based on Hitler's ideology and goal of world domination, but if we assume he actually stuck with his non-aggression pact with the Soviets, then that would happen. This would lead to the Soviets being able to focus more energy on their war with Finland and most likely taking over the nation. This war was happening concurrently with WWII with Finland being one of the only European nations never occupied during WWII.

Being able to keep troops focused on the remainder of Europe would strengthen Hitler's forces on that front. On the Eastern front, without the Soviet invasion of Manchuria/Manchukuo, Japan would have most likely had a stronger foothold on mainland China.

How does that play out in the grand scheme of things? I still think, in the end, the Axis powers would lose the war - but I predict the war would have taken longer to end. Significantly more lives would have been lost on all sides of the conflict. Also, I'd imagine post-war China would look very different than it would today. With significantly longer Japanese occupation, portions of modern-day China may remain part of the rebuilt Japan or be independent from the rest of current China. Additionally, it's unclear how the borders in Europe may look post-WWII with longer Nazi influence on the region. Germany would also have been unified much sooner post-WWII as there would be no Soviet section; it would only be divided into sections occupied by non-Soviet Allied powers. That said, we would have Poland which would most likely be divided post-WWII into a Soviet Poland and a Poland freed by the Allied forces.

As I said - a lot of factors...
28119 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/15/15
Well, my G-pa probably would have died in a POW camp...He was part of the 101st airborne during the Normandy invasion. The army had even declared him KIA state side. Their prison camp was ultimately liberated by the Russian armed forces. So cheers to them! I never got many details about exactly what happened to him, because when we were kids he would clean the stories up. Towards the end he let gruesome little details escape that sounded pretty harrowing. Then he would inevitably let me know he had friends at West Point if I wanted to join the military. Yeah sure...thanks but no thanks.
37445 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 4/15/15


Russia has a negative portrayal, not because they were Communists, but because of the way they became Communists. They slaughtered millions of their own people after the Bolshevik Revolution - which was, itself, quite bloody. They even killed people who supported the revolution because they were suspected of not being Communist enough, loyal enough, or said something that seemed suspiciously anti-revolution.

The rest of the world didn't want that to happen in their own countries. This is why Communism was rebuffed in many places. 20 million Russians were executed in this purge, and that was under Stalin's rule alone. It is not clear how many more were killed before and after his tenure as leader.

Can you imagine what it must have been like? You lived in a house in a nice neighborhood. It was nicely furnished, and you had a closet full of nice clothes. Then a squad would come in and forcibly evict your family out of part of your house, and then moved in another family into the vacated part of your house because your home was now the property of The People - and The People had the right to do with it as it deemed fit. Your "excess" furniture and "excess" clothing were confiscated and distributed to people who didn't have enough. Etc, etc, etc.

I imagine Russians who didn't like having their homes, farms, and businesses taken away in that fashion, protested and became part of the 20 million that were killed. Perhaps, Russians who advised moderation in those "revolutionary activities" were executed as subversives. On, and on, and on... This is what caused the world to fear Communism.

Russia was in a military conquest of its neighbors at the time, as well. They focused on conquering their Slavic neighbors around them, in Eastern Europe. Russia's "alliance" with Germany was really an agreement to "Keep out of each others' way, while each conquered their neighbors around them. Even if Germany didn't invade Russia, Russia would have invaded Germany. So, war between those two was inevitable.

WW2 ended, not because we feared the Soviet Union's military power, but because the world was exhausted. Over 10 million Americans died in that war, and who knows how many Europeans died defending and losing against Germany. The British Empire exhausted itself, too. There just wasn't the will to keep fighting. If the will was there, the Allied nations could have kept marching East, which was what many generals, especially Paton, wanted to do.

Russia would definitely have kept marching West if it thought it could win, but the two bombs dropped in Japan is probably what made them keep their word and stop at the agreed upon longitude (or whatever stopping point was agreed to) including splitting Berlin in two.

Speculation follows:

If Hitler had just waited until the Spring to launch his attack, the Russians would have fallen, but I think he still would have lost the war. He'd still not have the use of his Eastern Armies to reinforce his western forces. His Eastern armies would have been tied down keeping the Soviets from rising up again. Eventually, they would have to retreat, abandoning their conquests in the East, in order to defend Germany from the Allied push into Germany.

If those armies then made their return into Germany and backed up the floundering Western armies, the Allied attack would falter, and possibly get pushed back. It is possible then, that a third atomic bomb might have been dropped in order to break the German war machine - maybe dropped on Berlin...

Speculation continues:

In that case, with Hitler dead, whoever took over from him would likely surrender. Then with the Russian army defeated, the Allied forces would have continued marching East, into Russia, in order to keep them from rising again, with possibly a fourth atomic bomb dropped on Moscow. The Russians proved they could do a lot with a little, so taking out their leadership would, at least weaken their co-ordination.

Speculation concludes:

The result: No Cold War with the Soviets (because not Soviets), no arms race with the Soviets (because no Soviets, and we'd be the only ones with "The Bomb"), and no spread of Russian flavored Communism around the world (no Cuban Missile Crisis, etc.).

Instead, our arms race, and cold war would be against a Communist China.... I wonder what the world would be like, then?

15261 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / UK
Offline
Posted 4/15/15 , edited 4/15/15
Germany would have invaded Russia at some point in this case it would have happened at a later date. The Nazis despised communists with a passion and regarded Slavs as subhuman; the USSR was communist and contained huge number of Slavs. (Heck had everything gone Hitler’s way there would have ultimately been a war between Germany and Japan). Tiger tanks may have been able to beat Shermans or T-34s in a one-one-one but the Americans and the USSR could easily replace their losses, the Nazis had a much harder job. While the Nazis did use ballistic missiles AKA the V rockets these were very crude and extremely expensive in fact the V weapons cost more ($3 billion) than the Manhattan ($1.9 billion) project not to mention it required huge amounts of resources that could have been used elsewhere.
Posted 4/15/15
Considering the Soviet Union was the powerhouse of the war in Europe, I doubt the war would have been won...or, perhaps it could have been won only after many years and even more of a struggle than it already was.

17777 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
33 / M / outer wall, level...
Offline
Posted 4/15/15 , edited 4/15/15
well are we talking about an actual non agression between the soviets and nazis? cus then its would have been different.
otherwise, the nazis and the reds were planning on killing each other.
lets assume an actual peace, with minimal border military.

towards the end of the war, the biggest problem was industry. hitlers stupidity aside, the ME262 was pretty desisive in the air. if they had more time, more me262.

england i think would have never truly fallen. even if there was an invasion, it would have been long and bloody and not very productive aside from keeping them out of the war as a military.

the V-1 and V2 would have been useless for a long time.

the storm rifle production increase would have given the nazis more of an edge on the ground.

the biggest problem would have been american bombers. with more Me262 to fight that, getting a nuke to berlin would have been troublesome, but not impossible.

there were also jet bomber in the production line, as well as the amerika bomber project that might have made a difference.

pretty sure germans nuke program would have been the last to work. mid 1950s maybe?

as far as tanks, the shermans needed a 10 to 1 ratio to engage the tiger. german TD were cheaper and quicker to produce, not sure how that would have played out. a lot of tanks were killed in russia.

hilter probably would have conquered europe, minus england, or had a tough time staying there if he did conquer it.
if there was no soviet forces fighting the nazi, then there would have been more aid to japan.

we can also play this with admiral yamaoto. lets assume russia and nazi had a true peace, and lets say yamamoto didnt die.
then the i400 program would have been still alive and active sooner. lets assume even 4 operational i400 series.
lets also say the USA nuke something.

probably would have ended up with unit 731 weaponized biological program beeing used against west coast cities, or even west coast cities.
a massive plauge would have crippled 20% of the population.

in the end, the question would have been, would hitler have stayed in europe or not. if he would have, then there would have been three super powers in the cold war era, usa, nazi, ussr.

i dont think an invsaion of NA would have been feasable for a long time.
12712 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M / UK
Offline
Posted 4/15/15
"if Russia was never involved in WW2"

It depends on what you mean by that statement. If the USSR never got involved with the fighting and made its intentions clear then the eastern European nations could have concentrated more on the German advance and put up a stronger fight. If Poland managed to delay the German forces or convinced them to commit more troops then it is possible the western allies could have held on in 1940.

From there, if the allies were able to avoid the French surrender and the debacle of Dunkirk then Germany would have been denied a huge workforce of prisoners that in reality they put to use in agriculture and factories. Following on from that, Britain wouldn't have felt the need to attack French military targets out of fear they would fall into German hands. It would also have completely changed the war in the Mediterranean and north Africa, with the allies having ample French ports to resupply from or go to ground in when threatened by the Germans and Itallians, instead of relying solely on isolated British-controlled ports at Gibraltar, Malta and Alexandria.

Avoiding Dunkirk would also mean that Britain wouldn't have to waste time rebuilding its millitary forces and equipment. The eventual D-Day landings would also be redundant as the allies would already have a presence on Germany's western flank.

Another possible outcome could have been that Britain wouldn't have had to use torpedo bombers to criple the Itallian fleet at harbour in Taranto, an attack which the Japanese studied carefully in the months before their own attack on Pearl Harbour.


Was the USSR important in eventually winning the war in reality? Yes. However their pact with Germany to carve up eastern Europe was just as important in prolonging the war.
26420 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/15/15 , edited 4/15/15

AzazelOfNexium wrote:

The Nazi's would have won.

If the upper echelon of the Nazi Party were not so focused on taking Stalingrad they could have focused on the allied fronts in their battles against the U.S and England and most likely utterly defeated them.

The Nazi's mainly lost due to the amount of wasted man power and financial losses in their attempt to invade Russia as they were convinced Russians were a bunch of country hicks. They were sorely mistaken when they were ravaged by the Red Army soldiers that had nerves of steel that prevented them from retreating and giving up.



It wasn't the Soviets who bombed German factories and reduced their ability to build weapons.

If the Nazi's and Soviets did not fight, the Allies would have beaten the Nazis in 1945 or 1946. Germany could not defeat the UK and could not stop the US from supplying the UK with weapons and bringing US troops and equipment. By 1944, the Uboats were an inconvenience nothing more. No one was bombing US factories, railroads, supply dumps etc. Germany could not keep up with US production. Once the Atomic bomb is ready, it would have been used on Germany first to get them to surrender.

On the good side, half of Europe would not have been controlled by the Soviets for 44 years, no Berlin Wall.

I'm sure the Soviets would want to keep the part of Poland they invaded so how would that play out..
First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.