Would the Axis have won WW2 if Hitler had not ticked off Stalin?

[Felix The Assassin]

Originally posted by Aerich: Getting back to the original issue, the question of whether the Allies would have won WWII if Hitler had not "ticked off" Stalin is fundamentally flawed. The Non-Aggression Pact was never more than a convenience to either side; it ensured the security of one border for an indeterminate length of time, providing Hitler the security to act aggressively, and Stalin the time the Soviets needed to build their military-industrial output - the division of Poland was a nice bonus for each of them. There were two real reasons Germany and the USSR signed the Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact. First, both sides wished to buy time. Neither was suitably ready for war with each other (and Germany was not expecting a declaration of war by the Western powers following their invasion of Poland, in light of their success in Czechoslovakia), which is why the secret part of the agreement provided for the peaceful division of Poland between the two powers. Second, their historical relationship (beginning in the mid-1930s) grew out of the industrial and trade-related constraints on both powers - on the Germans because of the Versailles Treaty, and on the Soviets because they couldn't trade or otherwise acquire military materiel and expertise from wary European powers.

Your words work wonders, now understand what you have written. IF Hitler WOULD NOT have invaded Russia, would the Axis have won WWII? We cannot answer that yes or no, but many probable conclusions would lead to a probable yes.

For years we have been stationed on the ground in Korea, but we have not attacked the North. We were there to prevent the North from walking into the South. Even if I have a non-aggression pact with you, don't think I'm going to strip my borders and allow you or anybody else to freely stroll down my alley. If the Soviets did not protect their borders, Moscow would have surely fallen under Operation Barbarossa, and then we would have had another outcome.

[Black Baron]

Erm... you do not put yuor army's near the border in order to protect it. you do it if you want to attack. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Aragorn1]

Originally posted by Black Baron: Erm... you do not put yuor army's near the border in order to protect it. you do it if you want to attack. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Where would you suggest they position their armies to protect their borders? It is entirely logical, especially given the length of time it takes for a Russian army to mobilise, given her vast size.

[Black Baron]

You put it 100 km from the border (in russia it is piece of cake to do it due to the vast space available). Besides in 22.6 the russian army was almost completely mobilized; otherwise it is very hard to explain her great loses.

[Zebodog]

I don't think Stalin had much love for the Allies during WW2.

Had Germany concentrated their forces on one border, Britain would not have survived.

The US would have still defeated Japan, that was a non-issue, but who would the USSR had alied with at that point. I don't think either the USSR or the US wanted anything to do with "A War in Europe" and neither would have gotten involved.

Myself, I would think an alliance between the USSR and Germany would have happened, but it wouldn't be long before they turned on each other.

Regardless of who came out on top, the US sealed the deal with the advent of the H-bomb.

[Charlie]

Originally posted by Zebodog: Had Germany concentrated their forces on one border, Britain would not have survived.

Moot point....would Germany have lasted as long in different theatres having concentrated their forces on a single border?

If not who is to say Britain would not have survived?

[Zebodog]

Originally posted by Charlie: quote: Originally posted by Zebodog: Had Germany concentrated their forces on one border, Britain would not have survived.

Moot point....would Germany have lasted as long in different theatres having concentrated their forces on a single border?

If not who is to say Britain would not have survived? [/QUOTE]I'm not sure if Germany would have needed to concentrate in other theatres immediately if they hadn't tried to go for the USSR. It was initially a "European War," so once Britain was gone Hitler could have played nice until his forces were better prepared. With more time, Germany's rocket program would have made a huge impact (no pun intended)

Who can say for sure whether Britain would have gone down? Being a British citizen, I'd like to think not, but it sure didn't look good. England was throwing everything they had at Germany but Hitler was arrogant to the point, he felt he didn't need to focus 100% on the Brits.

[Charlie]

Originally posted by Zebodog: quote: Originally posted by Charlie: quote: Originally posted by Zebodog: Had Germany concentrated their forces on one border, Britain would not have survived.

Moot point....would Germany have lasted as long in different theatres having concentrated their forces on a single border?

If not who is to say Britain would not have survived? [/QUOTE]Who can say for sure whether Britain would have gone down? [/QUOTE]Thanks for answering my point for me. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Zebodog]

Isn't this whole thread a "what if?" [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Black Baron]

Once britain was gone hitler would have been dead meat. Stalin would have attacked him, regardless of Hitlers behaviour.