Could the Germans have won WW2?

[Karamoja]

Nope.

lend lease was a tiny trickle in 1942/43, More us trying to show willing, rather than any strategic effect, only really getting into its stride in 1944.

german defeats Moscow 1941, Stalingrad 1942, Kursk 1943 were home team.

Germany was effectively out of the war after Kursk in Mid 1943.
they had lost their entire strategic reserve and never regained the initiative..... Berlin was the inevitable next stop for the Soviet Army.

Stalingrad was when the decisions of our best general started to make a real contribution to their ultimate defeat.

 

[diverman]

I believe it was Stalin who said " quantity has a quality all it's own" or words to that extent. I agree that the distances involved in supplying the Wermacht in the Soviet Union alone contributed to the German defeat, let alone the manpower, weather and homeland advantage that the Soviets had.

Also, the railway guage in Russia was wider the the European one so to use the railways they had to either capture rolling stock, which the Russians were possible remove or destroy. The option which the Germans did, was to re-lay the railways in their gauge, a long slow process in view of the hyper-extended logistic train plus in 1941 the vast majority of the Whermacht was horse drawn and foot slogging..

 

[PhotEx]

Germany was doomed from the day Barorossa started. Hitler just extended himself as you say far too far and went far too early into Russia. If he had waited until 1944 to attack Russia he may have had a better outcome initially but the end result would have been the same. The other advantage was the Russians only had a war on one front as the Japanese concentrated on the Americans. Again that would have been another logistics war. Japan like Germany was low on basic resources such as metals and oil. Russia did not declare war on Japan until very very near the end of the far east war.

consider this......

25% of the trucks the Germans rolled into Russia with in 1941 had been captured at Dunkirk.

95% of their logistics and artillery towing was provided by 2.5 million horses.

A British Infantry company went to war in the back of trucks.
a German infantry company walked to Moscow with its baggage in a horse drawn wagon.

1942 - infantry Batallion trucks

UK - 97 trucks, command cars and Carriers
Germany - 6 trucks

the Germans relied on 150 horses and 60 carts

 

[diverman]

Stalingrad was when the decisions of our best general started to make a real contribution to their ultimate defeat.

A man greatly distrusted by the Stalin personality cult which is why Khrushchev was his political commisar.

 

[Tyk]

Not so sure about that. The Soviets were very dependent upon both USA and our help to keep going. I don't think their mechanisation would have struggled without US trucks and the supply routes were pretty important.

Persian Corridor - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Arctic convoys of World War II - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Pacific Route - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I'm not so sure about that, odds are that the UK convoys and slightly later US supplies kept them motivated to stay in the war early on, but once attacked and pushed to total war I'm inclined to believe the Soviets wouldn't have backed down, they'd lost a lot of territory and the political implications were severe. They would have taken a good deal longer on their counter offensive without the support, but it would have happened and been just as devastating.

The one thing that WW1 and WW2 proved comprehensively is that the Germans can NOT win a protracted war where attrition is a major factor, they simply didn't have the raw materials, supply lines and resources, even if they had taken the Soviet oil fields I doubt they could have held them. The Soviets weren't efficient, but they had such a manpower pool and industry that they would eventually have taken them back.
Britain while under severe pressure from the U boats had a gigantic merchant fleet and the Empire/Dominions to call on and while the RN was pushed it was still big enough to keep things together on the supply chain front.
As to successfully invading Britain (if a peace couldn't be forced, which with the likes of Churchill I think is unlikely to have ever happened) I think that's unrealistic. The RN and RAF were big enough to maul any channel crossing and by the time that the Germans could have attempted it, Dunkirk was long over, Britain would have been re-armed and even if there was a beachhead I doubt it would have held, the RN could afford to lose a lot of ships opposing a landing and chewing up the German supply lines to the point of choking them to death. There have been a few threads on that subject.

To answer the question:- No I don't think they could have won.

 

[Excognito]

US and British support helped Stalin hugely.

However, the Soviets enjoyed enormous strategic depth in terms of both geography and manpower which - quite literally - ate the Wehrmach. It would’ve taken many more years, but Germany could never have matched Soviet numbers, even if the Red Army had needed to manoeuvre on horses.

Regards,
MM

Would they have needed to push on beyond Western Russia and the oil regions? A major problem that the Soviets would have to overcome would have been resources for building modern weapons. Oorah! charges against German forces with plenty of oil might not have been that effective.

It would be interesting to war game it with any putative German advance stopping at a line roughly going from Oskolkova down through Perm to the mouth of the Volga, or even as far as the Urals. What resources did the Soviets have east of that line to draw upon? Oil, coal, hydroelectricity - yes, but what of other essential elements? Did they have the horses and manpower to substitute for the US trucks and keep factories and farming running?

 

[Excognito]

The Soviets were able to fight the war without distractions. They didn't need to build more warships as the British and Canadians effectively covered the naval side. They didn't need to build strategic bombers as that was covered by the Americans and British. So all they needed to concentrate on (ALL?!) was an army and tactical air. Even their logistics were covered by the other allies to a large extent.

They did recognise the need for a strategic Air Force, but, as you say, their prime need was tactical.

Strategic bombing during World War II - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Truxx]

No

Shit logistics and and outmatched industrially

 

[PhotEx]

Would they have needed to push on beyond Western Russia and the oil regions? A major problem that the Soviets would have to overcome would have been resources for building modern weapons. Oorah! charges against German forces with plenty of oil might not have been that effective.

It would be interesting to war game it with any putative German advance stopping at a line roughly going from Oskolkova down through Perm to the mouth of the Volga, or even as far as the Urals. What resources did the Soviets have east of that line to draw upon? Oil, coal, hydroelectricity - yes, but what of other essential elements? Did they have the horses and manpower to substitute for the US trucks and keep factories and farming running?

so they capture the oilfields and then what?

they still had no trucks, but 2.5 million gee gees.

in 1942 - @ half the Germans logistics on The a eastern Front was devoted to shuttling replacement gees Gees and thousands of tonnes of feed and hay each week to the Front.
the British Army didn’t need to train a single horse wagoneer in WWII, the Germans needed a hundred skilled men for each and every battalion to drive the carts and tend the horses..

one of the things that really bemused the Landsers as they slogged forward on foot to Moscow and Stalingrad following their horse drawn carts was the seemingly endless numbers of dead GAZ trucks they passed on the way.

the Heers horse breeding programme was a huge enterprise requiring hundreds of of huge stud farms, thousands of farms producing feed, and hundred of thousands men in the farriery trades making tack and wagons.

 

[Lindermyer]

1. Keeping out of Russia.

Not going to happen

or rather conflict with Russia was inevitable

Stalin was more devastated by the loss of France in 1940 than the UK was - He had rather planned that Germany and France would batter themselves silly and he would simply mop up the victor.

I doubt that the Red army would have faired any better in the planning and preperation of operation morskoy lev than the Werchmant and probably worse from a naval capability

 

[Truxx]

so they capture the oilfields and then what?

they still had no trucks, but 2.5 million gee gees.

in 1942 - @ half the Germans logistics on The a eastern Front was devoted to shuttling replacement gees Gees and thousands of tonnes of feed and hay each week to the Front.
the British Army didn’t need to train a single horse wagoneer in WWII, the Germans needed a hundred skilled men for each and every battalion to drive the carts and tend the horses..

one of the things that really bemused the Landsers as they slogged forward on foot to Moscow and Stalingrad following their horse drawn carts was the seemingly endless numbers of dead GAZ trucks they passed on the way.

85% of GE logistics was horse drawn.

And most of the GAZ trucks were Lend Lease Studebakers, nicknamed "Studer" (sorry - cant do the Cyrillic!)

 

[PhotEx]

85% of GE logistics was horse drawn.

And most of the GAZ trucks were Lend Lease Studebakers, nicknamed "Studer" (sorry - cant do the Cyrillic!)

Henry Ford built them a huge factory in the 30’s.
The GAZ was Ford Model B’s under licence.
Germans pressed every working one they came across into service. As Tough and reliable as an anvil.

yes, the ‘Studer’ was highly prized by the Soviets when they started receiving them @150,000.
the post war ZIL was basically a copy.

 

[monkey123]

Been wondering if there was any major issue that they could have changed, leading them to win the last War?

who could imagine the horror of a Europe dominated by Germany?

ah...

 

[DB216LOKDVR]

No, (ex) Corporals telling Generals, Admirals etc what to do (and how to do it) is bound to lead to problems.

 

[Bravo_Bravo]

who could imagine the horror of a Europe dominated by Germany?

ah...

Decent cars, no litter, ace beer and trains that run on time... cracking State pension...

 

[monkey123]

Decent cars, no litter, ace beer and trains that run on time... cracking State pension...

we'd still need a proper left wing nut to exterminate the jews-

 

[Gout Man]

@Bravo_Bravo have a look at the book called Third Reich Victorious.
A very good book written by several military and historical experts who each give an excellent theory of just how Hitler could have won the war.

https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/reviews/third-reich-victorious.438/

 

[Blogg]

Not putting Beppo Schmid (bezzas with Big Hermann and hailed as "the most disastrous intelligence officer the Wehrmacht ever produced") in commanded of the Luftwaffe Military Intelligence Branch from 1938 to 1942 when there were a few things happening.

 

[mattB101]

But why would you want to kill Patton...???

I’ve heard that German commanders thought very little of him and saw him as too cautious and that if they had the same defensives against him as they had on the eastern front most of his plans would’ve ended in failure.

 

[LJONESY]

I’ve heard that German commanders thought very little of him and saw him as too cautious and that if they had the same defensives against him as they had on the eastern front most of his plans would’ve ended in failure.

Are you about 90 then?