If Moscow fell…

[taamvan]

Those lebensraum arguments sound empty because their current populations are 100% greater than they were back then, and there is no problem whatsoever.  That had nothing to do with space or limited natural resources–it was technology they needed, not physical space.  They don’t even produce their own food (and didn’t then either).

The green revolution was the solution, the idea that some kind of crowding or overpopulation makes zero sense when the world’s population has doubled (in spite of tens of millions of deaths during the war) and are far better fed than in the past.  The difference is that agricultural production takes a fraction of the effort/resources that it did in 1900, so there is plenty of food for everyone and they can stack up on top of each other as much as they want, because they’re not starving.

The entire idea was a propaganda effort that focused on the myth of scarcity.  The development of nuclear weapon and power should emphasize that it was technology that was the limiting factor on available power, inputs, not space or a lack of production.

[8thGuards]

@Caesar:

As for Spain, history is basically in agreement that Franco wouldn’t join the Axis unless he got everything he wanted which was former French colonies in Africa and Gibraltar.

Didn’t Hitler send admiral Canaris to Madrid to get Franco to fully commit, with Canaris then doing the exact opposite telling Franco to stay out at all cost?

[barney]

yea Y think Spain was war weary after their civil war. Surprising Franco lasted as long as he did : )

[Midnight_Reaper]

@8thGuards:

@Caesar:

As for Spain, history is basically in agreement that Franco wouldn’t join the Axis unless he got everything he wanted which was former French colonies in Africa and Gibraltar.

Didn’t Hitler send admiral Canaris to Madrid to get Franco to fully commit, with Canaris then doing the exact opposite telling Franco to stay out at all cost?

That is my understanding but I don’t have any sources for that.

-Midnight_Reaper

[aequitas-et-veritas]

Nazi Germany couldn’t afford to roll with the partisans neither!

Sueing for peace? Yeah to backstab Nazi Germany of course…. :lol:

[Narvik]

@Midnight_Reaper:

@8thGuards:

@Caesar:

As for Spain, history is basically in agreement that Franco wouldn’t join the Axis unless he got everything he wanted which was former French colonies in Africa and Gibraltar.

Didn’t Hitler send admiral Canaris to Madrid to get Franco to fully commit, with Canaris then doing the exact opposite telling Franco to stay out at all cost?

That is my understanding but I don’t have any sources for that.

-Midnight_Reaper

The book Hitlers Krieger by Guido Knopp

[AxisAndAllies1940]

Stalin would have relocated to Central Asia, Siberia, or Kazakhstan and continued the Great Patriotic War. More partisans would’ve sprung up, and they would have continued destroying supply lines. Only now, the Germans are deep into Russia, where the terrain is even less friendly to attacking armies, so the damage would have been worse. A hypothetical German invasion of Central Asia and western Siberia would’ve been tricky, but they’d have been able to do it. The real question is whether they would have been able to hold it long-term, and the answer is no. Although the Red Army itself couldn’t have ejected them, partisans could have made this far-off occupation just not worthwhile.

[Caesar-Seriona]

@AxisAndAllies1940:

Stalin would have relocated to Central Asia, Siberia, or Kazakhstan and continued the Great Patriotic War. More partisans would’ve sprung up, and they would have continued destroying supply lines. Only now, the Germans are deep into Russia, where the terrain is even less friendly to attacking armies, so the damage would have been worse. A hypothetical German invasion of Central Asia and western Siberia would’ve been tricky, but they’d have been able to do it. The real question is whether they would have been able to hold it long-term, and the answer is no. Although the Red Army itself couldn’t have ejected them, partisans could have made this far-off occupation just not worthwhile.

All sources ( I can’t site any off the top of my head ) has stated that Germany had no plans to drive into the Asian part of USSR, they only wanted the west side of it and was going to hold on it.

[Karl7]

@Caesar:

@AxisAndAllies1940:

Stalin would have relocated to Central Asia, Siberia, or Kazakhstan and continued the Great Patriotic War. More partisans would’ve sprung up, and they would have continued destroying supply lines. Only now, the Germans are deep into Russia, where the terrain is even less friendly to attacking armies, so the damage would have been worse. A hypothetical German invasion of Central Asia and western Siberia would’ve been tricky, but they’d have been able to do it. The real question is whether they would have been able to hold it long-term, and the answer is no. Although the Red Army itself couldn’t have ejected them, partisans could have made this far-off occupation just not worthwhile.

All sources ( I can’t site any off the top of my head ) has stated that Germany had no plans to drive into the Asian part of USSR, they only wanted the west side of it and was going to hold on it.

Look no further Caesar Seriona: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-A_line

It was the Arkhangelsk-Astrakhan line, the line of optimal advance according the Germans at the start of Barbarossa.

Re: Germany’s ability to occupy the conquered parts of Russia, let’s be serious: they would have exterminated every village/farm/town that fostered partisans.

The reason insurgencies tend to succeed against the West is that Western powers are too crippled by moral expectations about their own behavior.  The US could end the Taliban in Afghanistan if we wanted by exterminating the bases of support among the people, even if that mean a number of “innocent” people were swept up too.  But of course we can’t because of popular reaction by our own citizens and allies.

Germany would not have faced this problem.  They weren’t interested in fostering allies among the eastern untermensch.  They were to be slaves or liquidated.  The Germans thus could and would have stacked the bodies even higher than they did.  Whatever insurgency would have eventually faded.  Can’t run a rebellion if you don’t have any warm bodies left.

[Caesar-Seriona]

The irony too is that I also do not believe Germany was going to keep USSR territory in Russia itself. The reason I can state that with some logic is because of the Axis powers openly and willing recruiting former Red Army soldiers and pilots who were anti Stalin or Pro Russia. Granted, it would be a puppet state to Germany but history of WWII says that Germany isn’t against doing that.

[AxisAndAllies1940]

@Caesar:

@AxisAndAllies1940:

Stalin would have relocated to Central Asia, Siberia, or Kazakhstan and continued the Great Patriotic War. More partisans would’ve sprung up, and they would have continued destroying supply lines. Only now, the Germans are deep into Russia, where the terrain is even less friendly to attacking armies, so the damage would have been worse. A hypothetical German invasion of Central Asia and western Siberia would’ve been tricky, but they’d have been able to do it. The real question is whether they would have been able to hold it long-term, and the answer is no. Although the Red Army itself couldn’t have ejected them, partisans could have made this far-off occupation just not worthwhile.

All sources ( I can’t site any off the top of my head ) has stated that Germany had no plans to drive into the Asian part of USSR, they only wanted the west side of it and was going to hold on it.

I did not know that. One learns something new every day, thanks for that bit of info!

Isn’t it possible that mass partisan activity could have simply made the German holdings in Russia untenable over time? I mean, the destruction of ALL towns and farms and cities (as was Hitler’s plan), would have made occupation difficult at best, as there would be zero supplies for an army of over a million men (3000000 started 0n June 22), and it would be fairly easy to cut a supply line stretching from Berlin to Moscow. Plus, the USSR’s roads were dreadful, making supplying this army trickier.

[Caesar-Seriona]

@AxisAndAllies1940:

@Caesar:

@AxisAndAllies1940:

Stalin would have relocated to Central Asia, Siberia, or Kazakhstan and continued the Great Patriotic War. More partisans would’ve sprung up, and they would have continued destroying supply lines. Only now, the Germans are deep into Russia, where the terrain is even less friendly to attacking armies, so the damage would have been worse. A hypothetical German invasion of Central Asia and western Siberia would’ve been tricky, but they’d have been able to do it. The real question is whether they would have been able to hold it long-term, and the answer is no. Although the Red Army itself couldn’t have ejected them, partisans could have made this far-off occupation just not worthwhile.

All sources ( I can’t site any off the top of my head ) has stated that Germany had no plans to drive into the Asian part of USSR, they only wanted the west side of it and was going to hold on it.

I did not know that. One learns something new every day, thanks for that bit of info!

Isn’t it possible that mass partisan activity could have simply made the German holdings in Russia untenable over time? I mean, the destruction of ALL towns and farms and cities (as was Hitler’s plan), would have made occupation difficult at best, as there would be zero supplies for an army of over a million men (3000000 started 0n June 22), and it would be fairly easy to cut a supply line stretching from Berlin to Moscow. Plus, the USSR’s roads were dreadful, making supplying this army trickier.

Germany was already building newer roads and rails lines in the territory they secured so given time, they might of had some kind of Wehrmacht highway.