Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

What if Stalin had stabbed Hitler in the back in 1940?

Discussion in 'Alternate History' started by Brutal Truth, Apr 4, 2021.

  1. Kai-Petri

    Kai-Petri Kenraali

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2002
    Messages:
    26,462
    Likes Received:
    2,208
    The order written perhaps but the commanders to my knowledge from the start were told and knew there was no elastic defence. How otherwise the Germans got big jackpots like 600,000 POW's in singular pockets alone and some 3,5 million POW's altogether who then practically died over the Winter time.
     
  2. Riter

    Riter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2020
    Messages:
    986
    Likes Received:
    267
    The Red Army of 1940 was not the same Red Army of 1944-5. Most of its officers were scarred survivors of the '37-'39 purges. Survivors were scared to be noticed. Th the time of the German invasion, the Red Army was reorganizing and dismantling the reforms of Tuchachevksy. Tank units were broken up into brigades. Tankers didn't have enough training and most T-34s were sitting in brigade storage. It was feared that learning to drive and operate them would wear them out. It didn't have the fuel or supplies to execute a deep penetration operation. In short, a Red Army offensive would have gained initial ground, then petered out.

    If anything, it might have prompted Germany to negotiate a peace treaty instead of an armistice. A term would be the French deploy along Normandy to repel a British invasion. Germany could then turn about and begin a counter-offensive against the Red Army.
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2021
  3. Thumpalumpacus

    Thumpalumpacus Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2021
    Messages:
    179
    Likes Received:
    66
    I'm unsure how that relates to my point, which is that in 1940 the Red Army was probably unready to take offensive action against Germany.
     
  4. Kai-Petri

    Kai-Petri Kenraali

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2002
    Messages:
    26,462
    Likes Received:
    2,208
    Just backing the quote you mentioned about 1942 being the turning point in Soviet military strategy.
     
    Thumpalumpacus likes this.
  5. Brutal Truth

    Brutal Truth Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2021
    Messages:
    142
    Likes Received:
    58
    Yes, the Red army was unready and an invasion would have been a very risky (and unlikely) move. But do you think that the French would have accepted a peace treaty that would require them to betray their British ally? And would have left France at the mercy of Germany?
     
  6. Riter

    Riter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2020
    Messages:
    986
    Likes Received:
    267
    I wouldn't call it a betrayal. France would not be invading England but defending itself against an invasion. If there was any betrayal, it was the RN attack on the French fleet. France would accept it and the Germans would turn east.
     
  7. Thumpalumpacus

    Thumpalumpacus Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2021
    Messages:
    179
    Likes Received:
    66
    Thanks, sorry for not following.
     
    Kai-Petri likes this.
  8. Riter

    Riter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2020
    Messages:
    986
    Likes Received:
    267
    When you think about it, a Soviet invasion of 1940 would be very much like what happened in 1914. Tsarist Army stalled and then got pushed back. The Soviets could overrun much of Poland, run out of steam and then shoved back into the Soviet Union.

    Could Stalin rally the people in face of an unjust war? Propaganda before the Molotov Treaty condemned the Nazis and they even made anti-Nazi movies showing the glorious Red Army entering Berlin. The after the Molotov Treaty it was nothing but words of praise for the Nazis. The Soviet people also believed that the pre-war Red Army was undefeatable. So being pushed out of Poland and then having much of Russia conquered would make it much more difficult for the Soviet propagandists to rally the people.
     
  9. Kai-Petri

    Kai-Petri Kenraali

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2002
    Messages:
    26,462
    Likes Received:
    2,208
    Just like the phony war if the Germans had to abandon the Sichelschnitt version, going for a version of the Allied Dyle plan might have been enough for the Allied. WW1 type of French warfare would let Hitler release troops to Ostront and leave troops in the west to Exchange fire in the meantime. Nothing else. If the Soviet Army had struck before 10th of May who knows would the Allied have considered the USSR a bigger danger?
     
  10. AZ Railwhale

    AZ Railwhale New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2021
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    3
    I don't think the BTs and T-26s were reliable enough for offensive operations and the Red Army lacked repair parts to repair them after they broke down. I think any major Red Army offensive would have been a cluster frack due to lack of supplies, poor leadership and inadequate transport.
     
    Thumpalumpacus likes this.
  11. Ricky

    Ricky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,974
    Likes Received:
    105
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    Daft question, how did the Soviets manage during their attack on Poland?

    Attacking an enemy already focused on their other border and back-pedalling fast would have parallels with attacking an enemy launching an invasion of their opposite neighbour. Basically very little opposition, at least initially
     
  12. RichTO90

    RichTO90 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2015
    Messages:
    2,584
    Likes Received:
    1,047
    The problem was the Soviets were just recovering from their near run thing in Finland, when Germany began its campaign in the west in April 1940. The Soviets were in no kind of shape to attempt such a thing and of they had, the forces Germany deployed on its eastern borders would likely have slowed the Soviet advance to a crawl.
     

Share This Page