If Hitler hadn't attacked Britain?

Question

Do you think he could have defeated Russia? He would have had 1887 more aircraft, and more importantly, 2698 more airmen - most of them having more skill than the rest of the Luftwaffe.

With this air power, and perhapy launching operation Barbarossa two months earlier than he did, could he have taken Leningrad, Moscow and Stalingrad before the onset of winter?

I think the siege of Leningrad would have come to a swift end with air superiority, same goes for Stalingrad.

As for Moscow...I don't know how bitter a battle it could have become as it never happened.

Also, just because these 3 cities would be in German control, surely it wouldnt mean the largest country in the world would simply give up?

Surely Stalin and his High Command would keep relocating further East, behind the Urals (where all the production facilities lay) and bog down Nazi Germany in a guerilla war of unprecedented scale?

Russia was unconquerable?

Answer 1

Hitler had to attack Britain - as Churchill pointed out in one of his speeches at the time,Germany had to knock Britain out of the war or face eventual defeat long term,and he was proved right.



To deal with your individual arguments:



Hitler would still have hed to have deployed a certain number of these aircraft and aircrew in the West,to deal with any potential British threat.



Barbarossa couldn't have started any earlier.Analysis of the German Order of Battle for the campaign clearly shows that all the ground troops weren't in place and ready for the offensive to begin before 22 June 1941.The logistics of positioning almost 4 million men and thousands of tanks and other vehicles to launch a coordinated attack along a 1800 mile front had begun to be put in place as soon as France surrendered - The Germans attacked USSR when they were ready,not because of any delays caused by any other operations anywhere else.



The second of these points means that Barbarossa would have panned out exactly the same way whether or not Hitler attacked Britain,so no change in the eventual outcome of the war.

Answer 2

When looking at history that way, you fail to consider that events do not happen in isolation. so when you consider a single "what if?", you have to consider a countless number of other ones. You cannot impose a limited set of conditions or possible outcomes at your whim.



But lets play your little game anyway. First of all, Germany would not have had that many extra aircraft and crews at their disposal in Russia, so it is debatable whether it would have made a big difference. The Germans certainly weren't going to leave their conquest of western Europe without significant air strength and they were certainly not going to reduce it to less than parity with England, which was not a weakling by any means.



Second, while Germany might have attacked Russia a bit sooner, they couldn't have done it in 1940. As it was, the plan was for May 1941, but it got delayed 5 weeks, in part due to the weather. They couldn't have gone earlier than May due to the spring mud season, and then there was the required time to move forces from the western to the eastern front, so would 5 weeks have really made that much difference? Probably not.



You also cannot ignore probable extra assistance given to Russia by England and the USA, nor can you ignore the probability that British forces in the Mediterranean would have been bolstered, putting more pressure on Germany in that theater, especially in Greece and North Africa. More American and British resources would have probably been sent to the Orient, changing the dynamic and course of events there. Events that could not have favored Germany.



Even if Moscow, or Leningrad, or Stalingrad had fallen, the Russian military and people would simply have fought on. Most of Russian production had already been moved so far east that it was essentially out of reach to Germany. The RAF wouldn't have done nothing, and in fact an aggressive bombing campaign of Germany would most likely have begun sooner. A British expedition to the continent, even possibly through Murmansk would have complicated things greatly for Germany, resource-wise. They could not escape a 2-front war.



Could Germany have done better in Russia? Probably. Could it have changed the outcome of the war? No. Final conclusion to your question? Checkmate!

Answer 3

A complicated question. Had Hitler ignored Britain (which would have meant putting up with some British attacks) and occupied Moscow, Leningrad and Stalingrad he certainly would have defeated the government of the USSR. Theoretically it is hard to see how the rest of teh country could have organized a response.



What would have helped and helped a lot was if he could have worked more closely with the Japanese to get them not to attack Pearl Harbor. Without Pearl Harbor or something similar America would not have entered the war. There were a few neutrality acts keeping the US out of such wars and the Republican Congress was not about to repeal them and but for Pearl Harbor would never have repealed them. As things were Franklin D. Roosevelt was trying to aid Britain the Lend Lease but it was not enough and the Germans were very close to winning the war in Europe when the US entered it.

Answer 4

Britain declared war on Hitler, not the other way around. It was a consequence of Hitler invading Poland. It's possible that he thought that the UK would back down on it's threat, but it didn't and that was that.



Without taking Poland, it would have been much more difficult for an attack on the USSR as there would have been no useful land corridor, so it's hard to visualise things working out another way.



Edit:

I think you need to go and reread your history on this one. The allies (The British and French Empires) joined the war together. Britain DID mount an expeditionary force to the continent in 1939.



"Sure the RAF would have conducted raids, but I doubt the Germans couldnt have been able to deal with them"

It was the RAF who crippled the abilities of the German airforce. The Battle of Britain was won because the British had a more advanced form of radar that the Germans couldn't counter. By later in the war they had better planes, both bombers and fighters.



Edit 2:

Thanks for the clarification, but once Britain was in the war it wasn't going to back down. Even Rudolf Hess going to the UK in person couldn't find any way to a peace treaty. Both Churchill and the British people were determined to fight on for as long as necessary. Although the Germans were right to have little fear of a full invasion from the west, it's difficult to ignore that you have a major power either side of you who are going to work together against you. Especially when your Italian allies are utterly failing to do anything right in the Mediterranean theatre.

Attacking the USSR at all at that point was suicidal for the Axis.

Answer 5

Hitler didn´t attack Britain. Britain attacked Germany.



First Britain tolerated Poland´s be extremely aggressive behaviour to Germans which were living in Poland.



Then they undermined the german negotiations with Poland.



And finally they declared war on Germany.



There is a very good book about this subjett: "1939 - The War That Had Many Fathers". from Ex. General Gerd Schultze-Rhonhof

Answer 6

Russia wiped out 80% of the German military that attacked them (more than all their allies combined). Russians were already marching toward Berlin before USA and Britain could break through the West Front. If Hitler sent more at them, Russia/Soviet Union would have a bigger struggle but they would still win.

And Russia would Never Give Up. They would literally fight until the very last man, they would chose death rather than defeat (not that they would need to).

Answer 7

If he hadn't attacked Britain and had attacked Russia earlier, he might have done more damage to Russia. In the end, though, I think Russia would've still won. Russia just had way more resources than Germany did, in terms of manpower, land, industrial capacity, and raw materials. They also had such a vast territory. Just trying to occupy all of that territory, particularly with anti-German partisans, would've been a big strain on the German military.



I don't think the British would've launched a serious attack against Germany. During the early months of the war the British and French were hesitant to take the offensive.

Answer 8

The 'Ifs' in History are difficult to answer. Like -If Adam hadn't consumed the apple?- If Alexander hadn't died at that age?- If Barbarians hadn't sacked Rome? - If Napoleon hadn't invaded Russia? etc.

Since Britain and Hitler were not the sole factors in the Second World War, the War would have continued as Britain was already on the Allied side.

Answer 9

The German War Machine was not really suited to a war with Russia. It was based on Lightning War. They would hit hard and pick up fuel and other resources as they moved forward.



The Soviets employed a Scorched Earth system. They destroyed everything of value to the Germans as they retreated.

Answer 10

It's the inverse that is more fascinating. If Hitler had not attacked Russia, Britain and her empire would surely have been history. It's hard to construct a way for America to get into the War (it would even have been difficult as it was, but Hitler declared war on US). With the U-boats, Britain would have very likely withered on the vine. Germany would have ruled Europe.

Answer 11

If you want to visit areas like Kremlin, Red Square and St Basil's Cathedral than you will have to go to Moscow, the capital of the Russian Federation and among the country's hottest destinations for international guests and you may be one of them if you look with hotelbye . In Moscow you will even see the entire world popular cinema, the Bolshoi Theatre, the jewel in the crown of Moscow's rich social life. Moscow has ton to supply and undeniably you will love a holyday here.

Answer 12

Hitler would have been better able to fight Russia and maybe win World War II.



By fighting two enemies at the same time, Hitler bit off more than he could chew.

Answer 13

And the British would have invaded into his rear, bombing Germany.



Britain declared war on Germany because they invaded Poland.



If you want to rewrite history, Hitler's stupidest mistake was invading Russia.

Answer 14

I doubt whether more planes and pilots would have made any difference.

It was the vastness of the Country that ultimately defeated Germany.

Answer 15

It IS unconquerable.