• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

What if the Nazis and Soviets had made peace in 1943?


parentheses

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
13,805
Reading Sir Basil Liddell Hart's book, History of the Second World War, I was greatly surprised to see the Nazis and Soviets discussed an end to their war in 1943.

Liddell Hart claims Ribbentrop and Molotov had a meeting in Kirovograd behind the German lines in June 1943. The talks broke down however because the Nazis wanted to keep control of Soviet territory west of the Dneppr river while the Soviets wanted restoration of the 1941 frontier.

If peace had occurred between the two dictatorial superpowers might Nazi Germany have survived?
 

ruserious

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
29,597
Dictatorial superpowers tend to fade eventually regardless.
 

H.R. Haldeman

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
4,444
Hitler would have had Ribbentrop's nutsack for talking to the enemy behind his back.

If the suggestion is that the solution might have involved Hitler being gotten out of the way, I don't think we have the evidence that his generals or senior political lieutenants had the ability or inclination to move on him in 1943 anyway. They were still in thrall to him for at least another year after that.
 

YouKnowWhatIMeanLike

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
7,224
Dictatorial superpowers tend to fade eventually regardless.
all kind of powers fade eventually regardless.

German and Russian had the Ribbentrop–Molotov Pact or Nazi–Soviet Pact since 1939. The question should be would have happened if Hitler had not broken the pact. And why did he change his mind in 1941.
 

parentheses

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
13,805
Hitler would have had Ribbentrop's nutsack for talking to the enemy behind his back.

If the suggestion is that the solution might have involved Hitler being gotten out of the way, I don't think we have the evidence that his generals or senior political lieutenants had the ability or inclination to move on him in 1943 anyway. They were still in thrall to him for at least another year after that.
Liddel Hart does not specifically say, but it seems to me Ribbentrop was speaking witht the approval of Hitler. Liddell Hart says his source is unnamed German officers who participated in the talks. After the war, Lidell Hart interviewed many former German officers.
 

making waves

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
19,179
The number one objectve of the Nazis was the destruction of the USSR - any so-called peace talks by the Nazis would have been a holding manoeuvre in order to regroup and resupply for a new offensive (just as the 1939 pact was designed to facilite Nazi invasion of western Europe prior to operation barbarossa).
 

Asparagus

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 7, 2010
Messages
4,882
Extreme right wing whackos plus Extreme fake Left wing whackos.

Sounds like the FLabourG coalition.

So the germans and the russians would all be in multi generational debt to us
 

H.R. Haldeman

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
4,444
Liddel Hart does not specifically say, but it seems to me Ribbentrop was speaking witht the approval of Hitler. Liddell Hart says his source is unnamed German officers who participated in the talks. After the war, Lidell Hart interviewed many former German officers.

Ah, thanks for clarification.
 

Eire1976

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2010
Messages
14,190
Reading Sir Basil Liddell Hart's book, History of the Second World War, I was greatly surprised to see the Nazis and Soviets discussed an end to their war in 1943.

Liddell Hart claims Ribbentrop and Molotov had a meeting in Kirovograd behind the German lines in June 1943. The talks broke down however because the Nazis wanted to keep control of Soviet territory west of the Dneppr river while the Soviets wanted restoration of the 1941 frontier.

If peace had occurred between the two dictatorial superpowers might Nazi Germany have survived?
The British would never of allowed this happen as Churchill promised Uncle Joe East Europe if he kept going till Berlin.
 

Dadaist

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Messages
13,803
By that stage Germany had obviously shown their intent. They could have agreed to a temporary truce but Germany would never have allowed the Soviet Union to rearm. Why would Germany turn away from their main goal, when no western allied boots were marching on mainland Europe by that date.
 

parentheses

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
13,805
An interesting article here which indicates Stalin did not favor the unconditional surrender policy declared by Roosevelt and Churchill. Unconditional surrender gave the Germans the incentive to fight on fanatically and caused dramatically increased casualties among Soviet troops.

Perhaps this is why Stalin was considering peace with the Nazis in 1943

A lot of people forget that the Soviet Union did about 90% of the actual fighting in the war against Hitler. Starting in 1942 Stalin repeatedly asked his "allies" in the west to either open a second front Europe or at least send military forces, particularly air power to help Soviet forces. In both cases he got promises that were never kept.

What he got instead was a declaration of a policy of "unconditional surrender" in early 1943 about which he was never consulted, a policy which gave the Germans every incentive to fight to the bitter end.
In spite of repeated protests from Stalin to modify this ill-considered policy, Roosevelt flatly refused to change his position, guaranteeing continued huge Russian losses while the west postponed its promised attack in the west for two years.
Even before the onset of the Cold War in the years after 1945, tension and distrust marked the relationship between Great Britain, the United States and the Soviet Union. Although this tension was understandable given the ideological differences between capitalism and communism, a more important immediate cause was the bizarre, even duplicitous, conduct of President Franklin D. Roosevelt toward Josef Stalin.
Unconditional Surrender
 

Mackers

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
5,526
Would F.G. still be in power with a better fitting shirts?
 

Ryan Tubbs

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2012
Messages
3,660
If peace had occurred between the two dictatorial superpowers might Nazi Germany have survived?
It would most certainly have. The German losses on the eastern front from July 1945 onwards were absolutely catastrophic (the average lifespan of a German soldier on the Eastern front in 1945 was 2 weeks).
 

BlackLion

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 21, 2010
Messages
4,856
If the Nazis and soviets made peace in 1943 I could see the Nazis making peace with the allies sooner or later and then sooner or later starting up again with the USSR. now a lot of that would have to do with the extraordinary possibility of the Nazis and soviets making peace.
 

Zag23

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 15, 2012
Messages
411
This meeting would have taken place just before the german assault on kursk on 5 july. As the russians knew in detail in advance of this attack and had prepared a defence line 20 miles deep, why attempt peace with the germans when they were about to destroy any german offensive capabilities forever?
 

BlackLion

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 21, 2010
Messages
4,856
Whatif history threads are always boring (only partially because of the nutjobs they attract)

This one (quite predictably) is particularly bad.
Ohh go get off your high horse and bit*h somewhere else.
 

parentheses

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
13,805
This meeting would have taken place just before the german assault on kursk on 5 july. As the russians knew in detail in advance of this attack and had prepared a defence line 20 miles deep, why attempt peace with the germans when they were about to destroy any german offensive capabilities forever?
How could the Soviets be sure they would defeat the Germans?

Up to that time the Soviets had never beaten the Germans in summer fighting.
 

Zag23

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 15, 2012
Messages
411
Because they knew everything that was about to come in great detail. The russians must have known they wern't going to loose this one.
 

Hitch 22

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 26, 2011
Messages
5,220
How could the Soviets be sure they would defeat the Germans?

Up to that time the Soviets had never beaten the Germans in summer fighting.
The Russians knew the German moves in advance thanks to Allied code breakers.

They knew the Germans would attack at the neck of Kursk salient and constructed concentric defensive positions with a 1:1 ratio of anti-tank guns to attacking vehicles.

When the Germans had been exhausted and brought to a halt, the Soviets launched their strategic reserves in in enormous counterattacks that threw them into retreat.

 
Top