Did Hitler save the West?

[trader/warrior]

(replies to my post.)

Thanks, now I understand better.
Not as wacko a theory as I got the impression of. But not anything very new either. I don't know about actual historians, but I've always kind of thought if Hitler didn't start a world war Stalin would. Would be interesting if its possible to prove it and find the extent of soviet plans, but I'll try to keep a sceptic for now (especially as i can't read the german article ).

As a conclusion it is also claimed that Hitler saw himself forced to carry out this attack in order to at least have a slight chance in fighting off the USSR.

This part led me to believe the theory states Hitler knew about the plans of the soviets. So if Hitler only realised this threat after invading Poland (or not at all), I don't really see how it changes anything with regards to the necessity of invading USSR.

 

[LightSpectra]

Polish dictator who entered in a conflict with the young Soviet state because he wanted to push Poland's borders further east and managed to stop Soviet counteroffensive.

His dictatorship was temporary, and things like this are typically expected in brand new states constantly in, or on the brink of, war. Nevertheless Piłsudski preserved the liberal democracy in Poland and wasn't simply power hungry as this post seems to imply (don't know if that was your intent or not); further, I strongly oppose the notion that he was simply an ultranationalist that attacked the Soviets in order to gain territory. Given that it was the stated intent of Lenin to use Warsaw as a springboard for exporting communism, his actions were largely necessary; and had other Eastern European states been so inclined to follow his Prometheus system, he could've permanently kept Marxism within Russia.

 

[Lord Baal]

So Stalin annexed foreign countries and territories to defend against an enemy he evidently never thought would attack?

Where are you getting this tripe about Stalin thinking that Hitler would never attack? He was surprised when Hitler attacked, but only because his intelligence correctly stated that Germany was not adequately prepared to invade Russia.

And if you paid attention, you'd note that I said, Stalin's actions prior to WWII were defensive, and his actions after it broke out opportunistic. Next time you decide to be sarcastic, you could try paying attention to the post you're mocking, because you've just made yourself look like an idiot by attacking statements I never made. Stalin never annexed any territory prior to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, which was signed less than a fortnight before the outbreak of WWII.

+

Some people would recommend, you know, ending one war entirely, before choosing a second front.

Including most of Hitler's generals at the time.

 

[Serutan]

Not entirely true. The forces on the eastern front were according to the article prepared for an offensive war way better than a defensive one, which is also a fact as far as I know. In historic canon this is called offensive defensive or something. And don't make the same mistake as Germany by judging the Soviet war capability solely on the failures in Finland.

I'm not. I'm juding by :
1) how much Soviet command and control still sucked in March
1942 in an attempted offensive that was a disastrous failure.
2) The Werhmacht was
a much more formidible proposition than the Finns
3) the fact that the German generals still had a fair amount of
tactical autonomy up until the war turned permanently against them at Kursk.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Where are you getting this tripe about Stalin thinking that Hitler would never attack? He was surprised when Hitler attacked, but only because his intelligence correctly stated that Germany was not adequately prepared to invade Russia.

This is utterly false. As a matter of fact Soviet intelligence made it very clear to Stalin that Germany prepared for an immediate attack. Stalin however did ignore all the evidence being a stubborn idiot who just could not believe that Germany in deed would attack.
Contemporary witnesses reported Stalin not being just surprised, but truly shocked when Barbarossa was started. His entire planning suddenly got screwed, his convictions about the future he was so sure of at the time collapsed. He had a hard time to accept this new reality which is also mentioned as one of the minor reasons the USSR needed such a long time to efficiently get countermeasures going.
Frankly I am not in the mood to dig up sources, but it would be an easy task if you wish to do so.

And if you paid attention, you'd note that I said, Stalin's actions prior to WWII were defensive, and his actions after it broke out opportunistic. Next time you decide to be sarcastic, you could try paying attention to the post you're mocking, because you've just made yourself look like an idiot by attacking statements I never made. Stalin never annexed any territory prior to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, which was signed less than a fortnight before the outbreak of WWII.

I repeat: So Stalin annexed foreign countries and territories to defend against an enemy he evidently never thought would attack?
This is essentially what you are saying, any mock is coincidental.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

I'm not. I'm juding by :
1) how much Soviet command and control still sucked in March
1942 in an attempted offensive that was a disastrous failure.
2) The Werhmacht was
a much more formidible proposition than the Finns
3) the fact that the German generals still had a fair amount of
tactical autonomy up until the war turned permanently against them at Kursk.

The bolted part is exactly what I said. Germany assessed the USSR according to the war with Finland and as a consequence gravely underestimated the USSR as Göring also admitted. Your third point is interesting, though debatable.
After the surrender of France Hitler was finally in the position to have total control of the military campaign. The invasion of France itself probably only succeed because the military did not act according to Hitler's orders occasionally / was able to change his mind.
After France and the public praising of Hitler's military skill this time was over. And Barbarossa being his one and only favorite Hitler had a lot of influence on its planning and execution. My impression is actual that it will be hard to find one significant part of the campaign were the German Generals wouldn't have liked to proceed differently. The most famous being their wish to focus on Moscow instead of spreading the forces thin.
Another thing that comes to my mind his how Hitler deliberately hindered the much needed delivery of clothes fitted to the Russian cold. The reason: He did not want to give the home front a cause for concerns.

 

[red_elk]

This is utterly false. As a matter of fact Soviet intelligence made it very clear to Stalin that Germany prepared for an immediate attack. Stalin however did ignore all the evidence being a stubborn idiot who just could not believe that Germany in deed would attack.
Contemporary witnesses reported Stalin not being just surprised, but truly shocked when Barbarossa was started. His entire planning suddenly got screwed, his convictions about the future he was so sure of at the time collapsed. He had a hard time to accept this new reality which is also mentioned as one of the minor reasons the USSR needed such a long time to efficiently get countermeasures going.
Frankly I am not in the mood to dig up sources, but it would be an easy task if you wish to do so.

I repeat: So Stalin annexed foreign countries and territories to defend against an enemy he evidently never thought would attack?
This is essentially what you are saying, any mock is coincidental.

Sill, you are totally misled here.
1. Soviet intelligence failed to report exact date of German attack. There were about dozen of reports with different dates, including June 22-nd.

2. Stalin was preparing for war with Germany since late 1930-s. Read here, paying attention to the table with buildup of Soviet forces:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barbarossa#Soviet_preparations

3. Reports about Stalin being shocked and unable to control country for a few weeks right after German attack are based on Khruschev's memoirs and also incorrect. You can easily find information about it. Though there was such period later in July, but only for 1-2 days.

4. Defensive measures were definitely one of the reasons for Soviet annexations in 1939-1940, though not the only one.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Sill, you are totally misled here.
1. Soviet intelligence failed to report exact date of German attack. There were about dozen of reports with different dates, including June 22-nd.

The fact remains that Stalin was warned. If in 1941 or 1942 may have been debatable. So this leaves two choices:
- Stalin did not really believe any of those reports and felt that any kind of invasion by Germany was not to come any time soon.
- Stalin planned on an Soviet invasion in 1942

Either way Stalin's grand strategy was offensive down to its core. The annexation of other nations take part in that offensive strategy. Not in a defensive one. Hence to call the annexations "defensive" is out-right distortion of history. Just as it is distortion of history to call the invasion of the USSR by Germany "defensive" weather or not the German High command knew of Stalin's plans (which it didn't).

Sill, you are totally misled here.
2. Stalin was preparing for war with Germany since late 1930-s. Read here, paying attention to the table with buildup of Soviet forces:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barbarossa#Soviet_preparations

Which is exactly what I have been saying in this thread. It is just that Stalin seemed to be sure to be able to attack on his terms. Not on the German ones.

3. Reports about Stalin being shocked and unable to control country for a few weeks right after German attack are based on Khruschev's memoirs and also incorrect. You can easily find information about it. Though there was such period later in July, but only for 1-2 days.

I am inclined to believe you here.

4. Defensive measures were definitely one of the reasons for Soviet annexations in 1939-1940, though not the only one.

I know what you mean, but such a use of words is gravely misleading.
The Soviet annexations were offensive measures which were supposed to play a defensive role in a grand offensive campaign. So yeah, somewhere the word "defensive" has its place.

 

[red_elk]

The fact remains that Stalin was warned. If in 1941 or 1942 may have been debatable. So this leaves two choices:
- Stalin did not really believe any of those reports and felt that any kind of invasion by Germany was not to come any time soon.
- Stalin planned on an Soviet invasion in 1942

Sorry, I'm not following you - how the fact that Stalin was warned means that he didn't believe in German attack or planned his own attack?
Generally, I was replying to this nonsense: "So Stalin annexed foreign countries and territories to defend against an enemy he evidently never thought would attack?" If he evidently thought, there must be some evidence.

Either way Stalin's grand strategy was offensive down to its core. The annexation of other nations take part in that offensive strategy.

Part of which strategy was building Molotov defense line on (re)annexed, former Polish territories?

Hence to call the annexations "defensive" is out-right distortion of history.

Did somebody here call Stalin's annexations defensive?

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Sorry, I'm not following you - how the fact that Stalin was warned means that he didn't believe in German attack or planned his own attack?

Because otherwise he had actually prepared for an attack by Germany and not only for his own potential attack?

Generally, I was replying to this nonsense: "So Stalin annexed foreign countries and territories to defend against an enemy he evidently never thought would attack?" If he evidently thought, there must be some evidence.

A valid conclusion
Really, every coverage of Barbarossa describes how Stalin was convinced Germany would not attack. I could now google for 30 minutes and post 10+ different sources but are you seriously telling me this is necessary?

Part of which strategy was building Molotov defense line on (re)annexed, former Polish territories?

Nope, part of which strategy was building an offensive line on annexed, former Polish territories. A defensive line would have been a smart idea though.

Did somebody here call Stalin's annexations defensive?

And if you paid attention, you'd note that I said, Stalin's actions prior to WWII were defensive, and his actions after it broke out opportunistic.

 

[red_elk]

Because otherwise he had actually prepared for an attack by Germany and not only for his own potential attack?

A valid conclusion
Really, every coverage of Barbarossa describes how Stalin was convinced Germany would not attack. I could now google for 30 minutes and post 10+ different sources but are you seriously telling me this is necessary?

Yes, find me please at least one reliable source which would state that Stalin evidently was convinced that Germany would never attack.

Nope, part of which strategy was building an offensive line on annexed, former Polish territories. A defensive line would have been a smart idea though.

So, this fortification line:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov_line
was offensive or it was built against an enemy who would never attack, as Stalin evidently thought?

Did somebody here call Stalin's annexations defensive?

And if you paid attention, you'd note that I said, Stalin's actions prior to WWII were defensive, and his actions after it broke out opportunistic.

Ok, tell me, which Stalin's defensive actions Lord Baal was talking about, in your opinion - and which countries were annexed by USSR before WW2?

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Yes, find me please at least one reliable source which would state that Stalin evidently was convinced that Germany would never attack.

You just twisted my words fellow. I said, that Stalin never thought Germany would attack. Not that he thought Germany would never attack. The former means he recognized the general potential, but fooled himself / was fooled that this would not take place any time soon. The latter means the sheer fought of an German attack was laughable to Stalin, which is of course not true.
For the former:

Stalin was convinced that Hitler would not be foolish enough to fight a war on two fronts. If he could persuade Hitler to sign a peace treaty with the Soviet Union, Germany was likely to invade Western Europe instead. [...] Stalin believed that Germany would not invade the Soviet Union until Britain and France had been conquered.

Source

On December 31, 1940, the German chief of state, Adolf Hitler, wrote a letter to his counterpart in the Kremlin, sending him “cordial New Year’s greetings and my wishes for success and prosperity to you and the people of Soviet Russia”. The main purpose of this letter, however, wrote the Führer, was to reassure Stalin that Germany had no untoward designs on Russia, that its single and unalterable desire was to bring the British Empire to its knees. In a letter some months later (like the first, reprinted for the first time in What Stalin Knew: The enigma of Barbarossa by David E. Murphy), Hitler goes even further. He pleads with Stalin not to be misled by rumours deliberately spread by the British, or indeed by some German generals itching in seek a conflict with the Soviet Union — something which he, the Führer, decisively opposes. Russia and Germany must have peace, he declares, so if Stalin learns of some suspicious German deployments, or troop movements towards the Soviet border — all justified by the Germans’ desire to keep the British in suspense — he must immediately inform the Führer, who will take steps to defuse the potentially explosive situation.

As Alexander Solzhenitsyn once said, “Stalin did not trust anyone, but he did trust Adolf Hitler’. Indeed, on June 21, 1941, he issued a remarkable order to his troops cautioning them not to respond to German provocations (massive reconnaissance flights, a daily occurrence since May) without first checking with their commanding officers.

It all reads like a piece of flummery now, but when Stalin received Hitler’s letter on May 14, four weeks before the German panzer divisions rolled into Soviet territory, did he actually believe it? The answer is, astonishingly, yes

Source

So, this fortification line:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov_line
was offensive or it was built against an enemy who would never attack, as Stalin evidently thought?

Stalin’s forward deployment of his military forces—did not make sense from a purely defensive viewpoint.

Source
Stalin prepared for a fight with Germany, never argued that.

Ok, tell me, which Stalin's defensive actions Lord Baal was talking about, in your opinion - and which countries were annexed by USSR before WW2?

You know the answer to both questions yourself. Make your point.

 

[red_elk]

You just twisted my words fellow. I said, that Stalin never thought Germany would attack.

You asked this:
"I repeat: So Stalin annexed foreign countries and territories to defend against an enemy he evidently never thought would attack?"

Can you tell me what was the purpose of fortification line, being built by the USSR in 1940, on annexed, former Polish territories?
To defend against an enemy he evidently never thought would attack?
To counter alien invasion?
May be something else?

You know the answer to both questions yourself. Make your point.

I really don't know which countries you meant.
Give me example of country annexed by USSR before WW2, which was in your opinion, offensive action.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

You asked this:
"I repeat: So Stalin annexed foreign countries and territories to defend against an enemy he evidently never thought would attack?"

Which means exactly "Stalin never thought Germany would attack"? Just a different grammatical structure.

Can you tell me what was the purpose of fortification line, being built by the USSR in 1940, on annexed, former Polish territories?
To defend against an enemy he evidently never thought would attack?
To counter alien invasion?
May be something else?

To invade. It was designed for an invasion. As I said like 10 times before.

I really don't know which countries you meant.
Give me example of country annexed by USSR before WW2, which was in your opinion, offensive action.

Who said anything about "before WW2"? Who does this constitute the annexations to be defensive if it is clear that Stalin wanted to get Europe under Soviet control? Hitler only annexed European territories to have a better stance when carrying out his clearly defensive preemptive strike against the USSR
And what exact defensive role could Bessarabia possibly fulfill?

 

[red_elk]

To invade. It was designed for an invasion. As I said like 10 times before.

Now I see what was happening in summer 1940.
Stalin treacherously started building bunkers and other defensive fortifications on his territory, which were surely intended to invade Germany.
In the same time, Hitler started developing his defensive plan "Barbarossa".

Who said anything about "before WW2"?

Quote from Lord Baal:

"And if you paid attention, you'd note that I said, Stalin's actions prior to WWII were defensive, and his actions after it broke out opportunistic. Next time you decide to be sarcastic, you could try paying attention to the post you're mocking, because you've just made yourself look like an idiot by attacking statements I never made."

Still don't get it?

And what exact defensive role could Bessarabia possibly fulfill?

Again, who said that Stalin's annexations were defensive?

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Now I see what was happening in summer 1940.
Stalin treacherously started building bunkers and other defensive fortifications on his territory, which were surely intended to invade Germany.
In the same time, Hitler started developing his defensive plan "Barbarossa".

Finally you come to your senses. There is still hope for you my Russian fellow.

Still don't get it?

Whoops! Now I did.

 

[Dragonlord]

To the Molotov Line: building a defense line is no proof one doesn't contemplate an offensive at some point. Germany also built a Westwall on the French border to intimidate France into not attacking - that didn't stop Hitler from attacking France when the time was right.
Similarly, Stalin building the Molotov Line is no proof he wasn't contemplating an attack on Germany at a time of his choosing. He just wasn't ready yet in June 1941, and Germany was too strong at that time.
I'm convinced Stalin simply misjudged the course of the war in the west - he (like all other 'experts' at the time) was expecting a long drawn-out war between Germany and France and was preparing to take Germany in the rear when it was totally occupied in France.
The rapidity of the Fall of France suprised him (like the rest of the world) and upset his timetable. He was still hoping to find a good opportunity to attack and thus neglected to change his armies offensive deployment to a defensive one - biiiig mistake!
Basically, I see both Hitler and Stalin as aggressive dictators who each wanted to dominate Europe and thus each wanted to eliminate the other. They were playing a game of bluff and misinformation which Stalin lost; like 2 gunslingers in a Western, Hitler drew first.

This does not mean Hitler's attack was 'justified', or that he 'saved the West' - he wanted 'Lebensraum in the East' and he was going to attack when he was ready, regardless of what Stalin did. But it does mean that Stalin was not some lily-white 'Defender against Fascism' who never had an aggressive thought in his head - he would have launched his own attack at an opportune moment.

 

[red_elk]

To the Molotov Line: building a defense line is no proof one doesn't contemplate an offensive at some point.

It is proof that Stalin was aware of possibility of German attack. As for Rezun's theories (Soviet offensive plans), they are not considered as valid by vast majority of historians.

 

[Lord Baal]

This is utterly false. As a matter of fact Soviet intelligence made it very clear to Stalin that Germany prepared for an immediate attack. Stalin however did ignore all the evidence being a stubborn idiot who just could not believe that Germany in deed would attack.

Allow me to clarify. Stalin was informed of two things; that Germany was going to attack, including the date of the attack, and; that Germany was not adequately prepared to invade the USSR. Both were true. Stalin's mistake was in looking at the latter intelligence as correct and assuming that the former intelligence was false.

He was somewhat justified in doing this, however, since there had been claims from within the Soviet intelligence community that Germany was going to invade for months, and it simply hadn't happened. Several dates had been supplied by Soviet spies; all of these dates had been correct at the time Stalin was provided with them, but the Germans had altered their plans - due to weather, not the invasions of Yugoslavia, Greece and Crete as is often erroneously assumed - and when the dates passed without an invasion occurring, the assets who provided the intelligence were discredited.

Contemporary witnesses reported Stalin not being just surprised, but truly shocked when Barbarossa was started. His entire planning suddenly got screwed, his convictions about the future he was so sure of at the time collapsed. He had a hard time to accept this new reality which is also mentioned as one of the minor reasons the USSR needed such a long time to efficiently get countermeasures going.

This is a myth, though it does have some basis in fact. Stalin did withdraw into isolation at the Kremlin, but only after his initial counterattack failed miserably. His withdrawal was also for far less time than is often presumed - more like 3-4 days than the 2-3 weeks usually reported - though it was just as total. He snapped out of his fugue after Molotov and Beria came to visit him with a few generals and Party officials - including Krushchev, the source of the later stories - in tow. Stalin asked them why they'd come to see him, and Molotov and Beria were shocked when they realised that Stalin thought they'd come to arrest him. Instead, they sat down and discussed the situation with him. The next day he called Zhukov to Moscow and Molotov issued the decree that propaganda be re-focused from "defending the revolution" to "defending Mother Russia."

Frankly I am not in the mood to dig up sources, but it would be an easy task if you wish to do so.

And those sources would be wrong. Mine, from historians like Richard Evans, are right.

I repeat: So Stalin annexed foreign countries and territories to defend against an enemy he evidently never thought would attack?
This is essentially what you are saying, any mock is coincidental.

You know, I was really going to beat you over the head with this, but after about four posts red_elk was finally able to point out to you how stupid this comment was.

 

[The Imp]

No, The United States of America has that honor.