Results 1 to 30 of 53

Thread: Could the Axis have won?

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #22
    Senior Member Senior Member ReluctantSamurai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,483

    Default Re: Could the Axis have won?

    Even with German technology, it was only a partial solution and a very long-term one.
    Agreed. But perhaps if the capture of Moscow does force the Soviets to capitulate (not likely, but possible), then oil could be sent from the Caucasus if the Trans-Siberian Railway can be improved enough to allow it. Also, the oil production facilities in the Sakhalin Islands becomes available to the Japanese to the tune of 580 million barrels/yr.

    Another issue is whether Japanese could have seriously threatened Russian Far Eastern Army, which was over a million strong and well-supplied.
    They could...as long as they stayed out of prime tank country like that found around Khalkin Gol, and operated in the heavily wooded areas (negating Soviet armored formations) around Kharbarovsk and Chingchangkou where their superiority in small unit tactics give them the advantage.

    As of 21 June 1941, Soviet forces in the Far East (Ussuri, Amur, TransBaikal, and Outer Mongolia Districts) stood at 700,000 men, 2,700 AFV, and 2,800 aircraft. The Japanese had roughly 350,000 men and 1,100 aircraft.

    As of September 1941, Soviet forces stood at 500,000 men, 1200 AFV, and 1100 aircraft. The Japanese Kwantung Army had swelled to over 700,000 men and 1100 aircraft. So by the fall of 1941, approximate parity, at least in terms of manpower had been reached. [figures are from Alvin D. Coox Nomonhan: Japan Against Russia 1939]

    Symbolic capturing of Vladivostok could have maybe been possible but that wouldn't do much to hurt the Soviets. Lend-lease made up only a small fraction of Soviet war-time production and the bulk of it came too late.
    I don't believe Vladivostok is simply symbolic and the discussion of LL is better kept to another topic

    Banzai attack against T34 would have been doom to failure.
    The Soviet tank force in the Far East were mainly BT-5's and BT-7's. All available T34's were facing the Germans. And even during the Khalkin Gol conflict, Soviet tank losses were very high due to "banzai" tactics that took advantage of the BT's penchant to catch fire.

    2. Hitler let the UK get almost their full europe army out of dünnkirchen, since he expected to get some kind of peace with UK
    This is pure conjecture that is quite difficult to prove.

    4. rommel had no luck, he was an very experienced leader
    True, but his complete lack of understanding of logistics in North Africa led directly to the defeat of the DAK.
    Last edited by ReluctantSamurai; 12-17-2012 at 14:57.
    High Plains Drifter

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO