Hacker News Reader

Comment by tompazourek | Hacker News Reader

Maybe also: Would the US have won against Germany if the USSR was not involved?

Please do recall that the USSR was effectively on the same side as Germany for the first two years of the war.

Not really. The USSR knew conflict with Germany was inevitable, Molotov-Ribbentrop was about delaying it as much as possible.

Why delaying? USSR has the most powerful army in 1939. USSR could have occupied Ploesti oil fields in 1940 that would effectively stop the war. Creating a common border with your enemy is not a very effective way to "delay" from my point of view.

This is really absurd. By 1939 the Red Army was massively lacking in tanks, artillery, air power, and logistics. They could not have sustained an expeditionary offensive against Germamy, even in Romania. And while Ploesti had significant oil production, by 1939 Germany had alternatives and a lower oil consumption, so this would not have stalled the offensive.

Check your numbers. Number of tanks as of June 1941. And Germany oil consumption and sources as of 1940. You'll be surprised.

The tanks the Red Army has in 1939 were of incredibly poor quality and many of them were barely even tanks by later standards.

You're also changing the goalposts. We're talking about 1939, not 1941, which was after two years of herculean production.

https://defense.info/re-thinking-strategy/2018/10/oil-and-wa...

By 1939 Germany was at less than half of its peak, and only 24% (replaceable, 1936 composition) came from Romania+USSR.

USSR backstabbed Poland and occupied it since 1939.

The pact was hardly a delaying strategy. They had almost 2 years since Poland was invaded to prepare against Blitzkrieg tactics and didn't. Stalin even knew the exact date of Barbarossa but didn't believe it or prepare for it, because for whatever reason one of the most paranoid people ever, trusted Hitler.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com