納粹德國能打敗蘇聯嗎?
絕對沒錯!
關於戰爭的書籍已經寫出來,“解釋”為什麼德國沒有/不能擊敗蘇聯......傳統的論點是德國人有供應問題,沒有足夠的人力,被坦克和人員壓垮,等等。許多人也認為,這些原因以及其他類似的原因是德國未能擊敗蘇聯的原因。
事實上,事實是,國防軍本可以在 1941-42 年徹底擊敗蘇聯,在紅場處決斯大林和他的主要追隨者,並保持對國家的控制,吞併大部分領土,之後德國可能會翻身一次她更多地關注西方
首先,請允許我聲明,與世界對抗時,基本上有兩種與敵人作戰並獲勝的方法,即:
蒙古方式。在這種方式下,你殺死每一個人,無論是士兵還是平民,(蒙古人甚至殺死貓和狗!)

s
亞歷山大的方式。亞歷山大大帝擊敗了大流士的波斯帝國並控制了它,馬其頓軍隊平均只有四萬人,而波斯方面則有數十萬人。他的秘密?擊敗他們後,他大多寬宏地對待敵人(有一些例外),將政治控制權歸還給戰敗的領導人,同時讓馬其頓人負責軍事事務。他整合了昔日的敵人,他們尊重他,並很高興成為他軍隊的一部分,與亞歷山大的敵人作戰。

馬賽克(修飾版)描繪了亞歷山大大帝與大流士三世大帝的戰鬥,可能是伊蘇斯戰役或高加米拉戰役,可能是根據早期埃雷特里亞的菲洛克塞努斯的希臘繪畫而來。這幅馬賽克是在龐貝城的牧神之家發現的,現在收藏於國家考古博物館(那不勒斯)。它的日期是公元前一世紀。
希特勒有一個絕佳的機會贏得東線戰爭,就像兩千年前的亞歷山大大帝那樣,從內部摧毀波斯帝國。
蘇聯大部分西部省份,特別是烏克蘭和白俄羅斯,人口約四千萬,都曾被俄羅斯人征服,其中大多數人將他們視為敵人。他們沒有忘記斯大林幾年前在烏克蘭組織的大饑荒,造成數百萬人死亡,也沒有忘記蘇聯內務人民委員部主席尼古拉·葉若夫之後的葉若夫運動,也被稱為“大恐怖” 。超過一百萬人在斯大林的命令下被暗殺。

尼古拉·葉佐夫

內務人民委員部的首席劊子手。他在清洗期間執行了一些引人注目的處決

我相信這張圖片是蘇聯在大清洗期間下令處決的(取自這裡:危機與成就)。我已經包含了這張照片的來源,因為我不確定它是否真的描繪了蘇聯下令處決。然而,這完全不重要,因為大量的處決確實是大規模進行的……不幸的是,周圍似乎沒有多少人拍照……當蘇聯在森林裡屠殺數万名波蘭軍官時,也沒有人卡廷。
1939 年,俄羅斯 СССР 仍像近 100 年前西奧多·蒙森 (Theodor Mommsen) 所描述的那樣,“一個由沙皇制度生鏽的箍圈固定在一起的垃圾箱”;一旦箍壞了,垃圾箱就會倒塌。希特勒有一個很好的機會對 СССР 的局勢採取行動,這在西方本質上是政治性的,也是軍事性的。希特勒只需與蘇聯的被征服人民結盟並摧毀它即可。阿爾弗雷德·羅森伯格博士強烈建議他這樣做。阿爾弗雷德·羅森伯格博士是一位波羅的海德國人,曾為希特勒提供外交事務建議,並且非常了解蘇聯的內部政治局勢。他告訴元首蘇聯從來都不是一個真正的國家,而是一個由多民族組成的國家,德國不應該試圖重建這個國家,而應該解散它。這個想法不是強加另一種政治制度,而是承認每個民族並進一步促進每個國家對獨立的渴望。羅森伯格接著說,應該告訴他們,德國人不是在與蘇聯人民作戰,而是在與布爾什維克制度作戰,他們的戰鬥將以民族自決的名義進行,並將他們從俄羅斯的枷鎖中解放出來。
當國防軍入侵蘇聯時,他們被普通民眾視為解放者。烏克蘭人認為希特勒是歐洲的救世主。白俄羅斯人渴望站在德國一邊作戰。許多哥薩克軍團向敵人投降,而格魯吉亞人、亞美尼亞人、土庫曼人、韃靼人和烏茲別克人則集體投降。正如阿道夫·希特勒國防軍士官埃里希·科恩 (Erich Kern ) 在1948 年所寫的那樣(《死亡之舞》),“整個城市的街道上都有人等待著,準備歡呼並歡迎我們.... ..我以前從未見過這樣的情況突然的轉變……布爾什維克主義不復存在了。敵人已經走了……無論我們走到哪裡,我們都會遇到笑著揮手的人們……蘇聯帝國的關節正在斷裂”
那時,希特勒只需要採納羅森伯格的建議(他基本上同意)並建立必要的政治聯盟來征服蘇聯。
但希特勒已經醉心於權力,當時他無視了這個他早先相信的建議,並繼續前進,期望蘇聯會像法國和其他國家一樣崩潰。此外,他忘記了其他人經過慘痛教訓才學到的一件事,即俄羅斯提供了廣闊的土地,士兵們可以撤退到另一天繼續戰鬥。拿破崙在俄羅斯各地追擊沙皇軍隊,當沙皇決定在莫斯科附近堅守時,沙皇在博羅季諾戰役中被擊敗。拿破崙拿下莫斯科後,坐下來等待沙皇接受失敗並簽署新條約。沙皇沒有採取任何此類行動……他的軍隊只是繼續玩捉迷藏的遊戲……有足夠的空間。
然後,在國防軍佔領蘇聯西部後,希姆萊和他的刺客開始在其控制的地區遊蕩,到處屠殺人民。這使得蘇聯境內的各個國家意識到,德國人的興趣並不是摧毀布爾什維主義,而是奴役他們。然後,他們改變了對斯大林的仇恨,並將其轉化為一場聖戰,並認為他們的唯一職責是在這場被視為和定性為“衛國戰爭”的戰爭中保衛蘇聯。
一些歷史學家認為,戰爭的轉折點是1941年,當時希特勒未能佔領莫斯科。事實上,轉折點是早在美國參戰之前,希特勒就改變了德國與蘇聯各民族結盟對抗斯大林的政策,從而從內部摧毀了蘇聯帝國。如果盟軍前蘇聯先找到斯大林,斯大林就會被裝在盤子裡交給德國人,在萊福托沃被監禁或被處決,或者他的屍體會被送到德國人手中。
簡而言之,是希特勒的愚蠢打敗了他,而不是蘇聯。馬其頓的亞歷山大一定會非常失望。
“事實上,轉折點是希特勒改變了德國與蘇聯各民族結盟反對斯大林的政策”
這從來都不是希特勒的政策。他總是堅持認為斯拉夫人不如德國人,必須先被奴役,然後被消滅——那時他們就沒有用處了。他的將士都是這樣教導的。
戰爭爆發時,我的祖母住在烏克蘭。1941 年,她 13 歲,這是她見過的第一位德國軍官只是為了好玩而向她開槍。當時她很幸運——她的哥哥就在附近,能夠把警察的手舉起來,所以他沒有擊中,然後笑著走出了房子,但其他一些孩子在佔領的第一天就被殺了。德國人認為射殺斯拉夫兒童是一項很好的運動,他們為此下了賭注,看著屍體哈哈大笑。
希特勒是一個殺人的精神病患者,他讓他的軍隊本質上變成了一群精神病殺人犯。是的,有一些正派的人,我對此很確定,但總的來說,他們是非常不人道的。
謝謝您的評論!
但我不得不說,蘇聯人民的反共和反斯大林主義態度在西方資料中通常被嚴重誇大了。是的,有一些社會和種族群體強烈反蘇,但規模很小:主要是烏克蘭西部人、波羅的海國家、克里米亞韃靼人、卡爾梅克人和車臣人。當然,還有那些因斯大林的暴行而憎恨斯大林的思想自由的人,以及憎恨共產主義者摧毀帝國並奪取他們的財富的前上流社會成員(沒有被殺害或驅逐出境)。
但大多數人還是字面地為共產黨祈禱,並全心全意地高呼“建祖國!” 為了斯大林!” 怒火中燒投入戰鬥。為什麼?因為大多數俄羅斯帝國公民(超過90%)都是農民,他們一無所有。他們沒有土地(貴族有),他們是文盲,他們幾乎無法獲得藥物,也幾乎沒有權利。他們的預期壽命約為 40 歲,這是一段辛苦勞作、貧窮和經常發生飢荒的歲月。
共產主義革命和內戰極其血腥(近 1000 萬人被殺或死於疾病和飢餓),但隨後他們得到的卻比想像的還要多。免費醫療、免費教育、社會保障(某種)、養老金、電力等等。
他們擁有的最重要的東西就是夢想。夢想他們的孩子會比他們生活得更好。並且在未來的某個時候,他們的後代將生活在共產主義之中。對於蘇聯人民來說,共產主義幾乎等同於基督徒的天堂。這是一個幸福生活的承諾,沒有飢餓、繁重的勞動、戰爭、犯罪等。
這就是為什麼他們如此渴望受黨和斯大林領導。他們想要相信這個未來的天堂。
因此,我非常懷疑,如果德國人堅持嚴格反共,而不是成為種族主義屠夫,他們是否還會有很多支持者。當然,游擊隊會少得多,逃兵會多,但我不知道這是否足以贏得戰爭。一個為夢想而奮鬥的人,是一種值得考慮的力量。
是的,德國可以擊敗蘇聯。只有希特勒是個白痴。
在 1941 年的現實中,武裝烏克蘭人並將他們的目標瞄準蘇聯是很容易的。想像一下,有10+百萬應徵入伍的士兵,沒有經過很好的訓練,但卻全心全意地憎恨“共產主義”。憎恨壓迫,憎恨“大饑餓”,憎恨秘密警察左右殺人,憎恨無緣無故地將家人送往西伯利亞……
烏克蘭人記得在創建集體農莊期間誰殺了誰es. 德國人的加入是他們回報的好機會。
如此龐大的步兵數量可以為國防軍提供足夠大的肉盾來抵消任何R
By all rights, Nazi Germany should have been able to defeat the Soviet Union, but that's not what they aimed to do. They attempted to annihilate the entire country and all its people.
Operation Barbarossa was the most devastating operation in history by multiple landslides. 4 million Soviets were killed, injured, or captured by the Wehrmacht. 20,000 tanks and roughly the same number of planes were lost. And this was in 5 months. Any other country would have come to the negotiating table for terms. But there was no negotiating table. So the Soviets fought on and only through the total
Not easily or quickly. Barbarossa planned to occupy the kremlin within six months of invasion of soviet union across a 3000 mile front. Like Napoleon's optimistic ambitions winter interfered.
If the Germans had conquered the soviets it is unlikely it could have been held long.
IF is bad word when it comes to history. That said, nazis did a huge mistake, when they attacked the Soviet Union. Even one vs one, I don’t think it would be possible for them. The thing is, nazi tactic of blitzkrieg works only on small territories like France or Poland… and the Soviet Union was a looot bigger than any european country. So you can’t really use a tactic which is suitable against France against such a huge giant like a Soviet Union. All in all, I would say that Soviet Union would win anyway but with higher casualties.
Define “defeat.” Define “Germany” and “the USSR.”
In the real world, countries go to war for reasons, not to see if they can win. Any consideration of how Barbarosssa could have turned out has to take into account the following:
- The actual nature of the German Reich and its actual war aims.
- The primitive logistical capabilities of the German military.
- The fact that when it snows, it snows on everybody.
The point of the war in the East was to found a slave-based agricultural empire ruled by Germans. The entire aim of the war was to depopulate the European territories of the USSR to make living room
It is unclear whether you mean under some sort of alternative history, such as British neutrality or the US not entering the European war, or not but regardless, the answer is the same - no. I disagree with many of the other respondents who seem to suggest it was a 'borderline' outcome
The USSR had a very significant advantage in nearly EVERY dimension - population and industrial capacity, land are
Well, the Soviet Union suffered a loss of more than 20 million lives fighting the Nazis, and still prevailed. For context, the US lost just under a half million people to the war. Fighting Russians doesn’t make a lot of sense, when you see what they will sacrifice to win. Attacking Russia didn’t work for Napoleon, either. Also, the Nazis were the most vile scum of the earth. They deserved to lose. I don’t understand why you seem to wish for a different outcome.
No, Nazi Germany never could have. But a non-Nazi Germany with the same resources? Would have destroyed the USSR in 1941.
What do I mean by this?
The Bolsheviks were hated by Ukrainians, Latvians, Belarussians, and many, many others. These people saw the advancing Wehrmacht as glorious liberators and celebrated them. There were parties in the streets!
But then the killing started.
You see, the Nazis race theories and desire for lebensraum were their downfall in the East. They massacred prisoners. They murdered civilians. They raped, looted and burned their way across the USSR.
And they galvanized t
Yes, not much question about it. The Soviets received massive aid from the US and UK during the war.
The Soviet air force never engaged in a strategic air war against Germany. Luckily for them, the US and UK did.
The 2 figures cited suggesting the Soviets were the primary reason for Germany's defeat were 1) Soviet losses which were immense and 2) the number of Germans killed.
Soviet losses are a measure of suffering in the Soviet union during the war, not their contribution to victory.
As far as the number of Germans killed is concerned, it's true most German soldiers killed in the war were kil
One key problem of Nazi Germany was their intelligence networks totally sucked.
Abwehr
German intelligence agency, Abwehr, was wrong on just about everything throughout the war. Their spies were routinely caught and turned into double agents, their estimates were off by ungodly factors and more. Better intelligence might lead them to conclude the Soviet Union was a far stronger power than they initially realized.
To put things in perspective, Abwehr estimated the Red Air Force had no more than ~2000 servicable planes. Luftwaffe reported destroying over 2,900 in the first three days, so obviously
According to the Russian historian Sokolov, who answered this question in a recent radio broadcast dedicated to the "what-if" questions about WWII, if Hitler had miraculously defeated the USSR, for example if he had decided to drive on Moscow instead of Stalingrad in 1942, defeated the Soviet troops there, thus causing a drastic drop in morale and fighting spirit of the remaining Soviet armies, in that unlikely scenario the war would have ended in the early 1946 with an atomic bombardment of Germany. The US would have still developed the Bomb by summer of 1945, but they would not have risked d

When I was a child I would always debate this question with my teacher.
I invented crazy and elaborate methods as to how the Germans could have won. Maybe, if they attacked before winter? Maybe, if Hitler wasn't such a idiot? Etc. Etc.
One day, as I walked into the class and I got ready to hotly debate the subject.
My teacher tells me “Normie you know what Stalin was quoted as saying during the battle of Stalingrad?
Me: ugh??? No! What?
“ Hitler and his Germans will run out of bullets, before I run out of Russians! ”
Me: huh??? (I ran to see the numbers)
I couldn't fkin believe it, he had got me.
The

留言
張貼留言