Nato V Russia.

[Ricardus]

I'm sure that would have been the case. Conversely, if Hitler had not reneged on his non-aggression pact with Russia, we'd probably all be speaking German now (rather than Urdu and half-a-dozen other foreign languages! - Oops, sorry!).

Actually no - in the early 70's the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst ran a series of wargames with the original Operation Sealion plans and several of the surviving German senior military officers taking part.
Conclusion was that an invasion of Southern England would have been stopped in Kent after a week when the Navy arrived and closed down the channel, leaving the invasion force cut off from supplies, with more than 80% of the invaders killed or captured.

Fortunately for us, Hitler was a madman and his generals (who were excellent warriors) were too frightened of the consequences to contradict him.

Late in the war all assasination plots against Hitler were canned as the allies realised his military incompentence was a great help. On the Russian front if the german generals had been given free reign to maneuver the war could have dragged on for another couple of years.

 

[Micilin]

Late in the war all assasination plots against Hitler were canned as the allies realised his military incompentence was a great help. On the Russian front if the german generals had been given free reign to maneuver the war could have dragged on for another couple of years.

Great point there, not seen anything on it. Got any links?

 

[Ricardus]

Late in the war all assasination plots against Hitler were canned as the allies realised his military incompentence was a great help. On the Russian front if the german generals had been given free reign to maneuver the war could have dragged on for another couple of years.

Great point there, not seen anything on it. Got any links?

Offhand no, seen the opinion repeated a few times on various History Channel documentaries repeated on Yesterday or Quest. (eg Hitler refusing to allow the 6th Army to be withdrawn from Stalingrad). It might also have been mentioned in the World At War series.

 

[ladylola]

http://www.google.com/cse?cx=partne....tab=0&gsc.q=Could germany win war&gsc.page=1

Not a definitely link as such but several threads that raise many good points.

 

[JBR]

I'm sure that would have been the case. Conversely, if Hitler had not reneged on his non-aggression pact with Russia, we'd probably all be speaking German now (rather than Urdu and half-a-dozen other foreign languages! - Oops, sorry!).

Actually no - in the early 70's the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst ran a series of wargames with the original Operation Sealion plans and several of the surviving German senior military officers taking part.
Conclusion was that an invasion of Southern England would have been stopped in Kent after a week when the Navy arrived and closed down the channel, leaving the invasion force cut off from supplies, with more than 80% of the invaders killed or captured.

Interesting. Is that taking into account the Germans retaining their non-aggression pact with Russia?

There's no doubt, of course, that the Channel has been like an enormous moat for our protection.

 

[mark vincent]

NATO would wipe Russia off the face of the planet!!! with ease

Hitler thought the same thing.

But Hitler was fighting a war on two fronts. If he could have thrown everything at the Russians, it might have been different. [/bbBquote]by the time the yanks landed in Europe the Germans were in retreat,the yanks hastened Germanies defeat but did not determine it. Russian blood and American money they say defeated Hitler,almost 90 % of German losses were inflicted by th
Russians,

 

[Ricardus]

Actually no - in the early 70's the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst ran a series of wargames with the original Operation Sealion plans and several of the surviving German senior military officers taking part.
Conclusion was that an invasion of Southern England would have been stopped in Kent after a week when the Navy arrived and closed down the channel, leaving the invasion force cut off from supplies, with more than 80% of the invaders killed or captured.

Interesting. Is that taking into account the Germans retaining their non-aggression pact with Russia?

I would assume so as Operation Sealion was originally slated for 1940 before the invasion of Russia (operation Barbarossa) in 1941.

 

[Norcon]

Any war between nato and Russia, nato will lose because Russia has Chinese backing.
And china's military forces and might far out weigh anything the yanks have.

 

[mark vincent]

Just read on the net that Germany has been repatriating their war dead from Eastern Europe and Russia for the last 20 years, to date they have brought back 800,000 and have located another 550,000 these numbers are staggering they have also found mass graves of Napoleons troops who apparantly died of typhus.
Napolean like Hitler had the most powerful army in Europe at the time but like Hitler he wasn't just defeated he was annihilated, this should be a salutory warning to those "experts" who think Russia is pushover.

 

[mark vincent]

Just read on the net that Germany has been repatriating their war dead from Eastern Europe and Russia for the last 20 years, to date they have brought back 800,000 and have located another 550,000 these numbers are staggering they have also found mass graves of Napoleons troops who apparantly died of typhus.
Napolean like Hitler had the most powerful army in Europe at the time but like Hitler he wasn't just defeated he was annihilated, this should be a salutory warning to those "experts" who think Russia is pushover.

 

[Ricardus]

Just read on the net that Germany has been repatriating their war dead from Eastern Europe and Russia for the last 20 years, to date they have brought back 800,000 and have located another 550,000 these numbers are staggering they have also found mass graves of Napoleons troops who apparantly died of typhus.
Napolean like Hitler had the most powerful army in Europe at the time but like Hitler he wasn't just defeated he was annihilated, this should be a salutory warning to those "experts" who think Russia is pushover.

Russia's defence in the past has largely been A) Huge numbers of troops, B) Distance and terrible infrastructure, and C) The weather.
Napoleon invaded and was defeated by the Russians trading distance for defence, destroying food and infrastructure as they went. Thus Napoleon's army was unable to forage for food and its supply lines just got longer and longer until winter hit and things got really bad.
Hitler's armies faced the same problem - long supply lines, terrible weather, hostile populace, and the genius of Hitler pushing to attack when his more sensible generals said to halt, dig in and hold the ground during the worst of the weather and go back on the offensive when their troops weren't either freezing or waist deep in mud.