Operation Barbarossa

[Revan]

I recently read about a Historian who theorized that Stalin did not see Hitler’s attack on the Soviet Union as a catastrophe; but as an opportunity. The historian went on to cite the ease with which Hitler launched Operation Barbarossa was evidence that Stalin permitted the Nazi’s to come through.
Question is, why? What did Stalin have to gain through letting his own people get slaughtered? Simple; power. With the amount of lives lost in the Soviet Union, no-one on the allied side could say they did not play their part; and did not deserve rewarding. The historian also claimed Stalin then had an excuse and justification to the world to smash through Europe and claim it as his own.

Interesting theory, do you not think?

[Damelon]

I don't think he, Stalin, saw it coming when it did. I read stories that stated he went on a monumental bender and was sauced for a week after the Germans attacked.

[Revan]

It was undeniably a purely preventive war. What we found out later on was the certainty of enormous Russian military preparations opposite our frontier. I will dispense with details, but I can only say that although we succeeded in a tactical surprise as to the day and the hour, it was no strategic surprise. Russia was fully prepared for war.

Most interestingly of all; this is one of Stalin's speeches:

The question of war or peace has entered a critical phase for us. If we conclude a mutual assistance pact with France and Great Britain, Germany will back off from Poland and seek a modus vivendi with the Western powers. War would be avoided, but down the road events could become dangerous for the USSR. If we accept Germany's proposal and conclude a non-aggression pact with her, she will of course invade Poland, and the intervention of France and England in that would be unavoidable. Western Europe would be subjected to serious upheavals and disorder. Under those conditions, we would have a great opportunity to stay out of the conflict, and we could plan the opportune time for us to enter the war.
The experience of the last 20 years has shown that in peacetime the Communist movement is never strong enough to seize power. The dictatorship of such a party will only become possible as the result of a major war.

Our choice is clear. We must accept the German proposal and politely send the Anglo-French mission home. Our immediate advantage will be to take Poland to the gates of Warsaw, as well as Ukrainian Galicia ...

For the realization of these plans it is essential that the war continue for a long as possible, and all forces, with which we are actively involved, should be directed toward this goal ...

Let us consider a second possibility, that is, a victory by Germany ... It is obvious that Germany will be too occupied elsewhere to turn against us. In a conquered France, the French Communist Party will be very strong. The Communist revolution will break out unavoidably, and we will be able to fully exploit this situation to come to the aid of France and make it our ally. In addition, all the nations that fall under the "protection" of a victorious Germany will also become our allies. This presents for us a broad field of action in which to develop the world revolution.

Comrades! It is in the interest of the USSR -- the workers' homeland -- that war breaks out between the Reich and the capitalist Anglo-French block. Everything should be done so that this drags out as long as possible with the goal of weakening both sides. For this reason, it is imperative that we agree to conclude the pact proposed by Germany, and then work that this war, which will one day be declared, is carried out after the greatest possible passage of time...

Deeply foresighted and infinitely cunning, Stalin had long seen World War II as the perfect opportunity.

[dlbpharmd]

If Stalin wanted to be attacked, then it was a huge gamble on his part. Germany NEARLY crushed the USSR. If the Battle of Stalingrad had been during milder weather, who knows what might have happened? Stalin's biggest goof was killing off the best military minds in the Soviet army.

[Revan]

Stalin knew better than anyone the harsh conditions of the Soviet Union's weather. Remember, despite nearly being crushed, the Soviet Union instead crushed the Germans; smashed through Europe to Berlin before the allied powers could get there. It can be speculated that he emerged from the Second World War with the stronger military, in terms of men and arms, than the other allied powers. It can also be said without a doubt that Stalin had a much stronger hold on his regimes than Churchhill and Truman did.

[Loredoctor]

I recently read about a Historian who theorized that Stalin did not see Hitler’s attack on the Soviet Union as a catastrophe; but as an opportunity. The historian went on to cite the ease with which Hitler launched Operation Barbarossa was evidence that Stalin permitted the Nazi’s to come through.
Question is, why? What did Stalin have to gain through letting his own people get slaughtered? Simple; power. With the amount of lives lost in the Soviet Union, no-one on the allied side could say they did not play their part; and did not deserve rewarding. The historian also claimed Stalin then had an excuse and justification to the world to smash through Europe and claim it as his own.

Interesting theory, do you not think?

I disagree. Stalin went into a deep depression or shock at the start of Operation Barbarossa. Hence why the German armies were so successful at the first few months (though, it didn't help Stalin executed so many of the military high ups in the Soviet armies). Essentially, Stalin did nothing but become a recluse whilst Germany smashed through Russia.

Stalin knew better than anyone the harsh conditions of the Soviet Union's weather. Remember, despite nearly being crushed, the Soviet Union instead crushed the Germans; smashed through Europe to Berlin before the allied powers could get there. It can be speculated that he emerged from the Second World War with the stronger military, in terms of men and arms, than the other allied powers. It can also be said without a doubt that Stalin had a much stronger hold on his regimes than Churchhill and Truman did.

Yes, he knew the Russian winter well, but there other factors at play here: Hitler's refusal to assist the stranded armies; the signing of a treaty with the Japanese to free up the Siberian armies; and one of the Soviet Generals whose encirclement plan worked so well (forgive me, I cant recall his name as I am at work).

But Stalin's obsession with Industralisation at the expense of Agrarian industry certainly played an integral part in Russia's retaliation.

[Avatar]

Good posts folks. Some interesting points. I wouldn't say that Stalin expected or allowed a German attack. About the only thing I would say was that it was a disasterous and fooloish move on the part of the Germans to open another front. But for that mistake...

--A

[dlbpharmd]

Right, Av. Fortress Europe might have been impregnable.

[Avatar]

Best evidence yet that Hitler was insane as far as I'm concerned.

At best it would have prolonged the war, maybe even several years...the nukes might have been dropped on Europe, and what a mess that would have been...

--A

[Loredoctor]

I don't think Hitler was insane as much as having too much pride (at least in the first half of the war). His obssesion with Russia/the East can be seen in Mein Kampf where he outlines the plans to build a new empire, plus making Stalingrad and Leningrad fall purely because of the names. Hitler also built up an aura of power and fear about him, so much so it countered the effectiveness of his generals; they were too afraid of informing him of their failures.

The failure of the German armies had more to do with Hitler's inability to make tactical/strategic decisions than his 'insanity'.

About the only thing I would say was that it was a disasterous and fooloish move on the part of the Germans to open another front.

As I wrote above, the eastern front had always been planned. The invasion was strategically and tactially sound apart from the massive error of thinking the troops could hold out during the winter, and ignoring the Soviets' resilience.

[Avatar]

Even planning it was a mistake though as far as I'm concerned. Only an idiot opens a vast new front against untested enemies while being hard-pressed on the original one anyway.

If he'd just shut up and sat tight, Stalin would have effectively being protecting his back.

The only way that front could possibly make sense was if he intended a rapid and crushing victory. (Which he probably did, but very very optimistically.)

--A

[Loredoctor]

Even planning it was a mistake though as far as I'm concerned. Only an idiot opens a vast new front against untested enemies while being hard-pressed on the original one anyway.

The German high command could not have predicted the winter, therefore there was no idiocy involved. It is more of a matter of Hitler refusing support to the troops.

At the start of the Eastern invasion, Germany was not hardpressed in the west. Their conquest of France was rapid and very successful. At that point the Americans had not entered the war. The fact of the matter is that Germany had to expand to the east in order to increase its oil supplies.

But regardless, Germany would had to have been foolish to not invade, for the Soviets had made their intentions known by taking over several territories. It would have been clear that they would have advanced further. The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was probably not that binding (never was, for Germany) to either side.

Anyway, as I wrote before, the eastern invasion itself was not a mistake. It was the failure to predict the events of the winter, Japan's deal with Russia, and the tenacity of the Soviets. Had Germany pulled out during the winter, things might have been different.

[Damelon]

Our discussion has drifted to discussion of the eastern front in WW II so I split the topic to discuss Operation Barbarossa.

[Loredoctor]

Our discussion has drifted to discussion of the eastern front in WW II so I split the topic to discuss Operation Barbarossa.

You Nazi!

[Damelon]

Apt comparison.

[Avatar]

You missed my last post on the issue though. Still stuck back in the cold war thread...

--A

[Damelon]

Drat you Av!

Please copy it and paste it here. It's a good post.

[Avatar]

Will do. And I'll delete it from the other thread.

--A

[Avatar]

[Moved from other thread]

Must have my dates wrong. When did Germany break the non-agression treaty?

However, I must disagree about whether or not the Germans could predict the severity of the winter.

The severity of the Russian winter defeated Napolean. Indeed, one winter defeated Napolean, and due to sheer bloody-mindedness, IIRC, it took 3 winters to defeat Germany.

Winter conditions in Russia were a matter of record. I just don't think Hitler cared.

--A

[Damelon]

Hitler was drawn into believing the Soviets would be an easy mark by the difficulty the Soviets had against the Finns. An easy assumption to make since Stalin purged the ranks of the generals so throughly in the 30's.

Av, Barbarossa was launched on June 21, 1941. Hitler had wanted to start in May, but was delayed by operations in Yugoslavia.