Nazi Germany: 633,786 sq. km with population of 79.3 million

This.

That's an interesting point, and I don't know. I know that DURING the purges Budyonny was called in and he literally pulled out his gun and demanded to speak with Stalin, not sure if anyone else called BS on the whole affair.

The Japanese were debating as late as Nov. 1941 whether or not to attack the USSR instead of America. That would have been interesting.

nips wouldn't reach the ural mountains with a respectable force before it would matter
american aid kicked in after soviets took over the initiative
krauts would enter moscow if he wasn't a massive retard and just let his officers do their thing

We've been over this before, Moscow in 1812 is nothing like Moscow in 1941. Moscow was not the capital of Russia in 1812, whereas it was the capital of the USSR in 1941. Similarly, Moscow was not a transport hub in 1812. Not to mention that populations were far more urbanized in the 1940s than in the 1810s.

Could the Japs had done both to a degree? Take some Islands while helping Germany and then focussing on the Pacific fully after the Russians were out?

>Industrial-era warfare is the same as 19th century warfare
KYS

But he was planning on taking Russia first, not the West.

It's more that he thought he would have the Western allies chill or at least submit so he could focus on the East.

Not to disparage the Russians but I'd worry that they wouldn't be able to handle both, especially if it meant the US didn't get involved in the Pacific.

>Would they capitulate?

Why the fuck would you surrender to nazis as a literal jewish commie???

How come they were able to take over half of European Russia but when they lost Stalingrad, they lost all the Eastern European territory so quickly?

And therefore the fact that he wasn't even planning on capturing the west but still did only mesmerized him

Stalin wasn't jewish you mouth-breathing stormfag

Japs had like 10 divisions that had enough equipment to conduct offensives. The rest of their 100 divisions were static, garrison units.

He let the racial supremacist nonsense he used to brainwash the German masses to get to his. Also likely assumed the Soviet Union was still suffering from the industrial underdevelopment that had cost the Russian Empire the 1st World War, which it wasn't.

>What if he had gotten Stalin?

kys retard

>literal jewish commie
He wasn't Jewish fucktard.

Hmmm......that picture really does put things in perspective, doesn't it? In the 19th and 20th centuries, railroads were the arteries and veins of a nation. Cut enough arteries and the beast will bleed to death.

Stalin wouldn't be in charge of USSR if nazis caught him you double retard

?
What the fuck has that to do with what I wrote retard

The biggest problem with losing Stalin would be all the instant in-fighting it would cause about who gets to replace him. Zukhov seems like the most logical replacement for the situation, but who knows, someone else might also try.

That's messed up had no idea. Were they still trying to industrialize or something to increase that capacity?

Yeah so you reckon the people would keep fighting under whichever leader could whip them up?

>How the FUCK did Hitler think that he could invade the USSR and get away with it?
Because in literally every metric but population, Germany was a far more powerful country than the USSR. Not to mention, Russia's recent military history was pathetic. They lost a third of a million men and over a thousand tanks against literally farmers with hunting rifles in their most recent conflict that point.

>That's messed up had no idea. Were they still trying to industrialize or something to increase that capacity?
They were poor, and had to feed the navy first.

>Yeah so you reckon the people would keep fighting under whichever leader could whip them up?

Yes. The people didn't really need additional reasons to fight back (even frogs resisted and krauts treated them much better than any nation on the east), but commie leadership knew they wouldn't live long if they surrendered. Jewish or not.

They didn't have the resources for that, they had to choose one plan or the other. Their invasion of the USSR called for 1.5 million soldiers and pretty much every single tank, truck, plane, and gun not already engaged against the Chinese. They couldn't muster that while also sending half a million well-equipped troops to Southeast Asia and maintaining a fuckhuge navy strong enough to fight the RN and last more than a few months against the USA.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kantokuen

The Japanese were like Britain. They spent most of their military budget on the navy, which is a sensible decision for an island nation to make.

Hmm so is that a big part of invading China? To get land & food etc? So wtf were the Axis powers thinking they could do in these situations or is it more of a problem of taking a gamble and finding out they were wrong like probing Russia by Japan and what not?

WW2 is more fascinating than I thought, would you guys say Ancient conflicts aren't nearly as crazy as the world wars?

>Stalingrad in Kuban

>would you guys say Ancient conflicts aren't nearly as crazy as the world wars?

punic and greco-persian wars were cool but obviously not as nuanced

>punic and greco-persian wars were cool but obviously not as nuanced

They were just as complicated, the difference is the level of documentation. The Crimean War was the first conflict in which armies started writing really detailed reports, and it was also the first war in which photography was used to document what was going on. Flash forward to WW1 and you have the same situation, but even more well documented. Why? Because of the rise in literacy of the average person. WW1 soldiers were very literate and they wrote a tremendous amount. They were constantly writing letters home, or making journals, writing in diaries, etc.

Flash forward again and you have a new variable: motion picture. Starting with 1850, each new war is tremendously well-documented. Also, in the 20th century, governments began to collect economic data on a scale that was previously impossible. We simply don't have that level of documentation for ancient wars because far fewer people were literate, less data was recorded, and there are no photographs for us to work with.

There is also the problem of certain documents simply being missing. For example, we know that Hannibal had a chronicler travelling with his army, but we don't have the actual documents written by this chronicler. Perhaps the Romans destroyed the Carthaginian records. We don't know, but that information is simply gone, and that deprives us of some of the "nuance" that we expect from modern wars, where historians have access to records from both sides.

Germany and allies had far bigger population than Soviets after Barbarossa.

only sharters or english dogs with a nazi dildo up their ass think that, its obviously bullshit

follow your leader

> It is like punching a brick wall; no matter how hard you punch, the wall will win.

Its not like they did it successfully 30 years earlier with only half as many men......

>Its not like they did it successfully 30 years earlier with only half as many men...
That time they made wall disintegrate all by itself by planting lenin-shaped bomb into it.

Only Slavaboo retards who also think the Soviets won the entire war by themselves deny this reality.
I don't need to ask you to follow your leader because you'll be starving to death soon enough, anyway.

This.
It was world vs nazi germany.

as for OP's statistics
>Nazi Germany: 633,786 sq. km with population of 79.3 million
>Soviet Russia: 23,700,000 sq. km with population of 181.5 million
Many of those 181.5 "soviets" would've rather, and DID rather for nazi germany then ussr. Even some pro-white russians did.

And listingsize of the country like some important factor is so brainlet I wont even reply to it

Yeah, it was Beria or a high ranking general or someone. Stalin demanded to know why the Red Army was crumbling and the guy/Beria lost his shit and said "because you've killed all the generals you fucking idiot" or something like thatn

1941 was literally a 1v1

no second front
no lend lease

Yet they got their asses kicked by the soviets in winter 41 in front of moscow.

After this point their situation got worse daily.

>krauts would enter moscow if he wasn't a massive retard and just let his officers do their thing

Are you serious?
By do their thing you probably mean ignoring soviet armies that threaten your flank and rush into a city surrounded by 3 soviet armies.
Very smart idea.
How to make aeven worse stalingrad happen in 41 at moscow.

Why are wehraboos always uneducated on the most basic subjects?

Are you really going to cite 1941 as being a 'win' for the soviets?

im not a slav shitstain, but despise your fat discussing useless unemployed neet ass

hug your pillow virgin asshat

>nazis then: uneducated nobodies, mostly poor peasants looking nothing like their idols

>nazis now: uneducated nobodies, mostly poor countryside (cant work the soil anymore, too busy being useless neets), fat and brown

really makes you ponder

Yeah those fucking idiots got WRECKED by the soviets, both in absolute and proportional terms!

Does this include the fact that around that time soviets were in a pretty fucked up shape because of stalin?

Does that statement relate to the original point at all?

Marshall Voroshilov apparently shouted at Stalin at a conference during the Winter War.

Question for the rest of you. Why do retards type like this: ?

>Yeah those fucking idiots got WRECKED by the soviets

Yes they were.

They had initial success they encircled a lot of units.

But, that doesn't change the fact that they lost 1v1 against the SU in 41.

The soviet armies used poor tactics had unexperienced officers.

But they still had a insane advantage around moscow in 41, look at the counteroffensives they almost completely destroyed the Heeresgruppe Mitte.

So yes, real war is more complex than saying "look at these charts we killed so many of them" in reality what they achieved was the absolute maximum of their capability.

Greetings from a german historian.

"Date 2 October 1941 – 7 January 1942
Location Moscow Oblast, Russian SFSR, USSR
Result

Decisive Soviet victory
Failure of Operation Barbarossa"

>Decisive Soviet victory
Failure of Operation Barbarossa

AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHA

It would have been fucking easy if he had been nicer to the Baltic states and Poland. They didn't want to be Soviet anyway, they would have happily been a part of the German state. Hitler could have won the war if not for his retarded slavhate.

You must be a military genius looking at 2 numbers

Well I believe hitler thought he could just blitzkrieg Russia and catapult it before it could even fight back. So that's why the winter was so devastating to the Germans, because when the snow melted it turned into mud and that makes it difficult for vehicles to move through.

Honestly Hitler was cornered, Russia had already invaded the Baltics and Finland which is an obvious sign that Stalin is expanding into Europe. And you know how Hitler trusts no one, well I believe he was like " It's either let them get the upperhand and invade us first or we invade first and catch them by surprise! "

No he wouldn't, simply because of Romania he already wouldn't.

It's kind of funny that despite looking like it, Stalin never wanted to invade Germany. He ever refused to believe that the Germans were invading for like three days. The most devastating front of any war could have been avoided if not for miscommunication. It's like a bad slice of life anime episode

This, good luck getting even to Kiev without that oil purchased on credit that never gets paid back

So like what? Hitler's lack of trust lost him the war? If he was more trusting he wouldn't have invaded Russia out of being afraid of being invaded first?

I wouldn't say lost him the war. It would have been WW1 all over again, except longer. Britain and the USA would've starved Germany out, possibly prolonging the war into the 50s, but I doubt he would have won.

>I know that DURING the purges Budyonny was called in and he literally pulled out his gun and demanded to speak with Stalin, not sure if anyone else called BS on the whole affair.
Budyonny was lucky. Stalin respected his attitude and gave him a pass. But don't overreach, it's not like anyone could have pulled a gun and save himself.

Stalin was in firm control throughout his rule. The NKVD, the Army, the Navy, the Party... all were terrified of him. He had a huge network of informants and was seen - through fear - as a living God. Just like modern North Korea but worse. People would literally clap for minutes after Stalin's speeches because nobody wanted to be the first one to stop.

If Yezhov had pulled a gun he'd still would have been purged - or killed on the spot if he resisted arrest.

Now do the same with whole European Axis plus occupied territories.

He got all fucked up on meth and ideology *sniff*

You're forgetting that Hitler's plan was to invade the Soviet Union from the start.

Oh, and obligatory wages of destruction, defaulting on Soviet loans, etc.

Because of Winter War. Russia was feared before WW1, and WW1 proved Russian military is a heap of shit. Then the country got ravaged by civil war, purge of skilled commanders, and finally during Winter War they just got the train ran on them by some retarded Finnish peasants. If I was Hitler I'd think Russia will be a piece of cake too.

>Country size doesn't matter
What are supply lines
What is logistics
What are partisan activities
What is attrition
What is a progressively thinning front

The Germans did not have the materiel, manpower, nor wherewithal to subject and occupy the USSR. In an alternate universe where the Soviet government was more conventional as per the West and would be willing to capitulate upon the capture of Moscow then the Germans would at least have had a slim chance. But the German war machine wouldn't even win if they got that far. The war would have ended the same way 1v1, it would just drag on longer.

too bad he didn't have the balls for it

if nazis had divisions emploeyd in the west, norway, yugoslavia, greece etc. available for the barbarossa operation USSR would be destroyed by the end of 1941. Atleast west of Urals

those countries only had divisions (as part of german army) in the eastern front. And most of them were occupied by them too

include all allies that equipped USSR on the list then

>IMplying that static garrison troops would have been much use in Barbarossa
>Implying the Germans had the logistical capability to move more forces than they already had.
>Implying that occupation is just free and that it's fair to accept economic bonuses from conquests but not the associated costs

If you're counting material contributions as well as direct military contributions, how far do you expect the Germans to get without Romanian oil?

He didn't win though, and he had allies.
Soviets had some 100-110 million people by late 1941, when you account for lost territory. Germany had 80 million, plus allies and slave labor.
Yet Soviets still managed to outproduce them despite the inferiority in resources and deploy larger troop numbers despite roughly equivalent manpower potential.
Stop this retarded meme.

Lend-Lease aid was around 7% of Soviet war production. Contributions of German allies (especially Romanian oil) and slave labor and exploitation of resources across most of Europe were far bigger contribution to German war effort than LL was to Soviet.

He only had to destroy Soveit government, get Stalin and install a new government. He was close. He nearly won but refused to cooperate with Stalin's enemies in the USSR.

they were few kilometers out of moscow, with all motorized or no units that were used for the other fronts of fucking course they could've taken it. And after that USSR would be a cripple

I swear that entire invasion is a metaphor for the perils of meth abuse.

>Country size doesn't matter
What are supply lines
What is logistics
What are partisan activities
What is attrition
What is a progressively thinning front

The Germans did not have the materiel, manpower, nor wherewithal to subject and occupy the USSR. In an alternate universe where the Soviet government was more conventional as per the West and would be willing to capitulate upon the capture of Moscow then the Germans would at least have had a slim chance. But the German war machine wouldn't even win if they got that far. The war would have ended the same way 1v1, it would just drag on longer.

Soviets outproduced Germany in some key areas but lagged greatly in overall industrial production, in some areas by factors of more than 10 such as aluminium.

The failure to achieve a complete knockout of the Soviet Union within six months does not constitute a loss. To say so would be taking into account the timeline after 1941, which is out of scope for this discussion.

Your statement that army group Centre was nearly destroyed during the battle of Moscow is also false. They did not suffer so many losses has to be considered "almost completely destroyed".

Yes, failing to knock the Soviets out in the first six months is a total failure. That's already twice as long as the Wehrmacht was prepared to fight.

>The failure to achieve a complete knockout of the Soviet Union within six months does not constitute a loss
It might as well since that means Germany's gamble and its only chance didn't materialize.

I would cite sometime before the war even started as when Germany lost. They could no out produce the Soviet Union. They lost before the even thought about winning.

I think it would be irresponsible to discount the decisive effect of lendlease in the years after 1941.

Underestimated the Slavic warrior

>Hungary
>Romania
>Italy
>"areas of Germany"

LL only made the momentum upkeep easier later in the war. Turning the sudden shock from Barbarossa around was all Soviet. Decisive decisions made by Soviet high command early in the war to move industry to the far east had far more impact than LL. Not to mention Germany had no hope of keeping their momentum at Moscow.

It's irresponsible to overplay the contributions of LL so much.

Hitler's plan was to exterminate Slavs and repopulate the land with Germans from the start. He was fucking loonytoons crazy and nothing would have saved Germany.

First you talk about the entire war, now suddenly the argument is only 1941?

Momentum to end the war quicker. They would have still won in 1 year without LL.

I wouldn't be so certain. The Soviet industry was able to support a fierce defense and logistical problems ensured the Germans would never be able to force an unconditional surrender on them, but without Western intervention and support a Soviet push into Central Europe as it happened historically seems unlikely, which would create a stalemate.

Hitler failed to beat the enrage timer.

Of course it wouldn't be like it was. There would be offensives from SU and then they would bog down and it would allow Germany a reprieve to form a counter offensive. It's a losing battle though for germany. They would still be losing out in every metric. The Soviet army wasn't a bunch of green idiots by 1942 either. They were well equipped, well led, and battle hardened.

Leftists can't handle any scenario where their precious soviet cunt doesn't smash fashi.

In reality stalemate was always the more likely scenario as opposed to out and out victory for either side.

This is the most retarded shit I've ever read.

The logistics DO NOT FUCKING ADD UP for Germany. They COULD NOT have won barring the impossible situation of them rolling 20s on every battle and finding oil in Berlin and a mountain made of metal in Munich. You don't have to be a 'leftist' to see that.

Screeching about your grand strategy games only proves you're an autistic polishit who has no interests in objectively assaying this situation beyond the common and obvious "hurrdurr resource curse" explanation retread to you by people smarter then you are.