Was Stalin really planning to attack Germany in 1942?

Discussions on WW2 in Eastern Europe.
User avatar
Shc
Member
Posts: 841
Joined: 12 Sep 2004, 02:35
Location: Montreal (Canada)

Was Stalin really planning to attack Germany in 1942?

#1

Post by Shc » 04 Nov 2004, 23:35

I have heard from other people that Stalin had plans to invade Germany once they recovered from the "purges"... so like in 1942 or 1943.

Is this really true?
What kind of evidences is there to back this info up?

Thx,
Jose.

john2
Member
Posts: 1023
Joined: 04 Feb 2003, 00:25
Location: north carolina

reply.

#2

Post by john2 » 06 Nov 2004, 19:15

There is no evidence. All we know is that when Hitler invaded Stalin was reorganizing and trying to modernize his army. Whether or not he would have eventually invaded is sheer speculation. Stalin's strategy was clearly to keep Germany's attention diverted westwards and prolong the fight with Britain so the capitalist powers would weaken each other. Beyond this we just don't know. There is supposed to be a speech made by Stalin in August 1939 where he said that Russia would not intervene and no matter who won reveloution would come to Europe on it's own. He said if Britain then the people would rise up Germany and that if Germany won, although there would be danger, the people in the occupied territories would rise up. Many however claim this speech was probably faked. If not though, it would be the only insight we'd have into Stalin's long reange intentions. Some speculate that after Germany defeated France Stalin, seeing that Germany was about to win, planned invasion then. But the British offered Stalin an alliance (July 3, 1940) and urged him to cut off the German's oil in Romania. Stalin rejected the offer and took no action. A few months later Romania was occupied by Germany and specific instructions were made to protect the oil. If Stalin had taken the opportunity to occupy Romania at this point the Germans would have been dealt a major blow. On the other hand it would mean certain war with Germany. Stalin passed up another opportunity to strike at Germany in the spring when Hitler attacked Yugoslavia and Greece. Even when the Germans had their armies assembled he refused to attack. Theories abound as to why he did this. So if Stalin was so reluctant to attack Germany in '41 would things have been any different in '42? That of course will always remain a mystery. The red army would be stronger but it would still lack experience, but the US would be taking a more active role in the war. Whether Stalin would continue to sit the war out or eventually gamble on an offensive against Germany may never be known. Perhaps the question will be answered if and when the former Soviet archives are opened up more.


User avatar
Grünherz
Member
Posts: 1152
Joined: 07 May 2003, 10:13
Location: California

was stalin

#3

Post by Grünherz » 06 Nov 2004, 19:27

In Reinhard Gehlen's book "The Service" (he was the head of German intelligence regarding the East), he said that he felt that Russia was preparing to attack Germany and that the German invasion of Russia forestalled that. He had lots of intelligence sources but I cannot tell you anything more than what he wrote in his book.
Tom

User avatar
Victor
Member
Posts: 3904
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 15:25
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Contact:

Re: reply.

#4

Post by Victor » 06 Nov 2004, 23:18

john2 wrote:But the British offered Stalin an alliance (July 3, 1940) and urged him to cut off the German's oil in Romania. Stalin rejected the offer and took no action. A few months later Romania was occupied by Germany and specific instructions were made to protect the oil.
I wouldn't call it an occupation, as the German troops came after being invited to. As to Stalin taking no action in July in August 1940 on the Romanian frontier, I beg to differ. There were many provocations and skirmishes between Romanian frontier-guards and Soviet troops.

john2
Member
Posts: 1023
Joined: 04 Feb 2003, 00:25
Location: north carolina

reply.

#5

Post by john2 » 07 Nov 2004, 00:38

Stalin took Besserabia, which was part of of the pact. He wanted to take all of Bukovina, not part of the pact, but limited himself to taking only the northern part of it due to German diplomatic pressure. The Germans went into Romania in September and Stalin made his territory grabs in late June. Stalin thus had almost 2 months to invade Romania, which he didn't. As far as the guarantee is concerned Hitler mentioned this in late July as part of his plans to attack Russia, Romania was to be used as a launch pad for the invasion and of course the oil had to be protected. Regardless of whether or not Germany was invited in the facts are:
Stalin could have invaded Romania to cut off Germany's oil and had 2 months to do so. He didn't and German troops arrived in September greatly strengthining the country's defenses.

moniroth
Banned
Posts: 21
Joined: 24 Oct 2004, 21:05
Location: Singapore

Stalin will attack Germany

#6

Post by moniroth » 09 Nov 2004, 23:31

I'm not saying that Stalin will attack Germany in 1942 04 even 1943. However, Stalin was an expansionist. He will attack Germany later, providing of course that the Western Allies greater manpower and industrial strenght slowly wind down the Germans. He did it in with Japan when the Americans virtually won the war. Stalin will attack Germany, if he knows it is a sure things. The German will not last out even if they are just fighting the British and Americans. A simple study in manpower, industrial and economic strengths will suggest this. But the war will not end in 1945 or will it it, givin hindsight and the A-Bombs.

john2
Member
Posts: 1023
Joined: 04 Feb 2003, 00:25
Location: north carolina

reply

#7

Post by john2 » 10 Nov 2004, 05:27

I'm not saying that Stalin will attack Germany in 1942 or even 1943. However, Stalin was an expansionist. He will attack Germany later, providing of course that the Western Allies greater manpower and industrial strenght slowly wind down the Germans. He did it in with Japan when the Americans virtually won the war.
This is where contraversey and speculation set in. Some of the German generals claim if Hitler had ignored Russia and concentrated solely on Britain he could have knocked her out of the war before the US could intervene. As far as Stalin attacking a weakened Germany, Roberto, a knowledgable poster who was once here claimed Stalin would never attack Germany though I must respectfully disagree. The point is that is speculation, not certainty Stalin would have attacked. The invasion of Russia was both a safe and dangerous move. Safe because it would stop Stalin from attacking if he chose to but dangerous because of the enormous size of the country. In the end we just don't know what was going to happen or was Stalin was planning.
Last edited by john2 on 17 Nov 2004, 02:17, edited 1 time in total.

JariL
Member
Posts: 425
Joined: 15 Mar 2002, 09:45
Location: Finland

#8

Post by JariL » 16 Nov 2004, 17:05

Soviet strategy was based on pre emptive strike before WWII. They planned on fighting the war on enemy territory should someone try to attack Soviet Union. It is practically impossible to say what Stalin was planning on doing in 1942 or 1943. He was certainly reorganising his army, which in the case of any big power, has practically always meant improving its offensive capability. But this is not necessarily a proof of actually planning an offensive.

Soviet troops in 1941 were deployed in a way that would have allowed quick movement into attack formation should that option have been chosen. But they could equally well have been deployed for defense. When Germany attacked, the confusion was pretty total in mopst units because they did not know what to do. Doctrine said that they should act agressively but reality suggested something else.

Regards,

Jari

User avatar
Drobjatski Sergei
Member
Posts: 249
Joined: 10 Oct 2003, 20:31
Location: Tallinn, Estonia

#9

Post by Drobjatski Sergei » 19 Nov 2004, 20:15

As far as i know, the attack was planned on 6th of july 1941(operation "thunder")...have you heard about that??? :roll:

john2
Member
Posts: 1023
Joined: 04 Feb 2003, 00:25
Location: north carolina

Reply.

#10

Post by john2 » 20 Nov 2004, 15:44

Suvorov nonsense. This was discussed endlessly in another thread. It's been pretty much been disproved. If you want to know why please do a search as I really don't want to rehash all the arguments again.

User avatar
DrG
Member
Posts: 1408
Joined: 21 Oct 2003, 23:23
Location: Italia

#11

Post by DrG » 20 Nov 2004, 16:51

My knowledge of USSR and the Ostfront is too limited to provide any good info; instead there are already some threads about Viktor Suvorov's theory (but, besides this theory, we shall not forget that Communism was an inherently expansionistic ideology).

When a country is going to mobilize for a total war and thinks that a capital ship will not be completed before it, the first thing that it does is to cancel its construction. As we know, Soviet-German relations worsened during the Summer-Autumn of 1940 (in fact it was not untill the late Autumn of that year that Hitler ordered the beginning of the planning of Barbarossa).
I don't know if this tiny evidence that I'm going to tell was already told by Suvorov or anybody else, but on 19 October 1940 (just a few weeks before the negative Molotov-Hitler meeting of November) USSR cancelled the laying down of any new battleship, cancelled the construction of the battleship Sovietskaya Belorossiya (of the very modern Sovietski Soyuz class, AKA project 23, partially based on the Italian project UP.41; laid down on 21 Dec. 1939), suspended the construction of the battleship Sovietskaya Rossiya (laid down on 22 July 1940) and cancelled the construction of the two battlecruisers (already laid down in Nov. 1939) of the Kronstadt class (Kronstadt and Sevastopol).
Given that instead the two remaining BB (Sovietski Soyuz, laid down on 15 July 1938, and Sovietskaya Ukraina, laid down on 31 Oct. 1938) whose construction was not halted until 10 July 1941 (thus after Barbarossa) were 75% built at that date, I think that they would have been completed by the summer of 1942. In other words: Stalin cancelled, in Oct. 1940, only those capital ships that wouldn't be ready in 1942, thus making this year the best choice for the beginning of a war (otherwise, if Stalin had wanted to stay neutral for many years of forever, why did he cancel those capital ships in Oct. 1940?).
This is my reasoning, maybe wrong, but I think rather logic. Any (polite and logic) critic is welcome. :)

john2
Member
Posts: 1023
Joined: 04 Feb 2003, 00:25
Location: north carolina

Reply.

#12

Post by john2 » 20 Nov 2004, 19:31

Thanks for that info. Can you mention a source? Btw I can't presume to tell you why Stalin may have done that. Stalin knew that Germany might attack him so he may have been switching to a short term program rather then a longer one originally envisioned. I will look into this and reply later if I find any better explanation.

User avatar
DrG
Member
Posts: 1408
Joined: 21 Oct 2003, 23:23
Location: Italia

Re: Reply.

#13

Post by DrG » 20 Nov 2004, 20:44

john2 wrote:Thanks for that info. Can you mention a source?
M. J. Whitley, "Battleships of World War Two", Cassel, 2002.
Stalin knew that Germany might attack him so he may have been switching to a short term program rather then a longer one originally envisioned.
I'll wait your reply with the proofs that Germany wanted to attack USSR already in Oct. 1940 and that Stalin knew it. Remember that we are talking about 19 Oct. 1940, two months before the planning of Barbarossa on 18 Dec. 1940.

john2
Member
Posts: 1023
Joined: 04 Feb 2003, 00:25
Location: north carolina

reply.

#14

Post by john2 » 20 Nov 2004, 23:16

I'm not ready for a full reply yet but as a side note Hitler was planning to attack Russia since July. On July 31, 1940 a diary entry recorded by Halder chief of the German general staff records a meeting between Hitler and the top military leaders. Hitler explained that attacking Russia would end Britain's "last hope" (Hitler believed Britain saw Russia as a potential ally) and isolate the US. Anyhow the point is there was a lot of planning and preparation prior to the Barbarossa directive, which outlined operations and set a timetable. So Stalin already had a few months to get wind of what Hitler was planning.

User avatar
DrG
Member
Posts: 1408
Joined: 21 Oct 2003, 23:23
Location: Italia

#15

Post by DrG » 20 Nov 2004, 23:55

John, although Hitler had already ordered to prepare a plan against USSR in July 1940, his decision to attack came much later, and the primary reason, AFAIK, was the very negative outcome of the meeting with Molotov of 12-13 Nov. 1940, when Hitler even offered to USSR to join th Tripartite Pact.
A problem with the history of WW2 is that while most of the orders and a good number of opinions expressed by Hitler are known and, if possible, used against him, I don't see the same documentation for Stalin. Thus, for example, I would like to know if there are Soviet documents explaining the reasons for cancellation or supension of the works on those capital ships, or if we have only to guess them (as done until now). Guessed reasons that are, in your opinion, the belief that Hitler would have attacked USSR regardless to the outcome of the meeting with Molotov and instead, in my opinion, that Stalin had never thought that he wouldn't try to spread communism or at least make USSR stronger (a proof, in my opinion, is the occupation of Northern Bukovina on 28 June 1940, against the previous pacts with Germany) along with his fear (right, but, in my opinion, only since Nov.-Dic. 1940) of a German/capitalist attack in the near future.
The problem with the planning of Barbarossa and of its hypotetic Soviet version has always been: who was born first, the egg or the hen? Nazi or Soviet imperialism?
Thus, instead of starting another debate (interesting, indeed, but usually exahusting) about the date of Hitler's decision to attack (when he wrote the Mein Kampf? In 1939? In the Summer of 1940? On 18 Dec. 1940?) or about Stalin's expansionism, I would prefer if you (or anybody else) were able, please, to document the reasons of Stalin's (or of the High Command?) orders of 19 Oct. 1940.

Post Reply

Return to “WW2 in Eastern Europe”