Quote:
|
Originally Posted by perseus What from a moral, legal or military point of view? I was assuming we were taking of the former two, since the question relates to whether Hilter was so bad, not whether he was competent. |
Well from a military viewpoint of course, as technically there can be nothing moral or legal about invading another country. I addressed the military aspect as you brought it up - I know it's a little off-topic.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by perseus I very much doubt if Russia would have attacked Germany after the Finnish fiasco and the resounding German victory in the west. Wasn't Stalin scared s*** of them, refusing to mobilize, despite Ultra reports and defectors indicating an attack was imminent, in case it caused Hitler to react? |
The way I see it is that Stalin did not want war
in 1941, as even he was realistic and pragmatic enough to realise that his armed forces weren't ready. After the Winter War fiasco and the purges of 1938 the Red Army was not ready for any fight with Germany and Stalin in no way wanted to provoke Hitler. So yes, he was ****-scared of starting anything in 1941.
However, make no bones about it, Stalin wanted to paint Europe red and ultimately he'd have to deal with Nazi Germany, if only for the realization that Hitler would not sit back forever and do nothing about the huge power sitting on his doorstep. The Soviets knew they had better tanks (as the visit to German tank schools in early 1941 had shown them) but they had to organize and train their tank crews and ensure the replacement of obsolete tanks with the new T-34s coming into service. The Red Army's armoured forces were in the process of reorganising into 31 giant tank divisions when the Germans invaded. However, they weren't ready even if the element of surprise hadn't overwhelmed them.