The reasons for Hitler's refusal to attack England in favor of an attack on the USSR - an attempt at an explanation from the German press

November 4, 2021 70

In 1940, Adolf Hitler planned to carry out the landing operation "Sea Lion", landing up to 40 Wehrmacht divisions in the British Isles. However, he abandoned his plans and redirected his aggression towards the USSR. The documents considered lost give an idea of the plans to occupy England and shed light on the reasons for the refusal to attack, writes the German newspaper Die Welt.

There is a gradual declassification of documents of that time, which makes it possible to understand what happened (since the 60s, materials have been stored in Podolsk, 2,2 thousand volumes are devoted to Operation Sea Lion). At the same time, most of the documents were removed from the ruins of the Army Archive in Potsdam in 1945. In November, the “Paulus records” (28 thousand volumes or more than 2 million sheets) are to be published for the first time, which have been digitized since 2014 by the German Institute of History in Moscow (DHI) together with the RF Ministry of Defense.

In 1943, the commander of the 6th Army of the Wehrmacht, Field Marshal Friedrich Wilhelm Ernst Paulus, one of the authors of the Barbarossa plan, was captured at Stalingrad. He became the highest-ranking German prisoner of war in the USSR.

Soviet investigators wanted to know everything, because he was one of the most informed people

- the article says.

From the documents, it can be understood that the Soviet leader Joseph Stalin was really surprised by the sudden turn of the Third Reich to the east.

When in September 1940 I arrived at the headquarters of the ground forces in Fontainebleau, I got the impression that the commander-in-chief of the ground forces and the chief of the general staff of the ground forces did not doubt the seriousness of the invasion plan.

- explained in 1946 Paulus, who at the time of these events was the deputy chief of the general staff of the ground forces.

Paulus reported that, starting in October 1940, the dates of the planned invasion of England were constantly postponed. Until the notification came that in 1940 Operation Sea Lion would not be carried out at all "due to the onset of a period of bad weather." In the spring of 1941, there was a reorientation to the Barbarossa plan. He gave four reasons for the continual postponement of the invasion.

First, the risk of "loss of prestige" of the Third Reich due to possible failure. Secondly, Berlin's hope is that London, with the threat of invasion, combined with attacks by submarines and bombers, will be ready to surrender. Thirdly, the expectation that later it will be possible to conclude an alliance with Great Britain. Fourth, Hitler in any case intended to attack the USSR and attached paramount importance to this, and he could postpone the landing in England to a later period.

Probably, the Soviets were preparing their invasion of Great Britain, which after 1945 was considered (in the West) possible. This assumption is also supported by the fact that the draft orders for the introduction of German criminal law and on "Possession of weapons in the occupied English territory" have been translated into Russian. Perhaps that is why, after the first acquaintance with the German archives, the Soviets involved Paulus who had been captured by them in the case, trying to find out why Hitler still refused to invade.

- tried to explain to the media.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

zenion

+3

4 November 2021 18: 56

Apparently for this, Hess flew to England and nevertheless agreed on something, for which he had to be hung on an electric cord, so that he would not write how it was there. It was not to let him go. And he was strangled when the British guarded him. The British had a lot of experience doing this.
1. Volga073
  
  +3
  
  4 November 2021 20: 26
  
  Berezovsky was pulled up in the same way ..
2. maiman61
  
  0
  
  5 November 2021 19: 51
  
  What, what, but killing people from the Anglo-Saxons turned out the best and more sophisticated!
Binder

-5

4 November 2021 19: 38

Independent historians consider the main reason that Hitler in 1940. decided to turn to the East, abandoning the plan to invade the islands, was the defeat of the Luftwaffe in the "Battle of Britain". The British then specifically gave the Germans Lyuli and this weakened the determination of the Nazi leaders to seize Britain. At the same time, the results of the Winter War with the Finns, in which the USSR suffered heavy losses and serious problems of the Red Army appeared, gave the Germans reason to believe that in the east they would be able to achieve success in the confrontation with the Bolsheviks.
1. Bakht
  
  +3
  
  4 November 2021 20: 06
  
  The landing was possible. The Luftwaffe gained dominance over southern England in late August and early September. So the first condition for disembarkation was fulfilled.
  The war with Finland, of course, prompted Hitler to make a decision. But the reason for the attack on the USSR was completely different.
  1. Ulysses
    
    +7
    
    4 November 2021 20: 54
    
    The landing was possible. The Luftwaffe gained dominance over southern England in late August and early September. So the first condition for disembarkation was fulfilled.
    
    First and last.
    And for a fairly short period of time.
    The Reich did not have sufficient amphibious means, did not have the ability to control the uninterrupted supply of the landed forces under the dominance of the British fleet.
    
    The article indicates the reasons why Germany did not attack England. But there is no indication of the reasons why Germany attacked the USSR.
    
    The protracted war required resources.
    The resources were in the East ..
    
    PS Reading the memoirs of German generals is entertaining.
    You understand the narrow thinking of German military professionals.
    
    It is enough to read Manstein's lamentations about the Mius Front.
    Hitler understood better than him the importance of manganese and other riches of the Donbass basin for the German economy and the prospects for the further conduct of the already protracted war.
    1. Bakht
      
      +4
      
      4 November 2021 21: 17
      
      There were enough landing craft. Domination over southern England was the main prerequisite for a successful landing. There was no dominance of the English fleet in the English Channel. The home fleet was based on the Orkney Islands. This is far enough from the landing area. And from aviation. The Stukas would have smashed any fleet in the landing area.
      The problem was that the generals were demanding a landing on a wide front. This would be difficult to ensure. The sailors demanded a landing on a narrow front. The landing of 2-3 divisions could be ensured, and then cover the landing area with aviation. By mid-September, the British already had practically no fighter aviation resources. And there were no airfields in southern England.
      
      The reason why Hitler attacked the USSR was voiced by Hitler himself. For the same reason, Napoleon attacked Russia.
      1. Ulysses
        
        -1
        
        4 November 2021 22: 25
        
        There were enough landing craft. Domination over southern England was the main prerequisite for a successful landing. There was no dominance of the English fleet in the English Channel. The home fleet was based on the Orkney Islands.
        The problem was that the generals were demanding a landing on a wide front. This would be difficult to ensure. The sailors demanded a landing on a narrow front. The landing of 2-3 divisions could be ensured, and then cover the landing area with aviation. By mid-September, the British already had practically no fighter aviation resources. And there were no airfields in southern England.
        
        I can not agree.
        
        Everyone has their own sources of information, according to mine the Germans simply did not have enough landing craft.
        
        The Germans did not even try to control the English Channel, there were no funds.
        Sometimes they slipped through, like the breakthrough of German ships from Brest in 1942, but that shame is purely English. The Germans were frankly lucky in that operation.
        
        This is far enough from the landing area. And from aviation. The Stukas would have smashed any fleet in the landing area.
        
        Close enough in all cases, even if the vanguard had reached the shore.
        Further communications would be cut.
        
        About The Stukas would have smashed any fleet in the landing area. , Goering suffered a cruel defeat in the battle for the English sky.
        
        I don't understand the sources of your confidence in Operation Sea Lion.
        
        Bakht
        
        +4
        
        4 November 2021 22: 55
        
        My sources are the actual course of the battle. Dowding already wanted to withdraw fighter aircraft from southern England. The commander of the air defense of England told Churchill that "we no longer have reserves."
        
        No one would have brought battleships into the English Channel. They were guaranteed certain death there. Only destroyers could operate there. The evacuation from Dunkirk showed that this could be neutralized by aircraft.
        
        Manstein's memoir - the landing was quite possible. Halder's diary - "The nature of the operation is the crossing of a large river."
        
        The failure of the operation is entirely the merit of Goering. This is stated in the report of the Main Naval Staff of the Kriegsmarine: "The Luftwaffe is conducting its own operation, not subordinate to Operation Sea Lion."
        And Hitler's unwillingness to wage war with England at all. Much later, in December 1941, he declared "we are fighting the wrong people." This is about England and the United States.
        
        Ulysses
        
        0
        
        4 November 2021 23: 56
        
        My sources are the actual course of the battle. Dowding already wanted to withdraw fighter aircraft from southern England. The commander of the air defense of England told Churchill that "we no longer have reserves."
        
        Throw a link to the source of your information, I will read it with pleasure.
        
        No one would have brought battleships into the English Channel. They were guaranteed certain death there. Only destroyers could operate there. The evacuation from Dunkirk showed that this could be neutralized by aircraft.
        
        I agree that it was enough for the British to control the eastern and western approaches to the English Channel with the linear forces, the light forces would be engaged in landing forces.
        You cite Dunkirk as an example, but the situation has changed a lot since then.
        
        Germany lost the battle for the skies of England in 1940, after which the naval operation became meaningless.
        
        Bakht
        
        +2
        
        5 November 2021 00: 08
        
        I don't have one specific source. There is a scattering of different sources. Books by Churchill, Liddell-Hart, Manstein, Guderian.
        The situation has not changed at all since Dunkirk. There is information about the "Dover convoys". The British lost so many ships that they were forced to stop shipping in the English Channel during the day. And all the destroyers were withdrawn from La Manche.
        
        This is from Liddell Garth:
        
        On September 2, a group of Dornier-17 bombers, accompanied by Me-109 fighters, bombed airfields in southern England. Only one squadron flew to intercept with the last remaining airfield in the ranks. Air supremacy over southern England was almost achieved... What will later be called the "critical period" has arrived. If the command of the Luftwaffe continued to strike at airfields until they were completely destroyed, it would have achieved complete air supremacy in the area. However, this was not done.
        
        Len Dayton:
        
        On August 8, another characteristic battle took place in the strait. By this day, the losses of the British amounted to 18 ships and four destroyers. During daylight hours, the strait became so dangerous that the destroyers were withdrawn from it.
        
        Quotes taken from the collection "From Munich to Tokyo Bay"
        
        Ulysses
        
        +1
        
        5 November 2021 21: 29
        
        I don't have one specific source. There is a scattering of different sources.
        
        Sorry, but this is the case when you "did not see the trees behind the forest", perceiving individual successes as a victory.
        
        At the exit:
        "German aviation made over 46 thousand sorties and dropped about 60 thousand tons of bombs, losing 1733 aircraft (the British - 915 aircraft).
        
        British Prime Minister Winston Churchill believed that September 15 was a turning point in the "Battle of Britain". In his opinion, the German air command made a serious strategic mistake by concentrating the main strikes on London. It would be much more dangerous for the fate of England to continue raids on airfields.
        
        As a result, German aviation was unable to achieve air superiority. Therefore, the operation "Sea Lion" did not take place, it was not possible to clear the way for it. Moreover, it was not possible to force the British to surrender. On September 17, 1940, Hitler postponed Operation Sea Lion "until further notice."
        
        On September 17, 1940, Hitler postponed Operation Sea Lion "until further notice."
        
        Then (by a directive of October 12) he postponed it until the spring - summer of 1941. The continued activities under the Sea Lion plan turned exclusively into a means of strategic camouflage for the preparation of an attack on the USSR. "
        
        Bakht
        
        +2
        
        5 November 2021 21: 48
        
        It seems to me that I see everything correctly. I wrote that Goering failed to prepare for Operation Sea Lion. But this does not negate the fact that in September 1940 the Luftwaffe achieved aviation dominance over southern England. The fact that Goering did not finish off the remnants of British fighter aircraft is another matter. But the Germans had to achieve superiority in the landing area. Which is what they achieved. With losses? They had enough aircraft left to continue the fighting.
        I am describing individual operations because it is impossible to retell all the research written on this topic. The fact is this. In August 1940, the Royal Navy withdrew its ships from the English Channel. How was he going to interfere with the landing? I wrote that the Stucks will destroy any fleet in the strait. This has been confirmed in practice.
        The victory was that Great Britain lost control of the English Channel. Quote from Roskilde's book "The Flag of St. George"
        
        But in the summer, the problem of fighter cover in the English Channel became especially acute, where the convoys were subjected to air attacks from bases in France. In July, the losses became so heavy that the Admiralty temporarily suspended convoys across the English Channel. But then the escort of each convoy was turned into a major operation of the naval and air forces, and the difficulties were overcome. By the fall, convoys resumed in both directions.
        
        Pay attention to the words "for a short time". Goering switched to bombing London and other major cities. So the resolution of the German naval headquarters was absolutely correct. "Goering fought his own air war. And did not act in the interests of Operation Sea Lion."
        
        By the way, in Germany there were great difficulties with subordination and discipline. Goering was fighting his own war. German generals often did not follow orders. In France, they got away with it. But in the USSR, the self-will of Bock, Leeb, Guderian led to sad consequences for the Germans. The only sensible commander was Rundstedt. But they didn’t listen to him.
        
        Ulysses
        
        0
        
        5 November 2021 22: 13
        
        I don't have one specific source. There is a scattering of different sources. Books by Churchill, Liddell-Hart, Manstein, Guderian.
        
        You saw no trees behind the forest.
        Tactical successes were mistaken for a strategic victory.
        
        Germany lost the battle for England's skies ..
        
        British Prime Minister Winston Churchill believed that September 15 was a turning point in the "Battle of Britain". In his opinion, the German air command made a serious strategic mistake by concentrating the main strikes on London. It would be much more dangerous for the fate of England to continue raids on airfields.
        
        As a result, German aviation was unable to achieve air superiority. Therefore, the operation "Sea Lion" did not take place, it was not possible to clear the way for it. Moreover, it was not possible to force the British to surrender. On September 17, 1940, Hitler postponed Operation Sea Lion "until further notice."
        
        Then (by a directive of October 12) he postponed it until the spring - summer of 1941. The ongoing activities under the Sea Lion plan turned exclusively into a means of strategic camouflage for the preparation of an attack on the USSR. The fate of Great Britain, according to the calculations of the fascist leadership, was to be decided as a result of a "victorious campaign" against the USSR.
    2. Bakht
      
      +4
      
      4 November 2021 21: 34
      
      One more point. Your phrase
      
      The protracted war required resources.
      Resources were in the East
      
      No one in Germany was planning a protracted war. The resources of the East, Hitler had without the war. And he paid not with money, but with machines and equipment. Russia supplied raw materials and received equipment and technologies. By attacking the USSR, Hitler deprived himself of the resources of the East. And received a complete blockade. It is illogical ...
      1. Ulysses
        
        0
        
        4 November 2021 23: 12
        
        No one in Germany was planning a protracted war.
        
        I didn’t plan, but for some reason many forget that by June 41 Germany was already waging a protracted war, almost two years long, with a mobilized army that wanted to eat.
        
        The resources of the East, Hitler had without the war. And he paid not with money, but with machines and equipment. Russia supplied raw materials and received equipment and technologies. By attacking the USSR, Hitler deprived himself of the resources of the East. And received a complete blockade. It is illogical ...
        
        Not all and not in the volume that was required.
        To continue the war.
        The turn to the East was absolutely logical, there are resources.
        With which any naval blockade no longer made sense.
        
        Bakht
        
        +3
        
        4 November 2021 23: 20
        
        The USSR not only supplied resources. He also provided the transit of resources from Asia. The same rubber was in transit through the USSR.
        You can get resources as a result of the war if you quickly win the war. Otherwise, you will lose everything.
        The pivot to the East was not due to resources. The wars of 1812 and 1941 had many similarities. But there was one significant difference. The pivot to the East (Napoleon and Hitler) was based on the conclusion of peace with England. But not resources.
        Regarding the mobilized army. Germany has not fought a two-year war. All campaigns completed within a maximum of 42 days (France). That is, pure wartime can be counted for several months. And Germany carried out a partial demobilization in the summer of 1940. Seems like 100 people. But then, in the winter, a new mobilization began and the formation of new divisions. This is already preparation for an attack on the USSR.
        
        Ulysses
        
        +1
        
        5 November 2021 21: 02
        
        The USSR not only supplied resources. He also provided the transit of resources from Asia. The same rubber was in transit through the USSR.
        
        Also imagine the USSR as Hitler's direct accomplice ...
        The Czechoslovakians were offered a military alliance, but they refused.
        The Poles dug the earth with their hooves, anticipating a joint campaign with Germany to the east.
        
        There are supplies today, but tomorrow they may not.
        I do not understand why I should chew common truths.
        
        The pivot to the East (Napoleon and Hitler) was based on the conclusion of peace with England. But not resources.
        
        Conspiracy, not supported by facts.
        By the 41st year in England, Germanophiles were out of favor, to put it mildly.
        Do you have any documentary evidence, besides the murky story with the flight of Hess?
        
        Regarding the mobilized army. Germany has not fought a two-year war. All campaigns completed within a maximum of 42 days (France).
        
        You have a bad idea of the processes of mobilization (demobilization) of the army.
        Since the 39th year, the Wehrmacht has only increased, it is enough to look at the same "Vika" (if you are too lazy to read something more serious).
        
        Bakht
        
        +2
        
        5 November 2021 21: 30
        
        About resources. Stalin was in no way Hitler's accomplice. There are trade relations between the countries. Unless they are at war. I don't understand why Stalin became Hitler's accomplice (as some claim) if he traded with Germany. Russia today trades with Europe or the United States. Although Russia is considered an enemy there. Sweden traded with Germany until early 1945. Are there claims in Sweden that they were Hitler's accomplices? It was this moment that Hitler used (supplies may be stopped). It is this moment that is being used now (Russia is blackmailing Europe). The USSR-Russia has never broken off its supply commitments. So this is just a propaganda slogan designed to justify their own aggression.
        
        Conspiracy on the attack on the USSR is not such. This rationale was given by Hitler. And more than once. He wrote about this in a letter to Mussolini. Which I am advised here to read carefully. Although I read it many years ago. Napoleon spoke about the same. No conspiracy theories. Just facts.
        
        About the Germanophiles in England. So I wrote that in 1941 the situation changed dramatically. And even Lord Halifax refused all Hitler's proposals. In 1941, peace between England and Germany was no longer possible.
        
        I also read about mobilization and demobilization. And not only Vicki. Demobilization in the summer of 1040 in the Wehrmacht was carried out. The workers had to be returned to the factories. The number of the Wehrmacht increased. But at some point it also decreased. By the way, the number of the Red Army also increased.
        And these are the plans of the Wehrmacht
        
        18 June 1940 year
        11.00 - Meeting with Fromm and Olbricht at the commander-in-chief: the main ideas of the transition from 165 divisions to 120 and the distribution of the demobilized in the Reich were discussed.
        
        4. Implementation: If demobilization proceeds quickly, these 39 divisions will make up the first batch to return home from East and West. We must strive to first of all demobilize formations from the 1st, 8th and 22nd military districts. The transports from the East should immediately be used (in part) to deliver the demobilized from the West.
        7. Demobilization: If it is carried out quickly (and this can be counted on), then the first to send back to their homeland active divisions of employees born in 1920; not to translate into spare parts, but to dissolve. Later contingents are trained normally in peacetime garrisons.
        
        The reserve army should be disbanded after the return of the field divisions. Dissolution will take 14 days.
    3. alexey alexeyev_2
      
      0
      
      6 November 2021 04: 56
      
      I hesitate to ask: What resources did Germany receive from the USSR? I got acquainted with the text of the trade agreement between Germany and the USSR. Honestly, I described myself with laughter. So perhaps no one mocked Germany. All the resources that went under the agreement from 39 years old. The Germans had to spend on fulfilling orders of the USSR. It got to the point that they also So that nothing of particular value was supplied to the Germans. In the refusal of landing on the island, Hitler was guided by something else. It is a pity that he did not leave a memoir. Considering that England controlled almost all world trade and London was the financial capital of the world, it can be assumed that he was promised something in exchange for non-invasion. But then they threw it like a sucker. And the flight of Hess can be considered as a turnout for the arrow. It did not work out peacefully. The goal of London - Germany's exit to the borders of the USSR - was achieved. And Hitler had a choice. To fight with England or rush to There was no choice, however, only for the USSR.
  2. Binder
    
    -6
    
    4 November 2021 23: 43
    
    Quote: Bakht
    The Luftwaffe gained dominance over southern England in late August and early September.
    
    Outright nonsense. Dominance in the air was not achieved, and you cannot but know about it, therefore, like the classic - "I congratulate you, citizen, lied!" When such nonsense is written by any of the illiterate individuals present on the site who make three mistakes in one word, this is natural, but you are positioning yourself as a connoisseur of history ... Not good.
    1. Bakht
      
      +3
      
      5 November 2021 00: 10
      
      I know the story. And he backed up his words with quotes. Unlike you. Who knows no history.
      
      By early September 1940, the RAF's forces were running out. Southern England was under the complete domination of the Luftwaffe: the airfields of the British were mostly badly damaged, and the flight crew was exhausted to the limit by endless sorties.
      
      https://warthunder.ru/ru/news/1153/current
2. DV tam 25
  
  +1
  
  5 November 2021 03: 25
  
  Again nonsense and optya large-scale in its stupidity! What independent historians ??? Name at least one! Where do you get this labuda? Do you read manuals in Hebrew ??? You at least take such nonsense from Ukrainian books, it's funny there. You were told - teach materiel, Mr. Repatriate. And you again for your own ...
  1. Marzhecki
    
    +3
    
    5 November 2021 07: 14
    
    So Odessa-bindyuzhnik from Ukrainian sources and takes)))
Bakht

+3

4 November 2021 20: 03

The article indicates the reasons why Germany did not attack England. But there is no indication of the reasons why Germany attacked the USSR.
Oleg Rambover

+2

4 November 2021 21: 21

Hitler was not going to conduct Operation Sea Lion
From the memoirs of Halder:

1940 year. July 13. The Fuehrer is most concerned with the question of why England is still not seeking peace. He, like us, sees the reason for this in the fact that England still relies on Russia. Therefore, he believes that it will be necessary to force England to peace. However, he is reluctant to do so. Reason: if we defeat England, the whole British Empire will fall apart. But Germany will gain nothing from this. The defeat of England will be achieved at the cost of German blood, and Japan, America and others will reap the benefits.

July 31: The Fuehrer proposed another option for defeating England. Since Russia is one of England's main hopes, if Russia is defeated, England will lose her last hope. In accordance with this reasoning, Russia should be liquidated. The deadline is the spring of 1941.
Miffer

+2

4 November 2021 22: 05

I read the title and at once I didn't feel like reading the whole opus.
ComradesChi! There is no such country - "England" ...
1. Miffer
  
  +1
  
  5 November 2021 00: 25
  
  Slightly digging into his memory of a professional philologist and remembered that in 1707 "the Great Britain" was formed.
NikolayN

+2

4 November 2021 22: 44

Britain had natural allies. Of these, America is the main one. Germany was weaker, for all she wanted. The world war was already on. It was impossible to stop it, otherwise the inevitable defeat, time was already working against Germany. The war against the USSR is a step of despair and an attempt to make peace with the rest of Europe. In case of victory over the USSR, there are two options: the end of the world war on Germany's terms. Or, if Germany is significantly strengthening, including increasing its army at the expense of the fifth column, then the continuation of the war in the hope of defeating Britain as well. However, I think that Germany would be quite satisfied with the 1st option with the development of the territories of the USSR, industry, agriculture for ten years as a respite. And then with new forces against Britain, the division of the world into a pair with America.
1. Bakht
  
  +2
  
  4 November 2021 23: 14
  
  Wouldn't work.
  The only way out of the war is peace with England. But this was only possible with Churchill's departure from power and the arrival of Lord Halifax's group. But after the defeat of France, Lord Halifax would no longer have made peace with Hitler. The peace that Hitler proposed meant the loss of all influence on the situation in Europe. And this is absolutely unacceptable for Britain over the past 300 years.
  
  There were only two options. Landing on the British Isles and defeating England. The operation was quite possible. Manstein is confident that it was risky, but quite possible. Even if the British government is evacuated to Canada, it is no longer possible to continue the war. Landing operations across the Atlantic are impossible. This means the complete security of Europe from the American invasion. This is Manstein's variation.
  The second option is Guderian's plan. A blow to the South, capture of Gibraltar, Malta and an attack on Egypt. At that time, there was still a grouping of Italian troops in Abyssinia. The seizure of the Mediterranean is the loss of connectivity across the British Isles. And much better starting conditions for a war against the USSR. This plan was reported to Hitler in the summer of 1940.
  
  Hitler tried the second option. He held talks with Franco and Mussolini. He would later say that these negotiations were the biggest disappointment in his life.
  1. Michael1950
    
    0
    
    4 November 2021 23: 29
    
    The Luftwaffe did not provide the German army with air supremacy, having lost more than 75% of the combat aircraft fleet in the "Battle of Britain". Cross the English Channel, whose coast has been fortified for a hundred and fifty years, no air superiority, the Germans simply did not risk it - having Comrade Stalin (with a huge ax) behind their back ...
    
    Read Hitler's letter to Mussolini, transmitted the day before June 22, 1941, read carefully:
    http://www.hrono.ru/dokum/194_dok/19410621gitl.php
    1. Bakht
      
      +2
      
      4 November 2021 23: 46
      
      Hitler's letter to Mussolini is simply an excuse for his actions.
      Lost 75% of your combat aircraft fleet? There was no army on the British Isles in the summer of 1940. And there were no modern fortifications. There were only 50 cannon Matildas in all of England.
      In the summer of 1940, Comrade Stalin did not stand behind Hitler. He did not have the Baltics, Bessarabia. And there was no way to strike. The war in Finland ended only in March. Western Beoorussia and Ukraine were in no way prepared for the conduct of hostilities.
      1. Miffer
        
        +2
        
        5 November 2021 00: 59
        
        In the summer of 1940, Comrade Stalin did not stand behind Hitler. He did not have the Baltics, Bessarabia.
        
        You are lying godlessly.
        The Baltic States (the so-called from the three republics) - on July 21, 1940, officially became part of the USSR.
        TN Bessarabia (Moldavian SSR) became part of the USSR on August 2, 1940.
        July-August is summer. Both in Russia and in Moldova.
        Perhaps according to the Turkish calendar - July-August are in some other season.
        
        Bakht
        
        +1
        
        5 November 2021 02: 11
        
        Who's lying is already clear. July-August and even September are only official dates. When were the military garrisons located there? When were the warehouses established there? When were the airfields built? When was the military infrastructure created?
        
        I repeat for the gifted - the preparation of a theater of operations is not done in one day, one week, or even a month. In the summer of 1940, Stalin did NOT stand behind Hitler. This is not a computer game, when, after the click of the mouse, a group ready to attack appears.
        
        Miffer
        
        +1
        
        5 November 2021 10: 10
        
        Any normal person understands what is written as it is written.
        
        And you there further paint about your Turkish theater of operations and do not forget to tell me at the same time how Soviet spaceships still ply the vastness of the Universe.
        
        Bakht
        
        0
        
        5 November 2021 10: 15
        
        The specifics are not visible. Is there something serious on the topic?
        
        Miffer
        
        +1
        
        5 November 2021 11: 49
        
        The Red Army in 1939 did not occupy the tundra or the desert, but a very developed area of Western Ukraine and Western Belarus, where there was already where to place garrisons, warehouses, and where there were already roads and other infrastructure.
        Probably, you are in the subject of how the spacecraft occupied Brest, which later received the title of "Fortress-Hero". In this fortress there was already everything for the deployment of troops.
        
        Bakht
        
        +1
        
        5 November 2021 11: 58
        
        One fortress? And what weapons were in this fortress? What railways were connected to the border? Certainly not a desert ... But for some reason the Germans did not consider the roads good enough for warfare. And the bridges did not all fit. How many warehouses were there? And how many ammunition and fuel stations were there at the border in the summer of 1940?
        There are memoirs of Manstein, Tippelskirch, and other generals. The disposition of the Red Army was not offensive. The density of battle formations was insufficient even in June 1941. For example: the width of the defense front of the Red Army division, according to the regulations of that time, was 10 km. For the offensive - 3 km. The average density of Soviet troops on the border in June 1941 was from 25 to 50 km. They weren’t just attacking, they couldn’t even defend themselves. What was the density in July 1940?
        
        Miffer
        
        +1
        
        5 November 2021 18: 04
        
        Warehouse bridges are all "facts in the galaxy world".
        Bessarabia was occupied almost instantly. Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia were also instantly occupied.
        
        http://moimir.org/parad-v-kishineve-1940-j-god-osvobozhdenie-bessarabii-ot-rumynskoj-okkupacii
        
        Bakht
        
        0
        
        5 November 2021 19: 43
        
        So what? Borrowed almost instantly ... What difference does that make?
        History is an applied science. It makes little sense to simply list the facts. We must apply them to the real situation. Suppose the first garrisons in the Baltics appeared back in 1939. In the summer of 1940, they became part of the USSR. Does this "instant capture" make them a springboard for the threat to Germany? Potentially it could be. But "instantly" by no means.
        
        Bridges, warehouses and so on are not from the "world of the galaxy". This is real planning by serious people with generals' shoulder straps. Rezun operates just "facts from the world of the galaxy." But when asked how 57 Soviet divisions on a front of 2000 km, with a density of 50 km per division (Baltic), 25 km per division (Belarus and Ukraine) and up to 90 km in Moldova, can threaten German troops, he does not answer. Even in the 41st year, the Red Army was outnumbered by the Wehrmacht troops on the border.
        But back to 1940. In the East, the Wehrmacht holds 20-30 divisions. The Red Army has superiority in forces. But there is no supply, there are no prepared positions, warehouses are not equipped and resources for the offensive are not accumulated. The defeat of France ended on June 22, 1940. In July-August, the Wehrmacht was free. Transferring a dozen divisions to the East along European roads is a matter of several days. Transferring the Luftwaffe is a matter of several hours. The airfields are ready. The whole world is under the impression of the defeat of the best army in Europe. Moscow will by no means take the risk of attacking Germany. By the way, this is one of the reasons why Molotov went to Berlin in November 1940. Stalin knew that he would not be able to obtain the straits by military means. He tried to negotiate. I tried to bargain, not fight.
        
        You think that in the summer of 1940, Stalin threatened Hitler from the rear. The facts show that even in the summer of 1941 he did not threaten in any way.
        
        Miffer
        
        +1
        
        5 November 2021 21: 30
        
        You think that in the summer of 1940, Stalin threatened Hitler from the rear.
        
        This is what I didn’t say, so I do not think so. In August 1939, two totalitarian leaders ripped apart some of the countries of Eastern Europe, which was done quickly and accurately.
        That's all.
        
        NikolayN
        
        0
        
        30 December 2021 16: 29
        
        Why are these disputes over Hitler's letter? When Germany attacked the USSR, we turned to England and the United States to open a 2nd front and enter the real battalion in order to draw off part of the Wehrmacht forces. Obviously, it was logical to assume that Britain would turn to the USSR for help, in fact, he describes the situation in this way. And he has a characteristic phrase about the construction of defensive structures of spacecraft, and in such conditions not starting a war with the USSR means missing the whole 41st year, especially considering the possible deliveries from the United States in 42. By the way, we can say that it is the States that are to blame for the continuation of the Great War in Europe, provoking Hitler with supplies. There is not a word in Hitler's letter that he would like to establish peace in Europe, stop b / d, abandon the conquest of Britain, and the USSR does not allow him to do this.
2. Miffer
  
  +1
  
  5 November 2021 00: 32
  
  Of these, America is the main one.
  
  I suppose you wrote this opus. England, Amerigo (Vespucci).
  You are cool here, pawns and girls - America :))
  North, South or Latin? Ameriga Vespuccia?
3. isofat
  
  -1
  
  5 November 2021 13: 32
  
  NikolayN, are you sure that everyone will understand what kind of America we are talking about? Clueless also occur.
Michael1950

0

5 November 2021 00: 18

Quote: Bakht
Hitler's letter to Mussolini is simply an excuse for his actions.

And why would Hitler suddenly "make excuses" before Mussolini ?! With what hangover should he feel "guilty" in front of him ?? Mussolini was his closest ally and, in fact, his only friend. After all, it was Mussolini who gave birth to fascism, not Hitler. Mussolini was Hitler's "elder friend" ...

Lost 75% of your combat aircraft fleet? There was no army on the British Isles in the summer of 1940. And there were no modern fortifications. There were only 50 cannon Matildas in all of England.

- Oh no no no! And why did not Hitler dare to rush to such a weak power, a small one under his nose ?! Have you stumbled into the vast expanses of the Soviet Union? And there was no one to tell him? Or did he urgently need "hammer, milk, eggs"?

In the summer of 1940, Comrade Stalin did not stand behind Hitler. He did not have the Baltics, Bessarabia. And there was no way to strike.

- Poor, poor comrade Stalin! And why did he then order Molotov in November to present such impudent demands to Hitler that Hitler, out of fright, immediately ordered the urgent completion and implementation of the Barbarossa plan ?!
1. Bakht
  
  +1
  
  5 November 2021 02: 21
  
  Hitler did not rush to defenseless England because he did not intend to fight her. He was going to fight with England. And he offered her the preservation of the Empire, and in return demanded Europe. But England could not agree to this in principle.
  
  Churchill was the first to understand that Hitler would not attack. And therefore, in the fall, he sent all the tanks from England to Egypt.
  Everything that you wrote is another topic. But it looks very much like Rezun's revelations.
  
  Molotov's trip in November was a mistake. But you don't know what follows. Stalin agreed with Hitler's proposals, which he wrote to him in the same November. I do not call Stalin's proposals a mistake, but the choice of a candidate. Molotov was not fit for the role of a diplomat. He simply conveyed what he was told, but could not appreciate what was being offered to him.
Michael1950

-1

5 November 2021 00: 20

Quote: Miffer
I read the title and at once I didn't feel like reading the whole opus.
ComradesChi! There is no such country - "England" ...

No need to find fault with trifles ...
1. Miffer
  
  +1
  
  5 November 2021 18: 08
  
  No need to find fault with trifles ...
  
  In my opinion, this is not a trifle. Probably no one calls you Moishe.
  Although I may be wrong.
Michael1950

0

5 November 2021 03: 30

Quote: Bakht
Hitler did not rush to defenseless England because he was not going to fight her. He was going to fight with England.

- And also with the United States allied with it ?! Hitler and Roosevelt first consulted? Oh yes, one more nuance: when, after Pearl Harbor, the United States declared war on Japan, Hitler did the same - declared war on the United States! Surely - to commemorate the future unbreakable union of Germany, Great Britain and the United States ?!

And he offered her the preservation of the Empire, and in return demanded Europe. But England could not agree to this in principle.

- Well, he could offer the UK "the sky in diamonds", then he sent Hess there. But "who will believe him"?

Churchill was the first to understand that Hitler would not attack. And therefore, in the fall, he sent all the tanks from England to Egypt.

- After the failure of "Battle of Britain" - Churchill believed that Hitler would not attack. And Hitler believed that Hitler would not attack - he was not sure of the capabilities of his troops and was afraid of Stalin's "stab in the back." But the landing of the British troops and a stab in the back from Great Britain - no, I was not afraid!

Everything else that you wrote is another topic. But it looks very much like Rezun's revelations.

- Vladimir Bogdanovich Rezun fulfilled an ingenious historical mission: for the first time in post-war history, he refuted a myth that almost the whole world believed in! And so - he is of course a traitor!

Molotov's trip in November was a mistake.

- "Comrade Stalin does not make mistakes!"

But you don't know what follows.

- Unlike you?

Stalin agreed with Hitler's proposals, which he wrote to him in the same November.

- A link to this blatant historical fact ?! Specific link ??

I do not call Stalin's proposals a mistake, but the choice of a candidate. Molotov was not fit for the role of a diplomat. He simply conveyed what he was told, but could not appreciate what was being offered to him.

- ?? Molotov's business was not "to evaluate something." Only Stalin evaluated. Only he made the decisions. Molotov could only offer something. Stalin could not give a damn about this proposal and rub it ...
1. Bakht
  
  +1
  
  5 November 2021 09: 46
  
  I knew that I would meet Rezun's apologists. That he is a traitor is beyond doubt. But he is also a godless liar. What he wrote has no basis whatsoever. And he wrote nonsense. I watched his interview. Sorry sight. A person of this level simply cannot write a good book. Moreover, research. And he doesn't even understand what he is writing. Most likely his books were written in MI6. But this is the tenth case. Not only in the summer of 1940, but also in the summer of 1941, the USSR could not attack Germany. There were no preparations. There were no gangs. The theater was not equipped.
  
  On November 25, 1940, Molotov conveyed a Soviet response to the German Ambassador Schulenburg.
  
  "The USSR agrees to accept basically the draft pact of the four powers on their political cooperation and economic mutual assistance [...] under the following conditions:
  
  1. If German troops are now withdrawn from Finland, which is the sphere of influence of the USSR, in accordance with the Soviet-German agreement of 1939 [...]
  
  2. If in the coming months the security of the USSR in the Straits is ensured by concluding a pact of mutual assistance between the USSR and Bulgaria and the organization of a military and naval base of the USSR in the Bosphorus and Dardanelles area on the basis of a long-term lease;
  
  3. If the area south of Batum and Baku in the general direction to the Persian Gulf will be recognized as the center of gravity of the aspiration of the USSR;
  
  4. If Japan renounces its concession rights for coal and oil in Northern Sakhalin under conditions of fair compensation.
  
  In accordance with the above, the draft protocol to the Treaty of Four Powers, presented by Mr. Ribbentrop on the delimitation of spheres of influence, should be changed in the spirit of determining the center of gravity of the USSR aspiration south of Batum and Baku in the general direction to the Persian Gulf. "
  
  By replacing the "Indian Ocean" with the "Persian Gulf", Stalin and Molotov made it clear that they were not interested in Indian tea, but in Middle Eastern oil. The first two points concerned Europe.
  
  As you can see, Stalin agreed with Hitler's proposal. But he left Finland and Turkey. As for Finland, Hitler agreed, but only after the end of the war with England. But he was not going to give Turkey and Bulgaria. So we didn't agree on only one point.
  
  Hess therefore flew to England to conclude a peace treaty. And Churchill already knew then that the attack on the USSR was a decided matter. But he could not agree to the dominance of Germany in Europe. Hitler did not understand this. By the way, it is Hess's flight to England that remains the most classified part of the English archives. They were planned to be declassified in 1990. But they extended the secrecy for another 50 years. So they will only see them in 2040. Maybe ... And they also say that the archives in the USSR are closed ...
  Hess was planned to be released from prison in the 70s. Great Britain was against it. But when the real question of his release became, he hanged himself. And during the British guard. All material evidence on his "suicide" was destroyed.
  Most likely Churchill gave verbal consent to end the war, and then deceived Hitler. It was Churchill, and not Stalin and Roosevelt, that Hitler considered his greatest enemy.
2. Bakht
  
  +2
  
  5 November 2021 10: 20
  
  You have highlighted the phrase
  
  Link to this blatant historical fact
  
  There is an official document given to Schullenburg on November 25, 1940. It is impossible to hide it, because it is in the archives. But there are no letters from Stalin. But there is indirect confirmation of such letters.
  
  Igor Bunich declares that “from October 1940 to May 1941 Hitler sent six personal letters to Stalin... Two of them were found, one dated December 3, 1940, and the second on May 14, 1941. " None of Stalin's answers were found.
  
  Can you imagine that the head of state writes six letters and does not receive an answer to them? I have already quoted a quote from the OFFICIAL response to the German proposals. Such an answer was impossible without Stalin's sanction.
DV tam 25

0

5 November 2021 03: 33

Quote: Bindyuzhnik
Quote: Bakht
The Luftwaffe gained dominance over southern England in late August and early September.

Outright nonsense. Dominance in the air was not achieved, and you cannot but know about it, therefore, like the classic - "I congratulate you, citizen, lied!" When such nonsense is written by any of the illiterate individuals present on the site who make three mistakes in one word, this is natural, but you are positioning yourself as a connoisseur of history ... Not good.

It's not good to lie, Mr. Repatriate.
1. The comment was deleted.
Michael1950

0

5 November 2021 03: 36

Quote: Bakht
Who's lying is already clear. July-August and even September are only official dates. When were the military garrisons located there? When were the warehouses established there? When were the airfields built? When was the military infrastructure created?

I repeat for the gifted - the preparation of a theater of operations is not done in one day, one week, or even a month. In the summer of 1940, Stalin did NOT stand behind Hitler. This is not a computer game, when, after the click of the mouse, a group ready to attack appears.

- Wait a minute! Hitler had enough time in several weeks to transfer his troops to the future Eastern Front and deploy them there. But Stalin, well, did not have enough of the same time to forestall Hitler in the deployment of troops on your territory! You see, Estonia interfered with him! With Latvia and Lithuania! Already included in the USSR!
1. Bakht
  
  +1
  
  5 November 2021 09: 52
  
  Germany was not deploying its troops for several weeks, but for several months. The first echelons moved back in April. Tank divisions began their advance in late May and early June. The reserve was planned to be transferred in July. Germany began to equip the theater of operations in the winter of 1940-41.
  Can you indicate the capacity of the railways in Germany and the USSR? Moreover, the railways of the USSR should be looked at in the regions west of Brest and Kiev. Until June 1941, this is peacetime. In addition to freight and passenger traffic, it was necessary to squeeze in military echelons and create supplies of equipment. And also to equip dozens and hundreds of airfields, barracks, training grounds, warehouses. These are building materials.
  
  The Baltic states did not interfere with Stalin. She was vital to him in order to secure the country. And according to German planning (including Barbarossa), it was the Baltic States that were considered as the primary goal. Paulus was one of the best General Staff officers in Germany. In his plan, he combined the ideas of Marx and Lossberg.
Siberian southerner

0

5 November 2021 12: 50

Why is that unclear? There are only two nations on the planet who know how to fight, these are the Germans (Western Slavs) and the Rus (Eastern). The Anglo-Saxons are sweating with horror that these two branches of the Slavs will unite and bend everyone. So they urged the stupid corporal, they say, come on, Adolf, and we will help. Only later did Adolf realize that the Saxons had been deceived.
1. Oleg Rambover
  
  -1
  
  7 November 2021 00: 38
  
  Quote: Siberian Southerner
  there are only two nations that know how to fight it is the Germans (Western Slavs)
  
  Since when did the Germans become Slavs?
  
  Quote: Siberian Southerner
  There are only two nations on the planet who know how to fight, these are the Germans (Western Slavs) and the Rus (Eastern).
  
  How did the Russians manage to lose to the British in the Crimea (on their territory!), While the Germans managed to lose to the British in WWI?
Siberian southerner

0

5 November 2021 14: 07

The reasons are simple and centuries-old, they are simply lined up with different suggestions, like they are being cultivated. The same crusades, that for Saracenia for the grave of the Lord, that for Russia, to weaken the strong in spirit and die a number of young and strong heads in their country. Nothing has changed over the centuries.
Oleg Bratkov

+2

5 November 2021 15: 56

England's friends, the Americans, funded Germany through Swiss banks, and an attack on England would have robbed Hitler of that financial support.
And when the Germans were defeated at Stalingrad, and the Americans realized that the case was ruined, and they would cope with Hitler without them, then they began to help the Soviet Union, in fact, to make money on the victory of the USSR. Like so.
1. Siberian southerner
  
  0
  
  5 November 2021 20: 11
  
  Everything is exactly like that, the Anglo-Saxons do not know how otherwise they have no conscience, they have a business, even on the blood of millions. The time comes to pay for everything.
  1. Oleg Rambover
    
    -1
    
    7 November 2021 00: 42
    
    How do you feel about Gorky?
    
    Your help will be recorded in history as a unique, gigantic achievement worthy of the greatest glory, and will long remain in the memory of millions of Russians ... whom you saved from death.
    
    Do you know why he said this?
    1. Oleg Bratkov
      
      +1
      
      14 November 2021 10: 49
      
      How do you feel about Khrushchev? He's so happy in the picture with an ear of corn ...
      1. Oleg Rambover
        
        -4
        
        14 November 2021 14: 31
        
        Quote: Oleg Bratkov
        How do you feel about Khrushchev?
        
        Better than Stalin.
        
        Quote: Oleg Bratkov
        He's so happy in the picture with an ear of corn ...
        
        Hmm ... you're scaring me.
        
        Just for reference, the quote above is from a letter sent to ARA head Herbert Hoover by Maxim Gorky.
        Do you remember how the American Aid Administration (ARA) saved millions of Russians from famine in 1921-23? Feeling grateful as the great writer bequeathed?
        
        Oleg Bratkov
        
        +1
        
        15 November 2021 17: 45
        
        It was Khrushchev who destroyed socialism in the USSR, and everything began under his leadership.
        And, another interesting moment. Under Stalin, the USSR increased its gold reserves at a rate of 1000 ... 1500 tons in a five-year plan. Under Khrushchev, and then Brezhnev, the gold reserve was lost at a rate of 500 tons in a five-year period. That is, they plundered what they had already acquired, and they stole what was mined on the move, that is, they lost $ 2.000 tons of gold every five years. Why did they lose, Yu was handed over to the Anglo-Saxons ... Your favorite years ...
        
        Oleg Rambover
        
        -1
        
        15 November 2021 17: 58
        
        Quote: Oleg Bratkov
        And, another interesting moment. Under Stalin, the USSR increased its gold reserves at a rate of 1000 ... 1500 tons in a five-year plan. Under Khrushchev, and then Brezhnev, the gold reserve was lost at a rate of 500 tons in a five-year period.
        
        Under Stalin, food was not purchased abroad.
        
        Oleg Bratkov
        
        +2
        
        20 November 2021 00: 30
        
        Quote: Oleg Rambover
        Under Stalin, food was not purchased abroad.
        
        And then Khrushchev began to cultivate virgin lands, then Brezhnev threw him from his post, and glorified himself as a pioneer of virgin lands, and the USSR began to buy grain. But they bought it cunningly, should the USSR supply some wheat to Cuba, they buy it in the USA, and on American ships they bring it to Cuba, and the Americans, unloading the ship, laugh that your socialism cannot feed itself.
        Well, when socialism was ruined, and thieves took the property of the people into private property, for some reason, for some reason, for some crap, Russia came out on top in the world in terms of wheat export. And the strangest thing is that the same relatives are at the helm. That's it, then they were servants of the people, and did not want to work or leave their posts. And now the money is in their pocket, already officially, by the way, thanks from them to the Americans, they helped a lot to destroy socialism ...
2. Oleg Rambover
  
  -2
  
  7 November 2021 00: 28
  
  Quote: Oleg Bratkov
  then they began to help the Soviet Union in fact, to make money on the victory of the USSR.
  
  How to make money?
  1. Oleg Bratkov
    
    +1
    
    14 November 2021 10: 44
    
    Do you know by what year Russia has finally settled with the United States on lend-lease debts? Question to question.
    The economy of Western Europe is tied to the United States, the rights to key technologies belong to the Americans, and with its sanctions the United States can paralyze the industry of the old world. Yes, Americans know how to create slaves for themselves, hundreds of years of experience.
    1. Oleg Rambover
      
      -1
      
      14 November 2021 14: 16
      
      I know, in 2006. Do you know that 7% of the deliveries were paid, excluding inflation. Moreover, the USSR paid 0,4% of them, the rest of the Russian Federation. And if we take into account that during this time the inflation of the dollar was about 1500%, then taking into account inflation, it paid less than 1% of the amount of supplies. What is the business if they were paid after 60 years 7% of the delivered, excluding inflation?
      
      Quote: Oleg Bratkov
      The economy of Western Europe is tied to the United States, the rights to key technologies belong to the Americans, and with its sanctions the United States can paralyze the industry of the old world. Yes, Americans know how to create slaves for themselves, hundreds of years of experience.
      
      But for some reason, millions dream of falling into this slavery. Including 77 thousand Russians in 2018. And there are not many who want to escape from slavery to a free Russia. How so?
      1. Oleg Bratkov
        
        +1
        
        20 November 2021 00: 44
        
        Yes, so, do not read pro-American newspapers, but the same Rosstat, how many left, but how many entered. So far, you are breaking straight in the eyes, like some kind of animal. Look at migration at Rosstat, in 2020, for example, 594.146 people entered Russia from abroad, and 487.672 people left abroad.
        Where were you taught to breach? Are there special courses somewhere, or are you just by nature, from birth, like that?
gorenina91

-1

6 November 2021 10: 17

- Hitler just stepped on the same rake - as once Napoleon ...
- Well, here it is ... Britain ... - take it and eat it, or rather make sandwiches out of it - and pop ...
- Some kind of "transportation transport" suddenly did not have enough in Germany ... - Yes, it's just a laugh !!!
- Damn, when German paratroopers (real suicide bombers) captured Crete ... - Damn, only some 5 thousand paratroopers with small arms (carbines and a few machine guns and a weak supply of ammunition ... - for a one-time short battle) ... - And this is against the fortified 25 thousand Cretan British garrison !!! - And all the same ... - captured this Crete by the German airborne forces - just like that ... - The same thing happened in Norway !!!
- And in Britain what ??? - Yes, everything would be exactly the same ... - The same airborne forces would have captured the British airfields ... - and then the landing of the main German units would have begun ... - And in Britain itself there were no "normal" troops. .. - all the British garrisons were scattered across the distant islands and colonies ... - So Britain would not flutter for a long time ...
- And then Germany would be able to create "British Luftwaffe", which would then fight against the USSR ... - And the British infantry corps would have recruited ... - Well, if Germany could recruit legionnaires from the French. to send them against Russia - some of the British - and even more so.
- Against Britain, Germany suddenly did not find "means" to invade this miserable island (there were not enough naval means that could reach the island) ... - But to attack the USSR (with its colossal potential and space vast expanses and where to achieve military success requires an unreal gigantic military potential) ... - and here Germany suddenly "found everything" ...
- Nobody is funny ???