Was the German invasion of the Soviet Union nothing more than naked aggression on the part of Germany, as some have suggested, a desire on the part of Hitler and his government to grap territory from the Slavs they considered inferior, or was it an attempt to preempt a Soviet invasion of Europe and destroy Bolshevism?

I would say some of both. The dream of Lebensraum in the East was quite clear like the desire to destroy Bolshevism at its core and once for all. Several things could have been done better in regards to the local Governorships over the Occupied territories but that is always easy to say in hinsight.

The land was wanted for lebensraum, and the Slavs were considered inferior. And of course Hitler felt threatened by Communism, what sane non-Communist leader wouldn't?

But whatever the motives, the attack itself was a screwup. They attacked too late in the summer, had too low an estimate of Red Army abilities, weren't prepared for the winter, and bickered too long about the next move for the next move to succeed.

The Russian deployments on (their) Western front may seem aggressive, but were they really planning an attack in the near future? They were, after all, caught with their pants down in the first little bit of Barbarossa, and the Russian doctrine of "People's War" did favour aggressive deployment of infantry regardless of the situation.

Some sort of conflict between Russia and Germany was probably inevitable in the long run, because conflicts between powerful countries are usually the norm. Guys with big shoulders bump up against each other.

Hitler was always going to wage war on Russia , Western Poland was never going to be enough.
Stalin , who would trust him in the long run would war have come , quite possibly.
Ebusitanus makes a valid point regarding how th east was administered , based upon the local population being subhuman.
Definatley a chance for popular local support was missed , a major mistake , it was not lost on the front line soldier.
I don't see it as an attempot to "get in first" , despite what Dr. Brandt says the Soviets were just not ready and Stalin did nothing for 24 hours , he was caught and well caught.
Hitler could have made a settlement with Stalin , it could have been done , and for Germany it should have been done.

Sorry Sinclair and cerebrus but...

Ive heard from my jew friend no less Stalin planned to attack in 1942, and the deployment of the supply caches forward seems to back this up.

Hitler still would have been smarter letting the incompetently led and poorly equipped reds to invade. They would have been slaughtered and public opinion would have swung to his side.

Stalin already destroyed Bolshevism during the Great Purges and his campaign against Trotsky. Although very sympathetic with his drive to destroy the Soviet state, Hitler's methodology left a lot to be desired.

How could one not create a Uke state to play them off of the Russians?

I haven't made up my mind on this issue. So if anyone has any evidence that Stalin was preparing to attack (which would not really surprise me), then lets see it.

There is a book about this, I think its been translating into English, Ill see if I can find it.

Icebreaker or something like that. I have never read it. I have also heard it was discredited.

The Last Republic


I dont know where you'd find it.

You can read a review of it here:
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v17/v17n4p30_Michaels.html

Icebreaker or something like that. I have never read it. I have also heard it was discredited.


Same author, I don't know if its discredited or not, but I'd be wary if the discrediting came from the usual subjects.

I think you mean "suspects" :jew: ;)

Yes, I stand connected.

Otto ,
1942 , you could not rule it out.
Fade Dr. B. was talking in a related thread that Stalin was going to "go" in less than two weeks ( that would be say 1st week in July 41) with a full sacle invasion of occupied Poland) he might be willing to reveal his sources , to date he is coy about doing so.

In 42 , who knows could well have happened , in 41 , no Stalin was not ready, and much as the Wehrmacht beat the Russians time and time again , they too were unprepared to wage war on this scale.
Barabarossa was something which Hitler always wanted a final showdown with the major Communist state , this he intended , "Sealion" he was always luke warm about and with England isloated he saw the way clear to embark on a quick violent assult to finish Russia in 6 months.

At some point in the future Germany / Russia would probably have come to blows , but who knows you could,have had a " cold war" type situation which could have gone on for years ?
My "2d" goes on germany always making the first move , that demand for living space being the driving factor.

Icebreaker or something like that. I have never read it. I have also heard it was discredited.

The non-discredited book which you are looking for is Stalin's War of Extermination by Joachim Hoffmann.

From www.amazon.com:

Prof. Richard C. Raack, Slavic Review, Summer 1996
Joachim Hoffmann explores Stalin's conduct of the 'war of annihilation' against the Germans and powerfully records its propaganda.

Berliner Morgenpost, Oct. 10, 1995
Hoffmann furnishes overwhelming data that Stalin conceived and accomplished his war against Germany as an extermination war of conquest.

Österreichische Militärische Zeitschrift, no. 1/1996
The extent of Stalin's extermination war and the justification of the German preventive war should be taken notice of.

About the Author
Joachim Hoffmann, Dr. phil., born 1930 in Königsberg, East Prussia; studied modern history, Eastern European history and comparative ethnology at the University of Hamburg and Berlin’s Free University. He received his PhD in history in 1959. Between 1960 and 1995, he was historian at the Militärgeschichtliche Forschungsamt der Bundeswehr (Research Department for Military History of the German Army). His field of expertise was "Armed Forces of the Soviet Union"; Dr. Hoffmann has authored numerous articles and books about political, diplomatic and military history of the 19th century and about the history of the German-Soviet war. In 1991 he was granted the "Dr. Walter-Eckhardt" Award, and in 1992 the "General Andrej Andrejewitsch Wlassow" Cultural Prize. Retired, he lives near Freiburg, Germany.

Book Description
Since the 1920s, Stalin planned the “World Revolution.” The outbreak of war in 1939 gave him the opportunity to realize his plans violently. This did not escape Germany’s notice who in turn planned a preventive strike. Dr. Hoffmann’s book proves Stalin’s aggressive intentions, shows how the Bolsheviks used unimaginable violence to force their own unwilling soldiers to fight against the Germans. Furthermore, this book reveals not only the atrocious treatment of German POWs by the Red Army, but explains also how Soviet soldiers were incited to unlimited hatred against everything German. Finally, it gives the reader an unpleasant glimpse into the gigantic wave of looting, arson, rape, torture, and mass murder that befell East Germany at the end of the war. Stalin’s War was a war of extermination both against Germany and against the peoples of the Soviet Union. It was not before 1948 that the US government realized that it fought against the wrong enemy in Europe during WWII. The author, a former historian of the German government, is one of the world’s finest experts on the German-Soviet war. His book is a huge success in Germany where left-wingers unsuccessfully tried to urge the parliament to ban it and punish its author.

So far as I understand, that Stalin had aggressive intent towards all of Western Europe is no longer contested. Hoffman's book is based on declassified documents provided directly from KGB archives by Putin, who - according to rumor - was punishing Israel for harboring oligarchs and refusing their extradition.

When Israel learned the nature of the documents released, they commissioned one of their own historians to preemptively discredit Hoffman's thesis. From all accounts, this has backfired, and the the superiority of Hoffman's work has not been impugned.

However, it is also not much talked about.

I recommend the book to everyone here; it's on the list I gave to Freidrich Braun which he has just posted. As an added bonus, when my copy arrived, it had a big sticker on the cover which alerted the reader to the fact that the book had been cleared by Germany's Board of Censors - an edifying experience.

Wintermute

I went to IHR site and took a quick look at the book linked.
The picture painted is one of total Russian strength. Misleading and innacurate.
The Russians did not have the quality of the german equipment nor did they have heavy tanks of a modern type such as T-34 and KV-1 to give away.
The majority of russian tanks were little more than scrap , how many had a radio in them , not one , that's how many.
By what terms is a heavy tank defined ?
Why did Germany have no heavy tanks similar to T-34 and KV-1 ?
Why did germany bite of more than she could take on , ask the Fuhrer , subhumans can't produce things like that was his attitude.
They don't have that many men , trust me its rubbish.

How much of this was in the West ? look at the size of Russia , a large land mass , to defend it , a large army.
The quality of the leadership and the material , was poor.
This allowed Germany to steal an early advantage , in time this was wittled away.
When you look at photographs of the 1941 battle field , the majority of Russian tanks shown are rubbish , the heavy ones shown are junk , total junk, ill armed and under powered , unsuitable for fast modern warfare.
KV and T-34 in the minority and only coming on line.
That was as far as I went...it said enough.
This is not a book I would read in isolation otherwise its possible to come away with an unrealistic impression of what was.

Barbarossa is a great example of why politicians dictating military policy is rarely good for the war effort.

If Stalin was on the verge of attacking Germany, what were all the best offensive/expolitative armour, the T-34's, doing hanging around Moscow?

Cavalry, or in the case of modern armoured warfare, medium tanks, are best held to the rear if one is expecting an attack- that way they can be used to quickly deliver strikes against enemy forces which have penetrated the defences, and hit them when they become overextended- just as happened to the German invaders in late '41.

It is true that Stalin thought he was going to invade west Europe- but this was in the late 30ies, and quickly evaporated when the western powers, instead of slugging it out in a protracted war, came to a quick (albeit temporary) resolution with the swift defeat of the Brits and the French.

Had a Soviet attack come in '42, it would have failed disastrously. Soviets were piss poor on the offence, as evidenced by their showing in Finland (and later). Thier battle experience came as defenders, which has been the historic strength of the Russian, against the fierce but failed German offensives (perfect example of this is Kursk '43).

Probably Hitler's greatest weakness laid in his reluctance to employ elastic defence- choosing rather, the outdated and fatal WW1 style static defence.

There is actually a very convincing argument put forward by some who believe that Stalin knew of German plans for attack, thus the fact that the crucial factor, the T-34's were held near Moskva.

-Steve

The Brits did warn Stalin , but he would not believe it.
He had everything down to the date and the time and still when attacked he did nothing , for 24 hours he did nothing.
A nation within 14 days of going to war would have done better , and as flak 88 says the Russians did very badly in Finland only against Japan did they do anything.
If war was coming in 14 days and was planned for well in advance why was so much being exported so frequently and so much on time to Germany ?
If Russia was building up to attack , it would seem obvious that the Germans would have known it , you can't hide the evidence so close to the event , the signs would be there .
What would be the reason for not mentioning this in what has been published to date , certainly no german acount by those who wrote mention it , Guderian in "Panzer Leader " didn't nor did Von Manstein in "Lost Victories" .
It just does not add up, unless there is some other aganda being served.

Of course there is another agenda being served. It's the same agenda that gets served by long threads about how the Germans were the poor, defenceless victims of the aggression of the unstoppable Polish military machine, and how dare the British and French have the temerity to actually HONOUR their agreements to Poland!

I mean, yeah, Hitler may have forseen a possible clash with Russia someday, a blind man could have seen that. But they were hardly on the verge of attacking. If they had, they'd have been beaten like red-headed stepchildren.