What if: Germany marched on Moscow instead of Ukraine

[ft254]

If Hitler hadn't interceded and allowed his armies to move on Moscow, as was the original plan and nearly all of the generals wanted to do, instead of diverting to the Ukraine, would the outcome of WW2 been different?

Moscow was the central point for the majority of infrastructure in the country, including the military and political organizations, which were intertwined. The collapse of the capital of the USSR would have been disastrous, but would have it been fatal?

Hitler's decision to delay the offensive on Moscow and divert the efforts south resulted in Russian losses of 750,000 troops and proportionate losses in guns and armor. The natural resources, agricultural food sources and production were assets that worked in Hitler's favor. Also, the Ukraine ultimately would be the jump off point for offensives southward into the Crimea and the Caucuses.

But, was the victory in numbers worth the time lost? Obviously the weather, rains in the late summer and fall brought the long march to a crawl. Later the hard freeze and brutal temps created terrible conditions to armies that hadn't considered a winter campaign or made preparations for it.

 

[SalAunese]

Still a long ways from the Soviet factories that relocated to the Urals. I think the war on the Ostfront may have lasted longer but eventually Germany was going to get bogged down into a stalemate. The loss of Moscow likely would have been a major impact on the transportation network (and morale) due to Moscow’s location on the road network but I think the Russians would have adapted and chipped away at the German war machine. They were extremely driven when it came to driving the Fascist Invader from Mother Russia

 

[mnole03]

They mucked the whole thing up. They needed to get to the oil fields more than they needed Moscow.

The German insistence on fully taking cities instead of bombing them out and moving on was catastrophic, in both Moscow and Stalingrad. The fact that the Japanese didn’t even pretend to threaten Russia enough to keep the Eastern Army from joining the fight didn’t help matters.

The Germans were never going to win against a sizeable t-34 force. They either had to get to the factories or cut off their oil.

 

[SalAunese]

They mucked the whole thing up. They needed to get to the oil fields more than they needed Moscow.

The German insistence on fully taking cities instead of bombing them out and moving on was catastrophic, in both Moscow and Stalingrad. The fact that the Japanese didn’t even pretend to threaten Russia enough to keep the Eastern Army from joining the fight didn’t help matters.

The Germans were never going to win against a sizeable t-34 force. They either had to get to the factories or cut off their oil.

Bombing the hell out of Stalingrad created much of the nightmare that they encountered in the deadly fighting among the rubble, ruins, cellars and sewers of that city. The Luftwaffe wasn’t built for large scale strategic bombing campaigns either.

 

[h-hawk]

IIRC the Soviets moved something like 1,500 large factories east to escape the Germans. These were pretty much out of reach and the Germans would have had a difficult time building a heavy bomber force large enough to have any effect on them. Germans gave them their best shot but Soviets had the space to trade for time, the people to expend, and a die hard dictator to match Hitler.

 

[bagdropper]

Germany was never going to beat "General Winter" while fighting a 3 front war. Russia is a big, big country - and easily had resources and manpower to fight on should Moscow fall. They needed food, oil, and production/raw materials - and strategically Moscow didn't supply much if any of those.

 

[NorthernHawkeye]

If the Germans had opted to take all of Poland on its own and then instead of attacking west, attacked Russia, could they have pulled off a one front war with Russia?

I realize the western allies drew a line in the sand with Poland but they didn’t really act on it. Would the western allies, if left untouched by Germany, have acted if Germany invaded Russia?

What would the west gain by having Germany and Russia knock the crap out of each other? Two dictators, equally evil...

 

[binsfeldcyhawk2]

If Hitler hadn't interceded and allowed his armies to move on Moscow, as was the original plan and nearly all of the generals wanted to do, instead of diverting to the Ukraine, would the outcome of WW2 been different?

Moscow was the central point for the majority of infrastructure in the country, including the military and political organizations, which were intertwined. The collapse of the capital of the USSR would have been disastrous, but would have it been fatal?

Hitler's decision to delay the offensive on Moscow and divert the efforts south resulted in Russian losses of 750,000 troops and proportionate losses in guns and armor. The natural resources, agricultural food sources and production were assets that worked in Hitler's favor. Also, the Ukraine ultimately would be the jump off point for offensives southward into the Crimea and the Caucuses.

But, was the victory in numbers worth the time lost? Obviously the weather, rains in the late summer and fall brought the long march to a crawl. Later the hard freeze and brutal temps created terrible conditions to armies that hadn't considered a winter campaign or made preparations for it.

Don't think you listed it but Moscow was also a rail/transportation/communications hub. Soviets lose the Moscow region they're going to have a very difficult time moving troops North/South along the front....really mess up their logistics.

As the Germans moved farther east their logistics were becoming a nightmare. Soviets able to get reinforcements to hot spots much easier and faster than the Germans. Anything that evens up that disparity (taking Moscow) is bad news for the Soviets.

Don't know if it wins the war in the east for the Germans but definitely would have made the situation much more difficult.

 

[joelbc1]

Just the size of the Soviet Union was enough to wear the Nazi’s down. Miles and miles of miles and miles. And lots of population, too. It was just a matter of time....and that was with Stalin killing as many Russians as the Nazis, too!

 

[BigDelHawk]

IIRC the Soviets moved something like 1,500 large factories east to escape the Germans. These were pretty much out of reach and the Germans would have had a difficult time building a heavy bomber force large enough to have any effect on them. Germans gave them their best shot but Soviets had the space to trade for time, the people to expend, and a die hard dictator to match Hitler.

This is why the Russians want control of the Ukraine.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

Might have changed how quickly the war was over but ultimately I think the war was lost for Germany the moment they attacked the Soviet Union.

They simply could not have conquered the entirety of Russia. Their supply lines would not have held up. Furthermore the Russians knew pretty quickly that the Germans had a massive hatred for them and would know that surrendering would be a far worse fate then fighting to the death.

Russia was going to win that war, even without the help of Britain or the US. It might have cost them 3/4th of their population but they where going to win.

Only path to victory against the Russians was convincing Japan to invade Russia from the other side.

But one on one Germany lost the moment they tried to invade Russia.

 

[BigDelHawk]

Might have changed how quickly the war was over but ultimately I think the war was lost for Germany the moment they attacked the Soviet Union.

They simply could not have conquered the entirety of Russia. Their supply lines would not have held up. Furthermore the Russians knew pretty quickly that the Germans had a massive hatred for them and would know that surrendering would be a far worse fate then fighting to the death.

Russia was going to win that war, even without the help of Britain or the US. It might have cost them 3/4th of their population but they where going to win.

Only path to victory against the Russians was convincing Japan to invade Russia from the other side.

But one on one Germany lost the moment they tried to invade Russia.

Had Germany treated the Russians in the North as equals, and acted as liberators instead of invaders, they would have had more of a chance. The White Russians hated Stalin.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

Had Germany treated the Russians in the North as equals, and acted as liberators instead of invaders, they would have had more of a chance. The White Russians hated Stalin.

I don't think they would have had a chance even if they where trying to liberate the Russians from Stalin. Russia is just too massive.

Even if the Germans get to Moscow they are only like a quarter of the way in. You are talking about pushing all the way to the pacific to eliminate organized resistance while trying to maintain your ever expanding supply lines and occupy the country.

It ultimately comes down to the maximum "Never start a land war in Asia".

Napolean couldn't do it and he was mostly fighting on one front at the time (I think he might have had some troops in Spain supporting his brother, but the bulk of his army was in the east.) and he was a far superior military leader then Hitler was.

 

[sober_teacher]

Operation Barbarossa was conceived as a 3-prong offensive aimed at the Baltic (Leningrad), towards ultimately Stalingrad in the south and Moscow in the east. They probably had the strength to do one, with Moscow being the smart play. As others noted, Russia moved many of their factories well east of Moscow. Taking Moscow would have enabled them to cut those factories (and Russian reinforcements from the east) from the oil to the south.

Idk if it would have ultimately changed anything but it would have made the war last longer. Long term what hurt the Germans more was treating Russians as conquered enemies than as liberated people. Doing that created a massive guerrilla campaign that tied down large numbers of troops.

 

[Titanhawk2]

Napoleon took Moscow and it didn't help him

 

[ft254]

This is why the Russians want control of the Ukraine.

My narrative would have been a book if I had listed all aspects of the situation, which is why I wanted feedback. The Ukraine was the center of commerce (factories, agriculture, mining, etc.) and its control was absolutely necessary. But,.....should Moscow have come first.

 

[h-hawk]

An example of the German logistics problems - Soviet railroads were a different gauge than the other European railroads. The Germans had to take supplies off trains at the end of their lines and then put them on trains meant for the Russian railroads - what a nightmare.

 

[BigDelHawk]

My narrative would have been a book if I had listed all aspects of the situation, which is why I wanted feedback. The Ukraine was the center of commerce (factories, agriculture, mining, etc.) and its control was absolutely necessary. But,.....should Moscow have come first.

This is why Russia wants The Ukraine back, it is part of that vast expanse slash and burn defense they have relied on for centuries. NATO agreed when the wall came down that we would not be expansionist.

 

[joelbc1]

An example of the German logistics problems - Soviet railroads were a different gauge than the other European railroads. The Germans had to take supplies off trains at the end of their lines and then put them on trains meant for the Russian railroads - what a nightmare.

This has always been a very underplayed reason for the German hardships in its invasion of Russia. With the miles to be transported and all, the "gauge " problem was real.