2019-06-08 23:50:41 UTC
successful and the USA had to use nuclear weapons on Germany, as they
were originally intended, and not on Japan?
(I said "Interesting", I do not necessarily agree.)
Thierry Etienne Joseph Rotty, Senior Controller
Well, we know from Stalin’s private archives that if the Normandy
Landings had been a failure, the Soviets would have halted at the
The Red Army would have assumed defensive positions and waited for
Hitler to make a peace offer.
Stalin’s wasn’t planning on taking on the remaining Axis all by himself.
He knew he didn't have the manpower to conquer and occupy all of Germany
on his own, so he wasn’t even going to try.
Had the Allies been forced to use nuclear weapons, the effects would
have been minimal. Western Cities couldn’t be compared to Japanese
cities (who used much more wood) and Germany’s air raid shelters were
Add to this that nuclear explosions don't cause firestorms and don’t
disrupt underground infrastructure when airbursted, and nuclear weapons
would have been considerably less effective than a major conventional raid.
Before the massive bombing raids on Germany took place, the Allies
estimated 200 nuclear weapons would be needed to bring Germany
economically to its knees. This was before the Germans moved their
Without successful Normandy Landings, the war would most likely have
ended in a negotiated truce.
Historically speaking, the Allies were at the end of their rope by 1945
while the Germans had run out of rope. The Soviets were conscripting
16-year-old boys. In Northwest Europe alone, the British had 45,000
deserters since the Normandy Landings, the Americans 200,000.
A negotiated peace in which Germany returns to its pre-war borders with
some minor adjustments is the most realistic scenario. At this point,
Austria, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, and the Low Countries would have been
bargaining chips at the negotiating table.
20.5k views · View Upvoters · View Sharers
‘Well, we know from Stalin’s private archives that if the Normandy
Landings had been