Everybody (the Allies, the Germans and the Russians themselves) thought
that RU was finished 3 weeks into B. GE considered this likely before
they set out. Stalin did so too as he did his utmost to avoid war in
June 41. England didn't think much of the soviet army and was willing to
engage it in Finland while fighting GE at the same time.

Churchill looked to America for help not RU. Had GE started to fortify
ist conquests England on ist own wouldn't have made much of an
impression. The blockade would have been ineffective. And was. In
particular, because a lot of raw materials critical to the war effort
were provided by RU.
As an aside: in WWI the blockade was pacticular effective because it
did not just affect war production but food supplies. The Allies didn't
bat an eye-lid about 100.000s dead civilian even after the armistice
when they kept the blockade going. This did affect Germany but even more
so Austria-Hungary and Bulgaria.
In WWII there were shortages and foodstamps but even in the final days
of 45 you could still get your food for your foodstamps and there was
milk for infants etc. This only changed AFTER allied occupation.

GE blockade and bombing vs. England in such a scenario would've been
more productive.

Also, England could produce as much as GE only because GE hadn't yet
organised ist production properly. (And even then I don't believe they
did after adding in all the conquests.) Once Speer started to organise
GE industry it wasn't in the same league.

>>> Håkon Fløystad <hakon.floystad@...> 14.01.2009 02:24 >>>
By maintaining the blockade, as well as their patience, the Brits could
do to Hitler the same they did vs Napoleon. Simply wait him out. Sooner
or later, he would either do something stupid, or something external
would happen.

The British alone could match Germany in industrial production, and
they commanded an even greater empire than did Germany. Also, even if
there were some issues in India, the British control of their Colonies
must be considered to be less volatile than Germany's control in the
conquered nations. In Italy also faced significant internal division.

And despite the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, it was not a very well kept
secret that Hitler and Stalin were mortal enemies, so Hitler hardly had
his back free when confronting England. While it can be disputed if
Stalin actually intended to attack first, or not, the possibility could
not be overlooked. Hitler certainly was not blind to this. Mein Kampf
does predict that the Russians sooner or later will attack Germany, and
I don't find it unlikely that Churchill also considered this a
possibility. I also expect that Chirchill's intelligence sources were at
least partially aware of the enourmous magnitudes of material that the
USSR industy were able to produce, far outshining the Germans.

Finally, of course, there was the possibility of the US joining at some
time, and if they did, it would certainly be on the allied side.

So, with both internal stability and the probability of external
factors, I don't really find it likely that the CW would have agreed to
peace any time soon.

Maybe this is just hindsight on my part, but it does seem to me that
many of the events that actually did take place, were quite likely to
happen.

Cheers
Hakon



> -----Original Message-----
> From: wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Devin Cutler
> Sent: 14. januar 2009 01:42
> To: wifdiscussion@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: SV: Antw: RE: [wifdiscussion] Re: Defending USSR
>
> But let's think about what exactly the CW could do if Germany
> simply maintained a defensive posture and didn't DOW Russia.
> If the US doesn't come into the European War (and I am not
> sure it would if Germany stands pat) then don't we
> effectively have a stalemate that devolves into a sort of
> cold war (with immense pressure from the Greeks, French,
> Dutch, Belgi
ans, and Norwegians to accept Hitler's terms)? If
> Hitler declares he will only bomb England on a one-for-one
> basis for each English bombing of Germany. I simply can't
> believe England is going to make a dent by itself and with
> mounting pressure to accept a truce.
>
> Devin