Forty Two wrote:jamest wrote:Just watched another WW2 documentary... got me thinking... why the fuck did Hitler give up on defeating Britain before attacking Russia? Was this the decision which ultimately led to Germany's defeat?
Oil.
Hitler had a nonaggression pact with Stalin, but Hitler was concerned that Stalin would choose to invade Romania in 1940 and to take over the oil fields there (and in the surrounding or nearby countries. Had he done so, he would have seriously hobbled Germany, and the Soviets could have then made fairly short work of Germany. So, there were all sorts of things going on through 1940 and 1941 where Hitler was trying to secure the Balkan area to secure the oil. So part of the reason for attacking Stalin was to preempt what Hitler saw as Stalin's opportunity to seize territory and the oil output.
Basically correct. Also, that it was part of a greater problem: The fact that Stalin's Soviet Union was bound to attack Hitler's Third Reich as soon as it felt powerful enough to win such a war. Hitler knew that it won't be long before the Soviet Union would be in a position to do just that. The Battle of Britain did not go according to plan. It is at this point that Hitler's plan for expanding his empire began to unravel, though we only know this with the wisdom of hindsight.
The cynically Machiavellian aspect of the non-aggression pact was widely recognised as soon as it was signed. It was signed on the 23rd of August 1939 and broken two years later. Here is a cartoon drawn by David Low and published by the
Evening Standard in Great Britain less than two months after the signing:
It not only exposes the utter dishonesty underlying the agreement, but also the important aspect of oil resources that were tied up with the breaking of it. I have already posted the cartoon in this thread about five months ago, but it seems appropriate to post it again for the benefit of those who can't be bothered to read through the entirety of this particular discussion.
