Romanian Military History Forum - Part of Romanian Army in the Second World War Website



Pages: (3) 1 [2] 3   ( Go to first unread post ) Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> 200 days shorter?!?!, Romania after 23.08.1944
 
Did Romanian participation shorten the war with 200 days?
1. Yes, it did! [ 7 ]  [43.75%]
2. No, it didn't because it didn't matter so much! (compared to the whole Soviet Army) [ 5 ]  [31.25%]
3. No, it didn't because we fought against them for almost 3 years! [ 4 ]  [25.00%]
Total Votes: 16
Guests cannot vote 
Dénes
Posted on March 28, 2009 12:59 pm
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4368
Member No.: 4
Joined: June 17, 2003



You forgot Croatia.

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on March 28, 2009 01:00 pm
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
MMM
Posted on March 28, 2009 01:41 pm
Quote Post


General de divizie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1463
Member No.: 2323
Joined: December 02, 2008



Ok, then, european allies - states that had an independent government - to rule out Croatia and Slovakia, good?


--------------------
M
PMEmail PosterUsers WebsiteYahoo
Top
Florin
Posted on March 30, 2009 05:16 pm
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1879
Member No.: 17
Joined: June 22, 2003



As usual, this "what if" scenario is linked by other "what if".
Combined with few others "what if", if Romania would remain in the Axis the war could be longer with 200 days. Even with 200 additional days, the outcome would be the same. With German industry under daily bombing, all kind of exotic projects of jet fighters, stratospheric missiles and futuristic submarines would be issued in small numbers.
America would have the atomic bomb in July 1945, anyway.

There are countless "what if" regarding this subject.
If Romania would remain in the Axis and the Soviets would break the fortifications and advance just as little as to occupy Ploiesti and the petroleum pits, it would not make much difference from that moment.

Or if the Germans would advance in December 1944 up to the Atlantic shore and cut the Allies in Belgium and Holland, those Allies could be supplied by air and by navy, and the Germans would be still vulnerable toward the Soviets.

This post has been edited by Florin on March 30, 2009 05:19 pm
PM
Top
MMM
Posted on March 30, 2009 06:48 pm
Quote Post


General de divizie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1463
Member No.: 2323
Joined: December 02, 2008



An observation: there would have been no need for the Soviets to physically occupy Ploieşti. The FNB line was at a few dozen kilometres from Ploieşti - like 5 minutes flying! Anyway, nobody ever said the final result could have been different - not to my knowledge, at least!

This post has been edited by MMM on March 30, 2009 06:49 pm


--------------------
M
PMEmail PosterUsers WebsiteYahoo
Top
dragos
Posted on March 30, 2009 09:34 pm
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 2397
Member No.: 2
Joined: February 11, 2003



An interesting issue raised by MMM, were Ploesti oilfields bombed by Soviet airforce during 1944, and with what consequences?
PMUsers WebsiteYahoo
Top
Florin
Posted on March 30, 2009 10:43 pm
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1879
Member No.: 17
Joined: June 22, 2003



QUOTE (dragos @ March 30, 2009 04:34 pm)
An interesting issue raised by MMM, were Ploesti oilfields bombed by Soviet airforce during 1944, and with what consequences?

The passenger trains around Ploesti were machine gunned by Soviet airplanes.
Somebody living now in the U.S. survived to such an attack.
However, this does not answer to your question, if their airplanes attacked refineries and industrial installations.

If I would be Soviet Union back then in 1944, I would not do it, considering the secret negotiations between the Romanians and the Soviets.
It could be argued that it would make sense for Soviet Union to capture the area instead of bombing it, but they did not need that much the Romanian petroleum.
PM
Top
Victor
Posted on March 31, 2009 06:20 am
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4350
Member No.: 3
Joined: February 11, 2003



QUOTE (dragos @ March 30, 2009 11:34 pm)
An interesting issue raised by MMM, were Ploesti oilfields bombed by Soviet airforce during 1944, and with what consequences?

No, but they did bomb cities in Moldavia IIRC.
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
MMM
Posted on March 31, 2009 03:46 pm
Quote Post


General de divizie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1463
Member No.: 2323
Joined: December 02, 2008



Did they? I don't remember reading that. Anyway, Suvorov/Rezun claimed in one of his undoubtedly true blink.gif books that on june 26-th 1941 the VVS launched a raid on Ploieşti that crippled the industry, halving the capacity of refineries for a couple of weeks. I found no other source on that - have you?
Getting back to 1944, it is unclear why didn't the Soviet bomb Romania earlier on in the war - only because of the peace talks? They did have the capacity...


--------------------
M
PMEmail PosterUsers WebsiteYahoo
Top
Dénes
Posted on March 31, 2009 06:00 pm
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4368
Member No.: 4
Joined: June 17, 2003



QUOTE (MMM @ March 31, 2009 09:46 pm)
...on june 26-th 1941 the VVS launched a raid on Ploieşti that crippled the industry, halving the capacity of refineries for a couple of weeks. I found no other source on that - have you?

Yes, I have. The VVS did bomb Ploesti several times in 1941, occasionally causing significant damage.
If truly interested, you can find details elsewhere in this forum, and also in my aforementioned book.

Gen. Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on March 31, 2009 06:03 pm
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
Victor
Posted on April 01, 2009 06:01 am
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4350
Member No.: 3
Joined: February 11, 2003



QUOTE (MMM @ March 31, 2009 05:46 pm)
Did they? I don't remember reading that. Anyway, Suvorov/Rezun claimed in one of his undoubtedly true blink.gif books that on june 26-th 1941 the VVS launched a raid on Ploieşti that crippled the industry, halving the capacity of refineries for a couple of weeks. I found no other source on that - have you?
Getting back to 1944, it is unclear why didn't the Soviet bomb Romania earlier on in the war - only because of the peace talks? They did have the capacity...

Read carefully dragos' post to which I replied. It is clearly mentioned there the year 1944.
In 1941 there were ideed VVS raids over Ploiesti. Just do a forum search.
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
MMM
Posted on April 01, 2009 10:29 am
Quote Post


General de divizie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1463
Member No.: 2323
Joined: December 02, 2008



So, the Soviets DID bomb cities in Moldova in 1944! Which cities and when? What Moldova (left or right of Pruth River)? wink.gif


--------------------
M
PMEmail PosterUsers WebsiteYahoo
Top
MMM
Posted on April 02, 2009 02:01 pm
Quote Post


General de divizie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1463
Member No.: 2323
Joined: December 02, 2008



QUOTE (dead-cat @ March 28, 2009 11:29 am)

Japan

Japan WHAT?!?! They did capitulate immediately after the Red Army entered thier territory of Manchuria in august 1945, at more than three entire months from Adolf's suicide!


--------------------
M
PMEmail PosterUsers WebsiteYahoo
Top
dead-cat
Posted on April 02, 2009 02:29 pm
Quote Post


Locotenent
*

Group: Members
Posts: 559
Member No.: 99
Joined: September 05, 2003



Japan was an axis member (to the end) and an ally of Germany after the war moved on german soil. scroll back. this is what you asked.
PMYahoo
Top
MMM
Posted on April 02, 2009 02:47 pm
Quote Post


General de divizie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1463
Member No.: 2323
Joined: December 02, 2008



I stick to my oppinion: Japan capitulated after being invaded by SU - at least, Manchurian territories held by Japan. And at that time, there was no more axis, thus no more tri-partite pact, right?! ohmy.gif


--------------------
M
PMEmail PosterUsers WebsiteYahoo
Top
dead-cat
Posted on April 02, 2009 03:46 pm
Quote Post


Locotenent
*

Group: Members
Posts: 559
Member No.: 99
Joined: September 05, 2003



when the US landed on Okinawa, there was still an "axis".
Manchuko was never annexed to Japan, so the occupation of Manchuko is pretty much the same thing as the red army invading Ukraine or the Baltic states.
also, Japan didn't surrender because of the soviet attack on Manchuko, but because of the atomic bombing.
PMYahoo
Top
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

Topic Options Pages: (3) 1 [2] 3  Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

 






[ Script Execution time: 0.0779 ]   [ 18 queries used ]   [ GZIP Enabled ]