Is Russia too big to be one Country?

Stovepipe

His generals advised him not to, for every very obvious reason, but he insisted and given the ease with which they beat Western Europe, it must have seemed to be a handy job.

PsychoPete

If Russia is reading this, you deserve to be a bigger country

titan18

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

What was Hitler thinking.

Tbf, whilst it's pretty impossible to take the whole country without help from the Japanese in the east and probably the Turkish in the caucuses, they did really well for a time. if the Germans had gone Moscow first and succeeded in taking that and the corridor to St Petersburg, they'd likely have cut most of the Soviet industrial capacity and made it very difficult for the Soviets to rebound if the Japanese cut off the pacific.

That or if they had managed to take Britain, they'd have had full reign to bring their full force to Russi and likely would have overwhelmed them faster.

Jinglejangle69

titan18 wrote: »

Tbf, whilst it's pretty impossible to take the whole country without help from the Japanese in the east and probably the Turkish in the caucuses, they did really well for a time. if the Germans had gone Moscow first and succeeded in taking that and the corridor to St Petersburg, they'd likely have cut most of the Soviet industrial capacity and made it very difficult for the Soviets to rebound if the Japanese cut off the pacific.

That or if they had managed to take Britain, they'd have had full reign to bring their full force to Russi and likely would have overwhelmed them faster.

They were never gonna win in the end.

Of course they would get off to a good start, but the, population size and geography of Russia was always gonna end one way for the Nazis.

Hitlers worst decision among many bad ones.

whisky_galore

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

What was Hitler thinking.

That they were sub human and they'd be easily defeated, simply roll over and be grateful to toil for the Reich.
Same with Westerners (British, Russians, Yanks found out to their cost) and the Japanese, oh these little men won't put up much of a fight, sure they're short sighted too.

mikeym

I heard the Boards.ie mods will run mother Russia when Putin retires

Dont mess with those guys :D:D:D

biko

biko wrote: »

It is too big because it's really a union like EU.
Many smaller nation swallowed up during the Soviet times (some even before) and now Russia won't let them go to find their own destiny.

There's not that many separatist groups within Russia proper, by and large Russia is in fact largely ethnically Russian. Its about as ethnically Russian as England is ethnically English. About 80%, of course England is declining on that number.

snotboogie

snotboogie wrote: »

If the CCP ever fell there would be a number of Chinese states that would immediately break off, Tibet and Xinjiang for sure.

Guangdong would make or break the country, if they left to form a Cantonese super state with Hong Kong and Macau (which would have a GDP of about 2.5 trillion USD, putting it on par with India, France and the UK), the other culturally distinct regions like Greater Sichuan, Inner Mongolia and Dongbei would likely follow, effectively breaking up the continent.

I have to laugh at the Western prediction of the fall or breakup of countries with fairly homogenous ethnic and cultural similarities. Which is really what binds countries together, not size or lack of it. The EU is unfortunately, more unstable. The UK is, delightfully, much more unstable. I bet the US collapses long before Russia and the Chinese.

china is 91.6474% Han Chinese ( via wiki). Another 1.2% are Zhuang who aren't really considered the much different. Then there's the Manchus who are considered highly Sinicized

titan18

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

They were never gonna win in the end.

Of course they would get off to a good start, but the, population size and geography of Russia was always gonna end one way for the Nazis.

Hitlers worst decision among many bad ones.

Unlikely, but I think they could have with better decisions. For one, just focusing on the Eastern Front, if they had treated the captured populations much better (likes of Ukraine etc here), the sizable anti Soviet element of Russia would have swung towards fighting for Germany against the Soviets.

The Germans of course executed loads and treated them horrifically so much that the anti Soviet population just went well Stalin isn't so bad and fought back.

Likely couldn't have captured and held all of it with the way they treated people. With no help from the Japanese, there was always likely to get bogged down at the Urals but likely would have had Stalin sue for peace.

No idea how even if they had succeeded, they would manage to rule a terrority stretching from the Atlantic to the Urals though with how they treated the populations.

Pawwed Rig

[Deleted User] wrote: »

china is 91.6474% Han Chinese ( via wiki). Another 1.2% are Zhuang who aren't really considered the much different. Then there's the Manchus who are considered highly Sinicized

China's east is like Russia's west in the respect that this is where the majority of the population live. West China and East Russia are very sparsely populated.

titan18

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

China's east is like Russia's west in the respect that this is where the majority of the population live. West China and East Russia are very sparsely populated.

Ya, when you look at the province map, Xinjiang, Qinghai and Tibet are massive in comparison to the other provinces (barring Inner Mongolia) and are 3 of the least populous. Haven't been a part of China for very long in comparison to other provinces.

Gatling

titan18 wrote: »

Ya, when you look at the province map, Xinjiang, Qinghai and Tibet are massive in comparison to the other provinces (barring Inner Mongolia) and are 3 of the least populous. Haven't been a part of China for very long in comparison to other provinces.

Look at Siberia a population of 30 +million and makes up something like 70 % of Russias landmass ,but it's sparely populated 1 person for every 3kms,now with a Chinese population of about a million while the Russians government say it's only 30,000 Chinese in Siberia .plenty of places for foreign countries to get a foothold in various parts of russia

pcardin

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Before WWI Russia included Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Belarus, Ukraine, most of Poland and a slice of Romania.

there was no Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia before WWi. As a countries they formed straight after WW1 and were occupied again during WW2 despite being neutral.

Montage of Feck

Lithuania goes way back, was once the largest country in Europe as the polish lithuanian commonwealth.

cj maxx

biko wrote: »

It is too big because it's really a union like EU.
Many smaller nation swallowed up during the Soviet times (some even before) and now Russia won't let them go to find their own destiny.

https://images.app.goo.gl/r6Zo1i28X8VW4iLN6

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

It could be even bigger. I watched this interesting summary recently of why Finland wasn’t annexed by Russia:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6aOk0SiHgI

McGinniesta

AMKC wrote: »

In my honest opinion I think it is.
I know there is lots of little states in it but not like the USA where they can set there own rules and so on.
If was broke up into to six or so small countries or maybe more maybe 12 it would be better.
So what is other peoples opinion on this?

Why?

alchemist33

Until they've won at least 3 All-Irelands in a row, I don't think splitting Russia should even be considered by Congress

play4fun1

pcardin wrote: »

there was no Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia before WWi. As a countries they formed straight after WW1 and were occupied again during WW2 despite being neutral.

?
the same as there was no Ireland?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latvia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estonia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithuania
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ireland

Capt'n Midnight

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

What was Hitler thinking.

Russia looked weak after the Winter War with Finland.

Hitler was gambler on a lucky streak.

Germany was running out of money and instead of facing France, Poland, Czechoslovakia, England and Austria in 1938 he got to face each in turn. He was hoping for something like a repeat of the 1918 Treaty of Brest-Litovsk

Russia renounced all territorial claims in Finland (which it had already acknowledged), Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania), most of Belarus, and Ukraine. and Poland

...
Russia lost 34% of its population, 54% of its industrial land, 89% of its coalfields, and 26% of its railways. Russia was also fined 300 million gold marks.

A quarter of the tanks used in the invasion of France came from Czechoslovakia.

The Russians were still regrouping from the Winter War when the Germans invaded. Had the Germans been able to attack earlier and not distracted then they might have captured Moscow. But Napoleon did that and still lost.

During the invasion the 6th Panzer Division was held up by a single KV-2 tank. It was a repeat of Dunkirk where German anti tank weapons couldn't take on British Heavy tanks. The Germans didn't even put long barrels back on their tank guns so were out distanced too. Had they invaded later then the Russians would have been better prepared

Fritzbox

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

During the invasion the 6th Panzer Division was held up by a single KV-2 tank. It was a repeat of Dunkirk where German anti tank weapons couldn't take on British Heavy tanks. The Germans didn't even put long barrels back on their tank guns so were out distanced too. Had they invaded later then the Russians would have been better prepared

I should think that the Soviets were as well prepared as they were ever going to be. There were 20,000 tanks in the Soviet army in June 1941 - several times more than to be found in the German army at that time.

Tony EH

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

What was Hitler thinking.

He thought that he could just "kick the door in and the whole rotten edifice would come down".

He, of course, was wrong and miscalculated terribly just how resilient the Russians could be to an invader. Hitler had a fantasy in his head about Russians being under the heel of a government who, once removed, would be thankful to those that did the removal. However, part of the Russian mindset is one that will put up with incredible hardship domestically, but will join together against those from outside who wish them harm.

But Hitler's racial trappings, which only allowed him a very simplistic view of people, didn't allow him to understand the Russian attitudes to a foreign invader. He didn't learn the lesson of 1812, and the only lesson he understood from WWI was that the Russian had no wish to fight for someone like the Tsar. Something he mistakenly applied to the, then, current government.

But Hitler's war was always about Russia irrespective of who its leadership was. Everything else that happened in the west wasn't supposed to come into it. So, regardless of how Hitler viewed Russia or the Russians, there was an inevitability to events once he was powerful enough to have a go, as it were.

In addition, another (more) significant event played into the Fuhrer's thinking in the matter and that was the fact that Germany couldn't feed itself in times of crisis, as evidenced during the First World War (which was responsible for much of his thinking on most matters). Millions of Germans were starving by 1918 and continued to do so once hostilities had ended. Hitler had a determination to not let that happen again and sought out the "breadbasket of Europe" as an answer. While Germany was strong intraindustry, it was weak in terms of food production and therefore vulnerable if attacked. Unfortunately, this meant aggressive moves as the Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union at the time. But in Hitler's mind, it was almost Germany's "manifest destiny" to go east and he didn't really consider the possibility of any real objection to such a move by western powers.

Tony EH

titan18 wrote: »

Tbf, whilst it's pretty impossible to take the whole country without help from the Japanese in the east and probably the Turkish in the caucuses, they did really well for a time. if the Germans had gone Moscow first and succeeded in taking that and the corridor to St Petersburg, they'd likely have cut most of the Soviet industrial capacity and made it very difficult for the Soviets to rebound if the Japanese cut off the pacific.

At no point in the war was Germany even close to taking Russia. Even with Japanese help it would have been a tall ask too. But the Japs weren't interested in a Russian campaign. Not even after Hitler declared war on the US - which was a kind of introduction to the Japanese to respond in kind by hitting Russia from its easternmost regions.

Thing is, both the IJN and IJA were already committed fully to their Chinese and pacific campaigns and simply didn't have the resources to lend a hand to Adolf.

The main problem for Germany was that the Wehrmacht was a summer army and its potency was greatly reduced during the winter. Whereas, the Red Army was well tailored for the extremities of a Russian winter. Plus, once Russia had moved its industrial capacity beyond the Urals, the Germans were impotent in attacking it. It simply didn't have enough aircraft, or the type necessary to carry out a sustained strategic bombing campaign.

Lastly, Russia did what it always did. She traded land for time and once again, it worked.

In short, Germany never had a chance.

The absolute best she could have hoped for would have been a stalemate of sorts, leaving neither side with a victory.

titan18 wrote: »

That or if they had managed to take Britain, they'd have had full reign to bring their full force to Russi and likely would have overwhelmed them faster.

They could never have taken Britain, even if they solely concentrated on her for years.

titan18

Tony EH wrote: »

At no point in the war was Germany even close to taking Russia. Even with Japanese help it would have been a tall ask too. But the Japs weren't interested in a Russian campaign. Not even after Hitler declared war on the US - which was a kind of introduction to the Japanese to respond in kind by hitting Russia from its easternmost regions.

Thing is, both the IJN and IJA were already committed fully to their Chinese and pacific campaigns and simply didn't have the resources to lend a hand to Adolf.

The main problem for Germany was that the Wehrmacht was a summer army and its potency was greatly reduced during the winter. Whereas, the Red Army was well tailored for the extremities of a Russian winter. Plus, once Russia had moved its industrial capacity beyond the Urals, the Germans were impotent in attacking it. It simply didn't have enough aircraft, or the type necessary to carry out a sustained strategic bombing campaign.

Lastly, Russia did what it always did. She traded land for time and once again, it worked.

In short, Germany never had a chance.

The absolute best she could have hoped for would have been a stalemate of sorts, leaving neither side with a victory.



They could never have taken Britain, even if they solely concentrated on her for years.

If Germany had concentrated on taking out the British military bases instead of bombing the cities, the RAF wouldn't have had a chance to reorganize after getting pushed off the continent. Also if they had finished the British army off at Dunkirk instead of halting, they likely would have seriously dented any British military power. I don't think the Germans could have succeeded in a land invasion but they were very close with some better decisions of ending the British military effort.

In regards Russia for a good 4-5 months the Germans absolutely destroyed the Russians in battles. Stalin even sent peace offers to Hitler and was going to give Germany Ukraine and the Baltics. Whilst I think they never could have taken Russia in full and once industry and government went behind the Urals, it was much more difficult, they could definitely have taken Moscow with better decision making and likely taken Leningrad aswell if they had cut off Russian lines towards it from Moscow. With that they'd have taken over vast swathes of the Russian land and population base and likely would have had an excellent peace offer from Stalin.

Best chance really would be if they had gotten the people on their side which they failed to do since they started executing loads of them. Ukraine originally championed them as liberators and after the Germans rounded them up for concentration camps, executed them etc they ended forming resistance movements.

Mad_maxx

pcardin wrote: »

there was no Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia before WWi. As a countries they formed straight after WW1 and were occupied again during WW2 despite being neutral.

isnt Estonia more like Finland

nordic ?

Mad_maxx

could the Soviet Union have taken Western Europe between 1945 and 1991 ?

i mean without the USA getting involved

Capt'n Midnight

titan18 wrote: »

If Germany had concentrated on taking out the British military bases instead of bombing the cities, the RAF wouldn't have had a chance to reorganize after getting pushed off the continent.

“I do not say, my Lords, that the French will not come. I say only they will not come by sea.”
- Admiral John Jervis, first Earl of St. Vincent, 1801

RandomViewer

Mad_maxx wrote: »

could the Soviet Union have taken Western Europe between 1945 and 1991 ?

i mean without the USA getting involved

They lost a lot of people in WW2, another 5 years of war to rule mainland Europe would have had too high a cost, I'm sure Stalin considered it, wouldn't be surprised if they've detailed plans for it

Mad_maxx

RandomViewer wrote: »

They lost a lot of people in WW2, another 5 years of war to rule mainland Europe would have had too high a cost, I'm sure Stalin considered it, wouldn't be surprised if they've detailed plans for it

well of course they had plans for it but would the combined forced of France and the UK have held them off ?

Germany would have rolled over easy enough as they are not militarily that powerful since WW2

im referring to the decades following WW2 , not during stalins time

1874

AMKC wrote: »

In my honest opinion I think it is.
I know there is lots of little states in it but not like the USA where they can set there own rules and so on.
If was broke up into to six or so small countries or maybe more maybe 12 it would be better.
So what is other peoples opinion on this?

Why? how could you come to that conclusion, maybe we should all agree to break up China, which holds territory within its borders that was never considered part of China, tibet and western areas currently.

https://thetruesize.com/#?borders=1~!MTY1NjAxMjg.OTM1Nzg5OA*OTM5ODk(MTIzODEwOTg~!CONTIGUOUS_US*MTAwMjQwNzU.MjUwMjM1MTc(MTc1)MA~!IN*NTI2NDA1MQ.Nzg2MzQyMQ)MQ~!CN*OTkyMTY5Nw.NzMxNDcwNQ(MjI1)Mg~!US*Nzc1NDk1OA.MTc1NTUyODA)Mw

Mercators projection isnt necessarily the best way to compare sizes of countries,
by that logic, based on? anti Russian sentiment? maybe we should break up the US, Canada (cast unpopulated areas) or Brazil.

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

China's east is like Russia's west in the respect that this is where the majority of the population live. West China and East Russia are very sparsely populated.

Id say thats a good thing, land unpopulated by people somewhere, certainly unpopulated areas of Eastern russia, sounds like it leaves a lot of area for wildlife to live uninhibited by humans, although I dont think the Russian Taiga is as densely populated with wildlife as other warmer locations.

Gatling wrote: »

Look at Siberia a population of 30 +million and makes up something like 70 % of Russias landmass ,but it's sparely populated 1 person for every 3kms,now with a Chinese population of about a million while the Russians government say it's only 30,000 Chinese in Siberia .plenty of places for foreign countries to get a foothold in various parts of russia

A large military with a presence can cover a lot of area with aircraft and can hold up an enemy while attacking their forces and legally eject them, even if they couldnt defeat them militarily. China can only impose its will on weaker nations, I doubt seriously if they would take their chances with the Russians, I know they did in the early 60's but they had a more rabid intense nationalistic communism at the time, so I think they lost the run of themselves, and that the Soviets were supposed to have planned to target parts of China with their Nukes based on Chinese hostility.
While I wouldnt like to see it happen, Russia still has one of the largest, if not the largest and most capable Nuclear forces in the world, I would say the Russians, if they so desired or felt forced to could take out all Chinas nukes with limited Nuclear strikes, so even the threat of that should be sufficient in the minds of Chinese planners, unless they have gone a bit mad with the recent xenophobic rabid nationalism.