Did Britain try to assassinate Lenin?

[Betonov]

Makes sense.
Without Lenin the Russians would have continued the war. Maybe the hundred day offensive would be more succesfull without the German reinforcements from the east (IIRC the 100day offensive was after Russia pulled out of the war).

[Raptor1]

Originally Posted by Betonov

Makes sense.
Without Lenin the Russians would have continued the war. Maybe the hundred day offensive would be more succesfull without the German reinforcements from the east (IIRC the 100day offensive was after Russia pulled out of the war).

More likely the German Spring Offensive would not have taken place, or would have followed a much more limited plan. Ironically, this might have actually meant the German position at the time the Hundred Days' Offensive actually begun might have been significantly stronger, since it would have meant the German army's best troops would not have taken the disproportionate casualties they suffered as part of Shock trooper units during the Spring Offensive.

[Betonov]

Originally Posted by Raptor1

More likely the German Spring Offensive would not have taken place, or would have followed a much more limited plan. Ironically, this might have actually meant the German position at the time the Hundred Days' Offensive actually begun might have been significantly stronger, since it would have meant the German army's best troops would not have taken the disproportionate casualties they suffered as part of Shock trooper units during the Spring Offensive.

Also posible. But then again, the hundred day offensive might have been executed along with the russians with equall success in the east braking Germanys back.
Aaaahhh the posibilites of a ''what if'' scenario

[tater]

Might've saved the lives of ~60 million future Soviets, too (30M if you prefer lowball estimates of Soviet democide).

[Freiwillige]

Originally Posted by tater

Might've saved the lives of ~60 million future Soviets, too (30M if you prefer lowball estimates of Soviet democide).

Possibly more if you look at how that could have changed WWII and Germany's view of the Bolsheviks.

But again on could argue the opposite as well I guess.

[Betonov]

Originally Posted by Freiwillige

Possibly more if you look at how that could have changed WWII and Germany's view of the Bolsheviks.

But again on could argue the opposite as well I guess.

Russia would have been invaded anyway if Hitler was in power. Lebensraum and all that jazz. But maybe the Russians would have put up a better defence, since no purges would have been made and there would be more better armed soldiers.... but then again, maybe Russia would have fallen to the third reich without the iron will of Stalin

[STEED]

If the Whites and Greens along with the Blacks and Western powers united as one the the Reds may have been stopped cold.

[ryanglavin]

Originally Posted by Betonov

Russia would have been invaded anyway if Hitler was in power. Lebensraum and all that jazz. But maybe the Russians would have put up a better defence, since no purges would have been made and there would be more better armed soldiers.... but then again, maybe Russia would have fallen to the third reich without the iron will of Stalin

On another note, the Germans would have defeated the Russians if they had arrived as liberators instead of conquerors.

[Raptor1]

Originally Posted by Betonov

Also posible. But then again, the hundred day offensive might have been executed along with the russians with equall success in the east braking Germanys back.
Aaaahhh the posibilites of a ''what if'' scenario

Perhaps, but I doubt it. Even if Russia stayed in the war, the Russian Army at this point was in a very poor state. It had some spectacular successes earlier in the war, of course, but it would be just too fragile for major offensive operations if it continued operating until 1918.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Raptor1

Perhaps, but I doubt it. Even if Russia stayed in the war, the Russian Army at this point was in a very poor state. It had some spectacular successes earlier in the war, of course, but it would be just too fragile for major offensive operations if it continued operating until 1918.

Just having the Germans being forced to occupy such a massive amount of territory would be a drain on them. Plus the deeper they drive in to Russia the more territory up north (The Baltic) they need to defend from an Anbhip attack like Adm Fisher wanted to do.

[Raptor1]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

Just having the Germans being forced to occupy such a massive amount of territory would be a drain on them. Plus the deeper they drive in to Russia the more territory up north (The Baltic) they need to defend from an Anbhip attack like Adm Fisher wanted to do.

The Central Powers had to keep massive forces tied up on the Eastern Front even after Russia surrendered anyway, in order to occupy their gains. And an Allied amphibious attack at this point would most likely be highly disastrous, especially considering the German fleet was still around to contest its landing and/or the necessary and constant supply and reinforcement convoys.

I'm not saying that the German position would have been better on its own, but Russia staying in the war might have kept it from making some of the more disastrous decisions which contributed to Germany's defeat.

[Catfish]

It's often forgotten how Churchill pressed on against the new Russia right after WW1, and parallel to the german Freikorps also fighting on there.
As "unknown" as some US, german and british pilots flying for Finland under the (finnish) swastika, against Russia before WW2.
Some of those soldiers remained where they were when WW2 broke out, and kept fighting against Russia, even joined the foreign SS groups.
And after the war the OSS (later CIA) helped those and other SS staff to escape to South America, if they were not jus re-installed in their former positions, in Germany.
Hard to believe ..

Greetings,
Catfish

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

Just having the Germans being forced to occupy such a massive amount of territory would be a drain on them. Plus the deeper they drive in to Russia the more territory up north (The Baltic) they need to defend from an Anbhip attack like Adm Fisher wanted to do.

Correct. Germany had no plans to occupy Russian territory beyond the limited gains they made under Falkenstein (sp?) in 1915-16. They could well have advanced deep into the Ukraine in an attempt to secure resources or attempted a pincer maneuver with Austrian forces to trap the retreating Russians after the recapture of Przmysl, but Falk opted out because he knew the garrison drain would be tremendous and he didn't want to humiliate the Russians or threaten the Russians with occupation, thus galvanizing resistance in what he rightly judged to be a nation on the verge of making a separate peace. His only miscalculation was the Russian willingness to persist in order to secure some territory in the Balkans and Constantinople, which has been promised to Russia by the western allies. Once Serbia had been secured and the expeditionary forces sent to the Baltic region routed, however, Russia's popular and political resolve quickly dissipated.