Was there any need for Germany to be torn 2

[timetraveller]

With the end of the WW2 .. we saw Germany being torn in 2 by Opposing Goverment's all for what ? which later resulted in another war being created a Very Cold one which needn't have started ...

Political spoils of War ?


Was it really worth it in the end ????

[Britishhawk]

Everyone wanted a share, Britain, US, France & Russia all got a piece. I believe it is considered that the occupation of Germany, in most cases was a hassle to the Allies but the risks of not stayng outweighed the gains.

It was worth it because the British started up the VW factory again to boost employment in their sector, all ze Germans driving in their VW's today can thank Major Ivan Hirst for the pleasure. ;)

[JCR]

In a nutshell, the division of Germany was not planned in WW2.
At least not the permanent division in two seperate states.
It was planned to divide Germany into 4 zones of occupation, and disagreements between the 3 western powers and the soviets let to a permanent political division.
The zone solution was before the cold war, but the cold war led to a competition between the west and the soviets for their political system.
But at least until 1948 everybody paid lip service to the idea of a unified germany.
In fact between 1945 and 47 not everything was as it seems, as the people in the french and american zone were actually worst off (the french simply plundered everything and the americans deliberately let the people starve), the british zone was administered as good as the ruined empire could.
Only the soviets made any attempt to better the living conditions of the germans in their zone, but at the same time brought the new democratic institutions and parties (which were the same everywhere) under their control.
Only when the americans realized that "a starving democrat is no match for a well fed commie" (Gen. Lucius Clay) they started rebuilding the west.

Also, until around the mid-1960s both halfes considered themselves to be "the" germany and the others just an occupied zone.
Interestingly, the german constitutional court ruled that the actual unified Germany was a dormant entity and both halves were not successors.
Only after the reunification the federal republic officially became "the" germany again that existed as a state since 1865 (via the north german confederation).

[Connaught Ranger]

In all reality what else could have been the option?:roll:

[JCR]

Austrian solution:
Withdrawal of both against guaranteed neutrality.

[Lt-Col A. Tack]

I've wondered what would have happened on the continent if the US has withdrawn, say to Britain, and fortified it, instead of staying in Germany.

[Britishhawk]

I've wondered what would have happened on the continent if the US has withdrawn, say to Britain, and fortified it, instead of staying in Germany.

Do you mean during the Cold War?

[Lt-Col A. Tack]

Do you mean during the Cold War?

Yes, basically stay just in the UK, was my thinking. Just musing.

[Silent Reader]

Yes, basically stay just in the UK, was my thinking. Just musing.


Well western Europe might have had bigger armies and western Germany might have developed its own nuclear weapons i'd guess

[Hollis]

In all reality what else could have been the option?:roll:


My thoughts too, Sort of the birthing pains of the Cold war.

[Lt-Col A. Tack]

Well western Europe might have had bigger armies and western Germany might have developed its own nuclear weapons i'd guess

Would there have been an East and West Germany?

[Atlantic Friend]

Austrian solution:
Withdrawal of both against guaranteed neutrality.

The Soviet Union proposed that, IIRC - would have been a bloody disaster for Western Europe.

IIRC, the permanent division of germany arose from the fact the Western powers and the USSR couldn't agree to a joint management of the entire country.

[GazB]

Would there have been an East and West Germany?

There is no way that Stalin would have allowed a unified Germany when he was alive. After losing 20+ million people and having most of the industrialised part of the Soviet Union trashed repeatedly as the front line moved back and forth with both sides exercising a scorched earth policy there was no way Stalin would allow the state responsible to remain intact.

[546]

^ I agree. IMHO Stalin wanted to consolidate all the "liberated" territories and maintain satellites which would keep him as far as possible from the West. Stalin, Beria and Abakumov and their people in the Smersh and the NKVD were paranoid of "decadent, western capitalist, and imperialist" habits and pleasures like freedom of expression, freedom of religion, and freedom of the press.

[GazB]

^ I agree. IMHO Stalin wanted to consolidate all the "liberated" territories and maintain satellites which would keep him as far as possible from the West. Stalin, Beria and Abakumov and their people in the Smersh and the NKVD were paranoid of "decadent, western capitalist, and imperialist" habits and pleasures like freedom of expression, freedom of religion, and freedom of the press.

Just because he was paranoid it doesn't mean he was wrong. The west did actually send in military forces to help fight against the Communists at the end of WWI and they have never really been friends. They used each other during WWII when the threat was bigger from the Nazis than anywhere else, but once that was dealt with they had no urgent reason to be friends.

[James]

With the end of the WW2 .. we saw Germany being torn in 2 by Opposing Goverment's all for what ? which later resulted in another war being created a Very Cold one which needn't have started ...

Political spoils of War ?


Was it really worth it in the end ????

I think we should all thank our lucky stars that the fighting during the cold war was largely unconventional and done by proxies in Africa, Asia, and Central America, rather than a conventional or nuclear war between NATO and the WP in Germany. I think it was worth it, but I'm American, and my exposure to divided Germany came when I was young, from 1981 to 1985.

You're German, you should tell us if you think it was worth it. What do you think the alternative might have been?

[546]

Just because he was paranoid it doesn't mean he was wrong. The west did actually send in military forces to help fight against the Communists at the end of WWI and they have never really been friends. They used each other during WWII when the threat was bigger from the Nazis than anywhere else, but once that was dealt with they had no urgent reason to be friends.

Of course, Stalin wasn't wrong on some of his assumptions on the Western governments. But Stalin only ran the country after Lenin died and he had Trotsky and the other contenders liquidated. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin The allies of course wanted to make sure that the Bolshevik Revolution does nto spill into their lands. That was why they sent those troops (aside from securing their interests in Russia). I am sure a lot of Polish MP. Netters will tell you that had it not been for the Red Army's defeat in Warsaw, communism would have easily spread over Europe.

I think it is important to point out that a lot of countries and their government were even divided during the Spanish Civil War since the governments favored Franco and the falangists, while the ordinary citizens signed as volunteers in the republican militia.

During the Second World War though, Churchill said that he would not even have second thoughts about making an alliance with the Devil, if it would be necessary to defeat Nazism. But of course, as soon the war in Europe ended it was back to normal. The differences between the policies and practices of the Western Occupational Armies and the Red Army were already very apparent in Germany even before Japan surrendered. http://countrystudies.us/germany/44.htm

[GazB]

But Stalin only ran the country after Lenin died and he had Trotsky and the other contenders liquidated. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin The allies of course wanted to make sure that the Bolshevik Revolution does nto spill into their lands. That was why they sent those troops (aside from securing their interests in Russia). I am sure a lot of Polish MP. Netters will tell you that had it not been for the Red Army's defeat in Warsaw, communism would have easily spread over Europe.

Stalin was a total a$$hole, but his demands that Germany be split so it cannot hurt the Soviet Union again is pretty understandable. Eastern Europe ended up being a buffer for him so that any future land war would not be fought on Soviet Soil like WWII was. It was not intended to expand the Soviet Empire. If that was the goal then banning all languages except Russian would be step 1. Step 2 would be to internally shift every ethnic group so that people had no connection to the land they lived on. Then remove all the border lines on the maps and make new names for places in Russian etc etc.
The reality is that he wanted a buffer. Most people in eastern europe already had a higher standard of living than many in the Soviet Union.

Red armys defeat in Warsaw? Can you tell me more about this?

[RIPTIDE]

Red armys defeat in Warsaw? Can you tell me more about this?
IIRC.. was it 1919-21 ???? They call it the Miracle of the Vistula IIRC... basically a Soviet communications **** up mixed in with some gritty Polish defence, halted a spread of Communism. Lenins policy was to spread COmmunism by military force if need be. And that started with the Russo Polish war of that time.

[546]

Stalin was a total a$$holewoot
Red armys defeat in Warsaw? Can you tell me more about this?

Yep RIPTIDE is right. Some people call it the Miracle at the Vistula http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Warsaw_(1920) and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish-Soviet_War

There was long discussion about that a couple of weeks ago here in MP.Net. Here's the link...
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=163126

Enjoy p-)

[Turhapuro]

The west did actually send in military forces to help fight against the Communists at the end of WWI and they have never really been friends.
No ****? I wonder why capitalist states are not friend of communists, who talk about class war and world revolution? Even western nations are not that dumb.

[Zeckenteppich]

The Soviet Union proposed that, IIRC - would have been a bloody disaster for Western Europe.

IIRC, the permanent division of germany arose from the fact the Western powers and the USSR couldn't agree to a joint management of the entire country.

right.....

[Lt-Col A. Tack]

There is no way that Stalin would have allowed a unified Germany when he was alive. After losing 20+ million people and having most of the industrialised part of the Soviet Union trashed repeatedly as the front line moved back and forth with both sides exercising a scorched earth policy there was no way Stalin would allow the state responsible to remain intact.

Not even as a Soviet client state, assuming the (Western) allies left?

[Zeckenteppich]

As AtlanticFriend allready said the Soviets with Stalin as leader proposed the austrian model for Germany as well.

[GazB]

No ****? I wonder why capitalist states are not friend of communists, who talk about class war and world revolution? Even western nations are not that dumb.

Great logic. So foreign states were justified in interfering in a civil war in Russia because if the wrong side won that wrong side would start civil wars in the West. I guess that means they should be allowed to destabilise countries outside their borders with a clear conscience seeing as how they are only returning the favour really.
(note I corrected it to foreign states because Japan also interfered and it wasn't really a western country at the time, though it was heavily influenced by Germany.)

Riptide and 546... thanks, will have a look.


Not even as a Soviet client state, assuming the (Western) allies left?

Every country wants its neighbouring countries to be friendly, or at least a bit like minded. It makes you feel better about things so you don't always feel like you are about to be stabbed in the back all the time. The Russians had a "back yard" for some time, but now apparently according to the US they aren't allowed that any more. The US of course considers most of central and south america as their back yard and for some time didn't tollerate interference there.
Having said that I really don't think Stalin wanted to control all of Germany. Keeping it split would be enough I think. If the west withdrew I would doubt he would have tried to take the rest of Germany. He really didn't need more land, he had plenty. The purpose of having half of Germany was to stop it becoming a significant power again. The purpose of Eastern Europe was to get direct access to East Germany and later if a conflict broke out with the west then the ground war would be fought on land that was not Soviet soil.
Taking the rest of Germany would unite Germany again and no matter what he did it might become powerful again. Also there is no telling what the west would do if he did try to take the rest of Germany after they withdrew. It was a risk with no tangible benefits for him.

[Gman992]

I've wondered what would have happened on the continent if the US has withdrawn, say to Britain, and fortified it, instead of staying in Germany.


Europe would probably be speaking Russian.

[lightfire]

Stalin was a total a$$hole, but his demands that Germany be split so it cannot hurt the Soviet Union again is pretty understandable.

Is that purely cold logic (I could agree in a way) or justifying because of some sentimental needs?



Eastern Europe ended up being a buffer for him so that any future land war would not be fought on Soviet Soil like WWII was.

or..a placdarm - call as you like it.


It was not intended to expand the Soviet Empire.

I wouldn't be so sure. I we stay on that thought proposed, that US leaves continental Europe and withdraws to Britain only, it's hard to imagine the soviets would do the same. Yes, they left Austria and Norway, but Stalin also promised to the west leave the Eastern Europe itself to decide what they want. We all know what the "decision" was with "free elections" etc.

The communist movements, in US had withdrawn, could have become stronger, especially in souther Europe - Greece would have fallen without western support, then quite possibly France with a chain reaction. "Exporting the revolution" ain't an easy thing, but Stalin and his crew knew how to do it and any sign of Weakness by the West - it's very likely Stalin would have used it.


If that was the goal then banning all languages except Russian would be step 1. Step 2 would be to internally shift every ethnic group so that people had no connection to the land they lived on.

Such process had happened in a way but more complex. The first thing was to install loyal/friendly puppet governments, then the "enemy" elements were "cleared" -- simply sent to Siberia, then collectivization. The paradox of USSR was that it let the nominal signs of identity, culture, but in a same way has spread the standardization/russification. Not in all countries of soviet block, but for instance in Baltic states Russian minorities have expanded due to colonization - hence more Russian schools, obligatory Russian language that was gradually taking over important spheres of life - you couldn't join a job without language.


Then remove all the border lines on the maps and make new names for places in Russian etc etc.

Wasn't that done with East Prussia, or would you call that an exception?


The reality is that he wanted a buffer. Most people in eastern europe already had a higher standard of living than many in the Soviet Union.

And it's quite probable they would have had even higher standard if remained neutral like Austria. Although, it was not a secrect, that during the Cold War Austrian army was ready to fight back only one potential enemy - the Warsaw pact.

[Kaplanr]

I've wondered what would have happened on the continent if the US has withdrawn, say to Britain, and fortified it, instead of staying in Germany.

If I can liberally paraphrase Churchill. "From Dunkirk on the Channel to Saint Nazaire on the Atlantic, an iron curtain has descended..."

[Yosy]

I've wondered what would have happened on the continent if the US has withdrawn, say to Britain, and fortified it, instead of staying in Germany.

Thank God that didn't happen. Imagine a Soviet Union with the whole of Germany's industrial might at her side - the Cold War would soon become hot.

Due to the circumstances, the partition of Germany was the best solution, IMO.

[HellToupee]

IMO it wouldn't soon become hot, they would still have to rebuild, without US presence they wouldn't need to invade western europe political pressure would be suffient for them as opposed to the task of occuping and managing all of europe.

[ferguson]

Both my grandfathers had to leave ome and family to travel to France with the AEF to drub the Kaiser and his barbarians.

My father and most of my friends fathers had to leave home and family for the ETO or PTO to crush the axis aggressors.

Most all would rather have stayed home and continued their lives uninterrupted.

People were pretty tired at Germany's affrontery.
The decision made at the time was to split it up and keep it from anymore shenanigans or crimes against humanity.
A good many wanted to blacktop the whole place and make a car lot out of it.
The Iron Curtain or cold war was just what came next.

Always puzzling to see drawn out discussions on 60 year old decisions based on modern day after the fact thinking.

[Gammelpreusse]

Both my grandfathers had to leave ome and family to travel to France with the AEF to drub the Kaiser and his barbarians.

My father and most of my friends fathers had to leave home and family for the ETO or PTO to crush the axis aggressors.

Most all would rather have stayed home and continued their lives uninterrupted.

People were pretty tired at Germany's affrontery.
The decision made at the time was to split it up and keep it from anymore shenanigans or crimes against humanity.
A good many wanted to blacktop the whole place and make a car lot out of it.
The Iron Curtain or cold war was just what came next.

Always puzzling to see drawn out discussions on 60 year old decisions based on modern day after the fact thinking.

Pretty much because today ppl know of government policies and descisions, and do not listen solely to what their respective governments told them to be true back in the days, especially in regards to black/white painting. After all, given the amount of wars started by France, the US and especially the UK, Germany comes out awfully short in this regard.