Eastern Front, should Germany have built a defensive line instead of invading?

Question

Would Germany have had a better chance of winning the war had they gone defensive and not invaded the Soviet Union, or did they need to take the Red Army out while they had a chance, while it was at its weakest point?

Would concentrating on North Africa, the balkans, and defending the western and eastern fronts a realistic long term strategy?

Would Germany have run out of resources or could middle east oil have done the job just as good as the oil Hitler desired from the caucusus?

Do you think there was a real danger that Stalin would have attacked first eventually?

Answer 1

There was the possibility, and nearly every leader knew it. National Socialist and Communist ideologies don't get along to well, not to mention Hitler and Stalin had expressed their hatred for the other's ideologies prior to 1939 so it's not unlikely that if Hitler didn't attack first, Stalin would. There was a book about this which came out not to long ago, but I forget the title.

Answer 2

Germany did not need a defensive line in the East. Germany had agreed with the USSR to divide Poland. Germany could have concentrated safely on the West. It was only the attack on the USSR that galvanized an alliance with the Allies. Previously, Western governments had isolated the Bolshevik USSR behind a "cordon sanitaire." The German attack justified a reversal of this policy.

Answer 3

I think they should have stopped at the english channel and invaded england after defeating russia. Russia and the rest of the world where too much for them.