StarDestroyer.Net BBS

What if the US had never helped GReat Brittain with D-day and Peral Harbor was never attacked? Would the Nazi have lst even thought we had not interviened? What would happen if Hitler had never abandoned the non-agression peace pact with Russia? Would the US be hailing Hitler? Would Great Brittain have finally succombed to the blitzkrieg?

P.S. I am not sure if this belongs in here or News and Politics.

No dice.

Germany could never compete with the industrial power of the rest of the world. To beat up Britain is one thing. The get people there is quite another, then the whole killing who is there.

I doubt they would be able to get troops near the US, much less land there and accomplish anything.

Russia would have attacked eventually, this is a lot of fronts.

There are other who can go into better detail.

All of Western Europe turns Red.

Techno_Union wrote:What if the US had never helped GReat Brittain with D-day and Peral Harbor was never attacked? Would the Nazi have lst even thought we had not interviened? What would happen if Hitler had never abandoned the non-agression peace pact with Russia? Would the US be hailing Hitler? Would Great Brittain have finally succombed to the blitzkrieg?

P.S. I am not sure if this belongs in here or News and Politics.

The Germans can never invade Britain, though a negotiated settlement will probably happen eventually if Germany does not invade the USSR. But there's no way that Hitler wouldn't invade the USSR; that's just who Hitler is. I suppose if one of the assasination attempts succeeded, this could come to pass.

OTOH, even if Pearl Harbour didn't happen, FDR clearly wanted us in the war. But that might change if Russia wasn't involved, since it would be a more doubtful prospect. Maybe not, again, though.

But even the worst case scenario just has Germany as one of four major powers in the world, and far from the biggest. It also won't stay that way for long unless there are major economic reforms.

Russia invades in 1943-1944.

Howedar wrote:Russia invades in 1943-1944.

Almost certainly; they were planning to, in fact. But I'm not sure if they would have succeeded in subduing Germany in this scenario--the officer corps factor.

But of course that would change once they suffered a few defeats, so probably Europe would go Red. The chance of the four-power scenario occuring is really infestimally small, makes the odds of winning the lotto look very good.

The Duchess of Zeon wrote: Almost certainly; they were planning to, in fact. But I'm not sure if they would have succeeded in subduing Germany in this scenario--the officer corps factor.

The Soviets produced enough marginally capable officers per year that they would have been nicely stocked with empty but competent suits by 1943, and their material advantage would have been such that it would take an exceptionally stupid officer corps to botch it. I don't know how the Germans would be able to resist even the most ham-handed thrust into Western Europe, if it was overseen by Zhukov and Konev and backed up by a few score of tank divisions and a few hundred rifle divisions. Casualties would probably be very heavy in favor of the Germans but it would still not end well for them.

The Russians win a war of attrition. 'Nuff said about that.

Rogue 9 wrote:The Russians win a war of attrition. 'Nuff said about that.

I dunno if the Germans could last that long. They would quickly entering into an defensive war sooner or later, and I doubt the German manpoer would be exhausted before German manpower is soaked up.

What would it have done to the development and deployment of nuclear weapons?

I tried to explain to some people the industrial power and manpower issues were just too much for Germany. They said: "look at prussia" they won!!!!!

I knew about prussia, but yet i didn't see what the hell they were saying.

Lazy Raptor wrote:What would it have done to the development and deployment of nuclear weapons?

Following the scenario the others have laid out, it seems that it would've given the Soviets a humongous leg-up on rocket technology and nuclear technology. All it would mean is that the Soviets would detonate an atom bomb first and the United States would be left looking quite embarrassed for half a decade until we got around to setting off our own atom bomb. Also, the Soviets would likely enjoy a huge advantage in long-ranged rockets until we caught up through American ingenuity and Cold War intrigue.

So it sounds like history would unfold as follows:
A) Hitler invades what he invades, Japan invades what they invade.
B) Hitler signs the non-aggression pact with the USSR.
C) (With no Pearl Harbor) the USA and Japan sign some sort of non-intervention treaty.
D) Hitler breaks the non-aggression pact and invades the USSR. Or the USSR launches its own invasion into Europe.
E) The USSR rolls up Eastern Europe and smashes Germany flat after a somewhat protracted war. All of Germany goes Red, as does possibly France and Italy.
F) It becomes the United States and Great Britain and whoever wasn't rolled up the the USSR, versus the USSR. The USSR sets off the first atomic device. Japan controls Southeast Asia and eastern China . . . however this doesn't amount to a whole lot. Though I'm not sure what the USSR would decide to do about Japan with Europe to mange.

Even if they did win, however, how long until Germany collapses under it's own government, I seem to recall reading about the theory that had Germany not gone to war, the Nazi government would have self destructed under the weight of its own spirallingly radical red tape, how long would it have been if Germany had triumphed for it to simply break down?

The_Lumberjack wrote:Even if they did win, however, how long until Germany collapses under it's own government, I seem to recall reading about the theory that had Germany not gone to war, the Nazi government would have self destructed under the weight of its own spirallingly radical red tape, how long would it have been if Germany had triumphed for it to simply break down?

The military buildup of 1933-39 could not last; had war not been declared in Semptember either Hitler stops his arms race or crashes and burns into depression rather quickly.

The Axis picked an unwinnabul fight, and by there own actions had force themselves to do so. For the allies not to win in the end requires the world to be very different, and that means its not WW2 where talking about, where talking about a theoretical conflict in a fictional world.

Cornelius wrote:I tried to explain to some people the industrial power and manpower issues were just too much for Germany. They said: "look at prussia" they won!!!!!

Prussia won some wars against superior enemies in the pre-industrial era, and again against a couple of overextended and poorly organized enemies in the 1860-1875 period. The example of Prussia is crappy and doesn't apply here.

GrandMasterTerwynn wrote:Following the scenario the others have laid out, it seems that it would've given the Soviets a humongous leg-up on rocket technology and nuclear technology. All it would mean is that the Soviets would detonate an atom bomb first and the United States would be left looking quite embarrassed for half a decade until we got around to setting off our own atom bomb. Also, the Soviets would likely enjoy a huge advantage in long-ranged rockets until we caught up through American ingenuity and Cold War intrigue.

Um, no. The German nuclear program was very far behind and would be of only marginal assistance to the Soviets, which had the American program penetrated anyways. Furthermore, the advanced of the German rocket program is, IMHO, overstated. The American program was already underway under separate team and would lead to IRBMs and such, while historically Von Braun's team did more work for civilian applications.

C) (With no Pearl Harbor) the USA and Japan sign some sort of non-intervention treaty.

Hrm, I'm not so sure about this. To do this, Japan would have to agree to the rather stringent American demands, and they were not about to give up China.

phongn wrote: Hrm, I'm not so sure about this. To do this, Japan would have to agree to the rather stringent American demands, and they were not about to give up China.

Indeed, while the US was not demanding Japan withdraw from Manchuria, the only useful area of China they held, Japanese casualties had been far too heavy for them to give up there gains in central China. Simply the loss of prestige was beyond unacceptable. The Japanese would see such a thing as a throwback to there 1895 war with China, during the aftermaths of which Japan had to give up a number of its gains under western and Russian pressure. It then saw some of those gains, notably Port Arthur go to the Russians a few years later. They'd fully expect the same thing would happen again.

There would be two big "WHAT IF"s that would have to occur for Britain to fall...Goring would have to continue the attacks on the RAF bases for two more months rather than switch to attacking London. This would have depleted their supplies of aircraft. Britain was building only around 100 aircraft per week (and only training about 60 pilots), while their losses in the first six days were 213 and 154 respectively. Given that they began the war with 704 operational aircraft and 230 reserves, 9 weeks should have been sufficient to reduce the RAF to a pittance force.

The second WHAT IF would be for Hitler to let the Navy run the Navy, and build the ships necessary to invade before the war. While it wasn't possible to know for certain, evidence from WWI strongly suggested the battleship was obsolete (Battle of Jutland, ease of destruction by submarines), and the resources used on the Bismarck and the "pocket battleships" would have been better used on landing ships and smaller escorts. Before anyone raises questions about the Home Fleet, those ships did not have adequate anti-air defense (re: Repulse and Renown). Navalised Ju-87s and long range Ju-88s and Me-110s would have inflicted heavy damage on the Fleet.

Note that I am not saying this is realistic; it is merely how, in 20/20 hindsight, the Battle of Britain would have needed to be fought to be won.

The Dark wrote:Given that they began the war with 704 operational aircraft and 230 reserves, 9 weeks should have been sufficient to reduce the RAF to a pittance force.

Wrong. The RAF would have pulled back its bases in the northern part of England which were beyond the range of the Luftwaffe. This would have made effective interception of the bombers before they hit their targets in the south of England all but impossible, but they could have easily jumped them on their return journey.

Before anyone raises questions about the Home Fleet, those ships did not have adequate anti-air defense (re: Repulse and Renown). Navalised Ju-87s and long range Ju-88s and Me-110s would have inflicted heavy damage on the Fleet.

The effectiveness of bombers intended for close support of ground troops against naval targets is often exaggerated. Now, I'm not at all an expert in WWII naval bits and pieces, but I think Skimmer or Phong can back me up here.

Note that I am not saying this is realistic;

Good, because it ain't.

Pablo Sanchez wrote:

Before anyone raises questions about the Home Fleet, those ships did not have adequate anti-air defense (re: Repulse and Renown). Navalised Ju-87s and long range Ju-88s and Me-110s would have inflicted heavy damage on the Fleet.

The effectiveness of bombers intended for close support of ground troops against naval targets is often exaggerated. Now, I'm not at all an expert in WWII naval bits and pieces, but I think Skimmer or Phong can back me up here.

You are correct. In any attempt against Britain, the Luftwaffe must take out both RAF Bomber Command and the RN Home Fleet to ensure that their invasion force isn't sunk.

However, in another scenario, I've recently read an excellent alternate history where Lord Halifax's coup in 1940 succeeds, promptly taking Great Britain out of the war in 1940. Things...greatly diverge after that.

The Dark wrote:There would be two big "WHAT IF"s that would have to occur for Britain to fall...Goring would have to continue the attacks on the RAF bases for two more months rather than switch to attacking London. This would have depleted their supplies of aircraft.

No, it would have resulted in fighter command pulling back behind the Themes. The bases of 12 Group where out of range of German fighters, and any attempts at raiding them would be slaughtered, witness the single attempt by Luftwaffe Air Group Five to attack Scotland with only Me110's for escort, the result was nearly fifty aircraft lost, the raid aborted and no further attempts made to attack the north, Air Group Five ended up sending most of its remaining bombers to France.

From those secure bases Fighter Command would be invincible and yet still able to fly cover over the invasion beaches.

The second WHAT IF would be for Hitler to let the Navy run the Navy, and build the ships necessary to invade before the war. While it wasn't possible to know for certain, evidence from WWI strongly suggested the battleship was obsolete (Battle of Jutland, ease of destruction by submarines), and the resources used on the Bismarck and the "pocket battleships" would have been better used on landing ships and smaller escorts.

The Pocket battleships where built before Hitler came to power and without the twins or any extra cruisers the invasion force would be easily salughtered by the Royal Navy, merely the wake of destroyers can swamp landing craft. In addition invading Norway would be near impossibul, it was a huge risk as it was, fucking Germany massively. The lack of surface raiders would also let the Royal Navy deploy a much larger force to the Channel.

Before anyone raises questions about the Home Fleet, those ships did not have adequate anti-air defense (re: Repulse and Renown). Navalised Ju-87s and long range Ju-88s and Me-110s would have inflicted heavy damage on the Fleet.

And yet the Royal Navy operated without any fighter cover off Norway for two months, and suffered zero capital ship losses to aircraft. Its losses amoung destoryers where also very low, about the only thing the Germans really threatened was the port facilities themselfs and anchored transports . Your argument doesn't fly; attacking moving ships of any form is not easy, and the Royal Navy has the ability to attack the invasion force largely under cover of darkness. It can also bombard the Germans ports with ease. When you unload several thousand rounds of cruise gunfire into something the size of Calais bad shit happens.

Note that I am not saying this is realistic; it is merely how, in 20/20 hindsight, the Battle of Britain would have needed to be fought to be won.

Nope, you plan won't work, and of course if the Germans are buuilding a huge mass of landing craft then the British will build a huge mass of anti invasion defences. The Germans had no experience in landing over the beach, and without any heavy gunfire for support even a relatively simple and cheep line of blockhouses would slaughter their invasion force.

Somthing all too often ignored by the "but if only" crowd, Germany can't build whatever it wants in a vaccume, if they move quicker or build different stuff then they did histrically then the UK may will begin rearmament sooner, or do so at a heightened pace which was very possibul.

Pablo Sanchez wrote:

The Dark wrote:Given that they began the war with 704 operational aircraft and 230 reserves, 9 weeks should have been sufficient to reduce the RAF to a pittance force.

Wrong. The RAF would have pulled back its bases in the northern part of England which were beyond the range of the Luftwaffe. This would have made effective interception of the bombers before they hit their targets in the south of England all but impossible, but they could have easily jumped them on their return journey.

You do realise that if the surviving british air bases are pulled out of range of the Germans than Britains own planes are effectively out of range of Germany and cannot mount any sort of counter attacks. They may be able to defend, but without any way of attacking Germany back, Germany's skies are effectively free and its plants are free to crank out long range heavy bombers and longer range fighters if the need be. Britain will be cornered and constantly under siege and Germay will just keep getting stronger.

The RAF did not attack Germany in any real numbers until long after German attacks had ceased.

I hope you all realize that by if Germany waited for Russia to invade the the Germans might be on the recieving end of Lend/Lease instead of the Russians. Think about it, it would give them the victim card... "See we were right about the threat of Boleshivism all along!"