What should the German generals have done? (RAR)

[phongn]

The term "Politics" comes to mind. Did Germany actually have that many divisions stationed there for anti-insurgecny efforts?

And of course, since you do want to station many COIN divisions, you'll spend vast sums of blood, treasure and resources and turn the locals against you. The escalating violence will end up killing the very manpower you need to run the European economy. But of course you ignore this because you are (1) trolling and/or (2) hate the idea that glorious totalitarianism and wanton violence might not be effective.

1. Kill Hitler. But do it painlessly, since apparently as part of the RAR I'm supposed to be loyal to the guy. Carry on his beliefs in... spirit?
2. Cancel the battleships and move resources from those into submarines and tanks.
3. Avoid the more severe forms of anti-semitism. Disenfranchising your most brilliant and capable citizens would just be stupid.
4. Move to a total war economy and don't waste resources on insane projects (a-bomb, Maus, etc). Delay war by two more years. Even if the allies rearm themselves to a greater extent, they'll never use their arms efficiently.
5. Don't invade Norway until after the allies invade it.
6. Pressure the French to declare war on Britain after the British attack the French fleet. It's worth a shot, probably won't work, but French industry would be enough to turn the tide of the war. One million French POWs would also no longer have to be fed, although French reparations to the Reich may have to be reduced and the POWs would no longer provide labor.
7. No Tiger tanks. Start development on the Panther before the Russian invasion, and with a 8.8cm gun. Panzer IV is to be the medium tank from 1939 onwards.
8. Avoid brutality if possible in the East. The communists were just losers in an election, and a Russian liberation army could be raised of sufficient size.
9. Households will have to do without maids, women in industry is inevitable, etc.

2. The Navy will protest vociferously and now you've freed the RN from having to deal with a fleet-in-being.
3. You believe in Hitler's aims, so this is a no-go.
4. The war was sold to the German people as a quick victorious war. You can't sell them - initially - on a long, grinding total war. Too many remember WW1.
5. You've changed the war, so you can't assume this will happen.
6. You've changed the war, so you can't assume this will happen. Also, curing the German economy is predicated on looting Europe, so French industry is of no help.
7. Dumb. Tiger tanks are a capability augmentation for the German Army and something within their grasp. Panther tanks are classic "skipping a generation" that leads to development hell.
8. You believe in Hitler's aims, so this is a no-go.
9. Germany actually had substantial mobilization of females into the workforce, just not into industry. Someone has to run the farms.

-The German public will be extremely war weary and subject to late WWI conditions, thus if the war continues past the fourth year, there could be internal revolution.
-If the A-A line in Russia isn't taken OR Britain starved into signing peace, then the war is lost.

You can't win in Russia, the logistics forbid it.

[CaptHawkeye]

1. Kill Hitler. But do it painlessly, since apparently as part of the RAR I'm supposed to be loyal to the guy. Carry on his beliefs in... spirit?

Hitler goes hand in hand with Lebensraum. You can't carry it on without him which makes rearmament pointless. De legitimizing much of the Nazi rhetoric.

2. Cancel the battleships and move resources from those into submarines and tanks.

Reasonable enough.

3. Avoid the more severe forms of anti-semitism. Disenfranchising your most brilliant and capable citizens would just be stupid.

Yeah but then you've further undermined the whole schtick for rearmament. The Nazis sold the public on the need to re-arm Germany out of the fear of a great existential Zionist conspiracy. Fascism derives its whole existence from the need to combat an enemy, real or not.

4. Move to a total war economy and don't waste resources on insane projects (a-bomb, Maus, etc). Delay war by two more years. Even if the allies rearm themselves to a greater extent, they'll never use their arms efficiently.

Define efficiently? The German Army could be pretty damn inefficient during the early stages of the war too you know. (Unwieldy Panzer hordes, the Light Divisions, etc.) What really brought the German Army success was that it was really bigger than its opponents. Good tactics and leadership played a part, but no one on Europe in 1940 was going to stop it. Delay longer than 1939 however, and the gap between the German Army's size and the Allies gets smaller, not wider. Hitler started the war in 1939 because he believed he could no longer delay due to the Allies beginning their own rearmament programs. He was right.

5. Don't invade Norway until after the allies invade it.

You can't risk that. Germany needs Sweden's iron ore and the Norwegian Army presents no real threat to begin with. The Allies cannot be allowed to turn Norway into a second front or put pressure on Sweden to suspend resource shipments.

6. Pressure the French to declare war on Britain after the British attack the French fleet. It's worth a shot, probably won't work, but French industry would be enough to turn the tide of the war. One million French POWs would also no longer have to be fed, although French reparations to the Reich may have to be reduced and the POWs would no longer provide labor.

Output of French Industry declined in most sectors during the war. In some, like coal production, it totally crashed. The Nazis simply did not prove themselves able to efficiently absorb and utilize the industry of any conquered territory.

7. No Tiger tanks. Start development on the Panther before the Russian invasion, and with a 8.8cm gun. Panzer IV is to be the medium tank from 1939 onwards.

You can't really cancel production of the Tiger. Their is a reasonable need for a breakthrough vehicle to prevent defensive deadlocks. Punching deep salients with heavy armor and then filling those salients with hordes of anti tank guns and infantry was a very profitable strategy for Germany.

8. Avoid brutality if possible in the East. The communists were just losers in an election, and a Russian liberation army could be raised of sufficient size.

Lebensraum is not compatible with Russian Slavs, Ukrainians, and Polish. There's only one way the Nazis know how to respond to that kind of problem.

9. Households will have to do without maids, women in industry is inevitable, etc.

This is a myth. Germany was employing mass female labor in the industry before the Allies were.

No doubt after doing the above, the following will be true:
-The German public will be extremely war weary and subject to late WWI conditions, thus if the war continues past the fourth year, there could be internal revolution.
-If the A-A line in Russia isn't taken OR Britain starved into signing peace, then the war is lost.

They won't starve before you.

[Dominarch's Hope]

You people really think Yugoslavia and Tito could kill anything near what happened on the Eastern Front?

No. They all die, village by village, city by city. They just all get killed with the cooperative ones sent to concentration camps.

You people are truly the most incompetent fools ever if you think an insurgency could survive against the Nazis without hope and eventual liberation by a conventional armed force.

And the only way to avoid excessive brutality in the East is incorporating Slavs into a pan european ideal. It wont happen and it wouldnt work anyway.

And yeah, even without Lend Lease, Germany isnt hitting the Urals. Even if they had motorized and had all the fuel, trucks and supplies they wanted they would never have made it to the Urals and would have been thrwonback. Now, without Lend Lease, its doubtful whether they would be in Berlin by 1945. But theyvwould most defniately make it into Poland and to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Its a snowball effect. Not as many tanks because labor and steel are needed for trucks, not as many munitions period, not as many being able to be fielded at once across the general front, etcetc. And it takes a little longer here and there, which allows the Nazis to be a little stronger and kill more and hold longer. Although by the time the Soviets reach Poland, the Werhmacht would be brutally attrited out to the point of simply not having that many competent guys left at all. But the important point is, baring a disaster in the USSR in the 30s, the Nazis arent making it to the Urals without major help they would never get.

Its why the main supposition I made was to avoid war with the USSR altogether. Eberything else is pliable, but no Eastern Front. Its basically pointless.

[Thanas]

You people really think Yugoslavia and Tito could kill anything near what happened on the Eastern Front?

No. They all die, village by village, city by city. They just all get killed with the cooperative ones sent to concentration camps.

Hey idiot, nobody is doubting the Germans can commit mass genocide if they want to. However, everybody is doubting it will be quick and cheap.

[Stark]

Did you read his list of 'suggestions'? They're a play guide to Hearts of Iron, not a realistic (or even coherent) combination of policies and plans. He seriously said 'skip Tiger and build more Panthers with better guns'. He might as well have said 'pay $200 to get +10 hitpoints per tank'. Cherrypicking policy makes even less sense, because it makes it look like he simply doesn't understand that policies come from politics which comes from popularity and personality. You can't just say 'tick this box, don't tick this box' or 'only choose paragon conversation options' and expect that to make any fucking sense.

[Thanas]

That was actually ryacko, but it was equally asinine.

[PeZook]

Hey idiot, nobody is doubting the Germans can commit mass genocide if they want to. However, everybody is doubting it will be quick and cheap.

Plus he's assuming people will just not give a crap forever, letting the Germans just finish their thing leisurely. They might not give two shits at the beginning, but that will last until they see the writing on the wall - for example, France historically treated Poland as an important counterbalance to Germany (hence the massive amounts of military aid in loans that were unlikely to be paid) - losing this counterbalance is going to make them seriously concerned and expecting Germany to turn towards France as soon as they're finished genociding Poland.

Britain, on the other hand, would be extremely miffed at the thought of a unified continental superpower right on their doorstep. So at the very least you can expect aid flowing to the partisans, which may very well escalate into war if, say, a bunch of Russian "advisors" get captured and executed in Poland for the 80th time, and the German populace begins clamoring for retribution.

Assuming war will not erupt eventually because hey who cares about Yugoslavia is a pretty huge assumption, on the level of spherical chickens in vacuum. I mean, just look at his suggestion Germany should clamor for peace with Britain while British bombers turn German cities into rubble: how is he even expecting to keep his advisors and populace in support of that plan?

[ryacko]

1. Kill Hitler. But do it painlessly, since apparently as part of the RAR I'm supposed to be loyal to the guy. Carry on his beliefs in... spirit?

Hitler goes hand in hand with Lebensraum. You can't carry it on without him which makes rearmament pointless. De legitimizing much of the Nazi rhetoric.

2. Cancel the battleships and move resources from those into submarines and tanks.

Reasonable enough.

3. Avoid the more severe forms of anti-semitism. Disenfranchising your most brilliant and capable citizens would just be stupid.

Yeah but then you've further undermined the whole schtick for rearmament. The Nazis sold the public on the need to re-arm Germany out of the fear of a great existential Zionist conspiracy. Fascism derives its whole existence from the need to combat an enemy, real or not.

4. Move to a total war economy and don't waste resources on insane projects (a-bomb, Maus, etc). Delay war by two more years. Even if the allies rearm themselves to a greater extent, they'll never use their arms efficiently.

Define efficiently? The German Army could be pretty damn inefficient during the early stages of the war too you know. (Unwieldy Panzer hordes, the Light Divisions, etc.) What really brought the German Army success was that it was really bigger than its opponents. Good tactics and leadership played a part, but no one on Europe in 1940 was going to stop it. Delay longer than 1939 however, and the gap between the German Army's size and the Allies gets smaller, not wider. Hitler started the war in 1939 because he believed he could no longer delay due to the Allies beginning their own rearmament programs. He was right.

5. Don't invade Norway until after the allies invade it.

You can't risk that. Germany needs Sweden's iron ore and the Norwegian Army presents no real threat to begin with. The Allies cannot be allowed to turn Norway into a second front or put pressure on Sweden to suspend resource shipments.

6. Pressure the French to declare war on Britain after the British attack the French fleet. It's worth a shot, probably won't work, but French industry would be enough to turn the tide of the war. One million French POWs would also no longer have to be fed, although French reparations to the Reich may have to be reduced and the POWs would no longer provide labor.

Output of French Industry declined in most sectors during the war. In some, like coal production, it totally crashed. The Nazis simply did not prove themselves able to efficiently absorb and utilize the industry of any conquered territory.

7. No Tiger tanks. Start development on the Panther before the Russian invasion, and with a 8.8cm gun. Panzer IV is to be the medium tank from 1939 onwards.

You can't really cancel production of the Tiger. Their is a reasonable need for a breakthrough vehicle to prevent defensive deadlocks. Punching deep salients with heavy armor and then filling those salients with hordes of anti tank guns and infantry was a very profitable strategy for Germany.

8. Avoid brutality if possible in the East. The communists were just losers in an election, and a Russian liberation army could be raised of sufficient size.

Lebensraum is not compatible with Russian Slavs, Ukrainians, and Polish. There's only one way the Nazis know how to respond to that kind of problem.

9. Households will have to do without maids, women in industry is inevitable, etc.

This is a myth. Germany was employing mass female labor in the industry before the Allies were.

No doubt after doing the above, the following will be true:
-The German public will be extremely war weary and subject to late WWI conditions, thus if the war continues past the fourth year, there could be internal revolution.
-If the A-A line in Russia isn't taken OR Britain starved into signing peace, then the war is lost.

They won't starve before you.

1. Hitler wasn't the only Nazi theorist, but I get your point. Can't have Hitler and victory.

3. Sumptuary laws might be enough. Can't say, but no alternate history is certain to be possible.

4. Their tanks had radios while the allies didn't have as many. While during the invasion of France, the size of allied and German forces were of roughly equal numbers in tanks and manpower, it was a rout and the allies did not recover.

5. The entirety of World War 2 was a risk. Much after the Sudetenland were bad decisions.

8. Delay lebensraum? There is a war on afterall.

9.

0. Not strictly true. The British in 1942 had critically low supplies of food. After that point, the Americans simply saved the day with their immense industrial capacity. It's possible. But unlikely.

Did you read his list of 'suggestions'? They're a play guide to Hearts of Iron, not a realistic (or even coherent) combination of policies and plans. He seriously said 'skip Tiger and build more Panthers with better guns'. He might as well have said 'pay $200 to get +10 hitpoints per tank'. Cherrypicking policy makes even less sense, because it makes it look like he simply doesn't understand that policies come from politics which comes from popularity and personality. You can't just say 'tick this box, don't tick this box' or 'only choose paragon conversation options' and expect that to make any fucking sense.

What's heart's of iron? Sounds fun.

[Dr. Trainwreck]

Jesus. Ban the fucking neonazi already.

[Carinthium]

Jesus. Ban the fucking neonazi already.

So thinking the Nazis could potentially win World War II means being a neonazi? Does thinking the British Empire could potentially have suppressed the rebellion of the American Colonies make somebody a modern-day Benedict Arnold?

[Dr. Trainwreck]

Jesus. Ban the fucking neonazi already.

So thinking the Nazis could potentially win World War II means being a neonazi? Does thinking the British Empire could potentially have suppressed the rebellion of the American Colonies make somebody a modern-day Benedict Arnold?

No. His claims that the Nazis could exterminate the entirety of Eastern Europe, and the tenacity with which he defends them in the face of all logic, just because they are the Nazis... well, I have difficulty in picking different vibes. I don't know: do you classify him as a mere wanker, an extreme wanker, or an outright ideologue? I'm between the latter two.

[phongn]

3. Sumptuary laws might be enough. Can't say, but no alternate history is certain to be possible.

You can't just handwave "it might be possible" just because it is alt-history. You are required to make an effort to defend those statements. Mere sumptuary laws are incompatible with Hitler's aims, of which alt-Nazi-you believes in.

4. Their tanks had radios while the allies didn't have as many. While during the invasion of France, the size of allied and German forces were of roughly equal numbers in tanks and manpower, it was a rout and the allies did not recover.

... except you've delayed the war two years. Again, you assume things will be like before.

5. The entirety of World War 2 was a risk. Much after the Sudetenland were bad decisions.

Are you conceding your idea or what?

8. Delay lebensraum? There is a war on afterall.

That's part and parcel to their ideology. Don't forget that the Nazi leadership will be driven to terrible deeds just to fight the insurgency.

9.

That's not all of the story. While women weren't in industry they were mobilized extensively for other labor, freeing up men for the factories. See Wages of Destruction by Adam Tooze; it's an excellent book.

[Simon_Jester]

No. His claims that the Nazis could exterminate the entirety of Eastern Europe, and the tenacity with which he defends them in the face of all logic, just because they are the Nazis... well, I have difficulty in picking different vibes. I don't know: do you classify him as a mere wanker, an extreme wanker, or an outright ideologue? I'm between the latter two.

Given his decision to make up a word like "dominarch" for his screenname, I suspect he's just an extreme wanker with a conquest-obsession. Nazis impress him because they tried to do a lot of conquering, and succeeded in conquering many weak or unprepared opponents.

But while he's clearly read at least the general histories, he hasn't got a firm grip on the details. And tends to fill in the details he doesn't know with "AND THEN WE BRUTE-FORCE THE SOLUTION!"

Calling him a neo-Nazi is giving him too much credit; he's more like the people who thought Hitler was cool in 1940 because he'd done a lot of conquering.

[Stark]

That was actually ryacko, but it was equally asinine.

Blergh.

[Dominarch's Hope]

Jesus. Ban the fucking neonazi already.

So thinking the Nazis could potentially win World War II means being a neonazi? Does thinking the British Empire could potentially have suppressed the rebellion of the American Colonies make somebody a modern-day Benedict Arnold?

I dont know about that. Given there stated goal and the people they had to work with, the Nazis were doomed to failure. Thankfully.

But the Revolutionary War? Thats a viable "It could have gone the other way, another way" Wars.

Jesus. Ban the fucking neonazi already.

Exactly where have I supported the Nazi Regime's policies or said that they were in anyway a positive force in the world? Where have I supported and advocated those policies?

I havent. Never. And never will.

You people really think Yugoslavia and Tito could kill anything near what happened on the Eastern Front?

No. They all die, village by village, city by city. They just all get killed with the cooperative ones sent to concentration camps.

Hey idiot, nobody is doubting the Germans can commit mass genocide if they want to. However, everybody is doubting it will be quick and cheap.

Oh it damn sure wont be quick or cheap.

But inflicting even an order of magnitude the cost and blood of the Eastern Front? Not even close. And the main discussion is tiny old Yugoslavia.

My estimate would be 1952 when all relevant resistance is gone and those slated for annhilation are dead by about 95% of those designated. Assuming the Barbarossa doesnt happen.

Now the partisans of the USSR would be able to inflict a hell of a lot of punishment, but again, not even in the same county as the ballpark of the historical Eastern Front. And nearly impossible that that situation happens beyond what happened historically anyways.

And yes, the presumption that the world wouldnt care about parts of Europe being annhilated is far fetched. But that brings conventional or more foreign military intervention, which has little to do with partisans driving out the Nazis all on their own.

And as far as Britain being miffed? Fuck are they going to do when the US tells them to fuck off, shut up, sit down and quit whining? They will do what they are fucking told. Unless this is Britain simply never sueing for peace or asking for it, but thats unlikely when all it would appear to be accomplishing is the ever increasing rate of RAF deaths in European skies.

And say peace happens and trade is resumed but Britain wants to reignite the war at say 1946? What justification would they have if Nazi Germany hasnt touched British soil the entire time? They wont have any verifiable proof, and it might not be listened to anyways given the track record that people remembered from the first World War.

Nah, if Britain goes for peace after France or the attack on the Balkans, and the Nazis dont try Barbarossa, the war is effectively over. Any attempt at reignition would be highly unlikely.

[CaptHawkeye]

Exactly where have I supported the Nazi Regime's policies or said that they were in anyway a positive force in the world? Where have I supported and advocated those policies?

I havent. Never. And never will.

Then why are so willing to go out of your way to find ways the Nazis could win the war than think of ways the Allies could have shortened or prevented it? Your answer will reveal much.

1. Hitler wasn't the only Nazi theorist, but I get your point. Can't have Hitler and victory.

Hitler was the core Nazi theorist, the other members of the Nazi regime were satellites and little else. Hitler went out of his way to make sure no one could equal him in power or personality. See: Ernst Rohm.

4. Their tanks had radios while the allies didn't have as many. While during the invasion of France, the size of allied and German forces were of roughly equal numbers in tanks and manpower, it was a rout and the allies did not recover.

So if German and Allied forces really are equal by 1940, that makes delaying the war longer than 1939 all the more pointless doesn't it?

5. The entirety of World War 2 was a risk. Much after the Sudetenland were bad decisions.

I would call not securing your biggest supplier of a metal needed to build every weapon in your fucking Army a pretty bad decision.

8. Delay lebensraum? There is a war on afterall.

You can't. By starting the war you've cut off Germany's major food suppliers in the Ukraine and Britain. You need to start mass-murder by starvation of non Germans or famine will spread throughout Europe rapidly. Yet killing non-Germans creates much hostility to the Nazi regime. See how pointless this is?

0. Not strictly true. The British in 1942 had critically low supplies of food. After that point, the Americans simply saved the day with their immense industrial capacity. It's possible. But unlikely.

By 1942 Europe had critically low supplies of food with no hope of that situation ending anytime soon.

[Thanas]

Man, DH's last scenario is so out there that it is not even worth responding to.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Are you a supporter of the Nazi party and Nazi racial policy, DH? Because the line "My estimate would be 1952 when all relevant resistance is gone and those slated for annhilation are dead by about 95% of those designated" is so chillingly heartless even by the standards of internet moron what-ifs that it really sounds like you are a Nazi. Or with the name Dominarch's Hope, possibly a Draka fanboy, which is almost as bad.

[PeZook]

Oh it damn sure wont be quick or cheap.

But inflicting even an order of magnitude the cost and blood of the Eastern Front? Not even close. And the main discussion is tiny old Yugoslavia.

My estimate would be 1952 when all relevant resistance is gone and those slated for annhilation are dead by about 95% of those designated. Assuming the Barbarossa doesnt happen.

Now the partisans of the USSR would be able to inflict a hell of a lot of punishment, but again, not even in the same county as the ballpark of the historical Eastern Front. And nearly impossible that that situation happens beyond what happened historically anyways.

Remember that Germany's opponents will ALSO not be bearing the costs of war themselves, and thus become capable of supporting partisan activity to a much greater extent.

The point here is that you want to maintain a wartime footing to fight a counterinsurgency in conquered territorry, which means the German economy will INEVITABLY keel over if you want to keep it up until 1952, and you aren't considering popular perceptions at all. Total war is perceived differently by the population than a grindfest of a quagmire that produces nothing but dead bodies for a decade while you are nominally at peace.

And yes, the presumption that the world wouldnt care about parts of Europe being annhilated is far fetched. But that brings conventional or more foreign military intervention, which has little to do with partisans driving out the Nazis all on their own.

Again, nobody says partisans will defeat Germany in battle, but the massive countrinsurgency campaign is likely to collapse Hitler's genocidal psycho regime eventually, and is MORE than likely to lead to war anyways. Remember how Roosevelt saw the writing on the wall and did his utmost to get the US in harm's way so that US servicemen would die and the populace would be riled up to support war?

Expect the same from everybody else.

And as far as Britain being miffed? Fuck are they going to do when the US tells them to fuck off, shut up, sit down and quit whining? They will do what they are fucking told. Unless this is Britain simply never sueing for peace or asking for it, but thats unlikely when all it would appear to be accomplishing is the ever increasing rate of RAF deaths in European skies.

How exactly are you going to keep German population and your own generals from outright revolting if your plan is "sit there and take it for years"? How will you deal with total British blockade of the mainland while your rare earth stocks dwindle? Why would the US trade with you when historically they reacted to Japan's warmongering with an embargo?

And finally, you are aware the British were a major part of the Manhattan program, right?

And say peace happens and trade is resumed but Britain wants to reignite the war at say 1946? What justification would they have if Nazi Germany hasnt touched British soil the entire time? They wont have any verifiable proof, and it might not be listened to anyways given the track record that people remembered from the first World War.

They won't have verifiable proof of a massive genocide campaign? How the hell are you gonna keep THAT a secret?

I'm only asking because, you know, once you kill ten million people, any nation anywhere will be able to manufacture a casus belli with an utterly trivial propaganda effort...

[K. A. Pital]

Expect the same from everybody else.

Indeed - I'd say European powers, due to the lack of natural barriers like the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, would be even more alarmed about Hitlers grandiose massacre. The USSR would certainly get involved. And others wouldn't be waiting that long either to start funneling money and weapons to partisans or even directly clashing with the Reich.

The US would not trade with Germany other than through third parties (e.g. Francoist Spain) which places severe restrictions on the trade volume and assortment. US embargoed Japan because of Japan's campaign in China, the genocidal extent and colossal death toll of which was only discovered post-facto...

Seriously, DH is just wanking. Leave him be or send him to... hmm... Luft'46 or something.

[Carinthium]

I'd actually be curious to know what Stas Bush, Thanas, or Pezook might do in the hypothetical situation. I don't know much history of this area compared to those on the board, but based on what I do know my best GUESS would be:

(NOTE: Things would be much easier if I could 'prophesy' by ludicrously uncanny predictions, such as that Britain would go to war over Poland but not Chekoslovakia or Austria, that Soviet Russia would be defeated in Finland, etc. If I could do this, I would claim to have a 'brilliant hunch' from time to time. However, that's arguably implicitly cheating.)
(NOTE TWO: As Hitler's main goals can't be achieved, it's probably wiser to try for something lesser. If I manage to exterminate the Jews from Europe, that's probably a legacy Hitler would go to his grave happy about)

1. Back Hitler up to the hilt prior to the invasion of Poland, with the exception of doing one's best to achieve limited genocide against conquered non-Germans, Jews etc. As one of Hitler's goals is the destruction of these people this is achieving his end, and although this is unathorisied it is unlikely in the extreme that he will mind.
2. Back the Von Manstein Plan up to the hilt(obvious- we know it worked), betting one's career if necessary on Von Manstein. If at possible, try to get this done sooner(although I suspect it isn't).
3. A general can't really affect the Battle of Britain, so try to use the time exterminating as many non-Aryans as possible. To exterminate the Jews within the lands he ruled would be a legacy Hitler would probably be glad for even if he ultimately loses. Study the Soviets as much as I can without alerting them including the Finnish War, as I know from Mein Kampf if nothing else that they are an eventual enemy (and I can ask if necessary just to be safe).
4. Since I know the Soviet war is inevitable and given the nature of Nazi command, I can start making preparations for winter wars, preparing provisions, and so on. There are limits to what I can achieve, but given the chaotic nature of the Nazi reigme I can do quite a bit as long as I conceal it from the Soviets. However, I don't allow this to distract me too much from killing Jews.
5. If I have enough influence with the Furher, I should suggest drawing Soviet forces into regions where the infamous Russian winter doesn't apply as well as slow expansion on the basis that we can exterminate the locals before moving on. I give the argument that superior Aryans have been destroyed by the weather before- we may be able to overcome it but much less German blood will be spilt if we fight in better terrain. Privately, I consider the war unwinnable but make sure not to say so.
6. I should try to be stationed on the Eastern front (as that's where I can make the most difference). My strategy during the initial invasion will be to focus on destroying Soviet forces unless I can somehow get a mad dash for Moscow approved (to capture Moscow would be a major strategic coup, whilst capturing Stalin even more so) or get away with it anyway. Even if my probability for capturing Moscow is a mere 30%, if Stalin is there I'll want to give it a go.
7. After the initial invasion, if the situation isn't a Soviet collapse I try to get away with a defensive strategy. Since Hitler won't approve, I present my strategy as drawing the Soviets to places where they can encircled or otherwise trapped and destroyed (paralleling it with Napoleon's withdrawal from the Pratzen heights at Austerlitz- a brief loss of land that will be reclaimed soon anyway) and to an extent actually follow through. Meanwhile, I focus on trying to ship local Jewish populations west for later extermination.
8. If and when we start losing ground to the Soviets, I propose to Hitler (if he hasn't thought of it already) that we should make our strategic aim to buy time to exterminate the Jews and revive the German Volk whilst establishing a border from which to repel the Soviets.

The most likely result is failure but far more non-Aryans killed (as a General I will enthusiastically support Hitler and by my actions can get such policies started earlier than they otherwise would), particularly Jews- exterminating the Jews from Hitler's conquests will be difficult but barely possible (exterminating them from Germany is quite feasible). IF I conquer Moscow and kill Stalin (admittedly very unlikely), I've probably bought enough time to exterminate the Jews from Eastern Europe at the least.

[Spoonist]

Proposal:
HoS this.

[Carinthium]

I can see where you're coming from, but I disagree- callousness in abstract doesn't necessarily translate to real cruelty.

[Stark]

What is it that combines alt-history cretins and genocidal fantasies? Is it an accident that these people gravitate towards the same themes and events with allegedly all of history to draw on for their childish 'make shit up' storytelling?

With order if they speak this way to normal people. 'Hey Bob, I've got this plan to increase the slaughter of non-whites by the Nazis do you want to chat about it over lunch?'

[Carinthium]

What is it that combines alt-history cretins and genocidal fantasies? Is it an accident that these people gravitate towards the same themes and events with allegedly all of history to draw on for their childish 'make shit up' storytelling?

With order if they speak this way to normal people. 'Hey Bob, I've got this plan to increase the slaughter of non-whites by the Nazis do you want to chat about it over lunch?'

Have you considered other possible reasons why I might like this idea? When I originally made it (and there was quite a bit of thought between that and my actual response), I found it interesting because Hitler's situation was essentially unwinnable given his overly ambitious goals and it brought up the implicit question "How much can I go against my leader and still count as 'loyal'"?

That's not to say I don't have the "pirate-loving gene" (i.e. a love of the idea of defying societal expectations, of which commiting genocide is just about the ultimate form) but I tend to have rather different fantasies when going down that route so I doubt it's that.