WW2 what if hitler went East?

[Finlandia]

If France and UK had been granted way through Northern Norway and Sweden during the Finnish winter war, to help Finland against Soviet and to seize control over the mines in Northern Sweden, then the trade with Germany would have been cut short and the war would have ended a few years earlier.

Not really what the thread is about though.

[johnxjsc1985]

s2art said:

And the second phase of the Atlantic Battle, to enable the USA to get men and materials in huge quantities to the UK and North Africa.

fantastic programme on TV tonight about the Queen Mary and her incredible story during WW2. 15,000 US troops at any one time over a million in total and of course 20,000 UK Brides.

[loose cannon]

Derek Smith said:

amgmcqueen said:

Interesting theory... but how would the axis have overthrown the industrial powerhouse that is the USA and how would they have had enough men to control both the US and Europe?

The amount of military equipment the US was churning out after 41 was simply staggering! Then there is the small matter of the A-bomb...

There was a majority in favour of isolationism in the US, not enough not to supply arms, to both sides, but a majority. Most papers were pushing it out all the time as well. There was a significant number of people in the UK who didn't want to honour the treaty with Poland. Whilst we had no treaty with Czechoslovakia for military intervention it has been referred to at the Great Betrayal, and there was a section of the government that wanted to be more forceful, perhaps with the help of the USA. But no.

So if Germany did invade the UK it is probable that Eire would have been given NI on condition of fortifications along the coast. Where would the yanks have invaded even if they wanted to? They'd have allowed everything to go on unhindered if the UK had been successfully invaded or we'd surrendered.

Would Japan still have attacked the Pacific fleets? I think so but with all their industry the war with them might well have been over earlier and with fewer casualties. Geremny was, of course, an ally of Germany but I feel certain that there would have been diplomatic moves somewhere.

However, post war America had a massive amount of military hardware, infrastructure and personnel. The military had a massive lobbying capability and for many arms manufacturers it was almost like a subsidy. It would have to go somewhere and it would have fought against what they thought of as socialism and leave Hitler as a barrier against the western spread of Stalin. But the same would go for him. His western border would have been reinforced and the southern movement of Russia might have come earlier.

A new world order? Or would things have sorted themselves out eventually, as they normally do.

Also the German American bund, Google Madison square rally 1939
Prominent pro nazi industrialist's include Henry ford

[Halb]

Mr Gearchange said:

Phillip K Dick Novel - The Man In The High Castle.

I suspect the TV programme was easier going than the book.

There is also Fatherland.

[Halb]

Finlandia said:

If France and UK had been granted way through Northern Norway and Sweden during the Finnish winter war, to help Finland against Soviet and to seize control over the mines in Northern Sweden, then the trade with Germany would have been cut short and the war would have ended a few years earlier.

Not really what the thread is about though.

But then Stalin never would have accepted British offers of help, and without UK/USSR alliance, it falls apart.

[perdu]

Halb said:

Mr Gearchange said:

Phillip K Dick Novel - The Man In The High Castle.

I suspect the TV programme was easier going than the book.

There is also Fatherland.

I suspect you are right

"Blade Runner" is easier going than "Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep" too

PKD is insightful and an awesome SF writer, but...

I love this speculation and hope it goes on longer than the war my dad saved us all in




(Confessions true... : I spend far too much of my life reading PH and have never seen either TV programme)

[Barmyfluid]

Great thread. I suspect the Pacific war overshadowed the European theatre in respects of more modern warfare so any 'leftovers' would have been quickly resolved /nuked in 1945. Still very interesting to speculate though.
Have sometimes thought if the Wermacht knew the war was not going to be won when winter closed in and they were 28m from Moscow or was it Day 2 in Kursk.

Edited by Barmyfluid on Tuesday 23 August 02:32

Edited by Barmyfluid on Tuesday 23 August 02:34

[Halb]

perdu said:

I suspect you are right

"Blade Runner" is easier going than "Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep" too

PKD is insightful and an awesome SF writer, but...

I love this speculation and hope it goes on longer than the war my dad saved us all in
)

(Confessions true... : I spend far too much of my life reading PH and have never seen either TV programme)

Fatherland is by Richard Harris, the film with Rutger Hauer is rather good.

[vonuber]

Finlandia said:

If France and UK had been granted way through Northern Norway and Sweden during the Finnish winter war, to help Finland against Soviet and to seize control over the mines in Northern Sweden, then the trade with Germany would have been cut short and the war would have ended a few years earlier.

Germany helped Finland, and also why would sweden consent to having its mines annexed?

[Finlandia]

Halb said:

Finlandia said:

If France and UK had been granted way through Northern Norway and Sweden during the Finnish winter war, to help Finland against Soviet and to seize control over the mines in Northern Sweden, then the trade with Germany would have been cut short and the war would have ended a few years earlier.

Not really what the thread is about though.

But then Stalin never would have accepted British offers of help, and without UK/USSR alliance, it falls apart.

You are thinking ahead of your time

If France and UK had sent troops to Finland along with some "modern" weapons, then Stalin and the Soviet resources had been kept at bay on the Finnish front, with the allies in charge over Swedish mines the Germans would soon have ran out of war material. Stalin hogtied and Hitler without hardware.

Very much simplified, but a possible outcome.

[rxe]

Derek Smith said:

There was a majority in favour of isolationism in the US, not enough not to supply arms, to both sides, but a majority. Most papers were pushing it out all the time as well. There was a significant number of people in the UK who didn't want to honour the treaty with Poland. Whilst we had no treaty with Czechoslovakia for military intervention it has been referred to at the Great Betrayal, and there was a section of the government that wanted to be more forceful, perhaps with the help of the USA. But no.

So if Germany did invade the UK it is probable that Eire would have been given NI on condition of fortifications along the coast. Where would the yanks have invaded even if they wanted to? They'd have allowed everything to go on unhindered if the UK had been successfully invaded or we'd surrendered.

Would Japan still have attacked the Pacific fleets? I think so but with all their industry the war with them might well have been over earlier and with fewer casualties. Geremny was, of course, an ally of Germany but I feel certain that there would have been diplomatic moves somewhere.

However, post war America had a massive amount of military hardware, infrastructure and personnel. The military had a massive lobbying capability and for many arms manufacturers it was almost like a subsidy. It would have to go somewhere and it would have fought against what they thought of as socialism and leave Hitler as a barrier against the western spread of Stalin. But the same would go for him. His western border would have been reinforced and the southern movement of Russia might have come earlier.

A new world order? Or would things have sorted themselves out eventually, as they normally do.

Yes - I think this is the answer.

Consider a scenario where Adolf invaded Poland, France, the Nordics and enough of Africa to get a bit of oil. Italy on side, Spain on side. He stops there and says to the UK: I've got no great desire to invade you, it will be hard and bloody for all of us. I'll leave you alone if you leave me alone. No bombing of UK cities, Battle of Britain is more of a skirmish.

I reckon there is a strong likelihood that we would have said "OK". The Americans would not have got involved.

Roll on 10 years and the German Empire is a powerhouse of industry and military production. At that point they take out the UK either economically or militarily.

Once they have done that, any putative US invasion fleet has to cross the Altantic, which would be verging on the impossible.

[Finlandia]

vonuber said:

Germany helped Finland, and also why would sweden consent to having its mines annexed?

Finland had no other choice but turn to Germany, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Having said that, Finland and Germany are very close ever since Germany helped Finland gain independence from Russia/Soviet in 1917-18.

Another question is why "neutral" Sweden provided Hitler with raw material to keep the Nazi army going.

[Halb]

Finlandia said:

You are thinking ahead of your time

If France and UK had sent troops to Finland along with some "modern" weapons, then Stalin and the Soviet resources had been kept at bay on the Finnish front, with the allies in charge over Swedish mines the Germans would soon have ran out of war material. Stalin hogtied and Hitler without hardware.

Very much simplified, but a possible outcome.

I'm thinking of cause and effect. Materials could be gotten elsewhere, different plans put into operation, but the goodwill between the UK and Stalin would not have existed, and the help that the USSR desperately needed might have been ignored, it was a fine line even the way it went.

Here's another discussion on it.

[CaptainSlow]

rxe said:

Yes - I think this is the answer.

Already said

CaptainSlow said:

One of the greatest misconceptions of the German army is that is was a fully mechanised force. Newsreels of 1939/40 showed the steaming ahead of Panzers but behind them the majority of the army were using horses and push bikes.

With 20/20 hindsight, Hitler should have kept to the non-aggression pact with Stalin after splitting Poland, even negotiating a dmz along their shared border(s). Take France and Greece as they did, then take Crete, Malta and Gib. Forces used in reality against the Soviets then used to take Egypt and the Suez, the Brits would be significantly out numbered and out gunned. North Africa split between puppet France and Germany, support the Middle East to revolt against the Brits. All the time keeping the US sweet with full diplomatic ties and no aggression against the British mainland, any attacks on the Britain turning public opinion against efforts to set up a puppet here.

[Halb]

rxe said:

I'll leave you alone if you leave me alone. No bombing of UK cities, Battle of Britain is more of a skirmish.

I reckon there is a strong likelihood that we would have said "OK".

That was almost happened. What changed it was that Hitler got bored waiting for the details to be ironed out, and ended the phony war.

[irocfan]

Finlandia said:

Another question is why "neutral" Sweden provided Hitler with raw material to keep the Nazi army going.

either that or be invaded....

[Halb]

irocfan said:

either that or be invaded....

Probably a good reason, also, and I don't know but there were probably establishment types who would want Germany as an ally against Stalin (like the situation in the UK).

[Finlandia]

irocfan said:

Finlandia said:

Another question is why "neutral" Sweden provided Hitler with raw material to keep the Nazi army going.

either that or be invaded....

The risk of an invasion would have been small if the allied forces held control over the mines, and the country in large. Instead the political cowards set the sails with the wind, regardless of direction, in the name of "neutrality".

Quite telling that the Norwegian royal family, even the Swedish born princess, were not welcome to Sweden after the German invasion of Norway.

[s2art]

rxe said:

Yes - I think this is the answer.

Consider a scenario where Adolf invaded Poland, France, the Nordics and enough of Africa to get a bit of oil. Italy on side, Spain on side. He stops there and says to the UK: I've got no great desire to invade you, it will be hard and bloody for all of us. I'll leave you alone if you leave me alone. No bombing of UK cities, Battle of Britain is more of a skirmish.

I reckon there is a strong likelihood that we would have said "OK". The Americans would not have got involved.

Roll on 10 years and the German Empire is a powerhouse of industry and military production. At that point they take out the UK either economically or militarily.

Once they have done that, any putative US invasion fleet has to cross the Altantic, which would be verging on the impossible.

In less than 10 years the UK would have the atom bomb and Germany not. We now know that the UK was on the right lines, but it may take a year or two longer without the yanks. In reality if all that was going on on the continent the yanks would get involved anyway. Why would Spain not stay neutral BTW?
And how would this fledgling German Empire stop the yanks crossing the Atlantic? Particularly with the might of the RN to assist. I think you underestimate the productive potential of the American military industrial complex.

[TVR1]

glazbagun said:

I'd say no, but a lot of the "Jewish Problem" was definitely of their own making. They were inviting native Germans back to Germany, tossing Jews and Poles out of their homes/businesses and eventually planned a sort of Greater Germany which spread into the East, with the Poles/Slavs moved further east like the Balkans and the Jews further east still.

Then as the logistical nightmare unfolded, alternative schemes such as dumping the Jews in Africa or elsewhere started to be floated to deal with the huge amount of internal displacement.

So a mess for sure, but I don't think it would have saved them from the Soviets.

With WWII almost gone from memory it's almost amazing at just how rational-yet-fking-nasty the Nazi's were. I mean, how cold do you need to be and sit around a table and plot something like this:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalplan_Ost

If you want cold..... Try Aktion T4

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aktion_T4