Question for WW II history buffs
- Thread starter pbslinger
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
feralmerril
Absent Comrade
I am nobody, but I belive if hitler would have let his generals fight the war we would have been in big trouble
semperfi71
US Veteran
feralmerril is dead on. Also Hitler should have left Russia alone. A stupid mistake. The Russians are the ones who actually defeated him. The U.S. and Allies were the second front.
Texas Star
US Veteran
About the last chance for Germany to have won (just maybe) would have been for the July, 1944 plot against Hitler by some of his own officers to have succeeded.
And, had Hitler released the SS tank divisions in Normandy in time, that might have ended badly for the Allied invasion.
The Allies also had problems, two of which were Montgomery and Patton and their vanity feuds. This issue at times cost thousands of lives, most markedly during the Operation Market-Garden parachute drops into Holland. But it also caused many casualties in Sicily.
By the way, does anyone think that FDR may have hoped for Japan to attack the US to cause huge wartime production needs to end the last of the Depression? Not that we shouldn't have been helping against the Axis, anyway. The Rome-Berlin-Tokyo Axis was clearly bent on conquest.
And, had Hitler released the SS tank divisions in Normandy in time, that might have ended badly for the Allied invasion.
The Allies also had problems, two of which were Montgomery and Patton and their vanity feuds. This issue at times cost thousands of lives, most markedly during the Operation Market-Garden parachute drops into Holland. But it also caused many casualties in Sicily.
By the way, does anyone think that FDR may have hoped for Japan to attack the US to cause huge wartime production needs to end the last of the Depression? Not that we shouldn't have been helping against the Axis, anyway. The Rome-Berlin-Tokyo Axis was clearly bent on conquest.
Bullman
Member
The start of where things went bad for Adolf Hitler was when he failed to finish off England before moving on. If he had won in England, which he could have done if he had remained focused and finished the RAF instead of turning towards London out of revenge.... But then he failed, then he got himself in a two front war with Russia, which became three fronts if you include North Africa... he was horribly over extended and had no hope of winning once America entered the war and had bases in England and the North Africa to bomb him from.
sub-moa
US Veteran
Good points...
And had he built Type VII U-boats in the numbers requested by the Kreigsmarine, before invading Poland.....
And had he built Type VII U-boats in the numbers requested by the Kreigsmarine, before invading Poland.....
Gun-runner
Member
Yep! Talk about getting LUCKY!
I don't know if anything could have turned the tide enough for an Axis victory, but, IMO his biggest mistake was invading Yugoslavia in April of '41. There was absolutely no need for this, Hitler was furious over the attempted coup that occurred after Yugo had joined the Tripartie Pact. This delayed Operation Barbarossa for about a month, which caused the Russian winter to become a huge factor in the defeat that winter, they were 15 miles from Moscow when the winter hit and turned the tide against German forces.
Had Russia been invaded in May as originally planned, May 25, IIRC, Moscow would have most certainly fallen in November/December 1941, which may very well have paved the way for a German victory in the East.
Had Russia been invaded in May as originally planned, May 25, IIRC, Moscow would have most certainly fallen in November/December 1941, which may very well have paved the way for a German victory in the East.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2005
- Messages
- 26,096
- Reaction score
- 46,829
The first major mistake was Hitler's sudden caution when he halted the Blitzkrieg just short of the total annihilation of the French and Brit forces in France.
Had he allowed the general, whose name escapes me at this time of morning to proceed, there would have been NO evacuation at Dunkirk. That would have left Britain much more vulnerable to invasion.
Had he allowed the general, whose name escapes me at this time of morning to proceed, there would have been NO evacuation at Dunkirk. That would have left Britain much more vulnerable to invasion.
uzisandfloozies
Member
1. the germans should have pushed much more aggressively into southern russia, to get to the oil fields, and not been so fixated on taking moscow.
2. the germans didnt realize that the U.S. had broken the japanese codes, and we were listening to the daily reports from the japanese ambassador in berin back to tokyo, explaining to the japanese government EVERYTHING that the germans were planning to do.
3. the germans should have stayed focused on destroying the RAF bases, as mentioned previously, and invaded england before taking on russia.
4. the germans should have put more emphasis on aircraft production instead of overly complex and too-large tanks. (hitler was fascinated with tanks)
2. the germans didnt realize that the U.S. had broken the japanese codes, and we were listening to the daily reports from the japanese ambassador in berin back to tokyo, explaining to the japanese government EVERYTHING that the germans were planning to do.
3. the germans should have stayed focused on destroying the RAF bases, as mentioned previously, and invaded england before taking on russia.
4. the germans should have put more emphasis on aircraft production instead of overly complex and too-large tanks. (hitler was fascinated with tanks)
Not taking St. Vith during the battle of the Bulge.Pattons tanks held on for three days till reinforced and broke the German advance before they could get to the gas dumps.50 years later in Houston the surviving commanders on both sides met and concluded that St. Vith was the pivotal engagement of the "Bulge". Small change , big difference.
Without "the bomb" Hitler never really stood a chance against the civilized world. His wonder weapons were too little too late. Anglo- American and Russian manufacturing production capabilities are what gave the allied armed forces the tools to defeat the Axis Powers.
LTC
LTC
Not a small change but I believe if Hitler had not wasted time, men and machinery rounding up Jews, Poles etc., and diverted those resources into the attack on Stalingrad, he would have won in Russia.
Maybe no won but been able to cut a deal.
Russia didn't win the war, they drug it out at least two more years. Had Russia declared war on Japan in 1942, and let us build air basses on Russian territory, there would have been no need for the island hopping campaign. A year of heavy bombing on Japanese mainland would probably have brought Japan to her knees in '43 and freed up many of the Pacific resources.
Maybe no won but been able to cut a deal.
Russia didn't win the war, they drug it out at least two more years. Had Russia declared war on Japan in 1942, and let us build air basses on Russian territory, there would have been no need for the island hopping campaign. A year of heavy bombing on Japanese mainland would probably have brought Japan to her knees in '43 and freed up many of the Pacific resources.
arkypete
Member
In 1938 Gen. Gudeian (sp) wanted Hitler to hold of starting the war until Germany could replace it's horse drawn artillry and supply chain, with trucks.
Most folks don't know that most of Hitlers big guns, beans, bullets, etc had to be hauled to the front by horses.
Jim
Most folks don't know that most of Hitlers big guns, beans, bullets, etc had to be hauled to the front by horses.
Jim
rocketdog
Member
Churchill dies early 1940, Britain makes peace or surrenders to Germany, Germany goes east and south without Britain in the fight, Germany defeats Russia and takes north Africa and over to Teheran before USA can bring power to bear, Japan takes Australia and India....
Hitler keeps non agression pact with Russia. Focuses on mass production manufacturing of the proven good weapons, Panther and Tiger tanks, 88s, Mg-42s, the best trucks, subs, fighters, and bombers. Go for strategic bombing targets in England instead of carpet bombing, and delay Jap invasion of Pearl, and eventually capture Great Britain. Spread throughout Europe and North Africa but do everything possible to delay the U.S. from declaring war with negotiations, peace treaties, whatever it takes. Any thing else is pretty irrelevant because whoever developed the atomic bomb first would win the war.
To answer the original question, I believe the world would have faced a 'cold war' type situation (neither out right global war, but constant small scale operations and fighting), involving the Axis powers against the Allied powers (now including USSR, but they wouild have cut their own deal as what is another XX millions of dead as long as Stalin and the communists remained in some sort of power) instead of the cold war adversaries we did have!
I believe that the atomic bomb would have been dropped on Japan as was done, but not used in the European theater. There have been numerous books, papers, theories, etc. defining how and why the war was fought differently against Germany versus Japan. Most seem to center on the fact that the European culture was so ingrained within the U.S. versus the Asiatic culture (remember the time frame) that was a definite minority in the U.S. at the time.
Also Germany would have eventually developed a nuclear capability, and then again a cold war type conflict, only different players on the other side.
So in effect nothing different than what happened, just different uniforms!
cmort666
Member
Outside of Jimmy Carter replacing FDR, I'm very doubtful that they COULD win.
Axis ends and means were so consistently not just irrational, but ANTI-rational that it's hard to see what would have made a serious difference.
If Hitler had died before the war, Germany MIGHT have had a sane leader to fight the war, but a sane leader probably wouldn't have fought the war, certainly not the war that Hitler started.
If Germany hadn't persecuted the Jews, they might have gotten nuclear weapons first, but as long as there was a Hitler, there was going to be no "Jewish science".
And the list just goes on.
As far as the Japanese go, only Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton could have saved them, and probably not even then. They would have needed a Dennis Kucinich to bail them out. The ONLY way for the Japanese to win was to have the US just roll over. And without a REAL loser at the top, that would never happen. There probably would have been an impeachment or a military coup anyway. The closest approximation I've seen to Japanese "grand strategy" is the machinations of "Drunky Crow" on the Cartoon Network. Attacking the United States was their version of "beer goggles". The general invasion of China was stupid beyond belief and in fact accomplished the EXACT opposite of everything it was allegedly supposed to accomplish. The war against the US and Britain was just a continuation of that monstrously ill-conceived fiasco.
The Japanese would have been better off if Yamamoto had seized power after the last Army mutiny, but he was the loudest voice AGAINST war with the US.
Asking how the Axis could have won is like asking how things could have worked out better for the Alabama mass murderer without him deciding to not BE a mass murderer.
Similar threads
