I always get the impression that Germany's timing for their first strike, either by malignant design or sheer dumb luck was exquisite. If they'd waited just one more winter I feel that they'd have had far less chance of breaking the French & the BEF in the field. Mechanisation, and perhaps even modernisation, for both those forces was on the brink of decent solid establishment and there may just have been time for the French to sort out their somewhat precarious organisational situation by then? I agree, it seems they picked an ideal moment, also because the Allies started to wake up & rearm by about 1937-1938 but were far from complete by 1940. Also I think if the Germans had launched Sealion end of June instead of 2 months later it would have had a better chance of success
That's a good point and I'd like to add to it. French forces morale and discipline was also very poor in '39. From contemporary reports from visiting Brits I think it would be hard to imagine it being lower without verging on mutiny. Unfortunately can't give a source for that, as I didn't make a note of it, one of those reading in passing things. This is only partially true. The Reserve and Class B troops, stationed along the vulnerable Ardennes front were older than the average French soldier, recieved older weapons and equipment, had irregular training and often had to forage for food. Leave was erratic at best. Political ideologues were also known to spread dissent. The Class A troops however, were well trained, well fed, had more modern weapon and were generally better respected and treated by their officers. The one thing they all had in common was absolute boredom.
It would have been interesting to see what Germany would have done by 1944. However Hitler's mental state began to flair. He was paranoid and suffered from a distinct nervous disorder that would not allow him to remain stagnet for too long. He was also itching to flex his military muscle. Many believe that Hitler felt he could only stay in power as long as he could continue to "act" as Germany's Fuhrer by being bold and courageous to Dem Deutschen Volk! http://re3.yt-thm-a02.yimg.com/image/25/m3/2684025003 "Wenn I waz dis tall I loved Root Beir."
It would have been interesting to see what Germany would have done by 1944. Its hard to see how they could make it that far. The Soviets were planning to attack Germany by the summer of 1942 in any event, Hitler's canny luck & timing again gave him the jump on this. Perhaps I should put up a hypothetical "what if" scenario, it's scary to think what the Axis might have done with a little better planning...
The Soviets were planning to attack Germany by the summer of 1942 in any event, This one's pretty contentious though isn't it. Though Stalin's table-talk certainly indicated he appreciated the possibility of a future war with Germany that doesn't necessarily indicate an intention. Those orders that were prepared, which seem to fuel this view, never seem much more than hypothetical preparation to me. A state's military planners would be rather remiss in their duty if they failed to prepare schemes of both defence and attack for any eventuality, I'm sure lurking in the archives of most countries there are pre-prepared military plans relating to potential attacks on neighbours and even allies... just in case. Cheers, Adam.
yes I believe advances in technology at this time would not have come around if this was the start of the war. All sides needed feedback to develop their weaponary to fit the needs and demand of previous battles. . . no previous battles means no feedback to develop on. I do agree that if the war had of started later on Germany would have been a little more prepared than other countries but it does take significant events and battles to ensue to devise new strategies, wepoanary ect.
Germany should of let the U.S.S.R alone and kept up friendly agreements with them. They should have joined with russia to fight the allies, but because of Hitlers stubborness and his hatred of the Bolsheviks he would not be able to do this. Germany should have annihalated Britain at Dunkirk. Germany shouldn't have focussed too heavily on the campaign in the Balkans and left it mostly to the Italians. These along with other factors attributed to Germany's capitulation and unconditional surrender.
Germany should have also worked more closely in developing decent semi automatic rifles and most importantly assault rifles. Hitler should have ditched the bolt action rifles when he saw the rest of the world developing militarily. They should have worked on an assault rifle from the start and made that their primary infantry weapon.
In all of the above scenarios, the US makes the Atomic Bomb, Berlin gets nuked, war ends!! Sorry for sounding so negative but there is an air of inevitability about it.
I never cease to be amazed at this type of people who wish for the victory for the ones whom their fathers and grandfathers fought against. Scenes like the ones below tickle my sense of irony. Want to see some Iron Crosses and Nazi Militaria? Just go to a place where there's a lot of them: One can wank about as much as they please, but the undeniable fact is that the dear Nazis lost. End of story.
In all of the above scenarios, the US makes the Atomic Bomb, Berlin gets nuked, war ends!! Sorry for sounding so negative but there is an air of inevitability about it. IIRC that is also being debated on the forum somewhere. I agree the Allies wouldn't have dropped the Atomic bomb on Germany for various reasons including location. Germany was a ally of many countries before the war and had much to contribute, Japan was mostly in a state of isolation for centuries hence had very little to contribute. I never cease to be amazed at this type of people who wish for the victory for the ones whom their fathers and grandfathers fought against. Scenes like the ones below tickle my sense of irony. Want to see some Iron Crosses and Nazi Militaria? Just go to a place where there's a lot of them: One can wank about as much as they please, but the undeniable fact is that the dear Nazis lost. End of story. Theres nothing wrong with a friendly (I haven't read the entire thread so I assume) discussion outlining the strengths and weakness of both sides. Regarding your first paragraph, just as you said that perhaps descendants of the Axis are also on this forum thinking of the opposite and the sacrifice of their parents, grandparents, etc and how things may have turned out differently for them?
Elven, by experience this kind of subjects tends to be as attractive as a stable to horseflys, and becomes sour soon enough. And we don't have that many Axis countries descendants here, what we have or may have is another sort.
IIRC that is also being debated on the forum somewhere. I agree the Allies wouldn't have dropped the Atomic bomb on Germany for various reasons including location. Germany was a ally of many countries before the war and had much to contribute, Japan was mostly in a state of isolation for centuries hence had very little to contribute. Theres nothing wrong with a friendly (I haven't read the entire thread so I assume) discussion outlining the strengths and weakness of both sides. Regarding your first paragraph, just as you said that perhaps descendants of the Axis are also on this forum thinking of the opposite and the sacrifice of their parents, grandparents, etc and how things may have turned out differently for them? Elven, I was making the point that the US would have nuked Berlin, especially if it meant ending the war quickly and saving lives. These "What if" threads always make me smile because no matter what Germany did , once 1941 came about it was inevitable what was going to happen. so imho, you can argue "what ifs " all you want, its wouldnt matter if Germany had 3 extra divisions staioned in Normandy or if they had managed to take Bastogne or even if they had managed to adopt a more flexible defence during Bagration, the longer the war went on the greater the chance that the target for the Manhatten Project would have been German, not Japanese. Germany could not have pulled itself up to the Economic Capacity of the US, never mind the manpower of the Soviet Union. So whilst some people may find these discussion interesting, all its doing is discussing conjecture, speculation and ultimately fantasy. Its right up there with "What if Patton had been in charge at Arnhem"?
A nice display in the case! Veterans association (WW1) flag , party banner , EK's WMC's and EK1 & 2's , MG-34 and rounds and some K-98's. A German Victory in WW2 would have been unthinkable - the lack of respect for life and the individual would have plumbed new depths , I think few rationally thinking people would every consider that it was worth the price. Those who do are the deluded idiots who frequent sites which reasonably thinking people avoid.
Could you imagine scenes like this? I remember quite a few years ago The British Legion run a poppy campaign showing German soldiers around landmarks in London with a caption like 'If it wasn't for them London would like this today' Very thought provoking. Cheers Andy
He wouldn't have stopped until he reached Norway? Norway? Vladivostok (as a guest, of course, he was a recipient of the Order of Kutuzov Ist class)
Drew Could you imagine scenes like this? Channel islands , gives a window into what might have been .
Hi all, I'm not a frequent poster, but speculative scenarios such as this interest me greatly. I would agree with the majority who say that Germany's defeat was inevitable, whether by conventional means or atomic weaponry. However, I think the largest factor in Germany's defeat was the head honcho himself, Hitler. He was a man driven not by any great military genius, but two overarching obsessions: Hatred of Jews and hatred of Russia. Through his campaign against both he was working out some incredibly mundane personal issues which stemmed from his violent childhood at the hands of h is drunken father and overly protective mother. Add to that the fact that his military knowledge was very poor, that he had created a leadership typical of dictators loaded with a combination of useless, corrupt psychophants and a smattering of good military minds, and the aforementioned paucity of raw materials and you have a recipe for disaster for all involved. Cheers
Hitler increasingly brought defeat on himself and blamed others for it. For him "The Final Solution" was every bit as much a part of "Final Victory" as winning on the battlefield. Manstein said Hitler had some tactical talent but failed to see that winning was really losing unless you could either exploit the opportunity which resulted or hold the ground gained, he also claimed that Hitler never understood the logistical side of a war , this and his underlying personality spelt the end for Germany.
