Alternative ending for WWII?

I think Hitler thought Britain would fall on it's own and submit, like most of the rest of Europe, with a bit of help from the Luftwaffe. He left Goering with the simple job of applying a bit of pressure on our trade and military installations so that we'd quit. However, Goering seriously underestimated the skill of our pilots and maneuverability of the Spitfire and Hurricane. At one point, pretty much the entireity of the the Luftwaffe was committed but they couldn't break our air defence. We'd lose 5 planes in an attack to their 20. It become a war of attrition, with the Gerries resorting to terror attacks on civilians (which we did get pay back for, in the end). Radar helped somewhat. We had it, they didn't. A bit of British ingenuity for you! Once an attack was detected, we could be up and airborne in 2 minutes.

If they've have gone for a land invasion, we'd have fought tooth and nail, but would have stood little chance, it has to be said. I think he did plan to, eventually, once he had air-superiority. But that had to be won first.

I'm sure Hitler would have invaded other areas that didn't fit his philosophy eventually, including the US. Japan kind of forced his hand before he was ready on that one though, which I'm sure he didn't thank them for. Why didn't the US join the war earlier though? Britain was the only nation to stand up and say 'hey, what the hell do you think you're doing over there Mr Hitler?', despite the fact our army was no way up to the task of fighting Germany alone. When we needed friends and extra voices, we had none.

Interested fact for you though, Hitler once said that of all the nations in the world he admired England the most, as despite being a small country, we had most of the world under our heel. Not really a compliment you want from such a person, but there it is.

 

If Hitler had honoured the Ribbentropp-Molotov pact he could have taken out the UK at his leisure, solidified his hold on Europe and the US would never have joined the war in Europe no matter what Japan did. Thankfully Hitler was a nut job and thought he could do everything at once. He would have clashed with the Russians sooner or later no matter what but if he had secured the western front first it would have been the Soviets alone against Nazi-Germany which would be an interesting fight. Either way I think the biggest impact would probably be that different kinds of fascism would have been the dominating ideology in the world and not liberal democracy.

 

Hitler going after Russia like he did was definitely the turning point of the war. Not the US joining, as they like to think. Imagine if Hitler did honour the Germany/Russia pact and the US entered as well. US, UK and allies vs Germany, Russia and allies.... that would have been interesting! I couldn't call how it would have turned out.

 

Because a) He didn't want to and b) He didn't have the power to do it

He didn't want to because, as Barmy has already said, Hitler admired the british empire.

As for the "he didn't have the power" reason, Hitler has done three crucial mistakes, that made the military conquest or the surrender of British isles an unachievable goal. a) Doenitz had requested for 300 submarines in order to lead Britain to starvation and Hitler due to his illusions of grandeur, instead of satisfying his admiral request, chose to spent the necessery resources in the making of a surface fleet. b) The famous halt order in Dunkirk. With this not only he allowed the escape of 300.000 troops, but also gave a big boost to the british morale. It's totally different to have 300.000 veterans defending your shores than to have your shores defended by rookies and militia. c) The initial targets of Luftwaffe were air bases and factories and that tactic had brought RAF to its knees because it could not replace airplanes and pilots fast enough. However, an accidental bombing of London by a group of German bombers led to the retaliative bombing of Berlin, something that enraged Hitler, who shifted Luftwaffe focus from factories and airfields to cities and therefore gave RAF the necessary time to breath and replace its casaulties.

Apart from these three mistakes, even if Luftwaffe had won the air superiority, the invasion would be a suicide attempt for Wehrmacht, since Germans didn't have the necessary landing boats for an amphibious operation and furthermore, the Royal Navy was still there. Operation "Sea-Lion" was just a bluff which was aiming to lead England to peace negotiations.

Because Russia cannot be choked this way. The supply routes of the Veringe sea are still open. Hitler's only hope for victory in Russia was a fast campaign, that would destroy totally the Red Army and the leading groups of the communist party.

 

Oh come on now... you got to give us Yanks some credit there. Even with the Germans fighting on two fronts the Brits were in no position to launch an amphibious invasion of the European mainland without help from the US.

That is a good point about the radar. I heard (and it seems reasonable) that because the Germans did not know initially about the radar, that the Brits actually let a few of the bombing sorties through if they were headed for less valuable targets.

I do not think Hitler ever would have invaded the US. Keep in mind that there are a finite number of able-bodied young men in Germany. After fighting through Europe, Africa, and the amphibious invasion of Britain, heavy casaulties were sustained. By the end of the war, the Germans were conscripting soldiers as young as 16. How many thousands more would you have needed to take the US?

 

One thing's for sure - we'd still have FOX News (although course it would be called FUCHS Neuigkeiten)

 

I don't think the US would have even joined the war at all without them being forced into it. We were definitely not in any position to strike back, we were hanging on for dear life really. However, with the German's losing in Russia without anyone elses help, and Britain holding on... who's to say where it would have gone? The US swung D-Day, but a lot of their contribution to the war was in the Pacific fighting for their wounded pride against out-numbered Japs.

Ok, I'll say that the US joining the war was 'less' of a turning point than Hitler committing hari kari in Russia. You just don't invade Russia, at least in those times. It was run by a man equal in nut-job terms as Hitler, and therefore it would be "fight to the death or else we'll kill you as a deserter" throughout, and well... having to plough through the entire Russian population to finally win would have taken some doing and alot of casualties.

They succeeded with France and a lot of other countries in Europe because when they got the upper hand the French decided peace and surrender was better than their cities being needlessly destroyed and civilians hurt so they as such gave up.. in Russia meanwhile as shown with Leningrad and Stalingrad the viewpoint was just suffer... and kill Germans. A lot of Russian soldiers weren't even given bloody guns... just told to loot one when the man beside them fell. What can you do against that kind of attitude?

 

And what about Japan's goofs? Midway should of been a crushing defeat/knockout blow for the US Navy, instead it gave us a second wind in the Pacific theatre. A US loss at Midway would of meant no ability to fight on land in the Pacific for the US. If that was the case, we would of never sent troops to Europe as invasion from Japan on US soil would of been our first priority.

 

Japan was not out-numbered. They were a superior fighting force at the beginning of the was (and certainly after Pearl Harbor). Japan was not able to keep up the industrial ability of the US ... but that's a different topic.

I do agree with BA -- the Russians defeated Germany. Period. Britain and US were simply nuisances until Russia broke the back of the German Army. In reality though, it was Germany that defeated themselves by overextending their supply lines and pushing into Russia too fast. Had Germany established their logistics and moved cautiously Russia would have been crushed with minimal losses.

To the topic ... had the war ended differently SP would be in German....

 

I don't think the Japanese could of conquered the US, but they definitely would of tied us up for a long time if they won at Midway. If so, we would of never enterd the European Theatre and Germany still could of had a fighting chance. Hitler had the world by the balls and let it slip away. Lucky us...

 

As T2 wrote, the US entrance in Europe shortened the war, probably saved countless lives but most of all it saved Europe from living under the heel of Stalin's boot. The D-day invasion and push into Europe was as much if not more about making sure Stalin didn't roll through all of Europe as to take out Hitler. Without the US the war would have lasted longer but we would most likely have ended up with a Soviet Europe. Even so he got his hands on half of Europe and the people there are still suffering for it.

 

I disagree that pushing to fast was the reason of the German defeat in Russia. IMO pushing to fast was their only option to end the war soon enough and not turning it into a war of attrition.The overextended supply lines became a problem only after the autumn rains, which turned roads to mud traps (something that the OKW never really took under consideration during the planning of the invasion), and after the atrocities commited by the Einsatzgruppen, which drove the populations, that had initialy welcomed Germans as liberators, to the resistance.

 

Had Hitler won, racist ideology would be much more predominant today. I doubt that the US would have had such a successful Civil Rights movement, regardless of whether they had entered the war or not. Hitler may or may not have tried to take the US -- he had lots of land to take from the Russians. Either way, though, we'd have well ordered, strict, and racially pure societies likely built on the enslavement (maybe not in so many words) of minorities or their outright elimination.

It might be a scientific wonderland (Hitler knew the value of scientific endeavors) far in advance of what we have now.

But it would be a moral wasteland and not fun to live in at all.

 

"Germany will dominate Europe, and England the world outside"

Adolf Hitler

 

I'll just let the experts answer the logistics issue:

“The history of war proves that nine out of ten times an army has been destroyed because its supply lines have been cut off.”
-- General Douglas MacArthur

“Gentlemen, the officer who doesn’t know his communications and supply as well as his tactics is totally useless.”
-- General George S. Patton, USA

“Amateurs think about tactics, but professionals think about logistics.”
-- General Robert H. Barrow, USMC (Commandant of the Marine Corps)

“You will not find it difficult to prove that battles, campaigns, and even wars have been won or lost primarily because of logistics.”
-- Gen Dwight D. Eisenhower

The Germans were destined to lose once they overextended their supply chain.

Japan could not have engaged in a land war in the US. They did not need to. The Japanese fleet simply needed to stop the US Navy and they failed to do it. Midway was the turning point in the Naval war, but was not the biggest mistake made by the Japanese fleet. Had they bombed the fueling depot at Pearl Harbor we would not have been able to enter the War in the Pacific at all. Japan would have crushed all opposition in the Southern Pacific.

 

@T2

You misunderstood, I don't disagree about the importance of the logistics or that overextended supply lines are a bad thing . My point is that the only way for Germans to win was to wage a lightning war in order to achieve a fast victory (the invasion plan predicted that the war would last 6 months), so that the overextension of the supply lines would be of minor importance.

As for the "what if" question, there is a novel and a movie based on the novel that deal with it.

 

There are dozens(maybe hundreds) of alternative history ww2 books out there.

triumph of third reich
&
amazons best alternative history list

[EDIT]
Completely forgot the absolute master of alternate history, Harry Turtledove.

 

I have read a few of those books. Also the reason why I like to play the SSI Panzer General/Allied General/Pacific General series. They include a lot of speculative scenarios. The Japanese Campaign was especially challenging.