Page 2 of 46 FirstFirst 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 684

Thread: WWII what-ifs

  1. #16
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    Stalin -could- have gotten more penal battalions, true, but on the other hand he wasn't hurting for manpower in 1942-1943; his main issue was arming them.
    All the more to knock Japan right out of the war and have unimpeded LL from the US.
    Chimo

  2. #17
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    12,965
    seeing how crazy Japan was, it would have needed an invasion of the Home Islands for Japan to sue for peace.

    the interesting scenario is if the US doesn't get involved past LL, or if Hitler had merely delayed his invasion of Russia. say Hitler opts for the "Mideast gambit" in 1941 instead of Operation Barbarossa; he cuts his way through Turkey and the Levant, and seizes the Suez.

    the British Empire could fight off Rommel given his sideshow status but not if the full might of the Wehrmacht is bearing down on them. most likely after the fall of Suez, the Churchill government would fall.

    which in turn would free up a LOT of antiaircraft guns, prevent a bombing campaign, and allow a one-front war...with a potential German starting point at the Caucasus Mountains.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  3. #18
    Senior Contributor Doktor's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Aug 08
    Location
    Skopje, Macedonia
    Posts
    13,668
    When was Stalin set to hit the Nazis?

    Make no mistake that he would hit them.
    No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

    To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

  4. #19
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    seeing how crazy Japan was, it would have needed an invasion of the Home Islands for Japan to sue for peace.
    Without Manchuria and Korea, the IJE would run out of bullets and gunpowder extremely fast.

    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    the interesting scenario is if the US doesn't get involved past LL, or if Hitler had merely delayed his invasion of Russia. say Hitler opts for the "Mideast gambit" in 1941 instead of Operation Barbarossa; he cuts his way through Turkey and the Levant, and seizes the Suez.
    And give Stalin the chance to hit Hitler while German armies are in Africa. Or at the very least, six more months Soviet build up while the Whermacht is bleeding white in Eygpt.
    Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 10 Nov 15, at 20:30.
    Chimo

  5. #20
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    12,965
    Without Manchuria and Korea, the IJE would run out of bullets and gunpowder extremely fast.
    that's assuming the Soviets could actually mount a sea invasion of Japan during the 1942-1943 timeframe. especially if Japan's not fighting the US, then there's no way the Soviets would cross over.

    And give Stalin the chance to hit Hitler while German armies are in Africa. Or at the very least, six more months Soviet build up while the Whermacht is bleeding white in Eygpt.
    don't think the Wehrmacht would bleed white against what the British had in the area. it was dicey enough in OTL until Nov 1942 against Germany's sideshow operation; Germany could easily triple the resources while holding a defensive line in Europe.

    and I think Germany would have LOVED for Russia to attack in 1942 or 1943-- they'd have interior lines, be fighting on the defensive, against a green army. Germany's problem in Operation Barbarossa was that they couldn't get at all the Soviet formations, and now here comes the Soviets delivering it to them on a platter. and without LL, the Soviets weren't going to be the mechanized Deep Battle monster they were in our timeframe.

    Germany on the defensive with roughly 1-1.5 million more freed-up anti-aircraft troops, entire western industry un-bombed. for that matter, the Luftwaffe and the Kriegsmarine is freed up. the initial fight would not have been like Operation Bagration.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  6. #21
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    12,965
    doktor,

    When was Stalin set to hit the Nazis?

    Make no mistake that he would hit them.
    I think I read somewhere that he didn't want a fight until 1943 at the earliest, and wouldn't have been comfortable until 1944.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  7. #22
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    that's assuming the Soviets could actually mount a sea invasion of Japan during the 1942-1943 timeframe. especially if Japan's not fighting the US, then there's no way the Soviets would cross over.
    The point is that without Manchuria and Korea, Japan would be forced to surrender or at the very least, negotiate a peace, freeing up both the USN and a secured and unhindered LL line through Siberia ... and at least 45 more divisions.

    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    don't think the Wehrmacht would bleed white against what the British had in the area. it was dicey enough in OTL until Nov 1942 against Germany's sideshow operation; Germany could easily triple the resources while holding a defensive line in Europe.
    The Kreigsmarine was not the RN. The Afrikakorps represented the limits of their brown water expeditionary capabilities. With the Kreigsmarine tied up supporting Afrika and Japan knocked out of the war, you've just bought a 2 million man British Indian Army into the fight.

    Not to mention, you've just freed up the entire Atlantic for the RN.

    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    and I think Germany would have LOVED for Russia to attack in 1942 or 1943-- they'd have interior lines, be fighting on the defensive, against a green army. Germany's problem in Operation Barbarossa was that they couldn't get at all the Soviet formations, and now here comes the Soviets delivering it to them on a platter. and without LL, the Soviets weren't going to be the mechanized Deep Battle monster they were in our timeframe.

    Germany on the defensive with roughly 1-1.5 million more freed-up anti-aircraft troops, entire western industry un-bombed. for that matter, the Luftwaffe and the Kriegsmarine is freed up. the initial fight would not have been like Operation Bagration.
    And German expansion stops dead in its tracks. They would have been bled so white that any dreams of marching to Moscow is out the window ... and that means Hitler stopped being Hitler.
    Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 11 Nov 15, at 14:29.
    Chimo

  8. #23
    Senior Contributor Doktor's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Aug 08
    Location
    Skopje, Macedonia
    Posts
    13,668
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    doktor,



    I think I read somewhere that he didn't want a fight until 1943 at the earliest, and wouldn't have been comfortable until 1944.
    Well he wanted the pesky capitalists killing each other as long as possible. Possility of kicking GB out of the fight would trigger a reaction, don't you think?
    No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

    To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

  9. #24
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    4,057
    If I may add a consideration to this discussion I would argue that war is also a psychological contest in which vast expanses of desolate territory matter nothing. If you can break the enemy's will to resist quickly you have won and can dictate terms as you please.

  10. #25
    Senior Contributor Stitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    14 Nov 06
    Location
    Patterson, CA
    Posts
    3,080
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    If I may add a consideration to this discussion I would argue that war is also a psychological contest in which vast expanses of desolate territory matter nothing. If you can break the enemy's will to resist quickly you have won and can dictate terms as you please.
    Sounds like Sun Tzu to me . . .
    "There is never enough time to do or say all the things that we would wish. The thing is to try to do as much as you can in the time that you have. Remember Scrooge, time is short, and suddenly, you're not there any more." -Ghost of Christmas Present, Scrooge

  11. #26
    Idiot Mode [ON] OFF Senior Contributor YellowFever's Avatar
    Join Date
    17 Jul 06
    Posts
    6,094
    Yellowfever >>>>>>>>>>Gunnut (Because I managed to hijack the Random Thread and keep it at one subject for over a page) :D

    No, seriously, while the Colonel and Asty are (masterfully) debating the East, I'm also wondering if Overlord couldn't have been attempted through Spain or Morocco had England not been available (had the battle for Britain has been somehow lost..yeah I know Germany didn't have a chance but indulge me here).

    I'm sure US and Canadian (and "free Britain") forces had no qualms about invading supposedly "neutral" Spain.

    Sure the campaign against the Reich would have been much more dragged out but couldn't it eventually have been doable?

  12. #27
    Senior Contributor Monash's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Mar 10
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,465
    Quote Originally Posted by YellowFever View Post
    Yellowfever >>>>>>>>>>Gunnut (Because I managed to hijack the Random Thread and keep it at one subject for over a page) :D

    No, seriously, while the Colonel and Asty are (masterfully) debating the East, I'm also wondering if Overlord couldn't have been attempted through Spain or Morocco had England not been available (had the battle for Britain has been somehow lost..yeah I know Germany didn't have a chance but indulge me here).

    I'm sure US and Canadian (and "free Britain") forces had no qualms about invading supposedly 'neutral' Spain.

    Sure the campaign against the Reich would have been much more dragged out but couldn't it eventually have been doable?
    I would have thought the correct order of advance would be :

    The Canaries, Morocco, Gibraltar (assuming it was not still in loyalist hands).

    Then Algeria, Tunisia, Libya and Egypt (to secure the Canal - again if not still held by loyalist forces) and thus the southern Med.

    Then Sicily, Sardinia, Italy and Southern France (plus the north east corner of Spain around Barcelona if you wanted to extend you landing options).

    A successful Operation Anvil followed by a rapid advances into central France would by default I think also force a hurried withdrawal of occupying forces from the British Isles lest the (presumably significant) military forces stationed there ran the risk of being cut off and isolated.

    All in all a much more complicated series of Ops than the one big hop across the channel that actually occurred in reality!
    Last edited by Monash; 11 Nov 15, at 10:42.

  13. #28
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    If I may add a consideration to this discussion I would argue that war is also a psychological contest in which vast expanses of desolate territory matter nothing. If you can break the enemy's will to resist quickly you have won and can dictate terms as you please.
    Yeah, what happened in Soviet occupied Afghanistan? NATO Afghanistan? Iraq? Algiers? Cambodia? WWII Ukraine? WWII Poland? Chechnya?
    Chimo

  14. #29
    Senior Contributor Mihais's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Apr 08
    Location
    Transylvania
    Posts
    5,071
    Bloodbaths.But men can live in their children.Freedom lost is more difficult to be recovered.
    Those who know don't speak
    He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

  15. #30
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    12,965
    col,

    The point is that without Manchuria and Korea, Japan would be forced to surrender or at the very least, negotiate a peace, freeing up both the USN and a secured and unhindered LL line through Siberia ... and at least 45 more divisions.
    true. on the other hand, that would have likely taken anywhere from three-six months to execute (the Red Army of 1942 was not the Red Army of 1945, especially not after the shattering defeats of Barbarossa). more so for significant LL to get in, which the US public might be wary of if they perceived the Russians as having run through all of Northeast Asia.

    giving the Germans that breathing space to improve their own logistics as well, which hamstrung them throughout 1943-1944. and in this case if the Russians lose Moscow, then they've lost a major logistics/production hub, which will set them back.

    I'm not arguing that the Germans would WIN (other than if the Russians completely lose their nerve), but it's likely that the war is delayed six months-- with or without a defeated Japan in the mix.

    The Kreigsmarine was not the RN. The Afrikakorps represented the limits of their brown water expeditionary capabilities. With the Kreigsmarine tied up supporting Afrika and Japan knocked out of the war, you've just bought a 2 million man British Indian Army into the fight.
    different scenario here, by the way, this is one where there's an invasion of the ME and no Operation Barbarossa (so no reason why Japan would be knocked out here). I don't see why Hitler couldn't have invaded Turkey and then straight down the Levant. colonial forces weren't going to stop them.

    And German expansion stops dead in its tracks. They would have been bled so white that any dreams of marching to Moscow is out the window ... and that means Hitler stopped being Hitler.
    no, Hitler could be patient -when he wanted to be-. after all, he pretty much mentioned off-hand that America would be the next target after he achieved Eurasia domination, but that it would have to wait for a generation or two after him.

    in this case one of his advisors persuades him to hit the Middle East and drive the UK out of the war (hitler was always prone to agreeing to whomever spoke to him last, and most forcefully) BEFORE invading the USSR. I see nothing that would prevent him, with a fraction of the resources he used for Barbarossa, to pretty much take Turkey, the Levant, and Egypt.

    he could have probably taken Iran if he really wanted, as well, which is why the Brits were so nervous about the prospect. (that'd stretch their logistics to a breaking point though.)

    most likely though the UK government collapses after Suez falls and Churchill is forced out. Hitler was willing to offer UK status quo antebellum to get the UK out of the war (first because he actually had sympathetic feelings to the Empire, second because he viewed the UK as natural partners against the Red Threat).

    I really can't see how Germany would be bled white by taking Suez. they got close enough in OTL and the entire area of the war was just a minor sideshow to them back then.

    if the UK goes, I can't see the US intervening in Europe at all.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. How necessary were BB's in WWII?
    By USSWisconsin in forum Battleships Board
    Replies: 118
    Last Post: 14 Oct 10,, 22:54
  2. Who really won WWII?
    By Tarek Morgen in forum Ancient, Medieval & Early Modern Ages
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 28 Apr 08,, 17:25
  3. WWII Germany Vs WWII Russia
    By Cosmobreeze in forum The World Wars
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 28 Jun 07,, 22:33
  4. WWII Germany Vs WWII U.S.A.
    By Cosmobreeze in forum The World Wars
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 28 Jun 07,, 22:29
  5. WMDs During WWII
    By Amled in forum The World Wars
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 17 Jun 05,, 23:57

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •