What was the point of Hitler's project?

[astralis]

basically speaking Hitler bought too much into his own "jews-stabbed-us-in-the-back" propaganda to account for WWI. also, he figured the Japanese were going to tie up the US, and he wanted to make the theoretical cooperation of the Axis powers into more of a reality.

it's telling that when news reached Hitler's staff that the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, they celebrated but no one knew where Pearl Harbor was, or what it was.

Germans, in both World Wars, had trouble with the whole "grand strategy" thing. they just weren't used to the idea of war being pursued outside the European theater.

[Officer of Engineers]

Actually, here is the situation. Never mind strike north or strike south. The primary objective always was China, more specifically coastal China. Failing that, they must keep Manchuria and Korea. One third of Japan's oil came from there. They had enough oil to do one year of war without resupply. So attacking north was out of the question. Siberia didn't have any developed oil then and the Red Army just clobberred them. Basically, you're going to lose a war over snow.

That leaves only the strike south option, more specifically, the Dutch East Indies and British India ... and the Japanese keep seeing a bomber wing in the Phillipines and the fleet at Pearl.

The decision is to go north and lose Manchuria and Korea or go south and have the only chance to win coastal China.

Really a no brainer ... except they didn't see a third option. Leave China.

[Samuels creek]

"Let's help the Russians when the Germans are winning and the Germans when the Russians are winning. So each may kill off as many as possible of the other."

Harry Truman
in U.S. Senate on June 5, 1941

[Doktor]

How was Germany with oil supplies during last months of Stalingrad? I ask this because even if they win ME and move everything to Russia, would that include the Italian logistics that were moving things in Africa?

[Triple C]

I think the traditional historiography that Pearl Harbor changed everything and roused the US for war is overdramatic. Interventionists already outnumbered isolationists on the eve of Pearl Harbor, according to White House's scecret polling. The US would be in the war eventually, without Axis provocation. But I have no idea how long that would have taken.

[Officer of Engineers]

How was Germany with oil supplies during last months of Stalingrad? I ask this because even if they win ME and move everything to Russia, would that include the Italian logistics that were moving things in Africa?

A cursory scan showed that Romania had more oil supplied to Germany than Japan had in strategic stock.

[Doktor]

A cursory scan showed that Romania had more oil supplied to Germany than Japan had in strategic stock.

I am more then sure about that, was curious if it's enough for careless moving things around trough Russia.

[astralis]

triple C,

Interventionists already outnumbered isolationists on the eve of Pearl Harbor, according to White House's scecret polling.

problem was, isolationists had much deeper political support than interventionists. it's easy to say that europe or asia should deal with their own problems. it's hard to say that we should lose tens of thousands of american boys now to head off a major threat in a generation or two.

[GVChamp]

I like these threads. Huge well of knowledge here.

Still having a hard time wrapping my head around the Soviets having enough logistics to launch major offensives in Moscow and Manchuria in late winter-early Spring 1942. I really have a hard time thinking Stalin would order that until after Stalingrad. But if what OOE says about Lend Lease is true, what would essentially happen, in the absolute BEST case for the Axis, is that the Soviets cannot successfully take Manchuria and Korea until after Stalingrad. The best case is that the Soviets don't get enough support to win Kursk, but even if the Germans win Kursk they still aren't able to prosecute a large-scale offensive like BLUE or Barbarossa.

So come late 1943, best case scenario, the Germans are still getting the shit kicked out of them in Italy, are in a slightly better position along the Eastern Front, and Japan has lost Manchuria and Korea.

That's the best case scenario I can think through in my head....basically Japan would offer itself up as a sacrificial lamb to give the Germans one last ballsy attempt to take on the Soviets, but considering they lost both times before, kind of difficult to see how Third Time is a charm. And something Japan wouldn't do, because nations don't offer themselves up for sacrifice like that.

[Officer of Engineers]

Based on my scenario in which Japan got really stupid and declare war on both the US and the USSR (again because of the Victory Disease), the Kwantung Army would be marching north or at least prepare to march north; not digging in as they did during AUGUST STORM. In short, giving the Soviets the kind of war that they wanted - a foot army out in the open with zero terrain advantage being surrounded by a motorized army.

[Blademaster]

Based on my scenario in which Japan got really stupid and declare war on both the US and the USSR (again because of the Victory Disease), the Kwantung Army would be marching north or at least prepare to march north; not digging in as they did during AUGUST STORM. In short, giving the Soviets the kind of war that they wanted - a foot army out in the open with zero terrain advantage being surrounded by a motorized army.

Why can't Japan take the seaports at Vladivostok and other nearby cities?

[Officer of Engineers]

With what? The IJN is busy with the USN and the Kwantung Army is going to die real fast.

[Mihais]

I like these threads. Huge well of knowledge here.

Still having a hard time wrapping my head around the Soviets having enough logistics to launch major offensives in Moscow and Manchuria in late winter-early Spring 1942. I really have a hard time thinking Stalin would order that until after Stalingrad. But if what OOE says about Lend Lease is true, what would essentially happen, in the absolute BEST case for the Axis, is that the Soviets cannot successfully take Manchuria and Korea until after Stalingrad. The best case is that the Soviets don't get enough support to win Kursk, but even if the Germans win Kursk they still aren't able to prosecute a large-scale offensive like BLUE or Barbarossa.

So come late 1943, best case scenario, the Germans are still getting the shit kicked out of them in Italy, are in a slightly better position along the Eastern Front, and Japan has lost Manchuria and Korea.

That's the best case scenario I can think through in my head....basically Japan would offer itself up as a sacrificial lamb to give the Germans one last ballsy attempt to take on the Soviets, but considering they lost both times before, kind of difficult to see how Third Time is a charm. And something Japan wouldn't do, because nations don't offer themselves up for sacrifice like that.

OOE is correct about LL.

Look,the decisive battles,Moscow,Stalingrad,Kursk,weren't one sided affairs.The Soviets lost big and the Axis wasn't finished in any of them.With slightly better Axis operational leadership(translate as Adolf shutting the fvck up),any of those can turn into a draw(Moscow,though that's a bit complicated) or Axis victories(Stalingrad&Kursk).But if you alter the historical force ratio,by either subtracting Soviet forces or by adding to the Axis,those battles can turn to the Axis regardless the mistakes the Axis made.
Now,if the Soviets don't start winning something and keeping the German units in the East,the Allies have zero chances of landing or staying in Europe.Throw the 1st SS PzKps at full strength against Salerno or Anzio and they'll end taking a bath in the Med.
But the reverse is also true.Take the armored reserves that went to Tunisia and send them at Stalingrad and the Red Army gets pounded.Keep that line and the Germans can do pretty much what they want elsewhere.

You have to consider,strength,position and timing.

[Officer of Engineers]

You have to consider,strength,position and timing.

Let's do that.

Okinawa, Saipan, Guidal Canal, Phillipines, the BIA, ANZAC. Never mind DOWNFALL. Are you seriously telling me that these forces cannot more than make up for 1 PzKps?

[Mihais]

Don't think so,Sir.Because in 1942-43 the forces you speak of don't exist yet.They're numbers on paper or fresh faced recruits in boot camps.

Now,if the Reds get toasted in 42-43,by 1944 they'd be as exhausted as they were before Berlin(even if they don't call for a separate peace).Only somewhere between Don and Dnepr,if they don't die on the Don. Or somewhere in the steppes.
You also get a much better armed Axis and at least 1.5 million men plus.Real soldiers,not the pensioners that manned the Atlantic wall.The Allies get to land 10 divisions instead of 5 as in Overlord.Btw,if don't get to Italy first,those Germans have oil to manuever.You can't disturb Ploiesti.
Again,without Stalingrad,by the time of Overlord the Axis is likely to benefit from Soviet oil.

After that it gets to complicated and they won't let me use JCATS to play all these .