WWII PODs

[Diamond]

What's your favorite WWII POD? Why?

[ConfederateFly]

Soviets lose at Stalingrad and Moscow, because it is intereting to see how the Aliies fare without Russia.

[Beck Reilly]

The loss of Stalingrad and Moscow, in the long run, would not have effected much. The Soviets would keep fighting on and the Germans would get no farther. The German supply lines were already stretched to the max and in a couple dozen more miles, the supply lines wouyld have broke. In fact, the collapse of German supply may have led to an even quicker 'retreat' (I have that in parentheses because it wasn't actually a retreat, Hitler wouldn't allow that).

[Diamond]

PS - you can vote for more than one choice.

[ConfederateFly]

With the capture of Moscow and the death of more Soviets than in OTL, wouldn't that give the Germans a chance to divert some of there troops on the Russian Front to the Western Front?

[Beck Reilly]

Nope, it most certainly would not. Hitler would, in fact, have to commit more soldiers due to the lengthening of the supply lines. You'd see a large shift in the supply forces (i.e. trucks, trains, and the soldiers that ran them) from the Western front to the Eastern front. Also, don't forget, just because you captured Moscow and Stalingrad doesn't mean the Soviets aren't going to continue hammering the Germans. In fact, Stalin will probably throw more troops in and the cities will be retaken inside of two months.

[ConfederateFly]

That is a good possibility. So if that happens Hitler will pull troops out of the Western Front and North Africa and the Nazis will lose faster because the Allies will win in the Western Front faster?

[Beck Reilly]

No, most likely you'll see the war continue in basically the same path. In the end, it won't make much difference. Hitler will never allow the troops on the Eastern Front to retreat. One thing you may see, however, is less old men and teenagers fighting on the Western Front and more fighting on the Eastern Front. In the end, obviously, these 'soldiers' if you can even call them that (they were 60+ or younger than 16), were not effective and the war would probably end around the same time, I'd say within a month of OTL's end of war.

[LDoc]

If Moscow does fall to the Germans the Russians will be in a extremely tight spot. Moscow is one of the biggest rail hubs in Russia and is the quikest ( maybe at that time the only) way of transporting troops between the north and south Russia and is the most convient place to deploy the siberian forces. Added on to that it is a major symbol in Russian history as being the heart of their country, imagine France without Paris and you get the idea. If Stalingrad then fell then Russians major oil feilds would be under the threat of German take over our just bombardment, along witht he loss of a major industrial center. Those duel losses could very well spell the end of Stalin as his armies moral would be shattered with the loss of two of the most symbolic places in Russia and two of the most important industrial and transportation hubs.

[Beck Reilly]

No, I disagree. By this point in time, the Soviet industrial capacity had, for the most part, been shifted east of the Urals. Also, in OTL, it's not like the Russians got any further use out of Stalingrad after the Germans surrendered. They had basically destroyed the city, including its industrial capability. Any German occupation of the two cities would soon be ended by hordes of Russian soldiers.

[LDoc]

That is if the Stalin can convince the Russians soldiers to attack. The RUssian army has just suffered two major defeates and their armies will be at an all time low. Not to mention Stalin will be feriouse and will most likely either A) kill those he thinks have failed him (bye bye russian commanders)
B) launch counter attacks before he has gathered sufficent forces
C) Both

And should the people at Leningrad hear about those defeats you could see the city fall to the Germanys freeing a whole army to reinforce Moscow or to continue the attack in the north.

[Hymie Goldberg]

If Moscow falls, there is no Russia. Stalin knew this and would have died there.

I don't know if all that many troops would be needed to protect the LOCs since most of the Russian population would've been too tired to attack anything while spending 20 hours a day building levies and dams to turn Moscow into a reservoir. You don't need soldiers to guard slaves.


Anyway, my favorite WWII POD wasn't listed: The Japanese catch a Carrier Group in port at Pearl Harbor and sink both carriers.

[Zach Rosen]

Yes, my favorite WWII POD is a German capture of Moscow.

[Sargon]

Hitler not declaring war on the US after Pearl Harbor would be interesting. I always thought that was a crazy move, but not surprising, after all, this is Hitler we are talking about.

The US would probably end up in the European theatre sooner or later, but I've always been interested in what effect a later US entry would have, not least because more resources could have been directed towarsd the war in the Pacific, and the implications there. An earlier end to the Pacific War? USSR being kept even more busy by the Nazis, and no Soviet invasion of Manchuria? No divided Korea later on?

Actually the POD that interests me most is not listed...Japan not attacking Pearl Harbor, and just attacking the European colonies in Asia. Risky, perhaps even somewhat unlikely, but interesting nonetheless.


Sargon

[Diamond]

I was only able to list 10 choices for the poll; believe me, there were a whole lot more I wish I could've added. But these are the ones I personally find most interesting. By all means, keep listing your own favorites.

WWII is an area I'm fairly weak in, and I'm always fascinated to read people's opinions on various areas. Thought this'd be a good discussion-starter.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Hitler not declaring war on the US has to me always been absurd. Hitler always saw the United States as a "bastion of Judaism," and would have attacked it sooner or later. And even if he doesn't declare war right away, the United States will. Popular opinion was against all the Axis nations, not just Japan. Remember, this was still pretty soon after the Ruben James incident, and that's easily a cause for war if Roosevelt chooses to ask for war.

As for the capture of Moscow, it's only critical to the Soviets in the first year of war. If it falls in 1941, there really aren't any other rail links from north to south on the West bank of the Volga, and as a prestige thing, it's huge, because the Soviet Army hasn't been able to stop the Germans short of their capital city. Even Soviet production wouldn't help if the population running the factories doesn't have the will to fight, or deserts the machinery.

Moscow falling in 1942 or later will matter, but it won't be absolutely critical to the Soviets, as by this time, there was another rail line running east of Moscow, but west of the Volga. Also, the Soviet Army will have stopped Germany short of Moscow once, they're still fighting in Leningrad, and if Germany decides to make a run for Moscow, they won't be doing an attack towards Stalingrad in 1942. Soviet production and Lend-Lease will bury the Germans in an avalanche of production eventually, even if it's not in 1945.

[aktarian]

No, I disagree. By this point in time, the Soviet industrial capacity had, for the most part, been shifted east of the Urals. Also, in OTL, it's not like the Russians got any further use out of Stalingrad after the Germans surrendered. They had basically destroyed the city, including its industrial capability. Any German occupation of the two cities would soon be ended by hordes of Russian soldiers.

True, but it took Sovs about a year to get those industry operational at previous level. You can't just pick factory and shift it several hundret km east. New locations need to be found, railways laid, electricy routed (which means new dams and grid), new sources for raw material (losing S Ukraine means lot of this output was lost). Also Moscow-Gorki space was one of largest concentration of population. capturing that lowers Soviet manpower pool. Cuting RR was mentioned. With Moscow Leningrad falls automatically.

It depends how Germans capture Moscow but if they don't go for Kiev it means there is large concentration of soviet troops down there. If Moscow falls their position bocomes hopeless and are withdrawn. OTOH they could strike at AGC flank during drive to Moscow but IMO that can be beaten of.

I think Moscow option is one of those historical things peopel will never agree on. Some (including me) beleive that capture of Moscow leads to Soviet defeat, probally by earlly 1943. Some believe that loss of Moscow would hurt Sovs but not finish them. Both sides have their arguments from which they can't be moved.

Re Stalingrad. Stalingrad sits on volga, which was important traffic route for Sovs. Cutting it would efectivelly cut of Caucassus from rest of SU. that is if Germans can capture it intact and early, but September 1942 was, IMO, too late.

[NHBL]

December 6, 1941: A squadron of B-17's orders to fly to Pearl Harbor are cancelled.
Early on December 7th, 2 privates manning a radar instalation pick up many planes inbound to Pearl Harbor, and their supreior oreders the army to scramble to repell an air raid. The Navy reacts as well, and there are fighters in the air, ships at battle stations. Pearl Harbor cold well be a most interesting battle.

[RMG]

I say Hitler gets offed, preferably by bomb-in-overcoat dude when he's reviewing the war trophies. If he'd just stayed out a bit longer...

[Chris Oakley]

Hitler assassinated during the war--it opens up a cornucopia of possibilities for the subsequent courses of the war in Europe and the Pacific.

[JHPier]

My vote goes to Hitler being blown up in the Bürgerbraükeller two months after the attack on Poland. It would be fascinating to see how his successors would conduct the war (no Barbarossa at all maybe?)

Runner-up: The Japanese join in Barbarossa, Stalin gets Churchill to declare war on Japan (he did promise to give the Russians all possible help after all).
Wahat does the US do?

[Peter Cowan]

Here are a few of my favourite PODs in WW2 (favourites because they rarely ever seem to appear in the usual course of events - of course that may just mean they aren't particularly feasible)

1/ No Battle of Britain. Hitler decides he isn't going to invade the UK and just blockades it - U Boats and bombing the channel convoys. In effect, for Britain to carry on the war, she has to take the offensive.

2/ Maybe tied in with the above. De Valera gives the Germans basing rights in the Free State, perhaps in exchange for the Six Counties in a subsequent post war peace treaty. How would US public opinion react to the knee-jerk invasion the British woud have to do?

3/ Mentioned in an earlier post - Japan only attacks the European Asian colonies. A big risk leaving the Philipines across the Lines of Communication but again would the US go to war to save the European empires?

4/ Instead of Midway, the Japanese invade Ceylon

5/ Anglo-French forces invade Norway just before the Germans do - it was a close run thing.

6/ Anglo-French forces try to bomb the Azeri oilfields to reduce the amount of oil Hitler's ally Stalin was shipping - again planned but wiser counsel prevailed

7/ Rashid Ali's coup in Iraq gets more effective German aid and leads to a wider arab revolt against the British

Any comments welcome

[Diamond]

4/ Instead of Midway, the Japanese invade Ceylon

That's a fascinating idea, one I don't recall seeing done. Did the Japanese have the wherewithal for such an attempt? I'm assuming they would've had to take and hold Singapore and everything else in the East Indies. No problem, but what happens when allied intel starts reporting massive troop buildups pointing towards India? Won't Japan have to divert significant resources to guard against Australia?

A lot of your ideas would tie in together nicely, perhaps:
1 and 2, tying up Europe in Europe, with no time or ability to worry about the Pacifice, then bring in 3 and 4.

[Dave Howery]

None of the above. My favorite WI for WW2 involves Churchill not sending troops from N. Africa to Greece... thus, Wavell goes on to smash Italy's forces and grabs Libya before Rommel and the AK get involved... the war would be very much affected by having no see-saw war in NA...