I know that a German victory is considered very impractical, if not downright impossible, but I still see scenarios posted surrounding a German victory. I just want to know how possible it is for such an event to occur. So after the war starts in 1939, how plausible is it for a German victory, aand what would be the most straightforward POD(s) for it to be achieved?
How plausible it for a German victory in WWII?
- Thread starter MrNumbahOne
- Start date
Anaxagoras
Banned
It's quite plausible before June 22, 1941. After that, it becomes much less plausible. And after December 7, 1941, it pretty much becomes impossible.
Germany should not invade Russia unless full support from Japan, and Japan must vow to not instigate the U.S. If germany and Japan can squeeze Russia, it is possible for an easier takeover of n.Africa and Britain
Japanese invasion force gets mauled, takes very little territory, and their war industry collapses a year later after the fuel runs out. Soviets conduct holding action in the Far East while focusing on the greater threat from Germany.
I don't think this would happen. Japanese had superior forces and could quickly evolve military tech and weaponry to fight the Russians, as they did the Chinese. And you must remember, the japs took Manchuria not that long ago
Those "superior forces" you are citing were utterly smashed when they fought the Soviets in 1938-39.
You are basically having Japan fall on the Soviet sword for the sake of Germany. The resources Japan needs to sustain its war in China can not be found in the Soviet territories it can reach so all the Soviets have to do is play a defensive game in the Far East for a year while concentrating on the German threat. Attacking the Soviet Union, as with attacking the Europeans and Americans, will increase Japanese demands for natural resources but, unlike their attack on the Western powers, would not bring any such resources under their control. After about a year of operation, Japan will economically implode.
Not to mention that even when the Japanese fought the post-purge Red Army they got pasted. The IJA is fundamentally a light infantry army taking on a mechanized army (however flawed) in territory where mechanized forces excelled. Even the 30-40 divisions the Soviets kept posted in the Far East throughout the entire war would be enough to handle any Japanese ground offensive.
Vladivostock is unimportant in lend-lease terms until 1943 and by then Japan's war industry would have collapsed from the lack of fuel, rubber, and other raw materials. The blockade collapses and the route opens back up.
On a different note: do not use the term "japs", it is a racial slur.
No they didn't, and couldn't. Soviet forces were superior in almost every way. They had better artillery, armor, air power, etc. The Japanese got mauled when they faced the Red Army, and this will continue of they make the colossolly stupid mistake of attacking in 1941.
All of this ignores the critical lack of fuel they will suffer from if an invasion of the USSR is undertaken.
Not to mention the nonsense about Japan evolving "military tech and weapons." Japan used the same airplane throughout the entire war, taking five or six years to build NINE of its replacement. Their tanks were crap and couldn't be improved at any faster rate.
The ONLY place Japan has a major advantage is at sea, which is irrelevant in a land war.
To the OP. Virtually none. A Germany which doesn't invade the Soviet Union or declare war on the United States is fundamentally so different than Nazi Germany the question becomes pointless. Either one of these actions was a major blunder, especially the second (to quote Calbear: don't fight someone who can replace machine guns faster than you can replace bullets); both in tandem made the war impossible to win.
It is extremely difficult. Not impossible, but lose enough that it may as well be.
The reasons are manifold:
1. The USSR is HUGE, not big, not large, huge. The way the Eurasian landmass is shaped means that as an invader advances supply lines not only get longer, but the front itself gets wider. It is also logistically challenging to an extreme degree.
2. Depending on how you look at it the British Isles have not been successfully invaded since 1688 or 1066. Short in invading the country or successfully blockading her into surrender, the UK wasn't going anywhere. Invading wasn't a legitimate possibility for reasons that have been beaten to death here. Starving the British out was almost equally impossible without actions that would bring the U.S. into the war.
3. The United States. At some point the Reich would have to engage the U.S. if it was to actually achieve its long term goals. Defeating the U.S., short of some level of geological upheaval, simply isn't going to happen. The economic and material advantages that a 1940s U.S. enjoyed make it impossible.
4. Too few Germans. German population simply isn't large enough to defeat the USSR and British Empire while also holding down the rest of Europe.
5. The country was run by a pack of lunatics who couldn't have managed a grocery store. The Reich's economy was literally built on quicksand. The country couldn't feed itself, arm itself or clothe itself. It survived by sucking its conquests dry. Problem is once they are sucked dry there's nowhere else to go.
The closest the Reich could hope for was some sort of "Warm War" against the UK where neither side was strong enough to force the issue on the other (something like the 1960s DPRK/ROK stand-off). Even that requires the USSR to suffer a massive political collapse. That isn't very high on the probability scale, in fact it is extremely unlikely, albeit barely possible.
The reasons are manifold:
1. The USSR is HUGE, not big, not large, huge. The way the Eurasian landmass is shaped means that as an invader advances supply lines not only get longer, but the front itself gets wider. It is also logistically challenging to an extreme degree.
2. Depending on how you look at it the British Isles have not been successfully invaded since 1688 or 1066. Short in invading the country or successfully blockading her into surrender, the UK wasn't going anywhere. Invading wasn't a legitimate possibility for reasons that have been beaten to death here. Starving the British out was almost equally impossible without actions that would bring the U.S. into the war.
3. The United States. At some point the Reich would have to engage the U.S. if it was to actually achieve its long term goals. Defeating the U.S., short of some level of geological upheaval, simply isn't going to happen. The economic and material advantages that a 1940s U.S. enjoyed make it impossible.
4. Too few Germans. German population simply isn't large enough to defeat the USSR and British Empire while also holding down the rest of Europe.
5. The country was run by a pack of lunatics who couldn't have managed a grocery store. The Reich's economy was literally built on quicksand. The country couldn't feed itself, arm itself or clothe itself. It survived by sucking its conquests dry. Problem is once they are sucked dry there's nowhere else to go.
The closest the Reich could hope for was some sort of "Warm War" against the UK where neither side was strong enough to force the issue on the other (something like the 1960s DPRK/ROK stand-off). Even that requires the USSR to suffer a massive political collapse. That isn't very high on the probability scale, in fact it is extremely unlikely, albeit barely possible.
Japs is a derogatory term that is frowned upon here.
Any Germany that doesn't declare war on the Soviets is a Germany that failed to take France.
Really if you could run WWII over and over again in simulation I'd be surprised if France fell more than 50% of the time. The Germans grabbed it on what was almost a shoestring and a prayer despite the French generals seemingly beating each other with an idiot ball.
Really if you could run WWII over and over again in simulation I'd be surprised if France fell more than 50% of the time. The Germans grabbed it on what was almost a shoestring and a prayer despite the French generals seemingly beating each other with an idiot ball.
I wouldn't rank it as possible at all. Stalin's methods, for all of its drawbacks and moral atrocity, had succeeded in beating the Soviet Union into submission under the Communist Party's (and, by extension, his) will. As Max Hastings observed: "If German generals attempts to bring down Hitler were half-hearted, no man even dared to raise a hand against Stalin." The fact that when he had his nervous breakdown on hearing of the fall of Minsk, the Politburo went and begged him to return is testament to that. Hell, the fact that Leningraders ate each other before they even considered surrendering is testament to it!
There is nothing in the historical record that indicates the Soviet Union was ever close to a real political collapse.
Last edited:
What was statins health like at the time? What if during his nervous breakdown he had a heart attack/stroke?
I would suggest that you review:
Battle of Lake Khasan
Battle of Khalkhin Gol
The Japanese were, frankly, pitiful regarding the development of new weapons. Take a look at the IJA TOE from 1939 and 1945. Compare it to that of the USSR, UK, USSR, of for a real laugh, the United States. Do the same for aircraft or ship classes. The Japanese played the entire war with the same pair of fives they started with; the Soviets upgraded from a pair of sixes to four aces, the U.S. from a pair of fours to a Royal Flush.
The Japanese Empire was starving for oil. There was not exploitable oil in Siberia, not using 1940s technology, especially 1940s tech available to the Japanese. Attacking the USSR results in massive losses, greatly increased use of fuel reserves, and in short order a collapse of the Japanese economy, and more critically, of the Japanese Army in China.
It is also important to note that, despite the popular myths, the Soviet Union NEVER weakened the Far East Front, even at the worst hours of 1941-42. The "Siberians" that are oft credited as saving Moscow, were as often as not Uzbeks, Kazaks, Chechens, and Siberians who lived within a few hundred miles of the Urals ("Siberia" covers almost 80% of today's Russia, stretching from the Urals to the Bering Strait, a few hundred miles isn't even a dimple)
While that speaks to their resolve I'm not totally sure that was so much loyalty to Stalin as a fear that Nazi occupation might well be worse than a descent into cannibalism. Or roughly the same. I've heard that in some German prison camps the Nazis running it declared that the Soviets were barbarians eating one another; until someone pointed out that they hadn't been giving them any food at all and in similar circumstances there'd be no doubt Germans would do the same.
No there isn't. That doesn't mean it could not happen.
I would put it at around a 0.5% possibility and it would require a couple major disasters that sent Stalin off on a purge that wiped out STAVKA, or Stalin falling down a flight of stars and breaking his evil neck.
Caesar Biden
Banned
As has been said, if Germany just fights the people it fought from 1939-1940, it can win. "Win", of course, would mean a negotiated peace because they sure as hell are not going to board the world's largest aircraft carrier.
Against the USSR, Germany stands a minusculy small chance. It would have to be a ridiculous set of circumstances. If Stalin suffers a heart attack and a civil war begins before a German invasion, then the Germans get a pair of loaded dice, they have a small chance of beating the Soviets. Even that sounds impossible.
I voted 1%. But more appropriate would be 0.00001%.
Against the USSR, Germany stands a minusculy small chance. It would have to be a ridiculous set of circumstances. If Stalin suffers a heart attack and a civil war begins before a German invasion, then the Germans get a pair of loaded dice, they have a small chance of beating the Soviets. Even that sounds impossible.
I voted 1%. But more appropriate would be 0.00001%.
The Japanese were simply unable to cope without access to oil and other strategic materials. They either had to comply with US demands (unacceptable) or seize the strategic materials they needed, which would place them at a disadvantage. They had to eliminate the US as a threat hence Pearl Harbour.
If they had gone North into Russia, they would have run into the Red Army, a heavily armoured force which the Japanese simply couldn't cope with. Besides at the time the only thing they were going to find in Siberia were a lot of trees and an opportunity to learn all sorts of interesting things about frostbite.
If they had gone North into Russia, they would have run into the Red Army, a heavily armoured force which the Japanese simply couldn't cope with. Besides at the time the only thing they were going to find in Siberia were a lot of trees and an opportunity to learn all sorts of interesting things about frostbite.
I suspect Germany's only chance of 'victory' would have required keeping the war far more limited, leveraging their outstanding early gains for a favorable peace that left them strong and secure. Sort of a redux of the Franco Prussian war, though that's a rather wobbly comparison.
I don't know if Britain would go for it though, even if the Germans agreed to withdraw from occupied France. Of course, it's a moot issue as long as the Reich is being run by genocidal lunatics.
I don't know if Britain would go for it though, even if the Germans agreed to withdraw from occupied France. Of course, it's a moot issue as long as the Reich is being run by genocidal lunatics.
The Japanese should have never bombed Pearl Harbor.
As a Japanese admiral put it-'' we have awaken a sleeping giant''. And yes, I agree, Germany winning is just signing treaties for no further war, and if germany had stayed alive until after hitlers death, it would be split between generals, as almost all militaristic empires with no economic growth have turned out ( Mongol empire - great idea, great generals, bad empire builders, epic failure) and the german empire may have opened trade with u.s and Britain and closer to hitters death would have maybe had a more open foreign policy. All of this is hoping that hitler rebuilds his empire instead of getting into risky battles in which defeat is inevitable. If im not mistaken, HBO or some other channel made a mini-movie over this in the 90s
As a Japanese admiral put it-'' we have awaken a sleeping giant''. And yes, I agree, Germany winning is just signing treaties for no further war, and if germany had stayed alive until after hitlers death, it would be split between generals, as almost all militaristic empires with no economic growth have turned out ( Mongol empire - great idea, great generals, bad empire builders, epic failure) and the german empire may have opened trade with u.s and Britain and closer to hitters death would have maybe had a more open foreign policy. All of this is hoping that hitler rebuilds his empire instead of getting into risky battles in which defeat is inevitable. If im not mistaken, HBO or some other channel made a mini-movie over this in the 90s