Why is it considered unlikely for Germany to win WW2 in this forum?

Seleucus

In short: The numbers were stacked ridiculously heavily against it.

In our world, Germany got ridiculously lucky. In the Battle of France, for instance, the raw numbers and equipment were against it. Germany succeeded in a quick decisive victory through a mixture of French incompetence (especially towards the higher echelons of French leadership) and a hefty dose of luck.

Similarly, they also got very lucky against the USSR in a strategic sense (due to severe issues with Soviet doctrine, preparation, and even managing to achieve strategic surprise on such a large scale despite the warnings of many Soviet agents.)

Even with so much luck,though, the numbers were still very much against them. They never came close to knocking either Britain or the USSR out of the war, let alone both.
 
Meadow

Meadow

The basic argument is that the United States of America had more industrial power than every other nation on the face of the earth combined. The Soviet Union, too, had an extremely formidable industrial base. But even if the Soviets somehow collapsed, the US would always eventually win. By 1944, one aircraft every hour was coming out of the biggest American factories. Even without the Manhattan Project, it was effectively impossible for the US not to eventually beat the Japanese and the Germans.
 

sparky42

Realist01 said:
Hello - I am new here and have skipped through some topics and seen that most people consider a German victory in WW2 unlikely.

In other forums I have been - the opinions on this were far more favourable

And according to this book I have recently read :

http://www.amazon.com/Axis-Power-Could-Germany-Imperial/dp/1477610731

Germany had a good chance of winning the war
And even Japan could have pushed the United states to sign a cease fire
Click to expand...

You do grasp the scale of material imbalances between the axis and the allies? There's no way Japan could have pushed the US to a cease fire, even if they USN lost every ship at midway it would just delay the inevitable.

That book looking at the reviews also has the suggestion of the unmentionable sea mammal! Not exactly something I would consider likely (to put it mildly)
 

MrHaakwood

Pretty easy if you ask me:

1.) Less people
2.) Less industry
3.) Less resources
4.) Military strategy based on ideology and not reality

That are the obstacles for the Axis powers, which have to be overcome and this is unlikely.

There are many things where the Axis could be better. But they cant win and stay in the core the same. Nazi Germany with its genocide policy was as an example an obstacles for recruiting allies against the Soviet Union.

Edit: And welcome to the Forum.
 

The Red

Economic and numerical inferiority to their enemies, the United States alone was outproducing all the Axis powers combined by over 200%. There's no getting over that, not even with a book that claims Japan could have invaded Hawaii.
 

idontlikesand

Total victory is impossible due to the afformentioned issues. The Nazis simply can't keep up with the allies in terms of anything except propaganda. However I do think a negotiated peace is possible if the right steps are taken on the eastern front or if Barbarossa is avoided entirely. If Barbarossa does go ahead then perhaps not launching Typhoon and directing Case Blue towards northern Russia with the intention of cutting off the Arctic naval convoys would do some good though Im not sure it would bring Stalin to the negotiating table. Of course any peace terms the allies would accept would have to include a change of government so the Nazis surviving won't happen but pre war Germany can remain territorially intact.
 

BeardedHoplite

I'm probably in the minority here, but I really think the Germans could have won in Spring 1942 against the Russians. That would have arguably been their last shot at it and it, of course, won't stop the USA from leveling the Reich with nukes later on. But with no Russia and US assets in the UK scant they might panic and offer a ceasefire; stranger things have happened.
 

Kung Fucious

BeardedHoplite said:
I'm probably in the minority here, but I really think the Germans could have won in Spring 1942 against the Russians. That would have arguably been their last shot at it and it, of course, won't stop the USA from leveling the Reich with nukes later on. But with no Russia and US assets in the UK scant they might panic and offer a ceasefire; stranger things have happened.
Click to expand...

This. Even if the Nazi's continue to roll 20's and somehow knock the USSR out of the war, they're eventually going to get rolled back by the US and the UK, either with nukes or a ground war in Europe.

Japan's got zero shot, they lost the war the instant the first bomb dropped on Peal Harbor.

The simple fact of the matter is that the Allies had a vastly larger capability to manufactor beans, bullets, and bandages. The Axis has the resources of Central/part of Eastern Europe, and Japanese Home Islands/bits of the Pacific. They were up against the entire industrial base of North America, Russia, Australia, South Africa, India, Brazil, etc. No amount of wunderwaffe or lucky wins is going to beat the fact that the Allies could literally outproduce the Axis into oblivion.
 

Mike D

BeardedHoplite said:
But with no Russia and US assets in the UK scant they might panic and offer a ceasefire; stranger things have happened.
Click to expand...

It's unlikely. The UK didn't do that when they were alone with half of the army's kit sat on a beach in France and Fighter Command reduced to what few squadrons Dowding could persuade Churchill not to send over the Channel to try and put some backbone into the French.

There's just no reason to do it when Fighter Command are far stronger, the Germans barely have a surface fleet worthy of the name, most of the Heer are playing hide and seek with partisans in the USSR and the US are in the war (no matter how small their contribution is at that point).
 

Cargil48

Germany could have won against France and the UK. From the moment it opened war in the Eastern front, they lost. And from the moment on when the USA entered the war, they lost a second time.
 

TheYoungPretender

Material Edge of the USA after the war.

A huge amount of the perception that the Axis had a shot comes from the purchasing power of the American consumer, a consumer who for a list of cultural reasons, likes tales of even fights and underdogs. They dislike the idea that the US were basically Russia plus brains and minus NKVD. The Americans can afford to win through throwing bodies on a fire like the Russians; they have the society and organizational capacity to do this intelligently in a way that does it with far less brutally than the USSR. Combined together, this makes them unstoppable. But we don't like looking in our mirrors and seeing the Borg, even if its what allowed us to triumph.

So you get cable channels that fluff up the Nazis and make the war a more even fight, books and games that really pile it on, and a consuming audience eager to accept these exaggerations and tales. Because we must be the underdog, or fighters in a fair fight. And the post-war boom means that the men who fought the war are a consuming audience for decades - if they want to hear about their youth, they want the heroic tale. Who wouldn't?

The hagiography makes an interesting contrast to the accounts of the Allies' commanders, administrators and planners. They knew they were smothering the Germans with men and material, and made no bones about it. These boards have more people who drill past the hagiography and into the facts. Plus, there's a considerable personal pride here of being the people who study the "real" story, and don't just go for the common myths and simple stories.

In addition, there's a distaste for the rule-of-cool factor that runs so much of the interest in the Third Reich's equipment and military. So the Wehrmacht had cool kit that anticipated a lot of modern military gear. So the Wehrmacht's uniforms were cool. So what? They were still serving on of the more vile regimes in history. Add to this some of the deeper attitudes of some reenactors, which are just not fucking seemly. They have other places on the internet to fester. Not here.

So it's part of the culture of the boards, and the verdict of an overwhelming amount of the historical evidence.
 
Last edited:

UncleDynamite

Realist01 said:
And even Japan could have pushed the United states to sign a cease fire
Click to expand...

In the Pacific, the Japanese never intended to fight a prolonged conflict against the United States or take Hawaii or any of that dross. They expected to win a few flashy battles, sue for peace, and get some islands and naval hegemony in the Pacific in the first 6 months. This was what Japan had done(and was very good at) at multiple points in the recent past. It didn't work in WWII because America was not like the nations that Japan had recently defeated, and after provoking the US in an ineffective attack, Japan was faced with an enemy that would carry the war to total victory.

There is no way to avoid this without changing the nature of the United States. All of Japan's victories in the models above were against undemocratic states- because if you're in your palace in St. Petersburg, who really cares about what's going on the the Pacific? An island here, a cruiser there, it's no skin off your nose. If FDR called a ceasefire and started negotiations in May of '42(even though the war was not at this time going in the US' favor), he would have been impeached. The American people simply would not have stood for such a thing, and giving Japan a few more pointless victories in the first few months of the war isn't going to change American public opinion a great deal. And no, this isn't a "MURRICA! FUCK YEAH!" thing, if the British government decided to agree to Nazi ceasefire terms once the Blitz started, there's no way in hell they could have made it out of the next election alive.
 

Cargil48

Major mistakes on the technical/organization side of the Germans which cost them huge ressources, men and material:
- Lack of naval aviation force and lack of coordination between the Kriegsmarine and the Luftwaffe.
- Bad leadership in the Luftwaffe (starting and ending with Göring)
- Basic design error of the nr. 1 fighter, the Me109, which cost many lives of young pilots.
- Error in not sending the Me262 jet fighter 100% against the bomber streams and sending them instead as fighter-bombers to bomb Britain.
 

Lateknight

Banned
TheYoungPretender said:
A huge amount of the perception that the Axis had a shot comes from the purchasing power of the American consumer, a consumer who for a list of cultural reasons, likes tales of even fights and underdogs. They dislike the idea that the US were basically Russia plus brains and minus NKVD. The Americans can afford to win through throwing bodies on a fire like the Russians; they have the society and organizational capacity to do this intelligently in a way that does it with far less brutally than the USSR. Combined together, this makes them unstoppable. But we don't like looking in our mirrors and seeing the Borg, even if its what allowed us to triumph.

So you get cable channels that fluff up the Nazis and make the war a more even fight, books and games that really pile it on, and a consuming audience eager to accept these exaggerations and tales. Because we must be the underdog, or fighters in a fair fight. And the post-war boom means that the men who fought the war are a consuming audience for decades - if they want to hear about their youth, they want the heroic tale. Who wouldn't?

The hagiography makes an interesting contrast to the accounts of the Allies' commanders, administrators and planners. They knew they were smothering the Germans with men and material, and made no bones about it. These boards have more people who drill past the hagiography and into the facts. Plus, there's a considerable personal pride here of being the people who study the "real" story, and don't just go for the common myths and simple stories.

In addition, there's a distaste for the rule-of-cool factor that runs so much of the interest in the Third Reich's equipment and military. So the Wehrmacht had cool kit that anticipated a lot of modern military gear. So the Wehrmacht's uniforms were cool. So what? They were still serving on of the more vile regimes in history. Add to this some of the deeper attitudes of some reenactors, which are just not fucking seemly. They have other places on the internet to fester. Not here.

So it's part of the culture of the boards, and the verdict of an overwhelming amount of the historical evidence.
Click to expand...

I feel the boards view of thrid Reich is on of the forums best features.
 

Alex1guy

TheYoungPretender said:
A huge amount of the perception that the Axis had a shot comes from the purchasing power of the American consumer, a consumer who for a list of cultural reasons, likes tales of even fights and underdogs. They dislike the idea that the US were basically Russia plus brains and minus NKVD. The Americans can afford to win through throwing bodies on a fire like the Russians; they have the society and organizational capacity to do this intelligently in a way that does it with far less brutally than the USSR. Combined together, this makes them unstoppable. But we don't like looking in our mirrors and seeing the Borg, even if its what allowed us to triumph.

So you get cable channels that fluff up the Nazis and make the war a more even fight, books and games that really pile it on, and a consuming audience eager to accept these exaggerations and tales. Because we must be the underdog, or fighters in a fair fight. And the post-war boom means that the men who fought the war are a consuming audience for decades - if they want to hear about their youth, they want the heroic tale. Who wouldn't?

The hagiography makes an interesting contrast to the accounts of the Allies' commanders, administrators and planners. They knew they were smothering the Germans with men and material, and made no bones about it. These boards have more people who drill past the hagiography and into the facts. Plus, there's a considerable personal pride here of being the people who study the "real" story, and don't just go for the common myths and simple stories.

In addition, there's a distaste for the rule-of-cool factor that runs so much of the interest in the Third Reich's equipment and military. So the Wehrmacht had cool kit that anticipated a lot of modern military gear. So the Wehrmacht's uniforms were cool. So what? They were still serving on of the more vile regimes in history. Add to this some of the deeper attitudes of some reenactors, which are just not fucking seemly. They have other places on the internet to fester. Not here.

So it's part of the culture of the boards, and the verdict of an overwhelming amount of the historical evidence.
Click to expand...

I think this sums things up nicely.
 

jmc247

Sabot Cat said:
Heartily seconded.

Long-story short: Nazi Germany was lucky to have not been taken out earlier.
Click to expand...

Given Hitler's moronic orders regarding Case Blue and the 6th Army and his decision to attack Kursk and his decision to divide up the command in the West and then take the divisional command for himself. Hitler ordering moronic offensives in the West and I am not just talking about the Battle of the Bulge. No... not really. With an even marginally better military strategy from late 42 on Germany would have survived until the nukes started dropping on German cities in the summer of 1945.

Hitler's military judgment from 1939-1945 went down the tubes. Germany was going to lose everything as long as Hitler 'had' to refuse any realistic peace offers with the Soviets. 1930s Hitler would have considered them and might even have made a separate peace with the Soviets. By the 1940s Hitler was too mentally inflexible.

The Allies staying in the war with the Soviets out of it say in 1943 isn't a sure thing either. Germany winning the war the way Hitler envisioned it was impossible. Germany retaining control of Eastern Europe, Central Europe and Western Europe was impossible.

Germany ending the war controlling central Europe is not impossible.
 

hasdrubal barca

jmc247 said:
Given Hitler's moronic orders regarding Case Blue and the 6th Army and his decision to attack Kursk and his decision to divide up the command in the West and then take the divisional command for himself. Hitler ordering moronic offensives in the West and I am not just talking about the Battle of the Bulge. No... not really. With an even marginally better military strategy from late 42 on Germany would have survived until the nukes started dropping on German cities in the summer of 1945.

Hitler's military judgment from 1939-1945 went down the tubes. Germany was going to lose everything as long as Hitler 'had' to refuse any realistic peace offers with the Soviets. 1930s Hitler would have considered them and might even have made a separate peace with the Soviets. By the 1940s Hitler was too mentally inflexible.

The Allies staying in the war with the Soviets out of it say in 1943 isn't a sure thing either. Germany winning the war the way Hitler envisioned it was impossible. Germany retaining control of Eastern Europe, Central Europe and Western Europe was impossible.

Germany ending the war controlling central Europe is not impossible.
Click to expand...

I agree, this is good assessment.:D
 

SunDeep

Banned
Meadow said:
The basic argument is that the United States of America had more industrial power than every other nation on the face of the earth combined. The Soviet Union, too, had an extremely formidable industrial base. But even if the Soviets somehow collapsed, the US would always eventually win. By 1944, one aircraft every hour was coming out of the biggest American factories. Even without the Manhattan Project, it was effectively impossible for the US not to eventually beat the Japanese and the Germans.
Click to expand...

Without the Manhattan project though, and if the US were fighting against the Axis on their own, with the UK and Soviet Union already knocked out of the war? Even if they still won, it'd probably be a Pyrrhic victory. They'd 'win', but in the same way that the British and the French won WW1, laying waste to their economy in the process.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top