AH Challenge: Liberation of Poland

[truth is life]

What POD after 1940 would lead to the Western Allies liberating Poland?

Presumably, something increasing the success of the Barbarossa invasion would need to be part of it. After all, the Soviets have a significant geographical advantage here. Maybe an earlier and bigger buildup of the US Army (perhaps via social changes leading to increased militaristic or interventionist feelings in the US), particularly if they can swing the early 200 division plan, would help a lot. Along with that, avoiding at least the more notoriously bad commanders would be good.

EDIT: Okay, I broke my own rule there at the end. Let us say no geopolitical PODs prior to 1940 (ie., the Battle of France still goes as OTL), but you can propose non-geopolitical PODs (eg., increased influence of the Poles on the Western Allies) which predate that.

[Mr.Wigglemunch]

The Nazis push out and get Moscow and keep pushing ( insert classic reasons for the Germans to kick extra ass in Barbarossa ), the Soviets however keep them tied up constantly in Guerilla warfare in the east. Meanwhile the Western allies still do the whole D-Day thing and win the war in europe by winter 45 or perhaps even spring 46. Thus everything including poland at the peace treaty comes under western protection in the treaty and you will have a single germany after the war, its doubtful but you may even have the Baltic states freed. The Soviet Union will be in a mess in this timeline post war aswell.

[Derek Jackson]

Maybe the alleged plot to kill FDR Stalin and Churchill comes off.

Zukov (head of government as well as armed forces) reckons a friendly US is in his interests and he cooperates with Polish resistence.

OKAY its not strictly the West but the outcome of an independent Poland happens.

[Eurofed]

Originally Posted by Mr.Wigglemunch

The Nazis push out and get Moscow and keep pushing ( insert classic reasons for the Germans to kick extra ass in Barbarossa ), the Soviets however keep them tied up constantly in Guerilla warfare in the east. Meanwhile the Western allies still do the whole D-Day thing and win the war in europe by winter 45 or perhaps even spring 46. Thus everything including poland at the peace treaty comes under western protection in the treaty and you will have a single germany after the war, its doubtful but you may even have the Baltic states freed. The Soviet Union will be in a mess in this timeline post war aswell.

D-Day would be a giant Dieppe if Soviets are to insurgency level, it's going to take a new sun over Munich, but basically yes.

[Typo]

This has been done before in detail. Soviets lose Moscow in spring 1942, but doesn't lose the war, and keeps up almost historical level of resistance until late 1945, when the red army is still within their own borders and collapses right as the allies march into brandenburg...

[MerryPrankster]

Originally Posted by Typo

This has been done before in detail. Soviets lose Moscow in spring 1942, but doesn't lose the war, and keeps up almost historical level of resistance until late 1945, when the red army is still within their own borders and collapses right as the allies march into brandenburg...

I think that was the POD for a TL I read where the USSR eventually collapses in 1945 due to a large-scale typus epidemic and the Nazis and their allies travel around the former USSR in rail cars, firing V-2s at the Allies who have occupied Germany proper at this point.

[truth is life]

Originally Posted by Typo

This has been done before in detail. Soviets lose Moscow in spring 1942, but doesn't lose the war, and keeps up almost historical level of resistance until late 1945, when the red army is still within their own borders and collapses right as the allies march into brandenburg...

You have a link or a title?

[Valdemar II]

Originally Posted by truth is life

You have a link or a title?

It was something Straha wrote.

[King Thomas]

The Polish Home Army capture the airports in Warsaw on Day 1 (in OTL they failed) and the UK within days sends in Polish soldiers and some of their own troops. They capture Warsaw between them and rather then order the Red Army to crush them (since the Germans are still a threat) Stalin co-operates grudgingly and at least part of Poland escapes Communist control.

[Eurofed]

Originally Posted by Typo

This has been done before in detail. Soviets lose Moscow in spring 1942, but doesn't lose the war, and keeps up almost historical level of resistance until late 1945, when the red army is still within their own borders and collapses right as the allies march into brandenburg...

A TL where the USSR loses Moscow but keeps up "almost historical level of resistance" is ASB, since Moscow was the main logistical hub and one of the main manpower and industrial centers of the USSR, if the Germans are in Moscow the Soviets have already lost or are bound to lose the others very soon (Ukraine, Leningrad) and the last one is under attack (the Volga basin). What is, Stalin is shitting railroads, factories, and soldiers back in Sverdlovsk ? It is just like saying "Germany has lost Silesia, Berlin, and Vienna, the Rhineland is under attack, but everything goes on as usual".
ASB Sovietwanking.

[bobbis14]

So German sucess in the East pushing up to the Urals and then facing an insurgancy. In the West the Allies land in France but face high casualties as the Germans launch counter attack after counter attack, in order to do this they take troops from the Eastern Front and to help defend the Italian army (No blunders like Monte cassino etc) by this stage guerillas in Russia, Poland and Yugoslavia become increasinly organised and effective against the weakend German Garrisons. The Germans make last ditch efforts to crush the Russians in the East such as wiping whole towns off the map etc. The Allied forces in the West continue to push as the Germans form last ditch line of defence on the Rhine whilst pounding Britain with Rockets. American planes fly over Munich and Hannover and drop A-Bombs, this signals all out resistance in the East as Guerillas take swaves of territory and German garrisons surrender like wildfire as they hear of news from the home front. Hitler declares Germany will fight on and is assassinate by a group of officers who sue for peace. Germany will be under Allied military occupation (Which will go more like Japan than Germany OTL) and Democratisation etc. Allied troops also land in Central and Eastern Europe and secure zones of influence etc their to prop them up against the threat from the Soviet Union (recongnised with pre war borders) and the SU collapses a few years later ecconomicaly. This is a Europe with no Iron Curtain.

Regards Bobbis

[Typo]

Originally Posted by Eurofed

A TL where the USSR loses Moscow but keeps up "almost historical level of resistance" is ASB, since Moscow was the main logistical hub and one of the main manpower and industrial centers of the USSR, if the Germans are in Moscow the Soviets have already lost or are bound to lose the others very soon (Ukraine, Leningrad) and the last one is under attack (the Volga basin). What is, Stalin is shitting railroads, factories, and soldiers back in Sverdlovsk ? It is just like saying "Germany has lost Silesia, Berlin, and Vienna, the Rhineland is under attack, but everything goes on as usual".
ASB Sovietwanking.

Near historical level is an exaggeration I guess, but the Soviets has more than half the battlefield power they had OTL even after Moscow fell.

I think that was the POD for a TL I read where the USSR eventually collapses in 1945 due to a large-scale typus epidemic and the Nazis and their allies travel around the former USSR in rail cars, firing V-2s at the Allies who have occupied Germany proper at this point.

That's the one

http://www.dalecozort.com/WW2_0398.htm
http://www.dalecozort.com/WW2_0498.htm
http://www.dalecozort.com/WW2_0598.htm

[Eurofed]

Originally Posted by bobbis14

So German sucess in the East pushing up to the Urals and then facing an insurgancy. In the West the Allies land in France but face high casualties as the Germans launch counter attack after counter attack, in order to do this they take troops from the Eastern Front and to help defend the Italian army (No blunders like Monte cassino etc) by this stage guerillas in Russia, Poland and Yugoslavia become increasinly organised and effective against the weakend German Garrisons. The Germans make last ditch efforts to crush the Russians in the East such as wiping whole towns off the map etc. The Allied forces in the West continue to push as the Germans form last ditch line of defence on the Rhine whilst pounding Britain with Rockets. American planes fly over Munich and Hannover and drop A-Bombs, this signals all out resistance in the East as Guerillas take swaves of territory and German garrisons surrender like wildfire as they hear of news from the home front. Hitler declares Germany will fight on and is assassinate by a group of officers who sue for peace. Germany will be under Allied military occupation (Which will go more like Japan than Germany OTL) and Democratisation etc. Allied troops also land in Central and Eastern Europe and secure zones of influence etc their to prop them up against the threat from the Soviet Union (recongnised with pre war borders) and the SU collapses a few years later ecconomicaly. This is a Europe with no Iron Curtain.

Regards Bobbis

There are still a couple of unplausible things in your scenario. First, if they get back pre-war borders (I suppose you mean the 1939 one, the USA are not giving the Baltic Lands back if they can avoid it), the USSR is not going to collapse in a few years. They still lack Eastern Europe satellites, and ITTL the destruction reached all the main European industrial centers, so they are to collapse faster, yes. But I'd say the 1950s or the 1960s. To be quicker, they would have to lose Ukraine as well. Second, Ukraine is an Allied occupied zone, Anglo-Americans should be well aware that Ukrainians don't want to be Soviet, and quite likely they have got a lot of first-hand evidence of Stalinist atrocities. The Siberian rump USSR is pathetic militarly ITTL. I see no reason why they are humoring Stalinist butchers. It's far more likely they set up philo-Western democratic governments in Kiev and Moscow. London had ties to White Russian expatriates. Third, if Russians are down to the point of insurgency, surely Germany has the spare troops to repel any Allied landing in France and Italy, they are too central to continental Europe. Make them land in Norway, Greece, or Spain, and stage a slow advance like OTL Italy, they do no real strategic brekathough but the Germans cannot dislodge them, owning to crappy logistics, then the nukes land and it's endgame.

[MerryPrankster]

The Allies might be able to successfully land in Italy even in TTL, since Italy is very narrow and thus harder for larger #s of Germans to outmanuever them in.

[Eurofed]

Originally Posted by MerryPrankster

The Allies might be able to successfully land in Italy even in TTL, since Italy is very narrow and thus harder for larger #s of Germans to outmanuever them in.

If they land in Calabria, yes. The logistics is sufficiently crappy for that. But then it slows Allied advance to a crawl by the same principle, it's the same outcome as in Norway, Greece, and Spain, an effective stalemate, the Allies canot advance more than that, the Germans cannot push them back into the sea. Landings in Naples, Rome, or Tuscany, no, the logistics is too good, OTL landings in Salerno and Anzio came very close to failure, if the Germans have extra troops in Italy they fail. I say they fail landings in Italy and France, then Churchill gets his ideas greenlighted about landings in Greece (and maybe Norway).

[Dan Reilly The Great]

Originally Posted by Typo

That's the one

http://www.dalecozort.com/WW2_0398.htm
http://www.dalecozort.com/WW2_0498.htm
http://www.dalecozort.com/WW2_0598.htm

I also remember a similarly themed TL where operation Torch is delayed, I never got to the ending of the TL, the author never finished it.

Here's one I got, inspired about another recent thread.

In early 1940 a u-boat sinks a US passenger vessel within sight of an american city. On board is some popular American figure (maybe Charles Lindberg decides to take his wife and child on a cruise or something). The outrage in the US is enough to tip the scales in the interventionists favor. The US declares war on the "dangerous warmongering dictatorship" of Nazi Germany. Hitler is forced to postpone Barbarossa, and concentrates solely on fighting in the west. The allies focus on taking out the Romanian oil fields to cripple the German War effort. Moving north from there they liberate Poland some time in '44 or '45. The war ends within a year or two.

[bobbis14]

Originally Posted by Eurofed

There are still a couple of unplausible things in your scenario. First, if they get back pre-war borders (I suppose you mean the 1939 one, the USA are not giving the Baltic Lands back if they can avoid it), the USSR is not going to collapse in a few years. They still lack Eastern Europe satellites, and ITTL the destruction reached all the main European industrial centers, so they are to collapse faster, yes. But I'd say the 1950s or the 1960s. To be quicker, they would have to lose Ukraine as well. Second, Ukraine is an Allied occupied zone, Anglo-Americans should be well aware that Ukrainians don't want to be Soviet, and quite likely they have got a lot of first-hand evidence of Stalinist atrocities. The Siberian rump USSR is pathetic militarly ITTL. I see no reason why they are humoring Stalinist butchers. It's far more likely they set up philo-Western democratic governments in Kiev and Moscow. London had ties to White Russian expatriates. Third, if Russians are down to the point of insurgency, surely Germany has the spare troops to repel any Allied landing in France and Italy, they are too central to continental Europe. Make them land in Norway, Greece, or Spain, and stage a slow advance like OTL Italy, they do no real strategic brekathough but the Germans cannot dislodge them, owning to crappy logistics, then the nukes land and it's endgame.

Well I was thinking they would give them 1939 borders because of the whole massive losses and war effort thing, but perhaps their is several winter war* styled conflicts with the West backing them up (with guns, volunteers etc) but not interveneing because of public opinion). I was actualy thinking a collapse around OTL Cuba Crisis, honest as they don't have half of Eastern Europe to ravish. Also I did write that the Allies face fierce counter attacks, perhaps a wider front (aka landing in the Balkans, Scandiavia and Italy) stretching the Germans even more thinly (note the mere size of Russia and the devotion of the people will be a problem along with other distractions like Tito)

* Yes I know Geo-Pol makes a similar war unlikely but I mean resistance to Soviet occupation by that.

[Mr.Wigglemunch]

Originally Posted by Eurofed

A TL where the USSR loses Moscow but keeps up "almost historical level of resistance" is ASB, since Moscow was the main logistical hub and one of the main manpower and industrial centers of the USSR, if the Germans are in Moscow the Soviets have already lost or are bound to lose the others very soon (Ukraine, Leningrad) and the last one is under attack (the Volga basin). What is, Stalin is shitting railroads, factories, and soldiers back in Sverdlovsk ? It is just like saying "Germany has lost Silesia, Berlin, and Vienna, the Rhineland is under attack, but everything goes on as usual".
ASB Sovietwanking.

You a funny fucker arn't you hahaha!!

[Fibis]

There is no way that the allies could land on dday and win if the majority of the german forces were not concenrating on the eastern front where the war was as good as lost. The east was where most of their divisions were deployed and were they fought harder

So I would of thought the only chance would be for the battle of france to fail, maybe the germans were spotted in plenty time in the ardennes.

There is still an allied army in france in 1941 which would make Barabarossa improbable (Hitler Mania aside). Stalin does not become involved

But here the western allies even with unlimited US involvement would be incapable to routing the Wehrmarcht all the way to Poland.

So the only way Poland could be liberated by the west would be if after the failure to win this limited war would cause a coup and Hitler to be deposed

[truth is life]

@Fbis: That breaks the rules: There must be an essentially OTL Battle of France.

Hm, after thinking a bit more about it, what if there was less Lend-Lease going to the USSR? Weren't they heavily reliant on American-supplied equipment in certain key respects (particularly trucks) by the end of the war? Would not more limited equipment supplies (and especially trucks) have an effect on their ability to take the offensive after 1942?

EDIT: Another thing that might work out is if Hitler never attacks the Soviets, and the US consequently is forced to focus on Japan-first (barring some relatively minor offensives in ETO, like North Africa, possibly attacks into the Balkans or Norway, and strategic bombing). When that winds up (either with nukes or with Olympic/Coronet), the US transfers the battle-hardened PTO forces into the ETO. With additional amphibious-capable forces, are the US and British capable of attacking on several fronts? Can American industry prevail over a Germany which has controlled the better part of Europe for five years?