Hitler avoids war.

[NapoleonXIV]

An incident on the Polish border is settled diplomatically in 1939. Hitler assiduously avoids war, tho the USSR, US, UK and France sometimes push many issues.

Hitler stays in power until the early 50's (how and exactly when he leaves is up to you).

What happens?

[Johnrankins]

Short of ASBs Hitler is sooner or later invade Eastern Europe.

[Elidor]

what if Stalin invades first, and gets beaten?

[Max Sinister]

From which ATL are you posting, N14? Hitler wanted war, you'll have to change his personality for that. (And quite suddenly, because I don't see him succeed with Anschluss and Sudetenland, let alone occupation of Czechia, if he's less reckless.) He even said shortly before WW2: "I fear that some schweinehund may come up in the last minute with a compromise."

[Elidor]

Maybe a change in 19th century "racial science", where Slavs are classified as "Nordic", that may cause Hitler to seek expansion elsewhere (Asia, Africa, etc. )

[The Mists Of Time]

Hitler avoiding war is pure ASB. Hitler wanted war because Hitler wanted conquest. He was power hungry and territory hungry. Hitler wanted to own and rule the whole world, all of it. He wanted a worldwide Third Reich, and the only way to get that was to invade other countries and that meant war.

[mikegold]

Originally Posted by The Mists Of Time

Hitler avoiding war is pure ASB. Hitler wanted war because Hitler wanted conquest. He was power hungry and territory hungry. Hitler wanted to own and rule the whole world, all of it. He wanted a worldwide Third Reich, and the only way to get that was to invade other countries and that meant war.

Yes, more or less. I think he'd settle for a German-dominated Earth, but this is more directly expansive than many of us give him credit for these days. Remember that he had marked the German-China border on his personal map; I am also rather certain that he would have wished to govern the "Aryan" Anglosphere directly.

The Latin powers, Japan, Iran, Boer Zudafrika, and other acceptable allies would have had to toe the line pretty closely; and I presume the Reich would have kept a monopoly on atomic weapons, and that if anyone else made a play for them, Milan or Sapporo would have gone up in smoke.

I also believe that not only Jews and Gypsies but Slavs, Africans and perhaps others would have been annihilated. In totum.

The problem with us worldly-wise modern types is that we don't take what people say seriously. Hitler demonstrated over and over again that this was a serious mistake.

[fhaessig]

The German economy crashes. The depression in the Reich which follows make 1932 look like a minor readjustment. Communist take power by legal means.

[Elidor]

Originally Posted by The Mists Of Time

Hitler avoiding war is pure ASB. Hitler wanted war because Hitler wanted conquest. He was power hungry and territory hungry. Hitler wanted to own and rule the whole world, all of it. He wanted a worldwide Third Reich, and the only way to get that was to invade other countries and that meant war.

But then Hitler had his priorities. In OTL, the priority was to expand eastwards first, conquering the (as he thought) "inferior slavs", and after building his then go to war with USA or Britain. He thought the rest of the World-- Africa, Asia etc, were best ruled by Britain, at least for a while.

WI 19th century racists do not think that Slavs are "inferior", and there is even a racial fascist movement in Russia and Hitler instead looks to Africa for 'living space'? Hitler could gear up for war with Russia after he conquers territory elsewhere, only to die of various diseases.

[seraphim74]

Originally posted by Elidor

But then Hitler had his priorities. In OTL, the priority was to expand eastwards first, conquering the (as he thought) "inferior slavs", and after building his then go to war with USA or Britain. He thought the rest of the World-- Africa, Asia etc, were best ruled by Britain, at least for a while.
WI 19th century racists do not think that Slavs are "inferior", and there is even a racial fascist movement in Russia and Hitler instead looks to Africa for 'living space'? Hitler could gear up for war with Russia after he conquers territory elsewhere, only to die of various diseases

Problem is, i 1930s Africa was already taken by Britain, France, Italy, Belgium and Potugal. Hitler wouldn't have been able to find Lebensraum there without war with European powers.

[Max Sinister]

Originally Posted by fhaessig

The German economy crashes. The depression in the Reich which follows make 1932 look like a minor readjustment. Communist take power by legal means.

Everything seconded, but the Communists wouldn't be able to do anything - the nazis had destroyed their organisations very soon after 1933. Or did you mean a takeover helped by Stalin?

[Grey Wolf]

Well, you could give Hitler a stroke in early Summer 1939, which would make the Western allies take a stronger stand, save Poland's bacon, and at the same time not look like Germany is climbing down. He might remain on as a figurehead, but with Goering pulling the strings, perhaps in some uneasy alliance with Goebbels, Germany is not going to lose face. Economies are built on confidence and not reality, so there ought not to be any sudden crash

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

[fhaessig]

Originally Posted by Max Sinister

Everything seconded, but the Communists wouldn't be able to do anything - the nazis had destroyed their organisations very soon after 1933. Or did you mean a takeover helped by Stalin?

Actually no, I was thinking of taking power by 'legal' means ( ie in the urns, with people's militia beating all opponents ).

But your point is right. The communist were not organised enough. SO instead, I think we'd see a German civil war, with several left ( including anarchist ) part and several right ones.

[Elidor]

Originally Posted by seraphim74

Originally posted by Elidor

Problem is, i 1930s Africa was already taken by Britain, France, Italy, Belgium and Potugal. Hitler wouldn't have been able to find Lebensraum there without war with European powers.

True, but I thought we were discussing the possibility of Hitler not making war in 1939 with poles and soviets.

[seraphim74]

Originally posted by Elidor.

True, but I thought we were discussing the possibility of Hitler not making war in 1939 with poles and soviets.

War with France meant for Germany war with Poland - Poles were allied with France and were very suspicious about Germans. With France defeated, who would have been ready to stand for Poland? If Germany attacks France, Poland almost certainly attacks Germany. Poles cannot win, of course, but they can do some serious damage (e.g. in Silesia) and a nice chunk of German forces must protect eastern border.
ASlso, war with France meant war with Britain. The last thing Britain wanted was Germans back in Africa.
Actually, this whole discussion is a little pointless. Even if Hitler suddenly gives up his plan of campaign against Poland, he goes bankrupt. Rapid rearmament of Germany was very expensive. Not to mention Hitler's mad beliefs.
And about that "border incident" mentioned by Napoleon XIV. He probably meant "Gleiwitz incident", but it wasn't any incident, but German provocation. It didn't start the war - it was actually first operation of the war.

[Arachnid]

Yeah the one thing that kept the German economy functioning even up to September '39 was the large gold reserves he had obtained from Czechoslovakia and Austria. At the time of the Ancluss he had about 2 months before Germany went bankrupt and despite that he was probably going to run out of money some time in early 1940 (difficult to tell precisely). There was a serious crunch coming and while he had restored some faith in the German financial system post war inflation and the depression were fresh in everybodies minds so he would have been in major trouble if he hadn't have gone to war. The only plausible alternative to his invading Poland is him invading someone who wasn't friendly to the Western allies like maybe Hungary or even Italy.

While this doesn't speak for its historical plausibility in HoI2 (a game any decent WW2/althistory buff would love) when playing as Germany after splitting the post-Sudetenland slump of Czechoslovakia with Hungary I then attack them (normally getting away with it) before attacking Poland in Sept '39.

[Admiral Matt]

No
filler
apparently "filler" isn't enough filler

[Elidor]

You are right, "Hitler avoids war" is kinda absurd, but "Hitler keeps the Nazi-Soviet pact" might be a stretch but workable

What if Germany Invades Italy and forces the Italians to Surrender Libya, Somaliland, etc, and eventually conquers Ethiopia. Hungary, Yugoslavia, etc, can be divided between Soviet Union and Germany. There is also closer collaboration between Hitler and Stalin, maybe even some tech exchange. Poland and France can be taken care of last. In the end, Hitler might end up with a large portion of Europe and Africa, and without the Invasion of the East, Germany can dedicate its military efforts into fighting Britain in the air more successfully.

Once again, it all depends upon Hitler changing his view of the Slavs.

[Croesus]

Originally Posted by Aracnid

Yeah the one thing that kept the German economy functioning even up to September '39 was the large gold reserves he had obtained from Czechoslovakia and Austria. At the time of the Ancluss he had about 2 months before Germany went bankrupt and despite that he was probably going to run out of money some time in early 1940 (difficult to tell precisely).

Germany's economy wasn't going to fall over just because it didn't go to war. This idea stems originally from pre-war British assessments that German economic conditions were unstable and weak and informed British foreign policy from 1933 onwards. As was demonstrated during the war, this view was wishful thinking, but was retained in political circles even when evidence began to emerge from economic intelligence sources that Germany was in fine shape and that the blockade was an overstated weapon. In 1939 the fundamentals of the German economy were on par with that of Britain and France, neither of whom are characterised as having conquest economies.

[esl]

Originally Posted by Croesus

Germany's economy wasn't going to fall over just because it didn't go to war. This idea stems originally from pre-war British assessments that German economic conditions were unstable and weak and informed British foreign policy from 1933 onwards. As was demonstrated during the war, this view was wishful thinking, but was retained in political circles even when evidence began to emerge from economic intelligence sources that Germany was in fine shape and that the blockade was an overstated weapon. In 1939 the fundamentals of the German economy were on par with that of Britain and France, neither of whom are characterised as having conquest economies.

Sounds about right, they could going on this path recycling the debt for some time. A case might be made for the UK having to go to war to get the emergency funding to continue their rearmament drive.

Hitler wanted a bigger germany and to exterminate the races. He didn't care much how he got that. If it took invading other countries to do so, he would. His assumption was that the Europeans were weak and would hang seperately rather than build an alliance against him. Funny thing is that European history has many examples of 'alliances of convience' being hammered out to face a contemporary threat.

In the last years before the war apparently he was fixating on America as Germanies principle threat, and their was no point in waiting any longer since that would only make the enemy stronger. So yes he got to a point where he had to have his war no matter what.