A Fascist (but not Nazi) Germany....

My vision is for this Reich to encompass all of the Kaiserreich (with the possible exception of Alsace-Lorraine and perhaps the Danish concessions), as well as Austria and Sudetenland, and have a heavy, heavy degree of influence on Czechoslovakia, Poland, Hungary, Romania and the Baltics (similar to the way the U.S. handled Cuba and other Latin American countries)-ie, trade agreements and military bases.
German occupation (or even dominance) of Baltics will mean immediate German-Soviet war. Having German panzers within 50 miles from Leningrad and Minsk and 300 miles from Moscow is more than any sane Soviet leader can bear in the world without nukes.

I can envision Germany being the first to the Atom Bomb, and using that threat to liberate Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia etc. as buffer states and staging grounds for German military bases, further weakening the USSR. I think that in the end, Germany would dominate Europe, but not have had to use war to do it...
Again, USSR will start war at 1st signs of such development, as it has nothing to lose. If idea of total war does not scare you, continue to work on this TL.
 
German occupation (or even dominance) of Baltics will mean immediate German-Soviet war. Having German panzers within 50 miles from Leningrad and Minsk and 300 miles from Moscow is more than any sane Soviet leader can bear in the world without nukes.

Again, USSR will start war at 1st signs of such development, as it has nothing to lose. If idea of total war does not scare you, continue to work on this TL.

Not sure what you mean by total war in this sense.

I could see our hypothetical dictator ITTL actually looking to provoke the USSR by forming a military alliance with the Baltics. At that point, it would be Russia, with it's at the time piss-poor military, trying to invade Germany-a Germany that had positioned itself with allied buffer states Russia would have to go through. Essentially, we'd have communist Russia invading a bunch of nations to get to Germany, and a Germany supported by Britain and France.

I'm not trying to disparage the points you've made, I just think the end result of any Soviet-German war in this TL with the alliances etc I've described would be much better for Germany than the USSR.
 

Typo

Banned
True, Germany 1871-1918, 1938-1943 have always been the single strongest nation on continental Europe.
 
Not sure what you mean by total war in this sense.
OTL both France and Great Britain lost less fighting men in all WWII than Germany in any given summer in 1942-1944 on Eastern Front. Would Soviet-European war ITTL be as fierce as Soviet-German OTL, French and Britons can prepare for German level of losses. Although I'm not saying that war must be as fierce ITTL. Russians really start to fight only after Hitler proved himself be worse than Stalin (huge accomplishment in itself). More "friendly" invasion, with great emphasize on "liberation", can succeed. Although I would prefer to discuss such TL in a separate thread.

I could see our hypothetical dictator ITTL actually looking to provoke the USSR by forming a military alliance with the Baltics.
Russia (communist, capitalist, nationalist, democaratic, you name it) can't survive in pre-nuclear world with Baltics being occupied by the hostile power, it is a given. Therefore takeover of Baltics by "Supergermany" would not "provoke" the USSR, it will start a war. USSR tolerated independent and hostile Baltics and Finland in 1920-1939 OTL as there were no Great Power with serious military designs in the region at this point, and dealt with them at first faint signs that Nazi could use them. "Nicer Führer" you envision is no better for the USSR than Adolph OTL, se there's no reasons to assume that USSR will react less energetically.

At that point, it would be Russia, with it's at the time piss-poor military, trying to invade Germany-a Germany that had positioned itself with allied buffer states Russia would have to go through.
USSR always have an option of hitting North from Minsk, effectively turning all 3 Baltic countries in huge cauldron. It does not really need to get to Germany to secure it's borders. BTW, I'm not sure Red Army was such a piss-poor force before 1939 and could have been after 1942. There's school of thought in Russian historiography that 1941 was actually worst year for USSR to start a war, as army was in the middle of huge reorg. I'm not sure how valid their points are, it can be just an attempt to rationalize dismal beginning of war...
 
OTL both France and Great Britain lost less fighting men in all WWII than Germany in any given summer in 1942-1944 on Eastern Front. Would Soviet-European war ITTL be as fierce as Soviet-German OTL, French and Britons can prepare for German level of losses. Although I'm not saying that war must be as fierce ITTL. Russians really start to fight only after Hitler proved himself be worse than Stalin (huge accomplishment in itself). More "friendly" invasion, with great emphasize on "liberation", can succeed. Although I would prefer to discuss such TL in a separate thread.
Russia (communist, capitalist, nationalist, democaratic, you name it) can't survive in pre-nuclear world with Baltics being occupied by the hostile power, it is a given. Therefore takeover of Baltics by "Supergermany" would not "provoke" the USSR, it will start a war. USSR tolerated independent and hostile Baltics and Finland in 1920-1939 OTL as there were no Great Power with serious military designs in the region at this point, and dealt with them at first faint signs that Nazi could use them. "Nicer Führer" you envision is no better for the USSR than Adolph OTL, se there's no reasons to assume that USSR will react less energetically.

USSR always have an option of hitting North from Minsk, effectively turning all 3 Baltic countries in huge cauldron. It does not really need to get to Germany to secure it's borders. BTW, I'm not sure Red Army was such a piss-poor force before 1939 and could have been after 1942. There's school of thought in Russian historiography that 1941 was actually worst year for USSR to start a war, as army was in the middle of huge reorg. I'm not sure how valid their points are, it can be just an attempt to rationalize dismal beginning of war...

.....

*runs away*

I just saw this hypothetical Germany as wanting to have influence in the Baltics exactly because it would stifle Russian influence in Europe farther; but I see you're point, and our hypothetical leader probably wouldn't need the point made for him (or if he did, he'd have listened to the Generals who made the point)
 
Top