AHC: Germany starts a major war post WW2.

So first off, I want to be clear. I am totally aware that there is literally less than a zero percent chance this would end well for Germany. This isn't intended to be a Fourth Reich wank scenario or anything. Also, apologies if this scenario goes against the rules, please remove it if so.

Alright, so with that out of the way, I'll lay down the rules. With a POD no earlier than May 8, 1945:

1. The war must be a total war involving the full scale invasion of involved countries, not just a minor border skirmish.
2. Germany must at least be at war with both France and Poland, but you can add as many countries as you want. For simplification, we'll call them the New Allies.
3. Germany must penetrate into New Allied territory, and the New Allies must get far into Germany, even totally occupy it if you want.
4. The war must last 3 months minimum. It can end with nukes if you think there isn't any other way to prevent their use, but it must be conventional for a time.
5. The war must be considered a major war. It doesn't need to be WW3, but it can't be some obscure conflict either. Iran-Iraq/Ethiopia-Eritrea level at least.
6. Germany must be the main aggressor, so no West or East Germany being the starting location for a larger conflict between the US and the Soviets.

Here are my thoughts as to how this could come about: Germany is never divided, or only divided briefly. Instead, Germany becomes a unified neutral nation, still with the Oder-Neisse border. Liberalization never occurs to the same degree, so Germany is extremely nationalistic. Almost certainly not Nazi, but still nationalist.

The US and USSR think Germany is still sufficiently suppress, so the Cold War still goes on as usual, minus Germany. The German economic miracle still occurs, but it also occurs in East Germany. Fearing NATO and the WP, Germany invests heavily into it's military. All in all, Germany is fairly powerful. Definitely not on the level of the US or USSR, but still formidable in their own right.

Eventually, the Cold War ends. The USSR either collapses, or just lets go of the Warsaw Pact. For whatever reason, the US decides NATO has fulfilled it's purpose, and NATO also dissolves.

Anger fueled by an economic crisis, ailing support for the ruling regime, popular support of the idea: whatever the reason, Germany looks at Europe and decides it has a chance. Germany also thinks the US and Russia won't get involved. Mind you, that doesn't mean the US and Russia actually won't get involved, but Germany thinks they won't. Germany strikes. Seeing history repeat, France, (also almost definitely the UK), comes to Poland's defense. No Phoney War, actual military action.

You would also probably need Germany to get nukes at some point, because I don't see France going along with a conventional war without the threat of MAD. Alternatively, avoid anyone in Europe aside from the USSR getting nukes, or at least limit how many nukes they have.
 
Last edited:
I think your best bet is not a unified Germany but, rather, a German unification movement. Both NATO and the Warsaw Pact willing to fund the part agitating for it on the other guy's side. Either they both succeed or, in the process of trying, open Pandora's Box. Germans in the western part blame NATO/the west, and Germans in the East blame Warsaw Pact/USSR for trying to thwart their dream. The closest place to strike at either of them? France and Poland. It has to fall together too quickly for either side to recognize the threat in time to prevent it. That could occur if it is not a movement of government policy but a rouge movement within the armed forces. It doesn't have to be an that "underground" a movement either (it could be like the Japanese junior officer corps before WWII). Maybe some sort of mass uprising ala' the mutinies/revolutions at the end of WWI (which are still fresh in people's minds). An at least loosely organized, mass movement of armed numbers coordinated by at least a rudimentary military organization. It doesn't have to be a "revolutionary movement" of any kind but it can act like one would.

It would be interesting to see how each bloc responds. Do they treat it as an opportunity to conquer the whole of Germany and incorporate it into their sphere? Do they see it as proving that Germany must be permanently divided/dismembered? Do they work together at all, or just keep marching until they meet up again (Torgau 2.0) and draw the new lines there (or kick off WWIII)?

The interesting one in all this...is France. If it is still in NATO, will it be the only one warning about the dangers of this movement, only to be ignored (and again invaded)? If DeGaulle wasn't pissed at the rest of the west before then, he sure will be now. If France is already out of NATO, will the rest of the Atlantic Alliance be in any hurry to help them-at least in the time leading up to any actual shooting? (I can just imagine the scene in the Oval Office-either Johnson or Nixon... Sec of Defence: "Mr. President, DeGaulle is calling again, asking what NATO is doing to defend against the Germany Unification movement." Prez: "Let that sonofabitch sweat for a while." Aide (rushing in breathless): "Mr. President, Germany has attacked France!" Prez & SoD: "Holy shit! We did nazi that coming!" :winkytongue:).

On that note, I would say that while whatever form this Unification Army takes, there will be few old Nazis in it-or at least not visibly so. While they might very well come out of the shadows when/if things get to the "let's invade someone again!" stage, in the early years everybody is going to realize that any connection to the 1936-1945 régime is going to be a Very Bad Idea ™.
 
Not a realistic scenatio, as france is a nuclear capable country. You will have to waive the french atomic arsenal before war starts to be even a remote option.
 
Not a realistic scenatio, as france is a nuclear capable country. You will have to waive the french atomic arsenal before war starts to be even a remote option.
If Germany had their own nukes, would it be possible for the threat of MAD to stop nukes being used, at least for a time?
 
Germany would never be permitted to have their own nukes.
Even decades on, when the US and USSR are much more focused on each other than on a neutral Germany? I doubt that Germany could reach their WW1 or WW2 levels of strength again, though I guess the US and USSR might not see it that way.
 
Germany is never going to be allowed to BOTH re-unify and meaningfully rearm on her own (as opposed to being in an alliance such as NATO).
 
Even decades on, when the US and USSR are much more focused on each other than on a neutral Germany? I doubt that Germany could reach their WW1 or WW2 levels of strength again, though I guess the US and USSR might not see it that way.
Neutral Germany would mean NEUTRAL Germany. They are going to be treaty-bound never to develop nukes, at the very least.
 
Neutral Germany would mean NEUTRAL Germany. They are going to be treaty-bound never to develop nukes, at the very least.
Would people actually step in if they started rearming and making nukes, say, in the 1970s or 1980s? Also, could Germany build them in secret, or at least get far enough that it's too late to stop them by the time anybody finds out?

Genuinely asking, I don't know anything about the process of building nukes or how people would look at Germany that long after WW2.
 
Last edited:
Would people actually step in if they started rearming and making nukes, say, in the 1970s or 1980s? Also, could Germany build them in secret, or at least get far enough that it's too late to stop them by the time anybody finds out?

Genuinely asking, I don't really know the process of building nukes or how people would look at Germany that long after WW2.
Quite.
WARPAC nations, in particular, will regard a nuclear-armed Germany as much more of a threat than the US, and act accordingly. The Soviet leadership was absolutely adamant on this point till the end, understandably enough.
A secret nuclear program will be seen and treated the way Israel did with Iraq's program IOTL, to put it mildly. And those things are quite hard to hide, especially in Europe (though it can be done, as North Korea shows). Now, IOTL the US never really felt that nuking Pyongyang was worth sacrificing Seul and maybe Kobe or Kagoshima; which is a reasonable view after all. The Soviets ITTL would absolutely vitrify Germany even at the cost of Minsk and Kiev, rather than live close to a nuclear-armed, nationalistic German state. Barbarossa was the sort of thing that leaves a MARKEDLY STRONG "never again" mindset afterwards. Only a Western aligned nuclear Germany could possibly prevent that, and that would require a very different Cold War. France, for example, would rather join the WARPAC herself than allow that.
 
Quite.
WARPAC nations, in particular, will regard a nuclear-armed Germany as much more of a threat than the US, and act accordingly. The Soviet leadership was absolutely adamant on this point till the end, understandably enough.
A secret nuclear program will be seen and treated the way Israel did with Iraq's program IOTL, to put it mildly. And those things are quite hard to hide, especially in Europe (though it can be done, as North Korea shows). Now, IOTL the US never really felt that nuking Pyongyang was worth sacrificing Seul and maybe Kobe or Kagoshima; which is a reasonable view after all. The Soviets ITTL would absolutely vitrify Germany even at the cost of Minsk and Kiev, rather than live close to a nuclear-armed, nationalistic German state. Barbarossa was the sort of thing that leaves a MARKEDLY STRONG "never again" mindset afterwards. Only a Western aligned nuclear Germany could possibly prevent that, and that would require a very different Cold War. France, for example, would rather join the WARPAC herself than allow that.
Ah, thanks for the info. This scenario might be dead in the water then.
 
Top