AHC: Nazi's win the Eastern Front

Starting Barbarossa earlier that and perhaps Japan invading the Soviet Far East. The first the Italian campaign in Yugolsavia and Greece took time and resources that could have been very useful for Barbarossa. Have those invasions not happening or perhaps Italy manages to subdue them without German help and Japan invading the Sovie Far East and not having war with the USA and we might have a chance at a sucessful Barbarossa.
 
Starting Barbarossa earlier that and perhaps Japan invading the Soviet Far East. The first the Italian campaign in Yugolsavia and Greece took time and resources that could have been very useful for Barbarossa. Have those invasions not happening or perhaps Italy manages to subdue them without German help and Japan invading the Sovie Far East and not having war with the USA and we might have a chance at a sucessful Barbarossa.



From what ive read, Japan invading was a no no, they would've been crushed, as the USSR had already had massive preperations for a Japanesse invasion. they would've been slaughtered.
 
It would take Germany other than Nazi Germany to attempt this. The Germany willing to exploit fragility of Soviet Union by offering its people independence and enlisting them as allies. But this Germany would butterfly away WW2 and replacing Nazi Germany with this Germany in 1940/41 would take intervention by Skippy, our favorite ASB.

It has been demonstrated by multiple thought experiments on this board that Nazi Germany with 'Operation Barbarossa' or any of its variants simply cannot overwhelm Soviet Union. Logistics and industrial capacity preclude this, no matter how you cut it.

To get Japanese to attack Soviet Union, requires they see Soviet Union as both a greater threat to their 'China incident' than Western powers and as a threat they can actually beat and profit from this victory. Capturing a wasteland of Soviet Far East helps Japanese in absolutely no way. And they cannot possibly beat Soviets without a POD well into early 20th century.
 
Hmmh, the Nazis got quite close to Moscow in the offensive, then they were bogged down in the mud because of changing seasons.

I don't know how realistic it would be for the Germans to have decent winter equipment and/or better logistics. Those would have led to faster offensive and should they have surrounded Moscow they would then have decent chance of starving the Russians while bombarding the city with artillery etc.

But really the Nazi party officials in Germany were not the most realistic sort so the possibility of reasonably good winter gear is in my opinion quite remote as those suggesting it would've been accused of defeatism.
 
Number one, they got bogged in the mud because their initial plan envisioned advancing 500 kilometers into USSR, after which it will collapse and war would be effectively over. This did not in fact happen.

Germans recognized logistical impossibility of Barbarossa, but decided to ignore it, hoping it will all end well.

It is not due to fear of being accused a defeatist that they didn't pack for winter, but they realized if it took them until winter to complete the campaign than it would have failed regardless of any other consideration. Most German generals realized operation failed in July, when Soviet Union failed to cease to exist. Reality is that, no matter what, Germans do not have nor will ever have, the capacity to supply their troops beyond first 500 kilometers until they repair railways leading to the front. So unless you have a solution for this (and many have been suggested and tried, both by contemporary German generals, and by armchair generals with hindsight) Barbarossa will not work.
 
Would the German transport situation be any better if they hadn't gone into North Africa?

No, the limiting factor was how far they could go before they had to rebuild the railways and how long that took. A few more trucks wouldnt help them go further, and would just eat up more fuel.
 
Oh, right. They could have planned ahead for this and build a few variable/Russian Gauge trains then?
 
Define 'win'.

Without US intervention a very lucky Germany can maybe bleed the Soviets dry until they agree to a Status Quo peace.
 
Hmmh, the Nazis got quite close to Moscow in the offensive, then they were bogged down in the mud because of changing seasons.

I don't know how realistic it would be for the Germans to have decent winter equipment and/or better logistics. Those would have led to faster offensive and should they have surrounded Moscow they would then have decent chance of starving the Russians while bombarding the city with artillery etc.

But really the Nazi party officials in Germany were not the most realistic sort so the possibility of reasonably good winter gear is in my opinion quite remote as those suggesting it would've been accused of defeatism.

It would be in Crack!TL territory. The Nazis simply put are psychologically and otherwise incapable of realizing how powerful the USSR actually was, as this would invalidate a number of their ideology's evil required assumption. They got to Moscow primarily from the results of the Kiev victory, but even then they were already overstretched, undermanned, and in a logistical sense far outmatched. Too fast an advance to Moscow merely sees Typhoon earlier: initially dramatic victories by exhausted, overstretched Nazi troops turns into a crushing victory for the USSR.
 
Top