AHC: Short Second World War

[JennyB]

Germany invades Poland, but surrenders to Britain and France before Japan confronts America. They may receive some support from the USA, but no direct military involvement.
Is it possible and if so, how?

Problems I see:
The Allies have no way to directly intervene in Poland, and few ways to threaten Germany itself except in the South, where France is already committed to defense. Can they bring Denmark onside?
If the war is going badly for Germany, how does that affect Japanese strategy?
With Britain having fought a short and successful war, is the Tube Alloys project ever started? No Bomb?
What does Stalin do? Does he continue the MR pact in the hope of weakening both sides? When that fails, the Allies are at least likely to demand that he withdraw from Soviet-occupied Poland. What happens then?

 

[The Tai-Pan]

Is Hitler around or what? He seems unlikely to surrender, so we sort of have to remove him, for starters.

 

[Caledon]

There were certainly plenty of points where the war could have gone much worse for Germany, and it's not too hard to imagine a few small changes leading to their collapse and surrender. For example:

- Before Germany invaded Norway, Britain was planning to send troops to occupy and defend them. (I'm not sure how the Norwegians would have felt about this.) This plan almost happened - a couple RN ships had to disembark troops before they sailed to respond to Germany's invasion. With a couple day's difference in timetables, there are British forces in Norway, and Operation Weserubung fails badly. (This isn't all that important, but it would certainly be a blow, especially if the British went on to occupy the iron mining region in northern Sweden.)

- The invasion of France and the low countries succeeded because of phenomenal luck and huge failures in the French command. Especially in the first few days before they crossed the Meuse River near Sedan, they could have been bottled up by any moderately effective resistance. With just a few days' delay, it's plausible that the allies get their act together to stop the initial attack. Then it's 1914 again, and Germany is badly outmatched for a long static battle of attrition.

- Now, with Germany bogged down on the western front, Stalin decides it's time to attack. (OTL, some historians believe he was planning to attack Germany in 1941, but Hitler beat him to the punch. Regardless of the details, it's pretty clear that the Nazis and Soviets were always going to end up fighting, the question was just when.) Despite being clumsy and inept, the Red Army is huge. More importantly, the sudden halt of resources from the Soviets basically cripples Germany.

Faced with the same situation as WWI, but worse, Germany would almost certainly collapse. How long it takes depends on many factors, but it could be a few months, probably not more than a year or so.

 

[bobbins]

There’s a great thread on this - a blunted sickle.

 

[marktaha]

Say Elser succeeded in 1939.

 

[Derek Jackson]

WI there was a different plan by Britain and France and different military doctrines. Septemeber 2nd 1939 RAF moves aircraft to france. 1am Sept 3rd formal declaration of war . 5am every german airbase within a hundred miles is put out of action. Large scale invasion of Germany. (possibly better Polish defence)

 

[ArtosStark]

WI there was a different plan by Britain and France and different military doctrines. Septemeber 2nd 1939 RAF moves aircraft to france. 1am Sept 3rd formal declaration of war . 5am every german airbase within a hundred miles is put out of action. Large scale invasion of Germany. (possibly better Polish defence)

I am not sure if aerial bombing was developed enough to put all those bases out of commission in that short of a time.

 

[Atterdag]

If Germany is defeated earlier with both allies and the Soviet Union relatively intact I think it’s quite likely that it soon turns into a allies-Soviet war with Germany as the main battleground.

 

[jsb]

If Germany is defeated earlier with both allies and the Soviet Union relatively intact I think it’s quite likely that it soon turns into a allies-Soviet war with Germany as the main battleground.

Not sure SU has just been humiliated and had its weakness exposed over Finland and the west has shown it's capable of defeating major power quickly, on the other side the west doesn't want a war. Would they not just share the spoils of a defeated Germany and Poland threatening to do stuff but not really want to risk it?

 

[marktaha]

If Elser had succeeded in Nov 1939.

 

[Atterdag]

Not sure SU has just been humiliated and had its weakness exposed over Finland and the west has shown it's capable of defeating major power quickly, on the other side the west doesn't want a war. Would they not just share the spoils of a defeated Germany and Poland threatening to do stuff but not really want to risk it?

Has it been? And if Germany's about to collapse to the allies I'm pretty sure they'd invade to try and grab what they can.

 

[jsb]

Has it been? And if Germany's about to collapse to the allies I'm pretty sure they'd invade to try and grab what they can.

Is the winter war not pre GB/Fr winning as a POD? Anyway yes SU would probably hold on to parts of Poland but that would not make GB&Fr want to fight them just give Poland parts of Germany as compensation as OTL? I simply don't think any of SU or GB/Fr want a larger war?

 

[Atterdag]

Is the winter war not pre GB/Fr winning as a POD? Anyway yes SU would probably hold on to parts of Poland but that would not make GB&Fr want to fight them just give Poland parts of Germany as compensation as OTL? I simply don't think any of SU or GB/Fr want a larger war?

If they've both built up for this huge war with Germany, Britain and France who's rearmed and Soviet Union which has begun to replace officers after the purge, and Germany has folded easier than expected, I suspect there'd be a desire from both sides to use their building strength to defeat eachother. They're not as exhausted as they were by 1945, the threat of nuclear war isn't becoming a reality and the power vaccum left by a deafeted Germany is sure to be a hotspot for tensions.

 

[ranoncles]

The most likely scenario for this to happen would be a successful French invasion of the Saar region. Historically, the French made a token effort before scampering back across the border.

If they had advanced with purpose (under a suitably aggressive commander), they could have penetrated the weak German defenses as the bulk of the Wehrmacht was busy in Poland. What was left in the West in 1939 were second-line/second-rate.

If the French offensive met with conspicuous success, the French high command might have been tempted to turn it into a major offensive. With Germany unable to stop it as Germany is now caught between two active fronts (the German nightmare), Hitler's prestige takes a nose-dive and eventually Germany is forced to sue for peace as French troops approach Berlin.

 

[jsb]

If they've both built up for this huge war with Germany, Britain and France who's rearmed and Soviet Union which has begun to replace officers after the purge, and Germany has folded easier than expected, I suspect there'd be a desire from both sides to use their building strength to defeat eachother. They're not as exhausted as they were by 1945, the threat of nuclear war isn't becoming a reality and the power vaccum left by a deafeted Germany is sure to be a hotspot for tensions.

Even if the war against Germany is easy GB & Fr will not want to fight another war they (or rather the electorate in each country) will want to let most of the conscript go back home and save money for domestic spending. SU will not want to risk fighting a war against such an obviously powerful alliance even after repairing from the humiliating of fighting Finland? There will probably be lots of tensions but neither side is crazy like AH, so I doubt it goes hot.

Note that SU would be crazy to start such a war is it might very easily end up with GB+Fr getting helped by all the European neutrals (including Italy, Spain, Balkans and Scandinavia who want to show they are friendly and anti-communist) and even the new German Government & army will be willing to prove they should be rehabilitated...... with the RN+ they have near total control of the oceans so US and world trade will be helping them..... World crusade against communism will sell nearly everywhere including US to large extent if SU starts it.

 

[Atterdag]

Even if the war against Germany is easy GB & Fr will not want to fight another war they (or rather the electorate in each country) will want to let most of the conscript go back home and save money for domestic spending. SU will not want to risk fighting a war against such an obviously powerful alliance even after repairing from the humiliating of fighting Finland? There will probably be lots of tensions but neither side is crazy like AH, so I doubt it goes hot.

Neither side is going to be able to disarm even if there is no immediate war. The allies and Soviets will both have to guard their new zones of influence in central Europe and unlike in otl, America likely aren't able to be a large part of this. If the allies pull back their conscripts, the Soviets invade where they've withdrawn from, if the Soviets do the same, well the same happens. Both blocs will have to remain on high alert for a while, like it was in otl, and without nukes there isn't an obvious detterent from launching major style attacks. Of course the specifics will determine all of this, but I see another war as a much more likely outcome than a long lasting peace.

 

[jsb]

Neither side is going to be able to disarm even if there is no immediate war. The allies and Soviets will both have to guard their new zones of influence in central Europe and unlike in otl, America likely aren't able to be a large part of this. If the allies pull back their conscripts, the Soviets invade where they've withdrawn from, if the Soviets do the same, well the same happens. Both blocs will have to remain on high alert for a while, like it was in otl, and without nukes there isn't an obvious detterent from launching major style attacks. Of course the specifics will determine all of this, but I see another war as a much more likely outcome than a long lasting peace.

The west could easily afford to cut down and still be far to large an alliance for SU to really want to fight a long war with no real prospect that they could really win, the problem is GB&Fr would effectively have all of Western Europe under control (and much of the world in the colonial and economic empires) they are simply to rich and powerful for SU to want to challenge IMO.

 

[Atterdag]

The west could easily afford to cut down and still be far to large an alliance for SU to really want to fight a long war with no real prospect that they could really win, the problem is GB&Fr would effectively have all of Western Europe under control (and much of the world in the colonial and economic empires) they are simply to rich and powerful for SU to want to challenge IMO.

I think it all depends on the details. If the allies have taken all of Germany (as op may imply) and are now at the old German-Soviet border, then you might be right.

But that scenario seems utterly unrealistic to me, a much more likely scenario I think would be close to what we saw in otl, with Soviet and allied forces meeting somewhere in the middle of Germany.

And perhaps the war doesn't break out immediatley between the allies and the USSR, but with the threat of Germany gone nothing prevents the Soviets from going after countries like Hungary, Romania, Finland again perhaps, or the chaotic mess the Balkans surely resembles in this scenario. None of those attacks are directly against the allies, so the Soviets likely goes for them, but are the allies simply going to sit back and watch the Soviets consume most of continental Europe? At first maybe, and a new round of appeasement might start, but sooner or later they will have to face down the Soviets just like they did Germany.

 

[Mad Bad Rabbit]

Asteroid 69230 Hermes strikes central Ohio on October 30, 1937, instantly inflicting death and destruction comparable to OTL Soviet WWII losses.

The U.S. is completely sidelined from any involvement in Europe, and the winters of '39 and '40 will be severe enough to halt most military operations.

 

[Bougnas]

This is adolescent boy game logic.

Sometimes adult leaders play by it. But fewer of them them do the more modern times become.

What raharris means is that it's not because "they built up so they are ready to fight" that the Entente and the Soviet Union necessarily have to use their newfound strength against each other.
Just like in 1945 OTL neither side has particular (or even good enough) reasons to fight each other. The USSR is essentially a co-belligerent against Germany. Sure, it's rather obvious that they are taking advantage of the situation and they occupy Poland, but after a still costly war I highly doubt that the Entente will want to attack the USSR, unless it showed such weakness in the invasion of Germany that they felt capable to push for a liberation of Poland (which I doubt).
Stalin is too cautious a man to give the Entente a reason to invade and will probably leave the rest of Eastern Europe (which is guaranteed by the Entente) alone.

More likely the USSR makes Poland a satellite state while giving part of East Prussia to it, and taking the eastern parts of Poland that were considered russian, just like in 1945 OTL. Czechoslovakia goes as OTL most likely. Considering the attitude of the Polish government in exile, and the fact that Poland was an autoritarian state in 1939, I can't say that the Entente will miss Poland much.