AHC/WI Hitler Plans to 'Defend Europe'

Let's suppose Hitler believes that Stalin plans to build up for an offensive into Western Europe, and lets suppose this is true. Maybe not 1941, maybe not even 1943, but "some day" and within Stalin's lifetime.

Hitler comes to believe that ultimately, allowing the Soviets to build up and attack first is the better strategy. It not only helps him legitimize the Nazi claim that communist bolshevism is a threat to Europe by having an actually manifest invasion, but he will have shorter supply lines, more time to build up force and infrastructure, and the ability to focus on dealing with the issue of Britain. In his mind, if the Soviets attack, more Europeans would be willing to support his cause in the defense.

Could Hitler pull this off? In my thoughts he could either focus on intensifying the campaign against Britain, or lax it in favor of keeping the US out of the war by avoiding granting any US president a Causus Belli from a submarine strike on an American ship. Without US involvement Hitler, could assume that Britain could never attack his Germany on its own, no matter how many bombers or commando raids they send.

If Nazi Germany does survive until Stalin decides to attack, suppose Hitler allows his generals more autonomy for dynamic defense with withdrawals and counter attacks and has much more faith in them. The goal is to draw out defense long enough for sympathy to grow around the world, particularly in the US and Britain. Could it work?
 

Wimble Toot

Banned
Could Hitler pull this off?

No.

Hitler thought the window of opportunity for defeating the USSR and finally crushing Bolshevism was closing in Autumn 1940 and may be gone by 1942-3.

A more strategically astute, less vengeful and dogmatic leader might consider it.

That leader isn't Hitler.
 
the only possible way to recast Nazi regime in sympathetic light would be mini-Barbarossa to "liberate" Finland and the Baltics, and hope no one notices the bombing of airfields across the USSR?
 
I think the way to get a sympathetic Germany is to not invade your neighboring countries, and spend the 1930s pursuing a legitimate series of revisions to Versailles.
 
Could Hitler pull this off? In my thoughts he could either focus on intensifying the campaign against Britain, or lax it in favor of keeping the US out of the war by avoiding granting any US president a Causus Belli from a submarine strike on an American ship. Without US involvement Hitler, could assume that Britain could never attack his Germany on its own, no matter how many bombers or commando raids they send.

The US was already involved, if the Nazis turn back on submarine warfare then that only means more equipment and resources getting to the British Isles.
 

Deleted member 97083

The Allies would never see Nazi Germany as "sympathetic" or legitimate.

But what about a different "Eastern Defensive Line" scenario:
  1. Germany still invades in June 1941, but Hitler is eliminated by the end of 1941, so the idea of a relentless offensive loses ground after the Battle of Moscow. Goering or somebody takes over.
  2. By June 1942, after the victory at 2nd Kharkov, the Germans decide on a "provoke the Soviets into an offensive then launch a counteroffensive" strategy, rinse and repeat.
  3. As German resources decline, probably by late 1943, the Germans shore up a defensive line at the Daugava and Dnieper rivers with only local offensives in certain areas.
How long can this situation be sustained?
 
The US was already involved, if the Nazis turn back on submarine warfare then that only means more equipment and resources getting to the British Isles.

Sending supplies isn't exactly the same as sending a military force and manpower. The supplies were there sustain Britain from collapse and starvation, but actual invasion plans in OTL heavily involved direct American military assistance.

Even with time and resources, would Churchill really attempt to pull off an invasion with just Commonwealth forces and no direct US military intervention? I'm under the impression that without the United States, Britain would just favor a strategy of escalated bombing and raids.
 

FBKampfer

Banned
And as long as the Germans keep smacking everybody else around ITTL, their doctrine and organization had pretty much been broadly hammered out by 41.

Heeresgruppe Afrika probably has a lot better luck ITTL too.

We probably don't see the Panther ITTL, unfortunately. But on the upside, they can't stick those awful straight-toothed gears on the final drive assembly.


But basically figured Barbarossa-level losses for the Soviets, and basically no significant progress until year 3 of the war. The problem with the Soviet armies wasn't just lack of radios, or the surprise attack. They needed solid field officers and an NCO corps to keep their formations from collapsing in the chaos. That was their real problem.
 
And as long as the Germans keep smacking everybody else around ITTL, their doctrine and organization had pretty much been broadly hammered out by 41.

Heeresgruppe Afrika probably has a lot better luck ITTL too.

We probably don't see the Panther ITTL, unfortunately. But on the upside, they can't stick those awful straight-toothed gears on the final drive assembly.


But basically figured Barbarossa-level losses for the Soviets, and basically no significant progress until year 3 of the war. The problem with the Soviet armies wasn't just lack of radios, or the surprise attack. They needed solid field officers and an NCO corps to keep their formations from collapsing in the chaos. That was their real problem.
What brings to question is how the Western allies act as those years go on. Would a Soviet invasion make the allies, a bit more cautious about throwing in their lot with the Soviets? Or was it always set in stone that the western allies would always support the Soviets if the alternative was Nazi Germany, even if the Soviets were actually attacking this time.

Roosevelt had to deal with Churchill's anti soviet leanings during the OTL which put a strain on cooperation. I can imagine this would be much more pronounced if the Soviets were openly attacking rather than defending their own territory as well.
 
Top