Alt ww2

The Nazi system, even without genocidal shit, which was its core anyway so pretty hard to remove, was awful when it came to industry and research. What you'd also see would be Frédéric Joliot-Curie perfecting with the British his patent #445686. Something the German scientists were historically very bad at compared to their competition, as testify their notes and 'private' conversations in 1945.
Well, was there a way some revanchist nationalist regime besides the Nazis could have taken power in the interwar period?
 
I seem to recall Adam Tooze making the argument that interwar-period Germany had two options: accept its position as a dependent of American finance and ultimately submit as an equal member of a European economic union (sound familiar?) or establish the economic union itself but with Germany as the clear master and risk long-term enmity with the United States.

The latter option obviously appealed to the Prussian militaristic establishment, but they didn't realize that it required Germany to declare war on the entire world...which they ultimately did. Ultimately, the Nazis were so committed to a preemptive war that they probably armed Germany quicker than any other regime would have. The difference between Hitler and nearly every other dictator in history is that Hitler didn't simply rattle the saber but fully intended to use it.

The way I see it, a more traditional German dictatorship led by Schleicher or some other right-wing militarist would not have rearmed as quickly as the Nazis. I imagine that they still would have pushed for the Anschluss and the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia, but when it came to Poland, the Germans would not have had the same motives. Ultimately, I think Germany would have moved much more slowly and cautiously than OTL Nazi Germany, which would have given Britain, France, and the Soviets more than enough time to rearm. By the time Europe would erupt into war, possibly in the mid-40s, Germany would have been crushed.
 
Can't Germany use its new found hegomeny to still force everyone to trade with it, seeing as its coming from a position of power?

They can threaten France or Poland with renewed hostilities. This undermines once again your premise of limited warfare.

The Dutch may be susceptible to pressure, if they don't choose to join the anti-German block. The Scandinavians will have flocked to British proteciton, and the Belgians to French.

The one area where political and diplomatic pressure, and frankly straight saber-rattling, can have effect is the Balkans, but there the Germans will face, as I mentioned, diplomatic and economic competition of the French and Italians (for instance in Romania), of the Italians (in Hungary), of the British (in Greece) and the Soviets (in Bulgaria). If the USA can and want to throw their weight around, it won't be in favor of German companies. That essentially leaves Yugoslavia. I doubt the Dutch and the Yugoslavs will be enough as trade partners.

Plus, in the event of a sort of ww3, Germanny will be playing on the defensive this time, so it can fortify its new borders and bleeed the coalition dry.

Are you reading what I write? I told you Germany will find it difficult to buy enough food abroad in peacetime. Let alone enough food from abroad in wartime. Or any foreign strategic raw materials. Where will the oil come from, for instance? The Romanian one will be outbought by the USA (which anyway owned part of the concerns in Ploesti) and hindered by the French, the British and the Italians. South American oil can't arrive because the Royal Navy is blockading. Soviet oil won't arrive because the SU isn't selling, and in any case, the Poles wouldn't let it get through.

Note that your scenario also further damages the chances of peaceful trade for Germany, because you have made sure they have to remain on a war footing. They won't be able to produce many radios and cuckoo clocks and cameras for export, because the factories producing those things will still be producing similar equipment for the Wehrmacht. They can't sell good German steel abroad, because they're using it for your fortifications. They can't sell chemical products or related hardware, because they need it all for producing in those costly plants the synthetic oil and rubber they can't buy abroad, and also because the chemicals go into the ammunition. In particular, they'll be producing less fertilizers than they need, because the stuff is the same that goes into making explosives, and they have to keep making those to remain in arms. Which means even less internal food production.
So even if the Germans found someone willing to sell them food, oil, iron ore, aluminium, rubber, tungsten and whatnot, they would have very little to sell.
 
Ultimately, the Nazis were so committed to a preemptive war that they probably armed Germany quicker than any other regime would have. The difference between Hitler and nearly every other dictator in history is that Hitler didn't simply rattle the saber but fully intended to use it.

The ultimate point, actually, was that the rearmament was done at such speed that the only alternative to economic meltdown soon became to use the steel which had not been paid for in order to conquer the gold.
It wouldn't matter if Hitler, in 1939, decided he would keep the saber sheathed; at that point, the people who had paid for the saber would demand their money back. So, the choice would have become not to either keep the saber sheathed or to use it, but to either give away the saber, or to use it in order to make more money. Hitler being Hitler...

The way I see it, a more traditional German dictatorship led by Schleicher or some other right-wing militarist would not have rearmed as quickly as the Nazis. I imagine that they still would have pushed for the Anschluss and the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia, but when it came to Poland, the Germans would not have had the same motives. Ultimately, I think Germany would have moved much more slowly and cautiously than OTL Nazi Germany, which would have given Britain, France, and the Soviets more than enough time to rearm. By the time Europe would erupt into war, possibly in the mid-40s, Germany would have been crushed.

Possibly. Many factors at play.
 
But let's assume a best case scenario. Germany does retake Pomerania and Danzig, and of course the Sudeten, and Alsace-Lorraine, after winning a short and limited war (or a series of such wars). What's the end situation?...

This has to assume a very different German government. The nazi leadership had the goal of destroying Poland. No two ways about it. They'd have to be solidly defeated on the battlefield to drop that and negotiate something less. The Poles had been willing to negotiate everything the nazi government demanded, and the French were supportive, they were reluctant to see a war started in 1939. The nazi government probably could have gained a great deal of what you outlined, perhaps more. But, that was not their goal. That the 'special' occupation units were standing up & preparing weeks and months, and the general occupation policies in place before the attack on Poland says a lot.
 
The Maginot line worked perfectly

It ensured that the fighting took place in Belgium and North East France which it did

The issue was with the forces doing said fighting not the heavy fortifications
Where did I talk about the Maginot line? I talked about the strategy as a whole. Playing defensively works less and less well with technological development that favours offensive systems and aerial attacks.
 
Where did I talk about the Maginot line? I talked about the strategy as a whole. Playing defensively works less and less well with technological development that favours offensive systems and aerial attacks.

You kinda did though

"And as for playing the defensive and fortifying the new borders, let's ask the French how it worked out for them."

It worked exactly as intended - the fighting took place in Belgium - its not the Maginot lines fault that the French were not very good at the fighting part!
 
Top