Challenge: British Defeat WW2

[stevep]

People

A few ideas.

a) More efficient use of U-boats, possibly also forcing the fat one to hand over a few a/c. A bit more resources allocated to subs, say Hitler gives up on the battle and the Blitz a bit earlier rather than draining the Luftwaffe. Possibly even just trying to concentrate more on tankers, which the allies were in short supply of for a while.

b) Japan doesn't attack the US. Either the gamble works or if the US declares war Hitler doesn't follow up with a dow himself. With the Far East under even greater pressure and American eyes switching to the Pacific Britain could find itself under too much pressure and persuaded to make a white peace.

c) The Germans, after 41, realise how big a task they have in the east and as well as not declaring against the US starts more seriously recruiting rebel forces in Russia. If they doing distinctly better then that gives them a lot more resources for elsewhere even if they don't force at least a limited victory in the east. Hence, even if a markedly denuded SU is still fighting, the allies could see far more serious fighting in Italy and a defeat in France. Coupled with heavier bombing losses and more V-1 attacks Britain might be persuaded to make peace.

Steve

 

[CalBear]

As tight as the T/L is, there is really no way to make it happen in any realistic manner.

You actually only have 11 months to defeat the UK since the moment the invasion of the USSR begins there is the massive diversion of resources to that front.

A far earlier POD, where the Reich builds hundreds of U-Boats prior to the beginning of the War, or no Soviet invasion taking place would bring thing to the edge of plausable, but only to the edge. The U.S. is always there, just over the horizon, and that puts paid on the issue (earlier, more severe, submarine attacks are more likely to bring the U.S. into the war earlier is one example of the diminishing returns of any increased efforts).

 

[bobbis14]

"Honorable members of Parliament, I know we have made our longstanding policy to oppose a continental hegemon, and I know that Hitler has used every treaty we've made to wipe his arse, but I am sure he will not use the European industrial base to destroy our nation."

Yeah but he'll also use that big European industrial base to stop the advance of teh evol commies, they are props under your beds ZOMG!

 

[I Blame Communism]

seriously recruiting rebel forces in Russia.

I've often questioned how much differance this whole "anti-Soviet forces" business would make. The Germans did employ hundreds of Hiwis and Slavic Schuma detachments, and the Vlasovites, and while a softer regime in the occupied territories might have yielded up more, I don't think they'd be suitable for anything except security or auxiliary work. I don't see the tide of war being turned. And then, when it was a choice between Berlin and Moscow, Baltics and Galicians pretty much were "collaborating" at the very least by keeping their heads down. The Germans in turn gave a blind eye to the murderous and internicine activities of the OUN. Raising two or three proper divisions in the Baltic is the most real military benefit, I should think.

 

[I Blame Communism]

Yeah but he'll also use that big European industrial base to stop the advance of teh evol commies, they are props under your beds ZOMG!

But who's going to argue this line? Not Winston "Stalin: Rugged and Decisive War Leader!" Churchill, that's for sure, and the other potential leaders of Britain were less stridently ideological.

 

[stevep]

I've often questioned how much differance this whole "anti-Soviet forces" business would make. The Germans did employ hundreds of Hiwis and Slavic Schuma detachments, and the Vlasovites, and while a softer regime in the occupied territories might have yielded up more, I don't think they'd be suitable for anything except security or auxiliary work. I don't see the tide of war being turned. And then, when it was a choice between Berlin and Moscow, Baltics and Galicians pretty much were "collaborating" at the very least by keeping their heads down. The Germans in turn gave a blind eye to the murderous and internicine activities of the OUN. Raising two or three proper divisions in the Baltic is the most real military benefit, I should think.

I think they could have done a lot more given the circumstances. Not just in recruiting from a lot of the POWs taken. The presence of a clear and supported RLA from early in 42 could have encouraged more defections and also helped build up Stalin/Soviets paranoia even higher. Also changes in the way they governed the occupied territories, especially in say returning the land to the peasants would have boosted production, virtually ended partisan resistance and also posed another great threat to the Soviet system. Not to mention any Russia who accepted land would know what happened to them if the Soviets got back in control.

I think such a change is virtually ASB but might have been possible to persuade Hitler to make changes even if only meant for short term purposes and with the aim of having the enlarged RLA consumed by fighting the Soviets. If say they had the prestige task of storming Stalingrad or Leningrad for instance.

Steve

 

[machine3589]

We don't think we're invincible or protected by a magic spell or phsyically incapable of surrendering, but that doesn't mean it isn't ASB. Gamb makes excellent points.

Oh yes you do. Well, maybe not you in perticular, but most British people on AH.com seem to think Britain cant be defeated by any means other then Bruce Dickinson leading the opposing side.

 

[I Blame Communism]

I think they could have done a lot more given the circumstances. Not just in recruiting from a lot of the POWs taken. The presence of a clear and supported RLA from early in 42 could have encouraged more defections and also helped build up Stalin/Soviets paranoia even higher. Also changes in the way they governed the occupied territories, especially in say returning the land to the peasants would have boosted production, virtually ended partisan resistance and also posed another great threat to the Soviet system. Not to mention any Russia who accepted land would know what happened to them if the Soviets got back in control.

I don't think partisan resistance can be so casually discounted. People don't like invaders whatever their rhetoric and the character of the regime they toppled, see: Iraq. And the Germans are hardly going to be as, uh, "nice" as we've been in Iraq, even if they moderate somewhat: IIRC, the fact was that they had to take food to feed themselves. Then of course in Belarus you had the kernels of detachments in the form of all the Red Army bands that had escaped encirclement in the first months of the war. There will be at best fewer partisans and more ani-partisans, meaning more Germans at the front. This will make things harder for Russia, but isn't going to change the outcome or compel Britain to surrender.

I think such a change is virtually ASB but might have been possible to persuade Hitler to make changes even if only meant for short term purposes and with the aim of having the enlarged RLA consumed by fighting the Soviets. If say they had the prestige task of storming Stalingrad or Leningrad for instance.

Such formations weren't used in a frontline capacity, though. The Hiwis were strictly auxiliary and informal, serving under German officers in German units, and the rest was all glorified Schuma. The Germans even had to pull German battalions back to put them under control at times, and after Kursk they were considered ore of a liability than anything and sent west, where most of them achieved almost nothing. The Germans formed only a single Russian frontline division at the end of the war in desperation, which promptly vindicated their fears by defecting.

 

[I Blame Communism]

Oh yes you do. Well, maybe not you in perticular, but most British people on AH.com seem to think Britain cant be defeated by any means other then Bruce Dickinson leading the opposing side.

Actually, it's me who makes the Iron Maiden jokes.

But I'm talking generally. How many people have critcised FabR (which I love) because Britain gets defeated by Filthy Euros? None that I've seen. We merely make the valid historical point that there isn't really a realistic way to knock us out of the war with this sort of PoD, and often get rather exasperated by people like Eurofed who seem to believe that we'd all have have risen up and hanged Churchill if the war had lasted another couple of months without Russian involvement.

 

[Eurofed]

As I see it:

Forget the U-Boats, they are a political trap as bad as in WWI, better use of them is not going to solve anything, it shall only bring America more quickly in the war, and that needs to be avoided at all costs.

Forget the Battle of Britain, with such a PoD a successful landing in the British Isles is not going to be possible for many years and bombing shall never bring Britain to its knees.

In the year you have got between the Fall of France and Barbarossa, shift the might of German war machine towards a Mediterranean strategy. Invade Malta, give Mussolini support to invade Yugoslavia with Hungary and Bulgaria, grant him a sphere of influence in the Western Balkans, but explicitly veto an invasion of Greece, build up logistics in Libya, a buffed-up Africa Korps, and the efficiency of the Italian military. Bring Vichy France in the Axis with a partition of Belgium, promises of future territorial rewards from British colonies, and equal political status in the Axis to Italy. Use all of this to conquer Egypt, Syria, Palestine, and Iraq, expelling British influence from Persia.

In the meanwhile, build up air defense against British bombers, but assume a defensive position towards Britain in Europe and the Atlantic. No bombing, no U-boats. If Japan attacks America, remain neutral, and offer sympathy and support to the USA. If Japan did not declare war to Russia after Barbarossa, declare war to Japan and make a public offer to send German and Italian fleets in the Pacific to support America if Britain shall agree to an armistice. Keep sending public peace offers to Britain. Let that Roosevelt fool throw as much Land-Lease as he can squeeze out of the Congress to Britain. He shall never be able to convince the American people and the Congress to declare war to Germany if the latter is not threatening the British Isles nor attacking US shipping in the Atlantic. Without American cobelligerance, Britain is a toothless tiger even with the Land-Lease, it shall never be able to launch an invasion of continental Europe and it shall be forced to keep a losing defensive stance in North Africa and the Middle East. Moreover, this makes a Land-Lease to Soviet Russia quite politically unlikely.

All the while, make the necessary adjustments to defeat Soviet Russia in 1941-43 (I'm not going into the details of that fro the purpose of this thread, but it was wholly possible, eg. this TL gives good ideas) and force it to sign a Brest-Litovsk peace.

After that, with Russia pushed back to its Muscowy borders, an impassable Axis air defense, a neutral America, and the Axis controlling continental Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East, Britain is practically neutralized and hence defeated, without an invasion or blockade ever being necessary or politically advisable.

 

[Eurofed]

We merely make the valid historical point that there isn't really a realistic way to knock us out of the war with this sort of PoD.

See my last post. With this PoD, Britain may or may not be knocked out of the war, depending on political butterflies (for the sake of productive discussion, I hope we may agree that a collapse of morale in Britain was neither certain nor impossilbe). But it may be effectively contained to insignificance. After all, if America remains neutral or goes off to fight its own separate war in the Pacific, Soviet Russia is forced to a Brest-Litovsk peace, Axis conquers North Africa and the Middle East, and fascist Europe builds a strong air defense, all perfectly possible with this PoD and the right strategical and political choices, what could Britain ever do ?

 

[BlairWitch749]

Manstein in Africa with an early 1941 pod puts a lot more pressure on the British including the capture of the suez canal however such pressure required a delay of Barbarossa till 1942. It is not so much the committment of German ground resources that is the problem (the British 8th army and home army would have been dead meat against say perhaps panzer group 2 from Russia in 1941) it is the committment of aircraft. Attacking Britian with aircraft directly is pointless since the pilots are unrecoverable if shot down and the British front line fighters enjoy at least parity the most advanced Luftwaffe designs. What was needed and the first pod I put into Manstein in Africa was the committment of 500 or so aircraft to achieve complete air dominence in the theater while the British were still weak

Manstein changes the world explored the necessary steps to defeat Russia without a dramatic change in the Reich's war economy (the defeat of Russia made the defeat of Britain inevitable as Eurofed mentioned)

 

[Eurofed]

Manstein in Africa with an early 1941 pod puts a lot more pressure on the British including the capture of the suez canal however such pressure required a delay of Barbarossa till 1942. It is not so much the committment of German ground resources that is the problem (the British 8th army and home army would have been dead meat against say perhaps panzer group 2 from Russia in 1941) it is the committment of aircraft. Attacking Britian with aircraft directly is pointless since the pilots are unrecoverable if shot down and the British front line fighters enjoy at least parity the most advanced Luftwaffe designs. What was needed and the first pod I put into Manstein in Africa was the committment of 500 or so aircraft to achieve complete air dominence in the theater while the British were still weak

Manstein changes the world explored the necessary steps to defeat Russia without a dramatic change in the Reich's war economy (the defeat of Russia made the defeat of Britain inevitable as Eurofed mentioned)

All very true, BW's two masterpiece TLs explore in detail the good choices that Germany may do in the Mediterranean and Russia with a pre-BoB PoD to neutralize Britain without ever mentioning the unspeakable mammal nor fatally antagonizing America with the U-Boats.

 

[BlairWitch749]

All very true, BW's two masterpiece TLs explore in detail the good choices that Germany may do in the Mediterranean and Russia with a pre-BoB PoD to neutralize Britain without ever mentioning the unspeakable mammal nor fatally antagonizing America with the U-Boats.

most of the more orthadox general staff officers in the German army were rather dubious of unrestricted submarine warfare because it antagonized neutrals and never had the strength to bring Britain to its knees.

Der Manstein Kommt (my next tl) will have a German sea mammal with an Oct 1939 pod and an August 1940 invasion. After this tell it will no longer be unmentionable infact it will be considered plausible

 

[Magniac]

I was going to say the US election could be a factor, but I just checked to find that Willkie had already won the GOP nomination (though the Democratic convention was July 15/18, which is close to the POD but not as significant as an alternate Republican nominating process, IMO.)

At this point it's impossible to get either Taft or Vandenberg the nomination, so if FDR dies there will still be an internationalist in the White House come January, whether it's Wendell Willkie or James Farley (or whomever the Democrats choose as the emergency candidate--I doubt Wallace goes to the top of the ticket.)

Anyway, as I'm not the kind of person to just dismiss the U-boat menace out of ignorance, what about Germany discovering their Enigma codes had been comprimised by the time the operation at Bletchley Park was in full swing?

 

[Faeelin]

a)
c) The Germans, after 41, realise how big a task they have in the east and as well as not declaring against the US starts more seriously recruiting rebel forces in Russia. If they doing distinctly better then that gives them a lot more resources for elsewhere even if they don't force at least a limited victory in the east. Hence, even if a markedly denuded SU is still fighting, the allies could see far more serious fighting in Italy and a defeat in France. Coupled with heavier bombing losses and more V-1 attacks Britain might be persuaded to make peace.

The problem is the Germans simply didn't have the resources to feed most of the East. If forced to choose between the Wermacht and the Slavs...

A far earlier POD, where the Reich builds hundreds of U-Boats prior to the beginning of the War, or no Soviet invasion taking place would bring thing to the edge of plausable, but only to the edge.

See, my problem with this scenario is that there is only one thing uboats are good for, and that's attacking Britain.

 

[Awilla the Hun]

Not neccessarily a defeat, but...

https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=135299

One of the few interesting timelines about World War 2 that I've ever read. Britain makes peace early on, France is left (mostly) independent (but allied with Britain), and all hell promptly breaks loose. Does this count?

But, seeing as how (after many, many threadfuls of battering it out), Sea Lion is considered impossible, and the longer Germany prepares, the more Britain can rebuild its armed forces, it may be a bit difficult to make this business work. The Royal Navy doing a worse job against the dastardly U-Boats (or letting a few larger German ships out into the Atlantic-how, I don't know) may starve this Sceptred Ise into surrender, though.

 

[BlairWitch749]

Sea Lion is considered impossible

just wait till Der Maintein Kommt.... I will change the whole notion of sea mammal it will no longer be unmentionable; it will be plausible and a worthy idea with only the slightest pods

 

[lothaw]

Alternatively, put the POD on the other side of the ocean. Robert Taft winning the 1940 GOP nomination(which very nearly happened) and campaigning against FDR on an isolationalist campaign(which a large majority of the US population was inclined towards), and winning in November could very well do the trick.

Taft certainly wouldn't send all that material aid to Britain, especially without payment in advance, and using US transport to boot. Britain simply doesn't have the wealth to fight the war and pay the US for the tools it will continue to need.

By 1943, Britain will have to seek terms. She can probably manage a stalemate in Africa, though any intervention in Europe directly is going to be beyond her capabilities alone.

This could very well butterfly away Pearl Harbor too. Taft might not turn the oil back on(though he very well could), but I think he would turn a blind eye to Japan's aggession in East Asia. He certainly isn't going to gut the Pacific Fleet to sell it to Britain, so you'd have a strong front presented on the US's side. Japan probably would go south, though they'd skip the Phillipines and Guam altogether.

If Britain could hold on until 1944, things could very well change with a Democrat(maybe even FDR, how cool would his glorious return be?) getting elected again. More than likely Britain has to sign a white peace with Germany(which Hitler is said to be amiable to), so he can focus solely on Russia, which will be in a world of troulbe of her own with no Lend-Lease keeping her army supplied and fed,.

 

[Astrodragon]

I think it would be possible to get Britain to sue for peace, but not much else in the timeframes. It also really needs a number of PoD acting together.

A different US election might help, though perhaps as not as some people seem to think. Much of the US aid to Britain was as a result of realpolitic, and the situation isnt going to change. If anything, the worse things get for Britain, the more worried about it the USA is going to get. There is always the US strategic nightmare of Germany getting the RN in a settlement lurking.

Despite certain peoples preoccupation with Egypt, defeating Britain in the Med isnt going to defeat Britain. The British presence was rather self-fulfilling prophecy, losing NA would just mean they'd retreat south and east, leaving Germany staring at a lot of desert and arabs. No way are you getting a logistic line down Africa or across to India. So while losing NA would be upsetting, it isnt a war-winner. Britain never really needed the meditarranean. So Manstein is sitting in Cairo. So what? Good luck to him with Egyptian politics....

The only possible way of forcing Britain to the negotiating table is a better u-boat campaign. And here you dont have much time. By late 1942 the US shipyards have got their act together. In any case, once the USA is in the war with Britain the chances of getting a settlment pretty much collapse. So you have really until the end of 1941.

In order to win a u-boat campaign you need more uboats. Not as easy as it sounds. If you build more before WW2, Britain builds lots of escorts. However there is one opening. At the start or the war the u-boat building program was in a mess. You need to sort this out somehow, give them a higher priority, and ideally start on mass production.
Second, you need to get the u-boats operational faster. historically the training period was rather long.
Third, you need to reduce the efficiency of ULTRA and HF/DF. So the 4th rotor earlier, plus actually enforcing the protocols, might well neuter ULTRA early on. Less central control might reduce HF/DF efficiency.
Get Goering to allocate more reconnaisance planes.
Oh, and fixing the torpedo problems early on would help!

As I said, it isnt impossible. However doing ALL the above, properly, in the small time window, is pretty much getting to ASB.... Even then, it might not work. Once the USA joins in the war, the British are going to hang on despite pretty much anything. You dont have a window of much more than a year, and in that time you have to destroy the merchant fleet (probably impossible in teh time frame, you simply cant get enough torpedoes into the Atlantic!), AND remember Britain had around 6-12 months of supplies stockpiled.

Realistically, I just dont see it hapenning.