DB Challenge: WWII

With a POD after 1900, make it so that a second World War occurs in the 1930s-1940s, with the USA and Britain on one side and Germany and Japan on the other. Germany must control (militarily and/or diplomatically) Europe from the Pyrenees deep into modern Russia at one point, but must still lose.

Bonus points if

-Nuclear weapons are used in the war, but not anytime after
-Italy is allied with Germany
-Russia is communist
-Poland is important in some way
- (just for fun) Winston Churchill (the war correspondent) is Prime Minister of Great Britain at some point during the war.
 
How on earth would Germany occupy all of France while still fighting a war against Russia and Britain? That can only be achieved via a liberal use of ASB's, even with Italian help. Drop the Pyrenees requirement, and something could be worked out.
 
How on earth would Germany occupy all of France while still fighting a war against Russia and Britain? That can only be achieved via a liberal use of ASB's, even with Italian help. Drop the Pyrenees requirement, and something could be worked out.
They don't have to occupy all of France. If part of it is a puppet state or something, it'll work.
 
It's hard to see Germany causing a second World War itself! It's got the prosperity, diplomatic clout and military power already, what would it gain from another war?

OK - POD in 1914 , Britain declares war on Germany instead of staying neutral. So instead of Britain being cordial terms with Germany after the peace of 1916 , iit's another defeated, resentful nation like France and Russia.

The French and Russians bide their time and with Britain on their side, eventually try to get their revenge in a second war. But Germany, Italy, Hungary and Austria are too powerful, and Germany soon dominates even more of Europe.

How Germany could eventually be defeated , I don't know. It's unlikely , but maybe the Americans use some A-bombs on Berlin, Hamburg and Warsaw. Not sure about Churchill, but maybe the Liberals are thrown out of power when Britain is losing. If Churchill had won that parliamentary election in about 1903, he'd be the right age in 1935 to be Prime Minister.

I'll leave Japan to someone else....
 
With a POD after 1900, make it so that a second World War occurs in the 1930s-1940s, with the USA and Britain on one side and Germany and Japan on the other. Germany must control (militarily and/or diplomatically) Europe from the Pyrenees deep into modern Russia at one point, but must still lose.

Bonus points if

-Nuclear weapons are used in the war, but not anytime after
-Italy is allied with Germany
-Russia is communist
-Poland is important in some way
- (just for fun) Winston Churchill (the war correspondent) is Prime Minister of Great Britain at some point during the war.

OK, let's see if I'm getting this right: In addition to the secondary ideas we have three requirements: 1) Germany must have incentive to wage a war of conquest; 2) They must have enough resources to take much of Euriope; and 3) They must still lose in the end.

We start with #1. This would assume that some more radical political entity than the Zentrum/Sozi governments in the '20s and '40s got to power. And this in turn would require some massive threat to scare the masses towards the political extremes. The stockmarket crash might be a start, but that wasn't nearly bad enough to cause anything revolutionary. Perhaps if the Bolsheviks had retained control over Russia, the Rotfront would've been a credible threat with its promises of revolution and a Marxist dictatorship? This manages the "Russia is Communist" aim as well. You could take some early point in the Russian Civil War for that; what if Admiral Kolchak hadn't worked with the Omsk Directorate, for example? Or if Denikin hadn't allied with Pilsudski?

Or conversely, you could have Fascism spread meaningfully outside Italy, perhaps even to Russia; the people there were desperate enough in the famines after the war, the question would be whether a sufficiently strong Party apparatus could be built up. With a Great Power backing them, you could make the German Fascists a credible threat to the Republic.

In any case, this might push the military into taking charge. Such a dictatorship, open or de facto, would be heavily influenced by nationalism and the Right generally, and it might then seek integration with Austria. That would mean trouble with Italy though, so you might look for something else. They might be displeased with the codominium they shared with the French over Elsass-Lothringen after the truce, but I don't think that'd be enough. Perhaps with some high-profiled French provocations, but it still wouldn't be likely. A Russian move on Finland?

In any case, expect close ties to Poland; whatever Russia there is, both will be suspicious of it. Poland may begrudge Germany some of her lands, but that won't get in the way of collective security. Italy is the odd card; depending on whom the Russians support, they might throw in their lot with them or the Germans. If we say that Russia is Red for the sake of the argument, they might find common ground with the German militarists, especially if the pan-Slavic agitation against the areas they snatched from Austria-Hungary when they fell continues.

Well, those are some ideas, at least. As for the war bit, they'd have to strike quickly to take out France before moving towards Russia. They'll not be as outnumbered as one might think, though; A Communist/Fascist government won't do nearly so well in keeping up the impressive economic growth of the Tsar's last decades, and they'll also lose all the great military innovators that developed armoured warfare: Wrangel, Sikorski... In effect, we'll see a scenario similar to the original Schlieffen Plan; for the purposes of this thread, it'll have to be successful this time. With France subdued and the Channel Coast fortified, the Germans could then take on Bolshevik Russia. The Central European nations will have fallen into line by then, and an allied Italy will maintain control in Albania and Greater Slavonia.

Then, everything is set for America to enter the war. How that'd happen I don't know; US history isn't my area of expertise, but you'd have to get rid of Huey Long before his third term for sure. But in any case, their entry will be what spells the end of the German victories. In the end, the Germans might be forced to use atomics to get a decent peace out of the war; if I know them right, it'd be against France.

EDIT: Oh, you wanted Japan in, too... and not on Britain's side? That's almost ASB-ish, though... why would they give up their alliance? Ah, well... I guess there's some expert on Asia who could come up with a plausible POD around...
 
Last edited:
Well, it's near ASB for there to be another world war started after the Great War. The one thing it taught the Europeans that war in Europe itself was to be avoided at almost all costs. The Russians going Communist seems laughable on the face of it. The Tsarist government was too strong. Italy allied with Germany isn't too difficult. Probably trying to keep the balance of power in Europe. I can't even see how Japan could get involved, it is too far from Europe.
 
OK, let's see if I'm getting this right: In addition to the secondary ideas we have three requirements: 1) Germany must have incentive to wage a war of conquest; 2) They must have enough resources to take much of Euriope; and 3) They must still lose in the end.

We start with #1. This would assume that some more radical political entity than the Zentrum/Sozi governments in the '20s and '40s got to power. And this in turn would require some massive threat to scare the masses towards the political extremes. The stockmarket crash might be a start, but that wasn't nearly bad enough to cause anything revolutionary. Perhaps if the Bolsheviks had retained control over Russia, the Rotfront would've been a credible threat with its promises of revolution and a Marxist dictatorship? This manages the "Russia is Communist" aim as well. You could take some early point in the Russian Civil War for that; what if Admiral Kolchak hadn't worked with the Omsk Directorate, for example? Or if Denikin hadn't allied with Pilsudski?

Or conversely, you could have Fascism spread meaningfully outside Italy, perhaps even to Russia; the people there were desperate enough in the famines after the war, the question would be whether a sufficiently strong Party apparatus could be built up. With a Great Power backing them, you could make the German Fascists a credible threat to the Republic.

In any case, this might push the military into taking charge. Such a dictatorship, open or de facto, would be heavily influenced by nationalism and the Right generally, and it might then seek integration with Austria. That would mean trouble with Italy though, so you might look for something else. They might be displeased with the codominium they shared with the French over Elsass-Lothringen after the truce, but I don't think that'd be enough. Perhaps with some high-profiled French provocations, but it still wouldn't be likely. A Russian move on Finland?

In any case, expect close ties to Poland; whatever Russia there is, both will be suspicious of it. Poland may begrudge Germany some of her lands, but that won't get in the way of collective security. Italy is the odd card; depending on whom the Russians support, they might throw in their lot with them or the Germans. If we say that Russia is Red for the sake of the argument, they might find common ground with the German militarists, especially if the pan-Slavic agitation against the areas they snatched from Austria-Hungary when they fell continues.

Well, those are some ideas, at least. As for the war bit, they'd have to strike quickly to take out France before moving towards Russia. They'll not be as outnumbered as one might think, though; A Communist/Fascist government won't do nearly so well in keeping up the impressive economic growth of the Tsar's last decades, and they'll also lose all the great military innovators that developed armoured warfare: Wrangel, Sikorski... In effect, we'll see a scenario similar to the original Schlieffen Plan; for the purposes of this thread, it'll have to be successful this time. With France subdued and the Channel Coast fortified, the Germans could then take on Bolshevik Russia. The Central European nations will have fallen into line by then, and an allied Italy will maintain control in Albania and Greater Slavonia.

Then, everything is set for America to enter the war. How that'd happen I don't know; US history isn't my area of expertise, but you'd have to get rid of Huey Long before his third term for sure. But in any case, their entry will be what spells the end of the German victories. In the end, the Germans might be forced to use atomics to get a decent peace out of the war; if I know them right, it'd be against France.

EDIT: Oh, you wanted Japan in, too... and not on Britain's side? That's almost ASB-ish, though... why would they give up their alliance? Ah, well... I guess there's some expert on Asia who could come up with a plausible POD around...

I don't see how the Bolsheviks would last long. The restoration of the tsar was inevitible. The Bolsheviks had far too little influence in the Russian military. Why would the Germans go Facist? I guess if the war lasted longer and the Germans lost and there was a more unfavorable treaty they might have got desperate enough but that would be a real long shot. How the Americans get involved I can't say. The most likely thing for the Americans to do is to sit out of it and trade with both sides making a ton of money.
 

Typo

Banned
I guess we could have Germany actually lose WWI.

But Germany and allies vs France and Russia is always tilted in favor of the Germans.
 
My guess would be that they would have to get either the Brits or the Americans against them or both. Maybe they actually invade Belgium and provoke Britian.
 
It's hard to see Germany causing a second World War itself! It's got the prosperity, diplomatic clout and military power already, what would it gain from another war?

OK - POD in 1914 , Britain declares war on Germany instead of staying neutral. So instead of Britain being cordial terms with Germany after the peace of 1916 , iit's another defeated, resentful nation like France and Russia.

OK, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say how about if the British being involved in the 2nd Franco-Prussian War means that the Germans lose? The Royal Navy was still powerful in 1914, how about they blockade Germany and somehow the French hang on long enough for the blockade to become effective?

So, after the war, which would have to drag on for maybe a decade in order for a blockade to win it, all the European powers are exhausted. The Russians and French go communist, the Germans and Italians go Fascist, the British Empire collapses.

The USA makes a killing supplying the British with arms, their economy booms and...oh yeah I got it...the British dump Japan to keep the Yanks sweet.

Then, because the fascist and communists are mortal enemies, the German-Italian alliance declares war on the French-Russian one. The British get dragged in because of treaty commitments dating from the last war.

The second war is basically a rerun of the first, with the British blockade again proving a war winner and the French and Russians hanging on (and the Germans have to go through Poland to get to Russia!) . The USA is more important as a supplier to the British this time due to the collapse of the empire.

As the British aren't allied with the Japanese any more the US thinks it can attack them with impunity (can't think why though, sheer racism maybe?) whilst the European powers are otherwise engaged, but reckons without superb Japanese diplomacy which makes common cause with the Germans.

I'll leave the nuclear weapons out, I hate that stuff. :mad:

And I've never heard of Churchill.:confused:
 
OK, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say how about if the British being involved in the 2nd Franco-Prussian War means that the Germans lose? The Royal Navy was still powerful in 1914, how about they blockade Germany and somehow the French hang on long enough for the blockade to become effective?

So, after the war, which would have to drag on for maybe a decade in order for a blockade to win it, all the European powers are exhausted. The Russians and French go communist, the Germans and Italians go Fascist, the British Empire collapses.

The USA makes a killing supplying the British with arms, their economy booms and...oh yeah I got it...the British dump Japan to keep the Yanks sweet.

Then, because the fascist and communists are mortal enemies, the German-Italian alliance declares war on the French-Russian one. The British get dragged in because of treaty commitments dating from the last war.

The second war is basically a rerun of the first, with the British blockade again proving a war winner and the French and Russians hanging on (and the Germans have to go through Poland to get to Russia!) . The USA is more important as a supplier to the British this time due to the collapse of the empire.

As the British aren't allied with the Japanese any more the US thinks it can attack them with impunity (can't think why though, sheer racism maybe?) whilst the European powers are otherwise engaged, but reckons without superb Japanese diplomacy which makes common cause with the Germans.

I'll leave the nuclear weapons out, I hate that stuff. :mad:

And I've never heard of Churchill.:confused:
Churchill is the famous journalist who for years was the voice of the BBC - so much so that his opinions oftentimes mattered more than that of the Prime Minister. He would have been too, if he didn't switch parties every couple of years...

As for nuclear weapons, perhaps Britain or the United States would use it against Japan? They could certainly play the "exterminating Oriental barbarian" card...
 
Here are a few items thatcould lead to the "Second World War". First off, you have to kill the Treaty of Locarno of 1925, which established the European Economic Community (EEC) and became the basis of the 1962 European Union (EU). The economic free trade created by the bloc served as a major basis for the "Second European Renaissance" with cultural leaders such as Pablo Picasso, Salvador Dali, Walter Schoenberg, Vladimir Horowitz, Jean Cocteau. Imagine the "cultural bankruptcy" of a world wherein Great Britain or the United States of America :eek: became the leader of "cultural enlightenment".

As for Japan, imagine the assassination of Prime Minister Inukai Tsuyoshi, prior to the formation of the East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere (EACS). While he was assassinated February 15, 1936, Inukai's finacial and diplomatic forums, served to modernize the economic infranstructure of the region. Imagine a Pacific Rim wherein the region was still divided by warlords, religious fanatics, and criminal organizations....
 
Guys, you are all missing the point on Churchill: The Man is a disgraced politician whose failure at Gallipoli should explain just how far out he is. This guy thinks he's an armchair general, instead his plan gets dorked up and lots of people die. He goes into the Media because he understands government and so serves as a good journalist on these topics. That man could NEVER have become prime minister after 1916--the UK just isn't that dumb.

Okay. Japan needs a very different reaction to the 2-2-6 incident. Historically the Emperor himself ordered the coup be crushed and disloyal elements of the armies brought to trial. So in 1936, many of the warmonger who have been preying on China are executed for Treason--Tojo Hideki remains the foremost example. The Trials revealed just how deep and how out of control the army had become. Quite Frankly, Japan nearly lost its cool as a result. What we need is something instead like the 2-2-6 Coup succeeding with Tojo or Senjuro running Japan as a warlord state--this presumably means that the Emperor has either been convinced to approve the change or that he was a victim of 2-2-6 as well. And this would remain a very fine affair.

Russia: The Russian Tsar is not as strong as it first appears, and I think that had he been a more negligent leader there could have been dire consequences. Instead, he managed to run Russia adroitly, finally making a Separate Peace with Germany and Austria that essentially gave him a free hand to destroy the Ottomans and Seize the Bosporus. Indeed, it's hard to imagine the Russian Tsar going down with a doomed war effort--but the Russians fought hard, dealt a sharp blow to the Germans at Tannenburg--and fought tenaciously as they were slowly forced back to the Vistula. You'd need the White Army to fight much worse, so that Trotsky's uprising in Moscow was more than a localized event, and you'd need to get the Tsar not to agree to land reforms to aid his people. Nicholas II was just too canny a leader to get outfoxed by Trotsky. And he played his hand with Germany very well.

So, what we'd need is a succession crisis in Russia that ultimately destabilizes the country. We know that Prince Alexei died at age 17, but then the Tsar's brother Michael becomes the likely leader of Russia. What if this was not so? Furthermore, suppose that Michael botches Russia's government horribly and so the Reds Return, or perhaps this is a Neo-Communist system that looks much more like Sweden then the proposed Communist state. Would a Neo-Communist state qualify? They were much more moderate than the Bolsheviks at the time...

And then there is Italy. As on singular "One Italy". So this means that there is no Winter Uprising that leads to a civil war: Plausible, but remember that Italy is an abused nation that's lost Venice and more to the Austria-Hungary-Slavonia Federation. Indeed, we are talking about a victim nation joining forces with a victor that's behind a partial dismemberment of its territory. Italy joining forces would require the unthinkable--Germany to turn on AHS. This is insane, AHS and Germany were strong allies in 1914, and in the late 30s to late 40s this would be the same.

Poland? Poland is just a German Vassal State. Perhaps it could be the flashpoint of a war between the AHS and Germany, but why would AHS want such a highly volitile minority?

So, what I'm thinking is something like:

1930: AHS and Germany have a massive falling out. Nicholas II is assassinated by another royal, and the state begins to collapse, while Neo-Communists begin to pitch a bloodless coup and take over without a fight.
1931 (OTL): Mukden Incident. Japanese Army seizes Manchuria.
1932: Italy somehow avoids the Winter Uprising. AHS continues its political realignment--allying with Neo-Communist Russia and France.
1933: (OTL): The UK begins to seek closer ties to the USA; the end of the Great War has alienated many of their potential friends in Europe and so the only choice is America.
1934: Realignment of Europe Continues. Germany gets an alliance with Italy with the promise of Venice and the the declaration that an Italian can once again feel proud of being an Italian. Alliances with Bulgaria and the remnants of the Ottoman State continue.
1936: Flashpoint-Poland. The AHS seeks to grab puppet Poland by manipulation and by granting Poland claims on German territory. As Poland wavers in an attempt to maximize the situation, Germany and AHS both send large numbers of troops around the area to force Poland's hand. Not surprisingly, the shooting war begins in the small puppet state.
1938: The First War ends with the 2nd Defeat of France and the collapse of the AHS. Germany annexes the large Austrian nation and creates Hungarian and Slavonic puppets.
1939: Japan joins an agreement with Germany, Ottomanns and German Puppets to shut down the Neo-Communist Menace.
1941: The Neo-Communist State, in an act of desperate defense, begs for help from the UK, which decides that it must act to maintain the balance of powers in Europe. This also draws the USA into the arrangement.
1942: Shooting War begins. Japan launches a massive attack on Singapore and Pearl Harbor to disable the US-UK fleets there.
1946: High point of the Eastern War. The Neo-Communists have retreated into the Ural Mountains and have lost much of Eastern Siberia. Meanwhile, Japan is in Calcutta and on the shore of Australia at this point. Knocking out India or Australia would be devastating to the Allies. For the past year, the Allies have begun manufacturing a secret weapon to guarentee their victory--the Atomic Bomb.
Dec 1949 The War Ends. Much of Germany and Japan are in ruins due to the usage of 200 atomic weapons. Although it seemed a necessary evil at the time, the usage of nuclear weapons has horrified the world and their usage is banned.
 
Top