Delay WW2 to 1950

What if the fat one took charge in 41? Hitler is poisoned by morell, earlier.
Goering might settle for madigascar rather than mass murder.
 
Their wouldn't be any nukes - since there would be no need.

Each country would purse a more sustainable rearmament, so the Nazi would not waste billions on West Wall or Hitler's goofier 4 year plan. NO economic crises, not that there really was much of one.

Every year USSR would build 4000 tanks most likely T-32 followed by KV/T-34. By 1950 they should have 20,000 T-34/KV-1.

Every year NAZI Would build 2000tanks most likely PZ-III/PZ-IV. Followed by VK-2000/20-30ton, So by 1950 they should have 10000 VK2028 ton.

Every year UK would build 2000 tanks mostly cruiser tanks and Infantry tanks into the 1940s followed by some universal tank, like Cromwell like tank. By 1950 they should have 10,000 Cromwell type tanks.

Every year the USA would build 2000 tanks per year , most likely Grant/LEE , followed by Sherman/M-10. By 1950 they should have 10,000 Sherman tanks.

Similar patterns would repeat on other weapons like planes,AFV & BOMBERS modeled on the above patterns using maybe the best prewar production numbers in each category, using the best prewar model and the logical follow on based on threat production.
 
- Germany gets taken over not by the Nazis, but by a run of the mill dictatorship. Rearmament is more limited but Austria still gets annexed.
- France gets communist by the early 40s (Communism always had a strong presence there, it's far from implausible)
- Italy faces more difficulties in Ethiopia and the Spanish civil war also shows that Italian equipment and doctrine was even crappier than thought.
- Franco and members of the Falange are killed in a plane accident, Spanish civil war ends earlier and the country continues to have a chaotic democracy.
- The UK continues business as usual, India becomes a Dominion by 1944.
- Japan's Taisho democracy somehow survives. Then Khalkhin Gol happens earlier, showing serious deficiencies in Japanese ground doctrine and equipment. Also Daquing oil field discovered in 1940.
- More cautious, the USSR decides not to initiate wars of aggresion but gives major assistance to Mao, causing the Communists to win the Chinese civil war by 1941. Japan, Germany and the UK get a containment pact. Italy, Spain and other minors join later.
- The US continues as usual, slowly but steadily recovering from the Great Depression.

This way, WW2 kicks in by 1950 when the USSR and France hit continental Europe, while Soviets and Chinese invade Burma and Manchuria. The first atom bomb is detonated by the Soviets against the massive Japanese fortifications in the Yalu river. UK retaliates by hitting the French submarine bases in Cherbourg. Germany, Poland, Italy and the Balkan nations fall against the communist masses, while Spain mounts a fanatical defense at the Pyrenees. The US joins by 1952...
 
Their wouldn't be any nukes - since there would be no need.

Each country would purse a more sustainable rearmament, so the Nazi would not waste billions on West Wall or Hitler's goofier 4 year plan. NO economic crises, not that there really was much of one.

Every year USSR would build 4000 tanks most likely T-32 followed by KV/T-34. By 1950 they should have 20,000 T-34/KV-1.

Every year NAZI Would build 2000tanks most likely PZ-III/PZ-IV. Followed by VK-2000/20-30ton, So by 1950 they should have 10000 VK2028 ton.

Every year UK would build 2000 tanks mostly cruiser tanks and Infantry tanks into the 1940s followed by some universal tank, like Cromwell like tank. By 1950 they should have 10,000 Cromwell type tanks.

Every year the USA would build 2000 tanks per year , most likely Grant/LEE , followed by Sherman/M-10. By 1950 they should have 10,000 Sherman tanks.

Similar patterns would repeat on other weapons like planes,AFV & BOMBERS modeled on the above patterns using maybe the best prewar production numbers in each category, using the best prewar model and the logical follow on based on threat production.
I seem to recall some quote about Italy needing at least five years to prepare for war. How would their situation have looked?
 
That was more what I was thinking also, a Red Alert 2 style scenario where Hitler never takes power, Germany remains a democracy or more likely a stock standard right wing autocracy (more bark than proverbial bite) and you have a powerful USSR have a go at Europe.
I agree. Given sufficient warning, we may see the establishment of a NATO-like alliance of all of Europe vs. USSR.

When the USSR strikes, does Japan strike SEA?
 

nbcman

Donor
I agree. Given sufficient warning, we may see the establishment of a NATO-like alliance of all of Europe vs. USSR.

When the USSR strikes, does Japan strike SEA?
Maybe Japan already attacked SEA and has been defeated by the undistracted UK, France and US. Or maybe Japan withdrew from China. Or maybe the Nationalists managed to defeat the Japanese and they unify China. Or any number of possibilities. There is no telling what occurred in Asia with a European WW2 not starting until 1950.
 
This is based on my first worlda map, Days Into Nights, albeit loosely but still counts:

Hitler gets killed during the Beer Hall Putsch (by a police bullet no doubt), the Nazi party falls apart, preventing its influence on German politics; the Weimar republic continues past 1933 but under a more Putin-esque leadership that has a more gradual rearmament campaign in response to Soviet aggression in the 1940's. The USSR makes an ally out of the Republic of China after the Soviet-Japanese border wars still happen, and makes enemies of France and Britain after the Winter War ends in a ceasefire, causing Poland and Germany to reluctantly but surely become allies in response. Then in the spring of 1950 Stalin gets a stroke yet survives and gets crazier and invades Romania after staging some border incidents, Manchuria style, causing the German-Polish Alliance to intervene. The Soviets make short work of the Poles but are stopped at the Oder river by the Germans who by then have hardware resembling that OTL's early to mid WW2 Germans; the French and British support the Germans and boycotted the USSR but the USSR responds by invading the Middle East via Turkey and Iran and later on the Republic of China, having kicked out the Japanese from Manchuria joins in on the fray by invading French Indochina and British India, having brought TTL's WWII to Asia.
 
I seem to recall some quote about Italy needing at least five years to prepare for war. How would their situation have looked?

Such an arms race would probably see Italy going broke; she was already spending more on her military that she could realistically afford IRL. Still, with all the international tension Italy can probably scurry around with minor expansion, playing one power off against another and the general desire to avoid another "Great War" by the Great Powers.

Japan also wasen't touched on... I personally think given the circumstances their war in China is going to go down a lot better internationally, if only because Japan could play the role of an eastern "Check" on Soviet expansion in the eyes of the West. (Except, ironically, perhaps Nazi Germany: they were really backing China and only pivoted to Japan fairly late).
 
Their wouldn't be any nukes - since there would be no need.

Each country would purse a more sustainable rearmament, so the Nazi would not waste billions on West Wall or Hitler's goofier 4 year plan. NO economic crises, not that there really was much of one.

Every year USSR would build 4000 tanks most likely T-32 followed by KV/T-34. By 1950 they should have 20,000 T-34/KV-1.

Every year NAZI Would build 2000tanks most likely PZ-III/PZ-IV. Followed by VK-2000/20-30ton, So by 1950 they should have 10000 VK2028 ton.

Every year UK would build 2000 tanks mostly cruiser tanks and Infantry tanks into the 1940s followed by some universal tank, like Cromwell like tank. By 1950 they should have 10,000 Cromwell type tanks.

Every year the USA would build 2000 tanks per year , most likely Grant/LEE , followed by Sherman/M-10. By 1950 they should have 10,000 Sherman tanks.

Similar patterns would repeat on other weapons like planes,AFV & BOMBERS modeled on the above patterns using maybe the best prewar production numbers in each category, using the best prewar model and the logical follow on based on threat production.

Nazi will be building no tanks, as there was a huge economic crisis. They're economy was doomed to fail miserably, mismanagement, rampant rearmament, cronyism and general incompetence meant that the Nazis were facing massive issues if they didn't start plundering their neighbors. The Nazis spent every penny on war materials to get an edge over France and Britain, if they didn't go to war they were probably fucked.

I agree. Given sufficient warning, we may see the establishment of a NATO-like alliance of all of Europe vs. USSR.

When the USSR strikes, does Japan strike SEA?

NATO lite? I guess it depends how relations are between Germany and France, if they hadn't been any significant issues and with the right eladership in place(I mean you'd hope by 1950's WWI would be water under the bridge) I reckon they could start some sort of coalition/alliance.

Japan is a wild card. Without the Fall of France, do they still invade Indochina and trigger the US embargoes? Does Japan try to take on France, Britain, The Netherlands and USA over Indonesia. Do they make overtures to the alt-Stalin to prosecute their war in Asia, hell maybe they end up fighting the USSR and being forced from Asia. An unholy Molotov-Matsuoka pact, with Japan taking Asia while the Soviets take Europe D: Could go anywhere.
 
Last edited:
Nazi will be building no tanks, as there was a huge economic crisis. They're economy was doomed to fail miserably, mismanagement, rampant rearmament, cronyism and general incompetence meant that the Nazis were facing massive issues if they didn't start plundering their neighbors. The Nazis spent every penny on war materials to get an edge over France and Britain, if they didn't go to war they were probably fucked.

.

Sounds like the kind of convoluted histories I grew up with. You need to read some more histories...preferably not from America or Britain.
 
Watching this topic with interest. With regard to nuclear weapons development, if the POD is prior to 1938, atomic fission may not be known, much less to be later weaponised. After all Fermi, in Italy, had all the evidence needed in 1934, yet he missed fission entirely. In 1938, at Kaiser Wilhelm institute, it became known almost as a fluke.

Try this time line with no nuclear weapons, bombs or dust.

Dynasoar
 
Watching this topic with interest. With regard to nuclear weapons development, if the POD is prior to 1938, atomic fission may not be known, much less to be later weaponised. After all Fermi, in Italy, had all the evidence needed in 1934, yet he missed fission entirely. In 1938, at Kaiser Wilhelm institute, it became known almost as a fluke.

Try this time line with no nuclear weapons, bombs or dust.

Dynasoar
This shows me that discovering fission was a matter of time and someone realizing that the results they were getting could only be interpreted that way. There was a lot of interest in nuclear physics and related subjects at the time, and it was basically inevitable that someone was going to observe fission sooner or later and figure out what it was. Delaying the discovery of fission past 1950 is pretty much impossible, I think.
 
Workable, et al

The Manhattan project, commandeering the best applied physics talent in the world, explored a minimum of nine uranium enrichment methods, a thorium/U233 approach and of course Pu 239 contaminated with 240. Literally endless blind alleys to explore, financed by the world's only industrial colossus. Even with the direct path to nuclear explosives stolen and presented them on a silver platter, it took the Soviet Union four (actually closer to nine since their program startup) to their first bomb. Please don't underestimate the extent of our crash program which compressed at least decades of development into four years.

Without the Manhattan project and its priorities and funding, with Peter Kapitza or Werner Heisenberg- Minimum 20 years from recognition of nuclear fission to first light.

Dynasoar
 
Sounds like the kind of convoluted histories I grew up with. You need to read some more histories...preferably not from America or Britain.

I mean I could use sources that contradict academic scholarship and even Goring himself (who questioned the feasibility of rampant deficit spending) and say the Nazi economy was functional and could last till the 50s despite the massive inefficiencies, but you know, I feel we'd both be wrong. That being said, I'm game if you can recommend contrary academics.
 
Last edited:
It seems that most of the cash crunch/financing crisis of the late 1930s, was the result of Hitler abandoning the previous plan and forcing his cobbled together "FOUR YEAR PLAN" to be ready with 100 divisions CRASH BUILT for war by 1940 [PLUS WEST WALL ETC] . Prior to this the plan - by the early to mid 1940s- was for completion of a mechanized army the size of the WW-I 1914 size Kaiser army - ----on the order of ~ 75-80 mobilized divisions plus 44 reserve brigades.

Since the Original thread is seeking 1950 war start, Hitler's four year plan clearly does not apply.
 
"Since the original thread is seeking 1950 war start" no nukes would be available to potential combatants till 1954 -assuming startup in 1938 by nations unwilling or unable to fund or populate a Manhattan project. (see post #37 Programs start at academic and industrial research levels, with some military input for 12 years till 1950, then go like Hell for four.)

Dynasoar
 
How would the Soviets and Italians have managed?
The Soviets would have been screwed .The faults of Stalin's "reforms" to the military wouldn't have been exposed in the Winter War and 10 years of promotions and training based on political loyalty would have made it a system wide problem that would be impossible to fix rapidly.
 
Top