Hitler Chooses Wisdom

I said from the beginning I wouldn't have all the Details right. My basic point was, how would it be bad for Germany to sit back and prepare more for the war for another 4 years? I don't see how this works to their disadvantage. Grrr.......screw it.

The British and French economies combined are larger than the German, which means Germany has to spend more to keep up, meaning that it will grow more slowly eroding its capacity into the medium-term.

Also Germany is at constant risk of having to fight Britain and France and Czechs/Poles or, if things get serious, the USSR, which creates problems. This is why war over Munich would have been a real problem.

The flip side is that Germany has no political problem maintaining the pace of rearmament whilst Britain and France do.
 
The British and French economies combined are larger than the German, which means Germany has to spend more to keep up, meaning that it will grow more slowly eroding its capacity into the medium-term.

Also Germany is at constant risk of having to fight Britain and France and Czechs/Poles or, if things get serious, the USSR, which creates problems. This is why war over Munich would have been a real problem.

The flip side is that Germany has no political problem maintaining the pace of rearmament whilst Britain and France do.

So the smartest thing might have been for Germany to continue with rearmament for a longer period-say 10 years after Munich-and let the British and the French efforts peter out for lack of enthusiasm from the electorate?
 
If:
there's anybody in the upper echelons of Nazi Germany with both the balls to shout at Hitler, telling him he's doing it all wrong, and the brains to realise this - may be difficult, if he had brains, he'd probably shut up - while being respected enough so that he's not removed...

...then i think the 'Epiphany' may, possibly be a good one.


If this could happen in '37 or '38, and they can reign in spending to prevent the economy overheating, then we can have a slower build up.

This slower build up could both be more sustainable in the long term, and cause less alarm to France, Britain, Poland, Czechoslavakia, the USSR, and anybody else you care to mention.


So, IMVHO, of course, if we have Hitler receive a dressing down, or a sharp knock on the head, then we have a chance.

The main problem is that the USSR will be much stronger in '43 than it was in '41.

Even if the Germans still have surprise on their side, its going to be a very hard, bloody fight. Not saying that a battle hardened wermacht with no other fronts couldn't do it, but its going to be a long, very nasty struggle
 
If:
there's anybody in the upper echelons of Nazi Germany with both the balls to shout at Hitler, telling him he's doing it all wrong, and the brains to realise this - may be difficult, if he had brains, he'd probably shut up - while being respected enough so that he's not removed...

...then i think the 'Epiphany' may, possibly be a good one.


If this could happen in '37 or '38, and they can reign in spending to prevent the economy overheating, then we can have a slower build up.

This slower build up could both be more sustainable in the long term, and cause less alarm to France, Britain, Poland, Czechoslavakia, the USSR, and anybody else you care to mention.


So, IMVHO, of course, if we have Hitler receive a dressing down, or a sharp knock on the head, then we have a chance.

The main problem is that the USSR will be much stronger in '43 than it was in '41.

Even if the Germans still have surprise on their side, its going to be a very hard, bloody fight. Not saying that a battle hardened wermacht with no other fronts couldn't do it, but its going to be a long, very nasty struggle

Ok, see, this is what I was hoping for. A reasonable critique of where the faults and the strengths in my ATL are, so that I can improve it. Thanks, Geordie!:D Oh, and Wozza, you provided some good thinking points too :)
 
HOW? You're saying the Brits and the French focused more on rearmament than Hitler? I find that hard to believe...and the British and the French had that much of an industrial edge over Germany? When did this happen?

One word: imports. Germany had to import strategic materials to sustain it's armament programs. and with economy on quasi-war footing they had nothing interesting to export. This naturally led to trade imbalance and severe cutting. UK and France didn't face that problem.

Plus there is a question of financing rearmament. UK and France had more money, had better trade balance and could, if necessary, borrow more. More money = more guns.

Plus, as I said, greater industrial base and access to US weapons.
 
Ok, here's another thinker. If Hitler is smart enough to decline a rapid push for war (which really was ALL HIM), would there even be a war in the first place? If Hitler is content with Austria and Sudentenland, there need be no war in Europe at all, which means that the UK and France simply accept a new normalcy.

Hitler needs a personality rewrite, at a minimum. And, frankly, Hitler might well decide to take Czechloslovkia and be done with it--he has Czech Lands for Living Space at this point. Poland is a good next choice, but Germany has gone as far as it can without a war. Perhaps it will be the Soviets that ultimately break the balance.

And that would be interesting--Germany makes the R-M pact with Stalin, but doesn't act militarily, instead using the arrangement to the political detriment of the Western Powers. Could make an interesting Cold War.
 
Ok, here's another thinker. If Hitler is smart enough to decline a rapid push for war (which really was ALL HIM), would there even be a war in the first place? If Hitler is content with Austria and Sudentenland, there need be no war in Europe at all, which means that the UK and France simply accept a new normalcy.

Hitler needs a personality rewrite, at a minimum. And, frankly, Hitler might well decide to take Czechloslovkia and be done with it--he has Czech Lands for Living Space at this point. Poland is a good next choice, but Germany has gone as far as it can without a war. Perhaps it will be the Soviets that ultimately break the balance.

And that would be interesting--Germany makes the R-M pact with Stalin, but doesn't act militarily, instead using the arrangement to the political detriment of the Western Powers. Could make an interesting Cold War.

Neato. Or another thought-a Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact, with the secret Poland partition....but then Hitler just sits back and rearms at a more sedate pace to help the economy, and...waits. For one, two, three years. Finally, Stalin, tired of waiting on Hitler's presumed Polish invasion to happen, goes ahead and attacks-at which point, Hitler, "appalled" at the invasion, abbrogates the pact and declares war, with quiet support from the British and French.
 
Neato. Or another thought-a Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact, with the secret Poland partition....but then Hitler just sits back and rearms at a more sedate pace to help the economy, and...waits. For one, two, three years. Finally, Stalin, tired of waiting on Hitler's presumed Polish invasion to happen, goes ahead and attacks-at which point, Hitler, "appalled" at the invasion, abbrogates the pact and declares war, with quiet support from the British and French.


Were this scenario (Stalin first) to occur, Hitler may not declare war on the USSR, instead maching into his allotted share to 'liberate' it from communism :eek:
 
Top