Hitler loses the war in 1942

As much as I enjoy a good Naziwank (sarcasm!), I think maybe we should try something less staid. So: input requested. Here's some stuff to consider.

1) Poland, Denmark, Norway fall as OTL

2) Original, non-Manstein plans for the invasion of France kept and adhered to. France manages to halt the initial offensive, though losing all of Belgium and meaty chunks of her northeast. A generally similar penetration to, say, January 1915. Mussolini decides to take his time before declaring for Hitler.

3) The Germans marshal their forces and make a final, concerted, and costly push in the fall, taking Paris in October. But it's a grind. Hitler's war machine - and Germany's economy - is nearly broken in the process, and will never fully recover. The French Army and government are harried in their retreat to Algeria, but survive and begin the process of fighting broken-backed. A plant in Georgia starts producing Somua-licensed tanks, and the new African troops France is raising will be outfitted with American weapons.

4) It is now January 1941. Mussolini, feeling that with France "out of the war", Germany is bound to win, jumps in. The war in the Mediterranean commences with the Italians in Libya being pinched in from the east and west by Britain and France. The first few detachments of the Afrika Korps, including Rommel, arrive just in time to be destroyed/captured in the defence of Tripoli. Libya falls.

---

Right, this is as far as I've gotten, which seems far enough for you gents to shred it apart. :) Where to go from here? Stalin's sitting on the sidelines waiting to pounce.
 
[Shameless Plug]https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=163709[/shameless Plug];)

Stalin would strike once he sees the Germans are likely going to be held indefinitely. Mussolini is a wild card he could just as easily jump on Greece or Yugoslavia, if France is fight bitterly and hasnt collapsed the way it did OTL he might be more wary.

Even if he isnt then the French Alpine forces simply grind the Italian Army to pulp the way they did OTL. French colonial troops can actually do something too forcing Italy to fight on two fronts in Africa, also the French Navy can link up with the Royal Navy and close the Med to Italian shipping much sooner.
 

Stalker

Banned
Stalin will certainly adhere to his doctrine. 'Let those imperialists weaken eah other in their fighting and then, when time is right, the Red Army will strike to bring Communist liberation to the opressed nations of Europe. 1942 is about the time we actially planned something like that.
But even then the Red Army even with some of its military equipment more advanced at that time but using its obsolete strategies and backwards in terms of means of communications is going to pay a terrible butcher bill in such an offensive.
The Russian Board of Military History a few years ago carried out a simulation game named "The offensive of Fuckendorf" and the conclusion after the game was very unsatisfactory for the Red Army v. 1941 - not to say more. Red Army v. 1942 would be far better equipped but all the same - same obsolete tactics and strategies, dammit. And the price the Germans will ask for teaching lessons of modern warfare is going to be very high. And changes are not going to be introduced aerlier than 1943.
There is going to be series of frontal assaults against German strongholds in Poland and Slovakia, Russian more or less successful advance in Romania with the spearpoint directed towards Ploesti and its oil fields but I afraid that maximum success in Poland is frontline on Vistula with the Soviets occupying Praga and Wehrmacht in Warsaw proper. There may be German counteroffensives stopping Red Army and even beating it in some places but lacking reserves to strike it stronger. The German general offensive against the Russians may start in spring 1943 but they will have no total domination in the air and that differs the situation from OTL 1941.
So, Hitler is not likely to loose the war in 1942.
 
So, Hitler is not likely to loose the war in 1942.

Agreed. I cannot see how, even with the opening gambit setup, that Germany can lose by 1942. At the start of 1941 you have her dominating continental Europe and France relegated to North Africa. Italy is in the Axis.

Short of the rest of Europe (and I mean everyone) now DOWing Germany, she can't be beat by 1942, though she is going to lose.
 
Not quite sure - has all of France fallen? The government seemed to flee direct from Paris to Algiers without going to Bordeaux?

If it has, then I can certainly see knocking out Italy in concert with the British being the next big idea, as with your fall of Tripoli and death of Rommel. The question for me is what would Mussolini do about it - he may well feel he can take on what remains of France and win, and does he have an intact fleet at this point?

I'm a bit confused by the thread title - are we pre-assuming the Germans are about to collapse?

Stalin IMHO won't attack Germany. He doesn't want Germany. He wants to extend his sphere of influence, and he wants to swallow up old Tsarist Russia

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
BW749 and I had a scenario where the Germans lose in 1942 but it was more L'Grand Armee style with Army Group Centre being destroyed in 1941 leading to Operation Sledgehammer going ahead and Franco joining the war on the allied side.
 
Sorry, I should have been more clear (this is what I get for posting, sleepily, at 2 am). I'm trying to construct a scenario where Germany loses the war relatively rapidly (1942 was pretty arbitrary), while still retaining the original 1939 start. Although I imagine a war over the Czech crisis would probably be more likely to lead to that sort of outcome.

I do think that people underrate just how brittle the Nazi war machine was in 40-41, and how the invasion of France was even more an economic gamble than a military one.

Grey Wolf: In my mind, the French wouldn't have been able to hold in the south of France, lovely as that would have been - the preponderance of forces just doesn't work. The best you can hope for is a retreat instead of a rout.

I always thought of Stalin as an opportunist. He'd want a 'seat at the peace table', if only to gobble up the rest of Poland and have his gains in Finland recognized. Granted, he'd wait until the war was (in his mind) decided to go for it..
 
Not too hard

Have the French 7th Army adhere to the original defense plan and be in general reserve. The Ardennes plan goes ahead, but the counterattack to cut the panzers off is conducted by 8 divisions not one. Panzergruppe Kleist is cut off and destroyed by the counterattack, and German offensive capability is pretty much shot, and their threadbare economy cannot make good the losses.

The French and British hold in the northeast, and gradually wrest air superiority from the Germans in a war of attrition that their superior production ensures they will win. The Italians never come in to the war, and over the Winter of 1940, the British build up to 30-40 divisions in France, and the allies have absorbed all the lessons of the previous year.

1941 is german stomping time. Victory by 1942.
 
Sorry, I should have been more clear (this is what I get for posting, sleepily, at 2 am). I'm trying to construct a scenario where Germany loses the war relatively rapidly (1942 was pretty arbitrary), while still retaining the original 1939 start. Although I imagine a war over the Czech crisis would probably be more likely to lead to that sort of outcome.

I do think that people underrate just how brittle the Nazi war machine was in 40-41, and how the invasion of France was even more an economic gamble than a military one.

Grey Wolf: In my mind, the French wouldn't have been able to hold in the south of France, lovely as that would have been - the preponderance of forces just doesn't work. The best you can hope for is a retreat instead of a rout.

I always thought of Stalin as an opportunist. He'd want a 'seat at the peace table', if only to gobble up the rest of Poland and have his gains in Finland recognized. Granted, he'd wait until the war was (in his mind) decided to go for it..

OK no problem, just that the French government's sojourn in Bordeaux was quite crucial in OTL - its when Reynard was battling Petain, when Churchill and quite a bit of his cabinet were flying out to confer with the French leadership, and when the under-the-table power struggle between the French who wanted to fight on and those who wanted to end it all was being played out.

I suppose its possible for the Germans to make Bordeaux and untenable option, maybe divert forces that historically went South or something and have them swing West. The government might then fall back on Marseilles, and when the power struggle occurs, its easier for those who want to continue the war to hop on board a ship and head for Algiers since they are already sitting at the end of the Algiers-Marseilles route.

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Grey Wolf: In my mind, the French wouldn't have been able to hold in the south of France, lovely as that would have been - the preponderance of forces just doesn't work. The best you can hope for is a retreat instead of a rout

I'd agree. The front would probably be too wide for the battered French divisions (holding it with the intact 1939 Army would already be a challenge), and the geography would work against them.

Delaying the German advance by launching a series of key counter-offensives could throw the Reich's timetables off by some weeks, though. Gamelin planned to separate the German panzers from their accompanying infantry and supply trains, and indeed if France managed to do that you could end up with German armored spearheads having to retreat before they run out of gas and ammunition, or find themselves caught in a pincer.

That would give heart to the "bellicists" in Reynaud's Cabinet as well as give him time to prepare an orderly evacuation of French units and other vital assets.
 
I'd agree. The front would probably be too wide for the battered French divisions (holding it with the intact 1939 Army would already be a challenge), and the geography would work against them.

Delaying the German advance by launching a series of key counter-offensives could throw the Reich's timetables off by some weeks, though. Gamelin planned to separate the German panzers from their accompanying infantry and supply trains, and indeed if France managed to do that you could end up with German armored spearheads having to retreat before they run out of gas and ammunition, or find themselves caught in a pincer.

That would give heart to the "bellicists" in Reynaud's Cabinet as well as give him time to prepare an orderly evacuation of French units and other vital assets.

I knew somebody would know more about it than me - AND be able to spell Reynaud's name right! I always know I get it wrong but can never remember HOW I get it wrong...

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
I knew somebody would know more about it than me - AND be able to spell Reynaud's name right! I always know I get it wrong but can never remember HOW I get it wrong...

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

Rainault, Raynault, Reynaud, Reynault, Reynaud, there are some many variants with French names that you can never be sure until you've double-checked. Twice. And even then... :D
 
BW749 and I had a scenario where the Germans lose in 1942 but it was more L'Grand Armee style with Army Group Centre being destroyed in 1941 leading to Operation Sledgehammer going ahead and Franco joining the war on the allied side.

Franco joining the Allies would certaintly make it easier for the South of France to be held, and the Spanish Army would be appreciated in the next counter-offensive. I'm not entirely sure what would make Franco decide to put in with the Allies instead of staying neutral however. Maybe one of Franco's surviving siblings is accidentally killed by a German attack while they're in Britain or France for insert-reason-here (his brother was a diplomat, maybe he is in France offering to be a go between to start peace talks and is killed in a bombing raid). In OTL Franco was heavily put off by Hitler's attempts to manipulate Christianity, if Hitler tries to force the Pope through threats or bribes to make statements or papal decrees that are obviously along NAZI party lines this could push Franco into the Allied camp.

The third possibility I came up with is that one night while he sleeps he has a vision in which the Virgin Mary and Saint James, son of Zebedee (Patron Saint of Spain) come to him and convince him that he must declare for the allied cause, although that kinda goes into ASB terratory.
 
IIRC Andorra had seen a lot of French refugees. If the Germans pursue them they are in a principality under joint Franco-Spanish hegemony.... I very very vaguely recall something about Spanish worries on this front

Or if the Nazis bungled the kidnap attempt on the Duke of Windsor on his visit to a farm in Spain and ended up killing him, or killing Spaniards, I think Franco would be a bit pissed off

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Not too hard
Have the French 7th Army adhere to the original defense plan and be in general reserve. The Ardennes plan goes ahead, but the counterattack to cut the panzers off is conducted by 8 divisions not one. Panzergruppe Kleist is cut off and destroyed by the counterattack, and German offensive capability is pretty much shot, and their threadbare economy cannot make good the losses.

The French and British hold in the northeast, and gradually wrest air superiority from the Germans in a war of attrition that their superior production ensures they will win. The Italians never come in to the war, and over the Winter of 1940, the British build up to 30-40 divisions in France, and the allies have absorbed all the lessons of the previous year.

1941 is german stomping time. Victory by 1942.

I agree with this scenario. All you need is for the geriatric generals in France to be kicked out around 1938 by an aggressive defense minister backed by an aggressive prime minister. Better tank doctrine and tank training to be implemented by competent generals. Radios put inside tanks. The Brits to start seriously building up their fighter squadrons a year earlier than OTL, and armed with cannon. Also, some more British tanks built earlier, with effective doctrine for their use. Alan Brooke instead of Gort leading the expeditionary force.

If the German attack is beaten off, Italy does not enter on Germany's side. The Allies have access to all the oil they need from the Middle East and have air cover all the way across the Med and up the French coast to help the combined Brit and French navies protect convoys, plus the Germans will not have subs along the French coast.

If Stalin has any sense, he makes threatening noises and forces the Germans to keep a lot of their troops and tanks in the east as a covering force, and gradually cuts off their supplies. Then when the Soviets are ready, they strike in concert with the French and British in the spring or summer of 1942. They'll make a lot of mistakes at first (because Stalin will be second-guessing Zhukov) and have to fix some flaws in the T-34, and will suffer major air losses, but it won't be at all like OTL.

The only question is, how fast could the Germans gear up for total war, esp. with the Soviets cutting off their supplies and the western Allies barring their way at sea and on land. But let's have Speer die in a plane crash, and some moron runs the economy. The Germans never get to the level of total war (which they were very, very slow to do in OTL) but the Brits and the Soviets get to total mobe as in OTL and the French get pretty much there.

One key factor would be trucks, armored carriers and mobile anti-tank guns to give the Brits and French more mobility than the horse-bound Germans. This is where the Americans come in. How fast can they get 10,000 trucks to the Allies?

As to the battle of the Atlantic, it will still be a problem because the Germans will control Norway and Denmark and probably also Belgium and the Netherlands--but German productivity without an "empire" will be less (hence less U-boat production), the navies facing them will be greater, and even insofar as the U-boats break out into the Atlantic the Brits and the French will have anti-sub air and sea bases in Morocco and West Africa, and under the circumstances Portugal may be willing to allow Allied bases in the Azores early on.

This war may be won probably without direct U.S. intervention, although they will be the arsenal of the West. A strong Britain and France may cause the Japanese to give up on their plan for easy conquest, so no Pearl Harbor. If the Soviets don't have to go to war until 1942 but prepare for it assiduously, and if the Germans are pinned down in the West, the Soviets won't need Lend Lease as much as in OTL. Most useful to them will be trucks and jeeps. They will produce the world's best tank on their own, and will rapidly catch up with the Germans in the quality of warplanes. Remember, in this timeline they won't have to pack up their factories and retreat to the Urals because the Germans, even if they have superior tactics and battle strategy as first, will not get anywhere near as deep into Soviet territory as in OTL.
 
Last edited:
Guys

The problem I see with the Germans getting mauled and losing a sizeable chunk of their armour in France in 1940 is that I rather doubt they would then last until 42. The wheels will start coming off very quickly, both militarily and economically, while the concerns of many of the German army & population about the situation could lead to unrest.

It might well be that Stalin will rather give further subtle support to the Nazis as he wants the war to last as long as possible. Also under the circumstances he might be able to squeeze some concessions out of the Nazis, either territorial or otherwise.

The only other way I could see the war ending in 42, with a wartime POD is possibly that barbarossa totally falls apart. Say the Germans have some further early successes and actually reach Moscow where their drawn into bitter street fighting. Basically Stalingrad on a much larger scale. Given that and the winter losses you might see the virtual destruction of Army Group Centre and the collapse of the entire German position in the east. However that degree of turn around may be too extreme.

Steve
 
I think I'll see if I can't flesh out Deckhand's scenario, though I'm not an expert on the military side of things. Mostly, I'm very intrigued by a post-war politics where France has a full seat at the victory table and the US hardly any at all. An isolationist's dream, I guess. :rolleyes:

Of course, we haven't discussed Japan yet. The Pacific War may yet happen, drawing the US in, but surely Hitler wouldn't declare war with French tanks in Bavaria or wherever.
 
Top