Hitler won't declare war after Pearl Harbor

iddt3

Donor
THREE U.S. destroyers had already been torpedoed and the Rueben James sunk. The U.S. electorate was already becoming accustomed to it. Despite the fact that FDR declared each time that the U.S. destroyers were peacefully going about its business and had been viciously attacked (which was not true, they were escorting British convoys,) the electorate was not showing an overt desire to go to war against Germany. In fact, they showed less ire about the Rueben James going down than the Greer being torpedoed.

If the U.S. did not go to war against Germany, there would have been a huge preponderance of landing craft available for the Pacific. If this is so, Guadalcanal and New Guinea would have been holding actions only, while the U.S. Navy took the string of islands across the middle of the Pacific. (This is what they wanted to do, but the landing craft were earmarked for Operation Torch.) With aircraft and submarines stationed on these islands, the southern part of the Japanese "empire" would have been strangled quickly. If the State Department gets the message through to the President that Unconditional Surrender is a no-no against the Japanese - which they would have - then I think we would have seen an end to the Pacific war toward the end of 1943. No need for an invasion of Japan or possibly even the Philippines and Okinawa.

Then rearmed, trained and experienced U.S. armed forces could have turned their attention to Germany, as a suitable provocation would have surely been manufactured by then.

(I did a timeline based on this concept some time ago, including the successful invasion of Great Britain by Germany, and submitted it here. Some day it may get published.)
The unmentionable Sea Mammal!? Here?!?! You sir are brave indeed to walk upon that path.
 
As CalBear has pointed out, Hitler going to war with the US was actually the right decision at the time. Otherwise he has to conceede the war in the atlantic as lost (no second happy time) and watch as american supplies flow into the UK and USSR. At least by declaring war he could hit that flow with subs, absent a war things look even worse for germany, especially if the US is done with Japan by '43 and turns to Europe with a hardened and battle tested army and navy.
Oh, indeed yes!
 
I did a huge time-line on this a year or two ago on this forum. The highlights:

  • Hitler wasn't totally irrational, which is why he didn't declare war on the US when the US gave him ample excuse to do so in the undeclared naval war in the fall of 1941. His declaration in December 1941 was a close call. It traded off the short-term advantage of a second u-boat happy time for the long-term disadvantages of having the US as a declared enemy. The decision could easily have gone the other way, and probably would have if the Japanese hadn't been as successful as they were in their initial attacks.
  • US participation/provocations in the Atlantic would dwindle for a time in December 1941 to the middle of 1943 simply because the bulk of the US fleet would be occupied in the Pacific. That happened historically, in spite of the fact that we were at war with the Germans too. It would happen to a greater extent if Hitler didn't declare war.
  • Overall, the Allies would be considerably stronger in 1942 because the u-boats would not be able to attack US shipping in the second happy time. However, most of that strength would go to the Pacific, as the US and Britain tried to hold the Dutch East Indies and deny Japan the oil there.
  • If the US did not declare war in December 1941, they probably wouldn't until the middle of 1943 at the earliest, simply because the Japanese were capable of giving us all the fight we could handle up until that point and unless the provocation was huge and clear cut, taking on another enemy would be a tough sell.
  • The US public has historically had difficulty sustaining public support for wars for than about three continuous years if mass amounts of Americans are involved, so the window of opportunity for the Roosevelt Administration to get us involved would probably start closing temporarily sometime in 1944, especially with presidential elections going on. That would have been especially true in World War II, where a lot of troops were initially drafted with the idea that they would have been out by October 1941, but historically were still in the army when Germany surrendered. Historically, after V-E day, public pressure to get the boys home hollowed out a lot of the experienced US units and forced the army to bring in a lot of relatively new recruits to finish off the war with Japan. Going after Germany while the war with Japan was grinding to a close would have been politically difficult. Wait a few years and it might have been possible.
  • A US focused on Japan from December 1941 until mid-1943 would make for a different war on the eastern front, mainly because German actions in response to the Allied landings in North Africa drained crucial resources from the Germans in the lead-up to the German 6th army getting trapped in Stalingrad. Specifically, the Germans pulled transport planes, fighters and bombers and a couple of divisions, including one Panzer division, to North Africa in response. They also sent a number (ten I think, but would need to check) mobile divisions to occupy Vichy France. All of that would have helped a LOT at Stalingrad. We've had this argument on this board many times, but the math is pretty clear that Stalingrad would have been a much closer run thing without Operation Torch.
  • Japan would have lost power sooner in this scenario, but the Allies would have probably had to invade the home islands to end the war, which would have meant incredibly brutal fighting.
There is a lot more detail, but that's the essence of it. The US and Germans would eventually fight, but I suspect it would be in the late 1940s instead of in 1941/1942, with late 1943/very early 1944 a possibility if the US can goad the Germans into doing something foolish. After mid-to-late 1942, the Germans would try very hard to avoid giving the US an excuse to declare war, simply because the Germans already have more war than they can handle, and that was starting to dawn on them. The Germans were capable of biding their time if the logic of doing so was obvious, as they proved in the face of increasingly obvious US involvement from Sept 1939 to December 1941.
 
One thing that I think may be possible is that without a German DOW on the USA, while we still end up declaring war on Germany, we may steer the course of a Japan-first approach, which may lead to a conclusion of the Pacific Theater quicker or may even lead to the invasion of Japan, which would be a bloodbath (As the atom bomb would not yet be available).

This would, in turn, lead to a later D-Day and maybe the USSR making it all the way to the Rhine.

The USA is going to enter the war at some point and Germany is going to lose. It is a matter of when, not if, in my opinion.

But it's really hard to say.
 
Hitler refraining from declaring war on us after PH is so close to ASB that I can barely tell it apart.

The guy was a war addicted hyperviolent egomaniacal manchild.

Not declaring war of the U.S. would require him to no longer be Adolph Hitler.

What if something just before PH puts him in a coma for a few months.
The people in charge don't think the war with the USA is such a good idea.
He makes a complete recovery. IMHO no ASBs needed, or has that never happened? No possibility he would see sense?

I will admit, I got this from an AH novel.

Extra points if you can figure out which on your own. Double extra points if you've read it:)
 
Actually. I can see even more Lend Lease to the USSR if Germany are USA are not at war. Lend Lease went to Greece and Britain when USA was still neutral so why not USSR. Most Lend Lease went on Russian Flagged Ships to Vladivostok in Siberia via routes the Japanese had to respect to avoid war with the USSR. Due to shipping losses the U.S couldn't transfer as much shipping as they wanted until 43 to the Russian Flag. Without the happy time loses to subs, more could be transferred earlier.

After the November 42 defeat in Egypt the Germans would still have to commit a bunch to North Africa to hold on to Tripoli and would get nervous about what Vichy might do with the British approaching and might just occupy Vichy in the Dec 42 time frame just the same.

However, Germany would be able to keep Italy in the war at least through 43 and there would be less bombing, and less danger of invasion from the west so Germany might be able to hold the Dnieper line longer in Russia but by the endof 1944 Russia will liberate her whole country just the same.

I just don't see the Russians pushing into Germany and Hungary without the USA on board though but could occupy Poland, Rommania, Bulgaria just the same. I don't see the Russians motivated to plunge into Germany alone taking heavy casualties when some sort of compromise with the west is going to have to happen anyway. Russian isn't strong enough to get really provocative with the west in trying to take over the whole of western Europe so I see them slowing down until Americans are really committed in Europe.
 
Hitler refraining from declaring war on us after PH is so close to ASB that I can barely tell it apart.

The guy was a war addicted hyperviolent egomaniacal manchild.

Not declaring war of the U.S. would require him to no longer be Adolph Hitler.

What if something just before PH puts him in a coma for a few months.
The people in charge don't think the war with the USA is such a good idea.
He makes a complete recovery. IMHO no ASBs needed, or has that never happened? No possibility he would see sense?

I will admit, I got this from an AH novel.

Extra points if you can figure out which on your own. Double extra points if you've read it:)

Adolph Hitler is a manchild ho loved to play with Toy Soldiers, and then one day it hit him that he had a massive army of REAL Soldiers that he could play war with.

Eve nafdter he woke up he would be massivly P.O., that his subordinates failed to declare war and do it anyhow.
 
Actually. I can see even more Lend Lease to the USSR if Germany are USA are not at war. Lend Lease went to Greece and Britain when USA was still neutral so why not USSR. Most Lend Lease went on Russian Flagged Ships to Vladivostok in Siberia via routes the Japanese had to respect to avoid war with the USSR. Due to shipping losses the U.S couldn't transfer as much shipping as they wanted until 43 to the Russian Flag. Without the happy time loses to subs, more could be transferred earlier.

After the November 42 defeat in Egypt the Germans would still have to commit a bunch to North Africa to hold on to Tripoli and would get nervous about what Vichy might do with the British approaching and might just occupy Vichy in the Dec 42 time frame just the same.

However, Germany would be able to keep Italy in the war at least through 43 and there would be less bombing, and less danger of invasion from the west so Germany might be able to hold the Dnieper line longer in Russia but by the endof 1944 Russia will liberate her whole country just the same.

I just don't see the Russians pushing into Germany and Hungary without the USA on board though but could occupy Poland, Rommania, Bulgaria just the same. I don't see the Russians motivated to plunge into Germany alone taking heavy casualties when some sort of compromise with the west is going to have to happen anyway. Russian isn't strong enough to get really provocative with the west in trying to take over the whole of western Europe so I see them slowing down until Americans are really committed in Europe.

Actually all the Russians needed was for us to keep the Lend-Lease coming, and we would actually be better fixed to do that if we AREN'T fighting a two front war.
 
Top