How COULD Nazi Germany win WWII?

[Wozza]

Yes... but when the Allies attacked Ploiesti, it just got into their reach, i.e. they had to fly over German-controlled territory. The Germans would have the advantage that the Turks and / or Persians probably wouldn't fight back, and since Russia doesn't expect an attack, they're screwed.

And about the Allies giving Russia the oil: I don't know when Russia started to get Lend-Lease help... did this happen in OTL before Hitler declared war on the US? I don't know how much gas the Red Army will need for their tanks... could be millions and millions of barrels...

The Russians will most definitely be petrified of an attack. German control of the MidEast loses Russia its main hold over Germany. The Russians will most definitely expect an attack, it is what they are preparing for.
The USSR's oil needs will be substantial, but US supply was massive, the US was the main oil produced at this time. Venezuelan production was also relatively substantial.
THe Soviet army was also still more horse than internal combustion engine driven
Ploesti and the Kirkuk fields are also in range of the Soviets, if the British have left anything of the Kirkuk fields.

 

[Karlos]

Questions about a 1942 Barbarrossa:
-Would Hitler declare war to the USA in dec. 1941,- provided Japans attacks as in OTL-, with the soviet matter still undecided? If so, the americans have 6 months to do something that could alter german plans on the USSR.
-The USA can provide oil to the soviets if they lose Baku. But in OTL the main problem was shipping, not production. This oil will be taking the place of ammo, trucks, steel or food.
-The big one, is, could Germany force peace with UK before Barbarrosa? If so, waiting a year is defintely better for Hitler. IMHO, the germans could have obtained air superiority over the USSR and eventually defeated them if they had no more enemies.
Anyway it seems a plausible Axis wins scenario. In OTL december 1941, with the soviets not defeated, the UK and USA in the war, Hitler had no way of winning.

 

[Bulgaroktonos]

In that case, the question becomes simple - how will Nazi Germany defeat the USSR ?

Grey Wolf

I agree, a war between Nazi Germany and the USSR is inevitable. Any discusion otherwise is foolish and ignorant of prevaling trends. As I said, a German victory is not predicated solely upon German planning, but simply better German luck. Let us say a few of Lieb's Divisions are capable of breaching the line around Novogorod in November and cutting the lines across Lake Ladoga? Or perhaps Paulus is able to reinforce the few companies the reached within 100 yrds of the Volga crossings and put them under heavy fire.........

In truth, the Eastern Front came down to what was as much sheer luck as actual skill......

Both sides possessed some of the most gifted individuals in the game, yet neiher was consistently capable of outright victory......Mars and Saturn prove that point all on their own.......

 

[Tony Williams]

Almost impossible, since Britain had declared war on Japan already three days before, so we'd have a three-sided war??? (US, UK, SU vs. Germany vs. Japan)

If Germany declared war on Japan rather than the USA, what excuse would Roosevelt have for entering the war against Germany? Before Hitler declared war on the USA there was no consensus in the USA that they should be fighting Germany.

It would have caused great confusion and dismay among the British and pro-British Americans. You would have the UK and USSR v. Germany, and the USA and UK v. Japan.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

 

[Wozza]

If Germany declared war on Japan rather than the USA, what excuse would Roosevelt have for entering the war against Germany? Before Hitler declared war on the USA there was no consensus in the USA that they should be fighting Germany.

It would have caused great confusion and dismay among the British and pro-British Americans. You would have the UK and USSR v. Germany, and the USA and UK v. Japan.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

The problem with this is that it means Hitler has broken every treaty he has ever signed - not just most of them!
If I were Roosevelt I would point out Hitler's tendency to attack those he has just made deals with

Britain - 1935 Naval Agreement
Poland- Non-aggression pact
USRR - Non-aggression pact
Japan - Anti-comintern pact AND the Axis treaty

"When the wolf offers you a chop it is because he is fattening you up because you are the next meal..."
Or words to that effect.

 

[Tony Williams]

The problem with this is that it means Hitler has broken every treaty he has ever signed - not just most of them!

Well, then he would merely be acting consistently!

Hitler only ever saw treaties as strategems to obtain a temporary advantage.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

 

[Wozza]

Well, then he would merely be acting consistently!

Hitler only ever saw treaties as strategems to obtain a temporary advantage.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

The point is that this would be extremely transparent. In some ways it would make Hitler look even more dangerous, simply as it is so wierd.
Not sure what the Japanese would do!
Invade Russia so Hitler changes his mind?
Make peace with the US?
Panic?

 

[DMA]

The point is that this would be extremely transparent. In some ways it would make Hitler look even more dangerous, simply as it is so wierd.
Not sure what the Japanese would do!
Invade Russia so Hitler changes his mind?
Make peace with the US?
Panic?

The Japanese should make peace with the USA before war has even begun.

 

[Wozza]

The Japanese should make peace with the USA before war has even begun.

Usually one would think so.
The Japanese start the war in a way that precludes that option.

 

[DMA]

Usually one would think so.
The Japanese start the war in a way that precludes that option.

Then they don't attack in the first place

 

[Wozza]

Then they don't attack in the first place

Is not the whole point that they have no idea what Hitler is about to do?
In truth I think this option is only clear with hindsight,
Hitler has just destroyed any chance of a distraction of the USSR at a time when his army is in desperate straits.
He has just provided a massive incentive for Japan to make peace, thus bringing the USA against him faster.
I think this only works in hindsight.

 

[Karlos]

I don't think FDR could have declared war on Germany. It was his most evident desire to do so, but he did not even after Pearl Harbor. He had to wait even then for a german DoW. If he didn't is just because he couldn't.

 

[DMA]

Is not the whole point that they have no idea what Hitler is about to do?
In truth I think this option is only clear with hindsight,
Hitler has just destroyed any chance of a distraction of the USSR at a time when his army is in desperate straits.
He has just provided a massive incentive for Japan to make peace, thus bringing the USA against him faster.
I think this only works in hindsight.

Yet Japanese like Admiral Yamamoto knew too well what would happen if Japan took on the USA. That isn't thinking with hindsight. That's clearly someone, a very important someone mind you, who clearly understood the situation at the time in question.

And this is despite the fact that Hitler couldn't have cared less for his so-call allies the Japanese. They weren't even European, let alone remotely related to Germans (& all that superior race bullshit).

In fact, if the Japanese worry about honour, they should have known well & truly not to have anything to do with Hitler. And it wasn't any great secret, by 1941, that Hitler didn't honour his treaties.

 

[DMA]

I don't think FDR could have declared war on Germany. It was his most evident desire to do so, but he did not even after Pearl Harbor. He had to wait even then for a german DoW. If he didn't is just because he couldn't.

Nevertheless the situation could have changed. If more American flaged merchantmen had been sunk in the Atlantic by U-Boats, or added to this a USN vessel or two convoying Allied ships, then don't be surprised if FDR, in response to a public outcry, demanded Congress to declare war on Germany sometime in 1942.

 

[Wozza]

Yet Japanese like Admiral Yamamoto knew too well what would happen if Japan took on the USA. That isn't thinking with hindsight. That's clearly someone, a very important someone mind you, who clearly understood the situation at the time in question.

And this is despite the fact that Hitler couldn't have cared less for his so-call allies the Japanese. They weren't even European, let alone remotely related to Germans (& all that superior race bullshit).

In fact, if the Japanese worry about honour, they should have known well & truly not to have anything to do with Hitler. And it wasn't any great secret, by 1941, that Hitler didn't honour his treaties.

The Japanese didn't. It is from Hitler's viewpoint I was thinking

 

[Tony Williams]

He has just provided a massive incentive for Japan to make peace, thus bringing the USA against him faster.
I think this only works in hindsight.

Well yes, hindsight is what this thread (and forum) is all about!

I don't think that the Japanese took any notice of what Hitler might do when preparing their war plans.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

 

[Wozza]

Well yes, hindsight is what this thread (and forum) is all about!

I don't think that the Japanese took any notice of what Hitler might do when preparing their war plans.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

Tony
I must disagree with you on a philosphical level. Hindsight is a form of ASB - it means someone knowing the future, which does not happen.

AH should be true Rankean history, illustrating the real choices available to people and how they could respond to them.

Hitler was thinking of the battle of Moscow, and the role Japanese intervention could play, not things he did not know about 3 years down the line.

 

[Max Sinister]

It would be only logical that the Russians would put some fighters around Baku and be especially wary once the Germans control Syria and Iraq. However, the people on top don't always think logical, and in this case, Stalin had a weakness for Hitler, trusting him despite Hitler's ideology and behavior. Even in OTL he refused to believe that Germany was planning an attack despite 50 or so warnings. In TTL, it could be too late.

 

[luakel]

Delaying Barbarossa is extremely risky, the Russians can only get stronger and better prepared, whereas the Germans are at their peak in 1941. These allies are useful but pretty low value.

I wouldn't say that the Germans are at their peak in 1942. In fact, if they wait a year, and weaken the Allies further, they will likely be in an evn stronger postition. Also, Stalin will probably have another purge, seeing how often he was doing them back then, to weaken the Red Army even more....

 

[Forum Lurker]

Also, I think that an offensive against Russia is the very worst thing Hitler can do, even if war with Russia is truly inevitable. One of Russia's greatest strengths is the amount of ground it can afford to give away to bleed its enemies; if the war is held in Poland instead of the middle of Russian territory, German supply lines are much shorter and more secure, there will be no disastrous pocketing, and casualties will overall be much lower.