How Long Could World War Two Last?

I don't know, but something would definitely need to happen to the Manhattan Project. As long as America can pop out nukes, WW2 couldn't be prolonged more than a few months.
 
Like Solommaxwell6 said, nukes kinda dictate everything. If there isn't any nukes, then the allies might execute Operation Downfall (aka invasion of Japan). If Japan doesn't surrender, then we might see WWII going into mid 1946.

Another possibility is a better German showing against Russia, due to a less devastating Stalingrad and/or Kursk. With a few more extra men, Germany might repulse the D-day invasions (simple weather changes can easily change this outcome). The allies try again sometime in 1945, and assuming no nukes, the war might be prolonged into early 1946

Now, if we assume both of these two things happen in the same TL, the war might (but its very close to asb) be prolonged to 1947, but its not likely.
 
1946. 1947 at the latest, if resistance in Germany was more hellacious than it already was, and just as a prelude to the Japanese resistance.
 
Of course the eaisest way to prolong WWII would be to have Patton charge head-long at the Russians? Although technically it may not be classed as "WWII"
 

General Zod

Banned
Barring a PoD in the 1930s that lets Nazi Germany develop nuclear weapons in 1945, they are crushed by American nukes in 1946. Germany could certainly wage Barbarossa in a better way and achieve a Brest Litovsk partial victory, or at least a white peace draw with the reestablishment of 1941 borders. And use the freed resources to repel any Allied conventional landing in Europe.

But they cannot escape the American nukes that are coming in 1946 at the latest. There is a little possibility that they could establish an effective MAD with the Western Allies by threatening Britain with V-2 with dirty-bomb or nerve gas warheads, and that is their only hope of survival, but surely it's not the most likely outcome.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
Barring a PoD in the 1930s that lets Nazi Germany develop nuclear weapons in 1945, they are crushed by American nukes in 1946. Germany could certainly wage Barbarossa in a better way and achieve a Brest Litovsk partial victory, or at least a white peace draw with the reestablishment of 1941 borders. And use the freed resources to repel any Allied conventional landing in Europe.

But they cannot escape the American nukes that are coming in 1946 at the latest. There is a little possibility that they could establish an effective MAD with the Western Allies by threatening Britain with V-2 with dirty-bomb or nerve gas warheads, and that is their only hope of survival, but surely it's not the most likely outcome.

It is conventional wisdom on this board that WWII cannot last beyond 1945 because of American atomic bombs. But the development of atomic weapons as IOTL is not a given- any number of PODs could delay their development for a long period of time or conceivably butterfly them away entirely.
 
It is conventional wisdom on this board that WWII cannot last beyond 1945 because of American atomic bombs. But the development of atomic weapons as IOTL is not a given- any number of PODs could delay their development for a long period of time or conceivably butterfly them away entirely.

the question is how long can you delay nukes? If MP is slower (later start, lower funding, more troubles, less scientists....) you could delay nukes for about as long as you wish. But once it is started it's bound to produce results.

Now, if as said MP is slower but still initiated ETO goes about as OTL as nukes had no impact there. PTO can be prolonged until mid-1946 but not much beyond that.

However you could have a combination of slow MP (compeltly removing it is IMO impossible) and better german performance (better Barbarosa or 1942 offensive, no Stalingrad) you could delay ETO as well. However if Gemrany is not seen as loosing the war by 1943 MP could get extra funding as Wallies would face same thing as PTO, that is long and bloody land fight with soviets feeling the presure and losses mounting. While this doesn't spell separate Soveit peace it could slow down their advance or have it more limited, not going full front assault in 1944-45 but rather focusing on Berlin axis and supportive advance to sever the link with Balkans. 1946 definatly but beyond that IMO not likely.

Of course how long will American public be willing to tolerate such war in ETO without any significant Allied progress is another matter
 
One thought is that Germany can kill various scientists instead of allowing them to flee to the United States--this might delay the US Nuclear bomb Project.

Then, after 1940, Germany and Japan together manage to defeat the Soviet Union. The United States does not enter this war due to Axis Attacks, but FDR gets the US involved in a shooting war by 1943. Its too late to save the Soviet Union, however, which is kicked behind the Urals.

Meanwhile, the IJN deals a humilating blow to the US Blue Water Navy as it steams for Manilla.

With Germany now able to send the forces on the Eastern Front to other portions of its territory and Japan now fueled with Sakhalin's Oil, both nations hold on until nuclear weapons make them litterally unable to fight on. This is 1949, and the United States has detonated hundreds of nuclear weapons against Germany and Japan. The Final Offensives--backed by the heavy use of nuclear weapons against tactical targets--can not fail, but it can be a agonizingly slow pace when radioactive fallout is concerned as a factor.

The war thus ends in 1951, as Germany's Eastern Redoubt is destroyed.

But this war has become Nuclear Hell.
 
Even if the Manhatten Project falls through or if the Germans still perform better on the Eastern Front, I think the end result is still an Allied victory. None of the Axis members had the resources for a long-term war (which was a big reason why some of them took the actions they did), so as long as the Allies could keep outproducing them, the Axis are guaranteed to lose.
 

General Zod

Banned
Even if the Manhatten Project falls through or if the Germans still perform better on the Eastern Front, I think the end result is still an Allied victory. None of the Axis members had the resources for a long-term war (which was a big reason why some of them took the actions they did), so as long as the Allies could keep outproducing them, the Axis are guaranteed to lose.

Wrong, as much as it involves a Barbarossa-successful Germany. A Nazi Germany empire that controls all of continental Europe and the Brest-Litovsk portions of the USSR, if not all of European Russia, has the resources necessary to keep up the production race with Britain + the USA, at least enough to counter any conventional major landing attempt on the continent and build an effective air defense system. If Germany has vanquished the USSR, the Western Allies NEED the nukes to win (at least with any decent reasonable expectation of success and without contemplating casualty rates that would make Operation Downfall look like a walk in the park amid cheering crowds).
 
Last edited:
In response to people saying that US nukes automatically end the war, is there any POD (or series of PODs) that gives Germany air dominance over Germany with a Ta-183 derived interceptor with a service ceiling of 50,000 feet by August 1945?
 

General Zod

Banned
In response to people saying that US nukes automatically end the war, is there any POD (or series of PODs) that gives Germany air dominance over Germany with a Ta-183 derived interceptor with a service ceiling of 50,000 feet by August 1945?

This may be a possibility, but to be an effective counter against nukes, an air defense systems quickly grows to need be unrealistically airtight, as the other side's nuclear arsenal builds up. The only effective defense is MAD deterrent. If the Germans develop a V-2 arsenal with dirty bomb and/or nerve gas warhead by early 1945, they may have an effective one as they take Britain hostage.
 
Germany takes over Britain, Japan kills the Chiang Kai-shek and Mao Zedong so the the Chinese resistance movement collapses, and the two nations work together to take down the USSR.

The U.S., Canada, Australia, and New Zealand are left to battle the Axis.

That should take a while.
 
Last edited:
There may be an earlier version of the Korean War (an earlier Chinese Revolution, supported by the Japanese, perhaps) if the war drags on into the late 40's.

At any rate, the pacific war could become a hellish scenario for American troops at that point.
 
Top