How The Nazis Could Have Won World War 2?

Lets say Hitler dies before 1939 and somehow that evil genius Reinhard Heydrich becomes leader. How could have Heydrich waged the war differently in order to ensure Nazi victory?
 
Lets say Hitler dies before 1939 and somehow that evil genius Reinhard Heydrich becomes leader. How could have Heydrich waged the war differently in order to ensure Nazi victory?

Not invading France and the Soviet Union and cut off all relations with Japan....that will leave a fucked up Poland, but thats all negotiable.
 
Not invading France and the Soviet Union and cut off all relations with Japan....that will leave a fucked up Poland, but thats all negotiable.

Except that Poland does not provide Germany the resources and cash it needs to kept its economy functioning. Especially if France and Britain are blockading it. This leaves Germany dependent on the Soviet Union for grain and oil imports. The long run result is that the Soviet Union will be able to subjugate and control Germany and Eastern Europe through diplomatic and economic pressure.
 
Not invading France and the Soviet Union and cut off all relations with Japan....that will leave a fucked up Poland, but thats all negotiable.

That would be workable.

At that point German included Germany, half of Poland, Checkoslovokia, and Austria.

I would call that a win.
 
Except that Poland does not provide Germany the resources and cash it needs to kept its economy functioning. Especially if France and Britain are blockading it. This leaves Germany dependent on the Soviet Union for grain and oil imports. The long run result is that the Soviet Union will be able to subjugate and control Germany and Eastern Europe through diplomatic and economic pressure.

Which is pretty much the point. Even if they win, they dont win.
 
Until the Anglo-French and/or Soviets invade...

Really, the only way Germany can win in the long term is if the British or French blunder to the extent that they bring the Soviets into the war on the side of the Axis.

You get someone in there OTHER THAN HITLER, and you can have a negotiated peace, that can last.

France in not going to want to invade Germany.

The Sovs will want to, but will they?

They might be afraid that the West will come in on the side of the Germans.

Or wait till the war has been going on for a while and then jump in to take them both out.

ANd the longer it goes on, the stronger the Soviets look, the more reasonable such fears would be.


I am assuming no Holocaust in this scenario, without Hitler.
 
What about if Hitler ordered the destruction of the British Army at Dunkirk, then Churchill was forced to resign and the new British PM made peace with Germany.
 
France in not going to want to invade Germany.

The French plan was to economically blockade Germany until an invasion 1941, when French forces would be numerically superior to the Germans. The French were overly cautious, but time is on their side if Hitler chose to play the waiting game.
 
What about if Hitler ordered the destruction of the British Army at Dunkirk, then Churchill was forced to resign and the new British PM made peace with Germany.
Except that wasn't possible.

Rundstedt's forces had outran their supply lines, so they were essentially on the breaking point when they reached Dunkirk. Attacking fortified Anglo-French forces at Dunkirk, which is set up on ground perfect for defensive forces, would have been suicidal.

Even if, by some luck, the forces get the supplies they need, they wouldn't have gotten very far before getting ground up by the British and the French, all whilst the evacuation continues.

And, let us say the Germans do, by some odd luck, get their supplies and break the British and French army. The British propaganda tune changes from "We brought our boys back" to "Our lads laid down their lives in Dunkirk. Don't let them die in vain." I could see the French being inspired that the British soldiers at Dunkirk died for France instead of turning tail and hiding across the Channel, and perhaps fighting on just a bit longer.
 
To "win" Germany has to get the war with Britain to "fizzle". My big thought is to offer France a decent peace and to create a "EU in 1940".

France must be recognised and get to have a say in the running of Europe. Italy and Spain to be brought in.

THAT will stop Britain cold. However, Hitler would not go for it, and it is a thought that will end up in the ASB column instead (shame, really).

Barbarossa must be seen as a "crusade" against the horrible communists.

Only if the entire Western Europe (inclusive of a good load of the Eastern European countries with a bit of a grudge against USSR) can it succeed. Maybe.

On the nuclear stuff: maybe Germany (with the influx of Italian and French scientist) could also get a bomb. Then we have MAD in 1945 (or much later insofar as Britain did not have the resources to do Manhatten project). Would 1950-1955 sound realistic for a British-only bomb?

On top of: Germany might just tell Britain that if you start with your nuclear WMD, we do have some biological or chemical one's which you would not like.

However, German economy had to be sorted out.

Ivan
 
If Germsny gets peace in the west the Red Army will be prepared for an invasion; Germany will also not receive the favorable grain and oil shipments in Winter-Spring 1940-41. The net result is a much worse performance in the East. IOTL Barbarossa destroyed or captured the Red Army's ammunition and fuel reserves, radios, artilley tractors, and support equipment within the first weeks of war. While the Red Army will still lose the border battles, the defeat will not be nearly as disastrous and leave it in a very strong position in July and August.
 
Take France, so theres no foothold for an attack from the west. Get Mussolini to sit down and shut up. Italy is probably worth more to Germany as a neutral conduit for imports than as an ally. Ditto Spain, althogh otl Franco was smart enough to see that.

Dont attack the Soviets, but milk them for all their worth.

Retool the economy so it wont collapse.

Dump the Japanese, and make pious noises about how awful their conduct in China is.

Offer a token force to the US to fight Japan, if Japan attacks the US.

Pretend Vichy really is neutral, and snowjob Admiral Leahy even more.


With no North Africa campaign, theres no good place for Britain to start attacking.

With the right diplomacy, they MIGHT be able to keep the US neutral.

If a second phony war, with no land troops fighting anywhere, how long can Britain keep up a war effort that isnt really doing anything?


Rather implausible, but possible, imo.
 
With Heydrich at the rudder the holocaust would surely get pumped up at some point. That would eventually mean an invasion by the bolsheviks or the Allies once the truth comes out. It would also destroy Germany as an economic power anyway.

Plus, Heydrich wasn't someone who would stop with Poland.

In any case Heydrich would never become Fuhrer anyway. He was high in the SS but no way near in the position to claim the throne.
 
Except that wasn't possible.

Rundstedt's forces had outran their supply lines, so they were essentially on the breaking point when they reached Dunkirk. Attacking fortified Anglo-French forces at Dunkirk, which is set up on ground perfect for defensive forces, would have been suicidal.

Even if, by some luck, the forces get the supplies they need, they wouldn't have gotten very far before getting ground up by the British and the French, all whilst the evacuation continues.

And, let us say the Germans do, by some odd luck, get their supplies and break the British and French army. The British propaganda tune changes from "We brought our boys back" to "Our lads laid down their lives in Dunkirk. Don't let them die in vain." I could see the French being inspired that the British soldiers at Dunkirk died for France instead of turning tail and hiding across the Channel, and perhaps fighting on just a bit longer.

So if Germany had pressed for a land attack, they would not have had enough troops to capture Paris a few weeks later?
 
In 1939 Japan and Italy go insane and attack all their neighbours, Germany joins the rest of the world in destroying them, thus being counted as one of the victors in WWII.

Of course being Nazi's they probably use their new found position of BFF's with the West to launch Barbarossa a year or two later with similar results to OTL but hey technically they won WWII.
 

amphibulous

Banned
Take France, so theres no foothold for an attack from the west. Get Mussolini to sit down and shut up. Italy is probably worth more to Germany as a neutral conduit for imports than as an ally. Ditto Spain, althogh otl Franco was smart enough to see that.

Dont attack the Soviets, but milk them for all their worth.

As long as the British blockade continues, the Sovs have the upper hand so they will milk you.

Retool the economy so it wont collapse.

Yes, well, that's splendid, really, mein Fuhrer - but could you possibly be a little more specific about the details?
Pretend Vichy really is neutral, and snowjob Admiral Leahy even more.

The "Infinite American Stupidity Theory" is taken to an extreme here...

With no North Africa campaign, theres no good place for Britain to start attacking.

The British blockade does more damage than any attack: you shouldn't get hung up on semantics.

If a second phony war, with no land troops fighting anywhere, how long can Britain keep up a war effort that isnt really doing anything?

Except ensuring the economic collapse of the Reich via the blockade.
 
Remember that Stalin was only being generous with his shipments in order to appease Hitler. The deal was German equipment and machine tools for Soviet grain and oil. If summer 1941 passes with no German invasion, Stalin is going to start asking for his tools, and demanding negotiations to finish Molotov's discussion with Hitler in November 1940 in regards to the Balkans. If Germany doesn't cooperate then it's going to find itself cut off from it's economic lifeline going into the winter of 1941.
 
Top