Nazi Germany wins: what next

In the unlikely event that Hitler won in Russia, what would Nazi Germany look like today?

Would we see a cultural revolution style massacre of scientists?

What would Germany's position be in a cold war with USA/China/Britain?
 
In the event that Nazi Germany wins against the Soviet Union, it is hit for 20,000 by the United States and the nuclear campaign against Germany intensifies. Eventually, Germany surrenders to ongoing nuclear attack, perhaps in 1948-9.
 
Germany would still be bled white to gain victory over the Soviet Union, getting a long, hostile border with the post-victory Soviet successor state that may or may not be engaged in actual direct or indirect warfare. Plus of course, partisans are going to be a constant headache, forcing a strong garrison just to keep those conquests under some form of control.

All the destruction means that Germany won't get all that much economic benefit from those territories without substantial investment in reconstruction. There's looting to be done, sure, but that doesn't help the German situation in the long run. How is Germany getting the food to feed the workers it needs to reconstruct local transport networks, mines, industry? How is it paying the farmers for that food? The Germans can certainly extort or requisition it, but that just boosts the hostility of the farmers and doesn't help win much improvement in food production. Starving the cities in the USSR in order to have food left over for German domestic and military consumption leaves you with few willing workers to reconstruct the primary products sector the Nazis were after in the first place.

With the war in the east more or less over, Romania, Italy and Hungary are also going to want to pack up their stuff and go home. They'll have to be given an incentive to stay and help with the partisan issue through Soviet loot, which simply adds to the expense.

The war's events have also left a massive chunk of German material and industrial output useless. Panzers won't help shoot down Allied bombers, or prevent allied buildup and landings across the Med. Retooling to build aircraft, u-boats, ships and AAA is going to be quite messy, and there's a potential question of availability for some materials.

What victory over the Soviets does do is give Germany the ability to reinforce its conquests in the west and south of Europe. That doesn't prevent future allied successes though, because the Germans have to be everywhere, while the Allies need only hit the proper weak points.

In any event, this at best delays Germany's defeat until nuclear weapons are available, possibly available in numbers. Even with heavy focus on air defenses, bombers are going to get through, and mushroom clouds pop up over German cities, and possibly troop concentrations until they surrender.

Japan probably avoids getting nuked, but instead is starved into surrender by bombing and blockade. If the entire government doesn't collapse, the potential for a communist revolution erupting among the starving and desperate population ought to focus a lot of minds on the inevitable.

When Japan goes down in say, 1945-46, those bombers, ships, supplies and aircraft can all be redirected to Europe in order to seize and pulverize every Axis island or peninsula the allies think they can hold. There'll be plenty of aircraft then to ensure Germany can be nuked early and often until the war is over.
 
In the event that Nazi Germany wins against the Soviet Union, it is hit for 20,000 by the United States and the nuclear campaign against Germany intensifies. Eventually, Germany surrenders to ongoing nuclear attack, perhaps in 1948-9.

This 'lolz US wud nuke dem end of stori' attitude somewhat annoys me. Not saying it wouldn't happen, but I don't think it'd be the end-all thing. With a frenzied Nazi army fresh from such an overwhelming victory, they'd need to nuke most of Europe, and secondly haven't people taken into account that Germany can shoot the bombers down? And end up with their own nukes? And who's to say that Germany wouldn't have perfected cross-Atlantic V descendants by then? Yeah, nuking Germany is an option, but there are things that would get in the way. Butterflies must be taken into account.
 
Last edited:
This 'lolz US wud nuke dem end of stori' attitude somewhat annoys me. Not saying it wouldn't happen, but I don't think it'd be the end-all thing. With a frenzied Nazi army fresh from such an overwhelming victory, they'd need to nuke most of Europe, and secondly haven't people taken into account that Germany can shoot the bombers down? And end up with their own nukes? And who's to say that Germany wouldn't have perfected cross-Atlantic V descendants by then? Yeah, nuking Germany is an option, but there are things that would get in the way. Butterflies must be taken into account.

Germany being in a position to defend itself, ok. Developing nukes, check.

ICBMs that can do more than hit somewhere near the eastern seaboard? A sub capable of flinging a rocket at short range, maybe. But I've got a hard time accepting accurate intercontinental missile targetting in the late 40s.

You don't need it anyway. Just develop a bomb production line, develop a stockpile, and offer a credible threat of massive retaliation- perhaps with multiple attacks on military targets in a relatively short period.

Cold war, done.
 
This 'lolz US wud nuke dem end of stori' attitude somewhat annoys me. Not saying it wouldn't happen, but I don't think it'd be the end-all thing. With a frenzied Nazi army fresh from such an overwhelming victory, they'd need to nuke most of Europe, and secondly haven't people taken into account that Germany can shoot the bombers down? And end up with their own nukes? And who's to say that Germany wouldn't have perfected cross-Atlantic V descendants by then? Yeah, nuking Germany is an option, but there are things that would get in the way.

I'll adress your points one by one:

That frenzied Nazi army has suffered a great deal of casualties, is being bled white through conquest and pacification, and harboured a number of opponents of the regime IOTL. If German cities start vanishing beneath mushroom clouds, is it to much to expect somebody at some level to question whether there isnt another way out?

Yes, the Germans can shoot bombers down. Outside of the wet dreams of Arthur Harris, Hugh Trenchard, Billy Mitchell, and Giulio Douhet, the bomber does not always get through, unless their is a major technological gap to be filled. That said, however, German air defense was never as adept as it could have been, and I fail to see how they would have been able to stop thousand bomber raids conducted by B-29s with fighter escort? For instance, if the Allies were to send up 500 bombers intended for a city in the Rhineland. one or two have nuclear bombs, the rest more conventional weapons. How are the Germans supposed to destroy with any reliability the bombers with nuclear weapons?

German nukes has been discussed time and time again on this site. The germans did not have a true nuclear program (and the existing one had been sabotaged by the Allies- Veermok raid comes to mind), and had multiple scientific, technical, logisitcal, and other issues with producing one (for instance, Heisenburg's calculations on the subject were fundamentally flawed). Germany is only going to realize that it needs nuclear weapons once mushrooms start blossoming over its cities, and by then it is far to late.

I'm not going to rule out the possibility of limited V-x strikes against America, but I dont see how that would make any difference. V1 and V2 were not war winners; they were terror weapons, dreamed up by a megalomaniacal, desperate state looking for a way to strike back. A few long-ranged missiles randomly landing on american soil will neither be enough to push America out of the war nor inflict any meaningful damage.

Nazi germany lasting is a possibility, but there are a multitude of factors that make it surviving as a state very unlikely.
 
This 'lolz US wud nuke dem end of stori' attitude somewhat annoys me. Not saying it wouldn't happen, but I don't think it'd be the end-all thing. With a frenzied Nazi army fresh from such an overwhelming victory, they'd need to nuke most of Europe, and secondly haven't people taken into account that Germany can shoot the bombers down? And end up with their own nukes? And who's to say that Germany wouldn't have perfected cross-Atlantic V descendants by then? Yeah, nuking Germany is an option, but there are things that would get in the way.

The Germans would try all of these things, with very mixed successes, no doubt. Problem is, the allies can still massively outproduce the European Axis, and eventually overwhelm them by air and sea. Bomber casualties will be horrible, yes. Unfortunately for the Germans, the Allies still have more pilots and were no slouches in the technology department either. When Japan is defeated, this war in the air is going to become very, very nasty for Germany.

Further, how are the Germans going to keep their fuel tanks full when the Allies begin to perfect their bombing techniques over Ploiesti and Caucasus? That is if Allied and post-Soviet forces don't end up grabbing Soviet Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia after Moscow falls anyway.

No doubt German V-weapons will get more resources thrown at them, but frankly, so what? They caused terror and damage, but they didn't do much to cause the British to reconsider the war. The pinpricks--at best--the Germans can inflict across the Atlantic would have a near-zero effect on the outcome, even if the missiles don't simply end up ruining some random farmer's prized apple trees or sinking in the ocean instead of hitting an actual city.

Add to that that the German nuclear project had hit a brick wall and was going nowhere, and that there simply weren't enough resources for Germany to advance ahead of the allies in that department.

Lastly, nuclear weapons are definitely going to be targeted at German cities at the great preference of the Allies. Nuking Brussels, even if it's a major HQ and logistics hub, doesn't send quite so powerful a message to the German people that they may have an interest in seeking a rapid end to the war.
 
This 'lolz US wud nuke dem end of stori' attitude somewhat annoys me. Not saying it wouldn't happen, but I don't think it'd be the end-all thing. With a frenzied Nazi army fresh from such an overwhelming victory, they'd need to nuke most of Europe, and secondly haven't people taken into account that Germany can shoot the bombers down? And end up with their own nukes? And who's to say that Germany wouldn't have perfected cross-Atlantic V descendants by then? Yeah, nuking Germany is an option, but there are things that would get in the way. Butterflies must be taken into account.

This so very much reminds of Eleven11 and his great idea that bombs that hit the ground can get flipped around and used on the Allies; its total and utter biunk because the bomb will detonate when it hits the ground, or it'll splatter into a billion pieces.

The Germans need to shoot down the RIGHT BOMBER to stop a nuclear attack; in addition, an ongoing nuclear campaign will be dealing far more damage than Germany will be able to fix; Once Hamburg is hit, it'll be months before it'll be working again (cue massive nuclear firestorm); and even longer when other nuclear weapon start hitting other portions of Germany.

Hit Germany with something like 10 bombs and they're out a third of their population and half their industrial power. That's very few successes for a devastating outcome.

No, there is no chance that Germany will be able to use a smashed bomb; they don't have the physics to do it, and they don't have a launch platform to carry it, either.
 
Meh. Not saying Germany wouldn't get nuked to death--probably would--but all I'm saying is that it wouldn't be so easy. . Flimsy, yes, but still within the realms of possibility. V-x strikes on the US wouldn't win the war, but improved V missiles on military targets in England--airbases--might cripple Allied bombing effort. Of course, this would be delaying the inevitable, but we'd end up with a fucked-up central Europe.

On the other hand, in TLs where Germany gets Britain, immediate nuclear strategy is not as viable...
 
Hit Germany with something like 10 bombs and they're out a third of their population and half their industrial power. That's very few successes for a devastating outcome.

No, there is no chance that Germany will be able to use a smashed bomb; they don't have the physics to do it, and they don't have a launch platform to carry it, either.

Ten bombs would perhaps kill 500 000-1000 000 people, if you take into account that German cities are less genocide-friendly then those of the unfortunate Japanese.

Besides, with, say, three years of using the industrial capacity of most of Europe to build up air-defences (which, as you might be aware of, are much more cost-effective then bombers) and fighters I doubt the US would have an easy time hitting the German heartland. And by the late 40s there's really no reason why Germany wouldn't duplicate the achievements of the Soviet union, and get a bomb of their own.

Not they might necessarily need one. After London is ravaged by VX the British might start loosing stomach.
 
Ten bombs would perhaps kill 500 000-1000 000 people, if you take into account that German cities are less genocide-friendly then those of the unfortunate Japanese.

Ah, that's right;

I'm thinking of more modern weapons.

I'd have to rethink the figures.
 

Neroon

Banned
The "Germany will always loose because of Nukes, which they cannot make themselves in time" scenario needs to factor in a few flys in that ointment:

- The Germans may not have nukes for MAD, but they hold the population of Europe hostage. Given the threat of having every German city wiped of the map, the Nazis wouldn't shrink on taking Nukes out on them. Also they wont shrink of protecting on German cities from air attack or the mass use of living shields. I don't think the Allies will politically be able to just keep on adding to the civilian death toll.
- If the Germans defeat the USSR, they might pick up some NKVD defectors, who got some VERY interesting stuff to bargain with. Some might even be able to offer spy rings in some obscure place in the States in exchange for a golden parachute.
 
This 'lolz US wud nuke dem end of stori' attitude somewhat annoys me. Not saying it wouldn't happen, but I don't think it'd be the end-all thing. With a frenzied Nazi army fresh from such an overwhelming victory, they'd need to nuke most of Europe, and secondly haven't people taken into account that Germany can shoot the bombers down? And end up with their own nukes? And who's to say that Germany wouldn't have perfected cross-Atlantic V descendants by then? Yeah, nuking Germany is an option, but there are things that would get in the way. Butterflies must be taken into account.

You raise some valid points. I too have speculated that the US would not immediately use its nuclear monopoly against an entrenched Nazi Germany occupying virtually all of western Europe. I agree there would be a legitimate concern on the US part that bombers could be shot down and bombs captured. It is one thing to drop a bomb or two on a virtually beaten foe as a necessary coup de gras - it is another thing altogether to think that a few bombs on Berlin or Hamburg would knock a Germany in command of western Europe out.

It is possible the US would husband its relatively few nukes until an opportunity aroze to use them to devastating effect in a tactical situation, such as an invasion of western Europe. I once wrote a TL imagining "WW2 part one" petering out shortly after a failed Normandy invasion by the Wallies and an defacto stalemate in the East, with "part 2" resuming several years later after the US and allies marshalled a second invasion force. The US has developed and produced a small number (10-15) in secrecy over several years but decided to use them only when they might make a decisive battlefield difference. All but one or two bombs are dropped on German troop concentrations and fortifications in western France as a prelude to the 2nd invasion, killing hundreds of thousands of troops, destroying tons of equipment, and rendering remaining German forces stunned, confused, in a state of shock, lacking any real command and control structure, and eventually suffering radiation sickness. The US (which had virtually expended its available atomic bombs) then bluffed, claiming that it had unlimited supplies of nukes and would begin raining nuclear doom down on Germany and all axis/collaborationist regimes unless they overthrew the Nazis. Faced with this threat, a number of axis regimes rose up in immediate rebellion against the Germans, and a civil war broke out in Germany itself between the Wehrmacht and SS. In this fantasy, the Nazi regime eventually imploded, a military junta took power, and Germany surrendered to the US and its allies before the first US troops even set foot in Europe (I butterflied in a number of other counterhistorical developments to help this make sense, but I actually think a tactical use of bombs against troops would be something the US might consider in such as situation)
 
- The Germans may not have nukes for MAD, but they hold the population of Europe hostage. Given the threat of having every German city wiped of the map, the Nazis wouldn't shrink on taking Nukes out on them. Also they wont shrink of protecting on German cities from air attack or the mass use of living shields. I don't think the Allies will politically be able to just keep on adding to the civilian death toll.[/QUOTE]

I don't know why not. The Brits and Americans thought nothing of killing hundreds of thousands of German civilians in conventional "thousand plane" bombing raids to the very end of the war in Europe long after it made much military sense. For that matter, they didn't worry too much about killing thousands of Frenchmen in bombing raids if they thought it would hellp the war effort. Nukes helped push the far more unified, fatalistic and fanatical Japanese to surrender - the Nazis' polyglot European Empire consisting of tottering allies and unhappy puppets might be more likely that Japan to collapse.
 
Look at what happened to Vichy ATL when the Germans feared they would try to go their own way. Adding Slovakia and the Ustashe to the mix doesn't change much. The German puppets were really weak, so your scenario seems unlikely.
 
this all kind of depends on the timeline.

if germany wins in russia say late 44 and the allies have a failed overlord the sittuation is totaly diffrent than say the allies cancel overlord for what ever reason and germans don't realy win just push the soviets behind the ural.

also do the allies still use there A-boms against japan first?

if the allies still use the A-bombs against japan first not only will they have fewer to use against germany but they also will realise just how destructive,
those A-boms are and that useing them on a germany that rules all of europa
will force a german responce with all the ABC weapons that are at there disposal.

a bad idea on part of the germans to use ABC weapons as a responce.....sure
but if the allies start useing them they might just use them anyway.

so lets see what such a german responce around say 1946-47 might entail.

Lots and lots of Chemical weapons.

Quite a few of Biological weapons, unsofisticated sure but still not verry pleasant.

Atomic weapons.....i am not saying that the germans are going to have an nuke but they might have so called dirty boms i read some where that they where looking into makeing those to and that they where alote closer in 45 to makeing those work than they where whit real nukes, so in 1946-47 they might just have those.

so i think it all greatly depends on the following things:

A: do the allies realize just how devestation those weapons are, either by further testing or by use against japan first.

B: are the allies capable of following up there use of nukes with an invasion of europa?

C:in what state are the axis at that time?

D:who is in chare of the USA,UK and maybe even germany at that time?

so lets say the germans and there axis allies win in russia in 44 by makeing peace with the soviets giving the germans all of soviet russia up to the urals.

for what ever reason operation overlord is a complete failure.

the germans have signifenetly strengent there air defence, and have a actual means to retaliate against britain....something like V2/A4 and or jet bombers.

the V2/A4 if i am not mistaken where up on the drawing boards at OTL end of the war, and the germans actualy had jet bombers OTL, not many and with quite a few problems and i am not sure if the V2/A4 could have been developed in time.

But lets for the sake of arguement say they have some way of actualy strikeing back.

do you people think that the allies are going to go for an WMD exchange with the nazis?

I personaly don't think they would be willing to trade britain for germany.

so it all comes down 2 the actual situation in that ATL.

because its not alway as easy as saying allies use nukes and pown the axis end of story, it kinda depends on the POD,witch is kinda unclear on the actual situation.
 
In the unlikely event that Hitler won in Russia, what would Nazi Germany look like today?

Would we see a cultural revolution style massacre of scientists?

What would Germany's position be in a cold war with USA/China/Britain?
What do you mean "unlikely event"? Let's get basics: in alternate reality there are many possibilities where (Nazi) Germany won soviets. In same cases that means that all battles in eastern front stops, and most of those troops are re-located somewhere else, for example France and Italy. Also this means plenty of oil supplies to Reich, so Allies would have some hard times in western front.
I think there wouldn't be any kind of massacre of scientists, but "Iron curtain" could be placed somewhere between Germany and France, instead of East and West Germany. Or even in English Channel?
 
In the unlikely event that Hitler won in Russia, what would Nazi Germany look like today?

Would we see a cultural revolution style massacre of scientists?

What would Germany's position be in a cold war with USA/China/Britain?

Thrid Reich wins WW2 that more ABS
but let see wat Top NAZI had in Mind in case they Win

Hitler retire after "Endsieg" and life the rest of his life in Linz.
wat result in "Civilwar" under Top Nazi for "who becomes next Führer ?" :rolleyes:

then also beginn of rebuild the "Führerstädten" in Third Reich after Hitler / Speer Plans
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=116677
with the totalcost are around 2500 Billion Reichsmark ! (1950-1970)

The SS had horrible Plans
not only destruction of City Moscow and Lenigrad and death of their inhabitants

the Holocaust had go next phase
after plans of SS-Obergruppenführer Reinhard Heydrich:
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=118923

first phase they exterminate all Jews in Europe
second phase ALL half-Jews in Europe
also had the population had Eastern Europe around 80% exterminate
to make place for German Settler

that mean death of over Hundred million humans in Concentration Camps

is lucky for us the Nazi failed...
98-animate.gif
 
The American atomic bombs do not have to be used as strategic weapons. I would say the best targets for the first two would have been the dockyard areas of Kiel and Wilhelmshaven. That would effectively decapitate the U-Boat service.
 
Top