Nazis vs WAllies/ Nazis vs Soviet Union

Nazi Germany vs America/Britain or Nazi Germany vs Soviet Union?

  • Germany has a higher chance of defeating or stalemating the WAllies

    Votes: 12 11.9%
  • Germany has a higher chance of defeating or stalemating the Soviet Union with no lend lease

    Votes: 45 44.6%
  • Germany has an equal chance of winning against either nations

    Votes: 1 1.0%
  • Germany still loses no matter what it does

    Votes: 43 42.6%

  • Total voters
    101

Cmyers1980

Banned
Which members of the Allies would Nazi Germany have a higher chance of defeating or stalemating in a conflict, the US and Britain or the Soviet Union?

If Nazi Germany didn't enter a conflict with the Soviet Union and focused all of its efforts on war with the British Empire and America after conquering most of Europe (France, Belgium, Norway, Poland, Balkans etc), how well would it do?

What would its chances of winning assuming for the same of argument that the Soviets don't invade Germany?

And the same question but opposite: If Nazi Germany focused all of its efforts on the Soviet Union after its victories from '39-41 and the Western Allies gave no lend lease at all to the Soviets while still maintaining hostilities against the Axis Powers, how well would Germany perform and could Germany win? This could butterfly away the Afrika Korps but it depends on how feasible that is and how events turn out in the war.

So in one scenario it is Nazi Germany vs America and Britain.

And in the other it is Nazi Germany vs Soviet Union with no lend lease.
 
If the Nazi do not have the Soviets trade or give them the resources they need, then the Allies win eventually. Or nuke the Nazis.

The Soviets will win. It would take them a bit longer and more casualties, but they would win. Especially if there are the Western Allies fighting the Nazis.

Nazis do not have resources sufficient to wage war against both Western Allies and USSR.
 
I could see the Nazis having a small chance against the USSR assuming there is somehow no Lend Lease. It's still very, very low, but as compared to fighting the WAllies it's still possible. The WAllies are going to get Nukes. Their industrial base can't be hit by Germany, while Germany's industrial base can be hit by them. They have more manpower, resources, industry, and economic output.

Now, so did the Soviet Union, but they were also exposed to the German War Machine, making a defeat possible if however unlikely.
 
Which members of the Allies would Nazi Germany have a higher chance of defeating or stalemating in a conflict, the US and Britain or the Soviet Union?

If Nazi Germany didn't enter a conflict with the Soviet Union and focused all of its efforts on war with the British Empire and America after conquering most of Europe (France, Belgium, Norway, Poland, Balkans etc), how well would it do?

What would its chances of winning assuming for the same of argument that the Soviets don't invade Germany?

And the same question but opposite: If Nazi Germany focused all of its efforts on the Soviet Union after its victories from '39-41 and the Western Allies gave no lend lease at all to the Soviets while still maintaining hostilities against the Axis Powers, how well would Germany perform and could Germany win? This could butterfly away the Afrika Korps but it depends on how feasible that is and how events turn out in the war.

So in one scenario it is Nazi Germany vs America and Britain.

And in the other it is Nazi Germany vs Soviet Union with no lend lease.
The USSR could be forced into a Brest Litovsk treaty. Anything more is impossible and th Nazis would never go for it. The US is to far away for Germany to seriously effect it. Britain is beatable though. US > USSR > UK.
 
No way the Nazi could have win against Allies or Soviets
to low number on troops, lack of resources and Morons in leadership.

let take the USA
as Hitler declare war on USA, they switch from Car industry to Aircraft and Tank production for over 3 years.
while german industry had low production number and scarcity on material and Luftwaffe changes there mind on top priority Programs.
Produced the American Bombers and Fighter aircrafts on mass, like the B-17 Flying Fortress they produce 12731 units and bomb The Third Reich back into the stone age.
the Wehrmacht learn on hard way that American troops are armed to the teeth and were experienced shooter

The Soviet make a total mobilization, in the end 6.4 million Red Army troops were pushing at East frontline, the 1.5 million survivor of the Wehrmacht back into The Third Reich
They produced massive low tech like the T-34 tank, were they make 64549 units and trow them against the Wehrmacht and SS Tanks divisions with success
Hitler reaction on that he order construction of bigger tanks, with bigger guns, what let to Panther, Tiger and Königtiger tanks and infamous MAUS prototype.
each one heavier, more complex and more petrol thirsty as his predecessor. Build in lower number as Soviet counterparts do to lack of resources.
 
Britain and America? Stalemate? Dreaming...

A super-Fortress Europa could begat full deployments of B-29s to Europe. And later, nukes.

The really scary idea about nukes against the Nazis is that I could easily see Hitler holding out somewhere saying "Bring it on!", while Germany is reduced to ashes around him. Some might say that that was already happening, but those are the same "some" who claim that the Bomb was an unimpressive tactical weapon doing little damage to the enemy. FDR just wanted to spend $2,000,000,000 in 1942-1944 dollars to construct a weapon that might not even work solely to scare the Uncle Joe that he was certain he could work with. As to that logic, see my sig below.;):rolleyes:

The USSR could be forced into a Brest Litovsk treaty. Anything more is impossible and the Nazis would never go for it. The US is to far away for Germany to seriously effect it. Britain is beatable though. US > USSR > UK.

The OP says all the Western Allies. That means Britain, her Empire, the Dominions, and the USA. Germany could make more U-Boats sooner, at the cost of tanks for the army, leaving the East vulnerable. Fighting against only the West the Germans can't scrimp on the Luftwaffe. A bigger U-Boat menace means even more ASW assets and faster introduced ASW technology.

No way the Nazi could have win against Allies or Soviets
too low number on troops, lack of resources and Morons in leadership.

lets take the USA
as Hitler declare war on USA, they switch from Car industry to Aircraft and Tank production for over 3 years.
while german industry had low production number and scarcity on material and Luftwaffe changes there mind on top priority Programs.
Produced the American Bombers and Fighter aircrafts on mass, like the B-17 Flying Fortress they produce 12731 units (1) and bomb The Third Reich back into the stone age. (2)
the Wehrmacht learn the hard way that American troops are armed to the teeth and were experienced shooters (3)

The Soviet make a total mobilization, in the end 6.4 million Red Army troops were pushing at East frontline, the 1.5 million survivor of the Wehrmacht back into The Third Reich
They produced massive low tech like the T-34 tank, were they make 64549 units and throw them against the Wehrmacht and SS Tanks divisions with success
Hitler reaction on that was he ordered construction of bigger tanks, with bigger guns, which led to Panther, Tiger and Königtiger tanks and infamous MAUS prototype, each one heavier, more complex, and more petrol thirsty than his predecessor. Build in lower numbers as Soviet counterparts due to lack of resources. (4)

1) Not to mention 15000+ B-24 Liberators,:eek: many going to Lend Lease ASW. They closed the gap between Europe and America for the U-Boat scourge. Poor B-24s. Longer ranged and much bigger load than B-17s, yet they never get the notice the Forts do.:( Despite all their good works against the Japanese captured oilfields in the DEI, plus Ploesti.

2) Well, the 19th century, anyway. Or Germany about halfway into the Thirty Years War.

3) But Americans had their own problems, including a lack of tactical sense that caused them to attempt bizarre and often unwise moves against the enemy. So too their most junior officers in the army tended to be poor until they got serious combat experience (if they lived that long).

OTOH, the Americans had considerably greater technical expertise than their Allied and Axis counterparts and were incredibly fond of captured equipment. They were able in tight combat circumstances to employ captured enemy weapons of a sophistication that most armies wouldn't attempt to try to use (frex, satchel charges, flame-throwers, AT/panzerfaust/panzershreck missiles).

4) Not to mention using slave laborers (5) rather than employing loyal German women as "Reni the Riveters":p Or God Forbid, Jews, who could be forced, by direct threat to their families, to give superlative output to save their lives. As the Jewish refugees escaped from Eastern Poland did when they reached Japanese-occupied Manchuria. They did outstanding work for Japan in their Manchurian factories, in exchange for their loyalty given to Japan and Japanese good sufferance of their presence.

5) The Germans may have increased the QUANTITY of their industrial war output, but their Quality Control had turned to shit. Many an artillery shell would land among Allied troops in 1944-45, turn out to be a dud, and when the UXB people took it apart, would find it loaded with earth or salt. With a little message inside, written in Russian, Polish, or Czech, that said: "Good Luck! Happy Hunting!":D
 
Last edited:
Thirty Years War? In 1946-1947 B-36s would rain nukes, british anthrax cookies and 2,4-D defoliant on Germany...
 
Thirty Years War? In 1946-1947 B-36s would rain nukes, british anthrax cookies and 2,4-D defoliant on Germany...

IOW, the sort of plagues know in the 30YW like smallpox, plague, typhus, incurable venereal diseases, typhoid, etc, etc, etc.

Short of Hitler unleashing nerve gas, the anthrax and defoliants stay on the shelf.

But throw in enough nukes and the Germans will suffer total economic collapse (as Japan did one month after VJ-Day). Total failure of all power systems, the rails stop running, the water works shut down, the sewers back up, the air force and navy are grounded for lack of fuel, and every German military unit in the field has their supply lines collapse, with the troops fighting from that point on only with what is in their backpacks.

Tho anyone could guess at that point what would happen to Hitler. Probably nothing past-Valkyrie. But if the Allies haven't invaded the Continent by the time of German economic collapse, not only would they be in a circumstance similar to the OTL "Battle of Germany" (cutting up the carcass of a defeated Nazi Germany), but even the few remaining friendly neutrals (1) and their own national forces could pose a threat to a German Army starving, immobilized, and hopeless.

The Allies would face little resistance at that point liberating Occupied Europe. It would be like the British, Australian, French, and Chinese forces occupying Japanese-occupied territory post-VJ Day. Some SS die-hards, perhaps. But not many. Not if a dozen or more German cities have been hit with Fat Mans.

1) Frex, Turkey and Sweden. Switzerland wouldn't go to war with H.G.Wells' Martians.:rolleyes:
 
They'll still lose both wars. Maybe the Soviets don't get to "liberate" all of Europe when they get no help, but they'll certainly push back the Nazis and I can't see the Nazi state faring very well after such a colossal defeat and so much death and destruction for no gain at all.
 

Deleted member 1487

They will eventually lose to the Wallies, but they could win against the Soviets, especially without LL. What matters is the circumstances though, if Germany doesn't conquer Europe first, say in a successful 1940 campaign, then its going to have some trouble; however in that situation the Soviets wouldn't have been allowed to occupy parts of Romania and the Baltics, so maybe that balances out. So assuming OTL up to late May 1940 when the British decide to get out of the war and stay out then the European Axis goes after the Soviets in 1941 the Soviets are going to lose.

Basically without the air war in the West, the naval war, the blockade, access to conquered Europe's colonial empires and their gold reserves (at peace they will be the legally recognized owners of the national bank accounts in the US, so Germany would have access to the largest collective gold reserves in the world; France alone had over $2.5 billion, which was enough to fund all the purchasing Germany needed not even counting what Germany could get out of the European colonial empires), no need to fight in the Mediterranean, probably not need to get involved in Yugoslavia without Britain in the war encouraging their revolt, no Greek invasion, etc.

The savings of not having to fight the West, plus having the gold to buy abroad what they needed or force their conquered European vassals to import from their empires to give them what they need, thus saving Germany from investing heavily into synthetic materials and being able to use those resources for war materials. No uboat war saves at least 1000 Uboats built IOTL, which would equal about 10,000 Pz IVs or ~7000 Panthers. Strategic bombing locked down over 6000 88mm guns in Germany, not to mention over 30k aircraft destroyed in bombing or the air, plus at least 800 tanks (not counting those that couldn't be built due to destruction of factories) over 30k trucks, untold numbers of trains, cost at least 200k truck production in 1943-44 from factory damage, etc.

Everything Germany needed to win the war in the East was cost by fighting the Wallies at the same time. Even the Stalingrad/Caucasus campaign was motivated by the American entry into the war (need to secure that oil to fight a long war in the west), so without that there is probably no Caucasus campaign in 1942 with obvious cost. Soviet losses would go up tremendously, especially in 1941 with double the number of Luftwaffe aircraft available thanks to no fighting from the Fall of France to Barbarossa.
 
Everything Germany needed to win the war in the East was cost by fighting the Wallies at the same time. Even the Stalingrad/Caucasus campaign was motivated by the American entry into the war (need to secure that oil to fight a long war in the west), so without that there is probably no Caucasus campaign in 1942 with obvious cost. Soviet losses would go up tremendously, especially in 1941 with double the number of Luftwaffe aircraft available thanks to no fighting from the Fall of France to Barbarossa.

If I understood the OP, the hostilities against the Wallies are still on?

And even if not, without the Soviet oil fields, the oil for the substantial German forces in the East comes from where?? Leuna+Ploesti??
 

Deleted member 1487

If I understood the OP, the hostilities against the Wallies are still on?

And even if not, without the Soviet oil fields, the oil for the substantial German forces in the East comes from where?? Leuna+Ploesti??

Ah, you were right, they are still at war, so my analysis is meaningless in this context. In my scenario though the oil would come via imports, first from the DEI until and unless the Japanese take it, then the world market paying cash with looted gold or bartering with goods like Congo rubber from Belgium. In Europe there still is synthetic oil, Romania, Hungary, Poland, Austria, etc.
 
I think one on one the Soviets could lose. They'd probably win, but without any foreign support for the USSR I'd guess Germany has like 1 in 4 odds of winning something. Probably just forcing the Soviets to bleed enough that they could steal a bit of land (Lithuania and a sliver of Belarus+Ukraine?).

Of course the Commonwealth would not be dropping out of the war and letting the Nazis have a free hand in the USSR, so that's not really a plausible situation. Without US support London would realise they'll not be opening a proper land front for quite a while so could ship a fair amount of stuff to the Soviets. The Japanese can't really act without drawing the Americans in, so that's another bonus for both sides. Any chance of Indian armies on the Eastern Front?
 
Hitler probably still loses, but he might be in a better position against the Soviets compared to OTL without Lend-Lease or WAllied support. There's no way he can actually conquer all of Russia, but he might be able to push the Soviet border back a little, or go for another Brest-Litovsk Treaty.
 
I presume the OP is based on the presumption that Germany is fighting either the USSR or the Anglo-Americans but not both at the same time. Given that, it seems fairly obvious that the only war Germany might have a chance to win (with or without lend-lease) is the war against the USSR. It is frankly impossible for Germany, lacking a navy to speak of and no good modern long-range bombers, to successfully invade Britain, let alone Canada and the USA, while the Anglo-Americans have the capability of striking pretty much wherever they want at Festung Europa. Also, with the Anglo-Americans, even if one of the allies signed an armistice or truce, the other could continue the war. With the USSR, Germany only has to beat one opponent, one its military and air force are much better suited to fighting.
 
Germany had a shot, narrow as it was, to knock the Soviets on their ass. Maybe it wouldn't defeat them outright and reduce them to a German satrap (ala the Anglo-American/Nazi War), but there's probably like a 5% chance (or whatever) of the Nazi's pulling off a pro-German stalemate in the East, if not an outright win.

On the other hand, the countdown to the fall of Nazi Germany started the instant Hitler declared war on the US. Once that happened, there is no version of WW2 that results in a Nazi victory.
 
On the assumption that Germany is able to inflict the same amount of damage against the USSR in the opening blow as per IOTL*, a stalemate against the USSR is possible. Against an Anglo-American alliance, not so much.

*If not, then Germany is hosed.
 
Germany has a higher chance of beating the USSR. It's incredibly unlikely, but it's still a higher probability than their chance of beating the USA+CANZUK (which is basically 0%).
 
Top