Realistic Allied WW2 victory without either the USSR or the US?

Ian_W

Banned
'Hitler remarked on 27 September: 'The "time factor" is in general not on our side, unless we exploit it to the utmost. Economic means of the other side are stronger. [Enemies] able to cash and carry.'" as the Wages of Destruction points out on pg. 328. When even Hitler is insufficiently delusional to match your arguments, you need to seriously start re-evaluating what you are saying.

Yeah, one of the things I found researching Sealion was that Hitler had more of a clue about the war than many Wehraboos.

When Hitler is better at sane and rational assessment than you are, you should back off and have a think.
 

Ian_W

Banned
German air superiority will eventually grind down French forces and secure a German victory - even if it takes 6 months instead of 6 weeks.

Just a reminder.

This "grinding down" process over the next six months absolutely failed to break the RAF, as the Battle of France turned into the Battle of Britain.

The same process will happen, of the Germans realising they haven't built a Luftwaffe for a long war.

Overhauling their training procedures would help a lot -rotate the Experten to the training schools so the next generation are a bit better, rather than keep them in the units.
 

hipper

Banned
Now this, this I don't really see. Without lend-lease, the British are going to run out of funds for cash and carry imports and then they'll have to quit the war in 1942 or '43 as their production drops away for lack of raw materials. It won't be a overnight or sudden economic collapse, but probably a gradual reduction of industrial production and a constraining of options. At the very least, the shortages will force the British to become less militarily active in order to shore up their economy...

The Germans for their part, have all of Europe under their belt after they knock out France and can trade with/through the USSR at rather favorable rates to fill in what their missing. So long as they don't attack the USSR and close off that enormous hole in the blockade, they can at least meet enough of their needs to at least stay afloat and maintain their earlier ability in conducting military activity.


the last point is somewhat correct

but probably a gradual reduction of industrial production and a constraining of options. At the very least, the shortages will force the British to become less militarily active in order to shore up their economy..

the UK could source everything it needs within the Sterling Zone so there is no possibility of running out of funds. They would however have to put more effort into shipbuilding and ASW aircraft at the expense of Bomber Command,

that done the land war in Europe could run until 1944 with no major differences. apart from slower russian advances

the war would end in 1946 or 1947 in the same way.
 
Just a reminder.

This "grinding down" process over the next six months absolutely failed to break the RAF, as the Battle of France turned into the Battle of Britain.

The same process will happen, of the Germans realising they haven't built a Luftwaffe for a long war.

Overhauling their training procedures would help a lot -rotate the Experten to the training schools so the next generation are a bit better, rather than keep them in the units.

Moreover the idea that the AdA will simply collapse even if the Germans are stopped at the french border is dubious as the AdA can just redeploy and refit further to the South out of range of the Luftwaffe. They can then rest, support a redeployed RAF effort and refit with the most modern aircrafts at disposal, while the increasingly stronger AA can help in the North along with what the RAF and AdA can send.

the last point is somewhat correct

but probably a gradual reduction of industrial production and a constraining of options. At the very least, the shortages will force the British to become less militarily active in order to shore up their economy..

the UK could source everything it needs within the Sterling Zone so there is no possibility of running out of funds. They would however have to put more effort into shipbuilding and ASW aircraft at the expense of Bomber Command,

that done the land war in Europe could run until 1944 with no major differences. apart from slower russian advances

the war would end in 1946 or 1947 in the same way.

And as said before if the UK doesn't have US support it can and will likely focus more on winning the battle of the Alantic and securing NA and the ME rather than trying to directly intervene on the Continent, at least until the USSR can do something. If both are done then the UK should be able to sustain itself decently.
 
Short answer: With a PoD before the battle of France Yes. With a PoD after No.

At least not without the Blockade somehow starving a Germany that dominatees the entire European continent west of the USSR either by occupation or by being able to lean on, while Alien Space Banks finance Britains war effort in perpetuity and hordes of Indians volunteer to fight for King and Empire.
 
A pandemic of equestrian encephalitis in the German logistical train would stop Blitzkrieg cold seeing as the German logistics were mostly horse drawn.
Slowing down the pace of the war to the point where France and England's industrial superiority would triumph
 

Ian_W

Banned
Short answer: With a PoD before the battle of France Yes. With a PoD after No.

At least not without the Blockade somehow starving a Germany that dominatees the entire European continent west of the USSR either by occupation or by being able to lean on, while Alien Space Banks finance Britains war effort in perpetuity and hordes of Indians volunteer to fight for King and Empire.

Or the Germans do something dumb, like unrestricted submarine warfare that sinks too many American ships.

Or the German's Japanese allies do something dumb, like attack the Americans at the same time as the British.

Or the Germans and Soviets fall out.

Can the British hold a line comprising UK and Suez indefinitely ? Yes.

Can the Germans break this by submarine warfare without risking American intervention ? No.

Can the Germans break this by unrestricted bombing of the UK ? Probably not - for a start, they'd need to design an entirely different air force and doctrine.

Can the Germans break this by invading the UK ? No.

So, yeah, either the US or USSR need to join the war, but the odds on that happening eventually are decent.
 
OTL Britain was broke by April 1941, this was with all the gold they took from Belgium, France, the colonies ect. So even if the French manage to fight well into 1941, they will run out of currency faster than the Germans.

this is not factually accurate. approx. half the French gold reserves was sent to the US, at certain points it was not accessible to the Vichy regime but it was never under British control. the other approx. half was sent to Africa, with the Belgian and Polish reserves funneled back, over a couple of years, to the Nazis.

whatever monies the Netherlands and Norway paid to UK were at the direction of their government-in-exile and not "taken"
 

Ian_W

Banned
Exept that the OP explicitly asks for an Allied victory scenario without that happening.

And then he claims anything that could lead to an Allied victory under these circumstances as "unrealistic", because he doesn't like his Nazi-wank interrupted.

You either need to handwave Strike South, or December 7 1941 is ticking clock. And it's very hard for the Germans to do anything meaningful against the UK between the fall of France and December 1941.
 
Even if France remains in the war until the end of 1940, it does not guarantee no Italy in the war,
It absolutely does. Mussolini had no sympathy for Germany and its poseur leader: the only reason he declared war when he did - the absolutely exclusive reason - is that he saw the war as won in its entirety already, with France destroyed and the UK bowing out from a conflict that was not their problem. Italy wouldn't have been ready for war until 1943 at the earliest, and everyone - from the Moose to the high command - knew this. This is, after all, a verbatim quote:

"Ho bisogno soltanto di qualche migliaio di morti per potermi sedere da ex-belligerante al tavolo dei vincitori."
(I just need some thousand deaths to be able to sit as former combatant at the same table as the winners.)

If the war is dragging out, Italy is not in any shape or form ready for it, and is going to sit it out (probably starting to revert most of the emergency approaches to Germany as it's more and more isolated, if not getting back to its Stresa Front position outright).
 
Top