Sea Lion ….. No Really

[CountofDooku]

As far as lend lease this is a scenario without FDR in the White House and therefore nothing above cash and carry would be going to either of the powers.

FDR or not doesn't matter for land-lease the right lobby groups were already pressuring for at least free trade into these regions to supply by themselves for the right amount of cash and some even accepted alter payment (not the same as land-lease, but still) that alone could be enough of an economic surplus from the USA to doom Japan in China and Germany in England/ Russia on the long run, as even with the occupied parts of Europe and Asia they simply cannot compete in terms of production and manpower, never could to be fair and even OTL was nearly ASB in regards how far they managed to come with being underestimated, as well as having luck. Anything more then OTL is therefore borderline ASB anyway and no party, or president will, or could enforce a complete embargo of US goods going were they were needed. After all the isolationist factions and those supportive of the enemies of Germany and Japan were strong, but not all powerful, even shortly before the war some were already supplying (including to Axis Nations to some extent until the war) and those that supported countries like Britain and China always had the moral high ground of continuing doing so, regardless of who sits in the White House or dominated the political landscape otherwise.

Atop of that the original 681.000 British/ English alone swell to 5.896.000 by the End of the War, in the number not included are the 1.100.00 Canadian, 993.000 Australians, 204.000 New Zealand, 250.000 South African and a total of 2.160.000 Indians from within the Empire alone, not counting foreign volunteers or others supportive of their cause. Even before Pearl Harbor the Americans supplies 189 Mio $ roughly made up to 47% war materials, 22% industrial goods, 12,8% food and 5,2% petrol/ fuel products among other stuff. Much of the goods included planes and material needed for them, followed by infantry equipment, transport planes, mechanical goods, tanks and other stuff (including further down the list uniforms, ammunition and even railway parts). Most of those overall throughout the War in Total went to the British (60%(, even when compared to the overall supplies for the Russians (23%) right next to it, followed by Free France (8%) and China (7%). If the Soviets are out simply more will arrive in Britain, allowing them to build up their own forces even more. Also while not as developed as England, Great Britain made up around 42% of the Empire in economy, the Dominions about 17% and the colonies around 41-42%, so they are much, much more useful then some give them credit for, especially in resources. Most of the final production however (13 of 17 Million Tons in Steel for example) came from England, with the Dominions producing only 2,8 Million Tons and India around 1 Million Tons), so England is the Industrial Core for sure and of major importance but not the deciding overall factor in any calculation at the same time.

 

[Garrison]

Original timeline Normandy in 1944 was not an island archipelago that could be besieged by marauding u-boats.

Except the U-Boats were never even close to achieving that and of course this would again assume that the British have made zero progress in combatting U-Boats, directly contradicting what we know happened. If Germany is going to conquer the USSR and exploit its resources there aren't going the be the resources to spare for a massive fleet of U-Boats, certainly not if Bomber command is also attacking the German heartlands.

 

[Look More Closely Later]

Except the U-Boats were never even close to achieving that and of course this would again assume that the British have made zero progress in combatting U-Boats, directly contradicting what we know happened. If Germany is going to conquer the USSR and exploit its resources there aren't going the be the resources to spare for a massive fleet of U-Boats, certainly not if Bomber command is also attacking the German heartlands.

The scenario we're being asked to consider involves no USA in the war. Therefore no pressure from American bomber fleets or fighter escorts, and depending how far the original poster is prepared to take the 'no USA', possibly no protection zone or whatever Roosevelt called it where American naval vessels and air assets are out looking for U-Boats.
Also, possibly no Liberty Ship spam. I'm unclear on whether Lend-Lease is supposed to be in effect or not, and there are limits in a no Lend-Lease situation to how much replacement merchant vessel shipping the UK can afford to buy, even if Malaya is still doing tin and rubber income to some benefit for the UK treasury.

 

[Moss]

Original timeline Normandy in 1944 was not an island archipelago that could be besieged by marauding u-boats.
It gets a lot more difficult for defenders, however determined, to defend, if they're malnourished and short on petrol* for motor vehicles or aircraft.
Hence my interest in French North Africa, which is crucial to running stuff through the Suez Canal and Mediterranean to/from the UK.

Edit:
* Yes, I know there were attempts to develop on-land oil-fields in the East Midlands in the UK during WW2, and some pre-existing minor extraction from places like Hardstoft in Derbyshire, but these aren't major sources.

Certainly true and if the axis can begin something of a blockade with the uboats, combined fleets, and air war this would surely weaken british defenses. It wouldnt be a cakewalk by any means, and again it certianly and un likely situtation but under blockade and aerial bombardment long enough could produce the results this thread has discussed

 

[Moss]

FDR or not doesn't matter for land-lease the right lobby groups were allready pressuring for at least free trade into these regions to supply by themselves for the right ammount of cash and some even accepted alter payment (not the same as land-lease, but still) that alone could be enough of a economic surplus fro mthe USA to doom Japan in China and Germany in England/ Russia on the long run, as even with the occupied parts of Europe and Asia they simply cannot compete in terms of production and manpower, never could to be fair and even OTL was nearly ASB in reguards how far they managed to come with being underestimated, as well as having luck. Anything more then OTL is therefore borderline ASB anyway and no party, or president will, or could enforce a complete embargo of US goods going were they were neeeded. After all the isolationist factions and those supportive of the enemeis of Germany and Japan were strong, but not all powerful, even shortly before the war some were allready surplying (including to Axis Nations to some extent until the war) and those that supported countries like Britain and China always had the mroal high ground of continuing doing so, regardless of who sits in the White House or dominated the political landscape otherwise.

Atop of that the original 681.000 British/ English alone swell to 5.896.000 by the End of the War, in the number not included are the 1.100.00 Canadian, 993.000 Australians, 204.000 New Zealand, 250.000 South African and a total of 2.160.000 Indians from within the Empire alone, not counting foreign volunteers or others supportive of their cause. Even before Pearl Harbor the Americans supplies 189 Mio $ roughtly made up to 47% war materials, 22% industrial goods, 12,8% food and 5,2% petrol/ fuel products among other stuff. Much of the goods included planes and material needed for them, followed by infantry equipmen, transport planes, mechanical goods, tanks and other stuff (including further down the list unfiroms, ammunition and even rialway parts). Most of those overall troughout the War in Total went to the British (60%(, even when compared to the overall supplies for the Russians (23%) right next to it, followed by Free France (8%) and China (7%). If the Soviets are out simply more will arrive in Brtiain, allowing them to build up their own forces even more. Also while not as developed as England, Great Britain made up around 42% of the Empire in economy, the Dominions about 17% and the colonies around 41-42%, so they are much, much mroe usefull then some give them credit for, especialy in resources. Most of the final production however (13 of 17 Million Tons in Steel for example) came from England, with the Dominions producing only 2,8 Million Tons and India around 1 Million Tons), so England is the Industrial Core for sure and of major importance but not the deciding overall factor in any calculation at the same time.

FDR was instrumental in the passing of lend lease. Without his determination and dare I say underhanded dealings it almost certainly wouldn't have passed. He was the driving force behind it. And while the business interests would want to supply, im of the opinion that cash and carry is the best they can get without a determined man in the White House. Now While the British Empire as you cite there can raise siginificant man power, that doesnt make up for a lack of materials. Churchill himself conceded that the he may have to throw in the towel if he didnt get the Bases for Destroyers deal. And that was rather early in the war. Consider years down the line where they would find themselves. By 1942 they would be damn near bankrupt if they had to pay for everything, plus im not so sure that the colonial forces you mention will consent to endlessly throwing away their lives "for the glory of the london empire". They have both their own interests and identities in their own right. And that applies even to the white british decsendent terriroties no longer seeing themselves as part of the home island but as Australians, or New Zealanders etc. And while the Empire can begin to canabalize it self and sell of assets to finance further conflict the fact remains that the industrial capabilities of a small island won't compete with the industrial potential of an entire continent.

 

[Cryhavoc101]

The scenario we're being asked to consider involves no USA in the war. Therefore no pressure from American bomber fleets or fighter escorts, and depending how far the original poster is prepared to take the 'no USA', possibly no protection zone or whatever Roosevelt called it where American naval vessels and air assets are out looking for U-Boats.
Also, possibly no Liberty Ship spam. I'm unclear on whether Lend-Lease is supposed to be in effect or not, and there are limits in a no Lend-Lease situation to how much replacement merchant vessel shipping the UK can afford to buy, even if Malaya is still doing tin and rubber income to some benefit for the UK treasury.

And this is where I have a problem with this

Why is the USA Isolationist to such a degree - why is there such a massive change in attitude over OTL

And if the world is that changed - why is the UK still acting as OTL?

 

[Garrison]

The scenario we're being asked to consider involves no USA in the war. Therefore no pressure from American bomber fleets or fighter escorts, and depending how far the original poster is prepared to take the 'no USA', possibly no protection zone or whatever Roosevelt called it where American naval vessels and air assets are out looking for U-Boats.
Also, possibly no Liberty Ship spam. I'm unclear on whether Lend-Lease is supposed to be in effect or not, and there are limits in a no Lend-Lease situation to how much replacement merchant vessel shipping the UK can afford to buy, even if Malaya is still doing tin and rubber income to some benefit for the UK treasury.

I have to agree with @Cryhavoc101, the scenario we are being asked to accept with the USA makes little sense as described, also The RAF was capable of delivering major air attacks without US bombers. what's being proposed is

 

[Garrison]

FDR was instrumental in the passing of lend lease. Without his determination and dare I say underhanded dealings it almost certainly wouldn't have passed. He was the driving force behind it. And while the business interests would want to supply, im of the opinion that cash and carry is the best they can get without a determined man in the White House. Now While the British Empire as you cite there can raise siginificant man power, that doesnt make up for a lack of materials. Churchill himself conceded that the he may have to throw in the towel if he didnt get the Bases for Destroyers deal. And that was rather early in the war. Consider years down the line where they would find themselves. By 1942 they would be damn near bankrupt if they had to pay for everything, plus im not so sure that the colonial forces you mention will consent to endlessly throwing away their lives "for the glory of the london empire". They have both their own interests and identities in their own right. And that applies even to the white british decsendent terriroties no longer seeing themselves as part of the home island but as Australians, or New Zealanders etc. And while the Empire can begin to canabalize it self and sell of assets to finance further conflict the fact remains that the industrial capabilities of a small island won't compete with the industrial potential of an entire continent.

In your opening post you asked what what people thought of your suggestion, and yet you've spent the last four pages rejecting every post that has replied pointing out the many, many, flaws in your idea. So one can only assume you already have a vision of what the outcome you will accept is, perhaps you should describe that?

 

[Sphinx]

It seems to be generally agreed based on other threads that a defeat of the USSR by 1942 or 1943 while difficult is not ASB.

Also correct me if im wrong but as far as Generalplan Ost/systematic genocide being a issue consuming german resources, didn't a rise in killings coincide with hitler loseing touch with reality due to his worsening mental condition as a result of the war turning agenst him and him blaming minority as being responsible for this (as far as I understand it the foundation of his beliefs at the time had a lot of commonality with the ww1 stab in the back myth and the belief that minoritys where undermineing the war effort) so presumably if hitler is successful on the eastern front his mental condition would be more stable meaning that while resorces are still wasted they would not be as bad as otl since hitler would not be actively scape goating people for a losing war in the same capacity.

Stab-in-the-back myth - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Separate from your points, if germany is successful there may be a silver lining in that they don't abandon colonial relocation plans as a solution to the jewish question since overseas colonial gains are still on the table if Britain can be beaten per this threads post eastern front sealion so the Holocaust might see a lower death rate with Germany instead opting to relocate the jews outside of europe to Israel, Italian east africa or Vichy french colonys as theoretical possibilitys. (Bearing in mind meny would still likely die in any relocation)

Depends how you define defeat.

The best, most optimistic scenario that stretches realism to the maximum would still see Germany occupying only Western USSR, at huge cost of occupation, and with massive partisan activity. Not to mention endless warfare with the Soviet remnants. To me, that's not the USSR being 'defeated' though to others it might be. For me a 'defeat' is either a reasonable Armistice which doesn't leave Germany even worse off or the total conquest of the entire USSR (which is pretty much ASB). As for Hitler's mental state, I don't really think it deteriorated that much until at least after Stalingrad (1943) and probably really only when they started a proper retreat from the USSR (1944) + Generalplan Ost had been in the works and much more detailed/planned/organised than the Holocaust so either way I don't see why it would be toned down. The East was meant to be Living Room after all.

But as Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya said in her last words:

"You hang me now, but I'm not alone. There are two hundred million of us. You can't hang us all. They will avenge me."

 

[Dorknought]

FDR was instrumental in the passing of lend lease. Without his determination and dare I say underhanded dealings it almost certainly wouldn't have passed. He was the driving force behind it. And while the business interests would want to supply, im of the opinion that cash and carry is the best they can get without a determined man in the White House. Now While the British Empire as you cite there can raise siginificant man power, that doesnt make up for a lack of materials. Churchill himself conceded that the he may have to throw in the towel if he didnt get the Bases for Destroyers deal. And that was rather early in the war. Consider years down the line where they would find themselves. By 1942 they would be damn near bankrupt if they had to pay for everything, plus im not so sure that the colonial forces you mention will consent to endlessly throwing away their lives "for the glory of the london empire". They have both their own interests and identities in their own right. And that applies even to the white british decsendent terriroties no longer seeing themselves as part of the home island but as Australians, or New Zealanders etc. And while the Empire can begin to canabalize it self and sell of assets to finance further conflict the fact remains that the industrial capabilities of a small island won't compete with the industrial potential of an entire continent.

The Fall of France triggered the US into action, the navy it authorised from here was the one that defeated Japan. This was begun 18 months before the Japanese declared war. Note that this military power triggered regime change in Japan and attempted regime change in Germany by mid-1944. The US understood that the Berlin-Rome-Tokyo Axis was aimed at them. It would become US policy of any administration to prop up an unsinkable aircraft carrier just off the coast of your Nazi wonderland. Added bonus that this island controls the other half of the worlds naval power and is a leading industrial power in it's own right.

So after coercing the Russian armies to complete destruction within 500km of Poland and then pushing all the way to the Urals, you have somehow extracted Peace Treaties with the SU and the French that somehow includes French naval cooperation?
The industrial potential of an entire continent is really just Germany with factories under nightly bombardment full of slave workers as German workers will be required for the armed forces to hold down occupied areas to loot the supplies that it needs.

Any sane person would resist a Nazi dominated Europe not just, "white british decsendent terriroties" who know their freedom is underpinned by GB and by extension the USA. No need to die "for the glory of the london empire".

 

[Hammerbolt]

Any sane person would resist a Nazi dominated Europe not just, "white british decsendent terriroties" who know their freedom is underpinned by GB and by extension the USA. No need to die "for the glory of the london empire".

And there are soooo many ways to fight back... One of my favourites was that of a French car maker who, force to make trucks for tech german army, found a way to right the oil tank meter só that it had lesse oil than it actually did, while still showing full. Result: the trucks constantly broke down from lack of oil, but he could point out that, in the factory, all was well!

 

[Moss]

And there are soooo many ways to fight back... One of my favourites was that of a French car maker who, force to make trucks for tech german army, found a way to right the oil tank meter só that it had lesse oil than it actually did, while still showing full. Result: the trucks constantly broke down from lack of oil, but he could point out that, in the factory, all was well!

Thats an intersting story I hadnt heard before. I gotta say it made me laugh

 

[Hammerbolt]

Thats an intersting story I hadnt heard before. I gotta say it made me laugh

Found him! It was https://www.drive.com.au/caradvice/...f-sabotage-against-the-nazis-in-world-war-ii/ and it's boss!

 

[Moss]

The Fall of France triggered the US into action, the navy it authorised from here was the one that defeated Japan. This was begun 18 months before the Japanese declared war. Note that this military power triggered regime change in Japan and attempted regime change in Germany by mid-1944. The US understood that the Berlin-Rome-Tokyo Axis was aimed at them. It would become US policy of any administration to prop up an unsinkable aircraft carrier just off the coast of your Nazi wonderland. Added bonus that this island controls the other half of the worlds naval power and is a leading industrial power in it's own right.

So after coercing the Russian armies to complete destruction within 500km of Poland and then pushing all the way to the Urals, you have somehow extracted Peace Treaties with the SU and the French that somehow includes French naval cooperation?
The industrial potential of an entire continent is really just Germany with factories under nightly bombardment full of slave workers as German workers will be required for the armed forces to hold down occupied areas to loot the supplies that it needs.

Any sane person would resist a Nazi dominated Europe not just, "white british decsendent terriroties" who know their freedom is underpinned by GB and by extension the USA. No need to die "for the glory of the london empire".

But is that the case for the Indians who dont want to be run from London? Is that the case for the africans, or the middle easterners? Indeed many in the middle eastern world were supportive of the axis for the exact reason of driving the empire out of their land. The australians would be and were historically much more concerned with the threat of the Japanese instead of the exact borders of europe. South Africa wasn't a fan of joining the war from day one and, with Apartheid right around the corner would actually hav quite alot in common with Berlin.

I'd agree that the US certainly would want to keep the "unsinkable carrier" afloat. Again Ive stated that even with a total victory in europe an outright invasion is still rather unlikely.

 

[Dorknought]

But is that the case for the Indians who dont want to be run from London?

2.5 million Indians VOLUNTEERED! It was the largest volunteer army in history.

Indeed many in the middle eastern world were supportive of the axis for the exact reason of driving the empire out of their land.

Approximately 1 million of the Indian troops were Muslim.

Is that the case for the africans, or the middle easterners?

East Africa provided over 300,000. Military pay scales far exceeded what African civilians could earn, especially when food, housing and clothing allowances are included.

The australians would be and were historically much more concerned with the threat of the Japanese instead of the exact borders of europe.

13,000 Australians were in the RAF where they didn't care about borders because you could fly over them. Over 4000 aircrew were lost.

South Africa wasn't a fan of joining the war from day one and, with Apartheid right around the corner would actually hav quite alot in common with Berlin.

But after Jan Smutts came in South Africa was very supportive of the war effort.

 

[sarahz]

An interesting idea but the only problem is that historically England heavily relied on the US partnership for these operations. If that isn't there then im not to sure how the british would manage to pull off a Normandy especially without the allied air campaign that defeated the Luftwaffe. Since they werent ready for Overlord until 1944 with the US it seems unrealistic to assum that without the US theyd be ready sooner. Further they'd be considerably weakened having to undertake this entirely on their own with no american support.

Normandy would be improbable Sicily or Sardinia would not be beyond the UK, and would still leave ample forces to defend against a sea lion should any troops get ashore. Actually given the balance of forces the effort Germany would need to even get troops ashore looks like a good way for them to lose so much they actually lose the war rather quickly as a result. The best Germany can get in this scenario is stalemate until their own economy sinks them.. .

 

[Sphinx]

The main problem is still logistics not mass and I don't see how the Nazis would solve it. For example they plundered literally every truck in Europe and it still didn't come close to meeting their truck-based logistics needs. Same with horses, never had enough. The necessary shipping for a landing force simply doesn't exist and it's way too easy to sabotage it either via bombing, special forces raids or resistance fighters.

It's weird to talk about Sealion post-Soviet conquest with the justification of 'little losses to USSR' when they couldn't do it IRL pre-Soviet conquest when they really would have had absolutely zero losses yet. And if you're conquering the USSR just for the resources- pre-Barbarossa trade was probably better long-term especially than a post-conquest constantly sabotaged and ruined source. So just proves OTL is in a better position anyway pre-Barbarossa and still couldn't do it.

Also despite popular misconceptions the Nazi economy was absolutely horrendous. It's not going to be either productive nor durable for a long stalemate either.

 

[sarahz]

True, but the axis would never have suffered the losses of Stalingrad, Kursk, Tunisia, or the air war. This alone would provide the reich 7 figures worth of more soliders, not to mention thousands of tanks and aircraft, artilery pieces, 88 guns, and ammuntion. As you probably know 40 percent of all german production was fired up at the allied airforces. Imagine all that artillery raining down on the british alone by themselves. Not to mention Italy would not have collasped and been invaded, the Spainish may be more interested at this point in joining and Petain may be open to making a deal where they carve up the british empire. With all the added benefits germany now has I would argue that they could win control of the skies in a second Battle of Britan, however its the naval component that becomes difficult to envision whether or not they could eventually cross the channel and hold it enough to reinforce the men landing.

Britain could probably still defeat Italy or at least seriously destabilise it by taking Sicily, and Sardinia. Without US involvement the UK are not fighting Japan India is not at risk, (there is no possible scenario where the Japanese attack the UK and not the US.) These resources compensate admirably for any losses the UK has in Lend lease from the US, additionally the UK can save on lend lease they themselves gave the USSR. .The problem with Spain joining is they want Vichy Territory. Any such promise will boost the Free French

 

[Sphinx]

Normandy would be improbable Sicily or Sardinia would not be beyond the UK, and would still leave ample forces to defend against a sea lion should any troops get ashore. Actually given the balance of forces the effort Germany would need to even get troops ashore looks like a good way for them to lose so much they actually lose the war rather quickly as a result. The best Germany can get in this scenario is stalemate until their own economy sinks them.. .

To be honest, in my opinion OTL Normandy landings were huge overkill especially if the landings had occurred sooner. Pre-1944 the Atlantic Wall literally only existed on paper and if the Allies had just been less cautious and just gone for France straight up instead of Italy they could have pulled it off with far fewer forces I believe.

Also personally never understood why they focussed their invasion force on a relatively narrow front with awful terrain allowing the Germans to concentrate there; considering their massive superiority in numbers and everything why didn't they land more widely across several areas more broad in scope but still close enough to be mutually reinforcing, that way it also allows for more manoeuvre post-landing and no more getting bogged down for months at Caen in almost WWI-style warfare.

 

[Sphinx]

The problem with Spain joining is they want Vichy Territory.

No, the problem with Spain joining is that they relied almost exclusive on the USA for food, meaning if they join the war they will either all starve to death within months or be a HUGE drag on the Axis war machine as they'd have to be propped up by Germany. There is no scenario where Spain joining the war isn't a massive hindrance to the Axis rather than a help. Propping them up when they have no resources are unstable and can contribute nothing just siphons away vital resources already in low supply.