The Ardennes Disaster

Taken from the thread about a successful Ardennes offensive ...

WI instead of attacking the German bulge in the Allied lines head-on, the Allies took a more indirect approach? That is, Montgomery, Hodges, and Simpson attack from the north while Bradley and Patton attack from the south, surrounding the Bulge and cutting the Germans off from their supplies and their lines.

How would this have affected the war? Would the Western Allies have been able to get deeper into Germany in 1945, perhaps precipitating a more equitable distribution of land between the West and the Soviets?
 
While I think that this would close the buldge faster, I don't believe it would change the outcome of the division. Remeber that the Allies and Soviets had already agreed on the division of Germany after the war. Plus even if the Allies could get farther into Germany Ike might not be up to it. He didn't want to advance to Berlin take the causlities and then hand the city back.
 
While I think that this would close the buldge faster, I don't believe it would change the outcome of the division. Remeber that the Allies and Soviets had already agreed on the division of Germany after the war. Plus even if the Allies could get farther into Germany Ike might not be up to it. He didn't want to advance to Berlin take the causlities and then hand the city back.

And of course in OTL the USSR did take Berlin and casualties linked to that and did in effect give Berlin up to the West, even if they changed their minds in 1948
 

randomkeith

Banned
Would the Germans have fought so hard against the Americans knowing the alternative was the Russians???

From what ive read the general consenus was hold out till the Americans get here. Apart form a few die hards i can't see the Americans having that much of a hard time in Berlin esspecially with the Red Army sitting just outside.
 
From what ive read the general consenus was hold out till the Americans get here. Apart form a few die hards i can't see the Americans having that much of a hard time in Berlin esspecially with the Red Army sitting just outside.

Interesting, where did you read that if you don't mind me asking?
Its just my own reading seems to make a mockery of the *Germans were just waiting to surrender to the Americans, preferably as soon as possible* theory.

The number of die-hards (just like the number of those commited to Nazi ideology) seems to have been far larger in Germany than generally seems to be accepted. I suppose de-nazification is somewhat to blame for that.
 

randomkeith

Banned
OK maybe i didnt read it but every time i see a documentry about the fall of Berlin the people are always saying. "And then we prayed for the Americans to arrive before the Russians did."
 

randomkeith

Banned
OK maybe i didnt read it but every time i see a documentry about the fall of Berlin the people are always saying. "And then we prayed for the Americans to arrive before the Russians did."
 
Well given the choice I think most rational people, especially civilians would want to be captured by the Americans rather than the Soviets. There certainly was a movement west to trying and arrange that at the very end of the war. On the otherhand that doesn't nessasarilly mean a greater desire to surrender by those who were still willing to fight to the end.
 

Markus

Banned
Would the Germans have fought so hard against the Americans knowing the alternative was the Russians???

In fact they did not! Once the Allies finally resumed the offensive into Germany in 1945 mass surrenders became more and more common, tough fights less and less.

So cut off the Bulge and you shorten the war by several month.
 
In fact they did not! Once the Allies finally resumed the offensive into Germany in 1945 mass surrenders became more and more common, tough fights less and less.

So cut off the Bulge and you shorten the war by several month.

Your forgetting one thing, Berlin had Hitler, SS troops, and other Nazi die hards in it. They had the most to loose to any of the allied forces, so they would have fought just as hard as they did against the Russians. Hitler tried to have Himmler arrested for the very idea of trying to forge a seperate peace with the Western Allies late in the war. The commanders closer to Berlin would be under preasure to fight hard. I would agree the Allies probably take less losses getting to Berlin but taking it would an entriely different manner.
 
Last edited:
Your forgetting one thing, Berlin had Hitler, SS troops, and other Nazi die hards in it. They had the most to loose to any of the allied forces, so they would have fought just as hard as they did against the Russians. Hitler tried to have Himmler arrested for the very idea of trying to forge a seperate peace with the Western Allies late in the war. The commanders closer to Berlin would be under preasure to fight hard. I would agree the Allies probably take less losses getting to Berlin but taking it would an entriely different manner.

True, but it has been hypothesized that Hitler might have surrendered to the Allies if it was the Americans and British nearby and not the Soviets. I'm no expert on Hitler, but I'm tempted to believe that since his racial views had little problem with the Western Allies he might have surrendered. Who knows, perhaps in his deluded mind he would have seen them as more likely to give him clemency or something.
 
True, but it has been hypothesized that Hitler might have surrendered to the Allies if it was the Americans and British nearby and not the Soviets. I'm no expert on Hitler, but I'm tempted to believe that since his racial views had little problem with the Western Allies he might have surrendered. Who knows, perhaps in his deluded mind he would have seen them as more likely to give him clemency or something.

Would the Western Allies have accepted a surrender attempt by Hitler? As the Allies overwhelm Germany they are going to come upon the Camps and Final Solution. This becomes public, can Winston or FDR afford to make a seperate peace with Hitler when the first news and then film of the Holocaust surivors comes out?

Another point, FDR wasn't concerned with keeping Joe Stalin out of Europe. While Chruchill had his concerns FDR didn't see the Soviets as an enemy. He would not have been worried with the Red Army going further west.
 

Markus

Banned
Your forgetting one thing, Berlin had Hitler, SS troops, and other Nazi die hards in it. ... The commanders closer to Berlin would be under preasure to fight hard. I would agree the Allies probably take less losses getting to Berlin but taking it would an entriely different manner.

How many SS troops did they have in Berlin? And withdrawing already was life threatening enough for commanders, let alone surrendering. Not that the commanders could have done anything anyway, it was the soldiers who simply called it quits.

In OTL the US Army got very close to Berlin and had not much difficulties on the way. If they had destroyed the last german reserves in a matter of days during the BoB, it´s only going to be more easy.
 
How many SS troops did they have in Berlin? And withdrawing already was life threatening enough for commanders, let alone surrendering. Not that the commanders could have done anything anyway, it was the soldiers who simply called it quits.

In OTL the US Army got very close to Berlin and had not much difficulties on the way. If they had destroyed the last german reserves in a matter of days during the BoB, it´s only going to be more easy.

Okay but wouldn't this encourage the Red Army to move even quicker? Stalin was paranoid that the Allies would take Berlin in OTL. Just a guess but won't he be even more inclinded to reach the heart of the Reich first?
 

Markus

Banned
Okay but wouldn't this encourage the Red Army to move even quicker? Stalin was paranoid that the Allies would take Berlin in OTL. Just a guess but won't he be even more inclinded to reach the heart of the Reich first?


Maybe, but my impression is they were moving at full speed anyway and against them the Germans still put up a fight.
 
Would the Western Allies have accepted a surrender attempt by Hitler? As the Allies overwhelm Germany they are going to come upon the Camps and Final Solution. This becomes public, can Winston or FDR afford to make a seperate peace with Hitler when the first news and then film of the Holocaust surivors comes out?

Another point, FDR wasn't concerned with keeping Joe Stalin out of Europe. While Chruchill had his concerns FDR didn't see the Soviets as an enemy. He would not have been worried with the Red Army going further west.

What I meant was that Hitler himself--i.e., personally--might have surrendered to the Western Allies if they were knocking at his door instead of the Soviets. It's a far cry, I'm sure, but I know it's been knocked around as a theory before.

In any case, I wonder if things would have changed if the German Army had been neutralized better during the Battle of the Bulge. I wonder how willing the Americans would be to leave if, say for example, they hold a huge chunk of Czechoslovakia?
 
This is the first time i reported a post.



I think surrounding the bulge would defnitly shorten the war. If the surrounded army is cut of from germany, they will surrender, as lmarkus hinted.

The partitioning of germany, on the other hand, would not be any other than otl, it was already discussed and signed by the allies.
 
Well given the choice I think most rational people, especially civilians would want to be captured by the Americans rather than the Soviets. There certainly was a movement west to trying and arrange that at the very end of the war. On the otherhand that doesn't nessasarilly mean a greater desire to surrender by those who were still willing to fight to the end.

There's also the fact the German knew what horrers their army had inflicted in the East in Poland, Russia and Ukraine they knew the Red Army would hell-bent on revenge.

Still given the Western Allies ruthless bombardment of German cities, why would the Germans harbour any great expectations of mercy from that quarter either?

I should point out millions of Germans surrendered to the Russian too...

As for the original question I don’t see thing Turing into a major encirclement Monty had major problems in the north, as did Hodges with supply due to Patton stealing all his fuel etc.

Model was a master of improvisation in my impression is the Wehrmacht would most escape back to a more tenable position. Suffering major equipment losses to allied air attacks in the process.

Due to a combination of factors I think the war in the west would take pretty much there same amount of time it did IRL, Eisenhower’s broad front strategy and supply problems mitigate against a quicker breakthrough into Germany.
 
Your forgetting one thing, Berlin had Hitler, SS troops, and other Nazi die hards in it. They had the most to loose to any of the allied forces, so they would have fought just as hard as they did against the Russians. Hitler tried to have Himmler arrested for the very idea of trying to forge a seperate peace with the Western Allies late in the war. The commanders closer to Berlin would be under preasure to fight hard. I would agree the Allies probably take less losses getting to Berlin but taking it would an entriely different manner.

More than half of the defenders in Berlin belonged to Henrichis armygroup and were pushed into Berlin since it was the only place they could go once the Oderline was breached and the Soviets was in their rear preventing them from reaching the Elbe and surrendering. Von Mantuffel in the northen sector made his units retreat as soon as the soviet launched their offensive there and ran for the western allies to surrender ASAP.
 
Top