What are the chances the WAllies accept Nazi hegemony if the USSR falls?

[TDM]

I see what you are saying, but realistically how many casualties will an invasion of Europe entail for the western allies?? Where would they have to fight to? Poland? Berlin? How could a d day succeed, when the germans have no eastern front? Imagine, the eastern war is over for all intents and purposes, and lets say for the sake of argument that britain doesn't make peace at this point. The vast majority of german energy would go into defending the atlantic coast. Imagine the nazis having millions upon millions of slavic slaves to build up the atlantic wall, and a seemingly invincible and victorious wehrmacht ready to pounce on wherever their hard fought empire was being attacked from. Realistically, d day will not succeed. If italy is invaded, i don't see it going well being the only front. I feel sorry for the russians if staling keeps forcing them into the meat grinder that would be the nazis eastern defenses. German industry can start focusing on defense as opposed to attack. Hitler will want peace with britain, he doesn't want to invade. He believes a fellow "aryan" power contolling 1/4 of the world is a positive thing. After all, mein kampf says nothing about the german necessity to subjugate britain, only believing in the subduing of western continental europe and the enslavement and exploitation of the east. The assertion that it would take a "Notler" to not try invade britain is baseless. In fact I saw a theory that the whole battle of britain was a ruse to trick stalin into believing hitler wouldn't invade yet as it would give him a war on two fronts which stalin believed a german leader could never subject his nation to after ww1.

The US would defeat Japan, and turn the rump ussr into a satelite of some kind. Britain could either keep fighting for a victory of which "pyrrhic" can't even begin to describe, or make peace, retain the empire probably for a long time, not lose about 5 million young men in an invasion, and have a supportive US ally across the atlantic. The US after defeating Japan would be war weary and in a mood for peace, not gearing up for a decade long bloodbath in western europe, thousands of miles across the atlantic. Who would want or have the stomach for this?? All I can think are the rightfully incensed Jews of America and arms manufacturers. Realistically everyone else is going to want peace, even with the totalitarian nazis.

Thing is a different time line will mean different tactics on both sides. So there is likely not going to be an OTL size/type D-Day type invasion if 75%+ German forces aren't busy losing in the east. But that doesn't mean that's the only Wallie play here.

The wallies can outproduce Germany in all most all things, they also have far greater resources in almost all areas, pretty much the only advantage Germany has is that it can make a conventional invasion of Europe bloody so to assume the wallies will do that is to assume the wallies are idiots. And it has to hold down its new empire at the same time

There another problem for Germany, it can't actually maintain it's military mobilisation levels indefinitely neither can is support a war economy as well, million's upon million's of slavic slaves sounds like an advantage but will take a lot of sunk resources to bare fruit, actually using them them to build an Atlantic wall doesn't help Germany economically.

So I agree the wallies just blindly trying to do D-Day as if everything is the same will be a bloody mistake, but they don't need to. Initially they can just up the air war, and there's no way Germany can compete in that area simply because the wallies so overwhelm them in economic resources. Nuclear weapons just makes this worse. Even stuff like V1/ V2's don't help because frankly it really just gives the wallies ideas! It took about two months for the wallies to work out the V1 and retro engineer it. The planned invasion of the Japanese Home islands was going to involve the US version of the V1 in numbers greater than the Germans could ever hope to produce. The V2 is certainly harder, but despite the myth rocketry really isn't a solely Germanic science. This last kind of touches on a wider point there is at times a bit of a myth that Germany was constantly ahead of the allies in technological advancement (just a bit let down in mass production), first combat guided missiles, rockets, first jet powered planes in combat etc, etc. But the reality is more the German were the first to be desperate enough to put into service stuff that didn't work very well or wasn't very effective in their delivered results. The reality is the allies tend to also be working on the same things, were less desperate for them and once ready able to manufacture them in far greater numbers. (even if OTL the Germans had already lost by the time it happened).

A great example of this is the idea that once not fighting in Russia, Germany will end the air war by flying thousands of Me262s against the same 4 prop bombers that had been flying since 1941/2. Only it bollocks because the allies were well aware of the concept of jet engines and were also developing new stuff and with their economic and other advantages were much more able to do so in effective numbers. Even more so given the war would be ongoing I'd expect increased development from the wallies than in teh OTL immediately poste WW2 period.

On top of all this Germany is going to be trying to tie down it vast new Russian territory

A few other point, HItler has to subjugate Britain as pointed ot is an unsinkable aircraft carrier. Trying to find consistency between Mein Kampf and Hitler's policies is to ignore the fact that Hitler's policies was what ever he decided it was at the time, and tended to be heavy on making a virtue out of necessity.

And again making the pollical choice for the wallies either sue for peace of lose millions in a D-Day style seaborne invasion vs. the entire Wehrmacht manning a massively enlarged great Atlantic wall is a false dilemma

 

[Lord_Gallicus]

And again making the pollical choice for the wallies either sue for peace of lose millions in a D-Day style seaborne invasion vs. the entire Wehrmacht manning a massively enlarged great Atlantic wall is a false dilemma

How? Seems true to me. Not sending millions of your young men to early graves sounds like a politically sound option to me.

 

[TDM]

How? Seems true to me. Not sending millions of your young men to early graves sounds like a politically sound option to me.

No the point is there are more options out there than either. As per the context explained in the rest of the post you took that from

 

[CV12Hornet]

How? Seems true to me. Not sending millions of your young men to early graves sounds like a politically sound option to me.

Because you've completely missed his point that the Allies have more options to continue the war than just a D-Day invasion.

The Atlantic Wall is nice and all, but the Allies clearing the Mediterranean opens up a great many avenues for attack that aren't covered by the Atlantic Wall. Southern France, for example. Greece, perhaps, to try and make a lunge for the Ploesti oil fields.

And even if they can't invade the air campaign can even without nuclear weapons grind the German economy down to nothing. Frankly it doesn't matter how much larger the German army is if their transportation infrastructure can't get men and supplies to the front and they have no fuel for the Panzers. And if they ever get the idea to bomb the electrical infrastructure the entire German economy is completely boned.

 

[Captain Homicide]

The Atlantic Wall is nice and all, but the Allies clearing the Mediterranean opens up a great many avenues for attack that aren't covered by the Atlantic Wall. Southern France, for example.

With no USSR in the war and an abundance of time and slave labor (along with other resources) Germany would be able to extend the Atlantic Wall to southern France easily. It wouldn’t be as formidable as the defenses closest to the UK but it still would be a much greater challenge for the WAllies than Operation Dragoon IOTL.

Besides that Germany would still have an extremely powerful ground force so it isn’t like invading through the Mediterranean instead of across the Channel is a magic bullet. Invading through Italy or Greece would be an even worse nightmare than OTL.

I’ll quote CalBear on the subject:

I have noticed some folks are advocating going in via the Med. Extremely difficult in this scenario. Unlike IOTL, the Heer would still have major maneuver elements available to move against any landing. The WAllies would need to take both Sardinia and Corsica, in addition to Sicily and Italy as far north as Rome, if not Piombino. After securing those regions it will then be necessary to move ALL the logistical base that existed on England and move it to the Med. Dragoon was managed on a relatively small scale, with a single corps as the landing force. That size landing would be pocketed and wiped out in the sort of scenario under discussion. It could be done, but it would require effort on a scale of Downfall (even the distances are similar to Olympic's plan), and Olympic was only designed to capture PART of Kyushu. The Kyushu landing was also much "lighter" than what would be needed for a ramped up Dragoon, since the Heer was a tank heavy force, expecially compared to the Japanese Army of 1945 which was fuel starved and had almost no decent tanks.

The problem with any landing in a Reich controlled Europe (although this is somewhat dependent on the sort of peace that exists in the East) is that the Heer can create a defensive belt that is close to unbreakable, assuming Hitler can be kept amused elsewhere and not divert materials for the latest Maus/Ratte/Dora Charlie Foxtrot.

At best the Allies can throw 10-12 divisions at the Continent (IOTL Overlord managed 5 divisions, the U.S. also put 3 divisions onto Saipan ten days later, so the lift could be found, especially if it happens after the end of the Pacific War) while maintaining anything close to coordinated command and control, sufficient air cover, and follow on logistics. That would be, by far, the largest landing operation ever attempted, marginally larger than the plans for Olympic, and would, with the proviso above, thrown at the most comprehensive defensive belt ever seen.

Twelve divisions sounds like a LOT of firepower, until you realize that the Heer could, without serious strain, put 50 divisions of troops into the defensive lines. Using slave labor, which is certain to be available in abundance, and the resources of the European Peninsula you can readily see just how deep a defensive belt could be, This assumes the conditions in the East are such that 35-40 divisions are sufficient to maintain whatever line the peace established with the Soviets. Moreover, a good number of the divisions manning the fixed defenses could be from Reich allies. Unlike the disaster along the Volga IOTL, the overall equipment levels of the Italians, Romanians, Czech, or Hiwi units wouldn't much matter since they will mainly need small arms and 37mm & 50mm anti-tank/landing boat guns. Heavier artillery, along with mobile formations could be mainly Heer.

An additional question is just how long it would take Bomber Command and the 8th AF to obtain air supremacy if the Soviets are no longer in the war. Not only will the Reich be able to shift noteworthy, if not huge amounts of DP weaponry to the defense of Inner Germany and the Western area of Occupation but the construction of single engine fighters should be able to increase thanks to a reduction in the need for ground attack aircraft in the East (again the conditions under which the Soviets surrendered make a major difference here). Total air supremacy will be an absolute requirement, both so fighter bombers can concentrate on the "Jabo" role and to allow the safe passage of 9-10,000 ships and craft of the landing armada and uninterrupted supply of the massive force that will need to follow on the assault divisions in the following 21 days.

IMO, the ONLY way to breach the Atlantic Wall, under the condition under discussion, would be with serious use of nuclear weapons in a tactical role, not just against shore defenses, but against communication nodes. Considering the production pace of Manhattan (IOTL there were only 53 physics packages in existence at the end of 1948) it would be summer of 1947, at the earliest, that any landing could be contemplated, assuming a rather modest four weapons per divisional frontage simply to force a crack in the defensive fortifications.and 6-10 against transport nodes.

 

[CV12Hornet]

My issue with that analysis is that "50 divisions in the defensive lines" sounds good on paper, but less so when they're spread across the length and breadth of the Atlantic Wall from the Spanish border to Norway. The Allies have the strategic initiative and these divisions are static, once the landing actually happens the vast majority become irrelevant.

What is relevant is the maneuver forces, the panzer divisions and higher-end infantry divisions. And those are vulnerable to the strategic bombing campaign demolishing their logistical tail at home. Speaking of, while Germany can increase production of single-engine fighters that's an equipment-heavy attrition fight and the WAllies are going to win that every time.

All of this means that a Cross-Channel invasion would have to happen later, but that was already the case.

I will concede the impracticality of a larger Dragoon, though.

 

[MattII]

Can the Allies bribe Spain into joining the war?

 

[Gudestein]

I’m surprised the 20% option has the most votes considering in another poll made a few years ago on this site about the same topic the “WAllies accept Nazi hegemony” option had almost as many votes as the other options combined.

Could you link the poll? It would be interesting to see how many of those voters are banned or just inactive today.

 

[Cymry-Korean]

Can the Allies bribe Spain into joining the war?

I'm pretty sure that wouldn't really help. Spanish forces were a shambles and I can't imagine how a campaign over the Pyrenees would be for the Allies. Plus, it's a lot farther from the German industrial heartland.

 

[JamesHunter]

Can the Allies bribe Spain into joining the war?

Probably not as Franco really wasn't that interested in joining in on either side OTL (for someone who owed Hitler he sure was skittish about signing on with the Axis when asked and pretty much turtled and went "Don't hurt me" when the war turned).

I'm pretty sure that wouldn't really help. Spanish forces were a shambles and I can't imagine how a campaign over the Pyrenees would be for the Allies. Plus, it's a lot farther from the German industrial heartland.

This as well, there is pretty much no point to getting the Spanish involved unless you can get Hitler to invade and suffer a repeat of the Guerrilla. As he'll already have this in Russia that's no real gain. Better to take Italy and then once the troops are blooded try and go for Southern France. Then around 1945 either Manhattan or even Tube Alloys have come to fruition and its time to blow up the Berghoff with Hitler and as many of his mates as possible in it.

 

[Cymry-Korean]

Probably not as Franco really wasn't that interested in joining in on either side OTL (for someone who owed Hitler he sure was skittish about signing on with the Axis when asked and pretty much turtled and went "Don't hurt me" when the war turned).


This as well, there is pretty much no point to getting the Spanish involved unless you can get Hitler to invade and suffer a repeat of the Guerrilla. As he'll already have this in Russia that's no real gain. Better to take Italy and then once the troops are blooded try and go for Southern France. Then around 1945 either Manhattan or even Tube Alloys have come to fruition and its time to blow up the Berghoff with Hitler and as many of his mates as possible in it.

Southern France also has the benefit of bordering a sea that German air and naval assets would have a difficult time doing much of anything, especially if the bombing campaign intensifies.

Also, what exactly are Tube Alloys? Do those make nuclear weapons more useful somehow?

 

[Captain Homicide]

Could you link the poll?

Operation Barbarossa succeeds. How soon can the WAllies plausibly attempt a landing?

If Operation Barbarossa succeeded in 1941 somehow (Stalin dies or another catalyst), leaving Nazi Germany in control of the continent including Eastern Europe to the Urals, how soon could the WAllies plausibly attempt an amphibious landing? Would they have to use nukes in a tactical role...

www.alternatehistory.com

 

[JamesHunter]

Southern France also has the benefit of bordering a sea that German air and naval assets would have a difficult time doing much of anything, especially if the bombing campaign intensifies.

Also, what exactly are Tube Alloys? Do those make nuclear weapons more useful somehow?

It was just a random term (even more so than Manhattan was) best guess is it was intended so any spies (before we caught every man jack of them) would think it was research into better alloys for boilers or gun barrels rather than something considerably more dangerous. Unlike the US the UK has tended to avoid making it obvious they're up to something by giving their projects heroic sounding names. In any case the project was fairly advanced, many of the people who worked on the American project had been at Tube Alloys first and going by OTL we got a bomb in seven years at walking pace.

I'd say Britain will have the ability to blow up any Germany city by the summer of 1946 at the latest and if there is no sub war and improved defences have reduced air attacks to the level where people cry for vengeance instead of "This has to end," that should be before our will to fight on gives out. As Germany was barking up entirely the wrong tree (and many of their scientists may be...disinclined to work very hard for them anyway) I'd say they end up in the situation where they can be nuked without reply for many years. If the first bomb gets Hitler that probably leads to a request for peace talks and either a very nasty cold war or "surrender or die!"

 

[TxAggie]

I agree with CalBear's take on it above. If the Soviets fall, the only way the WAllied armies can hurt the Germans is through bombing or a seaborne invasion, and they will have their full war machine available to make those 2 things as difficult as possible.

And I don't see nukes as an automatic war-ender either. Glassing Berlin and decapitating the Nazi government will throw the military for a loop, but they still have nerve gas they can retaliate with and multiple ways to get it to southeast England. Nukes were a war-ender against 1945 Japan because they had zero way to retaliate in kind against the United States, and couldn't even take it out on China because Soviet tank armies were about to roll them up there. If ATL Germany isn't on its knees, nukes are less of a Staples Easy button and more of an escalation to a proto-WW3.

 

[Quintuplicate]

possible likelihood.

Expected value is a real thing, you know.

 

[Captain Homicide]

And I don't see nukes as an automatic war-ender either.

Besides the fact that first generation nuclear bombs wouldn’t be a miracle weapon against a Reich that’s much more powerful than OTL people forget that the WAllies had air supremacy over Japan in 1945 and were bombing cities on a routine basis with virtual impunity. Comparing 1945 Japan to TTL’s Über Germany is like comparing a 98 pound crackhead to Mike Tyson in his prime. They’re completely different threats.

Achieving the required air superiority for the successful use of nuclear bombs (let alone supremacy) against Germany in this scenario when they have strategic depth and can devote their entire war machine to fighting the WAllies would be a much longer and much bloodier affair than it was IOTL.

Regardless as much as some believe on this site you can’t defeat a continental power run by fanatics with millions of hardened veterans at its disposal with a handful of first generation nuclear bombs. You need a massive ground invasion that would necessitate an ocean of blood and treasure.

 

[GDIS Pathe]

Regardless as much as some believe on this site you can’t defeat a continental power run by fanatics with millions of hardened veterans at its disposal with a handful of first generation nuclear bombs. You need a massive ground invasion that would necessitate an ocean of blood and treasure.

A Handful? Manhatten was due to achieve a production rate of 7 bombs a month in December, a number which would only keep rising, by late 46 and early 47 the Wallies would have hundreds, if not thousands of weapons at their disposal.

 

[StrikeEcho]

It's also far more likely the German economy collapses as rot sets in.

 

[TDM]

I agree with CalBear's take on it above. If the Soviets fall, the only way the WAllied armies can hurt the Germans is through bombing or a seaborne invasion, and they will have their full war machine available to make those 2 things as difficult as possible.

And I don't see nukes as an automatic war-ender either. Glassing Berlin and decapitating the Nazi government will throw the military for a loop, but they still have nerve gas they can retaliate with and multiple ways to get it to southeast England. Nukes were a war-ender against 1945 Japan because they had zero way to retaliate in kind against the United States, and couldn't even take it out on China because Soviet tank armies were about to roll them up there. If ATL Germany isn't on its knees, nukes are less of a Staples Easy button and more of an escalation to a proto-WW3.

Germany didn't really have nerve gas in a deployable form (it's a lot harder to weaponize it than just kill POWs with it). Plus they doesn't really have dozens of ways of getting it to South east England. And Nerve gas is not a retaliation against Nukes anyway nukes are a considerable escalation in force up from chemical weapons.

Nerve gas/chemical weapons are actually really unreliable as weapons vs. large open targets like cities anyway especially ww2 ear stuff

 

[TDM]

Besides the fact that first generation nuclear bombs wouldn’t be a miracle weapon against a Reich that’s much more powerful than OTL people forget that the WAllies had air supremacy over Japan in 1945 and were bombing cities on a routine basis with virtual impunity. Comparing 1945 Japan to TTL’s Über Germany is like comparing a 98 pound crackhead to Mike Tyson in his prime. They’re completely different threats.

Achieving the required air superiority for the successful use of nuclear bombs (let alone supremacy) against Germany in this scenario when they have strategic depth and can devote their entire war machine to fighting the WAllies would be a much longer and much bloodier affair than it was IOTL.

Regardless as much as some believe on this site you can’t defeat a continental power run by fanatics with millions of hardened veterans at its disposal with a handful of first generation nuclear bombs. You need a massive ground invasion that would necessitate an ocean of blood and treasure.

No because you still have the OTL allies as they were in May 1945 (knowing the Germans were already pretty much beaten for months before that) fighting the ATL Germans here in 1945 onwards.

1). it won't be a handful but pretty quickly hundreds even in OTL that was the planned production levels. But this is an ATL where you still have a larger active German empire to take care off. The production and development will be ramped up with a serious ongoing threat to deal with rather than the OTL 2 and done.

2). German anti air will be tougher, but frankly again the allies can if they wish do little else than devote themselves to beating it. It's the same point as last time not only can the allies out produce the Germans to a ridiculous degree but they are developing stuff that that is bigger and better than the stuff at the end of the OTL WW2. Again in this ATL expect to see that stuff coming earlier and in greater numbers because of the active ongoing need. Even just counting stuff actually deployed in WW2, B-29s will be an initial step up. It took 4 years of peacetime development (and while having an overwhelming global superiority in mature and delpoyed plane based systems) for the US to go from a captured V1's to a working MGM -Matador, and a couple more years to put it into production. In war time the impetus will likely shorten that considerably.

3). Now German tech will also not stand still of course, but they have the same problem here as they did OTL, German manufacturing and economic centres are under constant nuclear attack from the allies.. But Germany can't do the same back against the allies. Boeing can sit in the US churning out thousands of B29s safe and sound, Messerschmitt not so much.

4). Germany is still trying to control and consolidate a massive empire while all this is going on, that's really hard to do when nuclear bombs are dropping on your command and control in Germany. Nazi Ideology is going to kick Germany in the arse again here, because this is a German empire/Reich, they can't abandon Germany, and Germany's geographical vulnerability is till the same issue it's always been. (only now the issue manifests as flight time from England not marching time from France and Russia)

5). Millions of hardened veterans stop being a cohesive forces when the country commanding them is in smoking ruins. Let alone if they are also being attacked by nuclear bombs

Don't get me wrong this will take longer and, you are right there is no way to avoid putting troops on the ground at some point but a year or two of nuclear bombing campaign there's really not going to be much Germany left to fight and this German army of millions of veterans just waiting on the Atlantic wall will have largely ceased to exists as a cohesive force.

But frankly your point about hardened veterans is kind of telling, you think this is going to be about individual troop quality when one side has nukes!

(leaving aside the fact that German veterans didn't actually develop mythical powers that allowed them to ignore allied advantages, plenty of hardened German war veterans were killed in 1944/5 OTL. Plus of course it not like allied soldiers all stayed green recruits either)