What if the allies just liberated Denmark instead of France in World War 2?

Was shown a portion of the dialogue between the Brits and Swedes 1942-1944 on the subject of Swedish cooperation with the Allies. The Swedish position in their messages/remarks was their strategic position was impossible. Beyond military problems German controlled key contributions to Swedens economy, particularly in fuels. Electrical generation, food production, and winter heating would take deep hits were German controlled fuel cut off. The Swedish imperative was the essential items traded from Germany had to be immediately replaced by other sources.

Yes, and that could be gotten through Göteborg, the main Swedish port. Sweden was a nation of some 6,7 million inhabitants, the resources required would not be insignificant but not huge. Sweden also had a merchant navy which was mostly held at ports due to WWII and could be utilized. Sweden also had stockpiled resources which were in OTL significantly used to help Finland in 1944-1945 before trade routes through the Baltic could be opened. Sweden as a major forest industry nation could also use wood to replace coal, as Finland did in WWII.

A co-operating Sweden would greatly help in the initial invasion as well, as after taking out Zeeland the forces there could be rapidly reinforced by ferrying in Swedish troops. Swedish Navy could also provide initial help against (smallish) German naval counter-effort. Swedish AF was also not insignificant, although equipped with older planes. Re-equipped Swedish AF units could also provide some 500 fighters and 800 (tactical) bombers (SAAB 17 dive bomber and Caproni CA313 being major types) Some of the advanced aircraft could be sold prior to invasion in order to ensure smooth transition.

As for logistics, I would expect that fairly soon a new LL-route could be opened through Baltic, as Finland would get rid of Germany as soon as the Soviets would allow.

OTL the rapid gains from Op DRAGOON were due to the drawn down of forces in South France to reinforce the battle in Normandy. The same here requires a similar drawn down. Which may mot occur.

Larger German force in Southern France, the better. The best case is, if Hitler decides to get rid of Dragoon/Anvil force for good in order to deal a political blow for the Allies and in order to deal with Soviets and the Northern France invasion (a feint, in this case) later on. This would result in a set-piece battle from long distance of German supply base (Germany) where the Allies would excel.

To drive home their campaign on Germanys western frontier the Allies were very dependent on the Mega ports like Antwerp & Marseilles, and the aggregate of smaller ports such as Le Harve, Cherbourg, ect... In September 1944 a aggregate of about 35,000 tons daily were needed to sustain the Allied ground forces and tactical air forces in France & Belgium. A similar discharge through the Baltic ports would be needed, with a steady increase during the winter. What combination of ports there gives the Allies this capability?

Stettin, Greifswald, Kiel, Rostock, Lübeck and the number of smaller ports such as Greifswald which were not defended. Depending on which route the operation would take, maybe Hamburg as well. Southern Sweden and Zealand would provide most of the airbases, both having excellent port capabilities.

Scaling off my old national Geographic map I find that is about 600 km straight line from Normandy to Essen in the Rhur. From Essen to Rostock is some 500km. There is some savings in distance, but not a huge amount. Berlin is a nice economic target, but any Allied force headed there would be assailed from three directions.

Yes, but the Allies would be vastly superior on defense, resulting in German forces dwindling even faster. There's also further benefits. Even smallest German town occupied is a larger net loss to German capabilities than similar sized French town occupied. Tactical interdiction would be strategic interdiction as well as it would distrupt German economy even more gravely than similar effort in France.

Having said all that I do have a Scandinavian gambit that takes advantage of Allied sea power. While the goal is not a northern invasion of Germany it does detach Swedish resources from the German economy, & open northern Germany to a more direct attack from Allied air power.

A campaign in Norway would probably result in Hitler using the U-boats to battle this threat, resulting is smaller shipping losses in the Atlantic. Western Allied air and naval power in the Baltic (U/V -class British subs probably, along with MTB's et al) would also great hinder logistics of German Army Group North and would tie in German forces to defend Baltic even if an invasion was not really contemplated.

A Norwegian campaign would have the additional minor benefit of most probably getting Finland to the Allies as well - if the Soviets would allow it.
 
Last edited:
As for the German forces in Denmark, they were following in June 1944

Wehf.Befh. “Denmark”:
- 416 Inf.Div.
- 160 Res.Div.
- 233 Res.Pz.Div. (refitting)
- 363 Inf.Div. (refitting)

(axishistory.com)

From Lexikon der Wehrmacht:

- 416 Inf.Div. (Aalborg, Northern Jutland, unit had no combat experience with three Ostbattalion)
- 166 Res.Div. (No more in Denmark)
- 160 Res.Div. (Formed in November 1943, in Southern Jutland)
- 233 Res.Pz.Div. (refitting) (Jutland, formed in late 1943, even in 1945 had Panzer III's as Panzer Division Clausewitz and 20% of TO&E equipment)
- 363 Inf.Div. (refitting) Formed in Dec 1943.In Öksbol, Central Jutland.

As you can see, no major forces in Zealand with three large digit infantry divisions and one large digit panzer division in Jutland.

Yes, but even if the Wallies manage to secure Juttland within a few days they would still need to break out from a small peninsula into Germany propper. Germany would throw Everything at the invasion. The North sea would be filled with German submarines. Luftwaffe would not be decimated as Denmark would be near the biggest concentration of Luftwaffe protecting the center of Germany against the bombing raids.
 
Yes, but even if the Wallies manage to secure Juttland within a few days they would still need to break out from a small peninsula into Germany propper. Germany would throw Everything at the invasion. The North sea would be filled with German submarines. Luftwaffe would not be decimated as Denmark would be near the biggest concentration of Luftwaffe protecting the center of Germany against the bombing raids.

Well, as I wrote, Jutland is not the optimum road to take, except for the northernmost part. As for German subs, they were thrown against Normandy landings and how did that go? As for Luftwaffe, more the merrier as the Allies were superior in both quality and quantity at this point. Initial losses in air would be higher, though, but the Allied strength in Zealand and Southern Sweden could be built up very quickly. Not to mention AAA, which was a fearsome capability with VT fuzes at this point. Any pilots lost on offensive tasks by Germans would be 100% loss as well, unlike in home defense tasks, thus eating German pilot pool faster.

As for even quirkier option, one might take the following route:

1.) ANVIL landing in, say, March
2.) Northern Jutland / Zeeland operation in May
3.) (Reduced) Overlord in June
4.) Northern German invasion in August / September

This would ensure maximum scattering of German forces.
 
Just to wander off on a tangent, What do you think about Foresight war?
I cant get over why with such an early start they write off France? (OK I do the writer wants the story not to change much.....)

It's a good question and I used to be on his forum but some of the members are just toxic so I gradually didn't bother

But I do recall that this question was asked and Tony's answer was that this would make a lot of sense but the book would be much much smaller.

France not falling probably butterflies away much of WW2 - Italy makes the only winning move so no North Africa Campaign, Japan does not invade FIC so unlikely to be a Pacific campaign - great for humanity but a poor canvas on which to write an alternate WW2!

Basically by writing off France like he did it allowed him to tell a larger story and explore what equipment etc could have been built in that world which was his intention.
 
and explore what equipment etc could have been built in that world which was his intention.
That was the part that really bugged me I get he is a technical author and might want to keep WWII similar but on his website the AH like articles on kit are really good (such as his AN ALTERNATIVE 1930s BRITISH TANK GUN - AND ITS SUCCESSOR) but in the book its all less explained and analysed.

I was also admittedly reading it wanting some comedy sketch of The Small Arms Committee debating and rejecting anything that couldn't volley fire at 1000 yards....or trying to go to far with the state of the art and failing due to time and what set backs that would have....
 
Just to wander off on a tangent, What do you think about Foresight war?
I cant get over why with such an early start they write off France? (OK I do the writer wants the story not to change much.....)

If I may:
- Major mistake is that neither Poland nor France get any benefits from the UK, whether technical, tactical or strategic. So Germany can get those almost for free, and has even better & bigger armed forces to bash the Soviets. Thus the plot is relying on maneuvering the Germans to provoke a war against USA, and on attack on Hitler to make the war shorter.
- French still help out the British, despite being given a cold shoulder.
- Technically - aircraft technology gets same attention as under-80mm guns. Aircraft have a strategic footprint, small guns don't. But then again, small guns are Tony's field, so it can be understood. Despite everything, UK still produces the 2prd by late 1930s as main AFV/tank gun - no, no.
- No assassination attempt on either British or German throwback, the must valuable persons in respective countries.
 
That was the part that really bugged me I get he is a technical author and might want to keep WWII similar but on his website the AH like articles on kit are really good (such as his AN ALTERNATIVE 1930s BRITISH TANK GUN - AND ITS SUCCESSOR) but in the book its all less explained and analysed.

I was also admittedly reading it wanting some comedy sketch of The Small Arms Committee debating and rejecting anything that couldn't volley fire at 1000 yards....or trying to go to far with the state of the art and failing due to time and what set backs that would have....

One of the overriding concerns of the main character was to do no harm so for example he does try to get the ammo changed to a better 'intermediate' SCHV type round but they instead go for an SLR in .303 and so on - so better evolution than revolution - like going for a universal tank but starting with a smaller model rather than going straight for a Centurion.

Going for cannon armament on aircraft but knowing the issues to be overcome also goes for a .50 in the interim

And so on.
 
Major mistake is that neither Poland nor France get any benefits from the UK, whether technical, tactical or strategic. So Germany can get those almost for free, and has even better & bigger armed forces to bash the Soviets. Thus the plot is relying on maneuvering the Germans to provoke a war against USA, and on attack on Hitler to make the war shorter.
Just think what GB could have financed with its own Mefo bills.....the problem is the main block on GB/Fr/etc rearmament early on (ie pre 38) was logic that they couldn't afford to carry it on long term but since you know Germany is crazy & going to war (or will crash when it runs out of cash) it really doesn't matter.
 
Why not invade thru the Netherlands?

On the game board the invading army group gets penned in behind a maze of canal, dykes, & other water features. Its close to German supply sources, far from Allied airbases. A couple times I used it to trick unwary defending players into moving to many corps to corral the lodgment in the Netherlands. Then I'd make secondary landings where the defense was weakened and carry on. It would take a very lucky attacking player or inept defender for a breakout from the Netherlands polder & marshes to occur.
 
Top