What kind lasting victories could Hitler have achieved?

Hi, I have been a lurker here for a while. I just registered. Lots of great timelines and interesting stuff. OK, If Hitler had been more prudent and realistic? Could he have kept Austria and the Sudetenland? What if he never invaded Poland? Would Hitler have still invaded France? What could Hitler have gained without going to war with the whole world? It seems Hitler could have made Germany very strong without destroying it and the rest of Europe.
 
The Search Function is your friend. I don't mean that in a bad or rude way, just that this topic has been done over and over again, with pretty much the following conclusions:

Basically, the German economy would have rapidly collapsed without war, but once the war started, it was unwinnable for Germany once the US got involved, and arguably unwinnable anyway. It was kinda a Catch-22. Other results are possible, but they involve removing Hitler and temporizing the Nazis, which seems outside the scope of the question you asked.

However, I'd love to see a realistic proposal that fits your question!
 

Teleology

Banned
The best answer I've heard did not depend on any change in the Reich but instead the idea that Churchill, if he had gotten into power a few months earlier than he did, would have declared war on the USSR in the interest of Finland and seized some Irish Republic ports, alienating the US. Then Germany might have a chance of exhausting the UK and then grinding away at Russia for who knows how long.

Failing that, if Halifax had gotten into power instead and made peace then Germany and Russia could of grinded away at each other until someone invented the A-bomb.
 
well the strangest thing to do would have been nothing after the crushing Poland... just keep building up the east and the west wall and see if the french are crazy enough to repeat the battle of the frontiers. the allies were not going to go through belgium or the netherlands(without germany attacking first)... so germany could have sat behind her west wall almost indefinently until clear heads started the peace process
 
well the strangest thing to do would have been nothing after the crushing Poland... just keep building up the east and the west wall and see if the french are crazy enough to repeat the battle of the frontiers. the allies were not going to go through belgium or the netherlands(without germany attacking first)... so germany could have sat behind her west wall almost indefinently until clear heads started the peace process
I believe that there is solid economic historical research showing that Germany's economy would have collapsed if such a plan was pursued.
 
I believe that there is solid economic historical research showing that Germany's economy would have collapsed if such a plan was pursued.

The molotov-ribbentrop pact and the associated trade agreements filled in a lot of the holes in the german economy and strategic materials market. They had open trading relationships with scandanavia, switzerland, italy and the balkans... they made it thought 8 months of the sitzkrieg without appearing to go through any economic distress (well anymore economic distress than hitler was allready putting the country through)?
 
Your POD needs to be substantially before 1939. Hitler (or his successor if we wish to eliminate him) must take a more rational approach to advancing the military-industrial complex. Hitler himself said Germany needed to expand eastward. There are ways to do that with the Ukraine without starting a world war.

Hitler said in Mein Kampf the Jews must "be eliminated." Given the Jewish presence in banking and business, the words could be interpreted as "eliminated from control" [the harsher doctrine was later]. Depending on when you say Hitler "went insane," you can have a very different Nazi Germany. Victory would come with as little war as possible.
 
The Search Function is your friend. I don't mean that in a bad or rude way, just that this topic has been done over and over again, with pretty much the following conclusions:

Basically, the German economy would have rapidly collapsed without war, but once the war started, it was unwinnable for Germany once the US got involved, and arguably unwinnable anyway. It was kinda a Catch-22. Other results are possible, but they involve removing Hitler and temporizing the Nazis, which seems outside the scope of the question you asked.

However, I'd love to see a realistic proposal that fits your question!

It wasn't an unwinnable war. I once made a quite plausible Axis victory TL involving a Mediterranean strategy in 1940-'41. I'll see if I can find it.

EDIT: found it :D. https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=137749
 
There's a few obscure "lasting victories" that the Nazis, ironically, 'achieved' in OTL:

- the Central European Timezone extending into France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg is a result of WWII.

- the utterly wrong usage of the term "Machtergreifung". The term alludes to the assumption that Hitler "seized" power, this however is an image that the Nazis themselves fabricated. More appropriate would be the term "Machterschleichung" ('power encreepment').

- The usage of the term "Third Reich", which itself was a Nazi propaganda term to legitimize Nazi Germany with the Holy Roman Empire and Imperial Germany. In Imperial Germany, the terms "Altes Reich" (old empire) and "Neues Reich" (new empire) were used instead.

- the fact that whenever the term "Aryan" is used, everyone thinks of the Nazis and blond-and-blue-eyed Scandinavians, and not about Iran/Persia.
 
I'm very far convinced that a Mediterranean strategy is viable for the Axis at all, due to the logistical situation they were in. No matter how many supplies you stack up on the docks of south Italian ports or leave sitting in floating warehouses outside North African ones, the Axis doesn't have the legs to sustain an Egyptian campaign. Taking Malta's only a symbolic victory, and the Med was essentially closed to Allied trans-shipping anyway IOTL, so you've gained nothing there. All you can do is have the Axis spend even more resources there for the same strategic outcome as IOTL, so you've produced a net Allied gain.
 
The best answer I've heard did not depend on any change in the Reich but instead the idea that Churchill, if he had gotten into power a few months earlier than he did, would have declared war on the USSR in the interest of Finland and seized some Irish Republic ports, alienating the US. Then Germany might have a chance of exhausting the UK and then grinding away at Russia for who knows how long.

Failing that, if Halifax had gotten into power instead and made peace then Germany and Russia could of grinded away at each other until someone invented the A-bomb.


I don't know about that, Churchill understood just how much of a threat the Nazi's were. I doubt that he would have taken such a risk in the face of such a dangerous and unstable leader as Hitler. I think at most he would send material support to the Finns in the form of weapons and supplies, but that's probably about it.
 
It wasn't an unwinnable war. I once made a quite plausible Axis victory TL involving a Mediterranean strategy in 1940-'41. I'll see if I can find it.

I will re-read your TL, as I forget all of the facets of it.

However, my general position is that assuming American involvement, the war was absolutely unwinnable for Germany. Even had Hitler conquered Russia to the Urals and invaded England, I don't think he could have beaten the US, but such a scenario would be ASB-ish, anyway. The US simply had too many resources, and eventually the ultimate trump card - the Atomic Bomb.

If you keep the US out, yes, I agree Germany can win. As I said, I'll reread your TL.
 
Top