What would had been the best course of action for Germany after defeating France?

Deleted member 1487

No one said it was. But if the choice was either Soviet aggrandizement in the Balkans or war with the USSR, then appeasement was the necessary option.
But it wasn't, it never was. Soviet demands were for entry into the Axis, not demands to in return for not invading.


In order to avoid war with the US Germany needed to get out of France. In case of war with the US, the closer Germany's relations with the SU, the better.

In terms of Churchill losing an election - how long do you propose that British voters would be willing put up with England Alone?
Not really, the US didn't express an opinion about that, they just didn't want the Brits to lose the war in the sense of being occupied. Who is to say Stalin would honor a pact to fight the US either?
UK voters didn't have a say in wartime; they weren't allowed a vote until after WW2 in Europe ended. Unless they are rioting in the streets in every city there is no reason that Britain would stop 'going it alone'. The issue would be solvency. How long could they afford to fight? With LL it is until it runs out.

So long as the US does not declare war on Germany then you are correct. But, if the USA did declare war on Germany, then at virtually any cost Germany would need the SU at war with the USA. Failing that, a massive Lend Lease of Evil.
The US public was never in favor of declaring war on Germany until after the Japanese attacked PH. Even then Roosevelt waited for Germany to DoW the US first. So it is hard to see how the USSR's active participation would even come up and how it would really help other than potentially making an invasion of Europe impossible for the British and US...assuming Hitler was fine with Soviet troops crawling all over Germany and occupied Europe. Stalin also never offered LL, only goods for payment; IOTL he sent stuff on credit anticipating payment was shortly forthcoming...when it wasn't then he stopped cutting off those goods for fear of invasion in 1941. In 1940 he was much more bold about playing hardball:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi–Soviet_economic_relations_(1934–41)#Delivery_suspension
 
  • Like
Reactions: PSL
1) Battle of Britain must be a lite version in favorable conditions, attacking convoys over the channel, aircraft factories in reach of the me 109, night raids on liver-pool. (trying to keep attrition not so unfavorable, but still apply pressure, go for the long haul)
2) Don't disrupt the economy by dragging up all the river barges to invade, the British were worried about the big boats anyway, load up the idle big ships in Norwegian or Breton ports from time to time, unload discretely (trying to maintain pressure once again)
3) Come to a final peace with anyone that is willing. (France, Belgium). Diplomatically back up the French government in IndoChina against Japan. Doing this only helps keep USA out.
4) Deal with the Russians to the extent that is necessary to keep the trade going. (I just don't believe Stalin will ever attack Germany, unless a large allied force is in France).
5) Help Italy in the minimal OTL way. In summer of 41 secure Malta and Tobruk, the blocking position should be on Egyptian border.
6) Continue to develop your rockets. The threat of those might just be the kicker you need to force Britain to make peace later on (an early V1).
7) Build (as in OTL) submarines and Eboats as your offensive naval threats. Big ship raids don't offer good return on investment and just scare USA.
 
But it wasn't, it never was. Soviet demands were for entry into the Axis, not demands to in return for not invading.

It's not just a question of what the Soviets demanded in the period of peak German success after the fall of France. It was the question of what the Soviets would take when US forces arrived in Europe in strength and Germany was pinned in the west. Either the deal with Stalin is one the Soviets like or the Soviets would alter the deal at the appropriate moment. Either way, Rumania will be in the Soviet sphere.

Not really, the US didn't express an opinion about that, they just didn't want the Brits to lose the war in the sense of being occupied.

The core issue with the German victory over France was the upsetting of the global balance of power inherent to Germany having control of an industrial base with a potential larger than the USA's. There were two ways this was going to rectify. Either Germany got out of Western Europe or the US was coming over and ejecting them from it.

UK voters didn't have a say in wartime; they weren't allowed a vote until after WW2 in Europe ended.

Sorry, I wasn't aware that a democracy was democracy optional.

Unless they are rioting in the streets in every city there is no reason that Britain would stop 'going it alone'. The issue would be solvency. How long could they afford to fight? With LL it is until it runs out.

No, the idea was not solvency. The idea is futility and pointless policy. The reserve of the British people to fight alone was not an endless well. Once that reserve was tapped with no progress on getting the US and/or USSR in the war, Churchill falls.


So it is hard to see how the USSR's active participation would even come up and how it would really help other than potentially making an invasion of Europe impossible for the British and US...assuming Hitler was fine with Soviet troops crawling all over Germany and occupied Europe. Stalin also never offered LL, only goods for payment; IOTL he sent stuff on credit anticipating payment was shortly forthcoming...when it wasn't then he stopped cutting off those goods for fear of invasion in 1941. In 1940 he was much more bold about playing hardball

If Germany wound up at war with the USA then the only outcomes where Germany might not get defeated are related to the German relations with the USSR. If the initial premise is accepted that the USSR would go to war with the USA under certain circumstances, this no doubt constituted the nightmare foreign policy scenario for Washington, for it was the one theoretically possible political constellation that was beyond even US military strength to defeat.

None of that predicts what Stalin would actually do.
 
He'd cheat and lie to circumvent a "Japan First" policy imposed on him. He is a politician and he has an agenda ...

Agreed, he circumvented the restrictions of only surplus military supplies going to GB via Lend-Lease during 1940-1941 by making "Instant US military surplus". He had weapons made to British specs, had "Made for the US Army" stamped on them, ordered the army to reject them and then shipped them to GB.
 

TruthfulPanda

Gone Fishin'
Not sure if mentioned - how about giving Stalin the Straits ... arrange for a May 1941 invasion of Turkey by the Soviet Union ...
 
3 Stop the Holocaust. Take the irgun up on their offer. Finance a homeland for Jews elsewhere. Reiterate the offer to guarantee the British Empire.
 
Top