When could Germany have won WWII?

When could Germany have won WWII?

  • Dunkirk (1940)

    Votes: 70 42.7%
  • Britain (1940)

    Votes: 14 8.5%
  • Crete (1941)

    Votes: 3 1.8%
  • Barbarossa (1941)

    Votes: 29 17.7%
  • Winter Campaign (1941-42)

    Votes: 4 2.4%
  • Fall Blau (1942)

    Votes: 6 3.7%
  • Winter Storm (1942)

    Votes: 1 0.6%
  • Kursk (1943)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other (specify in post)

    Votes: 37 22.6%

  • Total voters
    164
Barbarossa:
The plan itself is good. The time for it short. Stick to the orignal plan, slow down, and next year you are good to go.
Risky option: Do not do Kiev, go for Moscow instead. Risky, very risky.

The plan wasn't good. Its success critically depended on a single assumption - the ability of the Red Army to effectively fight will cease to exist after the initial border battles. Once this did not happen, it was the end. Barbarossa couldn't be any slower or less comprehensive. Stopping somewhere or giving the Soviets more time only enables them to make more efficient evacuation of the industrial facilities. Besides, at all points in time, it felt that just one more bold strike will bring victory.

Leaving Southern Front alone just enables Soviets to strike north. Besides, the Germans would have nothing left to do with the forces at hand after the Smolensk. They couldn't advance forward before the logistical lines were reorganized and decided to do lateral advance to the south, at once employing the superfluous panzer force from the AG Zentrum and eliminating the threat of flank attack by significant Red Army forces into the axis of advance of AGZ.
 
Maybe if they'd just focussed on one goal (say taking the Caucasus oil fields) from the start, instead of constantly shifting things might have gone better.
 
Last edited:
Be wary that Hitler had in his hands the most powerful military force by that time. One thing he didn't do is to use them effectively. He overstretched his forces so much that reinforcements and supplies could not come to the front in the time of need. He thoroughly used the Luftwaffe to bomb the shit out of Britain when those could be used in the Eastern Front. He repeatedly sent assistance to Mussolini (damn that man) even though it is clear he needs Rommel and his forces elsewhere. He actively pursued war against the United States even though he knows such a stupid plan is stupid. He repeatedly tries to break Stalingrad, ignored pleas from his generals that he needs to reinforce the Caucasus, thus overall lost the war.

In my honest opinion, if someone much more sane could have been the Fuhrer, the Nazis might have at least held on to their pre-Barbarossa territories post-war.
 
In my honest opinion, if someone much more sane could have been the Fuhrer, the Nazis might have at least held on to their pre-Barbarossa territories post-war.

Someone much more sane would have probably avoided trying to conquer Europe to begin with.
 
The plan wasn't good. Its success critically depended on a single assumption - the ability of the Red Army to effectively fight will cease to exist after the initial border battles. Once this did not happen, it was the end. Barbarossa couldn't be any slower or less comprehensive. Stopping somewhere or giving the Soviets more time only enables them to make more efficient evacuation of the industrial facilities. Besides, at all points in time, it felt that just one more bold strike will bring victory.

Leaving Southern Front alone just enables Soviets to strike north. Besides, the Germans would have nothing left to do with the forces at hand after the Smolensk. They couldn't advance forward before the logistical lines were reorganized and decided to do lateral advance to the south, at once employing the superfluous panzer force from the AG Zentrum and eliminating the threat of flank attack by significant Red Army forces into the axis of advance of AGZ.


Well, i did not said, it was flawless, but still, i disagree. Maybe its a problem with me, but while i see the destruction of the western armies critical (otherwise, how could they reach the AA line), i did not see the assumption, that after that, the soviets will cease to fight. Predict to fight worse than without the border defeats? Yes, and thats happened.
The germans were not idiots. (And yes, i know the whole building will collapse - many leaders said similar things before the act).

As for cannot be slowed part: im bit of conservative in this regard, so i do not really see, why would not should go to winter quarters after Smolensk the WH. The WH before that never initiated winter combat, i do not see, why should they change that - of course, the temptation for grabbing Moscow (and watching the possible collapse) is far too big.

I should check my facts, but as far as i remember, the evacuation of the industry was practically full - if something was worth evacuating - and they were capable to move it - they evacuated it.

An the abandon Kiev option: very risky. Call it a big gamble :)
 
Joining the '38. brigade. Maybe '39. if they allow Poland a option to cede some territory while retaining honor. Maybe reminding them of eternal friendship of Russian and Polish people's and of 1918.

Otherwise, lol no.

Sealion can't happen. Even if you by act of God (or ASBs) erase BEF and RAF you still have the tiny issue of Royal Navy that will simply not allow a landing to happen and to be supplied.

As for victory in USSR. Rushing towards Moscow doesn't do anything. Even if Russian counter attack in south fails miserably, there is nothing to stop Moscow from becoming this TLs Stalingrad.

After '41 you have to handwave USA into not entering war.

And in the end, looking at OTL German "nuclear program", Tube Alloys will reach completion long before any German program. Much later than Manhattan yes, but still long before any German program.
 
Well, i did not said, it was flawless, but still, i disagree. Maybe its a problem with me, but while i see the destruction of the western armies critical (otherwise, how could they reach the AA line), i did not see the assumption, that after that, the soviets will cease to fight.

Well I never said cease to fight. Neither did OKW. They just assumed that after the border battles, Red Army will cease to fight effectively. They did not have the intelligence about the Soviet second and third echelon formations deployed in depth.

As for cannot be slowed part: im bit of conservative in this regard, so i do not really see, why would not should go to winter quarters after Smolensk the WH. The WH before that never initiated winter combat, i do not see, why should they change that - of course, the temptation for grabbing Moscow (and watching the possible collapse) is far too big.

As long as temptation to win the war just after the next battle is there, they will never stop. To remove this temptation, Soviets should fight more effectively and actually stop Wehrmacht somewhere, instead of folding anywhere where German panzer show up. Guess what happens if Soviet resistance is more effective.


I should check my facts, but as far as i remember, the evacuation of the industry was practically full - if something was worth evacuating - and they were capable to move it - they evacuated it.

An the abandon Kiev option: very risky. Call it a big gamble :)

I can't check it right now, though I am sure that stopping at Smolensk or October line leaves at least some industry to be evacuated slower or not at all and leaves Soviets in much better situation overall. In all reality, that debate is moot as long as Germans have 'just one more blow' perception.
 
Given Germany's industrial and resource constraints after WWI, I'm not sure there's any variant of Germany that can win any variant of World War II (assuming roughly the same constellation of forces) (except maybe one where Stalin doesn't go for broke industrializing the Soviet Union or a pacifist wins the US election in 1940).

Certainly there's no way the Nazis can.

World War II was a bunch of jaguars against 3 500 pound silverbacks - the jaguars will get in their shots, but the silverbacks will win in the end.
 

Geon

Donor
Plan Z and Other Matters

Hitler was too over eager in everything he did. He attacked Poland before his navy was really ready to be on parity or close to it with Great Britain. He attacked Russia before his army was adequately prepared for Barbarossa.

If Hitler was to truly win the war-and by win I mean retain most of the territories he conquered he needed to do the following.

  • Let Plan Z be completed. By 1943 the German navy would be at a point equalling the English navy. He would then be able to starve Britain into submission using submarine and surface raiding groups.
  • Better prepare for Barbarossa. Hitler should have sat down and read every military study on Napoleon's invasion of Russia. Many of the same mistakes that Napoleon made, Hitler also made. Two stand out.
    • He invaded Russia making no allowance for the bitterly cold and dangerous Russian winters.
    • He attempted to go too fast and too far.
  • Encourage the Japanese to attack Russia and India as part of their alliance. Putting some pressure on Russia ensures it will have to divide its forces.
  • Speed up research on a few secret weapons, not spend limited resources on several projects at once. Many experts say that Hitler would have had jet fighters and jet bombers by 1943 if he had concentrated more on those projects rather than have his researchers go off in several different directions.
    • And indeed make sure that jet fighters and bombers have utmost high priority. Forget the missiles for now, jet fighters are what would be needed to reestablish dominance in the sky.
  • Fire Goering. Plain and simple Goering was a bombastic incompetent fool who didn't know what he was doing. He threw the Luftwaffe into impossible situations which resulted in most of the Luftwaffe's best pilots being killed by the middle of the war. Instead put a plain level headed realist in charge of the Luftwaffe and make certain he has the resources he needs.
  • Let the generals run the war. Evil Overlord rule #17 When I employ people as advisors, I will occasionally listen to their advice.!! The generals plans and advice were often ignored by Hitler in favor of his own "expertise."
  • Set "realistic" goals for the war. Hitler's goals at the start of the war were: taking Poland, punishing France, and Lebensraum in the East. If he had kept to these three goals and not divided his forces later between the Balkans and North Africa his forces would have been more concentrated for the push eastward.
  • Finally, to follow up on the previous statement-don't ally with Mussolini. Bungling Benito had to have the Wehrmacht bail out his hide time and time again. Without Hitler to back him up Mussolini might be more restrained in his own goals.
These steps would not have the Germans triumphally marching down the streets of New York, Moscow, or London. But they would have probably ended WWII on terms more favorable to them.

In retrospect we can thank the monumental egos of Hitler and Goering for helping us to win the war!

Geon
 
Top