Erie/Ireland invaded by Germany 1940

[LWD]

I have read that if Hitler had decided once and for all that Britain was to be his main target he would either postpone Barbarossa or cancel it,

I've read lots of things many of them less reasonable than this. However this is a very significant change in the time line. Where, when, and how it occurs will determine what projected paths are reasonable.

...but Hitler can not conduct Seelowe and Barbarossa so close to each other, Hitlers forces needed time to recover after Seelowe. And i believe that Barbarossa would be conducted in 1942, that is my opinion and i'll be damned if you don't like it.

Wouldn't want that to happen and it isn't unreasonable so it looks like you stil have a chance at heaven. On the other hand there are a number of other options. So many and so verried that there is no reasonable way to make projections.

The thead never ruled out an unconditional surrender either did it.

That is to a large extent the point. I believe phylo has indicated that he is taking this thread as more of a quesiton about how serious the Irish and there goverment were about resisting aggression. This makes sence but probalby should be in another forum.

Also yes the US Government can move in and defend Ireland but i ask you why in this context the US Government would be willing to send troops to Ireland to defend it but not do the same for Britian ...

There are a number of possiblities here. One Britain could have fallen before the US could come to her aid. Or US troops could move to defend Ireland while it's still neutral. Again the possiblities are too numerous ...

And lastly, if you are so upset by the original thread question then why are you taking it out on me, all i have done is to answer it the best way i can,

I'm not taking that out on you. I am pointing out that giving defintive answeres in the face of such uncertainty is not logical or reasonable.

but you obviously don't like me for whatever reason,

Your are taking this way to personally. I don't dislike you at all. I just disagree with much of what you have posted on this thread.

... you have alway historically attacked me after i have posted any kind of response,

I'm not at all sure that I have ever attacked you. I have in all probability taken issues with many maybe even most of your posts but that is not the same thing. See above.

... but haven't got the guts....

??? Why does that take "guts"? And why should we send him a PM? We've posted our opinions here where he can see them if he wants.

[LWD]

...
acknowledging the original thread that Britain has fallen as per original question and all the POD's that goes with that,

I think we have acknowledge the fall of Britain. Note however that The POD (Point of Departure) had to occur before that. If you have multiple PODs after that you have fantasy and not a rational reasoned what if.

you still adhere to the what is, if this thread as you obviously can't stick to is to be followed many situations have occured.

Have they?

1, That the Royal Navy Home Fleet failed to prevent an invasion, deal with it.

Did it? That's probably the most likely but not the only possiblity.

2, That the Royal Air Force was defeated on home soil, deal with it.

Ditto.

3, That the Imperial Army and the allied troops stationed in Britain were defeated on British home soil, deal with it.

Dito.

You say the SS, SD and Gestapo were rank amateurs, tell that to the 6 million jews killed in the holocaust, or are suffering from selective memory loss.

The fact that they were experianced at one thing doesn't mean they were good at another.

Yes i can agree that the RAF could simply fly their aircraft into the Eire Republic to be interned as you suggest but that also means that the Irish have to intern those pilots as well, i have no qualms about that, but then we have the situation of does the Irish Air Force have the pilots and can they be trained in short time to face the Luftwaffe that has just beaten the RAF on home soil,

Once the Germans attack the pilots no longer have to be interned. Indeed if Britain has surrendered they no longer have to be interned

...Germany would certainly treat Britain differently than Vichy France....

Most likely but would it be better, worse, or just different?

I'll put the ball in your court and tell me what would the terms of the armistice be and can you refer me to the contents of the actual terms of the armistice that Germany would impose on Britain were it beaten.

Doing so is irrational / meaningless until it's determined how Britain "lost".

You say Germany could not launch an invasion so soon after beating Britain, says who, you, providence of arrogance i suppose, i wouild say the Germans would begin an invasion of Ireland within a week of defeating Britain, striking while the iron was scortching hot.

Thus suggesting you know little of logistics or the effort that goes into planning operations. Of course there might be situations that would allow this but most of them would not have Sea Lion as a precursor.

[tank,tank,tank]

" ...Germany would certainly treat Britain differently than Vichy France....


Most likely but would it be better, worse, or just different? "

Heydrich had a team, to be led by a Dr Six, organised to follow the invading roops into England witha list of politicians, jews, union leaders and other subversives to apprehend.

Apart from that, a plan existed to deport to Germany? every able bodied male over the age of 16, who was'nt working in an industry required by the Reich, as slave labour.

[montyp165]

Nearly forgot...

...how long is another serious question, it all depends on how much retribution the Irish population are willing to suffer from the authorities. Would the population turn on those freedom fighters, understanding some Irish history, i doubt it, they love martyrdom

Well - resistance to "English" rule ended in 1921...and began in 1177 I think that means it would stand a good chance of outlasting the Thousand-Year Reich

Considering how the Einsatzgruppen, Totenkopf-SS, Gestapo et al managed to kill more people in Eastern Europe alone than existed in the entire population of Eire at the time, it would not take much for them to exact a 'Final Solution' if they had deemed it so, particularly if Great Britain itself had fallen. The Nazis had industrial processes for doing this too that the English of earlier eras could not even conceive of. This will be my only comment on this.

[phylo_roadking]

Well....there have been several times in Irish history that holocausts similar in ratio to that in, say, Poland of the deceased vs. the rest of the surviving population have been perpetrated in Ireland...and it hasn't stopped resistance. Quite the reverse. The problem is...Ireland has exactly ONE "period" usefuness to any invader - agricultural production, huge amounts of it. The hundreds of head of Irish cattle on the Irish Sea ferries every day kept the industrial cities of northern England eating during the war. Even today Ireland's agricultural produce can be found all over the world. That's why the Germans can't prejudice the actual "running" of the country. They'll come up with some sort of compromise - very strong policing and anti-partisan activity - but historically...and as recently as the War of Independence...that has been repeatedly shown not to work in Ireland. Remember, at the same levels of technology, about 1500 activists held down 100,000 British soldiers in 1919-1921...complete with tanks, armoured cars and aircraft.

[montyp165]

Well....there have been several times in Irish history that holocausts similar in ratio to that in, say, Poland of the deceased vs. the rest of the surviving population have been perpetrated in Ireland...and it hasn't stopped resistance. Quite the reverse. The problem is...Ireland has exactly ONE "period" usefuness to any invader - agricultural production, huge amounts of it. The hundreds of head of Irish cattle on the Irish Sea ferries every day kept the industrial cities of northern England eating during the war. Even today Ireland's agricultural produce can be found all over the world. That's why the Germans can't prejudice the actual "running" of the country. They'll come up with some sort of compromise - very strong policing and anti-partisan activity - but historically...and as recently as the War of Independence...that has been repeatedly shown not to work in Ireland. Remember, at the same levels of technology, about 1500 activists held down 100,000 British soldiers in 1919-1921...complete with tanks, armoured cars and aircraft.

In all honesty though, the Yugoslav partisans and the Poles performed much better under harsher circumstances than the Irish had to face, and the British were already exhausted by WWI in comparison politically and financially, so the Irish were still far luckier in any case.

[phylo_roadking]

the Yugoslav partisans and the Poles pe ... ad to face

Really? The Poles and Yugoslavs performed under harsher circumstances? Again, Ireland has a history of resistance that covers almost every permutation you can think of; from Wiki...

The guerrilla phase of the war had been going since late 1650 and at the end of 1651, despite the defeat of the main Irish or Royalist forces, there were still estimated to be 30,000 men in arms against the Parliamentarians. Tories (from the Irish word tóraidhe meaning, "pursued man") operated from difficult terrain such as the Bog of Allen, the Wicklow Mountains and the drumlin country in the north midlands, and within months, made the countryside extremely dangerous for all except large parties of Parliamentarian troops. Henry Ireton mounted a punitive expedition to the Wicklow mountains in 1650 to try and put down the tories there, but without success.

By early 1651, it was reported that no English supply convoys were safe if they travelled more than two miles outside a military base. In response, the Parliamentarians destroyed food supplies and forcibly evicted civilians who were thought to be helping the tories. John Hewson systematically destroyed food stocks in counties Wicklow and Kildare, Hardress Waller did likewise in the Burren in County Clare, as did Colonel Cook in County Wexford. The result was famine throughout much of Ireland, aggravated by an outbreak of Bubonic plague. As the guerrilla war ground on, the Parliamentarians, as of April 1651, designated areas such as County Wicklow and much of the south of the country as what would now be called free-fire zones, where anyone found would be, "taken slain and destroyed as enemies and their cattle and good shall be taken or spoiled as the goods of enemies". This tactic had succeeded in the Nine Years' War that had ended in 1603. In addition they began selling prisoners of war as indentured servants to the West Indies (especially Barbados, where their descendants are known as Redlegs). A total of 12,000 Irish people were sold as slaves under the English Commonwealth regime.

This phase of the war was by far the most costly in terms of civilian loss of life. The combination of warfare, famine and plague caused a huge mortality among the Irish population. William Petty estimated (in the Down Survey) that the death toll of the wars in Ireland since 1641 was over 618,000 people, or about 40% of the country’s pre-war population. Of these, he estimated that over 400,000 were Catholics, 167,000 killed directly by war or famine and the remainder by war-related disease.

[montyp165]

the Yugoslav partisans and the Poles pe ... ad to face

Really? The Poles and Yugoslavs performed under harsher circumstances? Again, Ireland has a history of resistance that covers almost every permutation you can think of; from Wiki...

The guerrilla phase of the war had been going since late 1650 and at the end of 1651, despite the defeat of the main Irish or Royalist forces, there were still estimated to be 30,000 men in arms against the Parliamentarians. Tories (from the Irish word tóraidhe meaning, "pursued man") operated from difficult terrain such as the Bog of Allen, the Wicklow Mountains and the drumlin country in the north midlands, and within months, made the countryside extremely dangerous for all except large parties of Parliamentarian troops. Henry Ireton mounted a punitive expedition to the Wicklow mountains in 1650 to try and put down the tories there, but without success.

By early 1651, it was reported that no English supply convoys were safe if they travelled more than two miles outside a military base. In response, the Parliamentarians destroyed food supplies and forcibly evicted civilians who were thought to be helping the tories. John Hewson systematically destroyed food stocks in counties Wicklow and Kildare, Hardress Waller did likewise in the Burren in County Clare, as did Colonel Cook in County Wexford. The result was famine throughout much of Ireland, aggravated by an outbreak of Bubonic plague. As the guerrilla war ground on, the Parliamentarians, as of April 1651, designated areas such as County Wicklow and much of the south of the country as what would now be called free-fire zones, where anyone found would be, "taken slain and destroyed as enemies and their cattle and good shall be taken or spoiled as the goods of enemies". This tactic had succeeded in the Nine Years' War that had ended in 1603. In addition they began selling prisoners of war as indentured servants to the West Indies (especially Barbados, where their descendants are known as Redlegs). A total of 12,000 Irish people were sold as slaves under the English Commonwealth regime.

This phase of the war was by far the most costly in terms of civilian loss of life. The combination of warfare, famine and plague caused a huge mortality among the Irish population. William Petty estimated (in the Down Survey) that the death toll of the wars in Ireland since 1641 was over 618,000 people, or about 40% of the country’s pre-war population. Of these, he estimated that over 400,000 were Catholics, 167,000 killed directly by war or famine and the remainder by war-related disease.

If you want to insist on treating Irish revolts as being greater than everyone else, that's your perogative, but just checking on the campaign history of the Poles and Yugoslavs in WWII would easily match and exceed the Irish claims all things considered (and this is covered in wiki also). If the English were more like the Japanese, Ireland would have either already been completely assimilated or be wiped out (just look at Japan vs Korea for that).

Also, if the Nazis (and the Japanese for that matter) deem an area's resistance to be more of a headache than it's productive worth, wiping out the population completely would be but a necessary evil.

[phylo_roadking]

Which totally compromises any reason to bother invading the country. The one thing people forget about Ireland what-ifs is that there's NO reason at all to invade Ireland UNLESS as a back door to the United Kingdom unless they intend to preserve its agricultural production uninterrupted. If anything - a Neutral Ireland as a pimple on the ass of Hitler's Greater Reich but valuable...because it gives another neutral nation with through-maritime links to the rest of German Europe for imports/exports.

Despite having approved instructions for the Sealion preparations that involved the Ireland diversion, Hitler on several occasions apparently discussed his admiration for its neutrality and defiance of Britain - and Ribbentrop reinforced that as AH's position "allegedly" when he demanded the Abwehr stop trying to insert agents into Eire...in the Fuhrer's name.

People seem to have this strange idea that the nazis were out simply to invade and control eveything that moved. That's not correct; they were out to get control of what they needed to do what they wanted. Hence the more lenient hands'-off policies in Norway and Denmark for a time, for example, or 1940-42 Vichy France - because they could get what they wanted from a given nation WITHOUT having to expend an uneconomical amount on squeezing it out of the native populations. Ireland has NOTHING worth invading for after the UK is invaded successfully except its agriculural production, for its "strategic position is ONLY vis-a-vis Great Britain

[PF]

An alternative History if Dev was killed 1941 by the Luftwaffe:

http://www.alternatehistory.com/discuss ... ?p=4742561

[pacifritz]

It is worth pointing out that the 2000 or so Irish Jews were earmarked for destruction by the Nazis, just as in all other as yet unconquered territories.

Naturally, this would entail the Germans going into Ireland and 'removing them' by force: using an Invasion force more akin to Barbarossa than the sort of pseudo-heavy artillery featured in countless BBC news reports since 1969.

The relatively low number of Jews in Ireland probably would mean a return to the mobile killing-units of the Eistengruppen rather than building Treblinka-like facilities.


I would be easy for the Jews to hide in Ireland, so the SS would likely to resort to torture tactics to extract information on where the Jews were hiding from non-Jews.


Once captured, the Jews might simply have been shipped over to the UK mainland for destruction in more permanent killing facilities , which more than likely would have been required to thin out the population of such a crowded nation as the UK [of course, it has been suggested that the entire male population of the UK aged 15-55 was to be shipped over to mainland Europe for slave labor].


Regarding the future of Ireland in the eyes of the Nazis, it's unlikely that Hitler would allow anarchy and breakdown of Law and Order anywhere within his reach: he would have approached this problem with a sledgehammer........tanks, flamethrowers, ariel bombardments, heavy artillery , repeated shellfire on the scale of WW1, machinegun fire to quell rioting, etc.

It would not have been very difficult for the Germans to locate the dissident strongholds, given the manner of brightly-painted identity of the two heartlands.


The atrocities against Irish paramilitiries by German artillery would have made the [admittedly heavy-handed] events of Bloody Sunday look like an afterthought in comparison . Nazi Stormtroopers are not going to wait around for a riot to start up: they will burn down the dissident areas with flamethrowers first.

[phylo_roadking]

I'll be upfront - I didn't know whether to ignore the above, or answer it....

Naturally, this would entail the Germans going into Ireland and 'removing them' by force: using an Invasion force more akin to Barbarossa than the sort of pseudo-heavy artillery featured in countless BBC news reports since 1969.

We know IN 100% DETAIL what forces the Germans were intending to use; there's a copy of the full Fall Grun plan in the museum in the Cathal Brugha Barracks in Dublin.

I would be easy for the Jews to hide in Ireland, so the SS would likely to resort to torture tactics to extract information on where the Jews were hiding from non-Jews.

It's actually remarkably difficult for strangers to hide in even the most remote of rural environments; in the countryside, particularly the Irish countryside where everyone knows everyone else...and more importantly everyone else's business!...strangers stick out like sore thumbs. Why do you think the Germans had so much trouble inserting spies into Ireland??? A sixfoot-nine-inch tall 60 year old weightlifter? An INDIAN Nationalist in a country with a negligible Asian/Far eastern population...even in its large cities????

[of course, it has been suggested that the entire male population of the UK aged 15-55 was to be shipped over to mainland Europe for slave labor]

More than suggested; this is another known plank of the German post-invasion plans.

Regarding the future of Ireland in the eyes of the Nazis, it's unlikely that Hitler would allow anarchy and breakdown of Law and Order anywhere within his reach: he would have approached this problem with a sledgehammer........tanks, flamethrowers, ariel bombardments, heavy artillery , repeated shellfire on the scale of WW1, machinegun fire to quell rioting, etc.

How do you know??? Can you give me one example of "traditional" street rioting in the Greater Reich? The Paris Rising and the Warsaw Risings were all organised, paramilitary and relatively disciplined operations...

(If necessary I'll give you one and you might be suprised at what happened...)

It would not have been very difficult for the Germans to locate the dissident strongholds, given the manner of brightly-painted identity of the two heartlands.

...NOW. They weren't exactly like that in 1939-45!!! ; if nothing else.....PAINT along with almost every other consumer good was virtually impossible to get hold of in Eire after 1941!

And of course - it should be noted that even today you only get THAT sort of "community identification" in NORTHERN Ireland or within 40-50 miles of the Border.

Nazi Stormtroopers are not going to wait around for a riot to start up: they will burn down the dissident areas with flamethrowers first.

And finally - as I noted before - with 100,000 men, armoured cars, and aircraft....the BRITISH hadn't managed it in 1918-21

The atrocities against Irish paramilitiries by German artillery would have made the [admittedly heavy-handed] events of Bloody Sunday look like an afterthought in comparison .

Just on a point of detail - the deceased in Derry on Bloody Sunday were NOT paramilitaries.

Please don't continue to make the mistake that Ireland - North OR South - looked anything like, or any part of it was polarized anything like, the way they look or are today. Today, Northern Ireland is on the far side of 30+ years of polarization of the community along religious and political lines...and the rest of Ireland looks just like the Home Counties - or Scotland when you go further afield from large urban centres.

The rural Ireland that you think had painted kerbstones and flags flying everywhere? How would you even pick your "dissidents" out of a landscape that looked like the set of The Quiet Man???

[pacifritz]

Phylo, I appreciate your intense love of Irish History, but the History of Warfare as waged by Germany is 'all-out' with the resultant deaths of Millions, unlike Ireland, which has seen thousands of deaths in comparison.

Yes, millions were starved to Death in the Irish Potato Famine-----a calculated act I certainly do not support--------but in terms of sheer Warfare as recognized by anyone who ever looked at documentary film, the problems in Ireland pale into insignificance compared to the crimes of the Third Reich.


What is the difference between starving to death by the million,---under despicable British interference------- or getting gassed? Well, under Nazism you are locked up in a sealed cattle-truck for days on end, tortured by thirst for a start: if I had a choice between this, or having no potatoes to eat, I know which I would prefer personally.

If the Third Reich had invaded Britain, the problems of controlling such a large population would have required very heavy-handed tactics by the Germans: it goes without saying that the cattle-trucks would have been used on a large scale, as you have pointed out, a mass consignment of male victims were to be shipped over to Europe, where presumably many would have died.


Britain would have been depopulated using barbaric methods, there would have been no need to keep back more than a few million slaves. Ireland with it's very small population would have been regarded as something to ponder over a lot later, once the logistics of governing the UK was sorted out.


Hitler's ambitions would likely have turned to the Emerald Isle EVENTUALLY, however, and the only saving grace for the Irish would have been assistance from the US. However the problem of long-range bombers having to fly all the way from the other end of the Atlantic may have cancelled out this hope.


But let's assume Ireland was left alone by Nazi-occupied Britain 'til 1969. Hitler would have been 80, possibly dead of old age: but the Nazi regime would still be in place, and the events in Ireland would have been noticed by the German Rulers.

Maybe they would just let them fight each other, this is the most optimistic outlook. But the sheer war-waging outlook of the Nazis would more than likely see them interfering in Irish affairs, using the Troubles as an excuse to invade Ireland on a scale never attempted by the British.

The Germans would not be a 'peace-keeping' force in Ireland, merely patrolling the streets: they would attack the problem OFFENSIVELY, effectively wiping out the opposition at source using Blitzkrieg methods, which is a world away from standing back with rubber bullets, watching as petrol-bombs are hurled in the street.


I do want to make it plain I am not a Nazi sympathiser, and I am only stating my thoughts on any Nazi approach to Irish Troubles.

[Andy H]

Ok lets make a few things clear before we stray off the subject path

Firstly we are not going to discuss anything post 1939-1945

Secondly were not going to use hindsight in relation to post 1945 events to paint a picture within this WI

Thirdly were not going to re-fight or re-write the Potato famine within this WI.

Lastly I dont mind some logical and sourced extrapolations of what may have happened but lets not dress them up as absolutes

Regards

Andy H

[phylo_roadking]

Phylo, I appreciate your intense love of Irish History, but the History of Warfare as waged by Germany is 'all-out' with the resultant deaths of Millions, unlike Ireland, which has seen thousands of deaths in comparison.

Exactly how many people were killed during the invasion of Denmark?

If the Third Reich had invaded Britain, the problems of controlling such a large population would have required very heavy-handed tactics by the Germans: it goes without saying that the cattle-trucks would have been used on a large scale, as you have pointed out, a mass consignment of male victims were to be shipped over to Europe, where presumably many would have died.

Britain would have been depopulated using barbaric methods, there would have been no need to keep back more than a few million slaves. Ireland with it's very small population would have been regarded as something to ponder over a lot later, once the logistics of governing the UK was sorted out.

Hitler's ambitions would likely have turned to the Emerald Isle EVENTUALLY, however

WHY??? Ireland was ALREADY "pastoralized" - DeValera had done a fine job of that! It was a net exporter of foodstuffs - exactly what Germany needed - remember, the UK didn't survive on JUST Spam and Argentinian/Brazilian bully beef...every day thousands of head of cattle and pigs came off ferries to England, Wales and Scotland - from Ireland.

As noted before - Hitler didn't conquer contries for the fun of it - he conquered countries because they had something he needed, or to keep them out of the hands of others; a Neutral Ireland with no British trading partner for its agricultural produce....and a ready market for German manufactured goods replacing British/Empire ones...is exactly what Germany would have wanted.

And it would have got that without invasion, from a country that would run itself for them. Just like Switzerland...

Without the continued need to invade the UK with Ireland as either a distraction OR an entry point - there is literally no reason to invade Ireland at all...and every economic reason NOT to. Thus if Britain is conquered without Fall Grun actioned as a distraction - Fall Grun would never be actioned.

and the only saving grace for the Irish would have been assistance from the US.

...and the only fear for Germany would have been precipitating an early American intrvention.

However the problem of long-range bombers having to fly all the way from the other end of the Atlantic may have cancelled out this hope.

1/ what targets would there have been in an Occupied Ireland worth attacking?

2/ you mean the campiagn that work was started on what became the B36 because of??? From Wiki...

The genesis of the B-36 can be traced to early 1941, prior to the entry of the U.S. into World War II. At the time it appeared there was a very real chance that Britain might fall to the Nazi 'Blitz', making a strategic bombing effort by the United States Army Air Corps (USAAC) against Germany impossible with the aircraft of the time. The U.S. would need a new class of bomber that could reach Europe from bases in North America, necessitating a combat range of at least 5,700 miles (9,200 km), the length of a Gander, Newfoundland–Berlin round trip. The USAAC therefore sought a bomber of truly intercontinental range, similar to the Nazi RLM's own ultra-long-range Amerika Bomber program.

The USAAC opened up a design competition for the very long-range bomber on 11 April 1941, asking for a 450 mph (720 km/h) top speed, a 275 mph (443 km/h) cruising speed, a service ceiling of 45,000 ft (14,000 m), beyond the range of ground-based anti-aircraft fire, and a maximum range of 12,000 miles (19,000 km) at 25,000 ft (7,600 m).[7] These proved too demanding—far exceeding the technology of the day—for any short-term design, so on 19 August 1941 they were reduced to a maximum range of 10,000 mi (16,000 km), an effective combat radius of 4,000 mi (6,400 km) with a 10,000 lb (4,500 kg) bombload, a cruising speed between 240 and 300 mph (390 and 480 km/h), and a service ceiling of 40,000 ft (12,000 m).

But let's assume Ireland was left alone by Nazi-occupied Britain 'til 1969. Hitler would have been 80, possibly dead of old age: but the Nazi regime would still be in place, and the events in Ireland would have been noticed by the German Rulers.

Maybe they would just let them fight each other, this is the most optimistic outlook. But the sheer war-waging outlook of the Nazis would more than likely see them interfering in Irish affairs, using the Troubles as an excuse to invade Ireland on a scale never attempted by the British.

The Germans would not be a 'peace-keeping' force in Ireland, merely patrolling the streets: they would attack the problem OFFENSIVELY, effectively wiping out the opposition at source using Blitzkrieg methods, which is a world away from standing back with rubber bullets, watching as petrol-bombs are hurled in the street.

Note Andy's words.