Could Germany have won the war??

Benjamin Fanjoy · Post by **Benjamin Fanjoy** » 02 Jul 2002 06:34

[Moved from the Polls section]

When war broke out, do you feel the Germans had a chance to win, if Hitler made better choices??

T.R.Searle · Post by **T.R.Searle** » 02 Jul 2002 13:35

I think so "IF" he made better choices. But who knows what else could have happend.

T.R.Searle

Phil V · Post by **Phil V** » 02 Jul 2002 14:24

Mark 111 wrote

When war broke out, do you feel the Germans had a chance to win, if Hitler made better choices??

Victory would have indeed been attainable, not so much if Hitler had made better choices but perhaps if he let others make the choices for him.

i.e. letting his military commanders have more autonomy in strategic decisions - especially on the Eastern Front.

Siegfried Wilhelm · Post by **Siegfried Wilhelm** » 02 Jul 2002 15:35

Of course it really depends on what one means by 'win'. Could Germany have successfully regained all her former territory back, stableized her economy and regained her status with the other European nations on a world stage? Yes. But Hitler's aims were not just these.
I think Czechoslovakia ruined his chances to stay out of war--especially after humiliating Chamberlain who later so influenced Britian to go to war over Poland. Should have been handled differently--maybe after Poland.
Perhaps Germany's biggest mistake was to be friends with Italy--she'd been better off declaring war on Italy! Think of all the troops used and expansion (strain on logistics) Germany had to do just for Italy.
The biggest problem was it turned into a world war when to satisfy Hitler's aims much efforts should have been consciously made to keep it limited to a Germano-Russian war.

MVSNConsolegenerale · Post by **MVSNConsolegenerale** » 07 Jul 2002 00:31

There only real answer to that question is 'yes'. This is because anything 'can' happen. But, I think it the odds were of a significantly high value against germany.

I am amazed at how far they got.

P.S. I voted 'NO'

Andy H · Post by **Andy H** » 07 Jul 2002 17:45

Maybe if he played his hand with America differently then they had a chance to seal things in Europe in the short term, but eventually American industrial might would have undone it.

Andy from the Shire

valadezaj · Post by **valadezaj** » 18 Jul 2002 16:34

I believe the key to German victory (what I mean by victory is total domination of the continent the way Hitler wanted it this means destruction of Russia) was the surrender of Britain in 1940. If after the fall of France Britain had made peace the situation would have changed drastically. Forces in the west would be freed up and in addition no supplies would coming to Russia from either Britain or America. America would never even have been a factor because with Britain gone they would lost their excuse to intevene in Europe. Germany then could have invaded Russian in May instead of June the next year. The war would probably then have ended in German victory in 1942. The end result? The New Order of Hitler's dreams becomes a reality.

Christian Ankerstjerne · Post by **Christian Ankerstjerne** » 18 Jul 2002 20:32

IMO, here are a few hint for Germany to win:

France 1940: be sure to capture the BEF - although this was the Germans intentions, they failed because of lack of insight.
Operation Seelöwe: capture the French fleet, land paratroopers and follow up with an invasion. If the BEF is captured, the resistance will be limited from a military point of view.
Balkans: forget it - use a couple of divisions to guard the border
Africa: Use the saved divisions from the Balkans, and take North Africa - last nail to Britain coffin, and free fuel

Barbarossa: Hope for better weather

Capture Moscow, and try to capture Stalin. This won't be a military victory as such, but it will be a psycological victory.
Stalingrad: Forget it - already have the free fuel in the middle east - concentrate on the north for offensive, and south for defensive.
Forget the Holocaust - more people to fight alongside the Germans.
Kursk: Attack sooner, and it will maybe work. Even with a later attack, the Allied forces won't land in Sicily because africa is German, and this will mean the German attack won't be halted.
Western Allied Invasion - if it should ever happen, don't let them get on the beaches...

Christian

sea_fury · Post by **sea_fury** » 18 Jul 2002 22:54

The German army had the potential to wipe out the Allied forces, but eventually we would out-produced them. If Hitler hadn't been running the war single-handedly, the Nazi generals could have seriously hurt the Allies. Even the Japanese knew that they couldn't really win against the Americans.... total domination of the US was and is impossible.

sea_fury · Post by **sea_fury** » 18 Jul 2002 23:00

Had the Germans declared war in 1947 as planned by Goering in his Four-Year-Plan instead of 1939, they could have built a massive standing army, but Hitler was too paranoid of Russia, and desperately wanted to invade Poland and take their industry. So the German generals knew that they were engaging in war b4 the proper time, but who wanted to argue with the Fuhrer? What an incredible moron Hitler was... he was no military man.

IAR80 · Post by **IAR80** » 19 Jul 2002 18:19

For Germany to win there are too many things that have to go right. But was it possible? Yes. A perfect WWII campaign should look like this:
Directive No.1 : Research never stops! On of the greatest mistakes Hitler made was interfering with R&D and also cancelling some projects. Critical to the Wehrmacht would be to keep the pace in the very least with the gun/armor race on the ground. Ok, for the campaign.
1)Poland. No changes to the historical outcome obviously.
2)Norway&Denmark. Same.
3)France & Low Countries. Naturally, the BEF trapped in Dunkirk should not be allowed to evacuate under any circumstances.
4)Sealion? Now here is a nice dilemma. I don't think the germans could get to the french fleet before being sunk by the british navy, so there would be a great problem concerning transportation and deployment of an invasion force on british soil. However, Luftwaffe victory over the RAF would be possible, once this accomplished the next critical step would be dragging Ireland into the war and using the airports there to finish off the RAF squadrons in Scotland and ensure total air supremacy. Once this accomplished the actual Sealion could be attempted with paratroopers and close air support playing a major role in the opening phases of the invasion.
5)With Britain effectively out of the picture Hitler's attention could now turn to the Balkans. Given the fact that the UK is conquered the chances of the pro-allied military coup taking place in Yugoslavia are close to zero. This leaves just Greece and possibly a british expeditionary force. After defeating Greece, Hitler would apply the Sealion paratrooper-close air support formula to secure Crete and most importantly, Malta, thus ensuring a steady flow of supplies to the Africakorps. The whole mediterranean intervention would span along April 1941, during which the campaigns in the Balkans and Crete would be fought.
6)To ensure a quick victory over the british forces in North Africa, Gibraltar must be secured in order cut off their supplies and so Hitler would take measures to involve Franco into the war, by delivering substantial quantities of both german and captured french war material. The operation would take place sometime in late May/ early June 1941 and would end in securing Gibraltar and the french colonies in N-W Africa.
7)Barbarossa. Well, not much to say except the fact that the german armed forces, due to Directive no.1, would be now be equipped properly in the armor sector, with most PzIIIs sporting the 50L60 cannon capable of defeating earlier versions of the T-34 and KV series. Bad weather and poor communications lines will still mean that neither Leningrad, nor Moscow will fall in 1941.
December 1941. Germany declares war on the US and things just got a bit more interesting. Germany has made good progress so far, but some mistakes are undavoidable. The german troops and the other axis allies are occupying a defensive posture on the eastern fornt, meanwhile in North Africa, Rommel is making good progress, his troops are being constantly supplied while the british supplies are months away after losing Gibraltar,also the Luftwaffe is pounding the british navy at every turn. In addition, the Pz IVf2 (s) armed with the 75L43 cannon which arrived historically bearly in spring 1942 are now the mainstay battle tank in Rommel's Africakorps.

-1942 -
Germany and Axis Allies. On the eastern front, even with the much earlier arrival of the PzIII and PzIV series equipped to deal with heavy tanks plus the the arrival of the Tiger in early summer 1942, the fact that Hitler wishes to push in the south remains unchanged and even with the seizure of Stalingrad and the Caucasus along with the destruction of countless russian tanks, the fact that the critical psichological victory fails to come means that the russians will keep fighting. In North Africa, Rommel will most likely manage to secure North Africa and the Middle East, plus the oil fields by the end of 1942. In the west from Scotland all the way down to present-day Morocco a series of fortifications are being built to defend against a US invasion. The Kriegsmarine focuses on the destruction of the british fleet in the Mediterranean.

Allies.The US and the remnants of the british army will most likely focus on the North African front, however, the huge distances the convoys need to travel along with the fast pace of Rommel's advance means that the reinfocements will arrive either too little or too late. With the german victory in the North Africa,Middle East and Iraq in late 1942, the allies will focus on defeating Japan, lacking a base of operations in Europe.

-1943-
Germany and Axis Allies. Although Germany is now falling seriously behind in production numbers, the losses suffered during the soviet counter-offensive in the winter of 1942 would now amount to a fraction of the historical ones among german troops, again because the Wehrmacht manages to stay ahead in the gun/armor race. Operation Zitadelle takes place with the historical plan with 2 exceptions: 1. The german troops are more numerous and better equipped, 2. the soviets are caught by surprise( historically the soviets were informed by the allies about the operation through the "Lucy" spy network, with the UK defeated in Europe, North Africa and Middle East there would be no one to coordinate the resistance, not to mention the reluctance of anyone messing with the nazis which so far have been pretty much winning). With these two observations in mind along with the general favourable evolution of the front so far and the advent of advanced german equipment in much greater numbers (due to the lack of strategic bombing and the initial tech head start as a consequence of Directive No.1), operation Zitadelle had good chances of success and of ending the war in the east.

Allies. In 1943 the combined US-British-ANZAC armies would most likely trounce the japanese real bad and by the end of the year would push them back near the nippon archipelago. This would result in the allies gaining both seasoned troops and vital tactical insight into amphibious landings. Because the US nuclear program is still far from completion and with the matter of liberating Europe in mind the allies would most likely blockade Japan into submission.

Germany and Axis Allies. With european Russia conquered the Red Army behind the Urals would now have to rely on Lend-Lease war material, clothing and also food. Hitler has so far realised his sick dreams of conquest and all that remains is the US. The question is would Hitler attempt an invasion of the US or not? Let's say he would

-1944-
Germany and Axis Allies. The Kriegsmarine has been preparing for a US invasion ever since the british were defeated in their african and middle east colonies. Having a full year to prepare quietly the Kriegsmarine has expanded the U-boat potential, actively experimenting with V rockets launched from U-boats, also submarines used as carriers. The nuclear project has been finished and the first long range rockets are being tested as possible means of delivery. Hitler knows that the allies are developing the nuke too, so he wants to finish them off once and for all. Now there are two equally likely variants: Hitler could gamble for an invasion of the US in 1945 OR he could focus all resources on developing long range nuclear missiles and just pound the US before it develops its own arsenal.

Allies. The allies won the war against Japan, but who cares when Europe is occupied. The allies also develop their own nuclear project, but they are years behind, also in the field of rocketry and jet engines they have virtually no experience whatsoever. Surely the allies will attempt to build a huge "arsenal of democracy" to defeat Hitler. There are many options, including an invasion in Iraq, pushing north in Russia and west in Middle East. A massive invasion of "Fortress Europe" with landings in western Europe. A thrust straight through the Sahara and ending up behind all fortifications, securing North Africa, then up the Deadly Boot and also landings in the Balkans, Spain and France. But then again the is also the option of a push from Siberia alongside the russians and push the Wehrmacht westwards into the Atlantic. Still, in all, the allies are pretty much screwed because they will never be able to develop the nuke before Hitler has the chance to use it on american soil.

So there, Germany won the war. One thing: as one can see the important changes are linked to Hitler's decisions which were in some cases completely wrong, however, these decisions could not be contested in any way, so the only way to avoid them being taken would be without Hitler's meddling which in the historical context is impossible, therefore the only way to eliminate such wrong decisions is to eliminate Hitler, but then you eliminate WWII and the need for such decisions.
Therefore, my answer to the topic question is a definite NO.

Christian Ankerstjerne · Post by **Christian Ankerstjerne** » 19 Jul 2002 21:36

Altogether a nice posts - as for Dunkirk, I've made an article about it here: http://www.panzerworld.net/Dunkirk.htm

Christian

dmsdbo · Post by **dmsdbo** » 20 Jul 2002 14:49

In some ways, Hitker was the reason they didn't win. But their are many other factors.

Andy H · Post by **Andy H** » 20 Jul 2002 20:52

I'm not convinced that even if Germany had waited till 1947 to start a war that they would gone any better/worse than they actually did.

The allies were slow in starting to re-arm in 1938/39 and this helped the Germans achieve what they did. By giving the allies another 4 year's to re-arm then things may well have been a lot worse for Germany?

Andy from the Shire

Zachary · Post by **Zachary** » 20 Jul 2002 23:03

I think that the Germans could of won WWII. Of course therwe are many "Ifs" there. IF he made peace or made Britain surrender in 1940 he probably could have won. With Britain out, America wouldn't bother with Europe. But then there is the Japanese on the other side of the world, but I'm going to ignore them.
With Britain out I think Germany could have won against Russia if Hitler focused on Moscow. Without the main transportation hub of Russia she would probably lose.
Zachary

Axis History Forum

Could Germany have won the war??

Could Germany have won the war??

RE: Pigs could fly

Reply.

re