With out the Soviets being involved I doubt that Britain would have had the manpower to recapture the Continent, unless the Pacific War didn't happen freeing up troops and it would probably taken a large number of Indian troops to make up the difference. Yes, highly debatable if the US would have declared war on Germany, (Ignoring the undeclared quasi war going on at sea against the Germans).
Should the west have gone after Russia or Germany...
Probably knew the War would start before they could be delivered, same way they were supposed to build Battle Cruisers for the Dutch.
BritinBritain
Per Ardua Ad Astra
Interesting discussion.
I think Hitler would have still invaded Western Europe as he did in 1940. Would Stalin have invaded Poland along with Germany?
If Hitler had not declared war on the US, I believe Britain's situation would have been untenable.
BritinBritain
Per Ardua Ad Astra
I was totally unaware that Germany was going to build Battle Cruisers for the Dutch. I would have thought the Dutch would have used their own shipyards to build warships. I would have also assumed with Hitlers sabre rattling, the Dutch would have been suspicious of his intentions.
Went back to check on that. They were going to be built in Dutch shipyards with German triple 280 mm turrets and most technology with the Dutch doing just the actual shipbuilding. Dutch technical info was WWI era in Capitol ship technology. Originally German power was planned but final plans called for license built Yarrow boilers and Parsons turbine power.
Last edited:
MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
The idea that Germany and Russia could avoid conflict is unlikely at best, Mein Kampf was a long rambling diatribe about the Jews and Communists where he lays out his plans for both, from the time he gained a speaking platform he repeated the same themes of living space in the east over and over.
I also doubt that the declaration of war with the US would have changed anything, American servicemen were already being killed in Uboats attacks in the Altantic escorting convoys to Britain, my guess is that once the US became involved in a war Germany was going to be the first target.
Perhaps a better question would be what if Japan hadn't attacked Pearl Harbor but instead focused on British possessions in the Pacific and Indian ocean, would that have kept the US out of the war?
That Germany and the USSR could avoid war is very possible : US and the USSR also avoided war,although Dulles was claiming of rolling back the Soviets and although the Soviets attacked the US on the same way that Hitler attacked Jews,Slavs and Communists .
War between Germany and the US was unavoidable ,for ideological ,financial and political reasons : the WASPs ruled the US and they would not accept a European continent dominated by Germany, especially a Nazi Germany .
On the last question : no PH : the Japanese opinion was that
a they could not take that risk
b war with Britain only would not give them domination in China and the Pacific :US would still remain there and be stronger than before .
MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
The US eventually entering the war was inevitable but had the Axis managed to keep them out long enough to isolate them from Allies interests me.
There was no common Axis policy : Japan decided to attack PH, Hitler forbade the U Boats to attack the Atlantic Fleet .
MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
No but again what if there was, would it have made a difference.
The closest to coordination they managed seemed to be that the Germans bailed out the Italians and the Japanese went off on their own tangent and achieved bugger all.
Such a coordination was impossible : German forces could not operate in the Pacific and the Japanese could not operate in the Mediterranean .
A joint German-Japanese attack on the USSR in June 1941,would have been a failure,a failure in Europe and a failure in Asia, because the Soviets were strong enough to stop the Germans and to defeat the Japanese .Several times the defeated the Japanese before 1941 .
For Germany, Italy was more useful than Japan .
The Italian DOW in June 1940 had as result that all convoys going to/coming from East of Suez had to sail via Africa which meant an enormous loss of time and shipping capacity for Britain .
Without this DOW these convoys would have used the Mediterranean .
The same for the US LL convoys going to Iran .
Last edited:
Had they not invaded Russia they would have had the manpower to capture Egypt, the Suez Canal, and probably, with help from the Italian Navy, the Persian Gulf oil fields. While it would have been a huge risk ignoring the US, w/o Pearl Harbor the US might have stayed out indefinitely. Is opinion of some that if Roosevelt wanted a War with Japan the film shot onboard during the Panay Incident could have done it if released. But then again the US seemed to be backing Japan into a corner with the oil sanctions.
MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
The Germans never wanted Egypt though, they were only there to bail out the Italians.
Asia and Africa were going to be a never ending campaign for the Germans that they simply did not have the manpower, material or logistics to conquer, as it was moving away from its support meanwhile Britain was falling back on major supply bases of South Africa, India, Australia and NZ.
This is why I wondered whether Japan not attacking the US but rather isolating it in the Pacific and instead eliminating British possessions in the Pacific until the US could have been dealt with by a combined axis force.
Germany couldn't even invade the UK, unless Gibraltar fell & the Italian fleet could go to Atlantic France to move the Germans. Japan had decent navy strength but would probably take the combined German/Italian Navies attacking the other coast at the same time.
MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
That scenario kind of plays into my argument because it makes India the prime target for the Japanese, take out India and you remove Britain's link to the Pacific which makes North Africa a much easier target for the Germans.
Given that both India and South Africa had large anti-British factions it is possible that both countries would have dropped out of the war entirely
Japan did make a play for India. So, if they took India and Germans took the Suez Canal, Arabian Peninsula & the middle east oil fields they also would have direct contact for exchange of technology & raw materials.The Japanese did send subs into the Indian Ocean to disrupt British supplys to the Western Desert at German request. That was later than Operation C.
The ME oil was not important for Britain: 90 % of British oil during WWII came from the Americas : US and Latin America .
It was also unimportant for Japan as the ME was too far away from Japan .
The same for Germany .
The Suez Canal was not used from May 1940 to May 1943 for transports to and from Britain .Thus the capture of the Suez Canal would not hurt Britain and not aid Germany .
It is an old claim that no Barbarossa would make the capture of the ME possible . But this claim is wrong : due to logistics and distance ,a stronger operational Africa Corps would be impossible .
Suez Canal-Tehran : 1800 km Germany would need a big army to go from Tripoli to the Canal and from the Canal to Tehran ,and they would need a lot of oil .
US oil production in 1937 :173 million tons
Iraq in 1938 :4,3 million
Iran in 1938 :10,3 million
They came close to getting Egypt with what they had. Obviously the 1st thing Italy should have done was capture Malta, failure to do so was a catastrophic strategic failure that resulted in severe losses to her merchant fleet. Keep in mind we had Japan capturing India, so ME not far at all & the canal provides direct contact between the Axis.
NO : the capture of Malta would not help the Axis : the Italian merchant navy lost 15 % ( not all by Malta )of the goods they transported to NA .But, more goods would not have helped Rommel,because the problem was not the crossing of the Mediterranean ,but the transport of the goods from the ports to the front .
And for Japan : if it had captured India ( impossible ) ,where would its navy obtain the fuel to sail from Calcutta to the Canal ,a canal that would have been blocked by Britain ( it happened in 1967 and in 1973 )?