Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

What would it have taken for Germany to win their war?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
37 replies to this topic

#1 T. A. Gardner

T. A. Gardner

    Genuine Chief

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,855 posts

Posted 31 October 2007 - 09:36 PM

While the question of could Germany win has been asked it seems perennially, this is a slightly different tack. Essentially what is being asked is were there things the Germans could have done sufficently better or mistakes that if they had not happened would have allowed the Germans a win to WW 2?
Now, I'm not talking about the often brought up impossible stuff like tripling production suddenly or having some flegling technology suddenly become practical and in widespread use years ahead of its original introduction but more mundane things that the Germans simply did badly that squandered the possibility of winning.

For example, allowing Himmler and Göring to form "private" armies in parallel with the Wehrmacht (eg., the SS and Luftwaffe ground army). These were massive wastes of manpower and material. There was no justification of either beyond the private empire building of the two people running them.

#2 Za Rodinu

Za Rodinu

    Aquila non capit muscas

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,809 posts
  • LocationPortugal

Posted 31 October 2007 - 10:01 PM

I shall reply with a quote from J.R.R.Tolkien:

The Road goes ever on and on
Out from the door where it began.
Now far ahead the Road has gone,
Let others follow it who can!
Let them a journey new begin,
But I at last with weary feet
Will turn towards the lighted inn,
My evening-rest and sleep to meet.


Quousque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra...


#3 Ironcross

Ironcross

    Dishonorably Discharged

  • Dishonorably Discharged
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 523 posts

Posted 31 October 2007 - 10:07 PM

I think the command chain of the Wehrmacht was the single biggest problem for Germany during WW2. Many problems, such as supply and operational planning, could have been solved if the Germans had a more professionally set-up chain of command.
A good chain of command means no unrealistic operational goals, problems can be addressed in a timely fashion, and decisions are made professionally.
-
Posted Image

#4 Obsessed with WWII

Obsessed with WWII

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 18 posts

Posted 31 October 2007 - 11:00 PM

Germany would have needed a better economic base and more raw materials. Having the A-bomb, their Landkruezer Monsters, long range Amerika bombers and all sorts of technlogy would have helped. The whole Aryan Race thing didn't help much either during the invasion of Russia. They also needed more U-boats and less surface ships.

#5 skunk works

skunk works

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,156 posts

Posted 31 October 2007 - 11:28 PM

Bag the horses, go to motorized transport.
Secure (if possible) oil/synthetic oil, rubber/synthetic rubber.
Don't get greedy. Take and hold what you need and can.
Make friends (give them a taste)(there are always the down-trodden/disgruntled, of the conquered peoples/areas. Have them work with you to secure the other side of their border.
4 & 2 engined/long-range bombers, PBYs (ish) aircraft, C-47 (ish).
2 perhaps 3 at most (multi-purpose)(upgradable airframes/planes, high altitude (interceptor/air-superiority) & low (dive bomber/attack/fighter), 1 specialty.
Don't relax. Now work on the technological stuff, radar/countermeasures, proximity, rocket. Nothing stays new for long.
2 perhaps 3 tank chassis designs, not 50. Light, Medium, Heavy. When light becomes useless = extinct, med = lgt. hvy = med, and so on.
Stick with what works. Be successful and secure before you stray to the fantastic.
Bag the big surface fleet, do U-Boats (type XXI, as soon as possible).
Mines to work the water and the land while you sleep.
Negotiate with potential threats, no law says you have to say yes, just keep em talking while you get the range.
Keep the SS/Gestapo. Every Empire needs a "Goon Squad". If they don't love you (or fake it), let them know what door #2 has behind it.
Start earlier. You're not ready, but they're even less so. This may lead to capitulation instead of destruction. Your goal is not destruction as much as it is subjugation. No?

an opinion
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]There's one way to find out if a man is honest-ask him. If he says "Yes", you know he's a crook. Groucho Marx

#6 FramerT

FramerT

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,570 posts

Posted 01 November 2007 - 12:08 AM

I agree with Skunk, especially #1. Marching into combat on foot and horse is'nt going to cut it in WWII.
Start the war production sooner.

The manpower and materials wasted on all those "super-guns"....Dora and the like. Used 1 time then retired.

Hitler listening to his Generals[like Stalin did] that are actually out on the battlefield and have a better view on the situation.

#7 Roddoss72

Roddoss72

    Dishonorably Discharged

  • Dishonorably Discharged
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 363 posts

Posted 01 November 2007 - 05:27 AM

Assasination of Hitler 30th August 1939, cancelling of Operation Fall Weiss as a bad joke.
1917 to 1990, The Soviet Union and 25 miilion murdered civillians now thats progress.
Gulf War Two and 800,000 Iraqi civilians killed now thats progress

#8 Za Rodinu

Za Rodinu

    Aquila non capit muscas

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,809 posts
  • LocationPortugal

Posted 01 November 2007 - 06:06 AM

I'll be damned! I was giving up this thread up for lost until I saw this concise but absolutely brilliant post!

Roddoss, this was the Intelligent Post of the Week! :salute:

Quousque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra...


#9 Roddoss72

Roddoss72

    Dishonorably Discharged

  • Dishonorably Discharged
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 363 posts

Posted 01 November 2007 - 06:11 AM

I'll be damned! I was giving up this thread up for lost until I saw this concise but absolutely brilliant post!

Roddoss, you were Reborn! :salute:


Yeah well tell that to the 50 million or so that didn't make it, International politics pre 1939 had a lot to answer for. And we haven't learned a damn since.

On a lighter note, Hitler in the red corner and the Polish President in the Blue Corner and after 10 rounds the winner gets the others country for 1 year.
1917 to 1990, The Soviet Union and 25 miilion murdered civillians now thats progress.
Gulf War Two and 800,000 Iraqi civilians killed now thats progress

#10 JTF-2

JTF-2

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • LocationOttawa Valley

Posted 01 November 2007 - 02:48 PM

Germany needed a Neutral U.S.
[sigpic][/sigpic]
Facta non verba. "Deeds, not words"

#11 Roddoss72

Roddoss72

    Dishonorably Discharged

  • Dishonorably Discharged
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 363 posts

Posted 02 November 2007 - 05:36 AM

Germany needed a Neutral U.S.


Japan not to attack American interests. Keep America out of the war at all costs. Sorta like an Axis "Soviet Union First" policy.
1917 to 1990, The Soviet Union and 25 miilion murdered civillians now thats progress.
Gulf War Two and 800,000 Iraqi civilians killed now thats progress

#12 lwd

lwd

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,363 posts
  • LocationMichigan

Posted 02 November 2007 - 10:26 AM

Bag the horses, go to motorized transport.
Secure (if possible) oil/synthetic oil, rubber/synthetic rubber.
...
4 & 2 engined/long-range bombers, PBYs (ish) aircraft, C-47 (ish).
2 perhaps 3 at most (multi-purpose)(upgradable airframes/planes, high altitude (interceptor/air-superiority) & low (dive bomber/attack/fighter), 1 specialty.
Don't relax. Now work on the technological stuff, radar/countermeasures, proximity, rocket. ...
2 perhaps 3 tank chassis designs, not 50. Light, Medium, Heavy....

The problem with all this is Germany didn't have the economy for it. Germany would have needed to devote more of its resources to building up the economy first which means they don't have a size able military until the mid to late 40s at the earliest. This leads to a world that it so different it's hard to say where things will go. Although if you go by the definition of a "war avoided is a war won" they do win this way.

#13 redcoat

redcoat

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,370 posts

Posted 02 November 2007 - 07:59 PM

Don't invade anybody else after the summer of 1940.
if in doubt....Panic!!!!

#14 skunk works

skunk works

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,156 posts

Posted 02 November 2007 - 08:46 PM

Hitler was a double edged sword, they needed someone to work them up to do it, but no one needed that spoiled child micro-managing "literally" everything.
Death camps were totally stupid. That made permanent enemies out of people that weren't even born yet. Work farm like prisons have now. Have them grow their own food & extra.
I don't think they should have done it (war) at all, but .... it happened.
With expanded resources raw materials/personnel from potential friends/(ah-hem) "brothers of the cause" of attached/liberated (whatever syntax-semantics the spin doctors want to call it) peoples/countries/territories.
Ol Adolf buffaloed/bullied a lot of people with nothing more than words. If he would have stuck to politics (BS), and (as Framer said) let go of the ...."I wanna be a General" baby fit stuff, a much harder immediate future may have resulted for the rest of us.
Thankfully many of his disastrous (battle/campaign/war/production/invention/distribution/supply/allocation) defeats can be attributed directly to him, and that attitude.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]There's one way to find out if a man is honest-ask him. If he says "Yes", you know he's a crook. Groucho Marx

#15 Slipdigit

Slipdigit

    Good Ol' Boy

  • Administrators
  • 14,851 posts
  • LocationAlabama

Posted 02 November 2007 - 08:52 PM

Although if you go by the definition of a "war avoided is a war won" they do win this way.


I agree with you, lwd, and if I could give you a ding on your scales I would. But I have go smooching on others first before I can come back to you.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I doubt the likelihood this happening, but had Hitler had been able to maneuvere the Soviet Union into invading Poland first, what would have been the reaction of France and the UK?

Would they have taken action against Stalin while Hitler waits a few weeks and then swallows up western Poland, getting what he wants without inciting a war with the West in as happened in 1939? I'm thinking that Chamberlain and Daladier had made no direct proclamation to this regard, so would they have guaranteed Polish integrity against attacks from the east?

This reversed situation by no means assures German victory over the Soviet Union, if they were to come into the now existing war between the Western Allies and the Soviet Union that started over the Eastern Poland invasion by the SU. It would, however, relieve Gemany from fighting a two front war.

Even though the Soviet Union was carrying the bulk of the ground fighting in the real history, the war in the West and and South still was major drains on German resources. If Germany were to find itself fighing a common enemy (Soviet Union) with French and British forces, they would not have faced the serious raw material and oil shortage they endured.

The thought opens another can of worms as French and British armed forced would not be operating in a vacuum, they would learn from German operations, making a war to the West have a lesser chance of success as happened in 1940.

And then, what about the US, without a declaration of war on 11 Dec 1941 and possibly providing Lend Lease to the Third Reich?

Just a thought. Wars are won by coalitions and Hitler failed miserably in this regard.

Best Regards,  
JW :slipdigit:

SlidigitAxe.png


#16 Sloniksp

Sloniksp

    Ставка

  • TrusteeOKF Trustee
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,494 posts

Posted 02 November 2007 - 09:13 PM

I would say that looking at history and not think up these "what-if's", the most logical move would be to perhaps just stop after France and hope Great Britain agrees?
The war against Russia will be such that it cannot be conducted in a knightly fashion. This struggle is one of ideologies and racial differences and will have to be conducted with unprecedented, unmerciful and unrelenting harshness. -Adolf Hitler


#17 Slipdigit

Slipdigit

    Good Ol' Boy

  • Administrators
  • 14,851 posts
  • LocationAlabama

Posted 02 November 2007 - 11:05 PM

I guess in a roundabout way, I was saying that Hitler needed to have done a better job of picking partners and on who who he picked on. He couldn't fight most of rest of the industrialized world and still win.

I wasn't advocating any success in what I suggested. I was trying to propose a different way for Hitler to try to accomplish what he first set out to do and stated early on, which was to subjugate the countries to his East. I don't have any reason to think he would have succeeded in his intent, but I was looking for a way for him to eliminate a second (and third) front, which would have been very a important part of victory.

The Soviet Union did invade Poland on Sep 17, 1939. Whether they would have done so unilaterally is open for debate, but there is a precedent for such an action because of the Polish Campaign of 1939, the Russo-Polish War in 1919-1922 and the Winter War.

Hitler's sorely lacking diplomatic skills would have been tested trying to persuade Stalin into an unprovoked attack on Poland. Strange things have happened during the war. The world was greatly surprised by the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.

Best Regards,  
JW :slipdigit:

SlidigitAxe.png


#18 Roddoss72

Roddoss72

    Dishonorably Discharged

  • Dishonorably Discharged
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 363 posts

Posted 07 November 2007 - 12:24 AM

If i was Adolf Hitler and i had decided that i was going to invade Poland, i would expect at least that Britain and France would envoke their mutual assistance treaties they had with Poland, thus effecting them to declarations of war, now having said that i would have had to.

1, Order plans for the eventual invasion of the west, this was done historically.
2, Order plans for the eventual invasion of Britain, should have begun by June or July 1939, to build up supply invasion vessels, to train and implement the fine art of amphibious landing, order the Luftwaffe to practice torpedo attacks and the like.
3, Never have allowed the escape of the BEF and the French at Dunkerque.
4, Under no circumstances entertain an Armistice but a full Unconditional Surrender to France and seizure of all French Naval units in Home and North African ports.
5, Here is the tricky bit, a full invasion of Britain, knock her out of the war.
6, Insist that as per Surrender Treaties, defeated nations such as France and Britain under Pro-Axis puppet governments sign mutual assistance treaties.
7, Convene a meeting with Axis partners to clearly define a "Soviet Union First Policy".
8, Agree to keep the U.S out of the war at all costs.

I can add more stuff but my time is running short.
1917 to 1990, The Soviet Union and 25 miilion murdered civillians now thats progress.
Gulf War Two and 800,000 Iraqi civilians killed now thats progress

#19 bigfun

bigfun

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,837 posts

Posted 07 November 2007 - 01:31 AM

hmmmm................let's see.................
how about not listening to the crazy rantings of an idiot leader! he could rally the troops, but militarily he was not the sharpest tool in the shed!
Scott :flag_USA_ww2: :flag_netherlands:

#20 Roddoss72

Roddoss72

    Dishonorably Discharged

  • Dishonorably Discharged
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 363 posts

Posted 07 November 2007 - 03:00 AM

hmmmm................let's see.................
how about not listening to the crazy rantings of an idiot leader! he could rally the troops, but militarily he was not the sharpest tool in the shed!


Clarify which idiot you refer to Adolf Hiler circa 1933 to 1945 or Geroge W Bush circa 2000 to 2008, i am confused.
1917 to 1990, The Soviet Union and 25 miilion murdered civillians now thats progress.
Gulf War Two and 800,000 Iraqi civilians killed now thats progress

#21 Herr Oberst

Herr Oberst

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 782 posts

Posted 07 November 2007 - 04:08 AM

Clarify which idiot you refer to Adolf Hiler circa 1933 to 1945 or Geroge W Bush circa 2000 to 2008, i am confused.


Oh, then let me make it clear for you, Clinton he or she was the idiot in question.;)
Coir a glaive

Nemo me impune lacessit

#22 Slipdigit

Slipdigit

    Good Ol' Boy

  • Administrators
  • 14,851 posts
  • LocationAlabama

Posted 07 November 2007 - 04:10 AM

Clarify which idiot you refer to Adolf Hiler circa 1933 to 1945 or Geroge W Bush circa 2000 to 2008, i am confused.


I was far from being a fan of Bill Clinton but I would never compare him to Adolf Hitler, nor do I appreciate you comparing our current Head of State in a like manner. I would not do it John Howard, no matter how much I may or may not dislike him.

And here I was giving serious thought to give you a green ding on the scales.
  • JTF-2 likes this

Best Regards,  
JW :slipdigit:

SlidigitAxe.png


#23 Roddoss72

Roddoss72

    Dishonorably Discharged

  • Dishonorably Discharged
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 363 posts

Posted 07 November 2007 - 04:25 AM

I was far from being a fan of Bill Clinton but I would never compare him to Adolf Hitler, nor do I appreciate you comparing our current Head of State in a like manner. I would not do it John Howard, no matter how much I may or may not dislike him.

And here I was giving serious thought to give you a green ding on the scales.


Go ahead, John Winston Howard is just as big a war criminal as George W Bush, fancy sending in troops into Iraq on bullsh1t faked evidence that the United Nation slammed as complete rubbish.
1917 to 1990, The Soviet Union and 25 miilion murdered civillians now thats progress.
Gulf War Two and 800,000 Iraqi civilians killed now thats progress

#24 Slipdigit

Slipdigit

    Good Ol' Boy

  • Administrators
  • 14,851 posts
  • LocationAlabama

Posted 07 November 2007 - 04:33 AM

Go ahead


I can't, I have far too much dignity to make such a comparison.

Best Regards,  
JW :slipdigit:

SlidigitAxe.png


#25 Roddoss72

Roddoss72

    Dishonorably Discharged

  • Dishonorably Discharged
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 363 posts

Posted 07 November 2007 - 04:42 AM

I can't, I have far too much dignity to make such a comparison.


I can and i did, Hitler committed war on Poland with reasons only known to himself, Bush declared war on Iraq for the vast Iraqi oilfields and the billions that would flood into his families company. Iraq under Suddam Hussein had no i repeat no terrorist networks in that country, Hussein was openly opposed to the Bin Laden Family and regarded Osama Bin Laden and his Taliban as troublemakers.
1917 to 1990, The Soviet Union and 25 miilion murdered civillians now thats progress.
Gulf War Two and 800,000 Iraqi civilians killed now thats progress




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users