here's how it would have happened, in my head:
June 6, 1941: Germans take Paris (this is just a starting point)
June 6, 1942: V-E day, the wrong way. Sealion has taken Britain, and only the Ruskies and a handful of Allied forces in North Africa stand in their way.
Meanwhile, in the Pacific...
Entire War: Japan wins. Without British support (since they were taken), islands fall like dominoes, and pearl harbor is not necessary (The assets siezed were recovered by the Germans as they took over Britain.).
After the Pacific theatre ends...
Germany steamrolls over Moscow like, well, a steamroller. Japan catches the factories that the Soviets moved east to protect them by surprise. Needless to say, the entire world (almost) is in Axis hands. Only the U. S. stands in their way.
Sometime later...
While Japan is still on their blitz in the west, the Germans go British and storm up the Chesapeake, taking heavy losses. Eventually they reach the American capital, but are so beat up they don't have the manpowere or ammunition to capture or even burn it. Eventually the invaders are pushed back. Next, the Germans face a horror unseen. Truman drops the bomb on Tokyo AND Berlin. And if that isn't enough, they pretty much destroy pretty much everything important under an atomic hail. War ends, everything is happy again.

Your location sums up your post quite well.

__________________
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

Me reading your post......

__________________


"If you want peace work for justice" -Pope Paul VI

Jon

alright... Sealion would have failed. After looking at it over and over, The Kriegmarines simply didn't have the naval muscle to overwhelm the Royal Navy, and the RAF, would have made crossing the Channel nearly impossible. I think personally had Hitler not launched Barbarossa, Stalin simply would have invaded Germany, with far superior numbers. It was common knowledge that they wanted each other dead, it just so happened, Hitler threw the first punch, with him being cocky from his effortless victory in France and Poland. Had Stalin decided to be happy instead of going to war with Hitler, we would have a Soviet Union, a United States, and a Nai Germany, and Japan that would have comprised the Cold War

Hitler was willing to give Donitz more U-boats but it takes time to build them and to train the crew ;I think the importance of Ultra is exaggerated ;a total U-boatwar :FDR waited for it to convince Congress to declare war.

Barbarossa was the only option Hitler had to win:in WWI germany was defeated by 4 opponents(3 if you count the withdrawal of Russia) in 1940 UK was alone but said no peace. Why ?because they expected help from USA and USSR ;Hitler would not win against those three but they had to be three:without the USA UK and USSR could not win,idem without UK or without USSR .Thus if Hitler eliminated one of the three,he won. Which one? He could not eliminate the UK nor the USA thus the USSR before it was ready.

You are forgetting that the Kaiser's Germany, and the Central Powers had 6 opponents in WW1, Great Britain, France, Russia, Italy, Japan and eventually the US. When the Russians withdrew that still left 5, because the US came in when the Russians left.

Hitler saw and derided the military for getting into a two front war, and that was one of the reasons Stalin was so disbeliving when Barbarossa was launched. He couldn't imagine that Hitler was such a fool as to open a second front before he had come to terms in the west, either by defeating Britain, or forcing it into a truce of some sort. If Hitler didn't strike east, Stalin MAY have attacked at a later date, but that seems less than a "sure bet".

A popular position taken by some is that Hitler struck a "pre-emptive blow", and that Stalin was planning on invading him, all documentation from the former Soviet Union seems to show this to be incorrect.

__________________
Happy Trails,
Clint.

Japan profited from the war in Europe to fortify her position in China ;Italy was a burden for the allies(and in WW II for Hitler) ;Hitler had to open a second front;he had no alternative:he could not eliminate Britain and they would not negotiate ;yes Stalin May have attacked but that was not the reason for Barbarossa ,if Hitler eliminated the USSR he won :without a Russian front ,no Overlord because the bulk of the german army beying in France. The USSR beying "the continental sword "of the UK ",the Russians had to become allies or they had to be eliminated (=Hitler's point of view and it is not a foolish one .Concerning the"pre-emptive blow" you are rightnly speculation without proof. ................If the US remained neutral and-or-the UK made peace,then there was no NEED for Hitler for Barbarossa in 1941 ,maybe-probably-Barbarossa would follow later but at a time CHOSEN by Hitler . Last point:after the Republican convention the next president of the US would be an enemy,Willkie or Roosevelt ,Hitler could not eliminate the USA and lastly in 1942 there would be a war with the USA,thus:Barbarossa ,the Wehrmacht beying ready or not-it was not.

Your logic is a little off. Before Barbarossa was launched Hitler was only at war with the UK (only out of the big three you mentioned). Neither the US or the USSR were openly waging war against Germany, and the USSR had signed a non-aggression pact with Germany. Therefore, Hitler certainly wasn't thinking he needed to eliminate one of the three. As was already mentioned, it is unlikely the USSR would have attacked Germany, and if it did it wouldn't be until 1943 at the earliest. So according to your need for Germany to eliminate one of the powers, that is settled by never bringing one of the powers into the war against them.

__________________


"If you want peace work for justice" -Pope Paul VI

Jon

Perhaps the timing of the invasion of the SU could be questioned, but not its eventual happening. The cornerstone of 'dolphie's plan for empire is the Lebensraum to the east with the various ethnic groups there being reduced to agricultural chattels, ala blacks in America. There is simply no way to eliminate this and still have the dreamed of Third Reich.

Consider also that Communism and Fascism/Nazism are polar opposites on the political scale. I am well aware that both dictators used the same methods, but that isn't the issue. The divergent political theory of the movements promotes the inevitable conflict.

They won't be able to exist side by side in the atmosphere of mutual distrust that would have multiplied expotentially as time passed for very long.

Regards,
Dennis

On the other hand,had he an alternative ? The war with the USA was approching,remember the reunion of Churchill and Roosevelt at Newfoundland ,Hitler had to be sure that Stalin was on his side :neutral was not enough ,a neutral can enter the war and the USSR was more dangerous in the short time:it had a border with Germany :for Hitler the USSR was the continental sword of England.The USSR had to be his ally or had to be eliminated and without the USSR no Overlord. But Hitler was in a hurry:in 1941 the USSR was weak,but in 1942 ?

I don't know about that. The impression I get is that his response was more along the lines of "ah well, that'll serve the b****r right for being so palsy with Hitler" closely followed by "damn! Now half the Lend-Lease shipments we've ordered are going to have to go East to prop up UJ"

The US was definitely 'neutral on the side of england' even quite early on, extremely so once the Lend-Lease acts came into being. However I'm not sure AH fully appreciated at the time that the US was able and willing to essentially provide the UK with whatever was required to beat Germany.
The impression I have is that AH made the decision to attack the USSR pretty much on it's own 'merits' - i.e. that it was high time to turn the invincible nazi war machine on the untermenschen. The senior staff had apparently been drawing up plans for demobbing large numbers of soldiers and returning to a smaller more professional army when he told them to forget all that and get ready for the Phase II on the eastern front.

Hitler forbad the KM toripost to the US navy .Concerning the demobilisation,there was a partial demobilisation-a very good source is "the Dupuy Institute " ;there were plans for a war with the USA but the decision was only made in december 1940 . Ithink that-maybe? ,probably ? -after peace with or elimination of the UK , there would have be a war with the USSR ,but when ?

As stupid as this seems, he had to. Although it meant a doomed Reich, Hitler invaded Russia because he wanted to destroy the Soviet Union but also because the Soviets would have realized that they were in danger, too. Stalin might have realized this in time to prepare for war, and WW2 would have ended up the exact same way.

__________________
To the German Commander-- Nuts.

-- The American Commander

Russia would have eventually attacked Germany, but not necessarily directly. Russia might have turned its military south against Hungary or Romania, or maybe into Turkey or Iran.

Without Germany deeply into Russia in December 1941, would Roosevelt have prioritized Japan as the primary theater?

I didn't read through all 3 pages here so I 'm just going to state my opinion.

Firs of all. I believe that if he had not went after Russia that he would have invaded Britain, or at least tried to. I also think that he would have had a MUCH stronger army (Obviously). so in this case I think that America would come into the war much earlier and have it's industrial strength backing Britain for the ineviteble invasion.

After America has it's butt in gear with with the industrial stuff they will eventually launch an attack across the English Channel (Probably Normandy or Calais) in probably 45 or 46 after fighting it's way through North Africa and Italy. The Russians would also attack at the same time into Poland on a very narrow front heading for Berlin.

I think at this rate the war would have been finished by 1948-40, with the SS and the werchmant being very powerful because they hadn't been bled out. Germany would still control the sky's as the did in 42 and 43 with the US and Britain pounding them but still taking heavy losses even with the new P51s.

That is all well and good, but ignores the fact that the Germans were the original targets of the atomics, and if they had still been in the war when they were completed, it would have been Germany which was targeted, with the third and fourth going toward Japan if they remained "troublesome". # 1&2 were ready in August of '45, as historically. # 3&4 were ready before August ended.

The assembly of the two part case for the un-named implossion type was complete and sitting on Tinian when Nagasaki was hit, the core for #3 was complete but called back from San Fran (from where it was going to be airshipped), and kept at Los Alamos until the Japanese signed the papers of surrender in Sept. The two case halves and the core for un-named implossion type #4 was completed in this time-frame as well, and also held at Los Alamos until they were both used in the "Crossroads" tests at Bikini.

__________________
Happy Trails,
Clint.

You are right. But you have to remember that may have lengthend the war or shortened it. it could have gone either way. Hitler being who he was after seeing the Abomb hit would have pushed the German army harder and they would have fought harder IMO. them knowing that not just the russians were mean but both the allies also

I wonder at that; because Hitler and Goebbels had both been touting "secret wunderwaffe", and if an atomic or two had hit Germany it may have become apparent to both the troops and Hitler's closest advisors that they had lost the race completely.

Since Stalin had his spies in the MED project, he knew we were close, but if "mushrooms had started sprouting" in Europe he may well have pulled back and awaited the inevitable. Then again, knowing Stalin he may have advanced to the agreed upon "limits" from Yalta, and only stopped then.

I do NOT think Berlin would have been an atomic target, and only for the same reason Tokyo wasn't. You have to have someone from whom to take the surrender. I would put up Stuttgart, where the Allies knew the Nazis held their atomic ores stored, and Haiger-Loch wasn't too far from Stuttgart, and that was where Heisenberg had transferred his atomic research project. We knew that from our own spies.

__________________
Happy Trails,
Clint.

For Stalin invading first, read "Third Reich Victorious" chaper: "The Storm and the whirlwind" it provides an interesting point of view.

__________________
-Dustin

"Zey send zer hounds! zey to vill find only death!"

1. Very True.

2. I'm not at all sure what Stalin would have done, know him though I think that he would have pushed it all the way to the end.

3. True.

OK Hitler had launched his War Against USSR ,because Of Stalin's Cutting on Fuel Supplement 2 Germany!! and Some of His Secret Relations With Hitler's Nemesis=Britian!!
If He Didn't Then He Could With USSR Support Not Only Take Europe but Also The Whole Oily Middle East!! And Maybe They Could Together Make a Big Threat 2 America ItSelf!!

__________________
Spec Ops Motto 1=100

The USSR most certainly did NOT cut off the petroleum to the Nazis. The relations/negotiaions were going on between Nazi Germany and Britain as well as between the Soviets and Britain and France. Hitler only attacked the Soviets because he had always said he would, and that was the only direction into which he could expand for Lebensraum.

BTW, the oil in the Mid-east was largely unknown, over 75% of the global oil production came from the western hemisphere, led by the USA. The soviets had under 12% of global production, and the mid-east about 2% in Persia (Iran), and 1% in Iraq. None in Saudia Arabia, none in the African north (Egypt had a some minor output) the US was the "big dog" in global production until the mid-50s.

Even the Soviets imported oil from the USA during the war.

__________________
Happy Trails,
Clint.

As it has been pointed out, Stalin did not cut petroleum or any other supply's agreed in the treaty with Hitler. In fact, the last Russian train crossing the Russian-German border did so exactly 2 hours prior to the invasion.


And why are you yelling??

__________________
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

Found my resource on the oil sent to Hitler, and the last train across was carrying grain. As an aside, Hitler held the launch of Barbarossa for those two hours so that the grain delivery could be completed!

"The Soviets had sent over 4.5 million barrels of oil to Hitler in the time between Dec.1939 and June 1941 when he (Hitler) sent his armies east in Operation Barbarossa. The Soviet Union was at the time the world's second largest oil producer (far behind the USA). Despite strict rationing internally however, it still had to import oil from the United States to meet its own needs while shipping oil to Hitler!"

"…Hans Kolbe, a U.S. spy in the German Foreign Ministry in Berlin, offered this assessment: "The German need to obtain Soviet oil was deemed the primary reason for the attack. Since the Soviet deliveries were insufficient to satisfy German needs for bringing the war [in the west] to a conclusion, the only recourse appeared to be the seizure and exploitation by the Germans of the oil resources of the Soviet Union."

Goto:

http://www.eiaonline.com/history/bloodforoil.htm

The petroworld was really different in those days wasn't it, over 60% of global petroleum production came from the USA's own wells!

__________________
Happy Trails,
Clint.