What if Chamberlain was more wiser and realised what Hitler actually was. Instead of giving in to him at the Munich agreement, he supported the Czechs instead.
Public opinion was rather against the Munich agreement at the time, most people wanted the Czechs to be able to defend their own country.
Czechoslovakia had a powerful army in 1938, and the Sudetenland was quite defendable, though the British and French where still not ready for war.
What do YOU think? Would Hitler have backed down? Or would the Second World war have erupted a year earlier?

__________________
"One might as well try to charge at a wall."-Napoleon, regarding the British Infantry.

I might be mistaken, but isn't it so that Hitler needed the natural resources of Czechoslovakia to go to war? So, if Chamberlain......
I think it would have taken Germany a few years longer to be ready for war. The rest of the world would have been further involved in de-arming and there would have been nothing left to fight with.
It's been said once that if Hitler would have had the patience and waited until 1942 the german army's would have had a 'walk in the park'.

So, if Chamberlain would not have given in, the outcome would surely have been different. The invasion of England would have taken place and that would have been the end for the rest of Europe and the world.

So you think that just because the Germans didn't get the sudetenland (in this what if) the Britains would have lost the war, their island as well as the entire of Europe and the Soviets as well?

You must rememeber that even if the war started 1 or even 5 years later Germany would still be facing a man shortage expecially if she managed to take all these areas of the world. Now why would losing the sudetenland change this position that Germany was in?, if anything they would have had less resoureces and man power at the start as well as the Germans themselves ot being completely ready for a war considering that they werent completely ready for the polish invasion.

Also you must take into account the fact that Germany was not a completely mechanized army as it leads us to believe, but mostly horsedrawn transports before and well into the war, so how could they take the entire of Europe with horses? How would they cross the channel? how would they go against the industrial might of Russia?

__________________
They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We shall remember them. Lest We Forget

Considering the fact that the rest of the world was de-arming in an alarming rate, and unwilling to face the fact that there was a real threat in Germany's politics, I do.
If they could not get their hands on the resources from Czechoslovakia, they would have taken them elswhere. And not with war but through the regular channels. In this way they had been able to develope their army's further and would have had a big advantage to the rest of the world.

I'm well aware of that. But this was mainly in the beginnig of the war. Later on they became more and more mechanized. So, a couple years later should have made a lot of difference.
And not only to there army but also to the Luftwaffe and the Kriegsmarine.
They were already developing in an alarming rate.

And you think no one would notice that nice little battleship that suddenly appeared at Wilhemshaven docks? Ok seriously a few years would never had mattered in terms of the Kriegsmarine, that time is too short for the industrial power of Germany to accomplish enough to even hope to challenge the Royal Navy for sea supremacy, which is why "sealion" when ever it happened still would have been lost. Although the countries were ill prepared for war that quicky changed when war was declared, make shift tanks and quick produced weapons would have filled the armies ranks, just as what happened, the BoB would still have to had been fought for operation sealion to happen and probably still would have been fought off, seeing that American had more time to make up its mind, seeing that if Germany entered the war say at the same time as Japan, America would then be at war with both. Russia is too big to be taken by Germany, and had Germany remechanized her armies as is what they were doing, Somebody would have known this, seeing that hitler already showed his colours by taking Austria and the Rhineland, yes I know claiming back what is rightfully Germany's.

How would getting resourses through regular channels get to this "would have had a big advantage to the rest of the world"? How?

__________________
They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We shall remember them. Lest We Forget

It was already there before the war. And what did they do about it? Nothing at all.
They let Hitler spit on the Versailles treaty (written allright?) and, understandably reluctant of another war, they let him have it's his way.

There was hardly anything the Royal Navy could do about and against the force of the German U-boats. They were holding GB in a grasp for the first couple of years of WWII.
A year or two more would have meant more ships, more (and even better) U-boats.

What Allied ranks?
If Germany had taken more time before going to war they would have swept across Europe even quicker the they did.
And England would have been left to fight all alone. Which they actually did in the beginning.

Even after Pearl Harbor America did not want to get involved in the European war.
There only intrest was in the Pacific. That was, in their opinion, a just war. Just wage revence.
But it was Hitler who was stupid and ignorant enough to declare war on America.

[quote] How would getting resourses through regular channels get to this "would have had a big advantage to the rest of the world"? How? QUOTE]

I'll try to explain. Don't know the right word for through regular channels.
They had merchants sailing all over the world, buying Iron, coal, etc. etc. And there was this pact with Stalin. Russia is full of resources.
And, thus, the devolpment and building-up of an army could have been done easily while the rest of the world was kept quite by false promises.

Off the record, Nice discussion, intersting points of view. Been missing this for a long time. There is hardly any interest back home for this.
Happy to have found this forum.

Hitting very close to the bullseye here. While the natural resources and industry of Czechoslovakia were very good to have the financial resources were critical for Germany in 1939-40. The nazis had been busy cooking the books to hide their serious deficit spending. The hijacking of the Austrian government treasury and banks had bought another year or so, but had Germany not accquired Cezch financial reserves and credit it is likely a collapse of Germanys banks and government finances would occur sometime in 1939 or 1940. In the short term Gobbels propaganda could blame this on the evil British or French & their Jewish bankers, emergency measures could be taken, and if war had started then draconian rationing and controls over finances in Germany might be taken. But, in the longer run German would be be witout the cash or credit of any sort to pay for anything from the nuetrals. To a limited extent direct exchange of goods could pay for some items, but if Germany is at war then large scale parting with machine tools or the other usual exports inteferes with German war production. This barter system was used to obtain resources from the USSR in late 1940 - to mid 1941 and its was a strain. It also allowed the USSR to demand machine tools usefull for its own armament industry & it was not as if the nazis had a any negotiating position.

Brtian & France were not in the best finacial position either in 1938, but they appear of model of finacial managment compared to the nazi government

I think it would have taken Germany a few years longer to be ready for war. The rest of the world would have been further involved in de-arming and there would have been nothing left to fight with.
It's been said once that if Hitler would have had the patience and waited until 1942 the german army's would have had a 'walk in the park'.

Yes the outcome is very different. Germanys banks start going belly up in 1939 as the fabric of financial decit comes apart. As payments are delayed raw material imports slow, forigen banks increase pressure of prompt payment, German government securities begain collapsing. At some point nazi propaganda and BS are discredited. The financial collapse of the Weinmar government was a fresh memory, only fourteen years old. A banking panic and abrupt monetary inflation are quite possible before the end of 1939 and probable in 1940.

Were war with the Allies perciptated in 1938, or over Poland in 1939, then the financial problems could be masked temporarily, but in the long run of a couple years German industry is short raw materials of all sorts as imports through the nuetrals cease. And, I am thinking such imports cease sooner rather than later.


In short Cezchoslovakias wealth was critical for the development of the nazi ability to prepare for war. Without it is probable things fall apart fairly quickly.

__________________
I forgot my password, can I use yours?

The Germans created Pocket battleships such as the Graff Spee to get around the Versailles treaty, they had no real battleships until the Bismarck and later the Tirpitz as wall as no aircraft carrier, so they couldn't just start building them.



That was only true in the beginning of the Battle for the Altantic until Destroyer technology caught up with the Uboats and then the Uboast could not sustain enough sinkings to get their quota, and the "starving" of Britian woudl never had worked, I read somewhere that the Americans were able to build 1 transport ship a month from one company, then sold them to Britain to ferry goods. Also to get around this Britain instead of loading the merchant ships could just as easily paid the Americans to ferry the goods using their ships, thus making the trips safe, since the Americans were neutral at the time.


I do agree with that, more time means more tanks, but I don't think that it would have made a big enough difference, because many inovative designs that were created and developed during the course of the war only came about from war experience, such as armour skirtings on the StuG's and Pz IV tanks, as well as later models of StuG's having machine guns for infantry defense, so you could argue that the assualt may not have been so successful due to that fact.


Very True, but why would Hitler not do the same now?

And, thus, the devolpment and building-up of an army could have been done easily while the rest of the world was kept quite by false promises[/quote]I doubt the Allies would be fooled becuase that would be a lot of military hardware that would have to be built and then hidden, as well as the allies having their own suspicions about such a build up due to the fact that Germany is buying up so much extra resources.

Slow down we aint finished yet
You have defenitely come to the right place then, every week it is a discussion with someone different, some more heated then others

__________________
They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We shall remember them. Lest We Forget

As I recall the building of the Bismarck was finished at the beginning of 1939. So they were allready there. They meant a real danger to the Royal Navy.
When t comes to the Tirpitz I do agree. She was finished in 1941.
Indeed they had no aircraftcarrier, butlooking at their plans to o to war, did they really need one? Hitlers goal was to overrun England and that was well in reach of France.

Okay, good point there. But while destroyer technology developed they still couldn't really keep up the pace with Germany. Until the capture of teh Enigmamachine the royal navy was unable to break the code. So, a lucky find was a real turningpoint of the battle for the Atlantic.
When it comes to ships from America, the only thing I ever heard of is the Lend Lease of 46 aged destroyers. So, I have to look into it.

Indeed most of the improvements game from warexpierience. No point in argueing about that.
But the thing is, Germany was rapidly building up, while the rest of Europe, or the whole world for that matter, was de-arming and believing in the fact that they could stay neutral. And they where doing their very best to avoid any conflict at all.

Probably he would. As a matter of fact he surely would.

Hold on there. Looking back to the beginning of the war it's been a great shock to the rest of the world how for they had come in devoloping an army. Highly trained and well equipped.
And wasn't it during the first months the Allies took measures against germanys hunger for resources? Look at Norway.

Let's keep it going then. I'm surely having a good time discussing what if's. They are totaly opposite of my opinion on most Items and they really make me think and wonder.

@Carl;

This is hard to understand. I will respond to your opinion later. I have to let this sink in and think it over.

Not necessarily true. As the war progressed they came to rely more amd more on foot travel due to the scarcity of fuel and vehicles.

"Despite highly ballyhooed emphasis on employment of mechanized forces and on rapid movement, the bulk of German combat divisions were horse drawn throughout World War II. Early in the war it was the common belief of the American public that the German Siegfrieds of Hitler's Blitz rode forth to battle on swift tanks and motor vehicles. But the notion of the mechanized might of the German Wehrmacht was largely a glamorized myth born in the fertile brains of newspapermen. Actually, the lowly horse played a most important part in enabling the German Army to move about Europe.

Public opinion to the contrary, so great was the dependence of the Nazi Blitzkrieg upon the horse that the numerical strength of German Army horses maintained during the entire war period averaged around 1,100,000. Of the 322 German Army and SS divisions extant in November 1943, only 52 were armored or motorized. Of the November 1944 total of 264 combat divisions, only 42 were armored or motorized. The great bulk of the German combat strength-the old-type infantry divisions-marched into battle on foot, with their weapons and supply trains propelled almost entirely by four-legged horsepower. The light and mountain divisions had an even greater proportion of animals, and the cavalry divisions were naturally mainly dependent on the horse.

The old-type German infantry division had approximately 5,300 horses, 1,100 horse-drawn vehicles, 950 motor vehicles, and 430 motorcycles. In 1943, due to the great difficulties in supply and upkeep of motor vehicles in the wide stretches of the Eastern Front, the allotment to divisions in that theater was reduced to approximately 400 motor vehicles and 400 motorcycles, and the number of horses was increased to some 6,300. The 1944-type divisions had about 4,600 horses, 1,400 horse-drawn vehicles, 600 motor vehicles, and 150 motorcycles.

The only fully motorized unit in the old-type infantry division was the antitank battalion. Most of the divisional supply trains were horse drawn, motor vehicles being used chiefly to transport fuel and for the workshop company. A far greater degree of motorization existed among German GHQ troops, the supply units of which were mostly motorized. Motorization of GHQ troops was to a large degree a necessity, since these units included such types of outfits as heavy artillery, for which horse draft would have been a practical impossibility. These motorized GHQ units were assigned to armies, corps, and divisions as originally required. "

http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/germanhorse/index.html

__________________
For the first time I have seen "History" at close quarters,and I know that its actual process is very different from what is presented to Posterity. - WWI General Max Hoffman

@JC;

Okay, there is no way I can or will argue with that. That was so true. If it were the newspaperman, I don't know. But there was a lot of propaganda involved.


But you miss the point in my 'what if'.
I stated that if Chamberlain, etc. etc. the germans would have gone to war a couple years later and there would have been more time to develop their army and weaponry.
So, less horses, more armour, planes, ships, a fully developed V1, the V2 halfway, etc. etc.
Let's just say they went to war in '42 for example. Two years later there will be the first jetfighter. Can you picture it?
That's why I stated that in this 'If what' there would have been no allies and England would be runover bij the Germans.

And that's how it al started.

But how are the Germans going to get across the Channel without defeating the Royal Navy? (Which is impossible for the Kriegsmarine to do)

I sense a merry-go-round forming...

__________________
"One might as well try to charge at a wall."-Napoleon, regarding the British Infantry.

LOL Could be . With the same results .

__________________
For the first time I have seen "History" at close quarters,and I know that its actual process is very different from what is presented to Posterity. - WWI General Max Hoffman

Finished yes but not fully commisioned until August 1940, one battleship could never hope to engage the RN in a battle, this was proven with the Bismarcks attempted sorte into the Atlantic. Aircraft Supremacy was seen in the Pacific and in the Atlantic, they were the new "capital" ships that would lead the world now, fighter and light bomber support over northern Britain or even extended time in the air for an Me109 over Britain would be helpful.



Very True, and I supose if you had more submarines you could do more damage, but I don't think that it would be enough to "starve" britain in submission.

The lending of ships was me just coming up with a possible tactic that the British could imply to avoid losses to the Uboats, since the Americans are neurtal, sinking them would be the same as declaring war on America, which would never have gone well.


I am not doubting that they had a well equipped and well trained military, that was very evident with the Blitzkrieg tactic, except of course for the horse drawn supplies problem, and the foot propelled infantry.
Norway, what do you mean?



No problem then, I love discussions mate, I do like what ifs as well, as long as they don't turn into "what if germany had 15 battleships to take on the RN" realistic ones are the ones I like.

Oh I don't think they we are on a merry go round just yet, we are still exhanging differnet ideas.

__________________
They shall grow not old as we that are left grow old Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We shall remember them. Lest We Forget

Another thing to point out is that quite a few of the newer weapons that Germany was developing would have probably been put on the back burner as the war would have perhaps occurred later and the sense of desperation would not have taken priority. And the other countries realizing what a threat Hitler could be would start to rearm seeing Germany was doing so too. And there was always the USSR. I don't think IMO that they would have stayed buddies for much longer. War would have happened perhaps later but surely before Hitler was ready.

__________________
For the first time I have seen "History" at close quarters,and I know that its actual process is very different from what is presented to Posterity. - WWI General Max Hoffman