What if the Alpine Redoubt was reality?

I've been thinking about this a bit.
What if the Alpine Redoubt had not been an illusion, but instead the German High Command and Fuhrer had been serious about building this ultimate fallback and last line of defence?

Now we know Hitler didn't give permission for this, but what if he had? What if in 42 or 43 when the war started to turn, he gave it serious consideration and put someone like Speer working with the military on the project.

We know it was feasible because the allies took it so seriously in 45 and believed it could be.

So underground armourment factories, a supreme defensive line in extremely difficult terrain to attack (look at the Gothic line, or the trouble the allies had in Italy) with all German ministries relocated there in 44/45 and Hitler moving troops from Italy, Western Germany and the Lake Balaton area there when it was clear the Russians were going for Berlin and he'd stacked his troops up to defend against the wrong attack.

Look at the estimated area of the redoubt,




A truly huge area. So what would we have seen?

Would the allies commit large forces to taking this area, even though it could have been a bloodbath?
Would the Americans have used a nuclear bomb here? Would they have dared given the British, French and Russian reaction to a nuclear strike on central Europe?
Could we have seen indifference from the allies, given the Nazis were couped up in the redoubt and just on the defensive?
Interestingly, could this redoubt have continued as a separate state with a peace agreement or ceasefire?

 

First of all, welcome to the forum Petain. I think that the redoubt would have been a guerilla or resistance type of campaign and would have lasted a good year. This type of warfare is difficult to conduct as the Germans have found out. The guerillas could be compared to a hydra where once you cut off one branch, another pops up. In answering your questions:

Would the allies commit large forces to taking this area, even though it could have been a bloodbath? I believe so. The only way to fight guerillas is to saturate the area with troops making it hard for them to travel. Vietnam is an example of how not to handle guerilla warfare. Not enough troops for the area at hand.

Would the Americans have used a nuclear bomb here? Never.

Would they have dared given the British, French and Russian reaction to a nuclear strike on central Europe? It would not have reached that level.

Could we have seen indifference from the allies, given the Nazis were couped up in the redoubt and just on the defensive? No. As we have all seen, this was taken very seriously by Eisenhower and his response was to a rumour. So I believe that they would have addressed it with full military might.

Interestingly, could this redoubt have continued as a separate state with a peace agreement or ceasefire? No. At some point they would have run out of resources and even have had the German population turn against them due to their weariness on the war. I believe the population was too tired to fight on and wanted it to just end.

My opinion on the subject so don't etch it in stone as the ideal answer. Cheers.

 

I would assume they could have taken the 'Japanese homeland approach' where as opposed to taking large amounts of casualties in a full frontal assault, they would have waited it out, and eventually used 'the bomb' in August '45?

Yet in mountainous terrain with underground factories and entrenched troops, the blast effect would be minimal at best. And the chance of the Nazis causing any serious trouble from these positions would be a deciding factor in how to deal with them, as PzJgr says, they may not even have 'cared' as much to do anything as serious as an atom bomb! You know there is probably some form of speculative fiction written on this...but I would give the Nazis until summer '45 at best.

Eventually I would go with the Russians simply pushing straight through it, with their virtually inexhaustible supply of manpower.

 

The Germans make lousy gureillas. They are way too orderly and structured for that. What you need for an irregular war is a nation full of rebels, nutters, drunken scum or some other variant of that. None of that in Germany. The US....without a doubt. UK? No lack of crazy Englishmen. Russia....they invented crazed drunkards! France? They had being obnoxous assholes going for them.
What has Germany got? People who believe in the police. They willingly give their "papers" to the authorities! Hell, they probably don't even cross the street against the light! It would have never worked.

 

Well, you have made my day on this observation, but as Darth Vader once indicated "Those Friekorps are rebel scum" oh there are plenty of arseholes in Germany.

But on a serious note, no this would not work, it would hust take the Allies a little longer to wipe this little bastion of Nazism to extinction.

 

like most ot the nazi ideas, this "red spot" in the alps seems funny :lol:

just a few reamrks:

- the borders of the "red spot" are enourmous, i dare say ridiculous (merging different nations too)

- how would the "red spot" be resupplied?? i didn't know in '45 europe was so rich of goods to be stockpiled

- who would be ready to move there in '45?? apart from few fanatics, i can't see so many volunteers for this ultimate crusade. in fact, a mass suicide.

- i can't even see the concept of defending german homeland, moving into the "red spot" would mean abandon homeland's capital to the soviets.

- people moving there would be just fanatics, worshipers of hitler's cult of personality, in facts idiots with no skills at all: no techinicians, no good militaries, just bla bla bla fanatics

- the "red spot" would become just a mass grave.... it riminds me of Waco massacre in '93

- and what about the people already living in the "red spot" area? what was the nazi plan for them?

- finally, allied commanders considered this option like any other military option: but it's normal, it's their job!! but to me the "red spot" scenario is simply out of touch with reality. but nevertheless it's funny!!!

Now i can't wait to face another masterpiece of nazi humor: the deportation of the jews in madagascar. who's gonna start ?

 

Well, this is a what if afterall. Actually, guerilla warfare is not as complicated and difficult as you make it out to be. A man fighting for his country against an invader is a better fighter than a soldier who is paid to fight for his country. This is fact. Guns and ammo, just pick up from the dead enemy soldiers. This type of fighting has been done for years. Don't write off the redoubt.

 

Thanks for the welcome!

Notice I said that if Hitler gave the go ahead for the redoubt in 42/43. So given that, I think we could assume adequate time for a very tough defensive line to have been constructed. The whole what if of this scenario is what if Hitler had been sane enough to appreciate the odds were stacked against him and he would really need the redoubt. Training troops in Alpine/Gureilla warfare and devoting signficant resources to it. Maybe he would have hoped that if he could prolonge the war, then the Russian and allied co-operation would have broken down. Red Army troops at the borders of Italy, would they want that? I think in any scenario where the war is lengthened there is the potential for lots of things to happen.

The Germans could have stockpiled ammo at the redoubt, built underground factories and generally set up a functioning state.

I don't see the Americans under Eisenhower pushing ahead into the redoubt. Especially if casualties were horrific. With the Germans couped up, why bother about them?

The Russians I certainly could see going on regardless. But how far would this lengthen the war? And given the terrain, what casualty levels are we looking at? This could have bought further time for Hitler to be deposed, maybe by Himmler or the Prussian old guard, and then might we have not seen a peace agreement reached?


I think the idea of an aborration of a state, a small Nazi state in central Europe ignored by everyone, penned in, is very interesting and I wonder how it could have developed.

 

The allies would have to do something and being the Eisenhower did react to a rumour shows that he would send the military in to quelch this resistance. As for building underground factories and stockpiling supplies, well that is describing a fortress and easily detectible. Guerilla warfare involves stealth and mobility. So maybe on the stockpiling of supplies but nix on the factories.

 

Probably just a crazy idea when everybody was inventing crazy ideas in nazi Germany as the end was coming closer and closer.

Anyway, some sort of redoubt could have been created if Hitler had left Berlin early enough in 1945, but in the long run what would that have lead to? And that´s what Hitler had realized. Without Berlin there´s nothing left of the ideology really and a redoubt without a leading cause like Hitler in it would not work either.

ALso the factories could not work for long without coal, oil, steel and already in spring 1945 the Ruhr was not producing any mentionable figures of coal to send to factories.

I guess the Allied would just keep on bombing until the redoubt troops would be starving and started waving the white flag.

 

what can i add? i agree 100%

exacteley what i wrote before:
i can't even see the concept of defending german homeland, moving into the "red spot" would mean abandon homeland's capital to the soviets. People moving there would be just fanatics, worshipers of hitler's cult of personality

exactley what i asked before:
how would the "red spot" be resupplied??

 

Hey! I resemble that remark!

 

Welcome too, nobody here ever defended Le Maréchal.

But why would Adolf do that? By that time frame he still thought he only needed another push to win. And later on many times he did forbid building tactical defensive lines behind the FEBA so why would he order a massive redoubt smack in the centre of Germanhood? He wanted the other guys to do Last Stands, not himself!

 

Given the area described, it would not have been possible. Without an industrial base supporting it, either from within or from elsewhere, there's is no way such a redoubt could have been sucessful except to prolong everyone's sufferings. Who would have lead it, besides a few two-bit Hitler youth leaders intent on making a name for themselves? Besides, too many Germans in the upper echelons of the Third Reich were too busy making good on their escapes to other countries, and they could not have given a damn about any Wagnerian-inspired final stand.

I would like to add, that near the end of the Fall of France in 1940, a very few within the French government and military (namely Gen. de Gaulle and PM Reynaud) had entertained the idea of a "Breton Redoubt" on the Brittany penninsula. Likewise, the region had no large industrial base to support such an operation. Despite having a coastline, and possibly being supplied and reinforced by sea in limited fashion, there was really not enough deepwater ports to sustain such a defense, or even the notion of an offense. It too, would have failed.

I would like to point out that of the 4 countries you mention, only France has had the experience of having been completely occupied by a foreign military power. Refering to the actions of various underground movements as a result of they're being "obnoxious assholes" is really a disservice to their memories and diminishes their sacrifices. Then of course, your sense of sarcasm may have briefly eluded me. Still, not my choice of words.

 

Note that the Ruhr industrial pocket was surrounded and left behind by the Allied armys in 1945, as was the city of Breslau. In either case the isolated industrial city or cities were living on borrowed time and existed mostly because they were not worth assualting. While the Ruhr pocket had a lot of heavy industry it was still unable to sustain itself or the army defending it.

 

This is true, though I wonder if considerations for a post-war economical revival played a role in this as well. As you said, these areas were surviving on borrowed time; the fact that the Allies decided to not flatten these key installations is perhaps due to the foresight in Allied planning for the post-war era.

 

Well, we had made a determined effort to burn the Ruhr to the ground. Operation Clarion and subsequent attacks by the US 9th AF in januaary-March 1945 wrecked the remaining rail network in parts of the Ruhr.

The only postwar plan I'm aware of was a proposal to strip Germany of its industry & reduce it to a agricultural nation of impovrished peasants. The idea did not go far. The Swiss would have lost their market for hydroelectric power, the Dutch lost the trade from Germany to the world passing through their ports.

Maybe theres something Eisenhowers historys about this? Any preservation policy would have been promulgated via his HQ.

I forgot about the pocket of German soldiers trapped in Western Holland.

 

I know what you mean about lack of industrial base. And I realise this is quite a what if, seeing as Hitler never liked retreating or planning effectively for a retreat. But go along with the whole, visited by a ghost from 45 or whatever theme, and remember he gives someone full power and authority to plan and implment it from 42. Maybe after Stalingrad, if he is perceptive enough to understand it lessens chances of victory by a considerable percentage.

Given then time then, from early 42, I'm sure the Germans could have built a decent industrial base in the redoubt area, perhaps even moving some from the Ruhr, into sub-terrainian accomodation to spare them from allied bombing raids a bit.

Also, I think there'd be quite a few leaders/generals etc that would retreat to the redoubt and fight on, especially if the alternative was capture by the Russians. More than you think hated what happened in 1918 and didn't want to surrender again. Troops from the 6th SS Panzer division, 6th Army, III Panzercorps and the Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler could be withdrawn to the pre-prepared defensive positions at the redoubt in 45 instead of launching operation Frühlingserwachen. Maybe even the Hungarian Third Army would choose to join them?

A lot of the answers on here are really good, but they don't take into account that the what if scenario starts in 42 and the men/man charged with setting it up has support from Hitler to make whatever arrangements are necessary.

 

All right. Logistics all comes down to potatos. If you started stockpiling weapons, fuel, ammunition and potatos in 1942 for the men to eat, when it came to 1945 those potatos would be all rotten and stale, so how would you feed all those forces plus civilian population?

How many troops would it take to man the perimeter and provide a defence in depth? Even if you had the opportunity to renew the potato supply, all it would take would be time to, once communications with outside were cut, to let them eat all the potatos.

If you studied the classical authors (Aeneas Tacticus or Asclepiodotos are quite good in this) you'd learn that can conquer any fortification by one of several methods:

* direct military action: bombardment followed by assault
* indirect military action: cutting supplies off and let them starve until surrender
* psychological means: "you guys are all cooped in there while we are having all the fun in the world outside with your wives and children, etc"
* fiduciary means: a mule loaded with silver left outside the gate, or in this case a 3 1/2 ton GMC truck loaded with US Treasury bonds

Whatever the case, your redoubt won't last. Besides, the real Great Redoubt was Berlin and looked what happened to it.