How could Germany have won the war?

Have to go with Martin on this one. Britan,by herself was'nt going to hurt Germany too much. Not enough to warrant a SeaLion attack. I also don't think any one commander would've changed the out come with Hitler pulling the strings. Once the U.S. was involved,
Germany was through.

 

Glad to see that there is someone else who thinks that Germany could have won. I dont think that Rommel was the key but he could have still come along for the ride. Dont be afraid of these Red fellows they are just crying because the USSR no longer exists.

All Germany needed to do was to plan and execute a sound war plan.

Oh and Za it obviously doenst suck enough because you still felt obliged to post. If it was that bad you bould have simply hit the back key and moved on. I do it all the time.

 

Hey im the one that brought that up, i deserve credit too!!!

Crying??Are you kidding?!?! Now that there is no USSR I can where jeans!

 

Germany could have never won for the simple reason that they could not maintain their economy and they could not maintain their military growth. Hitler's reich had no legs. They peaked in ability, skill, and equipment advantages before 1941. The USSR and USA were still building to their peak when the war was about over. So the key would be to not get involved in war with those two countries. There was no way that they could avoid that with the nazi leadership. If you were to replace Hitler and crew with a military dictatorship that was brilliant, there are ways that the Germans could have taken over Europe. Not much different in the beginning, but embracing a policy of integrating more nationalities into the plan. Jewish acceptance is a two way street. On the positive, it would help with the financing efforts, but there are a lot of nations that had large anti-semetic populations. The alliance with Japan was not worth the cost, and they did not gained too much through the association with Il Duce. Likely, the war would not have started until several years later. A series of lightning takeover of the smaller nations after provoking them into combat would be the way to start. Always holding a large reserve to be prepared when France and England take the bait of aiding a nation. Forget large ships and concentrate on subs and small attack ships. Moving strongly on the aircraft and missile development. No matter how they achieve it, the first goal after France, would have to be Great Britain. With GB out of the way, there is no easy way to take the war to Germany. Only then would any attempt to challenge the USSR have any ability to survive.

 

The only way I see for the Germans to pull off a "win" in WW 2 is once France falls concentrate on either defeating or getting a peace from Britain period. No invasion of the East. Let the Italians swing in the wing. Concentrate on ending the war you have before starting any new ones.
Also, keep the US out of it. One way to do this is once Japan attacks the US Germany declares war on Japan. It ends Lend-Lease and pretty much halts US operations in the Atlantic. It might even have forced Britain to negotiate a peace.

 

Battle of the Atlantic. It was the thing that worried Churchill.

If the Germans passed on Norway, thus preserving their surface fleet they might have been better off. Dumping even more resources into the sub program would have helped them too. Or if they somehow got their hands on the French fleet. Or better air/sea coordination.

 

How Germany won the war

1. They got there sums right and built a number of atomic bombs
2. They built the aircraft to deliver the atomic bombs
3. drop the atomic bombs
4. End of war
5. Hell on Earth

There you go case closed, now let's get around to Za's place for his big party warp factor 10 people.

 

:lol: Not enough to kill and torture but they outlaws jeans... what a horrible time.

Interesting, very very interesting!

 

I would think Germany had to attack East, at least as far as Hungary. For oil and raw materials.

 

I agree with T.A.

Germany should have kept what she had before June 22nd 1941 and not get greedy!!

As for supplies, Hitler's buddy Stalin was providing everything needed. In fact the last train filled with supplies was crossing the border a few hours before Barbarossa began.

 

Adolf hitler said he would have won the war if he total restaffed his armys generals etc so maybe if he done that he could have won the war.

secondly if they din't invade russia i think they would have had a better chance.

Originally Posted by T. A. Gardner
The only way I see for the Germans to pull off a "win" in WW 2 is once France falls concentrate on either defeating or getting a peace from Britain period. No invasion of the East. Let the Italians swing in the wing. Concentrate on ending the war you have before starting any new ones.
Also, keep the US out of it. One way to do this is once Japan attacks the US Germany declares war on Japan. It ends Lend-Lease and pretty much halts US operations in the Atlantic. It might even have forced Britain to negotiate a peace..[/quote]

America would have eventually declare war on germany even if germany had declared war on japan after pearl harbour becuase they were already supplying england with weapons etc.

in conclusion in a war or battle there are many things the losing side could have done and should have done but never do it thus why they are the losing side.........

 

Problem was Hitler laid it all down in his book back in the 1920's and when he came to power that vision took shape as his army rolled up Europe in 39/41. We all know that Russia was the begging of the end for that mad man.

 

Yes indeed, the irony is that Stalin read his book and knew an attack was iminent.

 

That's an entirely original point of view in this forum! Now it's all the generals fault!

Will you please tell us:
a) which generals you have in mind,
b) when would they be replaced,
c) and by whom?


Oh, and

 

Interesting:

When I first posted this I had the dates (for the US DoW on Japan and the German DoW on US) wrong, but I had in mind that Germany would have already taken Briton either in the winter of 1940, or surely by mid summer 1941. Either way, long before US could dislodge their ground and air forces after Dec7.

If Germany had taken Briton by Dec 7, 1940 (a full year before Pearl Harbor), then there would be no excuse for American forces to be fighting in Europe for several years at least. Had the German nation been competent conquerors {read as "no Nazi's"}, British and French shipyards would be cranking out merchant carriers {Large Freighters whose top cargo holds were designed as duel purpose storage spaces/aircraft hangers and roofed with a flight deck}. Millions of French and British infantry troops would be available for any future assault on USSR (if such were even needed) and for expansion of the German empire.

My preliminary thoughts on how the Germans could have made better use of their limited industrial assets too make the most economical war possible have been posted here:

http://www.ww2f.com/what-if/12126-german-tonnage-war-strategy.html

In this tread I tried {and failed, badly} too get across the idea that the BoB and the battle for control of the North Atlantic could most economically have been fought as one and the same. Read this tread. Understand the concept of evolving the First World War's submarine battles into flying boat-torpedo bombers. With the submarines serving in a support role {as mobile, submersible spare gas tanks} instead of front line combatants. Basically:

Planes are cheaper too build than subs >>> use planes too attack convoys.
Planes are cheaper to replace than subs >>> use subs to pick up downed pilots.
Planes can be built in greater numbers, faster, and with greater security than subs.
Planes can see farther, move faster, and deliver their torpedoes too several different convoys targets each day. Something submarines cannot do.

I have as yet not posted on how the Germans could have made a workable sealion. That is in the works...

More later.

 

Actually, I must respectfully disagree with you on this point.

FDR was very much aware {as the everyday American was not} of the danger that a united Nazi Europe would pose to the rest of the world. Public opinion would not have allowed FDR to openly intervene in the British/German war {which is why he was forced to use indirect methods such as lend lease in the first place}, He would be booted out of office summarily for asking the US congress for a DoW against a nation that had just declared war on Japan for their sneak attack on pearl harbor!

Picture it:
FDR's speech to the nation... "Yesterday, Dec 7 1941, a day that will live in Infamy..." I ask congress for a DoW against the Empire of Japan, and oh yea, how about a DoW against the Germans {who just made a DoW against those who attacked us}, Right? Too be followed immediately by thunderous demands for impeachment, ect...

Welcome too the forums, by the way.

 

well hitler did think of him highly becuase he was the only infantry commander to have a panzer division under his command and rommel didn't just handle north africa he also had command of the German forces opposing the Allied cross-channel in the invasion fo normandy. and also the invasion of france. and many more battles that i can't rember

 

well A)adolf hitler said all generals so all generals.
B)he said he should have restaffed his generals before the war when he first gained power
C)well by other officers i am guessing there would be alot of promotions i guess himmler would still be in there and so would rommel becuase they all became leaders after hitler had gained power so they proably would of been apart of the restafing i do not realy agree with this veiw becuase i doubt the generals would have made much of a diffrence up against russia and america in the long run. it could have just been adolf hitler blaming the losing of the war on someone else. and thanks for the welcome

 

Hey, leave the poor Bold key off, it looks awful!

That would be interesting in terms of severance and early retirement pay. Unless he took the Long Knives approach and shot them all

And he said that when exactly?

And now let's split this paragraph:

1 - First of all in peacetime having someone promoted is a can of worms because you simply have to have your Colonel going through some Staff College to get the proper graduation (a course can take years) and then he gets to be a Majorgeneral. More years and seniority will bring the guy to Leutnantgeneral and General.

It takes years to form a proper Chief of Staff, and don't say anything about the Quartermasters and other logistics specialists!

You can't simply pull a colonel 'from the ranks' and give him a new set of epaulettes and call him a general. In wartime this is normal as generals get dismissed, shot, hanged, or become casualties.

Besides, what you say not borne out by reality. Just look at the Campaign of France. How many Feldmarschalls were created after that? So Adolf couldn't so unhappy with his generals, that was only his usual hogwash.

2 - Himmler was too busy being chief of the entire SS apparatus. One of Heinie the Chicken Farmer was he always took more load than his capacity allowed. In any case he was no field commander at all, unless you count the sorry incident of him being Commander Army of the Vistula when he spent most of his time in a spa curing a convenient "flu". And in any case the Waffeen-SS (which didn't even have that name at the time) was composed only of 3-4 underequipped regiments.

Rommel's higher abilities has been largely disputed in this forum, but there is no doubt he made a very competent PzDiv Commander in the French Campaign, so yes, he could be part of the plan but watch out for the Peter Principle.

3 - Now you're talking sense. Your plan of restaffing the General corps with rookie colonels would be a complete disaster

4 - Bullseye!

5 - Well, you're new to the forum and we are polite people and appreciate more polite people

But be warned, when you stick your neck out with obviously crazy ideas and, worse, badly thought out arguments, some of our members can be ruthless and tear you to tiny shreds, so do your homework and think beforehand the pros and cons of an argument if you want to survive in this forum

 

what the hell look at what i orignaly siad i said HITLER said not me.......it was not and argument but a statement that hitler blamed his generals so i didn't stick my neck out at all................

and he said this in his bunker after himmler had betrayed him in the bunker a couple of days before he killed himself