How Germany could've won?

Yes, perhaps we could split off the banter from this thread?

Possible? Yes.
Simple? no.

No, not really a big factor. (Leaving moral arguments aside)
There were only about 200,000 Jews in (Greater) Germany at war's outbreak, so assuming that there would have been about 100,000 males and at most perhaps about 30 - 40,000 able-bodied males between the ages of 18 and 38, with even less of those being willing to fight.
Most of the able bodied healthy males would end up in compulsive service with vital areas anyways (mines, work camps etc) so it's doubtful that a few 10's of thousands of extra bodies of questionable loyalty would have much of an effect.

With Britain either neutral, withdrawn from the war (ie Vichy Britain) or surrendered, the US would not enter the war, it would be exclusively concerned with Japan.

 

On point one, neither military personnel, nor labour, manning the German war-machine were exclusive to Germany but were drawn from the occupied regions of Europe as well. Though this actually works both ways as slave labour and theft of property of undesirables helped prop up the war-economy.

On point two, I fail to see why Germany would have remained neutral in the Pacific war without Britain. Germany declared war on the States, not the other way round, in line with the agreements made under the Tripartite Pact.

 

The Tripartite was a defensive alliance. Hitler declared war on the US after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor not because he was obligated to do but did so because he was an idiot, and for some silly reason he figured that the Japanese wanted to tangle with the Rookies again after getting royally thumped in 1939 by them.

Why would being involved in the Pacific benefit the Germans? The PTO was largely a naval conflict, and that's something the Germans had not much of, a surface fleet. There would be nothing for them to be gained by getting involved as a micro-junior partner in a theater of operations like the Pacific.

 

But how does he "finish" the western front? The only way I can see is to give up a good deal of his conquests. Britian might accept a peace deal that included Germann wthdrawl from Norway, Denmark, Holland, Belgium, and at least parts of France. But I suspect Hitler was constitutionally unable to even consider offering that.

Could he have "completely" defeated the BER? Remember not all of it was at Dunkirk. It's not clear just how much he could even have prevented from being withdrawn from Dunkirk. The Germans will also take losses trying to reduce Dunkirk and it may tie up forces they could use elsewhere.

The evidence is the BOB was wearing down the LW faster than it was the RAF. If for instance you look at the number of operational fighters the Germans started the BOB with a bit of an edge and soon lost it and never recovered it. The British were loosing slightly more at least during some stages but they were building planes faster and training pilots faster and could draw on larger industries and a larger population pool.

 

That's not at all clear. There was pretty strong evidence that the US would be coming into the war on the side of the British in the not too distant future and he may have thought that the timeing maximized the phycological impact. It also allowed the German Uboats to do quite a bit of damage before the US got things under control.

Did he? He may have hoped that they would join in but I've not seen anything that indicates he really expected it.

 

That final sentence in the first paragraph is the only reason I've ever been able to squeeze out of Hitler's war declaration that makes any sense at all. By declaring war openly he could legally sink US flagged ships at sea and interdict their supplying of Britain. I find it interesting that he had a message radio-gramed to his U-boat fleet slightly before he declared war authorizing their firing on any American ship without restraint. Before that time he had restricted their firing on American vessels, and with a few exceptions had maintained a pretty tight control over them. Operation Drumbeat certainly exposed America's weakness in protecting its ships in its own waters, and prompted the construction of the Big Inch and Little Inch pipelines from Texas to the east coast ports.

I think opening the U-boat war in the entire Atlantic to include American ships was the only "advantage" he could glean from the event. In all other areas it was an error of monumental proportions. His hope that the Japanese would break their "non-aggression pact" as easily as he did was misplaced.

 

Was it such an error? Afaics,the first fighting between US and German ground forces was in february 1943,and the first US bombings on Germany even later .

 

The first all American air bombing took place in August of 1942, and Operation Torch was launched in Nov. 1942, and while the first bombing was on occupied French positions, it was against Hitler's Nazis none the less. And the same is true of the landings in North Africa, against the Vichy French puppets of the Nazis. Both strikes were less than a year after the war declaration, and considering the distance and logistics involved, not that much of a delay in reality even if they were mostly "token" strikes.

They did nothing but increase in frequency and intensity from late 1942 on until the end in May of 1945. Declaring war against one of (if not THE) leading industrial nations in the world, in an industrial war was an error without doubt. It took us some time to get up to "full steam", but like a diesel engine; once we were "warmed up" we could run strong a long, LONG TIME.

 

I'm not convinced it was an error. The US was already gearing up for the war and was hardly a non beligerant at that time. FDR's military advisors had told him in mid 41 that the US wouldn't be ready for war until mid 42 and not ready to assume the offensive until the end of 42 or early 43. With the US now allied with Great Britain due to the war in the Pacific the flood gates on supplies for GP were surely opening soon. Now his immediate declaration did allow the US to essentially tar him with the same brush as the Japanese, but at this point I think Hitler had bitten off more than he could chew no matter what he did. His approach to getting out of a hole seemed to be "digger faster".

 

True, but the army personnel was mostly German. (with a few token volunteer formations in the SS)
There were far more Jews living in Poland and Soviet territory than Germany, and they didn't provide combat formations to the Wehrmacht. (other than a token amount)

The main reason for Germany declaring war was because the US was halfway into it already, providing vast amounts of aircraft etc to the UK, assisting with U-boat patrols etc.
If Britiain was neutral, there would be little animosity between the US & Germany, and in fact there would be considerable US sympathy for Germany's anti-Communist crusade.

If Britain was neutral Germany would continue it's campaign in the USSR, while the US might fight Japan, although that's far from clear.
Japan was resolved to go to war with the US & Allies only if they were unable to get Dutch & British oil. (reference the Imperial conference in July & October.)
There was a quid pro quo between the US & Britian, the US would back the UK war effort and agree to "Europe First" in event of war, while the British & Dutch would back the US's anti- Japan policies.
The British had no great desire to help the Chinese defeat Japan, and in fact would prefer a weakened China engaged in war with Japan, especially as it seemed to be more or less in a stalemate.

The most likely outcome would be that Japan & Germany would buy British & Dutch oil while Japan continues the campaign in china, and Germany continues the war in the USSR. (depending on the circumstances under which the UK was neutral)
The US embargo wouldn't be enough to force war, although FDR might be able to get enough support for stronger measures against the Japanese, though likely not in 1941

I concur.
He may have been able to negotiate to keep the ex-German land give to Poland after WWI (and a mutual anti-Communist pact) but by the time Hitler took all of Western Europe he figured that he was too powerful to contemplate that.

 

Again, a very good point.
It's also important to remember the 40% rule, and that there was no shortage of aircraft
available to the RAF after the fall of 1940, it was a shortage of pilots.

The 40% rule is that the defender could expect to lose only about 40% of the pilots of aircraft shot down, either as killed or injured. On the other hand, the LW would lose close to 100% of their pilots shot down, as those that survived would be captured.
So the LW would have to shoot down 2.5 times as many RAF aircraft just to break even, an amount that they never came even close to matching.

It's the same reason that the RAF fighter operations in France during 1941-1942 were so darn stupid, as even if their estimates of LW losses were correct, (they were over-claimed more than 7 times) they were still losing the battle.

(~400 RAF fighters lost for ~700 LW fighters = ~280 LW pilots lost in the second hald of '41.
In actual fact the RAF shot down only ~100 LW fighters, and so were losing 10x as many pilots as Germany)

Correct.
Hitler estimated that the US could offer little help during the first year other than supplying aircraft. (He was largely correct, at least for the first 10 months)
He expected to complete the conquest of the Soviet Union by mid-1942 at the latest, before US troops & air forces could arrive in force.

Actually it was much more than that, in the second half of '41 the U-boats had only limited success against the British & Canadian shipping on the well defended Liverpool - Halifax route, and a few sinkings in the South Atlantic.

By Dec 1941 the British available shipping (construction + US built purchases) is actually increasing as it exceeds tonnage lost.

By declaring war on the US, the Germans could also attack British shipping in US waters, which was almost unprotected in early 1942, nor did the British have much excess ASW capacity to extend coverage.
The British shipping losses exploded in early 1942, as they were unable to protect their ships (especially tankers) in US & Caribbean waters.
The British losses in this period were actually almost double that of the Americans

 

Imeadiatly after Pearl Harbor there was a strong minority of officers and political advisors/leaders who favored a Japan first war policy, Adm. Earnest King chief among them. Had Hitler not given FDR a windfall by declaring war on the US, there is the possibility that a more Pacific war strategy might have come to pass. The American public was all for revenge over Japan, but not so much in reguard to Germany. The US as a democracy had to consider public opinion in the actions it took, it could not send the Gestapo in the middle of the night to take anyone not with the program.

It would not simply be that some more resources went to the Pacific, rather than Europe, the composition of the US military would change. The Pacific was primarily a naval war so fewer ground formations would be organized and more naval assets produced in their place. Three great power blocks, put their primary efforts to defeat Germany, while Japan faced the partial power of only two of these powers, yet surrendered within weeks of V-E day.

The only value Hitler got from his DoW was the ability to station a dozen long range U-boats in American waters, The losses were embaressing, but not strategic. When he declared war on the US he already knew that he could not subjugate Britain, and that his plan to shatter the USSR in one summer was a lost dream, and had at least another year of war in the east. The purpose Hitler stated in attacking Russia was to deprive Britain of an ally, so gift wrapping one that he could not harm in realistic way does not seem wise.

 

That proves Hitler was an idiot, or at least severely delusional. FDR was not going to get a declaration of war from congress against Germany anytime soon. When that would happen, who knows. The Japanese fiercely clung to their non-aggression pact with the Soviet Union at all costs as to not offend or antagonize the Rooskies. Hitler had no guarantee that Japan was going to join in on his folly against Russia, and I never made that claim. If I did or made it seem as such, it was un-intentional. Yes, Hitler really really hoped that the Japanese would join in, but there were no advantages for the Japanese to go north. The natural resources they needed for their plan of actions lay in the south against the US, Great Britain and the Dutch East Indies.

 

I'm not so sure of that. FDR had already agreed to a Germany first strategy although just what that meant was flexable (Hornfisher's latest book suggest that Gaudalcanal was not compleltely consistent with it for instance). Also consider that US ship yards were going pretty much full bore anyway with a lot of capital ships set to hit the water in 43 which meant that 42 was kind of up in the air. The combination of Midway and Gaudalcanal would likely satisfy the American public that Japan was being addressed while things went on pretty much as planned.

 

Depends on what you consider anytime soon. The late fall 41 Gallup poles showed he had the support of the majority of Americans at that point for war vs Germany.

Spring or summer of 41 is a pretty good guesss.

 

Even with the well made points you present, that leaves a personal opinion in with your position, which I might add doesn't mean that you are wrong. My position in this portion of the debate was that Japan was not bound by the Tripartite to assist Germany against the Soviet Union. It seemed as if one of the Rogues posting on this thread assumed that in fact Japan was bound to join in the attack.

And the point you made about the large amount of capital warships hitting the water at US shipyards was very good, but the congressional endeavor to begin that ship building program began in 1940 or early 41 if I remember correctly. That issue alone I believe was the biggest factor in Japan's decision to attack the US when it did, the "hit 'em now before they get ready" plan.

As for FDR getting congress to declare war against Germany and Italy later, I'm sure you meant spring or summer of 1942. I believe that would be the absolute earliest time frame, possibly hinging on u-boat attacks on US shipping, or some sort of overt act between Germany/Italy and Japan. Please keep in mind that this scenario is my theory, based on my readings and interpretations. War with Germany was coming, but when and where could be another thread in itself.

 

Japanese communication ironically played an important role in the war in Europe, since Tokyo wanted information from its diplomats about German and Italian progress in the war, and their production abilities. Intercepting these Japanese messages gave Allied commanders vital information about Nazi weapons production and German plans to defend Europe from invasion. Allied leaders also knew from MAGIC that Japan would not surrender unconditionally unless forced to do so with military losses. American code breakers had been reading the Japanese diplomatic code since 1939 or 1940, and they never lost faith in their machines ability to "hide" their messages, much like the Nazis never lost faith in their Enigma machines.

Also, in a radio communication between Berlin and Tokyo it was revealed that Hitler would be declaring war on the USA as soon as he could do so and make a good impression on the German populace. FDR had this information in hand when he asked for a declaration of war on Japan on the afternoon of Dec. 8th, he knew full well that he would NOT have to include Germany or Italy in the war declaration, they would make that decision for the American people by declaring war on America in the near future, which they did.

Shortly after Japan's formal declaration of war, the following cable from the Japanese ambassador in Germany was intercepted and decrypted by U. S. intelligence. The Berlin message advised Tokyo that Hitler will declare war on the United States. [Secret] From: Berlin To: Tokyo December 8, 1941 Purple (Priority)

1437 Limited distribution

At 1:00 p. m. today (8th) I called on Foreign Minister Ribbentrop and told him our wish was to have Germany and Italy issue formal declarations of war on America at once. Ribbentrop replied that Hitler was then in the midst of a conference at general headquarters discussing how the formalities of declaring war could be carried out so as to make a good impression on the German people. At that time Ribbentrop told me that on the morning of the 8th Hitler issued orders to the entire German navy to attack American ships whenever and wherever they may meet them. (emphasis mine)

It goes without saying that this is only for your secret information.

Army Trans 12/9/41 Source: U. S. Department of State,op. cit.

Goto:

War Warnings

FDR knew he wouldn't have to ask to include the European branch of the Axis in his request for a war declaration, they would fire upon an American ship as soon as they could, and would declare war on the US in short order.

 

Forget the Tripartite and the AntiComintern :they only were blahblah:
Till september 1939,Germany was selling weapons to Nationalist China
In september 1939,Germany was stabbing Japan in the back (M-R pact)
In april 1941,Japan was stabbing Germany in the back .Hitler declared war on the US because he was convinced that in a few weeks the US would declare war on him (rightly or wrongly,it is irrelevant) and because he was afraid that if he did nothing,the US would quickly eliminate Japan,and then turn on him .

 

Very informative discussion but perhaps starting to sway off topic?

 

Oddly that is what usually happens in a decent and civil exchange of ideas and facts. "This" leads to "that", and the subject branches off on tangents never anticipated by the original post.

As you say however, a "very informative discussion" none the less.