If you had control of the German Army, where would u invade first?

Joking about what? If it had not been for Hitler's meddling the German war machine could very well have dominated continental Europe and most of central Asia. With the ideology of the Nazi regime they had no problem suppressing those peoples they occupied, no people, no problem.

But really, joking about what? I am up for a good dialogue about my opinion.

 

Interesting points, bigiceman - the main thrust being - keep Britain out of it !

Maybe this could have been achieved with smarter diplomacy ; a non-aggression pact ?

The problem with the actual BofB ( as opposed to theoretical versions ) is that, without invading, the Luftwaffe could not reach beyond RAF airfields in SE England. And without an improvement in the Luftwaffe's intel, they'd simply have gone on bombing non-strategic airfields - which is what happened in actuality.

It's intriguing to think what would have happened without Britain - no Mediterranean campaign to protect Barbarossa's Southern flank ; a stronger Luftwaffe, no jumping-off point for Overlord ( would the US have even been that interested in Europe ? ).

As soon as the Battle of Britain became a battle of attrition, things started to go wrong.....

 

My parents were older and gave me their impressions of the feeling in the country in the late thirties. If the English had not been involved and Japan had not been allied with Germany it would have been very hard for Roosevelt to have gotten congress to commit to a war in Europe.

 

I would have eliminated the immediate threat, France and Great Britain. Taken the low countries, keeping Poland, Czechoslavakia and the Balkans as a buffer between Russian and Germany. Build up Luftwaffe and Navy. Consolidate defenses. Hammer the UK into peace. Live in peace.

 

Dispensing with the details, I would overthrow Hitler, ally with England and the US and convince them that the Soviets (and the French) were the true enemies and together destroy them uterly .... the end.

 

Boy talk about an invitation to do some French-bashing!

 

I dont get it, why the french ?
Although a sizeable army, they aint a threat to germany/england at all.

Convincing the english that the Soviets are the "true enemies" perhaps you can work, but asking them to join you in a war, that's a different thing.

 

Capture or death of a large number of british soldiers will certainly demoralize the country. not to mention, peace treaty with the germans will bring those prisonerrs back to england. Good incentive for a peace with Germany.

Yup, Blitz on London and other cities was a breather for the RAF and it showed.

Any treaty may include surrendering colonies to germans. What if suddenly, most of the british colonies in asia becomes german ?

Or perhaps Germany will give them as gifts to the Japanese peacefully including the dutch oil wells in indonesia, and thus stop a potential war between the Japanese and America ?

Anyway, if Hitler didnt first declare war on the US, i doubt that America will be in the European conlfict at all.

Not to mention, the morale of the red army after the fall of moscow. Cut of the head and the body will fail to function. I believed that the SU will break apart if Moscow fell into German hands, epsecially if Stalin was killed in the process.

I was trashed in another thread regarding this. No one agreed that the fall of moscow will change the fate of germany.

 

I made that post when I was new to this forum and still naive about the industrial infrastructure of the countries involved. I would no longer make that post the same way. I still believe that the destruction of the British Expeditionary Force and the RAF could have been enough to bring the British to the peace table. This would have given Germany a free hand in Western Europe. The Germans probably would have been able to take out Italy as well. These things alone would not make that big a difference in the outcome of a war with Russia. The only thing that could have made a decisive difference in the war with Russia was production of war materials. The Russians out produced the Germans at everything! The margins were not even close.

I never took into account that Stalin would be killed. I really don't know if this would be that big an issue. As a motivational force he was a strong leader, he also made some good calls when determining what to do with their war production. I still don't think that after the suffering that the Russians endured at the hands of the Germans that they would roll over and play dead. Stalin lead the country, but the generals lead the armies. Someone would have taken his place in the lead of the country and the generals would have continued to fight. This means that the superior Russian industrial output will still carry the battlefield. The loss of the rail system would hurt, no doubt about that, but they still have the industry to build the weapons they need to defeat the Germans and the Germans never had sufficient industrial production to beat anyone but their immediate European neighbors in a successful blitzkried style invasion(short successsful campaign). They couldn't hold Russia and they couldn't invade the British Isles.

 

Just a little joke. I love the French.

[ 18. November 2005, 09:03 AM: Message edited by: drache ]

 

They taste like bratwurst.

 

Damn, looks like it's lonely me again.

But I still believe that the germans can win the war with Russia. A better planning, better logistic management, the germans could make use of their momentum to crash the russians and reach moscow before the winter allows any effective counter. And once Moscow is captured and held by the germans, russia would fall apart, even if not, morale problems and desertions will plague the red army.

Instead of wasting resources and manpower wiping out the slaves, concentration on victory against the red army would have to be the vocal point.

Once Moscow is secured, a second offensive (once the winter is over) into the Caucasus could seal the reed army's fate.

 

Good point.
I think that hitler always faced the french army, hence the huge time and effort spend on planning the invasion of france and the low countries.

 

I think also that Hitler still had a grudge against the French because of the treatment of Germany after the end of WWI. He really seemed to take delight in getting the French to sign their surrender in the rail car that was used for the signing of the treaties ending WWI.

 

If the Germans had taken hold of 1.) Leningrad in Oct 1941 and 2.) Moscow Nov-Dec 1941 this would have been a huge moral blow to the Russians. Whether or not the solution to win the war but definitely a huge blow.Also this would have released the troops from the Army Group North to join the other Army groups in the battle.

One of the questions in the Leningrad battle is why the Finnish troops did not attack Leningrad but instead stopped almost immediately after crossing the old border. We know Mannerheim stopped the troops but all in all considering that the aim was to smash the USSR does not make any sense to stop the troops in this case.