Was it possible for Germany to remain on peaceful terms with France and the UK

.... for Germany to remain on peaceful terms with France and the UK, whilst simultaneously taking Poland and the Sudetenland? And when?

How do you think this could have altered the course of the last 60 years?

If it were possible, how would that effect the possibility of a war with Russia? Would it be more likely that French and British forces would ally themselves with Germany? Or would the British use their additional resources to defend their empire in the Pacific?

I've been wondering if this were at all possible for a few days, and my pre-war European political knowledge is a little bit rusty.

 

I'm sure Germany wanted and would have had no problem being on friendly terms with Britain and France because in all of the documentation in the market shows that Hitler's intentions were towards the East.

Now the question really is if Great Britain and France were comfortable being friendly with an antogonistic Germany. I would have to say no. Hitler was clear in his intentions but Britain and France had no way of trusting him and rightly so.

Had they not declared war on Him at the onset of the invasion of Poland, I would say that they would definitely declare war when he would have invaded Russia. Reason being that if Russia is knocked out, that would leave Britain and France as the sole obstacles for Hitler and they would not want to be in such a position.

Also, lets not forget Italy's imperial aspirations which always seemed to put a wrench in Hitler's plans. Outcome would have been the same I think

 

When Hitler got the Sudetenland the western allied were backing Hitler more or less, I think. But for taking the rest of Czechoslovakia Hitler was not anymore trusted in the west as he had no "good reasons " for doing that.Just too much.

The Danzig situation was understood but it came too quickly and the Poles were not about to give in to Germans-ever?! So Hitler was not getting any further without war and that´s something he probably did not calculate correctly.

The Russian situation-Lebensraum-was evident from "Mein kampf". He would eventually attack Russia- non-aggression pact or not.

In the west Hitler might have been able to make peace after winning the 1940 campaign and humiliating the French and British armies. That is without Churchill. With Churchill-no way. And Churchill ganbled on getting Russian and especially the USA in the war, otherwise he could not beat Hitler.

---

If there was peace in the west Hitler still needed to prepare better for Barbarossa if he hoped to win. The Russian reserves were so huge in every aspect that 8/10 they´d still win if Hitler attacked, is my guess.Maybe even 9/10.

 

Very good points. I wonder though, if perhaps the Germans would possibly consider a couple of "decapitation" attacks to begin their offensives. The deaths of Churchill and/or Stalin would change the dynamics of the war quite seriously.

Any thoughts? Who was next in line for power in both countries, and what were their personalities like?

 

The likely hood of the germans assaisinating churchill was quite small. Anyway it would be chambelain at the outbreak. But even if they did attempt it, it would possible fail. the british quite quickly compromised the german spy network in the country.
not sure bout stalin, but i think he was the most highly defended allied leader so i don't see the germans being able to assasinate him.

 

Ah, the beauty of the what-if!

It would not necessarily have to be a Lee Harvey Oswald sort of assassination. Say a gruppe or two Ju88s or He111s attack Whitehall or the Kremlin while the respective governments are sitting? Surely killing the top levels of either government will effect their coordination and control?

I know its probably a one-way mission for the aircrews, but even the US did it in the Doolittle raid.


I suppose the thrust of what I'm trying to say is, to what extent did the government of either the UK or USSR effect the speed of their military response? What command, communcations and control systems did either government use, and should they have been attacked first?

Killing off much of the upper level of the USSR government in such a suprise attack could potentially slow their response significantly. This could result in the Wehrmact being halfway to Moscow before Russian reinforcements could be in position.

Or am I asking too many questions for one topic?

 

I think that the Brittish and the Russians would find it very strange that a few Me262 or any other fighters would fly to London and Moscow to bomb and to destroy the leaders of the countries.

Don't forget that England had a very good radar system and that the planes would have been seen.

As for the attack on Stalin, this might have worked. But let's not forget that the Red Air Force had around 4.000 planes.

Even if - let's assume Stalin really thought that there was something going on - 100 fighters would take off from different airfields, then the Me262 would have a very hard time.

This would have meant a suicide mission for the pilots with the mission to bomb Churchill, as well as the mission to bomb Stalin.

 

I never understood why they Germans didn't actually do that, bombing parliament would have been just as easy as bombing most of the rest of London (and they managed that). As for the Kremlin, there were attempts during the battle of Moscow but few of the aircraft ever made it through the air defences.

 

Parliament was actually bombed, not as an attempt at assasination but as part of the general bombing campaign....Famous picture of Churchil looking upwards at bombed out roofing.

 

I wouldn't think that a Me-262 could possibly be a weapon of choice in an almost surgical (for WWII standards) strike. I was more or less thinking of a few Ju88s.

Erwin, the whole point of the preemptive strike against the Kremlin is suprise. The point would be that there would be little if any initial reaction from the defending forces.

By the time the Germans actually got around to attempting to bomb the Kremlin, I would think that the advantage of suprise would have long been lost.

 

simply put......the Me 262's did not have the range required.

E

 

Actually never heard of any attempts being planned on Churchill ( except the book on KG 200 which probably was fiction purely, a suicide mission in 1944 )but then again I think German Abwehr did have some plans for killing Red Army High Command and probably Stalin as well, but so far not much data on this I´ve managed to find.

I made a comment on the situation of "no Churchill".

On Stalin being dead in 1941 I guess the country would have gone into a mess. Who´d be the next to lead the country or would it go into total chaos? Zhukov? Berija? Molotov? There´d be probably a time period of weeks during which Germans might have a definite advantage and move ahead and destroy masses of poorly lead Red Army troops. The Border might go to the planned Ural line thus. And the communists would have a country behind the Urals, as the Germans would have a rought time even occupying the land they thus had conquered.Probably a long battle for power among the communist leaders left to rule..

 

First, I am going to answer question number one:

A peace threaty among Germany, France and Great Britain after Munich was impossible. Neither France neither Great Britain were going to allow Germany to improve its might more than it already had done. And of course, that Daladier and Chamberlain had realised perfectly that they couldn't trust Hitler. Chamberlain clearly said: "I have this paper in which Herr Hitler says that he has no further territorial claims in Europe" and that was after the Sudetenland crisis. Hitler said the very same phrase after he occupied the Rheinland... This was the time when France should have acted to avoid World War II and perhaps, get rid of Hitler.

And question number two: it is indvery easy and very true to say that the deaths of Churchill, Stalin and Hitler would have changed WWII. Without Hitler, you do not have a megalomaniac totalitarian ruler with a fully-armed country behind him... Without Churchill you do not have the inspiration of the British Lion and a person strong and brave enough to convince his people that they must fight for their own survival and for the survival of "the whole Christian civilization" as Churchill himself pointed out. And without Stalin you behead the Soviet Union and create a political chaos in which many men would have seeked for power and the country would have collapsed.

The only detail is that killing those men was not an easy matter. And much less with inaccurate bombers. (Nowadays, with an excellent intelligence service, radars, satelites and lasser-guided missiles they can't kill the president of a nation...) Imagine then... And remember that Churchill attended to meetings underground, as well as Stalin. Do you think that Stalin spent his war-days sunbathing in the roof of the Kremlin, vulnerable to some Stukas' attack? [...]

[ 21. April 2003, 12:07 AM: Message edited by: General der Infanterie Friedrich H ]

 

Why didn't the Allies bomb Berchtesgaden or the Berghof, the Reich's chancellery, the Wolffschanze?

 

I think they bombed the Berghof at the end of the war. As for the Wolffschanze, I don't think the Allies knew where it was located. And it was probably well defended by anti-air defenses.

 

The Berghof was bombed in daylight on 25th April, 1945 by 350 aircraft of RAF Bomber Command escorted by 98 P-51 Mustangs of the 8th USAAF.

The bombers were led by 617 and 9 Squadrons equipped with 'Tallboy' bombs. Even on a perfectly clear day and with the Luftwaffe not a factor, the target proved very difficult to mark and bombing was scattered. The buildings were quite badly damaged but German casualties were light.

I've never researched this raid in any depth but have always assumed that it was more in the nature of a 'gesture' to convince any possible pockets of resistance in Bavaria that the war was truly over....

 

"A peace threaty among Germany, France and Great Britain after Munich was impossible."

What about before Munich? What course of action could Hitler have taken from the date he came to power, which would allow not only for Germany to become the major European power, but for the only wars fought to be winnable for Germany?

"Do you think that Stalin spent his war-days sunbathing in the roof of the Kremlin, vulnerable to some Stukas' attack?"

Well, no, but at the time that such an attack would have taken place, a state of war would not yet exist. And it wouldn't necessarily have to be an airstrike, although I have been alluding to it from the first post.


I'm glad this thread is not yet dead.

 

Well the first question is very difficult to anwser! Must think about this one for a very long time!

If Hitler wanted to kill Stalin, he might have give the order to the Marsians, because it would have been very difficult to kill him by airstrike or by a commando who would go to Russia and into the Kremlin.

 

Very nice information, Martin, which I did not know. Thanks. But I find it rather a waste. They did not make as much damage as they should have and let me think... on April 25th 1945, wasn't Hitler in his chancellery-bunker in Berlin, shelled by Zhúkov's guns?

Not possible as well. France had NO intentions of making an alliance with its archenemy. In 1935 and early 1936 several attempts were made to form an alliance between Germany and Great Britain and the closest point of it was the anglo-german naval threaty. Hitler had no intention of going to war with the British Empire in the near future, because his economic and expansion policies did not involve the obtention of colonies nor foreign trade. This was his typical Lebensraum policies of territorial expansion to the East and obtention of natural materials INSIDE Europe. France, as the archenemy was an obstacle to German might inside Europe. But France was not going to act without Great Britain and also, it was not good for the British Empire to let Germany dominate the whole continent...

But let's say that France and Great Britain come to an agreement with Germany. Germany invades Poland and then the Soviet Union. The USSR fells. Now what? Do you think that our 'thrustable' Hitler, with all the might of Eastern Europe behind him was going to leave France and Great Britain alone? That is precisely what neither of them wanted. They hoped Russia could hold the Germans and not taking the whole German might themselves...

Well, let's see: BEFORE the war. An air strike: where would the planes take off from? Which planes? Did they have the range to reach Moscow from East Prussia? Could they have gone through 1.000 km of Russian territory unseen by 12.000 Red Air Force's planes? Would comrad Stalin be present on the Kremlin with this 'unseen' planes coming?

A commando raid: How many men? How could they reach Moscow 'unseen' through a thousand kilometres of Russian hostile territory? How could you confirm that comrade Stalin is going to be there? Spies inside the Kremlin? Well, in that time even perfect-loyal to the regime men were being assassinated because of Stalin's paranoia... A German spy inside the Kremlin? Hahaha!

 

Just as a said: ask the Marsians to kill Stalin.