What if...

[Dragunov]

what if Moskau was captured before winter? what if Jerry controled England?
What if they wanted to go on and remove their last threat: Amerika, the 'dying empire' (or was that the name for England? )?

so, if they had did a 'normandy' on North America, how would they do it? landers would sink in the atlantic, so how could it happen? and where would be the ideal place to land? I would vote Canada, we'd definately have less defenses versus America.


and the Royal Navy has their HMS, in Canada, HMCS, in America USS, but what was the kreigsmarine way?

[Matt B.]

Dragunov,

My guess would be that there would be a multi-pronged attack on the eastern coast of North America (Canada being one of the landing sites, makes sense), but any of them would be, in my opinion, in conjunction with another similar one from the west (courtesy of the Japanese-assuming they had control of the Pacifac at the time). A two-front attack on the USA would be tougher to repel than a single-front attack.

Matt B.

[phylo_roadking]

Why would their landers sink in the sea? Large "landing ships" are as seaworthy as any other, and smaller landing craft are in the vast majority "parasite" craft, launched from inside via "wet docks" or off davitts.

Remember, over 60% of the landing forces for Torch in North Africa shipped directly from the US!

The smaller vessels that were also used for the whole crossing for Overlord as well as landing ships etc - that were at times VERY unsuitable to high seas! - were used simply BECAUSE it was a short sea crossing!

I'm not sure that the Germans would actually pick a sparsely-defended location far from civilisation, so to speak - they would have been depending on landing VERY close to a MAJOR urban area to 1/ increase the threat to US taxpaying citizens per soldier put on the beach, and 2/ tocreate greater mayhem for the defenders by having to deal with hundreds of thousands if not millions of fleeing refugees!

Drive straight at New Jersey and Long Island!

After all, thats EXACTLY what the Kaiser's Imperial General Staff postulated doing in 1901!!!

[derGespenst]

Invade North America? What a silly idea. Trade with them and eventually buy them up. Without England as a staging area, the Yanks can't hurt anyone.

[phylo_roadking]

Nope. The Yanks wouldn't have traded with Hitler. There was nothing they wanted from Europe! More likely they would have found some way to embargo him, like with the Japanese. Also, Hitler would have been forced to invade, if only because of the constant threat from American atomic research - which the Germans knew was in progress - just knew nothing about to what extent, in what direction, and where.

The Americans COULD have invaded directly from the US - eventually. IF something had happened to make them do so. They had plans to do so - blue-sky stuff, but ALL Staffs produce shelf after shelf of similar. Would have required an 8-10 year development process - but they also had VERY workable plans to do so if necessary across the Pacific from the continental USA. Time line on this...6-7 years.

In the meantime - look at the US of 1941-45; mobilisation of a war economy that could outproduce Europe, the Draft, women in factopries before the Germans etc. Total mobilisation of the richest nation in the world. Hitler would have HAD to neutralise it somehow. It couldn't be left over the horizon as a threat to National Socialism....

[Pirx]

USE needs nothing from Europe? maybe, but needs a lot from European colonies. I think that it would be race between Japan, Italy, Germany and US for colonial legacy left by UK and France. Probably USA had smallest chance to win that race.

[phylo_roadking]

Probably USA had smallest chance to win that race

The 1922 Washington Naval Treaty left the USN the largest navy in the world - IF the RN had been taken out of the equation. And given the accelerated building programs of 1939-41, the US would have been in a better shape than the japanese to sieze the Dutch East Indies, Hong Kong, Malaya...and even provide protection to Australia. However - we're not talking a total removal of Britain from the picture here, because that would NOT have happened. There would have been SOME form of rump Imperial direction of the Dominions - Canada, Australia etc., under SOME form of umbrella.

The USN was the most powerful navy in the Pacific UNTIL Pearl Harbour; IF Britain had been "removed" as postulated, the Japanese still wouldn't have moved to take British colonies, or colonies she protected after Holland etc, capitulated. And the greater the strategic resource under threat - Malayan rubber for example - the faster and with more strength the US would have moved.

Anyone who thinks the US wasn't an aggressive imperialist power would need to go and do some reading - the Philippines, Cuba, Costa Rica, Villa's Mexico, Hawaii, etc. all come to mind - would need to do so background reading. America's strange periods of "isolationism" were ONLY in respect of Europe.....

[Pirx]

Of course advantage of USA in navy and industry over Japan or Germany was huge. Why i said about smallest chances?
1. Those countries that were "protected" by UK like Iraq, Kuwait or Egipt could easy fall to Germans hands: as a new axis states or simply new colonies. USA had no possibility to made any action in this area.
2. Dragunov wrote that Russia was defeated so is a question what about India: indenpedence? And what then? civil war?
3. North Africa could be divided beetwen Italy and Vichy France: Remember that Rosevelt and G.C. Marshall were totaly not interested about North Africa and it was Churchill job to sent there US Troops.
4. US Policy IIRC was: our interest is western hemisphere. Only south east Asia was interested for most politicians in Washington. Roosevelt must work hard to argue his idea "Germany first". Majority wanted made Pacific main battlefield for USA.
5. Bussines is important for all politicians on the world. In 1941 US politicians saw no bussines in Africa or middle east. And that was disadvantage for this country.

[phylo_roadking]

Those countries that were "protected" by UK like Iraq, Kuwait or Egipt could easy fall to Germans hands: as a new axis states or simply new colonies. USA had no possibility to made any action in this area

If we're postulating that a conflict occurs between Germany and the US - then the US would intervene in these areas to deny the Axis persian oil. Kuwait is a misnomer here - her oil fields hadn't been discovered. Only Persia was vital there to one side....or to be denied it. many invasions/battles/campaigns are fought to deny the enemy something, not just to take it for yourself e.g. Norway, an attempt to halt germany's supply of iron ore from Sweden via Norway.

North Africa could be divided beetwen Italy and Vichy France: Remember that Rosevelt and G.C. Marshall were totaly not interested about North Africa

By this stage in such a war - the Axis would be welcome to it! The ONLY reason the North African nations were important were as an access point to the Middle East and Persia, and to deny the British the Suez Canal. Once Britain was gone...they were welcome to the pestilential sandholes that had no other real use!!!

US Policy IIRC was: our interest is western hemisphere. Only south east Asia was interested for most politicians in Washington. Roosevelt must work hard to argue his idea "Germany first". Majority wanted made Pacific main battlefield for USA

You're sort of contradicting your earlier point here in that obviously THIS would be the reason the US would occupy everything they could get their hands on on the Pacific Rim both to have it for themselves AND to deny it to the Japanese.

HOWEVER - don't forget one other thing - the Western Hemisphere may have been Congress and the State Depatment's major interest.....but events in Europe were of interest to EVERY single American of European descent, and it was THIS huge popular sentiment that FDR mobilised before December 7th 1941 to support the Draft and Lend-Lease.

[Pirx]

USA in 1942 probably had no way to made strike in Iraq. They must have base in India (one country with Pakistan then), or Arabia penisula. In other side IF Russia was defeated, Germans could have better access to oilfields in Caspian sea. What will do Turquey this time? When was no danger from Soviets, France and UK will they stay neutral or support Axis? They may only let Germans do transit to Iraq? I cant imagine that USA can made invasion so far away from bases, against well supplied German divisions, and luftwaffe above (in 1942 US fighters from Carries it's not enough).
And US congress. Americans can sacrifice soldiers but they must win. Was it possible that if US lost 50000 but win everybody call FDR great statesman but if they lost 5000 but loose everybody call FDR butcher?

[phylo_roadking]

First of all the Germans wouldn't sieze Persia, the Vichy French in Syria would. After all, they tried to during the war. Likewise Egypt, before the Italians got there.

Now, Dragunov's question at the top of this JUST says what if Moscow is captured - he deosn't say ANYTHING about the Russians being defeated, and they most certainly wouldn't have been by this; thrown into a terrible period of flux for a few winter months, but thats all. IF Stalin had survived and evacuated, a lot of loud bangs in the back yards of local commissariats and "order" would be restored. Which would mean that Soviet Russia would STILL hang over the Northern Border of Turkey.....and Persia, don't forget. Turkey walked a fine line of neutrality during the war - didn't want to side with the Allies at all, but with the Axis neither, because THAT would have brought down a Russian invasion. For her own protection then Turkey might very well have joined the AXIS IF Hitler would have been willing to send immediate military aid - but as a fair-weather, nonparticipating member? No chance. Her own survival would very suddenly have depended on that aid.

So, a variety of things would possibly have happened there, depending on who would have jumped first.....

The Turks would have joined the Axis IF the Russians had been about to or did invade - then might have siezed Persia;

The Russians would have had to sieze Persia then for its oil...cos they would have lost the Caucasus v quickly.

The British from India via Afghanistan - IF the Dominions had fought on without the Mother Country, would have tried to reinforce and hold Persia;

France would have tried to sieze Persia;

Here's an interesting thought; Persian oil - in fact no oil of any kind - is mentioned in the Armistice agreement and subsequent "Peace Settlement" and "reparations" foisted on France in June 1940. So IF France had succeeded in taking Persia....WOULD that oil have been automatically given to Germany....or made Vichy France suddenly a "valued" member of the Axis???

Dragunov - are we postulating that Perl Harbour did or did not take place? And did Hitler or did he not declare war on the USA on your December 8th?

[Dragunov]

Hitler was a fool, war on Amerika.

and yes for pearl harbour.


if England was kapputt by '43 and Moskau and Stalingrad wer kapputt by early 41,
1. when would Russia stop kicking? i doube the partisan attacks would stop, i mean major coordinated military ops and
2. when would the Invasion take place? what sort of fortifications would be erected by then?

[phylo_roadking]

Ok. late 1941 - England out of the game - Moscow gone - BUT Pearl Harbour has happened.

First of all. The US would have tripped over themselves "assisting" the British to protect SE Asia. Mind you, going by MacArthur's remarkable Bataan Plan to obligate the US to come to his aid...that sort of strategic thinking could have led to an even WORSE debacle than Singapore!!! However, lets assume he's still dealing with his own problems in the Philippines.....

The removal of England/the UK would not mean the end of the British Empire. Technically-speaking, all those people who have postualted that the Prime Minister and Royal Family would keep up the fight from Canada are wrong - the Canadians would have stuck them in nice big mansions somewhere, patted them on the head...and siezed the RN! FAR more likely that the British EMPIRE would have continued from INDIA, the King/Queen was Empress of India and far more closely connected in the 1920s and '30s than Canada or Australia! Using the Empire's manpower she would actually have tried to hold on to Persia. In SE Asia however, the US would have immediately intervened, probably at British request, to help shore up Malaya and the Dutch East Indies. Which MIGHT have preserved the situation there - certainly it would have led to ONE other result...either the Philippines became a minor front for the Japanese, as they gave more troops to Malaya...OR the other way round and the US/Imperial troops actually hold on to Malaya and up into Thailand.

Hmm the Atlantic however. The US is notoriously bad at coastal defences, have you ever noticed? Mainly because theyve had no modern history of requiring them! 1941-45 showed that the US could vastly outmobilise the Third Reich, and certainly outproduce it, in the same lines as the Russians did. Russia would never just roll over, there would be an diminished but still ongoing campaign in the East for many years, probably more stalemated but still there, and vastly more than just a partisan campaign. The Germans would only be able to slowly build up a huge invasion fleet for North America....BUT the same time would allow the US to outmatch them! In the meantime you'd probably see more American involvement in coastal Africa to destabilise the edges of the Greater Reich.

You wouldn't see an invasion attempt for many years, but what you WOULD see is a hugely-stepped-up campaign of subversion etc. in Central and South America. You'd probably see US "advisors" militarily supporting a LOT of regimes there 30-40 years ahead of what happened in real life!!! Very possibly an invasion of Mexico etc, and CERTAINLY an occupation of Panama and whatever size of a buffer zone on either side of the canal would be necessary.

Very possibly however, what you WOULD also see is... a political union between the USA and Canada!!! For the properly combined defence of North America. And guess who would be the Dominant partner???

[Reb]

One point no one has mentioned is America's submarine fleet. The Germans didn't provide them with many targets so they're not discussed much on this forum.

The Japanese however, could tell us something about that. US Submarines wrote the book on isolating a nation and paralyzing her commerce - a nation that had a great deal more naval moxie than ever did Germany.

I have long thought of how ironic that is - after ostensibly going to war in 1917 over unrestricted submarine warfare - we in the US became the masters of it - more ruthless than the Germans in either world war. (The Japanese really rubbed us wrong with that Pearl Harbor business)

But to my point - the chance of German troop ships getting to the US before 1950 were small. We'd have sunk them all. Five years could give Germany time to develop some anti-sub measures and build some escort ships if they chose to.

By 1945 America had enough carrier based air in the pacific to have challenged land based Luftwaffe forces - it wouldn't have been pretty but we could have done it. Our worst case would still put enough carriers in the Atlanta to savage any invasion fleet.

This would not have been Omaha Beach in reverse - more like the Spanish Armada.

Meanwhile - back at the mad scientist's house - the nukes were originally intended for Germany anyway. Getting 'em there could have been a problem with out von Braun on our side but the B-29 could have probably done the job - although with a margin of danger that we didn't have to fear over Japan in '45.

Would Hitler have entered an atomic arms race? What if we were able to keep it secret? Germany would have been stretched to the max dominating all that newly conquored territory and dealing with the issues mentioned in this thread so far. We might have got the jump on them.

But he'd still the "New York Missile," the V-2.

Absolute best case would be a much more dangerous world for at least fifty years. Hmmmm.... We got that anyhow!

cheers
Reb

[Pirx]

It is too hard to say what if. In this scale we ahve plenty of oportunities, and almost each way could be possible. But this is game so:
1. If UK fall very importand would be India. Did they fall to civil/indenpedence war? In history won Ghandis way, but he was not one and only politician who fought about free India, and not all wanted it in peace way. I guess that India could declare indenpedence and neutrality, so what Japan will do?
2. If Russia would be defeated, Germans should change policy with this country. Maybe puppet state (or states) with local "kniaz"?