A different outcome to WW2

[abramsteve]

If the Japanese had taken Hawaii, the US wouldn't remain neutral. The whole thought of the US not doing something makes this whole thread pretty far out there to begin with. The only way this would have been possible was if the US isolationists had won and Japan skipped Pearl Harbor.

Agree completley. But if the Japanese didnt want the US to enter the war then they wouldnt have taken the Philippines, the Marianas, Wake Is or attacked Pearl Harbor. In which case they wouldnt control Asia, American naval might would have been maintained and so would their presence in the region. Thats the problem with the Japanese plan.

Agree also with the threat from long range German bombers. I have heard a little of the Germans developing long range flying wing bombers, but not much. It would have been an interesting twist in the war if they were able to bomb New York from bases in Europe.The intresting thing though is that I was actually talking about the development of American bombers like the B-17 and B-24 which could hit targets in South America from bases in the US. Thats why they were well suited to operations against Germany from England.

The Germans would have had a clear immediate advantage in terms of Industrial capability from conquered lands in Europe over the Japanese. Japan would still have been vulnerable to being strangled from the sea once they/if they went to war with the US. I dont think the Germans were that good at ASW, so even if they were to share technology with the Japanese that would remain a weakness.

This is a really interesting topic

 

[long live usa]

If russia and britain had been knocked out then america wouldent have had a chance of striking back(they needed britain as a base and russia for fodder)and if japan had taken hawaii then the USN would only be concerned with gaurding there own coast the "sleeping giant" would have been awoken but by this time they probably would have been being pounded by long range bombers and an japanese/german invasion would have been inevatable if that suceeded then germanany and japan would be the sole powers with germany most likely controling,africa europe,european russia,middle east,probably S america, and japan holding asia,indonesia,australiaand probably N america,in my opinion it would be in evitable for the two remaining powers to start clashing,think about it they both believed that they were "the superior race" and land disputes would be inevitable,also even if hitler had not loaded up on drugs and killed himself i dont think he had much longer left

 

[eu2dude]

what if Japan had followed up the atack on pearl harbor with an invasion force and taken the island, what if germany had won the air battle over britain and taken it, what if the germans had suceeded in taking russia, and the axis troops would have met in india?, in my opinion the Americans would not have had enough time if britain and russia were knocked out,to build up there military and they would have either surendered or fought a noble but useless war only to be defeated,after that i think japan and germany(both of wich believed they were the only superior race)would have begun another war,thats what i think would happen what do you guys think would have happened?

These ideas need more details. The axis had no chance of winning WWII; indeed they were lucky to do as well as they did.

1. Japan could not have taken Oahu by land invasion in 1941. Japan had 11 deployable infantry divisions available - all earmarked for operations in the Southern Resource Area. Further, Japan lacked the logistical support for such an invasion, the landing craft, the support mechanisms, etc. Simply not possible.

2. SeaLion (the German invasion of Britain) was not possible. The defeat of the RAF - if it had occured - would have done nothing to the Royal Navy. The Luftwaffe - while very good at supporting land operations - did not have ordance (in 1940) capable of sinking a British battleship, battlecruiser, or heavy cruiser, and the German Navy would have been annhilated in the attempt. The prahm river barges that the Germans planned to use to ferry their army would swamp in seas over 1 meter (as the channel was wont to do). With a max speed of under 4 kts, the RN would have even needed guns; the wakes of their ships would have sunk them.

eu2dude

 

[Big-E]

These ideas need more details. The axis had no chance of winning WWII; indeed they were lucky to do as well as they did.

2. SeaLion (the German invasion of Britain) was not possible. The defeat of the RAF - if it had occured - would have done nothing to the Royal Navy. The Luftwaffe - while very good at supporting land operations - did not have ordance (in 1940) capable of sinking a British battleship, battlecruiser, or heavy cruiser, and the German Navy would have been annhilated in the attempt. The prahm river barges that the Germans planned to use to ferry their army would swamp in seas over 1 meter (as the channel was wont to do). With a max speed of under 4 kts, the RN would have even needed guns; the wakes of their ships would have sunk them.

eu2dude

I have to disagree with you on this point. The main reason the RAF was able to keep her Spitfires operational was from US materials. If the Kriegsmarine had won the "Battle of the Atlantic" all supply would have been cut off. Then the RAF is grounded due to parts shortages. No fighter cover means the Luftwafa has free reign to bomb British ports with impunity making the RN a sitting duck for bombers of all types. Did you ever ever see that video guided anti-shipping missle the Nazis came out with, that was one impressive weapon! With air dominance over the English Channel the Nazis could land troops at will... only opposition would be from land forces.

 

[long live usa]

I have to disagree with you on this point. The main reason the RAF was able to keep her Spitfires operational was from US materials. If the Kriegsmarine had won the "Battle of the Atlantic" all supply would have been cut off. Then the RAF is grounded due to parts shortages. No fighter cover means the Luftwafa has free reign to bomb British ports with impunity making the RN a sitting duck for bombers of all types. Did you ever ever see that video guided anti-shipping missle the Nazis came out with, that was one impressive weapon! With air dominance over the English Channel the Nazis could land troops at will... only opposition would be from land forces.

that is very true the and the british did not have the land forces to stop a german blitzkrieg of thier island they the british infantry would have had no were near enough tank support and would have been pounded from above also the japanese had no idea how succseful their raid on pearl harbor would be if they would have prepared a follow up invasion force they could have taken those islands,and also the russians came very close to total collapse if hitler would not have been a dumb pig and stop his forces out side of moscow they could have contoled that rail axis and its doubt ful that the russians would have continued the war,and yes i read somwere that hitler had planned to meet japanese troops in india

 

[abramsteve]

The problem is that the argument falls back on it self. If the US is not involved in the war, then its not defeated, and its abillity to wage war remains in tact. If the Japanese take Hawaii, then the US retakes the islands eventually, in which case they are involved in the war. The Battle of Britain was fought and won before American entry into the war, so it wouldnt matter. The Germans didnt have the cappability to move enough troops to invade England, let alone move and supply tanks and other heavy equiptment. Their U-Boats didnt sink enough ships to stop the supplies neccessary to keep the RAF in the air, therefore they didnt have air supperiority.

If a battered RAF can defeat a numerically superior German Luftwaffe, the I am confident the USAAF could have defended the US from German aerial attacks. The Germans and the Japanese could not control the entire world, its just too big!

A different end to the war could be German control of Europe (except for England) and into the middle east, and Japanese control of Asia (including the Philippines) as well as (heaven forbidd) a presence in north eastern Australia. In this case either the Japanese took Hawaii and destroyed the US Pacific fleet, including the carriers, either at Pearl Harbor or during an attempt to retake the islands, convincing the US to peace agreement. The Germans would be content to leave England and instead focus on defeating the Russians. In this scenario the world settles in to an uneasy peace with two major powers (Germany and Japan) one middle rate power (US) and what remains of the British Empire. Thats as far as my imagination takes me!

 

[Big-E]

This post isn't directed at anyone individually, but I have heard a few posts talking about JSF being a better choice than F-22 b/c of fuel range. JSF has no super cruise, F-22 does. This means F-22 has farther combat radius at supersonic speeds, Im not saying ferry range, but combat.

 

[long live usa]

This post isn't directed at anyone individually, but I have heard a few posts talking about JSF being a better choice than F-22 b/c of fuel range. JSF has no super cruise, F-22 does. This means F-22 has farther combat radius at supersonic speeds, Im not saying ferry range, but combat.

what f/22 fighters in ww2!!!:lam shocking!!!!!:lol3

 

[Awang se]

it is shame to see dictatorship screwed up everything. by WW2, german posses some of the world best generals and best military units.

 

[Big-E]

what f/22 fighters in ww2!!!:lam shocking!!!!!:lol3

Thats what I get for having another thread open at the same time LMFAO!!!

Do you remember the name of that movie that had a US CVN go back in time to Pearl Harbor and scare the shit out of the Japs. Seeing F-14s flying around zeros in the movies has been done. Lets throw the Raptor back in time LOL!

 

[eu2dude]

I have to disagree with you on this point. The main reason the RAF was able to keep her Spitfires operational was from US materials. If the Kriegsmarine had won the "Battle of the Atlantic" all supply would have been cut off. Then the RAF is grounded due to parts shortages. No fighter cover means the Luftwafa has free reign to bomb British ports with impunity making the RN a sitting duck for bombers of all types. Did you ever ever see that video guided anti-shipping missle the Nazis came out with, that was one impressive weapon! With air dominance over the English Channel the Nazis could land troops at will... only opposition would be from land forces.

The 'video-guided anti-shipping missile' - if the Germans had it all - was not available in 1940. To repeat: In 1940, the Germans had no air-launched, or air carried weapon capable of defeating the armor on British capital ships. SeaLion was simply not possible in 1940.

If you want to invade Britain in WWII, you need a POD siginificantly before the start of hostilities. Given that fall of France was a singular event, it is unlikely to repeated under any other set of cirumstances. In OTL, the Germans did not predict the rapid collapse of France, and therefore did not build for or even concieve of an invasion of Britain.

Eu2dude

 

[long live usa]

the british did think they were coming and they were getting desperate even putting faith in "phu gas" an oil like substance that rose to the surface from pumps and egnited the british hoped this would set ablaze an in coming invasion force proof that they were scared that their fleet would not be enough

 

[Big-E]

The 'video-guided anti-shipping missile' - if the Germans had it all - was not available in 1940. To repeat: In 1940, the Germans had no air-launched, or air carried weapon capable of defeating the armor on British capital ships. SeaLion was simply not possible in 1940.

If you want to invade Britain in WWII, you need a POD siginificantly before the start of hostilities. Given that fall of France was a singular event, it is unlikely to repeated under any other set of cirumstances. In OTL, the Germans did not predict the rapid collapse of France, and therefore did not build for or even concieve of an invasion of Britain.

Eu2dude

So SeaLion wasn't possible in 1940, well according to the timeframe you referenced it would obviously be after 1940. Don't be so inflexable with your dates, we are talking hypotheticals The Henschel HS293 radio guided glide bomb was ready in 1943 and the Nazis would have to wait until 1943 to win the Battle of the Atlantic anyway. They would obviously wait for the UK to run out of supplies with a blockade. But lets skip my timeframe, go with your 1940 timeframe and throw in another hypothetical 1940 scenerio:

Lets say that instead of Hitler ordering his panzers to stop before Dunkirk on May 24, 1940 that he ordered them to push on to the beach and wiped out the BEF before they could be evacuated. I think moral in Britain would have been so low that the British would have signed a cease-fire agreement and been knocked out of the war.

 

[long live usa]

So SeaLion wasn't possible in 1940, well according to the timeframe you referenced it would obviously be after 1940. Don't be so inflexable with your dates, we are talking hypotheticals The Henschel HS293 radio guided glide bomb was ready in 1943 and the Nazis would have to wait until 1943 to win the Battle of the Atlantic anyway. They would obviously wait for the UK to run out of supplies with a blockade. But lets skip my timeframe, go with your 1940 timeframe and throw in another hypothetical 1940 scenerio:

Lets say that instead of Hitler ordering his panzers to stop before Dunkirk on May 24, 1940 that he ordered them to push on to the beach and wiped out the BEF before they could be evacuated. I think moral in Britain would have been so low that the British would have signed a cease-fire agreement and been knocked out of the war.

if i recall right i think that the anti ship missle your talking about was used against an italian vessel sucesfully,yes if hitler had not ordered his troops to halt(at dunkirk) so he could consolidate his gains the germans could have pushed the british right into the english channel the british were so desparate during this fighting that they threw all 71 of there tanks against the german flank scaring the german high command only 2 british tanks came back,if the 400,000 or so BEF had been wiped out or captured,the british morale would probably plummit and an cease fire would come into place,allowing the german u boats to establish them selves in the atlantic making an American troop shifts to britain unlikely(if not impossible)this would allow the germans to concentrate on russia and if it is knocked out good luck getting any troops near europe

 

[eu2dude]

So SeaLion wasn't possible in 1940, well according to the timeframe you referenced it would obviously be after 1940. Don't be so inflexable with your dates, we are talking hypotheticals

OK - but I thought the reason 1940 was attractive was that the French had unexpectedly collapsed, and the British were completely unprepared for that - and thus vulnerable at home.

The Henschel HS293 radio guided glide bomb was ready in 1943 and the Nazis would have to wait until 1943 to win the Battle of the Atlantic anyway.

It is unclear to me how the Germans ever could have won the Battle of the Atlantic against the USA and UK. By 1943, the Wehrmacht couldn't inavde Britain - it was getting slapped around in Russia. If you postulate no invasion of the USSR (requiring either Hitler's pre-June 22 1941 death or a Hitlerian Brain transplant - he was going to attack Russia no matter what), then yes, things dramatically change. But even then, it is virtually impossible; the UK and America MASSIVELY outproduced Germany and Italy. With a big USA/UK ground force in the UK, how does this work?

They would obviously wait for the UK to run out of supplies with a blockade. But lets skip my timeframe, go with your 1940 timeframe and throw in another hypothetical 1940 scenerio:
Lets say that instead of Hitler ordering his panzers to stop before Dunkirk on May 24, 1940 that he ordered them to push on to the beach and wiped out the BEF before they could be evacuated. I think moral in Britain would have been so low that the British would have signed a cease-fire agreement and been knocked out of the war.

There is another list of the Web where this very scenario has been debated - at length. While we are talking speculation here, the consensus there (soc.hist.what-if) is this doesn't fly. Let me put it this way - at no time did Churchill give up. At Singapore, the UK (and Empire) lost far more troops than Dunkirk, and the British never threw in the towel. I just don't believe that Churchill ever took the idea of SeaLion seriously; heck he might even have wecolmed a German attempt to do so, as the British would have massively won.

One of the issues I have with WWII is the tendancy some people have to attach super-human technical prowess to the Germans. The Germans built some fine war machines yes, but they were not the almost sci-fi level they seem to be assigned. The Russians had the best tank (T-34), the USA the best prop fighter (the P51) and the only real 'wonder weapon' (a-bomb). The Germans had losts of theories, dead scientists, and a political system that would not have let them exploit them properly (see ME-262) anyway. Couple this with the fact that the Germans were hugely outproduced by their enemies, and there really is no plausible way they could win without a massive political divergence somewhere.

Eu2dude

 

[Big-E]

There is another list of the Web where this very scenario has been debated - at length. While we are talking speculation here, the consensus there (soc.hist.what-if) is this doesn't fly. Let me put it this way - at no time did Churchill give up. At Singapore, the UK (and Empire) lost far more troops than Dunkirk, and the British never threw in the towel. I just don't believe that Churchill ever took the idea of SeaLion seriously; heck he might even have wecolmed a German attempt to do so, as the British would have massively won.

I'm not saying that the British would have all out surrendered, they would fight to the last man before they accepted Nazi occupation. What I am saying is that a loss of the BEF at Dunkik would have left the army empty of personel with little time to re-arm for an invasion. While Churchill might not have surrendered the houses of parliament would have moved for an armistice and been neutral for the rest of the war. You make it sound like the British will revolved around Churchill, he was PM not a dictator. There were other levels of government to contend with. Churchill was not exactly beloved by the British people either, they didn't relect him to office after the war. Your reference to numbers at Singapore don't match up with the number the BEF would have lost had it been wiped out.

One of the issues I have with WWII is the tendancy some people have to attach super-human technical prowess to the Germans. The Germans built some fine war machines yes, but they were not the almost sci-fi level they seem to be assigned. The Russians had the best tank (T-34), the USA the best prop fighter (the P51) and the only real 'wonder weapon' (a-bomb). The Germans had losts of theories, dead scientists, and a political system that would not have let them exploit them properly (see ME-262) anyway. Couple this with the fact that the Germans were hugely outproduced by their enemies, and there really is no plausible way they could win without a massive political divergence somewhere.

I think the German technical prowess is well deserved. If it was not for German scientists that defected, America never would have had the bomb. I think Germany's Tiger II tank was far superior to the T-34. The Me-262 was more than a match for the P-51. The only reason the Tiger II never really made a difference b/c they were bogged down in mud at the battle of the bulge, a tactical error by hitler. The Me-262s were never fully used as fighters until it was too late, another error by Hitler. The only way the P-51s were able to defeat the 262s b/c all the experienced Luftwafa pilots were already dead and most 51s just waited for them to land and chew up their six.
Germany was outproduced by their enemies b/c Hitler made the tactical error of attacking Russia. If he kept himself from getting into a two front war and had wiped out the BEF the only enemy he would have faced would be America. That means no bombing and his industrial capacity would have equaled the US with full control of Europe and her resources. The reason Germany lost, Hitler was a military idiot. . . period!

 

[long live usa]

There is another list of the Web where this very scenario has been debated - at length. While we are talking speculation here, the consensus there (soc.hist.what-if) is this doesn't fly. Let me put it this way - at no time did Churchill give up. At Singapore, the UK (and Empire) lost far more troops than Dunkirk, and the British never threw in the towel. I just don't believe that Churchill ever took the idea of SeaLion seriously; heck he might even have wecolmed a German attempt to do so, as the British would have massively won.

One of the issues I have with WWII is the tendancy some people have to attach super-human technical prowess to the Germans. The Germans built some fine war machines yes, but they were not the almost sci-fi level they seem to be assigned. The Russians had the best tank (T-34), the USA the best prop fighter (the P51) and the only real 'wonder weapon' (a-bomb). The Germans had losts of theories, dead scientists, and a political system that would not have let them exploit them properly (see ME-262) anyway. Couple this with the fact that the Germans were hugely outproduced by their enemies, and there really is no plausible way they could win without a massive political divergence somewhere.

Eu2dude

by no means was the t-34 superior to the tiger 2 there are stories of 2 tiger 2 tanks destroying 50 t-34s(some of these have been confirmed!)on the eastern front the tiger 2s were rushed by hordes of russian infantry the t-34 was no match for a tiger 2 especially when the tiger was in a defensive position,the germans also had the best hand held anti tank weapon(look up the battle for seelow heights wow)and they also had at the near end of the war the best small arm(it went only into small batch production and was to little to late)i dont recall the name but i do know it was made of sheet metal, it used in the buldge and the idiot...hitler thought it was ugly and did not want it produced yet it was anyway im not saying the germans were technically superior just listing some of there good weapons

 

[EmperorNortonII]

what if Japan had followed up the atack on pearl harbor with an invasion force and taken the island, what if germany had won the air battle over britain and taken it, what if the germans had suceeded in taking russia, and the axis troops would have met in india?, in my opinion the Americans would not have had enough time if britain and russia were knocked out,to build up there military and they would have either surendered or fought a noble but useless war only to be defeated,after that i think japan and germany(both of wich believed they were the only superior race)would have begun another war,thats what i think would happen what do you guys think would have happened?

... well, what if worms had machine guns? I mean, the birds'd be screwed.

 

[Big-E]

... well, what if worms had machine guns?

Well there goes my fishing trip!:gun

 

[ODYSSEUS]

Hitler clearly underestimated the military power and might of the Soviet Union, despite that his primary strategic fault was that he opened multiple fronts at the same time and he continuously added new enemies to the already existent, no army in the world could be able to sustain a prolongued warfare in multiple fronts for a long time and Hitler simply didnt know where and how to stop his risky and according to others (insane) military venture.
Although he delivered a blow to the mighty British Empire and he bombed London and several major cities of England he couldnt prevail in the air because his generals and especially Goering who was the chief commander of the Luftwafe, didnt bomb the British airports when Luftwaffe had airsuperiority, at the beggining of the war and during Dunkerque evacuation which is considered to be another major mistake on behalf of Goering since most of the British expedition force and many french soldiers managed to escape intact in England.

Therefore the fact is that Hitler didnt have airsuperority and despite the success owed mainly to his U-Boats who indeed were devastating the British convoys his main battle ships could not match the British except Bismark which was sunk by the British a major loss that its concequences became apparent later on in the war, therefore although Hitler delivered major military blows to England nevertheless he never managed to completely defeat and despite this fact he choose to open a new front with the Soviet Union

If we assume that Hitler had prevailed in the war against England he would aparently had faced many losses especially concerning his airforce and his navy.
So he would have less available forces to use in operation Barbarossa and after he had finished operation Barbarossa succesfully his forces would be almost decimated due to the heavy losses that his army would have to endure
after all Russia is a vast country with a big population and the red army was very strong especially concerning its armour units (around 40,000 tanks) and artillery, therefore even with the most optimistic scenario Hitler would face such big losses that it would be almost impossible for him to succesfully continue the war against USA.

We should not also forget the operations in Africa (Africa Corps) and the troops that he defenetely needed in order to protect the occupied territories in Europe, America wouldnt face an immediate danger coming from Germany for many reasons but as paradox as it may sound the main enemy threatening America directly this period of time was Japan.