Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What if WWII had been started later?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What if WWII had been started later?

    Its been a while since I last posted, and I thought this would be a good way to get back in. I had read that the top military leaders of Germany had been told that the war was to start in the mid-40's, not the late-30's like what is historicaly correct. But think about it. The U-Boat fleet would have been larger. The Auto-Ban (sp?) would have been completed. More countries might have been annexed by the Axis. Extremely modern war machines would have rolled out of Germany. Do you think the Allies could have won? What are your views?

  • #2
    Well....

    The Soviet Union might have stopped killing its own officers and finally got their leadership and organisation in hand. They'd also have improved their armour capabilities and would probably have been eyeing up Nazi Germany for invasion by that time.

    Japan's oil shortage would have been critical, and they'd have HAD to start something to secure more supplies, or come to terms with the USA - Nazi Germany or no Nazi Germany.

    Britain would have completed her re-armament program and would have been FULLY prepared for a war rather than just semi-prepared as they were when it kicked off.

    France would have completed the Maginot line right up to the coast, thus preventing or slowing any German plans to circumvent it.

    All I can say is that it would have been "different". I think Germany would have had its arse handed to it on a plate if it had started the war much later than it did.

    Dr. S.
    Imagine a ball of iron, the size of the sun. And once a year a tiny sparrow brushes its surface with the tip of its wing. And when that ball of iron, the size of the sun, is worn away to nothing, your punishment will barely have begun.

    www.sinisterincorporated.co.uk

    www.tabletown.co.uk

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: What if WWII had been started later?

      Originally posted by Larkin
      Its been a while since I last posted, and I thought this would be a good way to get back in. I had read that the top military leaders of Germany had been told that the war was to start in the mid-40's, not the late-30's like what is historicaly correct. But think about it. The U-Boat fleet would have been larger. The Auto-Ban (sp?) would have been completed. More countries might have been annexed by the Axis. Extremely modern war machines would have rolled out of Germany. Do you think the Allies could have won? What are your views?
      HEY Larks good to see you back, almost thought Cuu got you for a bit. Suprisingly enough I put this scenario through in Hearts of Iron and my results were outstanding. I took Poland, France attacked, I took it and mainland Belgium and Netherlands. Allied myself with Italy, and Nationalist Spain. (They won the Civil War). Took Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. Allied with Finland and Romania, and the rest of the Balkans, and Greece. Attacked Britain and took her mainland. Took France's colonies in Africa, kicked the brits off of Africa and the middle east, gained control of the Med.

      It was April 1943 when I launched my offensive on Russia, beating them back past Moscow. I managed to go just beyond the Urals, when the Russians sued for peace, I effectively put them out of the war and halted my offensive and stabilized my borders. I then destroyed the English by taking India. Allied myself with Afghanistan, Tibet, and China. Attacked Austrailia (Rommel had a beachead established) and began island hopping across the Dutch Islands south of India and began an offensive AGAINST Japan. Allied myself with the U.S. (who managed to stay Isolationist for a while and didn't indulge in the Lend-Lease, Japan declared war on her, I declared war on Japan, and then after attempts to ally I was successful). The date was about October 1945 or something like that and I forgot about South Africa who when they invade one territory of mine the game crashes. But I owned or was allied with about 1/2 the world.

      Thats how it went for me and I think it is a plausible scenario, only because my military was bigger and a few chance things. Sadly you can change the years since the game ends in 1946 but I changed everyone's military to resemble themselves in the mid-40's.
      The meeting of two personalities is like the contact of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction, both are transformed. -Carl Jung

      Hell is other people. -Jean-Paul Sarte

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Doctor Sinister
        Well....

        The Soviet Union might have stopped killing its own officers and finally got their leadership and organisation in hand. They'd also have improved their armour capabilities and would probably have been eyeing up Nazi Germany for invasion by that time.

        Japan's oil shortage would have been critical, and they'd have HAD to start something to secure more supplies, or come to terms with the USA - Nazi Germany or no Nazi Germany.

        Britain would have completed her re-armament program and would have been FULLY prepared for a war rather than just semi-prepared as they were when it kicked off.

        France would have completed the Maginot line right up to the coast, thus preventing or slowing any German plans to circumvent it.

        All I can say is that it would have been "different". I think Germany would have had its arse handed to it on a plate if it had started the war much later than it did.

        Dr. S.
        I wonder though, would all of the nations have been as developed as you might think? I mean I know there still would have been advances in a number of areas, but I'm willing to bet that a lot of technology wouldn't have advanced a whole lot necessarily. Peacetime governments, tend to be fairly slow in adopting military changes. I think there's a real good chance that there would have been maybe more of some stuff, but not significantly better stuff. Stuff being the technical term in this case for anything (planes, tanks, guns, etc).

        A lot of innovations came from seeing how combat went and things really performed, what if they didn't have those opportunities?
        “To discriminate against a thoroughly upright citizen because he belongs to some particular church, or because, like Abraham Lincoln, he has not avowed his allegiance to any church, is an outrage against that liberty of conscience which is one of the foundations of American life.”

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: What if WWII had been started later?

          Originally posted by Larkin
          Its been a while since I last posted, and I thought this would be a good way to get back in. I had read that the top military leaders of Germany had been told that the war was to start in the mid-40's, not the late-30's like what is historicaly correct. But think about it. The U-Boat fleet would have been larger. The Auto-Ban (sp?) would have been completed. More countries might have been annexed by the Axis. Extremely modern war machines would have rolled out of Germany. Do you think the Allies could have won? What are your views?
          I seem to recall reading something about the original plan being to wait until 1942 to allow sufficient build-up. Of course, by this time the Soviet have already taken the Baltic Republics and Ukraine, and may also have attacked into Poland and the Balkans. What would the Nazis have done in this case?

          As well, will Japan have signed an alliance with Germany/Italy? If so, what impact will the German delay have on their plans for the "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere", and more important, their attack on Pearl Harbor.

          It is at times like this that we can be more cognizant of how inter-related many events are.
          Mens Est Clavis Victoriae
          (The Mind Is The Key To Victory)

          Comment


          • #6
            Would the U-Boat fleet have been larger? For a start where were the U-Boats going to base at the start of the war without French ports?

            Annexation of Poland pretty much led to war, if the Allies had stood back and let it happen that removes any buffer between the Nazis and Communists. That's a war just waiting to happen whatever Hitler's personal "get Britain" feelings were at the time

            The Germans had some very dodgy peices of experimental hardware in their 1939 inventory. Without the experience of Poland or Norway machines such as the original multi-turreted Pz VI might have taken pride of place in the German inventory.

            I think Britain would have re-armed fully. a working version of the Cruiser tank with an HE capable 6pdr would be the least of the Germans problems as the faced a Spitfire equipped RAF and a Royal Navy geared for ASW.

            I'm less sure about France as many of their designs were heading down a dead end.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Alan Laird
              Would the U-Boat fleet have been larger? For a start where were the U-Boats going to base at the start of the war without French ports?

              Presumably, yes. It is not certain if Doenitz would have got all he wanted, but certainly more than in 1939.

              Annexation of Poland pretty much led to war, if the Allies had stood back and let it happen that removes any buffer between the Nazis and Communists. That's a war just waiting to happen whatever Hitler's personal "get Britain" feelings were at the time

              Poland was essentially the spark to the powderkeg. After satnding on the sidelines through the Rhineland, Kristallnacht, the Austrain Anschluss , and the annnexation of the Sudentenland (and subsequent envelopment of Czechoslovakia), the Brits and French were faced with honoring their treaty with Poland, or betraying Poland and continuing with appeasement.

              The Germans had some very dodgy peices of experimental hardware in their 1939 inventory. Without the experience of Poland or Norway machines such as the original multi-turreted Pz VI might have taken pride of place in the German inventory.

              Waiting until 1942 would have introduced many new designs. Would three more years of peace have seen full deployment of V-1, V-2, possibly more fearsome weapons. While they would have developed jet aircraft, the Brits and US may also have done so. Another consideration would be the German synthetic oil program.

              I think Britain would have re-armed fully. a working version of the Cruiser tank with an HE capable 6pdr would be the least of the Germans problems as the faced a Spitfire equipped RAF and a Royal Navy geared for ASW.

              Yeah, that would be a bonus for Great Britain.

              I'm less sure about France as many of their designs were heading down a dead end.
              Yeah, well that's France for you - one dead end after another.
              Mens Est Clavis Victoriae
              (The Mind Is The Key To Victory)

              Comment


              • #8
                New to the forums here. After browsing some 3 hours I thought I would finally surface. Great place.

                One also has to wonder about the anti-nazi movement in Germany at that time. Much of Hitler's prestige with the German people was because of the successes of the Wermacht in the early part of the war. Perhaps if the war had started later that this movement may have gained more strength and support in both the civilian population and in the army.

                While this may be wishful thinking I thought I would just throw it into the mix.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Zorak2
                  New to the forums here. After browsing some 3 hours I thought I would finally surface. Great place.

                  One also has to wonder about the anti-nazi movement in Germany at that time. Much of Hitler's prestige with the German people was because of the successes of the Wermacht in the early part of the war. Perhaps if the war had started later that this movement may have gained more strength and support in both the civilian population and in the army.

                  While this may be wishful thinking I thought I would just throw it into the mix.
                  It is interesting to consider what direction the anti-Hitler elements would have taken. The later start of the war would not, IMHO, have seriously impacted their actions. Even without war, the SS/SD/Getsapo, etc. wouldstill had a pervasive presence in all facets and levels of German society, and its occupied terrory. Such a group would not be represented in the Reichstag, could not publicly campaign, and would have to be mindful of the possibilty of infiltration by the Nazi Security Services. Finding a means to assassinate Hitler, and necessarily his "Cabinet" would have been quite difficult. It would almost certainly be necessary to have in their fold a senior minister or military officer (a la Col. Stauffenberg), who had regular access to Hitler and the leadership. Absent this, an assassination strike would have been well-nigh impossible.
                  Mens Est Clavis Victoriae
                  (The Mind Is The Key To Victory)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Alan Laird
                    Would the U-Boat fleet have been larger? For a start where were the U-Boats going to base at the start of the war without French ports?

                    Annexation of Poland pretty much led to war, if the Allies had stood back and let it happen that removes any buffer between the Nazis and Communists. That's a war just waiting to happen whatever Hitler's personal "get Britain" feelings were at the time

                    The Germans had some very dodgy peices of experimental hardware in their 1939 inventory. Without the experience of Poland or Norway machines such as the original multi-turreted Pz VI might have taken pride of place in the German inventory.

                    I think Britain would have re-armed fully. a working version of the Cruiser tank with an HE capable 6pdr would be the least of the Germans problems as the faced a Spitfire equipped RAF and a Royal Navy geared for ASW.

                    I'm less sure about France as many of their designs were heading down a dead end.
                    Doubtful on the Pz VI. This multi-turreted experimental vehicle was always just that, a test bed for later production models. For instance, the smaller turret of the Pz VI became the main turret of the Pzr I. The Pzr I, II, III, and IV were already planned for mass production in the late '30s. The Pz VI never was. Not going to war wouldn't have changed that.

                    Now, if you want to talk about German tanks, one really has to wonder if the Germans would have ever developed the Panther if war hadn't broken out till 1945, since it was developed specifically in response to the T-34. Would the Tiger have been fitted with an 88 but for Germany's experience against the CharBis I?

                    The German Admiralty was promised the completion of a new giant surface fleet by Hitler by the mid forties, in order to challenge the Royal Navy. Historically that steel got turned into U-boats and tanks. While the Kriegsmarine certainly would have had more U-boats, naval construction plans before the war did not center around them.

                    One thing that does seem to be a safe guess: By the mid 40's, all German fighter squadrons would have been equipped with the Me 262, the Bf109 would have been retired or transferred to rear area use or to minor allies. Ditto for their bomber squadrons. Germany had a good twin engine jet bomber design that it undoubtedly would have upgraded it's Luftflottes with, the Ju88's and He111's being decades old designs by the mid 40's. Without the press of war, and replacing combat losses, by the mid 40's Germany would have had an all jet Luftwaffe. I can't say the same would have been true for any other power.

                    Japan marched to the beat of it's own drummer. I think it's oil crisis would have compelled it to follow the course of action it did regardless of what the Germans were doing.

                    I don't think Mussolini would have tried taking on Great Britain by itself in North Africa and Greece if Hitler was inactive, though. He was pretty cowardly in how he jumped in against France at the last minute.

                    If the Germans had waited till 1945, they probably could have won the inevitable Battle of Britain with their jets, but a fully reorganised and reconstituted Russian officer corps, and full tank armies armed exclusively with the T-34 and better, would have given the Whermacht big problems.
                    "Going to war is always an admission of defeat." --Jacques Chirac

                    "In the case of France, you're right!" --Rush Limbaugh

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I think the Germans would have had nuclear weapons by then and would have nuked Russia into the ground.
                      PvtJohnson

                      Hold your ground men, hold your ground!

                      Don't be a fool, wrap your tool.

                      If your not mad enough to bare nuckel box, your not mad at all.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Would Stalin have let Hitler build up? I'm thinking at some point he's going to decide he can't wait and attack Germany on his own.

                        Japan had it's own issues; they were backed into a corner to begin with so whether they started it in 41 or later, they still get pounded eventually. The only way for Japan to avoid complete devastation was for the Tojo crowd to have been removed and I think cooler heads would have nixed the 'attack the US' idea and tried very much to keep it against the Chinese, British, French, and Dutch... would we have entered... probably... would the end results be the same... likely... which is why they went for the knock-out punch early on.
                        If voting could really change things, it would be illegal.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          jets

                          I don't see why or how Germany would have an all jet airforce without the impetus of being involved in a military conflict. They didn't to my knowledge have a flying jet plane in test by 1939. Britain did.

                          Perhaps you can fill in my lack of knowledge on the Me262 but is was a war time design was it not? Not conceived prior to the war.

                          Similarly Germany's Atomic Bomb programme was headed down a blind alley. They might have worked that out by 1945 but I doubt it.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: jets

                            Originally posted by Alan Laird
                            I don't see why or how Germany would have an all jet airforce without the impetus of being involved in a military conflict. They didn't to my knowledge have a flying jet plane in test by 1939. Britain did.

                            Perhaps you can fill in my lack of knowledge on the Me262 but is was a war time design was it not? Not conceived prior to the war.

                            Similarly Germany's Atomic Bomb programme was headed down a blind alley. They might have worked that out by 1945 but I doubt it.
                            The Germans flew the first jet in 1939 before the British. The Me-262 was in the developement stages at the same time as the Henchal (sp) that flew before it. Both craft used the same engines, but the Me-262 making it into production due to its more advanced swept wing layout.
                            Lance W.

                            Peace through superior firepower.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Re: jets

                              Originally posted by Lance Williams
                              The Germans flew the first jet in 1939 before the British. The Me-262 was in the developement stages at the same time as the Henchal (sp) that flew before it. Both craft used the same engines, but the Me-262 making it into production due to its more advanced swept wing layout.
                              A potted history of Frank Whittle, inventor of the jet engine:
                              Frank Whittle, the son of a mechanic, was born in Coventry, England, on 1st June, 1907. He joined the Royal Air Force as an apprentice in 1923. He showed outstanding ability as a scientist and in 1929 took out a patent on a turbo-jet engine. However, the Air Ministry rejected his ideas as impractical.

                              Whittle studied at Cambridge University (1934-37) before forming the Power Jets Company. The Royal Air Force became more interested in Whittle's ideas in 1939 when they heard the news that Hans Ohain in Nazi Germany had developed the world's first jet plane, the HE 178. At first, it was thought that Ohain must have stolen Whittle's ideas but in fact they had both been working independently of each other.

                              Whittle's jet-propelled Gloster E28 took its first flight on 15th May, 1941 and travelled at speeds of 350 mph. This was followed by the Gloster Meteor that was used to intercept German V1 Flying Bomb. Power Jets Company was taken over by the British government in 1944.

                              Whittle retired from the Royal Air Force in 1948 with the rank of air commodore. He was knighted and granted a tax-free gift of £100,000 in recognition of his role in developing the jet-engine. He wrote about his experiences in his book, Jet: The Story of a Pioneer (1953).

                              In 1977 Whittle was appointed research professor at the US Naval Academy in Annapolis. Frank Whittle died in Columbia, Maryland, on 8th August, 1996.

                              Dr. S.
                              Attached Files
                              Imagine a ball of iron, the size of the sun. And once a year a tiny sparrow brushes its surface with the tip of its wing. And when that ball of iron, the size of the sun, is worn away to nothing, your punishment will barely have begun.

                              www.sinisterincorporated.co.uk

                              www.tabletown.co.uk

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X