Another turnout

Site Issues 2007 Archive Room
#21

I don’t think that all Soviets were bad, nor do I think that all Germans were bad. Gulags were pretty awful though.

Anyway, to the original question, the only way I see the Axis Powers winning would be by forcing Britain to surrender and then never attacking Russia (Germany) and never attacking the US (Japan).

Given that Hitler held the communists as idealogical enemies, and didn’t allow logic to rule his decisions, it’s hard to see a permanent peace between Hitler and Stalin. At the same time US oil sanctions made Japanese aggression against the US likely.

However assuming these conflicts could have been avoided, or have taken place later, I still don’t see Churchill surrendering. So, either Lord Halifax has to be chosen over Churchill in the first place, or has to replace him, after a vote of no confidence or maybe an assasination. Obviously the first didn’t happen, and the other two don’t strike me as likely.

I guess what I’m saying is that the only way I see the Axis winning is if it’s a European rather than a World war and is ended before Russia joins the Allies and before Britain can mobilise the Empire/Commonwealth.

In which case afterwards I see an increasingly aggresive Germany, because it’s undefeated, puppet/compliant governments in Scandanavia, the Low Countries, Britain and France, declining British influence in Africa, increased Italian power in Africa, facism throughout the rest of western Europe.

Eventually I see this leading to a German-Soviet war, which I don’t really see Germany winning, unless they develop nuclear weapons and use those. Without a friendly base in Europe it’d be difficult for America to do anything, so I suppose we’d end up with either a Communist (Soviet) Europe, or a nuclear wasteland. Neither are very appealing outcomes to me, althoguh as I’ve said I don’t see an Axis victory as very likely.

Sorry for the far too long post, and all the spelling mistakes it’s bound to contain.

#22

No problem,but your responce is very profesinal.I do agree that Germany and Japan made a bad chose by attacking U.S. and Russia.

#23

The Soviet people themselves were not evil and neither were the German people. However both the Soviet and Nazi regimes were guilty of heinous crimes. Trying to portray one as good and the other as evil seems hypocritical.

#24

I suppose it would…but, there are differences. The chief one being that the Nazis were expediting a war of conquest and enforcing their will on their neighbours. The people of Germany freely elected the Nazis to power, and embraced their early victories with alacrity and effussion.

My enemy’s enemy, is my friend.

I would argue that when wieghing up the pros and cons of good versus evil, one ought to consider the ‘justness’ of the ‘cause’ for which each of the protagonists are fighting (bottom line).

Of course, if the Nazis had, in some way or another, won. Then by now the justness of their cause would be the generally accepted truth.

#25

Of corse,even though it is confusing but I get what you’re saying.Brovo,um brovo, you get what I’m saying

#26

Hello!

Another option for Germany to win was to force UK to have a deal. In this case Germany would have stronger force in the East and Japan would attack too.

#27

Perhaps, if Germany had expanded their U-Boat fleet much sooner, and adopted a siege strategy against the UK, then it would not be beyond the realm of possibility to have forced a deal. However, simultaneously, it would have required Japan to have abandoned its ambitions in the Pacific and engage the USSR thus forcing Stalin to fight on two fronts.

#28

Germany did a good job. However Germany had to be careful not drawing the US into the too early. American pre-war intervention was a touchy subject early on in the war. It was obvious that “if” they came in that it would not be on the side of the Axis. Germany could have forced the UK to the table if they had rendered the RAF ineffective. This would leave Germany with a good advantage in Naval and Air Power. But doesnt mean that the Brits would have come. I think they still would feel safe for sometime knowing that an invasion would be hard for Germany. Dont know how long the Brits could go on in this type of situation. If the BoB had been lost things might have been very different.

Japan had no want to fight the USSR. Even thou it might have been very beneficial to their allies it threated their position in China. Plus the Soviets gave them a pretty good kick in the butt before the German invasion.

#29

If they had placed Doenitz in charge of the Kriegmarine from the beginning, they would have done far better. Instead they went for the big, sexy, surface ship which had a high propaganda value, but was less dangerous than the U-Boot Wolfpack. Germany, before the war began, had expnded its forces in breadth, but not in depth. They adopted the strategy and tactics of the Blitzkrieg, not wanting a long dran out war of attrition.

The Battle of Britain deterred an invasion, it didn’t save Britain. That would have always been the job of the Royal Navy and the surrounding water. By utilising the U-Boot and adopting a siege strategy, Britain could have been starved into submission.

Yes the USSR did kick Japanese butt, but it would have been less easy to repeat this if it had been fighting Germany in the west at the same time.

#30

The problem with this question is the assumption that the Axis powers were a united force.

They weren’t.

The other problem is the assumption that the Axis powers could defeat the Allies as a single group.

They couldn’t.

Italy blundered incompetently about the Mediterranean in North Africa and Greece forcing the Germans to rescue them, thus forcing Germany to alter its own strategy and plans, to rescue its arrogant and idiot smaller sibling. To Germany’s lasting disadavantage.

Japan struck when it thought that the Western powers were fully occupied in Europe. This was a necessary pre-condition for Japan to attack Britain and the US as it lacked the ability to defeat them if Japan was their only enemy. Moreover, Japan struck when it seemed that Germany would defeat the USSR. Japan carefully avoided provoking the USSR into a conflict with Japan for the whole war, having already been defeated in the last conflict with the USSR. This was fine for Japan but not what would have been expected of a committed Axis ally to draw the USSR away from the attacking and ultimately faltering Germans in 1942-3.

Contrast these largely independent and uncoordinated actions by the major Axis nations, each in pursuit of its own national objectives without regard to its allies’ objectives or strategies, with the united Allied actions which, although there were numerous disputes about all sorts of aspects at various levels, were part of a coherent and co-ordinated plan to beat the Axis powers, Germany first and then Japan.

The Axis powers were not capable of winning as an alliance. The individual nations might have achieved their own aims if things had gone differently, but not collectively.

#31

To Rising Sun:
You are right that Axis were not a one solid block.
But neither were the Alies. I am not just talking USSR wersus Western Alies. I mean interests of USA and UK and France were not solid either.

#32

Contrast these largely independent and uncoordinated actions by the major Axis nations, each in pursuit of its own national objectives without regard to its allies’ objectives or strategies, with the united Allied actions which, although there were numerous disputes about all sorts of aspects at various levels, were part of a coherent and co-ordinated plan to beat the Axis powers, Germany first and then Japan.

I think he Risingsun answered that one, Egorka!

#33

Germany would have been more succes if they would of grew there Navy. After the U-Boats were continueously being destroyed in the Atlantic Ocean. Hitler announced there would be no more submarines or navys in the Atlantic. For me I thank he should of had his navy continue. I know the losses were very much, but he should of tryed something new in the Atlantic Ocean. Maybe if he would of done this he would of had the Atlantic ocean controlled for a while.

#34

well Hitler stll had great control of the atlantic with the u boats.I read out of a book he had u-boats at the shore of long island and destroyed any supply cargo going to britain but when we found we destroyed them.