Thread: WWII: Hitler came that close to winning.

Originally Posted by Ausinus

Imo, there wouldnt be a Japan to fight Germany. The US had dominance in the Pacific, that much is certain. Japan would almost certainly have fallen to the US, not that it would make much difference in the long run save for allowing the Axis powers to gain Australia's natural resources.

With Britian and Russia out of the war so early, Hitler would have surely set his sites on the US. I really don't think Hitler is the type of guy who could have accepted anyone else with power equal to his own. Seeing the US a major force would have drivin him to pay special attention to attacking the US. I don't think the US could hold off an attack from the Germans if they aquired all the resources from Russia and the factories of Britian. I truely do believe they could have taken the vast majority of the world. But thats just my opinion.

Originally Posted by Darcy Smith

So what, Desi.

You want me to just accept that I am a racist, ignorant bigot who has no idea what they are talking about.

Well, i shall not.

I will get back to you, but it is late and it will take a while. So until tomorrow, adios.

Not at all, however, I would love it if you'd acknowledge historical facts - then again, you do not have to, since it's more of a personal thingy for you (your grand dad). I will leave it to you to further this.

@ The rest:

If Hitler had not invaded Russia or had fortified his postions and territory in it till winter stopped limiting his advance further in Russia, we may have had another situation altogether. It was a known fact that against the Brits, the Germans had an inferior Navy - UK had the territorial advantage on an island - they used it pretty well. Invasion was almost impossible, even a blockage was not possible.

I've read from sources that the reason why he let off those English soldiers and was very soft towards the Brits is because of his adoration for their colonial successes. Historical sources have suggested that Adolf never wanted War with the Brits in the first place - it was after the Polish invasion where it hit him in the face. His letting off of the English troops was a sign of truce - the only thing which baffles some is the bombing of London. Most likely, the latter to show them the German might, which makes no sense but is typical of the man - aggression.

In all, I think they might have become allies if the conflict had not involved an automated initiation of the treaty between the allies and Poland. I think the Polish were hated for occupying German 'territory' anyways - invasion was inevitable. UK entering the war is remnicent of Germany under Kaiser Wilheim and the Balkan Conflict - which ironically is called World War 1. It was completely stupid.

It's funny though. Two European conflicts labeled World Wars. I don't remember my people being in the War, and we've nearly got 1/6th of the world's population.

Originally Posted by T-Col

With Britian and Russia out of the war so early, Hitler would have surely set his sites on the US. I really don't think Hitler is the type of guy who could have accepted anyone else with power equal to his own. Seeing the US a major force would have drivin him to pay special attention to attacking the US. I don't think the US could hold off an attack from the Germans if they aquired all the resources from Russia and the factories of Britian. I truely do believe they could have taken the vast majority of the world. But thats just my opinion.

Actually I doubt so, considering his weak Navy - I think his was more of a land affair, there have been minimal off shore invasion attempts. I doubt he had sights on the US or UK, he would have walked into Asia though, but he avoided the Middle East pretty well. He even refused help to the Baath Party members looking to wage war against the Brits at one point of time.

Originally Posted by Ausinus

and the US would be unable to intervene simply because with Britain under German control, they have nowhere to land troops and also have to face a vastly strengthened Kreigsmarine..

The US wouldn't have intervened because it would have been too busy selling stuff to their newest, bestest trading partner.

Originally Posted by Desidude666

It's funny though. Two European conflicts labeled World Wars. I don't remember my people being in the War, and we've nearly got 1/6th of the world's population.

Are you Chinese?
Did you forget about Japanese invasion?

What a funny way do define WWII as a European war…

Originally Posted by Desidude666

Actually I doubt so, considering his weak Navy - I think his was more of a land affair, there have been minimal off shore invasion attempts. I doubt he had sights on the US or UK, he would have walked into Asia though, but he avoided the Middle East pretty well. He even refused help to the Baath Party members looking to wage war against the Brits at one point of time.

Baath party was founded in 1947.
Please, learn a little bit of history before trying to invent it.

Originally Posted by Desidude666

If Hitler had not invaded Russia or had fortified his postions and territory in it till winter stopped limiting his advance further in Russia, we may have had another situation altogether.

Wrong.
It all comes to resources and manufacturing capabilities.

Main defeat Hitler got in 1942, when he failed to capture Caucasian oil remaind limited tank forces. Russia alone manufactured much more tanks than the whole Europe under Hitler. But in addition to Russia, if you remember, Hitler was fighting two strongest economies of the world – American(*) and British. He had no chances. It is surprising that he did as much as he did.

(*) America, of course, was tied in war with Japan, but its economy was strong enough to supply Brits and Russians with a lot of helpful stuff.

Originally Posted by T-Col

With Britian and Russia out of the war so early, Hitler would have surely set his sites on the US. I really don't think Hitler is the type of guy who could have accepted anyone else with power equal to his own. Seeing the US a major force would have drivin him to pay special attention to attacking the US. I don't think the US could hold off an attack from the Germans if they aquired all the resources from Russia and the factories of Britian. I truely do believe they could have taken the vast majority of the world. But thats just my opinion.

The only thing about it is that Russia would not have been out of it. Russia controlled the oil that Hitler so desperately needed. Stalin already was making demands on Hitler. Hitler knew it was only a matter of time before the fate of Germany rested solely in the hands of Stalin. the non aggression pact lasted about as long as Hitler could let it last. As it was Hitler still ran out of fuel.

The battle for Britian was very close. There is evidence that Hitler never had real intentions of an England invasion. If he really planned it I am sure it would have been successful. As it was they did not have adequate landing crafts for a marine invasion. Feslin is correct however. If hitler did not make a stupid decission to bomb London instead of putting the death blow to the airfields and planes on the ground, they would have had cmplete control of the airspace over Southern England.

Originally Posted by justoneman

The only thing about it is that Russia would not have been out of it. Russia controlled the oil that Hitler so desperately needed. Stalin already was making demands on Hitler. Hitler knew it was only a matter of time before the fate of Germany rested solely in the hands of Stalin. the non aggression pact lasted about as long as Hitler could let it last. As it was Hitler still ran out of fuel.

If Britain had fallen then Russia would never have been able to withstand German assault. Russia wasnt able to withstand German assault until winter as it was.

The point remains that the war hinged upon Britain surviving long enough for the US to enter.