Help support TMP


"What 3 Things Had To Happen For Axis To Win WWII?" Topic


81 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the WWII Naval Discussion Message Board

Back to the WWII Rules Message Board

Back to the WWII Discussion Message Board



Areas of Interest

World War Two on the Land
World War Two at Sea

1,707 hits since 23 Jan 2019
©1994-2019 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Pages: 1 2 

Lee49423 Jan 2019 4:40 p.m. PST

First let me define "win" as the Germans, Italians and Japanese achieve a negotiated peace allowing them to retain MUCH of the territory they occupied by mid 1942.

Please keep answers plausible and not absurd like the Germans develop the A-Bomb in 1941. If you don't think they could have won under any circumstances that's valid but please explain why. Cheers!

Dynaman878923 Jan 2019 4:45 p.m. PST

Churchill tripping and falling down the stairs on the way to see the King.

Japan attacking Russia instead of the US and others in late 41.

willthepiper23 Jan 2019 5:22 p.m. PST

Recruit Spain as an active ally. Promise Franco that he can have Gibraltar. A siege of Gibraltar (even if unsuccessful) would effectively close the Strait to the RN, so that resupply to Malta would be much harder, and with no Malta, German and Italian resupply to their forces in North Africa gets to be easier, which could tip the balance enough to allow DAK to take Egypt.

Getting use of Spain as a base for long-range aircraft and raiding vessels, as well as U-boats, would change the balance in the Battle of the Atlantic, allowing strikes on convoys further out into the Atlantic, driving the convoys to take a more northerly route. Enough to tip the balance in the Atlantic? I don't know but would be interesting to investigate further.

jekinder623 Jan 2019 5:50 p.m. PST

Stalin dies or is replaced in a coup in the summer of 1941, FDR dies early in his first term so the US economy recovers slower and no Manhattan Project or a greatly reduced nuclear effort by the Allies. Read "The Man in the High Castle" and "The Moscow Option" by David Downing.

Winston Smith23 Jan 2019 6:13 p.m. PST

Strongly reinforce the Afrika Korps and replace Rommel with a General who understands logistics.
Forget glamor ships like Tirpitz and Bismarck and use the steel on U-boats.

donlowry23 Jan 2019 7:04 p.m. PST

1. Don't attack Poland, or …

2. Don't attack the USSR, or …

3. at least, don't declare war on the US.

hindsTMP Supporting Member of TMP23 Jan 2019 7:08 p.m. PST

LOL @donlowry

Phil Hall23 Jan 2019 7:29 p.m. PST

1. England surrenders. The RN and RAF are handed over to the Nazi's.

2.Spain joins the Axis.

3. Hitler doesn't declare war on the U.S.

Blutarski23 Jan 2019 8:03 p.m. PST

One thing only required -

The United States stays out of the war and remains strictly neutral.

B

Cke1st23 Jan 2019 8:16 p.m. PST

1. Never get involved in a land war in Asia.
2. Never allow Malta to stay in the war.
3. Never awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve.

Battle Phlox23 Jan 2019 8:55 p.m. PST

if the Italians discover they have oil in Libya. They would then have no need of a Eastern Front.

Blutarski23 Jan 2019 9:54 p.m. PST

"Never get involved in a land war in Asia."

Wise words of Vizzini.

B

Thresher01 Supporting Member of TMP23 Jan 2019 10:39 p.m. PST

1. Britain must surrender/fall

2. Start the Russian invasion earlier, so you capture Moscow in the first year

3. Axis doesn't attack/declare war on the USA, so they stay out of the fight

Personal logo Dan Cyr Supporting Member of TMP23 Jan 2019 10:49 p.m. PST

Have an actual industrial plan organized for total war.

Dump the fan boys and appoint actually qualified industrial leaders.

Never have the racial/religious nightmare that Hitler believed in.

Treat and support allies as "allies", not cannon fodder.

Have an actual general staff, run by professionals, run the war (i.e., put Hitler in a cage).

Keith Talent23 Jan 2019 11:28 p.m. PST

Win the Battle of Britain
Win the Battle of the Atlantic
Operation Typhoon is wildly successful

Martin Rapier23 Jan 2019 11:57 p.m. PST

Win the Battle of Britain.

If that doesn't work, win the Battle of the Atlantic.

Failing that, mobilise for Total War in 1940, not 1944, and make actual efficient use of the vast population, natural resources and industry under Axis control in 1942.

Lee49424 Jan 2019 12:10 a.m. PST

Great comments! Many are saying one thing that has to happen is the US stays out of the war. What if Japan attacks but Hitler doesnt declare war on America? Does Roosevelt manage to get us into the war against Germany anyway? When? Too late?

If America stays out of the European War, but still fights Japan, can Germany beat Russia? In other words can you have a "split" decision where the US beats Japan but Germany and Italy "win" in Europe?

Interesting. Keep your thoughts coming!

Keith Talent24 Jan 2019 12:47 a.m. PST

If Germany wins the battle of the Atlantic, there is no US versus Germany, and no lend-lease.

23rdFusilier Supporting Member of TMP24 Jan 2019 2:04 a.m. PST

How about do not get into a war you are not prepared for and not equipped for.

Richard Baber24 Jan 2019 2:11 a.m. PST

Britain surrenders/sues for peace in 1940 that`s that…..

Jcfrog Supporting Member of TMP24 Jan 2019 2:50 a.m. PST

Leave the socialist part of Na Zi and fi the unions, start war production mobilisation on day one, not 43.
Leave more command leeway to good generals instead of the caporal of Bohemia
Appu his bleep racial bleep post victory. Most of these people would work for the war instead….

Well can't as it all went along with tht rotten ideology.😝.
But remember KIssinger words:
Germany is too big for Europe and too small for the world.

bsrlee24 Jan 2019 3:09 a.m. PST

Churchill nearly died when hit by a taxi in New York well before the war – a few steps different and the Peace at All Costs lobby would have had Britain out of the War in 1940.

Japan is another problem since they wanted to take over all the resources in SE Asia, which happened to be colonies of France, Holland, Britain and the USA. They had no real trouble with French Indo-China, there were no resources to defend the area if Vichy had wanted to. But Britain, with the Empire and the US would not have anything to distract them if Japan tried to move on them.

Tired Mammal24 Jan 2019 3:38 a.m. PST

Hitler had to recognise Germany's weakness, their opponents strengths and the costs of future occupations. Their reliance on short wars meant that they could not be greedy.

After all, conscripting German workers and farmers to garrison captured lands who are revolting because you have enslaved their people to work in German factories and farms because you have conscripted your work force. (I am sure it didn't help their mad genetic purity goals much either). Trade is a much simpler method getting resources, even if you have to support a local warlord like they did in Spain, Hungary etc.

Of course if they had though it through they would not have started anything in the first place.

Lion in the Stars24 Jan 2019 3:41 a.m. PST

I cannot see the Japanese somehow not attacking Pearl Harbor. The Japanese (not entirely unreasonably) consider the first shot of the war when the US declared an oil embargo since at the time the US supplied 95% of Japan's peacetime oil consumption. And then you step up to wartime oil consumption…


Germany could have gotten most of their pre-war plans acknowledged if they had managed to punch out Moscow. All roads (and railroads!) went through Moscow. Taking out Moscow would have utterly crippled the Soviet ability to reinforce anywhere. That might have been do-able if Op Barbarossa had been launched earlier in the year, say 22 March instead of 22 June.

Andy ONeill24 Jan 2019 3:54 a.m. PST

The weather meant an earlier start for barbarossa wasn't as practical as it appears.

Gaz004524 Jan 2019 4:10 a.m. PST

Halifax as PM instead of Churchill……Winston's drive and stoicism influenced much of Britain's policies, some for the good others not so (Greece 1940) but without him the struggle for Europe wouldn't have gone past 1940.

Interesting to speculate if there would have been war in the Pacific? Japanese expansion via occupation of former British,French and Dutch colonies through Tripartite cooperation, solves their oil embargo and would further isolate Isolationist USA…….maybe a war in the Philippines in 1942?
Or a Japanese drive into Soviet Union in exchange for all the territorial gains from the defeated Europeans?

Personal logo Patrick R Supporting Member of TMP24 Jan 2019 4:41 a.m. PST

None of the Axis powers have the requirements to win a World War.

They don't have the endurance for a war of attrition for lack of resources like oil, steel and rubber. They can expand on some branches like the submarines or air power but it's at a cost to the other branches.

They must therefore rely on knockout blows, defeating the enemy armies in the field and force a surrender.

However this is not enough, Hannibal, Napoleon and others kept winning battles and forced their enemies to submit, but they would rebuild and come back. Even if you do take Moscow and Stalin is removed from power, the USSR would be Germany's Vietnam or Spanish ulcer wasting huge resources to control and pacify while the other powers arm themselves for a confrontation.

My main problem with What if scenarios is that they tend to stop and entrench themselves at a desired end result. Moscow is taken, Germany wins the war and remains in control for all perpetuity, the end.

It's like saying that the French would accept 1870 and German domination or the Germans accepting that 1918 was not a stab in the back …

At the very best Hitler might decide to fight limited wars and create vassal states like a pro-German Ukraine and Caucasus that would provide him with oil and resources. I don't think it's a permanent solution, everything will be put back in question as soon as the fuhrer dies or is incapacitated and power struggle begins …

mildbill24 Jan 2019 5:40 a.m. PST

accept Stalins 1942 or 1943 peace proposals for an truce based on the 1941 borders. Then finnish Britian and prepare for a east front in 1944. don't know if it would work and the political leadership of Germany would not go for it but it improves their chances until the A Bomb shows up.

Winston Smith24 Jan 2019 7:14 a.m. PST

If Hitler had not been Hitler, Germany could have won.
If Hitler had not been Hitler, there would have been no war.

thomalley24 Jan 2019 9:10 a.m. PST

If America stays out of the European War, but still fights Japan, can Germany beat Russia? In other words can you have a "split" decision where the US beats Japan but Germany and Italy "win" in Europe?
US would be all in against Japan freeing Commonwealth assets of Europe. Roosevelt could also have provided aid to Britain against Japan that got "rerouted" for other uses. If Japan doesn't attack USSR then Soviet flagged ships will still trade with US, as happen for the entire war.

Aethelflaeda was framed In the TMP Dawghouse24 Jan 2019 9:18 a.m. PST

Not let Italy join the Axis as an active belligerent, the whole of the Mediterranean and North Africa were playing to weakness and a useless distraction. . Activate Spain and/or Turkey. Ignore Russia for as long as possible and wait out the British to get tired.

Japan could never have won and most knew it except for the Army leadership with it's religiously fanatic ability to self deceive itself about its quality. The best they could hope for was to be too tough to defeat unconditionally that a peace left them with something. Germany too.

Legion 424 Jan 2019 9:20 a.m. PST

Falls under, What if Napoleon had a B-52 at Waterloo ? evil grin

Scipio9924 Jan 2019 12:12 p.m. PST

Win the battle of Moscow 1941.
Take Leningrad.
Take Caucasian Oil fields.

Fred Cartwright24 Jan 2019 1:25 p.m. PST

If Hitler had not been Hitler, there would have been no war.

Not sure that holds up. There was a lot of bad feeling in Germany about the result of WW1, which could easily have come to a head without Hitler. Remember Germany had been secretly rearming before Hitler came to power it just speeded up when the Nazis took power. A nationalist government elected on a platform of making Germany great again would have been able to rearm much as the Nazis did. Without the racist clap trap and a realistic war aim Germany could be in a similar position to it was in the summer of 1940. From there don't push the armistice conditions. Insist on joint negotiations with Britain and France. Offer to return the bulk of French territory just keeping the bits that are considered German and ask for a modest war reparation. This would be much better than the French could otherwise hope for and would see them pushing hard for the UK to accept. That would either leave Germany free to attack the Soviets when ready or maybe wait for a Soviet attack, get all the Balkan countries under German influence and maybe try and build an anti Soviet alliance. That would be helped by the Soviets aggressive action in Finland, Latvia and Estonia. One other thing. If you do invade the Soviet Union comes as liberators and get Latvia, Estonia and the Ukraine on side asap. Offer them independence in return for supporting the war and favourable trade deals.
As for Italy their best bet is not declare war on anyone!

rmaker24 Jan 2019 1:34 p.m. PST

How about do not get into a war you are not prepared for and not equipped for.

Dunno. Worked for FDR.

Personal logo Herkybird Supporting Member of TMP24 Jan 2019 3:27 p.m. PST

Hitler settles for isolating the UK, and does not attack the USSR.
The USA remains neutral.

Thresher01 Supporting Member of TMP24 Jan 2019 6:50 p.m. PST

Don't start the war until the German fleet is built to plan.

Of course, no doubt, other nations might have greatly increased theirs to match Germany's new navy.

Personal logo 4th Cuirassier Supporting Member of TMP25 Jan 2019 2:47 a.m. PST

Germany should have attacked Norway and the USSR in 1940, instead of Norway and France.

France wasn't going to attack Germany from the west while that was going on. IIRC France didn't even have a coherent offensive doctrine to implement.

Soviet Union is then defeated in 1940 by an unweakened, undistracted German military. Peace with the undefeated western allies is negotiated in 1941, probably on quite generous terms. Eh-dolf neither expected nor wanted a war with either of them, and has attained his life's goal of crushing Communism. The rest of the Balkan countries are then annexed at leisure. Italy never enters the war at all.

In Asia, instead of one weakened and two defeated European powers plus a pacifist USA, Japan's adversaries are now three intact European powers plus a pacifist USA. This is the same potential opposition she had faced since 1918, which she had not attacked, so the 1941 attacks never happen either and she goes after Asian Russia instead and a few more bits of China.

By 1945 the world comprises the Greater German Reich (all former European countries except Britain, France and the Low Countries, which are an armed camp), the EU (the latter countries and the British Commonwealth in the political union proposed in 1940), the Greater East Asian Co-prosperity Sphere, and America and her colonies in the Pacific. Because the EU is the most directly threatened territorially, they explode a nuke in the Australian desert by 1946.

Fred Mills25 Jan 2019 4:35 a.m. PST

1. Japan does not attack the US, which means that Germany does not declare war on the US. This alone is probably enough to win.

2. Japan DOES attack Russia, sending the Kwantung Army north. Russia can't reinforce the Moscow front against the Germans by using troops from the East. Moscow falls, and Germany seizes the oil fields in the Caucasus.

3. Germany fully mobilizes from 1933, not 1943. Lights out in Europe, whether America enters or not.

donlowry25 Jan 2019 9:29 a.m. PST

Don't start the war until the German fleet is built to plan.

No. The surface fleet is never going to be large enough. Use the steel etc. to build submarines and tanks instead.

I cannot see the Japanese somehow not attacking Pearl Harbor.

I don't think it was required. Would the U.S. have interfered if Japan had conquered Dutch Indonesia and its oil? I doubt it. Protested, yes; attacked? can't see it.

Winston Smith25 Jan 2019 3:17 p.m. PST

I'm glad nobody brought up ignoring Yugoslavia etc. That's a red herring, and an excuse.
Germany invaded Russia when it was ready and the ground was dry.

Fred Cartwright25 Jan 2019 4:12 p.m. PST

I'm glad nobody brought up ignoring Yugoslavia etc. That's a red herring, and an excuse.

It did put extra wear in the vehicles involved though, which might have some effect.

Lion in the Stars25 Jan 2019 9:43 p.m. PST

I don't think [attacking Pearl Harbor] was required.

It was required in the Japanese mindset.

But if the Germans had convinced the Japanese to attack into Russia that would have really helped the German attack into Russia.

Problem is that the Russians had handed the IJA it's collective butt at Nomonhan/Khalkin Ghol. BT5 and BT7s were good enough to beat the junk tanks the Japanese had.

Lee49426 Jan 2019 12:56 a.m. PST

Re foray into the Balkans. Let's take that one step farther. What if Hitler had not attacked the Balkans, or Crete, or sent Rommel to NA. What difference do those assets make on the Russian Front? Does it mean perhaps the Germans succeed in taking Moscow in 1941?

So Italy doesnt take the Balkans and gets thrown out of Africa. Britians ability to launch any sort of successful invasion of Italy in 1941 was nil. And when the Germans had taken Moscow, they could easily afford to send some divisions back to throw any tenuous foothold back into the sea.

Interesting. Cheers!

donlowry26 Jan 2019 10:20 a.m. PST

I don't think [attacking Pearl Harbor] was required.

It was required in the Japanese mindset.

Well, that's just the point, isn't it? We're talking about what needed to change, and their mindset is it.

But if the Germans had convinced the Japanese to attack into Russia that would have really helped the German attack into Russia.

What's in it for the Japanese? A good source of fur coats?

donlowry26 Jan 2019 10:24 a.m. PST

We might consider the diplomatic/political repercussions, had the Germans captured Moscow in 1941, and held it all winter: Possibly luring Turkey into the war on the Axis side? Or maybe that would also require German/Italian capture of Alexandria, Egypt (British naval base).

Fred Cartwright26 Jan 2019 12:00 p.m. PST

It was required in the Japanese mindset.

It wasn't required at all. Had the US kept supplying oil to Japan there would have been no attack. Can you imagine how the US would have reacted had some foreign power told them to get out of South America in the 30's?! The US ensured the Japanese could not get oil from anywhere. Having instructed the Dutch and the British not to sell them any, neither of which were in any position to refuse, particularly the British heavily reliant on Lend Lease to defend themselves against the Germans. Faced with a humiliating climb down or grabbing the resources they needed it is no surprise they chose the latter. The US left them no way of saving face.

Lion in the Stars26 Jan 2019 1:54 p.m. PST

Japan was already expanding to grab the resources they needed, they already planned to grab oil fields from the Dutch East Indies (decision was made before 1940, the IJN finally supported the plan in 1940, a year before the US Oil Embargo happened).

Japan was going to create a colonial empire, that decision had been made in about 1868 with the Meiji Restoration (step 1 was to modernize Japan from Feudal to Industrial, step 2 was to get the colonial empire). Unfortunately, they missed the memo that colonial empires were no longer in fashion among leading nations.

Fred Cartwright26 Jan 2019 4:09 p.m. PST

Japan was already expanding to grab the resources they needed, they already planned to grab oil fields from the Dutch East Indies (decision was made before 1940, the IJN finally supported the plan in 1940, a year before the US Oil Embargo happened).

And yet over a year later they hadn't done it, until the US refused to give them oil they had already paid for and then kept the money. Lots of countries and lots of plans, actually putting them into practice is another matter.

1868 with the Meiji Restoration (step 1 was to modernize Japan from Feudal to Industrial, step 2 was to get the colonial empire). Unfortunately, they missed the memo that colonial empires were no longer in fashion among leading nations.

Well no one told the French and Spanish who were waging bloody wars to maintain theirs or the Italians who started grabbing one in the 30's at about the same time the Japanese went into China. Strangely the US had little to say about any of those.

donlowry26 Jan 2019 7:20 p.m. PST

My point is, Japan could probably have grabbed the Dutch East Indies without starting a war with the U.S.

Pages: 1 2