Except that if he'd left it 5 years he still wouldn't have developed his "uber weapons" (the majority of which were over-blown, over-hyped, over-expensive failures), for the simple reason that those same "uber weapons" weren't even thought of UNTIL they realised the war could be lost. Those weapons were a response to Allied weapons - no war for 5 years, no "uber weapons" for another 5 years. Unfortunately for your argument Hitler's judgement was utter crap from the start. He was a political brinkman with an unshakeable belief in his own superiority, which was badly flawed. Every major military decision he made (and especially the ones he forced onto OKW) showed how inept he actually was.
Really? I can not posts links yet that show and tell of the advanced weaponry that the Nazi war machine had and were working on, but they were. Hitler's left had tremors were not crap... Parkinson's at least.
They only sent one corps at first to try to get the Italians to be useful. Compared to every other theater it was a minor sideshow and the Germans probably did not put ENOUGH resources into it. Escentially, had they been successful in North Afrika, it would have eventually meant the middle east (it was an easy oyster available to the Axis). Persia and Irak(esp Irak, yes I spelled it that way on purpose) would have joined on the axis side and Saudis would have been swept aside. Then if they managed to get far enough into the caucuses and thus surround Turkey completely it's very likely Turkey would have finally throw in (recognizing a winner this time), they were very close to doing that at several points in the war. In short winning North Afrika, even if the rest of history was pretty much the same would make for a VERY different WWII.
You are reffering to the Wunderwaffe projects. They were real, but they were nowhere close to being finished, let alone successful.
They were working on the nuke and V-2, I think they couldn't get the supplies for the nuke, I am not sure.
That is why I stated if Hitler waited 5 years and put the Soviets asleep and went on the offensive in 1944 or 45 it might have been different, but he did not wait. He instead threw 90% of his military including his elite SS at the Red army in 1940 with no long range bombers and was eventually totally destroyed.
Hitler made a lot of stupid command errors. Paulus never forgave Hitler for his failure during Barbarossa.
Real, yes. Possible - I dunno. As I understand it, they couldn't even manage to construct a working nuclear reactor, let alone build an atomic bomb. What rabbit weren't they trying to pull out of their butts once the war started going against them ? Maybe they should have put more effort into the "Vortex Gun". Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! The German economy wouldn't have lasted 5 more years the way they were going. Plus the Soviets weren't sleeping - they were building T-34s. Didn't help that Uncle Adolf's Ubermenschen had to rely on a civilian winter clothing drive for warm duds, either... Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Yeah you're right. Just look at Die Glocke. They underestimated the Russian Winter. Foolish mistake. Didn't they learn anything from Napoleon?
Yes I know that's what you meant - and my comment applies directly to those Those weapons were developed as a response to being on the losing end: if there were no war the Germans wouldn't even have thought about, let alone developed, them. Put the Soviets asleep? You mean like having a non-aggression pact and mutual trade and military exercises? The way the ACTUALLY did until Hitler invaded. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! They didn't have any long-range bomber designs or real plans to develop any - the Luftwaffe was regraded as a tactical arm. Your "extra 5 years" not only delays the war (by which time Britain would have been producing in full swing) but posits the Germans going down routes of R&D they never considered. For example, in 1938 the RLM cancelled research on jet aircraft because they "weren't needed", If there were no war what makes you think they'd have changed their mind?
One of the key reasons production/research stopped on the reactor/nuke/heavy water stuff was after the (Mi6/Stephenson)raid in Norway that wiped out all kinds of access to strategic materials and they gave up.
If Hitler had not ordered his generals to halt their advance for three days, only 10 miles from Dunkirk. It give the Allies time to organize an evacuation and build a defensive line. Ultimately 330,000 Allied troops were rescued. If the 330,000, of whom 102,250 were British, had been captured or killed, England might not have been the same. They might have later lost the Battle of Britain, leaving the US with no European base of operation.
Nietzachefan writes #30, (an old arm slavs to fight slavs strategy Hitler used PRe-WWII). I'm intrigued by this observation. Can you provide some more information please? As for Germany invading England with naval bombardment and landing craft in the English Channel.................. simultaneously invading France and the Benelux countries or not invading them but in either case risking the attention of the French navy? Germany fully realised it needed air control over the channel before it could mount a sea and air invasion. The British naval and air forces plus the French naval force could not be discounted under these circumstances. The German military had plans for invading England..........Operation Sea Lion. But just how it could have beaten England and enforced a capitulation raises significant logistical questions. Adm Ernest King, COMINCH US Navy, was an anglophobe who especially detested the RN's aristocratic class system. He refused the British offer of experienced convoy protection of US ships bringing supplies to beleaguered Britain and as a result the US lost vast supplies of materiel and many ships to German submarines. The Reuben James was on such ship. Therefore it is extremely doubtful that the USN would have sped to Britain's aid. Though the sinking of the Reuben James was a shock to the US public and did soften public opinion in Britain's favour and harden it against Germany. Germany, fiercely involved in the invasion and occupation of France, the Low Countries and England as well as asserting control over the North Sea and the Baltic and subjugating Denmark and Norway, might have had little time, materiel or inclination to join its Pacific ally in belated strikes against the Philippines, Malaya and the DEI. Added to which, the movement of a German army by land or sea eastwards toward Japan may have attracted some attention. One wonders what route it may have taken. Likewise the Japanese army's route to Europe to help subjugate the Low Countries and Britain. The US had significant air force capability and a huge naval base at Subic in the Phils. Add to this, the US had the foresight to install that master of self-promotion and bombast, Gen. Douglas MacArthur as CIC all US forces there [but that's another story]. Returning HK to Chinese authority would have been against the stated policy of establishing colonial extraterritoriality throughout East Asia. Japan had taken the Russian enclaves in China at Port Arthur and Dairen in the Russo-Japanese War and was expanding its empire hugely in eastern China. Of course, if the IJA had returned HK it would have been to Chiang. In an obsession to root out communism from his nation he slaughtered more of his own countrymen than did the Japanese in the years 1931-1945 [but that's another story too]. The US was already supplying arms to Chiang in vast quantities. Russia had little it could spare for the Chinese communists in northern China. And it will come as no surprise that the communists kicked Chiang out of the mainland mostly because it was they who had fought the Japanese. The people knew this and were heartily sick of Chiang's Kuomintang killing hundreds of thousands of Chinese instead of fighting the Japanese as well. Chiang should have won all China in a cake-walk with the US backing he had [and that's another story as well]. In late 1942, a co-ordinated attack on the USSR, Germany from the west and Japan from the East, may have succeeded. Japan had certainly considered a Strike North policy of invading the USSR instead of striking south into East Asia. A lot of the preparatory work had been done [mapping, photographing etc.] and Japan had already occupied the Kuril Islands and Sakhalin as part of the spoils of their war in 1904-5. The resources of Siberia were rich and resource-poor Japan slavered after them. However, the energy resources beneath the South China Sea were no mean prize either. Biggles, Prime
