stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,843 
Likes: 13,230
|
Post by stevep on Jun 23, 2024 9:29:59 GMT
I hadn't given any specific aims for Japan, because I don't think they could win. Not even if Germany succeeds against Britain with the submarines. And I can't imagine that Adolf Nazi will continue the war with the WAllies just to protect Japan. IOTL (OK, according to Speer) he started to worry after the fall of Singapore whether this was so good, because he thought that one day, the war between "the white and the yellow race" would be inevitable. I'm not 100% sure about India, but if Stalin wants to go for it, he'll at first have to cross Afghanistan, which won't be fun. I've already planned for Churchill to say in that case that the "Pathans" will mean trouble for his army.
Well with Japan the dramatic differences in the west will have impacts. The new Nazi-Soviet 'Pact' will raise concerns that Japan has to consider the Red Army as a threat again, which the German invasion will have removed from the board. This will be moderated once the Soviets start attacking the British and their allies. Also given the better results that Germany is having against Britain with possible successes against Gib and Malta - if I'm not mixing up threads - this would encourage Japan to strike south.
The other issue would be timing. Depending on when the pact is signed but if say after a failed Operation Typhoon that is closer than OTL then Japan will probably have already struck. There is the possibility that they only attack allied possessions - i.e. British and Dutch and not the Americans but I suspect this would be unlikely. If the pact is signed earlier this might deter them but especially if Stalin has already attacked the empire, which is likely if its 2+ months earlier than Dec 41 that would make it look even more vulnerable.
As such I suspect an attack south is most likely and that it would include strikes against both the allies and the US. I also think its likely that Hitler will declare war on the US shortly afterwards for the reasons he did OTL - because he thought conflict with the US was inevitable and the Japanese success at Pearl - assuming it still happens here - made it look a good time and because Dönitz wanted to open up the American Neutrality Zone for attacks by his subs. Also with the eastern front secured this would look even more suitable. - I would also say that this is probably a better fit with your preferred TL as if the US isn't drawn into the European conflict Britain is likely to be forced to make peace pretty quickly, especially with the Japanese on the rampage and hence its likely that the Nazi-Soviet war would be resumed fairly quickly. However if the US is formally at war with the Nazis then they both have a long and some bitter fighting before some peace deal is made. this would strengthen an alliance between the US and the remains of the allies - basically the dominions and whatever remains of the empire beyond the Nazi-Soviet reach. Alternatively you could have the US do a dow on Germany to combine the two conflicts then get fed up with the war at some stage.
Of course any US-Germany conflict raises the question of relations between Washington and Moscow. It Germany and the US are at war then what happens between the other great aggressor nations and the enlarged alliance?
Anyway this was meant to be a short reply but as so often it grew as assorted points came to mind.  |
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Jun 26, 2024 2:02:44 GMT
Yes, indeed... tomorrow I'll write a bit more about it.
The tricky thing (or the trickiest): We're approaching something we never had IOTL - a three-way Cold War. OK, as soon as the first party has nukes, that'll change, but currently, a hot war is always possible.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,843
Likes: 13,230
|
Post by stevep on Jun 26, 2024 15:02:40 GMT
Yes, indeed... tomorrow I'll write a bit more about it. The tricky thing (or the trickiest): We're approaching something we never had IOTL - a three-way Cold War. OK, as soon as the first party has nukes, that'll change, but currently, a hot war is always possible.
Do you mean that once one power gets nukes the other two will tend to become de facto if not de juro allies or do you mean that whoever gets nukes 1st will try and use them against one of the other blocs? The latter would definitely be a risk if it was the Nazis and to a markedly lesser degree probably the Soviets but I would still expect the democratic bloc to get nukes 1st but not use them militarily.
One other factor is that its not just a case of having nukes but also a way of delivering them to the target. For Germany if it got nukes 1st and also developed a delivery system, either an enlarged V2 say or a large bomber it could definitely hit Britain with a V2 variant but it would have more problems hitting the US, especially with any accuracy. At the same time the impact on Nazi German from allied retaliation, by bombers using chemical weapons could be very nasty because the core of the bloc, Germany would be in reach of probably very large numbers of strategic bombers. The USSR would probably be more vulnerable to a German nuclear attack as much of its remaining traditional heartland, including Moscow, Leningrad and quite possibly Baku would be in reach of German attacks whereas its doubtful that Soviet bombers could reliably reach Berlin say, let alone further west, especially with the large buffer zone the Germans have in the east. At the same time however Soviet centres in Siberia and Central Asia are still likely to be beyond Axis range.
I think the most likely order in which nukes would be discovered would probably be the west - because they have the freest society as well as a greater desire and also a lot of refugee scientists with suitable knowledge - the Soviets - because of their spies in the west - and then the Nazis - because they have the most destructive society in terms of mobilizing its population and accepting 'foreign' ideas.
|
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Jun 27, 2024 2:18:18 GMT
I agree that the US have the best chances to get it first. After that... it depends so much... relations between the US and SU will go to hell after the "Ostfrieden", so there'll be more of a Commie hunt. After that, it's the question: Will they be more successful, finding the Rosenbergs? Or will they only manage to kick out suspicious intellectuals and "sympathizers", like Chaplin or Brecht? I'm not sure yet.
IOTL, the US didn't use nukes against the SU when the latter didn't have any. This is also a topic to discuss...
What I meant: As soon as two powers have nukes (or thought to have them), there'll be no war because (hopefully...) even the nazis will prefer to enjoy their victory. Some will say the opposite's also possible, but I don't want TTL to end in a global thermonuclear war.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,843
Likes: 13,230
|
Post by stevep on Jun 27, 2024 15:34:11 GMT
I agree that the US have the best chances to get it first. After that... it depends so much... relations between the US and SU will go to hell after the "Ostfrieden", so there'll be more of a Commie hunt. After that, it's the question: Will they be more successful, finding the Rosenbergs? Or will they only manage to kick out suspicious intellectuals and "sympathizers", like Chaplin or Brecht? I'm not sure yet. IOTL, the US didn't use nukes against the SU when the latter didn't have any. This is also a topic to discuss... What I meant: As soon as two powers have nukes (or thought to have them), there'll be no war because (hopefully...) even the nazis will prefer to enjoy their victory. Some will say the opposite's also possible, but I don't want TTL to end in a global thermonuclear war.
OK thanks for clarifying that.  |
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Jun 30, 2024 0:59:47 GMT
About two of the three blocks ganging up on the third one:
Other than what is described in Nineteen Eighty-four (unless that's just in-story propaganda), I can't imagine that alliances would change as quickly. A certain mistrust will remain. The Anglosphere won't forgive Stalin that quickly that he deserted them in late 1941. After his death, all bets are off.
In Nazi Germany, I can imagine that inside the Nazi party, there'll be a split between those who prefer ganging up with the Soviets against the Anglos and vice versa. Somewhere I wrote a bit about that on this forum...
About a Japanese-Soviet conflict: After Nomonhan, Japan won't be keen. Since early 1941, they have a non-aggression pact anyway. Later, Adolf Nazi may decide that the non-white Japanese are becoming too strong... but not that early.
I had originally considered some Japanese-Soviet clash, with a maverick Japanese pilot destroying the Khabarovsk bridge... but it doesn't make sense, and could lead to ungood repercussions. Even if it happened: Would Stalin accept an excuse "Oh, it was just a maverick doing that, it won't happen again, his superior already committed seppuku"? When Stalin's already in the ropes as the Wehrmacht is approaching Moscow? Especially if, so or so, Nazi propaganda would use the incident to fire up the propaganda: "Japan has declared war on the Bolshevists! Now we will win!"
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,843
Likes: 13,230
|
Post by stevep on Jun 30, 2024 20:56:08 GMT
About two of the three blocks ganging up on the third one: Other than what is described in Nineteen Eighty-four (unless that's just in-story propaganda), I can't imagine that alliances would change as quickly. A certain mistrust will remain. The Anglosphere won't forgive Stalin that quickly that he deserted them in late 1941. After his death, all bets are off. In Nazi Germany, I can imagine that inside the Nazi party, there'll be a split between those who prefer ganging up with the Soviets against the Anglos and vice versa. Somewhere I wrote a bit about that on this forum... About a Japanese-Soviet conflict: After Nomonhan, Japan won't be keen. Since early 1941, they have a non-aggression pact anyway. Later, Adolf Nazi may decide that the non-white Japanese are becoming too strong... but not that early. I had originally considered some Japanese-Soviet clash, with a maverick Japanese pilot destroying the Khabarovsk bridge... but it doesn't make sense, and could lead to ungood repercussions. Even if it happened: Would Stalin accept an excuse "Oh, it was just a maverick doing that, it won't happen again, his superior already committed seppuku"? When Stalin's already in the ropes as the Wehrmacht is approaching Moscow? Especially if, so or so, Nazi propaganda would use the incident to fire up the propaganda: "Japan has declared war on the Bolshevists! Now we will win!"
I suspect you would see some type of 'common interest' for two to act in co-operation in some ways against a 3rd if that either made really, really bad decisions or was seen as getting too powerful, at least in the eyes of the other two. That would be basic balance of power politics at work but is unlikely to change too quickly.
|
|
samzyan
Leading Seaman
Posts: 3
Likes: 2
|
Post by samzyan on Jul 2, 2024 12:14:47 GMT
Hello there, I am new to the community. But I am curious about the discussion on WW2. I am curious about the discussion and the information i am going to learn.
I hope we can make this discussion interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Jul 3, 2024 11:01:06 GMT
stevep, this sounds reasonable, but I will have to give this a good thought. Also, we're still in the middle of the World War, and we're talking about the Cold War afterwards here. samzyan, you're welcome. Did you read the whole thread already? Do you have questions?
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,843
Likes: 13,230
|
Post by stevep on Jul 3, 2024 19:36:16 GMT
stevep , this sounds reasonable, but I will have to give this a good thought. Also, we're still in the middle of the World War, and we're talking about the Cold War afterwards here. samzyan , you're welcome. Did you read the whole thread already? Do you have questions?
I know but your already outlines some fairly clear parameters about what the post war period is going to be like and we are talking in fairly general terms because we don't know many details yet.
Steve
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,843
Likes: 13,230
|
Post by stevep on Jul 3, 2024 19:36:43 GMT
Hello there, I am new to the community. But I am curious about the discussion on WW2. I am curious about the discussion and the information i am going to learn. I hope we can make this discussion interesting.
Welcome aboard. Hope you like it here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Jul 4, 2024 0:47:21 GMT
stevep, While I have many ideas I'd like to use, I'm aware that many things may happen which would make them impossible. One big question: What will the smaller powers do? India, Free France, Latin America, independent Asian states? Will they be able to play off the superpowers against each other - or will the big ones agree to "mop them up"?
|
|
samzyan
Leading Seaman
Posts: 3
Likes: 2
|
Post by samzyan on Jul 4, 2024 9:25:56 GMT
stevep , this sounds reasonable, but I will have to give this a good thought. Also, we're still in the middle of the World War, and we're talking about the Cold War afterwards here. samzyan , you're welcome. Did you read the whole thread already? Do you have questions? Whatttt! you are in the middle of world war? and you are talking 
I did not read it whole but if you want then you can give me a small brief! I did not have questions yet but if I got I will ask definetely.
Thanks in advance.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,843
Likes: 13,230
|
Post by stevep on Jul 4, 2024 10:30:32 GMT
stevep , While I have many ideas I'd like to use, I'm aware that many things may happen which would make them impossible. One big question: What will the smaller powers do? India, Free France, Latin America, independent Asian states? Will they be able to play off the superpowers against each other - or will the big ones agree to "mop them up"?
I think that a lot of the medium sized powers - or potential ones such as India and possibly China will seek as much independence as possible. Doubt there would be formal agreements between the three super-powers but suspect that informal spheres of influence will be set up - with occasional challenges by the other two of the big three to those spheres. A lot of powers will need to look to one of the three for protection and also probably a level of military and economic support to aid them against internal issues - both unrest from internal factions and a desire to improve levels of poverty in much of the world.
One issue would be what happens to the European colonial realms? India will definitely gain independence in some form or another but assuming Japan is driven out of the region Indonesia is also likely to become independent as the rump Dutch state in exile will lack the ability to even try and restore their rule. Plus its likely that the US would support this. However what stance will they take of a French state in exile seeking to maintain control of their empire, or even simply Algeria which was technically part of metropolitan France if it comes under their control again - can't remember what your aims are for N Africa? Similarly for a Vichy government seeking to maintain control over areas away from direct German control. Or Britain in areas such as Africa, Malaysia and possibly say Aden if Britain is able to maintain control there - which would control access between the Red Sea and Indian Ocean. A lot would depend on whether Washington thinks its economic and political aims are best filled by its long time desire to destroy European empires or to support some to keep the Nazis and Soviets out.
|
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Jul 6, 2024 5:40:57 GMT
stevep , this sounds reasonable, but I will have to give this a good thought. Also, we're still in the middle of the World War, and we're talking about the Cold War afterwards here. samzyan , you're welcome. Did you read the whole thread already? Do you have questions? Whatttt! you are in the middle of world war? and you are talking
I did not read it whole but if you want then you can give me a small brief! I did not have questions yet but if I got I will ask definetely.
Thanks in advance.
stevep , While I have many ideas I'd like to use, I'm aware that many things may happen which would make them impossible. One big question: What will the smaller powers do? India, Free France, Latin America, independent Asian states? Will they be able to play off the superpowers against each other - or will the big ones agree to "mop them up"?
I think that a lot of the medium sized powers - or potential ones such as India and possibly China will seek as much independence as possible. Doubt there would be formal agreements between the three super-powers but suspect that informal spheres of influence will be set up - with occasional challenges by the other two of the big three to those spheres. A lot of powers will need to look to one of the three for protection and also probably a level of military and economic support to aid them against internal issues - both unrest from internal factions and a desire to improve levels of poverty in much of the world.
One issue would be what happens to the European colonial realms? India will definitely gain independence in some form or another but assuming Japan is driven out of the region Indonesia is also likely to become independent as the rump Dutch state in exile will lack the ability to even try and restore their rule. Plus its likely that the US would support this. However what stance will they take of a French state in exile seeking to maintain control of their empire, or even simply Algeria which was technically part of metropolitan France if it comes under their control again - can't remember what your aims are for N Africa? Similarly for a Vichy government seeking to maintain control over areas away from direct German control. Or Britain in areas such as Africa, Malaysia and possibly say Aden if Britain is able to maintain control there - which would control access between the Red Sea and Indian Ocean. A lot would depend on whether Washington thinks its economic and political aims are best filled by its long time desire to destroy European empires or to support some to keep the Nazis and Soviets out.
Definitely right about Indonesia. It might well be that the DEI will fall apart in the chaotic post-war time. Think about independent Aceh, or Maluku Selatan.
India will of course become the leader of the block-free nations, and coin the term "Fourth World". (Especially poor states will be called "Fifth World".) And all the blocks will try to get them on their side: The Anglosphere because of its past, the Soviets because they've been oppressed so much, and the Nazis because, hey, Indians are "Aryans" too. The latter becomes especially important since I expect that the "Reich", with modern agricultural methods used on the fertile soil of Ukraine, will gain a huge food surplus. That's why they'll initiate the "Indienhilfe", huge grain deliveries.
North Africa will be under Axis/Vichy control. South of it, de Gaulle's Free France has a chance.
One thing is sure: Things will become interesting!
|
|
