|
|
Post by Max Sinister on May 21, 2022 0:34:35 GMT
Sheesh, I've studied statistics, no need to tell me basic probabilities.
Again: If the rare event happens and you roll ten sixes in a row, this doesn't mean that the next time the chance for a six was lower than one in six because you "used up your good luck". (Leaving aside the question that such a die is likely rigged.)
But back to topic.
After thinking it over, an acceptable combination of lucky events for Adolf Nazi would be:
- BEF defeated
- Canaris uncovered
- More Enigma security
- Malta taken (BEF lost -> no British soldiers on Crete -> more surviving paratroops)
- Submarines sink more food transports for Britain
- If provided with food for his country, and not being disinformed by Canaris, Franco agrees to a conquest of Gibraltar
All of that should add up to knock out Britain, methinks. However, there's that condition from page 1 that Nazi Germany also has to conquer "Lebensraum" from the Soviet Union. But if Nazi Germany invades them with Britain still in the war, we'll get a British-Soviet alliance (with US support) that's hard to impossible to break.
I can think up that Nazi Germany is lucky again:
- Dietl destroys the Murmansk railroad, at least temporarily
- Japanese destroy the Amur bridge in Khabarovsk (happened during the Russian Civil War - took the Soviets years(!) to rebuild it)
- Invasion starts two weeks earlier
This might enable the Nazis to win bigger, maybe taking or at least encircling Moscow, but so far it seems like that'll only lead to a bigger fall afterwards.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Member is Online
Posts: 24,832 
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on May 21, 2022 12:28:52 GMT
Sheesh, I've studied statistics, no need to tell me basic probabilities.Again: If the rare event happens and you roll ten sixes in a row, this doesn't mean that the next time the chance for a six was lower than one in six because you "used up your good luck". (Leaving aside the question that such a die is likely rigged.) But back to topic. After thinking it over, an acceptable combination of lucky events for Adolf Nazi would be: - BEF defeated - Canaris uncovered - More Enigma security - Malta taken (BEF lost -> no British soldiers on Crete -> more surviving paratroops) - Submarines sink more food transports for Britain - If provided with food for his country, and not being disinformed by Canaris, Franco agrees to a conquest of Gibraltar All of that should add up to knock out Britain, methinks. However, there's that condition from page 1 that Nazi Germany also has to conquer "Lebensraum" from the Soviet Union. But if Nazi Germany invades them with Britain still in the war, we'll get a British-Soviet alliance (with US support) that's hard to impossible to break. I can think up that Nazi Germany is lucky again: - Dietl destroys the Murmansk railroad, at least temporarily - Japanese destroy the Amur bridge in Khabarovsk (happened during the Russian Civil War - took the Soviets years(!) to rebuild it) - Invasion starts two weeks earlier This might enable the Nazis to win bigger, maybe taking or at least encircling Moscow, but so far it seems like that'll only lead to a bigger fall afterwards.
So have I, albeit a long while ago. However it sounded like you were ignoring the point I raised. Apologies as that seems to have been inaccurate but unclear what you meant otherwise.
There are still some issues with the above.
a) If the German army does storm the Dunkirk defences it will take time and suffer losses. Probably not enough to save France but will make that battle loner and more costly as well.
b) If Malta is lost - one might ask how - and no British support of Greece then Britain also avoids a fair amount of losses there, including a lot of equipment and might still be continuing with an expanded Compass. If its not then it could be largely locked out of the Med and doesn't have the expensive task of supplying Malta so there are more ships for elsewhere, which would reduce shipping losses rather than increase them.
c) Where does Hitler get more food from for Spain? He's not going to cut already fairly limited supplies to the German folk and there's only so much he can starve the Poles, Belgians, French etc. He could lie and say he would but Franco is smart enough, especially with Hitler's past record, to insist on supplies up front.
Would agree that if Britain keeps fight and Germany attacks the Soviets - the latter being as certain as anything with the Nazis - then the Nazis are almost certain to end up losing. If Britain is forced out of the war then a lot would depend on the US reaction, as it would be harder to get support for the Soviets if not a precedent sent by L-L to Britain and its allies. In that case either side could win but it could well be a Pyrrhic victory.
I can't see Japan joining in a war against the Soviets, even if the Germans are willing to ask them once the US has established its economic embargo as its too much against their interests.
|
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on May 22, 2022 0:10:37 GMT
You answered, you shall receive:
a) The Wehrmacht had 800,000 men vs. 400,000 Allied ones. Sorry to say that, but the Allied soldiers panicked and left a lot of material behind, which they are now lacking. If they have to fight "like cornered rats", they may cause some damage, but that much? At the time the trap was closed, they were already down to half rations. Not a good condition for fighting. They were lucky the Germans didn't know.
b) If we are talking about Greece and North Africa, we have to consider "if the BEF is lost" here. No BEF means fewer experienced soldiers to train new ones. Sure, the Empire is big, but that doesn't mean they can raise good armies just like that. If they could, why didn't they just take ten million Indians and conquered the Soviet Union? And the Empire often is a liability as well. IOTL, there was some unrest in Iraq (the putsch) and Egypt (when they removed the Axis-friendly PM), and in other places as well. If things go worse for Britain, I'd rather expect more of that.
c) This implies that he has either conquered Ukraine or never made war with Stalin to begin with. That'd be the source for food. No, lying to Franco wouldn't be a good idea.
I also don't see Japan deliberately attacking the SU. Even if they had a chance (but just look at Nomonhan!), they'd rather be interested in the South (Malay tin and rubber, oil(!!) from Dutch Indies), not the North. They'd have to invest a lot there to make it pay off. Since the embargo, they needed the oil, because otherwise...
Yes, it's tricky. Even with a loss of the BEF, Crete(?), Malta, Egypt, Gibraltar, hell, let's add Cyprus as well, I guess Churchill wouldn't want to give up. So what to do, if you want them (for the TL!) to make peace with Adolf Nazi? An anti-Churchill putsch?
And the tricky thing about the SU is: Even if Stain was willing to make peace, he'll only do so when he thinks he is behind, and the Nazis would offer peace (if they did) only if they thought they couldn't win.
|
|
michelvan
Sub-lieutenant
Posts: 488
Likes: 804
|
Post by michelvan on May 22, 2022 10:57:21 GMT
Reading this threat, i get moral doubt, big moral doubts
i mean its fun to discuss Nazi victory in Alternate History, but what would bring this for Europa ?
Simple: Mass murder in scale never seen before !
Not only wanted the Nazis exterminate the Jewish people, but also over 80% of Polish population and East European and Russians.
That around 65 MILLION PEOPLE the Nazi wanted to Exterminate, the 20% survivors would Slave race for Nazi dictatorship !
But they would not stop either, next on Dead-list were every europeans with jewish ancestor down to third generation must be exterminated.
More Million who died for a fictitious purity of aryan race that never existed !
Then wanted Nazi started a "breeding program" to repopulate Europa and new Lebensraum with a monoculture of Blond, blue Eye, Master race...
As a German, for me this is a Ultimate nightmare !
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,964
Likes: 49,368
|
Post by lordroel on May 22, 2022 11:06:19 GMT
Reading this threat, i get moral doubt, big moral doubts i mean its fun to discuss Nazi victory in Alternate History, but what would bring this for Europa ? Simple: Mass murder in scale never seen before ! Not only wanted the Nazis exterminate the Jewish people, but also over 80% of Polish population and East European and Russians. That around 65 MILLION PEOPLE the Nazi wanted to Exterminate, the 20% survivors would Slave race for Nazi dictatorship ! But they would not stop either, next on Dead-list were every europeans with jewish ancestor down to third generation must be exterminated. More Million who died for a fictitious purity of aryan race that never existed ! Then wanted Nazi started a "breeding program" to repopulate Europa and new Lebensraum with a monoculture of Blond, blue Eye, Master race... As a German, for me this is a Ultimate nightmare ! True, this is a nightmare and we can be glad the Nazis never mange to complete their final solution to Europe ore any other place they wanted to take over. |
|
michelvan
Sub-lieutenant
Posts: 488
Likes: 804
|
Post by michelvan on May 22, 2022 16:53:41 GMT
True, this is a nightmare and we can be glad the Nazis never mange to complete their final solution to Europe ore any other place they wanted to take over. I'm so Happy that Hitler shot himself in foot, by doing this War ideologically instead strategic. Like his Orders on Stalingrad and this outer foolish idea to declare War to US of A... |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Member is Online
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on May 22, 2022 17:58:07 GMT
You answered, you shall receive: a) The Wehrmacht had 800,000 men vs. 400,000 Allied ones. Sorry to say that, but the Allied soldiers panicked and left a lot of material behind, which they are now lacking. If they have to fight "like cornered rats", they may cause some damage, but that much? At the time the trap was closed, they were already down to half rations. Not a good condition for fighting. They were lucky the Germans didn't know. b) If we are talking about Greece and North Africa, we have to consider "if the BEF is lost" here. No BEF means fewer experienced soldiers to train new ones. Sure, the Empire is big, but that doesn't mean they can raise good armies just like that. If they could, why didn't they just take ten million Indians and conquered the Soviet Union? And the Empire often is a liability as well. IOTL, there was some unrest in Iraq (the putsch) and Egypt (when they removed the Axis-friendly PM), and in other places as well. If things go worse for Britain, I'd rather expect more of that. c) This implies that he has either conquered Ukraine or never made war with Stalin to begin with. That'd be the source for food. No, lying to Franco wouldn't be a good idea. I also don't see Japan deliberately attacking the SU. Even if they had a chance (but just look at Nomonhan!), they'd rather be interested in the South (Malay tin and rubber, oil(!!) from Dutch Indies), not the North. They'd have to invest a lot there to make it pay off. Since the embargo, they needed the oil, because otherwise... Yes, it's tricky. Even with a loss of the BEF, Crete(?), Malta, Egypt, Gibraltar, hell, let's add Cyprus as well, I guess Churchill wouldn't want to give up. So what to do, if you want them (for the TL!) to make peace with Adolf Nazi? An anti-Churchill putsch? And the tricky thing about the SU is: Even if Stain was willing to make peace, he'll only do so when he thinks he is behind, and the Nazis would offer peace (if they did) only if they thought they couldn't win.
To reply a) They left most of that equipment on the beaches as I understand it. If the Germans seek to storm the position they will take much heavier losses. Also men with little choice will make very good cornered rats. Plus there is still the rest of the French army to consider.
b) How many new soldiers trained in Britain - or members of the BEF evacuated OTL - were involved in Operation Compass or the failed attempt to aid Greece? No they can't raise men just like that, although they did raise a hell of a lot and outside Britain and the dominion they were all volunteers to the best of my knowledge. Equipment, training and the willingness of accept recruits from different backgrounds, plus probably education and language in some cases are issues. However as I say I'm not talking about massive additional numbers.
c) He did conquer most/all pf Ukraine OTL but didn't make very efficient use of it - between Nazi ideology and incompetence. Without a major change in their leadership I can't see them not invading the USSR and also there's a limit to how much food Stalin can and will supply, at least without economic or other demands that the Germans won't/can't accept.
d) I doubt that Germany can take Gibraltar in a realistic TL and even less Egypt. Crete, especially without British defence of it and Malta yes. Cyprus would be likely to be a huge victory for Britain, especially if Mussolini is forced to commit the bulk of his fleet to such an operation.
e) Fully agree on the status of a Nazi-Soviet peace early in the war. In the example I gave earlier there is much higher mistrust between the allies and Soviets and both believe the other is seeking a separate peace. Coupled with a major Soviet disaster where Stalin thinks that the western allies left him in the lurk if not actually betrayed him and significant further advances would be very expensive in manpower and possibly even then unsuccessful it might - note I say might - be a significantly different matter.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,964
Likes: 49,368
|
Post by lordroel on May 22, 2022 18:02:11 GMT
Like his Orders on Stalingrad and this outer foolish idea to declare War to US of A... Ore what about Dunkirk ore the BoB among other things. |
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on May 23, 2022 15:33:51 GMT
Reading this threat, i get moral doubt, big moral doubts i mean its fun to discuss Nazi victory in Alternate History, but what would bring this for Europa ? Simple: Mass murder in scale never seen before ! Not only wanted the Nazis exterminate the Jewish people, but also over 80% of Polish population and East European and Russians. That around 65 MILLION PEOPLE the Nazi wanted to Exterminate, the 20% survivors would Slave race for Nazi dictatorship ! But they would not stop either, next on Dead-list were every europeans with jewish ancestor down to third generation must be exterminated. More Million who died for a fictitious purity of aryan race that never existed ! Then wanted Nazi started a "breeding program" to repopulate Europa and new Lebensraum with a monoculture of Blond, blue Eye, Master race... As a German, for me this is a Ultimate nightmare !
You're right. And that's exactly what I'd want to show in this AH - because, no matter how horrible it is, things like that could have happened, or people at the very least thought about making them happen.
Fun? "Interesting"/"a challenge", I'd agree. But don't get distracted if I add some gallows humor here and there (like the people in the real WW2 often did!), this is indeed very serious.
As said: This story will have the Nazis win and rule their Reich for at least 20 years undisturbed. Yes, it might well be that way more people will die in a genocide than IOTL. To show people the full horror.
There are people who wrote even worse things in ATLs. Have you read how Philip K. Dick lets "his" Nazis kill off all the black Africans in "The man in the High Castle"? Have you heard about what happens in "Wenn das der Führer wüsste"/"The Twilight Men" by Otto Basil, where Nazis and partners also rule the whole world?
Also, I actually had assumed you were Belgian. Corrected.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,964
Likes: 49,368
|
Post by lordroel on May 23, 2022 15:42:04 GMT
There are people who wrote even worse things in ATLs. Have you read how Philip K. Dick lets "his" Nazis kill off all the black Africans in "The man in the High Castle"? Its even mention in the TV series , just jump to 1:00. |
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on May 23, 2022 21:08:05 GMT
You answered, you shall receive: a) The Wehrmacht had 800,000 men vs. 400,000 Allied ones. Sorry to say that, but the Allied soldiers panicked and left a lot of material behind, which they are now lacking. If they have to fight "like cornered rats", they may cause some damage, but that much? At the time the trap was closed, they were already down to half rations. Not a good condition for fighting. They were lucky the Germans didn't know. b) If we are talking about Greece and North Africa, we have to consider "if the BEF is lost" here. No BEF means fewer experienced soldiers to train new ones. Sure, the Empire is big, but that doesn't mean they can raise good armies just like that. If they could, why didn't they just take ten million Indians and conquered the Soviet Union? And the Empire often is a liability as well. IOTL, there was some unrest in Iraq (the putsch) and Egypt (when they removed the Axis-friendly PM), and in other places as well. If things go worse for Britain, I'd rather expect more of that. c) This implies that he has either conquered Ukraine or never made war with Stalin to begin with. That'd be the source for food. No, lying to Franco wouldn't be a good idea. I also don't see Japan deliberately attacking the SU. Even if they had a chance (but just look at Nomonhan!), they'd rather be interested in the South (Malay tin and rubber, oil(!!) from Dutch Indies), not the North. They'd have to invest a lot there to make it pay off. Since the embargo, they needed the oil, because otherwise... Yes, it's tricky. Even with a loss of the BEF, Crete(?), Malta, Egypt, Gibraltar, hell, let's add Cyprus as well, I guess Churchill wouldn't want to give up. So what to do, if you want them (for the TL!) to make peace with Adolf Nazi? An anti-Churchill putsch? And the tricky thing about the SU is: Even if Stain was willing to make peace, he'll only do so when he thinks he is behind, and the Nazis would offer peace (if they did) only if they thought they couldn't win.
To reply a) They left most of that equipment on the beaches as I understand it. If the Germans seek to storm the position they will take much heavier losses. Also men with little choice will make very good cornered rats. Plus there is still the rest of the French army to consider.
b) How many new soldiers trained in Britain - or members of the BEF evacuated OTL - were involved in Operation Compass or the failed attempt to aid Greece? No they can't raise men just like that, although they did raise a hell of a lot and outside Britain and the dominion they were all volunteers to the best of my knowledge. Equipment, training and the willingness of accept recruits from different backgrounds, plus probably education and language in some cases are issues. However as I say I'm not talking about massive additional numbers.
c) He did conquer most/all pf Ukraine OTL but didn't make very efficient use of it - between Nazi ideology and incompetence. Without a major change in their leadership I can't see them not invading the USSR and also there's a limit to how much food Stalin can and will supply, at least without economic or other demands that the Germans won't/can't accept.
d) I doubt that Germany can take Gibraltar in a realistic TL and even less Egypt. Crete, especially without British defence of it and Malta yes. Cyprus would be likely to be a huge victory for Britain, especially if Mussolini is forced to commit the bulk of his fleet to such an operation.
e) Fully agree on the status of a Nazi-Soviet peace early in the war. In the example I gave earlier there is much higher mistrust between the allies and Soviets and both believe the other is seeking a separate peace. Coupled with a major Soviet disaster where Stalin thinks that the western allies left him in the lurk if not actually betrayed him and significant further advances would be very expensive in manpower and possibly even then unsuccessful it might - note I say might - be a significantly different matter.
a) I haven't found exact numbers how much was lost where. Makes sense though that most would be at the beaches. But as chaotic as the situation was (two million Belgians were fleeing, and later even more French), I guess that some material was lost on the way too.
Fighting like cornered rats... I'd like to see it, but from the top of the head I can't name an example of brits doing that. Did the Brits in Singapore fight like cornered rats? Or in Dieppe? Or in the English Civil War, or the Hundred-Year War? Maybe someone of you can name dozens of examples, but I can't. Certainly not if it means "until the last man is dead and the last bullet shot".
And this time, the French would lack the 100,000+ men who were actually returned from England in Operation Cycle, who had some modern fighting experience. OK, de Gaulle is still there, but if the old incompetent generals won't listen to him. The Nazis might win in France even some days earlier.
b) The thing they'd lack would be experience. Consider that practically nobody had experience with war after WW1. In this case, experience with the WAllies' favorite Nazi general Rommel, and his tactics. TTL's French would still think that dispersing tanks were the way to go. Also, before Britain would be able to care about Greece or North Africa, they'd have to care about Britain. Even IOTL many feared invasion, no matter how impossible Sealion is. ITTL people'd demand to move some troops from the Empire to Britain first. TTL's Crete would have a weaker AND less experienced defense force. Means more Nazi paratroopers for places like Malta and Cyprus.
And they'd lack talent. I've checked who'd become a PoW of the Nazis: Gort and Monty of course, "Mason-Mac" who once wanted to snipe the "führer" and was the BEF's Director of Military Intelligence, Harold Alexander who fought in Burma and Northern Africa, chief of staff Henry Pownall who later fought with Wavell and Mountbatten, Giffard Le Quesne Martel (yes, actually a Brit) who passed on valuable experience about how to fight panzers, Alan Brooke who become Churchill's most important military advisor, Ronald Forbes Adam who organised aptitude tests for the Army, decorated folks like Roger Evans and Dudley Graham Johnson, Edmund Ironside who organised the Home Army... and that's just the start. Good officers don't grow on trees.
Everything else they'd still have, that's true.
c) I don't have numbers right now. But I do know that thanks to Ukraine, the Germans didn't have to hunger like in WW1.
d) I'd have to think a bit about Egypt, but I do have an idea for Gibraltar. If you read Churchill's WW2, you may know what I mean.
e) Could well be. Still, we have to consider that Stalin won't be so naive a second time to trust that the "führer" of all people would never attack him. He might cede eg Ukraine and wait for better times, but he should know what the Nazis want to do to him... and this "next time", the WAllies won't be so eager to help him. Will have to read up about WW2 diplomacy.
|
|
michelvan
Sub-lieutenant
Posts: 488
Likes: 804
|
Post by michelvan on May 23, 2022 21:09:47 GMT
Also, I actually had assumed you were Belgian. Corrected. Nein, nein, nein, Just life there for while and return to the Vaterland (god thank for that) As said: This story will have the Nazis win and rule their Reich for at least 20 years undisturbed. Good luck with that you need major POD overhaul to get it realistic, without history Wank or ABS. I prefer a Kaiserreich that survive the first and Second Great War and the chill War with USA. |
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on May 23, 2022 21:15:55 GMT
Rhineland: 6 Anschluss: Close to a 6, but might be a 5 Munich: 6 Subsequent occupation of rump Czechoslovakia: 6 Poland: 5 or 6 Scandinavia: 6 Belgium: 6 (cf bridges etc) Sedan and the first phase of the Battle of France: 6 An argument could be made that Schickelgruber already burned through what could reasonably be expected as a run of luck by mid 1940. This was extended by the early phase of Barbarossa and Crete to the point of breaking. Rhineland: 6........................................................................Mine would be ....4 Anschluss: Close to a 6, but might be a 5................................Mine would be ....6 Mussolini was just about ready to pull the trigger. Munich: 6............................................................................Mine would be.....4 I think the western politicians were known cavers. Subsequent occupation of rump Czechoslovakia: 6....................Mine would be.....3 Munich doomed the Czechs. Poland: 5 or 6......................................................................Mine would be......(Question here)...2 My estimate is that Stalin was the pad. Scandinavia: 6.....................................................................Mine would be......10. This was a miracle that it worked at all. Belgium: 6 (cf bridges etc)....................................................Mine would be.......5 Sedan and the first phase of the Battle of France: 6..................Mine would be.......8 The French would have stopped them despite Huntziger and Gamelin if the defense at the Meuse had held up longer for about another day.
After some pondering, I now wonder what exactly constitutes good luck. Was it good luck that the Wehrmacht defeated the Poles who had a weaker army, few tanks, Stalin backstabbing them, and a muddled defense plan? Was it good luck that the old, incompetent French generals wouldn't listen to de Gaulle re: tanks?
Or was a Wehrmacht victory in these cases what you had to expect naturally, unless they rolled a 1?
|
|
miletus12
Squadron vice admiral
To get yourself lost, just follow the signs.
Posts: 7,470 
Likes: 4,295
|
Post by miletus12 on May 24, 2022 0:27:05 GMT
Was it good luck that the old, incompetent French generals wouldn't listen to de Gaulle re: tanks? Bad decision-making hobbled the French. 1. Wrong human factors engineering choices. 2. Wrong comms doctrine. 3. Wrong leadership selection process. De Gaulle might have written a political treatise "Towards a Professional Army", but he had no special insight towards "tanks". Besides "tanks" are not the whole jigsaw puzzle. That is "combined arms". When the French practiced it, the Germans got chewed up. |
|
michelvan
Sub-lieutenant
Posts: 488
Likes: 804
|
Post by michelvan on May 24, 2022 13:21:02 GMT
the old, incompetent French generals wouldn't listen to de Gaulle re: tanks? Generals Old Yes, incompetent No Government incompetent ? yes... The Issue with France was there post war approach to Germany by Minister Andre Maginot. They went for defence strategy and build the bigger Bunker system: The Maginot Line And spend Five billion old french franc between 1930 and 1936. The French were master in Fortress building so obvious the would take this approach and never consider Massive Tank attack or a Combined attack by Aircraft, Tanks, Infantry aka BLITZKRIEG. Other issue was prolongation of The Maginot Line into Belgium, to be build by Belgiums but they complete only four Fortress with reduce weapons, no match for Wehrmacht... Biggest problem was that The Maginot Line had sucked up most of military Budget during 6 years, Money needed in production on Aircraft and Tank or proper sub Machine gun for Infantry. Aircraft needed in defence of France as Luftwaffe Attacked Next to that was Stop and Go Issue in French politics do struggle between left and Right, what hamper Military and armament like nationalisation of private sector. Final was a strategic error to downfall of France, the French General believed that Wehrmacht, would move over flat Flanders to France and they position there army and tanks there, But the Wehrmacht made high risk gamble and manage go through Belgium Ardennes and invade France. had the French government spent the 5 billion old franc on Aircraft and Tanks and proper weapons for Infantry, the battle of France would quite different outcome... |
|
