Would Germany have won the war if Hitler did not invade Rus

[Baltenstein]

An invasion could have happened somewhere in the North of Scotland.

Again, no. Aside from the fact that German amphibious landing craft wasn't capable of such long distances, the notion alone - that an invasion fleet with millions of troops could have traveled all the way up to Scotland unnoticed by the British home fleet - is absurd.

[Rio Cana]

Some post above say the UK. would have won. If it was a repeat of what actually happened in WW II then yes, But if the Germans had not invaded Russia things would have been different. No need to have generals plan for an invasion of Russia. All would be concentrated on invading the UK. They would have though of something. The UK. cannot possibly watch over all its coast. An invasion could have happened somewhere in the North of Scotland.

The planned invasion of Malta is an example. The Germans wanted to invade Malta. However, the Germans never invaded Malta since they needed to send the troops for the Malta invasion to North Africa. Otherwise, Malta most likely would have been conquered. Same for the UK.. If the Germans had not gotten involved in Russia they could have most likely conquered the island of Britannia . Once those German tanks started landing and rolling on the island of Brittania it would be hard to stop.

Err, wasn't this clear already? The Germans didn't have a chance of making Seelöwe happen. They had no transport ships (or not enough to make a difference, anyway), no air supremacy, no naval supremacy. In the '70's, former British and German officers from WWII came together in a wargame to test Seelöwe. It didn't (SURPRISE) work.

Seems I am being misunderstood. First the OP. says if the Germans had won. Second, some here are suggesting that the Germans would do the same things to the UK. that they did when they in the real WW II invaded Russia. I am saying without a German invasion of Russia they would have most likely spent the resources to build whatever they needed to conquer the UK.The whole German war effort would have been brought down on the UK. Afterall, no Russia in the picture. When Russia was in the picture the Germans invasion of the UK. took a back seat. At that point the German war machine was largely pointed at Russia not the UK.

[Ardavia]

Err, wasn't this clear already? The Germans didn't have a chance of making Seelöwe happen. They had no transport ships (or not enough to make a difference, anyway), no air supremacy, no naval supremacy. In the '70's, former British and German officers from WWII came together in a wargame to test Seelöwe. It didn't (SURPRISE) work.

Seems I am being misunderstood. First the OP. says if the Germans had won. Second, some here are suggesting that the Germans did the same things to the UK. that they did when they in the real WW II they invaded Russia. I am saying without a German invasion of Russia they would have most likely spent the resources to build whatever they needed to conquer the UK.The whole German war effort would have been brought down on the UK. Afterall, no Russia in the picture. When Russia was in the picture the Germans invasion of the UK. took a back seat. At that point the German war machine was largely pointed at Russia not the UK.

The thing is, if the Reich hadn't invaded the USSR, it would have gone the other way around, and with the Wehrmacht focused on the UK, the Soviets would have steamrolled through Poland and possibly into the Reich itself.

[Ostroeuropa]

Err, wasn't this clear already? The Germans didn't have a chance of making Seelöwe happen. They had no transport ships (or not enough to make a difference, anyway), no air supremacy, no naval supremacy. In the '70's, former British and German officers from WWII came together in a wargame to test Seelöwe. It didn't (SURPRISE) work.

Seems I am being misunderstood. First the OP. says if the Germans had won. Second, some here are suggesting that the Germans would do the same things to the UK. that they did when they in the real WW II they invaded Russia. I am saying without a German invasion of Russia they would have most likely spent the resources to build whatever they needed to conquer the UK.The whole German war effort would have been brought down on the UK. Afterall, no Russia in the picture. When Russia was in the picture the Germans invasion of the UK. took a back seat. At that point the German war machine was largely pointed at Russia not the UK.

That's only because they realized that after pointing it at us for a few years that it wasn't going to work. We'd beaten them.
Hitler realized we were running out the clock since he was running out of oil for his army and it was a matter of time before Allies arrived.
So he decided on a Knock-Out strike on the USSR to force them to capitulate and seize their oil fields, at which point he'd sue the UK for peace.

[Baltenstein]

Err, wasn't this clear already? The Germans didn't have a chance of making Seelöwe happen. They had no transport ships (or not enough to make a difference, anyway), no air supremacy, no naval supremacy. In the '70's, former British and German officers from WWII came together in a wargame to test Seelöwe. It didn't (SURPRISE) work.

Seems I am being misunderstood. First the OP. says if the Germans had won. Second, some here are suggesting that the Germans would do the same things to the UK. that they did when they in the real WW II they invaded Russia. I am saying without a German invasion of Russia they would have most likely spent the resources to build whatever they needed to conquer the UK.The whole German war effort would have been brought down on the UK. Afterall, no Russia in the picture. When Russia was in the picture the Germans invasion of the UK. took a back seat. At that point the German war machine was largely pointed at Russia not the UK.

You missing a somewhat crucial factor - From the beginning of his reign, Hitler never wanted nor prepared to fight against Britain, muss less conquer her. Thusly, any speculation about long-term German war preparations against Britain are pointless.

[Rio Cana]

That's only because they realized that after pointing it at us for a few years that it wasn't going to work. We'd beaten them.
Hitler realized we were running out the clock since he was running out of oil for his army and it was a matter of time before Allies arrived.
So he decided on a Knock-Out strike on the USSR to force them to capitulate and seize their oil fields, at which point he'd sue the UK for peace.

When it comes to the real events of WW II you are correct. The Germans lost since they bit more then they could chew. And they paid the price.

[Ardavia]

That's only because they realized that after pointing it at us for a few years that it wasn't going to work. We'd beaten them.
Hitler realized we were running out the clock since he was running out of oil for his army and it was a matter of time before Allies arrived.
So he decided on a Knock-Out strike on the USSR to force them to capitulate and seize their oil fields, at which point he'd sue the UK for peace.

When it comes to the real events of WW II you are correct. The Germans lost since they bit more then they could chew. And they paid the price.

The Germans lost because they had the Allies against them. The US' industrial capacity was, in the end, what defeated the Reich. The Soviets used American vehicles, the British did, the Americans themselves did. And it was Japan who brought the US into the war, and Hitler who brought them to Europe. Though, they would have come anyway.

[The Two Jerseys]

Some posts above say the UK. would have won. If it was a repeat of what actually happened in WW II then yes, But if the Germans had not invaded Russia things would have been different. No need to have generals plan for an invasion of Russia. All would be concentrated on invading the UK. They would have though of something. The UK. cannot possibly watch over all its coast. An invasion could have happened somewhere in the North of Scotland.

You mean that the puny German surface fleet would escort an invasion force across the North Sea, being harassed by Coastal and Bomber Command virtually the whole way, and lead them under the guns of the entire Home Fleet with the sky above them controlled by 13 Group and absolutely no air support of their own? That would have been even more lopsided than Surigao Strait.

The planned invasion of Malta is an example. The Germans wanted to invade Malta. However, the Germans never invaded Malta since they needed to send the troops for the Malta invasion to North Africa. Otherwise, Malta most likely would have been conquered. Same for the UK.. If the Germans had not gotten involved in Russia they could have most likely conquered the island of Britannia . Once those German tanks started landing and rolling on the island of Brittania it would be hard to stop.

Until the Home Fleet arrives in the Channel and severs the Germans' supply lines, then those tanks grind to a halt real quick. Assuming that they could even make it over in the first place, which as has been pointed out a number of times was not very likely to happen.

[Ostroeuropa]

Some posts above say the UK. would have won. If it was a repeat of what actually happened in WW II then yes, But if the Germans had not invaded Russia things would have been different. No need to have generals plan for an invasion of Russia. All would be concentrated on invading the UK. They would have though of something. The UK. cannot possibly watch over all its coast. An invasion could have happened somewhere in the North of Scotland.

You mean that the puny German surface fleet would escort an invasion force across the North Sea, being harassed by Coastal and Bomber Command virtually the whole way, and lead them under the guns of the entire Home Fleet with the sky above them controlled by 13 Group and absolutely no air support of their own? That would have been even more lopsided than Surigao Strait.

The planned invasion of Malta is an example. The Germans wanted to invade Malta. However, the Germans never invaded Malta since they needed to send the troops for the Malta invasion to North Africa. Otherwise, Malta most likely would have been conquered. Same for the UK.. If the Germans had not gotten involved in Russia they could have most likely conquered the island of Britannia . Once those German tanks started landing and rolling on the island of Brittania it would be hard to stop.

Until the Home Fleet arrives in the Channel and severs the Germans' supply lines, then those tanks grind to a halt real quick. Assuming that they could even make it over in the first place, which as has been pointed out a number of times was not very likely to happen.

There were war games a while back between us and the germans simulating the invasion, they managed to reach Kent but very quickly ran out of supplies and ended up with about 1/3rd of their invasion force stranded in kent with no supplies or backup after the RAF+Navy started doing it's thing and controlling the channel.
The entire german navy was sunk in the process.

So they could have landed troops, but that's about it.

The invading army surrendered or scattered. The counterattack by the navy and RAF left many european ports destroyed (No ships to stop them), and severely crippled the reich.

[Wytenigistan]

But he wouldn't have done that.

[Lemanrussland]

The Germans had a plan to invade the UK. called Operation Sea Lion. They could have succeeded if they had not deviated from the plan and had not invaded Russia which took away much resources that could have been used in an invasion of the UK.

http://info-poland.buffalo.edu/britain/airbattle.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sea_Lion

(Image)

That plan could have never possibly succeeded. It called for Rhine river barges to ferry the troops over, under the cover of aircraft, seamines, and submarines, and make opposed landing on the south of England.

Imagine the allies trying something that silly on D-Day?

[Rio Cana]

You mean that the puny German surface fleet would escort an invasion force across the North Sea, being harassed by Coastal and Bomber Command virtually the whole way, and lead them under the guns of the entire Home Fleet with the sky above them controlled by 13 Group and absolutely no air support of their own? That would have been even more lopsided than Surigao Strait.


Until the Home Fleet arrives in the Channel and severs the Germans' supply lines, then those tanks grind to a halt real quick. Assuming that they could even make it over in the first place, which as has been pointed out a number of times was not very likely to happen.

There were war games a while back between us and the germans simulating the invasion, they managed to reach Kent but very quickly ran out of supplies and ended up with about 1/3rd of their invasion force stranded in kent with no supplies or backup after the RAF+Navy started doing it's thing and controlling the channel.
The entire german navy was sunk in the process.

So they could have landed troops, but that's about it.

The invading army surrendered or scattered. The counterattack by the navy and RAF left many european ports destroyed (No ships to stop them), and severely crippled the reich.

But those war games were in modern times.The UK. today was not the UK. at the start of WW II.

[Ostroeuropa]

There were war games a while back between us and the germans simulating the invasion, they managed to reach Kent but very quickly ran out of supplies and ended up with about 1/3rd of their invasion force stranded in kent with no supplies or backup after the RAF+Navy started doing it's thing and controlling the channel.
The entire german navy was sunk in the process.

So they could have landed troops, but that's about it.

The invading army surrendered or scattered. The counterattack by the navy and RAF left many european ports destroyed (No ships to stop them), and severely crippled the reich.

But those war games were in modern times.The UK. today was not the UK. at the start of WW II.

No, it was using era appropriate equipment /troop ratios and all that stuff.

[Kaztropol]

From the beginning of his reign, Hitler never wanted nor prepared to fight against Britain, muss less conquer her. Thusly, any speculation about long-term German war preparations against Britain are pointless.

Hitler expected a war with Britain, beginning in the late 1940's, because he didn't think the UK would declare war following the invasion of Poland.

The plan to fight against Britain, involved German surface action groups, with battleship + aircraft carriers, supported by submarines, to engage British merchant ship convoys. The plan was that the Royal Navy would be spread so thin, so as to cover all the convoys, that the British surface escorts of any particular convoy could be engaged and defeated by the German surface forces, which were very much smaller overall, even following the large programme of naval construction required by the plan. This would erode British naval superiority, compelling the UK to sue for peace.

A couple of battleships were built (Bismarck and Tirpitz), and there was an incomplete aircraft carrier (plan was for navalised Bf-109s - carrier operations with those might have been a scary prospect- narrow undercarriage), but that was about as far as it got.

[Nightkill the Emperor]

Likely not.

May have won it if he hadn't fucked with the West so much though and stuck to the Eastern front. But God knows what might have happened.

[Costa Alegria]

An invasion could have happened somewhere in the North of Scotland.

Again, no. Aside from the fact that German amphibious landing craft wasn't capable of such long distances, the notion alone - that an invasion fleet with millions of troops could have traveled all the way up to Scotland unnoticed by the British home fleet - is absurd.

He's talking about German troops sailing from Norway.

[Costa Alegria]

Likely not.

May have won it if he hadn't fucked with the West so much though and stuck to the Eastern front. But God knows what might have happened.

Hitler doesn't invade either Britain nor the USSR. That leaves him free to concentrate his forces in the Mediterranean and North Africa, which would subsequently severely weaken or destroy British naval forces there, leaving him relatively free to move supplies to North Africa and thus continue the drive to the Suez Canal and possibly beyond.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

When it comes to the real events of WW II you are correct. The Germans lost since they bit more then they could chew. And they paid the price.

The Germans lost because they had the Allies against them. The US' industrial capacity was, in the end, what defeated the Reich. The Soviets used American vehicles, the British did, the Americans themselves did. And it was Japan who brought the US into the war, and Hitler who brought them to Europe. Though, they would have come anyway.

The combined industrial capacity of the US and USSR defeated the Germans. The USSR produced more tanks and self propelled guns than the US, and MUCH more artillery. Of course, it was US materiel (chiefly in the form of trucks and similar logistical vehicles,) which allowed the Soviets to focus so heavily on tanks and guns. The Soviets also produced more ground attack aircraft than any other country, which, combined with the second largest air force of the war, certainly helped out a bit.

[The Tiger Kingdom]

Good argument, but I have some issues with it:

• 1) It was Nazi rhetoric to wipe out Bolshevism, a practical leader (which Hitler fortunately wasn't would have waited longer to try deal with them.
• 
  

It was Nazi rhetoric, yeah, because that's what Hitler believed. And fuck yeah, he believed it.
And yes, a practical leader would've waited, but Germany was not ruled by a practical man, so...

2) If the Mediterranean fleet and RAF caused so many problems with getting troops into Africa, how did Rommel and his army get in?

Good question. The reason was that according to what I can tell, Rommel's arrival as well as that of the (relatively pretty small) Afrika Korps was done under a massive intelligence smokescreen, and also done at a time in which the Royal Navy was struggling to contain the Italian fleet. It was a well-executed operation done at a fortuitous time. The supply and reinforcement convoys that followed them weren't nearly so reliably lucky, especially as 1941-42 drew on.

Also if Hitler had focused his military spending on Africa instead of Russia the Mediterranean fleet and RAF would have been less of a threat.

I take this to mean devoting more air and naval resources to the Med? That does make sense in theory, but seeing as how the Luftwaffe was already hugely tied down with the continuing bombing in Britain, as well as the fact that the Germans knew how precarious their whole industrial situation in terms of plane production was, they were keeping a lot of squadrons relatively close to their chest.
And naval assets? Look at the Med - it's a perfect bottleneck, with the Brits controlling both ends and no German port on the sea itself. You'd have to send ships through the bottleneck, which is exactly what the Brits are expecting to have happen and have been preparing for for years. Just sending U-Boats through Gibraltar was a massively deadly undertaking, much less surface ships.

3) If Hitler had put more work into his "Atlantic Wall" (or even fully completed it) D Day would have gone a lot worse for the allies.

The Atlantic Wall was a fundamentally flawed idea from the start. Seriously, all that time, all that effort, to build something that if you breach it at one point (which is always, always going to happen eventually), the entire rest of it is useless?
No way. Hitler just had a fetish for designing bunkers. The thing was a pipe dream. It would've taken on the level of five to seven years to actually finish, assuming anyone cared enough to plan and execute it right.
That would also take away an absolutely massive amount of useful labor, that could be devoted to offensive operations, which were much more likely to result in positive dividends anyway than building the most fucking huge fortification system in the world that's also doomed to fail.

4) Vietnam has much more overgrown and. inaccessible areas than France, Poland, etc. Also I meant more the resistance in the towns than the forests and mountains.

Maybe. The Germans tried that A LOT over the course of the war, and they were just not able to get a handle on it (except in Holland, which was kind of a weird case). I don't think throwing more men at the problem would help. It would probably just result in more dead Germans.

5) Point on he couldn't consolidate is good. It would be better if he tried end the war in North Africa and then try seize Africa's natural resources.

I take it you mean the oil.
As the Germans discovered when they took Maikop in the Caucasus, it's really easy to destroy oil wells as you're retreating. The Germans took a lot of good oil land there, but it would've taken years to get anything out of them. I imagine the same thing would've happened in Africa/the Middle East.

6) True, Stalin and Hitler only worked together in Poland out of practicality. But then again Stalin never really came rushing to the aid of his "allies" France and Britain until after the USSR was invaded.

The USSR and the Allies were by no stretch of the word "allies" before the invasion. Like I mentioned earlier, the Brits wanted to bomb the Caucasus (or at least Churchill did) when Finland got invaded. And hell, Stalin came rushing to ask THEM (well, Britain and the US, at that point) for aid when he was attacked, not the other way around.

7) Stealing the natural resources of Africa might delay or even stabilise his economy a little. True the odds were stacked against Nazi Germany (thank goodness) but with a more intelligent and patient plan. they would have lasted longer. And maybe even still be in power today.

Hitler and his cronies, with the possible exception of Hjalmar Schecht (who ended up in a concentration camp, shows you their priorities), had no idea how to run an economy, and introducing more oil wouldn't have helped matters. The entire Nazi government and economy would have kept on being somewhat equivalent to warring fiefdoms, each sector trying to horde as much influence and power as possible at the expense of the others, with massive fights in terms of control over factory production, distribution, etc.
It was flawed fatally from the beginning.
There never was an "intelligent and patient plan", clearly. There never even was a "plan". It was all just a day-by-day clusterfuck to get as much power for your organization (the Army, Navy, Luftwaffe, SS, Todt Group, Reserve Army, on and on and on) at the expense of all the others. Hitler was the only common thread that all these factions had, and even he wasn't enough to get them all to play nice together like the Allies and Soviets could. Even more of a realistic economic plan might have just spurred on the collapse even more, as this whole system of trying to get as much Hitler-favor as possible at the expense of the rest was a pretty intrinsic part of the system from the beginning, as Hitler didn't really trust anyone else to do it for him. With a system like that, maybe trying to deal with victory would have been just as bad as dealing with defeat.
Introducing more resources into broken system wouldn't have fixed the system, it'd just have added something new to fight over.

[The Tiger Kingdom]

Again, no. Aside from the fact that German amphibious landing craft wasn't capable of such long distances, the notion alone - that an invasion fleet with millions of troops could have traveled all the way up to Scotland unnoticed by the British home fleet - is absurd.

He's talking about German troops sailing from Norway.

Still utterly impossible. The Home Fleet wasn't in the Channel, it was up in Scotland (I believe that Channel Fleet was pretty formidable in its own right as well). As were a LOT of the FAA's Catalinas and Bostons and whatnot, specifically devoted to antishipping work.

[The Sovietyeto]

He's talking about German troops sailing from Norway.

Still utterly impossible. The Home Fleet wasn't in the Channel, it was up in Scotland (I believe that Channel Fleet was pretty formidable in its own right as well). As were a LOT of the FAA's Catalinas and Bostons and whatnot, specifically devoted to antishipping work.

But what if Goring wasn't an idiot? The Luftwaffe could have taken down the RAF if they hadn't kept switching objectives.

[Fascist USSR]

IF he did not invade Russia and dealt with England, i say yes because Germany would of probably taken e\England out thus taking out one of the most powerful nations to have to not align with the USA or Russia to take them over PS im german [/spoiler]

[The Tiger Kingdom]

Still utterly impossible. The Home Fleet wasn't in the Channel, it was up in Scotland (I believe that Channel Fleet was pretty formidable in its own right as well). As were a LOT of the FAA's Catalinas and Bostons and whatnot, specifically devoted to antishipping work.

But what if Goring wasn't an idiot? The Luftwaffe could have taken down the RAF if they hadn't kept switching objectives.

That was actually mostly Hitler's idea.
And Goering wasn't NOT an idiot (like I said before, Hitler put him there partially because he knew he was a harmless boob who he could control and who wouldn't oppose him - he wouldn't tolerate anything else), and seeing as how I'm trying to imagine this alternate reality having the same set of factors barring this new German strategic direction, I don't see your point.
And for something like the fifth time, the Luftwaffe could not have defeated the RAF regardless of targets. The influx of foreign pilots, coupled with the massive boost the British aircraft industry was getting, made that impossible. the massive losses the Germans were taking in the first month or so only confirms this further.

IF he did not invade Russia and dealt with England, i say yes because Germany would of probably taken e\England out thus taking out one of the most powerful nations to have to not align with the USA or Russia to take them over PS im german [/spoiler]

Two things:
1) Not sure why you being German is supposed to be funny,
2) Read the rest of the thread for my replies as to that.

[The Sovietyeto]

The RAF's big advantage was radar, would you agree with that?

[Priory Academy USSR]

It would all go down in North Africa. Given the lack of infrastructure in the area, and Britain's naval superiority, it's doubtful the Germans could have brought their full strength to bear. I'd give both sides a 50% chance of winning, but there'd have to be some sort of ceasefire afterwards given that neither side could realistically make any more moves against the other.