What would have happened if Hitler was allied with the USSR

[Linflas]

is it true that Hitler wanted an alliance with us (brits) before WW2? i know some brits in government and that royal family were for it but others (like churchil) were against.

what would have happened then if when britain declared war on nazi germany it had instead allied itself with it? i mean at this point, britain still was a hyper power i think right?

damn you sliders, i wish you were still on the air for stuff like this

He probably would have eagerly allied himself with Great Britain had the possibility presented itself much like he signed the Non-aggression pact with the Soviets. As it was Great Britain and France had 3 big missed opportunities to stop Hitler, first when he moved German troops into the Rhineland, 2nd when he moved on Czechoslovakia, and the 3rd would have been to quickly enter a mutual defense pact with the Soviets and the French regarding Poland before Germany reversed their stance in regards to the Soviets.

Edit: Funny this thread popping up as I am currently re-reading Shirer's "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" and as always am amazed at how easy it would have been to stop Hitler prior to the signing of the non-aggression pact with the Soviets. The Rhineland occupation is a great example as Hitler did not have complete control over the military at that point and the Generals had contingency plans to withdraw quickly if France made the slightest move to counter them.

 

[Vdubchaos]

Ha! The Allies would never have been able to defeat a united Germany and Russia. It may have been a "victory" in terms of an inevitable Germany/Soviet political collapse, but in absolutely no terms could the Allies defeat them in war.

I think you are wrong here. You are probably forgetting about a little thing called....Atomic Bomb

Even without it. Americas location and willingness to unite and produce necessary supplies etc would've overshadowed anything Germany/Russia can come up with.

Remember, what was done on home soil was probably more important than what was done on the battle field. The way America united and effort they put in was just amazing.

Both Russia and Germany public suffered way too much harm from their own people and morale would always be low.

(don't forget what Stalin and Hitler did to their own people)

 

[steve wilson]

If Hitler hadn't tried to take Russia, he would of had a lot more resources to go at Britain. Eventually it was the lack of supplies and the harsh winter that fucked the German army in Russia. Hitler expected a quick crushing campaign to defeat them and underestimated the size of Russias army. Russia replaced defeated armies quickly and then Germany needed more supplies which took a long time in coming. So they couldn't push forward...eventually the Russians got help with their supplies from the allied forces and could push back.

If Germany had just left Russia to it's own devices and concentrated it's forces on taking over all of Europe I don't think Russia would of intervened. Russia could of then be taken by Germany at a later date.

 

[Arkaign]

Thanks for the link. I am aware the lend lease program was significant but it was simply not 70% or even close to total Soviet production. If it was, how was there a Soviet Army before the beginning of the lend lease program in 1941? The Soviets were incompetent in 1941 to be sure, but their army was still very large. Lend lease was important but like most US history its importance is exaggerated.

I think that this subject is indeed arguable either way, and it's extremely fascinating to look at.

As far as pure % numbers, it's impossible to say. It is widely known that at the beginning of Barbarossa that the Soviets had very little in the way of equipment or weaponry. They had virtually zero air assets, junk for tanks and trucks, relatively few contemporary artillery units, etc. What they did have were masses of cannon fodder and an absolutely staggering Russian winter. The incredibly long supply lines of German armies, the lack of German preparedness for the sub-freezing temperatures, all of this is well documented and understood.

Given how precariously close that the USSR came to collapse even with substantial help, I think that it's very difficult to honestly say that they would have survived on their own. It works both ways as well. I don't believe for a minute that if we had let the USSR get overrun and crushed that we could have withstood the ability of Germany to focus completely on the Western front, backed up with virtually limitless fuel and food from the east.

I honestly look at it from an outsider's perspective, there are a lot of misconceptions that Americans have about the importance of their contributions in WW2, probably foremost the actual amount of ground warfare we engaged in Europe. Our contributions in the Pacific were more critical and hard-won, the Germans by the time of 1944 were dregs compared to the elites of the early years. But above all, the sheer production and supply to the allied efforts is nothing short of amazing. Our entire economy was focused around the clock at every level of society towards armaments and supplies, whether direct or indirect.

Another relevant link :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_production_during_World_War_II

When you're looking at the "allied" numbers there, realize fully that a gigantic bulk of that was US supplied. Although each of our allies (save late-era turncoat Italy) did admirably, nothing could come close to our ability to crank out weapons, gear, and supplies en masse, and get it where it needed to go.

 

[steve wilson]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_production_during_World_War_II

When you're looking at the "allied" numbers there, realize fully that a gigantic bulk of that was US supplied. Although each of our allies (save late-era turncoat Italy) did admirably, nothing could come close to our ability to crank out weapons, gear, and supplies en masse, and get it where it needed to go.

This was largely due to the fact that the USA was not under attack... Factories in Europe were with in striking distance of the German army. What the USA did for the allies was fantastic...don't get me wrong... but there were reasons why they were so good at it.

 

[Arkaign]

I think you are wrong here. You are probably forgetting about a little thing called....Atomic Bomb

Even without it. Americas location and willingness to unite and produce necessary supplies etc would've overshadowed anything Germany/Russia can come up with.

Remember, what was done on home soil was probably more important than what was done on the battle field. The way America united and effort they put in was just amazing.

Both Russia and Germany public suffered way too much harm from their own people and morale would always be low.

(don't forget what Stalin and Hitler did to their own people)

I think a lot of what you're thinking is essentially correct, but there is something I think people forget.

If you take the USSR out of the game by mid-1941 or jan 42 at the latest, it would take probably 2-3 months at the most for Germany to gear up for an actual attempt at Sea Lion. All of their resources would probably knock the Brits out of the game. If the Brits went, so went our real chances at getting a base from which to do something like Neptune/Overlord.

There's always the nukes, but I think by that time we'd have reached a stalemate. I don't think conventionally one side or the other could concievably get enough of a naval presence to go halfway around the world and get a real landing spot. It's just not believably possible in a direct fashion like that.

Cold war US vs. Germany I think at that point.

 

[Arkaign]

This was largely due to the fact that the USA was not under attack... Factories in Europe were with in striking distance of the German army. What the USA did for the allies was fantastic...don't get me wrong... but there were reasons why they were so good at it.

No argument there. It was just the right ingredients at the time, with national sentiment, innovations in assembly-line techniques, a capable workforce, adequate supplies of food, electricity, infrastructure, raw materials, it just all came together.

 

[Vdubchaos]

For those interested, check out The War by Ken Burns.

What Americans did during the war is simply amazing. Every woman/men and child had their hand in it.

There is no way in hell Germany or Russia could've done this. Russians and Germans weren't that loyal to their leaders (quite the opposite).

 

[Exterous]

I think you are wrong here. You are probably forgetting about a little thing called....Atomic Bomb

Even without it. Americas location and willingness to unite and produce necessary supplies etc would've overshadowed anything Germany/Russia can come up with

And just how do you plan to drop it on Germany if they control all of Europe? (As in the UK as well)

Or invade Europe for that matter. You'd need a base somewhere close for all the supplies, troops, bases for planes etc

Edit: I see this has already been covered

 

[Scouzer]

For those interested, check out The War by Ken Burns.

What Americans did during the war is simply amazing. Every woman/men and child had their hand in it.

There is no way in hell Germany or Russia could've done this. Russians and Germans weren't that loyal to their leaders (quite the opposite).

Sigh, patriotic ignorance and victor bias. Most Germans were extremely loyal to the Nazi regime, and most Soviets were loyal to the Soviet regime. The Soviets were more loyal due to fear, but they fought the Germans extremely hard and well.

More Germans and Russians served in their war efforts per capita than Americans. I don't need to look that one up.

 

[tommo123]

didn't the US only get the bomb in that timeframe thanks to nazi scientists that defected? those same scientists were called out of retirement to get the apollo program running after a shaky start iirc

 

[Vdubchaos]

I think a lot of what you're thinking is essentially correct, but there is something I think people forget.

If you take the USSR out of the game by mid-1941 or jan 42 at the latest, it would take probably 2-3 months at the most for Germany to gear up for an actual attempt at Sea Lion. All of their resources would probably knock the Brits out of the game. If the Brits went, so went our real chances at getting a base from which to do something like Neptune/Overlord.

Africa 🙂

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

If Germany didn't backstab russia, Russia would have eventually backstabbed Germany.

 

[momeNt]

Sigh, patriotic ignorance and victor bias. Most Germans were extremely loyal to the Nazi regime, and most Soviets were loyal to the Soviet regime. The Soviets were more loyal due to fear, but they fought the Germans extremely hard and well.

More Germans and Russians served in their war efforts per capita than Americans. I don't need to look that one up.

There are some pretty crazy stats on Russia and Germany. IIRC i think Germany lost like 30% of their adult male population, Russia about 25%.

 

[JTsyo]

After Germany take Britain how do they stop America from retaking it, while suppressing British resistance? It would have taken a good portion of the German army to keep control of Britain.
If the resources send to Russia was rerouted to British colonies, such as India, a sizable army could be raised and brought to battle.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

After Germany take Britain how do they stop America from retaking it, while suppressing British resistance? It would have taken a good portion of the German army to keep control of Britain.
If the resources send to Russia was rerouted to British colonies, such as India, a sizable army could be raised and brought to battle.

How does America launch a full scale invasion across the Atlantic in the 1940s. Across the channel was considered so difficult that Hitler wouldn't do it without air superiority. Your also thinking British resistance in terms of before they had their cities subjugated. It would be a drain of resources afterwards but not something that would magically make a transatlantic invasion possible.

 

[Olikan]

If Germany didn't backstab russia, Russia would have eventually backstabbed Germany.

second that!

or that, the Germany would ended beeing so big that they would lose the control over itself

 

[Vdubchaos]

second that!

or that, the Germany would ended beeing so big that they would lose the control over itself

Agreed

 

[SlitheryDee]

Hitler would have invaded Russia and got spanked.

 

[JTsyo]

How does America launch a full scale invasion across the Atlantic in the 1940s. Across the channel was considered so difficult that Hitler wouldn't do it without air superiority. Your also thinking British resistance in terms of before they had their cities subjugated. It would be a drain of resources afterwards but not something that would magically make a transatlantic invasion possible.

Iceland, Ireland or Norway would be my guess for staging. U-boats would be the only threat, other than maybe the weather.

 

[CPA]

I think you are wrong here. You are probably forgetting about a little thing called....Atomic Bomb

Even without it. Americas location and willingness to unite and produce necessary supplies etc would've overshadowed anything Germany/Russia can come up with.

Remember, what was done on home soil was probably more important than what was done on the battle field. The way America united and effort they put in was just amazing.

Both Russia and Germany public suffered way too much harm from their own people and morale would always be low.

(don't forget what Stalin and Hitler did to their own people)

Problem is where would the US stage the launch of the bombers in order to hit Moscow or any of the other major Russian cities. If Germany had control over Europe and Northern/Eastern Africa, then I'm not sure where US could launch from.

 

[CPA]

Iceland, Ireland or Norway would be my guess for staging. U-boats would be the only threat, other than maybe the weather.

Norway was in the hands of the Germans. Not a lot of men were stationed there, but they were there. It wouldn't be inconceivable that the Russians would have sent a ton of troops there to cut off any invasion from the North.

 

[BrokenVisage]

They were allies earlier in the war, or are you proposing that Hitler had honored the non-aggression pact and not invaded Russia?

This. If Hitler doesn't try to backstab Russia they might've won.

 

[Brovane]

After Germany take Britain how do they stop America from retaking it, while suppressing British resistance? It would have taken a good portion of the German army to keep control of Britain.
If the resources send to Russia was rerouted to British colonies, such as India, a sizable army could be raised and brought to battle.

I am trying to figure out how Germany invaded Britain. Germany has no amphibious capability and the English Channel is a lot bigger than a river. For Sea Lion they where planning on using barges which would have been a disaster.

http://www.alternatehistory.com/gateway/essays/Sealion.html

 

[Brovane]

If Germany and the Soviets where Allied and at war with the US. Around 1948 hundreds of these would fly from the United States -

They would have then started dropping these on every major production center in both Germany and the Soviet Union.

If they don't surrender then keep repeating until they do or everyone is dead.