what do you think would of happened

[bri]

if hitler had won the battle of britain.

 

do you reckon the yanks would of come nad bailed us out

[Guest shaunshanks]

You are joking about the Yanks bailing us out, arent you?

[Strontium]

The Yanks would have cut a deal with the Germans. I mean, we've seen in the latter half of the twentieth century how the Americans allied themselves to just about anyone, no matter how bloodthirsty they were, to combat the threat of communism. Nazi Europe would have been a buffer against Communist Russia. And there were plenty of rich anti-semites in the USA at the time (eg Henry Ford, Walt Disney, the Bush family, the Kennedys etc) who would have pushed for peace with Germany.

[RoboRiise]

I think our Navy might have had an interesting couple of years blowing the Germans out of the water. An assault landing against the UK in 1940/1 would have been a very tricky proposition for the Germans, in fact that's exactly why Hitler knew he had to establish near-total air superiority before even thinking about attempting it.

 

Any substantial troop landing staged from Europe onto British shores prepared for such an attack would have to involve a large number of ships in a relatively small area of water. At the time, our Navy had a strong numerical superior over the available German fleet and there's a good chance that they would have been able to destroy a sufficient portion of any force attempting a landing to make continuing a suicide mission. Even if not, they would almost certainly have been able to terrorise the German supply lines sufficiently to disrupt the logistic support needed to maintain a successful invasion.

 

If the Yanks had got involved too, it would never have worked, but I'm not convinced we would have needed them too. I think they would though, not necessarily because of the loss of the Battle of Britain but because they were moving towards a position of involvement anyway - they had been supporting Britain through unofficial channels anyway.

 

 

Of course, if they had managed a landing they would still have had to contend with coastal defence positions, the Army, Captain Mainwaring and probably my grandad, wielding a spade.

[Neil G]

I think our Navy might have had an interesting couple of years blowing the Germans out of the water. An assault landing against the UK in 1940/1 would have been a very tricky proposition for the Germans, in fact that's exactly why Hitler knew he had to establish near-total air superiority before even thinking about attempting it.

 

Any substantial troop landing staged from Europe onto British shores prepared for such an attack would have to involve a large number of ships in a relatively small area of water. At the time, our Navy had a strong numerical superior over the available German fleet and there's a good chance that they would have been able to destroy a sufficient portion of any force attempting a landing to make continuing a suicide mission. Even if not, they would almost certainly have been able to terrorise the German supply lines sufficiently to disrupt the logistic support needed to maintain a successful invasion.

 

If the Yanks had got involved too, it would never have worked, but I'm not convinced we would have needed them too. I think they would though, not necessarily because of the loss of the Battle of Britain but because they were moving towards a position of involvement anyway - they had been supporting Britain through unofficial channels anyway.

 

 

Of course, if they had managed a landing they would still have had to contend with coastal defence positions, the Army, Captain Mainwaring and probably my grandad, wielding a spade.

 

You're talking about what would have happened if the air battle had been lost. I think Bri meant if the entire battle had been lost, i.e. if the Germans had successfully invaded and occupied the UK.

 

If that had happened I don't see how the Americans could have landed enough troops in Britain to liberate the country. The only country they could have used as a base for it would have been Ireland, and they were neutral. If it looked for one minute as though Ireland were going to let the Americans start a troop build-up there, the Germans would have invaded first.

 

Without a base for an Allied landing in Western Europe, or for bombing raids against Germany, the Germans could have concentrated on fighting the Russians in the East. Even if they hadn't won, at worst they'd have had a stalemate. They could then put all their efforts into getting ahead of America and Russia in the nuclear arms race, and with their rocket technology - the leading rocket scientists in America's space programme were German - they would have had a clear advantage, and might even have launched a pre-emptive nuclear attack against the US.

 

Basically, if Hitler had won the Battle of Britain, he'd have won the war.

[Faustus]

I'm sure there's a "ifithadnabeenfor" joke in here somewhere :whistle:

[Neil G]

I'm sure there's a "ifithadnabeenfor" joke in here somewhere :whistle:

 

Oh, there is. Explore the site!

[DT]

I'm sure there's a "ifithadnabeenfor" joke in here somewhere :whistle:

 

I was going to say that Everton had won the league ifitadnabinfer Churchill.

[Paul]

I think our Navy might have had an interesting couple of years blowing the Germans out of the water. An assault landing against the UK in 1940/1 would have been a very tricky proposition for the Germans, in fact that's exactly why Hitler knew he had to establish near-total air superiority before even thinking about attempting it.

 

Any substantial troop landing staged from Europe onto British shores prepared for such an attack would have to involve a large number of ships in a relatively small area of water. At the time, our Navy had a strong numerical superior over the available German fleet and there's a good chance that they would have been able to destroy a sufficient portion of any force attempting a landing to make continuing a suicide mission. Even if not, they would almost certainly have been able to terrorise the German supply lines sufficiently to disrupt the logistic support needed to maintain a successful invasion.

 

If the Yanks had got involved too, it would never have worked, but I'm not convinced we would have needed them too. I think they would though, not necessarily because of the loss of the Battle of Britain but because they were moving towards a position of involvement anyway - they had been supporting Britain through unofficial channels anyway.

 

 

Of course, if they had managed a landing they would still have had to contend with coastal defence positions, the Army, Captain Mainwaring and probably my grandad, wielding a spade.

 

Surely total air supremacy would have negated the naval superiority, though? They could have just bombed our ships out of the water.

 

Where's NP when we need a brilliant historical hypothesis?

[wiiksie]

I was going to say that Everton had won the league ifitadnabinfer Churchill.

That is comic genius.

 

Interesting question this Bri. Assuming that Operation Sealion worked (Jerry invasion of UK), a couple of other factors would determine what the US response would be. If Japan still bombed Pearl Harbour, then the US would prioritise the pacific theatre rather than Europe (which Churchill persuaded Roosevelt was more pressing in 1941). So the yanks would have to defeat Japan before even considering any action on European soil.

 

But while this would be going on, and we assume Hitler still invaded Russia (I dont think occupying the UK would have stopped him from wanting the russian oil), I think Russia would eventually have defeated Germany all over Europe.

 

The interesting question to come out of that would be how much of Western Europe would the Russians keep, and what the relationship between the US and Stalin would have been like without Churchill acting as the mediator.

 

In summary: Stalin 1, Hitler 0.

[Joeys Pogo]

if hitler had won the battle of britain.

 

do you reckon the yanks would of come nad bailed us out

 

We would probably have ended up with a German royal family ruling over us.

 

Hang on a minute.......................:eek:

[Section_31]

The US would have been in no position to have bailed us out anyway.

 

After Perl Harbour it was stated that the US Millitary would have ran out of supplies such as fuel and bullets shortly following Japanese landfall had they chosen to invade, and that any invasion force would have made it as far inland as Chicago (from the West Coast!!!) before it could be halted, there was even a working scorched earth plan which featured blowing up the Golden Gate bridge as its coup de grace.

 

Also, had the Germans maintained a foothold on British soil the USA would have had nowhere to launch an invasion of mainland Europe, and reasonably secure in that sense Hitler could have re-deployed his best troops to the Eastern Front and brought an end to the war in that theatre as well.

 

The Germans would have had no problem subjugating us either, as continental resistance movements were only made possible by the Special Operations Exsecutive operating under Churchill's edict, supplying them with weapons and intelligence, without that kind of professional backup we wouldn't have been able to resist.

 

I once read a book based on notes written by the German high command on how they were going to sibjugate Britain, and its centre-piece was dominating the upper class establishments such as Eaton and Oxbridge, with their 'leadership' trickling down to the working classes - this would have worked a treat IMO, as i don't see the two movements being alltogether different (indeed a proffesor of mine - who it must be said was left wing, once described Facism as 'the extreme and violent reaction of a dominant portion of society when their positions of dominance is threatened') I'm sure the British ruling class would have found much weight in the Nazi's self stiled 'bulwalk against communism' philosophy.

 

In short, I reckon the whole of Europe and most of Asia would have fell to the Germans, then the Nazis would have developed Nuclear weapons to bring the yanks to their knees - There was no possibility or an Soviet style arms race as the scientists who advanced American nuclear science by factor of ten would all still have been in the Riechs' service. (

 

We'd all be watching Liverpool Vs a Nazi select eleven today, whith none-partisan commentary from a jackboot wearing Andy Grey.

 

when you bear in mind that the Germans lost the battle of Britain because a lone German bomber was lost and decided to drop its bombs (unbeknownst to the crew) over London, triggering retaliatory air-raids against Berlin - which pissed Der Fuhrer off and made him order continued attacks on our cities, even though their previous tactics of attacking the RAF had pushed it to withing two weeks of destruction, its pretty scary how easily things could have gone the other way - we should be greatfull Hitler was such a mad-head.

[Hermes]

I was going to say that Everton had won the league ifitadnabinfer Churchill.

 

Oh, yes.

 

 

 

 

The Dogs of War.

[DT]

The US would have been in no position to have bailed us out anyway.

 

After Perl Harbour it was stated that the US Millitary would have ran out of supplies such as fuel and bullets shortly following Japanese landfall had they chosen to invade, and that any invasion force would have made it as far inland as Chicago (from the West Coast!!!) before it could be halted, there was even a working scorched earth plan which featured blowing up the Golden Gate bridge as its coup de grace.

 

Also, had the Germans maintained a foothold on British soil the USA would have had nowhere to launch an invasion of mainland Europe, and reasonably secure in that sense Hitler could have re-deployed his best troops to the Eastern Front and brought an end to the war in that theatre as well.

 

The Germans would have had no problem subjugating us either, as continental resistance movements were only made possible by the Special Operations Exsecutive operating under Churchill's edict, supplying them with weapons and intelligence, without that kind of professional backup we wouldn't have been able to resist.

 

I once read a book based on notes written by the German high command on how they were going to sibjugate Britain, and its centre-piece was dominating the upper class establishments such as Eaton and Oxbridge, with their 'leadership' trickling down to the working classes - this would have worked a treat IMO, as i don't see the two movements being alltogether different (indeed a proffesor of mine - who it must be said was left wing, once described Facism as 'the extreme and violent reaction of a dominant portion of society when their positions of dominance is threatened') I'm sure the British ruling class would have found much weight in the Nazi's self stiled 'bulwalk against communism' philosophy.

 

In short, I reckon the whole of Europe and most of Asia would have fell to the Germans, then the Nazis would have developed Nuclear weapons to bring the yanks to their knees - There was no possibility or an Soviet style arms race as the scientists who advanced American nuclear science by factor of ten would all still have been in the Riechs' service. (

 

We'd all be watching Liverpool Vs a Nazi select eleven today, whith none-partisan commentary from a jackboot wearing Andy Grey.

 

when you bear in mind that the Germans lost the battle of Britain because a lone German bomber was lost and decided to drop its bombs (unbeknownst to the crew) over London, triggering retaliatory air-raids against Berlin - which pissed Der Fuhrer off and made him order continued attacks on our cities, even though their previous tactics of attacking the RAF had pushed it to withing two weeks of destruction, its pretty scary how easily things could have gone the other way - we should be greatfull Hitler was such a mad-head.

 

I think you're neglecting Everton's role in all this. They were effectively robbed of winning the title five times in a row by the war, and their efforts to keep world peace were totally ignored by war mongerers on all sides. In response, they sent their fans to the battlefields of Europe where they would stand and shout "meeerrrrrderers" at soldiers from both sides.

 

I've read this in the "Everton FC book of revised history" so it must be true.

[wiiksie]

The US would have been in no position to have bailed us out anyway.

Also, had the Germans maintained a foothold on British soil the USA would have had nowhere to launch an invasion of mainland Europe, and reasonably secure in that sense Hitler could have re-deployed his best troops to the Eastern Front and brought an end to the war in that theatre as well.

The best jerries were in the east mate, they only came back to the west for refit. The occupation troops in the west were generally poor quality.

 

In short, I reckon the whole of Europe and most of Asia would have fell to the Germans, then the Nazis would have developed Nuclear weapons to bring the yanks to their knees - There was no possibility or an Soviet style arms race as the scientists who advanced American nuclear science by factor of ten would all still have been in the Riechs' service.

The reason the jerries lost WWII was because of Russia, who still would have eventually fucked over Germany with or without the other Allies.

 

when you bear in mind that the Germans lost the battle of Britain because a lone German bomber was lost and decided to drop its bombs (unbeknownst to the crew) over London, triggering retaliatory air-raids against Berlin - which pissed Der Fuhrer off and made him order continued attacks on our cities, even though their previous tactics of attacking the RAF had pushed it to withing two weeks of destruction, its pretty scary how easily things could have gone the other way - we should be greatfull Hitler was such a mad-head.

The battle of britain had no bearing on Hitlers plans to invade the UK, that was postponed due to bad weather in the autumn of 1940. It was abandoned altogether because of Stalingrad/Kharkov and the general mauling the jerries were getting in the east.

[Nunavut Patrick]

Stalingrad was the key to the War along with Hitler's miscalculation of Napoleonic proportions regarding the Eastern theatre.

 

Churchill would never have cut a deal with the Nazi's but at that time the only victory of the War was the Dunkirk evacuations of the BEF after the French effectually surrendered and accepted Vichy rule. I wonder whether Churchill would have had the political clout to stay in power or whether Lord Halifax would have taken over to 'negotiate' with Germany (keep in mind the horrors of the Holocoust had not come to light and the pogroms were not as shocking in this era as they are in present-time.)

 

The Americans were very isolationist and had no interest in an European War and despite Churchill's great efforts at the special relationship of the English speaking nations it wouldn't have been enough to get the approriate support in the complex American political system. The Japs solved that little problem but that's is one for the conspiracy lovers out there (see also the bombing of Coventry).

 

In short, I believe Germany would still have fallen because the Russians were probably the fiercest and loyal fighting men of that era. They were destined to become bogged down those winters; very little of the German war machine was focused on Europe due to the capitulation of the Low Countries and France.

 

Because of the ideological divide and the ensuing descent of the Iron Curtain Russia never really got her credit in the West for defeating Germany. And we must remember that Hitler was born from the fruits of Versialles and the French wanting their reparations on a ridiculous scale.

 

But not to worry, they did build the Maginot Line.

[JagSquared]

I dont agree with the theory that the russians would have been ultimatly victorious. The russians were in a bad state and were helped by supplies that the Allies got to them and needed them to exist if only to make the Nazis have to look in two directions at once.

 

Like has already been said if Britain had fallen the US would have no platform to launch its attacks from and western europe would have been under Nazi control. I also think that neutral countries such as Spain would have signed alliances with Germany solidifying thier positions.

 

The Japs would still have attacked Pearl Harbour perhaps with more intent as they needed supremacy in the oceans and allowing the US to survive as a naval power would stop their expansion plans. The US would have concentrated their war with them allowing the Nazis to concentrate on the Russians. I think this would have greatly extended the war with the winner of the race to nuclear weapons ultimatley victorious.

 

My guess would be the Nazis coming out on top due to their scientists, which probably would lead to the end of the war with peace being agreed by all. With the Japs and Germans dictating terms to the US.

 

After consolidating their positions, Germany over Europe and Western Russia, and Japan over the Chinese Mainland and indo-china (perhaps even parts of eastern India and Russia) a cold war situation could have occurred with the US acting as a buffer or even the cause of tension as i'm sure both would look at it with hungry eyes. There is no way peace would last long as the Nazi ideal of Aryan supremacy would not allow them to share the world with another superpower especially with a coloured one for long.

 

What would be interesting would be the fate of empire countries such as Australia, India and Canada would they have carried on the brave fight? or ended hostilities once Britain had fallen? What about Africa and the Middle East?

 

They probably would have become puppet states and colonies in all likely hood.

[JagSquared]

I recommend reading 'The Man in the High Castle' by Philip K. Dick or 'Fatherland' by Robert Harris both look at the alternate worlds of Axis victory.

[Nunavut Patrick]

I recommend reading 'The Man in the High Castle' by Philip K. Dick or 'Fatherland' by Robert Harris both look at the alternate worlds of Axis victory.

 

 

Could I just read SS-GB by Len Deighton instead?

 

I'll have a look for those as the 'what if... ' is fascinating.

[Section_31]

The best jerries were in the east mate, they only came back to the west for refit. The occupation troops in the west were generally poor quality.

 

I'd agree that for the initial thrust of Barbarossa this is true, but even at the height of the attack the Wheremacht only fielded three million troops in the attack on Russia from an available pool of eight million men.

 

Hitler was intensely paranoid about invasion from the west, and still kept close to a million men in France and Belgium alone, including fully motorised panzer units.

 

When you look at the fighting which erupted after D-Day, the west also had many of the premier units and commander available to Hitler fighting there, including Rommel, Paul Hauser, and the creme of the Waffen-SS fighting in the Ardennes (Leibstandarte AH, Das Reich, Totenkopf) the absolute best of the best of the German Military.

 

 

The reason the jerries lost WWII was because of Russia, who still would have eventually fucked over Germany with or without the other Allies.

 

The Germans lost the war in the East due to Hitler, (a) because he believed the Russians were subhuman and would capitulate easily, and (b) because he turned the conflict into a personl duel between him and Stalin.

 

Instead of making his main push with Army Group South toward the oil fields of the Cuacases (which was the original plan) he became fixated with capturing strategically worthless targets like Moscow and Leningrad merely because of their propoganda value. Had the Nazis captured the oil fields, the Red Army would have turned up to the battle of Kursk on donkeys.

 

The battle of britain had no bearing on Hitlers plans to invade the UK, that was postponed due to bad weather in the autumn of 1940. It was abandoned altogether because of Stalingrad/Kharkov and the general mauling the jerries were getting in the east.

 

I strongly dissagree on this point my man, its a matter of historical record that both Hitler and the OKW believed no invasion of Britain could go ahead unless air superoiority was achieved, hence their attempt to destroy aircraft production, airfields, and aircraft on the ground, until the resources were re-directed toward London.

 

Its also worth noting that a third of the Luftwaffe was kept in France after the failure of the Battle of Britain where it should otherwise have been deployed to the East.

 

Taken in greater context, had Britain fallen, the U-Boat force would have been re-deployed to stop the supply ships heading to Russia, there would bave been no bombing raids on mainland German production facilities, and the resistance movements in France, Holland, and Norway (which was instrumental in setting-back Nazi heavy water production and its atomic weapons research) would have collapsed.

 

 

What would be interesting would be the fate of empire countries such as Australia, India and Canada would they have carried on the brave fight? or ended hostilities once Britain had fallen? What about Africa and the Middle East?

 

They probably would have become puppet states and colonies in all likely hood.

 

 

Hitler actually planned to 'restore' the British Empire following final victory, as he saw it as essential to maintaining control over 'savage' people over whom he had no interest in governing. I imagine the likes of the Suez canal would have interested him, but we'd be left to 'run' Africa and Australia with our Nazi friendly Oxbridge educated civil service and PM.

[Nunavut Patrick]

Section 31, I'd go with that.

 

Underestimation of Russia was fatal.

 

Hitler was obsessed with where the attack would come from to open up a Western Front. If he had won the Battle of Britain this would not have been a concern; many of the neutral countries would have lined up on his side.

 

His main goal, I believe, after winning the Battle of Britain would have been not invasion, but intimidation to get Churchill out of office. Winston was the only man that could give voice to the nation and to not capitulate to the Nazis; as well he could broker the Grand Alliance. A war weary Britian facing insurmountable odds after having lost of a Battle of Britian would have been subjected to some sort of Vichy without the occupation.

 

Hitler then could have crushed the Soviets.

[Section_31]

Section 31, I'd go with that.

 

Underestimation of Russia was fatal.

 

Hitler was obsessed with where the attack would come from to open up a Western Front. If he had won the Battle of Britain this would not have been a concern; many of the neutral countries would have lined up on his side.

 

His main goal, I believe, after winning the Battle of Britain would have been not invasion, but intimidation to get Churchill out of office. Winston was the only man that could give voice to the nation and to not capitulate to the Nazis; as well he could broker the Grand Alliance. A war weary Britian facing insurmountable odds after having lost of a Battle of Britian would have been subjected to some sort of Vichy without the occupation.

 

Hitler then could have crushed the Soviets.

 

 

That's what makes Churchill one of the most important men who ever lived IMO, we all know about the will to appease the Nazi's in the British parliament at the time, and that even among the millitary and aristocracy there was sympothy for the limitations placed upon them after the treaty of Versailles, rumours also abounded of Nazi sympathy at the heart of the Royal Family, so in essence it was Churchill and Churchill alone who said of the Nazi's: 'This shit ain't right'

 

You might be interested to read Fatherland, which has Kind Edward and Queen Wallace Simpson as head of the Royal Family in a post-war Britain where the Germans were victorious.

 

Duke and Duchess of Windsor visit Hitler in 37, (time magazines man of the yar in 38!) I doubt Winston was ever fooled though...

 

[cochcaer]

Any conquering force needs a supply line and frankly I think invading the UK would have overstretched The Third Reich and like the Brits in Basra they would have been restricted to local operations. Hitler's biggest mistake was not being contented with most of Central Europe and launching ill-judged offensives in Africa, against the UK and on the Eastern Front.

 

It Happened Here is well worth seeing and dramitizes a Nazi invasion.

[cochcaer]

I think our Navy might have had an interesting couple of years blowing the Germans out of the water. An assault landing against the UK in 1940/1 would have been a very tricky proposition for the Germans, in fact that's exactly why Hitler knew he had to establish near-total air superiority before even thinking about attempting it.

 

Trouble is the Navy was in Scapa Flow well out of range of the majority of the Luftwaffe. Had the German's formed a beachhead, the British would have put its fleet into the Channel and cut of their supply lines.

 

Operation Overlord was touch and go at times despite air and sea supremecy.

[Section_31]

Any conquering force needs a supply line and frankly I think invading the UK would have overstretched The Third Reich and like the Brits in Basra they would have been restricted to local operations. Hitler's biggest mistake was not being contented with most of Central Europe and launching ill-judged offensives in Africa, against the UK and on the Eastern Front.

 

I don't think the suppy line situation would have been an issue to be honest, if they had control of the sky they could have shipped and dropped men and equipment from France with an hours notice - plus I really don't think we'd have the resources to resist them - unlike France who had our support, or indeed Iraq which is surrounded by governments hostile to our occupation and tooled up with weapons and intelligence.

 

To be fair Hitler originally just wanted to 'reclaim' what he thought was German land by right, the sudetanland and Rhineland (where many ethnic Germans lived and in some cases were miss-treated by the locals) he always wanted to invade Russia and saw the Nazi and Communist ideologies as irreconcilable, and also to allow 'breathing room' for the growth of the German people - he wanted to settle the land there the way Europeans had settled America.

 

He never wanted war with France and Britain, and if we hadn't declared war on him may have left us alone for a few years at least (indeed he was reputed to have been physically sick when told of the declaration of war and viewed Churchill as a warmonger)

 

If you look at the German airforce as well it was designed for short range tactical operations rather than long range bombing of cities - he never really intended the Battle of Britain to happen.

 

The African invasion was Mussolini's fault, as he thought he could take advantage of the fact we were fighting for our lives (as the Japs did in Asia) and invade Europes's African colony's, our outnumbered force handed the Italian's their arse on a plate (with Veal and Parmizan) and Hitler had no choice but to support his allie - even though he viewed him as a blustering idiot.

 

He didn't even need to declare war on the USA, as there was every indication the Yanks just wanted to concentrate on the Pacific theatre.

 

Hitler was a victim of his own temper on most occasions, and Churchill's stomach for a fight on others, as said before though - WWII could have gone pear shaped for us in so many ways its scary.