This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Britain should not have declared war on Germany, 1939

We should have let the Germans eat up the East. Meanwhile, we strengthen our garrisons in the colonies, beat off the Japanese as a result, and maintain the Empire. The US goes into obscurity or whatever as the depression destroys their economy. Germany beats the Soviets and makes satellite states out of Eastern Europe.

Meanwhile, Britain does the same and makes satellite states out of Western Europe and other countries around the globe that aren't part of her Empire already. Britain and Germany fight a Great Game over South America in the 50s. Both develop the atom bomb and there is a cold war between the British Empire and Nazi Germany. The Nazi Empire breaks down in the early 90s like the Soviet one did, much for the same reasons, and Britain and her Empire are left as the world superpowers (since both Britain and Germany see to it that China never proper industrialises.)

Thoughts?

Reply 1

MagicNMedicine

20

sounds like a great plan, if only we had a strategist like you in charge of our war planning maybe Britain could still have a great empire

hopefully Hitler wouldn't have had any interest in Western Europe and it would have worked out well

Reply 2

M1F2R3

14

Stick to World of Warcraft...

Reply 3

Bagration

OP

18

(1) Hitler had expressed a desire not to fight Britain and France.

(2) After fighting the USSR there would be no desire for a war in the West, and it would likely be very difficult. Britain and France would have re-armed and learnt alot more after observing German tactics in the East.

(3) It's not really about me being an awesome strategist, it's a "What if" if we had never declared war on Germany.

Reply 4

Gremlins

11

Ok, a couple of things:

1. Holocaust, much?
2. Germany's war-plan was basically to use the resources of as much as Western/Central Europe possible to conquer Russia. France was one of the world's biggest industrial and military powers and would have had to have been conquered before a serious invasion of Russia could be mounted, so that puts your 'satellite state' idea out the window.
3. The USSR would probably still have won but would end up running much more of Europe.
4. Anti-colonial movements wouldn't dissapear overnight.

Reply 5

Student2806

17

The only flaw is that Britain would probably have been successfully invaded by Germany.
I also doubt us being able to "beat off the Japanese" by simply strengthening our garrisons in the region. This was a country which gave the US a serious run for its money.

A lot of assumptions would have to be made as well. Does Japan bomb Pearl Harbor? Does Germany invade France?

Reply 6

kersme

7

that just has so many ridiculous assumptions in it its not even worth the time of picking them out.

Reply 7

A.galloway

15

use your "brilliant" mind to build a time machine and put this plan into action.

Reply 8

Mr_K_Dilkington

14

Bagration - have you been reading Niall Ferguson out of interest?

Reply 9

Mr_K_Dilkington

14

kersme

that just has so many ridiculous assumptions in it its not even worth the time of picking them out.

That's counter-factual history for you :rolleyes:

This forum seems to have an obsession with it.

Reply 10

*MJ*

2

M1F2R3

Stick to World of Warcraft...

Bags, it's a good point but this comment sums up the thread:

kersme

that just has so many ridiculous assumptions in it its not even worth the time of picking them out.

Although not all of them are ridiculous, it probably wouldn't work. :nah:

Reply 11

paulo6675

And the point of this thread is????

Reply 12

E_D_B

9

Bagration

(1) Hitler had expressed a desire not to fight Britain and France.

Hitler invaded Poland having promised not to, and attacked Russia having engineered the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact a few years earlier. This discussion is pointless.

Reply 13

Al_Funcoot

1

I like this scenario because it's utterly ridiculous. Very amusing!

Reply 14

Mr_K_Dilkington

14

E_D_B

Hitler invaded Poland having promised not to, and attacked Russia having engineered the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact a few years earlier. This discussion is pointless.

I think Bagration's point is that we should not have promised to go to war with Germany if it invaded Poland.

Reply 15

E_D_B

9

Mr_K_Dilkington

I think Bagration's point is that we should not have promised to go to war with Germany if it invaded Poland.

And my point is that Hitler's claims that he had no interest in war with Britain or France would not have been a good reason not to take the fight to him.

Reply 16

Phobia27

14

You cannot guarantee your plan would work.

Reply 17

laeof

14

Bagration

We should have let the Germans eat up the East. Meanwhile, we strengthen our garrisons in the colonies, beat off the Japanese as a result, and maintain the Empire. The US goes into obscurity or whatever as the depression destroys their economy. Germany beats the Soviets and makes satellite states out of Eastern Europe.

Meanwhile, Britain does the same and makes satellite states out of Western Europe and other countries around the globe that aren't part of her Empire already. Britain and Germany fight a Great Game over South America in the 50s. Both develop the atom bomb and there is a cold war between the British Empire and Nazi Germany. The Nazi Empire breaks down in the early 90s like the Soviet one did, much for the same reasons, and Britain and her Empire are left as the world superpowers (since both Britain and Germany see to it that China never proper industrialises.)

Thoughts?

One of the main problems of course...taking over and defending Japan when it's clear across europe...and since Germany would have ahold of most of eastern europe = good base, camp etc for gathering troops to attack an island.

Reply 18

Liquidus Zeromus

17

Bagration

We should have let the Germans eat up the East. Meanwhile, we strengthen our garrisons in the colonies, beat off the Japanese as a result, and maintain the Empire. The US goes into obscurity or whatever as the depression destroys their economy. Germany beats the Soviets and makes satellite states out of Eastern Europe.

Meanwhile, Britain does the same and makes satellite states out of Western Europe and other countries around the globe that aren't part of her Empire already. Britain and Germany fight a Great Game over South America in the 50s. Both develop the atom bomb and there is a cold war between the British Empire and Nazi Germany. The Nazi Empire breaks down in the early 90s like the Soviet one did, much for the same reasons, and Britain and her Empire are left as the world superpowers (since both Britain and Germany see to it that China never proper industrialises.)

Thoughts?

World trade would collapse, and the pacific war would still happen. Japan and Germany would still be butt buddies. The USA wouldn't give us any of that much-needed help in the pacific.
Germany might attack the UK instead at a later date, as Hitler is more concerned about an early death and UK-USA-USSR trade. Etc.

Reply 19

Mr_K_Dilkington

14

E_D_B

And my point is that Hitler's claims that he had no interest in war with Britain or France would not have been a good reason not to take the fight to him.

Ah, I see your point.

I'm not sure I agree with your conclusion though. Hitler had a certain affinity for the British, and the French to some extent. As fellow Aryans, he admired us as equals for our strength, cultural achievements, empire, ingenuity etc. Apparently our deceleration of war on the Third Reich was one of the most unhappy days of Hitler's life. I think it's possible we could have avoided a war with Germany, I don't think it would have been desirable though.

I don't like the implicit glorification of imperialism in the OP though, the British empire was a brutal imposition on hundreds of millions of people, no matter what benefits it may have brought, glorifying such barbarism is pretty awful.

Britain should not have declared war on Germany, 1939

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you