What If Germany Won World War II?

[GoldenHind]

To me the more interesting question is what the result would have been if Britain had either remained neutral at the invasion of Poland or agreed to peace terms with Germany after Dunkirk. Hitler would have eventually invaded Russia, but could have concentrated all his forces on the eastern front. Russia would have had to resist without any aid from the Allies. Germany would not have had to defend itself against the massive bombing by Britain or suffered from the results of that activity. I think Russia would have ultimately prevailed in a long war of attrition with Germany, but I don't discount the possibility that the Germans could have eventually taken Moscow, Leningrad and Stalingrad, resulting in a collapse of the Soviet regime.

Since the Nazi regime was so closely tied to Hitler, I can't see it surviving for very long after his demise.

[Alain]

The question would still be how far Japan is involved in the matter would be the attack on the Soviet Union from the East, if you had not attacked the US - these are all speculations

[DMXX]

Further to Golden's position - It now appears that Hitler was on a cocktail of drugs (steroids, amphetamines, cocaine, you name it) throughout much of his tenure as Fuhrer. We can only speculate, and I'm no WWII historian, but it's conceptually quite likely that some of his more irrational decisions (the Eastern Front and taking the helm as military commander in particular) were enabled through the assertive and uninhibited haze brought on by all the medications that his physician reluctantly provided him at his behest.

I would imagine that, even if Hitler hadn't opened up the Eastern Front, won in the West and restricted his Lebensraum to NW+N+W+C Europe, his erratic nature may have compelled multiple coup attempts, depending on how much internal order he was able to maintain. Judging by the increased drug use rate, I'm doubtful that he'd avoid multiple Operation Valkyrie-like events.

If he somehow managed to survive said events, and if he remained childless (ignoring the alleged descendants) but didn't appoint a successor, then I'd envision the Third Reich would fall to the same fate as Genghis Khan and Alexander the Great's empires, where fragmentation occurred.

Even if Hitler had children, or appointed a successor, I don't think the Third Reich would have survived for long. Tyrannical authoritarian governments do not typically last. The sole exception being North Korea, but there's a multitude of reasons why they've managed to successfully oppress their citizens and deny them liberty or self-determination (small country, political influence/reliance on larger states, highly homogeneous native population, an unfortunately meticulous population control strategy etc.). The Third Reich didn't have all of those things in play (the ideological commitment notwithstanding).

The drug use, I think, is possibly the single greatest extrinsic factor on Hitler's person that affected his ability to reason. Had he not been on an Instagram "fitness model"'s combo, it stands to reason that his calculations would've been far more rational and pragmatic, albeit similarly deadly (recall the Night of the Long Knives).

these are all speculations

Yup, speculation's baked into the cake, here. Though I think we could make reasoned, educated guesses at what was possible, had we transported ourselves to 1940.

[Alain]

Since what can be true, Hitler would not be in an assassination attempt as Operation Valkyrie where the military would be brought under control maybe something like a wars of Diadochi after his death flared up and the Nazi Paladins had split the power and would be vulnerable from the outside again. Although Alexander the Great had despotic characteristics but had a vision he wanted to unite West and East (bringing the peoples together) Hitler did not

[Stone Meadow]

Hitler was barely 50 years old when he launched WW2, so had he not invaded Russia he could have repulsed the combined US-UK air war, held out against the Western Allies, and lived to rule Europe for another 20-30 years.

[Alain]

Hitler can not do without the Soviet Union
A. Raw materials (important Oil) for the Reich
B. Habitat in East for "Germanic Settlers"
C. The ideological enemy of communism
D. And he saw the Slavs and other peoples from above and unable to win against him

[Censored]

Some sort of conflict between the Soviets and the Third Reich was inevitable. I don't know why people talk about Hitler's invasion of the USSR like it was just a mistake. No, it was part of his grand plan all along. The timing was actually excellent as Germany had conquered most of central and western Europe, Stalin had rendered his army incredibly weak from military purges and lack of preparation, and the two states shared a border. The real issue IMO was how Hitler executed the attack itself. For example his generals were adamant that there should be a rapid push toward Moscow and an occupation of the city itself. Hitler instead thought that it'd be more valuable to capture the Ukraine/southern Russia where the so-called Lebensraum was.

Something similar happened with the Leningrad front. Like in Moscow, Hitler forbade his army from storming and capturing the city as he did not want to be responsible for feeding the populace. As a result many soldiers were dug in for a siege while they could have been used in more urgent fronts.

While I do think it was well within the Germans capability to capture Leningrad and Moscow, I can't say for sure that would have led to victory. If they were to accomplish those goals they could have captured the whole of European Russia easily and it'd be much harder for what was left of the Red army to stage a successful attack from the thinly populated Siberian section. The obvious possibility is some sort of large scale insurgency which we know took place in occupied parts of the western USSR.

[GoldenHind]

Some sort of conflict between the Soviets and the Third Reich was inevitable. I don't know why people talk about Hitler's invasion of the USSR like it was just a mistake. No, it was part of his grand plan all along. The timing was actually excellent as Germany had conquered most of central and western Europe, Stalin had rendered his army incredibly weak from military purges and lack of preparation, and the two states shared a border. The real issue IMO was how Hitler executed the attack itself. For example his generals were adamant that there should be a rapid push toward Moscow and an occupation of the city itself. Hitler instead thought that it'd be more valuable to capture the Ukraine/southern Russia where the so-called Lebensraum was.



While I do think it was well within the Germans capability to capture Leningrad and Moscow, I can't say for sure that would have led to victory. If they were to accomplish those goals they could have captured the whole of European Russia easily and it'd be much harder for what was left of the Red army to stage a successful attack from the thinly populated Siberian section. The obvious possibility is some sort of large scale insurgency which we know took place in occupied parts of the western USSR.

I agree that war between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union was inevitable. If Hitler hadn't started it, I think Stalin would have eventually done so when he thought the timing was right.

I suspect that the Germans would have taken Moscow if the winter of 1941 hadn't been one of the harshest on record. The Germans were not equipped to wage war in those circumstances, while Stalin could provide troops that were effective under those conditions.

I think his impetus to take the Ukraine and southern Russia had more to do with the oil fields there than Lebensraum.

When the Germans invaded Ukraine, they were initially welcomed as liberators. His harsh policies toward the Slavs in general and reprisals for partisan activities soon largely brought that to an end. Still there were a fair number of Soviets (notably the Cossacks) that joined the German effort and fought with them (and against the Stalin regime) until the bitter end. What happened to them at the end of the war was a disgrace and a stain on Churchill and the British, who turned them over to Stalin, and they were murdered en masse.

[alexfritz]

Hitler can not do without the Soviet Union
A. Raw materials (important Oil) for the Reich
B. Habitat in East for "Germanic Settlers"
C. The ideological enemy of communism
D. And he saw the Slavs and other peoples from above and unable to win against him

Concerning Point A what remains a mystery is why nobody bothered with the Libyan oil, the DAK was standing right on it and yet it was solely fixated with the southern route to Baku; concerning the slavs, what i have researched is that the historical slavs of Germany were always however considered a 'wendischen Volkssplitter' meaning a full part/fragment of the German people(volk), though the ult. aim against the wends was forced germanisation the full removal of the slavic identity; this was coupled with the regime's, one of many distortive views, of the ottonian(Saxon) dynasty and its leap over the Elbe river;
https://m.lr-online.de/nachrichten/d...en_aid-3600449

[uintah106]

Had Germany got the A-bomb you could probably say good bye to London and Moscow