Poland 1939 Was Hitler Right

An admitably dull thought to strike a debate but at least its not Covid or Brexit.

Hitlers Generals believed that Germany wasn't ready for war in 1939 and pressed for a Delay until 1941

Hitler (incorrectly) assumed that France and Britain wouldn't act, but more importantly Hitler himself argued that Les Frannglaise ensemblé were capable of rearming faster than Germany and so whilst delaying 2 years would strengthen Germanys Forces - the corresponding build up by les grenouilles et RosBifs would in fact put Germany in a weaker position. I myself am inclined to think that he was correct and delay only sees proportionally stronger opposition.

I decline to comment on the Soviets relative strength because whilst it would have given them additional time to re equip and shape up - It took massive losses to convince Stalin to release various officers from the Gulag - im not sure any event short of Barbarossa would see this happening regardless of start date.

Many Historians also argue that delaying until 41 sees far more Uboats and the defeat of Britain - the trouble I have with this is that to my mind its in Luftwaffe 46 territory and ignores changes to the allies capabilities

1) Theres more U boats but there is also correspondingly more escorts.

2) And this is the clincher to my mind - In 39/40 German U boats attacked at night on the surface where there low silhouette and reasonable turn of speed made them a very difficult target and of course this negated ASDIC. (which is why the tactic was adopted). Escorts receiving radar put a stop to this.
If war is delayed until 41 then trader amongst the escorts is going to be far more wide spread - The Uboats are going to be handicapped by attacking submerged so less opportunity to chase and sink targets owing to slow speed.

(US boats in the pacific enjoyed the freedom to operate on the surface at night until VE Day).




Yes I know its a misleading headline but ive been reading the Gruniad / wail / BBC (That's the news organisation not a niche category on dead rodent
 
If Hitler had delayed until September 3rd 1941 and the Japs had still done their thing three months later, it may well have been that the whole BEF shambles would have been delayed a year and been morphed into Overlord a year early.

It somewhat depends on whether the Germans went east beyond Poland, or not. If they’d not opened that front, then things may have played out quite differently in the west. Indeed, would the Soviets have opened the front themselves?
 
An admitably dull thought to strike a debate but at least its not Covid or Brexit.

Hitlers Generals believed that Germany wasn't ready for war in 1939 and pressed for a Delay until 1941

Hitler (incorrectly) assumed that France and Britain wouldn't act, but more importantly Hitler himself argued that Les Frannglaise ensemblé were capable of rearming faster than Germany and so whilst delaying 2 years would strengthen Germanys Forces - the corresponding build up by les grenouilles et RosBifs would in fact put Germany in a weaker position. I myself am inclined to think that he was correct and delay only sees proportionally stronger opposition.

I decline to comment on the Soviets relative strength because whilst it would have given them additional time to re equip and shape up - It took massive losses to convince Stalin to release various officers from the Gulag - im not sure any event short of Barbarossa would see this happening regardless of start date.

Many Historians also argue that delaying until 41 sees far more Uboats and the defeat of Britain - the trouble I have with this is that to my mind its in Luftwaffe 46 territory and ignores changes to the allies capabilities

1) Theres more U boats but there is also correspondingly more escorts.

2) And this is the clincher to my mind - In 39/40 German U boats attacked at night on the surface where there low silhouette and reasonable turn of speed made them a very difficult target and of course this negated ASDIC. (which is why the tactic was adopted). Escorts receiving radar put a stop to this.
If war is delayed until 41 then trader amongst the escorts is going to be far more wide spread - The Uboats are going to be handicapped by attacking submerged so less opportunity to chase and sink targets owing to slow speed.

(US boats in the pacific enjoyed the freedom to operate on the surface at night until VE Day).




Yes I know its a misleading headline but ive been reading the Gruniad / wail / BBC (That's the news organisation not a niche category on dead rodent
Nahhh. Hitler's still gonna loose.

Simply put nothing happens in a vacuum. We had a huge head start on the Germans in terms of escorts, and that's all she wrote really. If Germany starts building more U-boats (why? she can't get them out into the Atlantic), we build more Escorts. Equally if you wait until 41, then by that point we've (almost) got Hedgehog into service, with the better Squid under development.
If the U-boat's on the surface a few rounds of 4in makes the problem go away. If its under water the Hedgehog would end it. Remember at the start of the war we had a horrible chance of hitting a U-boat with a ten pattern spread of depth charges. I've seen numbers ranging from 1-6%. A Hedgehog will hit, and thus kill a U-boat one attack in three.
Look at the logistics of Germany. She's effectively blockaded, and cornered by the UK and she can't break out. Equally I heard a statistic the other day, the UK had access to something like 80% of the worlds shipping. So that's a serious trade advantage.

On Land, things could have been better by 41. Consider agaisnt what Germany was fielding. We'd have had a 16-20 ton Medium tank, with a V-12 engine chucking out about 450hp with 50mm basis and a 2-pounder gun if the Germans had waited a year. We may also have stopped fannying about and already deployed 1st Army Tank brigade across the channel. If that had been part of the BEF from 1939 the French campaign would have looked very different with the Germans suddenly puckering up for a Rodgering.
Go early, go late, it matters not German is almost certainly going to loose.

Just about the only chance Germany had was in 1941, in our current timeline, capturing Iraq. But as usual Hitler mong'd it and lost.
 

4(T)

LE
An admitably dull thought to strike a debate but at least its not Covid or Brexit.

Hitlers Generals believed that Germany wasn't ready for war in 1939 and pressed for a Delay until 1941

Hitler (incorrectly) assumed that France and Britain wouldn't act, but more importantly Hitler himself argued that Les Frannglaise ensemblé were capable of rearming faster than Germany and so whilst delaying 2 years would strengthen Germanys Forces - the corresponding build up by les grenouilles et RosBifs would in fact put Germany in a weaker position. I myself am inclined to think that he was correct and delay only sees proportionally stronger opposition.

I decline to comment on the Soviets relative strength because whilst it would have given them additional time to re equip and shape up - It took massive losses to convince Stalin to release various officers from the Gulag - im not sure any event short of Barbarossa would see this happening regardless of start date.

Many Historians also argue that delaying until 41 sees far more Uboats and the defeat of Britain - the trouble I have with this is that to my mind its in Luftwaffe 46 territory and ignores changes to the allies capabilities

1) Theres more U boats but there is also correspondingly more escorts.

2) And this is the clincher to my mind - In 39/40 German U boats attacked at night on the surface where there low silhouette and reasonable turn of speed made them a very difficult target and of course this negated ASDIC. (which is why the tactic was adopted). Escorts receiving radar put a stop to this.
If war is delayed until 41 then trader amongst the escorts is going to be far more wide spread - The Uboats are going to be handicapped by attacking submerged so less opportunity to chase and sink targets owing to slow speed.

(US boats in the pacific enjoyed the freedom to operate on the surface at night until VE Day).




Yes I know its a misleading headline but ive been reading the Gruniad / wail / BBC (That's the news organisation not a niche category on dead rodent


I think you are right. Delaying the war after already triggering re-armament in Britain and France just sees the allies immeasurably stronger by the time it kicks off.

Maybe the BEF goes to France with 1,000,000 men and 6 lbers instead of 200k and 2 lbers, the RAF has Spit MkV, better radar, heavy bombers and jets further down the development track, RN has extensive radar, more escorts, refurbished capital ships and possibly more carriers, HMG has had three years in which to cripple the German economy through economic sanctions and diplomacy.

Perhaps France even overcomes its internal problems, changes government and comes to the field at its true strength and potential.


Etc.

This thread could run...
 
If Hitler had delayed until September 3rd 1941 and the Japs had still done their thing three months later, it may well have been that the whole BEF shambles would have been delayed a year and been morphed into Overlord a year early.

It somewhat depends on whether the Germans went east beyond Poland, or not. If they’d not opened that front, then things may have played out quite differently in the west.
Hitler was always heading east - Ideology - Anti Semitism (Communist = Jew) and "living space" dictated that
France was a diversion of resources to his main effort - albeit one he was more than happy to make as he wanted revenge for Versailles.

The UK was a (Lancaster sized) fly in the ointment - He probably expected the UK to call it quits once Poland and France threw in the Towel and historically he would have been correct in that presumption; the UK generally made a nuisance of itself at sea, invaded colonies provided a token continental effort and funded its allies. When they were defeated the UK made peace and waited until it kicked off again where upon etc.

Indeed, would the Soviets have opened the front themselves?
A Fascist / communist clash was inevitable and they both knew it - Stalin signed the non agression pact and supplied Dolfy to buy time to prepare the Soviet forces. If Dolfy was locked in an attritional war with France ive no doubt he would have been up to his eyes in Ivans the moment Stalin was ready.
 
Maybe the BEF goes to France with 1,000,000 men
That I dont think happens in any time line - The UK didn't intend to be a major land power in WW2 - she was going to revert to type and be an embuggaerance to the opposition at sea and general nuisance to trade and colonies. As such the BEF was always intended to top out at about 350K and that was to show solidarity - the French didn't think it was required.
 
Look at the logistics of Germany. She's effectively blockaded, and cornered by the UK and she can't break out. Equally I heard a statistic the other day, the UK had access to something like 80% of the worlds shipping. So that's a serious trade advantage.
Yay and Nay - lets not forget she can trade overland (which she does via the USSR) and she has the resources of much of the continent - so a Blockade of German shipping isn't the same as blockading Germany


On Land, things could have been better by 41. Consider agaisnt what Germany was fielding. We'd have had a 16-20 ton Medium tank, with a V-12 engine chucking out about 450hp with 50mm basis and a 2-pounder gun if the Germans had waited a year.

Just about the only chance Germany had was in 1941, in our current timeline, capturing Iraq. But as usual Hitler mong'd it and lost
To insert a What if at this point - What if Hitler abandons the Hipper Bismark et al and limits the Kriegsmarine and associated U boat threat to counter invasion plus a nuisance to the UK .
However threatening it was at times in the big picture the German Naval effort achieved little more than adding to the death toll.

That's a shed load of steel - diesel and manpower that's now available for Tanks and Trucks and were talking a nation with aspirations of being a dominant continental power a navy to project power can come later.

An extra 10 panzer divisions on the Eastern front (which can be supported as all that fuels not being sunk in the Atlantic) could swing that theatre. Stalin was teetering on the edge in late 41 just a small nudge and he sues for peace.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if Japan had gone early and concentrated on the British, Dutch and French colonies would uncle sam had stayed at home and would our reinforcements got there in time and been of sufficient quality to sort out Tojo's battle proven Army and air forces.
Indeed what affect would that have had on Itler.
 

4(T)

LE
That I dont think happens in any time line - The UK didn't intend to be a major land power in WW2 - she was going to revert to type and be an embuggaerance to the opposition at sea and general nuisance to trade and colonies. As such the BEF was always intended to top out at about 350K and that was to show solidarity - the French didn't think it was required.

I'm not sure. We went to war according to a plan based on the experience in WW1. I.e. the government knew exactly how many men could be put into uniform (c5 million), how many were needed in industry, the coal fields, etc. They also seemed to have expected a 5-year war from the outset.

Even if France had held, it was forseen that there'd then be a WW1-style channel-to-Swiss border entrenchment that'd require substantial follow-on forces. There was also the possibility of having fight the soviet union (as an ally of Germany) in Scandinavia and the Middle East and India. The Med & North Africa had to be garrisoned and defended against the Italians.

One major clue is in the equipment orders that were placed in UK and overseas even before Dunkirk (ie the end of the possibility of keeping a BEF in Flanders). E.g. Britain had already ordered 2 million rifles, and followed that up with 2 million more - clearly those were intended for full scale mobilisation of those c.5 million men.

I think one of the fundemental differences between the British and the Germans was the British had a far more realistic and accurate vision of the forthcoming war than the Germans did (who of course stumbled badly once the quick victories did not turn into armistice). The only two wild cards for Britain were the French collapse and the Japanese war.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
The only time Hitler was right was on 30 April 1945.
 
We’d still have nuked them in 1945
This. The Germans were no where near nuclear weapons by the end of the war.

Even without the Manhattan Project getting additional funding due to the US participation in the war, it's likely that one of the Western Allies (possibly us with Tube Alloys) would have beaten the Germans to the punch and nuked Berlin out of the war.

If anything, a delayed start, followed by a non-expeditionary defensive war by Britain and the nuking of Berlin would have ended with Britain as the Superpower post war.
 
We’d still have nuked them in 1945
No you wouldn't, the Yanks might have, but given the assimilation of Americans with Europe, I very much doubt it. No the Nips got it cos they was Subhuman- which I find a tad ironic.
Hitlers Generals believed that Germany wasn't ready for war in 1939 and pressed for a Delay until 1941
I think you'll find the driver was the Ribbentrop pact. More than anything else
 
One major clue is in the equipment orders that were placed in UK and overseas even before Dunkirk (ie the end of the possibility of keeping a BEF in Flanders). E.g. Britain had already ordered 2 million rifles, and followed that up with 2 million more - clearly those were intended for full scale mobilisation of those c.5 million men.
Perhaps were both part right
The BEF was only going to be a small army , however If you factor in North Africa colonies etc the UK intended to mobilise a not insignificant force not intended to serve in Europe and I hadent taken into account.
 

4(T)

LE
Yay and Nay - lets not forget she can trade overland (which she does via the USSR) and she has the resources of much of the continent - so a Blockade of German shipping isn't the same as blockading Germany




To insert a What if at this point - What if Hitler abandons the Hipper Bismark et al and limits the Kriegsmarine and associated U boat threat to counter invasion plus a nuisance to the UK .
However threatening it was at times in the big picture the German Naval effort achieved little more than adding to the death toll.

That's a shed load of steel - diesel and manpower that's now available for Tanks and Trucks and were talking a nation with aspirations of being a dominant continental power a navy to project power can come later.

An extra 10 panzer divisions on the Eastern front (which can be supported as all that fuels not being sunk in the Atlantic) could swing that theatre. Stalin was teetering on the edge in late 41 just a small nudge and he sues for peace.

Its an unpopular belief, but my own view is the Germans did in fact come within a hair's breadth of causing the collapse of the Soviet regime, and that would have inevitably occurred had Stalin left Moscow during 15/16 October.

Had Stalin left with his government, then i do think that resistance to the German advance (bogged as it was by then) would have crumbled and eventually some general or other on the (ex-)soviet side would have sought terms.
 
No you wouldn't, the Yanks might have, but given the assimilation of Americans with Europe, I very much doubt it. No the Nips got it cos they was Subhuman- which I find a tad ironic.
I dont buy this line of reasoning at all

1) The bombs being developed when THE Enemy is Germany.
2) As far as they were concerned at the time - The Nuke simply allowed 1 aircraft to do what it currently took 1000. The other nasty effects weren't understood so modern sensibilities dont apply.
From a 1940 -45 perspective what is the difference between totalling Hamburg with the entire RAF vs a single bomber - Its simply a damn sight more efficient and risks fewer aircrew.

I see no reason back then why it wouldn't have landed on Dresden or Kiel.
 
Its an unpopular belief, but my own view is the Germans did in fact come within a hair's breadth of causing the collapse of the Soviet regime, and that would have inevitably occurred had Stalin left Moscow during 15/16 October.

Had Stalin left with his government, then i do think that resistance to the German advance (bogged as it was by then) would have crumbled and eventually some general or other on the (ex-)soviet side would have sought terms.
As I recall Stalin raised the prospect of surrender but Zukhov IIRC said no whatever happens we will ultimately win - like yourself I see a very close tipping point and swapping Tirpitz for a Panzer Division could be it

Edited because the original reads as though he offered terms to Hitler
 
No you wouldn't, the Yanks might have, but given the assimilation of Americans with Europe, I very much doubt it.
Don't agree.
Britian was well on track with Tube Alloy's the only reason the Manhattan Project got there long before anybody else was because Tube Alloys was effectively absorbed in to it and independent British research more or less ceased.

Had circumstances been different Tube Alloys would have ultimately come to conclusion with Berlin being turned in to a glass car park. Its very nearly a certainty.

Without American intervention Britain would probably nuked Moscow not long after Berlin.
 

Latest Threads

Top