Would WW2 have been over sooner if Hitler had been assassinated?

Discussion in 'Military History and Militaria' started by Bravo_Bravo, Oct 17, 2012.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Seen some commentary that the Allies did not want him killed as he made some catastrophic decisions, notably on the Eastern Front.

    If he'd been assassinated, more able Generals would have made life much harder for the Allies.

    Thoughts?
     
  2. Sounds plausible. Just been reading about how the Mujahideen in the 80s were told to hold off assassinating the then Afghan Minister of the Interior because his tribal affiliation meant that there was constant friction with a particular other tribe. Getting rid of him would have allowed a deputy from the other tribe taking over and thus unifying the Ministry.
     
  3. WW2 is over!

    Does that mean that I can go home now?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. No, it's all propaganda. Now, move along that trench a little will you? I'm pretty sure our officers will tell us when the Armistice is signed.
     
  5. Wordsmith

    Wordsmith LE Book Reviewer

    SOE actually did have an assassination plot at a serious stage of planning. It involved a sniper taking out Hitler as he took an exercise walk at Berchtesgaden.

    The flip side to having Hitler assassinated would have been that it released the German generals from their oath to him. At that point they might have seized power (think the July 20th plot) and made a peace well before 1945.

    Wordsmith

    As a PS: Hitler's replacement was widely expected to be Himmler. If Himmler had seized power he probably have made even worse decisions. Just look at his brief spell in command of part of the eastern front in 1945.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  6. Brotherton Lad

    Brotherton Lad LE Reviewer

    His death and replacement by others could also have split the Allies, say a peace was brokered in the West allowing Germany to concentrate entirely on the Eastern Front. Hitler's survival ensured total defeat and unconditional surrender.
     
  7. Can't see either Churchill or (possibly even moreso) FDR being much swayed unless there was a serious change of political direction as well as leadership. Whether their positions as leaders would have remained tenable if they refused a peace opportunity though is a different thing.
     
  8. Brotherton Lad

    Brotherton Lad LE Reviewer

    Agreed; just blue sky thinking, but I wanted to show there were strategic reasons from an Allied pov for Hitler not to be removed.
     
  9. He was getting the upper hand at Kursk wasn't he, until the allies landed in Italy and Hitler decided to divert forces away to tackle that? If he hadn't been making the decisions there then maybe it would have been a different outcome in Russia, but anyway, luckily he was a tit!
     
  10. The war was over long before the Battle of Kursk, it was basicly over when they failed to take Moscow which they could have done had Hitler listened to his Generals.

    He had some wonderful military leaders at his disposal, thank **** he didnt use them properly or we would all be speaking German now.
     
  11. An assassination could have lead also led to a (brief) civil war between various German factions too.



    Yes he wasn't exactly a success as a field commander:

    QI Talk Forum | View topic - Heinrich Himmler

     
  12. His repeated refusal to countenance tactical retreats in the east certainly doomed hundreds of thousands of his soldiers to die in so-called 'fortresses' or as slave-labourers in the gulag. He also placed far too much faith in high tech 'vengeance' weapons to the detriment of producing sufficient quantities of reliable, effective weaponry that could stand up against the T-34's in the east and the P-51's in the west.
     
  13. If Manstein or Guderian had been overall in charge in the East , Kesselring had been running the Luftwaffe
    with Speer I/C German war industry in 1943 I reckon the Allies might have had to sue for terms in about in 1950 , as the Yanks would have got bored and we would have been seriously depleted of manpower .
    Me262's would have blown US bombers out of the sky .
    Arado bombers would have bombed the crap out of the South coast ports .
    Fluid defence in depth would have kept the Russians at bay in the East for years .
    Improved German U boats would have carried on inflicting horrific losses .
    Properly supplied , Rommel might never have lost North Africa .
    Scary .
     
  14. Two words.

    Manhattan Project.

    All the what ifs about WWII, at least those that don't end it sooner than 1945, come down to who would have developed a viable A-Bomb first.

    And the Jerries were headed rapidly in the wrong direction.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  15. To add to that, could the Germans produce enough synthetic fuel to power all these jets and submarines? Did they have the mineral resources to produce the metals needed in construction of lots of jet engines? (I recall this being a problem even with the limited amount of engines produced).