Germany's strategy after 1942.

[Swampy]

I like refighting old battles, as you all know, so let's consider Hitler's options after he declared war on the US.

Within 6 months, the US would turn the tide in the Pacific at Midway and Guadalcanal, and, around the same time, the Anglo-Americans would begin their preparations to push the Germans and Italians out of Africa. And the disaster at Stalingrad would be just around the corner.

Hitler should have listened to the advice of his idol, Frederick the Great, who said that he who defends everywhere defends nowhere. So, once he faced the three greatest powers on Earth (and their allies), he had to fight a defensive war to keep his power.

This means he would have to evacuate Africa, which would have saved 300,000 men, pull back from Stalingrad (another 500,000), give up Norway (a few divisions), and Sicily (70,000). Assuming the Italians would not fight for him (very reasonable), he would have almost a million spare troops.

His best bet then would be to throw this million-odd men on the Eastern front, to fight the Soviets to a stalemate. Then, with that in hand, he could negotiate a peace with the Anglo-Americans.

The problem with this rosy scenario, of course, is that he didn't have a roof over his head - every night, hundreds of bombers were reducing his cities to rubble. So, in the end, maybe he never had a chance. But his best bet, as I've said, was to pull back and fortify the line in the East.

What do you think?

[boxcar]

I think at that time he put all his money on the WONDER WEAPONS, the new jets, the V-1s and the V-2s the tiger tanks plus they built a four motored bomber that could possibly reach the US. That was his gamble.

[Sir John]

Swampy,

As I have often said, Hitler was doomed the day he invaded Russia and he confirmed his fate the day he declared war on the USA,

Someone should have told him that Moscow was only half way to the Urals and the Urals were only half way to central Siberia.

He had NO hope!

Personally I would have concentrated 90% of my Allied bombing campaign on oil and the coal/oil/petrol facilities. Ball bearings and other factories were a sideshow. An engine can have lots of ball bearings but it goes nowhere without fuel.

Agree about North Africa. Norway had iron ore that Hitler needed and could not do without.

SJ

[Swampy]

As I have often said, Hitler was doomed the day he invaded Russia and he confirmed his fate the day he declared war on the USA,

Someone should have told him that Moscow was only half way to the Urals and the Urals were only half way to central Siberia.

I've always wanted to play a video game where my panzer divisions would be charging into the endless steppes of Russia. There are some historians, however, who said that, without American intervention, Russia would have been finished.

Personally I would have concentrated 90% of my Allied bombing campaign on oil and the coal/oil/petrol facilities. Ball bearings and other factories were a sideshow. An engine can have lots of ball bearings but it goes nowhere without fuel.

I think they had enough bombers so they could concentrate on wiping out the POL, and then had enough leftover to target ball bearings and other factories.

Agree about North Africa. Norway had iron ore that Hitler needed and could not do without.

They could have made a deal with Norway and Sweden - those Swedish Nobel prize holders were sure anxious to sell minerals to the Nazis. But I guess that's why they're so famous for their peace prize.

[Sir John]

I think Sweden's co-operation was based on the fact that if not, then Hitler would invade.



SJ

[Swampy]

Dec 11, 2012 16:52:08 GMT -5 Sir John said:

I think Sweden's co-operation was based on the fact that if not, then Hitler would invade.

Exactly! That's why, in my scenario, Norway would cooperate - I'm not saying I would want that; I'm saying that Hitler could withdraw and force Norway to cooperate with, say, a few brigades.

[mcnoch]

1.) To give away all those occupied areas would have made Germany the battle ground. That is not a sound idea, it is always better to fight the war outside of your own territory, no matter what.

2.) In 1942 the USAF was not that strong over Germany, only in 1943/44 is started to cause real trouble. And the POL was for a long periode simply out of range for the USAF, so it was not just a matter of strategy, but also of technology, which was still developing.

[Sir John]

1.) Agree, but the alternative was not all that good. An overstretched military holding onto what she could not defend is futile.

2.) Agree again, the USAF did not begin major operations until May 1943. prior to that she was going mainly to France and near German targets. The B17 was not a good bomb truck, she had to sacrifice a lot of range to increase bomb load. and vice-versa.

...and the British deH 'Mosquito' could take the same bomb load to Berlin as a B17, and come back on one engine with only 2 crew. Those same planes could have gone to Ploesti with incendiaries etc and eliminated the main source of German POL.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.



SJ

[Swampy]

Agree with SJ on #1 - the Germans were overstretched. If they had thrown everything to stabilizing the Eastern front, they could have stopped the Red Army cold. That said, they would still have to face the bombing campaign.