Hypothetical: Western Allies v. Nazi Germany with the USSR out of the war. Who wins?

[Joe McCarthy]

Imagine the war had proceeded differently and the USSR was uninvolved with the US-UK leading the war against the Axis. This basically assumes everything happened as it did before Barbarossa with the US being brought in at Pearl Harbor. The USSR is a neutral state in this scenario. Could the Western allies, buttressed by American industrial might triumph, or would Germany, having only one front to defend, be able to hold them off?

For the purposes of this discussion we'll concentrate on the European theater.

[Phil75231]

Assuming Hitler settled for Poland for his "Greater Germany", that would have freed him to go into the Middle East - more troops sent to North Africa. That would have made his drive to the Persian Gulf (Britain's oil supplier) much easier.

On the other hand, the US had a surplus of oil at the time, and so could have spared some for Britain. In that case, I anticipate three main fronts (although two only marginally related to Europe.)

*European Theater (limited to the British Isles and NW Europe)

*Sub-Saharan Africa (East Africa and a few areas of West Africa were UK colonies, a good staging area)

*Middle East / India. India would be the main fallback base and/or launch pad for a reinvasion of the Middle East (if it ever happened)

I think it's safe to say that the German Navy would remain bottled up (barring U-Boats), given both the UK and US fleets were first class. Germany certainly would have had their hands full with the US on board, especially when comparing their populations. Furthermore, resistance groups in Europe were likely active anyway, and would have tied down more German forces.

So in the end, I'm not too sure who would have won in this case.

[Oreka Bailoak]

Imagine the war had proceeded differently and the USSR was uninvolved with the US-UK leading the war against the Axis. This basically assumes everything happened as it did before Barbarossa with the US being brought in at Pearl Harbor. The USSR is a neutral state in this scenario. Could the Western allies, buttressed by American industrial might triumph, or would Germany, having only one front to defend, be able to hold them off?


If the Soviet Union wasn't in WW2 then Roosevelt wouldn't have antagonized Japan as much as he did and Japan never would have attacked Pearl Harbor.

But if America did come into the war, the allies would have to sustain probably at least 4,000,000 military deaths and I don't think we would have been able to take that many causalities. I think the public would have been outraged and demanded a peace treaty to stop a suicidal war.

But if we did fight militarily the Soviet Union would probably continue to provide materials for Germany. I think the Axis would have won because I don't think the west was prepared to suffer that many causalities, where America would bear the casualty brunt.

[Logan]

No chance in Europe or British Isles.

http://i111.piczo.com/view/3/3/3/9/4/y/y/v/z/p/t/l/img/i189687533_9429_3.jpg

Perhaps a stalemate until:

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/blogs/static/dowbrigade/biggboi.jpg

Too many hypotheticals.

[AussieScott]

Who cares, stop living in the past. Start living in the present to prepare for the future.

[Joe McCarthy]

No chance in Europe or British Isles.

http://i111.piczo.com/view/3/3/3/9/4/y/y/v/z/p/t/l/img/i189687533_9429_3.jpg

Perhaps a stalemate until:

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/blogs/static/dowbrigade/biggboi.jpg

Too many hypotheticals.

The war ends with Berlin destroyed by the atomic bomb.

[Joe McCarthy]

Who cares, stop living in the past. Start living in the present to prepare for the future.

"I know of no way to judge the future but by the past." -- Patrick Henry

[AussieScott]

"I know of no way to judge the future but by the past." -- Patrick Henry

Then why keep people thinking and repeating the past which was a failure?

Or do you get off on remembering 40 or 50 million European decent people died during this war...

Would it not be better to unite European and European decent people, then convert them to your realist racialist ideology of our Grandparents, which is now an utter failure to?

In fact the ideology of our Grandparents is what is used against us now by the Liberals and anti-racists, why do you continually keep giving them ammunition, by espousing your ideology and baiting the Nazi National Socialists?

In a way your ideology is as bad as the Nazi National Socialists, at least National Socialism has a better chance if they changed the name, re-packaged it and used better propaganda to sell it...

[TheBorrebyViking]

Then why keep people thinking and repeating the past which was a failure?

Or do you get off on remembering 40 or 50 million European decent people died during this war...

Would it not be better to unite European and European decent people, then convert them to your realist racialist ideology of our Grandparents, which is now an utter failure to?

In fact the ideology of our Grandparents is what is used against us now by the Liberals and anti-racists, why do you continually keep giving them ammunition, by espousing your ideology and baiting the Nazi National Socialists?

In a way your ideology is as bad as the Nazi National Socialists, at least National Socialism has a better chance if they changed the name, re-packaged it and used better propaganda to sell it...

Why I always list it as Odalism :thumbs up

[Logan]

Who cares, stop living in the past. Start living in the present to prepare for the future.

Seemed but a hypothetical question to me. Popular topic. Better than some of the others.

[AussieScott]

Seemed but a hypothetical question to me. Popular topic. Better than some of the others.

I guess so. I just think hypothetical scenarios of the present and future would be more constructive rather than arguing over a hypothetical past that will never happen. I just find it more divisive then anything else.

[Turkey]

Another day in the life of....

xx6CCPEFF6A

[GeistFaust]

I would say that Germany probably could have put a greater emphasis on parts of Africa and the Balkan areas to make their push to the East. Germany almost won their battles in Africa without a large number of troops and supplies. They were also contained a bit in the Balkans, and if they had put more emphasis on its they might have been able to use that area to break through into the Caucasian region and the Northern Middle East.


If you think about it Germany almost won the battle of El Alamein, and would have done so if they had more men and supply. The chances for driving the British back into the Middle East from Africa would have risen by taking the Island of Malta, which probably would have happened if they only put emphasis on invading the Balkan areas and North Africa.



Once the war moved into the Middle East it could have been anyone's game. I know there were some bad sandstorms the Nazis had to put up with in North Africa, but I wonder how they would fair against the harsh climate of the Middle East. In my opinion it would really come down to a battle of oil. The ones who possessed the oil throughout the Middle East and the Caucasus region would hold a definite advantage over their opposing forces.



I think though the taking of Alexandra would be a lethal blow to the British, but I am sure they would recover fairly well in the Middle East. At least enough to take on the Nazis with a viable force. Its tough to predict these hypotheticals, because there are so many complex and dynamic events that probably could have happened because of this or that. It can become quite a waste of time and useless to hypothesize about this after a while, just not worth it.

[ikki]

fantasyworld scenario tho. it was the soviet that was set on world conquest.
ask instead, what if britain and france hadnt been pressing for war against germany?

What if it were a greater germany vs ussr conflict and allies would stay home drinking coca-cola? With no lendlease or other transfers of tanks and technology to the soviets... maybe it would boil down to whichever managed to get the jump on the other. Soviets sure were preparing an invasion one way or the other.

[Raskolnikov]

I don't really know since countries tend to exaggerate their enemies' strength. My feeling that Germany would've won is probably based on that.

[Unurautare]

Stalemate.

[Joe McCarthy]

Would it not be better to unite European and European decent people, then convert them to your realist racialist ideology of our Grandparents, which is now an utter failure to?

In fact the ideology of our Grandparents is what is used against us now by the Liberals and anti-racists, why do you continually keep giving them ammunition, by espousing your ideology and baiting the Nazi National Socialists?

The American Jim Crow racial system was still in pretty good shape until WW2. The horrors of the Third Reich gave the budding Civil Rights agitators their impetus and motive force.

Nowadays, of course, any openly racialist politics is DOA, but without Hitler we would have had some chance to beat back the egalitarians.

Neo-Nazism though is very bad because it is so fringe that it leads many to absurdly monstrous conclusions, and creates political paralysis to the point of irrelevance. It's not even really pro-white, if we assess the intense anti-Americanism of its adherents. It's not uncommon to see them even prefer China over the US.