Remove ads

Britain goes Fascist, joins Hitler after the Fall of France.

horngeek said:
Citation Needed. From what I remember of reading The Second World War, Hitler in particular and the Nazis in general saw the US as a bastion of Jews. Even without that, the USA was arguably a major part of Germany's defeat in WWI, with all that followed.

Now, it should be noted that this is one of the two points in WWII where the Axis could have pulled off a… perhaps not total victory, but if Britain had gone to the negotiating table it would have been very difficult for them to return to a posture of defiance.

The other point was vs. the USSR and Pearl Harbour. Namely, Japan should have focused north and west instead of south and east. Attacking Siberia at the same time as the Germans attacked the west of the USSR would have put massive pressure on Stalin. Enough to take the Soviet Union out… maybe.

The reason they didn't, iirc, was they remembered some… border skirmishes, really, that Japan had done pretty poorly in… 1938? Before the actual major conflict. There's your answer, btw, @dylanredefined. Overall, the Axis powers made a lot of majorly suboptimal decisions.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
really? from what i have read right up until pearl harbour that most of Nazi high command liked America and the German public liked them as well.
that "most" did from what i read included little Adolf.
 
horngeek said:
Citation Needed. From what I remember of reading The Second World War, Hitler in particular and the Nazis in general saw the US as a bastion of Jews. Even without that, the USA was arguably a major part of Germany's defeat in WWI, with all that followed.

Now, it should be noted that this is one of the two points in WWII where the Axis could have pulled off a… perhaps not total victory, but if Britain had gone to the negotiating table it would have been very difficult for them to return to a posture of defiance.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The Nazis had no way to compel the UK to any onerous agreement, so it'd be the usual British approach to a continental hegemon, undermine them for a while before having another go.
The other point was vs. the USSR and Pearl Harbour. Namely, Japan should have focused north and west instead of south and east. Attacking Siberia at the same time as the Germans attacked the west of the USSR would have put massive pressure on Stalin. Enough to take the Soviet Union out… maybe.

The reason they didn't, iirc, was they remembered some… border skirmishes, really, that Japan had done pretty poorly in… 1938? Before the actual major conflict. There's your answer, btw, @dylanredefined. Overall, the Axis powers made a lot of majorly suboptimal decisions.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The Japanese were very badly handled by the Soviets in those border conflicts, particularly due to them being rather out of their military comfort zone, which would have made a full scale attack on the Russian Far East hugely risky and massively costly. Leaving aside that it also wouldn't gain them the resources that the Southern Strategy did.
 
Ironanvil1 said:
The Japanese were very badly handled by the Soviets in those border conflicts, particularly due to them being rather out of their military comfort zone, which would have made a full scale attack on the Russian Far East hugely risky and massively costly. Leaving aside that it also wouldn't gain them the resources that the Southern Strategy did.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yes, but in this case, the Japanese will be getting help from the Germans and British and Italians via sea, far more than OTL. The Italians and Germans aren't boxed in by the British fleet anymore.
 
Cloak&Dagger said:
Yes, but in this case, the Japanese will be getting help from the Germans and British and Italians via sea, far more than OTL. The Italians and Germans aren't boxed in by the British fleet anymore.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
that and they have the Indian ocean + Suez canal to make it much easier to resupply the Japanese forces if needed.
oh and Japanese forces will not be stuck engaging the British in Burma.
 
Cloak&Dagger said:
And the Germans won't be bogged down in the African campaign as well.

Russia is in for a very bad time.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
even worse with the Germans getting all of the technology that the British had that they didn't. not to mention the kick it would give to pre-existing gear.
just think of it, radar + night vision gear on a panther :o
 
True, and I didn't say total victory. Unmentionable Sea Mammal was a pipe dream.

On an attack north… I'm also saying focus on China here. And for fuck's sake don't poke the USA until you're ready and they're relatively isolated.

That's the biggest mistake the Axis made, I think. Pearl Harbor turned the opinion of the American public right around to righteous anger.

I don't think they could ever have realistically achieved victory, mind you. From what I've read and thought about, the best outcome for the Axis would have been becoming the Second World of the Cold War.
 
horngeek said:
True, and I didn't say total victory. Unmentionable Sea Mammal was a pipe dream.

On an attack north… I'm also saying focus on China here. And for fuck's sake don't poke the USA until you're ready and they're relatively isolated.

That's the biggest mistake the Axis made, I think. Pearl Harbor turned the opinion of the American public right around to righteous anger.

I don't think they could ever have realistically achieved victory, mind you. From what I've read and thought about, the best outcome for the Axis would have been becoming the Second World of the Cold War.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
best thing they could of done afterwards was to scream angerly at japan, cut off all ties to them, say "oh sit you ok?" to the US and offer a little aid, and pray that the sleeping giant goes back to sleep after it rekts japan.
 
kobster22 said:
best thing they could of done afterwards was to scream angerly at japan, cut off all ties to them, say "oh sit you ok?" to the US and offer a little aid, and pray that the sleeping giant goes back to sleep after it rekts japan.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Germany and the US were already in undeclared war in the Atlantic, so the formal declaration basically just allowed German subs to run rampant for a while before the US could adapt. It's not like the US lacked the resources to support Lend Lease and war against Japan at the same time.
 
Oh, I meant Japan, but Germany couldn't really afford the new war either.

Fortunately for everyone, though, the Axis made a lot of pants-on-head retarded decisions that were based off personal/national pride more than strategic concerns. Italy attacking the Balkans, the invasion of Norway (more to the point, the 200,000 man garrison parked there for the entire fucking war), the Final Solution happening while they couldn't spare the resources…
 
Last edited:
horngeek said:
Oh, I meant Japan, but Germany couldn't really afford the new war either.

Fortunately for everyone, though, the Axis made a lot of pants-on-head retarded decisions that were based off personal/national pride more than strategic concerns. Italy attacking the Balkans, the invasion of Norway (more to the point, the 200,000 man garrison parked there for the entire fucking war), the Final Solution happening while they couldn't spare the resources…
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
good thing huh?

though with the british generals on hand, they might not be making such pants-on-head retarded decisions. might.
 
This is true. I am speaking irl as much as within the context of this scenario, mind you.

With the British generals… keep in mind that a lot of said generals may need to be replaced (nevermind that British generals made some pretty shit decisions themselves. Look up the invasion of Crete, for example). Also, a lot of Polish troops were given sanctuary in Britain, and actually flew in the Battle of Britain. So, there's them to deal with.

Overall, I suspect that WWII in this alternate will end up developing into a Cold War, America vs. the Axis powers (which will, barring a major kerfuffle over Gibraltar, likely include Spain before long- the lack of Spanish involvement in WWII was a matter of 'recovering from civil war', not unwillingness).
 
Grognard said:
1. Lend/Lease aid ceases to flow through the Atlantic, as the flow is redirected to the Pacific.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Occurs to me, this is going to cause some major problems itself. The lend/lease corridor to get into Russia went in through Iran, after an Anglo-Soviet invasion (neutral country, btw). Russia and England have a long history of fucking with Iran, and without the Brits to join in, this supply corridor probably wouldn't even exist.

Aid can still come in through the Pacific, but I dunno precisely how quickly it's going to get where it's needed - the Persian Corridor looks well-suited to deliver supplies to the Eastern Front, but going in through the Pacific, those supplies get to cross the entire breadth of the Soviet Union.

Personal opinion re Iranian status: Unlikely to join the Axis. Had longstanding diplomatic relations with Germany, but Iran's attitude towards the Nazis was fairly unimpressed. And considering the existing tensions between Iran and England at the time, if England went Axis and started asserting itself more aggressively, Iran may well join the Allies outright (so the corridor may exist after all).

Horngeek said:
The other point was vs. the USSR and Pearl Harbour. Namely, Japan should have focused north and west instead of south and east. Attacking Siberia at the same time as the Germans attacked the west of the USSR would have put massive pressure on Stalin. Enough to take the Soviet Union out… maybe.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Two things to note to this.

#1, had they done so, it's highly likely the Soviet Union would have been in trouble. 'In late 1941, he informed the Soviet command that Japan was not going to attack the Union in the near future, that allowed the command to transfer 18 divisions, 1,700 tanks, and over 1,500 aircraft from Siberia and the Far East to the Western front against Nazi Germany during the most dangerous months of the Battle for Moscow, one of the turning points of the whole World War II.'

#2... why should they have? The Japanese were there to accomplish their own strategic objectives, not Hitler's. Russia was Germany's bogeyman, not Japan's.

Also, a lot of Polish troops were given sanctuary in Britain, and actually flew in the Battle of Britain. So, there's them to deal with.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Weren't the Canadians also in Britain by this point?

Kobster22 said:
though with the british generals on hand, they might not be making such pants-on-head retarded decisions. might.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Um... Dieppe?
 
Tbf britian might wait till adolf heads for moscow before goinh
nenene had my fingers crossed the entire time and stab adolf in the back:)
perfidious albion remember? Didnt get that name soley because of french sulking
 
Pale Wolf said:
Oh, the getting out was handled as well as could be expected.

The getting in... not so much.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
yeah that, that was pure British bullshit that decided to screw over the Canadians, i mean they didn't even test the fucking tanks to see if they would even work on the beaches.
 
Firstly, when I refer to the invasion of Crete, I'm referring to Major General Bernard Freyberg, VC. He had intelligence that the Germans were going to attack via an airborne drop, with a possible sea attack.

He promptly completely neglected measures against the air drop in favor of over-defending against a seaborne threat that never actually happened.

Now, the Allied forces still inflicted enough casualties to convince the Germans never to use airdropped troops as the primary part of an attack again (while the success of the attack convinced the Allies to try out major airdrops later on in the war. WWII is full of these small ironies, another being that the go-ahead on Project Manhattan was given the day before Pearl Harbor. :V). But... yeah. Of course, at the time he was a Kiwi and not a Brit, but he started out in the British army.

Pale Wolf said:
Two things to note to this.

#1, had they done so, it's highly likely the Soviet Union would have been in trouble. 'In late 1941, he informed the Soviet command that Japan was not going to attack the Union in the near future, that allowed the command to transfer 18 divisions, 1,700 tanks, and over 1,500 aircraft from Siberia and the Far East to the Western front against Nazi Germany during the most dangerous months of the Battle for Moscow, one of the turning points of the whole World War II.'

#2... why should they have? The Japanese were there to accomplish their own strategic objectives, not Hitler's. Russia was Germany's bogeyman, not Japan's.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Good planning? :V

More seriously, I can think of a number of possible reasons. Stalin actually provided quite a bit of assistance to Nationalist China, for one, both military supplies up until... er... *looks up* April 1941, when the Soviet-Japanese Non-Aggression Pact was signed. For that matter, Japan and the USSR had had earlier hostilities, and the Kurils and Sakhalin were a definite point of contention between them. I could see Japan deciding to extend that to Siberia, under their guise of kicking European imperialists out of Asia.

There's also your point 1. A two-pronged attack from east and west against the Soviet Union could have destroyed a major power of the anti-Axis alliance (I hesitate to call the USSR part of the Allies proper, given how... strained... the alliance often was. See Stalin's constant insistence on a Third Front, Churchill/Roosevelt constantly saying 'yes, we'll open up another front' and then not doing so).

Then again, I'm speaking from 70 years on. I have hindsight that no one had at the time. As far as the Axis goes, I'm pretty bloody grateful for that.
 
yeah, whenever i refer to those who fought against the Axis, i refer to them as the Allies and the soviets. they were allies united by hatred, and those alliances are the most fragile
 
horngeek said:
Good planning? :V

More seriously, I can think of a number of possible reasons. Stalin actually provided quite a bit of assistance to Nationalist China, for one, both military supplies up until... er... *looks up* April 1941, when the Soviet-Japanese Non-Aggression Pact was signed. For that matter, Japan and the USSR had had earlier hostilities, and the Kurils and Sakhalin were a definite point of contention between them. I could see Japan deciding to extend that to Siberia, under their guise of kicking European imperialists out of Asia.

There's also your point 1. A two-pronged attack from east and west against the Soviet Union could have destroyed a major power of the anti-Axis alliance (I hesitate to call the USSR part of the Allies proper, given how... strained... the alliance often was. See Stalin's constant insistence on a Third Front, Churchill/Roosevelt constantly saying 'yes, we'll open up another front' and then not doing so).

Then again, I'm speaking from 70 years on. I have hindsight that no one had at the time. As far as the Axis goes, I'm pretty bloody grateful for that.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Japan went to war to get resources like oil. Does going north get them anything like that?
 
As shown nicely by the fact that Soviet forces had orders to fire on the Allies if it looked like they were going to beat the Soviets to Berlin.
 
Skyllian Blitz said:
Japan went to war to get resources like oil. Does going north get them anything like that?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Actually, yes. Note that Wikipedia (yes, yes, I know, but I'm not exactly skilled at searching for this stuff and my primary source doesn't touch on this much) specifically mentions Sakhalin and the Kamchatka Peninsula as being important oil reserves. These are not far away areas deep within Russia. Hell, Sakhalin (along with the Kurils) was disputed by Japan and Russia all the way through the 19th and 20th centuries. The Kamchatka Peninsula is just north of the Kurils.
 
Last edited:
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top