The ideal Axis strategy

Discussions on High Command, strategy and the Armed Forces (Wehrmacht) in general.
MarkN
Member
Posts: 2549
Joined: 12 Jan 2015 13:34
Location: On the continent

The ideal Axis strategy

Post by MarkN » 22 Nov 2019 18:52

ljadw wrote:
22 Nov 2019 15:43
HistoryGeek2019 wrote:
22 Nov 2019 15:30
ljadw wrote:
22 Nov 2019 15:24
The best Axis strategy was the one they followed in the OTL. The fact that they failed proves that any other strategy also would fail .
Strategy = pieces op paper depending for success on the question if the enemy is stronger/weaker .The enemy was stronger, the Axis lost .
About the SU : it was never a threat for Germany,it would never be one .Because the SU would never attack Germany on its own, and if it did, it would have no allies .
If the SU was not a threat to Germany (which I agree with), then attacking the SU was the wrong German strategy.
No : it failed, but this does not mean that it was the wrong strategy .
In August 1940 (GOP convention ) the Germans knew that war with the US was inevitable,and the outcome of such a war was a well-known fact . The only possibility to prevent such a war was to eliminate Britain . Very quickly .
As the Germans could do nothing against the US ( and doing something was not wise ) ,and as they could do nothing against Britain that would force Britain to give up, the only possibility was to eliminate the USSR,hoping that this would strengthen the Japanese position vis-á-vis the US and that Britain would than give up .
The chances for Barbarossa to succeed were less than 1%, but it was all that remained, unless waiting til Spaatz and Harris would destroy the German cities .
"The best Axis strategy was the one they followed in the OTL." Really????

Your explanation.
1) The Fascists wanted to avoid war with the US. They decided the best way to do that was to eliminate Britain.
2) To eliminate Britain, they decided the best way was to attack the Soviet Union.

The burning question is: why were the Fascists concerned about war with the US in the first place?

HistoryGeek2019
Member
Posts: 399
Joined: 06 Aug 2019 03:55
Location: America

Re: The ideal Axis strategy

Post by HistoryGeek2019 » 22 Nov 2019 19:20

ljadw wrote:
22 Nov 2019 17:08
HistoryGeek2019 wrote:
22 Nov 2019 15:59
ljadw wrote:
22 Nov 2019 15:43
HistoryGeek2019 wrote:
22 Nov 2019 15:30
ljadw wrote:
22 Nov 2019 15:24
The best Axis strategy was the one they followed in the OTL. The fact that they failed proves that any other strategy also would fail .
Strategy = pieces op paper depending for success on the question if the enemy is stronger/weaker .The enemy was stronger, the Axis lost .
About the SU : it was never a threat for Germany,it would never be one .Because the SU would never attack Germany on its own, and if it did, it would have no allies .
If the SU was not a threat to Germany (which I agree with), then attacking the SU was the wrong German strategy.
No : it failed, but this does not mean that it was the wrong strategy .
In August 1940 (GOP convention ) the Germans knew that war with the US was inevitable,and the outcome of such a war was a well-known fact . The only possibility to prevent such a war was to eliminate Britain . Very quickly .
As the Germans could do nothing against the US ( and doing something was not wise ) ,and as they could do nothing against Britain that would force Britain to give up, the only possibility was to eliminate the USSR,hoping that this would strengthen the Japanese position vis-á-vis the US and that Britain would than give up .
The chances for Barbarossa to succeed were less than 1%, but it was all that remained, unless waiting til Spaatz and Harris would destroy the German cities .
So the strategy is to roll the dice on a 1% hope of eliminating the USSR, in the hope that this will free up Japan against the United States, in the hope that Japan will be able to weaken the United States to a greater extent than all the German forces sucked up by the Soviet Union could have?

Better to just use the forces that were deployed in Barbarossa against the USA directly.
Germany could not invade Britain, it could not invade the US, but it could invade the USSR,what it did .
In August 1940 Germany was in a desperate situation, something which required a desperate solution , It was a VaBanque . Hitler was forced to stake the survival of Germany on an invasion of the USSR.It was the only card that remained : already before Barbarossa, US,still at peace, were outproducing the LW .
How does throwing away Germany's best soldiers into the bottomless pit of Russia, depleting its equipment and resources, and greatly reducing its labor force improve Germany's situation? The only answer you've given is that Japan would supposedly weaken the United States. But there was no rational reason at the time for Germany to believe that Japan could weaken the United States by an amount great enough to compensate for the obliteration of Germany's manpower and equipment in the swamps and forests of Russia.

It's true that Germany couldn't attack Great Britain or the United States. But it could defend. Defend, defend, defend. The United States fielded only 86 divisions in WW2. Germany had more than that already in 1941. Germany could defend, defend, defend until the United States gave up like it did in Vietnam. Or at least, that would have been a more rational strategy than invading the USSR.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12060
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: The ideal Axis strategy

Post by ljadw » 22 Nov 2019 21:13

Time was working against Germany : US did not need to land in Normandy, they could land from the North Cape to the Pyrenees and from Gibraltar to Romania ,while Germany had not the needed forces to defend these coasts and to defend its frontier with the SU .It had to chose and it did chose Barbarossa as they hoped to eliminate thhe Soviets in a short campaign,while a war against the US would be a long one which Germany could not afford .


Besides, US did not need to land : they could attack the German cities while Germany could not attack he American cities .Britain had to fall before the Yanks would come, one way or another .
On June 20 1941 ,two days before Babarossa, Hitler ordered to give the LW priority again for the armaments production .Germany was preparing for a short war against the SU and a long war against Britain/USA, if Barbarossa did not result in the surrender of Britain .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12060
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: The ideal Axis strategy

Post by ljadw » 22 Nov 2019 21:29

Peter89 wrote:
22 Nov 2019 18:28
ljadw wrote:
22 Nov 2019 16:59
For the SU : it won against Germany WITHOUT the commitment of the Siberian divisions .
What do you mean here?

A great number of the divisions from the Eastern Siberian, Far Eastern, Transbaikal, Siberian Military Districts participated in the Great Patriotic War, the Battle of Moscow included (16th, 24th Armies, parts of 30th Army).
28 divisions ( mostly non Siberian ) moved to the west in 1941
June : 2 + 9 who went west before Barbarossa ,they belonged to the strategic reserve
July 3
August and later : 14 of which 3 with manpower from Siberia ,only 2 of them were going to the western front .
A lot of these 28 divisions belonged to the Military districts of the Volga and the Urals.
Source : the Siberian divisions and the battle for Moscow .
The claim that Moscow was saved by the arrival of the Siberian divisions is a myth .Most of the 28 divisions were already destroyed before the start of Typhoon .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12060
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: The ideal Axis strategy

Post by ljadw » 22 Nov 2019 21:46

MarkN wrote:
22 Nov 2019 18:52
ljadw wrote:
22 Nov 2019 15:43
HistoryGeek2019 wrote:
22 Nov 2019 15:30
ljadw wrote:
22 Nov 2019 15:24
The best Axis strategy was the one they followed in the OTL. The fact that they failed proves that any other strategy also would fail .
Strategy = pieces op paper depending for success on the question if the enemy is stronger/weaker .The enemy was stronger, the Axis lost .
About the SU : it was never a threat for Germany,it would never be one .Because the SU would never attack Germany on its own, and if it did, it would have no allies .
If the SU was not a threat to Germany (which I agree with), then attacking the SU was the wrong German strategy.
No : it failed, but this does not mean that it was the wrong strategy .
In August 1940 (GOP convention ) the Germans knew that war with the US was inevitable,and the outcome of such a war was a well-known fact . The only possibility to prevent such a war was to eliminate Britain . Very quickly .
As the Germans could do nothing against the US ( and doing something was not wise ) ,and as they could do nothing against Britain that would force Britain to give up, the only possibility was to eliminate the USSR,hoping that this would strengthen the Japanese position vis-á-vis the US and that Britain would than give up .
The chances for Barbarossa to succeed were less than 1%, but it was all that remained, unless waiting til Spaatz and Harris would destroy the German cities .
"The best Axis strategy was the one they followed in the OTL." Really????

Your explanation.
1) The Fascists wanted to avoid war with the US. They decided the best way to do that was to eliminate Britain.
2) To eliminate Britain, they decided the best way was to attack the Soviet Union.

The burning question is: why were the Fascists concerned about war with the US in the first place?
Because in August 1940 ,after the GOP convention,it was obvious that war with the US was coming.Willkie was the man /puppet of the Eastern liberal GOP establishment and he had the same foreign policy as Roosevelt .
There was nothing the Germans could do against the arrival from the US of supplies to Britain( first Cash and Carry ,later Lend-Lease ) unless an unlimited submarine war,who would precipate US participation on the war .
On June 26 1941 ,Milch said that already on May 1 the British/US aircraft production was higher than the German one and that if nothing was done at the end of 1942 the US/British production would be the double of the German one .
On May 1 US were still at peace,thus not much imagination was needed to have a picture of what would happen if the US would be at war .
Source : VaBanque P 44 .
US war production would pulverize the German war production and it did it in the OTL.
Milch was proposing to quadruple the manpower of the LW and to build as much aircraft as possible and even to build a number of them in factories in the new occupied parts of the SU . That proves that Milch was very desperate ( Same soure ) .

HistoryGeek2019
Member
Posts: 399
Joined: 06 Aug 2019 03:55
Location: America

Re: The ideal Axis strategy

Post by HistoryGeek2019 » 22 Nov 2019 22:04

ljadw wrote:
22 Nov 2019 21:13
Time was working against Germany : US did not need to land in Normandy, they could land from the North Cape to the Pyrenees and from Gibraltar to Romania ,while Germany had not the needed forces to defend these coasts and to defend its frontier with the SU .It had to chose and it did chose Barbarossa as they hoped to eliminate thhe Soviets in a short campaign,while a war against the US would be a long one which Germany could not afford .


Besides, US did not need to land : they could attack the German cities while Germany could not attack he American cities .Britain had to fall before the Yanks would come, one way or another .
On June 20 1941 ,two days before Babarossa, Hitler ordered to give the LW priority again for the armaments production .Germany was preparing for a short war against the SU and a long war against Britain/USA, if Barbarossa did not result in the surrender of Britain .
I agree with all this, but invading the USSR does not help Germany against the United States. It massively weakens Germany. On top of depleting Germany's manpower and resources, it increases the territory that Germany needs to defend. Germany needed to decrease (or at least not increase) the scope of the war.

User avatar
BDV
Financial supporter
Posts: 3704
Joined: 10 Apr 2009 16:11

Re: The ideal Axis strategy

Post by BDV » 22 Nov 2019 22:20

MarkN wrote: The burning question is: why were the Fascists concerned about war with the US in the first place?
Because of the ULTIMATUM addressed by the President of the United States of America, Franklin Delano Roosevelt to His Excellency Adolf Hitler, Chancellor of the German Reich and to His Excellency Benito Mussolini, Premier of the Kingdom of Italy, on April 14, 1939 ?
Nobody expects the Fallschirm! Our chief weapon is surprise; surprise and fear; fear and surprise. Our 2 weapons are fear and surprise; and ruthless efficiency. Our *3* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency; and almost fanatical devotion

Peter89
Member
Posts: 1188
Joined: 28 Aug 2018 05:52
Location: Spain

Re: The ideal Axis strategy

Post by Peter89 » 22 Nov 2019 22:43

ljadw wrote:
22 Nov 2019 21:29
Peter89 wrote:
22 Nov 2019 18:28
ljadw wrote:
22 Nov 2019 16:59
For the SU : it won against Germany WITHOUT the commitment of the Siberian divisions .
What do you mean here?

A great number of the divisions from the Eastern Siberian, Far Eastern, Transbaikal, Siberian Military Districts participated in the Great Patriotic War, the Battle of Moscow included (16th, 24th Armies, parts of 30th Army).
28 divisions ( mostly non Siberian ) moved to the west in 1941
June : 2 + 9 who went west before Barbarossa ,they belonged to the strategic reserve
July 3
August and later : 14 of which 3 with manpower from Siberia ,only 2 of them were going to the western front .
A lot of these 28 divisions belonged to the Military districts of the Volga and the Urals.
Source : the Siberian divisions and the battle for Moscow .
The claim that Moscow was saved by the arrival of the Siberian divisions is a myth .Most of the 28 divisions were already destroyed before the start of Typhoon .
58th Tank Division
60th Tank Division
112th Tank Division
75th cavarly Division
Etc.

I think you refer to "Siberian" divisions as divisions from the Siberian Military District. Maybe your numbers are more accurate then.

Anyway, your initial claim that the Battle of Moscow was won WITHOUT the Siberian (Transbaikal, Far Eastern, etc.) troops is wrong.

By the time of the Batte of Moscow, these troops were in fact some of the best units in the Red Army.
“And while I am talking to you, mothers and fathers, I give you one more assurance. I have said this before, but I shall say it again, and again and again. Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars." - FDR, October 1940

Peter89
Member
Posts: 1188
Joined: 28 Aug 2018 05:52
Location: Spain

Re: The ideal Axis strategy

Post by Peter89 » 22 Nov 2019 23:03

BDV wrote:
22 Nov 2019 22:20
MarkN wrote: The burning question is: why were the Fascists concerned about war with the US in the first place?
Because of the ULTIMATUM addressed by the President of the United States of America, Franklin Delano Roosevelt to His Excellency Adolf Hitler, Chancellor of the German Reich and to His Excellency Benito Mussolini, Premier of the Kingdom of Italy, on April 14, 1939 ?
It wasn't really an ultimatum, and FDR had to face a serious inner resistance against the war. It was rather a sensible act from a stateman to a dictator. He clearly saw that the US was to gain world dominance in 10-25 years, the colonial empires will fall, and the SU will get nowhere with communism.

Germany and Italy had to abandon their colonial dreams and so they can get a chair at the table of international politics.

FDR was like okay this is lol, the European nations are ruining each other, the SU will bleed white and it will be in ruins, China is crippled and pushed into a civil war and finally, Japan attacks - a great opportunity, this war will grant the US a leading position in politics, technology, economy for a century. And he was right.
“And while I am talking to you, mothers and fathers, I give you one more assurance. I have said this before, but I shall say it again, and again and again. Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars." - FDR, October 1940

User avatar
BDV
Financial supporter
Posts: 3704
Joined: 10 Apr 2009 16:11

Re: The ideal Axis strategy

Post by BDV » 22 Nov 2019 23:27

Peter89 wrote: BDV: ULTIMATUM

It wasn't really an ultimatum, and FDR had to face a serious inner resistance against the war. It was rather a sensible act from a stateman to a dictator. He clearly saw that the US was to gain world dominance in 10-25 years, the colonial empires will fall, and the SU will get nowhere with communism.

Germany and Italy had to abandon their colonial dreams and so they can get a chair at the table of international politics.

FDR was like okay this is lol, the European nations are ruining each other, the SU will bleed white and it will be in ruins, China is crippled and pushed into a civil war and finally, Japan attacks - a great opportunity, this war will grant the US a leading position in politics, technology, economy for a century. And he was right.
That's like, your opinion, man. To me the letter reads like an ultimatum. Historical developments prove it an ultimatum.
Nobody expects the Fallschirm! Our chief weapon is surprise; surprise and fear; fear and surprise. Our 2 weapons are fear and surprise; and ruthless efficiency. Our *3* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency; and almost fanatical devotion

MarkN
Member
Posts: 2549
Joined: 12 Jan 2015 13:34
Location: On the continent

Re: The ideal Axis strategy

Post by MarkN » 23 Nov 2019 01:03

ljadw wrote:
22 Nov 2019 21:46
MarkN wrote:
22 Nov 2019 18:52
ljadw wrote:
22 Nov 2019 15:43
HistoryGeek2019 wrote:
22 Nov 2019 15:30
ljadw wrote:
22 Nov 2019 15:24
The best Axis strategy was the one they followed in the OTL. The fact that they failed proves that any other strategy also would fail .
Strategy = pieces op paper depending for success on the question if the enemy is stronger/weaker .The enemy was stronger, the Axis lost .
About the SU : it was never a threat for Germany,it would never be one .Because the SU would never attack Germany on its own, and if it did, it would have no allies .
If the SU was not a threat to Germany (which I agree with), then attacking the SU was the wrong German strategy.
No : it failed, but this does not mean that it was the wrong strategy .
In August 1940 (GOP convention ) the Germans knew that war with the US was inevitable,and the outcome of such a war was a well-known fact . The only possibility to prevent such a war was to eliminate Britain . Very quickly .
As the Germans could do nothing against the US ( and doing something was not wise ) ,and as they could do nothing against Britain that would force Britain to give up, the only possibility was to eliminate the USSR,hoping that this would strengthen the Japanese position vis-á-vis the US and that Britain would than give up .
The chances for Barbarossa to succeed were less than 1%, but it was all that remained, unless waiting til Spaatz and Harris would destroy the German cities .
"The best Axis strategy was the one they followed in the OTL." Really????

Your explanation.
1) The Fascists wanted to avoid war with the US. They decided the best way to do that was to eliminate Britain.
2) To eliminate Britain, they decided the best way was to attack the Soviet Union.

The burning question is: why were the Fascists concerned about war with the US in the first place?
Because in August 1940 ,after the GOP convention,it was obvious that war with the US was coming.Willkie was the man /puppet of the Eastern liberal GOP establishment and he had the same foreign policy as Roosevelt .

[MarkNote: ljadw standard wall of irrelevant yadda yadda deleyed to save bandwidth]
Really????

Are you really putting forward the argument that the Fascist Axis powers, Nazi Germany in particular, only saw a threat from America in August 1940. That this threat came completely out if nowhere? That their actions and policies of the previous 7 years had nothing to do with the American stance and it was a complete surprise?

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Do you really believe that the Nazis suddenly, out of nowhere, and based purely on the GOP convention, thought that the American threat was so great that they were willing to attack the Soviet Union whilst still being at war with the British Empire?

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12060
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: The ideal Axis strategy

Post by ljadw » 23 Nov 2019 08:27

You are putting words in my mouth I never said : I never said that ONLY in August 1940 Germany saw a threat from America . I said that for Berlin war with US ( which Hitler was thinking would happen later, after 1950 ) was not only inevitable,but was nearing .Somewhere in his diaries Goebbels wrote that war with the US would occur before 1942 .
On July 31 1940 Hitler said the following :(diary of Halder ) in a conference with his advisors :
Englands Hoffnung ist Russland und Amerika.Wenn Hoffnung auf Russland wegfällt,fällt auch Amerika weg,weil Wegfall Russlands eine Aufwertung Japans in Ostasien in ungeheurem Mass folgt.Russsland ostasiatischer Degen Englands und Amerikas gegen Japan .
Britain is hoping on Russia and the USA.But if the hope on Russia disappears, US will also disappear,because the elimination of Russia will pave the way for Japan in East Asia .Russia is the East Asian sword of Britain and US against Japan .

Hitler had to do something . He could not eliminate Britain before 1942, he could do nothing against USA.Thus he decided to do something against Russia .
Barbarossa was the only remaining option .
About the GOP convention : Willkie was ,as FDR, hostile to Germany and an interventionist. This meant : war .
The only chance for Hitler to avoid war with the US was the election as potus of an isolationist : Taft, Dewey or Lindbergh .In August 1940 it was obvious that it would be an interventionist .

Peter89
Member
Posts: 1188
Joined: 28 Aug 2018 05:52
Location: Spain

Re: The ideal Axis strategy

Post by Peter89 » 23 Nov 2019 12:00

BDV wrote:
22 Nov 2019 23:27
Peter89 wrote: BDV: ULTIMATUM

It wasn't really an ultimatum, and FDR had to face a serious inner resistance against the war. It was rather a sensible act from a stateman to a dictator. He clearly saw that the US was to gain world dominance in 10-25 years, the colonial empires will fall, and the SU will get nowhere with communism.

Germany and Italy had to abandon their colonial dreams and so they can get a chair at the table of international politics.

FDR was like okay this is lol, the European nations are ruining each other, the SU will bleed white and it will be in ruins, China is crippled and pushed into a civil war and finally, Japan attacks - a great opportunity, this war will grant the US a leading position in politics, technology, economy for a century. And he was right.
That's like, your opinion, man. To me the letter reads like an ultimatum. Historical developments prove it an ultimatum.
Absolutely not, man.

IIRC the US did not declare war on Germany. Not even after Germany attacked the aforementioned countries.

I love it so much when the top politicans' diaries, letters, speeches and such are interpreted as real intentions and honest opinions. FDR also said this in the 1940 presidential election campaign:
"I have said this before, but I shall say it again and again and again; your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars."
source: https://www.archives.gov/education/less ... -churchill

We keep politicians to represent interests. FDR said these words in order to win the election, historical developments prove it .
“And while I am talking to you, mothers and fathers, I give you one more assurance. I have said this before, but I shall say it again, and again and again. Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars." - FDR, October 1940

ljadw
Member
Posts: 12060
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: The ideal Axis strategy

Post by ljadw » 23 Nov 2019 14:59

I did not invent what Hitler said on JUly 31 and later .

User avatar
BDV
Financial supporter
Posts: 3704
Joined: 10 Apr 2009 16:11

Re: The ideal Axis strategy

Post by BDV » 27 Nov 2019 22:45

Peter89 wrote:
Absolutely not, man.

IIRC the US did not declare war on Germany. Not even after Germany attacked the aforementioned countries.

I love it so much when the top politicans' diaries, letters, speeches and such are interpreted as real intentions and honest opinions. FDR also said this in the 1940 presidential election campaign:
"I have said this before, but I shall say it again and again and again; your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars."
source: https://www.archives.gov/education/less ... -churchill

We keep politicians to represent interests. FDR said these words in order to win the election, historical developments prove it .
Nope. Still your interpretation. Mine differs. The letter was an ultimatum in which for stopping their aggression/expansion in Europe and Africa Mussolini and Hitler were offered nothing (well, FDR's "word," but as you point out, that meant nothing).

The original question asked was:
The burning question is: why were the Fascists concerned about war with the US in the first place?

To which the answer is plain, USofA honchos words AND actions.
Nobody expects the Fallschirm! Our chief weapon is surprise; surprise and fear; fear and surprise. Our 2 weapons are fear and surprise; and ruthless efficiency. Our *3* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency; and almost fanatical devotion

Return to “German Strategy & General German Military Discussion”