Could Germany have defeated the UK, US and USSR if it had fought them individually?

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Sturmmann42
Banned
Posts: 7
Joined: 29 Aug 2023 11:22
Location: UK

Could Germany have defeated the UK, US and USSR if it had fought them individually?

Post by Sturmmann42 » 29 Aug 2023 12:10

So I think it can be agreed that Germany lost World War II because it had to fight all three of those countries at once. But the German Army showed that they were better than any one of their enemies armies during the war, they wiped the floor with the British in 1940-41, cut right through the Red Army in 1941-42, and humiliated the US at Kasserine Pass in 1943. Even in 1944 when they were in retreat on all fronts they consistently inflicted higher casualties on their enemies than they suffered. Their enemies always spoke highly of their capabilities, in contrast the Germans didn't think much of their enemies (the British were seen as brave but too cautious and no match tactically, the Americans as poor and incompetent soldiers who only got anywhere with large numbers of airpower, armour and artillery, pretty much the same for the Soviets). Personally I think that they could certainly have defeated the UK and USSR alone, Britain had American support in 1940, if you take that and the fact that Hitler had to launch Operation Barbarossa to pre-empt a Soviet invasion away, then the British would have had no choice but to surrender as far as I can see. Same with the Soviet Union, Stalin, Khrushchev and Zhukov all said that they couldn't have lasted without Lend-Lease. The Americans might have been a problem because of their industrial capacity, but I can easily see the Germans cutting through their mediocre army and ending the war before they get caught in a war of attrition (if the Atlantic Ocean wasn't an issue of course).

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8269
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Could Germany have defeated the UK, US and USSR if it had fought them individually?

Post by Michael Kenny » 29 Aug 2023 19:20

Sturmmann42 wrote:
29 Aug 2023 12:10
So I think it can be agreed that Germany lost World War II because it had to fight all three of those countries at once. ...............
along with Italy, Japan, Finland, Romania, Hungary & Bulgaria.
Sturmmann42 wrote:
29 Aug 2023 12:10
they wiped the floor with the British in 1940-41,
Strange that my history books show that 'Germany' failed to subdue The RAF in 1940 and thus were so afraid the RN would 'wipe the floor' with any invasion fleet they decided to stay in France.
Sturmmann42 wrote:
29 Aug 2023 12:10
cut right through the Red Army in 1941..........
...only to collapse exhausted outside Moscow as their plan for a short sharp campaign and quick demobilization completely failed and thus assured their eventual defeat.

OpanaPointer
Financial supporter
Posts: 5669
Joined: 16 May 2010 14:12
Location: United States of America

Re: Could Germany have defeated the UK, US and USSR if it had fought them individually?

Post by OpanaPointer » 29 Aug 2023 19:31

Come visit our sites:
hyperwarHyperwar
World War II Resources

Bellum se ipsum alet, mostly Doritos.

User avatar
Westphalia1812
Member
Posts: 605
Joined: 03 Jul 2019 20:01
Location: Germany

Re: Could Germany have defeated the UK, US and USSR if it had fought them individually?

Post by Westphalia1812 » 29 Aug 2023 21:32

Sturmmann42 wrote:
29 Aug 2023 12:10
So I think it can be agreed that Germany lost World War II because it had to fight all three of those countries at once. But the German Army showed that they were better than any one of their enemies armies during the war, they wiped the floor with the British in 1940-41, cut right through the Red Army in 1941-42, and humiliated the US at Kasserine Pass in 1943. Even in 1944 when they were in retreat on all fronts they consistently inflicted higher casualties on their enemies than they suffered. Their enemies always spoke highly of their capabilities, in contrast the Germans didn't think much of their enemies (the British were seen as brave but too cautious and no match tactically, the Americans as poor and incompetent soldiers who only got anywhere with large numbers of airpower, armour and artillery, pretty much the same for the Soviets). Personally I think that they could certainly have defeated the UK and USSR alone, Britain had American support in 1940, if you take that and the fact that Hitler had to launch Operation Barbarossa to pre-empt a Soviet invasion away, then the British would have had no choice but to surrender as far as I can see. Same with the Soviet Union, Stalin, Khrushchev and Zhukov all said that they couldn't have lasted without Lend-Lease. The Americans might have been a problem because of their industrial capacity, but I can easily see the Germans cutting through their mediocre army and ending the war before they get caught in a war of attrition (if the Atlantic Ocean wasn't an issue of course).
Dude even crazier than me 8O
I have been an atheist for most of my life but now I realize that I am God

Sturmmann42
Banned
Posts: 7
Joined: 29 Aug 2023 11:22
Location: UK

Re: Could Germany have defeated the UK, US and USSR if it had fought them individually?

Post by Sturmmann42 » 05 Sep 2023 15:47

Michael Kenny wrote:
29 Aug 2023 19:20
Sturmmann42 wrote:
29 Aug 2023 12:10
So I think it can be agreed that Germany lost World War II because it had to fight all three of those countries at once. ...............
along with Italy, Japan, Finland, Romania, Hungary & Bulgaria.

Who were comparatively weak, often treasonous, and generally useless/a burden (see the Italians having to be bailed out in Greece and Egypt or the Romanians running away outside Stalingrad, allowing the 6th Army to be encircled). The major Allies also had a bunch of other countries fighting with them. Please don't pretend that a fight between the Axis and Allies was anywhere near equal in terms of men and materiel, no matter how good the German Army was they weren't fighting off the Allies. It'd be like one great fighter and a few rubbish ones fighting three good ones and a bunch of rubbish ones lol, no matter how great he is realistically he has no chance.

Sturmmann42 wrote:
29 Aug 2023 12:10
they wiped the floor with the British in 1940-41,
Strange that my history books show that 'Germany' failed to subdue The RAF in 1940 and thus were so afraid the RN would 'wipe the floor' with any invasion fleet they decided to stay in France.

I believe the question was referring to armies only. The German Army absolutely wiped the floor with the British Army in 1940-41.
Sturmmann42 wrote:
29 Aug 2023 12:10
cut right through the Red Army in 1941..........
...only to collapse exhausted outside Moscow as their plan for a short sharp campaign and quick demobilization completely failed and thus assured their eventual defeat.
The weather and the long supply lines might have had something to do with that.

Sturmmann42
Banned
Posts: 7
Joined: 29 Aug 2023 11:22
Location: UK

Re: Could Germany have defeated the UK, US and USSR if it had fought them individually?

Post by Sturmmann42 » 05 Sep 2023 15:48

Westphalia1812 wrote:
29 Aug 2023 21:32
Sturmmann42 wrote:
29 Aug 2023 12:10
So I think it can be agreed that Germany lost World War II because it had to fight all three of those countries at once. But the German Army showed that they were better than any one of their enemies armies during the war, they wiped the floor with the British in 1940-41, cut right through the Red Army in 1941-42, and humiliated the US at Kasserine Pass in 1943. Even in 1944 when they were in retreat on all fronts they consistently inflicted higher casualties on their enemies than they suffered. Their enemies always spoke highly of their capabilities, in contrast the Germans didn't think much of their enemies (the British were seen as brave but too cautious and no match tactically, the Americans as poor and incompetent soldiers who only got anywhere with large numbers of airpower, armour and artillery, pretty much the same for the Soviets). Personally I think that they could certainly have defeated the UK and USSR alone, Britain had American support in 1940, if you take that and the fact that Hitler had to launch Operation Barbarossa to pre-empt a Soviet invasion away, then the British would have had no choice but to surrender as far as I can see. Same with the Soviet Union, Stalin, Khrushchev and Zhukov all said that they couldn't have lasted without Lend-Lease. The Americans might have been a problem because of their industrial capacity, but I can easily see the Germans cutting through their mediocre army and ending the war before they get caught in a war of attrition (if the Atlantic Ocean wasn't an issue of course).
Dude even crazier than me 8O
What's crazy about it?

LineDoggie
Member
Posts: 1280
Joined: 03 Oct 2008 20:06

Re: Could Germany have defeated the UK, US and USSR if it had fought them individually?

Post by LineDoggie » 05 Sep 2023 16:20

Sturmmann42 wrote:
29 Aug 2023 12:10
The Americans might have been a problem because of their industrial capacity, but I can easily see the Germans cutting through their mediocre army and ending the war before they get caught in a war of attrition (if the Atlantic Ocean wasn't an issue of course).
The German would have to get to America ALIVE before dealing with the ''Mediocre army'', wehraboo

and lets not forget the USA Was the WORLDS industrial powerhouse then, Germany could not hope to ever match that capability.

Name a German Landing craft capable of getting there past the US Navy, and inevitably the Royal Canadian navy attriting them? you would need the entire german surface fleet just as a pitiable escort for a landing force

You think the Air forces are just going to sit in the mess waiting for Bismark to arrive off Jones Beach Long Island? and the landers, will they even be fit after such a voyage?

Even more so the Kriegsmarine was a joke compared to the US Navy, not even capable of Naval Aviation to support landings. Meanwhile hundreds of airfields available on the USA eastern seaboard for basing aircraft to hit such a invasion force.


Would have been incredibly hard, almost a Miracle for the Wehrmacht to invade and subjugate the USA, even had they miraculously taken out the UK and USSR which never was going to happen anyway.

The Atlantic and Pacific, like the English Channel are natural barriers. Since the Wehrmacht never got across the 120 miles of English channel how were they to get across the 3,400+ miles of the Atlantic with enough surviving forces?

How do you resupply these forces?
"There are two kinds of people who are staying on this beach: those who are dead and those who are going to die. Now let’s get the hell out of here".
Col. George Taylor, 16th Infantry Regiment, Omaha Beach

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15681
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Could Germany have defeated the UK, US and USSR if it had fought them individually?

Post by ljadw » 06 Sep 2023 14:22

Germany would lose against the Soviets while US was neutral and Britain and France neutral or occupied .
Germany would lose against a coalition of the Soviets and Britain while the US would remain neutral .
Germany would lose against a coalition of US and Britain while the USSR remained neutral or was occupied .
I don't see a coalition of the US and the USSR as possible,neither a war between Germany and the US with Britain and the USSR being neutral or occupied .
Germany would lose in all occasions: no European country (even not the USSR ) was strong enough to dominate Europe :
France failed, Russia failed, Germany failed ...

KDF33
Member
Posts: 1282
Joined: 17 Nov 2012 01:16

Re: Could Germany have defeated the UK, US and USSR if it had fought them individually?

Post by KDF33 » 11 Sep 2023 03:31

No ljadw, you are wrong.

pugsville
Member
Posts: 1016
Joined: 17 Aug 2011 04:40

Re: Could Germany have defeated the UK, US and USSR if it had fought them individually?

Post by pugsville » 11 Sep 2023 04:35

KDF33 wrote:
11 Sep 2023 03:31
No ljadw, you are wrong.
If it's Just Germany versus the British Empire I don't see ow Germany can possibly win. Sure Britain pretty unlikely to invade Germany but how does Germany make war really. Sealion isn't a viable option historically in 1940m, and that;s downhill with wind assistance. This scenario is significantly owrce,

IS Germany with the conquest of France (then Germany is lacking U boat bases, and equipment lost in France ) Italy (draining off a lot of naval resources) Japan (draining off more resources) Romania (oil). That enough for the British to be better resource in the battle of the Atlantic and do substantially better. And probably be fine without lend lease.

Germany got the best possible start to invading teh Soviet Union a dream run of perfect storm and failed. In 1941 lend lease isnt a big factor. THe Germans left pretty stuff all motorized resources out of the invasion. It was fundamentally a failure of logistics. More stuff to be supplied is not going to help. Actually Without Germany being at war with some one else, the USSR is likely to perform better in 1941. As that would undercut teh whole surprise factor. Without a decent surprise factor Germany going to perform worse than historically.

There are arguments the alone Germany does not prevail,

Max Sinister
Member
Posts: 23
Joined: 16 Sep 2023 17:09
Location: Germany

Re: Could Germany have defeated the UK, US and USSR if it had fought them individually?

Post by Max Sinister » 16 Sep 2023 22:14

That's a topic many in AltHist have wondered about, as you know.

What I think about it?

Certainly these are outright impossible:
- Sea Lion
- The Reich outproducing the US
- The Wehrmacht taking and holding down the whole Soviet territory west of the Volga

So is a Nazi victory impossible, or just extremely improbable?

I've wondered about it, but so far I think it's still not possible, even if
- the Wehrmacht wins at Dunkirk
- the resistance in the Abwehr is discovered earlier, let's say, in summer 1940
- Barbarossa starts some days earlier and with a few divisions more.

So even if it was possible somehow, we'd need additional Points of Divergence.

Maybe we'll find an answer to the question together?

KDF33
Member
Posts: 1282
Joined: 17 Nov 2012 01:16

Re: Could Germany have defeated the UK, US and USSR if it had fought them individually?

Post by KDF33 » 17 Sep 2023 19:53

Max Sinister wrote:
16 Sep 2023 22:14
- The Wehrmacht taking and holding down the whole Soviet territory west of the Volga
This one was not only possible, but prior to autumn 1942 was IMO the most likely outcome in the East.

Max Sinister
Member
Posts: 23
Joined: 16 Sep 2023 17:09
Location: Germany

Re: Could Germany have defeated the UK, US and USSR if it had fought them individually?

Post by Max Sinister » 21 Sep 2023 01:19

KDF33 wrote:
17 Sep 2023 19:53
Max Sinister wrote:
16 Sep 2023 22:14
- The Wehrmacht taking and holding down the whole Soviet territory west of the Volga
This one was not only possible, but prior to autumn 1942 was IMO the most likely outcome in the East.
Occupying a territory which has more square kilometers than the Wehrmacht had soldiers? That's why I find it improbable.

Why do you think it was "most likely"? Why didn't it happen then in our history? If you had said that many people just thought it was most likely, I would have agreed.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15681
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Could Germany have defeated the UK, US and USSR if it had fought them individually?

Post by ljadw » 21 Sep 2023 10:34

And, even if the SU west of the Volga was occupied, the war would go on and the benefit for Germany would be nihil .

KDF33
Member
Posts: 1282
Joined: 17 Nov 2012 01:16

Re: Could Germany have defeated the UK, US and USSR if it had fought them individually?

Post by KDF33 » 22 Sep 2023 04:29

Max Sinister wrote:
21 Sep 2023 01:19
Why do you think it was "most likely"?
The Red Army was being incrementally attrited down.
Why didn't it happen then in our history?
The Ostheer stopped focusing on attriting the Red Army, and instead overextended along the Don flank and into the Caucasus.
If you had said that many people just thought it was most likely, I would have agreed.
My view goes beyond what people might have thought at the time: I'm asserting that Soviet defeat was the objectively most likely outcome.

Return to “What if”