A civil discussion of alternate WWII history

I agree. I think we have taken this discussion as far a we need to. Carrying it on will not benefit our hobby which is what this forum is for. Lets get back to the What ifs?

Here's one I have always been interested in:

If Britain and France had not given in at Munich and Germany had launched an attack on Czechoslovakia (as Hitler was desperate to do) what would have happened?

In 1938 the German army was not prepared for a two front war, but were France and Britains armies in any state to invade Germany? How long would the Czechs have been able to hold their version of the Maginot Line in the Sudetenland? Could Poland have been persuaded to join Britain and France and make it a war on three fronts?

Lets not get caught up in the morals, just what might have happened :D


Actually i believe that the Polish would open a two front war, not on the Germans, but on the Czechs; The reason Slovakia allied itself with the Germans was that it feared a Hungaro-Polish invasion. So it is pretty propable that the Poles would have joined in the partition of Czechoslovakia-pretty much what happened to their own country with the Soviet-German pact.
 
So let me get this right. You are saying that despite Britain and France guaranteeing Czech independence their ally Poland would turn their back on them and join forces with the Germans to gain some minor border territories? Yes there were territorial disputes between all of the eastern European countries but these were other relatively small areas. There's a difference between two nations disagreeing over a border lines position a few miles each way and a full on invasion / occupation. Poland may have wanted to claim some land from the Czechs, but I doubt they would have been willing to burn their bridges with France and Britain over the issue.

However if the Poles had decided to take advantage of the German invasion they would have greatly sped up the defeat of the Czechs who were banking on holding the Germans in the Sudetenland until the French could attack in the west. If Germany could swiftly defeat the Czechs with Polish assistance and swap their forces back west they may have been able to stand up to the French. That said they would have been constantly looking over their shoulders at the newly militaristic Polish waiting for a stab in the back.

One thing that greatly disadvantaged the Czechs was the German occupation of Austria which effectively outflanked much of their western defences. The Czechs did have a mobile force well equipped with vehicles and modern tanks but they lacked Germany's manpower and a lot of their troops were considered unreliable (Ethnic Germans and Slovakians IIRC). Still, all they had to do was hold on long enough for the French to come along and save the day!
 
But...Mc Monkey....

Historically Czechia was partitioned between the Germans and the Poles(of course what the Poles got was minor compared to Germany's). And the Slovaks fearing further partition by the Poles and Hungarians allied themselves with Germany. Hungary also grabbed about 1/3 of Slovak territory. After Munich that is.

There's got to be a wikipedia article somewhere.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaolzie
 
So i guess Germany getting promises of Polish neutrality would give them Zaolzie, while Hungary could invade from the south.

Ok sorry, i didn't read the hypothetical situation carefully. I don't think the Poles would go to war over it. I thought the Czechs would be on their own.
 
Well, i'm not against Polish people but......

In the Czech crisis, Poland govenment DID threated Czech together with Nazi. The Poland also swallowed some flesh of Czech.
At that time UK, France, Soviet all have an security guarantee to Czech.
But Poland changed the game. The geographical condition for Poland to attack Czech is better than Nazi, whose direction is more mountainous. With Poland joined the robber gang, it is unstopable without UK interven.
So UK played old good "balance" game, France was watching UK, and Soviet was glad to find that the Soviet-Czech agreement has a pre-condition article: France fulfill their obligation to Czech. So, None of them fulfilled.
(BTW Soviet is the only among these three that has far sight and responsibility seriously considered to fulfill obligation, it prepared its army, but found that it can't not go directly to Czech, Romania is in the way; it can't attack Poland, because UK/Fr still have treaty with Poland. It can do nothing)

And the side effect of this event threngthen Soviet's untrust to UK/Fr. Then for the Soviets, if those westeners can't be counted on, it is not a bad idea to sign a treaty to secure peace with Nazi.

This government deserves the humiliating defeat by Nazi in 1939. It is tragedy for Polish people to first be led by this government, then abandoned to Nazi by this government.

@Palaiologos2: hey you are quick. I just post a reply and find you've already explains Poland's role there.
 
I'm not disputing that Poland had any territorial claims over Chechoslovakia, but I do not see a situation where Poland would have launched a full on invasion of Czechoslovakia as the Soviets did in Poland in 1939. That is quite different to grabbing a bit of border territory when the worlds attention is focused on a much bigger takeover by the Germans. Its quite ironic that in 1938 Poland was still trying to grow its territory when the Nazi's were planning to grab the lot for themselves.

Munich was the ideal opportunity for France and Britain, supported by Poland and Czechoslovakia, to deal a swift and decisive blow against the Nazi's and prevent the larger war that was to follow. If they hadn't been through the first world war I'm sure they would have done the right thing, but the memories of the slaughter on the western front weighed heavy on the mind. Sometimes war is the only option!

If Nazi Germany had been defeated in 1938 I wonder how European history would have panned out over the next few years?
 
@McMonkey:
It is not only a problem of "territorial claims" or "full on invasion".
At that time Nazi Germany is the single most powerful in East Europe and also showed most aggressive in whole Eurepe.
In this case, for the smaller powers in East Europe, the only wise choice is to find allies, unite and help each other against aggression. Just as your suggestion.
Soviet tryed to do this, not because it is kind hearted, but because it realized it was then much weaker than Germany, it needs friends to against a huge foe.
However Poland didn't think alike, it think itself to be a somewhat eaqual power to Germany, so the best prepare for a Nazi threat is to enhance itself, even if it means to sacrifice a potential ally against Nazi aggression.
While at the same time Hungary also took this changce robbed Chechoslovakia, but Hungary is a little bit smarter than Poland that it choose to be a Axies vassal state.
After this event the idea of "Mutual Security" in East Europe went bankrupt. Everyone in East Europe understands that you can't count on the Westens, and you can't count on your neighbours. So everyone began prepare to fight for itself and on itself. Typically the Soviet began its ruthless acquiring of "Buffer Zone" from Poland and Finland.
Ironic as you said.

If UK,Fr,Po all performed more wise and far sight, it is very likely that war can be avoided by NOT Fear TO GO TO A WAR. Even if Nazi may still risk a fight, it can by no way go far. Thus Nazi would be likely to meet some internal problems to drive it down.
 
IIRC the Polish-Czech dispute was older than 1938. It went back in the 1920s when the then disputed territory was invaded by the Czechs during the Polish-Soviet war. Can't really remember the details, but it certainly left a grudge. Therefore that anti-German alliance could never materialize.
But Mcmonkey i too believe that the Poles wouldn't go to war with the French and British over Zaolzie, despite what i said earlier-i had read your hypothetical scenario with haste.
More propably they would have asked for Zaolzie from the krauts in order to stay neutral.
The Hungarians on the other hand....
 
To say something positive to poland it must be mentioned, that if they would not have stopped the red tide in the battle of warsaw in 1920, then the face of europe and the following WWII would be vastly different from what is known today.
 
Sorry to disapoint you Hans99 but the Poles were the attackers in that one.
Or at least not the defenders. And it was the Ukranians too, not just the Poles.


The commies did at least abandon their plans for the international revolution.
 
After thinking about this, I think an alternate route linked to one central premise would be quite viable. Germany (Hitler) not making one or more key early mistakes, like: Finishing Off Gibraltar/North Africa/Suez Canal before bothering with Russia (plus believing Enigma Machine to be uncrackable.)

This would then would buy Germany more time to bring new technologies into play, like

Elektro UBoats combined with Acoustic tiles like those used on U-480.
Jet Engines which had a life cycle of more than a few hours.
Heavy Bomber - despite its terrible teething problems the HE 177 was reasonably relaible by mid 1944.

Many of the 1944/45 weapons, like the ME262 were constrained by lack of access to raw/rare materials for new technologies. If the war had been stretched out a few years, the 3Reich might have been at its greatest geographical extent at the time when the nextgen weapons came online.

In order to execute this, you simply need a 'normal' WWII scenario, put in the best wonders like SETI, Adam Smith in Port Said, Malta and Gibralta, have events that give the 'communism' tech if the Axis capture Egypt, and add several advanced fictional units (like Panther II) to the tech tree at the end, such that there would be no way to reach them before defeat without getting the mediterranean wonders and free techs earlier.
 
Back
Top Bottom