From what point was Germany doomed during WWII?

[Tahuti]

Yeah, but AFAIK Britain had no any great successes in destroying German war industry before the USA joined to these operations.

Not yet, but they ultimately would, even without the USA. It's not unimaginable that without US entry, the British would have taken a shot at developing a nuke, and possibly use them.

Also despite the bombings German industrial production was constantly growing at least until early 1944.

Mainly because of Albert Speer. But Germany certainly wouldn't able to keep up anyway.

 

[say1988]

Yeah, but AFAIK Britain had no any great successes in destroying German war industry before the USA joined to these operations.

And bomb raids against the German industry were extremely costly for the Allies in the first period of the war.

Also despite the bombings German industrial production was constantly growing at least until early 1944.

I generally don't buy the fact that German industry grew as an argument against the bombing campaigns (there are other ones, mind you). While they wouldn't have made a decisive difference in this situation, ever bit of steel, every ball bearing, etc put into building AA guns or shells and other equipment stationed to protect industry was one bit that couldn't be used elsewhere, and every crewman on those guns could have been put on the front lines. Would this have made a decisive difference? Probably not. But every little bit counts when you are in such a situation and have the production and manpower to spare.
More importantly, even if the industry was growing, how much would it have grown without the bombing? Merely slowing growth can have a huge impact even if absolute numbers continue to rise.
There are plenty of good arguments about the value and cost of the bombing campaigns, but the idea that "German industry grew so they were worthless" is rubbish.

 

[Cutlass]

So, in figuring this out, how is the United States factored in? I figured, at a minimum, stepped up lend lease. Germany certainly couldn't outproduce both. Eventually, the sheer amount of material would allow the western forces to land somewhere. At a minimum, as bloody a campaign as it was, I don't think the allies would have been bogged down in Italy forever. If they were, they could still try a D-Day or move to Southern France. Germany could not guard the entire coast of France, Belgium, and Spain.

Do you mean before or after the US formally joined the war? Before they joined, the issue is just how much material were they willing to send. The ability of the US to produce war material greatly exceeded the Axis ability to do so. After the US joined the war, invasion of the continent was inevitable unless Germany found a way to peace first. They could not have stopped us. They might have made some location too difficult. But there was always different locations. I don't know that Britain could have invaded, even with full US material support, without US troop support. By that time manpower alone was something of an issue with Britain. I don't know if it was enough of an issue to stop them, but it would have been a challenge.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Yeah, if the US joined, Germany would be doomed either way (and I'm not being jingoistic, I think German invasion of the Soviet Union essentially sealed their deal).

 

[Domen]

It's not unimaginable that without US entry, the British would have taken a shot at developing a nuke, and possibly use them.

Nazi Germany was closer at developing a nuke than Britain ever was.

 

[Tahuti]

Nazi Germany was closer at developing a nuke than Britain ever was.

That is true, but first, Nazi Germany was by 1945 still miles away from a working nuke, and second, Britain historically had no motivation to develop a nuke because it wouldn't benefit them in any way (considering Germany also was at war with the USSR and the USA).

 

[Tee Kay]

That is true, but first, Nazi Germany was by 1945 still miles away from a working nuke, and second, Britain historically had no motivation to develop a nuke because it wouldn't benefit them in any way (considering Germany also was at war with the USSR and the USA).

That's not entirely accurate. It's just that the scale of the Manhattan Project makes British efforts look pale by comparison.

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

I always thought the Land-Lease was the critical turning point in an allied war effort.

Joseph Stalin, during the Tehran Conference in 1943, acknowledged publicly the importance of American efforts during a dinner at the conference: "Without American production the United Nations could never have won the war."

 

[Omega124]

I think Germany lost when they attacked Stalingrad. Everyone knows that once winter hits in Russia, you don't press foward. The city was important, for it was last line of defence before the Oil Fields, but attack when you have the advantage, not the other way.

 

[jlvfr]

That's not entirely accurate. It's just that the scale of the Manhattan Project makes British efforts look pale by comparison.

Indeed. Even if the brits had the scientists to do it, there is no way british industry was up for such a massive effort.

 

[Tahuti]

Indeed. Even if the brits had the scientists to do it, there is no way british industry was up for such a massive effort.

If the British economic capability wasn't up for such a thing, the German capability wouldn't be either. Especially when you count in the British strategic bombing campaigns.

 

[bombshoo]

If the British economic capability wasn't up for such a thing, the German capability wouldn't be either. Especially when you count in the British strategic bombing campaigns.

The V-2 Project, which was the most expensive German military project of the war, was nearly 1/3 of the cost of the Manhattan Project IIRC. Based on this, it's pretty doubtful the Germans would have been able to build the bomb, even if their science had been better.

Really, the only good thing that I can think actually came out of the V-2 program for Germany was that since the Allies didn't have a direct counter to it, they spent a lot of time bombing its production facilities instead of other German factories.

 

[Cutlass]

IIRC, the Germans had something of a nuclear project. But suspended it early on because they thought it would not pay off in time to be useful for the war.

 

[kdalibor]

IIRC, the Germans had something of a nuclear project. But suspended it early on because they thought it would not pay off in time to be useful for the war.

There was something on TV about it. History Chanel I guess.
If I remember correctly they miscalculated amount of uranium needed for a bomb. They thought much more is needed so they couldn't produce enough.

 

[rilnator]

I think Germany lost when they attacked Stalingrad. Everyone knows that once winter hits in Russia, you don't press foward. The city was important, for it was last line of defence before the Oil Fields, but attack when you have the advantage, not the other way.

I agree with this on some points. Splitting army group south and going after the Caucacus as well as Stalingrad was a fatal mistake.

In the summer Stalingrad was there for the taking but Hitler sent 4th Pz army south and the drive slowed down.

Not doing his utmost to destroy the British at Dunkirk was another major turning point.

 

[Dachs]

Winter's actually a great time to launch an offensive in Russia, provided you have the proper winter gear. The spring and fall rasputitsas, on the other hand, are hell to advance during.

 

[Domen]

Winter gear may be helpful for soldiers. But what about vehicles? What about logistics?

 

[Karalysia]

The mud dude. The mud is the problem, not the snow. In winter the ground is frozen. Your tanks don't sink into the roads.

 

[Dachs]

Yeah, that. The rasputitsa helped screw the Germans; the only things that could even sort of move quickly in the mud were tracked vehicles, and the Germans didn't have a whole lot of those outside of their breakdown-prone tanks. When the ground froze again in the late fall of 1941, the Nazis used their newfound mobility to launch Taifun.

 

[Birdjaguar]

I think the Germans lost the ability to win on 22 June 1941. They lost the war when they failed to knock the Soviets out in the winter of 1941. Hindsight says they should have sat on western Europe until Britain settled for a German peace.