What If: World War Two

[Brian Shanahan]

Why, why, why does this idea keep popping up?

Because it's the only conceivable way that any regime whose whole raison d'etre was to wrest Lebensraum off the USSR had of actually winning.

Also if you read my post in full you would have realised that I was talking of it as one of a series of very improbable events. Even with the lack of action in the Balkans I feel would have been neccessary it was still a very long shot (lack of manpower and munitions, large area to conquer, and with Nazi racial policy a very hostile back area).
As it was the Russian invasion was a million to one shot (and I don't mean it in the Discworld sense).

 

[ParkCungHee]

No, I mean that Barbarossa was delayed because of the invasion of Yugoslavia. Barbarossa was delayed because the Generalstab pointed out that an invasion of the USSR was unfeasable any earlier because of climate.

 

[Grishnash]

See, that first post has a Timeframe on which history is played out.
As you can see Hitler does not invade Russia, makes peace with the Allies and is not presently at war with America. The whole time frame for 1941 is set, it wasn't so much a debate on how history could have been different but how it would be Given the timeline set out in the Original Post.
In the Timeline, Barbarossa was abandoned for who knows what reason.
Some might say it was because Hitler foresaw a prolonged war with Russia, and wanted to end things while he was ahead.

All in all, the Timeline is already set (See first post)

 

[zhaoshuais]

Then I try to follow your timeline.
Although Japanese Navy fought better than real history,and might sunk all the CV of US navy,they could not defeat USA.
Feb 1942,Japanese Navy attempted to land on America,but failed.Although they had controled the whole Pacific,the Zero fighters carried by their CVs were not enough for a massive dogfight against all the fighters of USA,and the soldiers they could land were not enough,either.The tank and artillery of Japanese army were also laughable at that time.
San Francisco and Los angeles were almost ruined in the war,but the productivity of USA was not reduced much.
Mar 1942,Hitler claimed that it's impossible to help Japan,as he did not have enough ships to cross the Atlantic.What's more,USSR was becoming stronger and stronger,and he had to keep his army in Europe,as Stalin might change his mind at any time.He also need to control all the lands he got from UK,including Africa and Middle east.At last,after a cruel war,Germany needed peace to hold all the land they obtained in the war firmly,and actualize all the promises he made to everyone before the war.
In fact,I suppose that Hitler could realize that Japan would finally lose the war against USA because of low productivity.And he really need peace to change all the potential of the newly occupied lands into real military strength,even into the living standard of German people,as he promised before the war.
Apr 1942,Stalin decided to provide fighters,bombers,tanks and all other equipments for Mao,as he found out that although USA could finally win the war against Japan,they could do nothing from 1942 to 1944,and he would produce too much weapon in 1943 and 1944 without the war against Nazi.Now he could hold the west line firmly,and although he could not declare a war against Japan because of Hitler's attitude,through helping Mao,he could achieve same goal even earlier.
May 1942,USSR declared war on UK to obtain India,as UK had lost almost all the military strength in the war against Nazi,and if USSR standed still,Japan would got India.Although Japanese was really angry,they could do nothing as they were afraid of USSR's military strength.USA also kept silent,as they knew that they would have nothing to gain if they launch a war against USSR under such condition,but Chiang Kai-shek declared war against USSR and Mao at once,as the war would cut off the last channel for him to get weapon and supply from USA and UK,and Mao would grow out of control with weapon supply from USSR.Of course,Chiang Kai-shek knew that USSR would defeat him easily,but he had no choice.
June 1942,Japan made peace with Chiang Kai-shek,as both sides were in danger because of Stalin's decision.At the same time,Mao had equiped all his army with newest weapons from USSR.
Aug 1942,Japan finally conquered whole Australia,New Zealand,and all the southeast Asia.
At same time,USSR successfully conquered India,all the UK army retreated to China and joined Chiang's side.
Chiang's army surrounded Yan'an,attempted to defeat Mao before the arrival of reinforcement from USSR.
Sep 1942,reinforcement from USSR arrived on time,and Chiang suffered a great defeat.
Japan asked Nazi if they could declare war on USSR together,but Hitler rejected,as although Stalin sent part of his troops to India and China,he left even more troops in Europe than one year ago,and they were more prepared,but Hitler's troops were still scattered here and there,as he got too much land in a short time,and UK was not defeated completely,either.
Oct 1942,Japan asked USSR to divide China with a pact,but Stalin rejected at once,and Mao told everyone that he would not sign any pact until all the invaders were drove out of China.
Nov 1942,Chiang had to retreat to Sichuan to maintain the last line of defence with the help of mountainous area,where USSR's tanks could not pass.
Mao launched several battles against Japanese,and obtained great success with the help of advanced weapons and local peasants.Japanese army's weakness exposed completely in these battles.In fact,compared with USSR weapons,Japanese weapons were completely out of date.



USA Navy could get back their advantage in early 1944,even they lost all their carriers in 1941.But according to my plan,USSR might be able to defeat Japan before that.And Hitler's best choice was to keep silent and let Japan to be defeated.

 

[Brian Shanahan]

See, that first post has a Timeframe on which history is played out.
As you can see Hitler does not invade Russia, makes peace with the Allies and is not presently at war with America. The whole time frame for 1941 is set, it wasn't so much a debate on how history could have been different but how it would be Given the timeline set out in the Original Post.
In the Timeline, Barbarossa was abandoned for who knows what reason.
Some might say it was because Hitler foresaw a prolonged war with Russia, and wanted to end things while he was ahead.

All in all, the Timeline is already set (See first post)

For Germany not to invade Russia though it would have neccessitated the Nazis not being in power and every senior officer of the Wehrmacht dying, Lebenraum in the east at the expense of the Slavs was the one sing driving goal behind everything that Hitler implemented. The war in the West was simply because Hitler overestimated the amount of humiliation France and the UK would take before striking back. He eventually was planning on going to war in the West, but preferably after beating the Russians, andbeing essentially master of Europe.
Once the Nazis consolidated their power a Europe wide war was nigh on a given fact.

 

[Leifmk]

For Germany not to invade Russia though it would have neccessitated the Nazis not being in power and every senior officer of the Wehrmacht dying,

More or less. Essentially, it would require Germany not being run by Hitler.

One half-baked scenario I came up with some time ago does allow for a Nazi (or at least Fascist) Germany which can expand to the East and actually win. In order to make this possible, we have to eliminate the Soviet Union ahead of time. Go back to the aftermath of the Revolution and change the outcome of the Civil War, and have the Russian Empire collapse into several different smaller squabbling states motivated by different ideologies or no ideology at all -- essentially, a Russian version of what happened in China. Nazis or Fascists can still gain power in Germany; the main scarecrow might be anarchism and chaos rather than apparently monolithic Communism. Expansion towards the East can be excused by the need to secure borders against the chaos, and done piecemeal. Puppet regimes, treaties with client states, divide-and-conquer imperialism, etc.

 

[plarq]

Then I try to follow your timeline.
Although Japanese Navy fought better than real history,and might sunk all the CV of US navy,they could not defeat USA.
Feb 1942,Japanese Navy attempted to land on America,but failed.Although they had controled the whole Pacific,the Zero fighters carried by their CVs were not enough for a massive dogfight against all the fighters of USA,and the soldiers they could land were not enough,either.The tank and artillery of Japanese army were also laughable at that time.
San Francisco and Los angeles were almost ruined in the war,but the productivity of USA was not reduced much.
Mar 1942,Hitler claimed that it's impossible to help Japan,as he did not have enough ships to cross the Atlantic.What's more,USSR was becoming stronger and stronger,and he had to keep his army in Europe,as Stalin might change his mind at any time.He also need to control all the lands he got from UK,including Africa and Middle east.At last,after a cruel war,Germany needed peace to hold all the land they obtained in the war firmly,and actualize all the promises he made to everyone before the war.
In fact,I suppose that Hitler could realize that Japan would finally lose the war against USA because of low productivity.And he really need peace to change all the potential of the newly occupied lands into real military strength,even into the living standard of German people,as he promised before the war.
Apr 1942,Stalin decided to provide fighters,bombers,tanks and all other equipments for Mao,as he found out that although USA could finally win the war against Japan,they could do nothing from 1942 to 1944,and he would produce too much weapon in 1943 and 1944 without the war against Nazi.Now he could hold the west line firmly,and although he could not declare a war against Japan because of Hitler's attitude,through helping Mao,he could achieve same goal even earlier.
May 1942,USSR declared war on UK to obtain India,as UK had lost almost all the military strength in the war against Nazi,and if USSR standed still,Japan would got India.Although Japanese was really angry,they could do nothing as they were afraid of USSR's military strength.USA also kept silent,as they knew that they would have nothing to gain if they launch a war against USSR under such condition,but Chiang Kai-shek declared war against USSR and Mao at once,as the war would cut off the last channel for him to get weapon and supply from USA and UK,and Mao would grow out of control with weapon supply from USSR.Of course,Chiang Kai-shek knew that USSR would defeat him easily,but he had no choice.
June 1942,Japan made peace with Chiang Kai-shek,as both sides were in danger because of Stalin's decision.At the same time,Mao had equiped all his army with newest weapons from USSR.
Aug 1942,Japan finally conquered whole Australia,New Zealand,and all the southeast Asia.
At same time,USSR successfully conquered India,all the UK army retreated to China and joined Chiang's side.
Chiang's army surrounded Yan'an,attempted to defeat Mao before the arrival of reinforcement from USSR.
Sep 1942,reinforcement from USSR arrived on time,and Chiang suffered a great defeat.
Japan asked Nazi if they could declare war on USSR together,but Hitler rejected,as although Stalin sent part of his troops to India and China,he left even more troops in Europe than one year ago,and they were more prepared,but Hitler's troops were still scattered here and there,as he got too much land in a short time,and UK was not defeated completely,either.
Oct 1942,Japan asked USSR to divide China with a pact,but Stalin rejected at once,and Mao told everyone that he would not sign any pact until all the invaders were drove out of China.
Nov 1942,Chiang had to retreat to Sichuan to maintain the last line of defence with the help of mountainous area,where USSR's tanks could not pass.
Mao launched several battles against Japanese,and obtained great success with the help of advanced weapons and local peasants.Japanese army's weakness exposed completely in these battles.In fact,compared with USSR weapons,Japanese weapons were completely out of date.



USA Navy could get back their advantage in early 1944,even they lost all their carriers in 1941.But according to my plan,USSR might be able to defeat Japan before that.And Hitler's best choice was to keep silent and let Japan to be defeated.

Who would try to land on US? Japan would try to land in Australia and Hawaii.

 

[REDY]

More or less. Essentially, it would require Germany not being run by Hitler.

One half-baked scenario I came up with some time ago does allow for a Nazi (or at least Fascist) Germany which can expand to the East and actually win. In order to make this possible, we have to eliminate the Soviet Union ahead of time. Go back to the aftermath of the Revolution and change the outcome of the Civil War, and have the Russian Empire collapse into several different smaller squabbling states motivated by different ideologies or no ideology at all -- essentially, a Russian version of what happened in China. Nazis or Fascists can still gain power in Germany; the main scarecrow might be anarchism and chaos rather than apparently monolithic Communism. Expansion towards the East can be excused by the need to secure borders against the chaos, and done piecemeal. Puppet regimes, treaties with client states, divide-and-conquer imperialism, etc.

I think that if Germany would not have such racist ideology againist slavs and jews and promised national states, they should get support among opressed people. This should lead to chaos which you described, of course it would be pretty hard task for German propaganda to make such groups as UPA among whole Russia.

 

[Mathalamus]

to me there is NO WAY that Nazi Germany would win at all. ever. my alternate time lines puts the height of nazi power from Ankara ( yeah they took Constantinople..) in middle east, Moscow in Russia and the same as real history for the west.

in my history the Confederate states of America joined the axis. the war lasted until 1957 at the defeat of the confederacy somewhere at Kansas.

if i let the Germans win, i feel like because ill be basically supporting Nazism. Nazi Germany CANNOT be allowed to live.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

To conquer Britain,enough airplanes were enough.Although Royal Air Force had successfully held the Channel for several months with the help of radar,if Nazi did not divide their air force in at least 3 directions,including north africa,east europe and the Channel,they could finally outnumber the Royal Air Force and control the Channel after several months,or may be a year.

Sorry, but this is just wrong. The Germans weren't outracing the British in aircraft production, the British were deliberately withholding full RAF numbers from southern England. And the Battle of Britain was over a full year before the invasion of the Soviet Union began or German troops entered North Africa, so their deterioration in numbers was most certainly not due to demands elsewhere.

And if the air force could sink all the ships in the Channel,and clear an area with bombs,Nazi soldiers could even cross the Channel in the small wooden boats,or any kind of ships they could find.

But it wouldn't. The Luftwaffe had immense trouble hitting stationary warships that weren't fighting back during the Dunkirk evacuation, what makes you think they could stand against the might of the Royal Navy, at sea, and moving?

But in order to conquer USA,they needed carriers and all other kind of warships.

And time-traveling aliens.

we need Dachs here

Why? He would just scoff at it, as do I.

 

[zhaoshuais]

In fact,I suppose that Germany was still run by Bismarck.

If the the invasion of the Soviet Union never happened,Nazi would be able to control Egypt and Middle East after 1 year,and then the fuel supply might become a problem for RAF.
And Nazi produced slightly more fighters than UK in the World War Two.We should notice that they could not produce much in 1944 and 1945,when massive bomb raid destroyed most of the factories in Germany,and the resources shortage greatly hampered Nazi from producing more fighters.If all these above did not happen,Luftwaffe would get more fighters after 1942.
Only a few years after the Dunkirk evacuation,Japanese and American proved that it's possible for the air force to achieve that goal,as their bombers sunk battleships and carriers.2-3 years was enough for Luftwaffe to make changes and turn everything around,but because of the invasion of the Soviet Union,they had no chance to prove that.

In fact,Hitler also respect the most famous German leader,Bismarck,so did his generals and followers.Bismarck tried hard to maintain an alliance between Germany and Russia,as he knew that if Russia was the enemy of Germany,and cooperate with France,Germany would be defeated.And when Hitler decided to sign a pact with Stalin,most of his followers could understand his decision.
No matter what ideology Hitler believed,if he learned the history carefully,he could realize that invading Russia could only lead to the destruction of Germany.So the war should not happen at all,no one should make a decision which would kill himself later.It's stupid to challenge the conclusion made by a lot of famous leaders including Napoleon and Bismarck.

 

[zhaoshuais]

The reason why I let Japan to attempt a landing on US is that the only chance for Japan to win the Pacific war was to destroy all the carriers after 1943 in the shipyards and factories,reduce the productivity of USA,and even achieve more victory on the land of America.If Japanese could not achieve that goal,they would lose the war at last for sure.Their general knew that clearly.
Of course,the land could not success at all.But if I was him,I would attempt to land on USA.

If you can not conquer a country,you had to allow it to alive,not all the wish can become true.

 

[Lord Baal]

And time-traveling aliens.

Funnily enough, that story arc also included the chaotic, weakened Russia described by Leifmk. And the Germans still lost the war in that time line!

In fact,I suppose that Germany was still run by Bismarck.

Bismarck had many talents, but the ability to run a country a good 40 years after his death wasn't really among them. Even if he had this rare and magical ability, why exactly would he start a suicidal war? After he achieved German unification, he focused on a policy of avoiding even minor conflicts with Germany's neighbours, let alone massive global warfare.

If the the invasion of the Soviet Union never happened,Nazi would be able to control Egypt and Middle East after 1 year,and then the fuel supply might become a problem for RAF.

No, they couldn't. They were stopped at El Alamein even before Rommel began hurting for supplies. And without needing to supply Russia, the US would simply send more Lend-Lease to Britain for use in Egypt.

And Nazi produced slightly more fighters than UK in the World War Two.We should notice that they could not produce much in 1944 and 1945,when massive bomb raid destroyed most of the factories in Germany,and the resources shortage greatly hampered Nazi from producing more fighters.If all these above did not happen,Luftwaffe would get more fighters after 1942.

Too bad for your argument that Nazi war production peaked in 1944, and would have been even greater in 1945 if the country hadn't been defeated in May.

Only a few years after the Dunkirk evacuation,Japanese and American proved that it's possible for the air force to achieve that goal,as their bombers sunk battleships and carriers.2-3 years was enough for Luftwaffe to make changes and turn everything around,but because of the invasion of the Soviet Union,they had no chance to prove that.

The Pearl Harbour attack was based on the British raid at Taranto that destroyed much of the Italian Navy in port, so the British were well-aware of this possibility, probably moreso than any other nation at the time, seeing as how they were the only nation to have ever pulled this sort of attack off. What you don't understand is that the Royal Navy didn't stupidly sit in port in range of enemy bombers. Nor was the Luftwaffe equipped for the sort of long-range torpedo-bombing missions that the Japanese Navy was, being designed for continental rather than long range naval combat. You can't just switch production by snapping your fingers, and the time it would take Germany to redesign and re-tool to produce such bombers would be time in which the RAF tightened its defences to the point that such bombers were obsolete, as happened to the Japanese late in their war with the US.

Not only that, but if you really think Stalin would calmly sit by and allow Germany to become increasingly powerful for 2-3 years, you're a fool. He didn't invade Germany earlier because he didn't think he could win. That simple. He was wrong, but he wasn't alone in believing Germany to be stronger than it actually was. If he actually thought Germany capable of doing what you describe, he'd throw in his lot with the West in a heartbeat. He'd already tried to do so in 1939, but Britain, France and most notably Poland had rejected his advances, causing him to turn to Germany instead.

In fact,Hitler also respect the most famous German leader,Bismarck,so did his generals and followers.Bismarck tried hard to maintain an alliance between Germany and Russia,as he knew that if Russia was the enemy of Germany,and cooperate with France,Germany would be defeated.And when Hitler decided to sign a pact with Stalin,most of his followers could understand his decision.
No matter what ideology Hitler believed,if he learned the history carefully,he could realize that invading Russia could only lead to the destruction of Germany.So the war should not happen at all,no one should make a decision which would kill himself later.It's stupid to challenge the conclusion made by a lot of famous leaders including Napoleon and Bismarck.

Napoleon didn't conclude that Russia couldn't be defeated; he invaded them, and captured Moscow. He lost because his supply lines were too long and the Russian scorched earth strategy deprived him of local sources. If he'd withdrawn after teaching the Russians a lesson instead of ocupying Moscow he might have humbled the country.

As for Bismarck, he never had reason to fear Russia; they were never hostile to German or Prussian interests during his tenure. In fact, they were quite favourably inclined to Germany, unless I'm forgetting an incident of ill-will between the two.

Germany was pretty much screwed from the moment the US entered the war against it, and it wasn't much better off beforehand. The British Empire alone was probably capable of defeating Germany, but it would have taken longer. Adding first Russia, then the US to the picture merely hastened Germany's demise.

 

[Leifmk]

The British Empire alone was probably capable of defeating Germany, but it would have taken longer.

Pretty much. The Empire/Commonwealth alone dwarfed Germany in economic terms as well as manpower potential, was and would remain impossible for the Germans to invade in a meaningful way, and had the only nuke project that was going anywhere at the start of the war (see "Tube Alloys").

 

[zhaoshuais]

Lord Baal,you know that if US and USSR never joined the war,UK could only expect to survive from the war at most.Rommel asked for more supplies and troops earlier,but Hitler rejected as he planned to invade USSR.If Hitler concentrated on that battlefield and put in more troops and resources,he could really change the results in Egypt.
Without joining the war directly,the supply ability of USA was limited by the rule of war.If most of the troops which appeared on the land of USSR moved to Egypt,only more supply could not save UK from being defeated.

If Stalin decided to invade Nazi first,he could not prevent USA from growing out of control,as this war would break the only way of balance.USA would get the west europe as in the real history,and USSR would also suffer in the cold war.Ranking 2/3 should avoid the war against each other,as both side would suffer at last.

Yes,later Japanese bombers were obsolete,but the main reason was that USA produced more and better fighters,and controled the whole sky firmly.Instead,in 1943 and 1944,Nazi was producing better fighters than UK,although their production reached peak in 1944,without bomb raid and resources shortage,they would produce even more ME262s,but without any difficulties above,UK only produced so much fighters,so if UK fought independently,although they might hold the Channel firmly before 1943,they would gradually lose the war in 1943 and 1944.

If British Empire could achieve that goal independently,why they lost the whole France and Western Europe at beginning?They had enough time to prepare,and the war had begun for several months when Hitler finally invaded France.If Hitler was losing the war against UK,he would not invade USSR at all.

Napoleon made the conclusion that USA and Russia would replace UK in future before his death.After his failure,he realized that no one could overcome all the difficulties he experienced in Russia,including the long supply line and the cold weather.

Bismarck tried his best to avoid the war against Russia and France occur at same time,and he told everyone that they should try their best to avoid that,at that time,Russia might be weaker,but Bismarck understood that he could not overcome the difficulty found out by Napoleon,so peace was the only choice for him.According to the pact and the 2/3 ranking,avoiding that war was really possible if both side made right decision.

 

[Dachs]

Lord Baal,you know that if US and USSR never joined the war,UK could only expect to survive from the war at most.Rommel asked for more supplies and troops earlier,but Hitler rejected as he planned to invade USSR.If Hitler concentrated on that battlefield and put in more troops and resources,he could really change the results in Egypt.
Without joining the war directly,the supply ability of USA was limited by the rule of war.If most of the troops which appeared on the land of USSR moved to Egypt,only more supply could not save UK from being defeated.

Don't go overboard. German offensive capabilities in Egypt were limited by higher leadership, but even more than that they were limited by Royal Navy superiority in the Mediterranean and the inherent logistical problems one faces when one is attempting to fight a war in a desert. Hitler would never have been able to concentrate his forces as fully on the British in North Africa as he could have concentrated on the Soviet Union.

If British Empire could achieve that goal independently,why they lost the whole France and Western Europe at beginning?They had enough time to prepare,and the war had begun for several months when Hitler finally invaded France.

One might as well ask why the Russians lost the Battle of Smolensk if they could supposedly defeat Napoleon, or why the French lost the Battles of the Frontiers so badly if they could supposedly defeat the German Empire. One campaign does not always decide a war, and British global resources were still quite formidable after Hitler made the trip to Compiègne.

If Hitler was losing the war against UK,he would not invade USSR at all.

One of the reasons Hitler ordered the invasion of the Soviet Union is because he was losing the war against the UK.

Napoleon made the conclusion that USA and Russia would replace UK in future before his death.After his failure,he realized that no one could overcome all the difficulties he experienced in Russia,including the long supply line and the cold weather.

Wasn't that Alexis de Tocqueville? Anyway, the disadvantages of Russian space are eminently surmountable. Even Erich Ludendorff figured out how to win a war against Russia, and he wasn't exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer.

Bismarck tried his best to avoid the war against Russia and France occur at same time,and he told everyone that they should try their best to avoid that,at that time,Russia might be weaker,but Bismarck understood that he could not overcome the difficulty found out by Napoleon,so peace was the only choice for him.According to the pact and the 2/3 ranking,avoiding that war was really possible if both side made right decision.

Otto von Bismarck, after 1871, didn't just do his best to diplomatically avoid enemies on two fronts, but absolutely avoided all war at virtually any cost. His treaties were designed to keep Germany neutral during any conflict so as to be able to play the part of honest broker if it ever came to a war, between Russia and Austria-Hungary or between Britain and France, or what have you.

 

[Lord Baal]

Just to add slightly to what Dachs said, it must be noted that the UK was in danger of capitulation - that is, surrendering, as France did - it was never actually in danger of defeat. It's industrial and economic capacity massively outweighed Germany.

For that matter, it's a debateable proposition as to whether France was in danger of defeat or not. From Charles De Gaulle's subsequent success with the resources of French Equatorial Africa, it would seem that France was more than capable of holding on against the Germans, if only they hadn't capitulated due to Petain's collaborationist agenda.

Regarding fighter craft, British fighters - notably the Spitfire - were seen as the best in the world during the Battle of Britain, far superior to their German counterparts. When they were finally surpassed in terms of quality, it was by the Russians, not the Germans. I understand that Stukas were superior bombers to anything the British had at the time, but fighters outweigh those in importance in a contest like the Battle of Britain. In fact, when Hermann Goering asked his second-in-command what he needed to win the Battle of Britain, the second - whose name currently escapes me - stated; "a Spitfire." I think the second-in-command of the Luftwaffe would have a better idea of the quality of both German and British fighter craft than either you or I.

As for the US joining the war, they were fighting an undeclared, unofficial naval war with Germany in the Atlantic in 1940, during and after the Battle of Britain. FDR was limited in his official courses of action, but he was certainly throwing every bone to the British that he could. He wanted in the war, and badly, even enough to attempt to goad Japan into attacking US ships in Southeast Asia - eerily similar to the Gulf of Tonkin incident, actually.

Napoleon actually complained that he could have defeated Russia if he'd been smarter, although he tended to blame his mistakes on his subordinates. It was Alexis de Tocqueville you're thinking of.

Bismarck could easily have pursued a very belligerent policy in Europe, given Germany's shattering victory over France, previously seen as the power on the continent, and done so more successfully than his successors. He knew, however, that such a policy would be self-defeating in the long-term - and he wasn't an expansionist to begin with, being concerned not with territory, but power - so he did exactly what Dachs said; he pursued a policy of peaceful coexistence. I don't want to say neutrality, as he picked sides, but he very much wanted peace.

 

[zhaoshuais]

At that time,Axis had controled the whole Southern Europe,if Hitler really want to win the war at Egypt,he could force Turkey to choose side at once(If Turkey rejected to open border,Nazi would declare war on Turkey to destroy the rock on the way).Under such condition,Royal Navy superiority in the Mediterranean could not prevent Nazi any more,as they could find another way on the land to conquer Middle East,and UK had to deal with almost all the troops which invaded USSR in the real history.Of course,Hitler could win that easily.

In the real history,Hitler hoped that Turkey would help him when he invaded USSR.But Turkey only gathered troops at the border,and did not enter the war.

 

[Dachs]

Yeah, cause messing around in the Straits totally wasn't going to bring the Communists down on the Nazis' head, NAP or no.

 

[zhaoshuais]

Later in 1943,Luftwaffe really got better fighters,that was Me262 jet fighters.
Under unofficial condition,without the permission from Senate,FDR's action was limited strictly.If Hitler really concentrated on Egypt and Middle East,he could not change the result,either.And if Nazi and Japan could understand what was happening in USA,they could keep FDR in that condition for ever.

Bismarck chose peace because Germany really needed peace to hold newly occupied lands firmly at that time.But if he could finally change all the newly occupied lands into military strength,and found out that he could get rid of the worst enemy of Germany for ever and without being punished later,he would eliminate France and UK,but maintain peace with USA and USSR as a kind of new balance.