Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

Devilfish

What if WW2 never happened?

Recommended Posts

So, we'll accept that Hitler took power and set Germany on the path to war.  But, in 1937, after he reveals his plans to his subordinates, for world domination, several of the Generals are horrified that Germany could be plunged into another horrific war.
Hitler and his main henchmen are "removed" in early 1938.

Fast forward to 1945, and a now recovered Germany is hosting an airshow at Berlin Tempelhof.

The RAF send over some of it's premier fighters for display.

One of these is the Boulton Paul Defiant, seen as the premier anti-bomber fighter. Resplendent in it's highly polished metalwork, the Defiant, along with the RAF's main frontline fighter, the Hurricane, were stars of the show.

 

41738235994_e83b612bea_z.jpgDSC_0018 by Paul Carter, on Flickr

40652991030_b9b6ceafe0_z.jpgDSC_0020 by Paul Carter, on Flickr

41558907775_b9fa5b608f_z.jpgDSC_0019 by Paul Carter, on Flickr

42410757662_4b862d5be7_z.jpgDSC_0021 by Paul Carter, on Flickr

28588678258_3c214a4306_z.jpgDSC_0023 by Paul Carter, on Flickr

28588677848_b0825a7f8c_z.jpgDSC_0022 by Paul Carter, on Flickr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting idea. Progress that was so accelerated by WW2 would have stalled, & the Defiant & Hurricane would likely have still been the top of the RAFs heap, I like. :)

Steve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, stevehnz said:

Interesting idea. Progress that was so accelerated by WW2 would have stalled, & the Defiant & Hurricane would likely have still been the top of the RAFs heap, I like. :)

Steve.

That was my thoughts. The Spitfire, while technically superior, was expensive and difficult to build, so, in this reality, it would be just a footnote, only equipping 2 squadrons

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 31/05/2018 at 09:02, Devilfish said:

That was my thoughts. The Spitfire, while technically superior, was expensive and difficult to build, so, in this reality, it would be just a footnote, only equipping 2 squadrons

I think I might have said this on another site, but I suspect Uncle Joe might have been tempted to waltz into Europe à la C&C: Red Alert...

 

Still, very nice job, what's next? Silver Whirlwind?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, charlie_c67 said:

I think I might have said this on another site, but I suspect Uncle Joe might have been tempted to waltz into Europe à la C&C: Red Alert...

 

Still, very nice job, what's next? Silver Whirlwind?

Hurricane.

 

I'm not so sure about Stalin.  He created a buffer zone after the war because of what happened during it.  Germany had a non aggression pact with Russia in 1938, so there's no reason to assume after Hitler's demise, that would not continue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎6‎/‎5‎/‎2018 at 12:30 PM, Devilfish said:

Hurricane.

 

I'm not so sure about Stalin.  He created a buffer zone after the war because of what happened during it.  Germany had a non aggression pact with Russia in 1938, so there's no reason to assume after Hitler's demise, that would not continue.

I Agree. If Stalin had stayed in power to 1945 he may have had another one of his purges. The Red army may not have been in any fit state to take the initiative.

 

MM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, missile-monkey said:

I Agree. If Stalin had stayed in power to 1945 he may have had another one of his purges. The Red army may not have been in any fit state to take the initiative.

Stalin was in power until his death in 1953 and he had a 'purge' from 1945 to 1949; almost 1.5 million ex PoW were imprisoned and there were about 150,000 deportations of civilians

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 05/06/2018 at 12:30, Devilfish said:

Hurricane.

 

I'm not so sure about Stalin.  He created a buffer zone after the war because of what happened during it.  Germany had a non aggression pact with Russia in 1938, so there's no reason to assume after Hitler's demise, that would not continue.

 

That said, he had hoped that a prolonged war in the west between France, Germany and the U.K. would leave the USSR as the dominant power. Makes you wonder what would've happened had France invaded Germany soon after the invasion of Poland, or the western front in 1940 had gone on for longer...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Black Knight said:

Stalin was in power until his death in 1953 and he had a 'purge' from 1945 to 1949; almost 1.5 million ex PoW were imprisoned and there were about 150,000 deportations of civilians

I'm familiar with the figures of German POWs in Russia. Nearly 3 million and just over 350,000 died in captivity. I was also aware of the mass deportation of civilians.

 

However the original question posed by devilfish was 'What if WW2 never happened?' The Generals replace Hitler and his muckers. Germany slowly rebuilds. One would presume no invasion of Poland, so no French or British war with Germany. No Barbarossa. No Holocaust, one would hope. So no exodus of Jewish survivors from Europe to Palestine. So, maybe no state of Israel ? 

 

What would Stalin and Russia do if no WW2? Would Stalin rebuild after the 1936 - 38 purges and invade Poland from the East, or would he have another wibbble and a second round of purges, say in the early 40s.  

 

Interesting. What do others think?

 

Regards

 

MM... 

Edited by missile-monkey
Fat fingers little keyboard !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎6‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 1:31 PM, missile-monkey said:

 

What would Stalin and Russia do if no WW2? Would Stalin rebuild after the 1936 - 38 purges and invade Poland from the East, or would he have another wibbble and a second round of purges, say in the early 40s.  

 

 

Interesting that you mention Poland, as Stalin had his eye on Poland and Finland. Would he have invaded on his own?  Was his army in any fit state to do so?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finland fought and gained its independence from Russia in 1917. Stalin wanted that territory back and worried at Finland. They had war ; The Winter War of 1939 into 1940, after a brief period of peace the Soviet Union attacked Finland again - The Continuation War - thats when Nazi Germany moved into Finland to help and extended their lines against the USSR. In November 1939 to March 1940 the USSR was not involved in the 2nd European War

So yes, Stalin thought his army was capable of invading and taking over Finland. He was wrong

Prior to this the USSR had border conflicts [in the 1920s] with Poland as Stalin tried to get back territory Russia had lost on the formation of the new Poland

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is hard not to believe that even had WW2 in Europe as we knew it never occurred, the cold war could well have still happened, albeit based around different borders with a United Europe defending its borders against Stalinist expansionism. Would the USA have become involved, that might depend on if a Pacific war had occurred, likely,I feel, which may have involved GB, France & the Netherlands in a scrap with Japan defending their colonies, possibly more successfully with better resources than they had in WW2, not being involved in a European war at the time. I feel it is unlikely that Stalin, without a direct threat to the Motherland, would have accomplished anything like the mobilisation that was achieved post Barbarossa so the Cold war may have been more a Chilly war with some territorial pushing & shoving but nothing like the aggression that was seen toward the end of WW2 & any front line would have been more likely to have been from Poland, through the Baltic states & into Finland.  Maybe there is a book in this somewhere. :)

Steve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, PhantomBigStu said:

If ww2 didn’t happen, we’d probably be damn bored as aircraft modellers 

No way, just think of the different schemes we'd have. :)

Steve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, stevehnz said:

.. Would the USA have become involved, that might depend on if a Pacific war had occurred, likely,I feel, which may have involved GB, France & the Netherlands in a scrap with Japan defending their colonies, possibly more successfully with better resources than they had in WW2,

I think the USA would have supplied the Europeans in your Chilly War.

The USA suffered most in the 1929 Stock Market crash and had an isolationist policy, it had very severe protectionist import taxes, a very vocal Anti-War lobby body [not just about WW2 but all the minor wars going on] based on their losses in WW1 . . . the Committee for Un-American Activities was starting to search out Communists - the CfU-AA was to become more infamous during the mid to late 1950s under Senator McCarthy; thus in that respect the US would help European counties facing aggression [even passive aggression] from a Communist country, and I suspect that there would be skirmishes between the two political ideas [SCW} and there would be US volunteers in those armies but no official involvement

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could go with that, it certainly fits in with my broader theme which I hesitated to develop any further.

Steve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good afternoon

 Very interesting post , I think that we should not forget Mr Mussolini and Mr Franco even if Spain has remained neutral in WWII .. 

I think that Hitler would not have been able to gain access to power and maintain without the support of German industrialists such as Dornier Messerschmidt Porsche for the best-known ...

 

Patrice

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TEMPESTMK5 said:

Good afternoon

Very interesting post , I think that we should not forget Mr Mussolini and Mr Franco even if Spain has remained neutral in WWII .. 

I think that Hitler would not have been able to gain access to power and maintain without the support of German industrialists such as Dornier Messerschmidt Porsche for the best-known ...

 

Patrice

I believe you have a point Patrice.

Il Duce was a bully, he only went to War after the Germans were successful in Poland the low countries and France.

and his 'assumed' feeling was that Italy was missing out, and he wanted control of the Suez canal.

With no assult by Germany would Mussolini have gone it alone?

On paper, Italy had by far and away the superior force, but without German backing, would Mussolini have been just another

'windbag', who would have been removed from power by the populace?

 

Spain I feel may have had a completely different outcome, as with no reason for the German's to back Franco,

and assuming that Soviet Russia continued supply of arms and aircraft to the Republican cause, there would have been the

chance of the Republicans being the victors.

 

Therefore Spain remains neutral, Italy, without the victory of Germany in Europe would have had no backing, so.................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good evening PhoenixII

   You are right but I am not so sure that '' in 1937, after he reveals his plans to his subordinates, for world domination, several of the Generals are horrified that Germany could be plunged into another horrific war. Hitler and his main henchmen are "removed" in early 1938. '' the opposition to Hitler could have been strong enough to remove him and his henchmen from power ... 

 What if ...

Best regards

 

Patrice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For WW2 to not happen, you'd have to do a lot more than just go back and remove Mr Hitler. National Socialism grew out of Germany's domestic discontent with the way WW1 ended and the demands from the victors; if Hitler hadn't done it, someone else would have, to a greater or lesser degree. You'd need to stop WW1, which means going back to before that started, and then removing the causes of that, which were all the treaties made by the politicians and diplomats of the time, the same treaties that led inexorably to war when Ferdinand was assassinated. No treaties, no war. (In and of itself, the death of Ferdinand wasn't a real reason to go to war- he was a minor and somewhat embarrassing para-royal, and not worth rattling a sabre over, let alone actually marching an army for. His death did, however, give certain people an excuse to invade, which tripped those treaties and led to WW1.) Most likely there would still have been a war, but a much more local and shorter one- working out who'd be on which side WITHOUT those treaties to bind them would be an interesting exercise (one that I'm not equipped to do.)

 

Have a look at Ben Elton's book 'Time and Again' for one possible take on it (although he only stops Ferdinand dying.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you need to prevent WW1? If the ongoing German reparations after WW1 had been reduced for good behaviour, replaced by an earlier-generation equivalent of Marshall Aid, or even just eased after the post-crash depression, maybe the German people wouldn't have turned in such numbers to someone offering them a different way out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tripod said:

Would you need to prevent WW1? If the ongoing German reparations after WW1 had been reduced for good behaviour,

 

Germany didn't get around to finally  repaying the (much reduced) WW1 debt until 2010. The actual amount wasn't the real issue, it was Germany's attitude that was the problem- basically, they (the Weimar Republic leaders and thinkers) didn't believe that the war was their fault and that therefore, they didn't owe anyone diddly. The limits on rearmament, forced return of lands and all the other non-monetary provisions were what stung the most, and were easily communicated to the German people as propaganda, along the lines of "Look what they're doing to us, and they want us bankrupt as well!", which led to the German people believing that they were being hard done by, which eventually led to Adolf being put in charge of the country, with the result that here in 2017, we get to argue about the colours of his aircraft.

 

The Wikipedia entry on the topic is quite comprehensive and comes recommended for further reading and clarification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At what point in the twentieth century did the British Empire stop viewing France as a potential military opponent ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...