Broken backed World War Two

[uk 75]

I have always been intrigued by the idea of a World War Two in Europe beginning with a less well prepared Germany.
Britain and France hoped to contain German attacks in the Low Countries in a re run of World War 1 while a naval blockade strangled Germany slowly but relentlessly.
Key to this would have been Czechoslovakia and Poland fulfiling their Versailles role in encircling Germany.
One might also add a less hostile attitude in Paris and London to the Soviet Union.
Rearmament on both sides might have been slower but with France still in the war and Scandinavia unoccupied new battleships would have appeared on all sides.
Depending on how much of Belgium and Holland were lost to Germany the Luftwaffe would have had further to fly to bomb Britain and France
Japan would also have had stronger opposition from the European colonial powers.
With a slower pace of war jet engined aircaft might still have appeared but in a less dramatic fashion.
Matilda IIs Somuas and PzIVs would have been the standard tanks.

 

[Desertfox]

Perhaps starting in 1938 with an invasion of the Sudetland?

 

[Apophenia]

... add a less hostile attitude in Paris and London to the Soviet Union. ...

To what end? The Franco-Soviet Treaty of Mutual Assistance had already been signed on 02 May 1935. It didn't help. Some have argued that was because the French insisted on keeping to Locarno. So, instead, maybe compare with the Czechoslovak–Soviet Treaty of Mutual Assistance (16 May 1935) which was a bit closer to a true military alliance?

That Cz-SU Mutual Assistance pact opened up some Soviet supplies to Prague (the best-known being the supply of Tupolev SBs). But the Soviets made no military response whatever to Wehrmacht troops moving into the Sudetenland in October 1939. [1] Ditto when Czechoslovak was finally carved-up on 15 March 1939 between a pro-Nazi Slovakia and the former Czechia itself being absorbed into the Reich.

Then, within 5 short months of that absorption, the German-Soviet Boundary and Friendship Treaty (Molotov-Ribbentrop) was signed in the Kremlin. The Nazis had known full well that the Czechoslovak–Soviet and Franco-Soviet pacts weren't worth the ink of their signatories. The only question in Berlin is whether Hitler would have time to betray this Friendship Treaty with the Soviets before Stalin did.

So, the attitude towards the Soviet Union from London may have been hostile but that proven warranted. Sometimes, an unreliable or untrustworthy ally can be worse than no ally at all.

... Matilda IIs Somuas and PzIVs would have been the standard tanks. ...

The standard medium tank of the Panzerdivisionen would still have been the 5 cm-gunned PzKpfw III (the PzKpfw IV was viewed as a heavy support vehicle until 1941).

____________________________________

[1] Granted that Britain, France, and Italy had already agreed to the rape of Czechoslovakia. Vile as that appeasement was, it was no excuse for the Soviets to reneg on their commitments to the Czechoslovaks (although, that was of course their plan all along).

 

[Justo Miranda]

I have always been intrigued by the idea of a World War Two in Europe beginning with a less well prepared Germany.
Britain and France hoped to contain German attacks in the Low Countries in a re run of World War 1 while a naval blockade strangled Germany slowly but relentlessly.
Key to this would have been Czechoslovakia and Poland fulfiling their Versailles role in encircling Germany.
One might also add a less hostile attitude in Paris and London to the Soviet Union.
Rearmament on both sides might have been slower but with France still in the war and Scandinavia unoccupied new battleships would have appeared on all sides.
Depending on how much of Belgium and Holland were lost to Germany the Luftwaffe would have had further to fly to bomb Britain and France
Japan would also have had stronger opposition from the European colonial powers.
With a slower pace of war jet engined aircaft might still have appeared but in a less dramatic fashion.
Matilda IIs Somuas and PzIVs would have been the standard tanks.

The only way this could have happened is with a preemptive strike by the French army, but no democracy would start another war after the bad experiences of World War I.

The general idea was to wait for the German people to "react" against Hitler and thus avoid several million dead Frenchmen.

The blockade would not have worked because there was always the black market to circumvent it, the only thing that the blockade would have achieved would be an anticipation of the German-Soviet pact "against the democracies".

This display of weakness would have increased U.S. isolationism and Japan's aggressiveness.

The war was inevitable because the German people were very justifiably irritated with the diplomatic and commercial practices of the democracies they blamed, rightly, for the terrible shortages suffered during the 1930s and for the relentless obsession with tax collection of the French Jewish Minister of Economy, who had no mercy with the terrible economic situation suffered by the most helpless Germans. that was what built Nazism, not the ideological nonsense of a madman.

 

[Arjen]

relentless obsession with tax collection of the French Jewish Minister of Economy,

Yes, that was the reason for antisemitism, even though there is a thousand years history of it in Europe. Give me a break.

 

[Dilandu]

But the Soviets made no military response whatever to Wehrmacht troops moving into the Sudetenland in October 1939.

What exactly USSR could do? We have no common borders with Czechoslovakia and Poland not only refused to allow transit of Soviet troops (or even air forces) but actually threatened war in case of such attempt.

 

[Dilandu]

So, the attitude towards the Soviet Union from London may have been hostile but that proven warranted. Sometimes, an unreliable or untrustworthy ally can be worse than no ally at all.

Excuse me, who signed pact with Hitler first? Stalin or Chamberlain?

 

[Nik]

As I understand it, Chamberlain needed to get something on paper.
That, if reneged, was adequate 'Casus Bellis' (sic) for an utterly unwanted war with Germany that would be reluctantly but grimly supported by Commonwealth.

Up to then, had been H's verbal promises, re-assurances etc etc.
Chamberlain, however damned, got it in writing...

Hmm: A really big difference would be machine-gun nests atop the Belgian forts after the Belgian liaison officer saw Germans practicing assault-glider landings...
But understood what he'd seen...

Had that flank attack gone badly, would the Germans have tried to repeat their coup on Crete ??

 

[Dilandu]

As I understand it, Chamberlain needed to get something on paper.

My point was, that it's kinda illogical to insist that USSR was viewed as "unreliable potential ally" after Britain proved itself to be unreliable ACTUALL ally first.

 

[tomo pauk]

The war was inevitable because the German people were very justifiably irritated with the diplomatic and commercial practices of the democracies they blamed, rightly, for the terrible shortages suffered during the 1930s and for the relentless obsession with tax collection of the French Jewish Minister of Economy, who had no mercy with the terrible economic situation suffered by the most helpless Germans. that was what built Nazism, not the ideological nonsense of a madman.

Lame attempt to justify the Nazism and Nazi aggression.

 

[Apophenia]

What exactly USSR could do? We have no common borders with Czechoslovakia and Poland not only refused to allow transit of Soviet troops (or even air forces) but actually threatened war in case of such attempt.

Indeed. And it is not like Moscow's relations with Warsaw had suddenly soured. So what, exactly, was the purpose of the USSR signing a Mutual Assistance treaty with Czechoslovakia? As with London and Paris, Moscow's security promises weren't worth the paper.

 

[Apophenia]

Excuse me, who signed pact with Hitler first? Stalin or Chamberlain?

Stalin.

Chamberlain didn't sign a Friendship Treaty with Hitler (he just weaseled his way through various appeasement approaches with the Nazi leader until reaching a new low in groveling with the Munich Agreement/Mnichovská zrada).

 

[Dilandu]

. So what, exactly, was the purpose of the USSR signing a Mutual Assistance treaty with Czechoslovakia?

Firstly, to deter Germany. It was well-known that Germany is seriously fearing the possibility of two-front war, and Soviet leadership hoped, that if both Moscow and Paris show enough resolve and determination, Germany would not dare to actually try a war.

Secondly, Stalin hoped that either London and Paris would beat some common sence into Polish leadership (like that the idea of being in sour relations with BOTH of your more powerful neighbors is BAD idea), or that Poland would switch to German side (which was viewed as quite a realistic possibility not only in Moscow but also in Paris) and London & Paris would stop care about it.

 

[Justo Miranda]

Lame attempt to justify the Nazism and Nazi aggression.

Don't turn my economic and social reasoning around, its history, the Germans were irritated and the Nazis took the opportunity to lead them into a disastrous adventure. The wise man who predicts an eclipse is not the same thing as the leader who takes the opportunity to launch a pogrom against his political enemies.

 

[Arjen]

the idea of being in sour relations with BOTH of your more powerful neighbors is BAD idea

So is getting shot by a burglar in your own house, but whose fault would that be?

 

[Dilandu]

So is getting shot by a burglar in your own house, but whose fault would that be?

When you stole half of the house from the neighbor, you should kinda expect, that he might demand his property back at some point.

 

[apparition13]

Perhaps starting in 1938 with an invasion of the Sudetland?

1936, militarization of the Rhineland.

Stalin.

Chamberlain didn't sign a Friendship Treaty with Hitler (he just weaseled his way through various appeasement approaches with the Nazi leader until reaching a new low in groveling with the Munich Agreement/Mnichovská zrada).

Chamberlain was buying time to finish rearming. Everyone expected the war in 1942 or so. Poland was jumping the gun.

 

[Nicknick]

These days it is often overlooked that Poland was ruled by an aggressive fascist and notoriously anti-Semitic government as well. They also had a backup from England for support, no matter who started a war against Germany. Before the war, it wasn’t really clear who the worst of all was really. Remember, there was one incident, when the Polish displaced many Jews into a neutral territory between Poland and Germany were they had to stay without any shelter or support until the league of nations finally helped.

 

[Arjen]

When you stole half of the house from the neighbor, you should kinda expect, that he might demand his property back at some point.

Debatable, if you look far enough in the past the French-German, Polish-German/Prussian and Russian-Polish borders go back and forth with Poland disappearing from the map entirely at more than one point. Pick the right historical period as datum, and Lithuania can lay claim to large portions of Eastern Europe, including Russia. Or Spain can claim the Low Countries.

 

[Dilandu]

Debatable, if you look far enough in the past the French-German, Polish-German/Prussian and Russian-Polish borders go back and forth with Poland disappearing from the map entirely at more than one point. Pick the right historical period as datum, and Lithuania can lay claim to large portions of Eastern Europe, including Russia. Or Spain can claim the Low Countries.

Debatable, yes. But it's not an excuse of behaving like a total jerk, having bad relations with both neighbors (either of which was much stronger) and treating your own allies (on which Poland relied against its neighbors) with contempt. French were rather mightly annoyed when Poland basically sided with Germany against Czechoslovakia, undermining any attempt of deterring Germany for a sake of a merely opportunistic land grab. Morale questions aside, Polish inter-war politics was incredibly stupid; instead of playing one stronger neighbor against other, it basically antagonized them both, while not even particularly caring about Poland allies.

 

[Dolgoth Sepk]

The only way this could have happened is with a preemptive strike by the French army, but no democracy would start another war after the bad experiences of World War I.

But Hitler was democratically elected.
Hitler's fundamental reason for coming to power was “half a million marks of bread”. You make a similar point.
And Germany's severe economic problems were caused by the high war reparations of WWI. ps: That's why none of the post-WWII wars had the high war reparations of the previous ones.
So fundamentally, the 1918 pandemic was a half-time whistle, not a final whistle, WWI was the first half, WWII was the second half.

 

[Archibald]

The same Daladier that brought shame to France at Munich, was also a staunch supporter of Generalissimo Maurice Gamelin - France very own Cadorna / Caporetto, except with the stupidity cubed (scary, isn't it ?).
Long story short, Gamelin could not be removed without losing Daladier's Parti Radical; which, since 1931, had made itself a lynchpin of every single political coalition of the frail, decaying IIIrd Republic.

Case in point: Reynaud, PM on March 21, 1940. Reynaud hated Gamelin guts (for the right reasons) but had to build his political coalition with Daladier Parti Radical (he got Foreign affairs) and thus Gamelin stayed at his post.
The Daladier - Gamelin axis of stupidity and complacency certainly helped dooming 1940 France. Gamelin had been good enough in WWI, as Joffre assistant; but in the 1930's he really had decayed into complacency.

Another way of putting it: France fate was sealed on October 9, 1934 in Marseille. When Yugoslavia's king was killed by terrorists, Louis Barthou died along him while Alphonse Georges was severely crippled.
-Louis Barthou had seen the danger of Hitler and was actively building a coalition against him, and alliances;
-The government fell, another one replaced it, and among the ministers France very own Quisling traitor - Pierre Laval - got his breakthrough.
-Meanwhile on the military front, Commander in chief Maxime Weygand was going into retirement and Georges had good chances to succeed him. Unlike Gamelin - they hated each others - Georges was lucid and competent enough.
-But he got severely crippled, intractable pain and insomnia as result, and missed Weygand succession. Which went to Gamelin.
-Georges in 1940 was commander of the northern front, and saw the disaster coming. But he was mostly powerless against his superior... Gamelin.

Bottom line: drop a meteorit on Daladier and Gamelin circa 1937, and France chances in May 1940 are reasonably better.

 

[Justo Miranda]

Reynaud tried to fire Gamelin three times, but he was Daladier's protégé and even Norway's failure was not enough to end that "nerveless philosopher" as Reynaud described him in his frustration. Gamelin was so stupid that he had ordered all radio transmitters to be removed from Vincennes' headquarters and all orders were given by telephone.

 

[Dilandu]

Gamelin was so stupid that he had ordered all radio transmitters to be removed from Vincennes' headquarters and all orders were given by telephone.

It wasn't just him - many of French generals were worried that radio messages could be easily intercepted. They were aware how intercepted radio communications could cause military disaster (Red Army defeat at battle of Warsaw due to Polish being able to decipher its radio codes was well-known) and insisted that cable communications are more reliable. Ironically, but such concerns were partially responsible for French advances in microwave radars, including the creation of first practical magnetrons - French military was quite interested in the idea of tight-beam communication systems, "radio signal lamps".

 

[Archibald]

Gamelin is a man of paradoxes. He was intellectually brilliant in WWI and still was (somewhat) in the 1930's. His real weakness seems to have been - he politely advised but would not enforce orders he gave: he was a soft manered weakling, kinda.

There are also rumors his brain was fried by syphillis, but the jury is still divided over this. There are many grades and levels of syphillis, and it varies from one patient to another. Gamelin died in 1958 and still had a clear mind, go figure. In 1946 he wrote a VERY self-indulgent account of 1940.

He certainly isolated himself in Vincennes, with disastrous consequences. Even the panic of mid- May 1940 doesn't seemed to have lit a fire under his ass: he remained quiet and soft spoken even when Reynaud fired him.

Bottom line: he was like a sloth (think of Zootopia's DMV Flash) or an amoeba. He was a man of thinking, not of action.

 

[Justo Miranda]

It wasn't just him - many of French generals were worried that radio messages could be easily intercepted. They were aware how intercepted radio communications could cause military disaster (Red Army defeat at battle of Warsaw due to Polish being able to decipher its radio codes was well-known) and insisted that cable communications are more reliable. Ironically, but such concerns were partially responsible for French advances in microwave radars, including the creation of first practical magnetrons - French military was quite interested in the idea of tight-beam communication systems, "radio signal lamps".

The Germans ignored that France had already built an anti-icebergs radar in 1934 for the liner SS Normandie. It worked with two emitters in 80 cm and 16 cm and was installed in Sannois in 1939, supporting the defence of Paris without being detected by the ELINT German services.

They also did not suspect the existence of the Dutch radar of 70 cm, the only prototype built by the Delft and Leiden scientists that was dismantled after the May 1940 tests to avoid its capture.

 

[Justo Miranda]

But Hitler was democratically elected.
Hitler's fundamental reason for coming to power was “half a million marks of bread”. You make a similar point.
And Germany's severe economic problems were caused by the high war reparations of WWI. ps: That's why none of the post-WWII wars had the high war reparations of the previous ones.
So fundamentally, the 1918 pandemic was a half-time whistle, not a final whistle, WWI was the first half, WWII was the second half.

The current German prime minister has also been democratically elected to carry out the reforms he promised during the election campaign and denied just two hours after winning the elections. The German people are not responsible for the actions of the leaders they democratically elect, they are only unlucky with them.

The half-time whistle was the Spanish Civil War that started with the WWI weapons and ended with the WWII weapons.

 

[Justo Miranda]

Gamelin is a man of paradoxes. He was intellectually brilliant in WWI and still was (somewhat) in the 1930's. His real weakness seems to have been - he politely advised but would not enforce orders he gave: he was a soft manered weakling, kinda.

There are also rumors his brain was fried by syphillis, but the jury is still divided over this. There are many grades and levels of syphillis, and it varies from one patient to another. Gamelin died in 1958 and still had a clear mind, go figure. In 1946 he wrote a VERY self-indulgent account of 1940.

He certainly isolated himself in Vincennes, with disastrous consequences. Even the panic of mid- May 1940 doesn't seemed to have lit a fire under his ass: he remained quiet and soft spoken even when Reynaud fired him.

Bottom line: he was like a sloth (think of Zootopia's DMV Flash) or an amoeba. He was a man of thinking, not of action.

There is also a theory that Admiral Nagumo was ill with dengue fever during the Battle of Midway.

 

[Rule of cool]

On the half time whistle thing. It's not an original idea, maybe I read it in Kennedy's Rise and Fall of the Great Powers. But WW1 and WW2 were basically a '30 years war' to decide the world balance of power in the age where 'superpower' was possible, with Germany being the only possible 3rd contender alongside Russia and the USA. Germany reached the status of the 3rd superpower in March 1918 and again in April 1941 only to lose it by not seeking peace at those points.

 

[Dolgoth Sepk]

The current German prime minister has also been democratically elected to carry out the reforms he promised during the election campaign and denied just two hours after winning the elections. The German people are not responsible for the actions of the leaders they democratically elect, they are only unlucky with them.

hi, this is why most ancient Greek philosophers held critical views of democracy—the populace isn't subject to judgment, not only literal courtroom trials, but aslo the absence of accountability to rational standards.

The half-time whistle was the Spanish Civil War that started with the WWI weapons and ended with the WWII weapons.

What I was trying to say with the 1918 pandemic is that WWI was called off by off-site factors.

 

[royabulgaf]

Yes, that was the reason for antisemitism, even though there is a thousand years history of it in Europe. Give me a break.

I went

The war was inevitable because the German people were very justifiably irritated with the diplomatic and commercial practices of the democracies they blamed, rightly, for the terrible shortages suffered during the 1930s and for the relentless obsession with tax collection of the French Jewish Minister of Economy, who had no mercy with the terrible economic situation suffered by the most helpless Germans. that was what built Nazism, not the ideological nonsense of a madman.

 

[uk 75]

Some interesting ideas that would be worth a closer look.
War in 1942 with actual or hypothetical equipment
France under different leadership with effective armed forces
Communications and Radar developments
Poland as a more reliable partner to France and Czechoslovakia with better equipment
Soviet Union without Stalin perhaps better able to work with France.
UK under Halifax from 1940 focuses on Far East
Chamberlain retires from ill health in 1938. Churchill succeeds him but loses to Attlee in election (No 1939 War so elections as normal)

 

[Justo Miranda]

If the Maginot Line had extended to the sea, the Battle of France would have been a much longer war of attrition than WWII.

 

[Archibald]

Before 1934 and his death in a stupid mountaining accident the king of Belgium was favorable to a Maginot line extension. Leopold however returned to the neutrality mirage.

For the record: the last Maginot line fort to the north was at the crossroads of Luxembourg, Belgium and France borders. It was called"ouvrage de la Ferté" with 15 km range guns. Well then, von Manstein and co. noted the above and in February 1940 put the southern flank of their "panzer invasion corridor" right there, with a small safety margin.
The corridor was 100 km wide, with the panzer divisions in three groups, 2 - 3 -2 and Sedan right in the middle.

The three other panzer divisions were dispatched as follow: 1 to crush The Netherlands, and the other 2 in central, flatland Belgium : as a faint to convince the anglo-french-belgians the germans played the game.
Note that these two panzer divisions got their asses kicked at Gembloux and Namur. Bad luck, the 7 other walzed into France, crushing Huntziger and Corap II and IX armies in the Ardennes.

 

[Justo Miranda]

hi, this is why most ancient Greek philosophers held critical views of democracy—the populace isn't subject to judgment, not only literal courtroom trials, but aslo the absence of accountability to rational standards.


What I was trying to say with the 1918 pandemic is that WWI was called off by off-site factors.

So... why do all governments massively use alcohol, drugs, the media, counterculture and sports to lower the intelligence and decision-making capacity of the populace?... Do you think it is a useless effort if people are already stupid?

If people do not like a show, such as Ionesco's theater, and decide not to pay to see it, the government acts against the popular will by subsidizing the show, with the taxes of those who did not want to see it, to prevent it from being eliminated by the law of supply and demand. The usual pretext is that this is done to prevent the loss of humanity's cultural heritage, but it is only a brutal exercise in anti-democratic arrogance.

 

[Justo Miranda]

hi, this is why most ancient Greek philosophers held critical views of democracy—the populace isn't subject to judgment, not only literal courtroom trials, but aslo the absence of accountability to rational standards.


What I was trying to say with the 1918 pandemic is that WWI was called off by off-site factors.

The pandemic was not an external factor to the war, it began in a military camp in the United States and spread easily due to the massification of military life. This would not have happened in a conventional rural society with low population density because the spread of the virus killed so quickly that it would not have had time to reach other population centers.

The great mortality in Europe was caused by the low level of diet and the exhaustion of the troops due to life in the trenches.

 

[Arjen]

"Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time; but there is the broad feeling in our country that the people should rule, continuously rule, and that public opinion, expressed by all constitutional means, should shape, guide, and control the actions of Ministers who are their servants and not their masters."
Winston Churchill in a speech to the House of Commons,1947.

If you can vote - vote. For someone who will protect the right to vote, for everyone.

 

[Justo Miranda]

Another classic Winston Churchill response: when a woman said to him, "You're drunk!" he replied, "And you, ma'am, are ugly. But in the morning, I'll be sober and you'll still be ugly." "

 

[Dolgoth Sepk]

So... why do all governments massively use alcohol, drugs, the media, counterculture and sports to lower the intelligence and decision-making capacity of the populace?... Do you think it is a useless effort if people are already stupid?

I think you're focusing on the wrong point. A rebuttal to the idea that “the populace isn't subject to judgment” should use specific events.
Alcohol and the like are not counterexamples.

Another classic Winston Churchill response: when a woman said to him, "You're drunk!" he replied, "And you, ma'am, are ugly. But in the morning, I'll be sober and you'll still be ugly." "

BTW, nothing personal, I've noticed that in conversations Euros and Americans are always concerned with very small details, not the whole story.I wonder if your history education ever addressed the relationship between contingency and necessity. Or does it overly focus on anecdotes like 'for want of a nail, the war was lost'?
back to yor post, you also mentioned that the WWI led to poor sanitation in Europe, especially within trench warfare.
So it doesn't matter if the 1918 pandemic was brought on by Americans or not, other pandemics in that sanitary environment might not have caused the kind of killing effect that the pandemic did, and would have hit society hard.

 

[Rule of cool]

story.I wonder if your history education ever addressed the relationship between contingency and necessity. Or does it overly focus on anecdotes like 'for want of a nail, the war was lost'?

The latter, every Australian kid of my era knows the story of Simpson and his donkey. However if you study history in year 11 & 12 you'll get more into the bigger themes.

FWIW Simpson was a stretcher bearer at Gallipoli, he landed on Anzac day and was killed on May 19. He used a donkey to evacuate wounded.