Heidi XX

The mistakes that occurred by the germans/hitler help the axis empire get defeated,without those major mistakes,would/could the Allies defeat the Axis forces?
examples of the major mistakes......
*not closing the cap at dunkirk to keep the britisch forces from excaping.
*Lufftwaffe stop bombing britisch airfeilds and started to bomb britisch citys instead.
*Attacking Russia when briton was not defeated yet.
*Hitler declaring war onn the US,when there was no need too.

If these mistakes never occurred,did the allies have any chance att all of winning the war?

gregorian

Someone in another thread posted the GDP of the various combatants.
As long as the Allies chose to fight, they were eventually going to win.

The USA and USSR were just giants of available resources.
Even the UK, though a smaller nation than Germany, had sufficient resources to at least maintain a stalemate, and as long as the USA was shipping in material.. even if the US didn't go directly to war... the UK would have held out.

Sargon of Akkad

People always seem to forget that in WWII, it wasn't 'Britain', it was the British Empire. The US wasn't the superpower it is today, but a regional power on the rise. How quickly people forget, eh?

Cicero

If the entire British Expeditionary force at Dunkirk was nullified - captured or destroyed - that seems to be one of your premises Hedi - No, I think that Britain would have to had sued for peace. As it was, the 338,226 evacuated formed the kernel of the rejuvenated British Army allowing for continued resistance.

If we leave Dunkirk out of the equation, then yes, I think Germany et. al. could have been defeated as explored in another thread.

http://www.historum.com/showthread.php?t=4870


Best to You Heidi

Son of Cathal

I think that Britain would have sued for peace regardless of whether their men had been saved at Dunkirk. If the Luftwaffe had continued to bomb airfields rather than change to cities, the RAF would have given out, unable to prevent an invasion resulting in the collapse of British resistance. Free to concentrate its forces in Russia. It also stripped the remaining allies of a place from which to launch an invasion of the European mainland.

deadkenny

1. Dunkirk

Guderian originally issued orders for a Panzer division to advance on Dunkirk on May 22 (along with Boulogne and Calais). Then HQ 'forced' one of his divisions into 'reserve', so the advance on Dunkirk was delayed (the advances on Boulogne and Calais proceeded). With his reduced force Guderian still managed to have one of his remaining Panzer divisions on the Aa Canal, with bridgeheads over it, ready to advance on Dunkirk by May 24. On that day he received orders not to cross the Aa, i.e. halt his advance on Dunkirk.

Gort was still supposed to be attacking south in coordination with the French at that point in time. The decision to fall back to Dunkirk was not even made until late on May 25. So I believe we can see that had Guderian been allowed to (especially with his initial plan) the Germans would have easily been to Dunkirk before the British could have been there in force, and thereby cutoff the BEF's last available major port from which to be evacuated.

So, I agree here that a major opportunity to cripple Britain was lost at that point. Keep in mind that by the end of the war, Britain was having to break up some divisions in order to bring others back to full strength. So the loss of over 200k soldiers right at the start would have been a devestating loss. Possible consquences - someone else posted the possiblity that Britain may have quit the war. If that had occurred, then the 'dominos' start to fall in Germany's favour - they don't likely wind up fighting the US if not still fighting Britain. Being able to concentrate on the Soviet Union perhaps allows them to 'win', or at least achieve a favourable stalement in the east.

2. Battle of Britain

While the switch from bombing RAF bases to bombing cities was a 'tactical' error, in terms of achieving a 'strategic' result it was practically irrelevant. By the time the Luftwaffe ramped up their attacks and the RAF Fighter Command was hard pressed, it was too late in the season for a landing in Britain. The British had also had time to rebuild their forces and defenses. Plus, as daylight got shorter, the ability of the RN to attack any German crossing without effective interference from the air increased. While there might have been an 'opportunity' for a landing in July (especially combined with the Dunkirk scenario mentioned previously) by Sept. that opportunity was gone. So a continued 'pounding' of the RAF Fighter Command bases in SE England at that point would not have been decisive.

3. Barbarossa

If Britain is still in the war, as they were historically, the question then becomes when would the Germans invade the Soviet Union? A year later, after the Soviets had completed their reorganization and re-equipping of their forces with the latest equipment? By 1942 the Red Army may have been much better prepared, and may not have been caught by 'surprize' as they were in 1941. Furthermore, in order to effectively fight Britain, would have required a shift of production etc. more towards air and naval assets. So even if Britain had effectively been knocked out of the war, it is questionable how soon the Germans could have then prepared to attack the much strengthened Soviets. You can't take men who have trained and been fighting in u-boats for a year and then put them into tanks and attack with them the next day. I believe a 'Britain First' scenario would have necessitated a considerable delay in invading the Soviet Union, which would have made the prospects of success that much more doubtful.

4. Declaring War on the US

Taken in the historical context, it gained Germany practically nothing and cost them a great deal. Still, I believe that the US would have eventually ended up at war with Germany, a la WWI. As of the Japanese attack, both Britain and the US were at war with Japan. So the US would no longer have been under any restrictions with regard to supplying / reinforcing Great Britain. However, not being at war with Germany would have necessitated a 'Japan First' rather than a 'Europe First' strategy. So the Germans could easily have gained some time, even if not have avoided war with the US indefinitely.

sylla1

Aside from Kenny's excellent contribution, wars tend to be won by the contender with less major mistakes; ergo, I would say the opening question answers itself.

Andriko

I think that starting a major multi-front war with just about everybody is a mistake, which is to say, the only way Germany could have won WW2, in my opinion, was by not starting it in the first place!

MarkA

great post Kenny!

FWIW i think Britain should have never declared war on Germany and got involved in the war. Just the typical world policeman attitude Britain had then.

What did Britain gain in the End?

Mark

Paulinus

I think it hinges on whether the damage done to British forces (army and RAF) would have been enough for the UK government to sue for peace. Cathal postulated that it would, whereas Kenny pointed out that Sealion would probably not have worked even had the airstrips continued to be targeted and had most of the BEF been destroyed or captured. I doubt that we can answer the question.

The Guderian halt order is still contraversial. The book, Dunkirk: Fight to the Last Man by Hugh Sebag-Montefiore, speculates that it wasn't so much that Hitler ordered this halt as that the German military command suggested he should do so and Hitler simply ordered as they wished. The reason for the orginal proposal is that supply lines had become dangerously overextended and the infantry were too far behind the armour which prevented combined operations. Thus had they tried to continue they may well have got into difficulties, which might have had other knock-on consquences affecting the outcome of the battle for France and quite possibly delaying timing of he Battle of Britain, meaning more modern British planes and pilots by the time it got underway and an impossibly late start date for Sealion even had the Luftwaffe won. Thus the British may have fought on in any case.

My recently deceased uncle was an artilleryman in the BEF evacuated at Dunkirk and I remember him describing once how his group faced a mass of panzers at the opposite end of a road that did not advance towards them. I doubt though that this event directly corresponded with the Guderian halt order.