If Germany won the Battle of the Bulge would it have made any difference?

betgo

Ad Honorem
Jul 2011
5,500
#13
When you say German officers, several officers were executed for the July 1944 attempted coup and assassination. Clearly those officers wanted to make peace at least on the western front. Also, it was the Allies who insisted on unconditional surrender, which encouraged fighting to the bitter end.
 
Aug 2015
2,199
uk
#14
What would have stopped the Vistula-Oder Offensive?
My propisal was for Germany to allow the Western Allies a clear path to Berlin and then offering surrender. This stops the Soviet Uniin from attacking further West as these territories would now be occupied by US, Britush etc troops.

By surrendering to the Western Allies it allows what's left of Germany -which at this time is still substantial - to survive, and prevents the Soviet Union from acquiring most of Eastern Europe and half of Germany.

Of course Stalin may be infuriated that Germany has surrendered to Britain and the US before he has had time to occupy any further territory, but by continuing to invade further West he would risk confrontation with US/British troops now occupying those territories.

Like you said , in 1944 Germany would have been unlikely to surrender, but they must have known the writing was on the wall and that Western troops would get to Germany before the Red Army.
 
Jul 2016
7,353
USA
#15
When you say German officers, several officers were executed for the July 1944 attempted coup and assassination. Clearly those officers wanted to make peace at least on the western front. Also, it was the Allies who insisted on unconditional surrender, which encouraged fighting to the bitter end.
The officers involved in the 20 July Plot wanted to overthrow the Nazis. They weren't trying to surrender, they believed a limited peace, essentially a cease fire, was possible, but only with Hitler and the other Nazi leaders gone. They were delusional in not only their hope for a conditional cease fire with anyone, let alone the Western Allies, but also in the fact that their plan was infantile in its foolish assumptions. But at least they tried to overthrow the Nazis, which is much more then the rest of the officer corps did, who themselves, and not Hitler or the Nazis, rounded up and executed the conspirators in the very publicized honor court, led by some of the most famous surviving German generals, all trying to show their utter loyalty to Hitler by personally being responsible for the purge of disloyal officers.

As for Unconditional Surrender extending the war, I call baloney. That, along with the lie of the oath to Hitler, was just another ridiculous excuse cooked up by surviving German generals post war to explain why they kept fighting even when all was lost. If you want a better and more accurate explanation, for God's sake, don't expect to find the truth in the memoirs of dishonorable men.

The Allies didn't insist on an unconditional surrender of the Japanese until the very end, May 1945, and yet they needed zero encouragement to continue fighting, in fact it emboldened them even more because they had the hopes that if they bloodied the US enough we'd give in to their terms, which would NEVER have been accepted.

Neither would have the terms of the Germans been accepted, not by late 1944. Way too much had happened to ever allow Germany to not be dissembled and de-militarized and de-industrialized. It was not a few people among the Allies who believed the problem with WWII wasn't just Hitler, but the German people as a whole, who were probably the second most warlike people on the planet (next to the Japanese). That culture needed to be extinguished or they'd end up causing WWIII then WWIV then WWV.
 
Jul 2016
7,353
USA
#16
My propisal was for Germany to allow the Western Allies a clear path to Berlin and then offering surrender. This stops the Soviet Uniin from attacking further West as these territories would now be occupied by US, Britush etc troops.
It was not going to happen that way, it was completely and utterly against the thinking of the German officer corps, who wanted to keep fighting up to the very end and only thought of surrender and the occupation of their country when they realized all was completely and utterly lost, which was about the time their borders had been violated by tens of millions of enemy troops. In December 1944, it was not on the table, it was not something they would allow, and they didn't even think it would be a possibility until the Soviets and Western Allies both broke through to traditional German borders in January 1945, which was something they were in denial of (not just Hitler).

By surrendering to the Western Allies it allows what's left of Germany -which at this time is still substantial - to survive, and prevents the Soviet Union from acquiring most of Eastern Europe and half of Germany.
No, it doesn't. Nothing was going to stop the USSR, they were already planning the Vistula-Oder Offensive and if you read up on it, you will see what the Soviet did and how poorly the Germans responded, how utterly ineffectually, how impossible it would have been possible for Germany to stop it. It absolutely was not possible.

Of course Stalin may be infuriated that Germany has surrendered to Britain and the US before he has had time to occupy any further territory, but by continuing to invade further West he would risk confrontation with US/British troops now occupying those territories.
It wouldn't have stopped the war. First, it was already decided previously how Germany was going to be carved up post war. Second, no surrender done by the US and UK would have been accepted by the USSR, as it would have violated previous agreements. At that point, it was Berlin or bust, and they weren't going to lose.

All those German officers, and Nazi stooges were delusional to think any ceasefire or limited surrender would be accepted. And that was far beyond 1944, even after Hitler killed himself the fool Himmler thought he could negotiate a cease fire, without occupation, with Western Allies, who'd then join the Germans to fight the Soviets. :lol: Imagine how clueless an individual has to be to think that is possible on the table.

Like you said , in 1944 Germany would have been unlikely to surrender, but they must have known the writing was on the wall and that Western troops would get to Germany before the Red Army.
And negative view of the future of the war stop anything? No. After the Ardenne Offensive failed and Army Group B pulled back, shattered, and the best forces of OB West, 6th Panzer Army, were sent to the Eastern Front to attempt to curb the effects of new Red Army offensives (which they failed miserably), did the German soldiers of OB West give up? Absolutely not. Jan-March 1945 were some of the bloodiest months of the war and it wasn't until Army Group B was encirled and destroyed in the massive Ruhr Pocket in APRIL did resistance start truly crumbling. But it wasn't crumbling because Germans wanted to surrender to the Amis and not the Asian Horde Bolsheviks. It was because there was nothing to replace even the shadow of Army Group B after it disappeared, it was the only thing left west of Berlin that could stop the Western Allies, besides the Volkstrum, essentially SS controlled militia, not even worth being called a fighting force, who would contest towns under Nazi orders, resulting in the US Army policy to drive into a town, and if they were resisted they'd drop artillery on the town to largely level it while mobile forces bypassed it.

By late 1944, there was absolutely no way, zero way, that Germany was going to end up with a limited ceasefire with the Western Allies. They might as well have hoped to have Martians invade Earth and save them, because it would have been that realistic. It was not in the cards.
 
Last edited:
Aug 2012
791
Washington State, USA.
#17
I think the only differance it might have made is that the Soviet Union may have occupied all of Germany instead of just a part after the war. I'm aware of the Yalta agreement, but Stalin might have been a jerk if he had occupied all of Germany at the end.
Then again, the USA developed the A-bombs right at the end, and the Soviets didn't have them until 49.
You know what, I have no guess. I only know that Germany was done after the Battle of Kursk. They were counting the days after that.
 

stevev

Ad Honorem
Apr 2017
2,381
Las Vegas, NV USA
#18
I have a hard time imagining a German victory with the Ardennes Offensive. A glance at a map shows how far from Antwerp they were when the offensive was halted. The lack of air power alone would make Antwerp a virtually impossible objective. If they got there, the considerable reserves the allies could bring up would have cut them off and retaken the port.

 
Last edited:
Jul 2016
7,353
USA
#19
I have a hard time imagining a German victory with the Ardennes Offensive. A glance at a map shows how far from Antwerp they were when the offensive was halted. The lack of air power alone would make Antwerp a virtually impossible objective. If they got there, the considerable reserves the allies could bring up would have cut them off and retaken the port.

Cool map. it shows sectors, you can see 6th Panzer Army in the Northern sector was the main effort, tasked with Antwerp, and made the worst progress despite priorities of fires and logistical support.

Two things worked poorly for 6th Panzer. One, US Army infantry divisions they targeted werent green and poorly organized/trained like the unlucky 104th Infantry Division, which the 5th Panzer Army just broke through with little ease. And Sepp Dietrich violated orders and common sense by alleging the defending US infantry of an attack by a long artillery barrage that did little but alert them a major attack was coming. The two Volksgrenadier divisions attacking made little initial progress and Dietrich was forced to commit a panzer division for the breakthrough, which worked, but wasted supplies and hurt the division before it could capitalize on the start of exploitation phase.

Whereas 5th Panzer's general, Manteuffel, a smart dude, didn't even bother with artillery, sending in trained assault regiments of the Volksgrenadier with speed and complete tactical surprise, so by the time the 104th ID realized they were in battle, their MLR was breached and hold out units encircled.

Also helping the Germans in that sector besides two of the four US infantry divisions holding it being green, the other two veteran but recovering from being mauled at the Huertgen, was that they were covering nearly twice the width of ground that any division, even fully staffed and veteran, should have been holding.

Bradlet reallllllllly screwed the pooch in the Ardenne.
 
Jun 2015
5,487
UK
#20
The overall position of the Allies vis a vis the Axis in late 1944 was thus:

- better morale
- more troops
- more materiel
- better and more weapons
- more industry
- better technology, intelligence, and supplies
- bigger economies and populations
- new allies entering on their side (Brazil, to name one of a few)
- air supremacy
- naval supremacy

The picture for Germany at this point was WAY out of their favour.

Hitler privately knew this, and most of the German top brass knew this. The Allies knew it was a matter of when, not if.

The Ardennes Offensive was about splitting the British, Canadians,and Americans, and trying to get them into a separate peace. Hitler thought that the Allies were an unnatural alliance, which in some part was true since the Western Allies were capitalists, and the Soviets were communists. But he misjudged this - they were allied due to HIM and his regime. He was a threat to their mutual interests. The British didn't want a power of different political ideologies on their doorstep. America didn't want a powerful and aggressive country of diametric values to them in the world. The Soviets were fighting for the lives, in more ways than one, since Hitler wanted to kill them all and use the USSR as farmland and breathing room. So the likelihood fo the Allies splitting was slim. The Western Allies had some disputes, but by 1945 they realised that they hd nothing to gain from splitting. The British resented the Americans' insistence to run the war effort, adn the Americans didn't like the British desire to remain in control of strategy. But the Allies needed each other, and relied for a large part on each other's technology and resources - the Manhattan Project had vital British input, and most of Operation Overlord had British tehnological ideas.

So Hitler's plan from the get-go was false. And even if it worked, then he would still have lost to the Soviets.

By late 1944, Germany's options were to:

- Surrender to all of the Allies
- Surrender to the Western Allies and fight to the death with the USSR (and lose badly...)
- Fight to the last man
- Fight and then surrender when there is no other option - which is what they did in real life

Or another option was to secure a favourable peace with the Allies, and then they could focus on Japan. This would be stabbing Japan in the back, but it would keep Germany intact. The Allies said they wanted unconditional surrender, but then if Hitler made the peace deal sweet (possibly he would step down and be in secret confinement, or Germany paid reparations to the Allies) then maybe Stalin/FDR/Churchill would be receptive.