What if you became Fuhrer in June 1942?

tomar

Ad Honoris
Jan 2011
13,958
These offers to come to peace with one country or the other..... Germany's track record with treaties was so abysmal that its not clear who and under what conditions would be willing sign anything with Germany.... It would have required either some major amnesia or conditions that would likely have been unacceptable to Germany.....
Not to mention that convincing the german elite in mid 1942 to give stuff up essentially for free without getting anything in return was going to be tricky... For example, peace treaty with the USSR giving up most of the territory that Germany had acquired... What- from the german perspective- was to keep the soviets from gladly accepting that territory (thank you very much herr Adolf) and then attacking Germany ?.... That's what Germany itself would do if given the chance.... That's the problem with cynical real politik....
 

betgo

Ad Honorem
Jul 2011
6,447
It was standard from the in the 19th century and before for the losing side to cede a few provinces. In the Franco-Prussian and US-Mexican Wars the side whose capital was taken ceded territory, but the winner withdrew from large amounts of territory. Japan decisively won the Russo-Japanese War, and there were riots in Japan because many thought Japan got too little in the peace settlement.

Hitler was making the war a racial and ideological struggle and no one trusted him to keep a treaty after Munich, the Nonaggression Pact, etc.
 

tomar

Ad Honoris
Jan 2011
13,958
It was standard from the in the 19th century and before for the losing side to cede a few provinces. In the Franco-Prussian and US-Mexican Wars the side whose capital was taken ceded territory, but the winner withdrew from large amounts of territory. Japan decisively won the Russo-Japanese War, and there were riots in Japan because many thought Japan got too little in the peace settlement.

Hitler was making the war a racial and ideological struggle and no one trusted him to keep a treaty after Munich, the Nonaggression Pact, etc.
yes but in june, 1942 Germany was not losing, it had acquired quite a big chunk of territory..... and most of the german elite considered that victory was achievable
 
Sep 2016
1,326
Georgia
It was standard from the in the 19th century and before for the losing side to cede a few provinces. In the Franco-Prussian and US-Mexican Wars the side whose capital was taken ceded territory, but the winner withdrew from large amounts of territory.
You don't need to take the capital to acquire new territories from losing side.

Often countries not only withdrew from large amounts of territory, but also ceded something themselves to losing side or paid money as a compensation.
 

aggienation

Ad Honorem
Jul 2016
9,813
USA
By late July ‘42 Stalin was getting very worried about German advances, hence his “not another step back back!” order.
That order was the result of Red Army units collapsing, desertions, and other discipline issues plaguing the Red Army in 1942. The order didn't solve it but helped stiffen combat units, because at least they knew about unauthorized retreat was a death sentence.

It would’ve been a good time for Germany to negotiate from a position of strength. Even if Stalin didn’t then agree to German terms—maybe a border along the dneiper—Blau could’ve helped had it been done differently. No attack on Stalingrad, just contain it and the Don flank while giving supply priority to the Caucasus operation, while the Luftwaffe targeted Baku.
One cannot penetrate the Caucasus and not take the Volga. Its a prerequisite. And taking the Volga, and negating the industrial significance of Stalingrad means at least bombing the crap out of them.

The idea would’ve been to deprive the Soviets of oil and hence apply additional pressure to accept German war aims, if that were necessary.
Its also depriving Germany of oil, and all other military equipment and personnel needed to support a large, mobile army group that needs to drive almost 700 miles to accomplish the objective you want.

FYI, that distance is just as great as that which broke the German logistics system in 41 and nearly led to a stratetigcally disastrous winter, which is why same thing happened again in 42. The German army simply is incapable of supporting operations that travel further than about 400 miles max. After that, their system always collapsed.

Unfortunately positioning a large force in France while the allies had overwhelming air superiority meant a shredded logistical tether and the catastrophe at Falaise. France was bound to be lost anyway. V weapons weren’t much good either. In the long run it would’ve been a lot more economical and effective for the Germans to make their stand closer to their border
.

Calaise was the result of the First Army creating a breakout, then Patton not driving only to Britanny but actively pushing south and east to help encircle Army Group B, which was almost successful. Not at all part of the plan but an opportunity that was used to great effect to largely destroy two full panzer heavy armies.

Lol had the Reich avoided the vast bulk of losses from 1942 to early ‘44 the potential losses for the US might hardly have been small!! The Germans could’ve first ambushed advancing US forces, then launched a massive attack.
The highly trained pre war Heer was destroyed by 43, courtesy of nearly a million losses in 41 alone, about 2 million by the time 42 ended, and worse in 43 and afterwards. That was the trained NCOs and officer corps that spent the 30s training hard for war, then successfully invaded Poland, France, Yugoslavia, etc.

Your plan entails the already heavily battered Ostheer to reorganize and then launch another equally ambitious offensive as Barbarossa, that still ends the same, when German cubbard is bare while Red Army still managed to squirrel away numerous guards tank corps and rifle divisions in reserve to use for a crushing attack the depleted Heer, past their culminating point, can't endure.

Poof, bye bye Sixth Army, all over again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macon

aggienation

Ad Honorem
Jul 2016
9,813
USA
yes but in june, 1942 Germany was not losing, it had acquired quite a big chunk of territory..... and most of the german elite considered that victory was achievable
Plan Blue a plan of desperation, trying to claw some form of a victory against the Soviets in one campaign, the German way of war. Even Hitler said if it failed, they'd have to find a way to end the war diplomatically, which was an impossibility by the time it was grossly apparent Blue failed.

The original plan Blue didn't even really encompass anything beyond passing the Don. Along the way they were supposed to trap and destroy numerous Red Army fronts, similarly to 41 early campaign, but that didn't work in 42, the Red Army units, despite orders not to, were retreating like crazy to prevent being caught in kessels. That didn't happen, and then Sixth Army faced far more resistance than it was supposed to, as far too many Red Army units were still entact, so Hitler split AGS into two others, and then had them both try to accomplish their missions concurrently, instead of consecutively. The generals favored the latter, for logistics, while Hitler favored the former, concurrently because time was a major factor and if they did it slow like the generals wanted it would be a political and strategic failure. Blue needed to be wrapped up in a year, or else the Soviets would be able to recover again, and who knows what else would happen (like British in North Africa, the entry of the US, etc).

Any plan that involves driving deeper into the Soviet Union after the reality check of 41 was doomed to not just fail, but to eat up resources that were irresplaceable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: macon

starman

Ad Honorem
Jan 2014
4,119
Connecticut
That order was the result of Red Army units collapsing, desertions, and other discipline issues plaguing the Red Army in 1942. The order didn't solve it but helped stiffen combat units, because at least they knew about unauthorized retreat was a death sentence.
My point was that Soviet morale was low and even Stalin was very worried. It would’ve been an ideal time for Germany to negotiate.

Its also depriving Germany of oil, and all other military equipment and personnel needed to support a large, mobile army group that needs to drive almost 700 miles to accomplish the objective you want.
I wasn’t suggesting the army try to advance all the way to Baku, just Maikop and Grozny while letting the Luftwaffe hit Baku.

was the result of the First Army creating a breakout, then Patton not driving only to Britanny but actively pushing south and east to help encircle Army Group B, which was almost successful. Not at all part of the plan but an opportunity that was used to great effect to largely destroy two full panzer heavy armies.
Which attests to the risks of trying to hold France. The entire panzer Lehrer division was wiped out by bombing.


The highly trained pre war Heer was destroyed by 43, courtesy of nearly a million losses in 41 alone, about 2 million by the time 42 ended, and worse in 43 and afterwards. That was the trained NCOs and officer corps that spent the 30s training hard for war, then successfully invaded Poland, France, Yugoslavia, etc.

Your plan entails the already heavily battered Ostheer to reorganize and then launch another equally ambitious offensive as Barbarossa, that still ends the same, when German cubbard is bare while Red Army still managed to squirrel away numerous guards tank corps and rifle divisions in reserve to use for a crushing attack the depleted Heer, past their culminating point, can't endure..
My plan calls for peace with the USSR by the fall of ‘42 and no attempt to hold France with significant forces hence far fewer losses in 1942 and 1943 and a vastly stronger German army that counterattacks in mid-late ‘44.
 
May 2017
278
China
if i was fuhrer i will breed german like rabbits then give them free house and at least 10 hectare of free land in occupied area such as france and poland, and force frence and polish slaves to work until dead in factory and farmland, then will will invade more land after foothold in france and poland solidify.
 

aggienation

Ad Honorem
Jul 2016
9,813
USA
My point was that Soviet morale was low and even Stalin was very worried. It would’ve been an ideal time for Germany to negotiate.
They were freaking out because they figured the Germans would try for Moscow again so placed most of their reserves there. When the Germans went to the Caucasus instead, they were hoodwinked.

Operationally and tactically panicking doesn't mean they would surrender as a nation. They spent the last year doing nothing but saying things like Kill Germans. The war was the greatest thing to happen to Stalin, it finally unified the USSR under his govt.

I wasn’t suggesting the army try to advance all the way to Baku, just Maikop and Grozny while letting the Luftwaffe hit Baku.
So your improved plan is to do nearly exactly what actually happened? The Germans couldn't even get to Grozny. You should research why.

Which attests to the risks of trying to hold France. The entire panzer Lehrer division was wiped out by bombing.
No it wasn't wiped out. If that was true then the assault divisions wouldn't have encountered serious opposition after Operation Cobra started. The bombing weakened them significantly but what wiped them out as an effective fighting force was the US Army.

If you try to hold western German border, same thing happens. A gigantic fire support plan and assault eventually rips a hole through the West Wall and inside Germany. Or the big ambush offensive, which is just copying the Ardenne offensive of 44, wears out the defenders to make it even easier.

And you still ignore all the positives of holding France. Like strategic depth. Like industry. Like natural resources. Like high morale from not surrendering ground taken by a hard fight without even resisting. Yeah, I'm sure everyone in Nazi party, OKW, and OKH are just going to love the idea of handing France back to the very angry and vengeance filled French, adding millions of potential enemy soldiers to the UK and USA who can move in, spend a full year or more prepping for the invasion of Germany from inside France.

Oh, BTW. British still broke Enigma. Which means any secret attempt to move at least one army group to attack western allies, that's going to get detected.

My plan calls for peace with the USSR by the fall of ‘42 and no attempt to hold France with significant forces hence far fewer losses in 1942 and 1943 and a vastly stronger German army that counterattacks in mid-late ‘44.
How are you getting peace in 42? Your plan is to do the nearly exact thing that actually happened in 42. Send too few Germans too far into the Caucasus.

Worse because your plan completely ignores the Volga, which was the lifeline of the Caucasus. Also leaving the entire left flank of the invasion force open. If the Red Army crosses the Don, the whole invasion force is outflanked.

So how does that plan force Stalin to make peace?

You still won't be able to reach Grozny, the Red Army will still, with ease, be able to defend mountains that need to be crossed.

The Luftwaffe cannot even properly support your invading army group but you want them to attack Baku?

Zhukov still masses a ton of tank corps and rifle divisions for a winter offensive. What about your plan deals with them?

So what in your plan stops Rostov from falling in late 42 from a major Soviet counteroffensive and having the entire German force structure inside the Caucasus cut off worse than what actually happened?

Like I said, terrible plan.
 

aggienation

Ad Honorem
Jul 2016
9,813
USA
if i was fuhrer i will breed german like rabbits then give them free house and at least 10 hectare of free land in occupied area such as france and poland, and force frence and polish slaves to work until dead in factory and farmland, then will will invade more land after foothold in france and poland solidify.
So more German babies die in 44-45 when Germany is successfully invaded. Sure nothing else changes.