Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
It's a good question, especially since Britain and France were already in combat against Soviet forces in 1920, Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War - WikipediaWhat would have happened had the UK and France actually supported (with modern hardware, at least) Poland when it was invaded in the 1920s?
Regarding the Soviet part in the invasion of Poland.
I noticed in post #17 the British offered all the support "in their power". As both Britain and France would have to go through Germany to assist Poland, it seems more of a grand empty gesture even if Germany had not attacked.
I was wondering about Czechoslovakia though. I've read that Germany gained much from acquired Czech industry. The Wehrmacht used Czech tanks in front line service.
Was Czechoslovakia in any position to repel an attack? I guess since England and France were able to just give the Sudetenland away, the answer is no. Still, could the Czechs have offered any resistance or was the Sudetenland so pro-Germany that it couldn't?
After WW1 and the great depression, the whole world was bankrupt, but by 1939, was starting to recover (also thanks to war worries).Admiral Beez said:Germany has to start a war. Germany was nearly bankrupt.
They "stole a march" because France and Great Britain had stuck their head in the sand. Hitler had already rearmed and remilitarized the Rhineland, and united with Austria and Sudetenland under the "watchful" eyes of France and Great Britain, all in violation of the Treaty of Versailles. After the signing of the Munich Agreement, "peace in our time" document, I do not think Great Britain would pull its head out of the sand but rather lapse into hopeful peaceful attitude, especially if Hitler had complied with its terms. Remember Chamberlain and his "cautious rearmament" would still be in power.pbehn said:Much of Germanys success in 1939-41 was because they "stole a march". Given 4 years more to prepare the UK USA and Canada may have been able to eliminate the U Boat threat more quickly. Same for the war on land.
GrauGeist said:The historical Allies had plenty of hardware in development, but would have that been as accelerated without war?
Both the U.S. and Britain were operaring with tight purse strings until war broke out.
Same goes for Germany, where they weren't taking many technologies serious until the tide of war was turning against them.
My guess is that the RLM, not being desperate, would have still not taken the Jet program seriously, even by 1944.
Their aircraft manufacturing would have most likely still been a single-shift work week (as was historically) until circumstances became dire.
Your probably right. GB was very jealous of her lead in naval warfare and I think she would defend that.The Basket said:But the RN would match the Kriegsmarine ship for ship so dontcha worry about that.
Japan is the wild card. Would they go to war with the US not expecting Germany to start a war with the US? I do not think Germany would start a war with the US before engaging a war in Europe.Would Japan invade the Dutch East Indies? That's a difficult one because it's kinda yes and kinda no. I actually think they would. Really think that. Otherwise it's out of China and Korea and I doubt that's gonna fly.
If Japan goes to War then UK and USA will be at war regardless of what Germany does.
The question assumes nothing. What would the allies forces look like is part of the answer..Shortround6 said:This assumes the allies do nothing.
Germany may have been stronger but the British, Americans, and French were also improving their strength even before the shooting started.
Germany has to start a war. Germany was nearly bankrupt.
After WW1 and the great depression, the whole world was bankrupt, but by 1939, was starting to recover (also thanks to war worries).
Hitler was impatient. He already had Austria and part of Czechoslovakia. Four years of peace in a growing world economy could possibly have stabilized German economics including exporting their highly desirable technical abilities through products and importing needed raw materials for war stockpiles. All under the guise of "peace for our time"!
Now I know about Marshall Rydz-Smigly. Also, I never knew Poland had annexed territory from Czechoslovakia before Germany did. That answers my thoughts on Czechoslovakia.
Before the German invasion of Poland GB and the USSR had a serious disagreement over Finland. The US provided Brewster F2A fighters to Finland, not realizing that they would be used against a future ally. One of the more interesting paintings I have seen shows a Finnish F2A engaging Soviet Hawk 81A's.
I was wondering about Czechoslovakia though. I've read that Germany gained much from acquired Czech industry. The Wehrmacht used Czech tanks in front line service.
Was Czechoslovakia in any position to repel an attack? I guess since England and France were able to just give the Sudetenland away, the answer is no. Still, could the Czechs have offered any resistance or was the Sudetenland so pro-Germany that it couldn't?
A lot of jumping to confusion. I suspect few macroeconomist buys into this.Hitler's belief in the "Shrinking Markets" theory led to the implementation of Autarky in 1933.
Germany wouldn't/couldn't have made it to 1944.
After the signing of the Munich Agreement, "peace in our time" document,
he unknown on this is, would a dedicated, war planning, peaceful Germany be more efficient in preparing for war than a laid back "cautious rearming" peace loving GB and an isolationist US both thinking Germany is living up to the Munich Agreement?
I followed it fine enough. Where were you confused?A lot of jumping to confusion.
Germany's natural ally is Britain, IMO. They just need a common enemy, be it Napoleon, Stalin or Tojo. But not with Hitler or Nazis at the helm.What happens is USSR invades West in 1940something.
All Europe fights the red menace.
Germany becomes glorious ally against evil. Japan also joins fight.
Hitler is a Hero.