If Life gave Hitler a second chance,what must he do for Germany to gain a favourable outcome in WW2?

[Tuscan]

Put all military projects aside and focus on the V1/2 and the A-bomb, secretly. Then unleash it on his enemies. Germanys won.

 

[Amur_Tiger]

I've always been fascinated with the idea of a successful North Africa campaign.
To accomplish this, the Germans would have had to devote far more resources to protecting Romel's supply lines across the Med, but I don't think it's impossible.
Taking Malta would have helped.
I see a Germany that controls the Suez canal and the oil fields of Iraq and Kuwait as a far greater long term threat.

I don't think it's impossible to make for success in North Africa but I'm pretty doubtful about it being useful in going after the USSR.

Firstly I don't think that conquest and consolidation of North Africa and the middle east could have been accomplished within a year ( this is referring in part to TallTroll's hope that something could be achieved there ). The land war itself was perhaps winnable in that sort of time table but the naval war would have also taken some time and I'm not convinced that given the supply problems the Germans had with their relatively small force that they could have done better on land until the naval war made some progress. Inevitably this means counting on the Italian navy and Luftwaffe to sink some ships and neither of these were particularly brilliant at doing this. Of course the game is liable to be more forgiving in this regard.

Secondly the prospect of fighting the Soviets in and around the Caucuses seems like a losing proposition, logistics would have been hell and I don't think the Axis had the spare resources to significantly fix that so that it became a large enough front to make a big difference. Also it would have still been subject to sea lanes attrition due to British submarines which would have likely remained active in the med out of Gibraltar ( presuming Malta is taken, which is itself a considerable challenge ).

Basically more commitment to North Africa and the middle east inevitably makes more British resources more effective at combating the Germans, particularly in the naval field. Tackling North Africa in an efficient manner pretty well requires making the Italian Navy more effective then it was historically.

I have to admit I have quiet enjoyed this thread to date.

Though I do ponder why the overall size of the Royal Navy has an overriding impact on the feasibility of a successful Sea Lion. The application of naval power is more about the ability to project power over large swathes of ocean away from your own borders.

The advantage of naval power to effect zone control effectively disappers with the advances in airpower. With airpower you are able to cover a more localized area very quickly with a direct force and a heavy application to meet local need.

If the Axis were able to effect local air superiority over the channel then it would effectively be "no go" zone for the Royal Navy. Thereby mitigating the size advantage of the Navy.

Also the consideration for the application of airpower and range. Following the fall of France the Axis essentially possess the same advantages as British. Additionally they do not have the disadvantage of having your largest cities and industrial base being the site of the primary battle.

Thanks everybody and I look forward to the further discussion.

The trouble is that air power isn't nearly as simple a trump card as is sometimes suggested, ships and in particular Royal Navy ships were considerably able to defend themselves against air attack, certainly there'd be sinking but in the time it takes for the Luftwaffe to actually achieve the sinking a very small number of ships could tear vicious chunks out of any invasion fleet. A simple but brutally effective way of insuring a TPK ( Total Party Kill ) of a Sea Lion would be to send the 4 remaining Revenge class out on a death ride to meet the invasion fleet. 4 old battleships for the vast bulk of the invasion fleet would be a pretty good trade, and with 32 15" guns and 56 6" guns you can be quite sure that there won't be much of anything left to actually get onto the beaches. Also keep in mind that even these slow battleships will cover 4x the ground that landing craft will cover.

I think that if you want to optimize German plans you really want to avoid giving the Royal Navy opportunities to be useful because this was the largest area of advantage for the Allies after the fall of France.

 

[Liquid Sky]

Germany did get a favourable outcome from WW2. The west became the leading economic European power of the post war era. And were reunited with the east just 45 years later.

Hard to see Nazi Germany doing much better then that. A better war for them would probably have meant nuclear annihilation for most of the planet.

 

[Kovax]

Hitler could have made good on his early threat to "let Germany lie down and die", thereby collapsing the entire European economy, and possibly sending the world back into another several years of depression. In effect, surrendering before the war even began, all but forcing the rest of the world to prop it up against Soviet invasion or an internal Communist uprising, might have gotten the German economy everything it needed to become what it is today, without all of the messy shooting. Problem is, that path leaves one unemployed Fuhrer, so that wasn't acceptable to the rather egotistical and overly-biased character making the decisions.

 

[Secret Master]

Germany did get a favourable outcome from WW2. The west became the leading economic European power of the post war era. And were reunited with the east just 45 years later.

I disagree.

That outcome could have been achieved without WWII, Hitler, or even re-occupying the Rhineland. An economic analysis of Germany in the 1930s demonstrates that Germany could have just refused to rearm in violation of Versailles and continued developing the economy. (And gotten rid of remaining reparations thanks to the intervention of the US.)

Tooze's discussion of what German firms were doing with profits and capital from 1936 onward demonstrates just how much room there was to employ more people, increase wages, and even put more consumer goods on the shelf if Germany wasn't wasting industrial output on weapons while running financial scams to fund it.

The great irony of WWII is that Hitler's vision of Germany was utterly misguided and stupid. Prosperity for Germany did not require or come from adding arable land for "excess population" or whatever. Germany could become the biggest economy in Europe even after being practically leveled to the ground in 1945 without waging a single war or annexing a single acre of land.

If only millions didn't have to fight and die in WWII in pursuit of a wrong headed ideal, Germany could have attained its current economic prosperity without all the bloodshed.

 

[Sweed Raver]

The great irony of WWII is that Hitler's vision of Germany was utterly misguided and stupid. Prosperity for Germany did not require or come from adding arable land for "excess population" or whatever. Germany could become the biggest economy in Europe even after being practically leveled to the ground in 1945 without waging a single war or annexing a single acre of land.

I often think that the most successful path to both uniting the German people and bringing them prosperity would've been:

1. Anschluss + Danzig (through diplomatic means)
2. Diplomatic deal with all neighboring countries that allowing all German speaking populations voluntarily migrate to Germany.
3. Improved relations with the west and the Nordics through trade.
4. Continuously requesting that Germany and the Allied countries (and possibly Japan, Manchuria, the Nordics) form an anti Soviet coalition.

The war goals targeted at the Soviet Union by such a coalition would be:

1. Most of Continental Europe felt militarily threatened, thus: Cut the Soviet Union down to size (forced disarmament), release Belarus and Ukraine as sovereign countries.
2. Allied countries despised socialism, thus: Install democracy
3. Poland, Finland, Japan, Manchuria: Regain core provinces.

 

[jovialmadness]

There are several options:

If we assume his Nazism was honest, and he would have stopped his conquests once all German people were under his banner, then we could say one solution would be to negotiate with Poland for the Danzig, either offer to buy it, offer economic aid (due to Germany's boom while the other Majors were still in Depression), or an alliance.

If we looked at him as a conqueror who was BS-ing everyone, then there are other options:

> Form the "Unholy Alliance" with the USSR. In reality, the USSR was offered Axis membership, but a deal was never made. Maybe if he pressed harder and agreed to split the world between Germany, Italy, and Japan, and let the USSR spread the Revolution elsewhere, they might strike a deal and create an alliance capable of destroying the democratic powers of the world.
> Attempt to overthrow democratic governments to break the Allies apart.
> Use Economic influence to weaken the Allies, and to get more minor nations on his side.
> Not invade anything until both Italy and Japan have solved their issues (lack of industrialization and war with China, respectively) before messing up Europe
> Sue for peace before marching on Paris, and make small demands ("let me militarize, let me keep the Danzig", etc). Grow, and attack them again after a few years, when they expect that you are satisfied with the new status quo.

A little research shows us that Hitler's policies had placed Germany into a sort of impending financial collapse. Not a lot of people delve deep enough into the finances of the reich to know that. His only chance was conquest. The reich treasury was all but gone and within a couple years of the original start date of WW2 would have unmasked the nazi state for what it was.

Most of the policies, on the outside, of the nazis present that of oppression and domination. That is true. What their secret purpose was was one of confiscation. In every sense. This can be shown easily in the 8 years leading up to WW2 with the removal and confiscation of jews and their wealth. Obviously it went into overdrive during the war.

In my humble opinion, every single action of conquest they undertook was an attempt at padding a hidden financial fault sugar coated as idealogical views that they also just happened to agree with as well. The allies and conquered nations of europe knew this. That is why it is no great surprise that every nation attacked or that feared attack, shipped their bullion out of their country.

Easy answer, nothing could have changed Hitler and his mind for war. He needed it. That is with one exception. If Hitler himself somehow wasnt a national socialist and just happened to believe in completely opposite non-militaristic and self-destructive views.

 

[Kovax]

I disagree.

That outcome could have been achieved without WWII, Hitler, or even re-occupying the Rhineland. An economic analysis of Germany in the 1930s demonstrates that Germany could have just refused to rearm in violation of Versailles and continued developing the economy. (And gotten rid of remaining reparations thanks to the intervention of the US.)

I partially agree, but partially disagree. Germany was already seen as an economic rival and threat even before Hitler rose to power, and was intentionally being frozen out of trade by France and the UK. Germany might have prospered to a degree in spite of it, but eventually that economic semi-blockade was going to lead to friction and contention. Without a navy, Germany's options were to either find partners who could not be blockaded: the Soviets because trade was overland, and the US whom the UK and France didn't wish to openly deny free passage, or to rearm and contest the issue by force. The latter course had several serious flaws (the blockade itself being one) which almost inevitably led to defeat, and poisonous rhetoric that basically alienated most of the rest of the world insured that practically nobody willingly assisted.

Hitler merely took a difficult situation and made it totally untenable.

 

[Secret Master]

I partially agree, but partially disagree. Germany was already seen as an economic rival and threat even before Hitler rose to power, and was intentionally being frozen out of trade by France and the UK. Germany might have prospered to a degree in spite of it, but eventually that economic semi-blockade was going to lead to friction and contention. Without a navy, Germany's options were to either find partners who could not be blockaded: the Soviets because trade was overland, and the US whom the UK and France didn't wish to openly deny free passage, or to rearm and contest the issue by force. The latter course had several serious flaws (the blockade itself being one) which almost inevitably led to defeat, and poisonous rhetoric that basically alienated most of the rest of the world insured that practically nobody willingly assisted.

Hitler merely took a difficult situation and made it totally untenable.

This is true, although based on actions taken in the late 20s and early 30s, I see a peaceful and democratic Germany getting the US to help even more. It starts with ending reparations payments, but I could see the US helping even more by securing better trade deals with Germany in spite of French and British behavior. And if Germany stays at or near Versailles armament levels (and yes, I know Weimar was violating those armament levels long before Hitler came to power), she should be able to spend the 30s doing things like putting more consumer goods on the shelf and letting businesses expand naturally. She might even devalue the Mark to encourage trade (which Hitler and his cronies absolutely would not do).

Aspects of the Depression make some of this touch and go, but given where the German economy stood in 1936, and given where it stood on May 8th, 1945, I think we can both agree that an economic build up from 1936 to 1989 would easily equal or exceed the historical economic build up from 1946 to 1989.

Hell, not losing East Germany as a Soviet satellite for decades would do wonders for giving alternate history Germany a leg up compared to historical Germany.

 

[battlemac007]

Germany would have had a far better chance of controlling Europe if the following had happened:

1. I know that it is outside this discussion, but go to a full war economy in 1937. Churchill's comment on war production applies (the first year nothing, the second a trickle, the third all you want). Concentrate on subs, fighters, trucks and tanks - the Pzkw IV, and put a long gun on it. Prioritize your research on rockets, jets, radar/electronic warfare and sub technologies (and nuclear technology, but that would have resulted in much less robust research into other, more urgent, priorities).

2. Take the BEF out of the fight at Dunkirk. The 250,000 trained soldiers that Hitler let go allowed the Brits to continue the fight in North Africa and the invasions of Europe (Italy/D Day). While the material losses at Dunkirk were debilitating, the personnel losses of a BEF surrender would have set the Brits back by years.

3. Take Malta instead of Crete. Hitler took Crete because he feared bomber attacks from there to the Romanian oil fields. A much better way of doing that would have been to take the Suez Canal. Between point 2 and taking Malta, it would have been more likely to take the Suez.

4. Concentrate the first portion of Barbarossa on taking Moscow and the rail system to the Urals. While the Russians would always out man Hitler, it would have been much harder for them to resist without the industrial production getting to the front.

5. In the Battle of the Atlantic, concentrate on the escorts first. This gives you three advantages. The escorts are not there immediately to impede your attacks on the transports. The escorts are not there for subsequent convoys. And third, the naval personnel who man the escorts won't gain experience, and be able to pass that along (a transport isn't going to pluck sailors out of the water with subs around). And fix the torpedoes.

While the Germans have always been admired for their efficiency, the Third Reich was anything but. Especially in regards to intelligence, they didn't have a clue as to the military or industrial capabilities of their opponents, and they didn't kick in a war economy until it was too late.

 

[GhostKiller01]

You need elsaß, luxembourg, switzerland, south tyrol, austria, sudetenland, eupen, north slesvig, danzig, memel, some bunch of poland to achieve this goal. This requires a war versus France ( and maybe Italy )

Poor Luxembourg! That's my flag m8!
Fun/depressing fact: in his speech for entering NATO, the prime minister of Luxembourg said "after being raped twice, we can hardly pretend to still be a virgin"

 

[Denkt]

I can not see any way for Germany to be successful, it will end with defeat no matter what Germany does. Germany can not take on the whole world and win, you need to give them fantasy resources for them to win. And I can not see Germany avoiding war with the world either after they invade Poland.

Germany did not have the resources to build an airforce that could compete with their enemies. Even if they develop jets, their enemies would also field them soon. Even if they develop super submarines, their enemies will develop weapons that can destroy them. Even if they develop nukes their enemies will have them as well and much better ability to win a nuclear warfare scenario. No matter what Germany does the rest of the world can counter with many times the power.

 

[Amur_Tiger]

3. Take Malta instead of Crete. Hitler took Crete because he feared bomber attacks from there to the Romanian oil fields. A much better way of doing that would have been to take the Suez Canal. Between point 2 and taking Malta, it would have been more likely to take the Suez.

Crete was also a much softer target and the last holdout of the Greek government, if you look over the battle in detail it becomes clear that with a bit more organization on the part of the allies they would have beaten the Germans back. The problem was that these troops had all just arrived very shortly before the aerial invasion and there was a good bit of chaos going on there. In Malta you'd have less room for the Germans to land unopposed, which is critical to any successful airborne attack, vastly more supplies and a clear point of strength for the British around the port. Not to mention the Germans would have had to do something about Malta's fighters to begin with. Dealing with the Med is always going to be challenging for Germany as the critical first battle will always be a naval one led by Italy.

 

[GhostKiller01]

So, to answer the question. Nazi Germany would have to do a few things:

1) Try to negotiate with the Poles for Danzig, maybe give them Slovakia, if it works, ask them to join the Axis as it is the Anti-Communist Alliance officially, so Poland would like that (no Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact)

2) If that fails, war is needed(ish). Invade Poland, but only take the Polish Corridor (Danzig included) and leave the rest under a puppet government. Try to defuse the war with the Allies

branching possibilities

3a) If the Phony War is resolved peacefully or does not happen, as you did leave Poland with the Poles and only took the German areas, it's still technically self-determination, one of the 14 clauses made by the USA in Versailles. Start influencing the countries in Eastern Europe that border the USSR or are pro-fascist to build the Axis up (Finland and the Scandinavian area in general, Romania, Baltic States, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Turkey [yeah they're not in Europe, who gives? You still need them to make a far southern flank])

3b) Diplomacy with France and UK fails. Invade through the Ardennes, make France fall, make peace with the UK and in that peace only ask for Elsaß-Lothringen and maybe Champagne if they allow it. UK will most likely accept (it's not like you took half of France and left the rest under a French traitor...) and that will leave France with most of its land and a pretty crippling political situation (they did give full powers to a marshal who surrendered practically immediately). Don't expect too much from that side for a while

3c) If the UK does not want peace after the fall of France, well, you're fucked. Might help if you don't invade the USSR but keep a decent army on the border

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4a) Once you have a decent number of members in the Axis, invade the USSR, but keep your navy and the western army ready in case of intervention from the west (France and UK might intervene if you start to look too powerful) You did give a year or so more to the USSR to prepare but you now have only one front and a bunch of allies, and Turkey can snipe the oil fields you so dearly need. Try to make sure Japan did not sign a non-aggression pact with the USSR, it will force them to maintain a small army in the Far East to protect themselves against a Japanese invasion. The invasion should still be costly in terms of manpower and resources, but the USSR will receive it way worse than IRL. Stalingrad will most likely get sieged by Turkey, so send a few detachments to protect the oil fields, but otherwise keep pushing into their industrial area. The Scandinavian countries will most likely manage to push the USSR away from Leningrad. You could take Moscow in two years max.

4b) Congrats, you got the German lands back (and a few French), follow the step 3a mentions

4c) Pearl Harbour happened, and the USSR is invading on the East... ;_; you're fucked ;_;

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5a) Keep pushing until you can see Japanese soldiers, then make a peace treaty where you take the Lebensraum you wanted (Ukraine and Belarus), give a bit of land to the Axis or allow them to pillage the industry in the USSR (not from the lands you took). Then separate the USSR in three (Siberia, Muscovy, Mongolia) for good measure. Congrats, you have accomplished the goals set in Mein Kampf (with or without Elsaß-Lothringen) and can rest knowing Nazi Germany will live past the next century.

5b) Follow step 4a while making sure the UK and France are not rearming or preparing for war, keep your soldiers ready

5c) Germany is split in 3 zones of occupation... you blow your brains out in a concrete bunker

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6ba) The UK and France are not rearming, follow step 5a (but still maintain a force in the west, you can never be too sure)

6bb) The UK and France are rearming, prepare for a defensive war (do not go on the attack, build AAs and fortifications in the west, prepare against a naval invasion, send a few divisions back). Continue step 5a, but warn the Axis members that the UK and France might be getting jealous at the success and tell them to redistribute forces against an impeding invasion.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

7) The UK and France invade, and launch a strike from their colonies on Italy as well as sending forces from India into your new territory. The warning should have given you enough time to prepare against it. The Axis should be able to respond against the threat, so you will suffer a bit, but should hold out. Wage war against the west as best as you can while saying to Japan that you will be able to support its ambitions in the Pacific one you have dealt with the UK (prevent Pearl Harbour from happening).

8) You should win unless you have really bad leadership in the military. Enjoy your dominance in Europe and prepare for war with the USA. Improve relation with Argentina and Brazil and make them join the Axis. Deploy troops within their borders and prepare a naval strike against the USA. Give the green signal to Japan

9) Might go either way, just make sure you get soldier into the mainland an you should start to destroy their national unity and morale. GG

 

[FUregistration]

Hitler should have conquered and divide Poland with the SU, then focus on the west solely, France, Benelux, Denmark, Norway and finally the UK would fall if the war machine was focused on Sealion. Securing the whole Balkans region with puppets and/or invade. With the fall of the UK, Spain would probably be forced diplomatically to join the Axis, and Portugal would have really no other option, this were both dictatorships so its not like it would be that hard. With this Gibraltar would fall and the Mediterranean would belong to Germany and Italy.

At this point the Germans would control the west completely and North Africa, there would hardly exist any scenario where the allies and US could invade successfully. Germany would have an alliance of countries more than capable to match the Soviet Union in manpower, plus it would surpass the Soviet Union in both industrial capacity and technology, not to mention the puppets that can always provide something and supplies. Also is worth mentioning that with the UK falling, the resistance in western Europe would diminish considerably, meaning more manpower, more industrial capacity, more resources from occupied countries.

Since there's really no viable scenario where the Soviet Union could invade western Europe while this happens because they wouldn't have the army to do it before 1942-43, then it would be a question of making Stalin believe that he can take Berlin and end the Axis, and I believe he would take the bait.

Once the bait was taken the Germans would have "Defend the Homeland" morale while the Soviets would be the aggressors, this means that when Axis counter-attacks the Soviet Union would lack that morale boost, the war would drag on yes, and maybe it would still be hard for Axis to take Moscow, but inside the Soviet Union it would happen the same that happened in Germany in the late war, lack of unity among the top officials, this could easily be the demise of the Soviet Union.

The thing is, if there's no western front, would the allies send everything they have to the Soviet front? If so, a lot would depend on Japan, its really hard to know where this would go, but here are my 2cents.

 

[Vukodav]

I can not see any way for Germany to be successful, it will end with defeat no matter what Germany does. Germany can not take on the whole world and win, you need to give them fantasy resources for them to win. And I can not see Germany avoiding war with the world either after they invade Poland.

Germany did not have the resources to build an airforce that could compete with their enemies. Even if they develop jets, their enemies would also field them soon. Even if they develop super submarines, their enemies will develop weapons that can destroy them. Even if they develop nukes their enemies will have them as well and much better ability to win a nuclear warfare scenario. No matter what Germany does the rest of the world can counter with many times the power.

Except that Germany did not have to take on the whole world and those that it did, it didn't have to take on at the same time.

The only powers that could stop it were Soviet Union and the USA. And with the Soviet Union gone, Germany gets those fantasy resources you talk about. With the Soviet Union rendered ineffective (resources were not the problem for that but the poor management and decision in the time the victory could be achieved), the Axis would have the manpower, resources and a good position to fight off the USA. Maybe not invade it, but to fight it off? Sure.

And that would be a victory for Germany.

As the plan was to win against the Soviet Union in late 1941 early 1942, and the fact that USA could not bring its weight until mid 1944 (and even that to a weakened Germany), it is easy to see that victorious Germany would have no problem to fight off any USA invasion. And there is also the fact that no way was the USA prepared to sacrifice the amount of people it would require to fight the Axis in Europe.

So all it takes actually for Germany to win is for Japan NOT to attack China (thus remaining a threat in Far East and tying the Soviet Division there that were used in the Moscow area in the late 1941 and saved the city) and no Pearl Harbor (thus delaying the USA entrance into the war and economic mobilization for at least another year (crucial)), as well as smarter decisions on the Eastern Front.

With USA not yet in the war by the end of 1941 UK would likely come to some sort of peace or at least a cease fire. Germany would have enough time and resources to build up its defense and a Cold War would go on.

That is a German victory, no need to conquer the whole world with military in a single war.

And yes, maybe the enemies would develop the same tech... but with a few years of delay, and that is all that is needed. It was never a question IF, but WHEN, and is that time enough. That was the case in every war. Who cares that USA could develop its fighter jets in 1946 if Germany had theirs by 1943 (if there was not a stupid Blitzbomber decision) and enjoyed 3 years of total air supremacy? And as for the resources - false.

Victorious Germany would have the oil (Romania, Caucasus, Iran fields), the steel (Donbas region), the food (Pannonian and Ukrainian black soil), the aluminum for planes (Balkan mines), chromium (Turkey and Yugoslavia), manpower (take into the account that USA had at the time 130-140 million people while Germany, Italy and Romania alone had as much - no point in counting the other German allies of that time or how many would they get from other nations after the victory in the East).

In the scenario where the Soviet Union was pushed beyond the Ural mountains by 1942 and the USA entrance was delayed by 1942-43, there is simply nothing either Germany or the USA could do to one another even with the use of nukes.

 

[that-guy-is-it]

A little research shows us that Hitler's policies had placed Germany into a sort of impending financial collapse. Not a lot of people delve deep enough into the finances of the reich to know that. His only chance was conquest. The reich treasury was all but gone and within a couple years of the original start date of WW2 would have unmasked the nazi state for what it was.

Most of the policies, on the outside, of the nazis present that of oppression and domination. That is true. What their secret purpose was was one of confiscation. In every sense. This can be shown easily in the 8 years leading up to WW2 with the removal and confiscation of jews and their wealth. Obviously it went into overdrive during the war.

In my humble opinion, every single action of conquest they undertook was an attempt at padding a hidden financial fault sugar coated as idealogical views that they also just happened to agree with as well. The allies and conquered nations of europe knew this. That is why it is no great surprise that every nation attacked or that feared attack, shipped their bullion out of their country.

Easy answer, nothing could have changed Hitler and his mind for war. He needed it. That is with one exception. If Hitler himself somehow wasnt a national socialist and just happened to believe in completely opposite non-militaristic and self-destructive views.

Oh, yes, his economy would have collapsed within the decade, and odds are a Revolution of angry impoverished people would have removed him. That said, this is Adolf Hitler we are talking about, and he was not an expert in economic issues. I mean, Germany's economic recovery went like this:
>Spend money on highways and infrastructure to kick German Industry into action again and get the money flowing
>Conscript people into the army to keep unemployment down
That is it. It worked, of course, in the middle of the depression, Germans were the only people with reliable jobs and all, but he was inflating a bubble that would burst sooner or later. In reality, if the Axis had won the war, I would wager the new Reich would last until the 60's tops due to economics alone, even if we pretend no dissent ever happened. Point is, it would have fallen. But we are talking about Adolf Hitler here. I think we all know he was not a man to think long term. I think he could try and play his economic growth as long term (he was a dictator remember, he could tell the international community sky fairies gave him money and it would be hard to prove him wrong without espionage). Based on this, is it not plausible for him to convinced the more impoverished nations of Eastern Europe to sell some land?

 

[Vukodav]

Oh, yes, his economy would have collapsed within the decade, and odds are a Revolution of angry impoverished people would have removed him. That said, this is Adolf Hitler we are talking about, and he was not an expert in economic issues. I mean, Germany's economic recovery went like this:
>Spend money on highways and infrastructure to kick German Industry into action again and get the money flowing
>Conscript people into the army to keep unemployment down
That is it. It worked, of course, in the middle of the depression, Germans were the only people with reliable jobs and all, but he was inflating a bubble that would burst sooner or later. In reality, if the Axis had won the war, I would wager the new Reich would last until the 60's tops due to economics alone, even if we pretend no dissent ever happened. Point is, it would have fallen. But we are talking about Adolf Hitler here. I think we all know he was not a man to think long term. I think he could try and play his economic growth as long term (he was a dictator remember, he could tell the international community sky fairies gave him money and it would be hard to prove him wrong without espionage). Based on this, is it not plausible for him to convinced the more impoverished nations of Eastern Europe to sell some land?

Wow, this is oversimplification.

Large public works were the thing to do in the economic crisis. USA did it, Germany, Yugoslavia. It is easy and cheap to do (cheaper than usual way of paying some company to do it) and when creating new value you get to print more money (that is covered by the new value) and then you have more money to spend, lend or a greater chance to borrow.

That is actually the ONLY way to get the country out of the economic crisis and it is proven to work over and over again.

And it is a myth that German army was the main force behind the rebirth of the German economy. It did not become a great thing in the economy until the war started and the conscription was a thing only from 1938 onward. At that time Germany had 30 divisions, and that is a normal for a country that size. So it was nothing out of the question at the time.

Also, Hitler only talked about his wishes but he intervened only in the army planing, many things were outsourced to other members of the party in every day life, including the economy. That is why the economy could build up in the first place.

Just as USA economy did not collapse even if most of it was converted to military production, or UK economy, or USSR economy. And had they won, debt would be in the situation just like it is in the USA. Yes, the debt is huge. Has the USA collapsed and fell into a revolution? Nope, and it is not even a dictatorship.

A victorious Germany would have a huge amount of resources and labor force (you know what I mean, no details because of the rules here), and before the war it was the second world economy so it would most certainly not collapse after it just won the world war. Many countries weaker than Germany did not. It is a wishful thinking but Germany would deal with it like every country did.

After the war the country would not need any more tanks and guns, sure. But it would need railroads, wagons, cars, transport aircraft, roads, buildings, machines - all that is what tank, airplane factories and organizations like Todt would produce. And if there is a demand, there is a way to do it and profit, when you have the resources and a labor to do it.

No, after the war, if anything, Germany would fair better than any victorious nation. The only thing that might lead to its collapse would be a power struggle after the Hitler's death and a rising nationalism in the conquered regions in the same time. Other than that, its economy would be just fine.

 

[Church7cor]

1. Use another way to gain popularity and seize power without the "Jewish Question".
- This would of freed up troops and resources focused on that issue and be used towards the actual war. Of course the issue becomes what scapegoat or issue does Hitler use to take power.
- This also would not of alienated many Jewish people and their talents, including scientist that could of head develop weapons, more man power for the military.
-Also a chance to decrease Partisan and Resistance Groups.

2. Invasions, changes in order or times.
- Perhaps not invade Poland, strengthen In Romania and Bulgaria perhaps even take Greece. Work out a deal with Poland to give up the corridor in return for the Balkan countries and use it as a buffer to the USSR. Perhaps this would even end the Polish alliance with France and England.

- Use the might of the Luftwaffe in a coordinated invasion "sea lion", Hitler wasted his air power should have taken the risk although it could have gone badly.

- Force Spain into the Axis after the civil war or take it for himself giving him Gibraltar making it very possible to close the MED or at least increase the shortage of supplies to British Forces.

- See first part...... Possibly with a Polish Buffer instead of Barbarossa focusing on Russia turn it loose on the Rich Oil fields of British controlled Iraq.

- Coordinate with Japan in Master Plan to leave the US in isolationism until Britain Falls, helping supply materials to them to defeat China before they go into the east indies. Hopefully In time getting Central American Facist leaders to take control for a safe landing and operating area for forces in North / South America.

3. VERY IMPORTANT change infantry focus from rifleman supporting a machine gun squad to developing a M1 style rifle and having machine guns support rifleman adding to firepower of squads. Some say the M1 won the war.


Honestly though without keeping the US out of the war until every other major power fell or joined the fold with the axis or developing the Atomic Bomb first its doubtful they could match the population/manpower/ industrialization of the US to win.

 

[vazco]

In hindsight, to win he could just leave Jews alone. Germany had greatest theoretical physicists before the war, however oppression of Jews made best of them (eg. Einstein, Heisenberg) leave or saboage work on the nuclear bomb. If he focused on nuclear bomb before the war, he could have conquer the whole world easily.