True and declaring of war on America. :yep:

Well it was because of Japan's raid on Pearl Harbor that caused America to declare war on Germany and Japan. If Hitler had told Japan's leadership that he would help invade America in due time, they both could've attacked from both sides. That and the fact he invaded Russia, which is amazingly stupid tactically, you'd think Hitler was working for the allies when he did that. :rotfl:

False! Hitler declared war on America himself, for reasons we don't understand - after all, Japan refused to attack Russia when Hitler did so, even after all the pleas by Germany. Roosevelt was all the happier for it, but it is unlikely that he would have declared it immediately himself - the American public at the time would not have been very happy with declaring war without being attacked.

Hitler WAS working for the Allies. At least that is what my Flat Earth Society/Conspiracy Theorist Guild friends tell me! :doh:

THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE...

It is unconfirmed that Hitler made a remark about Japan's attack something on the lines "In a thousand years of history Japan has never lost a war." Probably believed the war can be won and so on.

ah well the good old what if scenarios. the post war perception of ww2 is full of semi true stories, over simplifications and sheer myth.
just an example is that "if the lw would have continued to bomb the airfields, instead of switching to london, raf would have collapsed". infact, the raf was never ever realy at a breaking point. they had squad rotation, airfields out of german striking range, and a industrial fighter aircraft output beating the german one around 3:1. infact the whole "the few" saved the day is a myth too. the raf and lw forces where about even, when comparing all aircraft. u can not just compare raf fighters, and include all lw aircraft. the uneven looking engagements where caused by the way how the raf comitted its units.

Hitler's war was to start in 1945.
By then the Germain Navy would have been much larger.
The invasion of Poland did not expect war with England or France because of Munich 1938.
The Allieds jumped the gun so to speak:)

I don't know if this is correct, but makes sense.

The problem with a lot of these what if scenarios is that they assume that you can only change one thing in isolation.

As someone else pointed out, if germany had built 5,000 U-boats either before or during the war, the USA and UK would have reacted and built even more ASW ships and aircraft to compensate.

The other issue is whether these additional ships, assuming they could be built, would have had a great impact. Germany commissioned 1, 154 U-Boats in 1935-45, but only about 700 ever saw combat. In 1939, the U-Boat service was an elite force, but the quick expansion quickly dumbed down standards.

In reading on the Battle of the Atlantic, one thing which always struck me was the large number of brand new U-Boats manned by green skippers and crews which were sunk on their first patrol before they even sank a single ship. A large number of kills were accounted for by a relatively small number of U-Boat aces.

So multiplying the number of U-Boats by 5 might only have multiplied the number of kills by a factor of 2.

They could have achieved the same thing just by making better use of their resources, for example:

-not wasting U-Boats on secondary missions, such as defending Norway or helping Rommel.

-changing standard U-Boat operating procedures when it should have been obvious that the british had broken the Kriegsmarine code and were using Huff-Duff to locate U-Boats.

:ahoy:

p.s. - Did you know that during the war, the Allies discussed whether they should make a serious attempt to assassinate Hitler, but came to the conclusion that he was of more help to the allied cause if they left him in control.

A quick reply:
USA was an isolationish nation (at that time) and would do very little. The Plan was for 300 U-boats in 1945.

Are you joking Germany had the upper hand in 1939-1942. Hitler knew from 1942 the Allies would catch up on Germany. Hitler had to go to war in 1939 for a fast victory but by the autumn of 1941 he lost the gamble. Or so Hitler's age was against him and his health.

im happy that hitler was so stupid - otherwise, if he had win the war i had to grown up an scream "sieg heil" all the day.
but what if scenarios are some fun.
what if when hitlers starts the war against the udssr not as an "vernichtungskrieg", a planned genozide and slavery for the russians.
what if he had start the war against the udssr only as an war to kick stalin out of the way? in the beginning of "operation barbarossa" the russians where really happy - they think the germans are going to free them from stalin -
but soon they see that hitler was a much bigger slaughter than stalin and want to force them to slaves - so the fight.
as an war only to kick stalin out of his way and free the russians - barbarossa
has only last 2 - 3 month an be won- what then? with millions of thankful russians with enthusiasm for the nationalsozialism that free them?
huh....that idea makes me fear.......

ok well
the whole question if the uboat war was effective, or what happened if the km had 5k boats etc, can not be answered, by simply adding all number from 39-45 up, and draw a conclusion out of that.
the war as a whole was lost for the axis in 43. there wasnt realy much what the axis could do, to prevent the ultimate defeat. big numbers of produced liberty mechants, cheap destroyer escorts en masse or fancy accoustic torpedos where a realitiy, but they where an answer to the impact, the km had with the uboat force. its cause and effect. an aswer that was given by the allies from mid 42 on.
a interesting "what if" to me, can only come out of a realistic scenario. the question what happened if the nazis had the bomb in 44 is simply not interesting imho. what would have happened if spiderman would be fighting for the chinese in 38 has the same appeal to me. its just fiction.
could the km have went into ww2 with like 250 VII/XI boats? of course they could have done that. a bismarck/tirpitz bb roughly equaled the cost/material/manhour of around 100 VII type boats. uboats had a devestating effect in ww1. guessing that in a comming conflict, uboats would be of great value isnt rocket sience imho.
the amount of goods, importet into the uk got halved by dec 40, from a hand full of operating uboats, a fraction of the calculated 200-300. the two years, 1940 and 1941 where the deceicive timeframe. the devestating impact, a force of 250 boats, operating from french, norweigian and german bases in 40 and 41 would have had, can not be negated. in may 1941, the operational status of the km uboat force reached a low, with a nr of operating uboats so small, its almost ridicilus.

I have to disagree. The allies did very little in the beginning of the war. They saw what was happening and they could feel the tension building between Germany and her neighbors but they decided to wait it out in hopes of avoiding the conflict. During the first year of the war there was a Sitzkrieg in the west and the Allies (pretty much the UK) were trying to negotiate a end to the war. Also you must take into account that while the Brittish and US were allies, they initally did not trust eachother.

Hitler had many mistakes or things go wrong for him
1. Provide the infantry with a semi automatic rifle. (used mostly bolt action)
2. Produce the Me 262 earlier in the war. Desiged in 1940
3. Withdraw from africa sooner. 250,000 soliders were captured when the germans surrenderd at Tunsia and another 100K either kIA, WIA, MIA, or captured in sicily
*****4. Dont switch prioritys so much in the Battle of Brittin. Went from shipping, to RAF instilations, to cities.

Thats just what I think.

Many mistakes were made, As for a LW switching from Shipping to Airfields to cities. The progression was coreect. The only problem is that the Lufwaffa stopped too soon before going after the cities.
The first thing they did was attack shipping and radar sites along the british coast. Next they went after the airfields. Had they continued pounding the airfields like they did. The british Air force would have have been destoryed. Most surviving RAF pilots have said in many interviews that the RAF was only weeks away from being defeated. Had the Germans been successful ,Operation "sea lion "would have went forward sometime in early to mid 1941. By controliing the skys would have canceled out the Royal Navy having much of a impact with the German landings that were planned. I believe Hitler attacked Russia just out of frustration over the Battle of Britian going sour.

If The Germans had won the Battle of Britian, Hitler would not of attacked Russia. If he did it would have been much later. Also remember one thing about Russia Stalin depended on MASSIVE aid from Britian and the US. Had England fallen. Russia would not of stood long, due to lack of War material. The Russian factories were a joke early in the war.

As for the u-boats if more were availible at the begining of the war say only 100 instead of the 30-50. The merchant shipping losses would have been twice as bad as it was in reality. Less material coming in less for the Royal airforce to defend with......All things have a impact.