Another What If

[STEED]

After Kursk and the invasion of Sicily, it was now clear Hitler as a military leader had lost the gamble. What could have been a successful way of removing Hitler from power and ending the war?

[August]

Originally Posted by STEED

After Kursk and the invasion of Sicily, it was now clear Hitler as a military leader had lost the gamble. What could have been a successful way of removing Hitler from power and ending the war?

From what i've read removing Hitler at that point may well have made the war last longer.

[JSLTIGER]

Indeed. I remember reading that at that point, the British were working out a plan that would have resulted in Hitler's assassination at the Berchtesgaden (sp?), but decided against implementing it because they discovered that the war would have gone on longer if Hitler had died.

A better question is what if the July 20, 1944 assassination attempt had succeeded? What would the world have looked like then? Would the war have continued (especially with Rommel still alive) or would the Germans have sued for peace?

[STEED]

Originally Posted by JSLTIGER

Indeed. I remember reading that at that point, the British were working out a plan that would have resulted in Hitler's assassination at the Berchtesgaden

Operation Foxley see link
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/war/wwt...itler_01.shtml

Bit tricky that one I think the Generals should have done something but with the SS every where yes hard to see.

OK open up question if they the Germans or us in 1943 once we exhausted that year lets move on to 1944.

[Abraham]

Originally Posted by JSLTIGER

Indeed. I remember reading that at that point, the British were working out a plan that would have resulted in Hitler's assassination at the Berchtesgaden (sp?), but decided against implementing it because they discovered that the war would have gone on longer if Hitler had died.

A better question is what if the July 20, 1944 assassination attempt had succeeded? What would the world have looked like then? Would the war have continued (especially with Rommel still alive) or would the Germans have sued for peace?

The Germans probably would have offered an armistice to the Western Allies and would have want to shore up their defenses in the East.
The West would probably have refused, they were too much tied up with Stalin.
Worst case scenario: Deadlock: England would want Germany to 'defend' Europe against Communism, the US would have wanted to continue the fight against Nazism and save it's post-war relationship with the USSR.

[STEED]

So how ever you look at it Germany has no options except open surrender.


OK a new one put yourself in the position of Donitz, how would you conduct the U-Boat war?

One thing I was thinking of from 1939-1942 have all U-Boats in the Atlantic, two lines the outer line the type IX boats and the inner line the type VII boats.

[scandium]

Originally Posted by STEED

So how ever you look at it Germany has no options except open surrender.


OK a new one put yourself in the position of Donitz, how would you conduct the U-Boat war?

One thing I was thinking of from 1939-1942 have all U-Boats in the Atlantic, two lines the outer line the type IX boats and the inner line the type VII boats.

I'd have done nothing differently as I think the critical mistakes were made by superiors who:

1. Were reluctant to provide air cover for U-boats entering/exiting the Bay of Biscay or even for aerial recon. What litte air support for these missions they did provide was too little, too late.

2. Ordered him at critical points in the Battle of the Atlantic to send boats that were critically needed in the Atlantic to the Med and Arctic theatres where the tonnage per boat was far lower and, in the case of the Med, the risks much higher.

3. Did not build the requested number of 300 boats needed for the Battle of Atlantic. Built in fact far fewer by the time of the outbreak of hostilities (I think 57 or 58 operational U-boats total on Sept. 2 '39) and increased production too slowly.

4. Until Doenitz succeeded in putting a stop to it, drafted skilled dockyard workers to send to the front. This is an almost criminal misuse of human resources.

Lastly, as it doesn't fall under the category of mistakes by superiors: the incompetence displayed by the torpedo directorate in their inadequate tests of magnetic pistols that resulted in missed opportunities.

[CCIP]

Originally Posted by STEED

One thing I was thinking of from 1939-1942 have all U-Boats in the Atlantic, two lines the outer line the type IX boats and the inner line the type VII boats.

Yeah, as Scandium says, Doenitz sure would - but those decisions weren't in his power.

As mentioned by others in the "what if hitler didn't..." topics, a lot of it is indeed on Hitler and the more incompetent of his cronies. I would say that Doenitz, among a whole number of such figures, was a brilliant military man - who made his share of mistakes, but nonetheless can only be admired for doing as well as he did with the little resources he had.

[Type941]

i am very curious to hear about this theory that had Hitler been removed, the war would have lasted longer. Can someone elaborate on that? I have trouble believing it.

[CCIP]

Originally Posted by Type941

i am very curious to hear about this theory that had Hitler been removed, the war would have lasted longer. Can someone elaborate on that? I have trouble believing it.

Well, I am not entirely familiar with the literature, but the assumption is that once Germany was caught in the war to the point of no return, they really had two options: unconditional surrender now, or unconditional surrender later. Even Doenitz didn't put an immediate stop to the war in his short time in power, because - like every other German leader - he was determined that if they were to surrender, they were to do so to the Western allies anywhere possible.

To put it simply, the Germans didn't want Soviets on their territory, and would do anything to keep them out. With Hitler (and Goering) out of the way, some of the mistakes of late-war management would be gone and Germany would be able to fight off longer, making the West more inclined to negotiate while keeping Soviet advances down anywhere possible. There was, I think, the expectation that after some time, they could even drive a wedge between the allies and make them fight each other. Without Hitler, that might have even meant that Germany would join the Allies vs. Stalin (far-fetched, I know, but that's a "what if" I could imagine).

[Abraham]

Disengagement and withdrawl are essential elements in warfare.
Hitler constantly refused to use them and orderen "Last stands" in "Führerbefehle". If Hitler would have been removed after July 22, 1944, the German army would have been withdrawn from Normandy, as his Generals advised him. Hitler's order not to withdraw after the counterattack at Mortain had petered out led to the destructive Battle of Falaise.
Germany could have made it a lot tougher for the Western Allies to withdraw behind the Siegfried Line and the rivers of Holland.

[Kapitan]

Hitler once said "Gentlemen we have just lost the war" when he heard they were building liberty ships in just 4 days.

Or was it doernetz?

[Abraham]

Originally Posted by Kapitain

Hitler once said "Gentlemen we have just lost the war" when he heard they were building liberty ships in just 4 days.

Or was it doernetz?

I take such quotes from Hitler with a few grains of salt. Most seem to be apocrif.

[STEED]

Hitler had a conversation with Marshal Mannerheim in the autumn of 1941 about the invasion of Russia he said “If I knew the Russians had that many tanks I would had thought twice about invading� And that one is on film they were in a rail carriage.

[Abraham]

Thanks STEED.
This then is a rare and documentated case in which Hitler openly admits having made a mistake and implicitly admits to think only once about important decisions like invading other countries... which is also a mistake!