What if...

[Tupolev]

Didn't someone literally bounce a torpedo off the battleship he was on?

I remember reading something like that. It was early war with all the pistol failures and the crew heard the clang of the dud.

T.

[Jaystew]

I dont think Germany winning the war was never out of the question until 1944/1945.

If they had had more U-boats or XXIs in 1939/1940 they could have caused some very serious havok during the "Miracle at Dunkirk" when 300,000 BEF and French forces lived to fight another day escaping to the UK over the sea.

This was more a failure of the air force because Germany was at a substantial naval dis advantage against the British but Germany had the air advantage against the UK.

1940/1941 was also the timeframe Germany could have easily taken the UK out of the war with a land invasion of the UK. Operation Sea Lion exist for just that purpose. In 1939 there was still half a continent opposing them and they did not have the number of divisions to support a land invasion but in 1940 though they did not have air supremacy they did have plenty of French Air bases, they did have the whole European coast under defensive construction and they had a very determined anti-sea campaign underway forcing the British to spread their naval defenses out.

According to "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" by William L Shrier the British in 1940 and early 1941 had essentially no homeland defense that could have fought off 10-20 divisions of German troops.

Suppose Germany had launched Sealion in late 1940 or early 1941 and it had succeeded. The UK would have been out of the war. Do you think the USA would have entered the war against Germany before December 7th 1941? I think it is highly unlikely. I think just like in WWI the USA of the 1930s and 1940s would have let European issues be solved by European players. This is not to say that covert or unofficial actions subverting the Germans and supporting the British would have been sanctioned or performed, but if the UK collapsed the Americans would have had very little in the way of motivation to go to war with Germany.

Sealion needed a few things to succeed. They needed to mine the entrance to the English Channel on both ends this to effectively keep the British Navy out of the channel or make it very difficult for them to get in without taking losses. They needed air superiority to protect the troop transports.

Hitler was the one who wouldn't take the gamble and the generals and admirals were smartly not for the invasion on the grounds that it would very likely not succeed. But if they had gambled and won, the war could have turned out a lot different.

By early 1941 the UK would have been out of the war, USA not very likely to come into the war, until Japan attacked in Dec 41 by which time the USSR probably would have been all but defeated by Germany could have waited another year or gone ahead with Operation Barbarossa and if they had waited another year they may have succeeded because they wouldn't have had to devote resources to fighting against the British.

The African campaigns would have been very much diminished in importance compared to the UK homeland. Without support from UK itself troops in Africa would not have been able to sustain a fight against Germany or deliver the defeat they did.

[desirableroasted]

Well, yeah, but the original poster was asking "if you could do one thing with only a U boat"

About a gazillion things could have changed the war, but we are scratching our heads about the one guy in a U-boat question.

[UKönig]

Yes, its true, the original poster said "what if...you could change the war". But, change it into what?
What if you had a type 21 available in 1940/1? Something with underwater dash capability? What if you had a reserve of speed that allowed you to get into the crisis point and affect the outcome?
You may buy the Bismarck and Tirpitz more time by keeping the ocean units away from visual range, but the allies would just change tactics. Probably focus on aircraft and/or carrier based attacks. Unless you could build, with 1940s technology, a U-boat that was a true submarine and did not need to come up for amperes or air, then any time you tried to get within range, the HK units would be all over you.
Convoy tactics would change dramatically.
If the politicians of any belligerent country died while the state of war was in effect, yes, it may be hard to speculate about possible outcomes. One thing is for sure, the war dragged on far longer than it had to, even when it was clearly lost. Germany was on the ropes and hitler was out of options. He was determined that if he (Germany) can't have it, then nobody will. We must be grateful that he did not have (and was years away from) atomic weapons, for since the situation was so dire, he would have laid waste to the world without hesitation. I think that he was that crazy and that desperate. So I ask, "change the war, but into what?"

[desirableroasted]

Originally Posted by UKönig

Yes, its true, the original poster said "what if...you could change the war". But, change it into what?

I think that is why we are seeming to agree that no U-boat captain, on his own hook, could have significantly changed the war, accidentally or intentionally, given the technology of the day.

Unlike the sniper who had George Washington in his sights, but did not fire. Or the guy who moved Stauffenberg's briefcase. Or the guy who accidentally shot Stonewall Jackson.

I know I am out of ideas other than sinking the Prince of Wales, and even there the captain would not have known WSC was aboard.

[desirableroasted]

Originally Posted by P_Funk

The only thing that would have put Churchill on a Battleship headed for Nova Scotia was the wholesale loss of the British Isles

I've been puzzling over this... but I realize now you thought I meant Halifax, Nova Scotia. I meant Lord Halifax, who was WSC's chief rival for the PM post when Chamberlain resigned in May 40.

[Admiral Halsey]

Originally Posted by P_Funk

Imagine entire convoys of nothing but American ships and escorts. That'd be a helluva gambit.

That would've been a hell of a sight to see. One could only imagine how Hitler would've reacted to that news.

[Admiral Halsey]

Originally Posted by Tupolev

Didn't someone literally bounce a torpedo off the battleship he was on?

I remember reading something like that. It was early war with all the pistol failures and the crew heard the clang of the dud.

T.

I think that was Roosevelt you're thinking of.

[Andrewsdad]

Wilhelm Zahn commanded U-56 and almost changed the war. The episode is documented in the dissertation called "Wolves Without Teeth, The German Torpedo Crisis in World War Two" by David Habersham Wright (Georgia Southern University, 2010)
http://digitalcommons.georgiasouther...99&context=etd

It's a fascinating read. The U-56 story is on p. 63

Salute,
AD

[Jaystew]

Originally Posted by desirableroasted

Well, yeah, but the original poster was asking "if you could do one thing with only a U boat"

About a gazillion things could have changed the war, but we are scratching our heads about the one guy in a U-boat question.

There are very few things which realistically would have changed the total outcome of the war and history.

Well one Captain and one boat, no they would not have changed the war. We were also discussing things that could have changed the war. Operation Sea Lion successfully undertaken would have required a half dozen subs among other surface units mostly destroyers and the barges they were going to use for troop transports. Had the UK been invaded and knocked out of the war, that would have been a huge game changer. Not only changing the war but probably the outcome of war as well.

I don't think Germany would have declared war on the USA and I dont think the USA would have declared war on Germany. It is pretty likely that the memorandum of understanding between Germany and Japan would not have brought Germany in on their side.

Earlier nuclear weapons maybe another one, but would the United States have nuked Germany? Probably not as they were already beaten by the Soviets. If Germany had developed the bomb I can think they would only be able to deploy it against the British or the Russians, clearly they would have used it on the Soviets and or both the Soviets and English. They were fighting a defensive action after 1943 on the whole of the Eastern front and nukes would have made that even messier.

Without a doubt the Soviets would have nuked Germany though and I also think if Japan had developed a nuclear weapon they probably would have used it against the Americans if only to stop their advances on the mainland.

[Tupolev]

@Andrewsdad: That was exactly the document I remember reading.
It's certainly an interesting situation to consider if the Nelson sinks and takes Churchill with it.

Without the FDR/Churchill relationship there may have never been any Cash and Carry or Lend/Lease legislation to help out the British. And if all the Brass died on the Nelson, it may have given Hitler the ego to attempt Sea Lion.

I'd definitely say in this instance, one U-boat could have changed the war.

T

[maillemaker]

If only Barnard had not farted in August of 1943 those escorts never would have found me!

Steve

[P_Funk]

Originally Posted by desirableroasted

I've been puzzling over this... but I realize now you thought I meant Halifax, Nova Scotia. I meant Lord Halifax, who was WSC's chief rival for the PM post when Chamberlain resigned in May 40.

Me being a Canadian clearly caused my initial reaction to miss your inference.

Originally Posted by Jaystew

I don't think Germany would have declared war on the USA and I dont think the USA would have declared war on Germany.

I don't think its conceivable for the USA to not become involved in a war with Germany. As much as public opinion was pig headed against involvement in another foreign war at the end of the day Europe and the US were far too close to one another economically to avoid Hitler's control of everything being a concern. The entire Cold War was an exercise in bootstrapping an irrational political fearmongering on top of what was basically a purely geopolitical concern over the Soviets having far too much influence over global economies and the political institutions that regulated them. Facing a united Fascist Europe would not have been terribly welcome I think to the United States, particularly after becoming more open to the notion of direct action against such perceived threats after being forced into such a mindset from the Japanese in the Pacific.

At the end of the day all of American history is replete with extensive effort to stabilize and control markets and their associated political institutions which are important to domestic prosperity and this predates even the turn of the century. There is a famous book written by the most decorated American Marine in history (at the time) who describes this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Is_a_Racket

Beyond that there was considerable effort being made on the American domestic front to propagandize the most important elements of American society towards entry in the war. If the Germans needed to kill anyone to slow American involvement it should have been FDR, and even then... would America have suffered Hitler's Germany being a natural opponent? I doubt it. America was sufficiently comfortable and effective at manipulating European powers in the aftermath of WW2. No such comfort would have existed with Germany.

How could America have told its people to fight for freedom in the Pacific while saying "but don't fight for Europe, where all your relatives are from"? The loss of Europe to Hitler would have meant an endless parade of refugees coming into the States and so more and more the effects would have been a pressure on the political establishment of the United States.

[Jaystew]

I don't think War is a Racket as summarized by wiki is realistic at all. War always escalates beyond "the rules" and there are countless examples from history to cite.

9/11 WTC

Syria

Atom bombing of Japan

Fire bombing between the European nations in WW2

Dec 7th 41

Maginot line debacle

If Germany had defeated the UK along with France and Poland and all the other in between nations I have serious doubts about the USA getting involved. WW1 was little different and really the USA got into it only because Germany became belligerent towards American interests, unrestricted warfare on shipping and the Zimmerman telegram where they tried to sell Mexico on the idea of re-taking Texas LOL

-Dont mess with Texas

Anyway in WW2 if Hitler had taken all of Europe but had not yet attacked the Soviet Union, a defeat of the UK which could have possibly happened in 1940-early 41, the USA would have had little interest into wading into Germany. Sure they were interested in selling war material and ships to Britain in exchange for islands and bases. But actual direct combat not until after December 7th.

The whole attitude of the country changed towards the war, a lot of civilians supported a war with Japan so much so civil right of Japanese Americans were compromised but not German Americans. If the UK was out of the war and Germany had worked on a neutrality pact with the USA very likely the USA would have taken such a deal with the devil.

They've done it after with Iran and Iraq when it met their national interest. Though FDR was no fan of Hitler and Hitler thought that the USA was all about capitalism and that they could strike a deal which would be "economically good" and that would keep the USA out of the war, he was probably right about that until December 7th. Sure the USA may have come in overtime if Germany had sunk a few more American merchants but what if Germany had abided strongly by international law and not attacked American merchants?

What legitimate reason would the USA have had for counter-attacking Germany until they were officially in the war?

[Tupolev]

I think you're forgetting some key aspects:

FDR's changes to the Neutraliy Act (which he tried severescorting were neutral in name only. The arms in those cash and carry sales only went to France and Britain. And that was 1939.

Lend/Lease ended any real facade of neutrality in March '41 followed by increasingly active roles in escorting convoys (and attacking UBoats) by the US Navy.

While I think Hitler wanted to keep the US out, FDR was pretty adamant about getting in. An invaded Britain would have been his ticket even without Pearl Harbor.