Nazi invasion scenarios in US article ( Life Magazine 1942)



  • It isn’t so easy to beat a population into submission.  Using inhumane tactics often leaves the population with powerful grievances nothing left to lose, and therefore creates more resistance.  Granted, this can be possible as shown by Stalin’s work in Chechnya…where by shipping most of the population to Siberian gulags, this was temporarily achieved.  By the way, how is Chechnya working out today (about 70 years later) for Russia?  How did Afghanistan work out for Russia?  It is telling they left because it was simply too expensive for them to continue; which will eventually be what happens to the US in Afghanistan as well.

    If an invader wishes to annex a large territory by force against a large population (and Chechnya is quite small) who are opposed, the armed forces can never leave.  That is my point…much of the German war machine would be forced in holding actions in Russia. Spending this kind of resources would not leave much for the Germans to use against the USA, though of course they would have sufficient oil and other resources they needed as somewhat of a tradeoff.

    The USA could not outproduce Germany?  Before the war the USA industrial output exceeded that of the combined axis by quite a bit.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_production_during_World_War_II

    Lets take 1942 as the base year.  The USA alone had industrial output of 1235 compared to an Axis combined of 902 (units of billion international dollars, 1990 price) which includes the help from their conquests.  Under the assumption of the fall of Russia, we could maybe add their full total of 274 and the Axis production would still be less…1176 < 1235.  I would also suggest that the Russian scorched earth policy would prevent this from ever happening.

    Now the addition of the $353 from the UK would potentially have the axis at a greater level than the US…1529 > 1235…except from this we should subtract Canada, Australia, India, New Zealand, S. Africa, etc. as well as whatever scorched earth policy the UK enacted.

    I wasn’t able to find numbers of the industrial ouput for the parts of the British empire without the UK, but it is significant.  See for example, Canada alone had a very substantial industrial production…

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_history_of_Canada_during_World_War_II

    Over the course of the war, 1.1 million Canadians served in the Army, Navy, and Air Force. Of these more than 45,000 lost their lives and another 54,000 were wounded.[5]The financial cost was $21,786,077,519.12, between the 1939 and 1950 fiscal years.[6] By the end of the War, Canada had the world’s fourth largest air force,[7] and third largest navy.[8] As well, the Canadian Merchant Navy completed over 25,000 voyages across the Atlantic.[9] Canadians also served in the militaries of various Allied countries.

    Regarding the A-bomb.  Yes, we only had three in 1945.  How many thousand (or tens of thousands) did we have in 1955?  Had the war continued, no doubt more would continue to be built.  And regarding a delivery system, which would be easier to develop/reverse engineer, the A-bomb or the V-2?  We would have developed a suitable delivery system, I think, before the Axis could have duplicated the manhattan project.



  • @FieldMarshalGames:

    @Imperious:

    Latin America would have sided with Nazi Germany knowing they (being considered an “inferior” race)

    Argentina and Chile were pro axis and had totalitarian governments. Also, Spain was the link to all of them and Hitler had no ill will against Spain. Germany already established glider clubs and many business relationships with them in the 1930’s

    How could Spain support Hitler if he had this racial bias against Latin peoples?

    BY the time Hitler might have won against UK and Russia, it would be at a point where they would have their own atomic weapons as well as Japan and I am not sure a B-29 was gonna take off any carrier with that payload.  In fact if they even bothered with USA it would be far in the future with a great consolidation of the recent gains.

    This is exactly what I was trying to say.  It seems SILLY from the perspective of 42-45…  But these were LONG TERM plans for dealing with the United States.

    There is a problem with long term plans. Germany would have become a huge socialistic nation ruling its people by force. That cannot be held for very long. The Soviet Union collapsed and they weren’t even at war. I believe that even if Germany and Japan had taken all but the US, they would have to fight so hard over it that they would give up and agree to peace. Then later the German and Japanese empires would collapse and break up.


  • 2017 2016 2015 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    I disagree entirely. German Reich and Japanese Empire installed very harsh control over subjugated peoples. Its not even close to Soviet Union 1980’s. People who got out of line would have been sorted out long before they were able to agitate any issues and once the world was under their control, various peoples would be eliminated while others would be entirely deprived of any education. Over time languages would be eliminated except for approved ones and most of these people would be treated like animals. Culture would be eliminated as well as most religions and eventually even that would be removed.

    It would be not unlike Gattaca with a small underclass of people working as slaves on farms.

    All opposition would be eliminated in time and satellite nations might receive some autonomy but these would be granted to peoples who fought for Germany in the war.

    Everything else would be liquidated and national borders reset. IN about 50 years time, the people who lived in areas where the Reich was not well established would resemble something what the Romans faced north of the Hadrian wall in the 1st century.

    Possibly in 100 years time the German people might themselves reexamine their recent History and attempt to rescind some of these horrible policies, but by that time most of the victims and peoples would have not been around anymore.



  • Zooey and IL, thank you for your input on this matter.

    Your responses indicate that you both believe sufficient use of brutal tactics would be sufficient to eventually establish sufficient control over a conquered territory such that the net benefits exceed the costs.  Though I still disagree that this is always the case (and I disagree this would have been the case regarding the Soviet and Chinese territories during the 1940s and onward had the axis managed to extend the war  as per the assumptions under this thread); your thoughtful responses have made me think about this subject further.

    To begin with, I decided to think about past events which bear similarities.

    Some examples where this type of actions may have succeeded:
       The settlement of the USA and Canada, maybe even parts of Latin America.
       Minor boundary changes in Europe (such as Alsace and Lorraine).
       Settlement of Australia and New Zealand.

    Some examples where this type of action did not succeed:
       European colonies in Africa and India
       Vietnam for the USA and Afghanistan for the USSR
       American colonization in the Philippines

    Which of these most resemble the Axis efforts?  Any other examples which may be more similar?

    What specifics would have lent a measure of success (or failure) for the axis.  I would submit that the distinction that would have resulted in ultimate failure to assimilate the annexed areas into the Axis is the very large number of inhabitants present in conquered Europe and Asia.  As the Russians and Chinese (not the mention the rest of the conquered territories) greatly outnumbered the Germans and Japanese, I do not think assimilation or annihilation would have been possible.  Your thoughts?


  • 2017 2016 2015 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    Your responses indicate that you both believe sufficient use of brutal tactics would be sufficient to eventually establish sufficient control over a conquered territory such that the net benefits exceed the costs.  Though I still disagree that this is always the case (and I disagree this would have been the case regarding the Soviet and Chinese territories during the 1940s and onward had the axis managed to extend the war  as per the assumptions under this thread); your thoughtful responses have made me think about this subject further.

    To begin with, I decided to think about past events which bear similarities.

    Some examples where this type of actions may have succeeded:
        The settlement of the USA and Canada, maybe even parts of Latin America.
        Minor boundary changes in Europe (such as Alsace and Lorraine).
        Settlement of Australia and New Zealand.

    Some examples where this type of action did not succeed:
        European colonies in Africa and India
        Vietnam for the USA and Afghanistan for the USSR
        American colonization in the Philippines

    Which of these most resemble the Axis efforts?

    None of your examples and not even remotely. All your examples are somewhat fixated on a world that has some checks and balances, where some nations can protect others out of the common decency of humanity. A global empire of Germany and Japan would remove any implement that even had the slightest qualm about killing entire populations.  The only example i can say is close would be when the Spanish gave small pox to the Mayans, or when Genghis Khan basically exterminated Asia Minor, except worse. Far worse.

    Germany and Japan would have exterminated everything they didn’t like. The few people they managed to let live would be toiling on far away fields in untold labor camps. The globe would be exploited for a much fewer population of people with the balance to left to die. The worlds population would be dropped by 2/3 in 50 years time.

    The people who were left would not complain about the past, the standard of living for the conquerors would be very good, since they now have all this land and resources and a vastly reduced population that would need to be fed. It would be another Roman Empire and some very remote areas in arctic mountains where people lived without language, culture and where mostly savages living day to day.

    All History would be removed and published information all lost unless it supported the German or Japanese goals.



  • IL, while I fail to see any checks and balances in the colonization of Africa (it seems to me a mad rush to conquest by all industrialized nations without any decency) perhaps better examples exist during the actual war.  But first, I want to clarify the actual German intent for conquered areas.  The formal plan was Generalplan Ost:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalplan_Ost

    After the war, under the “Big Plan”, Generalplan Ost foresaw the deportation of 45 million non-Germanizable people from Eastern Europe, of whom 31 million were “racially undesirable”, 100% of Jews, Poles (85%), Belorussians (75%) and Ukrainians (65%), to West Siberia,[2] and about 14 millions were to remain, but were to be treated as slaves.[4] In their place, up to 8-10 million Germans would be settled in an extended “living space” (Lebensraum). Because the number of Germans appeared to be insufficient to populate the vast territories of Eastern Europe, the peoples judged to lie racially between the Germans and the Russians (Mittelschicht), namely, Latvians, Estonians, and even Czechs, were also supposed to be resettled there.

    Where even the Germans could see their population was insufficient for such a vast area, necessitating keeping at least some of the native populations present.  Now how many German soldiers would be necessary to keep the 14 million within the boundaries under control and also hold a defensible border against incursions (both direct and infiltration for guerrilla warfare) from the Ural or Caucasians?  Considering the vast size of Russia, that would be a very considerable number of German soldiers and considering the Nazi experience during the war in Yugoslavia, I doubt the Nazis would have found E. Europe worth the effort.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yugoslav_Partisans

    The occupying forces instituted such severe burdens on the local populace that the Partisans came not only to enjoy widespread support but for many were the only option for survival. In certain instances, Axis forces and local collaborators would hang or shoot indiscriminately, including women, children and the elderly, up to 100 local inhabitants for every one German soldier killed. Furthermore, the country experienced a breakdown of law and order, with collaborationist militias roaming the countryside terrorizing the population. The government of the puppet Independent State of Croatia found itself unable to control its territory in the early stages of the occupation, resulting in a severe crackdown by the Ustaše militias and the German army.

    Note that in Yugoslavia, harsh oppression resulted in more resistance because once the population has nothing left to lose, they have no choice but to fight back.  Also note that the Germans were unable to control all of Yugoslavia…

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yugoslav_Front

    The Partisans fought an increasingly successful guerrilla campaign against the Axis occupiers and their local collaborators, the Serbian Government of National Salvation, the Ustaše-controlled Independent State of Croatia, and the Chetniks (which they also considered collaborators). They enjoyed gradually increased levels of success and support of the general populace, and succeeded in controlling large chunks of Yugoslav territory. People’s committees were organized to act as civilian governments in areas of the country liberated by the Partisans. In places, even limited arms industries were set up.

    which means they would likewise have trouble controlling all of Russia.  Now I realize that most German forces were fighting in Russia at that time, but this still points out the difficulties, and immense cost, of eliminating resistance by brutal force.

    With these difficulties, how much effort would Germany have been able to use to continue the battle against the USA?


  • 2017 2016 2015 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    All the examples of partisans are possible because Germany was fighting a world war and against some a war of extermination.  Once the war was over, we are talking 14 million soldiers ( and another 10 million Japanese) being used to systematically employ into police duty and wage extermination.  The resources diverted would have a huge devastating effect compared to the allocated personal they had DURING the war.

    Once they won, the army would have become focused against suppression and duties relating to liquidation of entire populations of people. The army would have turned into the SS and politically trained soldiers who would be used to locate and target all undesirable peoples.

    Yugoslavia partisans were viable because the army was used on the eastern front. The extermination camps were the only measure of liquidation possible given the resources they had during this world war. Also, since the war was still going on people had hope that to fight might make a new result, in Russia partisans felt that the war was not lost.

    But all these things are only possible if the world war is still being fought.

    while I fail to see any checks and balances in the colonization of Africa

    England and France as well as most of the colonial players did not exterminate peoples of Africa on any mass level, no concentration camps were made and no people were killed en masse. Colonial neglect might have cost the poverty level to cost a few lives.

    Italy did ruthlessly suppress Abyssinia, but didn’t exterminate the people as part of some plan.

    After the war Hitler would have given rewards for German woman who had children and promoted a re-population of formerly conquered territories as they become available.



  • IL,

    The whole point to Germany taking over Eastern Europe (and likewise Japans conquests) is to be able to compete with the industrial output of the USA, which as shown previously was significantly greater than that of Germany.

    However, the commitment of millions of soldiers to control these areas means these soldiers are not available to assist with the German war effort against the attacks from the USA (whether by strategic bombing or operation overlord).  Now once Germany was successful in liquidating these populations as you say (which as you say and as shown by example in Yugoslavia would take decades), then these forces would be available, but…

    without the production of the people in these conquered areas, German does not have this extra income.  Therefore Germany still doesn’t have enough industrial production to compete.  It is a catch 22 for Germany, the production comes from the people and the Nazis wouldn’t have that.

    Slave labor camps?  This halfway solution, I think, provides the worst of both worlds as it still requires large numbers of military forces but with a declining production in comparison.


  • 2017 2016 2015 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    I am assuming that the conquest of Europe, Asia, Africa and South America and the inclusion of various new allies whom all want a piece of the new order would sustain them against any American issues. The totality of occupation of the middle east and all resource rich areas would trump anything US could compete with, but most importantly the combined manpower working for axis aims would totally overwhelm the US. IN 1945 id say the population would be close to 3.5 billion and 3.2 billion would be under axis control against 300K in United States.

    It would only be a matter of time before US was forced to sue for peace having lost all trading partners and exhausted manpower, while the Axis players had new groups of people enlisted in their efforts ( all the middle east nations would have been used a foreign armies employed to help exterminate jews and other peoples). What you say might happen would never come before USA was liquidated long before. The Nazis would have invented even greater means of efficiency at extermination on a scale unimaginable.  The expansion of labor camps and other means would have accelerated the program they had to really limit due to the war.

    The capability of Yugoslavia did not even remotely resemble any threat to German control over this area, even with scarce resources employed in this task.

    The end of the war would have brought unimaginable pressure in the goal of this plan of extermination. Defeated enemies deprived of any government or ability to produce war material, would not just raise up against the new empires. Of course a few railways would get blown up and terrorist activities would occur, but the overall control would remain firmly in German and Japanese hands.

    Its like saying the japanese-americans in camps during the war are gonna break out a seize control of the US government… thats not gonna happen ever.

    The vanquished nations in some cases would be active partners with the axis, while one that gave problems would be erased from the globe and the books and memory of these places would cease to exist. What happened at Lidice would be repeated on a monumental scale.

    Slave labor camps?  This halfway solution, I think, provides the worst of both worlds as it still requires large numbers of military forces but with a declining production in comparison.

    During the war they killed about 13 million in about 5 years, while fighting a war. Japan killed less. Stalin killed 20 million and Mao killed like 40 million. Id say about 200 million a year could be a target, with depopulation of the globe in about 10 years time to about 1 billion. ( 700,000 German and japanese, and 300,000 slaves)

    With German control of Europe what could US land to try to retake all these lost areas?  Not a whole lot, while all the men freed up from fighting in Russia and Asia could be put to work in the duty of the axis.

    Take to total GDP of all nations other than the USA, and compare. If that does not do the trick, compare the population ratio of areas under axis control vs. North America… its like 20:1


  • '10

    If Germany and Japan were able to take over the world and were the last two standing I wonder if Germany would have eventually  begun a war against Japan for being ‘racially inferior’?


  • 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    @kurt3892:

    If Germany and Japan were able to take over the world and were the last two standing I wonder if Germany would have eventually  begun a war against Japan for being ‘racially inferior’?

    That’s basically how the alternate-history novel “The Ultimate Solution” ends.  “Power is seized by Reinhard Heydrich and the most fanatical “Contraxists”, who are determined to destroy “the degenerate Yellow Race” even at the price of an all-out nuclear war in which Germany itself would be annihilated.”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ultimate_Solution



  • Sorry for the lateness of my reply, I have been busy lately.  But I have enjoyed this conversation, and wish to continue with it further…@Imperious:

    I am assuming that the conquest of Europe, Asia, Africa and South America and the inclusion of various new allies whom all want a piece of the new order would sustain them against any American issues. The totality of occupation of the middle east and all resource rich areas would trump anything US could compete with, but most importantly the combined manpower working for axis aims would totally overwhelm the US. IN 1945 id say the population would be close to 3.5 billion and 3.2 billion would be under axis control against 300K in United States.

    I understand and agree the USA could never compete (at least long-term) with the rest of the world.  This is indisputable.

    It would only be a matter of time before US was forced to sue for peace having lost all trading partners and exhausted manpower, while the Axis players had new groups of people enlisted in their efforts ( all the middle east nations would have been used a foreign armies employed to help exterminate jews and other peoples). What you say might happen would never come before USA was liquidated long before. The Nazis would have invented even greater means of efficiency at extermination on a scale unimaginable.  The expansion of labor camps and other means would have accelerated the program they had to really limit due to the war.

    I agree the Germans would have implemented a mass extermination of all non desirable peoples.  The extermination of Jews took precedence before vital war needs during WWII.  Having acheived victory, can anyone doubt their program would not be accelerated?  But this proves, to an extent, why America and Canada would win.  It would not be 100M N. Americans vs. 3.2B people for the Axis.  It would be the 100 million N. Americans against only the Germans plus the “desirable” races.  That would be some of the Europeans (but not the Russians and other slavs), and some of the European settlers in Africa and Latin America.  Maybe this would include the Japanese as well. I don’t know the actual numbers, but I suspect you would agree this is a much different scenario as the billions of Asians, Africans, etc. would not be participating for the most part.

    Also, as Kurt pointed out, the German-Japanese alliance would be likely to fail in the same manner that the German-Russia alliance failed with the start of Operation Barbarossa.

    The capability of Yugoslavia did not even remotely resemble any threat to German control over this area, even with scarce resources employed in this task.

    My links indicated there were entire areas within Yugoslavia where the Serbs, not the Germans had complete control.  True, the Germans could have moved into any single one of these if they wanted, but clearly they lacked the manpower to do so unless they absolutely had to.  Now a conquered Russia would have freed up troops, but also required a defense against similar activities over vast landscapes and a guard at the Siberian border.  This would consume a significant amount of resources…but  I agree the resource allocation would be only temporary so maybe this buys the USA only a few years of assistance.

    The end of the war would have brought unimaginable pressure in the goal of this plan of extermination. Defeated enemies deprived of any government or ability to produce war material, would not just raise up against the new empires. Of course a few railways would get blown up and terrorist activities would occur, but the overall control would remain firmly in German and Japanese hands.

    Why not?  Why wouldn’t Hitler be taken out in a coup (there were several attempts during the war) and the German territory broken up into multiple warring sections (either into geographical sections or a true civil war)?  Certainly there would be considerable differences within this new German alliance… This, I think, would have been a distinct possibility.

    Anyway, these are my thoughts, I look forward to the opinions of others if they wish to share.


  • 2017 2016 2015 Organizer '14 Customizer '13 '12 '11 '10

    It would be the 100 million N. Americans against only the Germans plus the “desirable” races.

    The massive extinction of these other people would not take place until everything globally were settled. I think the limited nature of the extermination would not be on the grand scale until America was dealt with. I think we are assuming a level of cooperation in former UK colonies akin with the French conquests, so the level of Serbian reaction would have been somewhat mitigated by the axis partners carving up that nation and exacting the type of ethnic violence that occurred much latter. Germany had a commitment to pit old enemies against each other in an effort to make their job easier.

    The Soviets i feel would be somewhat difficult, but they did convert a few divisions of Russians who were against Stalin.  The middle east was another basket of potential friends who could be enlisted easily to fight the Jews. Germany raised a number of Muslim units in the war.

    If Hitler was removed, the replacement would be far worse because a NAZI victory would remove all the remaining inhibitions against violence against what they deemed lessor men. The SS would have selected somebody like Heydrich who had the most firm convictions of their type.  The choice would have to be political leader, and not a military one.

    On the German-Japanese partnership, i think they would not fight until USA had surrendered first. Once all opposition was gone eventually it would happen, but the Germans would have the best scientists, so the Japanese would be at a disadvantage.


Log in to reply
 

Suggested Topics

  • 9
  • 35
  • 11
  • 4
  • 2
  • 19
  • 1
  • 10
I Will Never Grow Up Games
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures
Dean's Army Guys

35
Online

13.7k
Users

34.0k
Topics

1.3m
Posts