World War II - The U.S. Loses

Discussion in 'Area 51' started by William, May 23, 2008.

  1. William Well-Known Member

    Since this apartment also deals with Alternative History, what do you think would've happened if the "Allies" had lost World War II? Just something to think about that'll spark some discussion.
  2. Ted Owls don't lie.

    One way the Nazis could have won, I think, is if they recalled all their U-boats to the English Channel and improved the Kreigsmarine to the point that they could destroy the British fleet bit by bit, then prevent D-Day. Keep Fortress Europe intact, and keep throwing materials at the Eastern front against Russia.

    Hitler didn't have long to live anyway. He was in the advanced stages of Syphilis and probably would have lived a few more years after 1945. Hitler was the glue that held the different areas of Germany together, from the propaganda machine to the war machine to the Luftwaffe. Once Hitler died, no matter how much Germany had conquered, it would be subject to division by dissenting members unless someone with Hitler's charisma came along again.

    That and pockets of resistance like in France would have stretched the Nazi lines too thin.

    Then there's the economic sustainability of Nazi Germany, but that's for another small rant.
  3. Archangel Sabre Well-Known Member

    Depends on what you mean by 'lost.' There's a lot of ground that could cover on the scale of a war as massive as World War II. Anything from Germany holding most of Europe to Germany holding the entire Northern Hemisphere.

    And personally, I don't think there's any way Germany had a chance of winning after America got involved. America's production capabilities were simply unmatchable by the Germans. It may have turned out a lot bloodier, perhaps end in a stalemate, but I don't think the Germans had a real shot at a decisive victory after 1942.
  4. PKT Forever /a/lone

    I think we'd be sitting back drinking beer and eating brautwurst. While we'd hang our laderhosen on the clothesline to dry and other things like that.
  5. There would be no more Jews.
  6. PKT Forever /a/lone

    Well they could have changed their mind about the jewish genocide thing.
  7. Kyuuketsuki C-c-c-c-combo breaker!

    There are many toss and turns that could have made a huge impact in World War II. There's one theory, that if Nazi Germany had not attacked Russia, they could have had a chance. And then there's another, where if Japan had not attacked Pearl Harbor, we would have potentially not been in the war. But you have to remember, America at that time was still how it was today. We still have the treaties, and we still have the kind of "You mess with them, you mess with us" way.

    The Axis powers could have won if they had done certain things. I believe, like stated above, that they would have had a chance if Hitler didn't order an attack on Russia. It lead to his death and the pillaging of Berlin. Hitler was a very important figure for the Nazi's. Through his death, they lost all hope they had. That's why I think that if they had won, as soon as Hitler would have passed away, the Nazi's would have no idea what to do.

    For Japans case, there was no chance for them. It was a really tough battle for them, even though they were more like a distraction. One on one with America, they'd have no chance. The real problem was in Europe. If the Axis had won, who knows what would happen to Asia... :p
  8. Japan was utterly stupid attacking us like they did. It was an impossible conflict. Although, the aftermath has lead Japan down a better path than they probably would have. The MacArthur constitution and all that.

    If the Axis had won the war, Russia probably would have been on their side. The 3rd Reich would have lasted for awhile before things heated up between Russia and Germany.They would attempt and agreement, but would end in failure, leading to a conflict, probably a war, Maybe WW III. The Germans and Russians would be fighting, bringing all of Europe into the war. Asia would, if not join Russia, be invaded by Russia, which would be made easier by the Chinese already switching to Communism. If China joins Russia, Europe would be Annihilated, and come after us. Our only defense would be to launch our "nukes" and wait for a counterattack. The Russians nuke us back, and the world becomes communist.


    That's without substantiation.
  9. Nazo Moderator

    If by a better path you mean making them have the want to always be ahead in technology, yes. I'm pretty sure deep down, they rage against us like everyone else.

    A counter attack...? You do know that Russia has enough nukes to destroy the world 8 times over, right?
  10. Archangel Sabre Well-Known Member

    I'm pretty sure Riddles is speaking of a time shortly after World War II, when the only country in the world that even had nukes was the United States.

    And even today, Russia only has 5,200 nukes. That's probably not even enough to completely destroy an area the size of Alaska, let alone "the entire planet eight times over" so I have no clue where you got that figure from. And even if they could, we have submarines with nuclear missiles that would be left relatively unscathed from an above ground nuclear holocaust. They could easily counter-attack if it came down to it.
  11. Nazo Moderator

    I was exaggerating, but still, that's what? 10 times what we hold in that department. If nuclear war started, Russia would be the ultimate victor, but the world would be in a fallout.
  12. Archangel Sabre Well-Known Member

    Nah, United States has about 4,000 nukes. Less than Russia, but enough to put a hurting on someone. None of the other nuclear states have more than 300, though. So United States and Russia would both, individually, probably have about ten times more nukes than all the other countries combined.

    But a direct comparison between the United States and Russia puts them on about equal terms. But yeah, fallout would probably kill just about everyone anyway.
  13. Nazo Moderator

    Last I heard we disposed of most of our tactical weaponry and are left with about 500 in our arsenal. I read it a couple of weeks ago in fact.
  14. Archangel Sabre Well-Known Member

    Yep, 500 tactical nuclear warheads, but that's a specific type of nuclear weapon designed to be used on the battlefield during a combat situation. It isn't what you'd use in a first strike against population centers.

    See this for more information: Nuclear Forces Guide

    What you're referring to is at the bottom, under "Theater Weapons - Warheads." The most important number is near the top, under "Weapons - Operational"; that's the total number of nukes each country has that can readily be used in the event of a nuclear war.

    Here is some more recent information (from April, 2009): Federation of American Scientists :: Status of World Nuclear Forces

    This time the tactical weapons are listed as "non-strategic," again at 500. The strategic and operational weapons would be the ones used in a first strike, however.
  15. PKT Forever /a/lone

    That's something I didn't know at all. Yeah, the fallout would pollute water and decimate crops but there is still a chance of survival.

Share This Page