Was WWII....

[dgk196]

Hello...

As you can see... by not defining 'outcome' or 'inevitable' the discussion can go off in almost unlimited directions. Its interesting to see what others considered relevant to this premise. Just on the surface, without any significant policy changes by the countries involved, I would have to say that WWII would have ended in an allied victory.

But, if you allow for any number of policy changes, then we are talking a whole different 'thing' altogether.
For example, what if the U.S. had entered the war, along with the other allies, in '39 in response to Germany's aggression, and Japans? Imagine the battle for France in '40 with a significant level of American forces present!

Or imagine Germany going to a full war-time-level of production before '39! Or say, instead of over-manning the conquered territories (France) and not invading England, they instead put more forces into the Mediterranean theater. So, instead of starting out with an Afrika Korps (three divisions) they started with an Armee Afrika (nine divisions, or more) instead!? And an enhanced Luftwaffe presence there too. Instead of a costly invasion of Britain, they beat them in the desert and take over the middle east oilfields!? That would have put an abrupt end to Britain's opposition to the Axis.

What if Hitler had not put the 'one year ban' on new weapons development? What if the Russians had gone through with their plan to start their war against Germany in '40 as they had planned? Many what-ifs to explore, eh?

Dennis