Axis wins WWII

[afleitch]

Basically, if the war starts in 1939, and England is not neutral or allied to Germany, you are going have to come up with some scenario in which the UK either is occupied or a separate peace is made.  The latter will not happen so long as the Nazis occupy the invasion beaches in the Low Countries.  "British Belgium" is a possibility, however.

The easy option here is have Lord Halifax become PM, under which Churchill would probably be given a far reaching defense portfolio, but reaching an amiable peace with Germany before the end of May 1940 by way of the Italians and their ambassador Bastianini with whom relations were somewhat stronger)

The peace terms would probably have been fairly lighthanded on the UK,  with the return of their mandates over the German colonies granted to then under Versailles and the de-militarisation of Gibraltar, Malta and the installation of a German base on Cyprus. There would of course have been an immediate general election, the first since 1935 so who knows how that would turn out. I can't see Churchill or Bevin playing ball in Halifax's coalition and there could be a re-alignment after the election, but one that would not jeopardise the peace treaty.

The US, where support for the UK had been brewing during May would probably focus more closely on the Pacific, would enter the war, but would not pay much attention to the European theatre. Cue the Soviets, who would still have been invaded in 1941; I can see them 'liberating' Europe almost single handedly.

[ATFFL]

The US, where support for the UK had been brewing during May would probably focus more closely on the Pacific, would enter the war, but would not pay much attention to the European theatre. Cue the Soviets, who would still have been invaded in 1941; I can see them 'liberating' Europe almost single handedly.

Them and what material?  If the US is not supplying them through lend-lease, the Soviets will lack for a lot of things.

[afleitch]

The US, where support for the UK had been brewing during May would probably focus more closely on the Pacific, would enter the war, but would not pay much attention to the European theatre. Cue the Soviets, who would still have been invaded in 1941; I can see them 'liberating' Europe almost single handedly.

Them and what material?  If the US is not supplying them through lend-lease, the Soviets will lack for a lot of things.

The US would probably still supply them. The US would declare war on Japan in December 41 and Germany would, as in reality, also declare war on the US. The US would still be on the same side as the USSR, but have less interest in Europe without the UK being part of the equation.

[ATFFL]

The US, where support for the UK had been brewing during May would probably focus more closely on the Pacific, would enter the war, but would not pay much attention to the European theatre. Cue the Soviets, who would still have been invaded in 1941; I can see them 'liberating' Europe almost single handedly.

Them and what material?  If the US is not supplying them through lend-lease, the Soviets will lack for a lot of things.

The US would probably still supply them. The US would declare war on Japan in December 41 and Germany would, as in reality, also declare war on the US. The US would still be on the same side as the USSR, but have less interest in Europe without the UK being part of the equation.

In that case the US would not be giving the stuff away.  They would probably want something in return.

[Colin]

The US, where support for the UK had been brewing during May would probably focus more closely on the Pacific, would enter the war, but would not pay much attention to the European theatre. Cue the Soviets, who would still have been invaded in 1941; I can see them 'liberating' Europe almost single handedly.

Them and what material?  If the US is not supplying them through lend-lease, the Soviets will lack for a lot of things.

The US would probably still supply them. The US would declare war on Japan in December 41 and Germany would, as in reality, also declare war on the US. The US would still be on the same side as the USSR, but have less interest in Europe without the UK being part of the equation.

I doubt Germany would have declared war on the US without there still being a state of war between Britain and Germany. I think it is much more likely that with the British out of the equation and with all eyes now turning on the Soviets it would have been much less likely that there would have been a declaration of war from the Germans.

[J. J.]

Basically, if the war starts in 1939, and England is not neutral or allied to Germany, you are going have to come up with some scenario in which the UK either is occupied or a separate peace is made.  The latter will not happen so long as the Nazis occupy the invasion beaches in the Low Countries.  "British Belgium" is a possibility, however.

The easy option here is have Lord Halifax become PM, under which Churchill would probably be given a far reaching defense portfolio, but reaching an amiable peace with Germany before the end of May 1940 by way of the Italians and their ambassador Bastianini with whom relations were somewhat stronger)

The peace terms would probably have been fairly lighthanded on the UK,  with the return of their mandates over the German colonies granted to then under Versailles and the de-militarisation of Gibraltar, Malta and the installation of a German base on Cyprus. There would of course have been an immediate general election, the first since 1935 so who knows how that would turn out. I can't see Churchill or Bevin playing ball in Halifax's coalition and there could be a re-alignment after the election, but one that would not jeopardise the peace treaty.

After the fall of France, I see no way that Halifax could have made a separate peace.  The Low Countries have been an issue since the Hundred Years War, if not before.  Further, Halifax had dealt for years with Hitler and didn't trust him.

The only thinks that I can see are:

1.  A Fascist British government in the mid-1930's that allies itself with the Nazis (Mosely most probably).

2.  The Nazis invade and win (it would have been a blood bath, even if they would have pulled it off).  I doubt if they could have carried out Operation Sea Lion.

3.  Hitler becomes exceptionally generous.  He agrees to give up land he recently conquered and permits a substantial British military presence in the both the Netherlands and Belgium, at least in the coastal areas.  Had the Nazis actually understood British policy, they might have made the offer.

Even in this case, Churchill would never have done it, though Halifax might.    There might have been that re-aligning election after that

[J. J.]

Thinking again about this, if you could keep the US out for a few more years, that might be a possibility.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

There might have been that re-aligning election after that

There was always going to be a re-aligning election after the War (and one happend o/c), as the political landscape of the early '30's was artificial and unsustainable in the long run.

[J. J.]

I'm actually thinking about an alternate history, with a point of divergence in May of 1940.

[Soaring Eagle]

The Axis would never have truly "won" WWII. Insurgents in Europe and Russia would just keep fighting until the Axis was slowly destroyed. The Axis war machine was not powerful enough to conquer the world, and they would have been eventually finished by other free countries.

[dazzleman]

The Axis would never have truly "won" WWII. Insurgents in Europe and Russia would just keep fighting until the Axis was slowly destroyed. The Axis war machine was not powerful enough to conquer the world, and they would have been eventually finished by other free countries.

Yes, but at what cost, and after how many years of sheer hell?

Look at the suffering that took place in the occupied countries during the war.  Would you wish to have seen that over a larger area?

I don't believe that Britain could ever have made an amiable peace with Hitler.  Let's not forget that Hitler had a pattern of throwing countries off-guard by making agreements with them just before attacking them.  He offered France peace even as he was preparing to attack it in 1939-40, and the attack was to go ahead whether they agreed to his peace proposal or not (they didn't).

I think it's foolish to believe that the US could have remained secure in a world that was dominated by the Nazis and Japanese, if the British and Russians had been defeated.  Hitler would not have needed huge amphibious forces to get a foothold in the Americas.  Friendly governments in South America would have let him in, or only put up token resistance.  Once established on the American mainland, it would have been an unacceptable threat to the US.

By that time, we would have had no potential allies of any consequence, and would have been facing a victorious and brutal empire that had conquered the Eurasian landmass.  I can hardly think of a less promising scenario.

They probably wouldn't even have had to invade the US in order to bring us to heel.  With all our potential allies under the Nazi boot, and the Germans having established a military presence in Latin America, we would have been effective checkmated.

And let's not forget that we did not then have the military power we do today.  The Germans were superior in military power in every way to the US at that time.  During the interwar period, we had put almost nothing into the military, and we had to play catchup in a major way.  Remember that it took the combined power of the Americans, British and Russians to beat the Germans, and even then, it was a near thing.  Had the Russians made a separate peace in 1942 or 1943, and the Germans been able to bring more troops to the western front, we may never have been able to invade Western Europe successfully.

I think a lot of people posting in this thread really don't understand just how serious the situation was, and how close we came to disaster in World War II.  Had Hitler not been so stupid and arrogant, he could have won the war before we were able to bring our full power to bear.  He could have, for example, occupied Gibraltar and cut off the Meditteranean, which would have finished off Britain, most likely.  Had he coordinated more closely with the Japanese, they could have jointly finished off Russia, which would have been catastrophic for the US.

Sure, they would have eventually found it too difficult to keep the world under their boot, and resistance movements would have sprung up.  But it would have taken an incredibly long time to overthrow them, and the period of their dominance would have been an incredibly dark one, including for the US.

[J. J.]

In 1924, Sir Oswald Mosley ran for the seat held by Neville Chamberlain.  He lost by 77 votes.  What would have happened if Mosley had won?  He was Independent Labor at the time.

What would happened if he developed a philosophy similar to the National Socialist, in fact and not in name?

To get Britain out of WWII, I only see two alternatives:

1.  Peace with divided Belgium.

2.  Britain allied with Germany (or at least neutral) prior to 1939.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

In 1924, Sir Oswald Mosley ran for the seat held by Neville Chamberlain.  He lost by 77 votes.  What would have happened if Mosley had won?  He was Independent Labor at the time.

Well, the power of the ancient Chamberlain machine in Birmingham would have been shattered and Neville could never have become P.M.
Beyond that, not a lot would have changed (certainly not as Moseley himself goes).

[J. J.]

In 1924, Sir Oswald Mosley ran for the seat held by Neville Chamberlain.  He lost by 77 votes.  What would have happened if Mosley had won?  He was Independent Labor at the time.

Well, the power of the ancient Chamberlain machine in Birmingham would have been shattered and Neville could never have become P.M.
Beyond that, not a lot would have changed (certainly not as Moseley himself goes).

I'm not certain.  Mosley, basically forms a Fascist party (under another name), with some socialist tendencies.  It starts small, but, like the Nazis, becomes bigger during the Depression.  Perhaps around 1934-7, the National  Government and Mosley becomes PM.