If Hitler had been smart, would Germany have won?

Thanks Milf.

I did not say nor did I mean to imply that the Irish people were or are anti British. I've had many enjoyable holidays in Ireland and always been made most welcome.


I said the Irish Government at the time hoped Germany would win, but for obvious reasons maintained a policy of neutrality.

My father was in the Belfast blitz and told me the story about the Dublin fire brigade coming up to help the local fire fighters. I always thought that a significant story.

But you said Dublin was bombed....who by and when?

As you point out the history of Ireland is complicated and bloody. Thats why I think the 1997 Belfast Agreement so significant.

By the Germans, in May 1941

Dublin, North Strand Bombing

Source

thanks Walter. Sometimes I feel I dont actually have to ask a question before you supply the answer.

Well at least Germany recognised it as a mistake and apologised.

Milf, did De Valera ever apologise or give a reason for signing the book of condolences for Adolf Hitler?

from http://www.pearsecom.com/Ireland/anniversaries/March%208th,%201966%20-%20Nelson%27s%20Pillar%20Blown%20Up.htm

quote

"Nelson's Pillar in Dublin actually predated the Column in Trafalgar Square, London. Its foundation stone was laid on February 15, 1808, and for 158 years it towered above O'Connell Street, surviving the Rising of 1916, when it was used as target practice by rebels in the GPO, and more than one battle of the war of independence and Civil War. The Free State gave way to the Republic and this last bastion of British imperialism remained, fondly thought of by Dubs without much consideration of the man it commemorates. Going up the stairs to the observation platform to view the city from on high was a popular pastime, and all the trams from various parts of Dublin terminated at The Pillar. Tram lines were replaced by bus lanes and it seemed destined to remain forever as a landmark of Dublin. Then, just after 2am on March 8, 1966, an explosion toppled the upper half of the pillar, leaving the statue in pieces strewn across the street. The dangerous remaining stump was safely blown up by army engineers and the plinth was eventually removed. The head of the statue, battered and unrecognisable, is in the Civic Museum. Arguments raged for decades after as to what, if anything, should replace it, and only in recent years did the Dublin Spire settle the dispute. When the foundations were excavated, a plaque and a time capsule box were found beneath it. Despite the fact that it WAS a reminder of British imperialism in Ireland, Dublin people did seem fond of the old Admiral, and the destruction of the pillar did seem a little pointless in many ways, but where would we be without symbolic gestures, and after all, we have the spire now, making the ultimate symbolic gesture to that old imperialism."


AND I'M WILLING TO TAKE A BET THAT I'M THE ONLY PERSON ON A2K TO HAVE BEEN UP IT (before it was blown up, dont be silly at the back....)

Dumb IRA blew the **** outta it.. Well before my time.. No a British victory was what the people here hoped for.. Ireland did, not anymore, relie on Britain for most of it's supplies.. De Valera once attempted several trade wars and was economically defeated by the British every time. Nope he didn't, it was basically giving the finger to Churchill and solidifying our statement of neutrality.. Face it the Irish wanted Britain to win.. We needed Britain to win..

De Valera inposed heavy measures to clamp down on IRA activity and German spies hoping for a rebellion here. The Catholic Church here was strongly anti-German and since the vast majority (70%+) of Citizens were church going Catholics, they stood by the bishops in the condemnation of War Crimes by Nazis.

Arn't you going to give up... We were pro-Allied despite being neutral.

BY THE WAY THE SPIRE IS THE BIGGEST WASTE OF METAL IN EUROPE.. ITS A BLACKENED PIECE OF METAL THAT PISSES OFF ANY DUBLINER THERE IS!!!

Well if I knew what it was, I'm sure I'd agree.

It's a large piece of metal that the government placed on the site of where Nelson's Column used to be. Waste of Metal, Money and Labour.... Biggest load of rubbish in the EU... No wonder we were voted dirtiest capital in the EU.

Here is the crappy thing itself...

It's either pollution or some crappy 'Celtic' Design that failed...


At night


During rush Hour

thanks but what is it?

flagpole?

Dubliners giving the finger to the rest of the world?

well i dunno what the **** it is... i believe they built it cos we have no world famous landmarks... a large pint of guiness would have satisfied me..

Hitler could have won if..
After the defeat of France in the summer of 1940, Hitler's principal error at that time was not to take on France as an ally. Once France had fallen, rather than occupation, if, like the allies, with Germany after 1945, France had then been given it's independence conditional on an alliance with Germany, hundreds of thousand of German troops would have then been free to be deployed elsewhere as, and when, required. Belgium could have been broken up, with the French speaking area given to France, and the Flemish area absorbed into a greater Germanic homeland, incorporating Holland, Denmark and Norway, and eventually, Sweden.

The occupation of Sweden as a 1940/41 campaign would have been far more immediately useful for Swedish iron and copper resources. Moreover, the establishment of industrial facilities in the Baltic would have been considerably more difficult to attack than those in the Ruhr. With France being allowed to build up it's naval and air power, a joint attack on England in the spring of 1941 with the Reich would have been infinitely more successful, with the French taking control of southern Britain, and Germany absorbing the North. The occupation of England was not really important for Hitler, but more so for the French. Germany only needed the Brits out of the war and the naval facilities offered in Scotland. The Scots would have been repatriated back to Ireland from where they supposedly originally came, and thus creating a neutral United Ireland. The French, despite their previous alliance with Britain would have been more than willing to give the Brits a good kicking, ending hundreds of years of humiliation.

German and French forces in North Africa, combined with Italian, would have made easy work of the British North African Empire, and eventually securing Suez and middle east oil resouces. A joint German-French attack on Britain in the Spring of 1941 would have seen off Churchill before any useful links could have been established with the US, and before any planned attack on Pearl Harbour. A combined German-French-Italian, and possibly Spanish (with Britain out of the war) attack on the western Soviet Union, I am sure would have easily defeated the relatively weak and disorganised Soviet forces from May 1941, as planned. The Spanish would have Gibraltar back - how small things can please the many! Argentina, with its vast grain producing areas would have the Malvinas. The defeat of Britain, with French military assistance could have been achieved within 3 weeks, with a 15 mile a day progression.

What then follows, is a prospect of a pan-European war against the US-Canada alliance at some point in the future, with Japan attacking in the Pacific. German technological know how, with newly aquired Russian resources and French/Spanish/Italian back-up almost certainly could have brought the US to its knees. We would then have a German dominated European alliance with North America as the true "Living Space" desired by Hitler. In the Pacific, Japan would have aquired Australia as their "Living Space" With much of the Americas in its wake, Russia, and large areas of eastern and northern Europe, Germany would have truly dominated the world. France, Spain and Italy would have carved up Africa between them from the remains of the British Empire, like feeding off a giant Anglo-dinosaur, the world would begin anew.

well the reason why the french lost the war was because of a 'defeatist' complex in all of its levels.. and the maginox line made them feel safe.. france would not have fought britain nor being strong enough after its collapse to damage britain... germany plain and simple lost the war because of hitler and his 'stupid' desisions... well in the advent of an axis victory, i could see a german - japan war.. they couldnt have got along and germany and japan both wanted india..

Welcome to a2k erickson.

Interesting picture you paint there. But I dont think it was ever a possibility that France would become an ally of Germany and attack Britain. Thousands of French had just been evacuated to England along with the BEF from Dunkerque. Many more thousands were taken prisoner or just went home. France was militarily defeated (again) by Germany. Do you really think they would have said "OK Adolf you win now we will help you to conquer the rest of Europe" ?

Just supposing Hitler did raise a French army against Britain. There was still the Free French government of de Gaulle in London, and then there was the little matter of actually getting to London to capture him. 'Operation Sealion' was half hearted at best. The task of getting thousands of troops across the Channel with the RAF and Royal navy not yet defeated was daunting. Moreover there was not the same atmosphere of defeatism in Britain that prevailed in France. The people generally were inspired by Churchill. There were some of course notably Halifax, who thought after the fall of France that the sensible thing was to do a deal with Hitler (and you can see why). But churchill would have none of it. After a cabinet meeting in (I think) June 1940 he said simply and forcibly ...we fight on whatever it takes. Government ministers banged their fists on the table with roars of approval. There was no talk of doing deals after that. We would have fought like furies against German invaders and their treacherous French allies (our former friends). We might not have won, but then we got Hitler to think the same thing.

to quote Churchill "all I have to offer is blood, sweat and tears."

had Hitler won, etc
Steve thanks for the welcome, and of course everything here is said in a speculative manner; if this, should that, and so on. The point again is that it would have been 'possible' for Hitler, once having defeated the French to have immediately offered them a peace treaty "with honour", allowing the complete removal of German troops and freeing all captured French soldiers, offering a "re-construction package" (similar to Marshal Plan) albeit on a much smaller scale, and the protection of French overseas Empire in Africa (the far East would have problematic due to insufficent logistics for that type of operation and would have clashed with Japan).

The downside would have an imediate decleration of war against its former ally, Britain (as with Italy against Germany in 1943), and the combined use of French Naval (fairly considerable) forces in the North Atlantic with the German fleet, and in the Med with the Italians. This type of alliance would have been far more sensible one than that with Britain, as they had been juggling for power for centuries, in fact the only 'true' ally Britain could have had in Europe - one that had never (WW1 outstanding) been a territorial competitor, was Germany. The imposition of a National Socialist/Fascist government in France would have been no more difficult than that of, say Norway. It is all a matter of proportion and effort. In this role, though Hitler was not really that type of RealPolitiK type man, and couldn't see beyond his own personal, fixed ambitions.

When discussing "what ifs" we make an awful lot of assumptions about the behaviour of people and nations. One could just have easily argued that for Hitler to have won, a sniper's bullet or poison cocktail could have seen off Churchill, and for Britain probably, as you say under Halifax, to have sued for peace. In that context the US would never had need or request to get involved in Europe, and all such aid from the US, Canada and Britain to the Soviet Union, , simply would never have happened. A Reich-Allies attack on the Communist state, with no prospect of US involvement, I am sure would have been a virtual given success. In fact, I suspect that Stalin would have been "bopped-off" and a newish possible peace settlement surrendering the Soviet West of the Urals may well have been signed.

Then again, had Franz Ferdinand never been shot, Hitler would have.....?

well as you say eric, a lot of "what ifs" there

A lot of people wonder what if hitler had done this or not done that. Hitler was not stupid but was imo a complete sh1t.

He started the war, prolonged it unnecessarily and finally, from the German point of view lost it. I dont think it was a question of Hitler being smarter. I think if Hitler had been more reasonable, less carried away with his own rhetoric, then the war outcome could have been much more favorable to Germany. But Hitler and the nazis were not like that were they?

well wasnt the french navy destroyed by the british as a procaution... i personally believe the soviets never would have stopped bringing it to germany, and if french troops would fight in russia, they would most likely be used as 'fodder' to cover German flanks (ie. the Rumanians at Stalingrad)..

anyway the germans 'raped' france during the war... germany used the majority of her resourses to fuel their war effort and her manpower to build her weapons.. i dont think france would have been willing to fight whatsoever.....

The Royal Navy attacked the French Navy at Mers El Kébir and Dakar.
(Actually, the French navy wanted to keep on the fight versus the Germans.)

an assassination attempt on stalins life wouldnt of hurt a few days before the barbarossa.. a lack of leadership could have tipped the balance at the start of the russia campaign..

Yeah i thought maybe that hitler could of won but if that is the answer then i would believe that would be right.I am German a little though .and thinkng about the past is horrible