WW2 What if

Tricky to work out I am still looking in to the pros and cons on this one. I did pick up on some info which will need to be checked to confirm its facts. The info was casualty figurers; the Italian campaign was much more costly than the Normandy. Well that as I said needs to be checked, I shall come back some time next week and post my view on this one. I will admit this one I saw else where, I shall think up a new one myself for next week.

If the South gained their independence in the Civil War, do you think they would be Allies or an Axis Power in WW2???

I'm seriously on the fence about that one.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
If the South gained their independence in the Civil War, do you think they would be Allies or an Axis Power in WW2???

I'm seriously on the fence about that one.

Neither. Lack of unification != overseas battle.

Well it’s tricky to really work out, so many factors having to be taken in to consideration. Without going into great detail I think at the end of the day the allies made the correct decision, to spread out the German army on more fronts and to where them down. If it had gone ahead and failed I suspect the war may have gone on to 1946.

I'm certainly surprised the Allies didn't take more drastic measures to locate Hitler and off him. That's certainly the type of action more widely taken today.

The British planned out Operation Foxley to assassinate Hitler some time in 1944. But as the saying goes Hitler was are ally by making all those errors.

I think more important than German forces in Italy- because the Italian campaign ground to such a stalemate it probably acted as a brake on the Allies more than the Axis- I think the simpler point is that we weren't ready to take France in '43. Crossing the Channel was an incredibly difficult task and the resources were not ready.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
If the South gained their independence in the Civil War, do you think they would be Allies or an Axis Power in WW2???

I'm seriously on the fence about that one.

Like Janus said neither....I doubt USA would still have been dragged/entered the war if CSA was alive and well.

OK a new one what would had happen if Japan had stayed put attacking China?

All U.S. forces would have been piled into Europe, pretty much. The war would have either ended just a few months earlier than it did, or even a year earlier.

It might be more interesting to look at the conceptual opposite of that question, and ask what would have happened if Japan had invaded Russia back in the early part of the war.

What would they gain?

A barren waste land which had no value what's so ever, thousands would suffer frostbite and hundreds dead in the winter months. And of course the Japanese would have to to face some 30 to 40 Soviet divisions.

But Japan already had form for beating Russia in the 20th Century. Losing as well, but the potential was there. And the Russian army was a pile of shit at that point.

Meanwhile, it was in moving reinforcements against the Germans that were meant to defend against a Japanese invasion that the Russians were able to save Moscow. If the Japanese had indeed attacked...

Russia would have indeed fallen.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
But Japan already had form for beating Russia in the 20th Century. Losing as well, but the potential was there. And the Russian army was a pile of shit at that point.

July 1938, Soviet and Japanese forces battle near Lake Hassan on the border of Manchukuo.

May 1939, From May to September 1939 Japan and the Soviet Union fought a fierce, large-scale undeclared war on the Mongolian plains that ended with a decisive Soviet victory with two important results: Japan reoriented its strategic emphasis toward the south, leading to war with the United States, Britain, and the Netherlands; and Russia freed itself from the fear of fighting on two fronts, thus vitally affecting the course of the war with Germany.

Soviet army was far from crap when they defeated the Japanese. 😉

No, it was crap, the Japanese simply were not on form.

We all know how crap the Soviet army was at first. We all know how they struggled to take even Finland, and how much it got totally smashed by the Germans at first.

I even specifically noted that the Japanese had lost to the Russians as well, so you simply bringing up something I had mentioned anyway makes no difference to the debate and does not address my point.

I forgot this bit of info.

August 1939,
Battle of Khalkin Gol. The Battle of Khalkin Gol was a major Russian victory over the Japanese Kwangtung Army in August 1939 on the border of Manchuria and outer Mongolia. It was the most disastrous defeat ever suffered by the Japanese Army.

As for Finland, yes that was a mess for the Soviets.

If the Germans managed to capture the oil fields of Azerbaijan, would it have helped them defeat the Russians?

Originally posted by general-pain
If the Germans managed to capture the oil fields of Azerbaijan, would it have helped them defeat the Russians?

Short answer no.