A "What If.." quesion.

[Motherland]

Instead of Germany invading Poland first, what if, Hitler invaded France first.  How much would WWII operations in European Theater change.

Considering Germany invaded Poland under the assumption that the weren't going to go to war with France and Britain because of it in the first place (remember that France and Britain declared war on Germany) I don't really see how that's a valid scenario in the first place.

[oakranger]

Sorry, but I'm having trouble following you.  My understanding is that England wasn't on Hitler's priority list to start with.  Even if France fell first, Hitler probably would have gobbled up everything else, too.. just in a different order, except, perhaps, those areas that the Soviets might have taken first.  There was a non-aggression pact between Germany and the Soviets, so I don't think the Soviets would have attacked Germany.

So.. we're back to where we were before Barbarosa kicked off. The big question is if Poland would have been under self or Soviet control.  Either case, it shouldn't have been a major influence on Hitler proceeding to invade the Soviets and getting wiped out by attrition/weather later on.

I post the question and see what you all think how the out come would be like.  Would Russia invade Poland and then Germany or not?

[APDrone]

I post the question and see what you all think how the out come would be like.  Would Russia invade Poland and then Germany or not?

Ok, fair enough.  I think the Soviets might invade Poland, between Stalin's cleansings, but I seriously doubt they would have attacked Germany.

[oakranger]

Ok, fair enough.  I think the Soviets might invade Poland, between Stalin's cleansings, but I seriously doubt they would have attacked Germany.

Here is a question that i am dare enough that i do not know.  Why did Russia invaded Poland?

[Angus]

Ok, fair enough.  I think the Soviets might invade Poland, between Stalin's cleansings, but I seriously doubt they would have attacked Germany.

There is some evidence that the USSR planned for a war with Germany in 1942. But they had already decided on the split-up of the Baltic countries and Poland. So the USSR actualli DID invade Poland in 1939 and met up with the Germans. Then they split as agreed.
Had the Germans done nothing, I am pretty sure the Russians would have gobbled up Poland on its own.
I am not sure if the British and the French would have declared war on both. They would inevitably be at war with Germany had Germany invaded France. But getting at the USSR would be a hard task.
In real life, Nazi Germany was actually supported by the USSR in their war against W-Europe and the commonwealth until they went to war against the USSR in 1941. Supported with a very profiable trade, especially oil. Did you know that the Germans gave the blueprints of the Bismarck to the USSR as a part of the deal??

[Masherbrum]

Agree.  there is no way they could have achieve air supericy over England in 1939. In fact, Germany could not have achieve anything, as far as invading Engalnd, with what they had.  However,  Germany taking France in 1939 would change the whole course of the war and Russia may have end it quickly too.

Stalin with the Purge and lack of good Mobilization left them out of any "attack scenario".    No way any "early strike" would have been attempted, let alone have been successful.

[PiratPX]

Hitler's Blitz through Poland was much more primitive than what he launched at W-Europe. One of the main attacking aircraft was a Bipe (Henchel), and the army was largely horse-drawn. The firebombing on Warshaw was done with JU-52's where they shovelled incendiaries out the cargo doors.
My point is, that both parties came a long way before 1940, not just the British.
FYI, Spitfires claimed the first LW victim in 1939, over Edinburgh. Was a bit of a shock to the Germans....

I'm afraid you're wrong, Angus. Hs123 was used as an auxiliary ground support plane in quieter areas of the front - no more than 40 planes of that type were used against Poland. BTW Adolf Galland flew a Henschel in Polish campaign. Ju52 was employed in bomber role against Poland only once - on sept 25th dropping 2kg bombs on besieged Warsaw; and it was a week after most of the Polish air force had evacuated to Romania. Core of German attacking force were He111s, Do17s and Ju87s. Also, the Wehrmacht remained largely horse-drawn army until the end of the war; they hadn't somehow become a fully mechanized force after conquering Poland.
If Hitler turned west in 39' it would most likely be a walk in the park, even more than it was in Poland. Blitzkrieg tactics would still be a surprise to allied commanders (not that French even tried to learn anything from Polish defeat...); as somebody wrote, France and England were still using mostly older equipment with new types of aircraft still to be introduced to line units; and finally Wehrmacht suffered relatively heavy losses in Polish campaign - similar to those in the year to come in France - this would mean additional 50.000 soldiers and 300 planes deployed against the west.
It's almost certain that Stalin would use the opportunity and try and grab the lands west of Soviet borders, including Poland. They would probably succeed, though they tried it 20 years earlier and failed badly: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish%E2%80%93Soviet_War. Huge but poorly trained and demoralised army vs more "westernised" and well motivated troops, anything would happen. It showed in Finland couple months later.

[Angus]

Okay, something again.
- HS-123's were not used in the BoB. Nor were Ju-52's. Stukas were withdrawn. Actually, Ju-52's were used extensivelly in the Western advance 1940, with quite some losses. Holland I belive.
- Blitzkrieg tactics were introduced in Poland. They were preceeded with quite some air superiority. LW losses in Poland are nowhere near what they were in W-Europe (before BoB). The numbers I hear are from 1.100 to 1.400, but I would be delighted to see somebetter ones
- Germany grew much stronger in Armour and Aircraft from the Polish ending untill the date of 10th og May 1940.
- Well, the aircraft types available in 1939 to the allies were more or less also in use in 1940. Again, I belive the rough 8 months between Poland and France were in Germany's favour.
- Again, invading France in the Fall of 1939 and even succeding in the 6 weeks as it later took, would have left no BoB to fight, since it would be too late for a channel crossing, and daylight being less and less. Daylight is after all in favour of the stronger, since it gives more hours of ops, thereby causing attrition to the smaller defender, who has to keep on his smaller toes for a longer time.

Now to Stalin. (Oakranger). Bear in mind that he DID indeed invade and capture a good slab of Poland. He did gobble up the Baltic states, and attack Finland. Had I been Stalin in 1939, and seen the Gerries go after France, I'd have taken ALL of Poland instead of nothing, and left the Finns alone. You?

[Simba]

The Battle of Britain wasn't a furball to see which side could shoot down more fighters than the other. Hitler launched the Luftwaffe against Britain to gain sufficient air superiority to threaten the main defence: the Royal Navy. Germany had no chance of defeating the Senior Service other than by bombing it to blazes as it steamed into action against anyone dumb enough to attempt a Channel crossing with no more escort than a few destroyers and the odd so-called capital ship. In 1939, the Kriegsmarine's heaviest guns at sea were the 11" carried by Scharnhorst and Gneisenau (nine each) and the three Panzerschiffe (six each), no contest against the Home Fleet. And forget the U-boats, RN submarines and Coastal Forces would have taken them on.

Splice the mainbrace! 

[PiratPX]

Now to Stalin. (Oakranger). Bear in mind that he DID indeed invade and capture a good slab of Poland. He did gobble up the Baltic states, and attack Finland. Had I been Stalin in 1939, and seen the Gerries go after France, I'd have taken ALL of Poland instead of nothing, and left the Finns alone. You?

That's what I would do if I was him and most likely what he would do. Taking into consideration that confrontation between the commie and nazi regimes was inevitable it would be the only right way to go. But then I doubt that the Red Army would be able to reproduce a swift victory Germany won over Poland. Not with the performance it showed against Finland and not against Poland which could then direct all of its military resources to fight one enemy. With Germany rolling over France in no time (as I think they would) and Poland in a prolonged war with soviet Russia, who knows how would the alliances shift in Europe.

[flight17]

another what if which is realistic...

what if we got the declaration of war earlier (say before they even launched the attack)? we would most likely went onto high alert and possibly the pacific fleet would have left the harbor before the attack arrived, or at least the ships that were ready to go.

[USRanger]

What if I eat this blue crayon instead of the green one?  Me likes the green ones.

[oakranger]

What if I eat this blue crayon instead of the green one?  Me likes the green ones.

Your will have blue crap.

[CAP1]

What if I eat this blue crayon instead of the green one?  Me likes the green ones.

do you choose the red pill, or the blue pill?

[CAP1]

i may miss something here......but this is my take.

it seemed that the germans rolled poland fairly easily. they didn't seemt o have too much trouble with france. i think that had they reversed the order, the outcome would've been the same.

 once they attacked britain, from things i've read in the past, they had the british pretty much on their knees. i think that if things i've read were true, had hitler chosen to cross the channel, rather thhan not, at this time, i seriously think he could've taken them over too.

 i don't believe it would've lasted very long, as i do believe the germans would;'ve been driven off the island, but i think it could've happened.