How many Sixes does Adolf Nazi have to Roll?

[Max Sinister]

Bump. Now one thing after another:

1. Spent the time in between for making entries for every halfway important country on the Fandom AH wiki. Check them out. Also in German.

2. Y'know miletus, it says a lot about the panic among the French if even the battle of Hannut - which went well for them! - couldn't turn their morale around.

3. Maginot was an expensive flop, no question.

But the French generals were incompetent. Billotte was a catastrophe re: morale, Weygand spent too much time (two days, in a crisis!) double-checking what Gamelin had told him already, Gamelin himself didn't have either telephone or radio in his HQ(!)... old guys don't have to be incompetent in general, but these ones were.

4. Still didn't decide when and where exactly this ATL diverges, although I'm pretty sure it has to be at Dunkirk.

5. However, I'll give you the first sentence I want the story to start with: "It's the little things which make a difference sometimes." (Notice something?)

[Max Sinister]

OK, here's the first longer text (exclusively) for you.

It'd be set some time after the first PoD, but that'll take a bit of time to write, so I'll give you this first. Pretty sure the TL will include something like that.

[lordroel]

Jun 5, 2022 15:20:36 GMT Max Sinister said:

3. Maginot was an expensive flop, no question.

I can agree with that.

[Max Sinister]

So, now I've created pages for WW2 on the seas and in the air up to the PoD as well. Now I really have to work on the very first PoD. It will have to do with Dunkirk, but this one's important.

[Max Sinister]

OK, so I have thought back and forth about Dunkirk. Here are the facts:

At first about the question: Why did Adolf Nazi actually give the halting order IOTL?
- Because he somewhere secretly admired the Brits, for being "Aryans" and having built a huge colonial empire? But not too much later he wanted all British men aged 17 to 45 deported to the continent for forced labor. (About which I thought: "That's crazy even for Adolf Nazi.")
- Because the soil around Dunkirk was too swampy? That makes me wonder: Have people never heard about this concept called roads? The area had more roads than about any other part of Europe. Also, the rain started to fall only after the order was given.
- The idea that the Luftwaffe would finish the Allies was also stupid. Göring had bragged. And even so, if the weather had been better...
- Rundstedt sided here with the "führer"? Other than generals like Bock, Guderian, and Kleist, he wasn't there when it happened. So I give their opinions more weight.
- The Wehrmacht needed time to recover? Even so, they were allowed on the 26th at 15:30 to get on with it.
- Panzers were broken? OTOH, the French 1st army had lost ALL heavy material on the 26th. A few hours should suffice for repairs. A bit longer if the right parts aren't around. But still.
- The canals blocked the Germans? (Don't armies have engineers around, to build bridges? The Wehrmacht had, under Generalmajor Rudolf Veiel.)

The more I read and think about it, the more I come to the conclusion: Adolf Nazi simply wanted to show the generals who was the boss, whether it made sense or not. In short: There was no good reason to stop.

So if the Wehrmacht had attacked, at least sooner than IOTL: Would they have succeeded?

Taking Dunkirk itself, or blocking the Allies from reaching it, seems possible. Kleist's panzers were only 18 kms from there, and not too many troops stood between them and the city. At one point at the beginning, just a British bataillon.

This leaves one last question: If there had been a big battle of encirclement, as the Wehrmacht often fought them one year later - would the Wehrmacht have won, and if yes, with about how many losses?

Advantages for the Allies:
- Their tanks (Renault Char) were on the average better, esp. with thicker armor than the German ones. (Compared with Pz III.)
- Their opponents had a supreme commander who was crazy.
- Sometimes, encircled soldiers fight like cornered rats.

Advantages for the Germans:
- The Belgians would capitulate on May 28th. (Which they didn't know yet.)
- Most French generals not named de Gaulle really weren't great.
- Since 23rd, the BEF was on half rations.
- 800,000 Wehrmacht soldiers vs. 400,000 allied ones.
- On the continent, the Luftwaffe had the advantage as well.
- Unless the French managed to break the encirclement, the Allies would run out of fuel too. If they hadn't already.
- German morale was strong, Allied morale not so much anymore.
- Radios for tanks. Better doctrine.

The only hope I could see for the Allies: If they bundled their strengths and tried to break the encirclement. Hopefully with help coming from the south. De Gaulle certainly would have liked to help.

But after all, I don't want to write a story where the Allies make a heroic last stand and kill three Wehrmacht soldiers for every dead "Tommy". But if they could - where was that spirit e.g. in Singapore? Or Dieppe?

And while I can see that the German tanks often had problems cracking the shell of the other side's tanks - it's nowhere written that you have to defeat tanks with tank cannons. Not if you have a commander who can think outside the box. As a matter of fact, the Wehrmacht had at least one, a certain Erwin Rommel. His idea: Using 8.8 cm cannons (originally conceived for fighting planes) against Allied tanks.

So all in all I guess: The Wehrmacht will suffer five-digit losses of men and lose some tanks and airplanes as well, but the Allies will lose the whole BEF. And the Wehrmacht will gain useful experience - esp. how to fight strong tanks. Maybe they'll even get a tank with an 8.8 cm cannon developed earlier than IOTL.

And no, I don't think that a destroyed BEF will actually make Sealion possible.

Did I forget something?

[michelvan]

Why Hitler, Dunkirk ?
it's mystery why he gave this order and why


Yes french hat better tanks but not in quality needed from combat because bloody Maginot line suck the Budget up
also was Renault nationalisation and run by french bureaucrat extremely contra productive "We need Trucks, not Tanks..."

Belgians... oh boy were do i start ?
A young self-willed King that terminate important defence treaty with France and Britain,
then get idea declaring Belgium neutral would do the Trick
A Governments with stop and Go in armament
A fortress program halfway abandon and finish complex had insufficient weapons to fight invasion
A Military that not wanted those fortresses and used biggest as penal camp for Army
The Airforce waiting on there delivery of Fighter aircraft as Germany invade
Their mechanised infantry was soldiers on bicycle carry WW1 rifle.
They had no Tanks more Tankletts and tractor for heavy guns
The Wehrmacht just steamrolled true Belgium in days and dash true ardennes into France direction Paris
While the allles waiting on them in wrong part of Belgium....

[Max Sinister]

As said, Michel: Meanwhile I'd bet that he just wanted to show Brauchitsch who's the "Führer".

Yes, if the French and Belgians hadn't made some mistakes, the Nazis wouldn't have come as far as IOTL.

Nobody else wants to comment something? My, my, then it's really time to write a chapter being based on this battle.

[Max Sinister]

No finished chapter so far, sorry. But the wiki (see the post with the web links on page 1) has a dozen or so more pages.

[Max Sinister]

Yes, I've stated several times already that I wanted to write chapters instead of wiki pages. But then, I got caught in creating pages for Wehrmacht generals, and some other folks who might become important in TTL. Now I think I really have enough. OK, maybe pages for Belgian Congo, Algeria, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Saudi Arabia, but that's it then, really.

[Max Sinister]

So, this time it's for real: Here's the start chapter for the whole thing. Thanks for reading.

[Max Sinister]

I've thought back and forth for a long time how a battle for Dunkirk would play out - that is, if there hadn't been a halting order, as IOTL. If it happened, it'd be the first big encirclement battle of WW2, but in the west instead of the East.

Here's my rough draft:

May 25th - The News of Dunkirk's Fall causes Panic among the Allies. Both Officers and Men have to choose between three to four bad Alternatives: Trying a risky breakthrough at Douai towards Peronne (distance 50 km, by air); trying to hold the line, make or break; risking a surprise coup of Dunkirk, to achieve Evacuation at the end; or capitulation. The Brits and younger commanders tend to a fight, the older Frenchmen and Belgians to capitulation. A few thousand Allied Soldiers per day manage to get picked up at the Belgian Shores by the small Boats at least. These boats have to take the longer Route Y, which means that even getting there takes them eight hours.

Edit: Winston Churchill, when learning that Dunkirk has been taken, orders the BEF to try to take it back, to continue Operation Dynamo, for which planning started just five days ago.

May 26th - The most advanced French Troops retreating reach Dunkirk, where the Germans already have created a defense line. First skirmishes end in a draw. German Panzer troops reach Lille, where the Remains of six French Divisions have concentrated.

May 27th - Belgian King Leopold III, supreme commander of his Army, capitulates - without having informed the other Allies about this. The Allied Troops in besieged Calais capitulate too, after a few thousand of them could make the evacuation. Lille is encircled by the 6. Armee (von Reichenau). For a short Moment, the Germans at Dunkirk seem to get into trouble, when the French mass their remaining tanks and start an offensive. The German anti-tank gunners seem helpless - but when the Germans divert their anti-air guns from their proper use, they can destroy even the thickly armored French Char tanks. From now on, the French are only able to fight defensively.

French counter-attacks of the 10th Army at Abbeville coming from the South are blocked by the Germans.

May 28th - More than 90% of the Belgian Soldiers have capitulated against the Germans, the Rest continues fighting on the side of the Allies. Almost all of Flanders is now occupied by the Heeresgruppe von Bock; now, the Allied Soldiers can't even flee via the shores. BEF commander Lord Gort escapes with one of the last Ships. Alphonse Juin, one of the Division commanders in the encircled Lille, capitulates with his Troops. The Germans capture about 100 tanks and 300 Guns.

May 29th - The British Expeditionary Force (now under Harold Alexander) has to move Troops to cover their Northern flank, after the Belgians aren't there anymore. Making an Offensive much more dangerous for them. The German Troops at Dunkirk push their opponents behind the Yser river.

May 30th - Hermann Hoth accepts the capitulation of Lille. The 1st French Army doesn't exist anymore. This is leaving only the BEF in the area around Ypres (once again...) between the rivers Yser and Lys. For one Week, the Men have fought on half Rations, effective strength and Morale have suffered accordingly.

May 31th - The commander Alexander contacts the Germans to negotiate about capitulation. The French counter-attacks at Abbeville are cancelled too, since the Situation seems hopeless.

June 1st - The BEF is dissolving now. Some Soldiers decide to fight their way through the German lines towards unoccupied France in the South on their own. Only few, like "Fighting Jack" Churchill, are successful with this.

June 2nd - Harold Alexander has to sign the BEF's capitulation at Ypres.

---

Results:

Even if the German losses (soldiers and panzers) were somewhat higher than in OTL, the Allied losses were several times higher, moving the balance in Germany's favor. Hence, the attack on France ("Case Red") was continued as soon as June 2nd, instead of June 4th.

The captured material alone which the Wehrmacht was able to peruse now was overwhelming: More than 500 usable tanks, more than 2,000 guns, over 10,000 Machine guns, and over 50,000 vehicles.

More than 300,000 men of the Allies had died, were missing, or had become German prisoners of war. Dozens of new prisoners camps (StaLags) were created for their placement.

The British Army wasn't just decimiated, but practically halved. About ten Divisions had been lost in the battle, which had to be replaced now. For which there were only bad Alternatives as solutions:

• Raising more Troops in the Dominions and colonies (which would take Months)
  
• Moving Soldiers of other services (Navy, Air Force) to the Army
• Sending badly or not at all trained Troops into the war

England now seemed defenseless against a German Invasion (even if the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force remained for defense), Landings of Fallschirmjäger (parachuters) were especially feared. In the Anti-Air Divisions for the defense against air attacks had about 150,000 Men serving in them in mid-1940, and this rather seemed too little.

The British Empire, which still covered one quarter of the Earth's landmass on maps, now had become weak and attackable everywhere potentially, but barely able to change to the offense. The Troops which now were evacuated as fast as possible from Narvik to Great Britain couldn't change too much about that.

Many competent commanders of the Brits became prisoners of war now:

• Alan Brooke, who'd become the most important Military advisor of Winston Churchill in OTL
• Noel Mason-MacFarlane, responsible for military intelligence at the BEF, who'd become Governor of Gibraltar in OTL
• Harold Alexander, who'd fight in Burma and Northern Africa
• Chief of Staff Henry Pownall, who'd later serve under Wavell and Mountbatten in OTL
• Ronald Forbes Adam, a good Organisator
• Giffard Le Quesne Martel, who passed on valuable experiences with German Panzers to the other Brits
• William Holmes, who fought in Syria and Northern Africa
• Kenneth Anderson, who participated in Operation Torch in OTL...
• Other famous commanders like Bernard Montgomery and Arthur Percival

Only a few, like Edmund Ironside, could be evacuated by plane.

Because of these losses of barely replaceable commanders, the Western Allies now were lacking leaders who had made experiences about the German Blitzkrieg tactics, especially the usage of Panzers, and in this regard, with Rommel as opponent. Hence, the remaining Troops of the Empire weren't just weaker and worse trained, but also less experienced and demotivated by the defeat.

Edit: France suffered too: Since those soldiers evacuated in OTL couldn't be sent back to France, Weygand has even fewer divisions available for defense.

On the other side, the Germans were able to use their Experiences from the battle of encirclement for great success later - especially the fact that many Officers had learned from Erwin Rommel how to use anti-air guns against strong tanks. The German Panzers often doing badly in comparison to the Allied ones lead to all of the Pz I and II being delegated for training purposes only, and the Pz III and IV getting stronger cannons faster than in OTL.

Finally, the German victory was an enormous Shock for the Allied Morale and that of opponents of the Nazis in general - and improved the Motivation of the followers of Adolf Nazi. Even if it was doubtful how much of a share he had regarding this victory.

[stevep]

  Max Sinister ,

   Initial thoughts:

a)  I suspect it would delay a push against the remaining French forces as actually forcing the surrender of the isolated forces rather than the OTL pause would mean some hard fighting.  Coupled with British demolitions before the surrender not only would the Germans suffer heavier losses - although probably more in equipment destroyed/damaged than manpower - its likely they would have very little captured equipment in anything like working order.

b)  Very probably still that France falls, albeit perhaps a bit later than OTL.

c)  Its likely that after such a disaster rather than the 'miracle' of OTL that Churchill is forced from office and Britain makes peace with Germany.  After this butterflies are huge.  Germany doesn't have the British blockade and is going to avoid the drain of supporting Italy in N Africa or side conflicts in the Balkans.  However its likely as a result to make a formal peace with France as well.  While that's likely to include a huge 'indemnity' and occupation of some areas as well as the annexation of areas - definitely including Alsace-Lorraine its probably not going to be able to massively loot France as OTL.  The primary restraint on Germany imports from outside would be lack of funds and given the massive military expansion that is likely to continue in preparation for the invasion of the USSR gold and other trade materials could be short.  Also its almost certain that POWs will be released which boosts French manpower a lot compared to OTL and will help Britain get much of the BEF back - apart from those killed or injured in the conflict.

d)  Its very likely even Stalin will accept that an attack is coming and won't be as totally caught by surprise although its still going to go very bad for the Red Army initially.  How things go from there is a big question.

e)  How does Britain react?  Different groups will go in different ways.  In part depending on the circumstances of events.  However there will be a lot of people unhappy about the defeat and seeking to boost British security.  There will be a strong incentive to learn lessons from the disaster and while not all the correct ones will be learned your likely to see a number of improvements made.  Furthermore without a large scale fighting war under dire conditions is going to ease Britain's economic position somewhat.

[Max Sinister]

Thank you for the feedback, steve. One thing after another...

a) You've pointed out something important: Even if nothing else works, they can still destroy a lot of material. Some will be lost during the retreat, so I guess the Germans will still get 300-500 working tanks (instead of 700 from OTL), but after the battle, all the Germans will get is a lot of scrap metal. They'll have to recycle it then, I guess... But as said, the Allies would still suffer morally, and from not having food. Armies march on their stomachs... and in OTL, they fought so at least some of them would make it to evacuation. The Sea... If that hope is lost, will they still fight for the sake of it? Compare to Singapore: The Japanese even had lower numbers, didn't treat their PoWs better than the Nazis, and still defeated the Brits in two weeks.

b) Sure about the "later" bit? The Wehrmacht might suffer some losses in a hypothetical encirclement battle near Dunkirk, but among OTL's evacuees were more than 100,000 Frenchmen and Belgians, many of whom fought in France after being returned there. Which won't happen ITTL.

c) He did survive the crisis from May 25th to 28th though, when it was far from sure that Dynamo'd work as well as it did. Hell, Churchill himself had feared to be able to save 45,000 max. Would Halifax try that soon again? After being defeated, because Labour, Asquith, and Chamberlain sided with Churchill then? Besides, there shouldn't be much of prestige for making the first peace since when, Napoleon?, where Britain would have to cede territory. - Finally, while I think I need a destruction of the BEF to get the result I want, I did not want Britain, let alone Churchill to fall over after that. Churchill wouldn't give up in such a situation, and I think he would at least be able to sway public opinion for some time. Until they can score a victory somewhere. (But with which men?) Or until the US help / Barbarossa will start. If he makes negotiations for peace, then rather to buy time.

d) IOTL he dismissed the many warnings coming from all sides because he thought it'd be irrational for Nazi Germany to attack its most powerful ally (true), so "Adolf" would never do that (wrong, obv.)

e) The first reaction would be shock, I guess. After that... as written elsewhere, they'll have to raise more troops, but that won't be easy. And they'll barely have experienced men to start the Commandos Churchill wanted. Making cheap arms like the Sten gun, that's more probable.

[stevep]

Nov 20, 2022 2:40:32 GMT Max Sinister said:

Thank you for the feedback, steve. One thing after another...

a) You've pointed out something important: Even if nothing else works, they can still destroy a lot of material. Some will be lost during the retreat, so I guess the Germans will still get 300-500 working tanks (instead of 700 from OTL), but after the battle, all the Germans will get is a lot of scrap metal. They'll have to recycle it then, I guess... But as said, the Allies would still suffer morally, and from not having food. Armies march on their stomachs... and in OTL, they fought so at least some of them would make it to evacuation. The Sea... If that hope is lost, will they still fight for the sake of it? Compare to Singapore: The Japanese even had lower numbers, didn't treat their PoWs better than the Nazis, and still defeated the Brits in two weeks.

a)  Yes they are likely to surrender when things get hopeless.  However I think while negotiating and especially once its clear that escape is hopeless there will be attempts to deny the Germans as much as possible.  They could still capture quite a lot but I suspect less than OTL.

  Singapore was a mess with poorly prepared troops, many already demoralised from the battles in Malaya and a leader who basically gave up.  Here you have the regular army making a stand in a close position.  If nothing out of pride a lot of the forces will put up a fight until their ordered to surrender.

b) Sure about the "later" bit? The Wehrmacht might suffer some losses in a hypothetical encirclement battle near Dunkirk, but among OTL's evacuees were more than 100,000 Frenchmen and Belgians, many of whom fought in France after being returned there. Which won't happen ITTL.

b)  Well here they will have a fight, to a degree a frontal attack against a dug in opposition so it won't be easy. 

  In terms of the French forces rescued from Dunkirk how many got back before the French surrender and how much equipment did they have?  The BEF got a lot of its men out but with very little even in terms of personal equipment in many cases.  Coupled with the disorder and uncertainty in France I suspect few had any real chance of picking up equipment and joining a regular and fully organised unit again.  I know that at least a couple of British divisions were sent to France after the evacuation and they had in turn to be pulled out but they were fully equipped regular units. 

c) He did survive the crisis from May 25th to 28th though, when it was far from sure that Dynamo'd work as well as it did. Hell, Churchill himself had feared to be able to save 45,000 max. Would Halifax try that soon again? After being defeated, because Labour, Asquith, and Chamberlain sided with Churchill then? Besides, there shouldn't be much of prestige for making the first peace since when, Napoleon?, where Britain would have to cede territory. - Finally, while I think I need a destruction of the BEF to get the result I want, I did not want Britain, let alone Churchill to fall over after that. Churchill wouldn't give up in such a situation, and I think he would at least be able to sway public opinion for some time. Until they can score a victory somewhere. (But with which men?) Or until the US help / Barbarossa will start. If he makes negotiations for peace, then rather to buy time.

  True and the butterflies could well be small enough at that stage to safe him again but after the loss of pretty much all of the BEF in a single disaster rather that the OTL miracle there is going to be a serious shock and a lot more people than OTL will be missing loved ones who are now dead or POW and many will be doubtful of any point in continuing a 'lost' conflict.  Also such a disaster would have an impact in the US as well.

  If Churchill goes I could see Britain making peace and being willing to concede some territory.  Malta is an obvious option as its too vulnerable and until Italy started bombing it there seems to have been an element who would have welcomed a change to Italian rule.  British Somalia might be another option.  Not sure about German WWI colonies - definitely not getting any back from Japan or Australia and heard differing arguments about Hitler's interest in Germany African colonies.  Think if Britain is willing to make a quick peace it could get pretty generous terms. Hitler basically wants Britain out of the way while he wages his eastern 'crusade'.  If Mussolini tries to demand too much I could even see a British negotiator offering to make peace with Germany and 'let Mussolini take what he can'.

  Note that such a peace agreement won't mean an appeasement government.  If the 25-28th crisis still occurs and Churchill wins then Halifax is probably a dead duck in political terms.  If Churchill goes, which I agree would be probably be necessary for peace, then you might also see a general election.  Who would stand for the Tories - possibly Chamberlain as his cancer isn't yet know to him but  with the level of disaster at the least the Tory majority is going to be greatly reduced and you might see an early Labour government or some coalition.

d) IOTL he dismissed the many warnings coming from all sides because he thought it'd be irrational for Nazi Germany to attack its most powerful ally (true), so "Adolf" would never do that (wrong, obv.)

  As I've read it he was hoping for both the democracies and Germany to have a long war of attrition and wear each other out.  The fall of France came as a nasty shock to him and he had already tied himself somewhat to the Nazis as he perceived them as the weaker of the two sides but once Britain decided to continue fighting he didn't expect Hitler to strike east until that was resolved.  If Britain does make peace then he should expect an attack fairly soon and possibly even listen to his spies and generals.

e) The first reaction would be shock, I guess. After that... as written elsewhere, they'll have to raise more troops, but that won't be easy. And they'll barely have experienced men to start the Commandos Churchill wanted. Making cheap arms like the Sten gun, that's more probable.

  Possibly not quite if we go to a peace agreement but a more studied rearmament to protect the homeland and also seek to secure the more distant interests.

[Max Sinister]

a) A lot will depend on the commander. Unfortunately, WP articles don't allow much judgement, and I typically read those history books which aren't extremely specialized. Lord Gort - well, he got a VC in WW1, he might fight on. Blanchard - wouldn't bet so much on it. Leopold III - capitulated IOTL on May 28th anyway.

b) Don't know many details, but the French 1st Army had already lost a lot of materiel when the PoD came. I'd assume they might try an attack against (hypothetically) German-occupied Dunkirk next. For the sake of a German victory, I assumed that Rommel would pull his trick (using anti-air cannons against French tanks), destroying their last hope.

c) Malta and Somaliland - that'd be a peace Britain might accept, but the Axis not so much. The former German colonies? Not impossible, Hitler did more than one U-turn as the "Führer", but even someone not as experienced in naval warfare as him should notice that the colonies weren't much of a help in WW1. Not as long as the Kriegsmarine comes even close to the RN. Would the Brits accept the loss of e.g. Egypt in such a situation? (Even if yes, that's not the TL I originally wanted to write.) What about Cyprus? Or Palestine, so the Nazis might send all the Jews in their realm there instead of Auschwitz?

The problem for Churchill: While we know with hindsight that the RN and RAF are all that Britain needs to avoid Sealion, the Brits at that time didn't necessarily know.

And while Hitler might have treated a Britain that'd be willing to ally with him against Stalin, or be benevolently neutral at least, I somehow don't think that's going to happen. I.e. the Brits wouldn't do that.

d) True, Stalin had hoped for a war of attrition in the west. If Britain made peace... however, that's not the decision I want them to make. So the situation until Barbarossa would be similar to OTL, with the German position being just a tad better. Maybe enough for Stalin not to change significantly.

e) Since the Brits would send all available and new troops to the mother country first during the next months, and keep more of the RN and RAF around there, they'd have to fight more defensively in Africa. Postpone counterattacks until, I don't know, one year later? Fortunately for them, Italy doesn't have the greatest army.