WWII Without Germany

by **Fircoal** on Sat Aug 16, 2008 3:59 pm

Discuss

by **InkL0sed** on Sat Aug 16, 2008 4:16 pm

by **Frigidus** on Sat Aug 16, 2008 4:23 pm

Russia vs. West

by **Jeff Hardy** on Sat Aug 16, 2008 4:29 pm

i doubt it would have started but if it did...
RUSSIA WOULD HAVE GOT OWNED

by **jay_a2j** on Sat Aug 16, 2008 4:37 pm

it would be likened to a banana split..... without a banana.

Probably wouldn't have escalated to a WW status, rather a "Conflict".

by **MeDeFe** on Sat Aug 16, 2008 4:56 pm

Frigidus wrote:Russia vs. West

That could have been it, especially seeing how the atomic bomb was only developed during the war, so there wouldn't have been a stand-off between the commies and Europe/North America to start with.

by **iancanton** on Sat Aug 16, 2008 5:02 pm

Jeff Hardy wrote:i doubt it would have started but if it did...
RUSSIA WOULD HAVE GOT OWNED

it had already started in 1937 without germany, when japan invaded china (china was backed by the western allies). what makes u think the ussr and the west would have been on opposite sides?

ian.

by **brooksieb** on Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:08 pm

There would be no war, simple.

by **Pedronicus** on Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:38 pm

I would of grown up with an airfix kit of sopwith camels not supermarine spitfires to glue together.

Bi plane rigging is hard to glue. I might of made better models

by **cmckinney** on Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:49 pm

It wouldn't have happened...because there would have been nothing to fight over.

by **pimpdave** on Sat Aug 16, 2008 10:17 pm

iancanton wrote:
Jeff Hardy wrote:i doubt it would have started but if it did...
RUSSIA WOULD HAVE GOT OWNED

it had already started in 1937 without germany, when japan invaded china (china was backed by the western allies). what makes u think the ussr and the west would have been on opposite sides?

ian.

I'm glad you posted this. As I started scrolling down the thread, I wondered when someone was going to mention Imperial Japanese expansion.

How would China have played a role? India, Australia?

If Germany isn't an aggressor nation, with whom would they side?

We can assume, for the hypothetical, that Japan would have attacked Pearl Harbor. Also, Italy was in Ethiopia.

How would Russia be involved?

by **Skittles!** on Sat Aug 16, 2008 10:25 pm

Japan would have continued its expansion, with or without Nazi Germany. Though it may not of attacked so fiercely if it didn't have a major ally distracting other powerful nations. I don't Japan would have taken as much territory as it did in WWII as the USA and other nations would of stopped them. Japan would have attacked Pearly Harbour, just because it wasn't getting oil or whatever from USA for attacking China.

Italy would also have possibly continued its expansion into Africa and possibly further. This would possibly have started WWII, but we don't know.

USSR would probably not of done anything. Probably have border treaties with Japan in Manchuria. It might of taken Mongolia, if it didn't own it already. USSR and Japan might of even become allies to carve up China between themselves.

by **strike wolf** on Sat Aug 16, 2008 10:28 pm

Japan attacks Pearl Harbor. US sends all their forces without Europe to distract them. Japan gets owned. No nukes. The world's a better place.

by **deronimo** on Sun Aug 17, 2008 1:43 am

WWII without Germany wouldn't be WWII

by **LYR** on Sun Aug 17, 2008 2:08 am

this is an incredibly stupid thread.

by **Juan_Bottom** on Sun Aug 17, 2008 3:09 am

Well if Germany wan't a country, then they would have been called something different like Hamburgerland or somethin, and then Hitler would have just taken power in that country, and used it to try and take over the world. So it probably been then the same only we would have been fighting Hambergerland.

by **Skittles!** on Sun Aug 17, 2008 3:10 am

Juan_Bottom wrote:Well if Germany wan't a country, then they would have been called something different like Hamburgerland or somethin, and then Hitler would have just taken power in that country, and used it to try and take over the world. So it probably been then the same only we would have been fighting Hambergerland.

If Germany wasn't a country, it still would be separate states, with some owing allegiance to Prussia and others to other countries.

by **jonesthecurl** on Sun Aug 17, 2008 10:19 am

The size and shape of most European continental countries were determined relatively late. The 19th century was for most people the first time that the idea of "nations" and "nationality" became important.

by **Hologram** on Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:59 am

No world war, but a huge Pacific War, even larger than the theater in the historic WWII would have developed. Japan would still keep expanding, US would've still done its oil embargo, and as a result there still would've been Pearl Harbor. It would have been an easy win against the Japanese because the US wouldn't be distracted with a war in Europe that Churchill and Roosevelt agreed was more pressing, so more resources to the island hopping campaign=super ownage. The Marines would have had the same success, and the Army would have uberly failed a few campaigns just as it did in the North African campaign, but as it became less green and more effective it would have rendered huge amounts of assistance to the Marine Corps. As for Russia, Stalin would have been looking for more places to spread the Revolution, and both as a matter of pride and imperial expansion, they would have tried to get in on the Japan action by intervening in China. This would have still resulted in a standoff between at least the US and the USSR, though nuclear weapons would not have become such a huge deal so early as the US would've blown Japan out of the water before the Manhattan Project came to fruition. In fact, the scientific efficiency of the command economy of the USSR probably would've put the US at a disadvantage in the nuclear weapons race.

Diplomatically, the US would have no connections with any Western European nations with the exception of Britain through the alliance born through necessity as Britain was also losing ground to Japan through Malaysia and imminent attacks on Australia. There would probably have been a treaty organization similiar to NATO, in the Pacific with the US and the Pacific British Commonwealth being the main contributors.

by **Juan_Bottom** on Mon Aug 18, 2008 2:58 am

Hologram wrote:In fact, the scientific efficiency of the command economy of the USSR

What are you smoking? It can only last for so long... and there are always spies....

by **Hologram** on Mon Aug 18, 2008 9:42 pm

Juan_Bottom wrote:
Hologram wrote:In fact, the scientific efficiency of the command economy of the USSR

What are you smoking? It can only last for so long... and there are always spies....

The fact that you would need spies to steal the technology lends itself to the fact that you're lagging in technology. And so what if they only had the advantage for a limited time? All we needed was half a decade or so of being the sole nuclear superpower to cement ourselves as the military leader in the Cold War. But as soon as we realized we had a huge advantage we got complacent and the scientists went back to their peaceful ways until the USSR surprised us and launched the first artificial satellite.