Hypothetical World War 2 question..

I am taking a History course in college and it just makes me curious when i think about this, who would have won in a HYPOTHETICAL ONE ON ONE WAR between the USA and Germany?

id root for the allies btw (anscestors fought with the allies)Pitbulllova

Probably depends a lot on where they were fighting and who was invading who.General_X

[QUOTE="Pitbulllova"]id root for the allies btw (anscestors fought with the allies)gamerguru100

[QUOTE="gamerguru100"][QUOTE="Pitbulllova"]id root for the allies btw (anscestors fought with the allies)Pitbulllova

[QUOTE="Pitbulllova"]id root for the allies btw (anscestors fought with the allies)gamerguru100

[QUOTE="gamerguru100"][QUOTE="Pitbulllova"]id root for the allies btw (anscestors fought with the allies)Pitbulllova

[QUOTE="gamerguru100"][QUOTE="Pitbulllova"]id root for the allies btw (anscestors fought with the allies)TheFallenDemon

[QUOTE="TheFallenDemon"]

[QUOTE="gamerguru100"] Well, of course you'd root for the allies. I'd hope you'd root for them even if your ancestors didn't fight for them. Who the hell supports Hitler besides Nazis? gamerguru100

The US would have a decisive win, primarily due to its geography. But the German military was definitely no slouch. So if geographical factors were made equal, and it was just US military vs. German military, I'd say that things would be rather even, and could go either way.

[QUOTE="gamerguru100"][QUOTE="TheFallenDemon"]
Mountain Dew


plus reach3lightleggy

[QUOTE="TheFallenDemon"]

[QUOTE="gamerguru100"] Well, of course you'd root for the allies. I'd hope you'd root for them even if your ancestors didn't fight for them. Who the hell supports Hitler besides Nazis? gamerguru100

[QUOTE="lightleggy"][QUOTE="gamerguru100"] What the hell's that? :lol:gamerguru100

[QUOTE="Pitbulllova"]id root for the allies btw (anscestors fought with the allies)gamerguru100

It would play out the same way as world war 2. Instead Germany would have gotten nuked.

Probably USA.

Germany could only get its troops through either the English Channel or the North Sea. A strong Navy would blockade any German advancement towards the US. Germany may have had superior submarines, but without the US having to worry about Japan, i think theres just simply a geographical upper hand for the US.

Who the hell supports Hitler besides Nazis?

gamerguru100

Pat Buchanan is quite fond of him.

:|

[QUOTE="gamerguru100"]

Who the hell supports Hitler besides Nazis?

Stesilaus

Pat Buchanan is quite fond of him.

:|

I would of thought it was safe to say the Nazis would have won. What evidence do we have that the Americans could stand alone by themselves. The got caught off guard by the Japanse and only beat them because of the Nuke. Honestly if it was 1939 straight up Nazis vs USA, I dont think America would have had much of a fight. The size of America would be its problem. I would bet that America would have lost atleast half of it before we saw the whole trench stalemate. Its easy for a big country to attack a small area because its focused on a single place. However I would doubt very much if Germany came up from the south, America would have had many defenses in such places.

At the end of the day, the Americans were not in the war till the end, they were hugely benefical but they worked together with the other Allies. They didnt have the best aircraft, they didnt have the best tanks. They were not trained as well and they didnt have the focus of Hitler and his generals. Also if they didnt have the ability to kick back in their own country without an invasion going on, I am not so sure they would have developed the Nuke because they would have spent all their money on ground resources.

if USA before pearl harbour and Germany on 1939, the nazi will win by sheer number of troops and technology they had. if its mobalised USA against 1941 Nazis, it would be a phyrric victory or stalemate.

I would of thought it was safe to say the Nazis would have won. What evidence do we have that the Americans could stand alone by themselves. The got caught off guard by the Japanse and only beat them because of the Nuke. Honestly if it was 1939 straight up Nazis vs USA, I dont think America would have had much of a fight. The size of America would be its problem. I would bet that America would have lost atleast half of it before we saw the whole trench stalemate. Its easy for a big country to attack a small area because its focused on a single place. However I would doubt very much if Germany came up from the south, America would have had many defenses in such places.

At the end of the day, the Americans were not in the war till the end, they were hugely benefical but they worked together with the other Allies. They didnt have the best aircraft, they didnt have the best tanks. They were not trained as well and they didnt have the focus of Hitler and his generals. Also if they didnt have the ability to kick back in their own country without an invasion going on, I am not so sure they would have developed the Nuke because they would have spent all their money on ground resources.

o0squishy0o

The United States would win...

The United States was by that point, the industrial capitol of the world...

The population of the United States was over 130,000,000 while Germany (excluding the territory they seized at the onset) was just under 70,000,000 (87,000,000 if you include those territories).

A war between us would be fought primarily on the sea at the onset and throughout the war (we are on different continents lol)... Most people don't pay attention to the US naval build up that occurred during WW2 because a lot happened towards the end, but the US Navy by 1945 was and has since been the largest naval force ever assembled in the history of man... By 1945, 99 aircraft carriers had been in commission, 27 battleships, hundreds of smaller surface battle frigates/escort ships for carriers, THOUSANDS of support ships... By 1945 over 8,000 ships had been commissioned in the US navy over the course of the war...

Not to mention an invasion of the US would have been impossible for Germany because of the Navy and coastal defenses... The US had been updating/modifying/building more coastal defenses in almost all of its history up to that point from the War of 1812 onward (Third System Foritifications, Endicot Board, etc)... EVERY major port and harbor along the entire coastline of the United States had naval defensive guns capable of firing miles out to sea... Some were extremely fortified (San Fransisco, New York, Norfolk, etc)...

The US no question. A lot more manpower and a stronger economy and better supply lines

Assuming it's strictly between the US and Germany, I'd say the US will eventually have the upper hand. I say "eventually" because the Germans had a substantial lead in torpedo design and fighter aircraft in the beginning of WW2. Their blitzkrieg tactics were also well-thought out along with having a very good battlefield communication system. I doubt Germany would have had the means to invade the US, not with the USN controlling the seas. Where the US would get bloodied bad is when the US land an invasion force in Europe. I think in the beginning, the Germans would show how its done and school US forces in the art of war just like what the Africa Corps did at Kasserine Pass in North Africa. Eventually, the numbers will shift to the US side as industry shifts to a wartime footing along with valuable experience being gained by US forces. The green US forces learned quickly how to survive and go toe to toe with the Germans after Kasserine Pass. So, I think this will also be the case in the hypothetical war.

The Germans would have lost to the US for the same reason they lost to the Russians -- Logistics. The Germans had no four engine aircraft, and the US could put one newly constructed cargo ship out to sea every day.

I think it's time to fire up "Company of Heroes", and do a little research.

:D

The only reason the US invasion of Germany was successful was because it was a joint effort by several allied nations. They were dependant on the reconnaisance and intel of Great Britain and Scotland Yard. Honestly, neither nation would make significant strides in a one-on-one war. The US forces would have to march through France (after landing) before any engagement with the enemy. In that scenario Germany would win. Germany invading the US would be a logistic nightmare and we'd slaughter them in open sea. In that scenario the US wins. Nope, the first country to win is the first to develop an atomic bomb...which is what we did anyway.

[QUOTE="gamerguru100"][QUOTE="Pitbulllova"]id root for the allies btw (anscestors fought with the allies)TheFallenDemon

[QUOTE="General_X"]Probably depends a lot on where they were fighting and who was invading who.gamerguru100

The only reason the US invasion of Germany was successful was because it was a joint effort by several allied nations. They were dependant on the reconnaisance and intel of Great Britain and Scotland Yard. Honestly, neither nation would make significant strides in a one-on-one war. The first country to win is the first to develop an atomic bomb...which is what we did anyway.

edgewalker16

Germany was close as well though... Several times their efforts were sabotaged by the British intervention or defection of scientists to the USSR/UK... The US did it in secret, half the world away, over several years... Germany almost did it amidst a continent wide war, daily bombing, daily ariel recon, invasion, shortness of supplies, etc... If none of that intervention ever occurred, Germany could have very well developed nuclear weapons first...

Wow, it is so obvious that this a US-dominated forum. So many dumb Americans in here.

The Nazis would have DESTROYED USA 1 on 1. nine of out ten would agree to that notion, the other one out of 10 is an American.

Nazi Germany took on the former hyperpower of Great Britain (though clearly not at their peak other wise Nazi Germany would've lost in weeks), a growing superpower known as the United States, a former large empire; France. And then there's the Soviet Union. Not only that, but Germany left half of Europe in ruins.

One on one, any country in the world during 1939-45 would lose to Nazi Germany.

Probably USA.

Germany could only get its troops through either the English Channel or the North Sea. A strong Navy would blockade any German advancement towards the US. Germany may have had superior submarines, but without the US having to worry about Japan, i think theres just simply a geographical upper hand for the US.

XaosII

Wow, it is so obvious that this a US-dominated forum. So many dumb Americans in here.

The Nazis would have DESTROYED USA 1 on 1. nine of out ten would agree to that notion, the other one out of 10 is an American.

Nazi Germany took on the former hyperpower of Great Britain (though clearly not at their peak other wise Nazi Germany would've lost in weeks), a growing superpower known as the United States, a former large empire; France. And then there's the Soviet Union. Not only that, but Germany left half of Europe in ruins.

One on one, any country in the world during 1939-45 would lose to Nazi Germany.

Mozelleple112

Lol

[QUOTE="Mozelleple112"]

Wow, it is so obvious that this a US-dominated forum. So many dumb Americans in here.

The Nazis would have DESTROYED USA 1 on 1. nine of out ten would agree to that notion, the other one out of 10 is an American.

Nazi Germany took on the former hyperpower of Great Britain (though clearly not at their peak other wise Nazi Germany would've lost in weeks), a growing superpower known as the United States, a former large empire; France. And then there's the Soviet Union. Not only that, but Germany left half of Europe in ruins.

One on one, any country in the world during 1939-45 would lose to Nazi Germany.

wis3boi

Lol

Probably depends a lot on where they were fighting and who was invading who.General_X

The US would have destroyed Germany. No doubt. The way the US industry was churning out tanks, aircraft, bullets, rifles, and other war materials is stunning, not only that but resource wise the US posses a lot more natural resources and industry than Nazi Germany.mjf249

The US would have a decisive win, primarily due to its geography. But the German military was definitely no slouch. So if geographical factors were made equal, and it was just US military vs. German military, I'd say that things would be rather even, and could go either way.

The__Kraken

[QUOTE="Mozelleple112"] Honestly, America wasn't even the second most powerful nation of WW2, my educated guess would be: 1. Nazi Germany 2. Great Britain 3. United States 4. Soviet Union 5. Japan --- honourable mentions: France, Italy, China, etc Ace6301

And you are saying this because I am not a dumb American who is saying "HURR DURR US #!", correct? Explain to me what was wrong. The US can't even win against 5th world countries after 10 years of war that is economically ruining your country :lol: Tell me, do your teachers tell you that the war was won by the US?

If Americans on the forum that must not be spoken of are anything to go by, your teachers tell you that you won the war alone. Which is probably why so many of you think the U.S. could beat Nazi Germany on a 1 on 1 fight, which in no time during history would be possible for the United states. Not during the 1920s, WWI or even the US' 1945-55 peak.

As I said only a few instances in history have we seen more powerful militaries for their time, and that was the British Empire as a hyperpower post Napoleon pre WWI (Pax Britannica 1815-1914) and the Roman Empire around the first few centuries A.D. / birth of Christ. Possibly Mongolia in the 1200s.

People seem to forget that the US only became a superpower after the war because it was one of the few strong economical countries that didnt get bombed to ****

I think the Nazis wouldve raped the US in a 1v1 fight

Mozelleple112 you aught to do some more research on the war. People are saying the US would Win for a couple of reasons, primary, for the same reason the allies won, logistics. and people are assuming that this scenario starts off the same as the real one, Germany attacks first.

logistics, not even touching the reliability and complexity issues of various advanced German weapons had, most widely seen in their armor, they had nowhere near enough to matter. Stalin famously said during the war " Quantity has a quality of it's own." Both the US and USSR a multitude of more tanks each than Germany could muster, and they were cheaper, easier to maintain, and were built much faster.

While Germany did have some things that were legitmately badass and laughed at what the Allies had at the time, like the Me 262, they were built in such smal amounts that they didn't make a difference, didn't help either that the Allies overwhelmingly had air superiority and bombed most of them while still on the ground, along with many other industrial and military targets.

The US had many more people, and a greater industrial capacity several times greater than Germany had. Which even at it's finest point, had only around a 1/3rd the German Army mechanized. The majority of it throughout the entire war were drawn from horses.

As for Naval, Both the US and Japan could have dominated Germany 1 on 1. The Bismarck class was nothing special to designs that they had. Germany both before and during Hitler was centered around a Continental Europe fight, they had no real desire to have big forces half way around the world. Consequently, they didn't. Even under Hitlers grand pre-war build up plan, a navy of 800 ships, would have only had a hand full of carriers. The US and Japan had large and power Navies well versed in many areas and could actually pull off many types of actions, including invasions. The crutch for the Japanese was the same as Germans, industrial capacity, they had about 1/10th of the capacity that the US had( which, was around a 1/3rd of the whole world at that time.)

They had arguably the best Navy at the start of the war, and they did have the best carrier force in the world. Until, we took it out. With no means to quickly replace it, there went that.

The Germany Navy had nor the size, or composition to make any kind of trans global invasion on the American East Coast, if they tried, even under Hitlers dreamed upon Navy, would have been a bloodbath. Assuming they somehow did gain a foothold, the issue of logistics would be the same as it was in Russia, the massive size of the US, for example, the entire nation of Germany, can pretty much be fit into the state of Montana.

take the war to Europe, The US would fight similar to how they fought in the real thing. they would not slug through German forces with a wall of human flesh. They take the coastline and blockade with Naval power, and hit the manufacturing and industrial sites in the air, and make planned assaults for the Army to conduct with proper support. In the real war Most Germans did die fighting the Russians, but that came a price for the other side. You can look at any battle on the Eastern Front, the Soviets would win, at the price of several times the soldiers, tanks, planes, etc.

TL;DR - Through logistics, man power, composition of forces, and geography, the US would defeat Germany 1on 1.

and FYI, the US Navy did destroy the "most powerful and indestructible" Battleship of the day, which was not the Tripitz, which by contemporary designs of the day, was a outdated relic.

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="Mozelleple112"] Honestly, America wasn't even the second most powerful nation of WW2, my educated guess would be: 1. Nazi Germany 2. Great Britain 3. United States 4. Soviet Union 5. Japan --- honourable mentions: France, Italy, China, etc Mozelleple112

And you are saying this because I am not a dumb American who is saying "HURR DURR US #!", correct? Explain to me what was wrong. The US can't even win against 5th world countries after 10 years of war that is economically ruining your country :lol: Tell me, do your teachers tell you that the war was won by the US?

If Americans on the forum that must not be spoken of are anything to go by, your teachers tell you that you won the war alone. Which is probably why so many of you think the U.S. could beat Nazi Germany on a 1 on 1 fight, which in no time during history would be possible for the United states. Not during the 1920s, WWI or even the US' 1945-55 peak.

As I said only a few instances in history have we seen more powerful militaries for their time, and that was the British Empire as a hyperpower post Napoleon pre WWI (Pax Britannica 1815-1914) and the Roman Empire around the first few centuries A.D. / birth of Christ. Possibly Mongolia in the 1200s.

Hypothetical answer. The primary factors for a drawn out total war effort of this kind are industrial capacity, population, martime forces/maritime tradition (since you need to cross an ocean) and geographic advantages (such as proximity of other enemies and the need to protect against attack from other forces).

It isn't even close as the US annihilates Nazi Germany on all primary factors.

also:

The U.S. Army was a puny weakling when the war began

When the European war began in earnest on September 1, 1939, with the German invasion of Poland, the U.S. Army ranked seventeenth among armies of the world in size and combat power, just behind Romania. It numbered 190,000 soldiers. (It would grow to 8.3 million in 1945, a 44-fold increase.) When mobilization began in 1940, the Army had only 14,000 professional officers. The average age of majorsa middling rank, between captain and lieutenant colonelwas nearly 48; in the National Guard, nearly one-quarter of first lieutenants were over 40 years old, and the senior ranks were dominated by political hacks of certifiable military incompetence. Not a single officer on duty in 1941 had commanded a unit as large as a division in World War I. At the time of Pearl Harbor, in December 1941, only one American division was on a full war footing.

Some American coastal defense guns had not been test fired in 20 years, and the Army lacked enough antiaircraft guns to protect even a single American city. The senior British military officer in Washington told London that American forces are more unready for war than it is possible to imagine. In May 1940, the month that the German Blitzkrieg swept through the Low Countries and overran France, the U.S. Army owned a total of 464 tanks, mostly puny light tanks with the combat power of a coffee can.

There was also a mental unreadiness in many quarters. In 1941, the Armys cavalry chief assured Congress that four well-spaced horsemen could charge half a mile across an open field to destroy an enemy machine-gun nest, without sustaining a scratch. This ignored the evidence of not only World War II, which was already two years underway, but also World War I.