Even if the "good guys" won, it would never work out, would it?

Yeah the whole premise of the book is fucking stupid its just using the nazis as a cut and paste villan

Nazi germanys navy had submarines and thats basically it, them getting any people to the usa is outright silly

IF the nazis had won in europe completey, overrunning russia and briton, they probably would have made a seperate peace with the usa, japan would still have gotten nuked

>them getting any people to the usa is outright silly

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Pastorius#Mission

Dick admits his scenario was stupid and impossible, but he wanted to play with the idea anyway.

We had some guy from Veeky Forums working on a more realistic Man in the High Castle spinoff where the invasion of the United States turns into a disaster on the scale of Operation Barbarossa with German forces becoming over-extended and having Vietnam-on-steroids-tier guerrilla warfare sap them of their combat strength. There's also a sideplot where Anne Frank has adventures with the KKK as they terrorize the German occupation force with lynchings and cross burning.

Because it was impossible to occupy the USA

Even if Nazis and Japs worked together 100%

Not to mention leaving a strip of Neutral territory was retarded

>There's also a sideplot where Anne Frank has adventures with the KKK as they terrorize the German occupation force with lynchings and cross burning.
BASED

Authoritarianism has a long history of collapse, so it'd fail eventually.

*civilizations have a long history of collapse

Oh yeah and I forgot, it's pregnant Anne Frank too (or she becomes pregnant by the son of a Grand Dragon and they shelter her for that reason).

I want to make a what if thread about if the axis won ww2 because I'm honestly ignorant.
>will be called a nazi

I don't want to shit up this board, can anyone please recommend me a easily accessible book, article, ePub, or whatever on this topic? Thanks

The odds against the Axis winning WW2 are so absurdly long that no serious, knowledgeable person even considers it. It's hard to even envision what would constitute a victory for the Axis; they started a series of total wars against opponents with hugely vaster population pools and industrial capacity.

Quite honestly, a Germany and Japan that survive with their governments and pre-war territories intact is already unlikely. Victory even more so.

>Not to mention leaving a strip of Neutral territory was retarded

isnt the neutral territory basically a sort of DMZ/impossible to occupy area?

i thought it was retarded too, but it's a not a altogether bad idea.

the neutral territory includes deserts, low-population towns, and hundreds of miles of flat land. there's kind of no point to occupying an area like that when the cost-to-benefit is extremely low.

>I want to make a what if thread about if the axis won ww2

this is basically it, user.

if the axis won, it isn't happily ever-after.

the man in the high castle sort of explores the in-fighting of the succeeding hitler.

>this bullshit again
You literally cannot invade and/or occupy America
>two fuckhuge oceans as borders
>two fuckhuge land borders
>in relatively good standing with the two neighboring countries
>geography makes it more impossible than fucking Afghanistan to put down an insurgency
Oh yeah, and the entire population has a self-loading rifle or the means of getting one easily. Fifty perfect of all existing firearms are in the United States of America.
>How does it feel knowing that America is the greatest singular state to ever exist in the history of civilization, a nation that essentially plays the game of geopolitics with fucking cheat codes? Never again could there be a country with such a solid population base, a plethora of natural resources, a titan of industry, a cultural juggernaut, a bastion for innovation and science, and the mightiest military force known to man with the ability to project its strength in every corner of the globe. The entire thing also has both oceans to serve as a fucking moat.

>How does it feel?

Thanks guys. Veeky Forums is always great for alt history but I suppose some things are too far fetched. I appreciate the responses

The Abwehr displaying any sort competence is pure fantasy.

This is the most realistic scenario user, I spent a decade as WWII history guy and the debate about victory for Germany became quite boring but to put it simply they stood no chance of ever even being able to knock Britain out of the war (and the only way they could have beaten the USSR was if they did it within a year and focused 100% of their resources; even then the odds are they would end up steamrolled once the rank n file of the Red Army recovered from the purges and gained some experience.) Once the US was involved the odds began approaching zero because the US is like Britain on steroids (a naval power whose homeland is essentially an uninvadeable island.

This scenario envisions Germany forgetting Africa after the Fall of France and rushing the USSR with Italy focusing on keeping the Allies out of the med (allowing for Rommel to be on the eastern front.)

Once Russia bows out (losing it's empire but becoming essentially the modern nation) the US and Britain end up attempting to defeat the German "Fortress Europe."

Good read for history nerds, and was written by a historian I know (a colleague not really a friend) who is probably one of the most knowledgeable in terms of military history regarding WWII I've ever met.

amazon.com/Festung-Europa-Anglo-American-Nazi-War-ebook/dp/B015URFGEC

You are fucking stupid, and

you are a faggot. A military defeat of the the United States would not have resulted in an occupation, either by Germany or Japan, rather, just a capitulation.

How the hell does that work? German ignoring of North Africa leads to an almost certain Italian collapse in Libya by late 1941 at the latest; at which point you have a very credible threat to Sicily and Italy proper. Historically, that caused the German allocations to the south to spike dramatically.

And I've seen no real evidence to indicate that Rommel being assigned to the Eastern Front would make a noticeable difference. Quite honestly, while he's a good tactician, he's not THAT amazing. He never really did anything innovative, just applied already standard German doctrines well.

It works because Italy was a drag on the German war machine and by not sending troops down there they can focus all of their men (and Rommel was a great general, but your feelings aside he was the *only* good general in Nazi Germany so him being on the EF is better than him not being there.)

Italy isn't going to take Libya for long, the Brits are all around them. They need to give up that goal and settle for a balkan empire.

>It works because Italy was a drag on the German war machine
[citation needed]

>and by not sending troops down there they can focus all of their men
Please make the case that the entire 3 divisions they sent down there in 1941 are significant. Especially since to prop up Italy proper they would historically send 26 divisions, and more to shore up places like occupied Yugoslavia and Greece

>but your feelings aside he was the *only* good general in Nazi Germany so him being on the EF is better than him not being there
This is bait, right? Rommel wasn't even the best German general in the MTO, Kesselring blew him out of the water. You have guys like Manstein and Rundstedt and Model and Von Balck. Hell, even Bock had a better performance record than Rommel.

>Italy isn't going to take Libya for long, the Brits are all around them
Missing the point. With the British overrunning Libya, you now have a clear and present threat to Sicily and southern Italy. Italy will need German support to not have a governmental collapse a la what happened in 1943 (except now it will probably happen earlier). That in turn will wind up costing you more men than the DAK did, because North Africa is a shit desert and it's impossible to supply the same numbers of troops that can function in Italy.

What would Veeky Forums suggest as an alternative history book about axis winning if man in the high castle is shit?

nice false flag

>axis
>winning
Already failed the shit-test.

>citation needed
okay so you are retarded, got it.

>that the entire 3 divisions they sent down there in 1941 are significant.

Italy was a constant drag, not only in just Africa but Germany even had to redirect operations to help them take Greece. And yes when fighting an enemy like the USSR *every* panzer division counts.

>This is bait, right? Rommel wasn't even the best German general in the MTO

Rommel was opposed to the war from the start and knew all he could do was slow down defeat in Africa. He didn't want too nor did he get the chance to show his skill at it's height.

>. With the British overrunning Libya, you now have a clear and present threat to Sicily and southern Italy

You're missing the point that if Italy would have focused on Greater Italy and maybe keeping Libya (instead of attempting to conquer their way past Ethiopia) perhaps they could have kept air and naval control of the med thus rendering Britains African campaign moot.

The absolute best case scenario based on the knowledge we have is Germany just stopping at Czechoslovakia and transitioning to an economy that wasn't entirely dependent on military build up, albeit with a huge part of its budget being dedicated to a military ala the second Reich. Without a general European war, Japan gets even more boring, since they don't have an opportunity to snap up colonies without getting gangbanged by every white man in the world. At most they may fund nationalist movements in the south Pacific

Italy and Spain would be the most interesting in terms of what would be different. Franco may have tried to be more openly Falangist if he wasn't worried about getting dragged into the war, and Mussolini with more autonomy would be interesting

The scenario where "the good guys" win is the timeline where Hitler gets BTFO by German high command before he even gets to power/before 1936

>okay so you are retarded, got it.
No, prove your shit. Italy fielded over 2 million men, produced about 15,000 airplanes, and kept the med closed to British shipping through it as long as they were in the war. How is this a "net negative"?

>And yes when fighting an enemy like the USSR *every* panzer division counts.
Forces in the USSR were limited by local supply constraints, not manpower counts. At the same time they have 3 divisions in North Africa, they have 8 in Norway. Are you seriously going to claim that the occupation of Norway cost them their chance in the Eastern Front?

>Rommel was opposed to the war from the start and knew all he could do was slow down defeat in Africa.
Wrong. Rommel deliberately ignored his orders to attempt to slow down defeat in Africa because he was an idiotic glory hound.

dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a348413.pdf

>It should have been clear to Rommel that his instructions required him to tailor a campaign that would maintain a viable Axis presence in Tripoltania. The forces provided to him by Hitler were equipped to conduct an active defense around Sirte. Rommel, for his part, did not share the limited intentions of his superiors.

1/2

>You're missing the point that if Italy would have focused on Greater Italy and maybe keeping Libya (instead of attempting to conquer their way past Ethiopia
This doesn't even make sense. Italy was losing Libya when Rommel was sent over in early 1941. They were doing everything they could just to hold onto Tripoli, and on their own, that would just be a matter of time. You don't get an axis offensive posture there again until Rommel created one.

>Perhaps they could have kept air and naval control of the med thus rendering Britains African campaign moot
1) Assets used in the Western Desert campaign were not naval and were not naval air. The war over the waters of the Med would continue more or less in the same way regardless.

2) THE BRITISH SUPPLIED THEIR FORCES THROUGH SUEZ YOU FUCKTARD. No amount of Italian success over the waters would matter, because they were not afforded an opportunity to interdict British supplies, unlike the reverse.

Seriously, how the hell have you been "Spending a decade as a WW2 history guy" and not know even the most basic facts about this campaign? Did you cover your ears and shout LA LA LA whenever anyone tried to bring up facts?

Your "plan" is actually counterproductive for its intended aims. If Germany does not prop up Italy in North Africa by 1941, then the Italians lose Libya. If the Italians lose Libya, the British start probing at attacks on Sicily and Italy. Histoirclaly, landing of Allied troops in those areas meant hte collapse of Mussolini's government, which means either

A) You now fight in Italy instead of North Africa, and you will need more troops than you do in the desert
B) You give the Allies a free shot to the Alps and fucking up Germany proper.

Both of these are disastrous. You simply cannot afford to ignore North Africa, and attempting to do so will spell doom for your "Concentrate on Russia" strategy.

>eight spies
>hundreds of thousands of soldiers and their equipment

Oh yes, they two are totally comparable.

>premise of the book is fucking stupid
I think alternate history requires one to somewhat suspend their disbelief user

The world of the book is different than what happened IRL tho. In the book the USA has a shit army and was never prepared to take part in the war, because of this there was no embargo to Japan, no Pearl Harbor, and basically the Germans and Japanese could to everything they wanted in Europe and Asia.

USA only attacks after the Nazis control all of continental Europe, just to help the UK. Their D - Day version was in 1946 or 1948, I don't remember well, and this caused the Germans and Japanese to declare war to the USA. The Slavs were basically exterminated then and the USA had to fight both Empires alone.

The book is different than the tv series, tho. In the tv series the Nazis and Japs basically divided the world between themselves, while in the book all of Latin America and the Caribbean, plus Canada, are still independent and basically the peons of both world powers during their Cold War.

Then again, the USA of the book is basically a joke when the events of WWII started to unfold. Shitty army, basically a never ending depression, shitty leadership, and so on.

so in the show there's a flashback to a nuke, did Germany actually beat a standing army or did America just surrender after a few A bombs?

In the first episode there are references to Germans storming the beaches in Virgina

Basically this is what happened, which made the USA a massive shithole unable to wage war against anybody

>Giuseppe Zangara, the Italian anarchist who killed some USA politicians IRL back in the 30's, killed Roosevelt (who has also present during the attack IRL)
>according to the book, because of Roosevelt never becoming president and issuing the new deal, the USA was never able to escape the depression and social disintegration
>way more racial tension and conflicts, not only between Blacks and Whites but between different groups ethnic groups
>widespread poverty and corruption in the government and military
>everything in Europe and Asia happens as it did IRL, but without any involvement of the USA
>the USA is no military threat, there is no help in for of resources to the USSR, France or the UK, no embargo or sanctions to the Axis, etc
>in 1946 the Nazis have control all over Europe and already took control by force of Italy, Spain and other fascists governments, only the UK is free
>this of course meant a stronger and more stable Nazi reich and Nazi military, they are basically destroying and killing everybody to the East (Stalin dies in 1948 or so)
>in 1946 there is a somehow "stable" USA, the UK convinces them to help them fight the Nazis
>the D - Day comes, it fails, Japan and the Nazis declare war on the USA
>Pacific and Atlantic theatres of war, it is just a matter of time for the USA to get fucked
>the Nazis nuke DC, literally cutting the head of the government and the military, this when both Japan and the Nazis can invade the continent
>basically different branches of the military and the government fight the invaders, but they are not only outnumbered but are uncoordinated
>not only is the USA military a joke but now they have no way of even establishing a defence of the country, they depend on guerrilla war tactics
>after a while and with the help of many desperate collaborators, the Nazis and Japs get hold of the territory
>the end

Also, in the book, they are only occupying the West and East of the continent, there is some kind of USA government in the "neutral zone", which is not as chaotic as its presented in the tv series. This government is basically a puppet of the Nazis, tho.

...

thanks for the summary

for everyone arguing Muh America too strong to be taken over, it makes sense if the country never came out of the Great Depression, after 20 years of shitty living wouldn't you rather have an empire come in and turn things around rather than die keeping them out

Not really; even in the throes of the Great Depression, America still averaged an economy greater than Germany, the UK, and France combined. And most of that was insufficient demand. The second they start majorly arming for a weak D-Day in 1946 in the timeline, the worst of it should go away.

Also, the notion of quick and easy victory against the Soviets, or that they could invade a Britain come 1946, are also extremely farfetched.