Change One Thing About World War II

By Alan Dale Daniel

Change One Thing About WWII looks at various decisive decisions during the WWII, then works through what might happen if a different decision was made.  The book also looks at the results of battles in new ways.  What if, Hitler had not invaded Russia, or the Allies lost on D-Day or China dropped o

• Language: English
• Publisher: Book Vine Press
• Release date: Feb 5, 2021
• ISBN: 9781953699855

Alan Dale Daniel

Alan Dale Daniel was born in Bakersfield, California in 1947. His dad worked in the oilfields while mom kept the household. His brother Charlie was several years older than him. They lived in the tiny area of Greenfield before moving to the city of Bakersfield in the early 1960s. Alan graduated from South High School, in Bakersfield, CA in 1966. His dad died that same year as Alan went off to college. Alan graduated from Bakersfield Jr. College in 1968 with an AA degree. He then went on to his four year degree in History. Alan received his BA in History from San Fernando Valley State Collage, now Cal State Northridge in 1970. He volunteered for the US Marine Corps as a helicopter pilot from 1970 - 1975. He earned his MBA from Pepperdine University while serving with the Marines. After his separation from the Marines Alan attended Pepperdine University School of Law and received his Juris Doctorate in 1978, the same year he passed the California Bar. He worked for the Kern County District Attorney's office and then the City of Bakersfield City Attorney's Office where he reached the position of Assistant City Attorney. Alan retired from the law in 2004 and is now living in the small town of Dayton, Nevada with his energetic wife Lori. Alan published the Super Summary of World History, Revised in 2010; Tracking Ancient Legends in 2013, and Drawings of Hollywood 1920 - 1939 in 2019.

Book preview

Copyright © 2021 by Alan Dale Daniel BA, MBA, JD.

ISBN 978-1-953699-84-8 (softcover)

ISBN 978-1-953699-85-5 (ebook)

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system without express written permission from the author, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other non-commercial uses permitted by copyright law.

Printed in the United States of America.

Book Vine Press

2516 Highland Dr.

Palatine, IL 60067

Other Books by Alan Daniel:

The Super Summary of World History REVISED (2010)

Revised and republished by Book Vine Press as The Super Summary of Western History

Tracking Ancient Legends (2013)

Drawings of Hollywood 1920 – 1939 (2019)

Republished 2020 by Book Vine Press

The Super Summary of Western History (2020)

Dedicated to Lori K. Daniel, my wife,

for all your years of support

– Love & Thank You!

Contents

WORLD WAR TWO BASICS AND AFTERMATH

THE USSR MAKES PEACE WITH HITLER IN 1942

THE INTELLIGENCE WAR IS WON BY THE AXIS

THE USA DOES NOT EMBARGO JAPAN

HITLER ALLOWS HIS GENERALS TO RUN THE WAR

HITLER DECIDES AGAINST INVADING THE USSR

YAMAMOTO ATTACKS SOUTH RATHER THAN MIDWAY

THE US CARRIERS ARE SUNK AT PEARL HARBOR

THE ATOMIC BOMB CANNOT BE CREATED

STALIN PREPARES FOR BARBAROSSA

CHAMBERLAIN FAILS AT MUNICH

ALLIES DRIVEN OFF OMAHA BEACH

FAILURE AT NORMANDY

CHINA QUITS

SEEING WORLD WAR II IN CONTEXT

INTRODUCTION

Another book on World War Two. So, what’s different? If the reader desires to learn the basics of WW-II, please read: Max Hastings, Inferno, The World at War, 1939 – 1945; Griess, Thomas, The Second World War vol. 1: Europe and the Mediterranean, and vol 2. Asia and the Pacific, The West Point Military History Series; and, The Super Summary of Western History, or The Super Summary of World History both by me. If the reader has a fair understanding of the facts and events of WW-II, and desires a deeper analysis of the conflict, this is your book. In this book we will attempt an analysis of various aspects of the war by changing one event and then trying to predict how this one event might change the war and the world after the war. Obviously, there are a lot of factors that might twist history one way or another, so we will stick with larger events and attempt to use logic to see what that change could bring about. All this is total speculation; however, it will require the reader to test their knowledge of WW-II in new ways. Disagreeing, or agreeing, with the analysis, and being able to say why, will increase your depth of understanding.

How to choose which one thing to change is a challenge. If, for example, Charles Limburg is not the first man to fly solo across the Atlantic Ocean his life would change rather dramatically; however, that does not mean the world itself or history would change in any significant fashion. Many were attempting to do the same thing, and someone else would have made the flight. In another example, what if we changed who won the election for US President in 1928 and Herbert Hoover loses to his Democrat opponent Alfred E. Smith. The 1929 stock market crash and economic downturn then impacts the democrats negatively, and Franklin Roosevelt might fail to attain the office of president in the following presidential election of 1932. That changes a lot. Policies adopted by the US government can change world events and millions of lives.

And that is the key to choosing the events. Which event impacts history and human lives in the greatest way? The type of impact is also important. At an individual level getting a new phone is good, assuming it works better, but that does not compare to being drafted and sent off to a war. They are both events in a person’s life, but one far outweighs the other. It is the same in history.

In World War II, key events turned battles, but not all battles are equal. The Second Battle of El Alamein from 23 October 1942 to 4 November 1942 is offered up as one of the pivotal battles of WW-II. But, was it? The German failure at the First battle of El Alamein to take Ruweisat Ridge cost the Germans Egypt and the Suez. Most general histories covering the war in North Africa omit this first battle. However, it was probably the most important action at El Alamein. After the victory at Tobruk, the Afrika Korps chased the British to El Alamein where they had stopped to dig in. Rommel decided he could not pause and allow the British to reinforce the small bridge of land between the coast and the impassable Qattara Depression, so he attacked at once; however, being low on fuel and not realizing the British had his battle plan through Ultra intercepts, his troops failed to take the critical Ruweisat Ridge. The rebuff at the First Battle of El Alamein ended the best chance for the German’s to win in North Africa.

Now Montgomery and the British could build up a massive force to smash the Afrika Korps. And they did. The breaking of the German codes allowed the British General Montgomery to know the German defense plan, the composition of the defending forces, and time his assault for the best advantage. Those same broken codes allowed the British to sink fifty percent of Rommel’s critical supplies as they crossed the Mediterranean, leaving the Germans starved of fuel and equipment at the decisive moment. In addition, American equipment was arriving in quantity giving the British more and better equipment, more fuel, more aircraft, and a lot of other war making tools. The increasing capability of the Royal Air Force might have been the most important equipment difference in the contest. Rommel’s extended supply lines opened his logistic support to significant degradation by the RAF, lowering the Afrika Korps’ combat power. So, the German loss at El Alamein was due to what? The arguments are endless, but changing one thing about the battle, the codes for example, could easily affect the outcome.

The critical consideration is, how important was the battle itself? Certainly, the twelve day action all but destroyed Rommel’s army and led to a demoralizing retreat all the way to Tunisia, but the German High Command did not seem to think this was such a big deal. The losses were not significant in real terms and the area being lost to Allied control had nothing the Nazis cared about. Hitler only reacted later when the entire enterprise was collapsing in Tunisia. In addition, American landings in North Africa on November 8, 1942 trapped the Germans in a vice that was going to close unless the Nazi’s made a major commitment of material and men. Note, that if the English waited for the American landings Rommel would have to retreat toward Tunisia without a battle, but his excellent combat units would have remained intact. The Americans and English landed at Morocco on November 8, 1942, only 4 days after Montgomery’s battle ended on November 4. So, why attack at all? Why lose all those men cracking through a well-prepared defense?

Figure 1 MAP:

El Alamein-Axis in Black, Allies in Grey

The reason for the attack was Churchill. His political career was in danger. Winston Churchill needed a British victory to continue holding the office of Prime Minister. General Montgomery built up a terrific force which outnumbered the Germans in every category of military arms by more than three to one giving Montgomery the assurance of victory. Rommel had left Africa for medical attention, leaving General Stumme in charge, when the assault began – which the British knew because of Ultra intercepts. There was no doubt the British would prevail, although the fight was much tougher than predicted and was stalling out when Montgomery changed the battle plan to redirect the attack north after expending huge numbers of men and equipment in the Southern sector. It was one of the best moves of his career and probably saved the British from another defeat, because the hugely outnumbered Axis forces were holding on and administering a blistering series of setbacks to the British advance. Montgomery’s change of plans secured the victory, even if it was at a high cost. It was all done to give Churchill a major victory and prevent his naysayers ousting him from office. As we can see, wars are a political undertaking in nearly every way.

While El Alamein was being fought between a handful of divisions, hundreds of divisions were clashing on the Russian Front killing more men in a day than were lost at El Alamein over twelve days. At the Second Battle of El Alamein the British fielded 150,000 men after an extended build-up. Hitler invaded the USSR with 3.5 million men. Battles were taking place on the Eastern Front that dwarfed the North African campaign, so why was El Alamein more important than much larger battles being fought in Russia on an almost daily basis? It is the impact of the battles that count. Many Soviet offensives were stopped by the soldiers of the Reich, but they did not change the situation on the Eastern Front. That is why Stalingrad is important. The total destruction of the German Sixth Army did change everything. Because of the balance of forces in the USSR, Germany could not afford a tremendous unforced error like Stalingrad. But battles can have more than material impacts.

The importance of the battle of El Alamein was, it kept Winston Churchill in office. The real impact was far away from the battlefields of El Alamein or the factories of the warring parties. Another loss in North African would have added to a series of British disasters stretching from Norway (Chamberlin was PM, but Churchill ran the Admiralty), to Dunkirk, Singapore (fell in Feb 1942), Greece, Tunisia, Tobruk, and many others, under Churchill’s government. This signal victory, for which church bells rang all over England, allowed Churchill to avoid ouster.

If Montgomery loses at El Alamein and Churchill is driven from office, what changes? Quite a lot. The Allied Italian campaign is probably not undertaken and D-Day, because of American pressure, might take place in the summer of 1943. It was Churchill, almost by himself, that pushed the Mediterranean strategy which called for the invasion of Italy and the delay of D-Day. If he departs, that surely changes British strategy, since the US and some central British generals opposed invading Italy. If a 1943 D-Day invasion works, the English and Americans enter Berlin first, and most of Eastern Europe is free from Soviet control. If a 1943 D-Day fails, the Nazi’s might survive the war. El Alamein kept Churchill as the British Prime Minister and so allowed his ideas and policies to drive the British war effort. The entire post war world could change if the British lost and Churchill was kicked out.

In this book we will give the reader a lot to think about and discuss. It should help with understanding history because it will cause cathartic thinking by placing the analysis outside normal channels and forcing the consideration of possible new future events. It should help the reader appreciate the import of current events. History is playing out before us right this moment. The events of today will have important future impacts. By knowing that outcomes matter we can better study history and see its importance in our present world.

Here is a current Change One Thing scenario that will start you thinking, imagine the headline:

HILLARY CLINTON ELECTED PRESIDENT IN LANDSIDE VICTORY

TRUMP BOWS OUT GRACEFULLY

REPUBLICANS LOSE HOUSE AND SENATE

The New York Times—Democrats celebrate a historic victory as Hillary Clinton was elected as the first woman President of the United States on November 8, 2016. The result was widely expected as the Republican establishment abandoned Donald Trump and contributed significantly to the Democrat victory. The loss of the both the House of Representatives and the Senate means the Democrats can enact long awaited legislation for one payer Medicare, citizenship and medical care for aliens, open border legislation once stalled in the Senate will now pass with relative ease, a series of gun control measures are certain to pass, and a proposed change to the Second Amendment is already part of the House schedule. Additional protections for women, blacks, and other minorities in the job market are expected to be submitted by the Democrat leadership in the first year.

Supporters of Donald Trump fear the future as never before. Our culture of hard work and reasonable regulations will be swept away and replaced by a European welfare state where opportunity will depend on who you know in the government. The Hillary gang will bankrupt us in two years. Other Republicans expressed hope that Hillary will respect the Constitution and run an orderly fiscally responsible administration as her husband Bill Clinton did in the 1990s…

See? Change one thing and BAM! A new world.

CHAPTER 1

WORLD WAR TWO BASICS AND AFTERMATH

World War Two was the most terrible conflict in history. The most important features of World War Two must be now be considered. We can’t choose what events to change without some idea about the most important outcomes of the conflict.

The Most Important Effects Of World War Two

(not in order):

SIXTY MILLION DEAD

The death toll is probably much higher because the 60 million number does not consider how many people died after the war from injuries suffered during the war. Wounds, radiation, continued starvation after the fighting ended, and much more, would all significantly increase the number of dead. In addition, the USSR understated it losses by fifty percent or more, and the number of dead in China were never properly tabulated. We should remember the war did not start in 1939 in Europe. Japan’s expansion and wars of Empire started years earlier in 1931 when Japan invaded Korea and Manchuria, then continued into China. By August of 1934 an all-out war raged between China and Japan. The Slaughter (Rape) of Nanking¹ took place in 1934, well before Pearl Harbor (1941), and the people killed in Asia before 1939 should be considered in the WW-II death tally, but most counts omit them and start the statistical count in 1939 when Hitler invaded Poland, and stop when the Japanese surrendered in 1945.

USA DEVELOPED THE ATOMIC BOMB

Nuclear obliteration hangs over the entire planet to this day because the atomic bomb was developed in World War II. The Germans started development on the atomic bomb prior to the entry of the US into WW-II, but Einstein, a famous German physicist who immigrated to the US, was warned of this by a friend in Europe who wrote him a letter saying the Germans were making heavy water. The scientist knew that meant the Nazis were working on the A-bomb. Einstein then told US President Franklin Roosevelt who decided the US must beat the Germans to such a weapon.

That one letter and Roosevelt’s individual decision to create the A-bomb changed the world. (Congress did not vote to build the Atomic bomb.)

If Hitler’s scientists had managed to build an atomic bomb before the Allies landed in Europe, he wins the war. He would have the bomb and the V-2 rocket as a delivery system, and London would have disappeared in a mushroom cloud – along with a lot of Soviet armies. But the Nazis were defeated years before Hitler’s goal was reached by German scientists.

TECHNOLOGICAL LEAPS FORWARD

The foundations for modern day computers, phones, aircraft, missiles, television, and many other marvels were laid during the WW-II era. Without the war pushing such development the discoveries would have come years later.

THE AXIS SURRENDERED UNCONDITIONALLY

If the Axis had survived the war the world would be much different. The Axis did not have to overrun England, the USSR, or the USA to win. All they had to do was prevent the Allies from conquering them, most likely by imposing unacceptable human losses. But the Allies did not stop the war despite the carnage. If the Allies ask for peace, the world changes radically.

THE USSR WON VAST TRACTS OF LAND IN EASTERN EUROPE

The area occupied by the Soviets was stripped of its industry and the people oppressed horribly by the USSR until the end of the Cold War in 1989. These areas added considerably to Soviet power in the post war era.

GERMANY, JAPAN, AND ITALY SURVIVED AS NATIONS

The Allies could have broken the losing nations up into small areas, then transported their populations to faraway places (like Rome, Babylon, Assyria, and other ancient Empires did to recalcitrant populations), and taken other steps to destroy them as a unified people, thus eliminating any future threat. The Western Allies did not do this, and America helped to rebuild these former enemy nations, something completely new in international relations. This was the opposite of what happened after WW-I, and the results were much better for the world.

Figure 2

Post-WW-II Split Between USSR and the West

END OF THE COLONIAL ERA

Since 1600 the world was ruled by European nations extending their power over the rest of the globe. After 1945 this global rule by Europe, and by extension the imposition of European values, ended.

The worldwide dominance of England and France, which had been in effect since before 1700, crumbled. The colonial Empires ruling from Europe included Britain, France, Belgium, Holland, and others. This loss hurt Europe, diminished its influence, and freed millions of people worldwide. Many of those freed from colonial control after World War II still hate their former imperialist governors and still blame them for all their national ills.

Since WW-II the world has changed massively; however, there are a few foundational facts we need to keep in mind as we assemble the puzzle of history. What are the most important events after 1945?

Figure 3

The British Empire & Commonwealth - 1939

THE MOST IMPORTANT EVENTS SINCE 1945 (not in order):

NO NUCLEAR WAR

The most important event of all is a non-event, no WW-III, meaning, no nuclear war. What does not happen can be just as important as what does happen. Another example, no worldwide plagues after WW-II, like the Spanish Flu after WW-I in 1918-1919, which killed 100 million worldwide and 675,000 in the USA. No pandemic is an important non-event. More people died of the Spanish Flu than both world wars combined (Officials figures put WW-II deaths at about 65 – 68 million and WW-I at 10 – 11 million for a total of 75 – 79 million). What does not happen can be super important.

Why is this the most important? Because a nuclear war was more likely than not. It is a near miracle that the USSR and USA avoided a nuclear exchange during the Cold War (1945 –1989). Some historians name our current era The Great Nuclear Peace. It might rather be named The still happening Great Nuclear Miracle.

THE COLONIES OF EUROPE GAIN FREEDOM and CHAOS

The ending of the European colonial period triggered extremely violent and bloody events as the former colonials fought each other for land and influence. Formerly British India was split into two new nations, one Hindu (India) and one Muslim (Pakistan). Both groups clashed over religion as the United Kingdom pulled out and thousands upon thousands were killed in religious clashes within the former colony. In the former Belgium Congo tribes once controlled by outside masters used their new freedom to attack one another with brutal consequences. Throughout the world fighting is still going on for control of areas once ruled by the colonial powers. The hatred engendered by these post-colonial wars is long lasting.

ENGLAND AND FRANCE NO LONGER WORLD SUPERPOWERS

England and France had ruled the world since before 1700. World Wars I and II destroyed their economic underpinnings and they fell apart. Seldom has the world experienced such a gigantic turnover in the world order in such a short period of time (1939 to 1950 approximately).

After the imperialist were thrown out, their cultural impact on the former colonies was also undone. The Western ideas of colonial inferiority and need for governance from a more enlightened people, products of the Victorian Age, were considered insulting, so these ideas were abandoned. Unfortunately, good ideas like free speech, universal voting, due process, trial by jury, and many others were tossed away with the bad ideas. The turmoil of this worldwide breakdown of order in the old colonies still affects us today.

After WW-II both England and France were still considered part of the major powers group and were included in the United Nations Security Council and otherwise treated as if they were still running things as before. This resulted in the exclusion of Red China from the Security Council. R ed China was a great power and eventually joined the Security Council as a permanent member. Nonetheless, the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council as of 2020 are Red China, United Kingdom, France, Russia, and the United States. The total membership of the United Nations Security Council is fifteen. The ten non-permanent members rotate.2

The United Nations Security Council shows us how history dies hard. France, after World War II, was not a major world power and should never have been given a seat on the UN Security Council. The United Kingdom was still a major world power in 1945, when the United Nations was formed, but within ten years she was falling into near bankruptcy and could not keep up with the new super powers like the USA and USSR. With her Colonial Empire dissipated and economy in tatters, the United Kingdom had fallen from the ranks of the nations that could impact world affairs in a significant way. And, even though the UK developed the atomic bomb and had first rate weapons, its sea power and economic power diminished to such an extent that for several years it barely maintained major power status.

What the United Nations did not foresee in 1945 was the rise of the Superpowers. The United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) were the only two superpowers after the Second World War, but from ground level it did not necessarily look that way. In 1945 England still held onto its colonial Empire and British forces were standing guard throughout the world. France also retained its Empire in 1945, thanks to the USA. Charles de Gaulle, leader of France’s Fifth Republic, demanded equal power status with Britain and the USA. Allowing France to maintain the look of a great power was idiotic. WW-II had destroyed what was left of French power after the horrors of WW-I. Compared to the USA and USSR, France was a minor