Manchuria even. (Manchuko)

Here are the most significant what ifs of WWII per side. AXIS What if Hitler had not declared war on the US? What if Hitler had not invaded Russia? ALLIES What if France had not been allowed to make peace with Germany, resulting in Vichy France? What if FDR hadn't insisted on unconditional surrender terms for Germany and Japan?

:Hitler ordering his armour to overrun the Dunkirk and Calais beaches allowing BEF and French Forces to escape. This one seems like a biggie. They tried somewhat to take out the BEF but the RAF asserted air superiority. If the Germans diverted more tanks though... If the BEF had been captured, then Overlord would be executed with three US beaches instead of two. Or maybe even more. What about the decision to switch the targets from the airfields to the cities by the Germans in the battle of Britain. Cities can suck in a lot of damage. Rubble is pretty much rubble if you bomb over and over again. So the bombs were pissed away. War would last another year or so without airfields to base 8th AAF. Bombing Germany would take a bit longer...if ever. What if Hitler had pushed for Moscow and not the Caucuses in 1941. Push for Moscow: Conquers Moscow, freezes to death. Overextended, Russians merely cut off the rear and sever supply. Stalin shoots a dozen people who try to rebel. Rest of Army surrounds Moscow, Caucasus forces sweep through East Germany, or try anyhow... What if Japan had attacked Russia and not the US, from Manchuria? Attack Siberia...Trans-Siberian gets cut, long bloody winter war in the steppes. Russia wins, Japan pisses away troops in the cold. IJN hits Vladvostok...but then hitting Siberia makes very little use of the excellent IJN.

What if Patton had been allowed to drive the Russians out of Eastern Europe at the end of World War 2?

1. The BEF did not have air superiority over the Dynamo beaches. 2. With the BEF destroyed then Operation Sealion would be even more likely. 3. Operation Sealion would have been semi on course if the axis had won the battle of Britain, by sticking with attacks on British airfields. This all could have led to the fall of the UK and thus no US involvement in the European theatre? I doubt Operation Torch could be accomplished with out European Base. I don?t think though that Operation Sealion could have worked even with air superiority, compare the German material to the allies in Overlord and they seem very badly prepared. I think the Home Guard would have given a good account of the selves and even a depleted RN would have cuased havoc. If Hitler had captured Moscow he would have captured the rail hub and command and control. it would have radically solved many German supply problems. Would have a real impact physiologically on the Russians and Stalin. On Japan attacking USSR instead of USA. This may well lead to no US involvement but would surely mean the end for Russia. On American Kafir point on Patton drive back the RED army. This seems laughable. Eisenhower only had 80 divisions. They would have bounced of the Russians.

>On American Kafir point on Patton drive back the RED army. This seems laughable. Eisenhower only had 80 divisions. They would have bounced of the Russians< Yeah, and a neat toy used twice in lieu of throwing troops at the Japanese mainland.

In addition to America having the atomic bomb, also remember that the Russians wouldn't be getting the food supplies from the US if we had gone to war with them right after the fall of Berlin.

On the Atom bomb front, good point. i had not considered it. But I am not sure how much fissile material we had to build lots of A-bombs? and in many ways the conventional power of the 8th and RAF was immense already. i dont think UK/US air power could have negated the Red Armies land power though. The historical key though was that we all felt we should be able to get on after the war. And obviously the cost of any conflict would have been devastating. Look at Korea, and this was just fighting satellite forces.

What if - The Japanese had Not attacked Pearl Hrabor in 1941 and has concentrated their forces solely against the British in Singapore, Australia and India? Could the Japanese captured either Australia and/or India? It is very possible that the Japanese could have captured one of theose 2 countries if that had been the focus of their main war effort.

What would have been the reason for attacking Australia or India? The main purpose of the Japanese strategy was to obtain oil from the Dutch East Indies. They wanted a land route on the continent to Japan, to minimize the amount of sea travel. Going after Australia or India would not have furthered any of those goals.