What do you think?
Rate this book
Hitler, The Victory That Nearly Was
DUST JACKET HAS SOME SCUFFING, DINGS AND EDGE WEAR. BOOK COVERS AND PAGES CLEAN AND WITHOUT MARKING OR WRITING NOTED.
- GenresAlternate History
179 pages, Hardcover
First published April 1, 1989
2 people are currently reading
10 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
June 14, 2012
This review contains spoilers.
Bruce Quarrie states, quite reasonably, in his introduction, that relatively small decisions can have major effects in large conflicts. And his book starts reasonably enough - Italian misadventure in the Mediterranean required German assistance, and this delayed the start of Operation Barbarossa by a month or so. The author wonders what might have happened if, instead of delaying by a month, the German invasion of Russia had been delayed by a year. This is quite a reasonable premise.
In the intervening year, the Germans capture Malta (which they had plans for, but they were never carried out). Without a commitment in Russia, the Germans would have had the troops to succeed. He then postulates that control of Malta would have given them control of the eastern Mediterranean, and this would have allowed Rommel to be much better supplied in North Africa. Well, maybe. The Royal Navy was still the dominant naval force in the Mediterranean, and while control of Malta would have given the Luftwaffe a base to provide support for convoys, the Luftwaffe took a mauling in the Battle of Britain, and the RAF desert forces were superior to the Luftwaffe and the Italian forces. But, let's go with it, and allow that this causes the British to be defeated and lose control of the Suez Canal, and South Africa pulls out of the Commonwealth and the war.
The next major change is that the Germans convince the Japanese not to attack Pearl Harbor, and the Pacific War doesn't start. I'm not convinced the Germans had this kind of clout - the whole purpose of the Japanese attack was to deliver such a blow to the Americans that they would never start a war, and would resume trade with the Japanese, because the Japanese were really suffering from lack of the minerals they had been getting from the US. The effect this has is that the Pacific basically goes into stasis.
From this point, the suppositions start to get much less likely. Operation Barbarossa starts in May 1942, and the extra month, and the extra troops that were deployed in Africa, allow the Germans to get closer to their objectives than they did. Possible - in reality, there is no indication that the Soviets would have been a lot more prepared 12 months later, and Quarrie doesn't have the Germans winning in one summer. However, he does have the Duke of Windsor (the abdicated King Edward VIII, who was a Hitler sympathizer) call upon the English to surrender, as they are starving. I find this difficult to accept. There are no food convoys coming from South Africa, but they are still coming from Australia and America. April 1942 was the apex of the U-boats war against the convoys, from there it started to taper off. Nothing that has been postulated so far is likely to change this. The Royal Navy still dominates the Atlantic from both England and Gibraltar, the Germans still don't know that their Enigma code has been broken, allowing the Allies much better chances of intercepting the Wolf Packs, and success in North Africa doesn't give Germany the increased industrial muscle to replace their U-boats losses, whereas the Americans certainly (as they did in reality) had the ability to replace the merchant navy losses.
The surrender of England gives the Germans access to a real heavy bomber (the Lancaster), and this allows winter bombing raids on Moscow and the Russian industrial base, located well to the east of Moscow. If we accept the surrender of England, this is possible. The surrender of England also triggers the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, starting the Pacific War.
Winter passes, America moves onto a full war footing, and in 1943, Beria stages coup, kills Stalin, and sues for peace with Germany. Ok, possible. Hitler then allows Russia to remain a self-governing semi-autonomous state. No way! Hitler consider the Slavic people untermensch, barely a step above the Jews in his reckoning.
But the other events of 1943 make this book pure fantasy, rather than a researched alternate history. In April 1943 the Germans have developed a two-stage rocket capable of achieving sub-orbital levels - in other words, an ICBM. Given that the V-2, with a range of 150 miles, didn't go into service until 1944, this is beyond the bounds of belief. Then, stretching reality even further, the Germans (using British nuclear physicists) are able to develop the atomic bomb before the Americans, and use their ICBM to nuke New York, forcing the Americans to accept peace under threat of a city being nuked every week. This has so many things wrong with it, that it's just laughable. Had England surrendered, all their research would have been destroyed before the Germans could get it, and the OSS (the forerunner to the CIA), if not the British secret service, would have ensured that their nuclear physicists would have disappeared, either out of the country or more permanently. And the Americans had exactly two atomic bombs, both of which they used. There is no way the Germans would have had the capability to be producing one a week, as well as enough ICBMs to deliver them.
So, ultimately, Bruce Quarrie has started with a reasonable premise, but in order to get to the result he wants (Germany winning World War Two), he has to suppose an increasingly unlikely series of events, not least of which is Hitler listening to his generals and always making sound military decisions. From a book that purports to presents a serious look at some of the alternate decisions that could have been made, it ended up as a near fantasy novel.
Bruce Quarrie states, quite reasonably, in his introduction, that relatively small decisions can have major effects in large conflicts. And his book starts reasonably enough - Italian misadventure in the Mediterranean required German assistance, and this delayed the start of Operation Barbarossa by a month or so. The author wonders what might have happened if, instead of delaying by a month, the German invasion of Russia had been delayed by a year. This is quite a reasonable premise.
In the intervening year, the Germans capture Malta (which they had plans for, but they were never carried out). Without a commitment in Russia, the Germans would have had the troops to succeed. He then postulates that control of Malta would have given them control of the eastern Mediterranean, and this would have allowed Rommel to be much better supplied in North Africa. Well, maybe. The Royal Navy was still the dominant naval force in the Mediterranean, and while control of Malta would have given the Luftwaffe a base to provide support for convoys, the Luftwaffe took a mauling in the Battle of Britain, and the RAF desert forces were superior to the Luftwaffe and the Italian forces. But, let's go with it, and allow that this causes the British to be defeated and lose control of the Suez Canal, and South Africa pulls out of the Commonwealth and the war.
The next major change is that the Germans convince the Japanese not to attack Pearl Harbor, and the Pacific War doesn't start. I'm not convinced the Germans had this kind of clout - the whole purpose of the Japanese attack was to deliver such a blow to the Americans that they would never start a war, and would resume trade with the Japanese, because the Japanese were really suffering from lack of the minerals they had been getting from the US. The effect this has is that the Pacific basically goes into stasis.
From this point, the suppositions start to get much less likely. Operation Barbarossa starts in May 1942, and the extra month, and the extra troops that were deployed in Africa, allow the Germans to get closer to their objectives than they did. Possible - in reality, there is no indication that the Soviets would have been a lot more prepared 12 months later, and Quarrie doesn't have the Germans winning in one summer. However, he does have the Duke of Windsor (the abdicated King Edward VIII, who was a Hitler sympathizer) call upon the English to surrender, as they are starving. I find this difficult to accept. There are no food convoys coming from South Africa, but they are still coming from Australia and America. April 1942 was the apex of the U-boats war against the convoys, from there it started to taper off. Nothing that has been postulated so far is likely to change this. The Royal Navy still dominates the Atlantic from both England and Gibraltar, the Germans still don't know that their Enigma code has been broken, allowing the Allies much better chances of intercepting the Wolf Packs, and success in North Africa doesn't give Germany the increased industrial muscle to replace their U-boats losses, whereas the Americans certainly (as they did in reality) had the ability to replace the merchant navy losses.
The surrender of England gives the Germans access to a real heavy bomber (the Lancaster), and this allows winter bombing raids on Moscow and the Russian industrial base, located well to the east of Moscow. If we accept the surrender of England, this is possible. The surrender of England also triggers the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, starting the Pacific War.
Winter passes, America moves onto a full war footing, and in 1943, Beria stages coup, kills Stalin, and sues for peace with Germany. Ok, possible. Hitler then allows Russia to remain a self-governing semi-autonomous state. No way! Hitler consider the Slavic people untermensch, barely a step above the Jews in his reckoning.
But the other events of 1943 make this book pure fantasy, rather than a researched alternate history. In April 1943 the Germans have developed a two-stage rocket capable of achieving sub-orbital levels - in other words, an ICBM. Given that the V-2, with a range of 150 miles, didn't go into service until 1944, this is beyond the bounds of belief. Then, stretching reality even further, the Germans (using British nuclear physicists) are able to develop the atomic bomb before the Americans, and use their ICBM to nuke New York, forcing the Americans to accept peace under threat of a city being nuked every week. This has so many things wrong with it, that it's just laughable. Had England surrendered, all their research would have been destroyed before the Germans could get it, and the OSS (the forerunner to the CIA), if not the British secret service, would have ensured that their nuclear physicists would have disappeared, either out of the country or more permanently. And the Americans had exactly two atomic bombs, both of which they used. There is no way the Germans would have had the capability to be producing one a week, as well as enough ICBMs to deliver them.
So, ultimately, Bruce Quarrie has started with a reasonable premise, but in order to get to the result he wants (Germany winning World War Two), he has to suppose an increasingly unlikely series of events, not least of which is Hitler listening to his generals and always making sound military decisions. From a book that purports to presents a serious look at some of the alternate decisions that could have been made, it ended up as a near fantasy novel.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 10, 2012
"Hitler - The Victory That Nearly Was" is a relatively short but entertaining book on alternate history. The author, Brice Quarrie, uses his war gaming skills to flesh out a likely scenario if Hitler had made just one or two decisions differently early in the war.
Instead of invading Russia in the late spring of 1941, Hitler decides to postpone that invasion for a year. In its place he orders his forces to capture the Suez Canal cutting Great Britain off from the short route to its colonies. In order to insure the success of Rommel in North Africa, he must also seize Malta and turn the Mediterranean into an Axis lake.
The invasion of Malta goes the same way as the invasion of Crete. His airborne forces take high casualties but successfully capture the island. With unfettered supply lines and reinforced armored forces, Rommel sweeps the British from North Africa.
Having convinced the Japanese to delay their attack on America, Hitler would have bought the Axis powers another year to build up sufficient forces to defeat the Soviet Union in 1942 and turn all of his power toward Britain and America.
The speculation is interesting but also realistic and the teases the mind with endless "what-ifs". That's what makes alternate history fun. This is a believable and agreeable little book. Enjoy it!
Instead of invading Russia in the late spring of 1941, Hitler decides to postpone that invasion for a year. In its place he orders his forces to capture the Suez Canal cutting Great Britain off from the short route to its colonies. In order to insure the success of Rommel in North Africa, he must also seize Malta and turn the Mediterranean into an Axis lake.
The invasion of Malta goes the same way as the invasion of Crete. His airborne forces take high casualties but successfully capture the island. With unfettered supply lines and reinforced armored forces, Rommel sweeps the British from North Africa.
Having convinced the Japanese to delay their attack on America, Hitler would have bought the Axis powers another year to build up sufficient forces to defeat the Soviet Union in 1942 and turn all of his power toward Britain and America.
The speculation is interesting but also realistic and the teases the mind with endless "what-ifs". That's what makes alternate history fun. This is a believable and agreeable little book. Enjoy it!
March 29, 2021
Too simplistic alternate history. Hitler postpone Barbarossa and takes Malta and the Middle East. Well for ont thing in 1942 the Red Army would have been fully modernized in spring 1942 and 5000 T-34 and a thoussand KV 1 would have easily butchered the Heer (in 1942 the best german tank was Panzer 4 but the T-34 was way better than it).
Also even with Malta and Iraq oil the western allies would not have done a peace deal with Hitler. Most of the Anglo-American oil came from the USA.
Last point, a manned sub orbital flight bu a modified V2 would have been a pipe dream since in 1943 the technology to send a manned space flight was not there yet.
Also even with Malta and Iraq oil the western allies would not have done a peace deal with Hitler. Most of the Anglo-American oil came from the USA.
Last point, a manned sub orbital flight bu a modified V2 would have been a pipe dream since in 1943 the technology to send a manned space flight was not there yet.
February 19, 2012
This book is an alternate history of what might have happened if only..............
I like these style of books but the writing in this book was total rubbish. The style was inconsistent and you never knew if you were reading a history book, an autobiography or a novel. All these styles were represented and this is why I didn't particularly like this book. It is just so badly written.
However, the alternate history was interesting and is worth pondering. Although is history is history and can't be changed.
Don't bother with this one.
I like these style of books but the writing in this book was total rubbish. The style was inconsistent and you never knew if you were reading a history book, an autobiography or a novel. All these styles were represented and this is why I didn't particularly like this book. It is just so badly written.
However, the alternate history was interesting and is worth pondering. Although is history is history and can't be changed.
Don't bother with this one.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews