MovieChat Forums > Battle of the Bulge (1966) Discussion > What if the Ardennes Offensive did not o...

What if the Ardennes Offensive did not occur?

posted 9 years ago by jeffyoung1
1 reply | jump to latest

There's a number of, 'what if' scenarios based on the Germans winning the Ardennes Offensive. I won't go into that here because it is a lengthy topic.

But what if Hitler listened to his top generals and did not launch "Wacht Am Rhein"? How would have that altered military history and world history as a result?

Here's my opinion.

1) Hitler listens to his generals and marshals his manpower reserves and last panzer reserves behind Germany's western borders, awaiting the late winter offensive of the Allies' 21st Army Group, 12th Group, and 6th Army Group.

2) Led by the brilliant Field Marshall Rundstedt, the Germans launch savage counterattacks up and down the Allies border penetration points. The Germans also employ well-situated and well-coordinated defensive strongpoints and fighting positions. The aggressiveness and savagery of the German resistance throws the Allies off-balance.

3) Rundstedt knows that British Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery has become overly cautious and yet wants his 12th Army Group to be in the forefront of the Allied advance. The Germans launch especially aggressive local counteroffensives against the 12th Army Group, relying on crushing hammer blows and hit-and-run tactics. Montgomery is convinced the bulk of the remaining German Army is arrayed against him and he halts the 12th Army Group ordering it to dig in. Montgomery demands Allied Supreme Commander Eisenhower dispatch American reinforcements and more supplies to the 12th Army Group, which Eisenhower ignores.

4) Rundstedt is aware the greatest danger comes from the aggressive, highly experienced Lieutenant General Patton and his Third Army, assigned to Lieutenant General Bradley's 21st Army Group. The 21st Army Group is where Rundstedt concentrates more resources to the defense. Buoyed on desperation, patriotism, and good leadership, the Germans manage to stall the Allies just past the German border. The Allies make short gains into Germany but cannot go further. The Western front becomes a vicious, bloody back-and-forth slugfest.

5) While the Germans manage to slow and halt the Allies tenuously, they cannot halt the Red Army juggernaut in the east. Stalin launches two Fronts amounting to two million men to capture Berlin and end the war. As in real history, the Soviets surround Berlin and at great cost in human lives capture the capital. Hitler commits suicide and Admiral Donitz becomes the next leader of Germany. The Soviets this around do not stop because the western Allies are bogged down near the Franco-Belgium-German border. 3/5ths of Germany remains unconquered. Soviet leader Josef Stalin orders the Red Army to push forward into the rest of Germany and meet up with the western Allies, catching the remaining German ground forces between them. Remaining German forces deep in Germany are unable to stem the Russian tide. Despite Admiral Donitz's acceptance of unconditional surrender, the Soviet Red Army continues its relentless advance.

6) The Allies and the Soviet Union accept Admiral Donitz's unconditional surrender but the Red Army continues its advance until it makes contact with the western front. The war is over in Europe. Hitler is dead. The western allies occupy only a small strip of German territory near the western border. The Red Army occupies almost all of Germany.

7) The western Allies demand that Josef Stalin honor the Yalta Conference agreements and withdraw the Red Army to its agreed-upon zone of occupation. A tense international standoff occurs as Josef Stalin contemplates his options.
a) Stalin can honor the Yalta agreements and withdraw the Red Army to its
agreed-upon zone of occupation around Berlin leading back to Poland.
But that means giving up huge territorial gains and Stalin's generals
and field marshals are adamantly against withdrawal.

b) Stalin can decide to keep the Red Army in place, insisting on altering
the Yalta agreements. Stalin knows this is extremely risky. This
entails very real military conflict against the Americans and British-
Canadians unless Stalin can convince their respective governments
otherwise. Stalin knows he will be resisted by British prime minister
Winston Churchill and the new American President Harry Truman, who is
not as accommodating to Stalin as the late President Roosevelt was.
Stalin's ambitions knows no bounds but he can be cautious when
confronted with powerful enemies. Stalin knows the Allies are war
weary, especially the British, who have reached economic exhaustion
and the end of their manpower reserves. The greatest danger is the
American military, at the height of its power, and empowered with
seemingly endless resources in men, supplies, and equipment. The
temptation is overwhelming. With all of Germany under Soviet control
the rest of western Europe will easily fall to the Red Army if he can
dispose of the British-Canadians, Americans, and reconstituted French
Army. While Stalin and his diplomats negotiate and bluster with
London and Washington, Stalin's STAVKA continues to match the current
and projected strength of the allies in Germany against the Red Army
should military confrontation become a reality. The clock ticks away.

[–] cowgoesmoo 9 years ago

I agree with some points, disagree with others.

I agree that the Russians still end up taking Berlin. (From Eisenhower's writings, he had no desire to take Berlin since it would have ended up in the post-war Russian zone anyway.) I disagree that the Russians would have kept moving. The Battle for Berlin was terribly costly and the Russians were now at the end of a very long supply line. Logistically, they'd need time to regroup and resupply before they could continue their offensive. That buys time for the Western Allies. The Germans also stripped the Eastern Front of men and materiel for their Ardennes Offensive. That gamble undoubtedly make it easier for the Russians in 1945. They would have delayed the inevitable but instead of Berlin falling in May 1945, maybe it falls in June.

I disagree with you about the Western Allies being held up essentially at the Rhine River. You state that it would happen, but not why you think that other than German leadership and desperation. If they are going to launch counterattacks, they need fuel, ammo, manpower and the ability to move stuff to where it needs to be. Western Allied air superiority in the spring of 1945 should go a long way to limiting counteroffensives. I would think the Allies would bypass resistance and press on. In the absence of the Ardennes offensive, I would think there were be a general buildup and a big spring offensive in the West that the Germans would be unable to stop. There was also the behavior of German corps commanders in the spring of 1945. They had no desire to end up in Russian POW camps and surrendered in droves to the West. They even left the western approaches to Berlin open in the hopes that the Brits and Americans would push on and get there first.

I think the net effect of the Ardennes offensive is to burn up what pitiful reserves the Germans had. The eventual outcome is the same, but delayed perhaps a month or two. One final note: the US had the atom bomb. It was meant to be dropped on Germany first - if the European war had gone on too much longer, that bomb would have been dropped on Berlin (or wherever). Of course, the Soviets had spies at Alamogordo and knew about the atom bomb all along - would that have deterred aggressive behavior on their part? Don't know that!!!