What if Nazi Germany did not invade Poland?

[Fisherking]

Figuring that the Nazis could leave Poland alone is a big stretch. Hitler wanted those lands back that were once German and was even willing to go in with the Soviets to do that.

But just for the sake of argument, assuming he did not attack Poland and perhaps allied with them it would have made a huge difference to the intelligence gathering abilities of the Western Allies. Cracking the German codes was based on Polish research. They gave the key to the cracking of Enigma to British Intelligence.

Just the same, Poland would have had to make huge donations of territory and take on a Nazi atmosphere to placate Nazi Germany, as well as participation in “The Final Solution” once it was thought up. It would have been just as ugly a proposition as its conquest.

There is little good one can find about the Nazis. The best thing may have been their invasion of Poland which put an end to appeasement.

[Domen]

The best thing may have been their invasion of Poland which put an end to appeasement.

But at what cost for Poland. Apart from Germany Poland was the biggest loser of WW2. But (Western) Germany after WW2 received $$$ financial support for reconstruction. Poland - which found itself on the other side of the Iron Courtain - did not receive anything.

In 1945 Poland was "liberated" from the German occupation only to found itself under Soviet / Communist occupation one moment later.

And lost so many civilians and soldiers. For what? Polish soldiers who fought alongside the Western Allies could not return to their country after WW2 - those who returned were persecuted by Communists. Home Army members were also imprisoned, persecuted, some executed by Communists.

In exchange for Eastern territories - Poland received land in the West as a "gift" from Stalin. But that land was devastated. Cities like Wroclaw were completely demolished, because Waffen SS and Wehrmacht defended them to the last building destroyed by Soviet artillery.

Warsaw was also demolished - after the 1944 Uprising Hitler ordered to destroy what remained of Warsaw. Stalin did nothing to stop him.

Churchill and - especially - Roosevelt - sold Poland to Joseph Stalin's regime. Communism was not much better than Nazi occupation.

Today nobody in the West remembers the Polish contribution to Allied victory in WW2 anyway. Jewish organizations blame Poland for doing not enough to save Jews from the Holocaust. And - strangely - American Jews seem to forget that they observed sufferings of European Jews and did nothing for so long time. Even later (from December 1941 on) American Jews did almost nothing to save European Jews. When information about death camps - including that from Poles, like Jan Karski for example - reached Western Allies - they did nothing to stop the massacres.

[PanzerJaeger]

When information about death camps - including that from Poles, like Jan Karski for example - reached Western Allies - they did nothing to stop the massacres.

What would you have had them do, apart from attempting to defeat Germany in the quickest manner possible?

[ReluctantSamurai]

Churchill and - especially - Roosevelt - sold Poland to Joseph Stalin's regime. Communism was not much better than Nazi occupation.

And what were the Allies supposed to do.....start WW3 against the Soviets over Poland?

[Gaius Sempronius Gracchus]

And what were the Allies supposed to do.....start WW3 against the Soviets over Poland?

I believe that Churchill advocated exactly that course of action..... now there's a what if.

[HopAlongBunny]

I believe that Churchill advocated exactly that course of action..... now there's a what if.

Largely a pipe dream I think.

The Soviets were just too big (and advanced) at the end of WW2; largely due to American aid.

While the Soviets did the majority of dieing in WW2 they still had more where that came from. The US would have had to "carry the ball" for the Eastern war, and I don't think the population would have stood for it. In addition, without time for retrenchment the Allies logistics would have collapsed. It is an interesting "what if" but I just can't see the needed popular support for extending WW2 much beyond where it finished.

[Gaius Sempronius Gracchus]

Largely a pipe dream I think.

The Soviets were just too big (and advanced) at the end of WW2; largely due to American aid.

While the Soviets did the majority of dieing in WW2 they still had more where that came from. The US would have had to "carry the ball" for the Eastern war, and I don't think the population would have stood for it. In addition, without time for retrenchment the Allies logistics would have collapsed. It is an interesting "what if" but I just can't see the needed popular support for extending WW2 much beyond where it finished.

Well, exactly. You've hit the nail on the head. Of course US national sentiment wouldn't have stood for it - nor was there too much appetite for extending the war within an already ravaged Europe. That is the thing with any what ifs - there is usually a reason why it remained a what if rather than an actual event. The reasoning was sound, but there were stronger reasons (cons) considered at the time which out-weighed the pros.

[Sarmatian]

And what were the Allies supposed to do.....start WW3 against the Soviets over Poland?

That was highly unlikely, as the Allies already set that precedent with Italy. They couldn't, with a clear face, ask for joint control of Poland while not giving joint control of Italy. And Italy, of course was much more important than Poland.