Who was WWII Germany going to nuke?

[Low Hanging Fruit]

So, they wouldn't nuke us, but they would launch bombing raids that did comparable damage to a (WW2) nuke?

Riiiiiiight

If he had the choice to kill a million Russians or a million people from Britain it would have been an easy choice. Russians. But it isn't always a black and white choice. Odds are he would have to get a plane to the location because nukes on the tips of rockets would have been very difficult during the war with war technology if things followed a similar timeline. So this likely limits the targets possible to even hit to the western allies minus unless we are talking at the highest point of German power when they were deep inside Russia but truth be told in 1942 a nuclear armed Germany likely wins the war by destroying Russian and the west so it isn't much of a discussion. Unless of course we say they shrunk weapons down enough to put on a rocket. Had rockets able to each Russian cities from Germany, and then also hit the desired target at that range. Then sure it's back to Russia again. But all of that is unlikely. Hitler would target the west less by desire and more because it's all that would be on the realistic target list.

[Berengil]

Russians, at first. Probably Moscow/Leningrad/Stalingrad. Basically any Soviet city west of the Urals that wasn't in Nazi hands would be on the list, with Moscow at the top.

Hitler wouldn't hit Britain unless they continued to refuse a peace deal even after watching Russia go up in smoke. And he did not have the capacity to reach targets in North America, and wouldn't have had it for some time. All the talk of Amerika Bombers is theoretical at best. They would have eventually been a reality of course.

You could end up with something similar to Fatherland: Japan surrenders to the US a-bomb and the Cold War is between the US and the Nazis, with the remnants of the British Empire hanging on to the US's coattails for dear life, while the US funds guerrilla movements in the former Soviet Union. And communism is strangled in its cradle of course, leaving the KMT in charge of China. The China/US alliance would be strong, with US forces based in NW China, ready to roll up to the Urals on the outbreak of Alt-WW3.

[Osmeric]

All the best nuclear scientists were German in 1940. At least the ones making the important discoveries.

Enrico Fermi shows you are wrong.

In general chasing out Jewish scientists devastated science there.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Germany had a lot of plans and the German leadership planned in big terms based on which project has the best outcome. However the atomic bomb programme wasn't such a thing. Most of it was left at paper and early experimental stage however. This was due to the fact that Germany at the late stages of the war was a bit strapped for cash, they were also chronically lacking secure sites, manpower and finally also time. There are a lot unfinished sites above and underground and a lot physicians who participated found themselves embroiled in moral issues as well. They were no officially or unofficially supported plans for an atomic bomb mainly because military leadership was not just sceptical but rather conservative in thinking too unbelieving of the promise that atomic bombs are vastly superior to conventional bombs. It devolved into a side project with inconclusive goals and rather low level of enthusiasm maintained by a handful of people of which all are well known (Heisenberg and von Weizsäcker being the most known ones). They lacked the centralized coordination, planning, resources and oversight that the Manhattan project enjoyed, instead they were spread out thinly over Germany, losing more and more sites as Germany lost territories to the Allies, one of these labs they had actually was actually inside a school in Stadtilm which is just 15 kms away from my own town.

Never claimed they put as much resources into it as the Americans did...just that they had a program and that was why they had the materials.

[Shibito]

Probably manchester, the greatest city in the world and last bastion of freedom against the enemies of democracy.

With 2 shitty teams one is worse than the other, guess which one.

[CptEgo]

Unlikely - they couldn't fly bombing missions to those cities at that point; and it doesn't seem as if their V2-rockets could have carried those nukes. I am unsure if a sub-launch against London would be possible.

Eh, you might be right. I was indeed thinking of a V-2 rocket possibly carrying a nuke but probably wouldn't have been possible.

[Yvaelle]

They mined it in the eastern parts of the country.
If you look at all time production of uranium up to 2014 the GDR comes in in fourth place.

Why does Canada have all of that material? Just for funsies?
Whom do they want to nuke? What about Australia?

Canada produces virtually all of the world's medical-grade nuclear isotopes (certain procedures require that people consume radioactive material).

But we are planning to bomb someone - we have The Manitoba Project - we are currently working on splitting the maple syrup atom, and then infusing it into timbits, for a truly nuclear level of flavor

[breadisfunny]

Neither did the USA at that point, that's why the question is who were they going to nuke not who did they nuke.

germany never had the materials or resources needed for nuke production. the u.s. did. this question is completely absurd since all germany was able to do was produce some of the components of making a nuclear weapon since they shipped most of the brightest scientists on this subject to death camps or deported them. furthermore after 1943 they lost air superiority and were being bombed constantly. germany had no real means of delivering it aside from their v2 rockets which were only capable of barely hitting london. so therefore the question of who they wanted to nuke is pointless since they had capability to do so. asking such a question is pointless since even if they wanted to they couldn't do it.

[Independent voter]

Canada produces virtually all of the world's medical-grade nuclear isotopes (certain procedures require that people consume radioactive material).

But we are planning to bomb someone - we have The Manitoba Project - we are currently working on splitting the maple syrup atom, and then infusing it into timbits, for a truly nuclear level of flavor

When C. D. Howe heard, on August 6, 1945, that a uranium bomb had destroyed the city of Hiroshima, he was not surprised. As Minister responsible for Canada's part in the World War II Atomic Bomb Project, he knew it was intended.

He had prepared a statement for the press in advance. "It is a distinct pleasure for me to announce," he said, "that Canadian scientists have played an intimate part, and have been associated in an effective way with this great scientific development."

Three days later, a plutonium bomb destroyed Nagasaki.

[breadisfunny]

They had potential to nuke pretty much anyone.

that's like saying a child has the potential to be a astronaut.

[Teebone]

It wasn't a bomb, Hubcap. It was a time machine.

There, you sampled the kind of crazy you subject us to. Enjoy.

[Deleted]

But you know Stalin's slaughter spree exceeded that of Hitler, right?
You just argued to make the biggest war criminal in WWII records even more potential than he was.
Guess what he would have done to the US if he would have had nukes? You are aware that the distance between Russia and the US is a measly 55 miles, right?

The only thing that kept Stalin in check during that war was the Nazis. First through treaties and alliances, then through warfare.


and this... He was more keen to have the lead in middle and long range rocket abilities than in nukes.

No it didn't, that's propaganda, seems western media adds millions each year.
If Stalin went around whacking millions left n right, he would have lost ww2.
Saying someone is worse than Hitler makes you look bad. Not just that but making light o the Nazis, seems you have an agenda!

20th century want their propaganda back.

- - - Updated - - -

Stalin killed more people than Hitler.

That's false.

[caervek]

after 1943 they lost air superiority and were being bombed constantly. germany had no real means of delivering it aside from their v2 rockets which were only capable of barely hitting london. so therefore the question of who they wanted to nuke is pointless since they had capability to do so. asking such a question is pointless since even if they wanted to they couldn't do it.

That's why this thread is about a HYPOTHETICAL question, we're discussing who Germany was planning to nuke before they lost the war. If things had worked out differently (I.E Hitler never declaring war on the USSR or the USA) then the war would have dragged on longer and they would eventually have had a working nuke (they expected to have a functional bomb by 1946, before things started going badly for them).

- - - Updated - - -

No it didn't, that's propaganda, seems western media adds millions each year.
If Stalin went around whacking millions left n right, he would have lost ww2.

You know that Stalin remained in power for 8 years after the Nazi's surrendered right? That's how he managed to catch/surpass Hitler (Mao eventually surpassed both of them to a large degree).

[Deleted]

No it didn't, that's propaganda, seems western media adds millions each year.

So how many was his victims when?

[Yvaelle]

When C. D. Howe heard, on August 6, 1945, that a uranium bomb had destroyed the city of Hiroshima, he was not surprised. As Minister responsible for Canada's part in the World War II Atomic Bomb Project, he knew it was intended.

He had prepared a statement for the press in advance. "It is a distinct pleasure for me to announce," he said, "that Canadian scientists have played an intimate part, and have been associated in an effective way with this great scientific development."

Three days later, a plutonium bomb destroyed Nagasaki.

We actually played a much more important role than just being aware of the Manhattan Project in advance.

The precursor for the Manhattan project was actually a British endeavour to create a nuclear bomb, but because the Brits were concerned they wouldn't be able to avoid Germany spies or leaks inside Britain, they sent their scientists to Canada and began the project here instead: which was also the source of the radioactive material.

Not long after, and possibly related to knowledge of the planned project, the US joined the war and the Manhattan project, along with the involved British, Canadian, and German refugee scientists - also moved to the US to join what then became the Manhattan Project: but for awhile there, it was actually a Commonwealth initiative operating out of Canada.

One of the more notable deaths on the project was one of the Canadian scientists - Louis Slotin - who was in charge of manually positioning fission tests (and you think you have a stressful job!). One day he fucked up, realized he'd triggered a fission reaction, and tried to bodyblock his colleagues in the room (none of whom were wearing the correct equipment). It was the last time anyone tried to manually position a fission core - they had to halt experiments and invent some robot arms after his death.

So ya - Canada definitely had a part to play in the creation of nuclear weaponry: our hands are no cleaner than anyone else's - spare that we don't actually make them for ourselves (I'm sure if we really wanted to nuke Switzerland or something, the US would let us borrow one)

[Forogil]

That's why this thread is about a HYPOTHETICAL question, we're discussing who Germany was planning to nuke before they lost the war. If things had worked out differently (I.E Hitler never declaring war on the USSR or the USA) then the war would have dragged on longer and they would eventually have had a working nuke (they expected to have a functional bomb by 1946, before things started going badly for them).

But to make it possible the scenario has to be so hypothetical that we cannot really answer the question; clearly if Hitler weren't at war with USSR and US there wouldn't be any reason to nuke Moskva or New York; and without US help it is unclear how well Britain would have held up - and if Germany had captured London they wouldn't have bombed it.

[draynay]

That's why this thread is about a HYPOTHETICAL question, we're discussing who Germany was planning to nuke before they lost the war. If things had worked out differently (I.E Hitler never declaring war on the USSR or the USA) then the war would have dragged on longer and they would eventually have had a working nuke (they expected to have a functional bomb by 1946, before things started going badly for them).

Its so far outside the scope of reality they might as well have bombed Atlantis or Care-a-lot or the Smurf village. I don't really see the point of such fanciful wonderings.

[Noradin]

Canada produces virtually all of the world's medical-grade nuclear isotopes (certain procedures require that people consume radioactive material).

But we are planning to bomb someone - we have The Manitoba Project - we are currently working on splitting the maple syrup atom, and then infusing it into timbits, for a truly nuclear level of flavor

I knew it!

[Adam Jensen]

Why do you need to be given the right to commit suicide?

Like who's going to punish you for committing suicide without permission?

[Mihalik]

If he had the choice to kill a million Russians or a million people from Britain it would have been an easy choice. Russians. But it isn't always a black and white choice. Odds are he would have to get a plane to the location because nukes on the tips of rockets would have been very difficult during the war with war technology if things followed a similar timeline. So this likely limits the targets possible to even hit to the western allies minus unless we are talking at the highest point of German power when they were deep inside Russia but truth be told in 1942 a nuclear armed Germany likely wins the war by destroying Russian and the west so it isn't much of a discussion. Unless of course we say they shrunk weapons down enough to put on a rocket. Had rockets able to each Russian cities from Germany, and then also hit the desired target at that range. Then sure it's back to Russia again. But all of that is unlikely. Hitler would target the west less by desire and more because it's all that would be on the realistic target list.

As late as summer to autumn 1944 German units were in practical bombing range of Moscow. It was simply strategically worthless to bomb it, as it would cost too many planes for very little effect.

Flying over Eastern Europe is not the only way to reach Moscow. Rather using occupied Norway or even German allied Finland it is easier to fly South over the Baltic into Russia.

Not to mention another juicy target sitting right under German noses, Leningrad, or any of the dozens of Russian armies concentrated in Poland, Belarus, Ukraine all areas Nazis would have no qualms about nuking.

So, they wouldn't nuke us, but they would launch bombing raids that did comparable damage to a (WW2) nuke?

Riiiiiiight

At no point did Germany launch any air raid similar in destructive power to a nuclear weapon on Britain. The entire German bombing at its full length killed about 45000 people and injured a similar number, highest estimates for dead and injured being in the range of the upper 130k.

The bombing campaign was first intended to destroy military capabilities, later industrial and finally to damage morale. It wasn't about the wholesale destruction of the Great Britain.

Many high ranking Nazis were Anglophiles and there were various attempts for peace and rapprochement with the UK, all unsuccessful. I am sorry to tell you, but the Germans simply didn't see Britain or the US as natural enemies. On the other hand they were fully intent on the wholesale annihilation of Russia and Slavs in general, whom they seen as "sub-human".

Furthermore most of the fighting and dying until mid 1944 was on the Eastern Front. The treatment of Western Civilians and POW's by Germany clearly highlights the difference in how they perceived their different enemies.

Had Germany knocked out Russia from the war using Nuclear weapons, and had the UK continued to fight, eventually they would have used the weapon against Britain as well, but it again, it wouldn't really have been a first choice for the Nazis, or even a preferred choice.