If Germany had Nukes during ww2 would they have used them?

>>1784353

Why would you think otherwise?

Yes.

No airforce means no nukes

>>1784355
>>1784366
On who?

???

If the Zionists gave them nukes who would they nuke?

Mecca? Tehran? Cairo?

>>1784353
>yet another WW2 alt history thread

saged hidden and reported

File: 1456360241296.png (356KB, 572x380px) Image search: [Google]

356KB, 572x380px

>It's another German WW2 fantasies thread

>>1784353
If noone else has them, sure.

If someone else has them, no.

Just like the chemical weapons.

They wouldn't use them.
They would use them to negotiate peace and permanent sovereignty just like N. Korea has.
If they had multiple, and assured delivery systems they would use one on Russia, one maybe on Britain, and hide how many they actually had.

>>1784355
Only good reason would be that they couldn't get a Ju-88 anywhere near anything worth hitting.

>>1784710
Oh wait, a Ju-88 can't even lift the damn thing, lol.

>>1784411
On a side note, I like how all the "Germany wins the war in Europe" wehrb fantasies conveniently forget the inevitable glassing of all German cities starting in 1945.

File: The Mufti's Army.jpg (184KB, 800x561px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 800x561px

>>1784386
>implying the Nazis would kill their allies

File: rugen nuke.jpg (156KB, 480x902px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 480x902px

According to the Nuremberg Trial records, they DID have nukes and tested one at Rugen. This seems to have been swept under the rug though.

>>1785014
I mean, ignoring the fact that Jackson's question explicitly makes clear that he's not talking about an Atomic weapon, here's the rest of the exchange:

>SPEER: No, and I consider it utterly improbable. If we had had such a weapon under preparation, I should have known about it. But we did not have such a weapon. It is clear that in chemical warfare attempts were made on both sides to carry out research on all the weapons one could think of, because one did not know which party would start chemical warfare first.

>MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: The reports, then, of a new and secret weapon were exaggerated for the purpose of keeping the German people in the war?

>>1785062
2/2

>SPEER: That was the case mostly during the last phase of the war. From August, or rather June or July 1944 on I very often went to the front. I visited about 40 front-line divisions in their sectors and could not help seeing that the troops, just like the German people, were given hopes about a new weapon coming, new weapons and wonder-weapons which, without requiring the use of soldiers, without military forces, would guarantee victory. In this belief lies the secret why so many people in Germany offered their lives, although common sense told them that the war was over. They believed that within the near future this new weapon would arrive. I wrote to Hitler about it and also tried in different speeches, even before Goebbels' propaganda leaders, to work against this belief. Both Hitler and Goebbels told me, however, that this was no propaganda of theirs but that it was a belief which had grown up amongst the people. Only in the dock here in Nuremberg, I was told by Fritzsche that this propaganda was spread systematically among the people through some channels or other, and that SS Standartenfuehrer Berg was responsible for it. Many things have become clear to me since, because this man Berg, as a representative of the Ministry of Propaganda, had often taken part in meetings, in big sessions of my Ministry, as he was writing articles about these sessions. There he heard of our future plans and then used this knowledge to tell the people about them with more imagination than truth.

>>1785014
>Nuremberg trials
>worth anything
>not Kangaroo Court 2: electric Boogaloo

>>1784353
Yes.
Drop one on England to force them into an armistice

>>1785014
are you fucking retarded

>>1784353
no

no heavy bombers