>ww2 became unwinnable for the Axis after September 3,

>>2483326
Can't. That is simply, factually, irrefutable.

Pretty sure Reagan would have kicked robo-Hitler's ass.

>>2483326

I don't disagree, but I feel you could probably move that date back a little and still be correct.

>>2483326
>implying Margaret thatcher could of beaten hitler

>>2483326

Don't be stupid. It was already unwinnable before that, and thus it didn't become anything on September 3rd.

>>2483469
England joined on the 3rd

>>2483498

England's joining was due to factors that long predated its own declaration of war. I mean, by itself, Britain was extremely unlikely to prevail against Nazi Germany (even if they themselves were pretty immune to German assault), and the principal role the British played was how they could drag other countries into war with Germany, which became near inevitable due to the ongoing British resistance.

So yes, nothing "became" unwinnable on the third. It became unwinnable before the shots were actually fired.

>>2483498
England wasnt going to beat germany on its own, Germany lost the war when it invaded Russia in 1941

>>2483532
This

>>2483532
It was going to happen eventually.

>>2483326
God damn your timeline must have fucked up bad if world war two lasted over fifty years.

>there are people who think ww2 ended in 1945 and that the cold war is not the real ww2

>>2483346
Yeah, 50 years to be exact

>>2483326
Na senpai. It became unwinnable once the US decided to fully support the allied effort.

GBs impaired here is constantly overhyped by larpers. Their war economy basically ran on American aid and before america entered GB wasn't able to conduct a Single decicive operation. Not even in Africa despite crushing Naval superiority.