Why did Hitler lose WW2? Was it because he broke the non agression

U.S. materiel was probably more important than U.S. troops.

>>132436885
Hitler needed the oil which was in the caucasus.
Anyway if he didn't attack the soviets he the war would have probably ended in a stalemate.

>inb4
>But THE EBUL GOMMIES WHERE GOING TO AATCK

Even with all the evidence (german scout plane crews being arrested all the time by the sovites) Stalin literally didn't believe his best spies that NatSoc germany was about to attack.

Operation Barbossa could have been a disaster.

File: 1497401414030.png (50KB, 761x608px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 761x608px

>>132436885

>and dragged the US into the war

It was necessary for the US to be brought into the war as they were sending military supplies to the USSR and Germany needed an excuse to sink those ships.

>Was it because he broke the non agression pact with the Soviet Union

We understand now that Stalin was planning on conquering more than just Eastern Poland, Hitler knew that the USSR would likely push past Poland and into German territory.

The real reason why Germany lost is because Hitler involved himself too much in his own military's movements rather than trusting his generals more. Also they were fighting just way too many people, it's true there was a chance they could've won but it was slim, tactical and strategic errors that would ordinarily lead to a minor setback mattered so much more when Germany was fighting against so many large powers.

And even if you say Russia had no intentions on attacking Germany at the time, a cursory look at their imperialist behavior during and after WW2 should tell you that their relationship with Germany would've quickly become hostile anyway.