Was it ever possible for the Axis to win WWII:

>>136849805
Maybe if they defeated the Russians and took malta years before.

File: 4344.png (418KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

418KB, 1920x1080px

>>136849805
How Germany could have won the WW2
>Had operation Barbarossa started on time instead of 2 week delay because of Italian fail in balkans
>Had Hitler listen to his Generals
>Had Japan attacked SU from flank instead of being pussies and just pillaging poor villages and civilians in pacific
>Not oppress Ukrainians who already hated communists
>start War production UP from start like in the end days of war when you started losing

Capturing moscow would be the end.

>>136850071
operation Barbarossa was a mistake

not really, they didnt have the manpower to fight the soviet union, britain would never have surrendered no matter how many convoys got sunk, and the usa had a basically untouchable industrial capacity to supply everyone

maybe if they followed the z plan, but its widely known that the soviets were going to invade before then

>>136849805

No

>>136850071

Cool Alien Space Bats hypothesis.

>>136849805
Yes if Italy was actually doing something and not only making it worse.

>>136850071
And what are your credentials ? Did napoleon defeat russia when they took moscow ?

Hitler did listen to his generals
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zinPbUZUHDE

Yes. In 1941 they should have put all resources into the conquest of North Africa with the Italians and the conquest of the Middle East through Turkey.

Turkey was a backward shithole with a dire army at this time. Nowhere near modernised. They should have overrun them and captured Iraq's oilfields as well as the ones on other Middle Eastern countries.

This would've been perfect because not only would it have secured the much prized oil for the Reich, but it would have given them another border with Russia, one right beside the oilfields of Baku. Only then should they have invaded Russia, captured the oilfields in Baku instantly, while also going for Moscow from Europe proper.

>>136851256
It was different time not Napoleon this time. Moscow at time was major population and economic centre this time SU would surrender in days after Moscow would be taken

>>136849805
they won, they had a much better k/d ratio

>>136849805
There are a few possibilities that could increase the likelihood, but it isn't certain.
1. Hitler doesn't bitch out and stall at Dunkirk, stupidly thinking that if he lets the British go politely, they'll be more willing to surrender. Should've kept going and wiped them out when he had momentum on his side.
2. Don't call off Barbarossa for a month just to invade Yugoslavia for slighting you. The invasion was purely for vengeance and should've been put off for the future. If they had that extra month, they would've probably been able to march into Moscow.
3. For the love of God, go straight to Moscow instead of focusing on stupid symbolic victories like Leningrad and the Ukraine. Stalingrad was another campaign built around the symbolism of taking down the core of communism itself, but it is a little justified because of the oil it opened the doors to. Still, if Hitler was more preoccupied with taking Russia, he should've went straight for the government.

Future conquerors, realize that these three issues could've been done away with if Hitler wasn't obsessed with symbolism and being taken over by megalomania. Don't ever think a sworn enemy is going to surrender to you just because you let them off easy. Don't take your eye off the main prize by going after some small piece of land just because they overthrew a government sympathetic to you. Don't count on the people of Russia to just lay down their guns and stop fighting after a few symbolic wins.

>>136851422

Wrong. Majority of the industry was shipped off to the Ural.
Germany could never win the war and hold all the vast territory.
USSR would not surrender if Moscow was taken, in fact Germany COULDN'T TAKE Moscow because the Far Eastern divisions reached Moscow just in time. If Germany would somehow advance faster, Stalin would sent those divisions faster back.

>>136851320
This is another crucial mistake by Hitler, not sending more reinforcements to Rommel and taking his campaign as seriously as he should've. Defeating the British in the Middle East would not only get him even more oil, but deliver a major blow to a major adversary. Britain wouldn't have a foothold in the ME anymore, the Mediterranean would be rendered Lake Axis, and it would allow them to travel all of the way up to Russia through the Caucuses and Black Sea.

>>136851749
Point number 1 is based on fan-fiction and nothing in reality, try again.

>if you let your enemies go, you win

Point two and be agreed upon.

Point three totally disregards strategic importance of Leningrad and the fact that they needed to go through Ukraine to grt to Moscow. Ukraine was pack loaded with grain fields and Nationalists willing to foght against the Communists.

>>136851749

Symbolic victories like Leningrad and Ukraine? They had to pass Ukraine to get to the Caucusus.., Leningrad = KV-1 tank factory, those tanks were stronger than any German tank on start of the war. Stalingrad was to be a defensive stronghold for the Caucusus offensive.

Yugoslavia was invaded because Hitler didn't trust them and feared of a possible attack in the future.

Dunkerque wasn't Hitler's decision but von Rundsted's because the line was too stretched and they suffered heavy casualties.
Then Hitler issued the Halt Order to bomb and shell them and later on launched an offensive that was repelled by mostly French who launched minor counter-attacks all the time even when outnumbered 1:20.

Hitler did nothing wrong

>>136851256

Not according to his generals, not to mention the famous Adolf quote "they should all come back to Germany leaving the army in my hands"

>>136851873
>muh Siberians saved Moscow
They only had 8 divisions with two of them barely being equipped. They didn't do the work everyone claims they did.

They should have more time to prepare to the Barbarossa and have better allies than Italian fagots. While preparing they could kill more polish subhumans...

>>136849805
Maybe if Hitler had waited to invade the rest of Czechoslovakia

>>136851749
>The invasion was purely vengeance.
Uh no, Prince Paul was overthrown in a British and Soviet backed coup. Documents found by the Germans in Belgrade prove this (Much like documents found in Warsaw prove that the US was secretly applying pressure to Poland not to find any diplomatic solution with Hitler) Yugoslavia then joined the allies, now there was an allied country on Germany's border, it had no choice but to invade.
>Leave the Ukraine
The reason the Ukraine was taken was because there were over 650,000 men that were presenting a real danger to Germany's flank. Many historians agree that the decision to take the Kiev and secure Germany's flank was unavoidable and the right one to make.
>Stalingrad
Stalingrad was a major juncture along the Volga River for transports in and out of the Caucuses. If one takes Stalingrad then theoretically, one has a free hand to pivot to the Caucuses facing little opposition. That being said, the symbolic nature cannot be denied as well.
All in all, Hitler's endeavor in the USSR was mostly due to bad information. The Abwehr had informed Hitler that there was only something akin to 50 or so divisions in the entire USSR and they misplaced their positions. They also greatly underestimated the military and economic potential of the USSR in wartime. Hitler found just that many divisions on the Russo-German border in the Bialystok region! Hitler admits this much when he discusses the operation with the Finnish leader Mannerheim in a secretly recorded conversation (The only time you'll ever hear Hitler speak normally - he had a very deep voice in fact)

>>136849805
NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI NEEKERI

>>136851873
>>136850753
>Alien space bats
Go back to alternativehistory.com and suck off CalBear's dick.

In all seriousness, they severely underrated Russia. They might be able to squeak out a bloody win with them if they can somehow get the Japanese to hold off on the US and attack Russia with them, but that was never going to happen under the time table Hitler wanted them to. So you'd have to tell Mussolini to eat a dick, not sperg out at Yugoslavia just yet, and make a beeline straight to Moscow and take out the government while simultaneously taking the oil that lay beyond Stalingrad. Russia would never win the war without that oil, and Hitler knew it and that's why he went for Stalingrad in the first place. This may have been plausible if he didn't waste so much time in the Ukraine and taking Kiev for symbolism. You also have to remember, Hitler wasn't just for taking the cities of Leningrad and Stalingrad, he wanted to raise them to the floor. It likely would've had to have happened, regardless, because the Russians were never going to give up the fight for their homeland, even if the Soviet government was taken out of the picture. Hitler wanted to let the Russians and other Slavs starve to death while he took all of the food and supplies for Germany. It was going to be a bloody fight until the end, and I just don't see Germany holding on.

>>136852580

8?
It were 32 Divisions from the Far East and Siberia. They threw back the Germans from Moscow. That's what I said and I don't care about your strawman "everyone claims they did"

Had the harsh and unexpected winter not set in the USSR would've fallen.

File: nigler.jpg (136KB, 1065x1067px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 1065x1067px

>>136849805
It was definitely doable, given the discipline and technological superiority of the German units and their tactical advantage in terms of mobility when fighting over a large terrain.

Hitler's boner for Stalingrad was a problem, since it had no strategic advantage, and holding it nullified all of the German tactical strengths and turned fighting into a war of attrition, which benefited the slavic subhuman hordes.

>>136853088
Which only 8 of them participated on the Western Front and the Battle for Moscow. Siberians are the ultimate WWII meme.

>>136849805

The Abwehr was heavily infiltrated by the Soviets.

>>136853044

I don't go there, I only use the term.
So what is your point?

>>136853291

It were 18 that were active during the offensive. Not 8.

>>136852898
He didn't invade the rest. Czechoslovakia was crumbling internally as the Slovaks declared their independence and the Poles and Hungarians took their ethnic lands as well as Germany. In 1939 Emil Hacha (Leader of Czechoslovakia) was summoned to Berlin to discuss the chaos in Bohemia. Hitler was concerned that a state in its weakened form would be easier to subvert by communists (As Germany had been in 1919 during the Spartacus and other various Communist uprisings throughout the country) Not to mention the Czechs had already shown their willingness to cooperate with the Soviets as shown by the 1935 mutual defense pact between Czechoslovakia, France and the USSR. To this effect, the USSR had been building airfields in Czechoslovakia right next to the German border posing a direct threat to the German heartland and its industry. Hitler realized he had to act now or someone else would, most likely the communists. Hacha came to Berlin stating that he was 'putting the fate of his country into the hands of the Fuhrer'. Hacha's political aide wrote in his memoirs that despite Hacha having two heart attacks twice (He was a very old man with a weak heart remember) there was no coercion or threat of force on the Germans part. The next morning German soldiers entered Prague and Hitler declared the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia. The Germans actually then helped the Czechs sending food and clothing and restocking their shops to aid their economy (Which like other countries was still suffering from the Great Depression) Chamberlain privately agreed that Hitler made the right decision but public opinion in Britain would never allow him to state that openly.

>>136852535
well yeah. Most generals were from respected or well known prussian familes. They don't want to taint their names and reputation. o it's easier to just blame everything on Hitler.

Inavsion of france, had hitler listened to the bulk of his generals. Perhaps they wouldn't even had captured france. So he went with guderians plan. One of his Generals.

And even as late as 1944 Hitler listened to Walter Model. And the result was catastrophic.

33:00 min into the video you can hear about this example
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zinPbUZUHDE

File: 1499941522577.jpg (14KB, 250x187px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 250x187px

Yes, if we didnt go towards Hitkmlers rush and gamble to eternal glory and instead waited 18 years for greater population we could have won.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TVi865H3IJc

>>136853500
18-30 divisions were sent West, only 8 participated directly at Moscow, two being ill-equipped calvary units from central Asia.

>>136853811
Hitler hadnto do what he could as he had absolute control for the nation before he died so its understandable he would havw been adssasinated by counter revolutionaries and the reoch eould never have eben gott3n a chance but it got one to establish and crush all enemies.

>>136851422
But since the russian industry was so mobile. I don't think capturing moscow would have won the war. Even if it was a big hub in the 40's. All the major people would have already fled the city, and most of the industry would have moved east. So they would have been stuck trying to defend just the city in the middle of the winter. But we can't really know. It could even have shortened the war because of all the casualities germany would have taken. Or perhaps russia actually would have surrendered. But I don't think it's likely

>>136853294
>The Abwehr was heavily infiltrated by the Soviets.
This. The collaborated greatly with the Red Orchestra. Canaris himself was involved in the July Assassination attempt.

>>136854103
Withoit moscow soviet union has no control or centralization.

>>136853909

34 were sent to the West.
18 participated directly in the counter-offensive at Moscow.

>>136849805
No, once the City of London and New York City backed the Bolsheviks it was impossible. Germany was doomed before Hitler was even appointed Chancellor.

>>136854103
That's correct. If one looks at Hitler ambitious ideas, the preferred position the German army would have to take for Hitler to consider Operation Barbarossa a success is the A-A Line from Arkhangelsk to Astrakhan.

Honestly if Hitler hadn't invaded France and waited till the 50's like he promised Mussolini, he'd have had France, rebuilt Italy, Portugal and Spain on his side withought shooting a bullet

>>136854584
France invaded Hitler dummy.

>>136854103
Not to mention if he supported the KMT in China rather than the Japs he would have had a massive second front against the USSR...

>>136854313
Maybe 18 divisions would have participated by the end of December to January, but during October and November in the autumn months the Soviets literally only had 8 divisions of Siberians in and around the city. An extra 80,000 troops is indeed useful, but the Russians had more han that nesr y reserves.

The Siberians didn't save Moscow, they helped at least. The real savior was Zhukov if anything.

>>136853294
My point is, no matter what you do, there was no way he could win this war completely. Which I am in agreement with you over.

>>136852484
>Yugoslavia was invaded because Hitler didn't trust them and feared of a possible attack in the future.
What threat would Yugoslavia pose to Hitler if they invaded him? Of course you don't want random invasions happening during your main conquest, but then why not postpone Barbarossa until the Spring if it is such a big deal? You have a very short timetable of defeating Russia, and taking a full month out to route Yugoslavia isn't going to help matters.

>Dunkerque wasn't Hitler's decision but von Rundsted's because the line was too stretched and they suffered heavy casualties.
Yes, Rundsted and Hitler agreed upon issuing the stop until more reserves and supplies could be brought in. However, in the account I am reading from General Halder, it seems that Goring played a part in getting Hitler to allow him to go at it along while the army stood still. The General Staff was not happy about this, and it seems like most of them felt they could have continued on, especially after the Luftwaffe failed at their objective.

>>136852924
>Uh no, Prince Paul was overthrown in a British and Soviet backed coup. Documents found by the Germans in Belgrade prove this (Much like documents found in Warsaw prove that the US was secretly applying pressure to Poland not to find any diplomatic solution with Hitler) Yugoslavia then joined the allies, now there was an allied country on Germany's border, it had no choice but to invade.
British scholars seem to go against the notion that the British had been a player in planing and orchestrating the coup. They may have supported it, as did the communists, but they did not play a part in it.

>>136854584
>Hadn't invaded France. Britain and France declared war on Germany simultaneously on 3rd September 1939. Germany's military strategy relied on lightning battles of rapid conquest. With Germany's incredibly limited resources she could not afford to wait for months on end in a stalemate like Britain and France could. They could play the long game because they had the control of the seas and the empires to supply them with all the materials they need to wage war. The longer Hitler waited, the longer the French and British stockpiled their supplies and gained the advantage. It's why Hitler wanted to strike as soon as possible (Remembering again that a state of war already existed between France and Germany, in fact France had invaded the Ruhr while Germany was preoccupied in Poland but abandoned that plan in favor of taking defensive positions)
>Spain
Spain had just come out earlier that year from the grips of a devastating civil war. No way is Franco putting his country through another war unless he explicitly believed Germany would win. Portugal probably wouldn't act without Spain and possible wouldn't turn on an old ally like Britain.

>>136854793

I was talking about the offensive which happened 5th of December.

>>136855203

>What threat would Yugoslavia pose to Hitler if they invaded him?

Exposed flank.

> it seems that Goring played a part in getting Hitler to allow him to go at it along while the army stood still

That's true because he was the one that assured Hitler that the Luftwaffe could demolish them without losing too much men that were needed further in the offensive.

>>136852924
>All in all, Hitler's endeavor in the USSR was mostly due to bad information. The Abwehr had informed Hitler that there was only something akin to 50 or so divisions in the entire USSR and they misplaced their positions. They also greatly underestimated the military and economic potential of the USSR in wartime. Hitler found just that many divisions on the Russo-German border in the Bialystok region! Hitler admits this much when he discusses the operation with the Finnish leader Mannerheim in a secretly recorded conversation (The only time you'll ever hear Hitler speak normally - he had a very deep voice in fact)
This I can easily agree with, and I've listened to the conversation and found his voice to be surprising. But yes, they severely underestimated not just the Soviets' equipment and numbers, but their will to fight to the very end in a bloody war as well.

>>136855278
Yeah and it still doesn't make the difference you think it does when you take into account there were already 5 entire armies comprised of dozens of divisions, all reserve troops.

Again, you're not understanding of the 18 divisions sent to Moscow only 6 of them were well equipped to fight. The argument I'm making is they were helpful in a combined effort, they didn't singlehandedly save Moscow like you're trying to push.

>>136855203
>British scholars seem to go against the notion that the British had been a player in planing and orchestrating the coup. They may have supported it, as did the communists, but they did not play a part in it.
British intelligence played a huge part in allowing the opposition to overthrow the government. The Soviets also played a role as well. Theses documents were discovered in Belgrade by the Germans and I assume they were published in the German White Book (If the Germans continued with that practice after 1940)

>>136855242
Stop reading wikipedia, Hitler promised Mussolini he wouldn't go to war prior to 1950 or so and France and Britain weren't ready to attack Germoney even after the declaration of war, France was headed towards a nationalist revolution and Hitler killed it in the egg.

>>136855794
>Again, you're not understanding of the 18 divisions sent to Moscow only 6 of them were well equipped to fight *and actually took park in the counter-attack

File: 686787.jpg (58KB, 501x900px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 501x900px

>>136849805

If they didn't become infamous for breaking treaties they could have created a peace plan and controlled upto the french border and poland.

Instead Hitler embraced his inner Jew and wanted everything. He destroyed Europe and handed it over to Russia and the USA to play with.

Bravo Eternal Kraut.

File: sowjetische-soldaten-deutsche_foto_LEMO-F-8-20_uls[1].jpg (252KB, 1280x1690px) Image search: [Google]

252KB, 1280x1690px

>launching a land invasion of Russia without nukes
WHOOPS

>>136849805
No, they lacked the industry, population, or navy to win.

>>136855916
>France heading to nationalist revolution
If we are talking about revolutions, the only foreseeable revolution I could possibly deduct coming from France at that time (Unless you have proof otherwise) is a communist revolution.
> France and Britain weren't ready to attack Germany even after the declaration of war
That's the point though. They declared war on Germany and either Germany struck first or allow them build the resources on the continent and face a WWI situation all over again. Germany simply struck first, which was well within her right to do since France and Germany were already at war.
>Promised Mussolini he wouldn't go to war prior to 1950
Things don't always go according to plan do they? Hitler believed that the allies wouldn't go to war over Poland but they did. Now Hitler was forced into war much earlier than he expected and extremely under prepared for the magnitude of war he was faced with (World War that is) He didn't demand Italy to join the war. Mussolini merely saw an opportunity and tried to seize it.

>>136855916
Kek, France didn't know if it wanted to be Communist or if it wanted to be Nationalist, get outta here.

>>136851749
>MUH MOSCOW
You say symbolic victories are the problem but that is the ultimate symbolic victory. You think capturing that city would have won the war? Especially if leningrad and ukraine are in soviet hands? You fucking retards are why napoleon lost, another huge MUH MOSCOW faggot. Hitler was right, you had to economically destroy the soviets. Stalingrad is where the oil came up from baku through the volga, taking Stalingrad was almost as good as taking Baku. Taking ukraine wiped their food, kiev wiped their factories, leningrad wiped their naval port. Everything had a good reason

>>136856278
Britain dindu nuffin. We just went to war over a country we knew we couldn't defend and then rejected all peace offers from Germany because muh Churchill needs to pay off his debts. Wasn't there a new Muslim sex ring discovered in England this week? You should really get on to that but don't state your opposition too loudly old boy, we wouldn't you being arrested for hate speech now would we.

>>136856739
>Especially if leningrad and ukraine are in soviet hands?
I don't think a cities under siege really count as being in Soviet hands.

>>136857040
meant for>>136856914

>>136856928

>Deflecting historical fact to modern news

Really makes you think. Bravo Naziboo you sure showed me.

File: 1475403498807.jpg (19KB, 271x400px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 271x400px

>>136856390

>>136857356
*RAFFS IN MONGRORIAN*

>>136849805
stop fucking around in stalingrad and decapitate their actual political leadership.
stop dicking around avoiding malta.

sue for peace giving up half of captured territory before the US got involved, OR turn on japan and say they dindu nuffin against the US instead of declaring war against them.

It's a crap shoot really. Stalin would have invaded the Reich in 42 or 43 anyways so I don't fault Hitler for Barbarossa. After Fall Blau failed any chance of totally defeating the Soviet Union evaporated. One can argue that invading the Soviet Union in late May instead of late June would have bought 4 more weeks of campaign weather and possibly lend itself to the fall of Moscow. After reading a great deal on Stalin, I doubt he would have capitulated, but the fall of Moscow would have made supplying Leningrad difficult. Also if Moscow fell in say mid to late November of 41, it would have mitigated the ensuing Soviet winter offensive due to the fact the Moscow would have been easier for the Reich to defend, and it was the staging are for the Soviet reserve forces used in the counter offensive. Since the U.S. was already luke warm on sending lend-lease aid to the Soviets, with Moscow and Leningrad in German hands, I doubt any lend-lease aid would have sent to Stalin. With out lend-lease early in the war I suspect Stalin would have sued for peace. Without the east front to contend with, I suspect clearing the Reich out of North Africa would have been difficult and France impossible.
2nd possibly isn't total victory, but a scenario that lets the Reich survive. Hitler abides by Mansteins theory, and after the disaster at Stalingrad, commit to a mobile defense in dept doctrine and attempt to bleed the Soviets out. If the Dneiper offensive failed in 1943, there may have been a negotiated peace giving the Germans just enough time to bolster their defenses in France and hold the winter line in Italy.

File: 1502182926937m.jpg (97KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 1024x576px

>>136849805
Yes, Germany should've pushed straight for Moscow and St. Petersburg and prepare for shitty weather and infrastructure. If Germany would've concentrated those thousands of tanks on Moscow, he would've been done in no time

>>136856739
>>136856554
You don't know shit about French history or pre war politics, the socialist and communist movements were crippled and only recovered during the collavoration and the nationalist ones had massive momentum thanks to the 6 February 1934, not to mention the pacifists and the fascists who were gaining ground thanks to the spotless Italian regime ans the French endorsment of Franco...

>>136858811
>Yes, Germany should've pushed straight for Moscow and St. Petersburg
They did.

>>136856914
Easy there tiger, wipe the foam your mouth next time. I'm sorry, but the capital city is a little more than a symbolic victory, you know being the place where the government and central communications system is located. Get rid of the Soviet government, and obviously all of the Russians wouldn't just quit and let themselves die, but it would create so much chaos that Hitler and his army might have a chance of taking the whole damn country. It's absolutely retarded to think that taking out the entire highly centralized government of the USSR would be a bad or zero-sum move. I wasn't even saying Stalingrad was a bad idea, because even though his plan of complete utter decimation in order to kill communism as an ideology was a large part of his reasoning, the vast oil fields that it led to would decide the winner of the war. It would be a lot easier to fight that battle if the, once again highly centralized, government was taken out. They got to the outskirts of Moscow and could even see the Kremlin in eye sight before the icy cold winter made them stop and then backtrack once Zhukov started his attack in early December.

How come Switzerland was never invaded by Germany?

>>136858811
The Germans would have a 250 mile exposed southern flank had they not cleared out the Kiev pocket. Hitler screwed the pouch come 1942, but in 1941 they did extraordinary with the resources at hand. Basically with the Soviet Union the Reich bit off more then it can chew

>>136858585
>It's a crap shoot really. Stalin would have invaded the Reich in 42 or 43 anyways so I don't fault Hitler for Barbarossa.
This is a thing I always have trouble with. Were the Soviets definitely going to invade in the near future? I remember reading in Kissinger's Diplomacy that they had no clue what Stalin was thinking at the time, or at least conflicting evidence, and that time and the release of records would tell us if he truly did intend on striking first at some point.

I saw someone on here claim a while ago that Hitler should have directed all his forces at Leningrad and Stalingrad so as to take these two cities first, rather than splitting his forces into three as he did. I have no understanding of military strategy so can someone tell me if this is completely retarded or not?

>>136849805
>Invade Sweden for the minerals
>Earlier Barbadossa in March/April
>Alliance with Turkey

These could have done it

>>136859556
>Invade Sweden for the minerals
For what reason? They were already getting their metals from Sweden anyway.

File: Steel_Legion_Trooper.jpg (320KB, 915x1077px) Image search: [Google]

320KB, 915x1077px

>>136858938
They encircled Leningrad. They halted the advance on Moscow and never committed to taking the city. This was actually done because two of the leading military thinkers of the time, Jodl and Brauchitsch, wrestled with the idea of taking everything else and allowing the remaining Soviets to funnel into Moscow, using it as a death trap. The plan didn't work since they couldn't cut them off in the Caucasus by seizing Stalingrad.

>>136859211
>I'm sorry, but the capital city is a little more than a symbolic victory, you know being the place where the government and central communications system is located. Get rid of the Soviet government, and obviously all of the Russians wouldn't just quit and let themselves die, but it would create so much chaos that Hitler and his army might have a chance of taking the whole damn country. It's absolutely retarded to think that taking out the entire highly centralized government of the USSR would be a bad or zero-sum move.

THANK YOU

File: jew_mountain.jpg (144KB, 1024x729px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 1024x729px

>>136859367
>How come Switzerland was never invaded by Germany?

>>136859495
He had all his divisions split

>>136859460
Nipe, Hitler, once again, fucked up, Stalin was the Bismarck of slavs, he wanted pan-slavism but hitler went full muh commies when his israeli handlers chimped out.

>>136849805
no, the ONLY lose condition in the United States Playbook, aka the ONLY world scenario where the United States is at serious risk of capitulation, is a world where someone unites Russian resources with Germany Industry. The absolute be-all end-all goal of U.S. foreign policy is that this condition never be created. The United States would have gotten much more involved much faster if the Soviets had Fallen.

File: World War II in Europe Every Day.webm (2MB, 968x720px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 968x720px

no. hitler should have stopped at austria and czechoslovakia.

>>136859837
>Frog swimming lessons

>>136859712
>>136859367
they held the gold in neutral territory.
there was very little benefit to taking the territory
they literally loaded every single mountain pass with foxholes and explosives as to make them impenetrable or absurdly costly to take, able to be completely collapsed under the mountains, and then clean up for usage.

>>136851320
Capturing iraq or mideast oil does nothing for germany

They still have to get it back to europe. Britain controls the seas.

File: DK grenadier.jpg (171KB, 535x933px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 535x933px

>>136859495
All of the meaty well equipped Soviet div's were in the central sector. According to Hoth in Panzer Operations, the main motorized units were all in the central sector. It would've been a mistake not to tackle every sector. The only area they could have delivered less punch and conserved resources is in the north, where the Soviets did the worst. General Winter takes no sides, for some reason westerners forget that.

>>136860059
As much as I don't have qualms with Ludendorvian and early Hitlerian theory, 1940 and onward were just a series of mistakes for Hitler.

>>136860031
>implying the Soviets or the Western Puppets would allow Germany to survive, making pacifism the easier route to Germany's destruction

>>136860031
Did you know that Croatia was officially the last country that stopped being Nazi?

>>136849805
Did Hitler have plans for Africa?

>>136860140
Faggots should have knocked out Malta and stomped the Allies out of North Africa before even considering invading the Soviets.

>>136860372
nobody gave a fuck until he invaded poland.

>>136860372
Everyone was appeasing Germoney until the final escalation.

>>136860235
Thanks.

>>136860453
The plans were to send the Afrika Korps to help the Italians in their pitiful fighting. They could have went straight to Egypt if they were sensible.

I don't think Africa was an important goal for the Germans considering how little they put into it.

>>136860031
man, that's the greatest webm.

wtf is up with that hold out in ethiopia staying axis for like 2 years while the rest was taken?

>>136859460
Think of Stalin as little finger from GOT. Stalin waited a week after the Reich did invading Poland. He insured that Britain and France declared war on Germany hence freeing him if blame. However, he severely misjudged the capabilities of the Wermacht. Stalin figured that the French, Germans, and British would have fought themselves into mutual civil and economic exhaustion. At the oppertune time, he would have moved into Europe with little opposition. When France fell quickly, he quit the purges and rapidly increased the size of the Red army and reorganized it into an "Offensive" force. The reason why the initial stages of Barbarossa were so successful was due to the Red Army arrayed in an Offensive posture.

File: 1476945443051.jpg (177KB, 682x1024px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 682x1024px

>>136849805
Of course it was. I've done it plenty of times in HoI3, maybe they were just retarded back in the day.

>>136860906
>nu-male fantasy allegory
Helli reddot

>>136849805

yes if they didn't went full autism at dunkirk.

>>136860813
italian and irrelevant, i think.

>>136851256
SHUT THE FUCK UP DRUMPFTARD RUSSIAN IS BAD AND EVIL AND WHITE AND HITLER
KILL ALL RUSSIANS FUCKING KILLL!!!!!!!

File: argyle germany must perish.png (35KB, 502x279px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 502x279px

>>136860535
>>136860560
>Germany and the Soviets invade Poland
>Soviets had agreed and knew when the Germans would invade
>Invasion happens. Who does the west blame?
>Hitler, economic miracle but jewish pogroms. Many jews flee, many detained, many simply leave Germany paid by the Germans with the Haaretz agreement.
>Soviets. No freedom of religion,expression,speech,property rights, and the notorious Gulag system. Soviets kill more of it's peoples than Germany using either accurate or popular numbers by an order of magnitude. Sometimes through purges, sometimes through negligence.
>Surprise! Western powers have nothing to say about USSR invading.
>"MUST KILL GERMANS" - the west
>Generations don't stop to pause why a greater evil wasn't fought for the same reason a lesser one was.(assuming you consider the German reaction at the time evil, I'm being generous because I don't-they were reacting to communism)

>>136860453
Italy wanted Egypt and Sudan to connect Libya to Ethiopia and have its New Roman Empire

>>136861377
1.everyone was appeasing germany
2.above was due to germany being the western bulwark against bolshevsim

Hitler commited many political and tactical mistakes, attacking France backing Japan, invading Russia, going to war so early.while Italy was already engaged in Spain and busy with internal reorg, etc...

The Axis had very bad luck. It's almost as if it was destined to be.
>The winter in eastern Europe was, at that time, one of the coldest and most violent winters ever recorded.
>When the allies landed, Rommel was away at his wife's birthday. The invasion could have happened any day within 1-2 years.

>>136861735
>Hitler commited many political and tactical mistakes, attacking France
But Hitler didn't declare war or invade France first, so try again.

>declare war on Germany to help Poland
>don't lift a finger for Poland

Really makes me think.

>>136861735
yet it was the allied kikery that ruined everything untill today

>>136860109
>they held the gold in neutral territory
That's pretty much what I was suggesting with the pic>>136859712 , also you are quite correct, tanks and logistics suck in mountain passes. Sending ridiculous material to take such a small piece of clay made no sense

File: 2.jpg (193KB, 750x1041px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 750x1041px

>>136861735
Hitler let France go easy. Not much casualties and all you got was nazi like government

>>136861947
You proved my point in your post.

>>136861983
Hitler himself gave ammo to the kikened allies, his ideas were gaining ground worldwide and prior to 1939 he was seen as the bulwark against commies,even in masonic France the SOCIALIST party was aligning with him.

>>136862308
The rising nationalism in France caused the population to side With Pétain Against Hitler。

>>136862352
Where did I prove your point? You symbolically lifted a finger by mounting a pitiful invasion of Southern Germany.

You declared war first, you invaded first. Nowhere did I prove your retarded point right.

>>136851256
>Hitler did listen to his generals

This is actually right as well, but one of the more common mistakes. In his 1942 personal conversation with Mannerheim of Finland, he says he always listened to his generals. So why would anyone believe otherwise?

Amateur historians follow Manstein and I suspect with his popular book Lost Victories he garnered a large amount of modern followers. In the book, he does put the blame on Hitler for not listening to the advice of military sense and some of it's proponents, who conveniently agree with Manstein. BUT, if you read Panzer Operations, going back to Hoth for a minute, a canny reader will find out that Hitler was listening to his Generals, and ones that were higher up and equally as experienced as Manstein. Manstein just didn't like taking orders from people he disagreed with and whined about it in his book, and now we have a large number of amateur historians who read Lost Victories, ignore the rest, and take the wrong lessons from a man who should be renowned for his impudence and arrogance, and instead is now often vaunted as the greatest German general of world war 2.

>>136862565
Are you making up.history as you go ?

>>136862817
Where is my history wrong? Explain this to me.

>>136849805
If he bombed strategic places in England during the battle of Britain instead of just bombing the city, and then taked the island, he could had a better chance of winning.
Also he lost a chance of making Franco join him, the Spanish navy could had helped in the African campaign and against the Usa

>>136861735
>Hitler commited many political and tactical mistakes, attacking France backing Japan, invading Russia, going to war so early.while Italy was already engaged in Spain and busy with internal reorg, etc...

I think you mean 'strategic'. Explain this, because half those things are hands down the right move. Backing Japan for instance, one of the very few countries willing to ally with Italy and Germany while being the most capable of all non-European powers. That's step number one.

Maybe say what you would do differently.

File: Burger smuggie.png (104KB, 1458x835px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 1458x835px

I think the Axis could have won if Britain was knocked out by Germany or if Britain made peace with Germany (probably would have if Chamberlain was still in power, as Chamberlain was very lenient and apologetic towards Hitler in the years leading up to the war, very reluctant to go to war, as can be seen by letting Hitler take Sudetenland AND Czechoslovakia). Firstly, if Britain was not a combatant, there would have been no base for the D-Day invasions, so there would have been no liberation of France, Netherlands and Belgium. If Britain was out, there wouldn't have been a major war in North Africa, Italy probably would not have been invaded and Japan wouldn't be preoccupied with us until they attacked America, so they could be able to go to war with the USSR with Germany. Also, if Britain wasn't involved America wouldn't have been involved in the Western front for the reasons I mentioned. With the Western front stable, Hitler could have allocated more troops to the East. His invasion of the USSR wasn't a mistake in itself, as war was inevitable, and it was best to catch the commies off-guard.

>>136863271
>tl;dr: British army should have either been destroyed at Dunkirk or Oswald Mosley should have seized power

>>136863044
Hitler was favoring the Chinese KMT over Japan for a long time, not gonna write down history but look up where Chiang's adopted son was during the anschluss.

>>136862893
Hitler was a friend of the west, per Daladier and Chamberlain, until he went out of line and forced a declaration of war, the west was so kind with him that the invasion of Poland was disregarded as being justified。

>>136863271
>pic
KEK

>>136863554
>Hitler was a friend of the west, per Daladier and Chamberlain, until he went out of line and forced a declaration of war, the west was so kind with him that the invasion of Poland was disregarded as being justified。
Are you going to point out where my history is wrong or are you just retarded?

>>136850240
Stalin was a paranoid maniac who killed tens of millions farmers because he thought they'd oppress the working class and half his cabinet over the years because he was Afraid of assassination. He would have invaded Germany eventually.

File: really makes me think.jpg (597KB, 2731x1385px) Image search: [Google]

597KB, 2731x1385px

>>136863271

>>136849805
>>136850071
reminder finnish meme production would be 20-25% higher today if america hadn't interefered in the war

>>136863653
Are you ?
The invasion of France was unnecessary and the Battle or France itself was enough to align with the Axis... without De Gaulle going and being kept in England, and without resentment.

>>136863789
Point?

>>136863271
True, also it was the americans who forced the Europe to implement the kalergi plan

>>136863935
You didn't even try at all, frogkek.

>>136863955
Declare war on Germany all you want, but don't claim it's because you care about other people's territory being molested.

>>136849805
Yes, abort barbarossa and sue the brits for peace, unify continentmental Europe and proceed from there.

They fucked up on Operation Sea Lion and Barbarossa.

>>136863994
Yes, the (((Americans))).

Yea, if John Titor hadnt gone back and fucked everything up the axis woulda won.

File: 19060122_1961615267408938_6828009390129392698_n.jpg (62KB, 720x710px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 720x710px

>>136863994

>>136864214
>They fucked up on Operation Sea Lion and Barbarossa.

Germans had no chance to invade Britain, because their Navy was a piece of shit and Rommel got his ass kicked by Monty in Africa

>>136864258
Roosevelt and Eisenhover

>>136863875
Benis

>>136864116
We viewed Europe as different to Africa, funnily enough. It's almost like we though Euros and Africans were different races of people.
We didn't go to war because it was morally wrong to invade Poland, but because Germany had to follow the terms of the Treaty of Versailles to ensure stability in Europe, which includes respecting Poland's borders. What borders did the natives of those lands have? It's completely different, with different civilisations and standards. Also, it was mainly France that had the issue with Germany, so we went to war WITH France as we were close allies. I personally think it was thought to play out as a war primarily between France and Germany, with the French thinking that they could dominate Germany. This ambition was cut short and it became a war between Britain and Germany for some time. I'm sure we would have made peace with Hitler under Chamberlain, but (((they))) didn't like him and replaced him with (((Churchill))).

>>136864116
De Gaulle accepted a position in the 1940 Vichy government but was held in England by the birtish government.

File: Who_is_it.jpg (52KB, 680x464px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 680x464px

>>136864396
Eisenhower was a kike and Roosevelt was compromised by communist spies. It's clear who is behind our troubles. Everyone sees it, but nobody has the courage to call it what it is.

>>136864550
Vichy were a bunch of cucks didn't even own half of their country

>>136864550
Stop responding unless you want to substantiate your claim that my history is wrong.

>>136864537
>We viewed Europe as different to Africa, funnily enough. It's almost like we though Euros and Africans were different races of people.
It's almost like that's not even an argument when you're predicating your declaration of war on Germany over conquest being wrong when you've already obtained your war spoils.

>>136849805

Only if America wasn't involved, Spain was, and the UK was invaded by sea.

>>136864617
Whatabout Truman and Lyndon b Johnson

>>136864716
>>136864550
Why did Hitler keep the north of France? Did he think they were ethnically Germanic? I know he planned on splitting England between eastern England, which is more Germanic, and western England, which is more Celtic. Same for France with north and south?

>>136864884
>Why did Hitler keep the north of France?
Wanted German control of coastlines against Britain.

>>136864768


Nice whataboutery

Just because another country invades a country doesn't make it right for a country to invade a country. Difference between Germany and Britain is that Britain brought technology, art and litterateur. While Germany brought destruction

>>136864768
We didn't think it was necessarily wrong, we just wished to preserve European stability, which Hitler was affecting. Our policy was always equality on the continent and a competition for dominance elsewhere. Not saying this is really right.

>>136851256
Did Napolean have Railroads or Radio?

>>136864884
He invaded the south of France in 1942, he took the north because of the access to England and thought that Petain was a puppet so he could leave the south to Italy that wanted Nice.

File: 10621162.jpg (7KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 200x200px

>>136864850
>Presidents run things

The best thing Hitler could have done was not even incite a world war.

Literally stay put and continue being an economical juggernaut and fascism would today be praised and accepted. The Soviet Union would have fallen eventually because of the tremendous upkeep (just like in our time) and hell, chill on the Jews and he'd exclusively own nuclear arsenal.

But no, he had to have a blind ego and ruin it for Europe.

>>136865019
>Nice whataboutery
It's called British and French hypocrisy.

>>136865027
>We didn't think it was necessarily wrong, we just wished to preserve European stability, which Hitler was affecting.
What would be unstable about a German controlled Europe exactly? Warfare tends to lower stability by nature of war being a destabilizing activity.

>Our policy was always equality on the continent and a competition for dominance elsewhere. Not saying this is really right.
It's the opposite of right.

>>136865134
Soviet Union fell in the 90s. I doubt a national socialist and very powerful Germany and a communist and very powerful USSR right next to one another would have maintained peace for that long.

>>136865134
Russia was preparing to invade on the East and sentiment within England was that Germany must be brought to heel. You don't honestly believe the kikes would allow their banking system to be overthrown without a fight.

>>136865310
So when will Canada give back it lands to the Native Americans?

>>136864325
Rommel ran out of supplies. That's the biggest reason why he lost. He couldn't retreat when the Brit's brought in an airstrike and had nothing given to him to counter a Churchills armor. He was set up for failure.

Sealion in 1940 couldn't have worked. If Barbarossa was deferred, it would have been achievable by 1941-42. Goering drew up plans to invade their Mediterranean holdings in 41(Second World War by Fuller). If that plan were accepted, Sealion would have been initiated late 41 or early 42. Friendly reminder that the Germans lost more aircraft to the Soviets than the Brits, and German aircraft production in 1942 exceeded the British. Also, if Speer's industrial program were put into place in 1940, by 1942 they could have put out 2.5x as many planes at 40k.

>inb4 muh royal floating coffins

Torpedo bombers and submarines made ships easy targets. Just look at the Prince of Wales or the Repulse. Using the French coast and captured transports, they could have held off or annihilated most of the RN by late 41, and launched a full attack in early 42. With aircraft production, either the partial mobilization or full mobilization number, would have been enough to fight several Battles of Britain.

So what should have happened:
>1940 goes as planned
>Goerings idea implemented, British colonies from Egypt to Gibraltar are seized by mid 1941.
>1941 Air craft production begins strain the Brits. By early 1942, the Brits have lost numerical supremacy, and can't properly defend neither ship nor port. Without any losses against a Soviet counterattack in this year, the Germans have total air superiority and area denial over the immediate sea lanes.
>Without having to send massive amounts of equipment to operation Barbarossa, Rommel has more than enough supplies,air power, heavier artillery, fuel, and tanks.
>Using Germany's Arabian allies, fuel flows freely keeping the war machine stable with more machines.

It's a problem if the Soviets invade before 1943 though.

>>136865310
Poor wording on my part. I really meant predictability for France and Britain. Europe was changing drastically, and our leaders didn't like it. I'd hate to be a little France next to the powerhouse that is Germany. Consider that France had previously been invaded by Germany unjustly in WWI, and before that was absolutely rekt by Prussia. France always wanted to keep Germany down for France's safety, and we were BFFs with France at that time.

>>136865486
When they stop drinking mouthwash every day.

>>136851256
>Napoleonic era Russia was dependent on the Moscovian railway hub for their transportation

Virtually all major railways met in Moscow. Losing that would have hampered supply and troop transportation so heavily that the Soviets probably wouldn't have been able to recover.

>>136850071
This, in rough lines. Also, they should have pressured Franco a lot more and even threatened with war, to get Gibraltar from the land. From then on, Malta would have been an easy prey and the rest of the Mediterranean would come eventually. The Bongs would have to resupply their troops in Northern Africa either by sailing across the Cape or from India and the Afrikakorps would have it a lot easier with supplying across the Mediterranean. The Suez canal would eventually fall, closing the two entrances to the allies. India would be of less relevance later in the war because the shipping lanes would be 2x as long.

>>136860439
you still haven't stopped though

>>136865134
>be hitler
>shut down jew banks
>seek peace with neighboring countries
>they declare war on you
>get blamed for starting world war 2

>>136849805
Yes. Technology could have changed it all. If the Axis developed the atom bomb...

Why didn't Japan make China a puppet state and attack the Soviet Union?

File: circumcision3.jpg (553KB, 2560x1707px) Image search: [Google]

553KB, 2560x1707px

>>136849805
maybe if he did not declare war on the USSR, but even then I am pretty sure the USSR would've attacked anyways.

Germany had the RAF on the ropes and should have kept fighting them to achieve air superiority instead of blitzing the civilian populations in the cities out of frustration

>>136866153
Chinks and Japs hate each other to death. One can't rule over the other, only kill.

>>136865574
> I really meant predictability for France and Britain
So because France and Britain happened to not be soothsayers about the future of Europe that means that declaring war is somewhat justified, am I getting that right?

>I'd hate to be a little France next to the powerhouse that is Germany.
yeah and I'd also hate to be a small hardware store located right next to a Wal-Mart, do I just accept the times I'm living in and set-up shop somewhere else or do I pipe bomb Wal-Mart?

>>136849805
No. The Soviets set up Hitler so he would take over Europe, and then they could take out Hitler. Imagine all of mainland Europe being in the Soviet Union. That was the plan.

Then Hitler went and invaded Russia a few weeks earlier than expected.

>>136865134
German economy was a house of cards. It was about to collapse which is why hitler started invading

>>136866153
Japan couldn't get inland into China and got BTFO on the Russian front.

>>136866414
Why should Germany be able to determine Europe's future, but Britain and France not?
If that Walmart had invaded you and trashed your store numerous times in your history, then yes. It's a stupid comparison.

>>136866628
>>136866414
To elaborate, why can Germany just declare war on any small neighbouring country and be "justified", but Britain and France not able to intervene? The cognitive dissonance is bretty gud.

File: agent hitler.jpg (16KB, 460x321px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 460x321px

>>136853790

Invasion of France was a Von Manstein plan they luckly had approved after over 9000 difficulties. If germans followed Hitler invasion plan they end up probably blocked by belgians.

Hitler was a strategy retard, thats why Axis lost the war.

>>136849805
If the US had sided with them from the start, absolutely.

We'd could have pressured the UK and France to mind their business and kept friendly with the Japs.

>purged Africa
>purged commies/Marxists
>US conquers entire Western hemisphere and uses IQ based eugenics to sterilize most of the brown people
>Islam and Judaism completely stamped out of existence
>UK keeps it's empire

Would have been great.

>>136849805
>Was it ever possible for the Axis to win WWII
Yes. If the Americans never entered the war.

>>136866544
>What's the Russo-Japanese War
You don't need that
>>136866325
But it worked in Hearts of Iron

>>136849805
I wish map was valid Today ,things would have been so much better for everyone by now ...
t.a Tunisian

>>136866804

Add to this >>136866761

this >>136866804

The moment we declared war on the U.S. because Japan we were doomed.

>>136866628
>Why should Germany be able to determine Europe's future, but Britain and France not?
Why should Britain and France be able to decide the future of lands they don't even have territory in?

Exceptionalism for me, not for thee I guess.

>>136866755
>The cognitive dissonance is bretty gud.
What in the fuck are you talking about? I'm asking you the same question on why Britain and France could do it and all you had to say was:

"I don't think it was really wrong, we just wanted to preserve stability" which is a literal non-argument because warfare in and of itself is a destabilizing action. Stability comes AFTER warfare. You're also bring up the fact Germany declared war on France during WWI not even fucking realizing France and Russia had an alliance with one another, with the latter of the two being the one who was the FIRST to mobilize for warfare.

>inb4 mobilization isn't an act of war
Protip: it most certainly is.

>>136866821
Yes what's an irrelevant conflict, during WW2 Japan attacked Russia and got anihilated prompting the pearl harbor attack。

>>136867257
Both sides are justified in wanting to determine European future, get it? Germany was justified in taking Poland, Britain and France were justified in trying to stop it.
Yes, but look at it from a French perspective.

File: 4444.png (320KB, 1116x493px) Image search: [Google]

320KB, 1116x493px

>>136867488
>Both sides are justified in wanting to determine European future, get it?
Yeah, just one side was with the Jews and the other wasn't. That's the entire difference and it only takes one glance at Europe today to realize the Nazis were in the right.

Maybe you'll one day realize this when you're a rotting corpse lying face down in the mud.

File: Il Dvce & Mosley (Italy 1936).jpg (73KB, 1000x600px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 1000x600px

>>136867488

The only real question is: why based Mosley did not win brit hearts?

>>136867670
>that last sentence
So fucking edgy.
You've diverged from it. Yes, it is unfortunate that Jews influenced Britain and France, but with hindsight you know it led to mass migration. An average British soldier would never have foreseen a Muslim mayor, or a Muslim person, in their country as a result of their fighting.

File: too right mate.jpg (39KB, 396x478px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 396x478px

>>136867914
>but with hindsight you know it led to mass migration.

Gee, if only someone said all of these things would come true. If only there was a last hope.

File: Mosley rally.jpg (61KB, 620x400px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 620x400px

>>136867760
Because Brits were too comfy when Mosley was campaigning. Much like how Hitler was a laughing stock before the depression, where people actually took him seriously. If Britain was as shit as Germany during the depression, Mosley would have probably gained power. I mean, Mosley had loads of support when Britain was relatively comfortable (he held the biggest in-door rally in history, I believe). Add mass discontent and depression and you have a Mosley majority. People very rarely vote for extremists when in comfort.

>>136867914
>So fucking edgy.
Yeah because European stability is the highest it's ever been right? Civil War are totally a silly thing of the past, right?

>Yes, it is unfortunate that Jews influenced Britain and France, but with hindsight you know it led to mass migration.
It doesn't take hindsight to know the Jews have it out for white people, look at the last 20 fucking centuries of them in Europe you absolute clown.

>An average British soldier would never have foreseen a Muslim mayor, or a Muslim person, in their country as a result of their fighting.
A less than average British soldier could have seen this coming a kilometer away, and many spoke of the future of Europe in low-regards when they realized what happened.

File: WW2BLACKED.jpg (50KB, 590x389px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 590x389px

>>136867914
Talk for yourself mate. My granddad was served with Black African soldiers during the fighting in Italy. He told me he never saw men that were fitter or more noble than the swarthy gents he fought with. It's little wonder women back then were going crazy for black blokes, and women today are going crazy for black blokes.

>>136867488
>Both sides are justified in wanting to determine European future, get it?
By the way, is this some form of bullshit relativism? Despite having two completely different goals for Europe they were both in the right despite one of those outcomes being better than the other?

Where do you get your crazy pills?

File: IMG_4728.jpg (83KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 960x960px

>>136863875

This is the real tragedy here fellas

>>136859641
RIDF pls leave

>>136868280
The vast majority of white women don't find black men attractive, both from personal experience and statistics. Your picture is just a few women out of millions.
I know you're joking, but your cuck memes are getting out of hand.
>>136868195
Jews supported the British Empire. The average Brit probably didn't even know that they were Jews, and the Brits in charge would have taken kindly to Jews given that they financed our empire. What you said is ABSOLUTE bullshit. NOBODY would have foreseen mass migration.

>>136868363
Again, hindsight.

>>136868280
Fuck off, Achmed.

>>136852516
except he did one thing wrong and that was losing the war

>>136849805
yeah

File: BLACKEDHOT.jpg (419KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

419KB, 800x800px

>>136868587
Go to any school, college or university in the UK and you will see how 90% of white women have had a black cock in them at some point or another. Just because you bury your head in the sand doesn't mean it's not happening.

File: baitzkrieg.jpg (8KB, 261x152px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 261x152px

>>136868686
>>136868280

>>136868542
>invade a country that you're already getting materials from
>for the materials
Yes.

>>136868587
>What you said is ABSOLUTE bullshit. NOBODY would have foreseen mass migration.
And what are you basing this on exactly? Many people before, during and AFTER the war knew that Germany being destroyed would mean the destruction of Europe.

I'm saying a lot could have seen it, you're saying NO IMPOSSIBLE NEVER COULD HAVE SEEN IT COMING EVER when that's based on nothing in reality.

>>136868776
thats a porn actress my dude

>>136868681
>justified at the time
>but not anymore
They're either justified or they're not. You're saying they're both justified despite having two completely different goals.

The Germans spoke of their eventual goals as did the Allies, so there isn't any hindsight there at all you dumb ass.

>>136868776
Nope. Look at statistics from dating websites, etc. The vast majority have not. I've only seen about three white women with a black my entire life, and most of the time she's a complete whore, fat, ugly or older. Stop being a pessimistic beta faggot.

File: vinceremo.jpg (68KB, 500x666px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 500x666px

>>136868168

>imagine Mussolini in Italy
>Hitler in Germany
>Franco in Spain
>Mosley in UK
>Not to mention Romania, Bulgaria, Finland
>All allied against the soviet leftism cancer

Did we end up in the worst timeline lads?

>>136868934
>has to be paid to get blacked

I almost hate to see bait get ruined this badly

File: okcupid.jpg (105KB, 480x510px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 480x510px

>>136868776
they're literally the ugliest people second to Indians. No hair, Fat nose, there's a reason women avoid them

>>136868834
>during and AFTER the war knew that Germany being destroyed could* mean the destruction of Europe.

File: blackedddddd.jpg (98KB, 747x733px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 747x733px

>>136868965
There are entire towns in Britain where it's full of white women with black babies. I've seen them with my own eyes. Go anywhere in London or near to London and you'll see 10 mixed race babies being pushed around by a white woman for 1 white baby.

>>136868954
What, did the allies mention mass migration? The allies' goals were to stop Germans gaining the dominant hand in Europe. The Germans wanted to gain the dominant hand in Europe. Neither party is at fault.
I'm honestly fed up of arguing with you. You clearly are a Wehraboo who has a hard-on for Germans and can only see history from one modern perspective. You can add this to your list of internet arguments won, I really dgaf.

>>136869187
Why have you got pictures of black men with white girls? You're either a demoralisation shill or you're a paranoid cuck. I've been to London, southern England, western England, northern England, my home country of Wales, and have never seen a single respectable white woman who wasn't a slag, fat, ugly or old with a black man. It's so rare for me to see the latter types with black men.

>>136849805
Very difficlut since Germany was facing all majour global powers.
Probably only had a chance if Usa stayy´d out and Spain and Portugal really join the axis or something. With Vichy France allied and Italy not moving, it would be possible.

>>136869024
Most certainly. The world you described is the best possible timeline I can think of.

File: WhiteRaceBTFO.jpg (50KB, 640x583px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 640x583px

>>136869420
Because I'm proving you wrong. White women love black men while insecure white boys like you and me are left with nothing. The difference is that I accept it while you lash out with racism.

>>136869194
>What, did the allies mention mass migration?
Strawman much? Jewish controlled Europe means more than sending third-worlders into Europe, but that's certainly not limited to just that.

Explain to me how that was such an unforeseeable event given what other kind of kikery was pushed upon Europe.

> The allies' goals were to stop Germans gaining the dominant hand in Europe. The Germans wanted to gain the dominant hand in Europe. Neither party is at fault.
Fucking take your wishy washy relativism and stick it up your fat arse you dumb cunt.

>I'm honestly fed up of arguing with you.
You can't even argue, that's why.

>You clearly are a Wehraboo who has a hard-on for Germans and can only see history from one modern perspective.
You're the one saying all the different perspectives were justified. You're seriously so fucking stupid it hurts to read what you're spouting.

File: infighting.png (689KB, 1592x1690px) Image search: [Google]

689KB, 1592x1690px

>>136869622
even groid females despise groid males, there's a reason they have to resort to rape to get any women

>>136869622
You're pathetic. Again, you're a nigger, a shill or a cuck. No girl I have been with or girl I have known personally at all has expressed any attraction to blacks. You have all these pictures of whites with blacks, you are so obviously a shill.
>>136869642
>you can't even argue
Grow up, virgin. I can guarantee you're either a skinny pale-skinned weakling or a fat tubbo lardarse. If you weren't a complete failure in life, you wouldn't take arguing with randoms on the internet so fucking seriously. Show me a picture of your internet arguments won tally chart, m8. I'm laughing at you.

>>136849805
If Poland chose not to be retarded, I think it'd be actually quite likely. I mean, France in 1940 had to fight more or less the same force Poland fought and if Germany attacked a year in advance...

>>136849805
Maybe if general walther weaver had lived another 5+ years

File: 1468614104038.gif (847KB, 350x197px) Image search: [Google]

847KB, 350x197px

>>136869939
>Grow up, virgin. I can guarantee you're either a skinny pale-skinned weakling or a fat tubbo lardarse. If you weren't a complete failure in life, you wouldn't take arguing with randoms on the internet so fucking seriously. Show me a picture of your internet arguments won tally chart, m8. I'm laughing at you.

File: yourdaughter.png (542KB, 497x721px) Image search: [Google]

542KB, 497x721px

>>136869939
Yes I am a "cuck". And what are you? A sad little racist lashing out at black people online for taking his women. Grow up mate. Your mum and your sister probably took black cock at some point, and so will your future daughter. Women love black men but white men are insecure, so they have to hide it.

>>136870261
You probably have something against white people if you save all of these pictures and spam them. How would your mother react if she saw those pictures on your computer? She'd be shocked, and then she'll fucking laugh at how pathetic you are. How many girls have you personally been with? From your obsessive nature, I can tell 0.

File: axis and allies 1.gif (107KB, 1480x625px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 1480x625px

also to answer OP, to win ww2 would mean invading Poland first instead of collecting various other tiny neighbors which helped the anglos build their war mongering up against Germany.
If Hitler invaded Poland first, it's likely there would be no response from the west and then Germany could have continued to invade Soviet Union thus solidifying a victory in the culture war and making it impossible for the west to declare war on Germany from thereon.

>>136870092
KEKKKKKKKKK

File: 1501173366329.jpg (15KB, 600x375px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 600x375px

>>136870261
t. Based "British" Black man

File: 1318199516002.png (47KB, 645x773px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 645x773px

>>136869024
>>136869616

I cant read these things...right in the feels. Too brutal.

>>136851256
Moscow was a glorified fortress in Napoleon's time, it didn't house the kind of industry that the Soviet Moscow did.

>>136870261
u got problems bro

File: Oswald Mosley looking quite old.jpg (65KB, 468x356px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 468x356px

>>136870570
>Germany annexes Sudetenland
>Britain accepts it
>Germany annexes Czechoslovakia, which they have NO claim to whatsoever
>Britain allows it
>France and Britain warn Germany not to declare war on Poland
>Germany declares war on Poland
How are we the warmongers in that scenario? I like Hitler, but this revisionism is on a ridiculous level.
>>136871082
How do you think Mosley felt?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fng3Vdte7mw

>>136871468
>claims best timeline is a fascist Britain and Germany
>also says Britain were not the warmongers and Germany were the aggressors, both somehow being justified at the same time
>tells me I'm a Nazi Wehraboo fucking WHITE MALE
Can you make up your mind?

>>136871468
I would do the same as Hitler. If France and Britain think they have some authority over central and eastern European matters when they are extremely weak and pathetic with millions of unemployed and plummeting birth rates- then they deserve one last big smack before we both go down in flames.
Really dislike anglos and french.

>>136871830
What am I exactly confused about? You must have a small, one-track mind. I'm not saying that the fact that the war happened was good for Britain, but saying we were warmongers is false. If you studied history, you would know that Nevile Chamberlain was extremely lenient towards Germany. It wasn't until Churchill came into power that we became completely unreasonable towards Germany. I'm fed up of the "Eternal Anglo" meme.
Also, how long have you been waiting to call me out on something again?

>>136871989
With that logic, what business does Hitler have in Czech and Polish affairs?

File: angloss.jpg (532KB, 1484x1127px) Image search: [Google]

532KB, 1484x1127px

>>136872117
Britain was war mongering against Germany.
It is naive to claim any major nation at any point in history is not war mongering against an outside element- it is simply important to pin down who their focus is on.

This is where we come to the conclusion that Hitler was right. Hitler was war mongering against jews, communism, and Soviet Union.
Britain meanwhile was war mongering against Germany when it should have been war mongering against soviet union and communism.

(((nevile chamberlaine))) and why did anglos somehow let this obvious member of the tribe become their prime minister?

>>136872117
>but saying we were warmongers is false
Germany declares war, they're warmongers, Britain and France declare war they're not.

Got it.

>If you studied history, you would know that Nevile Chamberlain was extremely lenient towards Germany.
Actually if you studied history you'd realize Chamberlain was reluctant about appeasing Germany and going as far as to declare war the third time he went for new territory.

>t wasn't until Churchill came into power that we became completely unreasonable towards Germany.
That's not entirely true.

>I'm fed up of the "Eternal Anglo" meme.
That's where you're getting a little confused. It's a mix of both Eternal Anglo and Jew.

>>136872191
Maybe the fact that Czechoslovakia and Poland contained ethnic Germans and the very same kikes that tried to turn his nation into a pile of rubble?

>>136872191
Because there are significant number of ethnic Germans living in them and are also on the road to Soviet Union?
It is impossible to invade Soviet Union without going through Poland.
Does Hitler have to spell out his intention? Well he technically did already.

File: churchillwhite.jpg (35KB, 850x400px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 850x400px

>>136872479
>Chamberlain: "No doubt the Jews aren't a lovable people; I don't care about them myself; but that is not sufficient to explain the Pogrom."
Churchill, the fat cunt that he was, wanted war with the USSR too after Germany was defeated. Churchill was the person to, in the eyes of many, announce the existence of the cold war, coining the "iron curtain" term. He probably hated the USSR more than he did Germany.

File: 1496662641008.jpg (44KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 640x480px

>>136871468

What a missed opportunity of making Europe Great Again!

Let's hope, at least, brexit has triggered the downfall of the leftist/allies victory project after ww2, so we could be friendly neighborhoods but without soviet style EU institution.

>>136872664
What Germans were in Warsaw? What Germans were in Prague? Silesia and Danzig =/= all of Poland, all of Czechoslovakia =/= Sudetenland.
I never said the Germans were warmongers, not that that is a bad thing. I'm just saying, to say that we out of the two parties were warmongers is stupid.
Chamberlain is criticised today by Jews and Marxists because he was too appeasing to Germany. That's why he was removed by Jews.

>>136872783
Except Churchill actively lobbied on behalf of the communists over the whites during the Russian civil war.
Regarding British support to anti-communist elements in Russia during the civil war, Churchill said he would no longer support anti-communists in Russia if they continued to be anti-semitic.
This can be seen as a catalyst, and that once again if it was between an anti-semite, and a communist- Churchill sides with the communist. And this was the reality.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_movement#Ideology

File: perfecteurope11.png (359KB, 2148x1560px) Image search: [Google]

359KB, 2148x1560px

>>136849805
No
>Wants to be ruled by Germany and Italy
Argentinian, obviously

File: greater_spanish_empire_by_generalhelghast-d3brvgq.jpg (84KB, 900x470px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 900x470px

>>136863789
Spanish empire best empire fucking leaf

>>136873076
>why invade [country] ?
>because [country] has [thing]
>BUT [city] DOESN'T HAVE ANY [thing]

Also like the other leaf mentioned, it's kind of hard to invade the Soviet Union when Poland is in the way.

Germany never had the resources or industry for a long-term war.

That's why they were planning Blitzkrieg. Barbarossa was supposed to result in a victory before winter 1941/42, when that failed the war was lost.

I'd say they had a ten percent chance to win WWII. 20% at best.

A far more realistic chance of success would have been if they kept the relations with the SU good, or even turned it into an alliance. Germany, Italy, Japan and the Sovietunion against the British empire, later expanding it against US interests.

It came close to an alliance, Molotov was in Berlin for that purpose at least once. Alas, it never worked out.

>>136873351
Best inquisitors, bless the Spanish empire

>>136873351
You're not Spanish you dumb beaner.

>>136863756
>Stalin was paranoid
>Hitler invaded first
Even if Stalin was paranoid Hitler's invasion vindicated his paranoia.

>>136873953
Except the alliances were already formed way before ww2 even happened. Spanish Civil war is where the lines in the sand became obvious.

France and Soviet Union aided the commie republic, while Italy and Germany aided Franco.
They were on opposite sides since the start.
France being so cucked it was aiding the spanish republic even though it knew the soviet union was propping it up.

Even Britain wasn't this cucked and stayed out of the civil war.

File: download (3).jpg (7KB, 243x207px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 243x207px

>>136871468

Why we are doomed to this instead out great future...