My thoughts are:
>Italians not fucking around losing wars in the Balkans, instead concentrate on helping in the war against the Soviets
>Turkey joining the Axis
>Invasion of Sweden for the manpower and more resources
>An earlier Barbadossa immediately after the winter ends (not June), concentrate on Leningrad and Moscow with full power
>After that focus on bringing down Britain
>Japanese Empire not attacking US territories
Could stuff like this be enough to tip the balance of power?
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
they should've invested in mecha
Turkey was in no shape to fight another war
>the holocaust
that could of worked
Well, I mean, yeah, the extra Jewish soldiers and not wasting resources on the killing machine could have helped too.
I believe that had they pulled a Zimmerman letter during WW2, they could've had Mexico join the Axis and invade the US alongside Japan to prevent the US from sending supplies to Europe.
That's pretty insane, I like it.
They should've scrapped Barbarossa altogether.
To show they weren't going to take Stalin's shit they should've massed troops and installed defensive structures near the Finnish/Soviet border, all the while maintaining friendly trade relations with the USSR to effectively carrot & stick them (Barbarossa was doomed from the start)
With a one front war they could've knocked England out (especially if they switched from terror bombing London to actually attacking valuable military targets)
And If the Japs didn't sperg out and bomb Pearl Harbor they could've helped Germany destroy Britain's superior navy
Realistically their best bet would be to never invade Poland in the first place.
Even defeating France was an absolute miracle, so the Axis's fate was sealed as soon as the war started.
I would say the best way to win would be to ally with the west to take down Russia first.
After that, they would have to rely on defeating the west with the incompetence and indecision that gave them France (against all odds) to begin with.
Pearl Harbor happened to attempt to cripple the US Navy in the Pacific to give Japan a chance to hold on to the Philippines.
In and of itself it wasn't the stupid decision.
the entire purpose was taking down russia, only one could rule europe and the world
It seemed to make sense on the surface, but dragging the entire U.S into the conflict for the sake of gaining an edge in the southeast asia is ridiculous. That move should have waited until Britain fell
Russia would have been more open to compromise regarding dishing out territory if they knew Germany wouldn't have to fight a two front war and if they're alliance with Germany was sufficiently fruitful
I'm saying that Japan assumed war was already inevitable with the attack on the Philippines.
So attacking the Philippines was the stupid move, Pearl Harbor was just to try unfucking it, which utterly failed.
it would be a really really fruitful alliance for russia, its the germans and europe that would get COMMIED shortly after
Also I think it needs to be clarified what "winning the war" actually meant, because the Axis's best-case-scenario endgame is mostly just left to speculation.
invading the Soviet Union in early spring 1941
>offer literally all of the US to mexico
>waiting game to see if churchill chimps out and messes up
>tell mussolini he's a shitty fighter who's stupidity is going to contribute to his larpire
youtube.com
This feels like pretty decent alt-history
Go MMORPG somewhere else, kid.
Mexico was in no position to fight anyone.
They couldn't even retaliate against the Axis until they got equipment sent from the US.
Should've worked more at bringing Britain on side or keeping brits neutral rather than declaring war indirectly by attacking allied countries. Britain was in two minds about war
Having Italy in your side is barely worth anything. It's like having a noob on counterstrike who only uses sniper. Hungary and Romania gave better battalions.
> Attack Dunkirk immediately.
> Instead of sperging out and bombing UK cities, concentrate on RAF Airfields.
> Tell Japs not to bomb USA under any circumstance.
> Do not attack USSR. Simply invest heavily in Nuclear weapons and drop the first one on Moscow without warning.
If they wouldn't have attacked us Japan wouldn't have gotten raped by us
If anything Italy had the better idea by keeping the fighting to territories nobody gave a shit about rather than starting an unbelievably costly and unwinnable war.
Case in point, nobody giving a shit about anything Japan did until it attacked the US.
>>An earlier Barbadossa immediately after the winter ends (not June), concentrate on Leningrad and Moscow with full power
This is just meme Barbadossa didn't failed because winter came, it was logistics catastrophe
this +
>get Spain to join war
Invest all resources in ICBM and nukes. No need to start the war before that.
Or to put it another way, watch and learn from North Korea.
>Turkey
>How could they realistically have won?
Not attacking the US
except it would've gone better if they didn't go south and split their armies further.
>900 miles to moscow?
>nah lets go 2000 miles south to Azerbaijan
>get Spain to join war
they basically did without all the negatives attached
Hitler should have let Italy actually prepare for war instead of just going "muh poland" and attacking without warning. Mussolini clearly spelled out to Hitler that his country was not ready at the moment.
And trying to get Spain involved that may have shut off Gibraltar and access to the med for the British
They HAD to attack Stalin. Stalin has a fully prepared invasion army on the german-soviet border ready to strike, but the germans attack first. Stalin was getting redy to conquer whole europe while Hitler was busy with the fucking english.
...
the plan was to attack at the same time as the soviet union so brits would either have to let it slide or fight a war against both. stalin was trickier though and had some "problems" which delayed the soviet attack for a week allowing brits to safely declare war
There was no way to win it
>germany was doomed right from 1939
>annihilate Britain
>follow Hitler's original plans of capturing Leningrad and Ukraine, then pincer Moscow
>use tabun on the Soviets, unrestricted total warfare
if germany had stopped at their third land grab and diverted all efforts to breaking the allied advance before continuing their goals of conquest they would have won
ultimately it doesn't matter how they would've won, just like it didn't matter to hitler in 1919 how germany could've won ww1
>volunteers
Im talking about capturing Gibraltar and using it to cut off the strait for allies it was heavily fortified and could fuck up British supply lines
You think every Russian would just deactivate after they would capture Moscow? He would need to push at least to Ural. Anyway Hitler pushed toward Caucasus because there were Soviet oil reserves which he needed for already collapsing reinforcement to eastern front.
Germany only had the manpower to fight on a single front at a time.
At the start of the war, they had major technological gaps (they were still using horse-drawn artillery, and had no real attack aircraft to fill the gap, so they retrofitted naval bombers)
In the middle and end of the war, they replaced those gaps with stupid and inefficient weapons to make their lack of manpower and resources even worse.
The usual stuff. Either put the Brits out of the game by negotiations, or continue the Battle of Britain by hitting the RAF, and not go into useless terror bombings. A knocked out RAF would not be able to protect the Royal Navy against the Luftwaffe. Thereby enabling Operation Seelöwe. A ground war in Britain would have been over very quickly indeed.
Your idea about using Sweden for manpower is unnecessary. Not enough population base. With Britain out of the game, nobody but Germany would buy Swedish iron ore. Therefore no need to invade Denmark or Norway. Then when striking Russia, go for the oil wells in the Caucasus, and nowhere else. With no Brits to defend anymore, US would stay out. Give the Japanese free reign over all British, Dutch and French colonies in SEA (and natural resources) in exchange for a second front in Siberia, or possibly a second front through India - Iran going North, enabling their forces to hook up with German forces in Caucasus.
and I forgot one more thing south part of the eastern from was cake walk until late 1941 while around Moscow there was heavy resistance even in early offensives
What killing machine?
no but taking leningrad and moscow would've done alot more than stalingrad or the south ever would have done.
moscow was the center of all russian supply lines. not to mention the fucking up the command and control as well as the symbolism of leningrad and moscow
well they got pretty far on horse draw artillery, but then again weren't other countries also horse drawn?
The push into the Caucasus, at least the more concerted effort in 1942, was directly because the 1941 push for Moscow failed and the front came to a standstill.
That's what Rommel suggested, but anti-zionism was too strong a theme in Germany to attract much willing Jewish manpower.
Deporting Jews instead of wasting resources imprisoning them would have helped, of course.
It would have freed up supplies and manpower.
>axis was only 3 members
>burger education strikes again
The issue was that horse-drawn artillery was too slow to keep up with their doctrine of high mobility. As a result, it barely got used, and German soldiers had to make do with 15-minute response times of air support rather than fast artillery support.
Some other countries had it, but it wasn't as much of an issue because they didn't maneuver as quickly.
Speaking of which, Germany's ability to maneuver was thrown out the window with its later tanks needing maintenance every 15 miles because their engines and transmissions were built for vehicles half their weight.
>annihilate Britain
Easier said than done.
Hitler's biggest folly - by far - was letting the English escape at dunkirk. he should have kill their army to the last man. At that point he could be in a position to negotiate some kind of armistice deal and then turn his full attention to the east.
look at this please if they couldn't make it to Stalingrad they wouldn't make it to Moscow
yes hungary
you were just an affiliate baddie
>Italians not fucking around losing wars in the Balkans, instead concentrate on helping in the war against the Soviets
The Italian Army was weak, underequipped, untrained and poorly led. If it couldn't beat Greece, how could it beat Russia?
>Turkey joining the Axis
Why would they do that?
>Invasion of Sweden for the manpower and more resources
Manpower? The Germans had to deploy 250,000 soldiers just to keep Norway under control. TheyOne German soldier for every eight civilians was the minimum necessary. Sweden's population is double that of Sweden. Germany would have had to deploy nearly a million soldiers just to hold Scandinavia. By any rational metric, Hitler's random invasions of neutral countrie are a major reason for Germany's defeat. Imagine if the 6 million occupation soldiers scattered across Europe had been sent to fight Russia.
>An earlier Barbadossa immediately after the winter ends (not June), concentrate on Leningrad and Moscow with full power
The roads are pure mud immediately after winter. The invasion would have stalled even more quickly than Barbarossa did.
>After that focus on bringing down Britain
How? There was never a situation in which Germany could defeat Britain.
>Japanese Empire not attacking US territories
Look, Spurdo, your whole argument basically amounts to:
>Germany could have won if they'd had farting unicorns that ate everyone Hitler didn't like.
Seriously, fuck off and don't post here again until after your 18th birthday.
Okay, I'll give you Sweden, but wasn't Norway pretty important for Atlantic control though?
This is true too.
>japanese force in iran
how does that geography even work?
>Don't invade Poland
>Maintain buffer zone between Germany and Soviets
>Invade France instead
>Get Turkey to join by offering them a restored Ottoman empire
>Liberate British Middle East and India
>Access to the Middle East means you can flank the Soviet Union in the south and conquer all their oil within the first year
>Invade Poland
>Invade Soviet Union on two fronts (Eastern front and Southern front)
Or:
>Don't start any war and wait for them to come to you while also strengthening Poland
no u
Getting the nuke first and somehow mass producing it. Or at least enough so the allies believed they could produce them easily.
Thats it. There was no other way to win. The US and the Russia had enough material and bodies that they could have won any conventional war.
>but then again weren't other countries also horse drawn
All the Anglo forces in France were completely motorized
pretty sure the BEF was a tad smaller than the german army
Nukes.
Nuking London, negotiating peace with allies, then crushing the ruskies.
I mean in 1944
Oh wait nvm there was actually another way. They could have waged a propaganda war and destroyed their enemies from the inside.
NatSoc actually had a decent amount of support in the US before Hitler went full retard.
Only way Germany could defeat Russia was like Hitler said "kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will fall"
If this doesn't work,nothing will. Germany cannot win wars of nutrition they have no resources. Russia is way too large and big manpower to be conquered like this
I don't get why the fucking Japs decided to attack Hawaii. It was just so fucking dumb. They should have released some tensions with the states (they were heavily westernized since Meiji anyway) and attacked Russia in sync with Hitler in '42.
when did hitler go full retard?
>Jews working in the interest of the German people
lol ok
Yeah the ideological victory seems more likely than the military victory. Germany could have helped other nationalist movements worldwide. Could have destabilized the European empires a decade or two earlier. A lot of communist movements were actually nationalist movements for example the Vietnamese.
>commies were nationalists
After the munich agreement imo.
Pretty much.
>Sweden's population is double that of Sweden
trying to persuade mexico to invade US
it's hard to shake a guy's hand when he's dunking his balls in your pepsi
By building more trucks desu
>trying to persuade mexico to invade US
>believing jooish false flags
>Italians not fucking around losing wars in the Balkans, instead concentrate on helping in the war against the Soviets
Not going to happen. The Italians' conflicts in the Balkans were in their national interest, attacking the USSR was not.
>Turkey joining the Axis
Could have happened, but would have been as helpful as Spain joining (read: not at all).
>Invasion of Sweden for the manpower and more resources
Waste of resources, especially while the war in Russia was going poorly
>An earlier Barbadossa immediately after the winter ends (not June), concentrate on Leningrad and Moscow with full power
Entirely possible to have had some positive benefits. Would have given the Germans more time, and caught a less mobilized Soviet military by surprise. The flip side of this is that Germany may not have been able to mobilize as many troops at an earlier date. Barbarossa was really a tactical failure; if Hitler hadn't micromanaged his officers and ordered them to pursue a foolish policy of constant offensives, and instead allowed them to retreat or stop to consolidate forces, they might have been better prepared.
>After that focus on bringing down Britain
What the fuck do you think the Battle of Britain was? It was impossible for Germany to cross the channel without defeating the Royal Navy, and it was impossible to do that without first subduing the RAF. There was nothing they could have done that they weren't doing, except pull RADAR technology out of their ass.
>Japanese Empire not attacking US territories
Not going to happen. Japan couldn't continue their invasion of China/Southeast Asia without oil. Pearl Harbor was supposed to scare the US into returning to negotiations with Japan. They weren't expecting war in the Pacific with them. They had no real other option, in any case, because their supplies were stretched thin and their mechanization was their only advantage of China and Britain.
>How could they realistically have won?
They should have actually killed all those Jews.
>usa puts trade embargo on Japan
>be surprised when they attack you
The ZOG was already in place then, and they desperately wanted to enter the war, only they could find an excuse. I am on the opinion that even if Japan doesn't attack the USA, they would have made up some other cause.