Could Hitler win WWII IF... he had divine foresight...

[Shofercia]

No, he wouldn't. Here's the thing: as the Great Patriotic War went on, the Red Army became progressively better, while, prior to 1944, Nazis stagnated, and after, got the shit kicked out of them. If Nazis weren't to be stopped at Stalingrad, they'd be stopped elsewhere. The Great Patriotic War was the most important Front of WWII, and you cannot win a war, without winning the most important Front.

Well France kind of tumbled through the hundred years war. England won most battles but in the end France won the war.

Possibly, but when you have one army becoming progressively better, and another stagnating, and the armies are each able to initially defend and counterattack, you can figure out who's going to win the war eventually. Blitzkrieg not so good against Russia, where you have Heroic Defense by the population, and a bunch of land. Throughout the Great Patriotic War, the Red Army held the terrain advantage. It was only lost after Operation Bagration, but by that point, the Red Army didn't need it.

[New Carloso]

The real question is how did the fucking textbook get in the past? Was it through a technology that so many yearn to go back in time to kill Hitler?

Surely somebody could have provided a better source for Hitler to win with than the canker on the ass of historical scholarship that is The American Pageant.

Agreed. Maybe The Neutral Book of Unbiased Information on World War II.

[The Tiger Kingdom]

Surely somebody could have provided a better source for Hitler to win with than the canker on the ass of historical scholarship that is The American Pageant.

Like today's edition of the Daily Mail?

At least he'd be contented there that his opinion on foreign immigrants has carried into the future.

[Hathradic States]

No.

Even with God on their side, the Axis had no fucking hope of winning WWII.

[Benuty]

No.

Even with God on their side, the Axis had no fucking hope of winning WWII.

Total victory is not the ultimate definition of winning.

[Lorkhan]

Keep in mind that Hitler was warned several times not to do the hings he did by his top advisers. Whatever the cause of the dream, Hitler could have argued it in several different ways. In fact he already believed that victory was the destiny of Germany. He certainly already believed that he was manifesting the work of God, so the dream may not have been relevant, and given the way dreams work in the real world and the possibility of divine foresight he may have actually had Hitler could have already seen the fate of the war in his dreams and ignored them.

I don't think a history book from the future would have changed much of anything.

[The Tiger Kingdom]

Surely somebody could have provided a better source for Hitler to win with than the canker on the ass of historical scholarship that is The American Pageant.

Agreed. Maybe The Neutral Book of Unbiased Information on World War II.

If that's a jab at me, try reading Pageant for yourself and see what you're defending.
That time-traveler must've just been choosing stuff at random, really.

[God Kefka]

The real question is how did the fucking textbook get in the past? Was it through a technology that so many yearn to go back in time to kill Hitler?

Surely somebody could have provided a better source for Hitler to win with than the canker on the ass of historical scholarship that is The American Pageant.

You don't like that book? You've read it?

I know it at least covers the battles but the language in that book from time to time... is so biased and pro-American. It's also poetic and over-dramatic in the extreme...

Just off the top of my head I recall some quotes (not word for word but to the general effect of)":

''As Japan's bamboo empire is toppling down...''

''(referring to the USSR and Germany)... there may well be a chance that the two giants will slit their throats on the icy shores of Siberia.''

''the forces of righteousness will prevail as they did in 1917...''

At times you forget this was supposed to be a textbook.

[Luziyca]

Agreed. Maybe The Neutral Book of Unbiased Information on World War II.

If that's a jab at me, try reading Pageant for yourself and see what you're defending.
That time-traveler must've just been choosing stuff at random, really.

Or he wanted to kill Hitler, but forgot his weapon.

[Benuty]

If that's a jab at me, try reading Pageant for yourself and see what you're defending.
That time-traveler must've just been choosing stuff at random, really.

Or he wanted to kill Hitler, but forgot his weapon.

Unless the time traveler was killed and his knapsack discovered.

[Shofercia]

Actually, I can, since over 70% of fighting occurred on that Front. You're welcome to read Col. David Glantz to get a confirmation about my statement.

I don't think you read what I posted.

I did. Now, let's say the U-Boats triumph. Welp, the USSR still gets supplies from Vladivostok. So no biggie there. Salerno played a minor role in the grand scheme of things. And by the time of Normandy, Nazis were already retreating. Normandy was a brilliant battle, one for which Ike has my eternal respect. But the Great Patriotic War had numerous brilliant battles and operations. Normandy vs Moscow, Stalingrad, Kursk, Bagration and Berlin, well, that's like, at least, 5 on 1. As for the air war, it certainly helped, but it wasn't the deal maker or deal breaker.

[The Tiger Kingdom]

Surely somebody could have provided a better source for Hitler to win with than the canker on the ass of historical scholarship that is The American Pageant.

You don't like that book? You've read it?

I was a high-schooler in America once, yes.

I know it at least covers the battles but the language in that book from time to time... is so biased and pro-American.

Well, that's kind of to be expected from a history textbook to focus on the country its profiling.

It's also poetic and over-dramatic in the extreme...

Just off the top of my head I recall some quotes (not word for word but to the general effect of)":

''As Japan's bamboo empire is toppling down...''

''(referring to the USSR and Germany)... there may well be a chance that the two giants will slit their throats on the icy shores of Siberia.''

''the forces of righteousness will prevail as they did in 1917...''

At times you forget this was supposed to be a textbook.

I just remember when it talked about the annexation of Texas - it decided to use a marriage metaphor that went on for fucking pages and got really, really twisted.

[New Carloso]

Agreed. Maybe The Neutral Book of Unbiased Information on World War II.

If that's a jab at me, try reading Pageant for yourself and see what you're defending.
That time-traveler must've just been choosing stuff at random, really.

...I have read some of the American Pageant and I am not defending it.

[Hathradic States]

No.

Even with God on their side, the Axis had no fucking hope of winning WWII.

Total victory is not the ultimate definition of winning.

They wouldn't have been able to defeat the Russians or the US.

Reason being: the USSR is just big. They would never have been able to occupy it, and Stalin was willing to fight all the way to the Urals, which would have stretched the Nazis too thin. Maybe if the Japanese jumped on Siberia would they have had the chance to win, but...

Japan never could have beaten the US. In order to defeat us, they would have had to shut our industrial capacity down, which was impossible for them to do. They wouldn't be able to occupy the West Coast for more than a week at best, if at all. They would have had a heavy partisan resistance, as well as a giant ass country to try to occupy.

Unless they got help from the Nazis, would would have been wrapped up fighting His Majesty's Royal Navy as the Soviets, which means they would never have been able to get support to the Japanese.

So, yeah, it was hopeless.

[New Carloso]

You don't like that book? You've read it?

I was a high-schooler in America once, yes.

I know it at least covers the battles but the language in that book from time to time... is so biased and pro-American.

Well, that's kind of to be expected from a history textbook to focus on the country its profiling.

It's also poetic and over-dramatic in the extreme...

Just off the top of my head I recall some quotes (not word for word but to the general effect of)":

''As Japan's bamboo empire is toppling down...''

''(referring to the USSR and Germany)... there may well be a chance that the two giants will slit their throats on the icy shores of Siberia.''

''the forces of righteousness will prevail as they did in 1917...''

At times you forget this was supposed to be a textbook.

I just remember when it talked about the annexation of Texas - it decided to use a marriage metaphor that went on for fucking pages and got really, really twisted.

Textbooks in Ireland particularly on History are fairly unbiased.

[Benuty]

Total victory is not the ultimate definition of winning.

They wouldn't have been able to defeat the Russians or the US.

Reason being: the USSR is just big. They would never have been able to occupy it, and Stalin was willing to fight all the way to the Urals, which would have stretched the Nazis too thin. Maybe if the Japanese jumped on Siberia would they have had the chance to win, but...

Japan never could have beaten the US. In order to defeat us, they would have had to shut our industrial capacity down, which was impossible for them to do. They wouldn't be able to occupy the West Coast for more than a week at best, if at all. They would have had a heavy partisan resistance, as well as a giant ass country to try to occupy.

Unless they got help from the Nazis, would would have been wrapped up fighting His Majesty's Royal Navy as the Soviets, which means they would never have been able to get support to the Japanese.

So, yeah, it was hopeless.

This would have to require a WW2 in progress rather than Hitler gaining the knowledge before German forces marched into Poland.

[Evil Lord Bane]

The whole outcome of the second world war in Europe could have been changed if:

1.Germany waited two years before starting the war. Had they waited to invade Czechoslovakia until 1940, they would have been out of bankruptcy, and the whole war would have gone much better for them.
2. Hitler didn't second guess his generals. As a corporal in the first world war, Hitler had no idea how to run a military campaign. He should have left the running of the war to those who had an idea of how to do so.
3. Close the first front before opening the second. If Germany waited until they defeated England before attacking the USSR, things would have turned out much better for them.
4. Attacked Moscow before turning south to Keiv. Hitler ordered his army to turn south and take the city of Keiv when it was only 300 miles away from an undefened Moscow. If he had taken that first, then turned south to take the city of Keiv, the Russian capital would have been in German hands before the onset of winter. As it was, by taking Keiv first, the German army returned to face a much better defended Moscow, right at the onset of winter, for which the Germans where not prepared for.
5.Germany's biggest probelm in the second world war was logistics and fuel. They have no domestic sorce of petro fuel and spent the war trying to secure a sorce of it. The logistal problems grew worse as the supply lines grew longer, and the army was not equipped for winter fighting when they faced their first Russain winter. Had they solved these probelms early on, things would have gone much better for them

[Shofercia]

Knowing the mindset of Hitler and his character the chances are he would just dismiss it and claim a disloyal general placed it on his desk. The general accused would then commit suicide a la Rommel style to "save their honor". War continues as it did.

Then early 1943 after Stalingrad/Kursk Hitler realises it was not a joke, accuses another general of disloyalty for telling him before that the first general planted the book to trick him. That general then shoots himself but it's to late to do anything about it, America are already in the war and Russia are on the offensive.

Late 1944 is when it will get interesting, what will the allies do? Hitler knows they will assault Normandy, it's really heavily defended and they lose. Many say Hitler wanted to sue for peace in the west anyway in late 44 so now does he have the bargaining power to get it? More to the point with Churchill saying we should continue the war and fight the Russians and with Hitler able to show then what will happen and the Commies plan will the west join forces to fight Stalin? Or will they sit back and let them annex the whole of continental Europe?

Oh for crying outloud, it made no strategic sense for the Allies to fight one another. Also, if Normandy was heavily defended, and Calais was left open, don't you think that Ike would've hit Calais instead?

[Benuty]

The whole outcome of the second world war in Europe could have been changed if:

1.Germany waited two years before starting the war. Had they waited to invade Czechoslovakia until 1940, they would have been out of bankruptcy, and the whole war would have gone much better for them.
2. Hitler didn't second guess his generals. As a corporal in the first world war, Hitler had no idea how to run a military campaign. He should have left the running of the war to those who had an idea of how to do so.
3. Close the first front before opening the second. If Germany waited until they defeated England before attacking the USSR, things would have turned out much better for them.
4. Attacked Moscow before turning south to Keiv. Hitler ordered his army to turn south and take the city of Keiv when it was only 300 miles away from an undefened Moscow. If he had taken that first, then turned south to take the city of Keiv, the Russian capital would have been in German hand before the onset of winter. As it was, by taking Keiv first, the German army returned to face a much better defended Moscow, right at the onset of winter, for whch the Germans where not prepared for.
5.Germany's biggest probelm in the second world war was logistics and fuel. They have no domestic sorce of petro fuel and spent the war trying to secure a sorce of it. The logistal problems grew worse as the supply lines grew longer, and the army was not equipped for winter fighting when they faced their first Russain winter. Had they solved these probelms early on, things would have gone much better for them

I think you mean Poland....

[New Carloso]

Knowing the mindset of Hitler and his character the chances are he would just dismiss it and claim a disloyal general placed it on his desk. The general accused would then commit suicide a la Rommel style to "save their honor". War continues as it did.

Then early 1943 after Stalingrad/Kursk Hitler realises it was not a joke, accuses another general of disloyalty for telling him before that the first general planted the book to trick him. That general then shoots himself but it's to late to do anything about it, America are already in the war and Russia are on the offensive.

Late 1944 is when it will get interesting, what will the allies do? Hitler knows they will assault Normandy, it's really heavily defended and they lose. Many say Hitler wanted to sue for peace in the west anyway in late 44 so now does he have the bargaining power to get it? More to the point with Churchill saying we should continue the war and fight the Russians and with Hitler able to show then what will happen and the Commies plan will the west join forces to fight Stalin? Or will they sit back and let them annex the whole of continental Europe?

Oh for crying outloud, it made no strategic sense for the Allies to fight one another. Also, if Normandy was heavily defended, and Calais was left open, don't you think that Ike would've hit Calais instead?

Aye. Every heard of United we stand, divided we fall.

[Lorkhan]

The whole outcome of the second world war in Europe could have been changed if:

1.Germany waited two years before starting the war. Had they waited to invade Czechoslovakia until 1940, they would have been out of bankruptcy, and the whole war would have gone much better for them.
2. Hitler didn't second guess his generals. As a corporal in the first world war, Hitler had no idea how to run a military campaign. He should have left the running of the war to those who had an idea of how to do so.
3. Close the first front before opening the second. If Germany waited until they defeated England before attacking the USSR, things would have turned out much better for them.
4. Attacked Moscow before turning south to Keiv. Hitler ordered his army to turn south and take the city of Keiv when it was only 300 miles away from an undefened Moscow. If he had taken that first, then turned south to take the city of Keiv, the Russian capital would have been in German hands before the onset of winter. As it was, by taking Keiv first, the German army returned to face a much better defended Moscow, right at the onset of winter, for which the Germans where not prepared for.
5.Germany's biggest probelm in the second world war was logistics and fuel. They have no domestic sorce of petro fuel and spent the war trying to secure a sorce of it. The logistal problems grew worse as the supply lines grew longer, and the army was not equipped for winter fighting when they faced their first Russain winter. Had they solved these probelms early on, things would have gone much better for them

I remember reading somewhere that Hitler was forced into attacking Russia, because he feared that they would turn on him first.

EDIT: What were the chances of the Germans scoring a deal with the US that may have helped them in the war before the war actually happened?

[Evil Lord Bane]

The whole outcome of the second world war in Europe could have been changed if:

1.Germany waited two years before starting the war. Had they waited to invade Czechoslovakia until 1940, they would have been out of bankruptcy, and the whole war would have gone much better for them.
2. Hitler didn't second guess his generals. As a corporal in the first world war, Hitler had no idea how to run a military campaign. He should have left the running of the war to those who had an idea of how to do so.
3. Close the first front before opening the second. If Germany waited until they defeated England before attacking the USSR, things would have turned out much better for them.
4. Attacked Moscow before turning south to Keiv. Hitler ordered his army to turn south and take the city of Keiv when it was only 300 miles away from an undefened Moscow. If he had taken that first, then turned south to take the city of Keiv, the Russian capital would have been in German hand before the onset of winter. As it was, by taking Keiv first, the German army returned to face a much better defended Moscow, right at the onset of winter, for whch the Germans where not prepared for.
5.Germany's biggest probelm in the second world war was logistics and fuel. They have no domestic sorce of petro fuel and spent the war trying to secure a sorce of it. The logistal problems grew worse as the supply lines grew longer, and the army was not equipped for winter fighting when they faced their first Russain winter. Had they solved these probelms early on, things would have gone much better for them

I think you mean Poland....

No, he went after Czechoslovakia first (1938). Poland was next (1939).

[Benuty]

I think you mean Poland....

No, he went after Czechoslovakia first. Poland was next.

Poland was under an alliance of mutual guarantee with the United Kingdom and France (among others). That is the official start of the war in Europe not the invasion of Czechoslovakia.

[The Tiger Kingdom]

I don't think you read what I posted.

I did. Now, let's say the U-Boats triumph. Welp, the USSR still gets supplies from Vladivostok. So no biggie there.

Not nearly in the same volume, and with a corresponding massive increase in transport time. Effectively, you've cut two of Russia's three major accessible ports (Murmansk and Archangelsk) entirely out of the picture and put the sole strain on one port about 2,000 miles away from the front. That's "no biggie"? You've just cut supply capacity by 66% and increased traveling time and distance by a massive amount.

Salerno played a minor role in the grand scheme of things. And by the time of Normandy, Nazis were already retreating.

Because of the massive (and elite - a great number of Panzer and SS Panzer divisions were in France) number of forces that they had to pull back to cover France, not to mention because of the fact that the Luftwaffe had been stretched thin and annihilated by the 8th Air Force and Bomber Command. If Germany was fighting a one-front war with the Luftwaffe un-destroyed and no reason to hold back their forces in the West, it would not have turned out well for Russia.

Normandy was a brilliant battle, one for which Ike has my eternal respect.

I mean the Western Front as a whole here, not separately - Africa and Italy and France bundled together.

But the Great Patriotic War had numerous brilliant battles and operations. Normandy vs Moscow, Stalingrad, Kursk, Bagration and Berlin, well, that's like, at least, 5 on 1.

Let's all agree to not count the Bulge, Alamein, all of Italy, and the deceptions that kept dozens (literally) of German divisions out of battle on either front waiting for attacks that never came.
We may have been facings smaller forces numerically, but on the whole Western forces were facing more elite troops led by better commanders.

As for the air war, it certainly helped, but it wasn't the deal maker or deal breaker.

Not convinced, and the statistics don't really back you up. Neither does the testimony of many of the surviving German officials, including Albert Speer, Minsiter of Armaments, who would know.
The air war annihilated the Luftwaffe (who were never really equalled or exceeded by the VVD in any way other than numbers) and destroyed German industrial capacity just as it was starting to finally gear onto a practical, mass-production mentality. it destroyed Germany's oil supplies, rail transport, road transport, bridges, power stations, and strained Germany's workforce to the limit.

[Shofercia]

The whole outcome of the second world war in Europe could have been changed if:

1.Germany waited two years before starting the war. Had they waited to invade Czechoslovakia until 1940, they would have been out of bankruptcy, and the whole war would have gone much better for them.
2. Hitler didn't second guess his generals. As a corporal in the first world war, Hitler had no idea how to run a military campaign. He should have left the running of the war to those who had an idea of how to do so.
3. Close the first front before opening the second. If Germany waited until they defeated England before attacking the USSR, things would have turned out much better for them.
4. Attacked Moscow before turning south to Keiv. Hitler ordered his army to turn south and take the city of Keiv when it was only 300 miles away from an undefened Moscow. If he had taken that first, then turned south to take the city of Keiv, the Russian capital would have been in German hands before the onset of winter. As it was, by taking Keiv first, the German army returned to face a much better defended Moscow, right at the onset of winter, for which the Germans where not prepared for.
5.Germany's biggest probelm in the second world war was logistics and fuel. They have no domestic sorce of petro fuel and spent the war trying to secure a sorce of it. The logistal problems grew worse as the supply lines grew longer, and the army was not equipped for winter fighting when they faced their first Russain winter. Had they solved these probelms early on, things would have gone much better for them

1. Germany waits two years. Red Army recovers from Stalin's Idiotic Purges. Germany gets ass handed to them by 1942, 1943 at the last. Red Army dines in Paris.
2. Hitler usually started going after his generals, after they failed to initially deliver.
3. See point 1.
4. That would leave a huge Army in Kiev; also, Moscow wasn't undefended. And even if they took Moscow, so what? Napoleon took Moscow, how'd that work out?
5. How do you solve the problem of logistics early on, when you have Patriotic Partisans blowing your ammunition dumps over fast stretches of land?