How could the Axis Powers win WW2?

[Thanatttynia]

I'm not going to pretend to know about weapons or military vehicles to this extent so I will bow to your superior knowledge on this point. But in discussing things like this people have a tendency to promote the idea of Russia as unconquerable when it's nothing of the sort. It's really your opinion that Nazi Europe and Imperial Japan could not have defeated a Russia with a modernised military even without having to worry about fighting any other state?

The Soviet Union in a prepared state, not with units in the middle of redeploying and modernizing as it was IRL, would be a damned brick wall with multiple more brick walls behind it in the west, facing Germany. Japan, meanwhile, was already once bitten, twice shy, when it came to the Soviets. They'd gotten man-handled by the Soviet forces using T-26 and BT tanks, with old model (relative) infantry armament and artillery. If they tried to fight the modernized Soviets in the vast openness of Siberia and Kamchatka? You'd have Soviet high command issuing stop orders to frontline units because there's 2 fronts going on, and while it's great homefront news to be overrunning dozens of kilometers of enemy territory every day, it's a bit hard on the logistics.

If that characterisation of the European front is accurate, it may well be that the war there becomes a stalemate until someone develops a nuclear bomb or they reach another unholy alliance. I'm spitballing here. All this is only a problem assuming the British-German peace is signed after the modernisation of the Soviet military is complete.

[The South Falls]

The simple answer: Britain would not make peace.

I wouldn't be so sure. Britain had its fair share of Nazi sympathisers and even more who believed war with Germany was unnecessary. Had a few historical figures not been around; had the British defeats been more severe or humiliating; had the bombing not inspired so much patriotism; had American aid not been so forthcoming: a combination of any of these things could have led to an early Nazi-British treaty. We did spend the 30s giving them everything they wanted specifically to avoid war, it's not like most politicians were chomping at the bit to start it in the first place.

But Germany was never going to make peace with Britain. Britain was too invested in their own ear. Russia could still win without Great Britain. Plus, what says Germany could have traveled the Atlantic like that?

Hitler was an opportunist, I don't see why he wouldn't have made peace with Britain so as to consolidate his control over mainland Europe and (possibly) focus on Russia. Of course Russia still could have 'won' (lol) but it's conceivable that Germany would win. And Japan and Germany together, absent Britain and Russia, could most likely intimidate America into keeping to their own hemisphere. It's of course possible that given this chain of events America would not go to war against the Axis at all.

Huh? You are aware the Soviets were in the middle of modernizing their military when Germany attacked IRL, yes? And that the German tanks everyone wanks were developed due to combat on the Eastern Front, yes?

That means that come the breakdown of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, the Germans will be attacking with Panzer IIIs with 50mm guns (as always intended for modernization), Panzer IVs with short 75s, and StuGs with short 75s. Do you know what they're running into when they do attack? It's not the T-26 and BT light tanks which Germany padded its kill counts early in the war with. It's production finalized T-34s. T-34s without the wartime corning cutting and emergency expediency measures. It's KV-3s with 85mm guns and armor that makes the non-existent Tiger I blush. It's German Infantry with bolt-action Kar98Ks and MP40s fighting Soviet infantry with semi-automatic SVT-40s and PPSh-41s as standard. If Germany hadn't invaded when it did, if it had waited, the Soviets would be the second military in the world to be issuing a semi-automatic battle rifle as its service weapon.

I'm not going to pretend to know about weapons or military vehicles to this extent so I will bow to your superior knowledge on this point. But in discussing things like this people have a tendency to promote the idea of Russia as unconquerable when it's nothing of the sort. It's really your opinion that Nazi Europe and Imperial Japan could not have defeated a Russia with a modernised military even without having to worry about fighting any other state?

Britain would never accept the peace, that's what the obstacle is here. America's lend lease and Russia's production capacity could have kept it alive for the allies

[Hypron]

1. Hitler would not have sacked his best Generals, including Guderian and Manstein
2. If he didn't declare war on the US, he could have beaten back the Russians out of Moscow and kick Britain out of Africa.
3. If Japan, when bombing Pearl Harbor, had also went for the fuel stocks and submarines tending areas, could have crippled the Pacific Fleet even more.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Has anybody suggested North Africa and Lehi yet?

So there was a Zionist Fascist movement called Lehi.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehi_(militant_group)

They actually wanted the Axis powers to support them and help them establish a Fascist Jewish State. Sound crazy?

You have to remember that the Final Solution wasn't always final. At one point they were considering just kicking all the Jews out of Germany.

So in this scenario, the Afrika Korps is augmented by not only the units that in OTL were sent to Russia, but by units made up of European Jews wishing to settle in Israel. As a result, invading the USSR is put off until the UK is knocked out of the war, with the help of Lehi.

I think we all know the best part of this scenario.

It's not that crazy. Fascism isn't incompatible with being Jewish. Italian Jews were major players in the Fascist Movement there, right up until Hitler made his Italian Social Republic puppet-state and forced them all out.

[North Arkana]

That's a pretty bald-faced lie based upon a single skewed account by a Cold-War defector.

And the Red Army's positions and the very nature of the armament they developed (eg: BT series tanks), and their perceived mobilization.

You don't think a huge nation like the USSR would develop fast moving armor?

1. The V2 is incapable of carrying a WW2 era nuclear warhead.

Absolutely true, however, I was speaking of hypotheticals. I meant to indicate that Germany was well on its way to developing delivery methods (ballistic missiles), and vehicles that could get them in range (missile subs). Who knows what could have been?

What would happen is the US would be dropping nukes with trans-atlantic bombers long before Germany figured out a nuclear capable V-2.

2. Deutschephysik was decidedly unkind to nuclear science, which was Judenphysik. German scientists were so far off base from making a nuclear weapon it's rather comical.

Once again, we are talking of hypotheticals and mistakes that should have been avoided. Though I have doubts that what you are talking about (ie: the dismissal of an entire branch of science) is more than Allied propaganda during and post-war, it is a fact that many great scientists in this field were Jewish and were forced to flee Europe. Many of them ended up working on Project Manhatten. Regardless, the Germans quite far ahead in understanding how nukes were supposed to work.

That's the thing about Nazis, they're so comic bookishly stupid evil, it's hard to believe a lot of the things they actually did.

How? The entire German intelligence apparatus in the UK had been either turned, imprisoned, or killed. And that doesn't even begin to account for the problem of the Abwehr being run by someone actively working to subvert Hitler.

Surely there was at least one agent with a working gun? It had probably more to do with wishing to avoid making a martyr of Churchill and strengthening the resolve of the British. Such sentiments, after all, were common on both sides. In hindsight, we know that Churchill being alive was quite detrimental to the German war effort.

I'm not even joking when I say "the entire German intelligence apparatus". It was literally the entire thing. It's one of the greatest counter-intelligence coups of all time.

Italy didn't have the industrial base to make use of German technology. Tankette production, the tiny little MG armed armored boxes, never rose to levels where you could conceivably have Italy trying to drive Panthers up and down Italian mountains.

Now that is straight up bullshit, which saddens me because most of your post was rather good. Italy had developed its own medium tanks, just too little and too late. Germany should have given them their own medium tank designs much earlier, such as the Pz4, but there's much more than that. Just about everything Italy had was dogshit. Small arms, aircraft, cannons. They had the capacity to build these, just not the designs. Even the odd tankette can be upgunned with say, the long 50cm German gun found on late Pz III's, and suddenly it's capable of taking on Britsh cavalry tanks in the desert. Same with Hungary and Japan, both had domestic medium tank designs and production, but not nearly as good as their German counterparts. I guess even if the Germans sent nothing but advisors to aid development, it could have been a huge help.

You've got it backwards. Italy had the designs. They did not have the industrial capacity. Their largest productions runs were in the low hundred, for "medium" tanks everyone else would have called light.

1. Italy - Mussolini's biggest mistake was joining up with Hitler. Per their Alliance, both countries would have to become actively involved the other's wars in the event of war in Europe. Mussolini knew Italy wouldn't be ready for war until 1942; something Hitler also knew, yet totally disregarded. Mussolini put too much faith in Hitler and it cost him everything. If Italy was to survive WWII, it would have to forego any alliance with Germany. He also shouldn't have invaded Greece, as Metaxas could have been a great potential ally.

2. Germany - Hitler's greatest mistake was never invading Britain. His plan to bomb and starve Britain into submission was utterly stupid, utterly flawed, and an utter failure. Britain should have been invaded before any action was taken against the Soviets. His second biggest mistake was declaring war on the Soviets; no. Just, no. He should have let them attack him first; this would have improved German morale drastically as the Soviets would have had less reason to fight so stubbornly and bitterly. He also should have ensured they'd have winter clothing in the event they couldn't conquer Russia before winter set in. His last big mistake was declaring war on the USA when the US had no reason to declare war on him (yet). Avoiding war with the USA is the best option here.

3. Japan - Honestly there's nothing they can do here. An attack on Pearl Harbor would've been inevitable, and so a war with the US would be inevitable, and so their defeat would be inevitable. No real way to alter that.

2. The German invasion of the UK would have ended in a disaster for the Germans, and a massive military and morale victory for the Allies. It was a plan so bad even the Germans rejected it.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

Has anybody suggested North Africa and Lehi yet?

So there was a Zionist Fascist movement called Lehi.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehi_(militant_group)

They actually wanted the Axis powers to support them and help them establish a Fascist Jewish State. Sound crazy?

You have to remember that the Final Solution wasn't always final. At one point they were considering just kicking all the Jews out of Germany.

So in this scenario, the Afrika Korps is augmented by not only the units that in OTL were sent to Russia, but by units made up of European Jews wishing to settle in Israel. As a result, invading the USSR is put off until the UK is knocked out of the war, with the help of Lehi.

I think we all know the best part of this scenario.

I mean the Final Solution became the policy in mid 1941 and the war in Northern Africa was only becoming a major theater after that. Plus, even if that wasnt the standard policy by that time, there was no way the German military was going to allow an armed force of Jews to be integrated into its military, let alone with the end goal of fighting for an independent Jewish state.

[Rezmaeristan]

Has anybody suggested North Africa and Lehi yet?

So there was a Zionist Fascist movement called Lehi.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehi_(militant_group)

They actually wanted the Axis powers to support them and help them establish a Fascist Jewish State. Sound crazy?

You have to remember that the Final Solution wasn't always final. At one point they were considering just kicking all the Jews out of Germany.

So in this scenario, the Afrika Korps is augmented by not only the units that in OTL were sent to Russia, but by units made up of European Jews wishing to settle in Israel. As a result, invading the USSR is put off until the UK is knocked out of the war, with the help of Lehi.

I think we all know the best part of this scenario.

It's not that crazy. Fascism isn't incompatible with being Jewish. Italian Jews were major players in the Fascist Movement there, right up until Hitler made his Italian Social Republic puppet-state and forced them all out.

We both know it isn't, but the average person probably would find the idea of Hitler being okay with the Jews existing anywhere crazy.

[Thanatttynia]

I wouldn't be so sure. Britain had its fair share of Nazi sympathisers and even more who believed war with Germany was unnecessary. Had a few historical figures not been around; had the British defeats been more severe or humiliating; had the bombing not inspired so much patriotism; had American aid not been so forthcoming: a combination of any of these things could have led to an early Nazi-British treaty. We did spend the 30s giving them everything they wanted specifically to avoid war, it's not like most politicians were chomping at the bit to start it in the first place.


Hitler was an opportunist, I don't see why he wouldn't have made peace with Britain so as to consolidate his control over mainland Europe and (possibly) focus on Russia. Of course Russia still could have 'won' (lol) but it's conceivable that Germany would win. And Japan and Germany together, absent Britain and Russia, could most likely intimidate America into keeping to their own hemisphere. It's of course possible that given this chain of events America would not go to war against the Axis at all.


I'm not going to pretend to know about weapons or military vehicles to this extent so I will bow to your superior knowledge on this point. But in discussing things like this people have a tendency to promote the idea of Russia as unconquerable when it's nothing of the sort. It's really your opinion that Nazi Europe and Imperial Japan could not have defeated a Russia with a modernised military even without having to worry about fighting any other state?

Britain would never accept the peace, that's what the obstacle is here. America's lend lease and Russia's production capacity could have kept it alive for the allies

Britain not accepting peace is dependent on quite a few things, as I've just listed. Most of them are outside of the Nazi's direct control, but all of them are more than possible, and there were ways the Nazis could make certain of them more likely. If this happens in 1940, neither America nor the Soviet Union are at war with Nazi Germany and they may well never be.

[Greater Hunnia]

1. Italy - Mussolini's biggest mistake was joining up with Hitler. Per their Alliance, both countries would have to become actively involved the other's wars in the event of war in Europe. Mussolini knew Italy wouldn't be ready for war until 1942; something Hitler also knew, yet totally disregarded. Mussolini put too much faith in Hitler and it cost him everything. If Italy was to survive WWII, it would have to forego any alliance with Germany. He also shouldn't have invaded Greece, as Metaxas could have been a great potential ally.

2. Germany - Hitler's greatest mistake was never invading Britain. His plan to bomb and starve Britain into submission was utterly stupid, utterly flawed, and an utter failure. Britain should have been invaded before any action was taken against the Soviets. His second biggest mistake was declaring war on the Soviets; no. Just, no. He should have let them attack him first; this would have improved German morale drastically as the Soviets would have had less reason to fight so stubbornly and bitterly. He also should have ensured they'd have winter clothing in the event they couldn't conquer Russia before winter set in. His last big mistake was declaring war on the USA when the US had no reason to declare war on him (yet). Avoiding war with the USA is the best option here.

3. Japan - Honestly there's nothing they can do here. An attack on Pearl Harbor would've been inevitable, and so a war with the US would be inevitable, and so their defeat would be inevitable. No real way to alter that.

What most people don't know is that the Soviet doctrine at that time was very similar to the German blitzkrieg. OFC we never got to see it in action as it was the Germans who started the conflict, but the Soviets were armed for a quick, offensive war. Letting them take the initiative would have been suicidal, and assuming that the Soviets would not have fought so stubbornly on their own land if they attacked first is IMHO just far-fetched.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

It's not that crazy. Fascism isn't incompatible with being Jewish. Italian Jews were major players in the Fascist Movement there, right up until Hitler made his Italian Social Republic puppet-state and forced them all out.

We both know it isn't, but the average person probably would find the idea of Hitler being okay with the Jews existing anywhere crazy.

Hitler didn't give a shit at first. He wanted them gone; he didn't care how. He tried to kick them out, but then boxed himself in so he couldn't. There was only one other option left after that.

Now Himmler? Oh yeah, that dude - I could see him being like that. He was just downright evil; rotten to the core.

[Big Jim P]

Not jumping on the two countries with the largest industrial potential AT THE SAME TIME would have helped.

[Rezmaeristan]

Has anybody suggested North Africa and Lehi yet?

So there was a Zionist Fascist movement called Lehi.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehi_(militant_group)

They actually wanted the Axis powers to support them and help them establish a Fascist Jewish State. Sound crazy?

You have to remember that the Final Solution wasn't always final. At one point they were considering just kicking all the Jews out of Germany.

So in this scenario, the Afrika Korps is augmented by not only the units that in OTL were sent to Russia, but by units made up of European Jews wishing to settle in Israel. As a result, invading the USSR is put off until the UK is knocked out of the war, with the help of Lehi.

I think we all know the best part of this scenario.

I mean the Final Solution became the policy in mid 1941 and the war in Northern Africa was only becoming a major theater after that. Plus, even if that wasnt the standard policy by that time, there was no way the German military was going to allow an armed force of Jews to be integrated into its military, let alone with the end goal of fighting for an independent Jewish state.

The Afrika Korps was established in March 1941, and construction on Belzec, the first extermination camp, began in October of that same year. It seems reasonable that the Final Solution could be cancelled in that timespan, especially since Sea Lion had already been cancelled; OKW would be looking for other ways to beat Britain, and this seems pretty feasible.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

1. Italy - Mussolini's biggest mistake was joining up with Hitler. Per their Alliance, both countries would have to become actively involved the other's wars in the event of war in Europe. Mussolini knew Italy wouldn't be ready for war until 1942; something Hitler also knew, yet totally disregarded. Mussolini put too much faith in Hitler and it cost him everything. If Italy was to survive WWII, it would have to forego any alliance with Germany. He also shouldn't have invaded Greece, as Metaxas could have been a great potential ally.

2. Germany - Hitler's greatest mistake was never invading Britain. His plan to bomb and starve Britain into submission was utterly stupid, utterly flawed, and an utter failure. Britain should have been invaded before any action was taken against the Soviets. His second biggest mistake was declaring war on the Soviets; no. Just, no. He should have let them attack him first; this would have improved German morale drastically as the Soviets would have had less reason to fight so stubbornly and bitterly. He also should have ensured they'd have winter clothing in the event they couldn't conquer Russia before winter set in. His last big mistake was declaring war on the USA when the US had no reason to declare war on him (yet). Avoiding war with the USA is the best option here.

3. Japan - Honestly there's nothing they can do here. An attack on Pearl Harbor would've been inevitable, and so a war with the US would be inevitable, and so their defeat would be inevitable. No real way to alter that.

What most people don't know is that the Soviet doctrine at that time was very similar to the German blitzkrieg. OFC we never got to see it in action as it was the Germans who started the conflict, but the Soviets were armed for a quick, offensive war. Letting them take the initiative would have been suicidal, and assuming that the Soviets would not have fought so stubbornly on their own land if they attacked first is IMHO just far-fetched.

The Soviets had inferior technology and equipment, though. Their air force was a just, their armored divisions at the time were "meh" at best, and their infantry were mostly motley conscripts in rags armed with 19th century rifles. What kept winning them the day was the sheer number of them and their burning desire for revenge. Remove the latter and all you'll have is massacres and mass desertions.

[The Galactic Liberal Democracy]

Not jumping on the two countries with the largest industrial potential AT THE SAME TIME would have helped.

The Nazis were already doomed by the time America joined. Japan would have been ignored or swiftly defeated by the Soviets.

[Big Jim P]

Not jumping on the two countries with the largest industrial potential AT THE SAME TIME would have helped.

The Nazis were already doomed by the time America joined. Japan would have been ignored or swiftly defeated by the Soviets.

Indeed. Either America or the Soviets had the ability to crush Germany. My point is, Hitler jumped on BOTH. Takes the phrase "go big or go home" to an all new level.

[The Grand Duchy Of Nova Capile]

I've responded to questions like this in the past on different forums, so here's my prewritten response, focusing on Germany (sorry if it's a little long):

Option 1: One conceivable path to victory is if Hitler had signed peace with Britain immediately after the Fall of France in June 1940. It may sound far-fetched, but this was actually a very real possibility, as many British authorities, such as Lord Halifax (who almost became Prime Minister instead of Churchill), were sympathetic to peace. Churchill himself was privately not as committed to fighting to the bitter end as he let on. Furthermore, Hitler was, in the summer of 1940, willingly to offer "generous" terms to Britain, guaranteeing it its empire apart from lost German colonies (and perhaps even recompensating them with French territory). The British government might have been even more willing to negotiate if the Germans had engaged the British at Dunkirk, an engagement that they surely would have won, destroying most of the British army in the process; or if Roosevelt had not pledged American aid to Churchill (a decision that was opposed by many within the United States). The combination of these factors could very well result in Churchill being ousted, or, even if he wasn't, he surely would be compelled to listen to whatever offer Hitler proposed. If Britain complied, then the war would change instantly. First of all, the British wouldn't be able to open up any side-show theaters in Africa or Greece, allowing Germany to launch Operation Barbarossa much earlier than in our timeline. When it did invade the Soviet Union, then Germany would have the entire combined might of Europe to bear down on it, as France, Spain, and probably Britain would most likely throw in their lot with the Axis once an Anglo-German peace was secured.

Option Two: Even if Britain could not have been brought to terms, Operation Sealion had a much higher chance of success than many give it credit for, especially if Germany had won the Battle of Britain by focusing on industrial targets, radar installations, and airfields instead of on British cities. In this case, the Royal Air Force, which was stretched almost to breaking point in real life, would likely have shattered, leaving the Royal Navy unable to operate due to German air superiority. At this point Britain very likely would have capitulated, but, for sake of argument, let us say that they don't, and Operation Sealion continues as planned (Hitler seriously considered launching it, and likely would have had the Battle of Britain been won). With their air superiority, Germany would be free to use paratroopers (remember that the Battle of Crete had not happened yet, and Hitler had not yet developed a disdain for airlanding operations) to secure important targets in Britain before using an unrivaled Kriegsmarine to land German troops on the island. Once German boots hit the ground, then the fight is over; Britain had no hope of defeating the Germans with their meager army and shattered air force. Afterwards, Hitler most likely would have set up a puppet regime led by Edward VIII and possibly Oswald Mosley, allowing Britain to join the Axis, at least ceremonially, along with Spain and France, which would have huge impact for the war in the East, virtually assuring victory, as the United States would most likely not intervene without Britain to use as a launch pad.

Option Three: Moving on to Operation Barbarossa itself, and assuming that up to that point everything has happened as it did in real life, there are still numerous ways for the Axis to achieve victory. First of all, if Germany had continued their drive on Moscow in 1941 or even 1942, they most likely would have taken the city. Now, whether or not that would have knocked the Soviets out of the war is a point of contention among historians, but it most certainly would have been a crippling blow to Soviet morale. If the Germany army could maintain its momentum, and perhaps driven as far as the Archangel-Astrakhan line, then Stalin would certainly have been deposed by a junta of military and civilian leaders, at which point the Soviet Union likely would collapse, leaderless. Or, consider that the Battle of Stalingrad could easily have been avoided if the German 1942 summer offensive had focused on that region, and thus the Sixth Army would not have been lost, and the turning point in the war would have been avoided. Another point is Japanese and German coordination. Japan always considered only two strategic options: an offensive in the north (Siberia), or an offensive in the south(South-East Asia). The option of a Siberian Offensive by Japan was always an option, and not as obscure as many seem to think. One of the main reasons that Japan abandoned this idea was the Battle of Stalingrad, and if it had been a German victory, then a Japanese attack on the Soviet Union would become more likely (though I admit that it is still an unlikely thing).

Option Four: One more scenario, which is less plausible given Hitler's character, is one in which the Germans make a genuine effort to befriend the oppressed peoples of the Soviet Union- of which there are many- and rally them to the Axis' cause. From the people of the Baltic to Ukraine, from Belarus to Kazakhstan, from Christians to Muslims, from anti-Bolsheviks to White Russians, and from farmers to soldiers, many of the people of the Soviet Union welcomed the Germans when they invaded. It was only because of their treatment at the hands of the SS and occupation forces that these people were driven back into the arms of Stalin, and if Hitler had delayed his purges until the Soviet Union had been dealt with, and tried to actively rally the Soviet people to his cause, it would have changed the course of the war in his favor. Furthermore, the rampant partisan activity that so hindered German logistics in Russia would have decreased exponentially had appeasement efforts been pursued (German middle-management was actually quite effective in this effort). The Germans could almost certainly have mobilized these oppressed peoples into the war; it worked on a small scale, with RONA, a division-sized force of Russians who fought for Germany. Consider this: German generals and current historians estimated that 1 to 3 million Soviet citizens served the Wehrmacht in some capacity during the war (either as front-line soldiers or in logistics, anti-partisan, and support roles). If that many could be recruited while enduring German oppression, imagine how many could have been utilized if Germany had actively pursued friendship with them! Of course, this would require the policy of the Nazi Party to change, and Hitler was initially against the idea. But, surprisingly, many influential Nazis were in favor of this policy, including almost all of the high-ranking German generals who served on the Eastern Front and even Alfred Rosenberg, a fanatical Nazi who despised Slavs and was in charge of a large section of occupied Soviet territory. Rosenberg also had a lot of influence over Hitler and might have convinced him to delay his genocide of Slavs by a few years.

(EDIT: All of this is based on research compiled by the historians Harold Deutsch, professor of history at Colorado College, Dennis Showalter, historian of the University of Minnesota, and William Forstchen, professor of history at Montreat College.)

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

The Nazis were already doomed by the time America joined. Japan would have been ignored or swiftly defeated by the Soviets.

Indeed. Either America or the Soviets had the ability to crush Germany. My point is, Hitler jumped on BOTH. Takes the phrase "go big or go home" to an all new level.

"Hold my beer..."

[Valentine Z]

Nazi Germany was too cocky and thought that the Soviets back then were a bunch of losers.

When Winter War happened between the Finns and the Soviets, Hitler was watching the whole thing. He actually was super confident that he would be able to kick around the Red Army. After all, if the Soviets lost to a small number of Finns and suffering heavy casualties along the way, the sheer number and tech of the Nazis would be able to do the job... right?

And we all know how Operation Barbarossa went.

Still, this wasn't the main cause of it... not yet, at least. Knowing the operation was a failure, Hitler could have pulled out of USSR and recoup his losses, or invade another smaller territory, or just hold off the war until they are back on their feet. But nope, he really, really wanted Stalingrad, and asked the troops to stay there and fight, which resulted in more losses.

[Liberated Communist States]

I think Germany should have allied with the Chinese, and not Japan. Yes they were in the middle of a Civil War, yes Japan was more technologically stable at the time. But as we saw, the Chinese advanced steadily, and if Germany chose a side in the Chinese Civil War and they won(let's say Nationalist China, s they were allies for abit) then the Nazis could influence China after the war. And as China has more available resources their army would have been stronger and larger over time. Not to mention that the Germans could have use the Chinese to invade British controlled India, and other islands if they wanted. And unlike Japan, China would be less reliant on foreign oil.

[Farnhamia]

Indeed. Either America or the Soviets had the ability to crush Germany. My point is, Hitler jumped on BOTH. Takes the phrase "go big or go home" to an all new level.

"Hold my beer..."

"Halte mein Bier ..." Except Hitler was a teetotaler, I think.

[Torrocca]

What most people don't know is that the Soviet doctrine at that time was very similar to the German blitzkrieg. OFC we never got to see it in action as it was the Germans who started the conflict, but the Soviets were armed for a quick, offensive war. Letting them take the initiative would have been suicidal, and assuming that the Soviets would not have fought so stubbornly on their own land if they attacked first is IMHO just far-fetched.

The Soviets had inferior technology and equipment, though. Their air force was a just, their armored divisions at the time were "meh" at best, and their infantry were mostly motley conscripts in rags armed with 19th century rifles. What kept winning them the day was the sheer number of them and their burning desire for revenge. Remove the latter and all you'll have is massacres and mass desertions.

Actually, the Soviets had equipment either on-par or surpassing Nazi equipment, especially in the latter years of the war. In addition to that, they had (by the time the Soviet counteroffensive began in force) developed a superior offensive doctrine in the form of Deep Battle that blew the Nazi Blitzkrieg right out of the water.

[Big Jim P]

"Hold my beer..."

"Halte mein Bier ..." Except Hitler was a teetotaler, I think.

Proof that alcohol is good.

[Evil Dictators Happyland]

If Britain sues for peace instead of getting Churchill in power and for whatever reason permanently stays out of the war, and the Germans win a few key battles against the Soviet Union (such as taking Moscow, Leningrad, and Stalingrad), and they don't declare war on the United States, then they could potentially win the war. But it should be noted that all of these things could be undone - if Britain rejoins the war, the Russians don't surrender, and America decides to declare war on Germany (all of which were more likely than their respective opposites), then literally every single thing here would mean nothing.
It's honestly kind of shocking that they did as well as they did, but I don't see them doing much better than they did historically without wehraboo level leaps of logic.

[Valentine Z]

The Soviets had inferior technology and equipment, though. Their air force was a just, their armored divisions at the time were "meh" at best, and their infantry were mostly motley conscripts in rags armed with 19th century rifles. What kept winning them the day was the sheer number of them and their burning desire for revenge. Remove the latter and all you'll have is massacres and mass desertions.

Actually, the Soviets had equipment either on-par or surpassing Nazi equipment, especially in the latter years of the war. In addition to that, they had (by the time the Soviet counteroffensive began in force) developed a superior offensive doctrine in the form of Deep Battle that blew the Nazi Blitzkrieg right out of the water.

Ah, really? Shoot, I might stand corrected on my point above, then. I always thought the Nazis got the good guns and logistics.

Still, how were their tech matchup like when Operation Barbarossa happened?

[Bezkoshtovnya]

I mean the Final Solution became the policy in mid 1941 and the war in Northern Africa was only becoming a major theater after that. Plus, even if that wasnt the standard policy by that time, there was no way the German military was going to allow an armed force of Jews to be integrated into its military, let alone with the end goal of fighting for an independent Jewish state.

The Afrika Korps was established in March 1941, and construction on Belzec, the first extermination camp, began in October of that same year. It seems reasonable that the Final Solution could be cancelled in that timespan, especially since Sea Lion had already been cancelled; OKW would be looking for other ways to beat Britain, and this seems pretty feasible.

However the first killings of Jews by the Einsatzgruppen began in June 1941, which marks the shift from removal of Jews from Germany to outright extermination within Germany and beyond. While it isnt necessarily impossible that the Nazis would suddenly scale back their policy on Jews it seems unlikely. Using an armed unit of Jews and supporting a Jewish independent state I think is still far less probable than using Arabs and other Muslim groups since hitler had a degree of respect for them and they would be a far more influential force in the British Middle east and Africa.