How could the Axis Powers win WW2?

[Sovaal]

new theory but could a victory in the battle of Britain give enough German superiority to stop DDay and maybe launch an actual good version of sea lion?

Germany really couldn’t “win” the Battle of Britain because their end goal was to invade and occupy it. However, say they did, there probably wouldn’t be a D Daya s we know it because the Allies wouldn’t have Britian as a staging ground for an invasion of Europe. Instead they probably just concentrate more on the invasions of Southern Europe.

[Lanorth]

Mostly by not invading the Soviet Union in June, completely underestimating their power and their coruage to hold their line once they gained the upper hand in the winter, thanks to their troops that had been deployed from Siberia. Though my native country of Britain would continue to hold their footing in the war, so they could have beat the British if the Norweigan Resistance did not stop Hitler from designing and possibly creating the German version of the Atom-Bomb.

[The Transhuman Union]

Germany was in my opinion doomed from the start. It had so many enemies and so few """""allies""""" that defeat was a foregone conclusion.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Honestly if Hitler weren't motivated by genocidal ambitions to start a major war he could have left Germany much stronger than he found it, but he rebuilt the German economy by taking massive amounts of loans that he had no intention of paying off because he wanted to start a giant war that would destroy the other powers. By 1939 it was too late for him to pull back on this, but if he had never had that plan in the first place, it's easy to see a way that he could have made Germany stronger without going to war or exterminating people at all. But that alternative scenario would require Hitler basically not being Hitler and having totally different beliefs.

[Hanafuridake]

Were the Japanese more rational?

Not really. They picked a fight with the USA, which up until that point had been content to just watch as they invaded half of Asia.

Not quite, stern economic action combined with the Hull Note were the catalyst of the Japanese decision to enter the war against the United States, and the conversations between the Emperor and military which precipitated Pearl Harbor made clear that they viewed the decision as a last gambit rather than a curbstomp victory.

[Uxupox]

In hindsight it was impossible. Technically it could have been a protracted conflict without either the Japanese or the Germans declaring war on the United States but ultimately they would have still lost. Though I’m a bit iffy at the Soviets ever producing a capable navy in the pacific to engage and decisively defeat the Japanese.

[Free California Republic]

Had Germany not betrayed the Soviet Union, and Japan not bombed Pearl Harbor in 1941, the probability of US interference would be low. But don't listen to me, I don't know much about WWII.

[The Galactic Liberal Democracy]

No, it wouldn't be "taking out all of the ideological differences". It would, however, be blatantly ignorant of all of the reasons they felt they needed to invade. First and foremost being oil.

The Soviets weren’t the reason they were running out of oil. Defeating Britain by invading would stop their naval blockade, so the Germans could get oil again.

[Grenartia]

No, it wouldn't be "taking out all of the ideological differences". It would, however, be blatantly ignorant of all of the reasons they felt they needed to invade. First and foremost being oil.

The Soviets weren’t the reason they were running out of oil. Defeating Britain by invading would stop their naval blockade, so the Germans could get oil again.

I never made that claim.

[Confederate States of German America]

There’s no way two democratic powers could have the willpower to defeat a dictatorship as large as the Soviet Union

The Axis only need to hold on until Western protestors ensure Allied defeat

Only one side will be able to stomach hundreds of millions of losses if it comes to that

Except the Anglo-Americans did exactly that:

USSR - 14% of global war-making potential
Germany - 14,4% of global war-making potential

Point is, you're giving far too much credit to the USSR.

[Confederate States of German America]

Invading the USSR absolutely was the right call, giving the Red Army more time to modernize and launch their own attack on Europe would have been foolhardy in the extreme. Even up until 42/43 the war in the east was very plausibly winnable for the Germans but a few big strategic mistakes sealed their fate.

No it wasn't, there was physically no way Germany could win, it was running out of oil and was fighting a zealous enemy that got stronger every day, it was a fight of attrition that Germany could not have won under any circumstance, that is, unless they stopped being Nazis.

There was multiple ways Germany could win against the USSR, to claim otherwise is to have not read on the Eastern Front beyond memes.

[The Black Forrest]

No it wasn't, there was physically no way Germany could win, it was running out of oil and was fighting a zealous enemy that got stronger every day, it was a fight of attrition that Germany could not have won under any circumstance, that is, unless they stopped being Nazis.

There was multiple ways Germany could win against the USSR, to claim otherwise is to have not read on the Eastern Front beyond memes.

Ok how? Curiosity mind you.

Date mentioned is about right 42/43 it was down hill. Production couldn't be matched. Example, Germany made about 900 King Tigers and the USSR had about 3800 JS II's.....

[Awesome Dudes and Dudettes]

They couldn't have;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbim2kGwhpc&vl=en
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYTrjxOPYNY

[The New California Republic]

Not really. They picked a fight with the USA, which up until that point had been content to just watch as they invaded half of Asia.

Not quite, stern economic action combined with the Hull Note were the catalyst of the Japanese decision to enter the war against the United States, and the conversations between the Emperor and military which precipitated Pearl Harbor made clear that they viewed the decision as a last gambit rather than a curbstomp victory.

By "just watch" I was meaning military actions.

[Wysten]

No it wasn't, there was physically no way Germany could win, it was running out of oil and was fighting a zealous enemy that got stronger every day, it was a fight of attrition that Germany could not have won under any circumstance, that is, unless they stopped being Nazis.

There was multiple ways Germany could win against the USSR, to claim otherwise is to have not read on the Eastern Front beyond memes.

Not really, the German Army was well over extended beyond Kiev and was running low on fuel by Sept of 1941.

[Bear Stearns]

The UK pursues a ceasefire in '40 and the U.S. only goes to war with Japan in '41.

[Orange-Transvaal]

By building one really, really big tank rather than lots of little ones.

That doesn’t work though do to Germany’s shortage of oil in the late war, so “just build a bigger tank” isn’t a valid point.

[Valrifell]

The UK pursues a ceasefire in '40 and the U.S. only goes to war with Japan in '41.

Do note that Germany declared war against the US, not the other way around. If Japan attacks Pearl Harbor the Nazis either have to honor their alliance or piss off Japan.

[Kaystein]

Step 1: Don't fuck with the Soviet Union/USSR
Step 2: Profit.

[British Tackeettlaus]

The Soviets could of retreated past the Urals and they would still have won.

No it wasn't, there was physically no way Germany could win, it was running out of oil and was fighting a zealous enemy that got stronger every day, it was a fight of attrition that Germany could not have won under any circumstance, that is, unless they stopped being Nazis.

There was multiple ways Germany could win against the USSR, to claim otherwise is to have not read on the Eastern Front beyond memes.

I am honestly of the opinion that is was an unwinnable war. The Germans would have had to beat the Soviets in 1941 to have had a chance. Guderian and some others argued after the war that diverting forces to Kiev in late August/September delayed the push on Moscow and prevented the Germans from capturing it before the onset of winter made operations unbelievably costly (130,000 cases of frostbite requiring treatment for the Germans in winter 41/42 alone). However, I agree with a lot of modern military historians that launching an attack on Moscow without securing the southern flank would have been unbelievably reckless. The Soviet forces in front of Moscow were also actually in a stronger state in August that the were in October, before they had been ravaged by useless counterattacks. Plus the reserve armies Stalin was bringing in could have struck from the south which could of been disastrous for the Germans.

So basically I think the only feasible way for the Germans to have won in the east, was infeasible! Oh and case blue would never have worked, the forces the Germans committed, while mighty, were still not nearly enough to achieve all the goals of the operation.

Two things for me are important, one, the Germans massively underestimated the ability of the Red Army to replace its losses and move its reserves quickly, they underestimated the amount of reserves and division that were available to the soviets. And secondly, Looking at thejaw dropping casualties the Red Army suffered in 1941, it is easy to forget that the Germans suffered terribly as well. In the first 6 months of the eastern front the Germans lost a colossal amount of men and equipment. While they inflicted massively disproportionate casualties, The victories they gained came at a large cost, they faced stronger and more brutal resistance that in any of their previous campaigns. As it turned out, the Soviets could afford these losses, the Germans could not.

[Franco-Iberie]

The answer is simple: They couldn't. The Axis lacked the resources necessary to win a prolonged war. Even if they didn't invade the Soviets and the United States didn't enter the war, the British would eventually starve them out or they'd collapse from a coup or internal revolts. The Nazi state was really f***ing unstable if you read into its inner workings, constant power struggles between different branches of the Heer, the SS, and political wings of the party. The Japanese might eke out a win from their sheer naval superiority over the British in the Pacific, but obviously they wouldn't be achieving total victory.

[Sovaal]

By building one really, really big tank rather than lots of little ones.

That doesn’t work though do to Germany’s shortage of oil in the late war, so “just build a bigger tank” isn’t a valid point.

I doubt they where serious.

[Chan Island]

There really isn't any.

Except if perhaps Germany, Italy, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and Japan didn't go to war with China, France (+empire), Britain (+empire), Greece, Luxembourg, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, the United States, the Soviet Union, Greece, Yugoslavia and Brazil.

But again, that would mean the Nazis not being Nazis, and the Japanese not being so enamoured by the idea of fighting for the emperor.

[Cloney]

Nothing to see here yet

[NeoOasis]

There really isn't any.

Except if perhaps Germany, Italy, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and Japan didn't go to war with China, France (+empire), Britain (+empire), Greece, Luxembourg, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, the United States, the Soviet Union, Greece, Yugoslavia and Brazil.

But again, that would mean the Nazis not being Nazis, and the Japanese not being so enamoured by the idea of fighting for the emperor.

You forgot Poland.

That aside, it appears Germany could have maybe won the war by not being Germany. So the best answer I can get from this thread is there is no way the Axis could have won. Germany and Japan, in order to win the war, would have to take on policies that would have essentially avoided the war. Seems a bit Catch 22 to me.