okay, now that the dust has settled
how could they have won?

>>17783096 (OP)
UK government ends up in the hands of a pussy + the italians manage to push into egypt scaring them + germany reaches the caucasus oil fields in time to stop their energy problem
If ALL of these happen there COULD be a scenario where the UK decides to make a sensible peace (They keep their empire and germany has to abandon france and norway but they can keep poland etc)

But it's so unlikely and far fetched I don't see it happen, ever

>Every nationalist is haunted by the belief that the past can be altered. He spends part of his time in a fantasy world in which things happen as they should – in which, for example, the Spanish Armada was a success or the Russian Revolution was crushed in 1918 – and he will transfer fragments of this world to the history books whenever possible.

>>17783096 (OP)
Barbarossa earlier, Panther earlier, Assault Rifles earlier, Radar guided Ruhrstahl earlier.
>UHHH NUKES
America didnt have the ability to produce nukes in 1942.
America didnt have the ability to produce 50+ Nukes in 1945 (the equivalent was dropped on Germany throughout the war).
America doesnt have the ability to stop Air to Air missiles or radar guided surface to air missiles.

>>17783136
thats not really true, nationalists are much more futurist than they get credit for.
maybe petty nationalists like jews or Poles.

>>17783136
kek this is me fr

>>17783136
Orwell uses the word nationalist in a much broader way than usual. He includes basically any ideological collectivism and "transferred nationalism", in his understanding of the term communists are also nationalists.

>>17783161
That's because Orwell was a commie who was mindbroken by Stalin's regime. He thus had to rationalize a way to keep his beliefs while also denouncing Stalin.

>>17783096 (OP)
by going for economic conquest and political pushing instead of total war

>>17783096 (OP)
> It can therefore be said that Germany lost this war because she wanted to win it as a nation-State. For even a nation of 80 million politically “perfect” citizens is unable to sustain the effort of a modern war and thus of ensuring the political existence of its State. And the German example proves clearly that nowadays, a nation, no matter which one, which persists in maintaining its national political exclusivity must sooner or later cease to exist politically: either through a peaceful process or as a result of a military defeat . By dispelling the illusions of the 1914-18 war, the current war, conducted by Empires, signaled the last act of the great tragedy which national States have performed for five centuries.

>>17783096 (OP)
Why was Hitler too AFRAID to attack Switzerland and take all their gold?

>>17783161
A large chunk of /his/ are transferred nationalists for Nazi Germany and feel it is their ideological homeland.

Don't attack Russia?

turkey joins

>>17783141
>Barbarossa earlier
so at the same time as the invasion of france? unless you're proposing to invade the soviets in the middle of winter, or proposing to intentionally fight a 2 front war
>wunderwaffen
lol ok buddy. just waste what little time was put into making useful weapons into useless memes instead

>>17783402
the good old "nazis would've won if they simply weren't nazis". if the nazis weren't nazis there wouldn't have been a war they needed to win at all

>>17783432
Are you saying that becythey were nazis they HAD to attack Russia? They were not opposed to allying with them earlier. Their mistake was thinking that they could take Russia quickly. No one can take Russia quickly.

>>17783096 (OP)
If you had been in their army they would have won.

>>17783096 (OP)
Cut down the unsustainable military spending, don't declare war on anyone, pursue diplomatic ties with the UK, US and France to form an anti-communist bloc, keep pursuing a pro-natalist policy and just let your large, industrious population do their thing. By the end of the 20th century they would've been the demographic, economic and military powerhouse of Europe by a pretty long shot and it would've happened without firing a bullet.

>>17783436
>they HAD to attack Russia
when your ideology blames all evils in the world on judeo-bolsheviks in charge of russia, yeah you kinda have to invade russia
>allying with them
their plans were to invade and exterminate the slavs from the very beginning. and the soviets were planning to invade germany sometime in the late 40s anyway, after they had industrialized enough. you mindbroken retards cannot understand that molotov-ribbentrop was mutually but tacitly understood to be a temporary measure to let each country build up its military to invade the other, not some prelude to a eurasian alliance

>>17783468
again, just make the nazis not nazis and the nazis would win. the nazis came to power by accusing the west of raping glorious germany post great war, they could never cozy up to them as a long term strategy because their ideology demanded revenge

>>17783487
>again, just make the nazis not nazis and the nazis would win. the nazis came to power by accusing the west of raping glorious germany post great war, they could never cozy up to them as a long term strategy because their ideology demanded revenge
In that case then I doubt there's any scenario where they win an all out total war, unless the US completely stays out of the war and doesn't even offer economic and material support.

>>17783096 (OP)
Try to tie the soviets to their economy as much as possible, wait until stalin dies, invade in the chaos that would ensue.

Tell nipnogs to calm down and not declare war on the US. The Axis position in 1942 was good enough to win a war of attrition against just England and Russia

>>17783432
>the most successful tank and assault rife of the war are "wunderwaffen"
?????????????????????????????????
Yeah, what a waste of time, high quality weapons that the Germans delayed because Hitler's personal opinion was "scoped rifles are better than auto/burst rifles".

>>17783487
>again, just make the nazis not nazis and the nazis would win. the nazis came to power by accusing the west of raping glorious germany post great war, they could never cozy up to them as a long term strategy because their ideology demanded revenge
You dont actually know anything about Nazi Germany.

>>17783866
US was already in the war.

>>17783141
Does it make a difference if Germany is nuked in 1947?
I really dont see your point.

Also, the continent would be starving at that point because British blockade isnt going to end.

>>17783487
>you mindbroken retards cannot understand that molotov-ribbentrop was mutually but tacitly understood to be a temporary measure to let each country build up its military to invade the other

Neo-nazies literally argue this.
You point out the hypocracy of Hitler allying with the communists in 1939 and signing off 1/3 of the continent to communism, their immediate answer is that the pact was temporary and Germany would invade the USSR eventually.

But now they argue that Soviets and Germany could have remained allies.

Do you see a trend in their argument tactics? They only reactionary nay-say to anything you say that is negative towards Hitler, but there is no actually coherency in their views.
It will flip 180 degree depending on what argument you've pushing.

>>17783141
you forgot the most essential point
>ignore africa

>>17783141
>Panther earlier
>Assault Rifles earlier

We should honestly make a thread "How could the allies have won sooner".
And literally make the exact same point:
Rockets earlier
Nuclear bomb earlier
Pershing, IS-5, Comet etc earlier
AK47 earlier
B52 bombers earlier

And if anyone tell me it's not possible, I'm gonna do exactly like you do and write >???????????????????????? WHY NOT POSSIBLE LUL THEY COULD HAVE ??????????? DISPROVE IT! OMG JEW

>>17783141
>Barbarossa earlier,
Ok sure, but then allies get to launch Overlord earlier.

>>17783096 (OP)
Do everything the same but roll for better luck

>>17784604
They tried to do a tiny little attempt in 1942 (Dieppe) and it went poorly.
Do you want an Overlord in the summer of 1943?
Without Husky and Anzio as test runs?

>>17784462
Yes because Germany could end the war prior to 1947 and Germany had the equivalent of multiple nukes dropped on them throughout the war.
nukes arent the superweapon you think they are. The firebombings were more destructive in Japan than the nukes.
nukes also need to be delivered and with more capable air to air weaponry not a single heavy bomber would get through.
>the continent
>the british blockade
a unified continental Europe is food independent
>british blockade isnt going to end
Britain wouldnt have a choice.
but even assuming theyd have to be fought, the resources of Continental Europe and Asia would overwhelm the British Navy.

>>17784595
Except the allies didnt develop Assault Rifles or Panthers.
These were both developments which were staggered by personal decisions NOT technological development time.
>Rockets earlier
everyone had rockets
>nuclear bomb earlier
ok, who was delaying the nuclear bomb?
How would they get it earlier?

We know how Germany would the get assault rifle earlier, tell Hitler to go pound sand and give the experts the autonomy to do what they actually wanted to do.
>Pershing
Pershing sucked
>IS-5
no one delayed the IS
>Comet
Comet sucked
>AK47
no one delayed the AK
>B52
no one delayed their development and they arent meaningfully better than the other heavy bombers at the time.


Keep coping, you fundamentally misunderstood my post.

>>17784604
>uhhh the allies need some points too
can you shut the fuck up?
If the allies COULD have launched Overlord sooner, well, why didnt they?

The Germans delayed Barbarossa due to personal decisions.
Overlord occurred when it did because the British and Americans literally did not have the capability to launch it until mid 1944.

>>17783141
>Barbarossa earlier, Panther earlier, Assault Rifles earlier, Radar guided Ruhrstahl earlier.
Never had the resources to do any of this in any actual quantity

>>17783436
When your entire political theater revolves around toys Jew death and total Slav death then yeah you kinda gotta do it

>>17783109
>Italians manager to win a war!
That was so not going to happen, we sent a few good bersaglieri, and our artillerists weren't bad, but the rest wasn't really trained or equipped for WAR

>>17785337
The Panther was the third most produced tank of Germany.
They mass produced their assault rifles, the problem was they did so too late.
These problems could have been avoided because they originated with human error.
>>17785338
that wasnt what their political theater revolved around tho, that is what historians have hyperfixated on for some reason.
deliberately ignoring the equally as long time they spent at peace.

>>17784437
>because Hitler's personal opinion was "scoped rifles are better than auto/burst rifles".
Which they are lol. Optics are GOD. Full auto is useless to riflemen.

>>17785377
You’ve never read Mein Kampf lol

>>17783096 (OP)
The past is the past. Question is will we get another shot. If so how do we get it right this time around.

>>17785660
The next war will be race vs race, not country vs country

>>17783109
The caucus oil fields would have been demolished destroying flamable things is easy would have taken years to get oil from the caucuses back to germany in any meaningful amount. O and just having a competent italy has to be a joke.

>>17785377
infantry firearms from crimea to now are basically useless for winning a conflict. If the US still the used the garand, our infantry performance would be basically identical. MG's and explosives do the killing.

>>17785261
>If the allies COULD have launched Overlord sooner, well, why didnt they?
Same reason Germany didnt

>The Germans delayed Barbarossa due to personal decisions.
lol ok, then Overlord was delayed due to personal decisions

>Overlord occurred when it did because the British and Americans literally did not have the capability to launch it until mid 1944
Sounds like cope.
So Germany can do everything earlier but not the allies? hmmm

>>17785258
>everyone had rockets
The allies were ahead of Germany. Robert Goddard developed rockets before ww2.
So allies might as well have rockets in 1939 because why not? Germany gets everything early for no reason.

>How would they get it earlier?
How would Germany get anything earlier?

>We know how Germany would the get assault rifle earlier,
We actually dont.

>tell Hitler to go pound sand and give the experts the autonomy to do what they actually wanted to do.
Ok so tell Churchill to mind off from Tube Alloys program and Britain gets nukes in 1941. Easy.

>Pershing sucked
They were quite good actually and would have busted most of the Panzer 4s that were the backbone of German armour.

>no one delayed the IS
No but Soviets can have them earlier because why not? Germany gets their tech earlier.

>Comet sucked
Tank designs post-ww2 were based on Comet rather than Tigers. Cope

>no one delayed the AK
No but the Soviets can have them earlier because why not?

>no one delayed their development and they arent meaningfully better than the other heavy bombers at the time.
Dropping 4 nukes on Germany in a single run is pretty kino tho?

>>17785255
>Germany could end the war prior to 1947
Only if they surrender.

>nukes arent the superweapon you think they are.
Did I just fucking read this right?

>a unified continental Europe is food independent
Is that why Germany starved millions of people in east through the Hunger Plan despite having virtually the entire continent under occupation?
Or did the Germans do it just for fun?

>>17783144
>petty nationalists like jews
Jewish nationalism is much more forward thinking than modern German, French, Italian, Scandinavian, Iranian, or Arab nationalism.

>>17786069
"Modern nationalism", in the context of European countries, usually involves thinking that giving a Bomalian a new passport magically makes them one of your ethnic group

>>17783096 (OP)
Letting Poland join the Axis Powers

>>17783096 (OP)
Tell Japan to avoid occupying Indochina, thereby preventing the US oil embargo which led to the Pearl Harbor Attack. Persuade Japan to join in the war against the USSR by promising to trade them massive quantities of oil from the Caucasus once the USSR was conquered.

>>17785831
The Caucasus oil wasn't so much as needed for Germany (Germany got the vast majority of its oil from Romania) but to deprive the Soviets from their oil and render them powerless. Hitler was also worried that the Romanian oil fields would get hit which was one of his biggest reasons for invading the SU. It would have also opened the way to Iran.

>>17783096 (OP)
The real question is why didn't the world let them win so that they could establish global Germanic Catholicism?

>>17786236
Just shut the fuck up

>>17785850
If we removed the infantry firearms from the Vietnamese army, would they have won?
if we removed the infantry firearms of the Chinese, would they have won in Korea?
If we removed the infantry Firearms of the Union Army, would they have won the Civil War?
>>17786043
>same reason Germany didnt
The American Navy was in Yugoslavia?
Really? I dont remember that.
>ok then
you are clearly coping because you are unable to grasp Germany made military mistakes.
Is your alternative view that Germany was militarily perfect and was overcome by numbers and production?
This is a wehraboo view btw, which is funny because you think I am some German worshipping chud.
You are an NPC.
>Germany can do everything earlier
no one said this.
I said Germany made certain decisions which delayed their critical operation Barbarossa.
The Americans and British did not make such strategic mistakes/the mistakes they made did not have such a profound effect.
>The allies
we prefer to call them "the enemies"
>Rockets
Germany was ahead, they won the space race and their rocketry was much more sophisticated regarding the direction rockets (and later missiles) would go in.
No one uses the saturation method, EVERYONE has moved towards the German rocketry "doctrine" of high yield long range delivery systems.
>Germany gets everything early for no reason
no one said this, I already explained Germany suffered from too much political oversight in their arms manufacturing.
The idea and capability for producing MBTs, Assault Rifles, and Missile systems existed but were delayed in favor of more traditional warfare elements.
Notice how I didnt say jets because that actually WAS the result of technological development limitations in a way the Panther or Assault Rifle was not.
>how
Germany could have relied more on battlefield and weapons test reports than on what Hitler personally felt like.
These were decisions made by people, sometimes Hitler himself, that could just as easily go the other way.

>>17786043
>we actually dont
uh yeah we fucking do, its called Hitler doesnt delay the assault rifle development program LOL BY PERSONAL INTERNVENTION
LOOOOOOOOOOL
>Britain gets nukes in 1941
you are clearly seething, this was limited by development time.
Germany already had assault rifles developed by 1942 and they wouldnt be rolled out until two years later because Hitler wanted instead to produce more and better scoped rifles and sub machine guns over assault rifles.
This is an example of Germany having the technology but due to poor decision making not deploying said technology.
This is not comparable to Britain lacking nukes until they actually developed nukes.
>Pershing was quite good
not really, it was a late war tank that was lacking in most metrics compared to other late war tanks.
The PzIV is an early war tank.
>Germany gets their tech earlier
GERMANY HAD THEIR TECH EARLIER
THEY WERENT DEPLOYING OR REFINING IT FOR POLITICAL REASONS
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE??
>post WWII tanks were based on the Comet not the Tiger
they were based on neither.
Post WWII tanks followed the philosophy of the Panther with high powered, not necessarily larger calibre, guns, emphasis on mobility, high frontal armor at the expense of flank and rear armor, and minimized profiles relative to their predecessors.
The Panther's development and production was delayed by personal decisions from Hitler disliking certain designs and pitting manufacturers against each other.
This was not a problem the Pershing, IS, or Comet faced, they were limited solely by development times as these were more 'reactionary' designs compared to the Germans which had more 'pioneering' designs.
>Germany reacted to Soviet tank designs
no one said they didnt but I know youre going to claim I am saying this because you instinctively know "pioneering" vs "reactionary" makes Germans seem more intelligent which you cant abide for some reason due to harboring an ethnic grudge against Germans and their politics

>>17786347
>The American Navy was in Yugoslavia?
No but everything used for Operation Torch + Tunis campaign could have been Overlord in early 1942.
Again, if Germny can magically launch Barbarossa sooner, then allies can magically launch Overlord sooner
And USSR can magically launch Bagration sooner.

>no one said this.
"lul Germany is just gonna get late war tech sooner because they can ok?" Literally your point about panthers and stg44 but whatever retard. Pretend like you didnt say it.

>I said Germany made certain decisions which delayed their critical operation Barbarossa.
Ok
And the allies + Soviets made certain decisions which delayed their operations.
Point?

>The Americans and British did not make such strategic mistakes
Says who?
We can alt-history change their mistakes with magical abilities as much as we can with Germany.

>Germany was ahead, they won the space race
Fucking cope
And V2 was a meme with insiginifcant damage to the enemy but with catastrophical costs for Germany. But I am sure you are going to deny this like the rabid autist you are.

>no one said this
"lul Germany is just gonna get late war tech sooner because they can ok?" Literally your point about panthers and stg44 but whatever retard. Pretend like you didnt say it.

>I already explained Germany suffered from too much political oversight in their arms manufacturing.
Sure, and so did the allies.
Like I said. Comets and IS-5 in 1941. Germany is cooked since most of their tanks then were Panzer 3s
You gonna give Germany magic ability to reach tech, might as well give the allies.

>The idea and capability for producing MBTs, Assault Rifles, and Missile systems existed but were delayed in favor of more traditional warfare elements.
Ok so you proved my point. Allies might as well have nukes in 1939.

>Germany could have relied more on battlefield and weapons test reports than on what Hitler personally felt like.
Also Germany cant magically get late tech just because you feel like it

>>17786043
>because why not
because we arent handing things out for no reason, there is a reason the German assault rifles was delayed, it wasnt limited by development time, the reason was personal intervention because Hitler wanted different weapons produced.
They had the technology, they just didnt use it.
>4 nukes
how is it going to get through a much tighter air defense net?

But no, I dont think nukes on Europeans is kino.
Why do you think nuking Europe is kino? You hate White people or something?
>only if they surrender
or if they had made better strategic and production decisions.
>NO NO NO THEY COULDNT WIN THEREFORE YOU CAN NOT IDOLIZE THEM THEREFORE YOU ARENT ALLOWED TO VOTE AGAINST ETHNIC SUICIDE AND TRANNY PILLS
^^^ This is the vibe I am getting from your posts.
>did I read this right
yeah you did, read it again, better yet, read the damage reports on Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and Tokyo. Tokyo got it worse than the literal nuke victims.

This is actually something bunkertrannies agree with because it diminishes the argument for the callousness of the Western powers in WWII by saying "nukes arent THAAAT bad".
>Germany starved millions of people in the east through the hunger plan
There was no such thing as the hunger plan this is a post war fabrication, we must apply occam's razor, we know the groups which accuse Germany of the hunger plan are notorious for fabricating evidence, lying, and spreading disinformation as a means of propaganda and social war, why should we see the hunger plan as the exception?
We shouldnt.
Germany did not have the entire continent under occupation.
The food productive sectors of Europe were contested.
If they were not contested, Continental Europe would be food secure like it was prior to the war when food imports vs food productivity had a favorable ratio.

>>17786395
No, it couldnt have been used for Overlord in 1942. They lacked the special operations units and aerial supremacy.
>Germany can magically
what exactly is magical about just not going into the Balkans in 1941?
What magical force made them go into the Balkans that of course would require to magic to then negate?
Why do you call a strategic blunder magic?
>The USSR can launch bagration sooner
how? They were limited by materiel. They wouldnt have the reserves necessary for Bagration until it was actually planned out.
Germany had the men and materiel for Barbarossa in 1940.
>Germany is gonna get late war tech sooner
THEY LITERALLY HAD IT BUT CHOSE NOT TO USE IT
They literally had the assault rifle, they literally had the Panther designs. They physically had functional versions of these weapons that were discarded because Hitler personally was not vibing with them, he would later accede to the better judgement (too late) of German armaments reports and inquiries.

What decisions delayed American, British, and Soviet operations? What strategic mistakes did they make? You seem to think Torch and Tunis were huge strategic blunders, why go for the periphery when you can go for the killing blow?
Can you explain what made the Americans and British monumental retards who passed up Berlin in 1942 because they wanted Italian Libya in 1943?
That is a colossal mistake.
>magical abilities
Please explain what is magical about Hitler deciding to launch Barbarossa over the Balkan campaign or Hitler deciding not to go directly against The Waffenamt?
What is magical about that?
Was Hitler spellbound to always oppose the Waffenamts reports?
Was Hitler spellbound to go into the Balkans instead of the USSR?
>V2 was a meme
ok? it was also ahead of its time and yes Germany undeniably won the space race.
>because they can ok
to quote myself "they literally had it but chose not to use it"

>>17786395
>comets and IS5
ok how? I explained Germany already had the tech but was choosing not to use it.
Did Britian and the USSR already have the Comet and IS5 in 1941?
>magical ability
What is magical about Hitler obstructing the production of the Panther and Assault Rifle?
>Allies might as well have nukes in 1939
Did they develop them in 1939 but then make the active choice not to use them?
yes or no?
>magically
what is magical about choosing not to use something you already have?

>>17783219
It's like robbing a brother.
You rob someone - You become one with the robber (jewry)

>>17783432
This tranny seething.

>>17786440
>They lacked the special operations units and aerial supremacy.
Nope they had aerial supremacy and special forces ready in 1942. Who says they didnt?

>what exactly is magical about just not going into the Balkans in 1941?
Because Barbarossa was not ready regardless if they go into Balkans or not.
They were still wating on requistion trucks from occupied territory, especially from France. They were still training divisions. Provisional airfields couldnt be used because of the late spring weather. Thaw in Eastern Europe caused soft muddy ground and flooded rivers.

You're going to make Barbarossa magically ready when it wasnt. Might as well make Overlord magically ready when it wasnt.
So yeah, Overlord in 1942. Germany lose harder.

>how? They were limited by materiel.
I recon they can launch Operation Bagration sometimes in September 1941, since Germany gets to launch Barbarossa earlier, kinda makes it even.

>Germany had the men and materiel for Barbarossa in 1940.
Ok and Soveit had men and material for Bagration in 1940. Point?

>THEY LITERALLY HAD IT BUT CHOSE NOT TO USE IT
Sounds like cope

>They literally had the assault rifle, they literally had the Panther designs
And Soviets literally had assault rifles so they could get AK47 in 1939. Problem?
Britain also had nuclear bomb designs so they can get nukes in 1939. Problem?
You just gonna magically give Germany late war tech, might as well give allies too.
P51 Mustangs flying for Britain during Battle for Britain in 1940 and British Comets in France 1940. Literally total German defeat.

>They physically had functional versions of these weapons
They actually did not have these weapons nor the system to support them being the mainstay of the German guns, but keep pretending like they did and I will keep pretending like the allies did the same. What a funny game we're playing here.

>>17783487
Why would you ally with your enemy ? Lmao
You can't ally with the AngloSphere if You have any morals.

>>17783522
People forget Jew S of A and United Kingdom sent thousands of tanks to Judeo-Bolsheviks

>>17783766
Stalin would have to be assassinated.
But then again, what's left of Trotsky loyalist or/and other vermin would take his place.
Not a realistic idea, considering that CCCP was planning invasion of Deutsches Reich in 194x-1950's, it was their only reason of building a large army.
To spread communism to European lands.

>>17786440
>What decisions delayed American, British, and Soviet operations? What strategic mistakes did they make?
Lets start with 1940
1. Not putting divisions at Sedan 1940 instead of sending everything to Belgium
2. Not acting on German plans for Case Yellow which were captured
3. Sending all British armaments to Greece instead of winning North Africa in 1940
4. Not counterattacking the overextended German lines in 1940
5. Not defending Crete despite ULTRA intercepting the exact plans to attack Crete
6. Not delay Operation Wilfred which would probably have sank half of the German invasion force
7. Not scouting the Ardenne in 1940
8. Not putting British and French forces in Norway under a unified command
9. Not militarizing Malta before Italy inevitably joins despite being aware Italy will join
10. Not using the convoy system immediately which had been proven in ww1. Because of this Britain took heavy and unecessary losses in 1940-41. Not prioritizing ASW technology early.

>Please explain what is magical about Hitler deciding to launch Barbarossa over the Balkan campaign
Because Barbrossa was not ready, with or without Balkans. Pretending like it was ready is like pretending Overlord was ready in 1942.

>ok? it was also ahead of its time and yes Germany undeniably won the space race.
So you're a moron thinking it's a good thing for Germany to double down on one of the shitties projects of the war that was the V2 rocket. Barely no damage and an insane amount of armament cost.

>to quote myself "they literally had it but chose not to use it"
Sure, but so did the allies.
You gonna give Germany magic tech early in the war, might as well give the allies. What a fun game.

>>17784537
>Oil and resources

>>17784628
What about making more foreign-national regiments, like in the Empires of old ?
Millions untrained and unequipped civilians awaiting the draft.

>>17785691
We won't be alive during next war.

>>17786098
"Letting" ?
They didn't want to join but should've been made a draft-state

>>17786302
>Shalom.

>>17786236
Would Iran join Nazi Germany in war against the Soviet Union ? Millions of infantry men awaiting draft.

>>17786251
>Ze world
Jews.
>Catholicism
Reich was throwing most priests in the camps, as well as condemning the Papal State

>>17786527
>Germany did not need oil
>You're a jew if you disagree

Fucking meds. Immediately.

>>17786573
No, you're not a jew because you disagree, you're a jew because you were born this way.

>>17786529
The Brits and Soviets wrecked them when they invaded Iran in 1941.

>>17786069
>modern German, French, Italian, Scandinavian
Nationalism does not exist in these countries.

>>17786236
bruh, they couldnt make tires by the end, they were absolutely desperate for oil. And Japan was even worse.

>>17786347
Why make up a dumb fucking argument, like infantry not having weapons. No one proposed that.

>>17786649
why even suggest that infantry weapon technology has been irrelevant since muzzleloaded cartridge weapons?
ok well lets say the Vietnamese and Chinese were using muzzleloaders, would they have won in Korea and Vietnam?

>>17786774
The chinese didnt win in korea.
And I never said you could take a weapon from that far back. Hence why I suggested a garand as the earliest firearm that wouldnt meaningfully affect performance. But if you took a 1853 enfield and equipped the british rifleman in WW1 with it, the conflict would have stayed the same.
Also Yes the Vietnamese would have still won the US Vietnamese war with muzzleloaders. If you dont understand that, no one can help you.

>>17784437
>the panther was successful
LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
the sherman and the t34 were the best tanks and its not even close. you know how I know this?
because the countries that made those tanks won.

>impotent nazicels still seething their ubermensch armies got raped to death by, in their own view, subhuman vermin
just give it up. its sad at this point

>>17783096 (OP)
Just don't do the Lebensraum thing

>>17786454
Hitler actually despised Switzerland, which was almost everything the NSDAP hated (a multiethnic democracy which rejected German nationalism and literally chose to coexist with fucking French and Italian speakers as their countrymen)
They didn't attack Switzerland because Switzerland was useful as a neutral middle man for communication with the outside world

It's impossible. This was a war they never should have started in the first place, but their ideology demanded it.

>>17783096 (OP)
Just bait the soviets into invading Poland first and team up with the British and French to liberate it.

>>17783096 (OP)
- don't go all in as germany, but instead
- create satellite states in the east, but leave them believing they are free. just very patriotic.
- get them to fight russia for you and just provide military aid.

Even if they had beat russia in the war, actually controlling the territory of such a vastly different culture would have been a much bigger issue

>>17783096 (OP)
nazis are inferior in terms of warfare, thus wining is not possible for them
nazism is an ideology of haterd, of bullying weak people that won't strike back, it's completely useless for a warfare vs strong enemy

>>17787294
They didnt hate multiethnic democracies, they were a multi ethnic democracy.
They hated Switzerland because it was a base for clandestine operations into Germany by the British and French and the Swiss did nothing to prevent this despite being an avowed neutral.
They wanted the benefits of neutrality (like trade with Germany) while actively aiding belligerents working to the detriment of Germany.
It wasnt because the heckin NOT-Z hated racially homogenous Alpines who showed up to cast a meaningless opinion every few years.

>>17787274
>Berlin is the Whitest major European capitol
>Germany is the strongest European economy
>Germany is the defacto leader of the EU
>England had to beg Germany for its independence then begged Germany to be let back in
>Russia is a third world tapestry of muds, asiatics, and is being depopulated in the fields of ukraine
>England no longer exists
>France no longer exists
>Poland lost more land than when the war began
>Poland has the highest level of European-African interbreeding

Germany won.

>ubermensch
They were right, if they were wrong they wouldnt be the strongest country in Europe despite being ground zero for ZOGslop.
>raped to death
Britain was actually raped to death.
Germany raped the Red Army so hard Solzhenitsyn wrote in his diary he lamented having to shoot Red Army soldiers who complained about paternity fraud among German women forcing them to raise German boys.

Germans are simply superior to Poles.

>>17787268
This really is the theory of mind for redditors.
>>17786926
>didnt win in Korea
lets see
>America is in Northern Korea
>China pushes them out of Northern Korea using military force
>China is keeping them out of Northern Korea with military force
Looks like a win to me.
>the SAW, grenade launchers, high quality secondaries, and a burst/auto function on rifles didnt improve squad combat performance
L OOOOOOOOOOOOOO L
>WWI would remain the same if the British had to use linear tactics
Do you understand why Germany didnt circumnavigate the French army in 1914?
It was because the British riflemen had a rate of fire so high the Germans thought they were coming under machine gun fire, this effectively ended the German maneuvers which had already outpaced the French ability to respond.

How is this not campaign deciding if not war deciding?

Would WWI have ended differently if the French army was surrounded in 1914 like they were 40 years prior?

>Vietnamese would have won with muzzleloaders
You are beyond help.

>>17786926
I must also state we have the accounts and reports of battles in WWII where infantry, due to high rate of fire weapons, played a decisive role.
Specifically in towns and villages. The Germans in books like Volk and Fuhrer and Panzer Ace wrote about how the Red Infantry was the primary obstacle to the German advance as they had to be cleared out with handgrenades and submachine guns from villages, bunkers, prepared positions, and cities before armor could advance.
Russian armor could be sniped, bombed, outmaneuvered, but it was Russian infantry that required small unit tactics to be removed and they necessarily had to be removed.

The people who fought the war themselves said infantry and their weapons were a decisive factor.

>>17783096 (OP)
there is no axis victory scenario that is possible with the knowledge of the time. i would say that if they had late 40s plane tech during the battle of britain and knew about oil in libya before barbarossa they would have won. but not otherwise.

>>17786460
>they had Aerial supremacy and special forces in 1942 who says they didnt
>https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_of_the_Reich#German_day_superiority_(1942–43)
>https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_war_during_Operation_Overlord
The British and Americans did not have air supremacy.
Air Supremacy is a specific term, look it up.
I notice, and I dont know if it is (You) but I suspect it is, this occurs often where le chud says something and then (You) or something who posts identical posts to you, says the opposite without actually knowing a specific term/event is being referenced.
>https://wikipedia.org/wiki/82nd_Airborne_Division#Initial_training_and_conversion
>https://wikipedia.org/wiki/101st_Airborne_Division#World_War_II_and_Cold_War_era
The special forces divisions which were more pivotal in the invasion, literally did not exist as full divisions or even combat divisions in 1942.
>Barbarossa wasnt ready
It was.
>waiting on trucks
they had trucks, how many were they waiting on? was it 50% of their total truck count? give us a number.
>provisional airfields couldnt be used in Spring
You are aware Barbarossa was planned for summer not spring?
>magically ready
It was ready, the Germans had intended to launch it earlier.
>Overlord in 1942
did the British and Americans plan Overlord in 1942 in the way Germany planned Barbarossa in early Summer 1941?
no.
>makes it even
we arent trying to make anything even, we are talking about strategic blunders made by the German command.
>NO NO NO YOU HAVE TO LET THE COMMUNISTS WIN
no we dont lol
>cope
projection because you have no argument.
>Soviets literally had assault rifles
Name the soviet assault rifle from 1939.
>Britian had nuclear bomb designs in 1939
source?
>magically
what is magical about simply having Hitler not say "no, I want scoped rifles because Russia is flat"
where's the magic?
>British Comets in 1940
well did the British have the comet in 1940 because the Germans had the Panther before 1943.

>>17786460
>pretending
They literally had them, you fucking retard.
>https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Panther_tank#Design_2
>https://wikipedia.org/wiki/StG_44#MKb_42(H)_&_MKb_42(W)

No one is pretending except for you.
The Germans had these weapons long before they deployed them, this was the result of decisions.
The British did not have the Comet in 1940.
The Mustang did not exist in 1940.
The AK 47 did not exist in 1939.

The Panther tank, the German assault rifle, these existed for months for the former and literal years for the latter before they were deployed.
This was a mistake resulting from political oversight in the weapons department.

>>17786496
>lets start with 1940
wow I guess if they had made those theyd be in a better position.
>Barbarossa was not ready
Then why did the Germans plan it for early summer?
>Barbarossa going off a month earlier is equivalent to the largest naval landing in history going off two years earlier
HAHAHHAHAHHAAAHHAHAHHAAAAA
KILL YOURSELF MONKEY HAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAA
>V2 was le bad
ok? I dont know what you want me to say here, The V2 was still a demonstration of the sophistication and superiority of German rocketry compared to American or British or Soviet rocketry.
>so did the allies

Like what? What did they choose not to use?
>magic tech
>>https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Panther_tank#Design_2
>>https://wikipedia.org/wiki/StG_44#MKb_42(H)_&_MKb_42(W)
Where's the magic?
These were developed and produced months/years before they were deployed to the battlefield, this was due to specific decisions made by Hitler.

you call it magical tech because you personally did not know these weapons existed long before they were deployed, you thought Germany was just rolling out le wunderwaffe in the vain hopes they could turn the tide, maybe they shouldnt have been heckin racismo o algo.
That is what you think.
You are just wrong.
not magic, it was a strategic blunder, Germany had these weapons but decided not to use them. no magic, the Germans were not aware of their advantage.
It is the same argument with Sarin gas, Britain had nothing comparable to Sarin gas by the time Germany had Sarin gas, Sarin nullifies gas masks, no other gas nullifies gas masks (at the time Sarin was developed).
If Germany wanted to they could have inflicted 100% casualties on Britain or the USSR while not taking 100% casualties from Britain or the USSR.

They chose not to do this because national suicide (even sub-100% casualties taken would be tantamount to) is not in the German character.
we see it today with Germany being demographically much more secure than Britain, or France... or Russia.... or America...

>>17783096 (OP)
By not starting a war

>>17787892
germans are the master race. the masters of losing every war they start