The Only Way Germany Could’ve Won WWII
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 сен 2024
- Take to the skies for free with the sponsor of the video War Thunder wtplay.link/al...
I decided to take on the role of Doctor Strange and look into millions of alternate realities. I'm happy to report back that out of 14 million timeline, this is the most likely one where Germany wins WW2
/ alternatehistoryhub Become a patreon and double your diet of alt history scenarios, while supporting the channel
/ discord Join the discord community for unique challenges, video suggestions and much more
/ @altremer 4th crusade alternative history visual novel
Take to the skies for free with the sponsor of the video War Tunder wtplay.link/alternatehistoryhub
war tunder?
Can you make an alternate timeline where the allies win the battle of France?
Suggestion: What if U.S. Presidential terms were just a single 6 year term instead of 4 or 8 years? I feel this is a topic that could be multiple videos since so much of U.S. history would change from this decision.
Sighs...what if the indo-europeans never existed? how would history change?.
what if the Semitic-speaking peoples and Semitic Languages never existed at all?? how would history be affected??
“Does Roosevelt just sit back and watch Germany take over continental Europe?”
Well, he certainly wasn’t going to be standing.
Bruh
Killer joke
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
US entered WW2 because Japan attacked Pearl Harbor unprovoked, their attack is purely offensive and absolutely unprovoked. The US didn't do anything to Japan that time.
We was going to act sitting
"So we are fine. As long as no one attacks the United States."
"Question."
"What's your question, Tojo?"
"I attacked the United States!"
@@Stoneworks STONEWORKS??
@@Stoneworks “Did you mean to, or was it an Accident? If it was an Accident go back and apologize”
@@Stoneworks”what…?”
@@Stoneworks "How...much?"
It’s a crime that this video isn’t sponsored by HOI4.
Seriously. It's free marketing for HOI4. But instead it's War Thunder.
Your username is literally TNO based batov lmao
Finally, a decent sponsor I could ACTUALLY get behind.
@@ordinaryrat
Oh my god is that a tno reference?!
The reason is that paradox didn’t have the new Bhutan DLC ready
No DLC = no sponsor
My biggest personal "I'm skeptical" on German victory is the idea that beating GB guarantees Barbarossa's success. Stalin got a lot of word that the attack was coming, but one of the biggest reasons he disregarded it was because he thought the West, especially the Brits, were trying to pull him into "their," war, and he didn't want to take even basic defensive measures that might give Germany a pretense to attack (which he figured Hitler would eventually want to do, even if he hoped it wouldn't be for a few more years.) If GB goes down, Stalin is looking at that intel with a very different mindset, and he might do his famous fingers-in-ears act. Even a significantly more powerful Wermacht isn't going to just roll over the Red Army if they're not being deliberately held back prior to that initial blitz.
That's actually an insanely good point.
Yeah, Stalin was aware War with Germany would come eventually.
Thing is, this is not the battle-hardened soviet army that has rebuild its officer core. This is post-purge weakened Soviet army, the army that struggled with Finland, and also almost collapsed under OTL Barbarossa. They might be more prepared, but that won't change the fact that leadership is abysmal.
In 1941, the red army wasn't ready for a large scale war.
The lack of US support guarentees a Russian loss.
Yugoslav government did actually side with Germany and even join Axis, it's just that the said government was overthrown a few days later, making the invasion inevitable in almost any scenario
To me the coup was a bizarre one, many of the men who participated turned back to germany and said they would honor the axis agreement even appointing a pro-german foreign minister ( momčilo ninčić), to me this indicates that many of the coup member's were just opportunists payed off by the british.
That's completely false
The coup was sponsored by the British and the Soviets, with, and the war was only declared on Yugoslavia to not allow Brittain to reinforce it. With Brittain not being at war with Germany, Yugoslavia would almost certainly not get invaded
Unless Hitler uncovers Mussolini's plan to invade Greece and forces him to cancel.
@@user-pn7jz9vr2zwhat? The coup was a plot by a bunch of Serbian officers and even the communist party in Yugoslavia barely got involved (they did street protests but nothing more really) let alone Britain or the USSR. I also hope this satire.
@@user-pn7jz9vr2zDid you actually believe the nazi propaganda?
I love how there is no alternate history where Italy has a competent military.
Problem is, Italy would have never be able to do it with out any major changes in it's history.
We were a medium power of Europe, strong enough to bend minor nations like Albania but we weren't strong enough to face major powers like France.
On a side note, Italy was actually managing to push in Greece after the initial come back as we deployed actually alpin troops.
@@El.fish.the.chocolate point of divergence would have to be way further back and would render the setting unrecognizable
@@bobertobobino2372 yea, at least from the Risorgimento like many had hypothesised, with a Italy reunited under Garibaldi and a republic... But in that case, could have fascism ever took place?
@@bobertobobino2372 point of divergence is paradox making the superesercito take-able before ww2
BOT DETECTED
On the Soviet point, the reason the Soviets weren't prepared for a German attack was because Stalin believed Hitler wouldn't risk a two front war like in WW1.
In this scenario with the UK knocked out, the Soviets would most likely be on high alert for any signs of a German attack. While it is possible that with the extra support from not worrying about the Western theatre would help the Germans win, it would have still been a brutal slog.
Thank you for listening to my rant.
Idk man, stalin literally got proof of the preparations the axis were making and basically said "nuh uh". Eitherway he just didnt want to accept reality and prefered to live in his own little delusional world
Even at High Alert the Soviets would require lend lease
I mean yeah, Stalin's mistake was that he assumed Hitler wouldn't be stupid enough to fight two fronts at once. the key word is "Assumed".
Yeah, that was something I immediatly thought of.
A big reason why Barbarossa was such a disaster for Soviets, was that it was an insane plan, so they ignored the possibility.
Now it would not only be a sane plan, it would be the likely scenario.
@@InquisitorXariusProbably not, Germany’s main advantage was initiative. If Soviet forces weren’t paralyzed at the start of the war the Germans would have gotten a lot less progress. Also the vast majority of lend lease can after 1942, the war was lost by then.
There's several ways Germany could have-
"Doesn't alter major decisions"
Yeah they're screwed
Seems there's many misconceptions about Hitler's stance towards Britain in this comment thread. In 1940, Hitler was hoping to have Britain agree to generous peace terms (allowing Britain to keep all of her territories) so that the war in the west could come to an end quickly. There were three main reasons for this:
1) Hitler didn't want to fight a war on two fronts.
2) He saw the English as part of the Germanic peoples and often stated that England was not a natural enemy for Germany.
3) He always saw Germany as a land power with aims to the east, so trying to fight a war against a sea power was senseless.
Interestingly, it's also a strong possibility that his own personal experiences influenced his decisions:
Firstly in WWI, Hitler was carrying a wounded comrade back to German lines when a British rifleman caught him out in the open. The British rifleman did not fire, but lowered his weapon and signalled from a distance that he would let them go. Many years after the the First World War, Hitler had a painting of that event commissioned and kept it in his office. The identity of the British rifleman was never truly confirmed, despite a few claims from various individuals.
Secondly, Oswald Mosley's sister-in-law, Unity Valkyrie Mitford, became obsessed with Hitler after seeing him speak in 1933. She moved to Germany and found his favourite cafe and learned his routine so that she could deliberately sit at a nearby table. After almost a year of this, one day Hitler invited her to join him. He was fascinated by her middle name and was impressed by her persistence. They began to meet regularly and became close. Their relationship became so close that Eva Braun saw her as a threat, after Hitler had referred to Unity was "a perfect specimen of Aryan womanhood". She remained close to him for 5 years and in that time tried her best to convince Hitler that an alliance with Britain was absolutely necessary and that the English people were being mislead by the political class. When war broke out in 1939, she was so distraught she walked into a park in Munich and shot herself in the head. However, she survived with massive injuries. After visiting her in hospital a few times, Hitler arranged for her to be transported back to Britain.
These experiences no doubt left Hitler with a conflicted feeling of how to deal with Britain, so it is no surprise that he was desperate to end the war between Britain and Germany with as little bloodshed as possible.
I believe he wrote in Mein Kampf that Great Britain and Italy were the natural allies of Germany. Of course, this is moustache man, we will never truly know how his mind worked, but it seems he wanted to avoid confrontation with Britain at all costs. Unfortunately for him, Britain had it's own geopolitical goals that were just never going to align with Germany.
@@cryoraptora303tm2 I think that was in his second book
Hitler was expecting England to fall into his hands, internally. There were small groups of Nazism cropping up around England. He was using propaganda against the British to win the war against them.
Hitler fail is to understand UK main Geopolitical stance is to not let Continent rule by one dominant power make them ready to fight and hitler really not considerate how italy ambition and Japanese expansion threatened UK hegemony in her colonies .
@@cryoraptora303tm2 he really have no idea about Britain geopolitical goals. Same mistakes willhelm 1 do with US or Japanese government believe US will accept peace term after surrender.
Lack understanding of Enemies geopolitical stance really lead to their downfall .
I think that you also need to consider why the Soviet Union was so unprepared against the German invasion. Stalin believed that Germany could not start a war with the Soviet Union until they made peace with the British. In this alternate scenario, the Soviet military would be much more alert towards the possibility of an invasion by Germany.
TIK history has proposed that this may - stress on the word may, this is a hypothesis, not a claim to knowledge - have been part of the reasoning behind the order to the German army to halt before Dunkirk.
The idea being that Moustache Man didn't want to kill too many British, maybe hoping for a white peace peace treaty (that's were both sides agree to end hostilities with no terms and just pretend the war didn't happen) or, failing that keep a sort of 'phony war' up with the British to explain away the military build up prior to Barbarasa.
Agreed but one of the main reasons the red army wasn’t prepared was cos the purges during the 30s that lead to most of the good and experienced generals and there family’s sent to gulags and with them all there experience and knowledge
@@fgo1949 Which just begs the question, if Stalin would be willing to initiate a purge of the army when he expected a German invasion.
@@DanDorugh the problem the purges were already done when the war ends
@@PresleyPerswain Except that it was Von Rundstedt who halted the armour, not adolf. He had good reasons, in that he feared the possibility of a repeat of The Miracle of the Marne, and wished to have the tanks serviced and crews rested before the second stage of the French campaign. In addition, as his boss already knew, the area around Dunkirk was difficult tank country, and the horse-drawn German infantry divisions, more suited to the task, were beginning to arrive.
Thus, when Goering said of the elimination of the Dunkirk pocket, that 'this is a special job for the Luftwaffe' adolf believed him.
You might also add that conventionally educated Prussian soldiers saw the sea as a barrier, whereas the British saw it as an open door.
But anyone who thinks that the British were less likely to accept an armistice if the BEF had been captured than they were when it was evacuated seriously needs to think again.
How Germany could have won WW2: Columbus doesn't discover the new World, thus no USA.
Big brain time
Christmas falls on Opposite Day so Santa Claus becomes a real person who only gives presents to bad boys and he gives Germany the W
Not really if you never seen why usa when crazy after realizing thay can't do any thing if the uk was invaded then thay would just be crushed as there bomber planes that could fly to france and back and why the H-4 Hercules was made to transport troops to i think england or france or spain.
Lmao
Any alternative WW2 with the US even slightly involved would have led to Germany's defeat
Just one nitpick about the US nuking Berlin and Hamburg: The reason why the nukings in OTL was even possible to begin with is because America at the time had total air superiority over Japan to the point they’re comfortable with sending singular B-29s on their own.
With Germany stronger than ever, they would’ve surely made huge advancements in their air capabilities and a much bigger and unharmed industry to foot the mass production bill, which means more jets, rockets and such.
Since the Battle of Britain didn’t wear down the Luftwaffe, this means that America would have little to no hope of breaking the Germans in the air, thus rendering strategic bombing operations such as Dresden impossible.
In addition, the Trinity test would likely have been a major wake up call for the Germans who had to this point dismissed nuclear science as “Jewish” in nature, and thus spark Hitler’s interest in getting the Reich the Bomb to even the playing field.
Yeah, the last point in which the US brings freedom with Atomic bombs is just impossible in this scenario. The overwhelming German industries ( which are not bombed in this timeline and also the whole URSS industries added to it) can produce so much jets by then, that any air operation in Continental Europe would be suicidal.
I remember the old US bomber crew who fought the first me262 jets, they said those planes were so fast that they were impossible to shoot. That they were their nightmares. So imagine a whole fleet of those.
Interesting divergence...here is one nugget to add.
U 56 spotted HMS Nelson and HMS Rodney in October 1939 and fired off a spread of torpedoes. But they missed.
Had those torpedoes hit.
Quite possible that Churchill and the high-ranking Admiralty are killed as they were onboard HMS Rodney at the time.
How does that affect the timeline?
That would be very interesting
Probably to Germany's disadvantage. The entire parliament and people would be calling for blood with the PM dead, Churchill becomes a martyr which is the opposite of what the Nazis need. Imagine thousands of posters with his face captioned with stuff like: "DON'T LET HIS SACRIFICE BE IN VAIN," "HE GAVE HIS LIFE FOR BRITAIN," "DON'T LET HIM DOWN," etc.
His replacement has no choice but to stay in the war and keep fighting, at which point things unfold basically identical to OTL. Even with a lot of high ranking officers and commanders dead, it doesn't really matter. Competency be damned, so long as Britain can draw resources to the west, it buys crucial time for the Soviets to receive aid, arm up, and claw their way to a victory.
THen churchill - The mad dog would be Gone and Eden would be in charge making more rational decisions
@@LionroaringHeusingerGnawingwho would step into his place then, as someone who was willing to fight with blood sweat and tears?
Then they would’ve been made martyrs
What if Hitler challenged Truman to a beat boxing competition? How would that affect the war?
I dunno about beat boxing but hitler would win a rap battle.
hitler was on like every drug at the time and very weakened so it'd break down the god complex a bit
Hitler challenges Roosevelt to a 100m dash 100% win
hitler would take too much speed and accidentally spit out his dentures, then trueman would pull his pants down and everyone would laugh at him. in this alternate history he still dies the same way, slopping his own top
Truman would run circles around him
Germany: "Alright, we're doing good. No one do something stupid"
Italy: "No worries, Im content"
Japan: "....so guys, about that"
USA: *"WHO THE FUCK TOUCHED MY BOATS!??"*
Basically TWR
Noice stepbrothers reference
"QUIT BLOWING HOLES IN MY SHIPS!"
At least it wasn't the carriers. I heard the fleet wasn't even there when the Japanese showed up. Big oopsie from them, and they paid dearly for it. Makes me think. There could be an alternate history scenario on this.
Germany: damn you guys are so stupid
also Germany: invade USSR, the strongest industry country🥴
know German are not smart but holy shiet they hitting the dumbest with this one
"Thousand-Week Reich" is quite similar to the scenario presented here, with one key difference: with the UK out of the picture, Germany never allies with Japan, meaning that when the US joins the war, it only has to deal with Japan.
Made me wanna checkout that game on my whishlist finally
@@brushrunner HOI4 is fun on its own, but the modding community is incredible.
US would have never joined then
@@margs5544 In Europe, no. But the US was still very much against the invasion of China, and the oil embargo still would have happened.
@@margs5544 In Europe, no. But FDR and the US in general opposed Japan’s war in China, and the oil embargo would have still happened.
19:00 I actually yelled out “OH COME ON!” when this popped up. Cody had a way of surprising me
This has got to be one of my favorite videos!
I just started to laugh
LOL. I read the "OH COME ON!" in Sweetie Belle's voice. XD
Murica 🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🕶️🕶️🕶️💥💥🕶️💥💥🇺🇲💥💥🇺🇲🕶️🇺🇲🕶️🇺🇲💥🇺🇲💥🕶️🗣️🗣️🗣️❗❗❗❗💥🕶️💥💥❗🇺🇲🇺🇲🗣️❗🇺🇲❗💯💥🕶️❗🇺🇲💪💪💪💪💪💪💯💥💥🕶️🕶️❗🇺🇲🇺🇲🕶️💥💯💯🕶️❗🇺🇲💯💥🕶️🗣️🦅🦅🦅
*Johnny comes marching home intensifies *
One thing to note, that 40,000 coming home wouldnt be a strain on Churchill at all, he and the government aimed for atleast 30,000 returning home, so 40,000, although low was still acceptable in their eyes - When the actual number that returned back in reality was found out, they where genuinley shocked.
Yeah, that would be easy to spin as "Despite all odds, we still got so many of our boys back. Let's arm up and go take back the rest".
@@Sigma-gb9yd That was basicley the viewpoint, the government aimed for 30,000, so if they got 40,000 thats still 10,000 or so more than their aims, and wouldve been acceptable in the public eye, as they didnt even know the number of soldiers there, so either way i wouldnt see that changing the war that mutch outside of a weakened allies ground wise, but again overall it wouldnt matter.
I think the modern day equivalent is the expected list of life when 9/11 happened. Both twin towers can carry thousands of people in the buildings on a typical work day, we also have to include the passengers on the planes, as well as the first responders. So the fact we were just shy of 3000 lives lost, it could have been worse, in some cases, should have been. A lot of people have explained those off chance scenarios where they just missed being in the buildings/planes cause they were late, they had an appointment, etc.
The lost of so many was heavy, but can’t help but have gratitude it wasn’t worse.
No way the brits and the strong man churchill was would just hand away being the top dog in the planet because of a few thousand soldiers. Just train more, will take slightly longer.
@@tysongamerpro1095 It would change it because there would be a 1/4 of a million POWs.....
Thousand Week Reich scenario pretty much
TWR>TNO
Yep
@@Luzeru362underrated but completely valid opinion
@@Luzeru362 TWR is actually fun to play as well. TNO mod makes me fall asleep after 15 minutes
@@Luzeru362 Nah, TNO is much better.
I doubt Hitler would have fought Britain a second time. He looked favourable towards the British and saw the British Empire as a force for good in the world
Not completely true germany was busy building a 130 meter artillery cannon aimed at the united kingdom but it wasn’t finished
Eh, kind of. He more or less viewed that the Brits could be the "administration" in the Reich. But he certainly didn't disdain them like the Jewish and "lesser" races (Hitlers words not mine).
"Does that mean Italy would succeed?"
"Obviously not."
😭
I don't think Italy failing to take Greece would be the case in this timeline.
The same strength he attributes to Germany, that being saved resources from knocking Britain out the war, would also apply to Italy in this scenario. All other campaigns Italy had to worry about could be coalesced on just only Greece in this case on a 1v1. The Italian air force being able to only concentrate on Greece dwarfing their air force would be massive, and perhaps naval invasions with a stable Mediterranean without Britain in the way. They did assist in the invasion of Crete with a naval invasion. A mainline naval invasion would be possible. The enormous loses in North and East Africa didn't occur yet in this timeline so the advantages of saved losses from other fronts is there. I'd even argue that a German victory against Russia with these saved resources and assets is a bigger leap than Italy taking on Greece in the same position.
Yeah I don't think Italian military incompetence alone could save Greece. Im surprised Althisthub went this route and I believe he didn't really invest much thought in this part, as its not about Italy. You have to consider Greece would be alone without support, facing an Italian airforce that could yield a force 10x the size did in our timeline, over 3,000 planes against Greece's 79. A navy that is uncontested free to coastal raid and level Athens if need be, they have air superiority so the navy would be practically untouchable. Now would they send every plane, every soldier, and every ship to greece just because they're at war with no one else? No because they wouldn't even be able to if they wanted too because of logistics, and they wouldn't want to do so to begin with. The point is that the Italian forces fighting Greece would be in a much better state, being actually supplied with a reserve of equipment now. Even if Greece managed to pull off the same defense and offense into albania in this timeline, somehow despite the domination of air and sea by italy, and a better supplied army. The reinforcements that Germany had sent could be matched by Italy, in tanks, in aircraft, and men. As the combined forces would be half of the Italian standing army at the time.
@@dudewithamustache5027 Nah, Greece wins. The British support was minimal, a few hundred troops and about 40 hurricanes... its the fact we fucking threw everything and the kitchen sink at them, men were leaving for the front with smiles on their faces, and women would march mules up near vertical mountainsides to resupply the front even after losing limbs to frostbite. Greece wins, because the Italians never wanted to be in this war to begin with, and the Greeks were defending mountainous, well-known terrain in heavy winter.
@@GM-vt6is I agree that the British support is minimal compared to the other factors I mentioned in my first comment. That's the problem though, you've ignored or at least failed to address my other points.
I can't deny the heroism performed by the Greek people, but to rely on that as your crux still wouldn't save Greece. Understand that many of these accounts such as the one you gave actual provides implications that not everything is fine. The fact they used civilian women with their mules to supply the fronts albeit, very honorable, but demonstrates the shortage of staffed supply lines and desperation. If Greece "threw everything and the kitchen sink at them", as you mentioned, then that isn't a very good plan to fight a drawn out war. Whos gonna be left to manage the home front to provide a labor force? Now its not like it'd be a ghost town, but Greece's small population of 7 million at the time compared to Italy's 45 would be in tremendous strain in the long run. The fact Greece mobilized half a million as they did in our timeline is impressive, considering that was 12.5% of their entire male population, and arguable most of their young men primed for service.
Your statement, "the Greeks were defending mountainous, well-known terrain in heavy winter" Is very true, but good thing winter isn't all year and that terrain would likely be passed anyway, as it did in our timeline. My first comment went over this. In this alternate history presented by Cody, the Italians aren't at war with no one else, and their disasters in Africa have been adverted since Britain was knocked out the war. Even if Greece managed to pull off the same defense and offense into Albania in this timeline, somehow despite the domination of air and sea by Italy, and a better supplied army. The reinforcements that Germany had sent could be matched by Italy, in tanks, in aircraft, and men. As the combined forces would be half of the Italian standing army at the time.
Also the Greeks don't just win because of poor army morale. As it wouldn't be as low in our timeline. Which why was the morale so low? Because almost every campaign before the Greek invasion in ww2 ended in disaster. However, that doesn't happen, there isn't enough time for that to happen as Britain surrenders. So there is no destruction of the North and East Africa armies, morale was considered standard for the army before the war. There is no reason that'd change in Greece unless they managed to inflict the same loses as the British did, which would require encircling entire Italian armies like the British did in our timeline.
Ultimately Italy very much could still lose such an engagement, as nothing is verbatim in alternate history. But given their circumstances provided by this alternate history timeline has my judgement saying no.
1:32
Luxembourg is just sitting in a corner waiting for the moment somebody notices it.
He he.
Luxembourg is always ignored
Even Luxembourgish would say "at least we're not Kiwis"
“DONT MOVE! It can’t see us if we don’t move!”
As someone from the Benelux (Belgium)
You mean the Belgian Province of Luxembourg?
"Goliath battleships that will make the Bismarck look like a fairy boat"
So...Yamato?
yhea german naval doctrine was just bad. even with time to build up they still lose to the usa/uk navy
Just look up H-class battleship proposals. H-44 would have been 131,000 tons and be armed with 20 inch guns. At that tonnage, it would have been twice the weight of the A-150 Super Yamato proposal.
@@Edax_Royeaux assuming it was a real design to be built. I've seen some historians who think the H series was just a design study exercise comparable to the Tillman Maximums
Yea bro I’m sure they can just invest that much in a battleship when their main goal was a army and yea bro I’m sure it won’t be a big target for British coastal defenses or air attacks
And didn't Yamato spend almost all its time in repairs?
I think the one thing that doesn't change: the era of the carrier was upon us.
It’s a sad day for RUclips when you can’t even say the names of historical figures without self censorship.
Yeah I don’t get it. It’s crazy
Ikr
One day Cody needs to explain COD Zombies lore.
That sounds like a pointless hub video. Even though he mostly does movies on that channel
@@captainplague4921 I know he did Fallout and Injustice once.
@@fulcrum6760dont forget red alert lmao
he’s said in the past he regrets doing videos like that (mainly the aot one) because it takes away the discovery aspect of it.
my old content was terrible from about a year ago
Ehh, it's probably just gonna be some mad Nazi scientists on some crazy projects.
I'm calling BS on the peace terms.
No way Britain sacrifices Gibraltar, Malta AND Suez. This is the Empire we're talking about.
But I think Germany would have accepted something lesser for peace to concentrate on the Soviets.
Gibralter and Malta are on the table
Suez isn't, the Germans would go for a lesser peace if it guaranteed a safe western front
Dude! The Empire gave up its whole EMPIRE after the war
@@JacobFraps yes, but on the empires terms, not germany's
@JacobFraps Gibraltar is still part of Britain. Malta could have been but voted for independence.
@commisaryarreck3974 Britain will lose Gibraltar when Spain pries it from its Cold Dead hands.
Malta maybe but I can see Germany leaving Gibraltar in British hands to curry favour. It's not like Franco was rushing to join the Axis.
i'm calling it, the defeat of germany in ww2 was a canon event
And now the entire Western world is gay, filled with people who hate the western world, and slowly crumbling around its true inhabitants.
true. Not even Miguel O hara could save the absolute trainwreck that the germans were in for in any timeline. Germany simply does not posess the manpower nor the resouces to sustain any long military action in the late 30s and early 40s.
@@flipogreen Yes it did. You are spewing the same boring opinion that one "Germany could not win WW2" video 6 years ago
@@KingBobChad Got a Wehraboo over here
@@KingBobChad
Silence, nazi sympazhiser
I love how ALL alternate WW2 universes where Germany somehow survives D-Day and the red bear just end in Berlin turning into a giant car parking
Wolfenstein taught me that big robot dogs are the answer
And aren't they always really
and magic, dont forget about magic
Ehh, I'm more of a mecha dinosaurs with rail guns my self.
And ancient Jewish science stuff
@@Johnathan-swift
Whitch is a giant cope to make the villians more incompetent, bad writing. The Germans were advancing technologicaly just fine by themselves. Having that tech designed by them isn't a stretch.
Cody says, " You can't fly the tank."
Hannibal Smith says, "I love it when a plan comes together."
Soviet tank designers: Ha ha ha! Hold my vodka.
aerogavin:
Hannibal should have stopped there and left the Tetris with shipping containers out of the movie.
My Aiwprton with Ripazha:
Here’s something to think about: the main reason Stalin wouldn’t accept the idea of a German invasion is because he was still at war with the western Allies. In this timeline it’s more than possible Stalin would have turned their western frontier into a fortress more than it already was in June 1941
with buffed up air and panzers i dont think the soviets could've hold the germans especially without any help from the allies.
@@user-uh7cb3vy4v the problem is that when Germany invaded the Soviet Union, they mobilized 34,000,000 illiterate serfs (partial joke). The main factor of Barbarossa’s strike was the element of surprise
Not really true. You the Soviets had 10k fighters and bomber in range of Germany to keep the peace in their recently conquered half of Poland? No Stalin was planning an invasion, but he was trying to reorganise the Soviet military due to the embarrasing failures in the recent campaigns such as the invasion of Finland or the fact that the Germans were much faster than the Soviets during the invasion of Poland.
Now Stalin disregarding his intelligence came mainly from the British at the time. The British intelligence was running circles around the Germans at the time but in this timeline, the British would not likely help the Soviets as much in fear of having to pay for it later.
The only real difference is that Stalin and your average Soviet would be more wary of German aggression but the Soviets would still lack the organisation and cohesion.
@@MrDwarfpitcher stalin knew a war was inevitable. even just not having extreme forward deployment or not leaving airfields vulnerable would hugely blunt the german advance as they couldnt encircle millions of troops so quickly or destroy so many planes.
I'd say Stalin would definitely prepare more, but I doubt the Red Army would've been ready.
There are a few problems with this scenario:
1. The only reason that the soviets were unprepared in our timeline was because stalin didnt believe Hitler would fight a two front war. With Britain out the soviets would start to prepare for war.
2. The reasons Germany lost against the Soviet union was due to lack of manpower, insufficient supply chains, too low armament production and a lack of oil. These problems will not be solved by limiting the balkan campaign and having a greater luftwaffe.
3. The american lend lease to the Soviet Union only began to come in in larger quantity from 1943 onward. At that time the german army had already been decisively defeated.
To add onto this: a lot of the Soviet Union's early problems stemmed from the plan of essentially overhauling their entire military right before Germany attacked, they were planning to take 2 or so years with that to get their military retrained and equipped with radios and such en masse.
A massive strategic blunder that could have been avoided if the soviets were given even just a week or two of being sure that germany would attack (they had conflicting reports constantly so got complacent) was the fact, that at the actual frontline, the germans outnumbered the soviets by a significant margin, most of the soviet troops were deployed in 3 long lines which allowed germany to essentially tactically massively outnumber soviet troops, break through in a few places, surround the rest and force them to surrender, if there was a redeployment into real defensive positions with defensive preparations, Germany would be forced to fight much more deadly, time and rescource consuming fights that would leave them drained before they got anywhere close to Moscow. Germany could initially straight up bring, on average, more and better equipped forces into the fight, and if they couldn't do that, they likely would have thrown in the towel atleast a year earlier than they did historically
Lend Lease is a very touchy subject but the US help was, for the most part, mainly critical in terms of food supply and transportation, most warfighting materiel was producable within the USSR itself but the need for all of these things would be immediately lower if the soviets didn't suffer the massive losses and loss of fertile land that they did historically, so in a world in which germany fails to essentially wipe out most of their frontline for free via encirclement of unprepared units, the USSR might not need Lend Lease at all
For the second point, without the UK/western front and thus getting blockaded wouldn't that just not be an issue, until maybe Japan got involved so at the very least the window of time before running out of oil would probably be higher, and I doubt that the soviets could go from complete trash to decent in any timeframe
He who controls the air controls the war.
Without Lend Lease Soviets can not counter as much as they did. If Anything Germany be unscathed. Soviets not make it that far that soon. Even Russians acknowledge this.
@@MbisonBalrog Tbf the rest of the world was pretty much coming out of fighting by 1943, meaning the Empire abroad, such as Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the African nations could have provided a lot of material support to the allies without the US. Japan was never really a threat to the European theatre as all they wanted was more land in Asia
I feel you overlook some stuff here,
1. Even if the major Soviet cities were taken, the USSR still would’ve fought because at the end of the day the German conquest was a campaign of extermination so in the end for the Russians it was a literal do or die situation.
2. While Britain would make a separate peace treaty with Germany, it still would’ve fought with Italy and Japan since those two were threatening British colonies in Africa and Asia.
3. A bit of an add on from 2 but even if the US doesn’t fight Germany they still fight Japan. Japan always saw America as a threat to their power in the Pacific so war with them was going to be inevitable and while it would still end in a US victory it probably end a lot bloodier than our timeline,
1. you're forgetting this is something known in hindsight with about a century of propaganda occasionally laced with truth backing it. Countless minority groups (non russians) joined the Germans since they saw them as a better alternative then the mass graves and death camps of the Soviet Union
2.Italy would be brought to heel by Germany, they could barely handle Greece or an undermanned French front. Britain would fight Japan but Italy would at most get minor concessions in Africa. It's not worth ruining a secured front over ridiculous claims from some incompetent bald dictator. The Italo-German alliance would be a short lived one as Italy getting shafted again would be somewhat reasonably be angry at receiving a pittance for their pathetic display and contribution
3. Japan saw America as a threat, Japan was however forced into war the second the Embargo started. Twas war or a total surrender to China as it's lifeline (oil from the US) had been cut. Even with the other Allied colonies the Philipines were a dagger at the alternative line
Their actions were not justified, but god damn I can't see any other option except a hail mary hoping to knock out the US by shock and awe (Pearl Harbor)
in regards to point 2: it's safe to assume Hitler would have demanded concessions to Italian colonial claims. And quite frankly even if the brits did take a seat at the negotiating table I'm almost certain talks would have broken down. I don't see any situation where the British would be willing to accept all of Hitler's demands (and this is even if they accept their weaker position) in a way WWII was win or die for a lot of countries. Italy's claims alone were irreconcilable to the British. there is no way in hell they'd give up Egypt and Sudan (their richest colonies outside of india) without total military defeat.
Underestimating the Red Army’s resiliency and overestimating German logistical capability? I’ve seen this one before!
3. I don’t know if it would be bloodier. with the US focusing all of its effort on the Pacific, the Japanese fold a lot quicker.
@@warlordofbritannia something something incompetent commies something something I'm very smart
Just one thing I’d like to add: The British DID send air units to protect the Evacuation of Dunkerque, and they weren’t hamstrung by any fears about “retaliation”. The main reason you don’t hear about them is because they weren’t seen by the BEF soldiers being evacuated, the people statistically speaking most likely to have survived, because they were tied down bombing and strafing the Wehrmacht approaching Dunkerque, who were actually the genuine threat. Not to downplay their role in the Battle of France, but the Luftwaffe, like the rest of the German High Command, was overstretched, and generally mismanaged Dunkerque, especially the defense and support of German ground units later on.
If you want to know the specifics of this, read the book “Dunkirchen 1940” by Historian Robert Kershaw: It gives you a good picture of how everything played out on the German side, and tackles the “Dunkirk Miracle” myth.
Think you can give me an overview? I'm curious about it.
@@buddermonger2000he gave you a book to read about it
19:17 I should note prior to early 1943 IRL, the US's nuclear program was on it's own. It was the merger of the UK program(which was further ahead tech wise, but way behind in resources and scope) which sped things up. And this was initiated by the UK(They came to America for help with their top secret project, America told them they already had their own, they got merged).
If this doesn't happen, America's nuclear program is set back at least a year, until 1946. Possibly even 1947. The UK provided a ton of research and help, and Canada helped with resource issues and served as a middle man.
probably gotten it even earlier in this scenario as a "pacified" Churchill would have full send any and all tech and research to the last bastion of freedom and the tech upgrade could have very well prevented pearl harbor, as a better radar equipped base and ( after seeing how Europe got folded) a more twitchy base would have had NO sunday breaks and first radar contacts coming from the west being instant red alert would have devastated the surprise attack and possibly launch a counter attack. That could have crunched the Philippines invasion (taking away MacArthur's "vowel to return" since he never left) and may have ended the pacific war far sooner, which in turn would make vladivostok THE entry way for allied troops to enter and "help" the soviets..... if they even bother to in the first place.
@@crocidile90 This isn't a strategy game dude, there isn't a tech tree that you can just spend more of your resource points on to unlock shit "earlier."
lets not forget the new resources for germany like the heavy water
@@algorithmgeneratedanimegir1286 He's not wrong thou, despite the gamer phrasing.
@@crocidile90 It was not the quality of the radar that wuld have helped, as the reason it was suprizing was that it was on the radar, but they thought it was a glitch.
The Germans offered peace many times. Even with terms that included leaving occupied territory. Even while the UK bombed German possions without retaliation for just over a year
0:58 he knows what his fan base plays
Also 0:06
1.3k hours and growing
Wish he included Old World Blues
AltHist: "you can't fly tanks in war thunder".
Me" You can if you're packet loss is high enough.
I feel like you forget that the Soviets would not be as surprised if Britain surrenders. Stalin believed that Germany wouldn’t attack the Soviet Union if they were at war with Britain. If British surrendered, then Soviets would be mobilized by Barbarossa
The weirdest part is that this was the premise for one of his older videos. What if the Soviets attacked the Nazis
@@jadeimusprime2158 fun fact is that Stalin was pursuing internal dominance, not world dominance like Trotzky. Even the Warsaw Pact was meant to keep a war out of Soviet territory. The Pact members were only a kind of "human shield" to be doomed to be devastated in a war that would end before the front line would reach Soviet borders
Tbh I don't think thatd change the preparedness of the Soviet army. The purges still occurred by Dunkirk and the Soviets were still building up anyway so all that would change is that theyd guess it would come around 1941-42 rather than 1944-45 and Stalin wouldn't have a panic attack for 3 days
@@Alex-xh9woand what do you think that’d mean? Million upon millions of Soviet troops being stationed on the border, dug in and prepared for a German attack. Factories, already moved to the Urals. Yeah the Germans in this scenario would be stronger but the Soviets would too, or at very least they would be much more prepared for the German invasion.
the soviets would still be unprepared. remember the purges were fresh,, Stalin's refusal fo believe that hitler will invade is not logical but ideological
I'm only a few mins into the video and you've nailed it already.
5:22 This is even more of a striking fact when you know how unpredictable, random and chaotic weather events are. It's very much like Quantum Physics, where it's absolutely *impossible* to know things "for certain". The weather very well might have been different that week, and it could have changed the outcome of the entire war. Unlike human decisions that affected the war, this fact is completely out of our control and completely plausible.
Ah, so that's how Germany wins WWII: it doesn't.
Hey it won WW2, not WW3
It's kinda comforting in a really strange way.
@@avandorhu-3389 If alternative realities are real then Germany did win WW2
unfortunate
If germany would have given an Exemption.
Two jewish scientists The outcome will have been A very different outcome
The short answer is that Germany could have never won in a prolonged war that ended up being fought but they could've won simply if the allies gave up at some point. Similarly to the Confederates in the Civil War if you lack the population and resources to continue the fight then just hold out long enough for the other side's population to throw in the towel.
EDIT: After seeing the video, yeah on second thought Germany could've "won" in 1940 but eventually the US and UK would've come into the fight again. A reason being that there is no scenerio where Japan doesn't attack the US, whether it's in Pearl Harbor or some other location. After that occurred it was Hitler who declared war on the US. The German justification being that the US was sending aid to Britian was hollow. Hitler was already a delusional egomaniac who in our timeline thought the US would surely be defeated by Japan and so he wanted to be part of it. In this alternate scenerio where Britain pulled out of the war, Hitler has an even bigger ego and so still would've declared war on the US after Pearl Harbor. So the allies still would've won anyways but the war probably would've waged for a few years longer past 1945
There is already a similair to this detailed axis win made by channel called general hd
And that's how Germany has fought ever since Prussia was fucked sideways during the 7 Years War and by Napoleon - they realise Germany doesn't have nearly enough manpower or resources to wage a prolonged, attritional war against France, Russia or Austria. Thus, they geared their state to be incredibly militaristic and combat ready, with the military itself heavily focused on quick, decisive victories - decentralised command, the use of trains early on, superb discipline and drilling, junior officer training, even the Dreyse rifle were all tools used to make the Prussian and then German military a heavy hitter for the first round. Because without that, they'd be smashed by the superior manpower of their neighbours. And that's why they became so good at that - almost taking out France in World War I and taking out Russia, conquering Europe in WW2 with crazy rapidity. But it just wasn't decisive enough, and from the Battle of Britain/Battle of the Marne onwards their fate was sealed - as the only victory possible evaded them.
But The US literally did support Britain, regardless of if Hitler was a bad crazy dude him using that as a justification when Japan went to war isn’t wrong. He’d been waiting for an excuse but knew he couldn’t win if the US went full force against the Axis, so when Japan declared that was the opportunity to ensure that the US was no longer officially neutral so that he could attempt to stop the convoys the US was sending to Britain and the Allies. Believe it or not, Nazi Germany actually did care about diplomatic rules, and that included U-boat raiding neutral convoys. I think people tend to look at Hitler as a stupid psycho because of the evil shit he did, but he wasn’t actually that dumb at all. He made bad calls and was a bad dude, but he didn’t lead Germany and he wasn’t successful in the early war through luck. And iirc (could be wrong may be misremembering, please reply if I am) the US was using civilian boats that transported foodstuff (which were off limits for sinking/capturing) to smuggle military equipment to the UK and Germany was aware of it
There is a scenario where Japan doesn't declare war on the US. It's the scenario where the US doesn't embargo Japan.
So basically, Germany couldve won if Hitler wasn't in charge
One minor correction is that mustache man was not the one who gave the halt order. It was given by 4th army Commander Günther von Kluge and Generaloberst Gerd von Rundstedt and then approved by mustache man a day later. Too much of the German militaries actions are put on the mustache man, especially actions done early on in the war. It really wasn't until the invasion of the USSR that he really started to override his generals and dictate the actions of the war.
A similar misconception is that the mustache man was the one who wanted / planned the battle of Kursk. He wasn't, it was the general staff who persuaded him to do it. The mustache man wanted to attack further south toward some oil fields. Much of our misunderstandings come from misconceptions and over simplifications, as well as post-war writings by German generals wanting to distance themselves from the actions and failures of the army.
Not even at the beginning of Barbarossa, Mr. Moustache man adopted the hands on approach rather late (~44-45) when he lost complete trust in his generals. Sadly nearly century old (and debunked)myths still get propagated.
@@ThealmightyMattsilence, Halo4oid
@@bubble4072 Fair point!
@markricheard1870 lol! I made this my picture back when Halo 4 was announced, and I've just never changed it
This assumes that in this timeline the Soviet reaction to realities in Europe would be the exact same. Stalin always planned to eventually fight a war with Germany. An early defeat of the Allies would mean that the Soviets would likely promote more deterrance rather than just assuming Germany would never invade. This could significantly delay German advances for long enough for America to enter the war via Pearl Harbour. Just like Barbarossa, Hitler would eventually break the Non-Aggression pact with Britain and open a 2 front war with Sea-Lion. This would mean American lend lease to Britain and the Soviet Union while begining its own war economy. It's really unliukely that Dunkirk would change that much if Germany commits to opening 2 fronts regardless and Japan goes the Pearl Harbour route.
You are assuming Hitler declares war on the US after Pearl. That was only done because Hitler recognized his Army was in a near collapse after the failure of Typhoon. He desperately needed help. Hitler hoped Japan would come into the war against the USSR in December 41. Japan didn't have the resources to attack the Soviets, battle China, and conquer the colonies of the US/Brit/Netherlands, all at the same time. They barely had enough for two
of these operations. So, bottom line, if the Germans are more successful in the USSR and don't get wiped in Army Group Center, there is no need to involve the US. In fact, Hitler would have welcomed his de facto war with the US taking a back seat to the real war in the Pacific, drawing off US support of Britain's naval lifelines. Eventually, perhaps, the US gets involved in the European war, or maybe not. Britain didn't have the resources to develop the Atom Bomb itself (although it did have a big part of the science). Thus, I can envision Germany successful against the Soviets, not at war with the US, and Britain agreeing to an armistice by mid 43 or 44. Germany's goal in the war was to conquer European Russia/USSR and if Hitler agreed to free the western nations, that pretty well ends WW2 in Europe.
Japan is another matter: They have zero chance of success in every scenario. Lack of resources, Atomic bombs, overreach, you name it.
"after years of preparation"
*HOI4 screenshot*
oh this is gonna be a fun ride
Adolf: "Finally. Europe is mine again!"
Wilhem II: "Cool! Can I get my throne back while you remain as Head of State?" 😄
Adolf: "Nope"
Wilhem II: 😢
This enraged Wilhelm… who punished him severely
Wilhelm li: 😄
Wilhelm ll: 😢
rare pinwheel bearer W
Interesting thought about monarchy... What if part of the peace treaty was that Mustache Man be recognized as an actual emperor, and one of the terms of peace was a betrothal to 14yo Princess Elizabeth of York. This might be seen as some sort of restoration of a connection between British royalty and the German Throne. I wonder what sort of wrench that might throw into the works. Can you imagine _Führerin_ or perhaps an Anglicized _Fuhress_ Elizabeth?
@@Lucius_Aurelian_dude.
Uncool.
3:39 please dear God leave me alone
The snail knows where you are at all time
:(
I read it right as it happened and felt dread overcome me
My favourite part is seeing the spike in “most watched” after the sponsor. Nobody fucking watches them lmao
I'm convinced Gaijin is the immortal snail
7:00 SICILY MENTIONED 🎉🎉🎉
Sicily isn’t real
RAHHHHH SICILY MENTIONED RAHHHHH WHAT THE FUCK IS A RULE OF LAW RAHHHHHHHH
One thing I would consider, is that in order to build enough warships to actually defeat the British Navy before the UK can recover, Germany would have to dedicate so much that it would collapse trying
Besides british can also build more ships as a reaction
Well could devote all that labor to labor instead of killing them. Though slave-and-subject built ships have a...Bad reputation. Let's just say the first two Kamikazes had a little help from the Mongols' unhappy conquests.
Plus the us navy would still be getting stronger
Hitler did not have to build a navy based on Bismarck's, those were obsolete before the WW2 began, see Pearl Harbor or The Battle of Midway. Those ships did not fire a single shot in the entire battle. Germany needed planes, a lot of them.
Mustache man : "Europe is almost all mine!"
Uncle Sam: "Open your mouth I'm about to make you glow"
Was that a 2014 godzilla reference?
Uncle Sam: Nooo!! you cant just fly planes into muh towers!!!
@@Blox117 that’s 60 years too early dude
Wrong timeline bud@@Blox117
Hey, one of the devs of the Ultra Historical Mod for Hearts of Iron IV here. Yeah, kinda the wrong mod for this scenario...one would think. xD In any case, we did some extensive research on industrial output numbers, resource needs and manpower requirements and I have to say yes, Germany could have "won" in your scenario. However what is unlikely is that the Soviets would ever have fully surrendered. At some point the German supply lines just get so overstretched it requires years of logistical buildup to push them further back. There is a reason that while Hitler wanted all of Russia up to the Urals, the generals were more looking at the Arkhangelsk-Astrakhan line as the final point of the advance. Behind that was a massive gap in terms of railway connections and essentially no roads anymore. So if Russia doesn't surrender and until 1945 only Japan actively fights the US and UK...well, that doesn't end well for Japan and all the Lend-Lease to the USSR is going to flow through Vladivostok soon.
So yeah. I agree the scenario you guys painted here could have been possible. After all, the USSR would have been weakened to the point Germany could have pulled A LOT of men from the frontline for a 1945 Sea Lion, and of course at that point a whole new generation is available for recruitment too, without the massive losses of 1943 and 1944. I really like that you decided to end the hypothetical scenario there. Since what happens after the nukes fall on Germany is just something one can't really find out. And luckily we never had to.
the thing is Hitler would never have declared war on Britain again. and would have no reason to declare war on the USA, in the timeline or at least the same one. US war against Germany would have to be one of aggression
Do you think it would be plausible if Germany had accelerated u-boat production pre-war? If they had had the number of boats they had in 1942 in 1940 or 39, I bet that would play out similarly. The Soviets might be more alert to the German threat in any scenario where Britain is out of the war before June of 41, but if the UK is on her last legs around then we can assume the Brits surrender before 1943 and then Barbarossa gets to play out similarly - but the Soviets don't get lend lease (and the germans have the u-boats to stop the USA shipping via the Atlantic).
Ultra is my favorite mod
@@King.Leonidas Ah, that's not accurate I fear. Hitler wanted an alliance with Britain, that is true. However he never would have gotten it, instead they would have kept arming and preparing, fueling resistance in Europe.
And the US would likely support the USSR in various ways, possibly including LL. Plus after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, it is not unlikely that Germany would have declared war on the US to curtail US support for the Soviets and Brits, especially with the Brits being in an alliance with the US against Japan now...since, ya know, Japan did also invade UK colonies.
@@maximilianodelrio Great to hear! Thank you!
Ok so like hear me on this. If I remember right. Churchill had the stain of the Gallipoli campaign under his belt. A horrible loss that plagued him later in life. He suffered from severe depression and alcoholism. The loss at Dunkirk could have been enough for him to commit suicide. Where then Britain would be without such a strong leader. Sure someone could have taken the PM seat and been a stellar leader. I’m just saying that it could be even more of a severe blow.
For all that people love to think about "what if the 'bad guys' won?" alt history scenarios, the truth is that the vast majority of plausible WW2 scenarios involve Germany losing much more quickly than they did in our timeline.
Also, there is *zero* chance that Britain *ever* gives up Gibraltar. That would've been seen as essentially giving up the entire Empire. Also, Hitler probably wouldn't have pushed very hard for that, because it's not like *he* would've been getting it. Plus, if Britain is already wanting out of the war, Hitler has even less motivation to give a big gift like that to Franco. He'd be in a position where he no longer really needs another ally.
Spain is still annoyed that they lost Gibraltar...even thought its been like...700 years.
@@bizmen81 To be fair, it's on their land rather than an island.
Yeah World War 2 is kind of a crapshoot where the Germans get very lucky
@@bizmen81 And a lot of Gibraltarians are annoyed they are still part of Britain
The bad guys did win.
I will admit, when the Nuke came down? I suddenly went: “Oh SHIT!” Because I suddenly remembered that, yeah! That’s definitely a thing.
I did too! I have studied the Manhattan Project a lot and I loved that he mentioned that originally, Germany was supposed to be the target.
The only thing im curious about is how america manages to get a fleet of bombers over berlin without the years of effort it took to degrade german air defenses and their air force
@@devinlastnamenotneeded8521eh should’t be too hard if Germany just ignores the west and focused itself on the east which I assume is how the Americans got past
@@devinlastnamenotneeded8521 I would say that getting into German airpace and dropping the bomb would probably be easier that it was for the Enola Gay to get to Hiroshima. The filght they took was well over 2500 k. Further, the bomb was dropped from an altitude of about 31000 feet, higher than the max effective range of much of Germany's Anti Air batteries. Though they did have some that had effective ranges into the 40000 feet range, but those were limited in numbers. Basically, with the right intel on the possible locations of those higher altitude batteries as well as the short distance needed to fly to deliver the payload, a strike on Germany was well within the capabilities of the US Army Air Corp.
Yup
Nukes dropped, over a nation that this time had an actual airforce and would be fielding jet fighters
Japan was a nation firebombed to dust with no air force left to speak of
Germany in our reality had little to no airforce to speak of by the time the nukes dropped
Germany in this timeline would have a pacified Soviet Union and not crippled itself in the Battle of Britain
One nuke could fly past, but more against an active airforce? Good bloody luck, let alone the risk of the bomber being shot down and the Germans getting their hands on a functional Nuke
19:00 Freeduumh jumpscare
A single conversation across the table with a wise person is worth a months study of books.
Hold up. With an almost entirely intact Luftwaffe, how do you even get the bomb to Berlin? Hamburg is at least coastal, but just how incompetent does the Luftwaffe have to be to let an enemy bomber reach Berlin here?
1) The luftwaffe was busy engaging the RAF and had taken losses later on in this scenario
2) If they were preparing for operation Sealion, they would be mostly based in NW France at this point
3) The element of surprise. America would be coming likely from the north and flying over the North Pole, I doubt there would be much of a force in Sweden and Northern Germany.
Same as how the Americans bombed Nagasaki and Hiroshima. You send 2-3 planes by themselves, which aren't worth the AA shells and fighter scrambles to go chase after
@@annadelsienaThing is though that in the Japanese case their airforce had been devastated by the years of conflict as well as having little fuel to actually bring the planes up in the air.
This Germany would have no such logistical difficulties, having captured the oilfields of the Caucasus years ago by this point and likely would send up forces to defend, especially such a symbolic place as their capital.
@Anonyomus_commenter 2 of those would be a non factor due to the fact that the luftwaffe wouldn't be used on operations over Britain and wouldn't be battered and attritioned in the new time-line. I think hamburg getting is fair but Berlin as well feels iffy.
@@whitehawk4099 We're also talking about a fully comitted US airforce and a British airforce which has been able to build up for multiple years unmolested, so the same 1000+ plane waves would take the same priority as they did in our timeline. And the same priorities would take precedence, in that they would be less inclined to go chase a small group of planes over the tens of thousands actively carpet bombing Germany
18:25 “nore-wick” lol
Wtf is a kilometer 🔥🦅🇺🇸
I thought he said Lerwick 😂
lol I guess he’s never heard of Norwich CT
As a Norwich lad, it was painful to hear
@@tragonthunder8668”ah 5 syllable words hurt my brain”
20:02 - At least where the availability of additional bombs was concerned, this was only in the very short term: In our timeline, the third shot was planned for August 19th. The actual bigger problem probably would have been getting it on target, as every B-29 fling single or in small groups would have become a high-priority target for the basically intact German air defense of this alternate timeline, whereas Japan had little air defense left.
Yeah, I was about to comment this. There were 4 atomic bombs, including Trinity meaning 3 targets could be selected
A way around that, I'm thinking, is either vast quantities of pilots/fighters could be thrown, or more accurately, a "smarter" route. The bombers would have taken off, let's say from Alaska or something. Point is that the planes could fly from the North (Arctic Circle) and largely bypass the air defenses. Can't the B-29 also fly higher than most planes at the time?
Or, in a more desperate way, the aircraft could play the role of innocent civilian aircraft, until they would have got closer to Berlin and Hamburg. Similar to how the Soviets used airliners to start their attack in Afghanistan in 1979.
@B-52H yeah the demon core was the 4th bomb
19:00 I applaud the smooth plot twist transition here
While it isn't character assassination to say Britian sues for peace, that is a fairly extreme perdiction I dont entirely agree with as in our timeline they were having a very rough time for a very long time and ended up not going through with it. Though this is also the only way to let the germans win this one
Yeah, but the war seemed winnable. If the war didn’t seem winnable, then the public would have wanted peace
Cody has fallen off 😔
200K PoWs in France
Britain would've sued for peace and Churchill and his puppetmasters wouldn't be able to destroy the entire empire out of spite. The Germans wouldn't push for a harsh peace on Britain either with an Anglophile dictator and in his own words him having no interest in dismantling the empire. This would also be truly retarded as it would secure the western front and free up men occupying Northern France and the coast
The interest in Germany's old colonies are also vastly overstated
@@Anonyomus_commenter ehhhhhhh I can't quite agree, there have been plenty wars that looked more bleak where people kept fighting and if nothing else Churchil does have an empire to throw at germany
@@Anonyomus_commenter The British empire was the biggest in history. it still would have looked winnable even if Dunkirk was a slaughter. While I agree with cody that the brits *might* have taken a seat at the negotiating table the talks would have inevitably broken down.
With all little Jimmy has learned from this channel, I’m surprised he hasn’t become a off shoot channel of every time Cody breaks into his house to talk about mustache man and fez wearing Italian man.
whimsu and pointlesshub
I know this is an alt history video, but....
- German army wasn't stopped because of mercy or something, but by logistics
- Germany couldn't defeat the USSR because of logistics
- Without war in Europe, the US would take down Japan much faster
- Sea Lion would be possible only if the UK disbanded Royal Navy.
1. Logistics was not the decisive factor, but rather the enormous Allied numerical and weapons superiority. Historians already agreed that during Operation Barbarossa, any false move could have tipped the balance one way or the other.
2. Germany would have destroyed the Soviet Union if it had not been for Roosevelt.
3. Likewise, they would have also destroyed the United Kingdom if Roosevelt did not assist them
@@czeroxd
1. Logistics is a decisive factor in all wars, your numerical superiority means nothing if your men are starving or out of bullets.
2.A huge portion of lend-lease arrived to the USSR after 1942, and by then the war was decidedly starting to turn against Germany in the east. Mostly alone, the Soviets managed to stall the Wehrmacht's advance. I think its deeply irrational to phrase the entire Soviet victory over the Nazis as some kind of an American accomplishment.
3. Constructing a fleet the size of the Royal Navy overnight is a completely and utterly insane idea. Navies are only insanely expensive to build, but they take time and dockyards have very limited amounts of space. Dockyards within Germany were simply not numerous nor large enough to construct a Kriegsmarine large enough to challenge Britain at all, and even within their conquered territories there are not enough docks to facilitate building a navy of that size within 5 years. Ignoring the economic ruin devoting that many resources to shipbuilding would cause, not to mention the enslaved Slavs and Frenchmen probably wont be so compliant in constructing vessels for the nation that is killing their people or disgraced their country.
Furthermore on this point, when the Luftwaffe does engage the RAF over Britain for operation Sealion the exact same problem as the historic battle of Britain arises again - the Luftwaffe will be mauled, there is no doubt there, and it will be permanently crippled by every loss it takes.
And finally, by the time the new Kriegsmarine is built after probably a decade or so, the USA is fully mobilized and has almost definitely destroyed Japan by then, as no matter what they will join the war in Dec. 1941. If the Germans were to declare war on the US as is historical, they will end up stomped too, if not before Sealion then after they try it. All Germany's declaration of war will do is give the USA a brand new base for its bombers and soldiers, essentially guaranteeing D-Day happens. I didn't even touch on why Sealion will fail because it is obvious, Britain was turned into a fortress within a year of the fall of France historically - give the British a decade to prepare and the Germans no air superiority and you'd have to be genuinely mad to think they stand a chance.
@czeroxd
Fine. I'll elaborate.
1. The most probable explanation is that logistical issues stopped Germans from destroying allies in Dunkirk. If Hitler really tried to spare allied forces, then Luftwaffe wouldn't bomb them.
2. In 1941, Lend Lease for soviet union was relatively small, especially compared to 1942-1945.
Also, logistic issues resulted in Barbarossa's failure.
3. Kreigsmarine was no match for the Royal Navy, so the naval invasion went out. Battle of Britain showed that Germans couldn't win the air war.
Don't get me wrong, Lend Lease was an enormous help, especially to the Soviets which started to catch up with technology (long term that was a mistake which resulted in cold war).
@@czeroxd a wehraboo and a weeb. Absolutely insane and unhinged assessment lmao.
without the lend lease, the USSR cannot win against Germany. They may be able to hold in Siberia indefnitely, beyond german supply reach.
without the food, trains and trucks, there will be no soviet offensives and very limitewd counteroffensives. in our timeline, the Soviet Union was on breaking point in the winter of 41/42 and that was WiTH limited lend lease (obv lend lease really kicks in later and enables the soviet counter offensives and solves their fuel and food shortages)
The issue of the German soviet war is that the losses the germans suffered in our timeline are significant even before any lend lease arrived. German casualties were something like 1000 per day and incomparable to the losses of the previous campaigns. Another compounding issue with Russia is that these losses were concentrated in the spearhead troops (the Panzer groups) and most tank divisions were severely depleted before the battle of Moscow.
Please do a vid on if the Sino-Soviet split never happened or was patched up in the 70s, my good man.
Sup my man
@sergioventura2595 hey! Haven't seen you or been around for a while. The struggle continues.
If the split never happened, the U.S. and the People’s Republic of China would both put off rapprochement for at least another decade or two.
Good idea that'd rock.
The bombings of Germany would essentially have to be suicide missions in this scenario. If the Germans have a recuperated luftwaffe and a more capable kriegsmarine by 1945 then I don't see any way the US could get a B-29 over Germany without the mission being recognized as the bomber isn't making it back (and the fighters escorting it) and thats if the bomber even makes it without being shredded by flak guns and fighter planes.
Yeah, I really do not see the USA risking their new weapon on a mission against a still functioning Luftwaffe. Imagine the fear of the plane getting downed and the bomb falling into enemy hands. Never.
This is actually a good point, but one thing to consider is that the Ally’s would also know this and the potential for a rocket delivery system or something isn’t out of the question. However, the bomber mafia being a thing means yeah they’d probably launch a billion B29’s from Britain and lose 90% of them before reaching their target
@@awesom6588 them loosing 90% of them means theres a 90% chance they lose the one with the bomb, still not very good ods.
Yeah, that was my big gripe with the video, flying over a German dominated Europe would not be as easy as flying to an island.
@@awesom6588who’s rockets? American rockets? Remember, American rockets were built by the Germans after the war. WWII German rockets barely crossed the channel. I doubt the US could field a wartime rocket or an anytime rocket without paperclip.
How could America deliver the atomic bombs in this scenario? If the German air force was still unbeatable, wouldn't the bombers be intercepted trying to get to Berlin? Part of why we were able to deliver the atomic bombs to Japan was due to the air superiority we already achieved.
they just used invincibility stars, simple
modified wooden mosquito with jets
The RUclipsr is obviously not going to make a happy ending for the Mustache man. Logic be damned lol
Also with the continent being pacified, it is very likely the American public refuses to join the war no matter what Roosevelt wants. That's the main reason why in our timeline the USA didn't join for years despite constantly sending help for UK and others. And with Germany winning, it is also likely that USA will have elections with fascists winning. USA already had many in the population who were similarly minded. The allies were colonial powers, guess what they thought about people with different skin colours
@@ReuterL There is no lol here Roosevelt will obliterate japan and drum up all of its atrocious (which theres barely any druming needed) and paint Germany as the same if not worst. Though the US had similar minded ideas the fact was hitler was deeply unpopular due to its aggressive nature he was seen as a type of person to attack everyone and everything and with Japan Hitlers ally doing exactly what Roosevelt saying these types of nations would it wouldnt be hard to see an awaken United states join a defensive war siding with the united kingdom.
With the supercharged US we likely blow up the German navy and turn the tide in the air battle we nuke Bremen or Kiel and hell maybe even D day those places since theyd be wastelands .
lets not mention the soviets were fighting wars of survival and stalin would likely actually be prepared for Barbarossa since the only reason he wasnt was because he thought Hitler would deal with the UK first with much better defense I could see the Russian army preforming a guerrilla war that later gets super charged with massive military aid.
the only issue here is convicing the US to invaded the main land its likely the US just floods yuogslava and the east with weapons forcing them to fight a second front 2.0 with the US perodically bombing and nuking germany. It all depends on how well the gurrlia wars go if they force germany to waste alot of resrouces I could see the US pulling off a massive mvp win if they dont its likely the US takes the win saving the brits and leaves
American air power and industry. They would’ve out numbered the German Air Force heavily and it wouldn’t take long. Germany still would have man power shortages as the years went on assuming they still lost millions and thousands of equipment in the Soviet Union
We need a part 2 please you can't leave us on a cliff hanger like that without a part 2 thank you. love your channel.
The main problem I have with this theory is that its based on two pivotal, and I think faulty, assumptions:
1: Britain abides by the peace terms.
2: Germany believe that Britain would possibly abide by those peace terms.
The only real leverage that Germany has after a successful Dunkirk is, well, the captured soldiers. Germany gives them back as a result of the peace, and sudden Britain's only reason to abide by the peace terms is honor (lol) and the threat of German invasion (double lol). In theory the peace terms could spell out a slower transfer of POWs, over the course of years to keep Britain in line while Germany takes on the Soviet Union, but finding that middle ground between "Germany has sufficient leverage to turn their backs on Britain" and "Britain gets enough to agree to peace terms while Britania still rules the waves and is un-invadeable" is going to be extremely difficult...
In that scenario, Churchill wouldn't have been able to continue as Prime Minister. The political mood of Britain becomes much more anti-war after suffering a bitter sudden defeat at Dunkirk. Also, the peace terms that were actually being offered by Germany in 1940 would have allowed Britain to retain its entire Empire, which would have made them much easier to accept. Hitler always stated that he saw Germany as a land power and wouldn't have wanted conflict with a sea power such as Britain when his goals were in continental Europe and the east.
Also, once peace has been accepted, it would have been incredibly hard for Britain to renege on it and declare war with having more to lose than before: with their being no other Allied nations left in Europe. Even with its Empire and the US, the cost would looked even higher than in 1939.
@@strongbrew9116 The problem is that there's a lot of room between "fighting a ground war against German troops" and "doing nothing at all while Germany conquers all of Europe".
And once Germany invades the USSR, why would Britain stay on the sidelines? They can outsource the land war now, they just need to funnel supplies to the Soviets and provide them critical intel, and let the Soviets spill most of the blood. Doubly so when so much of their actions on that front could be done covertly.
As long as Britain can hold the seas, they have no reason to fear Germany. Fighting with intel and money is how they took down Napolean a century and change before, its how they'd be able to take down Hitler, regardless of what happens at Dunkirk.
In this scenario, the british public wouldn't have wanted to re-enlist in war against a STRENGTHENED Germany to save the Soviets or Greece in my opinion.
@@Wraithfighter problem is that strategy relies on your opponent making stupid mistakes Napoleon did and Hitler especially did
I think this scenario is plausible, but not with Churchill as PM. I don’t think there are any conditions under which he would have accepted a surrender/peace with Germany, he would have fought tooth and nail all the way. So if Parliament wants terms with Hitler, it necessitates replacing him in a no confidence vote with Halifax which, given the now crushing demoralisation of so many POWs, is definitely more than possible.
I don't think the germans would give a "soft peace" either.
Hitler talks highly about the british some times but always in light of them being under the germans.
The big problem with "Germany wins" scenarios is assuming the nazis was logicalin their actions. They were ideologic fanatics, logic is out the window.
I was about to comment the same thing but have to agree, not a lot to add on to it.
@@OllidolAgreed, Hitler would definitely have demanded more than just access through Suez, and would probably have grabbed as many African colonies as he could. He would almost certainly push for Egypt, Iraq, Syria and Palestine in particular to nip Zionism in its crib and curry favour with the Arabs.
@@Ollidol Agreed, Hitler would have demanded more than just the scraps of old German colonies but as much of Africa as he could get his hands on, as well as Iraq, Syria, Egypt and Palestine, both to eradicate the Jews there and to curry favour with the Arabs.
@@Ollidol The Soviets wouldn't've keeled over anyways. A lot of the reason the Soviets suffered so much in Operation Barbarossa is because they were caught off guard. In Stalin's mind it made no sense for the Nazi's to open a second front when they can't even beat Britain into submission. If Britain fully gives up no way Stalin wouldn't assume or at the very least prepare for an invasion. This would have huge effects, basically the only reason the Germans did as good as they did was because of Soviet incompetence. In fact, towards the end of it, they started having huge casualties. Army Group Center was nearly destroyed multiple times, part of the reason for the push towards the south with the tanks was to prevent this. And though the Lufftwaffe would be much stronger, it doesn't change much of the shortages on the ground. For instance, by the end of Barbarossa the Wehrmacht needed over 900k reinforcements, but only received 30k. Another is that by Operation Typhoon the 2nd Panzer Army was down to a fifth of its initial strength in tanks.
Germany needs to win Barbarossa, it cannot win if the Soviets don't collapse by winter. Even if they take Stalingrad and cut off the Caucasus, they just don't have the strength to hold it. So if they couldn't do it in our timeline, I doubt they could do it in a timeline where Stalin had no reason to doubt a German invasion.
10:25 If Germany isnt worried about Britian invading europe through the Allied Greeks, would Germany even bother to try and bail out Italy from Greece? Especially when Germany would still be preparing for barbarosa? Or would the lack of Allied Airpower from Crete and other support prevent the Greeks from holding back the Italians?
That or would they even resist at all? If their main protector was knocked out and (a smart diplomat in the reich) were given a chance to stay around BUT, as subordinates to the "new guys" even if the soviets did prepare well, it wouldn't have been enough as a month earlier assault +full power Luftwaffe would have busted through..... though the assault would definitely (on the ground, the air was a shit show lol for the soviets lol) have had FAR more casualties and while Leningrad would have fallen, Moscow wouldn't. Also a conquered europe mean MacArthur gets ALL the resources he needs and Pearl Harbor the good radar and the pacific starts out in the Allies favor far more from the start.
@crocidile90 50/50.
Italy invaded Greece and fighting went on for 6 months before they accepted britains help.
And they only accepted because Germany was on its way to help Italy.
Bold of you to assume 9 days of nice British weather a reasonable timeline.
Question is, how unprepared the USSR would have been in case of a peace treaty between Nazi-Germany and the UK. I guess, Stalin and the Stavka counted on Germany not being so stupid to wage a two-front war and felt a bit secure, as long as there was still war in the West. With a peace treaty in place, the Soviet Union might have sped up its preparations a lot more and be actually better prepared than it was in "our timeline".
Soviets may invade Germany in this timeline to gain the offensive
@@peterroberts4415 i honestly think that would've been a slaughter. The German Army wasn't really noted for succeeding defensively - and even buying time to drain the Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe of oil would guarantee a rather easy victory.
i mean y'know i am no expert on soviet military history but wasn't the great purge and the winter war happening around this time? Could have they prepared for such an attack right after this? Especially with buffed up nazi air and tanks plus no help from the brits or the americans. I dont think that they would've lost entirely germany would still loose at the end of the world war but i dont think that barbarossa would've went any differently even if stalin saw it coming.
@@user-uh7cb3vy4v
The Great Purge and Winter War were both long over by June 1941. The war actually sped up the Red Army’s rebuild, incompetent sycophants were quickly “replaced” with competent leaders, motorization became an increasing priority, operation ability improved with experience, etc.
@@archiboldpentigrass6600 Eh, in this timeline, Germany isn’t blockaded, so they can import oil from Mexico, Venezuela, etc.
What if Buddy Holly, Ritchie Valens, and the Big Booper didn't die in February 1959?
They would make music. Done. Roll credits.
The Guild of Calamitous Intent wouldn’t have its oldest members
No American Pie. 🫨
I believe the Germans would still have lost WW2.
@@jtsnowman66and therefore no “The Saga Begins”.
How is berlin getting nuked in this timeline? You just said that the luffwaffe had completely dominated in russia and hadnt lost a any of their ace pilots. Littleboy and Fatman were not nuclear missles, they were bombs dropped from regular of planes. Unlike the japanese, germany is completely capable of shooting down a B29
Yeah also Germany would have mass produced Jet Fighters like the messerschmitt me 262 making impossible for american bombers to reach Germany in the first place since they would be detected and defeated in occupied territories
@@DuvalSt1 Sure thing that's why german planes were always detected when flying across the channel and in the skies of the UK even before 1945 in our timeline,Radar technology was fine especially in 1945 and do not let me start on the fact that we are talking about the germans the same guys who had the wunderwaffen, without allied bombings they would have produced even more powerful radars and we can only guess what else
Regarding some assertions here, The "home-chain" was effective because it spotted very easily, Luftwaffe planes coming over the ocean - over land radar of the time was less effective and it often still came down to spotters and the like when the Luftwaffe was over Britain. Britain of course, had their part in inventing radar and "co-operative" Allied Radar development began before the USA was even a belligerent - I doubt that changes here, peace or no. Either way, British development would eventually end up tied into Allied Radar development,. There were differing paces of development and priorities with it that aren't just changed. The British put a radar in a night fighter in 1940, Germany didn't until 1942, for example, and may of had less of a reason to even do so fighting the USSR in this scenario, but that's a stretch that I wouldnt consider -. I could be an ass and point out the technically (but not war impacting) or visually impressive things (that work once or were impractical) the Reich actually wasted their time on, but we all know.
Oh fun fact! A little tid bit about radar that many people seem to overlook, Britain had figured out how to jam the German radar signals and used it to decent effect in the actual war, both at sea and against the Luftwaffe, I doubt that's somehow changed.
Regarding the ending point, a Strategic Bomber could be adapted to exceed its service ceiling believably for a mission to drop a single, albeit large, bomb on a target without having to make many justifications at all. The B-50 (not52) entered production in 1947 and was not a jet bomber and was already exceeding in its service ceiling the max altitude of the Me-262. An adaptation similar in 1945 for a single air frame is reasonable, given all the other.. questionable things that have to happen to the let germans get this far in the first place. This is putting aside a reasonable argument that with the USA and UK in the war together, the air battle still reaches the same conclusion it did in our time. A victory in the USSR is not a simple solution to Germany's resource or industrial capacity terms in the short to medium term, if at all in this matter.
There is always some pro wunderwaffen and supposed technological german superiority in all things angle that people let creep in, the Luftwaffe battle with the Red Air Force is a really egregious example in this video, sure the Luftwaffe on the whole was "superior" - Does that matter when the majority of the Soviet Air Force in this quote were destroyed on the ground or desperate mass bombers?. These suppositions are rarely true in reality, though the Reich had their moments, shout out to getting things going on rockets more effectively than others - but being aware of your bias will help.
@@emperorinvictus5433 they only started looking at wonderweapons when they knew they were losing the war and they needed something new to try and turn the tide, in this scenario, investing in unproven and highly dangerous jet aircraft and other stuff wouldnt be that much of a priority as the more conventional designs work just fine, infact if anything the brits would be the first to use jets as they already had the meteor and in this desperate timeline there would be more of a priority for cutting edge technology to try and make up for the stronger luffwaffe.
As without the main argument of 'this thing can win the war' when the war already seemed won meant that hitler wont be as convinced.
even if it got hit, it could still drop the bomb without them being able to stop it after
Soviets would not be caught so unprepared if they didnt think Germany is busy fighting UK.
Britain stands alone.... with its massive global empire, but yeah... alone
The empire that collapsed right after the war.
@stefankovevski112 that's what happens when you are too weak to hold down the subject peoples
@@stefankovevski112 All the colonies at that point where mostly self sufficient and could govern themselves. Britain would keep those colonies as long as the mainland stayed in one piece and not invaded.
@@theflamingeagle572 nah things were a changing the UK's weakness after ww2 was apparent...they defintely weren't keeping india anymore
@@camm8642 After the war is one thing, but I think it's less likely for a colony to leave during the war as long as the colonizer stayed in one piece. If they leave they'll just be easy pickings for Germany, and propaganda went crazy in that time period, that was when it was most effective.
One thing you got wrong is the pronounciation of Norwich (it's 'Norrich', not 'Norwick')
Which? hehe.
I was wondering where the hell Norwick is. Also I thought he said Homburg when I'm pretty sure he meant Hamburg. Both are real places in Germany, but only one is a massive port city (also nuking Hamburg would be risky, since the wrong winds would blow fallout across the English channel and contaminate East Anglia, including Norwich!)
Thank you as an English person that made me wince lol
Come to think of it I’m surprised that this isn’t a more popular scenario. Dunkerque really gets underappreciated as one of the big events of WW2 that could’ve gone either way
Also, given the weather-based criteria, seems like there’s a lot of room for “in-between” outcomes.
Yes, it really gets overlooked despite being one of the earliest major events of WWII which would have had a dramatic impact on the future.
The idea of a Dunkirk as a cannae like massacre of the British is absurd unless the royal navy disbanded. They would more or less be evacuated even under worse weather conditions. If the Germans pushed they could've fortified and sure, less would've gotten out but not enough to decisively convince the British to surrender.
The fact that the weather did this just makes this even better
I find weird the way you ended the video. I'm not sure the austrian painter would have risked to invade Britain when he already got everything he wanted from them. Actually his plan was never going to war with Britain unless necesary. Also by this point America would still be at war with Japan so nuking a country with which you were at peace only to help Britain doesn't make sense. The entry of the US to the war without a Germany attacking them first would have required a war declaration by the congress which neither the opposition nor the US population would have supported
i actually confused how Cody could think of DUNKIRK of all time as the "turning points" of the war.
Since it is one of the most easily debunkable...
First of all the "stopping offensives to take Dunkirk" were not done by Hitler randomly:
It was NECESSARY.
The panzer divisions had gone beyond any german protection bubble. They were actively risking being confused by germans CAS and Bombers for enemies..They were running out of supplies and they were so overstretched any counterattack would have broken the lines..
I still find the idea of the British Empire surrendering just after half a year of fight unconcievable. Especially given the peace terms you have proposed.
There is no WAY in Hell Britain would simple "wisk away" Malta and Gibraltar Especially to an enemy (Italy, i am italian) who the UK was CONFIDENT they could defeat in battle in the mediterraneum, given that the UK was aware of Italy's poor industrial sector, old navy, lack of fuel and lack of carriers..
In our timeline italy could barely contest the mediterraneum to a very inferior british force. Because every time they tried the UK could intercept them, scout them and overwhelm them.
Even with italy taking out most of the british heavy ships in the med they STILL couldn't effectively protect their routes for lack of fuel, coordination and most of the merchant fleet being taken captive at the start of the hostilities. (Mussolini didn't even bothered to advise civilians vessels NOT to be in enemy docks BEFORE the declaration of war)
Britain could explore germany's peace offer.
Accepting it is a complete different issue.
Especially if Germany demanded anything they had not taken and secured.
The Allies knew time was on their side.
Also. Britain had just lost British Somaliland to the italians. But Britain KNEW italy couldn't supply its troops in Ethiopia. They would have pushed to take Ethiopia anyway..
Of all the alternate scenario this seems the most farfetched.
The only way to make Britain give in to the war would be to:
1) Cut the empire in half expelling them from the mediterraneum: which implies the capture of GIbraltar, Malta AND SUEZ. Which the italians were in NO POSITION to achieve. Given the inferiority in experience and material of the italian navy to the British Navy..
2) Avoid the involvement of the US (which would demand a modification of even more of the history we know);
3) the death of basically every senior officer..a plague.. alien invasion.. take your pick
Great deconstruction of the points presented in the video, I only think a peace with Britain is plausible, after a (very) successful North African campaign, which is very unlikely to say the least.
Also another point to add is the sheer underestimation of the USSR, who would magically be completely curbstomped by the German army in 41.
Byfar the best debunk of this video, though compared to other althistory this one was one of the least insane ones.
You should rewatch the video. The decision to temporarily halt the advance wasn't even his POD.
The main point wasn't about halting or not halting the advance, it is about the fact that the weather allowed German Airforce to literally DECIMATE the British ships sailing to evacuate their men. Without any way to get their men back home safely, the British Expeditionary Force has no other choice but to provoke Germany into fighting them in Lille and other cities and towns, seeing that the British are legit hopeless, the Germans have all good reason to keep on going even if friendly fire occurred.
This is ultimately what caused the British to seek peace. Albeit they would probably only give up Malta and keep Gibraltar whilst allowing German ships to pass by the strait.
As for the colonies, the British wouldn't give anything away, Suez remains British. Italy would still attack the UK, however, since Italy and Germany were in the Pact of Steel before this, Germany could have the leverage to force the UK to simply demilitarize to a non-threatening extent along the borders with Libya and East Africa. Italy can attack the UK, just at a later time because they still want their "Roman Lands" (the whole reason Fascism was invented).
Love the dollar signs on the HE-111 vertical stabilizer , censorship is awful.
@10:03 The correct word is “respectively,” not “respectfully.”
19:00 is singlehandedly the funniest bit of comedic storytelling you’ve ever come up with
When are we getting “What if South Africans traveled back in time to give the Confederacy AK-47s”
If you want to recommend people read _The Guns of the South,_ why be coy about it?
Without a doubt the best production about the start of WW2 is the 1983 miniseries "Winds of War", which tells from the pov of an american admiral played by Robert Mitchum living in Berlin and his family how Adolf started the deadliest conflict in history. The portrayal of the dictator by Günter Meisner is easily one of the best the austrian painter got
Downfall my guy.
It's disgusting that you can't mention historical figues on a history channel. We need a new tube site.
The only thing I’d add would be Germany front loading a construction project in Italian Tripoli to extract vast amounts of oil from there. Pretty much agree though about the change at Dunkirk.
You did forget to add that the pre World War One German colonies be returned to Germany in the peace deal . This was a deal beaker for both during the early part of the war and something I’m sad to see you glossed over completely .
the WW1 colonies were a bargaining chip that hitler didnt really care about
I highly doubt this.
@@beepbop6542Highly doubt what exactly ?
The British didn't control much of Germany's old colonies; the Japanese held their Pacific territories, which left little bits of Africa? Not sure that those would have been seen as worth the cost to administer, even with the prestige of taking them back.
19:00 the music gets tenser and tenser you wonder what gonna happen next, fortunately we all knew where this was going
The US actually had three nukes at the ready with the unused one becoming the demon core. Also Berlin probably wouldn't be nuked for similar reasons as to why Tokyo wasn't nuked.
This video has been released for 1 minute and yet there’s already 100 comments
I find it hard to believe that a lone bomber could fly its way all the way from England to Berlin in a timeline where a supercharged Luftwaffe exists
they collected 7 chaos emeralds beforehand you see
Obviously there would be a preparatory air campaign like that which proceeded D-Day. Slowly but surely the Allied Air Forces would gain supremacy.
Personally I think the nukes wouldn’t be used until after D-Day and the liberation of France.
given the mosquito bombers were going over germany without being detected in real life and britain had jets at this point its not hard to see.
Yeah, people forget that this is still fiction.
All this really does is put into perspective how the Germans were always doomed to fail, even with the many miracles Cody glossed over
They went at night
3:14 my mums uncle died in that battle
RIP 🙏
what a man
Rip 🪦 Just won’t to know on what side 🤨
My grandfather was a french soldier and was evacuated to britain in Dunkirk to get medical treatment after being badly injured by german artilery schrapnels.
@@changingpeopleslivesmoon2993 the correct one
"Germany wins" realistically probably means they force an armostance with the soviets and then fall apart in civil war or rebellion swveral years later
this! many people underestimate just how strong USSR was, in 30's it was strongest force on earth - the only reason why germany managed to even pass their border was because they werent prepared - when they were already taking minsk some soldiers still thought it was just a military exercise - and should they make truce with britain, soviet union would certainly not be caught off-guard
and if they were caught off-guard as they were historically, it would be a draw ending in truce as you said.
Respectfully, I think this is one of the more pop history alternate concepts of yours, even by the standards of this channel. Its amusing, but was very hard to take seriously at all.
While I cant speak to plausability of a british surrender due to an unlikely worst case Dunkirk scenario, I think your picture of the realities of the eastern front are still pretty inaccurate.
If anyone is interested in learning the more painful realities of the eastern fromt, I highly recommend the authors Robert M. Citino and David Stahel for German focused perspectives, and David M. Glantz for a Soviet one.
I prefer Stahel to Citino, since Citino is prone to over exaggerating and using more emotive language.
Churchill wasn't a dictator; it wasn't just his political will that mattered. No matter how defiant he remained, if things went really badly, he could have lost enough allies to result in his being removed.
19:11 America asserts Hamburger Dominance.
War Thunder is not free, it costs one soul