@@anomaly3055 What? They would be ready on the german front. The japanese would never under any circumstamce fight the Soviets. That's just an impossibility in the realm of fantasy.
@Ich bin der Jochen Is that even a fucking question? 🤦♂️ Germany had low oil shortages from the start of the war 'till the end of the war. No oil means no combat vehicles such as tanks, aircraft, trucks, etc. No vehicles means no fast and swift mobilization. No fast or swift movements means no blizkrieg (Lighting Warfare). No blizkrieg means no tactic that can easily break and deform enemy lines. Operation Barbarossa is a clear example of this.
Hobypyrocom germans could have beaten russians. in 1941 massive bombarding of germany began,if it wasnt for that germany could have continued to make just as much weapons as before,then we have operation torch in africa and so on+ they supplied ussr with weapons and resources
civecnavi c man stop reading US history, its false history, read neutral history that is written by neutral country for the WW2 and youll see that Russia did most of the damage and casualties to Germany not the western countries...
Hobypyrocom lol im not from USA,im from eastern europe myself but is it that gard to admit that USA was the reason germany lost? russians lost 14 000 000 soldiers and germany lost only a fraction of that in eastern front which means if it wasnt for USA and allies pushing in africa and later in western and souther europe nazis would have won
@@yamato3870 Hitler in this version of the world:,, Tdebug.... Ok..... Annex SOV..... Oh... Instantconstruction.... Manpower 1000000000000000000000...aaaaaannnddd i think i can unpause now! "
5 reasons why this would never succeed: 1: The Japanese economy would collapse in 1942 due to lack of oil and other materials. The American/Dutch oil embargo was the sole reason to attack in 1941 in the first place. 2: The Italians would not have been able to invade Malta. They didnt have the necessary equipment, notably landing craft. Also, the Royal Navy would have intercepted any invasion attempt. 3: The USA would most likely have joined the war even without a Pearl Harbour. They were practically at war before Pearl, sending supplies to both UK and USSR. Heck, they even fought uboats on occasions. 4: The Soviets would likely be too strong in 1942. They outproduced Germany (by a lot) in 1940-1941. There is absolutely no reason for a 42 attack to be more successfull than a 41 attack. 5: Continuing the Battle of Britain would only lead to a weaker Luftwaffe against the Soviet Union. See point 4.
+Jack Rolfland Yep. the Japanese had no natural war materials they could harvest from their land. Everything had to be imported. In a long drawn out war they would inevitably lose.. To be fair to them they knew this and their whole doctrine in the early stages of the war was based on lightning quick attacks and fast conquest ,partly to get more resources,, which was no easy feat in itself. If anyone wants an idea of why the japanes did not surrender despite the hopeless situation google up hiroo onoda. He wrote a book that i read and basically he thought all the surrender appeals were propaganda.
1: Why japanese would have collapse in 1942 and in real time did not collapse until 1945, even with embargo and a war with USA? 2: Italians would have been able to invade Malta in the early phase of the war, when Malta was not so important neither for British. 3: Usa would joined the war for sure, but later. and, probably, too late for a complete defeat of Axis. 4: Soviets in 1942 were under siege at Leningrad, lost at Kharkov and were under attack in Caucasus 5: Aircraft never was the major problem for Axis in Russia
Delayed response: 1: Japan lastet until 1945 because they occupied rich Dutch colonies. 3: USA would defeat the Axis eventually. Look at the US in the late 40s and early 50s, and compare it to the rest of Europe. 4: Not relevant. Im obviously referring to an invasion in 1942. Not how the situation was in 1942 IRL. 5: Aircraft were vital during the early stages of Barbarossa. And during the rest of the war.
What if Monaco, Luxembourg and Montenegro formed an axis alliance and proceeded to invade the rest of the world with the power of the bucket paint tool.
Wrong hitler and his generals were actually pretty confident that they could defeat the ussr just like in ww1, it was actually france that most general thought was impossible to conquer
@@saadtanveer5593 When you have nuked India and Israel? In your dreams or in some video games? By the way your media use to nuke India and Israel every day in some shows and with poor graphics.
Usa and NATO, wherever this evil comes, they carry with themselves evil children. Children are shunned by children. Some people think that they are treating others. When they fall in love, they sow the seed of evil anywhere in this world. In the lives of all countries, they determine the whole world how anyone will live. They will take away legally elected presidents who choose the people and set up their satanic followers. The amateur is devil and satan. All say salazu. His politics is a lie.
Cyrulez93 There is many hole and different outcomes, this is all just one of many possibilities. Kinda like the lend lease situations would never happen for military support.
In which outcome do you take over the most heavily defended islands in the world survive a Russian winter, take over the Nile IN ONE DAY AND TAKE OVER MOSCOW IN A SINGLE YEAR!!?
tbh. he didn't show a "way" to win, he just reversed all mistakes by the axis. Like Italy not attacking greece or Germany attacking the Sovjets too early. Sure they were many ways how they could have gotten a better outcome then the whole occupation of germany.
Germany was ahead in everything. Germany was building parts of reactor in 1945 and had most researches done, but due the situation of the fronts and lack of resources and after that the defeat of germany, it didnt happened. learn history and dont write bullshit scrub.
-many borders are simply wrong on your maps -Ireland was neutral -Why did Finland not attack the Sovietunion in Operation Barbarossa? -Why did Germany not attack Leningrad? -Without Enigma codes, Egypt would be lost within 1940 -Without their troops from Dunkirk, the British wouldn't attack Eastafrica or so on -Why was it neccesary(?) for the Axis to invade Greece and Yugoslavia in this situation? -The peace treaty sucks, Germany would have never left the eastern occupied territory -Why didn't the Soviets destroy their oil refeneries(?) when the Germans advanced? Excuse my English, I am not a native speaker. So many mistakes.. But still a entertaining video.
Usa and NATO, wherever this evil comes, they carry with themselves evil children. Children are shunned by children. Some people think that they are treating others. When they fall in love, they sow the seed of evil anywhere in this world. In the lives of all countries, they determine the whole world how anyone will live. They will take away legally elected presidents who choose the people and set up their satanic followers. The amateur is devil and satan. All say salazu. His politics is a lie.
Ok, number one just no. The Japeneese had to sign a non agression pact with the USSR because the soviets had given their army a very bloody nose in recent border conflicts, the japeneese were scared of the soviets, even going as far as to not sink american shipping to the ussr. 2 On june 22 1941 operation barbarossa wouldve had to have been launched, the actual date they launched it germany thought the soviet union was at its absolute weakest because they were in the middle of transitioning their army from the old t-26 and bt tanks to the new t34 and kv, along with all the other equipment. 3 In this video you failed to mention the british bombing of berlin, which made hitler target civilians instead of airbases, so thats out of the question. 4 The german war economy was a nightmare considering their backwards production throughout the war, germany would never and could never have won the war, they are a country too small and too short on recources. Watching further into the video, On december 7 1941 Japan needed to attack pearl harbor, The us had stopped all oil from going to japan and the japeneese needed recources, thus meaning they needed to expand south to continue their war in china, but 1 problem the south is heavily colonized by america, britian, france, the dutch, ect. The japeneese said themselves they could not win a prolonged war with the usa because of the us’s capability to produce weapons, ships, planes ect, along with their vast recources. The japeneese and Germans both made the best of their bad situations, they had both backed themselves into a corner and could not escape. Watching even further, what the actual fuck.... First of all Germany had basically canceled their atomic program partly brcause hitler had killed all of his top jewish scientists, I’m getting ahead of myself here. Ok, by april of 1942 the soviets army modernization would almost be done, thus meaning germany wouldn’t and couldnt even move into soviet territory, also the soviets would fight to the literal end, instead of surrendering, just like germany did irl, they wouldve kept fighting and fighting until every soviet man, woman, and child was killed or captured. In conclusion this is just so unrealistic and i’m going to consider this video a joke. thanks for reading. and the armistice at the end is retarded Edit: also at Dunkirk The german panzers had to stop because they were so far ahead of the infantry they were risking being cut off themselves, also they had been moving nonstop for days, they needed the stop to rest and refit refeul and rearm their tanks
It's hard making a Germany win scenario, because they couldn't, if they wanted to win, the entire scenario had to change so that Germany could have a chance.
@Alex 1324 Romania is not that oil rich as Russia is, it would be able to supply them for a bit longer but not in the long run, also Malta was British, and the Royal Navy was a superior naval force than the German Navy or the Italian Navy, they could have sent reinforcements into Malta and drive back an invasion.
@elli Seeley No, the middle east didn't produce oil by this point. Neither did north africa, neither did norway. France didn't have enough oil by far, they couldehave shipped the oil to germany. And wait GERMANY HAD MANPOWER ISSUES. TO AN EXTREME EXTENT, then also. The soviets would be WAAAY to strong for germany by 1943.
It feels like a bad fanfiction. The Italians were steamrolled all the way to Tripoli? Nah, they just grew some decent command and didn't let the allies get past Tobruk. Even though it took an Australian volunteer division 90 minutes to completely shatter irl, they can hold out for a year! The Japanese had their shit absolutely slapped and did nothing but teach the Russians how to do combined arms warfare? Nah! They totally could have held out at the battle of kholkin Gol.
@elli Seeley noimeant yu said it wouldn't be hard to tell that enigma was cracked, but it famously was hard for the germans to tell, the brits didn't just go around using all the information they could get out of it making it super obvious that they knew, it was really quite hard to tell.
@elli Seeley but they didn't use it like that, you are wrong, if it was so easy to tell why didnt the germans notice sooner irl? Or are you smarter than the entire german high command intelligence sector. Come to think of it maybe we all are.
@elli Seeley "just notice faster" what..? like how is the reality of they only notice it after a good chunk of time changed? there has to be a REASON it changes, not just "it changes"
@Plo Koon Germany runs out of oil by 1945, late 1941 without synthetic oil. Even with every single drop of oil in Romania, it only fills around half their consumption, and this includes Romanian reserves, which are stored not produced so that does not last. The only way Germany gains enough oil to keep them going is to take the caucuses WITHOUT the soviets commencing scorched earth operations there, which would likely never happen.
Did we forget about Lend lease, Germany’s Oil shortage, and the fact that the Soviets Streamlined production of tanks allowed them to produce tanks like 3x faster then Germany could ever be.
1:20 If you read a book you'll know that the commander of the tank division gave the order to stop because they had outrun their logistics and needed to stop, regroup and service their tanks anyway. They had to stop. They could *not* attack. Instead the order was given to the Luftwaffe to attack the British at Dunkirk and it wasn't like they were going to swim out in the sea anyway....or so the Germans thought. The area also had marshlands and plenty of rivers, which the allied defenders planned on flooding making a German advance possible only through a narrow single road. The French kept fighting and stalling the Germans which made an attack on Dunkirk of low priority considering France hadn't yet surrendered. So this is impossible 1:33 Utterly ridiculous. German elite paratroopers occupied Crete by the skin of their teeth in 1941. How, the poorly armed and trained Italians would be able to do it is a pipedream. Italy doesn't have the naval capacity to pull this off. The Royal Navy by comparison is the largest in the world and has 4 aircraft carriers at this point. Italy wants *Egypt* not Malta. 2:22 How do they do that without long-range bombers? Great Britain produced 15,049 aircraft in 1940 (more than anybody in the world at that time). Nazi Germany produced 10,862. In 1941 Britain produced 20,094 aircraft, Nazi Germany 12,401. How can you defeat the RAF? 2:52 Thanks to Albanian(!) reinforcements the Italians can withstand? Germany only sent divisions to North Africa because the Italians were soundly beaten and risked getting kicked out entirely! Had Italy done well on its own there'd be no need to send German help. Hitler himself told Finland's Marshall Mannerheim in 1942 that the Italians caused him constant headaches since they had to aid them in all theaters from Greece to North Africa. 3:10 Mussolini has never had any plans to invade Yugoslavia himself and re-integrate the Dalmatian coast back to Italy? He doesn't support Croatian fascist Ushtashi to make an independent Croatian fascist puppet-state? 3:34 Japan had already been given a royal beating by the Soviet Union in the Battle of Khalkhin Gol in 1939, in which they became painfully aware that the IJA was no match against the Red Army's armored divisions. Japan also did *not* have the fuel available to conduct a long campaign. They already had their hands full fighting the Chinese in Manchuria which took up half the strength of the IJA throughout the war. The USA supplied help to the Chinese which also angered Japan. How can they attack the USSR when they can't even control Manchuria? Also there was *nothing* of value in Far East Russia. What Japan needed was the oil in French Indokina, Dutch East Indies and Malaya. That made Great Britain and the USA the logical enemies of Japan. Japan got their scrap metal from the USA and when they USA cut their supply Japan knew they were being slowly strangled by the USA, which they knew was building new battleships and aircraft carriers. Roosevelt as also expanding the American army (which in 1939 was just 17th in size in the world). Japan was ill suited for a land war but they had a powerful navy with which they could become the masters of the Pacific - which was their long-term goal in the first place. Not invade the USSR and hope Nazi Germany would be kind enough to share the spoils with them. The USA and Great Britain were Imperial Japan's main enemies and the main obstacles to the territories they so wanted to seize for themselves. *Why* would they invade the USSR for nothing?? Ridiculous. 3:52 Are you even serious? Hitler and the Nazis had planned an invasion of the USSR and they knew that 1941 would be the best chance they would have. Delaying it would give the USSR more time to re-arm, re-organise, finish their defence lines and having a new officer corp *finish* their education, which they were caught right in the middle of at Operation Barbarossa. There hardly were any T34's and KV-1 tanks in 1941 as they were just entering production. Besides, Hitler expected a Soviet invasion any month and therefore wanted to attack *first*. You just gave Stalin *more* time rather than catching him with his pants down in 1941. Congratulations! HOW can you *transport* enough German divisions to Africa? The Kriegsmarine lacks the transport and troop ships with which to do this. You also just extended the German supply lines dangerously thin. It's one thing transporting divisions and equipment by rail but there are no railroads in the Mediterranean! It's several times more difficult to just magically wish the German divisions meant for Operation Barbarossa would be used in North Africa instead. Also, how does the USA just stand idely by watching this happen? They had already granted a lot of lend-lease to Great Britain and were gearing up for a war themselves. 4:40 Italian navy in the Atlantic?? With what fuel? In our history the Royal Navy never came close to being defeated in the Mediterranean. In fact they made life very difficult for the Axis supply ships. Do the British still control Gibraltar?? If so they control who goes in and out of it. Can the Italians pass Gibraltar? Well? 4:50 Sigh. Why would Japan NOT attack the American fleet at Pearl Harbor? Their entire plan hangs upon them being able to knock out most of the American fleet. Why leave it there fully operational.? Btw, the USA *were' already indirectly in the war by supplying goods and arms to the British and in 1941 they started supplying the Soviets and Chinese too. The USA with its immense industrial capability will arm these three to their teeth before entering the war themselves. Roosevelt started re-arming in 1939 so he *knew* the war was coming. He will find another excuse to get involved, count on that. 5:05 And in this scenario the USSR has started mass producing T34's and KV1's. They are fully mechanized. Fully re-organised. Have functional and finished defense lines. Fully trained officers and troops which have finished their training. Nazi Germany are yet to learn what they learned in 1941 in which they already had 800,000 casualties and neeed 700,000 horses to make the very long supply line work at all. Hitler admitted to Mannerheim that the USSR had way more industrial capability and weapons than he thought was possible. In 1942 they will have way more. You also started the invasion in April when there's heavy rainfall in the area and which makes the roads utterly useless since they turn into quagmire. In 1941 the invasion started as soon as the weather allowed it which was in late *June* . Only an idiot would invade in the Russia spring rain in April. Do you have any idea what you're talking about? Bye bye Nazi Germany. 6:00 Tell me. How the hell do they manage to move so fast with the dreadful Russian roads? That was what stopped Operation Barbarossa in 1941. Also explain how they can defeat far more well-equipped, trained and organised Soviet troops armed with thousands of T34's and KV-1's? I've heard enough. Not going to debunk the rest. You're making up as you go along, ignore certain well-known *facts* , assume things will stay the same and that some crucial factors are just butterflied away out of the blue. And worst of all you just assume the USA will silently watch this? Your "super-italians" are also fantastic when 35% of all Italians were illiterate during WW2. You display an utter lack of knowledge, both of what long-term goals the Axis powers had and their capabilites to wage wars long from their own shores. This is a ridiculous scenario. Your English is also not even adequote. A person making basic grammar errors isn't somebody you would trust knows what he's (?) talking about. Please read a few books about the war and enlighten yourself. This video here is just mindless speculation with no basis in reality.
Undecided-But-Engaged Voter They could not. The Germans more or less followed an optimal plan of action and even had a lot of luck. Look at how they beat the combined army of Poland franc and Britan that out classed them on every field except for close air support. The axis had to small a population they were always going to lose by attrition. There only hope was to crush the soviet and somehow negotiate a piece. This were the German plan. After they failed to capture Moscow Germany was lost, but capturing Moscow was never going to succeed do to logistic. Videos like this is made by people not understanding the historical facts. Second World War was unwinnable for the axis not due to some particular tactic but due to the unchangeable climatically and geopolitical factors.
Cassius Chaerea The reason for the tanks being stopped short of Dunkirk is not known with certainty but there is a little known incident that happened at exactly the same time - Hitler visited some top Generals at some French chateaux at this time to find that they had - without consulting Hitler - ordered the Panzer divisions to advance on Dunkirk. This is reported to have thrown Hitler into a rage because he saw it as a threat to his authority, and he ordered them to stop in order to assert his authority and make it clear who was in charge!! Evidence suggests the troops were in need of rest, and tanks in need of service but they weren't inclined to stop them on the brink of a great victory and they didn't get serviced in the days they were halted. The troops were rested, the tanks serviced once Dunkirk was secured, when there was quite an extensive refit, period of rest and reorganisation prior the occupation of France.
Ramen_95 let’s be honest, even if Germany won Stalin wouldn’t’ve just capitulated and accepted the fate of the USSR but would’ve instead forced his starving forces to fight to the bitter end just like the Germans did in our time. Sorry, I got a little nerdy there lol.
The Germans didn’t “stop” at Dunkirk to be nice they did so to repair and refuel their panzers and let the infantry catch up so they would not be incircled
John Blahut there is also a rumour hitler deliberately held back because he admired the British and wanted peace with them but yeh yours makes sense as well 😂
@@florianruhstaller1730 Well the Germans were the ones who declared war, so who really wanted it? Not to mention, the UK let Germany remilitarize the Rhineland and take lands from Czechslovakia without declaring war, despite it being in defiance to the Treaty of Versaille. Germany wanted war
Hitler cold not have wan the war--he did not have enough oil, by 1941, only 10 panzers divisions and 10 motorized divisons out of 157, the rest of the army was relying on horses! Whilst the Allies had never problems with oil.....Barbarossa was terrible, even taking Moscow wouldn't have deterred the soviets.....Hitler needed oil, that was rationned in Germany and the conquered countries.....Some say he should have built more tanks, more airplanes, but they had tu fuel it and crew it...No chance..
WOW! RUclips armchair generals are the greatest military minds in history. Question: How could Germany have won WWII? Answer: If Hitler would have had RUclips.
Usa and NATO, wherever this evil comes, they carry with themselves evil children. Children are shunned by children. Some people think that they are treating others. When they fall in love, they sow the seed of evil anywhere in this world. In the lives of all countries, they determine the whole world how anyone will live. They will take away legally elected presidents who choose the people and set up their satanic followers. The amateur is devil and satan. All say salazu. His politics is a lie.
One problem: It took 1 year longer for operation Barbarossa to take place, so in that 1 year the Soviets would have build their army and would also be ready since Germany and her friends were attacking every other country in the mean time, and the Soviets would not just sit, wait and do nothing. So its most likely that the Soviet Union would have attacked before operation Barbarossa would have taken place.
It would be stupid to assume to Soviet Union would arm for a war that would not happen for an additional year than reality would teach. That and the fact Stalin was not intent on declaring war with Germany until the final months when an invasion seemed certain. In November 1940 he even asked Hitler to be part of the Axis, but he did not respond because Germany was already beginning to plan the invasion.
The soviets wouldn't be ready for a defensive war until 1945 and you think they could attack the Reich in 1942?Tge only reason they survived in our time line is because they were just spewing out man and bad tanks and aircraft every ten minutes with massive help from Britain and the US which since the caucus region false would likely mean the soviet aid from America would be cut in half or more, I just don't get why the treaty looks like this
@@topsecret1837 they were arming rapidly before operation barbarossa so it makes sense that if germans attacked in 1942 they would face 10s of thousands of t-34s and kv-1s. germans wouldnt stand a chance.
Most of these "what if's" strongly depend on the decisions of countries other than Germany. Secondly it totally discounts the raw material problem for the Axis as a whole. "Japan doesn't attack the US" Their choice was to literally end their imperial aspirations, or attack the US and hope for the best. The US was strangling them economically. You totally ignore this like Japan attacking the US was just some willy nilly decision on the part of the Japanese. If they could have realized their aspirations without attacking the US, they would have. Them not attacking the US, would require the US to turn the oil spigot back on for the Japanese. "Italy doesn't invade Greece" The Axis wasn't like the allies. They didn't make decisions together. They were nominally allied countries that supported eachother. They each had their own aspirations. I am pretty sure Hitler would have preferred Italy didn't do that too. "Japan/Russia non-aggression pact" It was largely meaningless. Neither of them wanted to attack eachother. In this scenario where they don't sign an agreement, Russia still would have moved their eastern troops. I mean you are literally arguing Russia felt the barren east was more important than where most people actually live in Russia. "Without engima US arent advised of the attack" Enigma had no impact on the pacific theater, the Japanese used their own ciphers and the US decoded these messages which was integral at midway. There is so much I could pick apart in this video. It just wouldn't have happened...and obviously didn't.
@Tim Easy: 1) Japan STILL doesn't attack the US. Attacking a country that literally just cut off its oil to you is a very very bad idea, especially if this country is the US. You'd be better off not attacking it, at least you'll hold on for a couple more years. 2) The axis can agree to make decisions collectively, since we are looking for the best ways to win the war for them, we'll just make them agree on this point, so no attacking Greece. 3) There were minor skirmishes between them in 1938-1939, the Japanese were defeated though and couldn't increase their influence northwards. This proves that Japan wanted to invade the USSR, they just failed and realized the USSR is much more stronger so they signed a non-aggression agreement. Your next statement is somewhat wrong. The Soviet Eastern front was very important actually, sure not as important as say Moscow, but still very important. The Japanese not signing the pact means they can keep pressure on the Soviets, so they can't fully deploy all their Asian units towards Moscow. Imagine they do that and Japan starts attacking Vladivostok and other important cities. Remember, in this timeline the Japanese DO NOT attack the US, so they are much more prepared and could put some troops North. Now the Soviets will be forced to fight a war on two fronts, which isn't a good idea at all. 4) I don't have a lot of background knowledge about this matter, but I must ask when did the Americans decode the Japanese ciphers? If you're going to say 1942, then I advise you to take this current scenario into consideration because in this video, everything that happened in real life post-1941 happened about a year later. So if the US decoded the ciphers in 1942, then that would take place in 1943 in our new timeline, which is a year later after the new attack on Pearl Harbour. Otherwise, I would just assume that lightning doesn't strike twice and this time the entire American fleet was there and caught by surprise, and mostly destroyed, severely weakening the American power in the Pacific, although I am not sure for how long, since in my opinion, I would take the US over Japan any time. If the Americans fought the Japanese in 99 scenarios, the Americans would win all 99 due to their increased production rate and better economy and industry. Any war against the US would be a suicide attempt. I would love to discuss with you any other stuff you'd like to dig from the video. I personally think it's a logical scenario so if you have other concerns I can discuss them with you.
@@glurt628 well you're not wrong and how do we know it's stupid if it never happened? just saying What this persons said could be completely right but at the same time could be wrong but we don't know since it never happened
You know how badly the economy is gonna become? Western Soviet Union was the one of the most fertile lands in Europe, they also lost Caucasus, an area with huge oil fields. Most industry is also in the Western lands. What use is the few factories left in Central Asia gonna do? This will eventually cause the Soviet Union (if it survives) to become a third world nation, but its more likely that it will collapse.
Germany doesn't attack Russia and it would have dominated Europe. However, the problem that Hitler understood was Europe has poor natural resources. Hitler could not support his empire without Russia's resources. It is doubtful that Stalin, who did not trust Hitler, would have been a trading partner. Add Stalin's huge level of paranoia and it was inevitable that Germany and Russia were going to war.
***** The whole thing has nothing to do with trust. The Soviet Union was stuck in the war against Finland and showed itself weak. So for Hitler attacking the Soviet Union was taking land from the weak. Unfortunately for him, he didn't have an idea about the real potential of the Soviet Union. You mentioned the cold war - this is why no one attacked during the cold war - both sides knew that the other side is very strong. It's another thing that Hitler wasn't a very rational player in the first place.
@Cecil Holstein: Stalin could have captured the Romanian oil fields with about 2 divisions. If they had done so, Germany's war with England would have been lost within a few months. Stalin wasn't about to attack Germany itselfs, but rather Romania. Since that would have had rather bad consequences for Germany, they could not allow it, and they told Molotov on no uncertain terms that if they wanted to capture Romania, that would mean war. And since Molotov went home with the intention to capture & occupy the Romanian oil fields, that meant war.
I love it how you think you’re a military genius. Because surrounding Stalingrad will definitely halt the soviet reinforcements defending the caucuses. Why didn’t hitler think of this? GENIUS
Hitler actually thought of this. The supplies we're cut off when they reached the don or somewhere near that point. Also this is a tactical EMBARRASMENT. Because doing this would first over-stretch the units, get them destroyed while trying to cross the don. Also Stalingrad being surrounded, well.... people by now are just thinking they have unlimited supplies. Don't you know how hard is it to supply troops over the Volga? Also the manpower issue, now tell me. If they concentrated all their forces in 6th army they could've encircled it. BUT what about the flank? The Axis-Allied troops will be DESTROYED when operation Uranus comes.
Normally I kind of like counterfactual, speculative "what if" history, but the less counterfactual it is, the more believable it is. This one is counterfactual heaped upon counterfactual.
To every action there has to be a reaction. you basically looked back at ww2 and all the things germany did, altered them. without having the allies react.
The US bankrolled the USSR and UK during WW2. Without that massive aid, the two countires could not have carried on, With it, the UK could survive and the USSR could push West to Berlin. The US had to race East to Berlin to keep the USSR from conquering all of Germany and possibly more of Europe. The fact that Finland survived as a free country is amazing. The US played an economic waiting game that could have cost the Western Allies all of Western Europe to Soviet domination. Instead, thanks to THE BOMB, we had the Cold WAR. I would like to see an alternative history where Germany did not invade Western Europe, but only attacked Russia without any outside aid or intervention from the rest of the World. And in conjunction, seeing how the Pacific War would have gone between China and Japan without allied aid or intervention.
J.L. Roberts America made a mistake in the war - it decided to scale down it's plans for the army. Originally, it planned on raising about 200 Divisions - in the end it raised about 80 odd. To be fair; it would have required considerably more shipping to get those divisions, tanks etc where it needed them but in Europe, it found it did actually need more divisions and equipment than it had and that meant it couldn't advance as rapidly as it would otherwise have done - had it, it would have been in a much stronger position vis a vis Russia and would probably have saved much of Europe from Soviet occupation.Finland survived largely because Russia was very depleted of manpower by the end of the war and certainly couldn't afford to risk a war with the West over Poland etc - Russia needed peace with Finland to capture and secure Eastern Europe. The Finns never advanced beyond their 1939 borders with Russia either - which saved Leningrad and so Russia from defeat and that probably helped save Finland too!!Without the West, and Western aid Russia would have lost!! Simple as that - Russians would disagree but Germany built thousands of AA guns the steel and manpower for which would have otherwise built tanks etc, and fielded about 500,000 manning those AA batteries - not to mention U boat construction, the DAK or Deutsche Afrika Korps, or withdrawing numerous fighter planes etc from the eastern front.
Limestone Mills Very interesting. We must remember that the US was also fighting an island hopping ground war with Marines and Army ground forces in the Pacific. They were doing a global balancing act with resources. The Soviet Army was in terrible condition before they were bankrolled by the US, as shown by the Polish War in the 1920s and the Winter War with Finland in 1939. That is when Hitler should have invaded Russia on the pretext of saving the Finns. This scenerio could have saved Western & Eastern Europe and Scadinavia, while distroying Communism for years to come. Or at least the 2 abhorrent dictatorships would have destroyed each other. If Germany could have conquered eastern Russia, where would they have stopped to set up an eastern boundary for occupation and resettlement of Germans?
J.L. Roberts In truth though; Germany for 1, couldn't attack the Soviet Union in support of Finland with France at the time, about equal in strength to Germany's army at her back, and 2. she was far from able to!! Germanys attack in the West was postponed no less than 29 times for lack of equipment, training and last but by no means least; ammunition which is why that in 1940, a new armaments ministry was set up under Todt though primarily to deal with an ammunition crisis - in the event it actually failed to materialise as what they were expecting was a rerun of WW1; static warfare with a large consumption of ammunition but in the event, it was over before they knew where they were. Beyond that though; they were still in no position to attack Russia as conscription had only been going 4 years - and those years relied on those born in 1914 - 1918, when the birth rate was half it's norm at about 700,000 so it only produced about 360,000 male recruits a year for all three services; army. navy, Luftwaffe. Those born after 1901 were termed the white years - forbidden by Versailes to receive military training so Germany actually relied very heavily on 40 year olds at this stage of the war - especially for officers in which it was severely lacking!! The proposed line of an occupied Russia ran from Archangel south to the Volga a little North of Moscow, along the entire Western shore of the Volga to the Caspian Sea.
Limestone Mills I see. It is so refreshing to exchange comments with a knowledgeable historian rather than a troll. Couldn't the invasion of France have been avoided if French occupation troops in the Rhineland had repulsed early German advances into their area of control when the Wehrmacht was weak and ill-prepared?
J.L. Roberts In truth probably not; the Germans actually kept 66% of their young, well equipped full time army - all be they all infantry divisions on their Western border at the out break of war and 43% of their overall army ( which means; including reservists) there too - though many of the latter were not well equipped but regardless; it would have required an enormous effort on the part of the French just to break through and an even greater effort to encircle and really maintain any advance given all bridges would have been blown up and it would have required plenty of trucks, pontoon bridges, air superiority etc. For sure; they couldn't have just walked in - it was far from undefended!!! If you really like history I recommend Germany and the Second World War by Oxford University Press - written by German history academics who wrote them over the course of about 20 years having acquired access to the once communist held German War Archives - the detail in them is phenomenal!!! They WERE more than expensive - they were absurd!! About £300+ per volume!! HOWEVER - they have literally just been released in paper back for about £50 each ( and a good few are actually two books per volume so you get two books for your £50 ). FOR THE MOST PART they are very, very readable, meaning they're written in a way that's easy to read, not TOO ' academic' and it covers everything you can think of and probably more besides; I'm not too big on battles per se - I know who won Stalingrad etc I'm much more interested in the behind the front line issues and these books, whilst covering campaigns; Russia, North Africa, various U boat campaigns etc are much more focussed on what was behind those campaigns - what the shortages were, why they acted accordingly and it does cover all that; exact numbers of anti aircraft guns they had and when, U boat launches, u- boat losses, U boat losses per ton of shipping sunk; the tonnage war, aircraft losses, casualties, rations, manpower, the economy, recruitment issues, the resistance movement, the policing and administration - or lack of it, of the occupied territories and more besides nothing less than brilliantly! Free samples - often 100 pages or so, can also be found in Google books which is how I originally discovered them.
They run out of fuel because they invaided the USSR So they should had saved more fuel in that extra year to also commit a stronger fall blau Idk to me only the fact they made an atomic bomb is unrealistic
@@keanulukaspopken3299 they souldnt be that desparate of fuwl in 1942 without barbarrosa keep in mind that hitler was saving suplies for it and with a foul year where the whiermaht was doing basicaly nothing and still had the USSR as a trade partner along with romania they sould be stronger but an other unrealistic thing is the inability of the red army in the same yes campare with our timeline where the red army was literaly anailated was still capable of defending
They would have run out of Fuel with or without the invasion of the Soviet Union which would have meant a total collapse of both economy and armed forces. Hitler was going East to get Oil and Food in the first place. The Axis Oil shortfall in Europe was 15.000.000 tons, three times what they produced even with Romania. Later in the War they were on the defensive whivh meant they didnt really need a lot of Fuel.
You forgot that crucial point when Jar Jar Binks went to visit Berlin and inadvertently pressed a button and gave all the secrets of the Axis powers to the Allies thus preventing any of this from happening!
@@supratiksaha2001 you don't need to be european to know him. Literally half the world watches Star Wars. Jar jar binks is a star wars character. You should watch Star wars, it's really good brings back old memories when my dad took me to watch my first movie in 1999.
Yeah till two elite SS guards sneak up behind him and throw him in a truck because he told some girl he thought was jewish but was to drunk to tell. Always account for Varible Change.... There was many occasions if axis powers won would be the results of imeadeit victory Exspecialy if syco Japan listened to Hitler and attacked Russia instead of Pearl Harbor but that's what happens when I go outside the Reich. Just can't expect them to be the same
Germany winning ww2 is simple. Don't bring Russia and America into the war. Crush resistance in North Africa and invaded the British Isles after months of starvation.
WhyNotZoidberg Absolutely! Adding Russia and America into the war almost guaranteed Germany's defeat. Taking on three superpowers at the same time was dumb.
How can you not realize that America was on the war from the start? Sending war materials and supplies into a warzone to prop up a faltering enemy is an act of war. No two ways about it.
WhyNotZoidberg That is stragetically impossible, the british navy finally started crushing u boats and defend its trading routes. Hitler attacked russia for there oil because thy were low on it. The battle of britain would be lost because RAF dominated the skies.
WhyNotZoidberg There were actually many ways for Germany to defeat the allies in ww2: 1: King Edward Albert Christian George or Edward VIII if he didn't abdicate the throne would have propably make the British Empire ally with Germany and then 'Merica wouldn't be involved in the war meaning after France surrendered WW2 would be over...And the invasion of the soviet union would be a totaly different war with 'Merica,Germany,the British Empire,Italy and Spain (and the French puppet) Invading to destroy communism... 2:If the germans discover nukes first as said above... 3:If Hitler listened to his generals and had spend more recources towards making a better airforce thus winning at the Battle of Britain, then 'merica wouldn't dare invade europe...then he would finish off the balkans quick not by attacking if possible but by establishing influence in the goverments of these countries or making coup'd etat,after finishing the balkan and waiting for the spring to come he would invade the soviets with better equipment and supply lines and he wouldn't attack the soviet civilians making Axis liberator at the eyes of many slavs, so he wouldn't have to face serious guerilla war and the soviets wouldn't have so many soldiers of slavs fleeing their homes to escape nazi persecution...thus hitler would have outnumber the soviets having 20.000.000 - 50.000.000 soldiers (from all of europe even slavs(ukranians mainly, but white russians too),the spainish would propably join him by then,and the soviets having 5.000.000 soldiers max every winter his army would fortify their posissions and wait,thus he would hunt them to siberia and capture them or killed them.After year 1946 lets say he would launch a joint invasion of 'Merica with the japanese who would propably had finnished off the chinese (BOTH the communists and the nationalists) with german (axis&puppets) help to libarate them from the jews.Thus 'Merica would had been completly surrounded forcing them to surrender or if they were stuborn and continue the war most of latin america would have join the axis side the german-americans in america could had secedded and most probably their nukes wouldn't cause significant damage(Germany most likely by then would had developed its own nukes) even if america somehow managed to bomb berlin or tokio that would only anger axis making the war losses of the 'Mericans much higher...
No, that wouldn't be needed. If Germany kept the starvation going on Britain, there would be an easy invasion or a surrender. He wouldn't bomb Stalingrad either, since he had troops surrounding it. He would just need to keep a good encirclement force around them and push the other soviet lines. Stalingrad would easily be crushed by a much stronger German army than the one that invaded it in the real world.
Stalingrad was bombed to rubble. The reason they lost there was because they got surrounded after they entered the city and failed to guard their rear. How would Hitler have kept his starvation on Britain? U-Boots were getting hard countered by the time the Brits had sonar/anti-sub destroyers/naval decrypts.
The outcome disappointed me, there is no way the germans would've let the french live without taking a lot of their land, besides there were plans to annex the netherlands and belgium into the greater german empire after the war and hitler would've been way more harsh against the soviets too, taking more lands. He would probably not have released so many countries while taking so little himself.
USSR/German military losses were like 1,3 - 1,4 (11 mill and 8-9 mill). USSR suffered from civillian losses ~ 20 mill. I want you remember that it was a war of life and death for soviets. Don't compare it ti France occupation. Sorry for my grammar.
It wasn't that they fucked with Russia it was that hitler was in charge of the army. If they had somebody who wasn't a physco and thought regionally they would've won.
Hitler saw Barbarossa as a preemptive defensive strike. Stalin was rapidly increasing the size of the Soviet Military and Hitler feared it was with intent to invade the rest of Europe much like Finland and the Baltics.
This is good and all but Germany’s whole plan was to invade the USSR, Not invading the USSR in 1941 mean’t USSR would of been ready by the time they invaded.
@@tizi087 By 1942 the USSR would have almost entirely switched out their armoured corps for T-34s and KV-1s, the same tanks that the Germans feared coming up against because they couldn't kill the damn things with their light AT guns.
+Nate H. No no no it was the Navajo code talkers working closely with the greys. The greys felt bad that they gave Germany jet propulsion and violated the prime directive so they helped the allies with enigma. Also alien technology. Don't tell anyone though or they'll leave swastika crop circles in your girlfriend's pubes.
+Nate H. nah. the poles did. the brits even declassified secret documents to confirm it not so long ago. the brits like to take credit for more than they did.
+Belnen The Polish have had practibly no recognition of this. There was more than one Enigma and they were continually being improved and the codes becoming more difficult to crack. But without the Poles they would have been walking around in circles at Bletchley Park. The Soviets denied the Poles having any part in defeating the Nazis. They were even omitted from the VE Day celebrations in order not to annoy Stalin. The Poles were insulted by the movie"Enigma" with Kate Winslett with no mention of Poles, and the British were insulted by the movie "U571" where Harvey Keitel and Bon Jovi capture an Enigma on high seas almost single-handedly
+Gareth Whittaker Marian Rejewski, Henryk Zygalski and Jerzy Różycki have broken the Enigma, not Britain. GB cough British didn't brake the Enigma but Poles ;) If u still think, the GB broke the Enigma I rue ;/
I watched but that videos ( part 1 and 2 ) are only on about specific singular events. What if Germany did that or that. It was not one unsuccessful operation that led Germany to the defeat. It was multiple unlucky and unprepared attacks, defense battles,policies of Britain etc. I am aware this video here is pretty old and prepared with a terrible English. However if all the things mentioned on it were to be true Germany in ww2 had the chance. I suggest you to look up to the newer videos of this channel. Quality sure gone up.
I feel this is literally the single most optimal situation possible. There is no way any of this could've happened. This is way to optimistic of a situation here.
1: Do not treat El Alamein like it’s a port, because it isn’t! It’s a railway station and by the time the Germans were in El Alamein there supply line was so stretched that they couldn’t continue the advance 2: The German had a fatal flaw in manufacturing, it wasn’t streamlined and it barely produced any tanks. The consistency was non existent in Germanys manufacturing of tanks in fact. But this also meant that the Soviets and the US had many times the amount of tanks then the Germans. This means that if then Germans were focusing on Egypt and North Africa then the Soviets would have more time to rapidly build up there arsenal to such an extent that the Germans couldn’t compete. Oh and everything in this Senario is BS because the Germans didn’t have one key item which is: O I L
You think Germans would turn evil, well, perhaps centuries from now with "evil ideas" but they right now are surely a Western country that prisons people that talk or sympathize with Nazis, even the people there don't want to talk about Hitler.
Hitler peace offers was a ploy, to keep a country/s out of the war while they sorted things out before returning the attention back, remember he broke the peace pack a number of times, the Russian winter was Germany down fall on the eastern front it just got to cold for them. Germany got to big to fast also another downfall, bigger and more land they grab meant more to protect then you had the underground that to also took heavy tolls of Germany,it also meant more troops had to go to where the underground was operating. this would of been at the expense of the front line troops. no single country can rule the world nor can it take on the world and expect to win. every one in history that as tried came undone in the end. England and France made a big mistake, when Germany invaded Poland the borders along France, Belgium and Holland could not be defended by Germany. They should of just walk into Germany and the war would not of lasted very long
He wanted the whole of Europe and some more, His intention was to humiliate France and Britain for WW1. He was one of many of the Germans who thought ww1 was not over.
Its not Socialism it is Capitalism, I am a Socialist and I know Capitalist will do any thing to stop people having Socialism its international, it can never be nationalism, to be social to others = Socialism, Hiltler and his party was Capitalist of the worse kind extreme, you can run or own a business so long your are a party member, Capitalism for its own kind. I am not fooled by false lieing propaganda of the Fascist. He even joined up with Franco to destroy the Socialist in Spain. And I see you never read Marxs books, if you did then you would know Marx books are about Capitalism and all it failed system he even predicts people like Hitler would come along and tell lies to the people and give a false image to gain there trust. He wanted war from the start and he got it. National Socialism is a lie to gain people trust, I just glad people in England are not easy fooled by it, people like UKIP BNP NF EDL will never get power here, they get seen off the same way as Mosley did.
No he did not he broke every agreement going, even when others like England allowed him to do it, he wanted more and more, if he wanted peace he would of stuck to the ww1 peace treaty and not break them, he should of gone to league of nations, he would of kept to the Geneva convention but he broke that to. the man wanted war from the start he was never going to comply to any peace treaty's, Poland was not his to march into but he did, They signed the agreement that made Poland a buffer zone. So please stop believing that national capitalist crap.
End Marxism 1) West was stable and under control for Germans (70% of troops wew deployed East) 2) They did applied blitz tactics in Soviet Union 3) Decisive battle of KURSK 4) Germany got rekt.
+Nvideon From a philanthropic point of view there isn´t, but speaking of nations there are winners. It took the USA and Russia two world wars to become superpowers, whereas the european powers that dominated for a couple of hundreds of years went self-destruct in two world wars. Both of them totally needless, by the way, as neither side is free from guilt on the outbreak of WWI, and without WWI there would not have been WWII. Nations can indeed rise and fall over the course of battles and war.
+Nvideon If you think about, both Germany and Japan won in the long run. The allies had learned from WWI that punishing the defeated enemy only leads to resentment. Instead, the allies built up West Germany and Japan after the war (because of their strategic importance in the cold war) and now both countries are economic superpowers because of it.
+Thomas Dineen ahahahah very good point... but remember what chorchill said..."Europe must keep USA in, Russia out and germany Down"(in terms of power)
Steven Gibb The two words are interchangeable. It is the same as saying the US, USA or the States, Burma (Manor), Persia (Iran), Iraq (Babylon), etc... No matter what name you prefer the two names describe the same country or land mass.
hackman669 - No it is not. Saying Wales and Scotland are interchangable with England is an insult. Britain is NOT England. I live in Britain and I am not English, I am Scottish. England is just one country within Britain, even if you are saying Britain (land mass) or The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. There is no definition of Britain that is just "England".
@@stevengibb482 Even that I would say is wrong I would say 'British Empire' is more appropriate considering how much manpower from British colonies was used
Lots of variables on display here but a very interesting point about a delayed Operation Barbarossa and Pearl Harbour attack. Give or take a few months and things could have been very different indeed.
Приколы
*steel, manpower, and oil shortage intensifies*
@Bitmap espescially when the soviets are more prepared for war than in 41 with even more t 34 and kv 1
@@tizi087 but on the wrong front
@@anomaly3055 What? They would be ready on the german front. The japanese would never under any circumstamce fight the Soviets. That's just an impossibility in the realm of fantasy.
Also forgot hitler wanted to attack Russia in 41
@@sovietcomarade5645 all his generals wanted that as it was their only chance.
This whole scenario count on Hitler is a successful painter...isn´t it?
You made my day😂
Absolutely is his subconscious desire to fuck aryan race finally fucked us
Successful map painter
@@costamcostam8961 ah yes draws the german flag on all of the usa
Ah if just George Elser just had timed his device 15' earlier...
You forgot the part where the Germans have no oil in 41 bruh
Hmm...... you comming from TIK
But he didn’t attack the USSR till later.
And you forget the Part that US didnt Fight in Korea and Vietnam
@Ich bin der Jochen
Is that even a fucking question? 🤦♂️
Germany had low oil shortages from the start of the war 'till the end of the war.
No oil means no combat vehicles such as tanks, aircraft, trucks, etc.
No vehicles means no fast and swift mobilization.
No fast or swift movements means no blizkrieg (Lighting Warfare).
No blizkrieg means no tactic that can easily break and deform enemy lines. Operation Barbarossa is a clear example of this.
nabil benz trying to throw shade at facts when you can’t spell coming
So the German player was using console commands, then?
Activate infinite manpower
~delall SOV
~delall ENG
~delall USA
setarmy 999999999
/give player [Germany] oil 99999999
*opens console command*
"annex USA"
So you changed the game level to easy.
Leonard S *civilian
@@blackorange5091 Regular*
@@blitzkrieg7353 *recruit
@@hetecks1385 Wrong, conquering ussr on regular is easier than recruit or civilian
Blitzkrieg No civilian and Recruit is more easy because they give you more building speed and research bonuses
03:52 Germany doesn't attack USSR - enough said this is the reason why Germany lost :)
Hobypyrocom nah it was japaneese bombing of pearl harbor,ussr would have been defeated if USA remained neutral
civecnavi c
US did nothing in the war with Germany, the Russians were the ones which weakened Germany...
Hobypyrocom germans could have beaten russians. in 1941 massive bombarding of germany began,if it wasnt for that germany could have continued to make just as much weapons as before,then we have operation torch in africa and so on+ they supplied ussr with weapons and resources
civecnavi c man stop reading US history, its false history, read neutral history that is written by neutral country for the WW2 and youll see that Russia did most of the damage and casualties to Germany not the western countries...
Hobypyrocom lol im not from USA,im from eastern europe myself but is it that gard to admit that USA was the reason germany lost?
russians lost 14 000 000 soldiers and germany lost only a fraction of that in eastern front which means if it wasnt for USA and allies pushing in africa and later in western and souther europe nazis would have won
I imagine this uploader saying “Why didn’t the Germans send Rommel 50 divisions to win in North Africa?!?!”
Mediterranean Sea and Middle East: Halo
@@scl1332
Royal Navy Force H: *Hello, Kraut.*
@@youraveragescotsman7119 how to fix the lack of supplies???
JUST SEND MORE MEN
@@madermc2979 well, actually don't open another front
@@faridconde6591 No... that's not how you fix supplies bottlenecked by the sea.
"I play Hearts of Iron 4 ok i know a Germany strategy that could have won even the cold war"
smart boi just turn on infinite supplies and boom.
@@yamato3870 Hitler in this version of the world:,, Tdebug.... Ok..... Annex SOV..... Oh... Instantconstruction.... Manpower 1000000000000000000000...aaaaaannnddd i think i can unpause now! "
@@user-pg3iy3re1d you forgot "debug_nuking"
Instantconstruction, manpower1000000, nocb, yesman boom USA joins the axis and boom u win
The whole video be like:
5 reasons why this would never succeed:
1: The Japanese economy would collapse in 1942 due to lack of oil and other materials. The American/Dutch oil embargo was the sole reason to attack in 1941 in the first place.
2: The Italians would not have been able to invade Malta. They didnt have the necessary equipment, notably landing craft. Also, the Royal Navy would have intercepted any invasion attempt.
3: The USA would most likely have joined the war even without a Pearl Harbour. They were practically at war before Pearl, sending supplies to both UK and USSR. Heck, they even fought uboats on occasions.
4: The Soviets would likely be too strong in 1942. They outproduced Germany (by a lot) in 1940-1941. There is absolutely no reason for a 42 attack to be more successfull than a 41 attack.
5: Continuing the Battle of Britain would only lead to a weaker Luftwaffe against the Soviet Union. See point 4.
+Jack Rolfland Yep. the Japanese had no natural war materials they could harvest from their land.
Everything had to be imported.
In a long drawn out war they would inevitably lose..
To be fair to them they knew this and their whole doctrine in the early stages of the war was based on lightning quick attacks and fast conquest ,partly to get more resources,, which was no easy feat in itself.
If anyone wants an idea of why the japanes did not surrender despite the hopeless situation google up hiroo onoda.
He wrote a book that i read and basically he thought all the surrender appeals were propaganda.
1: Why japanese would have collapse in 1942 and in real time did not collapse until 1945, even with embargo and a war with USA?
2: Italians would have been able to invade Malta in the early phase of the war, when Malta was not so important neither for British.
3: Usa would joined the war for sure, but later. and, probably, too late for a complete defeat of Axis.
4: Soviets in 1942 were under siege at Leningrad, lost at Kharkov and were under attack in Caucasus
5: Aircraft never was the major problem for Axis in Russia
Jack Rolfland soviet strong when 1943
Delayed response:
1: Japan lastet until 1945 because they occupied rich Dutch colonies.
3: USA would defeat the Axis eventually. Look at the US in the late 40s and early 50s, and compare it to the rest of Europe.
4: Not relevant. Im obviously referring to an invasion in 1942. Not how the situation was in 1942 IRL.
5: Aircraft were vital during the early stages of Barbarossa. And during the rest of the war.
They had coal
Hitler: *_Aggresively taking notes_*
*in his grave*
@@sakmadik69420 How are your 2 dads doing?
@@JOECURR1488 why the insult?
@@sakmadik69420 Ok.
YOU'RE VERY ARROGANT.
IN HIS GRAVE?
YOU SOUND LIKE YOU LEARNED ALL YOUR GREEK GODS FROM A VIDEO GAME.
@@JOECURR1488 lmao i know the game but i know inaccuracies.but wtf you guys preachin hitler tho
What if Monaco, Luxembourg and Montenegro formed an axis alliance and proceeded to invade the rest of the world with the power of the bucket paint tool.
what about Liechtenstein?
@@Nasrosee they're so powerful they can have -1 casualties
Don’t forget San Marino and Vatican City
@@hockeyislife2 CATHOLIC EMPIRE
@@antimatterg Yes
Hitler: “too late, 75 years to late...”
Churchill: "PUT A SHIELD AROUND THE ISLAND!"
HAHAHAHA
2030.
PART 3
9:24 that images is kind of unsettling to me
that image does not seem right
History is amazing. I bet that was one hell of a meeting to attend.
It’s actually edited. The real photo has only Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt sitting by each other.
Chevy Silverado 2005 Gang ik 😂
@@ChevySilveradoGang no shit
8:21 isnt that the east coast of US?
BRUH how did he typed it so bad
I guess, from Europe the US only has a west coast, and an extremely west coast.
@@bbenjoe hát az biztos XDD
Benjámin Kurilla lmao this made me crack up
No you dumbass its the west coast of Russia, ah durr
Zvallid posts this video
Germany: write that down, write that down
Wrong hitler and his generals were actually pretty confident that they could defeat the ussr just like in ww1, it was actually france that most general thought was impossible to conquer
@G E T R E K T 905 learn how to ducking joke
you could replace the whole audio of this video to bruh sound effect on repeat and it would make more sense
the power of MS Paint
Please nuke Pakistan.😀😀😀😀😀
@@saadtanveer5593 Your warheads can't cross the barriers of Iron dom or PDV and AAD.
@@saadtanveer5593 When you have nuked India and Israel? In your dreams or in some video games? By the way your media use to nuke India and Israel every day in some shows and with poor graphics.
Usa and NATO, wherever this evil comes, they carry with themselves evil children. Children are shunned by children. Some people think that they are treating others. When they fall in love, they sow the seed of evil anywhere in this world. In the lives of all countries, they determine the whole world how anyone will live. They will take away legally elected presidents who choose the people and set up their satanic followers. The amateur is devil and satan. All say salazu. His politics is a lie.
@@tonizarkovic5009 Thank you, crazy person.
I can't even begin to list all the holes in this speculation
Cyrulez93 There is many hole and different outcomes, this is all just one of many possibilities. Kinda like the lend lease situations would never happen for military support.
In which outcome do you take over the most heavily defended islands in the world survive a Russian winter, take over the Nile IN ONE DAY AND TAKE OVER MOSCOW IN A SINGLE YEAR!!?
He didn't and by the time Stalingrad was liberated it was obvious who was going to win
still a cool vid though 😃
tbh. he didn't show a "way" to win, he just reversed all mistakes by the axis. Like Italy not attacking greece or Germany attacking the Sovjets too early. Sure they were many ways how they could have gotten a better outcome then the whole occupation of germany.
Lol the title should be "Hitler's wet dream"
9:26 top 10 anime crossovers
That photoshop is bad
@@theconfederationofswitzerl4552 Indeed, this comment is debatable.
The German atomic research lab was believed to be ahead of America, but when Germany fell they discovered it was years behind.
while that is true, the US only started developing a bomb so they could use it to end the war. If they aren't in the war, they don't develop the bomb
Whoa there!
They were researching Nuclear Energy, The war gave them the excuse to go "Fuck this, We'll blow you the fuck up"
Germany was ahead in everything. Germany was building parts of reactor in 1945 and had most researches done, but due the situation of the fronts and lack of resources and after that the defeat of germany, it didnt happened. learn history and dont write bullshit scrub.
The germans didnt sucseed because their main ingredience. Tungtvann (Heavy-water). Was destroyed by Norwegian sabotage teams.
-many borders are simply wrong on your maps
-Ireland was neutral
-Why did Finland not attack the Sovietunion in Operation Barbarossa?
-Why did Germany not attack Leningrad?
-Without Enigma codes, Egypt would be lost within 1940
-Without their troops from Dunkirk, the British wouldn't attack Eastafrica or so on
-Why was it neccesary(?) for the Axis to invade Greece and Yugoslavia in this situation?
-The peace treaty sucks, Germany would have never left the eastern occupied territory
-Why didn't the Soviets destroy their oil refeneries(?) when the Germans advanced?
Excuse my English, I am not a native speaker.
So many mistakes.. But still a entertaining video.
Leningrad was never attacked and would've been useless to attack to, Yugoslavia was never invaded it joined the axis and Italy invaded Greece.
@@videoclips4271 YES YOUGOSLAVIA joined axis and then soufered a famous coup de etat and was invaded and dissmembered
The Dunkirk troops were out of action for a long time, meaning they were not used in Africa
Did you see where the Japanese did not attack Pearl Arbor? Allergic to flowers?
Usa and NATO, wherever this evil comes, they carry with themselves evil children. Children are shunned by children. Some people think that they are treating others. When they fall in love, they sow the seed of evil anywhere in this world. In the lives of all countries, they determine the whole world how anyone will live. They will take away legally elected presidents who choose the people and set up their satanic followers. The amateur is devil and satan. All say salazu. His politics is a lie.
Ok, number one just no.
The Japeneese had to sign a non agression pact with the USSR because the soviets had given their army a very bloody nose in recent border conflicts, the japeneese were scared of the soviets, even going as far as to not sink american shipping to the ussr. 2 On june 22 1941 operation barbarossa wouldve had to have been launched, the actual date they launched it germany thought the soviet union was at its absolute weakest because they were in the middle of transitioning their army from the old t-26 and bt tanks to the new t34 and kv, along with all the other equipment. 3 In this video you failed to mention the british bombing of berlin, which made hitler target civilians instead of airbases, so thats out of the question. 4 The german war economy was a nightmare considering their backwards production throughout the war, germany would never and could never have won the war, they are a country too small and too short on recources.
Watching further into the video, On december 7 1941 Japan needed to attack pearl harbor, The us had stopped all oil from going to japan and the japeneese needed recources, thus meaning they needed to expand south to continue their war in china, but 1 problem the south is heavily colonized by america, britian, france, the dutch, ect. The japeneese said themselves they could not win a prolonged war with the usa because of the us’s capability to produce weapons, ships, planes ect, along with their vast recources. The japeneese and Germans both made the best of their bad situations, they had both backed themselves into a corner and could not escape.
Watching even further, what the actual fuck.... First of all Germany had basically canceled their atomic program partly brcause hitler had killed all of his top jewish scientists, I’m getting ahead of myself here.
Ok, by april of 1942 the soviets army modernization would almost be done, thus meaning germany wouldn’t and couldnt even move into soviet territory, also the soviets would fight to the literal end, instead of surrendering, just like germany did irl, they wouldve kept fighting and fighting until every soviet man, woman, and child was killed or captured.
In conclusion this is just so unrealistic and i’m going to consider this video a joke. thanks for reading.
and the armistice at the end is retarded
Edit: also at Dunkirk The german panzers had to stop because they were so far ahead of the infantry they were risking being cut off themselves, also they had been moving nonstop for days, they needed the stop to rest and refit refeul and rearm their tanks
Although I agree this is almost word for word from Potential History.
yeah i agree with him, i like his points
It's hard making a Germany win scenario, because they couldn't, if they wanted to win, the entire scenario had to change so that Germany could have a chance.
The Japanese could easily swabber dunk the soviets with the hordes of Chinese collaborationist forces and native Siberian support.
Manchukuo _1940 The chineese hated the japeneese lmfao
so the africa corp failed because of a lack of supply and your solution to that is to just move more troops into africa?
*oof*
@Alex 1324 Romania is not that oil rich as Russia is, it would be able to supply them for a bit longer but not in the long run, also Malta was British, and the Royal Navy was a superior naval force than the German Navy or the Italian Navy, they could have sent reinforcements into Malta and drive back an invasion.
@elli Seeley No, the middle east didn't produce oil by this point. Neither did north africa, neither did norway. France didn't have enough oil by far, they couldehave shipped the oil to germany. And wait GERMANY HAD MANPOWER ISSUES. TO AN EXTREME EXTENT, then also. The soviets would be WAAAY to strong for germany by 1943.
@Alex 1324 they had that anyway bruh
@Alex 1324 there isn't an explanation to why Italy is competent tho
Yeah, saying that german intelligence just becomes aware of the cracking of Enigma was a red flag.
It feels like a bad fanfiction. The Italians were steamrolled all the way to Tripoli? Nah, they just grew some decent command and didn't let the allies get past Tobruk. Even though it took an Australian volunteer division 90 minutes to completely shatter irl, they can hold out for a year! The Japanese had their shit absolutely slapped and did nothing but teach the Russians how to do combined arms warfare? Nah! They totally could have held out at the battle of kholkin Gol.
@elli Seeley which is totally why they immediately noticed in real life /s
@elli Seeley noimeant yu said it wouldn't be hard to tell that enigma was cracked, but it famously was hard for the germans to tell, the brits didn't just go around using all the information they could get out of it making it super obvious that they knew, it was really quite hard to tell.
@elli Seeley but they didn't use it like that, you are wrong, if it was so easy to tell why didnt the germans notice sooner irl? Or are you smarter than the entire german high command intelligence sector.
Come to think of it maybe we all are.
@elli Seeley "just notice faster" what..? like how is the reality of they only notice it after a good chunk of time changed? there has to be a REASON it changes, not just "it changes"
The ending with Hitler in Yalta conference was hilarious!
So many things wrong with this but I'm too lazy too point them out
If anyone would like to challenge my claim that there are things wrong, I'll actually point them out
@@JoshuaJacque117 *POINT IT*
@@gayfurryporn goddamnit I dont wanna write out a friggin paragraph
@@JoshuaJacque117 dont worry. there are enough videos about it so just post some of them. such as ruclips.net/video/kVo5I0xNRhg/видео.html
@Plo Koon Germany runs out of oil by 1945, late 1941 without synthetic oil. Even with every single drop of oil in Romania, it only fills around half their consumption, and this includes Romanian reserves, which are stored not produced so that does not last. The only way Germany gains enough oil to keep them going is to take the caucuses WITHOUT the soviets commencing scorched earth operations there, which would likely never happen.
Did we forget about Lend lease, Germany’s Oil shortage, and the fact that the Soviets Streamlined production of tanks allowed them to produce tanks like 3x faster then Germany could ever be.
Makes me want to play Axis and Allies
get hearts of iron 4
Spoils of the Interwebs EVERYONE SUBSCRIBE TO MY CHANNEL AND YOU WILL NOT REGRET IT
n0
I'm working on a web and then mobile version of Axis and Allies, if you have game animation or iOS dev skills I'd love a hand.
Templar S Nice name
1:20 If you read a book you'll know that the commander of the tank division gave the order to stop because they had outrun their logistics and needed to stop, regroup and service their tanks anyway. They had to stop. They could *not* attack. Instead the order was given to the Luftwaffe to attack the British at Dunkirk and it wasn't like they were going to swim out in the sea anyway....or so the Germans thought. The area also had marshlands and plenty of rivers, which the allied defenders planned on flooding making a German advance possible only through a narrow single road. The French kept fighting and stalling the Germans which made an attack on Dunkirk of low priority considering France hadn't yet surrendered.
So this is impossible
1:33 Utterly ridiculous. German elite paratroopers occupied Crete by the skin of their teeth in 1941. How, the poorly armed and trained Italians would be able to do it is a pipedream. Italy doesn't have the naval capacity to pull this off. The Royal Navy by comparison is the largest in the world and has 4 aircraft carriers at this point.
Italy wants *Egypt* not Malta.
2:22 How do they do that without long-range bombers? Great Britain produced 15,049 aircraft in 1940 (more than anybody in the world at that time). Nazi Germany produced 10,862. In 1941 Britain produced 20,094 aircraft, Nazi Germany 12,401. How can you defeat the RAF?
2:52 Thanks to Albanian(!) reinforcements the Italians can withstand? Germany only sent divisions to North Africa because the Italians were soundly beaten and risked getting kicked out entirely! Had Italy done well on its own there'd be no need to send German help. Hitler himself told Finland's Marshall Mannerheim in 1942 that the Italians caused him constant headaches since they had to aid them in all theaters from Greece to North Africa.
3:10 Mussolini has never had any plans to invade Yugoslavia himself and re-integrate the Dalmatian coast back to Italy? He doesn't support Croatian fascist Ushtashi to make an independent Croatian fascist puppet-state?
3:34 Japan had already been given a royal beating by the Soviet Union in the Battle of Khalkhin Gol in 1939, in which they became painfully aware that the IJA was no match against the Red Army's armored divisions. Japan also did *not* have the fuel available to conduct a long campaign. They already had their hands full fighting the Chinese in Manchuria which took up half the strength of the IJA throughout the war. The USA supplied help to the Chinese which also angered Japan. How can they attack the USSR when they can't even control Manchuria?
Also there was *nothing* of value in Far East Russia. What Japan needed was the oil in French Indokina, Dutch East Indies and Malaya. That made Great Britain and the USA the logical enemies of Japan. Japan got their scrap metal from the USA and when they USA cut their supply Japan knew they were being slowly strangled by the USA, which they knew was building new battleships and aircraft carriers. Roosevelt as also expanding the American army (which in 1939 was just 17th in size in the world).
Japan was ill suited for a land war but they had a powerful navy with which they could become the masters of the Pacific - which was their long-term goal in the first place. Not invade the USSR and hope Nazi Germany would be kind enough to share the spoils with them.
The USA and Great Britain were Imperial Japan's main enemies and the main obstacles to the territories they so wanted to seize for themselves. *Why* would they invade the USSR for nothing?? Ridiculous.
3:52 Are you even serious? Hitler and the Nazis had planned an invasion of the USSR and they knew that 1941 would be the best chance they would have. Delaying it would give the USSR more time to re-arm, re-organise, finish their defence lines and having a new officer corp *finish* their education, which they were caught right in the middle of at Operation Barbarossa. There hardly were any T34's and KV-1 tanks in 1941 as they were just entering production. Besides, Hitler expected a Soviet invasion any month and therefore wanted to attack *first*. You just gave Stalin *more* time rather than catching him with his pants down in 1941. Congratulations!
HOW can you *transport* enough German divisions to Africa? The Kriegsmarine lacks the transport and troop ships with which to do this. You also just extended the German supply lines dangerously thin. It's one thing transporting divisions and equipment by rail but there are no railroads in the Mediterranean! It's several times more difficult to just magically wish the German divisions meant for Operation Barbarossa would be used in North Africa instead.
Also, how does the USA just stand idely by watching this happen? They had already granted a lot of lend-lease to Great Britain and were gearing up for a war themselves.
4:40 Italian navy in the Atlantic?? With what fuel? In our history the Royal Navy never came close to being defeated in the Mediterranean. In fact they made life very difficult for the Axis supply ships. Do the British still control Gibraltar?? If so they control who goes in and out of it. Can the Italians pass Gibraltar? Well?
4:50 Sigh. Why would Japan NOT attack the American fleet at Pearl Harbor? Their entire plan hangs upon them being able to knock out most of the American fleet. Why leave it there fully operational.? Btw, the USA *were' already indirectly in the war by supplying goods and arms to the British and in 1941 they started supplying the Soviets and Chinese too. The USA with its immense industrial capability will arm these three to their teeth before entering the war themselves.
Roosevelt started re-arming in 1939 so he *knew* the war was coming. He will find another excuse to get involved, count on that.
5:05 And in this scenario the USSR has started mass producing T34's and KV1's. They are fully mechanized. Fully re-organised. Have functional and finished defense lines. Fully trained officers and troops which have finished their training. Nazi Germany are yet to learn what they learned in 1941 in which they already had 800,000 casualties and neeed 700,000 horses to make the very long supply line work at all.
Hitler admitted to Mannerheim that the USSR had way more industrial capability and weapons than he thought was possible. In 1942 they will have way more.
You also started the invasion in April when there's heavy rainfall in the area and which makes the roads utterly useless since they turn into quagmire. In 1941 the invasion started as soon as the weather allowed it which was in late *June* . Only an idiot would invade in the Russia spring rain in April. Do you have any idea what you're talking about?
Bye bye Nazi Germany.
6:00 Tell me. How the hell do they manage to move so fast with the dreadful Russian roads? That was what stopped Operation Barbarossa in 1941. Also explain how they can defeat far more well-equipped, trained and organised Soviet troops armed with thousands of T34's and KV-1's?
I've heard enough. Not going to debunk the rest. You're making up as you go along, ignore certain well-known *facts* , assume things will stay the same and that some crucial factors are just butterflied away out of the blue. And worst of all you just assume the USA will silently watch this? Your "super-italians" are also fantastic when 35% of all Italians were illiterate during WW2.
You display an utter lack of knowledge, both of what long-term goals the Axis powers had and their capabilites to wage wars long from their own shores.
This is a ridiculous scenario.
Your English is also not even adequote. A person making basic grammar errors isn't somebody you would trust knows what he's (?) talking about.
Please read a few books about the war and enlighten yourself. This video here is just mindless speculation with no basis in reality.
Cassius Chaerea Excellent analysis.
What, in your view, would have enabled Germany to win WWII ?
Cassius Chaerea Finally! There is someone who knows what they're talking about on here. :)
Undecided-But-Engaged Voter They could not.
The Germans more or less followed an optimal plan of action and even had a lot
of luck. Look at how they beat the combined army of Poland franc and Britan
that out classed them on every field except for close air support. The axis had
to small a population they were always going to lose by attrition. There only
hope was to crush the soviet and somehow negotiate a piece. This were the
German plan. After they failed to capture Moscow Germany was lost, but
capturing Moscow was never going to succeed do to logistic. Videos like this is
made by people not understanding the historical facts. Second World War was unwinnable
for the axis not due to some particular tactic but due to the unchangeable climatically
and geopolitical factors.
Cassius Chaerea The reason for the tanks being stopped short of Dunkirk is not known with certainty but there is a little known incident that happened at exactly the same time - Hitler visited some top Generals at some French chateaux at this time to find that they had - without consulting Hitler - ordered the Panzer divisions to advance on Dunkirk. This is reported to have thrown Hitler into a rage because he saw it as a threat to his authority, and he ordered them to stop in order to assert his authority and make it clear who was in charge!! Evidence suggests the troops were in need of rest, and tanks in need of service but they weren't inclined to stop them on the brink of a great victory and they didn't get serviced in the days they were halted. The troops were rested, the tanks serviced once Dunkirk was secured, when there was quite an extensive refit, period of rest and reorganisation prior the occupation of France.
Cassius Chaerea man you have so much time on your hands!
9:27 Lol Stalin Looks So Sad
Ramen_95 he’s thinking capitalist thoughts comrade...
@@h.t.awesome3822 huh but he looks sad also about losing the war right?
Ramen_95 let’s be honest, even if Germany won Stalin wouldn’t’ve just capitulated and accepted the fate of the USSR but would’ve instead forced his starving forces to fight to the bitter end just like the Germans did in our time. Sorry, I got a little nerdy there lol.
@@h.t.awesome3822 lol true comrade
you two are idiots
The Germans didn’t “stop” at Dunkirk to be nice they did so to repair and refuel their panzers and let the infantry catch up so they would not be incircled
John Blahut there is also a rumour hitler deliberately held back because he admired the British and wanted peace with them but yeh yours makes sense as well 😂
@@florianruhstaller1730 Well the Germans were the ones who declared war, so who really wanted it?
Not to mention, the UK let Germany remilitarize the Rhineland and take lands from Czechslovakia without declaring war, despite it being in defiance to the Treaty of Versaille.
Germany wanted war
At least it's nice you've classified this video under the category "Comedy". Very appropriate.
Only not every joke is nonsense and not every nonsense is funny.
When people think they are war strategists
Joseph Stalin Same with you, you couldn’t make a battle plan till The German Operation typhoon. Deutschland #1.
Too many HOI4 players
Joseph Stalin damn it couldn't you let the führer win?
Hitler cold not have wan the war--he did not have enough oil, by 1941, only 10 panzers divisions and 10 motorized divisons out of 157, the rest of the army was relying on horses! Whilst the Allies had never problems with oil.....Barbarossa was terrible, even taking Moscow wouldn't have deterred the soviets.....Hitler needed oil, that was rationned in Germany and the conquered countries.....Some say he should have built more tanks, more airplanes, but they had tu fuel it and crew it...No chance..
When People think they are cool if they Name themselves after the cruelest Leaders in world history
Now make a version were they actually fight back
There's one big hole that can counter his entire arguement,
*A C O M P E T E N T A L L I E D L E A D E R*
As well as forgetting about Germany’s limited fuel supply, where are the commonwealth countries and rest of the British empire?
WOW! RUclips armchair generals are the greatest military minds in history.
Question: How could Germany have won WWII?
Answer: If Hitler would have had RUclips.
Usa and NATO, wherever this evil comes, they carry with themselves evil children. Children are shunned by children. Some people think that they are treating others. When they fall in love, they sow the seed of evil anywhere in this world. In the lives of all countries, they determine the whole world how anyone will live. They will take away legally elected presidents who choose the people and set up their satanic followers. The amateur is devil and satan. All say salazu. His politics is a lie.
a youtuber does have the power of 20/20 hindsight, however.
Why do you trolls always try to disrupt interesting conversations? Go away child ,
let the adults talk.
Toni Zarkovic no one asked you, Serb
lol true so many dudes on youtube thinks they are increadable tactics :DD
One problem: It took 1 year longer for operation Barbarossa to take place, so in that 1 year the Soviets would have build their army and would also be ready since Germany and her friends were attacking every other country in the mean time, and the Soviets would not just sit, wait and do nothing. So its most likely that the Soviet Union would have attacked before operation Barbarossa would have taken place.
The only reason the situation developed as it did was a diplomatic error between the two. That's all it was.
It would be stupid to assume to Soviet Union would arm for a war that would not happen for an additional year than reality would teach. That and the fact Stalin was not intent on declaring war with Germany until the final months when an invasion seemed certain. In November 1940 he even asked Hitler to be part of the Axis, but he did not respond because Germany was already beginning to plan the invasion.
The soviets wouldn't be ready for a defensive war until 1945 and you think they could attack the Reich in 1942?Tge only reason they survived in our time line is because they were just spewing out man and bad tanks and aircraft every ten minutes with massive help from Britain and the US which since the caucus region false would likely mean the soviet aid from America would be cut in half or more, I just don't get why the treaty looks like this
@@topsecret1837 they were arming rapidly before operation barbarossa so it makes sense that if germans attacked in 1942 they would face 10s of thousands of t-34s and kv-1s. germans wouldnt stand a chance.
@@ussindianapolis487 without the Help of the Allies , soviets would be lose the war
I think this is a very good video well done
Most of these "what if's" strongly depend on the decisions of countries other than Germany. Secondly it totally discounts the raw material problem for the Axis as a whole.
"Japan doesn't attack the US"
Their choice was to literally end their imperial aspirations, or attack the US and hope for the best. The US was strangling them economically. You totally ignore this like Japan attacking the US was just some willy nilly decision on the part of the Japanese. If they could have realized their aspirations without attacking the US, they would have. Them not attacking the US, would require the US to turn the oil spigot back on for the Japanese.
"Italy doesn't invade Greece"
The Axis wasn't like the allies. They didn't make decisions together. They were nominally allied countries that supported eachother. They each had their own aspirations. I am pretty sure Hitler would have preferred Italy didn't do that too.
"Japan/Russia non-aggression pact"
It was largely meaningless. Neither of them wanted to attack eachother. In this scenario where they don't sign an agreement, Russia still would have moved their eastern troops. I mean you are literally arguing Russia felt the barren east was more important than where most people actually live in Russia.
"Without engima US arent advised of the attack"
Enigma had no impact on the pacific theater, the Japanese used their own ciphers and the US decoded these messages which was integral at midway.
There is so much I could pick apart in this video. It just wouldn't have happened...and obviously didn't.
this is a real good comment, I like reading long comments proving the video wrong, unfortunately were late so nobody will see this :(
@Tim Easy:
1) Japan STILL doesn't attack the US. Attacking a country that literally just cut off its oil to you is a very very bad idea, especially if this country is the US. You'd be better off not attacking it, at least you'll hold on for a couple more years.
2) The axis can agree to make decisions collectively, since we are looking for the best ways to win the war for them, we'll just make them agree on this point, so no attacking Greece.
3) There were minor skirmishes between them in 1938-1939, the Japanese were defeated though and couldn't increase their influence northwards. This proves that Japan wanted to invade the USSR, they just failed and realized the USSR is much more stronger so they signed a non-aggression agreement. Your next statement is somewhat wrong. The Soviet Eastern front was very important actually, sure not as important as say Moscow, but still very important. The Japanese not signing the pact means they can keep pressure on the Soviets, so they can't fully deploy all their Asian units towards Moscow. Imagine they do that and Japan starts attacking Vladivostok and other important cities. Remember, in this timeline the Japanese DO NOT attack the US, so they are much more prepared and could put some troops North. Now the Soviets will be forced to fight a war on two fronts, which isn't a good idea at all.
4) I don't have a lot of background knowledge about this matter, but I must ask when did the Americans decode the Japanese ciphers? If you're going to say 1942, then I advise you to take this current scenario into consideration because in this video, everything that happened in real life post-1941 happened about a year later. So if the US decoded the ciphers in 1942, then that would take place in 1943 in our new timeline, which is a year later after the new attack on Pearl Harbour. Otherwise, I would just assume that lightning doesn't strike twice and this time the entire American fleet was there and caught by surprise, and mostly destroyed, severely weakening the American power in the Pacific, although I am not sure for how long, since in my opinion, I would take the US over Japan any time. If the Americans fought the Japanese in 99 scenarios, the Americans would win all 99 due to their increased production rate and better economy and industry. Any war against the US would be a suicide attempt.
I would love to discuss with you any other stuff you'd like to dig from the video. I personally think it's a logical scenario so if you have other concerns I can discuss them with you.
I'm wondering if people don't realize this is just their opinion and idea of an alternate universe
@@thegermanfool8953 I mean maybe, but the uploader trying to pass this off as perfectly realistic is just stupid.
@@glurt628 well you're not wrong and how do we know it's stupid if it never happened? just saying
What this persons said could be completely right but at the same time could be wrong but we don't know since it never happened
The USSR wouldn't have surrendered at that point. You do realise that Stalingrad isn't even 1/8 of Russia?
+Surgus OfTheBlack if USSR had already lost Moskow, Stalingrad is not 1/8 of Russia
zvallid Moscow is also not even 1/8 of the area of Russia.
+Surgus OfTheBlack but 6/8 of Russia is Siberia, almost useless
zvallid Not quite useless and decent conditions to retreat.
You know how badly the economy is gonna become? Western Soviet Union was the one of the most fertile lands in Europe, they also lost Caucasus, an area with huge oil fields. Most industry is also in the Western lands. What use is the few factories left in Central Asia gonna do? This will eventually cause the Soviet Union (if it survives) to become a third world nation, but its more likely that it will collapse.
8:20 a middle capable to reach the West Coast of USA. (Diagram of East Coast)
David Zachariah LOL
i was gonna put that
David Zachariah I think he meant "Capable of reaching as far west as the east cost of the United States".
David Zachariah + when they try that the u.s are gonna crush them
David Zachariah in
Germany: who next im gonna invade mmm.....
*Switzerland: *Start sweating**
historical reasons for war: exist
zvallid: no they don't exist
6:56 sovietic army 😂
Germany doesn't attack Russia and it would have dominated Europe. However, the problem that Hitler understood was Europe has poor natural resources. Hitler could not support his empire without Russia's resources. It is doubtful that Stalin, who did not trust Hitler, would have been a trading partner. Add Stalin's huge level of paranoia and it was inevitable that Germany and Russia were going to war.
***** The whole thing has nothing to do with trust. The Soviet Union was stuck in the war against Finland and showed itself weak. So for Hitler attacking the Soviet Union was taking land from the weak. Unfortunately for him, he didn't have an idea about the real potential of the Soviet Union. You mentioned the cold war - this is why no one attacked during the cold war - both sides knew that the other side is very strong. It's another thing that Hitler wasn't a very rational player in the first place.
xxl96 If Stalin did not trust in Hitler,he not have ignored the warming of the URSS's spys,of the Axis attack >.
JC Denton Actually about to attack Romania, because of its oil fields.
@Cecil Holstein: Stalin could have captured the Romanian oil fields with about 2 divisions. If they had done so, Germany's war with England would have been lost within a few months. Stalin wasn't about to attack Germany itselfs, but rather Romania. Since that would have had rather bad consequences for Germany, they could not allow it, and they told Molotov on no uncertain terms that if they wanted to capture Romania, that would mean war. And since Molotov went home with the intention to capture & occupy the Romanian oil fields, that meant war.
Yea, that's the point, exactly.
Background music is super-duper awesome 😎 !!!
Alternative Title: Hitler plays Hoi4 on Civilian difficulty.
I love it how you think you’re a military genius.
Because surrounding Stalingrad will definitely halt the soviet reinforcements defending the caucuses. Why didn’t hitler think of this? GENIUS
Well honestly Hitler could have launched invasion on time and take Moscow. That changes things. If he gets the oil fields things get real bad
@@smithnwesson990 why do people think that Capturing Moscow= Win?
@@Echo5427_ they're just wehraboos
Hitler actually thought of this. The supplies we're cut off when they reached the don or somewhere near that point. Also this is a tactical EMBARRASMENT. Because doing this would first over-stretch the units, get them destroyed while trying to cross the don. Also Stalingrad being surrounded, well.... people by now are just thinking they have unlimited supplies. Don't you know how hard is it to supply troops over the Volga? Also the manpower issue, now tell me. If they concentrated all their forces in 6th army they could've encircled it. BUT what about the flank? The Axis-Allied troops will be DESTROYED when operation Uranus comes.
@@JosiahJS976 Without a doubt
Category : Comedy
Because this would be impossible considering the characters of the Germans.
@@user-yj8pt7gt3g not only that.
Thank You. May We disscus one or two topics. Great job
Normally I kind of like counterfactual, speculative "what if" history, but the less counterfactual it is, the more believable it is. This one is counterfactual heaped upon counterfactual.
To every action there has to be a reaction. you basically looked back at ww2 and all the things germany did, altered them. without having the allies react.
That's me when I plan my next moves in chess.
The US bankrolled the USSR and UK during WW2. Without that massive aid, the two countires could not have carried on, With it, the UK could survive and the USSR could push West to Berlin. The US had to race East to Berlin to keep the USSR from conquering all of Germany and possibly more of Europe. The fact that Finland survived as a free country is amazing. The US played an economic waiting game that could have cost the Western Allies all of Western Europe to Soviet domination. Instead, thanks to THE BOMB, we had the Cold WAR. I would like to see an alternative history where Germany did not invade Western Europe, but only attacked Russia without any outside aid or intervention from the rest of the World.
And in conjunction, seeing how the Pacific War would have gone between China and Japan without allied aid or intervention.
J.L. Roberts America made a mistake in the war - it decided to scale down it's plans for the army. Originally, it planned on raising about 200 Divisions - in the end it raised about 80 odd. To be fair; it would have required considerably more shipping to get those divisions, tanks etc where it needed them but in Europe, it found it did actually need more divisions and equipment than it had and that meant it couldn't advance as rapidly as it would otherwise have done - had it, it would have been in a much stronger position vis a vis Russia and would probably have saved much of Europe from Soviet occupation.Finland survived largely because Russia was very depleted of manpower by the end of the war and certainly couldn't afford to risk a war with the West over Poland etc - Russia needed peace with Finland to capture and secure Eastern Europe. The Finns never advanced beyond their 1939 borders with Russia either - which saved Leningrad and so Russia from defeat and that probably helped save Finland too!!Without the West, and Western aid Russia would have lost!! Simple as that - Russians would disagree but Germany built thousands of AA guns the steel and manpower for which would have otherwise built tanks etc, and fielded about 500,000 manning those AA batteries - not to mention U boat construction, the DAK or Deutsche Afrika Korps, or withdrawing numerous fighter planes etc from the eastern front.
Limestone Mills Very interesting. We must remember that the US was also fighting an island hopping ground war with Marines and Army ground forces in the Pacific. They were doing a global balancing act with resources.
The Soviet Army was in terrible condition before they were bankrolled by the US, as shown by the Polish War in the 1920s and the Winter War with Finland in 1939. That is when Hitler should have invaded Russia on the pretext of saving the Finns. This scenerio could have saved Western & Eastern Europe and Scadinavia, while distroying Communism for years to come. Or at least the 2 abhorrent dictatorships would have destroyed each other.
If Germany could have conquered eastern Russia, where would they have stopped to set up an eastern boundary for occupation and resettlement of Germans?
J.L. Roberts In truth though; Germany for 1, couldn't attack the Soviet Union in support of Finland with France at the time, about equal in strength to Germany's army at her back, and 2. she was far from able to!! Germanys attack in the West was postponed no less than 29 times for lack of equipment, training and last but by no means least; ammunition which is why that in 1940, a new armaments ministry was set up under Todt though primarily to deal with an ammunition crisis - in the event it actually failed to materialise as what they were expecting was a rerun of WW1; static warfare with a large consumption of ammunition but in the event, it was over before they knew where they were. Beyond that though; they were still in no position to attack Russia as conscription had only been going 4 years - and those years relied on those born in 1914 - 1918, when the birth rate was half it's norm at about 700,000 so it only produced about 360,000 male recruits a year for all three services; army. navy, Luftwaffe. Those born after 1901 were termed the white years - forbidden by Versailes to receive military training so Germany actually relied very heavily on 40 year olds at this stage of the war - especially for officers in which it was severely lacking!!
The proposed line of an occupied Russia ran from Archangel south to the Volga a little North of Moscow, along the entire Western shore of the Volga to the Caspian Sea.
Limestone Mills I see. It is so refreshing to exchange comments with a knowledgeable historian rather than a troll. Couldn't the invasion of France have been avoided if French occupation troops in the Rhineland had repulsed early German advances into their area of control when the Wehrmacht was weak and ill-prepared?
J.L. Roberts In truth probably not; the Germans actually kept 66% of their young, well equipped full time army - all be they all infantry divisions on their Western border at the out break of war and 43% of their overall army ( which means; including reservists) there too - though many of the latter were not well equipped but regardless; it would have required an enormous effort on the part of the French just to break through and an even greater effort to encircle and really maintain any advance given all bridges would have been blown up and it would have required plenty of trucks, pontoon bridges, air superiority etc. For sure; they couldn't have just walked in - it was far from undefended!!!
If you really like history I recommend Germany and the Second World War by Oxford University Press - written by German history academics who wrote them over the course of about 20 years having acquired access to the once communist held German War Archives - the detail in them is phenomenal!!! They WERE more than expensive - they were absurd!! About £300+ per volume!! HOWEVER - they have literally just been released in paper back for about £50 each ( and a good few are actually two books per volume so you get two books for your £50 ). FOR THE MOST PART they are very, very readable, meaning they're written in a way that's easy to read, not TOO ' academic' and it covers everything you can think of and probably more besides; I'm not too big on battles per se - I know who won Stalingrad etc I'm much more interested in the behind the front line issues and these books, whilst covering campaigns; Russia, North Africa, various U boat campaigns etc are much more focussed on what was behind those campaigns - what the shortages were, why they acted accordingly and it does cover all that; exact numbers of anti aircraft guns they had and when, U boat launches, u- boat losses, U boat losses per ton of shipping sunk; the tonnage war, aircraft losses, casualties, rations, manpower, the economy, recruitment issues, the resistance movement, the policing and administration - or lack of it, of the occupied territories and more besides nothing less than brilliantly! Free samples - often 100 pages or so, can also be found in Google books which is how I originally discovered them.
Does Germany really want to invade the Soviet Union in April 1942, when they run out of Fuel in August 1941?
They run out of fuel because they invaided the USSR
So they should had saved more fuel in that extra year to also commit a stronger fall blau
Idk to me only the fact they made an atomic bomb is unrealistic
The Germans were already running low on fuel in March of 1941 even though they had Romania of which they would have needed 4 to cover their shortfall
@@keanulukaspopken3299 they souldnt be that desparate of fuwl in 1942 without barbarrosa keep in mind that hitler was saving suplies for it and with a foul year where the whiermaht was doing basicaly nothing and still had the USSR as a trade partner along with romania they sould be stronger but an other unrealistic thing is the inability of the red army in the same yes campare with our timeline where the red army was literaly anailated was still capable of defending
They would have run out of Fuel with or without the invasion of the Soviet Union which would have meant a total collapse of both economy and armed forces. Hitler was going East to get Oil and Food in the first place. The Axis Oil shortfall in Europe was 15.000.000 tons, three times what they produced even with Romania. Later in the War they were on the defensive whivh meant they didnt really need a lot of Fuel.
@@x.pause__20 And in April of 1942 the situation was even worse with Panzer Divisions being basically unable to move
“Italy doesn’t invade greece” no that was gonna happen
I'm from Algeria and if I was born in the ww2 I'll fight with Germany
Meytal Yasser =|
Axel Andersson it's my opinion
lol do you even know what germany did ?
you r fucking small racist, so shut up n go watch naruto
Агрессивный Коментатор HhhhHhhhh dud I'm not racist I don't hate people I just hate the Jews :-D
You forgot that crucial point when Jar Jar Binks went to visit Berlin and inadvertently pressed a button and gave all the secrets of the Axis powers to the Allies thus preventing any of this from happening!
Who is Jar Jar Binks? Sorry I'm asking you that because I'm not an European but I'm interested in WW2 history.
Search it up
@@supratiksaha2001 you don't need to be european to know him. Literally half the world watches Star Wars. Jar jar binks is a star wars character. You should watch Star wars, it's really good brings back old memories when my dad took me to watch my first movie in 1999.
@@kavinraj8176 You maen it's not a historical character related to WW2 history?
Yeah till two elite SS guards sneak up behind him and throw him in a truck because he told some girl he thought was jewish but was to drunk to tell. Always account for Varible Change.... There was many occasions if axis powers won would be the results of imeadeit victory Exspecialy if syco Japan listened to Hitler and attacked Russia instead of Pearl Harbor but that's what happens when I go outside the Reich. Just can't expect them to be the same
Your first alternative history video and the most popular one.
It's easy, just make tons of Bob Semple tanks
Bruh thats from Kiwi island not Hitlerland
@@SirKarlIsTheMod thats how i Will call Germany from now on
Germany winning ww2 is simple. Don't bring Russia and America into the war. Crush resistance in North Africa and invaded the British Isles after months of starvation.
WhyNotZoidberg Absolutely! Adding Russia and America into the war almost guaranteed Germany's defeat. Taking on three superpowers at the same time was dumb.
WhyNotZoidberg Exactly. Divide and conquer.
How can you not realize that America was on the war from the start? Sending war materials and supplies into a warzone to prop up a faltering enemy is an act of war. No two ways about it.
WhyNotZoidberg That is stragetically impossible, the british navy finally started crushing u boats and defend its trading routes. Hitler attacked russia for there oil because thy were low on it. The battle of britain would be lost because RAF dominated the skies.
WhyNotZoidberg There were actually many ways for Germany to defeat the allies in ww2:
1: King Edward Albert Christian George or Edward VIII if he didn't abdicate the throne would have propably make the British Empire ally with Germany and then 'Merica wouldn't be involved in the war meaning after France surrendered WW2 would be over...And the invasion of the soviet union would be a totaly different war with 'Merica,Germany,the British Empire,Italy and Spain (and the French puppet) Invading to destroy communism...
2:If the germans discover nukes first as said above...
3:If Hitler listened to his generals and had spend more recources towards making a better airforce thus winning at the Battle of Britain, then 'merica wouldn't dare invade europe...then he would finish off the balkans quick not by attacking if possible but by establishing influence in the goverments of these countries or making coup'd etat,after finishing the balkan and waiting for the spring to come he would invade the soviets with better equipment and supply lines and he wouldn't attack the soviet civilians making Axis liberator at the eyes of many slavs, so he wouldn't have to face serious guerilla war and the soviets wouldn't have so many soldiers of slavs fleeing their homes to escape nazi persecution...thus hitler would have outnumber the soviets having 20.000.000 - 50.000.000 soldiers (from all of europe even slavs(ukranians mainly, but white russians too),the spainish would propably join him by then,and the soviets having 5.000.000 soldiers max every winter his army would fortify their posissions and wait,thus he would hunt them to siberia and capture them or killed them.After year 1946 lets say he would launch a joint invasion of 'Merica with the japanese who would propably had finnished off the chinese (BOTH the communists and the nationalists) with german (axis&puppets) help to libarate them from the jews.Thus 'Merica would had been completly surrounded forcing them to surrender or if they were stuborn and continue the war most of latin america would have join the axis side the german-americans in america could had secedded and most probably their nukes wouldn't cause significant damage(Germany most likely by then would had developed its own nukes) even if america somehow managed to bomb berlin or tokio that would only anger axis making the war losses of the 'Mericans much higher...
9:24 grade A photoshop
lol
ikr
Hitler's glowing head
I dont know why but i listen this every time i play hearts of Iron 4.
The world would be a much better place if Germany won!
They would bomb London, not Stalingrad.
No, that wouldn't be needed. If Germany kept the starvation going on Britain, there would be an easy invasion or a surrender. He wouldn't bomb Stalingrad either, since he had troops surrounding it. He would just need to keep a good encirclement force around them and push the other soviet lines. Stalingrad would easily be crushed by a much stronger German army than the one that invaded it in the real world.
Birgilios Marmaroglou Actually, no. They would've either bombed Stalingrad or Moscow as Hitler hated the Soviets.
Stalingrad was bombed to rubble. The reason they lost there was because they got surrounded after they entered the city and failed to guard their rear.
How would Hitler have kept his starvation on Britain? U-Boots were getting hard countered by the time the Brits had sonar/anti-sub destroyers/naval decrypts.
Category: comedy
Exactly!
Yes it is true but it looks like comedy
*Seinfeld theme*
You should make a second part to this. Like what life would be like in the 50s and 60s
Amazing great video 10/10
The outcome disappointed me, there is no way the germans would've let the french live without taking a lot of their land, besides there were plans to annex the netherlands and belgium into the greater german empire after the war and hitler would've been way more harsh against the soviets too, taking more lands. He would probably not have released so many countries while taking so little himself.
Germany could've won if they didn't fuck with Russia
Interracial Suspect lol I am sorry but 8 Russians had to die to kill a German soldier
sparda hellkin conscripts aren't the best at shooting.
USSR/German military losses were like 1,3 - 1,4 (11 mill and 8-9 mill).
USSR suffered from civillian losses ~ 20 mill.
I want you remember that it was a war of life and death for soviets. Don't compare it ti France occupation.
Sorry for my grammar.
It wasn't that they fucked with Russia it was that hitler was in charge of the army. If they had somebody who wasn't a physco and thought regionally they would've won.
Hitler saw Barbarossa as a preemptive defensive strike. Stalin was rapidly increasing the size of the Soviet Military and Hitler feared it was with intent to invade the rest of Europe much like Finland and the Baltics.
Well done! Even tho many smart-asses like to point out "wrongs" and such I think you made a lot of good points :)
This is good and all but Germany’s whole plan was to invade the USSR, Not invading the USSR in 1941 mean’t USSR would of been ready by the time they invaded.
maybe not completly but far better than in 41 i guess
@@tizi087
By 1942 the USSR would have almost entirely switched out their armoured corps for T-34s and KV-1s, the same tanks that the Germans feared coming up against because they couldn't kill the damn things with their light AT guns.
well done, really this is truly impressive, well done.
0:42 Really?
Polish decode German code system ENIGMA*
+Belnen Poles decoded ENIGMA code in 1932.
+Nate H. No no no it was the Navajo code talkers working closely with the greys. The greys felt bad that they gave Germany jet propulsion and violated the prime directive so they helped the allies with enigma. Also alien technology. Don't tell anyone though or they'll leave swastika crop circles in your girlfriend's pubes.
+Nate H. nah. the poles did. the brits even declassified secret documents to confirm it not so long ago. the brits like to take credit for more than they did.
+Belnen The Polish have had practibly no recognition of this. There was more than one Enigma and they were continually being improved and the codes becoming more difficult to crack. But without the Poles they would have been walking around in circles at Bletchley Park. The Soviets denied the Poles having any part in defeating the Nazis. They were even omitted from the VE Day celebrations in order not to annoy Stalin. The Poles were insulted by the movie"Enigma" with Kate Winslett with no mention of Poles, and the British were insulted by the movie "U571" where Harvey Keitel and Bon Jovi capture an Enigma on high seas almost single-handedly
+Gareth Whittaker Marian Rejewski, Henryk Zygalski and Jerzy Różycki have broken the Enigma, not Britain. GB cough British didn't brake the Enigma but Poles ;) If u still think, the GB broke the Enigma I rue ;/
Please watch Potential History's "Germany Could Not win WW2" to see why you're wrong.
I watched but that videos ( part 1 and 2 ) are only on about specific singular events. What if Germany did that or that. It was not one unsuccessful operation that led Germany to the defeat. It was multiple unlucky and unprepared attacks, defense battles,policies of Britain etc. I am aware this video here is pretty old and prepared with a terrible English. However if all the things mentioned on it were to be true Germany in ww2 had the chance. I suggest you to look up to the newer videos of this channel. Quality sure gone up.
@@justsomeone1153 ruclips.net/video/kVo5I0xNRhg/видео.html Within the first few seconds of TIK's video he pretty much destroys all your arguments.
@@justsomeone1153 Here's one just for shits
ruclips.net/video/Ed8fdX9LGlY/видео.html
Another armchair historian, no thanks.
*German bruhs intensifies*
Great Video
I feel this is literally the single most optimal situation possible. There is no way any of this could've happened. This is way to optimistic of a situation here.
always fun to speculate though.
No chance. Germany is TINY compared to the US and Russia. They just didn't have the resources. It was insanity from the start.
You mean, just like they "easily won" the First World War?
A genocidal totalitarian dictatorship dominating Europe! Fun!
@@johndeer5033 had no lendlease they had won
Ok guys I finally found it. The song is Warrior Strife by Jingle Punks.
Jonny Garcia darude sandstorm
Thank you!
Me: sees title
Also me: Boots up HOI4
1: Do not treat El Alamein like it’s a port, because it isn’t! It’s a railway station and by the time the Germans were in El Alamein there supply line was so stretched that they couldn’t continue the advance
2: The German had a fatal flaw in manufacturing, it wasn’t streamlined and it barely produced any tanks. The consistency was non existent in Germanys manufacturing of tanks in fact. But this also meant that the Soviets and the US had many times the amount of tanks then the Germans. This means that if then Germans were focusing on Egypt and North Africa then the Soviets would have more time to rapidly build up there arsenal to such an extent that the Germans couldn’t compete.
Oh and everything in this Senario is BS because the Germans didn’t have one key item which is: O I L
A lot of historical mistakes at the begining
igor lechoszest for its how germany could have won ww2 are you blind?
I initially thought WW2 was a one sided battle but it very, very close. A few bad mistakes cost them the whole war as it is demonstrated here.
+Bold Erdene Germans were stuffing us until USA came. Thanks USA.
+Conrad Price the U.S. of A. did not win the war on it's own, please stop.
Mylan Voskamp I didn't say it did.
+Mylan Voskamp
The Soviet would have lose if The USA didn't send Supplies!!
+John von Shepard That's true. It's a shame Germany allied with Japan which did nothing except bring USA in the war.
you said soviet counterattacks but the map didn't change wow good video
How Mussolini could have won
He cant
THE END
Main problem for the Axis, skilled politicians, incapable military leadership
Agree.
He could won by joining the Allies
Kill a commie for your mommy
@@theangry8876 give me a gun
this is the best world war 2 story, then in real life.
Japek34 "the best" for you maybe? little worthless piece of shit
Whats scary is that germany has better firearms now. With both the world best tank Leopard 2A5 and great anti tank/aircraft guns
+SapFireMC Lets hope the germans dont turn evil
But so do the rest of the world with the Swedish archer system and the Russian special forces and let's not forget the American drones
The Leopard 2A6 is now more commonly used. The Leopard 2A7+ is the newer generation and the Leopard 3 is in developement...
The Falkonett
... .-.
You think Germans would turn evil, well, perhaps centuries from now with "evil ideas" but they right now are surely a Western country that prisons people that talk or sympathize with Nazis, even the people there don't want to talk about Hitler.
from 2014-2023 I maniaclly watch this. I must stop.
I think it represent my war with obstacles which I face in my life.
I just looked at Ireland at the peace treaty and I'm like WHAT!!!!!!!!!
This video is like 'if Germany wins every single battle they could win the war' lol
also the west coast of America is near California not New York.
9:33 Haha new Europe? Germany would have taken all of Poland, Belgium, Germany and parts of France. And create some puppet states
yeah
Hitler peace offers was a ploy, to keep a country/s out of the war while they sorted things out before returning the attention back, remember he broke the peace pack a number of times, the Russian winter was Germany down fall on the eastern front it just got to cold for them. Germany got to big to fast also another downfall, bigger and more land they grab meant more to protect then you had the underground that to also took heavy tolls of Germany,it also meant more troops had to go to where the underground was operating. this would of been at the expense of the front line troops.
no single country can rule the world nor can it take on the world and expect to win. every one in history that as tried came undone in the end.
England and France made a big mistake, when Germany invaded Poland the borders along France, Belgium and Holland could not be defended by Germany. They should of just walk into Germany and the war would not of lasted very long
He wanted the whole of Europe and some more, His intention was to humiliate France and Britain for WW1. He was one of many of the Germans who thought ww1 was not over.
Its not Socialism it is Capitalism, I am a Socialist and I know Capitalist will do any thing to stop people having Socialism its international, it can never be nationalism, to be social to others = Socialism, Hiltler and his party was Capitalist of the worse kind extreme, you can run or own a business so long your are a party member, Capitalism for its own kind. I am not fooled by false lieing propaganda of the Fascist. He even joined up with Franco to destroy the Socialist in Spain. And I see you never read Marxs books, if you did then you would know Marx books are about Capitalism and all it failed system he even predicts people like Hitler would come along and tell lies to the people and give a false image to gain there trust. He wanted war from the start and he got it.
National Socialism is a lie to gain people trust, I just glad people in England are not easy fooled by it, people like UKIP BNP NF EDL will never get power here, they get seen off the same way as Mosley did.
No he did not he broke every agreement going, even when others like England allowed him to do it, he wanted more and more, if he wanted peace he would of stuck to the ww1 peace treaty and not break them, he should of gone to league of nations, he would of kept to the Geneva convention but he broke that to. the man wanted war from the start he was never going to comply to any peace treaty's, Poland was not his to march into but he did, They signed the agreement that made Poland a buffer zone. So please stop believing that national capitalist crap.
this video deserves a remaster
When you lost the main campaign, so you reset the game but with easy mode enabled
Very nice job. You have intrigued me.
The music seems nice, I wonder what they call it.
me 2
Jacob Griffin Richard Wagners music
outpostflags Doesn't seem so. What's it called? The music seems more modern and digital-ish-y-esque.
Jacob Griffin True....
How not to loose WW2 :
Step 1 : *Don't attack Russia*
End of tutorial.
but they were preparing to invade German controlled europe
End Marxism
1) West was stable and under control for Germans (70% of troops wew deployed East)
2) They did applied blitz tactics in Soviet Union
3) Decisive battle of KURSK
4) Germany got rekt.
that is simply not true...
this video used to have 10k views when i watched this, this guy had 1k subs. keep it up. Also Can U make more vids?
Love that picture at 9:26 Lol 🏹🤠👍.
There are no winners in war...
+Nvideon From a philanthropic point of view there isn´t, but speaking of nations there are winners. It took the USA and Russia two world wars to become superpowers, whereas the european powers that dominated for a couple of hundreds of years went self-destruct in two world wars. Both of them totally needless, by the way, as neither side is free from guilt on the outbreak of WWI, and without WWI there would not have been WWII. Nations can indeed rise and fall over the course of battles and war.
+Nvideon If you think about, both Germany and Japan won in the long run. The allies had learned from WWI that punishing the defeated enemy only leads to resentment. Instead, the allies built up West Germany and Japan after the war (because of their strategic importance in the cold war) and now both countries are economic superpowers because of it.
+Thomas Dineen ahahahah very good point... but remember what chorchill said..."Europe must keep USA in, Russia out and germany Down"(in terms of power)
+Nvideon Yes there are, the Richer get richer and poor get poorer or dead.
+Nvideon So if France invades Luxembourg no one wins? :'D
"England" didn't fight in WW2, Britain did.
Steven Gibb The two words are interchangeable. It is the same as saying the US, USA or the States, Burma (Manor), Persia (Iran), Iraq (Babylon), etc... No matter what name you prefer the two names describe the same country or land mass.
hackman669 - No it is not. Saying Wales and Scotland are interchangable with England is an insult. Britain is NOT England. I live in Britain and I am not English, I am Scottish. England is just one country within Britain, even if you are saying Britain (land mass) or The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. There is no definition of Britain that is just "England".
Wales is a country just like England and so is Scotland
@@stevengibb482 Even that I would say is wrong
I would say 'British Empire' is more appropriate considering how much manpower from British colonies was used
0:40 Poland decode enigma before WWII and tell this to GB
Lots of variables on display here but a very interesting point about a delayed Operation Barbarossa and Pearl Harbour attack. Give or take a few months and things could have been very different indeed.