How Could the Axis Won the War ?

What do you think the axis needed to do diferently to achieve final victory ?

They simply lucked common Goals.

Germany allowed Italy to drug them into a war in Greece (Balkans) and Africa and Japan to drug then into a war with USA.

What one should be asking is who actually lost most in WWII and that would be the British Empire. It went into the war as one of the biggest Empires the world had seen and come out of it a country that could not pay back the "lend lease" equipment they used...

I don't think there was any real way of actually winning the war for the axis. The odds were simply stacked againts them from the start.

USA would of entered the war anyways, even if Japan hadn't attacked.

I guess something could of been done if Japan had focused all it's millitary industry on land forces instead of navy with the hope of crushing the soviets, and Japan would attack the soviet union in the far east while Germany attacks it from Europe.

It would of helped if their allies were better i guess, Italian, Romanian forces weren't of very high quality.


If Germany didin't attack the Soviet Union and focused on invading Britain theres a very high chance the soviet union would of attacked eventually i still think that an attack in 1943-1944 would of happened. And then the soviets would of probably have fully modernized and a much more capable fightning force than they were in 1941-1942, while Germany would probably be dragged down by trying to invade Britain.

I don't think there was any real way of actually winning the war for the axis. The odds were simply stacked againts them from the start.

USA would of entered the war anyways, even if Japan hadn't attacked.

Really? On what basis do you make this reasoning?

I guess something could of been done if Japan had focused all it's millitary industry on land forces instead of navy with the hope of crushing the soviets, and Japan would attack the soviet union in the far east while Germany attacks it from Europe.

No no.

Japan had already had an adverse brush with the Soviets in 1938, from memory. Its direction was focussed on oil and a territorial hegemony, which required naval superiority.

It would of helped if their allies were better i guess, Italian, Romanian forces weren't of very high quality.

If my Aunt Fanny had balls, she would have been a man.. The Axis had what they had.

If Germany didin't attack the Soviet Union and focused on invading Britain theres a very high chance the soviet union would of attacked eventually i still think that an attack in 1943-1944 would of happened. And then the soviets would of probably have fully modernized and a much more capable fightning force than they were in 1941-1942, while Germany would probably be dragged down by trying to invade Britain.

The evidence is to the contrary, I think: if Hitler had invaded UK in 1940, he would probably have got to where he needed to to be.

I highly doubt if Stalin ever had a serious intention of attacking Germany within the time scale you set out, or at all.

Nazi zombies- that's how.

Really? On what basis do you make this reasoning?



No no.

Japan had already had an adverse brush with the Soviets in 1938, from memory. Its direction was focussed on oil and a territorial hegemony, which required naval superiority.



If my Aunt Fanny had balls, she would have been a man.. The Axis had what they had.




The evidence is to the contrary, I think: if Hitler had invaded UK in 1940, he would probably have got to where he needed to to be.

I highly doubt if Stalin ever had a serious intention of attacking Germany within the time scale you set out, or at all.

Im basing it on the fact that the US was already giving out lend lease stuff well before they etnered the war. Had it not been pearl harbor, it would of been something else, a german submarine would of sunken an american ship, and yadda yadda somehow they would probably get involved.

And you do know that the invasion of the UK in 1940 was essentially impossible , it would of taken years for germany to construct a powerful navy enough to challenge the british navy.

Germany would probably have won war if they:
1) Had eliminated Hitler and the other Nazis. This is the most important thing that they should have done. Hitler and the other Nazis took stupid decisions.
2) Had given supreme command to Manstein.
3) Japan should never have declared war on USA. This would have forced Stalin to keep the divisions that saved Moscaw (1941) in Siberia. At least Germany should not have declared war on USA, and this would probably have kept USA out of the war in Europe.

Other more concrete mistakes by the Germans were:
1) Hitler should have permit Guderian to eliminate the Brits in Dunkerque 1940.
2) Hitler should have permit Guderian to advance towards Moscaw directly after he captured Smolensk in August 1941 (and not towards Kiev).
3) They should have given winter equipment to Wehrmacht before the winter 1941-2.

spam more vet 2 grens

Japan had to declare War on USA to get the "first punch" in.
There was no way that their highly mobile & spread out strike forces could deal with a fully mobilsed US pacific & British fleet.
Their strategy was to knock the US fleet out then advance as quickly as possible to get the allies to sue for peace- therefore recognising their claims to Korea & Manchuria.
If they had advanced down the Kokoda track & taken Port Moresby in Papua it probably would have seen the British Empire giving up it's claims to most of Asia in order to preserve Australia & New Zealand.
However Japan's losses in Guadalcanal panicked their leadership & a withdrawal was ordered that proved to be disastrous to both morale & material loss. Japan never recovered from this and were on the defensive ever since.

I highly doubt if Stalin ever had a serious intention of attacking Germany within the time scale you set out, or at all.

Really? On what basis do you make this reasoning?

Really? On what basis do you make this reasoning?

Bcs I have neither read, nor heard of a serious study which suggested otherwise. Doesn't mean that may not exist ofc.

Your link to the contrary, please?

Im basing it on the fact that the US was already giving out lend lease stuff well before they etnered the war. Had it not been pearl harbor, it would of been something else, a german submarine would of sunken an american ship, and yadda yadda somehow they would probably get involved.

With respect, that is pure speculation. I agree FDR was making lend-lease available, but at a cost to UK.

And you do know that the invasion of the UK in 1940 was essentially impossible , it would of taken years for germany to construct a powerful navy enough to challenge the british navy.

I do not agree, sadly - what stopped the Nazis from invading UK in 1940/41 was Hitler. The same Hitler who allowed the remnants of the BEF to escape back to UK via Dunkerque, but without any of their outdated equipment

....if germany built the atomic bomb first

Hitler fucked up big time in Russia.

In my opinion they simply overdid it with Russia. After capturing France and Poland Germany already had a pretty decent amount of territory occupied. From this point they should have better taken a break and try to establish their position in a diplomatic way rather than trying to execute an entire religion, race or Russia.

First of all, while Germany was supported by all the resources they needed for war by Soviet Union, so they could really finish off the Britain (they lost BoB because of some stupid mistakes of Hermann Göring though) and then could easily take the Africa. With no annoying Britain and no reason to waste resources in Africa (and African oil) they could attack Soviet Union with a chance for a victory.

On the ost front - Germany had a great chance to win - while 'rasputitsa' and then winter didnt start Guderian tanks, as Guderian begged the Hitler, could attack and take the Moscow. In that time Moscow also wasnt prepare for defence and had no that 1 million army from Siberia. But, Hitler said "We cant go for a Moscow before we take Kiev, so turn your tank back" - yeah they took Kiev and surrounded another Soviet army but if they just took Moscow they really could finish the war). If Japan attacked SU on the east Stalin couldn't able to send the whole 1 million Siberian army to Moscow. It is 1 million army who highly specialised on winter war.
Germany should never declare war on US and Hitler should never take command on Eastern front - he did just huge mistakes. This guy just didnt know what to do. Sent tanks to one direction then turn it back then sent againt, made a really wide front, failed at Caucasus, didnt ordered to reatreat from Stalingrad. Then that retarded operation "Citadel" that was failed before it started.

Yeah, Germany had a chances to win the war, but they wasted it.

Secret jewish technology

Bcs I have neither read, nor heard of a serious study which suggested otherwise. Doesn't mean that may not exist ofc.

Your link to the contrary, please?

There are few studies, to say the most important search for books of :

Viktor Suvorow and his Icebreaker :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Suvorov

Mark Solonin and his work about first days of Operation Barbarossa and how USSR was preparing for a gigantic assault in 1941/1942:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Solonin

For telling if these are serious studies, I recommend reading few books from these two guys.
Theres also article about this controversy (that USSR was planning major assault on whole Europe (even some parts of Asia) and raised/supported German Nazis to weaken Europe before that attack) here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_offensive_plans_controversy

In my opinion they simply overdid it with Russia. After capturing France and Poland Germany already had a pretty decent amount of territory occupied. From this point they should have better taken a break and try to establish their position in a diplomatic way rather than trying to execute an entire religion, race or Russia.

i agree . Even so i believe russia would attack the germans anyways .