1941 Nazi Germany vs Soviets ALONE: Who would have won?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 13 ต.ค. 2024
- World War 2: what would have happened if in 1941, Third Reich Germany and Soviet Union had fought one on one, without any foreign help? Who would have won? Hitler or Stalin? And in situation what would have happened in the Pacific, between Japan and USA?
All This - Scoring Action di Kevin MacLeod è un brano autorizzato da Creative Commons Attribution (creativecommon...)
Fonte: incompetech.com...
Artista: incompetech.com/ Constancy Part 1 - The Descent di Kevin MacLeod è un brano autorizzato da Creative Commons Attribution (creativecommon...)
Fonte: incompetech.com...
Artista: incompetech.com/ Constancy Part 2 - The Descent di Kevin MacLeod è un brano autorizzato da Creative Commons Attribution (creativecommon...)
Fonte: incompetech.com...
Artista: incompetech.com/ Darkness is Coming di Kevin MacLeod è un brano autorizzato da Creative Commons Attribution (creativecommon...)
Fonte: incompetech.com...
Artista: incompetech.com/ Epic TV Theme di Audionautix è un brano autorizzato da Creative Commons Attribution (creativecommon...)
Artista: audionautix.com/ Gathering Darkness di Kevin MacLeod è un brano autorizzato da Creative Commons Attribution (creativecommon...)
Fonte: incompetech.com...
Artista: incompetech.com/ Martian Cowboy di Kevin MacLeod è un brano autorizzato da Creative Commons Attribution (creativecommon...)
Fonte: incompetech.com...
Artista: incompetech.com/ Night Runner di Audionautix è un brano autorizzato da Creative Commons Attribution (creativecommon...)
Artista: audionautix.com/ Opus One di Audionautix è un brano autorizzato da Creative Commons Attribution (creativecommon...)
Artista: audionautix.com/ Video Game Soldiers di Twin Musicom è un brano autorizzato da Creative Commons Attribution (creativecommon...)
Fonte: www.twinmusicom...
Artista: www.twinmusicom...
Churchill: "We shall never surrender"
Germany: And I took that personally
😂
Pretty much
STOP COPIEING MY NAME!!!!😠😠😠😠😠😠😠😠😠😠😠😠😠😠😠😠😠😠
@@trencidarko7271 you have problems
@@trencidarko7271 what is your name . Kid
I didn't know Siri was so knowledgeable of WWII history.
LOL
literally just say "Simon says dadada" siri would say it
В нас своя история..у Сири и ...кого то своя.
Lmao
XD
USA had no problem selling weapons to anyone willing to pay for them 😂🤣😂🤣
Nothing wong i can feel it
@@aaanjaaa feel*
What's so funny?
@@Jo-li2bi well because USA let every country to buy their weapon cuz you know USA need money
explain the lend lease
Nazi germany vs soviets alone
1/3 video is about what happened with UK and japan
Ahh..
Because its important...?
@@Irgendwelche5 nah
But still great
Historicism man.
Relevant
[13:21] *"Japan had no interest in Siberia as it is an endless forest full of bears."*
Now that's the pertinent analysis they just don't give you over on the History Channel!
bro siberia have a lot of Oil, that is a importend resoruces for japan since USA stop export Oil to Japan
@@AbdulRasyidPangrango-qr9dt yeah and full of endless forest,bear,and their army aren't that strong (weak)
@@afdhalulakbar5382 bro.. soviet win WW2 again german in Eropea. But soviet still habe 40% manpower in far east, they are not that weak
@@AbdulRasyidPangrango-qr9dt dude the entirety of the Allies especially the US gave USSR 1billion USD and tonnes of natural rwsources and supply to keep them alive.
@@ReclaimTheMainland what do you espect to the country that just trought Starving, WW1, Two revolution in 1 years, Civil Wars, military Officer purge, and WW2? After all Soviet pay it back after wars. If soviet having long peace and not surronded by enemy like USa, of course they dont need it
Fun fact, that August 5 1941 attack was Hitler's first attempt to encircle the Kiev pocket, but his generals not only didn't commit to it, but many actually opposed the idea.
At that point many high ranking German officers started realizing that the 'cauldron' tactics used to encircle so many Soviet divisions in Kiev, Brest-Litovsk, and Smolensk were actually slowing down German Infantry to the point where the encirclements weren't even worth it, sometimes German divisions would let the Soviets break out of their pockets to rejoin the frontlines simply because it was taking so much time to reorganize and continue their advance.
Not just the Generals,not even Hitler himself was sure if he really wants to delay caputing Moskow with that.(Since they had to divert Army Group Centre's tanks for the northern spearhead)He wait 19 crucial days to make the final Order
I think the “madman who caused the defeat” narrative is incredibly overblown. There was a lot of times Hitler’s personal orders saved lives, or caused great victories. He may have made a few blunders, but he had far more successes’ over failures.
@@lizzyregis I mean isnt the whole idea to circle them to take them out of the war? Turn them into prisoners or just kill them?
Oftentimes they try to outflank them then cut their supply lines off typical wartime strategy
Girls: OMG let’s do girls vs boys
Boys: Naz!s vs Soviets
Jajajaja ilegal with the full name
BULLSHIT
Naz¡s VS Soviets
@pepsi man dont forget
Capitalist pigs
@Wehrmacht nazi deutschland Based 😎
@@jeremiatampubolon6149 haha gblk para cewek2 selalu membandingkan cowok vs cewek haha
1 vs 1 would have been a no-contest. It took 3/4 of the whole world to take Germany down.
Giovanni Gavassino actually it would be a contest. The Soviets did most of the work, killing 8 out of every 11 Germans that were killed during the war. This also doesn’t take into account German oil shortages which stopped Germany from producing a mass amount of weapons. It also doesn’t take into account that Russia would have fought until the bitter end and it wouldn’t matter if they conquered even half of Russia. German supply lines would be so far extended and since they would eventually have to cross the Ural Mountains and river. Germany would never be able to force the ussr to surrender
@@ajaibsidhu6226 I do agree with your points, would be a fierce fight till the very end. Nonetheless, considering German's army was spread out on two major fronts and occupied countries, USSR had a massive lendlease of equipment with the best technology from the Allies, I still think they could pull it off, even in a war of attrition. There is a reason while almost all historians believe Germany lost the war because of the two fronts opened. Still, I do agree that it would be a very bloody war, with no real winners due to incredibly high losses. Indeed I highly respect Russian army and their efforts.
@black ops zombies lend lease indeed
The Soviets had a lot larger industry so they could just outproduce Germany by itself
@black ops zombies are you actually that stupid? The Soviet Union WITHOUT american lend lease had still 2x more Tanks than germany. America helped them but not nearly as much to really be imporant in the war. Its not Soviet Propaganda but actually fucking History. They mightve not had the same industrial capabilities as the Germans or the USA, but their doctrine didnt rely on Quality, but on Quantity, which was a decisive factor for them. *... Hopkins stated the following: "We never believed that our help lend-lease is the main factor in the Soviet victory over Hitler on the Eastern front. It was achieved by heroism and blood of the Russian army."* - Actual Quote from Harry Hopkins, one of the closest persons to F.D.R. who helped him design the New Deal.
Quit your American bs and dont tell others to Learn history if you yourself cant take it neutral.
That would make a good hoi4 mod
Huntet Hunter there is one, its named war in the east
So who win
Sovimany
Yes, but that's really it. The Video is Bullshit.
Hidde Boland
“DREW DURNIL!!!”
Even as a Russian, I believe if it was a 1v1 we would have lost.
Winter:am i a joke to u
You are not a Russian
Joseph Stalin we don’t have to lose as many soldiers as we did, the Americans captured the first German city in WW2. The city of Aachen fell to the Americans and was the first German city to fall in WW2, mainly because the Americans used small groups of men clustered on the battlefield. Germans that fought in Aachen said it was the most unpredictable things the Americans did, that caught them off guard. Also if you look into it RAF and American bombers destroyed the majority of German factories, and industry and economy. Also note that T-34 tanks where actually built on American machinery, and factories built by American contractors brought in during the late 30’s by Stalin, not many people know that.
Joseph Stalin We also used a lot of British Aircraft, also before we invaded Berlin we had the Americans bomb Berlin the night before. Certainly we did are part against the Germans, but we used everything we had while they still had men on the western front and in Africa Italy etc etc. The Germans lost millions and millions less men than we did, because their Generals where the greatest on earth, their pilots like Erich Hartmann shot down 352 Soviet aircraft alone and was the top ace. Also for every panzer lost, 70 T-34’s where lost. In a pure 1v1 Germany would have won, the Soviet Union depended on American money British aircraft and other American goods even top Soviet generals admitted to that in the 50’s after the war.
Joseph Stalin it’s also insane to think France and Britain wanted to attack the Soviet Union right after the war and although I dislike Americans, they where the only ones that respected are hard fight and disagreed because Churchill was a mad man by 1945
What I do like about this video. Is that it takes in consideration that "an army cannot fight with boots and guns only. It needs food too." And even with the stretched supply lines Germany would have far less problems with keeping their armies supplied. And Stalin did consider peace talks until late 1942. And had been willing to give up the Baltics, Belorussia and Ukraine for a peace between Germany and the USSR.
Hitler was so stupid not to take this. Thats an insane amount of resources if Hitler just accepted that. Ukraine is particular is the breadbasket of Europe and theres plenty of oil there too.
@@nemanjajovanovic8295 Pretty sure Ukraine and the Baltics would have been enough if you look at the line he drew across the map. Sure no Caucuses region but the best land is truly the Ukraine and the Baltics. Hell Russia stole the Baltics and Ukraine anyways, it just changes hands. Hell, had the German Army gone into Ukraine as liberators they would have had a working and dedicated populace with full support against the Russians. This alone would of freed up at least 75K 2nd line troops from Partisan duty.
@@JuergenGDByou can’t go in as liberators if you see the people as less than animals. Mustache guy still should’ve taken it
No? Stalin would never consider peace, because this war was not just a conflict for land and resources, but an extermination war. If USSR surrendered, tens of million would be executed
@@RoCK3rADhe could've came up with some bs like the Ukrainians are honorable Aryans or the Ukraine was the real Russia "kievan rus"
No allies for the Soviets
*Winter has joined the server*
Winter: Allow us to introduce ourselves
winter: i got you fam
To be honest if Nazi Germany and Soviets fought eachother alone and the winter wasn't there for Soviets, there's a chance Nazi Germany could've won that war...
YE ALL TALK ABOUT THE NUMBERS OF DEAD LIKE YE ALL BEEN THERE SEEN EVERY THING AND COUNTED AND DOCUMENTED . EVERY 10th YEAR NUMBERS KEEP CHANGING LOWER HIGHER AND LOWER AGAIN . SO WHY DO WE ALL BELIEVE IN HISTORIANS EXPERTS AND ARCHIVE ?????
@@reptiloidx8942 the weather does change but the change isn't significant. Since it still goes Below freezing.
But we are both alcoholics, why should we fight?
We should learn from our mistakes, unite and liberate west from zionist terrorists in power.
@@user-vy2hv5pp7k ✌👌
For money power
@@deVeresd.Kfz.1515 It was not Stalin's fault, you do not understand. He was a God's scourge against Bolshevik terror. His purges in 30s eliminated almost all original Jewish Bolsheviks. He was a ruthless leader but he was necessary for Russia to survive.
Kevin DeVere Damn right
6:22 After what the Soviets did to Finland in 1939 / 1940, Finland would definitely have joined the Germans, anyway.
Same with Romania, after the Soviet invasion of the Romanian Eastern province of Bessarabia.
[later edit] Not to mention that Romania had the oil that German panzers needed so badly (at least until the German conquest of the Russian-controlled oil fields in Caucasus).
Finland was russian empire, and soviets gave ir independence in 1917, you dumb fool. Nothing was done to finland in 39
@@neptunefog6082 Are you autistic in 1939 the Soviets bombed Helsinki and invaded without any justification.
@@neptunefog6082 Yeah, absolutely nothing ... except invading it and then stealing a large piece of its land, YOU DOLT.
antred11 Finland was part of the Russian empire before 1917, so ussr did not “steal” anything. In 1917 Lenin signed finland’s “application” or declaration on independence and soviet russia acknowledged finland independency ( first country to do so). From 1917 till 1922 , during ww1 and ussr civil war at the weakest moment for the russian country, finland used the moment and was the aggressor , started a war and occupied lands of russia ( ussr) that had never been part of Finnish Duchy ( part of Russian empire) in belief of so called Great Finland by the finnish nationalists. In 1938 ussr had secret negotiations with finland, supposing that germany plans an attack on ussr, ussr suggested a pact with finland : in case nazis attack finland, that finland does not join the nazis and does not let the nazis onto finish territory while ussr supports finland to fight the nazis off. Finland refused the pact. Then ussr suggested an exchange: finland gives to ussr key territories for ussr border protection in exchange for karelia that Finland wanted. Finland refused again, even though there was no sense it that refusal. Finland refuses all other reasonable suggestions not to facilitate nazis attack on ussr. Finland left no choice to ussr. In 1939 Ussr had to move the borderline with this traitor country as far as possible before ww2. Finland was land-hungry, that’s all, and took the convenient side in ww2. They also were anti-Russian, since they always had territorial claims on russia/ussr. Finland wanted russian lands, this is why they sell themselves to nazis.
Soviets did not commit any war crimes in Finland. Finland on the contrary took part in 1941-1942 leningrad blockade to starve people to death which is a war crime.... You know only the convenient part of history, you are brainwashed like most westerners
I've watched all of your videos and I have to say. That they're all thought provoking and great source of What if or an look into an alternate universe. So keep up the great ideas, my good sire.
“If your losing a battle, throw more men in it”
-Stalin Maybe.
That explains why the Germans used kids and teenagers in the battle of Berlin lmao
if you see a panzer send 500 men to die against it to destroy it
-Joseph Stalin
@@joekaputt4415 I never said nunna this shit
- George Washington
@@sooryan_1018”Wtf is all this shit?”
-Sun Tsu in 2024, probably
"Slowly return to democracy."
That only happened to Franco's Spain because it was pressured geopolitically from all sides by EU/NATO, with a new and solid Fascist bloc in Europe democratisation wouldn't have happened after Hitler's death - not even after attempts at gradual subversion. Germany could have at least carved out Byelorussia as a satellite out of the USSR as well., otherwise fantastic video.
In Spain we returned to democracy when Franco died, we signed the Marshall plan and thus we were not touched (idk what would have happened in this other reality)
actually nvm, I had not finished the video and didn't understand the context of what you were saying
daniel Gcos fascism only thrived because the people of germany were poor and desperate and angry following the First World War and the treaty of Versailles, this chaos and turmoil in German politics is what drove people to ideological extremes such as fascism. Now that Germany have won and the anger of the people have been satisfied, there is no reason for Germany to go to war again. And with this low war support it would be incredibly difficult for the nazi’s extremist popularism to survive. Ultimately Germany would have to descend into moderatism.
Facist regimes don’t last very long look how long it took Russia to get rid of communism
I would say - here neo-Nazis masturbate tirelessly to their sick fantasies :>
At the end of the video you said that USA, germany, and USSR test their atomic bombs. How the USSR test their atomic bomb if they were invaded, then they were split, then a civil war, and then internal divisions. I think its not possible. The cold war will be between USA and Germany.
Yeah in that alternate timeline russia devestate so much
and by the way either soviet union or the US wouldn’t have the material or the Knowledge for creating that bomb. (There are some books about the German atomic facilities at Jonastal. Still a restricted area).
But the Germans wouldn’t have „heavy water“ from Norwegian factory.
Uran would be found at Kongo, but that’s an British colony. Will they sell?
@G E T R E K T 905
You should ask Pagaun G, he wrote about that.
China could develop atomic bombs even before being an economic power, ae goes with North Korea.
U can argue they had soviet support, but I think they would have gotten it sooner or later anyway
Civil wars can reinforce countries, especially the army
11:45
I tought it was one of those bad advertisement for an android game or something
With 6900 tigers II tank you could conquer the world...love it
nukes tho
mermaidboy89 tsar bomba
They would probably break before the borfer.... Heavy tanks are only good on the defensive battles.
Everything financed with fiat money. Created out of thin air. It is time for an anarchistic society. I use Bitcoin / Monero.
germanys nuke was in hiroshima and Nagasaki
and 1000 ME 262
Better we🇩🇪 drinking with the 🇷🇺 thats better for all 😁😁😁🍺🍺🍺
Me and the boys uniting to stop USA from world domination
Make booze, not war)
Maybe 🇰🇵
Star Trek Theory fuck that
The war over the drink. Beer or vodka?
In resume: Oil shortages were only a thing because the british enforced a naval blockade, the video explains how half of the luffwaffe was expended on the western front, how the production equivalent of 6900 tiger II tanks was used to make U-boats to try to emulate the british blockade and starve them into surrender aswell a 25% of the total artillery and ammo production being used on western anti-air defenses
The eastern front might have sucked most of the manpower, but the western front sucked most of the resourses
It said 7k tigers. Tigers didn't exist in 1942. They could have made panzer IV though
@@opperturk124 Yeah i forgot to add that, panzers were not heavy tanks like the tigers but were cheaper so there would be a whole lot more than 7K
@abdullah slhllr I wish i had a good pc to play on :(
And we think that Russia alone won the war and allies only joined in 1944 when Germany was retreating blah blah she also forgot to tell one of the best commander Erwin Rommel and africa korps engaged in africa
The reality is that allies already joined in 1939
@@ericvonmanstein2112 Yup, basically naval production it's super expensive compared to anything land-based, that's the most important bit
My biggest enemy:
WINTER
Just copy this name and your god Deutsche Brüderschaft
No it’s not, it’s lack of supplies, oil and manpower
GSG Deutschland Come, we will give you teeth again and break as our grandfathers did. For hundreds of years you went to us with your sword. And now you have migrants
BIGGER ENEMY FINNISH WINTER MUHAHAHAHA
So ist es... Immer genug Sauerkraut essen... Es gibt dir Kraft
14:28 What really helped the USSR weren't the things they used for fighting, but things that help fighting, like spare parts of a vehicle, food, etc. Stalin and Zhukov both admitted that without Lend lease it would have been difficult if not impossible to win.
The lend lease represented around 3 percent of the soviet material, and the american tanks were really crappy.
The americans contributed mostly with jeeps, nothing too important.
@@ruka3219 americans contributed in places like food, among other things.
Sherman M4s were quite popular among soviet tankers because they were more reliable and refined. their guns were weak but they have the IS-2 for that, who cares
American planes were used often, and Valentine light tanks were used inn place of crappy T-60
@@ruka3219 zhukov admitted that without the lend lease it would have been much difficult if not impossible to win the war.
@@ruka3219 Tldr at at the bottom
"I want to tell you what, from the Russian point of view, the president and the United States have done for victory in this war, the most important things in this war are the machines.... The United States is a country of machines. Without the machines we received through Lend-Lease, we would have lost the war."
That is what Joseph Stalin said about American lend lease. Hell even Nikita Khrushchev confirmed that Stalin expressed those views. "If the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war, one-on-one against Hitler's Germany, we would not have withstood its onslaught and would have lost the war. No one talks about this officially, and Stalin never, I think, left any written traces of his opinion, but I can say that he expressed this view several times in conversations with me."
According to an essay for RFE/RL's Russian service by Boris Sokolov "In a hypothetical battle one-on-one between the U.S.S.R and Germany, without the help of Lend-Lease and without the diversion of significant forces of the Luftwaffe and the German Navy and the diversion of more than one-quarter of its land forces in the fight against Britain and the United States, Stalin could hardly have beaten Hitler, it should be remembered that during World War I, the transportation crisis in Russia in 1916-17 that did a lot to facilitate the February Revolution [which lead to the abdication of the tsar] was caused by a shortage in the production of railway rails, engines, and freight cars because industrial production had been diverted to munitions," Sokolov wrote. "During World War II, only the supplies brought in by Lend-Lease prevented the paralysis of rail transport in the Soviet Union. In order to really assess the significance of Lend-Lease for the Soviet victory, you only have to imagine how the Soviet Union would have had to fight if there had been no Lend-Lease aid," Sokolov wrote. "Without Lend-Lease, the Red Army would not have had about one-third of its ammunition, half of its aircraft, or half of its tanks. In addition, there would have been constant shortages of transportation and fuel. The railroads would have periodically come to a halt. And Soviet forces would have been much more poorly coordinated with a constant lack of radio equipment. And they would have been perpetually hungry without American canned meat and fats."
Georgy Zhukov himself was even monitored by the KGB to have said "People say that the allies didn't help us. But it cannot be denied that the Americans sent us materiel without which we could not have formed our reserves or continued the war. The Americans provided vital explosives and gunpowder. And how much steel! Could we really have set up the production of our tanks without American steel? And now they are saying that we had plenty of everything on our own."
Tldr; The real significance of Lend-Lease for the Soviet war effort was that it covered the "sensitive points" of Soviet production gasoline, explosives, aluminum, nonferrous metals, radio communications, and so on. Under Lend-Lease, the United States provided more than one-third of all the explosives used by the Soviet Union during the war. The United States and the British Commonwealth provided 55 percent of all the aluminum the Soviet Union used during the war and more than 80 percent of the copper. It also sent aviation fuel equivalent to 57 percent of what the Soviet Union itself produced. Much of the American fuel was added to lower-grade Soviet fuel to produce the high-octane fuel needed by modern military aircraft. American aid also provided 4.5 million tons of food, 1.5 million blankets, and 15 million pairs of boots. It shipped 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 aircraft, 8,000 tractors and construction vehicles, and 13,000 battle tanks and 180 billion USD (In today's currency).
@@gaminglichgamer4035 you deserve way more likes you literally wrote a SA
Never again war with our russia brothers...
GERMANY + RUSSIA
Little do you know that Goths and Slavs hate each other for thousands of years.
Ussr + germany = nazi union?
@@โชกุนเกมเมอร์-ฤ7น no soviet reich
No, Berliner Pakt or Pact of Iron and Work or something like that
Brothers ?! 😂😂😂😂
Girls locker : ew I hate P.E omg what is that
Boys locker :
This video leaves out an important part:
Some of the USSR countries could have switched sides to get freedom, imagine, for example, if Caucasus switched sides and helped Germans to get to Baku oil reserves in exchange for freedom, bet Germany would love it.
This is pretty realistic, taking into account their plans on Caucasus.
@Kwen he did say “some”, not all, not with direct support from Germany, could’ve been Kazakh revolt. and he used the Caucasus not Ukraine or Byelorussia as an example because it would’ve supplied Germany with desperate needed oil smart fella
ahahahahahahahah
@@sgtreznov9869 completely deconstructed his argument there good job.
To OP.
"Some of the USSR countries could have switched sides to get freedom, imagine, for example" That is impossible. The nazi ideology means all those countries and their people are considered "lesser people" by them. Fact is that this is *exactly* what happened in the Ukraine; Belarus and many other Soviet republics. At first the people believed they won their "freedom" from Stalin. Then they quickly learned that Stalin's police-state prison was better than the nazi extermination camps. They could play charades with Stalin and get spared. They could play no charades with the nazis who considered them "sub-human". You're speculating if Nazi Germany would offer those states "freedom" when this something that isn't even considered among the nazis.
" bet Germany would love it. " No, because they are not fooling anybody with their ideology at this point (even Imperial Japan and Fascist Italy had serious qualms siding with it) and they're NOT into offering people they loathe any kind of bargain. The only country they offered some sort of fair deal were the British following the fall of France. For everybody else it was simply conveyed as "You do exactly as we say or else..." Historically this has *never* been a good way to convince other people you're their friend and ally.
And Caucasus isn't a country. Neither is it populated by people the nazis consider "worthy".
Last of all, what could Nazi Germany *possibly* offer the people of Caucasus to make them consider "switching sides" ?? HOW are they going to get these assurances??
@@McLarenMercedes Tbf Japan did some terrible shit that was probably equal to the nazis if not worse. During the rape of Nanking a Nazi ambassador (I forget what he actually was so ambassador it is) openly protested it and went around stopping rapes in progress. Of course he is just one person and not all Nazis would have done that. But yeah I don’t think Japan really cared. Other than that I agree with what you said.
I honestly think people minimize how close this war actually was and the dire consequences of a german victory I appreciate everyone actually doing there part. Imagine the number of soviet casualties without allied strategic bombing if the soviets could have even survived long term Every partizan every soldier every pilot did there part.
Yes. At one point the Nazis had overrun nearly 2% of Russian territory. Before they retreated.
@@annoyingbstard9407 Imagine if the Russians where like you and didn't put there industry on trains.
@@annoyingbstard9407 I think you are likely to stupid to understand land is useful for defense only if its defended and you can make bullets to defend it otherwise it should be made inhospitable .
Soviet casualties were really mounting up when the Germans were on the losing side so I think a German victory may be beneficial to the world. No Soviet means no Cuba, North Korea and most importantly, no communist China either, a better world.
😊😊😊
@@zdynasty7975 fuck no
As for the Pacific war in World War 2, the United States would have still prevailed against the Japanese with no assistance. The American strategy for winning against Japan would more than likely have been different but arriving at the same results. Every senior Japanese commander knew that challenging the Americans could only be effective for 6 months,at most, before the American factories were able to outproduce the Japanese Empire on a massive scale. Both the Nazis and the Japanese made the same strategic blunder in expanding their empires far beyond the capacity fo their military forces to hold them.
I agree.
Wrong. America had the japanese naval, military and diplomatic Cypher decryption in 1940. America wanted Japan to attack and knew it.
By late 44 the US was producing a fleet carrier (Large ones like Enterprise) every month and at least 5 Escort Carriers per month.
They also had the population to train and rotate pilots in and out of combat.
Tbh if Germany didn't declare war on the U.S, the Germans wouldn't have spent so much money on the Atlantic Wall and they could've sent more men to the east as well as resources.
@@JL-XrtaMayoNoCheesewrong, with nothing to back your claim up.
Finally! you release the new video! I’ve waited for this video was released for months.
Stalin had a son called Svetlana? Errr... she might have corrected you on that...
She became transgender
Svetlana in history: Stalin's daughter
Svetlana I know: a sledgehammer used to pound meats
@@darrelarno9151 is boris
@@darrelarno9151 BORIS
Wasn't his name Yakov/
One on one Germany wins against anyone. Germany faced 3 super powers.
Why is it that literally any other timeline seems better than our own?
Because in no other circumstances war drag itself longer than 3 years and causing exaustion to anyone even to those do not involve themselves with war.
every alternative timeline better than our own you say? hm... american civil war won by south? guess that would be a good alternative right?
i dont think that the slavic people woud not like to get enslaved and shit
A bit idealist at the end maybe, nevertheless an enjoyable senario and video
@@rock3tcatU233 Even if so, how about the states economy end up? How strong the state would be? How about crimes that are commited by non blacks?
I havent started it yet but i feel like the third reich will conqure russia.
The ultimate battle between fascists and communists.
Facist for god
Capitalism❤️
Wtf man, Germany was not a fascist
Nazis v Communists
@The Paranoid What qualifies as fascist in the modern era?
I know this is a Russian saying this so some here doesn't mean anything but Khrushchev said:
`I would like to express my candid opinion about Stalin's views on whether the Red Army and the Soviet Union could have coped with Nazi Germany and survived the war without aid from the United States and Britain. First, I would like to tell about some remarks Stalin made and repeated several times when we were "discussing freely" among ourselves. He stated bluntly that if the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war. If we had had to fight Nazi Germany one on one, we could not have stood up against Germany's pressure, and we would have lost the war. No one ever discussed this subject officially, and I don't think Stalin left any written evidence of his opinion, but I will state here that several times in conversations with me he noted that these were the actual circumstances. He never made a special point of holding a conversation on the subject, but when we were engaged in some kind of relaxed conversation, going over international questions of the past and present, and when we would return to the subject of the path we had traveled during the war, that is what he said. When I listened to his remarks, I was fully in agreement with him, and today I am even more so.`
that's interesting, didn't know that
Nope, Germany lacked oil and natural resources, as well as military strength and equipment. The US would have crushed Germany one on one.
@@rs72098 though without the UK that would have been much more difficult..invading from North Africa?
KingJustice98 - The question was not the US, the question was Russia WITHOUT US AID.
where did you find this statement by krushhev ?
Very nice video! It shows that you don't need a gigantic budget to make a quality video on TH-cam - just brains, time and effort! Good job, zvallid!
I think Barbarossa had a better chance of success than Sea Lion. Britain is well defended by a sea. The USA are an impregnable fortress, separated by two oceans from any potential enemy. I think even if we start the "what if" at June, 1941 (not 1940, for example) - Germany could have won if some things (realistically) were different.
I agree Barney. Maybe if BEF was not allowed to escape Dunkirk...but still, even German invasion of Norway using Destroyers was very costly. Plus RAF was superior to Luftwaffe and we know what air superiority does.
So I just woke up
And I see zvallid has uploaded
My man you have MADE my day
Lol same story here
I think Germany during the WW2 was overpowered, it takes the greatest two forces on earth USA and Soviet together along with Great Britain and the rest of Europe countries to take them down
If it was one on one no army could have defeated Germany
So overpowered we had massive nerfs in natural ressources, allies, and manpower.
USA could've beaten Germany in a long fight because they can't touch our homeland, and if they tried to invade they would have to fight a bunch of American Gangsters, Hunters, hobby shooters, cowboys, along with the military. We barely had a military at the beginning, and we had the best production, eventually we would overwhelm them.
@@mushroom11g55
Maybe but it's the same goes with opposite, I mean USA alone may win but that will cost them a lot of time, blood and money, but having great British, Soviet Union, France and many other countries and not mentioning those who Resist against the Nazis from inside as well
Britain were above the USA at that point it was only after the war when the US took the second spot off world power
@@arrow3123 nuclear bomb bruh.
WW3
McDonald’s vs Burger King
Hamburger vs Lettuce
Number 15 burger king foot lettuce
T series vs pewds
Mobile Cyclop series won
Pepsi vs coke ww4
This is interesting. Have read a lot about the Eastern Front during the Second World War. It is these "what ifs" make one wonder how much things may have been different. Thank you for sharing it.
I didn't know Stalin had a son named Svetlana
@@paulwhite760 sons, not son
Daughter
@@zvallid th-cam.com/video/EnQ_3anpWQk/w-d-xo.html
Daughter, he hated his drunken son. He had the other one shot because he gave up and got captured.
Nirad802 she had a relationship with a jewish photographer that made Stalin angry and Stalin expulsed the jewish photographer to a gulag in a artic island in 1943.
Germany was fighting all 4 countries at the same time and he split himself making himself weaker.
That’s why he struggled to the very end
Yes. Germany did very well too. Amazing the amount of tech and organization of the armies they were able to pull off. Imagine if the US GAVE GERMANY THE LEND LEASE? Europe would've been Germanys.
True
@@thediaz07 Never in any world where FDR is President would Germany get a lend lease... thank the Lord. Which wouldn't have helped Germany much. They had more than enough weapons.
@@BeniTheTesseract what? Production of those said weapons is the key. Imagine the luffwaffe on steroids? Or kreigsmarine?
@@thediaz07 Without the manpower or fuel to fly them? Good luck
Without the 250,000 trucks the US gave to the Soviets, their logistical chain would have been even poorer than the German one, despite the much longer distance the Germans had to manage. This alone would have greatly altered the outcome of the war, let alone many other factors, such as Germany not being decimated from the air by British and US saturation bombing of industry and civilians.
Damn so the usa really bailed russia out and yet russia thinks they took germany out all by themselves. Hell no. Germany would have murdered them if it didnt face the obstacles it did.
bull
@@TheRealBillBoball talk, nothing to back your shit up.
Correct. The Soviets were a western welfare state.
@@TheRealBillBobIts true!
Finally! I’ve waited for 4 months to watch this video and finally it's released!
ROK Ball, go and watch any American war movie, is much better that all this crappy video. What a waste on time. You must be the most simplistic guy in the whole world, expecting that the past be changed by these morons that made the video. Poor empty brain guy. That war is over and possibly another one is coming produced and directed by the president of the USA, mr Trump. Let's see if anyone is left alive on the Earth to make moronic videos.
ramon roman Stop trolling around here. If you want to troll to others why won’t you go somewhere else?
ROK Ball
@@ramonroman8076 Bwhahaha 😂
Your response is proving my point. The only people that likes this moronic video is people like you, with a brain with no neurons. Why don't you give a response with at least something that can be understood by a worm? You bloody can't, you love nonsense.
"two Stalins sons - Vasily and Svetlana" made my week:)
I think it's very interesting the fact that Britain's choice ,if they want peace, changed the whole world!
@G E T R E K T 905 Well yes but Britain would have had to surrender to Hitler, not exactly a terrific deal.
@G E T R E K T 905 but what makes you think you Hitler won't go back on his word like he did with Munich agreement and all the other treaties and pacts he's violated?
@G E T R E K T 905 Do you seriously think so? damn
@G E T R E K T 905 Why on Earth would you surrender peace with the tragic war crimes Germany committed constantly??
And with a ruler that clearly was never going to stop no matter what. Peace meant nothing to Hitler. Nor did any rules of engagement in War. Hell even humanity to its most basic level meant anything to him.
Couldn't be me to yield to an evil tyrant like that. Churchill saw it. He was the one we finally needed to act on that, we'd already allowed more than enough to go down by then.
@G E T R E K T 905 Nothing even anywhere near on the same level as the mass killings of Jews, homosexuals etc. The gas Chambers, what both Germany & USSR did with the constant mass executions to the already surrendered Polish.
Although two wrongs do not make a right, Hitler was immeasurably worse in both action and intent and needed to be stopped, a man that wanted the entire World so he could destroy everybody in it.
"And 2 of his sons - Vasilij and Svetlana."... no comments
Svetlana was a very pretty.....boy?
Just one of about "one billion 800 thousand" errors!
Yup, yup, dude
"Hitler and Mussolini die at the same day in 1964" holding hands in same bed.
WOW good one, I would not give a comment like this a like most of the time but wow so good.
I ship it
I would say - here neo-Nazis masturbate tirelessly to their sick fantasies :>
The men did not really like eachother though
@ShapeShifter The Name of The Song is Action Hero From Jingle punks
NO WAR PLEASE ,BOTH GOT HOT CHICKS AND AWESOME BANDS
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE HLC .
Bands go to Germany but chicks maybe Russia? lol
@@martinmueller4240 classic dude
Whoowh your right dude
But wait we dont want bands or hot chicks we want victory and powerrrrrr hahhahhahhaaaa. Сука
the most realistic simulation!! thanks for the video
I really wanted to watch this video, but the computer voice was too much for me. Can't you find someone to do a voice-over?
just turn the volume off lmao
@@Dietsch_ :- I did, & the video!
@@blueeyeswhitedragon9839 lol
His real voice is much worse
@@Dietsch_ heyyy my clone!!
I haven't seen such a greatly made and very interesting video like this for years!! Each consideration you made was perfect!
Well done
Yes it has been years and years and years and never has there been great video as such as this! And now it is here! It is with great joy that I enjoy the wonderous new video!
NO it was not. 1. Even without lendlease, Germans would not have been able to pull the thing off within 1 year.
2. The main goal for the Barbarossa Offensive have been the important caucasus oilfields.
But yes, with free access to world ressources without the british blocade and without the allied bombing, the Sovjets would have had it way harder to defeat Germany
@@markusz4447 Germany wouldn't need to go for the Caucasus in this since they had trade from the west due to no blockade or two front war.
the germans would have won easy.if they were only fighting russians.
@@nubitynub1757 of course they would. Would you think that, even in this scenario, they would want to remain fully dependent on foreign oil exports for the upcomming expansion?
Expansionism was part of their political Agenda.
I do know that it was possible to produce fuel from their synthetic raffineries, but that is highly ineffective and expensive as well.
Besides I think that it is a bit unrealistic for the Germans cede Belgium in a peace deal as it is the only way to any offensive against France... (no way through the Maginot)
Also no war with Britain/France/US would not mean unlimited access to markets they are controlling.
I am not a foreign speaker so excuse me if there are a few misleading phrases ^^
seems about right to me
edit: my username used to be adolf hitler
Too bad,muricans won in the end and both of us lost.
@@tsarnature6587 Your php and username is Joseph Stalin. The irony hurts so much.
@@stalingaveusanorder6262 Sorry comrade,I dont use capital letters because I hate capitalism.
@@tsarnature6587 How did Murica win?
Megumin they won by sending a fuckton of supplies to the allies in which they were in and kinda booty raped Germany, and in the Cold War democracy won following the collapse of the USSR. So in the end I guess Murica kind of did win lol.
America has turned fascist.
Oh shit!
German let's the "Desert Fox" General Rommel loose on Russia. Russia would still be speaking German today.
the suicide choice that Hitler made was stopped attacking Britain instead invading Russia. He should take Britain first. then there would be no ground holding for Americans later on Europe . strategical failure for Germany. if he really want Russia land, he could do that later, after united west euros.
Yes. The "strategist Hitler" decided that opening a war on multiple fronts was a smart idea. In history that has never worked. But apparently Hitler thought that "this time it will be different!". You know you're in trouble when you start believing your own propaganda about "weak and degenerated enemies" and base your military strategy on wishful thinking.
Keep dreaming boys, Nazi's are gone !!
I think he tried lol
You show extreme ignorance
Stalin was creeping up to the west,he had to go in and send him running.
"They attacked Finland"
Me: *"Awww Snap!Here we go again,Winter war"*
11:46 Tiger vs Bear?🐯🐻 Not Eagle vs Bear? 🦅🐻 The tiger is not a symbol of Germany. Besides, the tiger is the symbol of Korea over the centuries with the dragon.🐅🐉🐯🐲
이동연 I thought the same
Yes but you may know the Tiger tank.
Maybe that's why he used a Tiger for the Germans
@@n4ppin That's how I took it.
Eagle is symbol of Italy munezz
Wait wild Tigers still live in Korea?
This video puts into perspective how much the Germans actually accomplished having all the world against them: Atlantic defenses, 25% of production devoted to AA guns, embargos everywhere, U-Boat production, V1 and V2 rockets which were the pinnacle of rocketry for years to come, powerful tanks, first assault rifles, first use of jet aircraft in combat, having to carry their idiotic allies, etc. and they still managed to defend themselves against enemies with 3 or 4 times the manpower, tanks, aircraft, etc. for a long time. They could have even gotten the atom bomb did they really care to do it. Germany truly deserved to become another Superpower and would easily have been one, probably not the dominant one, but still winning on the technological front. Even now Germany is the dominant force in Europe, not even two defeats, a division and all its capital destroyed were enough to push it too far back.
They were never alone. The axis powers were Germany, Austria, Finland, (Vichy) France, Italy, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia, yugoslavia and Japan. Less than a third of the axis forces were actually German.
@@annoyingbstard9407 Croatia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Austria, Vichy France and Finland weren't really that significant. Sure Finland was crucial for a northern campaign but Germany alone could have accomplished that. On top of this, Italy was more of a nuisance than a benefit for Germany. I guess the only somewhat competent countries from that list would be Romania and Hungary.
soviets: ATTACK
Germans: Fritz are those children?
soviets: made 90% of children
Germans: nap time
U mean 90% were children in nazi army
Woman an childeren did help to make fortifications but they didn’t pull the trigger
Giving u the 69th like
Every German is a gangsta
Until the snow starts speaking Russian
Njörðr of the Atlantic 3 Words Siege of leningrad
Yeah, in our timeline Germany had troops spread all over the place -- North Africa, France, all of Eastern Europe, etc. At the end of the war there were 400k German troops in Norway, for example. They were fighting in all directions. The naval war in the Atlantic was a massive expense of labor and materials. The Luftwaffe was spent in the skies over Britain and the allies enjoyed overwhelming air superiority. All major German cities were bombed into rubble. Her industry was utterly crippled and railways were destroyed, compounding logistical problems. The atlantic wall was an absolutely enormous project. They had no oil. And they had to contend with communist partisans and saboteurs in occupied territories. Yet they still put up an incredible fight.
1v1 with the soviets, the reds would have been crushed. Every tank, plane, bullet, man; all German industry, engineering, and military might directed at a single enemy, on a single front.... Plus they would have several million anti-communist volunteers from across Europe joining the war effort (in our timeline over 1.5 million volunteers). And any extra weaponry and material Germany couldn't produce themselves they could just get from trade. Honestly, soviets would not have stood a chance. It would still be a titanic struggle, but Germany would definitely have won.
Britain surrender: perhaps.
Russia surrender: Never!
@@jacobreinhardt8724 Good counter argument, that surely made people change their opinions on the subject.
You are right.
@@samuelskogqvist5565 These men are your héroes too. Show some respect.
My favourite bit was when "highly" was pronounced "higgly". Still interesting tho.
I am txnping whit my foit
@@charityjackson2601 Bruh
Khrushchev wrote in his memoirs, that Stalin admitted that without US aid, Germany would of defeated the USSR.
He's not wrong no one can fight germany alone it's basic suicide cause german strategies and engineering are far superior than any country at the time
He wasn't wrong.
Overall lots of good points in this video about historical misconception around the war. German ability to import Oil would be by far the biggest factor, lack of oil is what really made the German advance stop, not just that they could not transport it across Russia, they did not HAVE enough to begin with. If German oil imports are unlimited and their cities not bombed then they have unlimited time horizon for victory.
Yes that is true because the four month plan to victory in the east was because it would run out of fuel by then.
Hey, guys. I know this is a very controversial topic. I'm a sci-fi fan, and this kind of work really appeals to me. I think that from a purely entertainment point of view, this is so well done. Who ever compiled this work should WRITE. Whoever you are, you Rock! I hope you are familiar with Philip K. Dick's 'The Man in the High Castle'.Frank Spotnitz's take on it rocks!
Yeah but the series ended up horribly
The man in the high castel from amazon I mean
*zvallid* your name should be *Second World War Changer*
BTW nice video I like it
One of the more important notes on operation Barbarossa in this scenario is that Stalin would had not been caught with his pants down as he did in our timeline - although both Hitler and Stalin knew the inevitable war between Germany and USSR was coming, Stalin didn't think Hitler would be crazy enough to invade while still battling Britain on the western front. In fact when British intelligence was trying to convince Stalin that Germany was planning the attack, Stalin shook those points off, being convinced that this was a ploy by British to engulf Soviets on the eastern front. If there was peace between Britain and Germany in this scenario, I'm curious what preparations Soviets would had made prior to Barbarossa.
The Soviets wanted to join the Axis powers but Hitler was too ideologically opposed to communism
I think there’s a fundamental misunderstanding of how russia works. Wars in Russia NEVER end with the fall of Moscow. While morale certainly would have taken a hit, I find it very hard to believe that Stalin would just surrender just because moscow fell, while the city that bears his name is still in the midst of one of the most brutal battles of the war. If the germans have no ammunition or oil in the dead of winter, it won’t matter if they have more freed up men and tanks. Stalin still had tons of planes and tanks from the far east REGARDLESS of lend-lease, that he could use to stage a counter-offensive.
You are certainly right about fall of Moscow. But then I think it is different if all major cities of Stalingrad/Moscow/Leningrad would have fell - I think it is very likely that World War 1 outcome in the eastern front would have repeated itself. A revolution in Russia at some point when enough casualties would have been sustained and not enough food...
but then again you cant have an army without food or weapons
yousef 501st Most of the manufacturing is in the Ural Mountains. The red army’s remains could have easily gotten weapons and food.
If Stalingrad will be occupied no more oil from Caucaso trough Volga can feed russian tanks..they had to surrender..
So how do you build tanks without the steel from lendlease ? how do you fuel them without the oil from land lease since Germany took most of Russia's oil fields ? How do you not starve with 40% areas to grow on gone ? They would have lost on their own
How the Confederacy could have won the American Civil War and what would happen after the Southern victory? Inb4 Harry Turtledove.
Hi michal! good idea
@Black Vitriol What? The southen states were not poor.
Michal, that would mean, that only the South would side with the Entente and the North with the CP. Maybe Mexico would side with the CP too, to get Texas back.
@@charlesnapoleon9070 Mexico wouldn't be able to do anything, as the CSA would create its own influence zone in Latin America.
@@michahunicz1741, don't forget we are during WW1. After the collapse of Russia, the CP could send enough help to Mexico to let them win.
THE BEST ERA THAT WE DIDN'T REACHED
If you mean technology uhm i guess
@@blockifahad6412 not at all
"With 6900 Tiger 2s, you can conquer the World" Best quote I've heard in a while.
Those who believe this scenario's outcome would be no different than real life... are failing to consider some enormous differences between the two situations.
- Germany does not have to devote a large portion of production to uboats --> increased German production
- Germany is not being bombed from '42 on by Americans or British. --> increased German production, more available troops for the East, more available anti-air for the East, no skilled pilots lost fighting non-Soviet allies increases Luftwaffe capacity in the East.
- Germany has a navy with nothing better to do than to attack/blockade Soviet ports, meaning that whether or not other allies aren't fighting, they can't trade with the USSR anyway. So on top of lack of material assistance from allies --> No USSR ability to acquire foreign goods, unless via Siberia.
- It is not necessary for Germans to commit resources to the construction of the Atlantic Wall, nor to keep dozens of divisions in the West to respond counter any allied invasion --> more divisions in the East.
- None of the fighting in Africa or Italy ever happens --> more divisions in the East.
- USSR receives no intelligence assistance from British project Ultra --> increased Soviet fog of war.
The sum of the differences in Germany's fighting and production abilities in the two scenarios is MASSIVE and could easily have tilted a 1v1 war in their favor, and I believe it would have: Germany would have a small boost in men and material at the start of Barbarossa, but the difference between scenario and reality grow over time: more men and machinery available to start with and the greater/faster ability to replenish.
It's a double whammy - the scenario makes Germany stronger AND the USSR weaker.
Even if the Soviets still win the Battle of Moscow, the battle of Stalingrad was very closely fought, and I believe the advantages described above would've changed the result of this battle -- and the consequences of this are huge. The Volga is a key artery for the Soviet Union and German control of the river around Stalingrad is a crippling change in situation. Then, once Stalingrad and the Volga fall, it is likely that Case Blue's other thrust, into the Caucasus, is a success as well. From there, German victory is only a matter of time. The best the Soviets can hope for at this point is a stalemate where the Ural mountains separate each side. But at this point, the Soviets are little more than a nuisance.
Additionally -- Without other fronts or opponents to worry about, there's no reason to assume that the Germans wait until June 22nd to start Barbarossa. Launching even two weeks sooner might have made the difference between victory and defeat in 1941, as mud-then-winter did about as much to slow German progress as the Red Army.
But you forget that hitler suprise stalin with attack,so think twice
@@Atlantis1789 Stop at the Urals? He never reached them in the first place.
@@piramida3684i think it will be the same also
Ya we also watched the video. Why you're reiterating it like it was yours is beyond me.
Great video! One tip: it might be worth getting someone who speaks English as a first language to proof read the script, as there are a few grammatical errors which create a small amount of confusion, but on the whole, a brilliant watch!
it's difficult because the text is modified while I do the video
I think the script is fine. The spelling errors are completely fine and the grammar errors aren't an issue either.
Fun fact: those 850k men from other axis countries made up mainly army group south and when Germany was encircled at stalingrad it was the Romanians that were overwhelmed on their back
While in the North, Finns and Spaniards played an important role.
@@gumdeo mhm, the fins greatly improved the German capacity to fight in the winter and the army group north wasnt pushed back as much as the others when winter came
Superb content thank you for creating historical videos. 💯💢💥
"No country can face Germany, only the Soviets can face them head to head."
Usa - "We'll see about that"
USA alone lost against vietnam
@@zvallid Speaking of which, I want to see a 2v2 USA and UK vs Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
@@Pandadude-eg9li before the stupid invasion of Russia, allied had already lost the war.
@@zvallid I still believe they still had a chance even in July 1943 to beat the allies. It would require more King Tigers, though. When they worked, they could defeat anything the Soviet forces could throw at them save for allied bombings and state of the art anti-tank.
@@zvallid completely different circumstances, very little public support, guerilla warfare, vietnamese lost more people, etc. They didn't lose they just left
I don't think there would have been a peace agreement between Russia and Germany. The Germans were within 30 miles of Moscow and Stalin was prepped to evacuate Moscow. I think that once Moscow was in the process of being encircled that Stalin would have fled and someone else, probably Kruchev, would have taken control surrendered to Germany.
I do question his thoughts that Japan would not have attacked Pearl Harbor in this scenerio. They were not connected to the war in Europe. It was a totally different subject. America wasn't at war with Germany when Pearl Harbor was attacked so the Japanese had no reason to expect that they would be fighting anything but the entire US fleet. I can't connect the dots on how the war in Europe, which the US wasn't a part of at the time, had any bearing on Japans decision to attack Pearl Harbor.
He did hit one thing right on the head. Hitlers true downfall was Churchills refusal to accept any peace agreement. And he was right. It hurt the UK more to continue the war than it would have to accept Hitlers peace plan. WWII would have never gotten to the point it had if it wasn't for Churchills stubborness to defeat Hitler at any cost.
Hitler made 2 mistakes in my opinion that cost him the war. He didn't have to invade Russia when he did. He needed to get the war in the west over before he took on Russia. If Britain wasn't going to accept a peace agreement then he need to pour all his resources into that to either get them to the peace table or get them to surrender. He almost had the air war won when he backed off and he cancelled his plans for an invasion of Britain which may have forced Britain to the peace talks. If he wasn't so involved with Russia he could have had the resources to do that.
He was short on oil that's why he had to attack Russia.
Maybe if he hadn't declared war on America, he could have ignored the lend-lease fact. The British alone could not have invaded Europe like D Day. Even if Britain received supplies, it was pretty much unable to open up another front on mainland Europe
The most insane comment I’ve ever read.
It’s different tho because Russia is much weaker in this scenario and Germany doesn’t have to fight to fronts
Good video. Hypothetical scenarios are always fascinating. One point to consider would be the size of the German invasion force at the outset of Barbarossa. One would think they could have employed a considerably larger force on 21 Jun 1941 given the fact they could have utilized the additional divisions that were garrisoned in Occupied Western Europe. Thumbs up.
Velox Versutus Vigilans
good video?? if the grammer and spelling was anywhere close to understandable english it might be good!
Great video man.
Your English and video’s are getting consistantly better. Great job! You should really consider narrating your video’s though.
Greetings from the Netherlands.
"Without the Help of America we would have lost" General Kruschev
amazing !!!! you just have said a cuote tha Krusche never said , you also have promoted Kruschev the grade of general !!!
Germany would literally won easily one on one on Russia..
@@loafbread1920 witout the 20 million slaves from Poland and the occupied europe , the Chekoslovakia ,industry ,the looting of trucks in europe , Germany could not even sept ay the treeshold
@@fergar9264 th-cam.com/video/EnQ_3anpWQk/w-d-xo.html
@@fergar9264 just use 🧠 so you can easily understand it
Insightful video. I love alternate histories, as real history is filled with so many effective opportunities for a small change that will later have a huge impact... like the storm that decimated the Spanish Armada, or the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, or The Battle of the Teutoburg Forest. Even Columbus arriving in the Bahamas instead of on the mainland had a huge impact. Or, what if the Native American tribes simply killed all invaders, explorers, and settlers and burned their ships so no news of their status could be sent back to Europe (making all undiscovered lands to the west still undiscovered, and ultimately a death sentence). Or what if ancient Persia had taken Greece. Or, what it Germany had won WW 1? Or what if the Swedish Empire had conquered St. Petersburg and annexed western Russia for the West. Or what if the Jews were embraced as Germans instead of persecuted and rounded up (more money, more fighters, and the morale high-ground would have gone to Germany). Or what if Ben Franklin had died of influenza as a child. All of these little things could have spun us into an entirely different present.
You did a great job Zvalid, with this particular alternate history. Good work.
You my guy! Are restoring my faith in youtube alone. Thank you
If my aunt had balls , she would be my uncle.
Racer X wiser words have never been spoken.
😂😂😂😂
yes, yes he would
Yep, what the hell, such weird and stupid questions. If the rest of the world wasn't involved, then the soviets wouldn't sit Idle too! Heck, they'd probably conquer Europe and Germany itself before Germany even set out to conquer other European countries and grew its might as much as it did. But even that's pointless to think about.
"If my grandmother had wheels, she would have been a bike"
"Laftwaffa" 😂
Lol yes
it's actually spelled almost good. The right spelling is "luftwaffa"
Khronosis that’s the fake English spelling not the real spelling
Lustwaffle
Luftwaffe
FASCINATING hypotheses. A lot of "IF's" but believable, and well done. Thanks, much
Not a chance in hell of Russia winning against Germany. Although Germany suffered the majority of its casualties on the Eastern front they still dedicated a significant amount of troops, and resources to the west. If you add 50+ more divisions, an air force that would’ve been twice the size in the initial invasion, an unfathomable amount of tanks, factories not being bombed, more than enough oil for 10+ years of war, and unthreatened supply lines behind the front?! My god…how is this even a question?!?!
Am surprised that even just before or after Moscow encirclement Zhukov or other top General's were not executed by Stalin. Also, no usage of Luffawawa are mentioned as Germany been the first Country to use it strageticaly before sending soldiers, armoured battalions etc's forward they use as such. And yes, what supply lines overstretch as even so it won't take long for Germany to correct it as with no Wars at other fronts with other Countries which leaves Germany a free hand to see to it.
A lot of people don't realize that Germany heavily relied on a lot of it's Allies troops
LOL, like the italians who couldn't beat greece?
@@JogenMogen To be fair, Italian soldier's weren't bad. They fought better than anyone in the mountains. Give them good leadership and weaponry and you have a good military.
@@LastRedStar They even lost to Ethiopia 😂
@@LastRedStar my point is, they needed more done to get them as good as the germans
and the soviets realied heavily on lend lease for trucks and logistics. Maybe not tanks though but definetly logistics.
Not a particularly difficult question, considering that Germany had the military genius but limited resources and territory, while the militarily less-competent Soviets held vast territory and resources. In a rapid war of maneuver, the Germans would win. In a protracted conflict of attrition, the Soviets would prevail. Hitler played his cards spot on, until the 1941 invasion of the USSR. For Germany, the issue in the west with England was still unresolved in 1941, as well as North Africa. It was a time that Germany could ill-afford adding both the USSR and the USA to the enemies list. But, that's just what Hitler did, assuring the defeat of Germany 4-years before it actually happened, and leaving historians forever asking "why."
Hitler was counting on a quick war with the Soviet Union, after seeing their performance in Finland
Germany probably would have won, don’t forget, the Soviet Union was receiving hundreds of millions from 42-45 in military aid, weapons, ammunition, fuel, trucks, food, guns.
Without it, I’m not sure the Soviets would have won against Germany
One on one, Germans would crushed them.
nope
@@andrj8844 yes.
@@darklysm8345 no.
uh no
@Hubert Turski no you are not. the soviets would not give up of the germans took moscow. and russia had so much manpower that there was no chance for the third reich to win
The computer voice threw the hole thing off by the really poor grammar and other things
So true!
ironic
i muted sound, but cations were equally execrable, stopped watching then!
Whole.
captions!
A very heavy accent with subpar spelling and grammar, but more than made up for by the excellent detail in the ‘alternate universe’ battles and follow up. I enjoyed this a lot. Seems most of the world would’ve been better if this all happened instead of actual history.
Ray van der Heij it’s not accent lmao, it’s text to speech 😂
My friend told me that Stalin was making an educated guess planning to defend against the nazi invaders. Lol
Missed was the fact that two thirds of the tanks that stopped Germany in front of Moscow came from UK lend lease.
This really depends on what ‘Germany’ is back then. In a real 1v1 Germany doesn’t have African land (Vichy France or Italian rule). It doesn’t have the oil fields of Romania. And occupied areas such as NL, Norway, France, Belgium, Greece and Yugoslavia were not directly annexed to the Reich. Which means that Germany has way less resources to fight the Soviet’s and in this scenario lose it
But they still can trade and industry is completely safe so they can build weapons easily. Also they would still have armies lost during other wars and now completely focus on USSR.
There were over 1 million occupation troops and many more focused on naval war against UK and in North Africa.
Also they would lunch offensive much earlier so they would reach Moscow before winter.
On the other hand Soviet Union would not recive help from the Allies. 25% of planes, 70% of trucks, 60 % of fuel, 60% of gunpowder Soviets used during ww2 was supplied by the allies, not to mention milions of tons of machinery, tanks, steel, copper, aluminum,food etc...
ste1fan1 yea but that would not be enough to finish off the 1v1
@@beanosswag488 16:35-17:00
@@императорПалпатин-к6у involving other countries does not make it a 1v1 anymore
@@beanosswag488 , в любой войне воющие страны торгуют с нейтралтными
The Soviets also received a great deal of help from the west including the breaking of the secret codes . It's an interesting argument .Certainly the ratio would have changed . There is no war in North Africa or bombing of factories in Germany.
cccpterminator ahh another butthurt communist that sad that the USSR disbanded
Yea they had no resources and America supplied them with just a about everything that did not have that they needed.
I'll point something out about the video...Japan had to take on the entirety of the US fleet alone, as it was. The US devoted very little military shipping to the Atlantic, in fact close to 90% of the entire shipping (merchant and naval) for DDay and follow up was british or Canadian (who ended the war with the third largest navy in the world).
That’s right which means the USA would defeat Japan much faster and easier.
Nah
Russians act like they could have beat the Germans ALONE. They had lots of help and after WWII, the countries they "liberated" were just under new management. Still, respect for fighting the good fight when they had to.
80% of the German army was fighting the soviets without which the normandy invasion
would have failed, imagine millions more german soldiers on the beaches, so the soviets
helped the western allies as well, if you want to compare the germans and soviets
here are some stats
German occupation of Poland: 6 million poles killed
Soviet occupation of Poland: 150k poles killed
the soviets werent trying to exterminate most of eastern europe like the germans
@@edmiesterful these stats are also based on the fact, that there were almost no soldiers in the Eastern side side of Poland, cause yk they were defending the western side
@The RightStuff Khrushchev was
full of crap.
@The RightStuff Germany invaded
alongside:
Romania
Finland
Italy
Hungary
Slovakia
These countries gave many soldiers and
the Germans got supplies from occupied
countries like France, Belgium, Holland etc.
Nazi Germany would lose even quicker if
they fought the Soviets alone.
@@edmiesterful you're that the Soviets weren't trying to exterminate people like the Nazis...they were trying to enslave those people since they are no use dead and that is why Communism is the greatest system to enslave the masses. Absolutely nobody could take on the Germans alone. The Soviets relied on Western intelligence, weapons, infrastructure, equipment, and support on the battlefield. I mean the Germans fought on 3, almost 4 fronts.
girls : omg im too weak alone, Jenny come help me.
boys :
Painfully cringe