Japan attacked US first. Then Germany chose to declare war on US shortly after because Hitler believed that sinking US convoys in the Atlantic (previously neutral and off-limits) would force the British to surrender faster than USA could impact the war. He was wrong.
I know but that was in hope that the Germans would do something stupid like attack the US or USSR. If they didn't attack them, after a while the UK would agree to peace as they knew they couldn't hope to win alone
@@sirsausagedog4162 You need to learn a bit of history here fella. Germany offered peace at Dunkirk when Britain’s forces were surrounded after France’s collapse. Churchill told them to fuck off. Britain managed to get the majority of their troops out of there. Germany offered peace again, Churchill told them to fuck off. Germany started the Battle of Britain by launching an air invasion of Britain, the Battle commenced throughout the summer of 1940. Germany started bombing British cities, offered peace, Churchill told them to fuck off. Britain DEFEATED Germany in the Battle of Britain, Germany realised they couldn’t successfully invade Britain and turned on the USSR a few months later.
@@SCTheth from what I read, without Canaris, Franco might have gotten involved with Hitler and War. But the Admiral was anti Nazi/Hitler.He had Franco ask for things Germans didnt have. He told Franco Allies would win. He kept it up and Franco bluffed and finally told Adolf he wouldnt join axis and that he thought Allies would win. Canaris made a big mistake: he kept a diary. He also got involved with the Valkyrie mess. Gestapo found his diary. Goodbye Canaris.
"1:Stop at Dunkirk."- They tried, multiple peace offers were sent to the British, who refused to come to the negotiating table "2:Don't invade the USSR"- This only works in hindsight. While I do find it unlikely that the Soviets would have invaded in 41 or 42, if a settlement could not be reached with Britain or if a landing similar to D-Day occured while there was a massive Russian buildup on the Polish border, we'd be saying 'Well he obviously should have attacked Russia when he had the chance.' "3: Don't declare war on the USA"- The USA was essentially fighting an undeclared war against Germany by protecting British shipping and mixing US ships in with British convoys to try and goad Germany into attacking them. By declaring war on the US, this allowed Germany to start unrestricted submarine warfare which was their only chance at slowing an Allied buildup of troops and equipment in Britain. The US was going to declare war on Germany at some point anyways. Germany would rather hostilities begin when America was in the process of shipping war materials to Britain rather than wait for America to declare war once their buildup was complete.
Just like what America is doing in Ukraine now. I have a feeling that this war is going to go the same way. I have a feeling, though that America is going to do an attack on an American sovereign nation or someone we are friends with, and that will give us the reason to put boots on the ground.Ukraine is running out of men. I feel this will happen before the next election. The Democrats aren’t gonna let Trump come in and get elected because they will all get arrested for all of their crimes against humanity.
Japan was going to attack usa sooner or later which they prob shouldn't have but it seemed like if they only attacked the brits n dutch usa would attack japan anyways
Another thing TK remmeber is that Nazi political ideology goes against with not invading the USSR. The USSR was the hegemony of Bolshevism. Hitler invading the USSR was going to happen no matter what
“We shall fight them on the beaches we shall fight them on the landing grounds we shall never surrender” I don’t think negotiations after Dunkirk was possible.
Ok, try checking in 10 years later after constant low level bombing raids and u-boat attacks but no significant changes in favor of either side. See if there is still broad public support to keep fighting
@@GoErikTheRedmy guy, history literally showed us that the British public was all in favour of fighting, the u boat attacks and bombing didn’t do anything but strengthen public opinion to fight
@@acanofbacon914 The UK spent exactly one year, June 22 1940 to June 22 1941, fighting alone. Then Barbarossa kicked off, and 6 months later Pearl Harbor. I don't doubt the will of the British public to fight during that year, and probably for several years after. But if there's no Barbarossa and no operation torch, then N Africa falls. At that point what fighting is there left to do? With no need to send planes into Russia Germany can much better protect their airspace, so the bombing campaign becomes even more costly than it was historically, and probably has to be canceled. At that point, even if the will to fight exists, there's no fight to be had. Now imagine that situation persists for 5 or 10 years, with no end in sight. Obviously the UK wouldn't surrender to the Germans. But assuming the Germans are able to consolidate their hold on the territories they've taken, how long are the Brits going to keep fighting for other people who already seem to have given up?
@@GoErikTheRed we knew the Russians would be at war with them soon. Was only a matter of time. That's why we waited. The navy and raf could hold off, and us supply could keep us fighting harder.
They only made the speech to try and convince the US to join the war. The hawks couldn’t convince the people or the doves to go to war, one of the biggest concerns was that the British would surrender before the hawks could sway the public “we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God’s good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old”
1. As others have mentioned the British rejected peace talks. 2. Operation Barbarossa was considered to be a pre-emptive strike. A war between Germany and the USSR was at that point seen as inevitable. Germany wanted to win a quick lightning war against the USSR as they did France while they still had the upper hand in industry and military. That and they need to secure oil for the war machine. 3. The US was likely to join in at some point or another either way.
I think the only way they could have beaten the British is if Chamberlain stayed in power somehow or if even more pacifist leaders were elected. Germany beats France, wipes out part of the British army in Dunkirk, perhaps Cairo falls, and the Brits surrender
@@snowmeows3342 Perhaps. It is worth noting that appeasement wasn't however just a pacifist strategy, it was mainly intended to buy time for the soon to be allied powers to ready for war. Iirc the british were not ready for an all out war with Germany and while the French certainly on paper had the means they had a lot of internal issues which meant that they could not enter a war with germany alone. With that said, trusting hitler not to invade the rest of Czechoslovakia was a big blunder considering that it provided both the industry and the gold required to pay for and develop the german army to what it was about to become.
Barbarossa was going well until the Germans forgot why they were there and tried to take Stalingrad, which was nowhere near as useful as the oil fields.
@@clonecommandermike332if the Germans had not tried to take Stalingrad, Operation Uranus might’ve resulted in all German forces South of the Don captured. They had to at least reach the Volga and the Don to protect their flanks
Nuklear fission was found by German scientists. So if you go back to the 30s, you just need to accelerate their knowledge to get the bomb. Austrian painter always spoke about a Wunderwaffe. They were ahead in rocket science and found nuklear fission. You can imagine what allies interpreted from that.
They tired to negotiate after invading multiple sovereign nations, of course they aren't going to accept. Especially with the terms that Germany had set forth
@Daniel Mudge it sure did. but if a plan goes well for two years and then results in the utter devastation of your regime and the fracturing of your country... you can't really call that a great success
@steelbiceps 1. They did stop after conquering France because they only attacked it in the first place because they were declared on... 2. The USSR almost finished building up the majority of their forces for a massive invasion of the rest of europe, which is why Germany chose to get the upper hand by invading them first... hence the massive support Germany got from various countries for Operation Barbarossa. 3. Germany had no choice but to declare war on the US because of the Tripartite Pact and the fact that the German and American navies were at war anyways... Ggs!
@@bashbish4564 Pearl Harbour didn’t happen for another 1.5 years after Churchill gave that speech. Britain defeated Germany in the Battle of Britain in summer 1940. Which confirmed Germany couldn’t invade Britain. US “sprang into action” in December 1941. You’re way off with your history.
@@tomben6180 I'm halfway off? You think Brittian won? Loll you'd be speaking German if it weren't for America Comrade. And the Red army with 21 million losses in turn causing the highest rate of death upon the German army during WW2 "won the war." Go Brexit and Queen queef on your island.
@@bashbish4564 I didn’t say “halfway off” I said you’re “way off”, which you are. No, Britain wouldn’t be speaking German as Britain defeated Germany in the “BATTLE OF BRITAIN” in the summer of 1940. Can you read that please? Germany then did nothing until spring 1941, a full 7 months later. And decided to invade the USSR as it failed to invade Britain. The US didn’t join the war until December 1941 and didn’t engage with Germany until 1942, a full two years after Germany had lost to Britain in summer 1940. You Americans have a bad reputation for ignorance, by pretty much everyone around the world, but congrats, you’re the worst one I’ve come across.
Also Mussolini’s failed invasion of Greece delayed Operation Barborossa by a month or two. Probably could have captured Leningrad, Moscow and properly prepared for winter
GB wouldn't be able to hold out much long if Germany did not divert 90% of it's resources and military to the East. People would oust Churchill a out of office and sign peace
GB would most definitely have been able to hold out. Maybe not in Africa, but don’t forget that GB at the time had the strongest navy in the world (Germany wasn’t even close) and the English had practically destroyed the luftwaffe over the Battle of Britain. Although Germany had a great land army, their AirPower had been decimated and they had no navy. Not to mention the English people were super patriotic and heavily sided with Churchill on his “never surrender”. Let’s just say there was a reason germany focused it’s expansion elsewhere
1: UK rejected the idea of surrendering after Dunkirk. 2: Germans didn't have enough oil to maintain their army, they declared war on USSR to get to the Baku's oil fields 3: He's right, Germans lucky they didn't get 50 megatonns of freedom
1.yeah i really have no idea what he is talking about there 2.ehh it was more ideological reasons.the baku oil fields were more cost then worth and the german idea wasnt to take it but to bomb it to cripple the russians 3.yeah this is simply true.germany thought they could get a quick peace with the us and force them to stop aiding the uk.they didnt really realise how much pearl harbor shifted american opinion towards war
PARTIALLY wrong on 2 and 3. Main ideological goal of WWII was to invade the USSR shortly after the defeat of Poland. It was delayed however because Hitler didn't want to have a war on two fronts. And admittedly, yes it was a dumb idea to declare war on the USA, but Hitler wouldn't have not done so. He was actually very pleased about Pearl Harbor.
1. They tried negotiating with the british, british basically said up yours 2. They were bound by the tripartite pact to come to Japan’s “defense” and failing to do so may make the Italians even more distrustful of their german counterpart 3. The USSR was an inevitable clash, and everyday that went by was a day they would gain more competence and Stalin could replace the military staff he killed. It was a matter of when not if, and better to fight a war when you have the upper hand and take the chance of them developing the advantage during it, than if you just wait for them to develop it regardless.
Suggested reading: Thunder on the Dneiper. Details how Stalin and Zhukov war gamed exactly what they did, for the Soviets to win, though it was a close run.
The nuclear weapons of the british and americans (manhatten, and tube alloy programs). And the germans wanted to exterminate an entire people. There is no way for germany winning
Also the fact that, alongside better Generals being instated, the army was also modernizing at the same time. Mainly the old T-26's and BT tanks being phased out for the better KV-1s and T-34s, as well as new doctrines and guns.
For real. Everyone who claims “hitler could’ve won if he did ____” forgets that’s he’s HITLER. He’s an ideologue. He’s not some pragmatic negotiator who’s gonna change his goals based on what’s realistic. Conquering the western regions of the USSR was core to Hitler’s ideology, and it was also something he’d NEVER be able to achieve within the context of the second world war
@@3turnall Germany is bad shit insane, they will go out of their way to intentionally fuck up their war effort just to achieve ideological goals, the Holocaust was a huge drain on resources and if Germany was logical, than there would be simply no Holocaust as they would focus more of their resources on the war effort instead of on useless late war inventions and the genocide of Jews. Fuck off with your shitty ass attitude to this very legit concern.
@@timothytimothy4854 See, someone explained. I just dislike it when people decide to have a point on something and then go on to never explain. It's necessary for any real dialogue.
Germany lost 300 000 troops, max 500,000 troops in Stalingrad. It was the commies lost huge number of soldiers in almost each battle during ww2. I would say Germany’s biggest mistake was helping Italy in invasion of Greece. By doing that they had to postpone soviet invasion, which was initially planned at the beginning of April. They lost almost 3 months, and that played a crucial role in failing in Operation Barbarossa. Taking into account that the Wehrmacht reached to the outskirts of Moscow by December 1941, they could definitely have captured Moscow have they begun the invasion on planned time.
They wouldnt even if they reach moscow what after that? They would just lose it in the winter they would get moscow and lose it instanly and the 3 months on grece gave them more time to build up there army@@hopefulperson9622
@@hopefulperson9622 Yeah, first of all it was 500,000 lost by the Germans in Stalingrad, and considering the big difference in the ratio of manpower between the Germans and Soviets, losing the 6th Army was a catastrophe for the Germans, since they couldn’t afford that kind of loss. The Soviets lost millions between 41 and 44, and still had a 11 million strong army in 45. Next, I always hear this amateurish suggestion that if the Balkans wouldn’t had set back the German timetable, the Germans would have captured Moscow. Everyone who says this completely forgets the logistics involved. The German advance was already starting to slow down in mid July, do to supply lines becoming overstretched. Tanks, and other motorized vehicles don’t run on hopes, and wishes. Crossing the Russian countryside was hard on equipment. They needed fuel, and replacement parts. The bulk of German forces who started Operation Barbarossa weren’t even mechanized, it was straight legged infantry that covered 20km a day. Not to mention the Germans had to use 600,000 horse to move supplies, and artillery pieces. So it’s complete conjecture on your part to claim that the Germans could have taken Moscow on a earlier timetable.
Ephesians 6:10-18 says, Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might. Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness; and your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace; above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God: praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints. The bible is no old book. You have to really let Christ open your eyes; to see the world in shambles. Many people say it's a religion to lock up people in chains, and say it's a rule book.. why? Because people hate hearing the truth, it hurts their flesh, it's hurts their pride, it's exposes on what things have they done..people love this world so much, s*x, money, power, women, supercars.. things of this world. Still trying to find something that can fill that emptiness in your heart. You can't find that in this world.. only in Christ, the bible is no chains, it's a chainbreaker. Breaking your sins into pieces... Repent now, and turn back to the true Lord only.. God bless. 😊😊
Not that. Germany actually needed to attack the Soviet Union as they were desperate to get more fuel for their vehicles. They hoped to capture the oil-rich North Caucasus. The German economy was in absolute shambles and the war went on based on MEFO bills. Basically, "If you give us money, we promise that a Nigerian prince will give you 10 times more in return" If Germany stopped, they wouldn't be able to hold what they gained. And then there's the fact that Britain said, "We will never surrender" in the "We shall fight on the beaches" speech. None of these 3 ways would have worked out.
@@KenobiThOnly5561 Why do you think Blitzkrieg was such an important German war tactic? Germany was extremely powerful but it would not be capable to support it's forces in a long term war, Germany had terrible logistics.
@@KenobiThOnly5561 He aint, a big reason Germany "had to" invade the USSR was because it was at an "end game" point in fuel and food, the military even said it was likely already too late but best to try anyway.
A. They did try to negotiate peace with the british, we said no. B. The USSR would've attacked the Nazis eventually if they hadn't, too much ideological difference. C. Blame the japanese for that one.
@@philipphilip8769 for C kind of because all germany had to do was not declare war on the us after japan attacked pearl harbor and then america wouldn't have a reason to attack germany
Point No. 1: - Here's the problem. The British would not tolerate negotiations, especially after Churchill took over. Point No. 2: - Invading the Soviet Union was their main goal from the very start. That non-aggression pact was signed so that they could buy some times to knock France and Britain first before turning towards the Soviet Union. Point No. 3: - This is more possible than the other points, but in my opinion, the involvement of the US in WWII would be inevitable
@@Truewinner112 -That would be pretty difficult, because Germany cannot perform land invasion through the English channel without receiving any heavy casualties because of the Royal Navy
They had absolutely no choice but to go to war with Russia because they needed *OIL* to power their vehicles in the ongoing wars. Germany had very little natural resources, and still does. They really had no other option. The war was lost before it started and many German generals knew this but were still swayed by the nationalist rhetoric.
War with Russia was going to happen regardless If Germany didn't invade Russia Russia was going to invade Germany. Both Hitler and Stalin knew that one or the other was going to backstab the other the only question was when? So it wasn't even a matter of making the choice not to, Germany just chose to do it first.
1: British government was against ending the war, and they would only peace with a negotiated peace terms, not German favoring ones 2. The Soviets would invade Germany the moment Britain left or when Britain got conquered 3. The Germans could delay war with the Americans, but this would just mean a larger communist Europe in the future
Well the original nazi ideology were actual socialists though, before hitler ernst rolm was the actual leader of the party and hitlers friend which hitler assassinated he was also gay
@@chasesam138first one Churchill declined any peace treaties Second one. The USSR would have declared on Germany and broke it if Germany didn't. Though it would have been at a later date. Third one If Germany didn't declare on USA they would have still lost but this time Europe would be fully controlled by Soviet union with maybe only France being liberated since a d day would have been slower. And final thing Germany would have won if they accepted Soviet unions alliance. They offered to change the Molotov so they get Bulgaria in return they join axis
@@sciencemoth8669Mind if I correct some of your comments. 1. Churchill will never accept any peace deals on Germany. 2. I had always heard about “If Germany did not declare war on USSR they could have won”. This is just not right as USSR is Germany’s main objective. 3. Not declaring war against US will just make US declares war with them. Churchill convinced Roosevelt to join the Allies. If Germany did not declare it will be in the same thing as how WWI ended.
@@ronconnell826 second one I said USSR would have declared on Germany if Germany didn't. And Roosevelt only joined the allies after Germany declared on them.
They did. The ussr literally had their own problems. Especially with how paranoid Stalin was. Do you think it is weird how alike the US and Russia were and still are today? Like ice and fire, yin and yang, master cheif and the arbiter. Both had their own problems during ww2 until Germany screwed both of them over haha! Just Russia got it worst unfortunately.
USSR lost a war against Finland in the winter of 1939. When Germans attacked the Soviets they couldn't believe it at first and took a long time to mount any kind of meaningful resistance. Soviets were not ready.
@@БелыйКузнецов the USSR had no intention of honoring Molotov and had every intention of attacking Germany once their internal tensions were resolved.
Yea right his whole list is basically a complete misunderstanding of why WW2 even happened. “Oh but German would have won if they listened to me” gimme a break
Highly doubt Germany could have done much to win but as a leader who ripped up chamberlains concessions of Czech territory for peace, nothing is off the table for hitler as far as “pacts” go lol.
It’s a defensive alliance. Japan was the aggressor, Germany only declared war because Roosevelt had basically been fighting a psychological war with their nations for a while, and also supported their enemies. Japan didn’t come to aid Germany when they attacked the Soviets.
The germans did try to negotiate a peace deal with the UK after the fall of France, poland, and the Benelux. The UK refused any deal, even if it gave them more favourable terms, shows true resilience and true heroism regarding the UK, as they knew that giving up would only create a stronger more prepared evil
100%. A lot of the decisions Churchill made (ie moving troops from N Africa to Greece) to show to the world (meaning USA) that GB and the Commonwealth will defend freedom every.
Heroic only cause they were surrounded by sea and they knew German Navy womt be able to do much. If Britain was part of Europe like France they wouldnt last long
As already mentioned you can bark all day if you have a fence north sea ocean in between you and the bigger dog. If AH had been smart he would have left the UK alone for now and dealt with the eastern front first. But we can be glad that never happened.
Another idea i've heard is if they just FORTIFIED the Maginott Line/Border with France and then after invading the Soviet Union, if they treated the Soviet Civilians decently and not terribly, they could've raised a massive uprising against Stalin. Many people in the EARLY days of Operation Barbarossa welcomed them as liberators from the Soviet Union.
Let's remember that Hitler's primary objective was lebensraum, and he saw that to the East: Poland, Ukraine and Russia. Western Europe was just securing his flanks, and he would have been perfectly happy to accommodate an English peace, especially as he saw them as fellow Aryans, or close enough (we Americans were of course a "mongrel race"). Declaring war on the USA was a huge blunder, done only in solidarity with his ally Japan. The isolation v. engagement debate here at home was on every lip; it makes our present disengagement with other polarities look anemic. When Japan attacked Pearl, everyone, including FDR, assumed we would be fighting a Pacific war. As FDR was wrangling to get us to help England, this declaration by Hitler was a Godsend, and resulted in a Europe First battle plan.
Hitler's opinion on the United States varied with his mood. Prior to the war he spoke very highly of the US, after the war his rhetoric changed to the "Mongrel race" you mention. As for Germany's declaration of war on the US, it was done for purely selfish reasons. Hitler hoped it would convince the Japanese to break their treaty with the Soviets and open a second front in his war against the USSR. Any solidarity Germany showed Japan was purely coincidental. The two powers rarely saw eye to eye and almost never cooperated, the entire war can almost be considered two separate wars.
@@skie6282 FDR had been wary of Hitler from the beginning and wanted to declare war on Hitler after Poland but congress wouldn't have it. Even after Pearl Harbor Congress was reluctant to get involved in another European war. Even American sentiment was largely against the European campaign. America was ready to pull out of the war in 1943 until a victory in Midway shifted American opinion that the war was actually winnable. Everyone always forgets that because history books wash over all that because its uncomfortable to think about.
1. They were already at war with Britain. 2. The USSR had the land needed for Germany to hold up their powerful empire. 3. Japan started war with the U.S and so Germany had to go to war because they are allied with the Japanese. Also, the U.S Was bringing supplies to the allied forces in Europe and Germany had to attack the U.S vessels.
Point 3 is technically not correct. Germany was only obligated to join the war with the US if the US was the aggressor which was obviously not the case. Hitler's declaration of war against the US is one of the biggest head scratchers of the second world war.
Germany only had to back Japan IF Japan was attacked. Not if Japan attacked some other country. Hitler should never have declared war on Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s government. Roosevelt wanted in to the war and he set up Japan to attack Pearl Harbor.
But the Americans sent enourmous amounts of equipment to Russia since March 1941, this convoys were a provocation and needed to be stopped by Germany if they wanted to succeed in the east
1. The British wouldn’t have surrendered 2. Hitler was always going to invade the Soviet Union (he talked about it in Mein Kampf) 3. The U.S. would have just found another way to enter the war against Germany after Pearl Harbor.
Also mentioned in Mein Kampf was Hitler's desire to have Britain as an ally I realise a fascist Britain was extremely unlikely, Hitler was being rather wishful It would have made for a whole different war if it happened
2. Ideologically it made sense for the Germans to attack the USSR but tactically it was way out of logic because German army was short on everything before the start of operation Barborosa
It is like the First World War when Germany changed the course of the war, defeated Russia and was pushing back the French. The United States intervened to save the United Kingdom. It is the policy of the United States, which had sold millions of weapons to the whole world against Germany was going to join the war sooner or later.
@@JustAnotherArmyVet Also, theres the common misconception the Soviets would've surrendered if Moscow fell. They wouldn't have. Mainly because they KNEW it was a War of Survival. Stalin would've likely relocated to Siberia or Vladivostok had Moscow Fallen. With lend lease also occurring, this might've merely just extended the war to 1946 or 1947. Also, a reminder to anyone in general that even if the Germans and their horrendous supply lines somehow, by some miracle, made it to the Caspian and took Stalingrad, as well as Baku and the rest of the caucuses, it would've still been unusable for at least 2-4 years, as the Soviets had cemented them shut, as well as various other measures to prevent it from being able to aid Germany when it looked likely it'd fall.
@@TheT-90thatstaresintoyoursoulхочу уточнить. Ещё в октябре прорабатывали план сдачи Москвы и перенесения столицы в Куйбышев, куда должно было перебраться всё правительство
Stalin was in absolutely no position to invade. He was too busy purging his political opponents and invading Finland. This is why operation barbarosa took Stalin completely by surprise. He did not have the military means to do anything.
1: Hitler offered the British a peace deal that allowed them to keep their empire. The UK refused. 2: one of the main aims of Hitler from the beginning was the conquest of the USSR. The only reason he went to war with other European countries was to ensure that he didn't have to fight on a two front war with multiple enemies ( that was the idea at least). 3; this one I agree with
They did not declare war on the US until Japan attacked. As part of the Axis powers, they supported Japan. The US would have just sat back and sold arms to the multiple Allied powers fighting Germany, safe behind the oceans.
@@ace74909 350,000+ casualties to 70,000 is far from a victory, not to mention the Soviets pretty much failed all their objectives and had to settle for sparse concessions , if the Finn's weren't exhausted and resolved to drive them out they could've.
One huge piece of the puzzle almost everyone forgets or just does not know: The reason operation Barbarossa was undertaken was Russia was massing troops and equipment for an offensive war on their western border with Germany. Germany was able to drive so deep because all these troops were setup for offense and were not dug in for defense. Hitler had no choice but to be first to strike Russia because they were preparing to do the same.
This is complete nonsense. Hitler literally wrote a book saying that the Germans would have to destroy the Soviet Union to get rid of the communist, and for living space for Germans.
if hilter wouldn't have been hilter than sure that would have been a point. saying he shouldnt have invade russia is saying that the nazi shouldnt have been nazis
Problem, British weren't willing to surrender after Dunkirk. War with Soviet Union was in evitable. Both Soviet Union and Nazi Germany were opposing ideologies and Hitler knew it was only a matter of time. So he tried to get the jump on stalin. He also needed fuel and didn't want to rely on the Soviet Union to provide it and potentially cut him off. Third, the United States government wanted war and since Japan was in an alliance with Nazi Germany, Germany was obligated to declare war to defend an ally. So nice thoughts but they unfortunately don't work lol
I can agree with 2 and 3, especially 3. However 1 was never an option. He tried, he genuinly tried to get britan to make a deal or surrender or sue for peace, but churchhill was never going to do that.
And even then, they only lost the Battle of Britain because they started targeting civilians instead of the RAF and their critical infrastructure/ supplies. They had their chance and they shifted focus to the civilians. Same thing can be said when the Allies started retaking France. They shifted their main focus to extermination of all that ‘got in the way’ or civilians.
@@beigegaming9905 Ehh yes and no, modern historians looking at the data believe a lot of that to be early bluster to build up the "tension" so to speak and make it look worse then it was (afterall, you look far grander if you overcome even worse odds). Was it bad? Yes, was the swap of targets life saving for the RAF? Not as much as its made out.
@@beigegaming9905 bullshit, RAF would have won the Battle of Britain regardless, because of the combination of radar and home advantage. That meant that Allied planes over Britain had more fuel for actual patrol & battle, and any pilot who lost his plane but not his life could be driven to the closest airport and get in a new machine. A surviving German pilot was Lina recta for a PoW camp. Hitlers promises after Dunkirk were worth less then toilet paper. Because toilet paper actually has value. Like cleaning your arse, instead of smearing feces on your face. When you sign over a dozen treaties over a period of 7 years, and break every single one of them, at some point people will no longer make any treaty with you. Somehow mister Aldolf ‘bigbrain’ Hitler learned that lesson about as well as the current 5D chessmaster in the Kremlin
The plan to play it like that was invented after Soviet presentation where they showed to western military attaché Red Army excercise and in it 40 000 paratroopers jumping out of places in single operation when in the same time no western forces got not even a single unit capable to do something like that->It was 1937 and that is when plan to make a pact with Poland was made and make all the fake promises to Poland. Just go to wikipedia and read article "Western betrayal"... it was all according to plan and always drunk Churchil was not the brain of this whole plan.
And they'd have been wrong to accept it. Poland was counting on Britain and France. They had promises to uphold. It only got this bad because Britain, under different management, was scared to put their foot down and tell Germany "No." And instead appeased them at every turn. Accepting the deal wouldn't solve anything, just prove further that Britain was not only a weakening, aged empire, but also untrustworthy in the extreme.
@@CountSpartula not appeasing wouldn’t have changed much, no one was ready for ww2, even when ww2 started it was called the phoney war for months because no one could do anything. The commonwealth came through in the end, single-handedly fighting the nazis and the japs for years. With or without appeasement, Poland was falling. That was Hitlers exact attitude to it, even if Poland accepted his ludicrous demands he already had plans in action to give him cause for war. Not to mention the deal with the Russians, Germany was obligated to declare war on Poland after the pact. You can however blame the British for refusing to cooperate with the USSR, who were trying desperately to form a defensive pact with the British and French. And you can blame the USA for not joining the League of Nations aswell. Without them it was always doomed to fail.
About Dunkirk, they should’ve captured the 338,000 British French, Belgian troops that were on the beaches at Dunkirk. That would’ve left England, completely defenseless and more likely to come to the peace table. Those troops that got back to England, were the British expeditionary force And the best troops in the British army. They could’ve also been held as hostages if the negotiations stalled. Hitler’s first and biggest mistake was letting England off the hook.
@@m_fredi9549 the French couldn’t do anything to stop the Wehrmacht when they were highly organised and well positioned, but now they’re totally defeated and with no high command, they’re going to pull the defence of a lifetime out of their asses? There was no legitimate effort made to stop the evacuation of Dunkirk, Hitler though the British would come to term with them if they showed mercy. No amount of French resistance would’ve stopped the Wehrmacht at that time, let alone the Luftwaffe.
The thing people don't understand is even if Germany were able to invade Britain, Britain still had Canada, Australia, India to call upon so I doubt England would surrender
Why does this myth persist? The Germans tried to capture the troops at Dunkirk. They failed, because they were out of fuel and the (mostly French) rearguard fought a determined defense. And even if they did, it wouldn’t have meant peace, because there was absolutely no way for Germany to invade Britain or force the rest of the British empire to yield, and Hitler had proven very extensively that his promises were worthless so peace negotiate were useless. Pacts Sunt Servanda is one of the oldest principles of international diplomacy for a reason, and Hitler basically took 1 big dump over it for 7 years. Then he was surprised when no one trusted him and the British & allied governments in exile refused negotiations.
I like these reasons because none of them would’ve worked. A war between Germany and the USSr was inevitable it just depended on who would start it, not declaring war on the us wouldn’t change a thing because Germany simply couldn’t match up to the USSr and would lose inevitabley, and negotiating peace was simply impossible because Britain had a very strong “never surrender” policy
If the Soviet Union would have declared war on Germany, they would have done it in the far future. They wanted to industrialize fully first before tackling on a powerful nation. They wanted to declare war on Turkey though, cause that would have allowed them to secure the Black Sea. Perhaps even expand into the Middle-East after.
The Soviets were actually unprepared and badly managed and could've fallen to Germany only surviving due to the U.S lend lease and Britain diverging some of Hitler's forces away from the eastern front.
@@gustopher6500 Especially oil. The German army was so short on fuel they had to de-motorize some units after France to have enough fuel to invade. The German quartermaster general predicted that the logistics Germany had could only get 700km into the Soviet Union. As it worked out they got an extra 150km by robbing everything they could to keep the Panzers going at the expense of the rest of the army. But even if they captured Moscow in 1941 it just would have been a Stalingrad a year early because they'd probably have achieved that by leaving a million Soviet troops on the flank of their attack ready to cut off the advance.
1. Didn’t occur due to Britain planning a preemptive invasion of Norway to cut off the area from Germany due to the Trondleheim mines. Following the failed invasion Chamberlain was ousted even though it was Churchill that had pushed for it, and Churchill was actively indebted to several lobbyists that more or less held him by a noose to keep the British in the war. This more or less meant Britain wouldn’t willingly surrender unless Churchill was ousted. However even after the invasion of France Britain’s population and politicians were still mostly pro-peace, so what occurred is Churchill broke the implied agreement between themselves and Germany to not bomb civilian centers by launching a huge air raid on Berlin (after mind you bombing factories that were in civilian centers, to which Germany made no response), which forced Hitler to have to respond in kind to save face. You can find records of Hitler’s hesitance to antagonize the British and his repeated statements that he desired an alliance with them. Also the Soviets were rearming and seemed to be preparing an invasion so a two front war was inevitable, Germany just decided to pull the trigger since they thought through blitzkrieg tactics they could beat the Soviets even at a numerical and debatably (not speaking to quality but quantity) material disadvantage (to clarify further in terms of raw resources).
They didn't have to attack Russia for those resources, they had all the wealth of France to trade for them. Germany should have consolidated their gains and forged deeper economic ties with the soviets. Without the Eastern Front the British would have been easily subdued.
@@boomerisadog3899 "the British would have been easily subdued". I can tell you've never met a pissed up brit who's waiting hungrily for his kebab on a Friday night. But on a serious note, no, it wouldn't have been easy. The British beaches were so well defended that Normandy would've been a walk in the park by comparison. Mined to the gunnels, booby trapped with great pipes filled with petrol which would explode along the entire length of the beach, the home guard being trained to fight a guerilla war, both the RAF and RN undefeated both in the air and at sea. Not to mention Germany had very few, and I mean very few purpose built landing craft. And invasion of Britain would've relied on capturing and holding several deep water ports and airfields. Basically the operation would have had to have begun with a massive parachute assault and a small amphibious invasion. And we all know how German parachute assaults play out... The invasion of Crete, was it successful? Yes. But did it cost the Germans hugely in terms of man power and materials? Yes.
The reason they invaded Russia was that Russia was supplying them with oil and Hitler knew they could cut it off at any moment and didn’t trust Stalin.
Did you not pay attention to the video, that doesn’t meet their political ideologies at the time. Hitler was gonna fight the soviets one way or another.
Yeah the United States declared war on America due to Japan going to war with America in the Pacific so Germany could have decided to stay out of that war but Adolf Hitler and his generals were arrogant
1. Hitler did sue for peace but Churchill was like “we don’t negotiate with lames”. 2. Hitler wanted to conquer Russia in the very beginning because he saw the east as the natural route for Germans. But France and Britain declared war on him before that could happen naturally. 3. The us would’ve gotten involved anyways after Pearl Harbor. Which was the japans plan and not Germany. There’s a reason Hiroshima and Nagasaki was bombed and not Berlin
They didn't let the British retreat from Dunkirk. They were bombing and strafing the beaches constantly. There were prevented from reaching Dunkirk too soon by the valiant actions of British and French soldiers.
The Germans went for the oil rich Caucasuses but instead if they encircled Stalingrad and continued pushing forwards they might’ve won the war against the Soviet’s
@@DavidNaval adolf told his generals how he walked around in lederhosen during wintertime and his troops just needed to man up during the russian offensive. the guy was delusional.
Actually, if you look through history, Germany attempted to make a peace deal on multiple occasions. We actually had multiple accident where we fired a boat and that’s actually written in history but wasn’t talked of much. The American government wanted to get involved very badly so they were pushing for Germany to declare war against us. We armed there enemies. We had American troops fighting under the Royal Air Force and on the ground with the Britt’s. Now, if they never attacked Russia, and then declared war against the US, the outcome would’ve been way different. We would not have won. So that story reminds you of today’s world? The American people are not interested in war yet our government supplying weapons and aid countries they don’t want to give money to.
Correct. Hitler did actually try to stop the war no strings attached, and at one point he even had planes drop leaflets over London which called for peace but churchill wanted to continue fighting.
@@MrJohansen it’s why casualties at Dunkirk were much lower than what it could’ve been. Hitler though that it would be more demoralising to see the entire British army coming home asses on fire than to just kill them all. He underestimated British propaganda massively, they turned the biggest military disaster in UK history into a positive thing.
@@MrJohansen do you think he would of made peace…..I don’t, I wasn’t there obviously but if we was left till last we would of definitely got some, hitler knew by taking the uks allies left us without backup, they wouldn’t of gone into half the country’s they did if they wanted “peace with Britain”
Honestly yeah. If they kept quiet and didn’t expand, they might’ve been seen more like Spain, just an isolated dictatorship. Fascism however is illogical so-
Thats removing the one reason why the Nazis were insanely expansionist. Removing Lebensraum is like saying Germany shouldn't have invaded the USSR or Germany shouldn't have hated the Jews, you're removing the things that made the Nazis what they are. You're saying the Nazis would've won by not being Nazis.
@@ad_astra5The difference is, Spain was pragmatic and not stupid. Spain emerged from a Civil War right before World War II kicked off. Spain had no way to contribute for the Axis. They were smart in staying out.
They DID try and negotiate with Britain through June and July, the invasion of Russia was inevitable and declaring war on the US was a treaty requirement with Japan
The Treaty With Japan Was Only Effective If Japan Was Attacked. Japan Attacked First. Hitler was just a war monger at that point. Declaring War against USA was the worst move
The book “We March Against England” demonstrates that Hitler considered dropping his eastward expansion after the fall of France. The wind blew the dust in his room in a way that changed his mind again.
1. They did try to have peace with the UK. Churchill did everything he could to continue war. 2. The Soviets themselves were preparing to invade Europe so war was inevitable. 3. Germany was treaty bound to declare war and the USA was essentially already a combatant by sending 1 morbillion lend leases to the uk and Soviets
1. Germany offered 30 something peace offers and tried to negotiate with Brittain who refused any negotiation 2. Stalin threw Germany ,France and Brittain into war intentionally by delaying the invasion of Poland so only Germany would trigger the defence pact between Poland , UK and France. When France and Poland were out and Brittain stuck on an island , the war between USSR and Germany was inevitable. USSR had the resources Germany needed to defeat Brittain. USSR would not have traded it's resources to the only enemy they had in Europe who was more technologically advanced. 3. The US declared war on Germany , not the other way around. US was escorting British supply ships to Brittain and , after an incident where a German sub accidentally fired at a US destroyer , Roosevelt gave the "shoot on sight" order. So basically , US protected Germany 's enemy and also shot at any Germany vessels they encountered. The practical declaration of war was made by Roosevelt. Hitler just made the formal declaration of war.
1 any treaties with Hitler had been extensively proven to be useless the moment they were signed, because he behaved like a criminal not bound by laws or treaties. So, Hitler could offer whatever he wanted, no one would agree to it because no one could trust him to abide by it
Actually the British and French decided not to declare war on the Soviets, because Churchill was literally playing 4 d chess and knew that Germany was planning an invasion, and knew in the near future, the Soviets could be turned into an ally against the Germans.
The first two are impossible, since Churchill vowed to never surrender, and Stalin was planning to invade just 3 weeks post operation Barbarossa. The last one makes sense. American support is no joke, and probably the main reason why Moscow and Leningrad did not fall.
and the source is a book written in 1980 that is rejected by most historians.stalins first goal was to recover from the great purge.until then stalin knew russia wasnt ready for war
I vote for numbers two. They tried numbers one, but churchill refused the idea of peace, and held his famous speech on The radio, where they would fight on land, sea and air, and never surrender.
Yes number two which is never gone to happen because hitler hated communism because he saw communism as a system created by jews so no number two wouldn't work not even in any other Universe
What kongo said, plus the fact that Germany was short on many resources which it couldn't get! So Germany would stagnate a ton in this scenario...and the war would still go on as the British and the Free France Forces would surrender or accept peace!
What the first two said, plus the fact that Stalin was already planing to betray hitler, they both knew when they signed the pact that it would not last as long as they said it would.
Yes, I gues the biggest problem was that the USA send much material to the other western allies even without being officially in the war. Without the help of the USA I doubt that the UdSSR would have hold the front against the Germans. In ww2 and ww1 the problems with the USA were not that they have a huge army (which was at least in ww2 in total ok but not really strong in quality) but they had so much stuff which other couldn't compete with
@@red-gp9ohh True, but they were in the process, however treacherously. Not sure that diplomats from Japan knew until the last minute either. According to info in BRIDGE TO THE SUN film, they didnt. It was with Carol Baker and James Shigeta about 1960. Southern gal married japanese diplomat's son before Pearl Harbor and lived in Japan. True story. Sad.
1. “We shall not flag nor fail. We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France and on the seas and oceans; we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air. We shall defend our island whatever the cost may be; we shall fight on beaches, landing grounds, in fields, in streets and on the hills. We shall never surrender” 2. War with the Soviet Union was inevitable, even Stalin knew this. It was who would attack first was the real question. Hitler saw the complete incompetence within the Red Army especially after the Winter War and decided to strike first before the Red Army could make reforms. 3. Like with the USSR, war with the US was also inevitable. US ships were being sunk by German U-Boats, another Lusitania was inevitable. No matter what way you put it, there is no way Germany could have won WW2 without making MASSIVE changes in who they were at that time.
Thank you, finally someone with an ounce of overarching historical knowledge. This video pissed me off so much, especially point 2. Hitler was a racist, territorial megalomaniac. He hated slavs, he hated bolsheviks. there was a 0% chance of not invading the USSR.
Hitler tried and tried again to stop there after Dunkirk. But Churchill rejected all attempts at communications. Edit: That’s when they sent R.Hess (the SA’s best man, alone in a dogfighter with a letter addressed the King if I recall correctly, with a mission to parachute out into the countryside, surrender to the local police and attempt diplomacy behind Churchill’s back (probably with sir Mosley’s backers). The mission was unsuccessful and so the war continued… Rudolf.H spent the remainder of his life in prison until he was murdered by a coloured guard at 93 years of age. His murder is documented as suicide.
That was the soviets. N@zi germany had the best economy after national socialism without war while everywhere else had been suffering from the great depression.
@@averagelifeenjoyer Germany had already recovered from the Great Depression by the time the Nazis come to power, actually. In the meanwhile the German economy during the war was entirely reliant on plundering occupied Europe, which left much of Europe - even in the west, facing starvation and famine as early as the winter of 1940.
@@michealkasey2292 Thx, was in fact my 1st take--& my 2nd--but then I thought, while I might get teased for asking, I just didn't want to risk, missing something pretty important out of timidity...
Re: 2. I highly recommend "Icebreaker" by Viktor Suvorov, a GRU officer who defected to the UK in 1978. Very thorough analysis of how the USSR was preparing to attack Germany. That's why Germans were initially so successful, they attacked Soviets, who disassembled anti-tank obstacles, cleared minefields and staged their logistics to rapidly advance. It's a great read.
And yet Stalin had already purged his military of officers he thought unloyal to him. Both Stalin and Hitler were so evil it wouldn't allow them to be rational in their military planning.
@@alpardo4124 I'd say it was just arrogance. They both surrounded themselves with sycophants and cowards, too afraid to tell them they were doing something wrong. I think that's also why Putin gave the order. There was nobody to tell him his military was crap and Ukraine would not just roll over. It's tempting to dismiss them as just "evil", while they all had, what they believed to be, "rational" reasons, and were not motivated by desire to do evil things.
@@serpents666 " Putin gave the order. There was nobody to tell him his military was crap " Nope, there was an Russian gerneral that told him that and Putin just kicked him out from position for preaty much predicting the future...
@@serpents666 Why? Suvorov has been shown to be utterly wrong by multiple military historians! The state of Soviet forces before Barbarossa alone shows that no attack was coming in 1941 as the units were undermanned, umdergunned and had no supplies!
@@Pikkabuu Mainly Soviet/Russian historians. Interestingly enough, several Soviet historians agreed with him. Not only does his analysis explain how Germans were able to advance so quickly but it's also consistent with one thing Russia is really known for - breaking international agreements whenever it suits them.
They did #1 and not only after Dunkirk, but many other times- and actually very reasonable and arguably generous terms when they held the cards. It's a muted fact by "our side". #2 is curious bc they knew things about Russia that were indicating betrayal. #3 they were forced into by their pact with Japan.
Both parties of the Mol pact were planning on betraying the other, and both knew the other was planning on betraying them, even media at the time knew all of that. The pact was about divvying up Poland, not about non aggression, non aggression was just used to cover up their plans to invade Poland.
Germany actively wanted to go to war with the US. Hitler made this clear many times before Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. The Nazis were more than happy to declare war on the US
The only way they could have won is if all three of these somehow happened, which is incredibly unrealistic. Britain had won the Battle of Britain by the time Germany invaded the Soviet Union, and once the Soviets got their game together, it didn't matter if D-Day happened or not because nothing was stopping the Soviets from reaching Berlin. It is basically impossible for Germany to win because they would never have managed to knock Britain out of the war, so unless the British suddenly turn arould and surrender, which would go completely against popular opinion in Britain at the time, Germany can't win.
@@maxsmusings339 It’s hard to say that. Yea, it would have been longer, but the German army wasn’t in any way ready for the long haul that the eastern front would have been if it lasted longer. If Germany had taken western Russia, the war would have had move east to Siberia, and the Germans were not ready for a war in Siberia. Also, their oil and manpower problems would eventually come to bit them. Would the Soviets have steamrolled the Wehrmacht like they did in the latter part of the war? Probably not. But would Germany have won? Also probably not.
Germany didn't declare war on the US because Japan attacked them and they were allies. Germany declared war on the US because Roosevelt was continuously provoking and outright attacking the German U-boats and used the US Army to thwart German military operations on Iceland and Greenland in the spring, summer, and autumn of 1941. Roosevelt was itching for any opportunity to join the war despite running his reelection campaign on neutrality. The US public was OVERWHELMINGLY against war (97% against I think; maybe 93% against). Despite being a neutral nation, the US Navy attacked German U-boats and led the Royal Navy to German positions if not outright attacking themselves. These actions [obviously] violated neutrality. Hitler constantly ordered his U-boat fleet to avoid attacking US ships and to withdraw if antagonized by the US Navy without fighting back. In Greenland and Iceland, he ordered the withdrawal of his men. Hitler constantly honored US neutrality, while Roosevelt used it as a convenient shield while antagonizing and attacking the the Germans. Germany declared war on the US because it was inevitable. The US earned the declaration by Germany over the better part of the year leading up to war being declared in December of 1941. Roosevelt was the worst war hawk in US history and should be reviled, not praised. Hitler literally offered peace to Britain and France 4-5 different times between September 1939 and March 1940. During this time he also offered the Brits/Poles about half of what was Poland to be reinstated as a new Polish state. Remember, Poland was formed from land that was German for hundreds of years prior to the German defeat in WW1; it would have essentially been Poland as it was for most of Polish history. After conquering the low countries and France, he offered peace to Britain; again, multiple times. Leading up to the war Hitler offered the German army up to defend British overseas holdings if the need ever arose. Hitler didnt want to conquer Britain, he wanted to work hand in hand with them; Germany on land, Britain at sea. Hitler admired Britain more than any other nation.
Laughs in railway gauge, Wehrmacht relying on horses, low tank production numbers, soviet partisans, panzer Corps taking most of the loses and fuel shortages
1. don't fight soviets 2. don't ally with japan 3. don't invade Poland, or don't continue after dunkirk. 4. be united by a religion, would have strived better 5. Don't worry about silly people in the future saying that you could've won despite the fact that you lost and no one can change that
1) completely wrong and ignorant opinion as if they didn’t invade they would’ve gotten invaded and they needed the supply for the war. 2) who tf could’ve foreseen Japan doing what they did? Who r u god? Hindsight is always 20/20
@@hokhanh7266 well i mean they did ally with the soviets at the start but I suppose you're right, and also japan kinda sucked in the first place and they didn't really need em, but I suppose they needed an ally around the pacific. Anyway there's no point in arguing over if they could've won or not because the point is THEY LOST (thankfully).
@@liltapewormthetapewormGermany and Japan was semi-allied with each other. They had a defensive pact against communis/Russia. But Japan avoided that war since Germany started it and not Russia. Instead they jumped another Superpower. Axis coordination was a joke
“Don’t declare war on the US” Japan : “This looks like a job for me “
technically, japan attacked first before a declaration of war was sent..
Germany formally declared war on the US after the attack on pearl harbor (unnecessary)
Japan attacked US first. Then Germany chose to declare war on US shortly after because Hitler believed that sinking US convoys in the Atlantic (previously neutral and off-limits) would force the British to surrender faster than USA could impact the war. He was wrong.
Japan did not attack USSR so Germany could've done the same to them
@@pc_suffering6941the pact between them was defensive
The British rejected the idea of a negotiated peace after Dunkirk.
No yea this is all bull shit.
I know but that was in hope that the Germans would do something stupid like attack the US or USSR. If they didn't attack them, after a while the UK would agree to peace as they knew they couldn't hope to win alone
@@sirsausagedog4162 if they didn't attack USSR the USSR would attack them.
@@sirsausagedog4162 we will fight on the beaches and we will never surrender
@@sirsausagedog4162 You need to learn a bit of history here fella. Germany offered peace at Dunkirk when Britain’s forces were surrounded after France’s collapse. Churchill told them to fuck off. Britain managed to get the majority of their troops out of there. Germany offered peace again, Churchill told them to fuck off. Germany started the Battle of Britain by launching an air invasion of Britain, the Battle commenced throughout the summer of 1940. Germany started bombing British cities, offered peace, Churchill told them to fuck off. Britain DEFEATED Germany in the Battle of Britain, Germany realised they couldn’t successfully invade Britain and turned on the USSR a few months later.
Japan was that one teammate that awaken the sleeping boss while Germany was farming
Italy is the brother that Germany let play because he had an extra controller
Spain is the teammate that was taking a shower when the team needed him
What boss?
@@SCTheth Spain was the teammate who didnt really want to play.
@@SCThethLol
@@SCTheth from what I read, without Canaris, Franco might have gotten involved with Hitler and War. But the Admiral was anti Nazi/Hitler.He had Franco ask for things Germans didnt have. He told Franco Allies would win. He kept it up and Franco bluffed and finally told Adolf he wouldnt join axis and that he thought Allies would win.
Canaris made a big mistake: he kept a diary. He also got involved with the Valkyrie mess. Gestapo found his diary. Goodbye Canaris.
Hitler : Hi Churchill i offer you 2 peace deals .
Churchill : no peace
“Ill take the 3rd option” 💀
War and blood, nothing else
Bro it was 34 or more
@@efextechsystems that 3rd option could save many countries from British colonial rule
@@tapash5868 Glad Britain carried on with it's empire then, if only for a few more years.
"1:Stop at Dunkirk."- They tried, multiple peace offers were sent to the British, who refused to come to the negotiating table
"2:Don't invade the USSR"- This only works in hindsight. While I do find it unlikely that the Soviets would have invaded in 41 or 42, if a settlement could not be reached with Britain or if a landing similar to D-Day occured while there was a massive Russian buildup on the Polish border, we'd be saying 'Well he obviously should have attacked Russia when he had the chance.'
"3: Don't declare war on the USA"- The USA was essentially fighting an undeclared war against Germany by protecting British shipping and mixing US ships in with British convoys to try and goad Germany into attacking them. By declaring war on the US, this allowed Germany to start unrestricted submarine warfare which was their only chance at slowing an Allied buildup of troops and equipment in Britain. The US was going to declare war on Germany at some point anyways. Germany would rather hostilities begin when America was in the process of shipping war materials to Britain rather than wait for America to declare war once their buildup was complete.
Just like what America is doing in Ukraine now. I have a feeling that this war is going to go the same way. I have a feeling, though that America is going to do an attack on an American sovereign nation or someone we are friends with, and that will give us the reason to put boots on the ground.Ukraine is running out of men. I feel this will happen before the next election. The Democrats aren’t gonna let Trump come in and get elected because they will all get arrested for all of their crimes against humanity.
Japan was going to attack usa sooner or later which they prob shouldn't have but it seemed like if they only attacked the brits n dutch usa would attack japan anyways
Another thing TK remmeber is that Nazi political ideology goes against with not invading the USSR. The USSR was the hegemony of Bolshevism. Hitler invading the USSR was going to happen no matter what
@@cajdoesstuff9454Especially the fact Slavs are one of the lowest levels of race in Nazism and the USSR was seen as a Slavic Bolshevik Horde.
Well put my friend
“We shall fight them on the beaches we shall fight them on the landing grounds we shall never surrender”
I don’t think negotiations after Dunkirk was possible.
Ok, try checking in 10 years later after constant low level bombing raids and u-boat attacks but no significant changes in favor of either side. See if there is still broad public support to keep fighting
@@GoErikTheRedmy guy, history literally showed us that the British public was all in favour of fighting, the u boat attacks and bombing didn’t do anything but strengthen public opinion to fight
@@acanofbacon914 The UK spent exactly one year, June 22 1940 to June 22 1941, fighting alone. Then Barbarossa kicked off, and 6 months later Pearl Harbor. I don't doubt the will of the British public to fight during that year, and probably for several years after. But if there's no Barbarossa and no operation torch, then N Africa falls. At that point what fighting is there left to do? With no need to send planes into Russia Germany can much better protect their airspace, so the bombing campaign becomes even more costly than it was historically, and probably has to be canceled.
At that point, even if the will to fight exists, there's no fight to be had. Now imagine that situation persists for 5 or 10 years, with no end in sight. Obviously the UK wouldn't surrender to the Germans. But assuming the Germans are able to consolidate their hold on the territories they've taken, how long are the Brits going to keep fighting for other people who already seem to have given up?
@@GoErikTheRed we knew the Russians would be at war with them soon. Was only a matter of time.
That's why we waited. The navy and raf could hold off, and us supply could keep us fighting harder.
They only made the speech to try and convince the US to join the war. The hawks couldn’t convince the people or the doves to go to war, one of the biggest concerns was that the British would surrender before the hawks could sway the public
“we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God’s good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old”
1. As others have mentioned the British rejected peace talks.
2. Operation Barbarossa was considered to be a pre-emptive strike. A war between Germany and the USSR was at that point seen as inevitable. Germany wanted to win a quick lightning war against the USSR as they did France while they still had the upper hand in industry and military. That and they need to secure oil for the war machine.
3. The US was likely to join in at some point or another either way.
I think the only way they could have beaten the British is if Chamberlain stayed in power somehow or if even more pacifist leaders were elected. Germany beats France, wipes out part of the British army in Dunkirk, perhaps Cairo falls, and the Brits surrender
@@snowmeows3342 Perhaps. It is worth noting that appeasement wasn't however just a pacifist strategy, it was mainly intended to buy time for the soon to be allied powers to ready for war. Iirc the british were not ready for an all out war with Germany and while the French certainly on paper had the means they had a lot of internal issues which meant that they could not enter a war with germany alone.
With that said, trusting hitler not to invade the rest of Czechoslovakia was a big blunder considering that it provided both the industry and the gold required to pay for and develop the german army to what it was about to become.
Yup, American destroyer escorts would get attacked probably. Pretty easy to sell after Pearl Harbor.
Barbarossa was going well until the Germans forgot why they were there and tried to take Stalingrad, which was nowhere near as useful as the oil fields.
@@clonecommandermike332if the Germans had not tried to take Stalingrad, Operation Uranus might’ve resulted in all German forces South of the Don captured. They had to at least reach the Volga and the Don to protect their flanks
Imagine Germany invents a Time machine in WW2, sees this video, goes back and change the timeline 💀☠️
You mean the Austrian painter gets a time machine 🎨🖌🙋♂️
seems like they did not
Oh hell no 😮
@@O3-O1 other timeline
Nuklear fission was found by German scientists. So if you go back to the 30s, you just need to accelerate their knowledge to get the bomb.
Austrian painter always spoke about a Wunderwaffe. They were ahead in rocket science and found nuklear fission. You can imagine what allies interpreted from that.
I always love these... "Germany could have won the war if they'd have done literally everything differently" opinions.
Agree people Just like this for some stupid reason they Just saying straight up bullshit without research any proof and other stuff
Or “the Nazis could’ve won, if they weren’t Nazis”
Germany could have won the war if they'd only won the war!
@@orange8420 it is always fun to speculate
@@orange8420 "unlike me they just say straight up bullshit without research" - 🤓
Germany tried the first one. It was the UK who refused to negotiate
Yep. Oversimplified has a really good TH-cam video on this.
@@SarcasticTruth117no one gives a shit. 🤡 😂
Good ✌️
It was a laughable attempt by Germany everyone knew they were full of shit so the UK didn’t negotiate
They tired to negotiate after invading multiple sovereign nations, of course they aren't going to accept. Especially with the terms that Germany had set forth
"operation: completely stack the odds against us" didn't really roll off the tongue, so they just went with "Barbarossa"
Good one
Haha.
Barbarossa was the initial plan.
The UK and France declaring war on Germany was not what Hitler intended.
The plan worked pretty well for the first two years...
The Soviets would have attacked Germany anyways. We fought the wrong enemy.
@Daniel Mudge it sure did.
but if a plan goes well for two years and then results in the utter devastation of your regime and the fracturing of your country... you can't really call that a great success
True historians know the Germany tried all of this...
Explain?
@steelbiceps
1. They did stop after conquering France because they only attacked it in the first place because they were declared on...
2. The USSR almost finished building up the majority of their forces for a massive invasion of the rest of europe, which is why Germany chose to get the upper hand by invading them first... hence the massive support Germany got from various countries for Operation Barbarossa.
3. Germany had no choice but to declare war on the US because of the Tripartite Pact and the fact that the German and American navies were at war anyways...
Ggs!
@@steelbicepsabsolutely correct. Most people don’t know the specifics of the war
@@starborn6239 funny they didnt mention that in the video.
@@steelbiceps that's why I mentioned "real historians"
"we shall never surrender" springs to mind
America springing to action comes to mind
Yea the germans accualy told the british to give up and surrender, as even seen in the Dunkirk movie. But the brits didnt like that idea.
@@bashbish4564 Pearl Harbour didn’t happen for another 1.5 years after Churchill gave that speech.
Britain defeated Germany in the Battle of Britain in summer 1940. Which confirmed Germany couldn’t invade Britain.
US “sprang into action” in December 1941.
You’re way off with your history.
@@tomben6180 I'm halfway off? You think Brittian won? Loll you'd be speaking German if it weren't for America Comrade. And the Red army with 21 million losses in turn causing the highest rate of death upon the German army during WW2 "won the war." Go Brexit and Queen queef on your island.
@@bashbish4564 I didn’t say “halfway off” I said you’re “way off”, which you are.
No, Britain wouldn’t be speaking German as Britain defeated Germany in the “BATTLE OF BRITAIN” in the summer of 1940.
Can you read that please? Germany then did nothing until spring 1941, a full 7 months later. And decided to invade the USSR as it failed to invade Britain.
The US didn’t join the war until December 1941 and didn’t engage with Germany until 1942, a full two years after Germany had lost to Britain in summer 1940.
You Americans have a bad reputation for ignorance, by pretty much everyone around the world, but congrats, you’re the worst one I’ve come across.
Soviet Union was what Hitler wanted the whole time lol That was unavoidable. That was Hitler's true goal
Well ya the Soviets wanted the world they needed to be stopped
If Japan went west in Barbarossa, instead of East into the Pacific they would've got it.
Also Mussolini’s failed invasion of Greece delayed Operation Barborossa by a month or two. Probably could have captured Leningrad, Moscow and properly prepared for winter
His generals werent really happy about it so if he was more of a person that listened to his generals they couldve probsbly talkrd him out of it
@@sandsilly That's also true. Japan was really hurting on resources.
"Negotiate a deal on your terms"
GB: "Nuh uh"
Edit: ww2 in reply section 😅😅
More like
GB:✌️
GB wouldn't be able to hold out much long if Germany did not divert 90% of it's resources and military to the East. People would oust Churchill a out of office and sign peace
GB would most definitely have been able to hold out. Maybe not in Africa, but don’t forget that GB at the time had the strongest navy in the world (Germany wasn’t even close) and the English had practically destroyed the luftwaffe over the Battle of Britain. Although Germany had a great land army, their AirPower had been decimated and they had no navy. Not to mention the English people were super patriotic and heavily sided with Churchill on his “never surrender”. Let’s just say there was a reason germany focused it’s expansion elsewhere
This also doesn’t even account for American intervention which 100% would’ve happened if GB started losing.
@@Sectarian. no they wouldn't. the VAST majority of british citizens were in favour of fighting to the end
1: UK rejected the idea of surrendering after Dunkirk.
2: Germans didn't have enough oil to maintain their army, they declared war on USSR to get to the Baku's oil fields
3: He's right, Germans lucky they didn't get 50 megatonns of freedom
The atom bomb was created in Britain and the assembled in the US. The UK would have dropped one on them if not for
1.yeah i really have no idea what he is talking about there
2.ehh it was more ideological reasons.the baku oil fields were more cost then worth and the german idea wasnt to take it but to bomb it to cripple the russians
3.yeah this is simply true.germany thought they could get a quick peace with the us and force them to stop aiding the uk.they didnt really realise how much pearl harbor shifted american opinion towards war
PARTIALLY wrong on 2 and 3. Main ideological goal of WWII was to invade the USSR shortly after the defeat of Poland. It was delayed however because Hitler didn't want to have a war on two fronts. And admittedly, yes it was a dumb idea to declare war on the USA, but Hitler wouldn't have not done so. He was actually very pleased about Pearl Harbor.
Stalin actually offered to ally with German after the war started but Hitler refused because he didn't trust him and ended up deciding to invade
2: no, it's because he wanted to conquer the slavs, who he saw as racially inferior, and end bolshevism.
I swear that's the main mistake all invaders make.
Pause, regroup, rebuilt, continue
Thiere have been many times invaders have done just that only for the enemy to have to time to do the same and beat you
Doesn't matter...eventually they will have to invade or attack America. It's what an Empire does!
Germany couldn't allowed herself to go a gruling war of attrition with ussr
@@orange8420 yeah, big waste. Especially considering they had a pact
@@armins.601
Pact was just delaying the imminent.
Both Germans and Russians were aware of it.
1. They tried negotiating with the british, british basically said up yours
2. They were bound by the tripartite pact to come to Japan’s “defense” and failing to do so may make the Italians even more distrustful of their german counterpart
3. The USSR was an inevitable clash, and everyday that went by was a day they would gain more competence and Stalin could replace the military staff he killed. It was a matter of when not if, and better to fight a war when you have the upper hand and take the chance of them developing the advantage during it, than if you just wait for them to develop it regardless.
Suggested reading: Thunder on the Dneiper. Details how Stalin and Zhukov war gamed exactly what they did, for the Soviets to win, though it was a close run.
Plus the US was already sending aid to Russia, before Germany declared war on them.
A huge mistake was to detour to Stalingrad
The nuclear weapons of the british and americans (manhatten, and tube alloy programs). And the germans wanted to exterminate an entire people. There is no way for germany winning
Also the fact that, alongside better Generals being instated, the army was also modernizing at the same time. Mainly the old T-26's and BT tanks being phased out for the better KV-1s and T-34s, as well as new doctrines and guns.
A lot of times ideology and logic don’t go together. This is one of those times.
For real. Everyone who claims “hitler could’ve won if he did ____” forgets that’s he’s HITLER. He’s an ideologue. He’s not some pragmatic negotiator who’s gonna change his goals based on what’s realistic. Conquering the western regions of the USSR was core to Hitler’s ideology, and it was also something he’d NEVER be able to achieve within the context of the second world war
I'd love to hear you explain instead of just pronouncing some grand revalation :)
@@3turnall Germany is bad shit insane, they will go out of their way to intentionally fuck up their war effort just to achieve ideological goals, the Holocaust was a huge drain on resources and if Germany was logical, than there would be simply no Holocaust as they would focus more of their resources on the war effort instead of on useless late war inventions and the genocide of Jews.
Fuck off with your shitty ass attitude to this very legit concern.
@@timothytimothy4854 See, someone explained. I just dislike it when people decide to have a point on something and then go on to never explain. It's necessary for any real dialogue.
Yeah communism and fascism are two different things
The biggest strategic mistake Hitler made was to attack the Soviet Union. During the battle of Stalingrad alone Hitler lost almost 1 million soldiers.
Germany lost 300 000 troops, max 500,000 troops in Stalingrad.
It was the commies lost huge number of soldiers in almost each battle during ww2.
I would say Germany’s biggest mistake was helping Italy in invasion of Greece. By doing that they had to postpone soviet invasion, which was initially planned at the beginning of April. They lost almost 3 months, and that played a crucial role in failing in Operation Barbarossa. Taking into account that the Wehrmacht reached to the outskirts of Moscow by December 1941, they could definitely have captured Moscow have they begun the invasion on planned time.
They wouldnt even if they reach moscow what after that? They would just lose it in the winter they would get moscow and lose it instanly and the 3 months on grece gave them more time to build up there army@@hopefulperson9622
@@hopefulperson9622
Yeah, first of all it was 500,000 lost by the Germans in Stalingrad, and considering the big difference in the ratio of manpower between the Germans and Soviets, losing the 6th Army was a catastrophe for the Germans, since they couldn’t afford that kind of loss. The Soviets lost millions between 41 and 44, and still had a 11 million strong army in 45.
Next, I always hear this amateurish suggestion that if the Balkans wouldn’t had set back the German timetable, the Germans would have captured Moscow. Everyone who says this completely forgets the logistics involved. The German advance was already starting to slow down in mid July, do to supply lines becoming overstretched. Tanks, and other motorized vehicles don’t run on hopes, and wishes. Crossing the Russian countryside was hard on equipment. They needed fuel, and replacement parts. The bulk of German forces who started Operation Barbarossa weren’t even mechanized, it was straight legged infantry that covered 20km a day. Not to mention the Germans had to use 600,000 horse to move supplies, and artillery pieces.
So it’s complete conjecture on your part to claim that the Germans could have taken Moscow on a earlier timetable.
They did try to seek terms with the UK. We declined 👍
As they should have (the British)
That worked out so well for you guys lmao
@@hotwaxonmyuddersohyeahmoo5701 you've watched to many YT conspiracy videos mate.
@@anon_ymous91 My man, chill. We both know that both of our countries are super fucked right now. You guys ain't exactly putting up 10's either
@@hotwaxonmyuddersohyeahmoo5701 They didnt lose!
**insert Argentinian grandpa joke**
nice r2da profile pic
Ephesians 6:10-18 says, Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in the power of his might. Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness; and your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace; above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God: praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints. The bible is no old book. You have to really let Christ open your eyes; to see the world in shambles. Many people say it's a religion to lock up people in chains, and say it's a rule book.. why? Because people hate hearing the truth, it hurts their flesh, it's hurts their pride, it's exposes on what things have they done..people love this world so much, s*x, money, power, women, supercars.. things of this world. Still trying to find something that can fill that emptiness in your heart. You can't find that in this world.. only in Christ, the bible is no chains, it's a chainbreaker. Breaking your sins into pieces... Repent now, and turn back to the true Lord only.. God bless.
😊😊
I think your grandpa may be hiding a Time Machine somewhere
Copied comment
do you mean Austrian?
Most arguments saying “Germany could’ve won WW2” hinge on the idea of Germany not being what it was back then, glad you talked about that.
Not that. Germany actually needed to attack the Soviet Union as they were desperate to get more fuel for their vehicles. They hoped to capture the oil-rich North Caucasus.
The German economy was in absolute shambles and the war went on based on MEFO bills. Basically, "If you give us money, we promise that a Nigerian prince will give you 10 times more in return"
If Germany stopped, they wouldn't be able to hold what they gained.
And then there's the fact that Britain said, "We will never surrender" in the "We shall fight on the beaches" speech.
None of these 3 ways would have worked out.
@@KenobiThOnly5561 Why do you think Blitzkrieg was such an important German war tactic? Germany was extremely powerful but it would not be capable to support it's forces in a long term war, Germany had terrible logistics.
@@KenobiThOnly5561 He aint, a big reason Germany "had to" invade the USSR was because it was at an "end game" point in fuel and food, the military even said it was likely already too late but best to try anyway.
@@mitchverr9330 lol Soviet military sucked ass
Im even surprised how they defeated a Military with Centuries of traditions
@@danlomanalo4161Go and read ww2 eastern front Germany's greatest defeat in ww2 was Operation Bagration which was obviously against the USSR.
austrian painter's great grand son: alright thank you for tips
He doesn't have one
Oh he does. Definitely in Argentina.@@alliedonovan1978
Robert Lewandowski
@@Rayeno28 Nigga he ain't related to Hitler
@@Rayeno28proof?
A. They did try to negotiate peace with the british, we said no.
B. The USSR would've attacked the Nazis eventually if they hadn't, too much ideological difference.
C. Blame the japanese for that one.
They could have stalled the russians until Britain was defeated
For the B its actually true, the tension already there, and for the C is actually the blunder from axis power
@@philipphilip8769 for C kind of because all germany had to do was not declare war on the us after japan attacked pearl
harbor and then america wouldn't have a reason to attack germany
@@volheim2684yea
@@volheim2684Germany wanted to be able to attack us shipping and navy presence in the north Atlantic which was arming and helping to feed Britain.
Point No. 1:
- Here's the problem. The British would not tolerate negotiations, especially after Churchill took over.
Point No. 2:
- Invading the Soviet Union was their main goal from the very start. That non-aggression pact was signed so that they could buy some times to knock France and Britain first before turning towards the Soviet Union.
Point No. 3:
- This is more possible than the other points, but in my opinion, the involvement of the US in WWII would be inevitable
Hitler should have waited to invade the ussr so he can knock Britain and not fight on two fronts at the same time
@@Truewinner112 -That would be pretty difficult, because Germany cannot perform land invasion through the English channel without receiving any heavy casualties because of the Royal Navy
@@Kalashnikov413 Yeah but Hitler should have waited
Even if US did not have entered the war, the lend lease would have done the job anyway.
@@Kalashnikov413 Soviet union was already aware and they were planning to invade germany next 3 months if their politics wouldn't change.
1. Don't go to war with Russia.
2. Don't go to war with Russia.
3. Don't go to war with Russia.
They had absolutely no choice but to go to war with Russia because they needed *OIL* to power their vehicles in the ongoing wars. Germany had very little natural resources, and still does. They really had no other option. The war was lost before it started and many German generals knew this but were still swayed by the nationalist rhetoric.
Literally not possible. War was inevitable
War with Russia was going to happen regardless If Germany didn't invade Russia Russia was going to invade Germany.
Both Hitler and Stalin knew that one or the other was going to backstab the other the only question was when? So it wasn't even a matter of making the choice not to, Germany just chose to do it first.
And then Russia goes to war with you.
Russia was a terror state
1: British government was against ending the war, and they would only peace with a negotiated peace terms, not German favoring ones
2. The Soviets would invade Germany the moment Britain left or when Britain got conquered
3. The Germans could delay war with the Americans, but this would just mean a larger communist Europe in the future
Literally what every hearts of iron player thinks lmao.
"Just spam Naval bombers over the channel and Sea-lion into Britain with your 7/2 divisions!"
@@SirCheeseEaterlol fr
As a person that plays hearts of iron I have a brain and know that the germans chould have never won
@@Cat_DeGaulleseems like a skill issue
Hey not all of us are tankies or historically illiterate 😅
I remember hearing “Germany coulda won if they weren’t nazis” and it fits very well
how, maybe by using the people who hated the ussr, because even before the nazis germany planned to get its power back
I hate Nazi
" If the nazis werent nazis, they could have won" was the eact words
Well the original nazi ideology were actual socialists though, before hitler ernst rolm was the actual leader of the party and hitlers friend which hitler assassinated he was also gay
Nazis also divided poland with the ussr
So...he's telling us he doesn't know WWII history without telling us he doesn't know WWII history.
Explain
@@chasesam138he can’t be he talking about himself
@@chasesam138first one
Churchill declined any peace treaties
Second one. The USSR would have declared on Germany and broke it if Germany didn't. Though it would have been at a later date.
Third one
If Germany didn't declare on USA they would have still lost but this time Europe would be fully controlled by Soviet union with maybe only France being liberated since a d day would have been slower. And final thing Germany would have won if they accepted Soviet unions alliance. They offered to change the Molotov so they get Bulgaria in return they join axis
@@sciencemoth8669Mind if I correct some of your comments.
1. Churchill will never accept any peace deals on Germany.
2. I had always heard about “If Germany did not declare war on USSR they could have won”. This is just not right as USSR is Germany’s main objective.
3. Not declaring war against US will just make US declares war with them. Churchill convinced Roosevelt to join the Allies. If Germany did not declare it will be in the same thing as how WWI ended.
@@ronconnell826 second one I said USSR would have declared on Germany if Germany didn't. And Roosevelt only joined the allies after Germany declared on them.
This is literally the most surface level analysis of ww2 you could’ve possibly made. Then again what can I expect from an American?
They tried to negotiate peace, yea that didnt work
Also bold to assume the ussr would want to keep the pact
They did. The ussr literally had their own problems. Especially with how paranoid Stalin was. Do you think it is weird how alike the US and Russia were and still are today? Like ice and fire, yin and yang, master cheif and the arbiter. Both had their own problems during ww2 until Germany screwed both of them over haha! Just Russia got it worst unfortunately.
@@БелыйКузнецов except those 34,000 tanks rhey were building up
USSR lost a war against Finland in the winter of 1939. When Germans attacked the Soviets they couldn't believe it at first and took a long time to mount any kind of meaningful resistance. Soviets were not ready.
@@БелыйКузнецов the USSR had no intention of honoring Molotov and had every intention of attacking Germany once their internal tensions were resolved.
@@148crusader ahh. Thank you.
Point no 3 was inevitable. There was an agreement made between japan and Germany, since japan declared war on the US, Germany also had too
Point No. 2 was inevitable too. As well as Britain leaving Germany on read whenever they asked about a peace deal
Yea right his whole list is basically a complete misunderstanding of why WW2 even happened. “Oh but German would have won if they listened to me” gimme a break
Highly doubt Germany could have done much to win but as a leader who ripped up chamberlains concessions of Czech territory for peace, nothing is off the table for hitler as far as “pacts” go lol.
So? Germany also had an alliance with Stalin. That didn’t exactly work out. Hitler wasn’t really known for taking his alliance’s seriously
It’s a defensive alliance. Japan was the aggressor, Germany only declared war because Roosevelt had basically been fighting a psychological war with their nations for a while, and also supported their enemies.
Japan didn’t come to aid Germany when they attacked the Soviets.
The germans did try to negotiate a peace deal with the UK after the fall of France, poland, and the Benelux. The UK refused any deal, even if it gave them more favourable terms, shows true resilience and true heroism regarding the UK, as they knew that giving up would only create a stronger more prepared evil
100%. A lot of the decisions Churchill made (ie moving troops from N Africa to Greece) to show to the world (meaning USA) that GB and the Commonwealth will defend freedom every.
Heroic only cause they were surrounded by sea and they knew German Navy womt be able to do much. If Britain was part of Europe like France they wouldnt last long
@@lukaha5545 this is exactly how geography helped with the war. But hurt them with brexit
@@rb239rtrSo true. They shall remain isolated 😂
As already mentioned you can bark all day if you have a fence north sea ocean in between you and the bigger dog.
If AH had been smart he would have left the UK alone for now and dealt with the eastern front first.
But we can be glad that never happened.
Another idea i've heard is if they just FORTIFIED the Maginott Line/Border with France and then after invading the Soviet Union, if they treated the Soviet Civilians decently and not terribly, they could've raised a massive uprising against Stalin. Many people in the EARLY days of Operation Barbarossa welcomed them as liberators from the Soviet Union.
Let's remember that Hitler's primary objective was lebensraum, and he saw that to the East: Poland, Ukraine and Russia. Western Europe was just securing his flanks, and he would have been perfectly happy to accommodate an English peace, especially as he saw them as fellow Aryans, or close enough (we Americans were of course a "mongrel race").
Declaring war on the USA was a huge blunder, done only in solidarity with his ally Japan. The isolation v. engagement debate here at home was on every lip; it makes our present disengagement with other polarities look anemic. When Japan attacked Pearl, everyone, including FDR, assumed we would be fighting a Pacific war. As FDR was wrangling to get us to help England, this declaration by Hitler was a Godsend, and resulted in a Europe First battle plan.
Hitler's opinion on the United States varied with his mood. Prior to the war he spoke very highly of the US, after the war his rhetoric changed to the "Mongrel race" you mention.
As for Germany's declaration of war on the US, it was done for purely selfish reasons. Hitler hoped it would convince the Japanese to break their treaty with the Soviets and open a second front in his war against the USSR. Any solidarity Germany showed Japan was purely coincidental. The two powers rarely saw eye to eye and almost never cooperated, the entire war can almost be considered two separate wars.
@@hiredmurderer6228 Like it, subtle.....
fdr after hitler declares war on u.s after america feels ready for war because of pearl: "fck it we will takeout them all out"
@@skie6282 FDR had been wary of Hitler from the beginning and wanted to declare war on Hitler after Poland but congress wouldn't have it. Even after Pearl Harbor Congress was reluctant to get involved in another European war. Even American sentiment was largely against the European campaign. America was ready to pull out of the war in 1943 until a victory in Midway shifted American opinion that the war was actually winnable. Everyone always forgets that because history books wash over all that because its uncomfortable to think about.
the problem with Hitler was that he was addicted to uppers (especially amphetamine) and to the elusion of grandure.
1. They were already at war with Britain.
2. The USSR had the land needed for Germany to hold up their powerful empire.
3. Japan started war with the U.S and so Germany had to go to war because they are allied with the Japanese. Also, the U.S Was bringing supplies to the allied forces in Europe and Germany had to attack the U.S vessels.
Point 3 is technically not correct. Germany was only obligated to join the war with the US if the US was the aggressor which was obviously not the case. Hitler's declaration of war against the US is one of the biggest head scratchers of the second world war.
Germany only had to back Japan IF Japan was attacked. Not if Japan attacked some other country. Hitler should never have declared war on Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s government. Roosevelt wanted in to the war and he set up Japan to attack Pearl Harbor.
But the Americans sent enourmous amounts of equipment to Russia since March 1941, this convoys were a provocation and needed to be stopped by Germany if they wanted to succeed in the east
1. The British wouldn’t have surrendered
2. Hitler was always going to invade the Soviet Union (he talked about it in Mein Kampf)
3. The U.S. would have just found another way to enter the war against Germany after Pearl Harbor.
And if Germany don't invaded the Sowjetunion, the Sowjetunion invaded Germany
This was a plan from Stalin
Also mentioned in Mein Kampf was Hitler's desire to have Britain as an ally
I realise a fascist Britain was extremely unlikely, Hitler was being rather wishful
It would have made for a whole different war if it happened
2. Ideologically it made sense for the Germans to attack the USSR but tactically it was way out of logic because German army was short on everything before the start of operation Barborosa
yeah but if germany followed all these three things this guy said the war would’ve went from six years long to ten years long
It is like the First World War when Germany changed the course of the war, defeated Russia and was pushing back the French. The United States intervened to save the United Kingdom. It is the policy of the United States, which had sold millions of weapons to the whole world against Germany was going to join the war sooner or later.
Entire point of ww2 was the war with the soviets there is simply no ww2 without this eventual war with the Soviet Union .
POV: You have a 1000 hours on HOI4
If Germany had NOT helped the struggling Italians invade Greece and had actually started Operation Barbarossa ON TIME…
Then they still would have lost. The Soviets would still push them back, and the British would have a whole new gateway to invade Germany.
@@rtixboi probably. But, we will never know
@@JustAnotherArmyVet Also, theres the common misconception the Soviets would've surrendered if Moscow fell. They wouldn't have. Mainly because they KNEW it was a War of Survival. Stalin would've likely relocated to Siberia or Vladivostok had Moscow Fallen. With lend lease also occurring, this might've merely just extended the war to 1946 or 1947.
Also, a reminder to anyone in general that even if the Germans and their horrendous supply lines somehow, by some miracle, made it to the Caspian and took Stalingrad, as well as Baku and the rest of the caucuses, it would've still been unusable for at least 2-4 years, as the Soviets had cemented them shut, as well as various other measures to prevent it from being able to aid Germany when it looked likely it'd fall.
@@TheT-90thatstaresintoyoursoul very true
@@TheT-90thatstaresintoyoursoulхочу уточнить. Ещё в октябре прорабатывали план сдачи Москвы и перенесения столицы в Куйбышев, куда должно было перебраться всё правительство
Hitler : Keeps the pact
Stalin : builds up army and invades
Hitler : confused screaming!!
Ты перепутал
Stalin himself said that war with Germany was inevitable
Translation: You're confused@@BookedBucket
Stalin was in absolutely no position to invade. He was too busy purging his political opponents and invading Finland. This is why operation barbarosa took Stalin completely by surprise. He did not have the military means to do anything.
@@ReveredDead ???
The USSR had already been established and in enough stability by then lmao.
1: Hitler offered the British a peace deal that allowed them to keep their empire. The UK refused. 2: one of the main aims of Hitler from the beginning was the conquest of the USSR. The only reason he went to war with other European countries was to ensure that he didn't have to fight on a two front war with multiple enemies ( that was the idea at least). 3; this one I agree with
They did not declare war on the US until Japan attacked. As part of the Axis powers, they supported Japan. The US would have just sat back and sold arms to the multiple Allied powers fighting Germany, safe behind the oceans.
Much like when they ended slavery around the world, some things matter more to the brits than an empire.
@@thoroniirealoelon9520true. They’d rather genocide and oppress the Irish than do anything economically viable.
FDR promised to join by 1944 regardless. It’s impossible to keep the United States out of the war.
Had the Germans not invaded the Soviets, the Soviets would have invaded the Germans.
-and failed miserably, before the Great Patriotic war the USSR's military doctrine was so bad it lost them the winter war.
@@amongdrip8073they actually won but only got Karelia and some small pieces of land
@@ace74909 350,000+ casualties to 70,000 is far from a victory, not to mention the Soviets pretty much failed all their objectives and had to settle for sparse concessions , if the Finn's weren't exhausted and resolved to drive them out they could've.
@@amongdrip8073 they still get partial credit because they managed to get something
@@ace74909 Absolutely not, their goal was to destroy Finnish democracy and they failed miserably.
Japans the guy who spawns the wither while Germany is just farming
Fr Bahahaha
Hold on a minute just need to equip my what the f…
Last words
Japan: I summoned the wither
Germany: YOU DID WHAT?!?!?!
Roosevelt was itching for a war with Germany.
You saying that Lame guy had antsy pants
He was a jew.
@@AO00720 not quite there.
Not really, he wanted to be neutral
@@MrThhg he wanted to walk
One huge piece of the puzzle almost everyone forgets or just does not know: The reason operation Barbarossa was undertaken was Russia was massing troops and equipment for an offensive war on their western border with Germany. Germany was able to drive so deep because all these troops were setup for offense and were not dug in for defense. Hitler had no choice but to be first to strike Russia because they were preparing to do the same.
This is complete nonsense. Hitler literally wrote a book saying that the Germans would have to destroy the Soviet Union to get rid of the communist, and for living space for Germans.
There's several factors as to why these more than likely wouldn't work, especially the one with the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact
"Germany couldve won the war if they had literally none of the same goals!"
Nop Germany can Germany Win but hilter was stupid
@@maik8409he really wasn’t as stupid as people like to make him out to be.
@@appealtoreason7584this video is simply saying america did all the work to defeat hitler like they really did all the work lol
@@maik8409if Hitler Was stupid then How he Stabilized German economy?
@@asemleonard2728USSR:
Hitler and Stalin should have just smoked a blunt and talked things out
Hitler was on speed buddy lol weed wasn't his thing
if hilter wouldn't have been hilter than sure that would have been a point. saying he shouldnt have invade russia is saying that the nazi shouldnt have been nazis
Unrealistic. They hate each others ideology. Germans viewed the Russian less then peasent.
Problem, British weren't willing to surrender after Dunkirk. War with Soviet Union was in evitable. Both Soviet Union and Nazi Germany were opposing ideologies and Hitler knew it was only a matter of time. So he tried to get the jump on stalin. He also needed fuel and didn't want to rely on the Soviet Union to provide it and potentially cut him off. Third, the United States government wanted war and since Japan was in an alliance with Nazi Germany, Germany was obligated to declare war to defend an ally. So nice thoughts but they unfortunately don't work lol
"Tell me you know nothing about ww2 without telling me you know nothing about ww2"
Wow you’re so clever
Call yourself out is pretty funny
I can agree with 2 and 3, especially 3. However 1 was never an option. He tried, he genuinly tried to get britan to make a deal or surrender or sue for peace, but churchhill was never going to do that.
And even then, they only lost the Battle of Britain because they started targeting civilians instead of the RAF and their critical infrastructure/ supplies. They had their chance and they shifted focus to the civilians. Same thing can be said when the Allies started retaking France. They shifted their main focus to extermination of all that ‘got in the way’ or civilians.
@@beigegaming9905 Ehh yes and no, modern historians looking at the data believe a lot of that to be early bluster to build up the "tension" so to speak and make it look worse then it was (afterall, you look far grander if you overcome even worse odds). Was it bad? Yes, was the swap of targets life saving for the RAF? Not as much as its made out.
@@beigegaming9905 bullshit, RAF would have won the Battle of Britain regardless, because of the combination of radar and home advantage. That meant that Allied planes over Britain had more fuel for actual patrol & battle, and any pilot who lost his plane but not his life could be driven to the closest airport and get in a new machine. A surviving German pilot was Lina recta for a PoW camp.
Hitlers promises after Dunkirk were worth less then toilet paper. Because toilet paper actually has value. Like cleaning your arse, instead of smearing feces on your face.
When you sign over a dozen treaties over a period of 7 years, and break every single one of them, at some point people will no longer make any treaty with you. Somehow mister Aldolf ‘bigbrain’ Hitler learned that lesson about as well as the current 5D chessmaster in the Kremlin
bro German Army was More Stronger Than US army lol
The point two was just not possible due to oil shortages and as has been pointed out hitlers deranged racism
they actually tried the first one and if not for churchill, they would've succeeded
The plan to play it like that was invented after Soviet presentation where they showed to western military attaché Red Army excercise and in it 40 000 paratroopers jumping out of places in single operation when in the same time no western forces got not even a single unit capable to do something like that->It was 1937 and that is when plan to make a pact with Poland was made and make all the fake promises to Poland. Just go to wikipedia and read article "Western betrayal"... it was all according to plan and always drunk Churchil was not the brain of this whole plan.
And they'd have been wrong to accept it. Poland was counting on Britain and France. They had promises to uphold. It only got this bad because Britain, under different management, was scared to put their foot down and tell Germany "No." And instead appeased them at every turn. Accepting the deal wouldn't solve anything, just prove further that Britain was not only a weakening, aged empire, but also untrustworthy in the extreme.
Well Hitler was emboldened by Churchill's predecessor.
@@CountSpartula not appeasing wouldn’t have changed much, no one was ready for ww2, even when ww2 started it was called the phoney war for months because no one could do anything. The commonwealth came through in the end, single-handedly fighting the nazis and the japs for years. With or without appeasement, Poland was falling. That was Hitlers exact attitude to it, even if Poland accepted his ludicrous demands he already had plans in action to give him cause for war. Not to mention the deal with the Russians, Germany was obligated to declare war on Poland after the pact. You can however blame the British for refusing to cooperate with the USSR, who were trying desperately to form a defensive pact with the British and French. And you can blame the USA for not joining the League of Nations aswell. Without them it was always doomed to fail.
@@CountSpartula it's funny how the allies entered the war for Poland only to betray them and give them to the soviets
There would be no peace with the UK as long as Churchill was PM but yeah the other two are spot on.
About Dunkirk, they should’ve captured the 338,000 British French, Belgian troops that were on the beaches at Dunkirk. That would’ve left England, completely defenseless and more likely to come to the peace table. Those troops that got back to England, were the British expeditionary force And the best troops in the British army. They could’ve also been held as hostages if the negotiations stalled. Hitler’s first and biggest mistake was letting England off the hook.
Britain. Not England. That's like me saying Nebraska when referring to the United States.
Well. They did try. But the French army didn't want them to
@@m_fredi9549 the French couldn’t do anything to stop the Wehrmacht when they were highly organised and well positioned, but now they’re totally defeated and with no high command, they’re going to pull the defence of a lifetime out of their asses? There was no legitimate effort made to stop the evacuation of Dunkirk, Hitler though the British would come to term with them if they showed mercy. No amount of French resistance would’ve stopped the Wehrmacht at that time, let alone the Luftwaffe.
The thing people don't understand is even if Germany were able to invade Britain, Britain still had Canada, Australia, India to call upon so I doubt England would surrender
Why does this myth persist?
The Germans tried to capture the troops at Dunkirk. They failed, because they were out of fuel and the (mostly French) rearguard fought a determined defense.
And even if they did, it wouldn’t have meant peace, because there was absolutely no way for Germany to invade Britain or force the rest of the British empire to yield, and Hitler had proven very extensively that his promises were worthless so peace negotiate were useless.
Pacts Sunt Servanda is one of the oldest principles of international diplomacy for a reason, and Hitler basically took 1 big dump over it for 7 years. Then he was surprised when no one trusted him and the British & allied governments in exile refused negotiations.
I like these reasons because none of them would’ve worked. A war between Germany and the USSr was inevitable it just depended on who would start it, not declaring war on the us wouldn’t change a thing because Germany simply couldn’t match up to the USSr and would lose inevitabley, and negotiating peace was simply impossible because Britain had a very strong “never surrender” policy
the USSR would have been steamrolled if not for Lend Lease the US had to come save Europes tails from the Germans you're welcome for the bail out
If US hadnt supplied USSR through Lend Lease and opened up a second front against japan, it couldve been much much worse for the soviets.
If the Soviet Union would have declared war on Germany, they would have done it in the far future. They wanted to industrialize fully first before tackling on a powerful nation. They wanted to declare war on Turkey though, cause that would have allowed them to secure the Black Sea. Perhaps even expand into the Middle-East after.
The Soviets were actually unprepared and badly managed and could've fallen to Germany only surviving due to the U.S lend lease and Britain diverging some of Hitler's forces away from the eastern front.
there is no way, if you look at the weapons and ordinance available to the allies, it wasnt even a contest it was just a matter of time
And also oil
What weapons are you referring to
However this compromised if USA stays out
@@gustopher6500 Especially oil. The German army was so short on fuel they had to de-motorize some units after France to have enough fuel to invade. The German quartermaster general predicted that the logistics Germany had could only get 700km into the Soviet Union. As it worked out they got an extra 150km by robbing everything they could to keep the Panzers going at the expense of the rest of the army. But even if they captured Moscow in 1941 it just would have been a Stalingrad a year early because they'd probably have achieved that by leaving a million Soviet troops on the flank of their attack ready to cut off the advance.
1. Didn’t occur due to Britain planning a preemptive invasion of Norway to cut off the area from Germany due to the Trondleheim mines. Following the failed invasion Chamberlain was ousted even though it was Churchill that had pushed for it, and Churchill was actively indebted to several lobbyists that more or less held him by a noose to keep the British in the war.
This more or less meant Britain wouldn’t willingly surrender unless Churchill was ousted. However even after the invasion of France Britain’s population and politicians were still mostly pro-peace, so what occurred is Churchill broke the implied agreement between themselves and Germany to not bomb civilian centers by launching a huge air raid on Berlin (after mind you bombing factories that were in civilian centers, to which Germany made no response), which forced Hitler to have to respond in kind to save face. You can find records of Hitler’s hesitance to antagonize the British and his repeated statements that he desired an alliance with them.
Also the Soviets were rearming and seemed to be preparing an invasion so a two front war was inevitable, Germany just decided to pull the trigger since they thought through blitzkrieg tactics they could beat the Soviets even at a numerical and debatably (not speaking to quality but quantity) material disadvantage (to clarify further in terms of raw resources).
They did try to make peace with England. And they could not have continued with out attacking Russia because of oil and food
They didn't have to attack Russia for those resources, they had all the wealth of France to trade for them. Germany should have consolidated their gains and forged deeper economic ties with the soviets. Without the Eastern Front the British would have been easily subdued.
@@boomerisadog3899 "the British would have been easily subdued". I can tell you've never met a pissed up brit who's waiting hungrily for his kebab on a Friday night. But on a serious note, no, it wouldn't have been easy. The British beaches were so well defended that Normandy would've been a walk in the park by comparison. Mined to the gunnels, booby trapped with great pipes filled with petrol which would explode along the entire length of the beach, the home guard being trained to fight a guerilla war, both the RAF and RN undefeated both in the air and at sea. Not to mention Germany had very few, and I mean very few purpose built landing craft. And invasion of Britain would've relied on capturing and holding several deep water ports and airfields. Basically the operation would have had to have begun with a massive parachute assault and a small amphibious invasion. And we all know how German parachute assaults play out... The invasion of Crete, was it successful? Yes. But did it cost the Germans hugely in terms of man power and materials? Yes.
"Beaches. Fields. Streets. Hills"
"Take one with you"
"They dont like it up em........."😉
The reason they invaded Russia was that Russia was supplying them with oil and Hitler knew they could cut it off at any moment and didn’t trust Stalin.
Did you not pay attention to the video, that doesn’t meet their political ideologies at the time.
Hitler was gonna fight the soviets one way or another.
Number 2 was a game changer. As for number 3, thank Horohito for that lol.
The Japanese had nothing to do with it, germany could of stayed out of the conflict between the us and Japan...
2
Yeah the United States declared war on America due to Japan going to war with America in the Pacific so Germany could have decided to stay out of that war but Adolf Hitler and his generals were arrogant
They say Germany forced Japan to do Pearl Harbor
The Americans didn’t declare war in Germany, they would’ve focused on Japan if Hitler didn’t declare on America too
80 years of historical academics and people are watching this marine cosplayer talk about things he has no idea of
1. Hitler did sue for peace but Churchill was like “we don’t negotiate with lames”.
2. Hitler wanted to conquer Russia in the very beginning because he saw the east as the natural route for Germans. But France and Britain declared war on him before that could happen naturally.
3. The us would’ve gotten involved anyways after Pearl Harbor. Which was the japans plan and not Germany. There’s a reason Hiroshima and Nagasaki was bombed and not Berlin
Didn't they send a lot of peace treaties to Britain and they let them retreat from Dunkirk
Yep. Even agreed to defend the Bitish empire against all threats - including their Japanese allies.
Yes they sent many peace treaties
They didn't let the British retreat from Dunkirk. They were bombing and strafing the beaches constantly. There were prevented from reaching Dunkirk too soon by the valiant actions of British and French soldiers.
@@gregoryclark8217 that's not true , they let them get away , Google it
No Nolan movie if this succeeded
So basically “win” by changing their end goals
Fourth way: actually have winter clothing
Still would have lost
The Germans went for the oil rich Caucasuses but instead if they encircled Stalingrad and continued pushing forwards they might’ve won the war against the Soviet’s
@@DavidNaval adolf told his generals how he walked around in lederhosen during wintertime and his troops just needed to man up during the russian offensive.
the guy was delusional.
There was winter clothing, it just didn't get to frontlines because of logistical problems.
@@GalacticTradingPost Sure he did.
Discovery channel told you this?
Actually, if you look through history, Germany attempted to make a peace deal on multiple occasions. We actually had multiple accident where we fired a boat and that’s actually written in history but wasn’t talked of much. The American government wanted to get involved very badly so they were pushing for Germany to declare war against us. We armed there enemies. We had American troops fighting under the Royal Air Force and on the ground with the Britt’s. Now, if they never attacked Russia, and then declared war against the US, the outcome would’ve been way different. We would not have won. So that story reminds you of today’s world? The American people are not interested in war yet our government supplying weapons and aid countries they don’t want to give money to.
I think the first one is plain impossible because of our mindset in Britain at the time
Correct. Hitler did actually try to stop the war no strings attached, and at one point he even had planes drop leaflets over London which called for peace but churchill wanted to continue fighting.
@@MrJohansen it’s why casualties at Dunkirk were much lower than what it could’ve been. Hitler though that it would be more demoralising to see the entire British army coming home asses on fire than to just kill them all. He underestimated British propaganda massively, they turned the biggest military disaster in UK history into a positive thing.
@@MrJohansen do you think he would of made peace…..I don’t, I wasn’t there obviously but if we was left till last we would of definitely got some, hitler knew by taking the uks allies left us without backup, they wouldn’t of gone into half the country’s they did if they wanted “peace with Britain”
yes I have the same thought
@@MrJohansen as he should have
To be honest, the best move the Nazis could have made was stopping at the Munich Agreement when they ate the Sudatenland.
Honestly yeah. If they kept quiet and didn’t expand, they might’ve been seen more like Spain, just an isolated dictatorship. Fascism however is illogical so-
Thats removing the one reason why the Nazis were insanely expansionist. Removing Lebensraum is like saying Germany shouldn't have invaded the USSR or Germany shouldn't have hated the Jews, you're removing the things that made the Nazis what they are.
You're saying the Nazis would've won by not being Nazis.
@@ad_astra5The difference is, Spain was pragmatic and not stupid. Spain emerged from a Civil War right before World War II kicked off. Spain had no way to contribute for the Axis.
They were smart in staying out.
@@USSFFRU True! :-D
@@USSFFRUFranco also knew that Germany was gonna lose the war at the start, so he decided to focus on Spain and not the war.
They DID try and negotiate with Britain through June and July, the invasion of Russia was inevitable and declaring war on the US was a treaty requirement with Japan
The Treaty With Japan Was Only Effective If Japan Was Attacked. Japan Attacked First.
Hitler was just a war monger at that point. Declaring War against USA was the worst move
The book “We March Against England” demonstrates that Hitler considered dropping his eastward expansion after the fall of France. The wind blew the dust in his room in a way that changed his mind again.
1. They did try to have peace with the UK. Churchill did everything he could to continue war.
2. The Soviets themselves were preparing to invade Europe so war was inevitable.
3. Germany was treaty bound to declare war and the USA was essentially already a combatant by sending 1 morbillion lend leases to the uk and Soviets
English refused to stop hostilities, because they hope that eventually Russia and USA would be dragged to war. Which is exactly what happened.
Ukrainii slava
*British
@@brodieduff5968 we’re English mate
@@joshuabarlow1031 nice name. How do I put that in mine?
Bankrolled by (((international financiers)))
Best way: make snorkels, not big ass ships
Germany would still need to get the oil it was running out of
@@Therealferm Dude. Think logicaly. 1000 oil on one ship or 1000 oil for 10 submarines
1. Germany offered 30 something peace offers and tried to negotiate with Brittain who refused any negotiation
2. Stalin threw Germany ,France and Brittain into war intentionally by delaying the invasion of Poland so only Germany would trigger the defence pact between Poland , UK and France. When France and Poland were out and Brittain stuck on an island , the war between USSR and Germany was inevitable. USSR had the resources Germany needed to defeat Brittain. USSR would not have traded it's resources to the only enemy they had in Europe who was more technologically advanced.
3. The US declared war on Germany , not the other way around. US was escorting British supply ships to Brittain and , after an incident where a German sub accidentally fired at a US destroyer , Roosevelt gave the "shoot on sight" order. So basically , US protected Germany 's enemy and also shot at any Germany vessels they encountered. The practical declaration of war was made by Roosevelt. Hitler just made the formal declaration of war.
1 any treaties with Hitler had been extensively proven to be useless the moment they were signed, because he behaved like a criminal not bound by laws or treaties.
So, Hitler could offer whatever he wanted, no one would agree to it because no one could trust him to abide by it
Roosevelt doesn't have the power to declare war.
Actually the British and French decided not to declare war on the Soviets, because Churchill was literally playing 4 d chess and knew that Germany was planning an invasion, and knew in the near future, the Soviets could be turned into an ally against the Germans.
Soviets did trade with Germany just not enough for the war machine
@@isimperialist no they didn't
The first two are impossible, since Churchill vowed to never surrender, and Stalin was planning to invade just 3 weeks post operation Barbarossa. The last one makes sense. American support is no joke, and probably the main reason why Moscow and Leningrad did not fall.
and the source is a book written in 1980 that is rejected by most historians.stalins first goal was to recover from the great purge.until then stalin knew russia wasnt ready for war
Stalin plan on invading Germany in 1941? What a load of crap.
I vote for numbers two.
They tried numbers one, but churchill refused the idea of peace, and held his famous speech on The radio, where they would fight on land, sea and air, and never surrender.
Yes number two which is never gone to happen because hitler hated communism because he saw communism as a system created by jews so no number two wouldn't work not even in any other Universe
What kongo said, plus the fact that Germany was short on many resources which it couldn't get! So Germany would stagnate a ton in this scenario...and the war would still go on as the British and the Free France Forces would surrender or accept peace!
@@KongoMuller69 just say youre pro-extermination
Lol lol not true
What the first two said, plus the fact that Stalin was already planing to betray hitler, they both knew when they signed the pact that it would not last as long as they said it would.
How to win ww2:
1.
just cut off so much of ww2 that its not even a fucking world war anymore
2.
There is no step 2, i lied.
Now put on the power armor
Japan: Guess what I just did
Germany: What?
Japan: I declared war on the USA!
Germany: What...
* to be continued *
Yes, I gues the biggest problem was that the USA send much material to the other western allies even without being officially in the war. Without the help of the USA I doubt that the UdSSR would have hold the front against the Germans.
In ww2 and ww1 the problems with the USA were not that they have a huge army (which was at least in ww2 in total ok but not really strong in quality) but they had so much stuff which other couldn't compete with
@@darkforce3348That goes for the UK and the USSR as Roosevelt was doing anything to help the allies.
@@darkforce3348 not really strong? Crock or they & Brits Not win WWII.
Japan didn't declare war on the USA, it was a surprise attack
@@red-gp9ohh True, but they were in the process, however treacherously. Not sure that diplomats from Japan knew until the last minute either. According to info in BRIDGE TO THE SUN film, they didnt.
It was with Carol Baker and James Shigeta about 1960.
Southern gal married japanese diplomat's son before Pearl Harbor and lived in Japan. True story. Sad.
4. Don't decide to massacre 6 million of your citizens thus tying up manpower and resources you could use in the actual war.
1. “We shall not flag nor fail. We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France and on the seas and oceans; we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air. We shall defend our island whatever the cost may be; we shall fight on beaches, landing grounds, in fields, in streets and on the hills. We shall never surrender”
2. War with the Soviet Union was inevitable, even Stalin knew this. It was who would attack first was the real question. Hitler saw the complete incompetence within the Red Army especially after the Winter War and decided to strike first before the Red Army could make reforms.
3. Like with the USSR, war with the US was also inevitable. US ships were being sunk by German U-Boats, another Lusitania was inevitable.
No matter what way you put it, there is no way Germany could have won WW2 without making MASSIVE changes in who they were at that time.
Thank you, finally someone with an ounce of overarching historical knowledge. This video pissed me off so much, especially point 2. Hitler was a racist, territorial megalomaniac. He hated slavs, he hated bolsheviks. there was a 0% chance of not invading the USSR.
My great grandpa faught
Screw your war
Your trash
@RyanMiller-tb6fdYeah, I mean if Germany had still been fighting after the US was done with the Japanese it was gonna be kaboom.
Hitler tried and tried again to stop there after Dunkirk. But Churchill rejected all attempts at communications. Edit: That’s when they sent R.Hess (the SA’s best man, alone in a dogfighter with a letter addressed the King if I recall correctly, with a mission to parachute out into the countryside, surrender to the local police and attempt diplomacy behind Churchill’s back (probably with sir Mosley’s backers). The mission was unsuccessful and so the war continued… Rudolf.H spent the remainder of his life in prison until he was murdered by a coloured guard at 93 years of age. His murder is documented as suicide.
Hess wasn't sent.
@@dr_tomK What? He is literally famous for his mission to Britian.
@@klausdietrich3676He wasn't sent though. He acted on his own, was mentally unstable and didn't offically represent the German Reich.
@@klausdietrich3676 I meant, Hess chose to go on his own. He wasn't ordered. He aborted three or four times before his successful flight
Even they knew they couldn't have won it, they were a vampire economy and needed war.
That was the soviets. N@zi germany had the best economy after national socialism without war while everywhere else had been suffering from the great depression.
@@averagelifeenjoyer here's another low info fan boy, why do you think they had what appeared to be a good economy (it wasnt)
@@averagelifeenjoyer Germany had already recovered from the Great Depression by the time the Nazis come to power, actually. In the meanwhile the German economy during the war was entirely reliant on plundering occupied Europe, which left much of Europe - even in the west, facing starvation and famine as early as the winter of 1940.
they did offer peace to the brit’s multiple times do your research.
😆 🤣 😂 so your advice is trust Hitler?
How did that work out for Stalin?
Top 10 ways Germany could have won WW2:
Thanks for watching!
Was something erased?
@@sholoms The joke is there was no realistic way for Germany to have won WWII
@@michealkasey2292 Thx, was in fact my 1st take--& my 2nd--but then I thought, while I might get teased for asking, I just didn't want to risk, missing something pretty important out of timidity...
@@michealkasey2292 Yes there was buddy
@@One10ab elaborate
Re: 2. I highly recommend "Icebreaker" by Viktor Suvorov, a GRU officer who defected to the UK in 1978. Very thorough analysis of how the USSR was preparing to attack Germany. That's why Germans were initially so successful, they attacked Soviets, who disassembled anti-tank obstacles, cleared minefields and staged their logistics to rapidly advance. It's a great read.
And yet Stalin had already purged his military of officers he thought unloyal to him. Both Stalin and Hitler were so evil it wouldn't allow them to be rational in their military planning.
@@alpardo4124 I'd say it was just arrogance. They both surrounded themselves with sycophants and cowards, too afraid to tell them they were doing something wrong. I think that's also why Putin gave the order. There was nobody to tell him his military was crap and Ukraine would not just roll over. It's tempting to dismiss them as just "evil", while they all had, what they believed to be, "rational" reasons, and were not motivated by desire to do evil things.
@@serpents666 " Putin gave the order. There was nobody to tell him his military was crap " Nope, there was an Russian gerneral that told him that and Putin just kicked him out from position for preaty much predicting the future...
@@serpents666
Why? Suvorov has been shown to be utterly wrong by multiple military historians! The state of Soviet forces before Barbarossa alone shows that no attack was coming in 1941 as the units were undermanned, umdergunned and had no supplies!
@@Pikkabuu Mainly Soviet/Russian historians. Interestingly enough, several Soviet historians agreed with him. Not only does his analysis explain how Germans were able to advance so quickly but it's also consistent with one thing Russia is really known for - breaking international agreements whenever it suits them.
The Germans did try to stop after Dunkirk. But Winston Churchill didn’t accept anything but unconditional surrender.
Bro don't tell German viewers that are already in artschool...
They did #1 and not only after Dunkirk, but many other times- and actually very reasonable and arguably generous terms when they held the cards. It's a muted fact by "our side". #2 is curious bc they knew things about Russia that were indicating betrayal. #3 they were forced into by their pact with Japan.
Both parties of the Mol pact were planning on betraying the other, and both knew the other was planning on betraying them, even media at the time knew all of that. The pact was about divvying up Poland, not about non aggression, non aggression was just used to cover up their plans to invade Poland.
japan joined the pact, they coulda kicked them out or just not went with the flow since the pact with the ussr didnt last
Not really. Japan attacked, it wasn't attacked, Germany couldn't BTFO'd on that.
@@MrWWIIBuff not really what?
Germany actively wanted to go to war with the US. Hitler made this clear many times before Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. The Nazis were more than happy to declare war on the US
The only way they could have won is if all three of these somehow happened, which is incredibly unrealistic. Britain had won the Battle of Britain by the time Germany invaded the Soviet Union, and once the Soviets got their game together, it didn't matter if D-Day happened or not because nothing was stopping the Soviets from reaching Berlin. It is basically impossible for Germany to win because they would never have managed to knock Britain out of the war, so unless the British suddenly turn arould and surrender, which would go completely against popular opinion in Britain at the time, Germany can't win.
That is mostly correct, except for the fact that the Soviets couldn’t have won without American and British support.
@@maxsmusings339 It’s hard to say that. Yea, it would have been longer, but the German army wasn’t in any way ready for the long haul that the eastern front would have been if it lasted longer. If Germany had taken western Russia, the war would have had move east to Siberia, and the Germans were not ready for a war in Siberia. Also, their oil and manpower problems would eventually come to bit them. Would the Soviets have steamrolled the Wehrmacht like they did in the latter part of the war? Probably not. But would Germany have won? Also probably not.
The number one was actually tried, but Churchill refused
"We're winning, surrender and you may keep your land."
"no."
Germany didn't declare war on the US because Japan attacked them and they were allies. Germany declared war on the US because Roosevelt was continuously provoking and outright attacking the German U-boats and used the US Army to thwart German military operations on Iceland and Greenland in the spring, summer, and autumn of 1941. Roosevelt was itching for any opportunity to join the war despite running his reelection campaign on neutrality.
The US public was OVERWHELMINGLY against war (97% against I think; maybe 93% against). Despite being a neutral nation, the US Navy attacked German U-boats and led the Royal Navy to German positions if not outright attacking themselves. These actions [obviously] violated neutrality. Hitler constantly ordered his U-boat fleet to avoid attacking US ships and to withdraw if antagonized by the US Navy without fighting back. In Greenland and Iceland, he ordered the withdrawal of his men. Hitler constantly honored US neutrality, while Roosevelt used it as a convenient shield while antagonizing and attacking the the Germans. Germany declared war on the US because it was inevitable. The US earned the declaration by Germany over the better part of the year leading up to war being declared in December of 1941. Roosevelt was the worst war hawk in US history and should be reviled, not praised.
Hitler literally offered peace to Britain and France 4-5 different times between September 1939 and March 1940. During this time he also offered the Brits/Poles about half of what was Poland to be reinstated as a new Polish state. Remember, Poland was formed from land that was German for hundreds of years prior to the German defeat in WW1; it would have essentially been Poland as it was for most of Polish history. After conquering the low countries and France, he offered peace to Britain; again, multiple times.
Leading up to the war Hitler offered the German army up to defend British overseas holdings if the need ever arose. Hitler didnt want to conquer Britain, he wanted to work hand in hand with them; Germany on land, Britain at sea. Hitler admired Britain more than any other nation.
4. Properly prepare for winter
Winter was overrated
Acting like Russians were impervious to the weather 😂
@@slyze6933 maybe not but they were significantly more prepared than the Germans
Laughs in railway gauge, Wehrmacht relying on horses, low tank production numbers, soviet partisans, panzer Corps taking most of the loses and fuel shortages
1. don't fight soviets
2. don't ally with japan
3. don't invade Poland, or don't continue after dunkirk.
4. be united by a religion, would have strived better
5. Don't worry about silly people in the future saying that you could've won despite the fact that you lost and no one can change that
1) completely wrong and ignorant opinion as if they didn’t invade they would’ve gotten invaded and they needed the supply for the war.
2) who tf could’ve foreseen Japan doing what they did? Who r u god? Hindsight is always 20/20
@@hokhanh7266 well i mean they did ally with the soviets at the start but I suppose you're right, and also japan kinda sucked in the first place and they didn't really need em, but I suppose they needed an ally around the pacific. Anyway there's no point in arguing over if they could've won or not because the point is THEY LOST (thankfully).
@@liltapewormthetapewormGermany and Japan was semi-allied with each other. They had a defensive pact against communis/Russia. But Japan avoided that war since Germany started it and not Russia.
Instead they jumped another Superpower.
Axis coordination was a joke
There’s an unbelievable amount of nuance to all of these.
this guy does not have even clue what hes talking about on this,
@@vauxvids true! Hobby military analysts are not historians
@@Briggattonii he is great at that but he should not make videos and misinform people.
@@vauxvids Please elaberate. What misinformation are you referring too?
@@Briggattoniilol and where do y'all get your information from Wehraboo approved sources?
The main way is that if Hitler used his forces invading the USSR and invaded the UK, and never invade russia
This isn't a video on how to win WW2. It's a video on how to win a hypothetical smaller conflict where you remove two of the main combatants.
Just wrote a big reply to this video, but what you said really makes the point I was trying to make in a lot more of a straightforward way.
Germany actually tried to negotiate peace with Britain but Britain refused
1. They couldn’t
2. They couldn’t
3. They couldn’t
Bro they literally negotiated a peace deal like 20 time after dunkirk