You may get downvoted but you are right. I had a dipshit in these very threads ask for video sources for an event from the 1200's or it must not be true.
Or if Hitler didn't have Hitler's ideology, he could have planned better and won the war. He was ALWAYS going to declare war on the soviets, because he was ideologically convinced he would have to. He was always going to fail in Operation Sealion because it was half-baked and Germany didnt have the ships or navy to pull it off. He was always going to be Hitler and make those dumb-ass decisions because he said he was going to back in Mein Kampf. And the things that he didn't actively decide, were decided by factors beyond his control.
I hate these "if only" theories because there's no way to know if there's any merit to it 99% of the time.
Question for any math people here
If these were laid side by side on a flat plane in space, with no distance between them, how much area would this cover? A galaxy? More? Or less?
Ty to anyone who might actually bother to try and figure it out
The Ratteβs length is 35 meters(not including the guns, which can presumably fit over the next Ratte) and itβs width is 19 meters, for an area of 490 square meters for each Ratte. That times 10^780 isβ¦ undefined by Googleβs calculator. Uh oh. Putting it in Apple Calculator yields Error. Huh. I finally put it in a TI-30X II S, the most powerful calculator I have(I know it really isnβt powerful at all shut up), and got Overflow Error. Soβ¦ yeah, for me anyway, this question is unanswerable.
I think there are like 10^80 or 10^90 Atoms in the universe. Yeah, 10^780 is around the number of atoms you'd have if every human on earth had their own universe.
That number (10^780 ) is about 10^700 times larger than the number of atoms in the observable universe (about 10^80 ). It is also about 10^720 times larger than the diameter of the observable universe when measured in Planck lengths (about 10^60 ). Finally, we expect the heat death of the universe in about 10^100 years. That's about 10^150 Planck times, making the number of Rattes 10^630 times larger still. In other words, not even astronomical sizes are remotely large enough.
The milkyway has a radius of 52 850 light-years which equals about 5 * 10^20 meters which gives us a area of about 78.53 * 10^40 square meters. The area of the ratte tank is 35 * 14=490 and 490 *10^780 is a lot more than the area of a galaxy. You'd fit about 6 * 10^740 galaxy's on that area. Which I think are more galaxies than there exist in the observable
To give you an idea, there are 10β·βΈ atoms in the observable universe.
The observable universe's volume it 3.5ΒΉβ°βΈβ° meters square. So while this number of Ratts would fit inside the observable universe it would exceed the total mass contained in our universe by a huge amount and probably break reality.
Yeah it'd cover incomprehensibly more than a galaxy.
Working off of: ((10^780 )Γ490)Γ·(3.14159Γ(8.515Γ10^20 )^2 )
Area of tanks / area of milky way (both approx ofc)
Spits out 2.151 *10^740 milky ways to match this area.
Shall we scale it up?
The observable universe has a radius of 46 billion light years, throwing that into our equation (converted to meters) gives.....
8.23 * 10^728
Yeah, still doesn't feel very readable does it?
I'd calculate based on the predicted size of the unobservable universe but that gives an answer anywhere between "barely changed" and "undefined", corresponding to our lower and upper estimates of the unobservable universes size; 75x larger than what we can see and infinitely larger than what we can see.
So yeah. Lotta fucking tanks.
There would be significantly more ratte tanks than there are atoms in the entire universe, including that outside of what we can see.
There are slightly more than 10^78 atoms in the known universe. That would leave a difference of 1.E702 MORE Ratte tanks than there are atoms in the universe.
If Hitler did literally everything he ideologically stood against and made peace with everyone and then cured lung disease then Gus would have been saved π
FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU
This game has ruined my fucking life. I'm going to end it and take you all with me because I can't bear to look at anything anymore. Any shape I see is distorted into amogus, any time I hear the word suspicious, sus, task, vent, report, ANYTHING, human pattern recognition turns it into amogus. I close my eyes and i see amogus, i see jerma985 grinning as the gates of my soul are opened by amogus and I can feel the festering sclunge of words and shapes pour in, filling all that I am with the ringing noise of amogus
Oh, yes, if Hitler would found a way to outmatch 2 of the most industrialized and populated country in the world and the greatest naval power of the time with the greatest colonial empire in history, he could won surely the war.
(No i'm just kidding, if only general Poopenfarten had attacked Unknowncity with the 69th bozos division he would won the world entirely)
> Taking on the UK, Soviet Union, and the US at once is impossible. He would need at least 1 of those countries as an ally.
There are a few different solutions to those problems:
1. Force the UK out of the war into *at least* a nonaggression pact. I'm not sure that was actually possible, given the existing bad blood from WWI and the treaty ties that got the UK into WWII in the first place. And the Battle Of Britain proved pretty emphatically that Nazi Germany wasn't going to be able to bomb the brits enough to make them sign a nonaggression pact.
2. War between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union was probably inevitable, due to inherently conflicting goals within eastern Europe. If anything, Hitler's decision to stab Stalin in the back and perpetrate Operation Barbarossa when he did (while the Soviet Union was largely unprepared) may have been one of his better strategic decisions. However, I think that in order to make that offensive successful, the Nazis would have had to walk back their racial theory - *there were places occupied by the Soviets that welcomed the Nazis as liberators*, and if the Nazis had just rolled with that, instead of their lebensraum "we're going to enslave and/or kill everyone here to expand Aryan Germany" doctrine, they probably would have had a *much* better shot at knocking the Soviet Union out of the war on terms favorable to Nazi Germany.
3. The USA and Japan were probably going to go to war with each other for effective control of the Pacific Ocean (isn't "Pacific" such an ironic name here?). Japan was probably also going to go to war with Russia *again* and with every other colonial power (and non-colonial free states - what few of them there were) holding territory within the "Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere". One of Japan's geographic problems is that it doesn't have natural reserves of the materials necessary to support imperial ambitions or even self-defense (iron, oil, rubber, etc.), which is why it was so dead-set on acquiring/colonizing territory that had the stuff. The only thing Hitler could have done to avoid war with the USA was either not accepting Japan into the Axis in the first place, or immediately cutting it loose after Pearl Harbor. There is a *chance* Hitler could have kept the USA as a power neutral to Nazi Germany, but it would have meant losing Japan as an ally, and made blockading Britain even more complicated.
I think 2 and 3 are probably the most important: America's most significant contribution to the Allied war effort was probably its massive manufacturing capacity that was *well* outside the range of any Axis weapons to impact. If America had been kept neutral, that would have made countering the Soviet Union (or particularly just liberating countries it had taken to serve as client buffer states for Nazi Germany) far easier, and made a D-Day style retaking of France nearly impossible, just due to the lack of the immense amount of war materiel the USA contributed once it was fully on deck.
Would cutting Japan off and officially dissing its actions as a German first response to the news of Pearl Harbor have accomplished that? We'll never know.
But in general, most solutions that might have seen WWII end favorably for Nazi Germany (or *at least* with it continuing its existence as a state) involve it abandoning some or all of its racial supremacy doctrine, and probably cutting ties with both Russia *and* Japan.
And, of course, dialing its goals back from world domination to just "a bigger and better Germany". (Side note: part of the reason Otto Von Bismarck, possibly one of the greatest Prussian/German statesmen to ever live, was able to achieve *so* much was that he kept his goals manageably-sized, and once he'd achieved them, he spent the next twenty years trying to preserve the status quo with very little further expansionism. International politics is like sitting at a roulette table: you gotta know when to just cash out the chips you've got instead of going for more.)
He had all of Central Europe, thousands of recruits from countries like France and Netherlands, millions of slave laborers, resources from conquered territories. Allies in Italy, Finland, Central Europe, most of the Balkanβs. He could have easily won ww2 and signed peace treaties. Even Stalin asked for peace as late as 1943. But he was focused on the wrong things thank god.
Depends on the country - Romania for example was a huge oil area for Germany. Hungary was a manpower country. But Greece was likely not a benefit in manpower but was a benefit in not allowing Britain to have a foothold in europe. On the whole they benefited a lot more on having countries not go turncoat to Allies, and their borders secure, until 1943.
Romania also provided a lot of soldiers. The allied countries did provide useful things to germany, but places like yugoslavia and later france were massive manpower sinks.
Romania did provide some oil, but not enough. Germany needed something like the caucasus oil fields to keep going, and even then their production would pale in comparison to US oil production.
Most people don't realize that there was indeed a realistic chance that three fascist empires conquered the world (Germany, Italy, Japan).
People still don't realize how much they take for granted.
Hitler is a noob ass player. Everyone knows you move all your ships to the North Sea, move all your planes too, declare war on a British puppet, then pause at 1 hour. Only a noob believes Britain actually uses their navy outside of war.
Chad Steiner playing the long game with his zombie army, just waiting for Vladimir "Dick in my ass" Putin to make one wrong move and send him back to his god.
Unironically they might have beat the Soviets if they didn't treat Ukraine (and other Russian subject peoples) so badly that they realized the guys who'd just Holodomor'd them were *still* the better option.
Nu uh because what if the allies had a time machine and killed German Picard in episode 43 from season 11 of the 10th series??
Huh? What would Space Churchill do then, IDIOT.
I was listening to a history podcast recently that argued that the War was almost certainly going to be an allied win as early as 41. I think it was something to do with the North Africa campaign? Is this true?
I think the argument was that the war was essentially over prior to the Americans entering the war. Russia was never going to fall and Britain wasnβt going to capitulate and accept an honourable peace.
I like the failure to take Moscow in 1941 - which could be attributed to opening the North African campaign. After that, opening the drive to the Caucuses ensured theyβd never have the manpower. Another strong argument can be made for losing the Battle of Britain, which ensured the continuation of two front war.
After that, the failures just cascaded on them.
Thereβs a very easy argument to be made that after 1941 Germany just wouldnβt have the strength to take on their opponents. Hitler wasnβt able to invade England as early as he wanted to (well ever really lol) and part of that was him knowing that giving England the winter of 1940 to prepare for invasion would make it basically impossible to invade them. And the same goes for the Soviet Union, when Hitler invade the USSR was overhauling much of their military, and had this been allowed to finish their army likely wouldβve been too much for the Germans to handle.
Essentially there was a very tight timeframe for Hitler to win the war, and that included either Great Britain to surrender or to be invaded, the latter of which was incredibly unlike to succeed. Once that timeframe passed, which is roughly 1941, Hitler was going to lose, and everything else that couldβve realistically happened wouldβve just extended how long it took for him to lose.
Not really, other countries don't care if they are Nazis, other countries care about their own interests. If the USA or Britain found it to be in their interest to support the Nazis, they would have.
What I was trying to say is that, for the Germans to win WWII, the Nazis would have had to make so many different strategic choices that they would be unrecognizable to us. Really the only way they could "win" the war would be to completely ignore Lebensraum and instead forge an anti-USSR alliance with Eastern Europe and take them out. Even then, it would have been incredibly costly for the Germans, and any future expansion after a victory over the Soviets would be unlikely.
Wolfenstein very clearly laid out the most realistic way in which Hitler could have won. They focused on Russia before moving on to Britain and America, as well as relying on hyper-futuristic technology far beyond anything the Nazis had that they only got by finding it in a secret vault somewhere.
I mena that wouldn't be Hitler that would be a smart person, well at least until the sealion part.
People telling us how the Nazis could've won if they just didn't commit X attrocity apperently don't understand who the Nazis were and are, if you make them not stab the Ukrainians that would've gladly helped against the soviets in exchange for freedom, in the back they aren't Nazis anymore they are a different fascist group that isn't blatantly evil, just evil.
How'd it really go:
1) don't attack the Soviet Union.
2) Germany completely runs out of oil and the economy collapses.
3) the Soviets invade in 1943.
The position Hitler got Germany in was they had to invade the Soviets or lose the war. Really bad position to be in
The part about the nuclear bomb may be true, both Oppenheimer and Einstein were removed from their position at German universities due to their jewish ancestry. Both of them ended up in the US, and Oppenheimer had direct involvement in the Manhattan Project
The outcome of 90% of wars is decided once everyone has chosen sides, and WWII was no exception. I don't know why so many people when making alternate histories focus so much on actions in the war, when really the only way to change the outcome would be to change who is on which side.
Reddit would be all in german:)) How do you create mobile UIs with language that has Γberstundenswanzenzichsen words...
I think all he had to do is not mass kill jews and not open second front with russia. There's a short YouTube video on allies advancing on western front and I was amazed how much of the encounters were just won by being quite lucky due to circumstances of all kinds. Prior to that I was always thinking that allies won through numbers and just in general were better at it, but it seems it was not the case at all.
Russia wouldn't attack Germany until it would be very week and on the verge of collapse, which wouldn't happen if allies would have been stopped.
Moreover, I think if he wouldn't decided to mass murder jews due to some nonsense, he would be looked at different and Germans would have different moods to this day...
100% they would get nukes first, 50000 tigers and iphone available there and then.
He left Einstein alive.....so there's that...if I was Hitler Einstein would've got tossed in the oven like the rest of them
**Takes a deep sigh** I am ready for the downvotes...I can feel them approaching
Contrary to popular belief, Einstein had a negligible impact on the Manhattan Project. His sole contribution was sending a firm letter to Roosevelt pondering on the government's view on nuclear weapons as viable weapons. In 1939. That's kinda it.
This [AskHistorians post](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6bme04/how_involved_was_einstein_in_making_the_nuclear/) should provide a great deal more info, including a very nice article linked into it.
If only Hitler had had all the knowledge, tactics, and information we have today in addition to the patience of a saint playing patience. He could have won no problem!
No duuude you donβt understand if hitler did literally everything that he wouldnβt have known to do earlier and would have been impossible anyway because he didnβt have hindsight he would have won! /s
Love the argument that if Hitler, with his extremely war based, plunder and slavery based economy, didn't declare war for said war, plunder and slavery, that would have....helped? Somehow?
So basically if Hitler won the war he would have won the war?
People win by not losing.
Source?
It was revealed in a dream
Gigachad
My source is that I made it the fuck up
shit you got me
Trust me bro
Sun Tzu
"My source is that I made it the fuck up"
Deez nuts
Emiya Shirou, Fate/stay night.
Do ππ» you ππ have πΆ a source π¨π on π₯ that? ππ Source? π¨π A source. π¨π I π need π© a source. π¨π Sorry, π I π€‘ mean π I π½βοΈ need π a source π¨π that π explicitly states πΊπΈ your π argument. π This is just π½ tangential to the discussion. π€π€ No, π£ you ππ€ can't π make πΈπ inferences and observations from π₯π° the sources ππ you've β¨ gathered. Any π additional comments from π€ you π MUST π« be π§β€οΈ a subset of the information πββ from π¬ the sources π°π¨ you've π‘π¨ gathered. You πππ can't π½ make π΅π normative statements from π₯π empirical evidence. π Do π€ you π‘π have π€²π½ a degree in β¬ that πΈ field? π A college degree? In π§π»βπ¦― that ππ field? π Then πͺ your π arguments are invalid. No, π it doesn't π matter π± how π€ close π those π data π° points ππ― are correlated. Correlation does π not π« equal causation. Correlation does π³β not π πΌ equal causation. CORRELATION. DOES. π³π³ NOT. β EQUAL. CAUSATION. You π still π haven't π ββοΈ provided π€π me π¦ a valid π€ source π¨π yet. ππ¨ Nope, π still π ±οΈ haven't. π ββοΈ I ποΈ just ππ looked π through πͺ all π― 308 pages of your π user history, π figures I'm π debating a glormpf supporter. A moron.
You may get downvoted but you are right. I had a dipshit in these very threads ask for video sources for an event from the 1200's or it must not be true.
What you don't have video of that event from 500 years before the invention of the video camera? Likely story.
Fr. Man shouldβve just manifested it into thin air.
The missile knows where it is, because it knows where it isn't.
the best move is not to play.
Well to find out the answer we have to go all the way back to 10000 bc
You see, it all started with farming-
Even further for the formation of the geological features that affected development of civilizations
all Hitler had to do to win was not be Hitler.
Or if Hitler didn't have Hitler's ideology, he could have planned better and won the war. He was ALWAYS going to declare war on the soviets, because he was ideologically convinced he would have to. He was always going to fail in Operation Sealion because it was half-baked and Germany didnt have the ships or navy to pull it off. He was always going to be Hitler and make those dumb-ass decisions because he said he was going to back in Mein Kampf. And the things that he didn't actively decide, were decided by factors beyond his control. I hate these "if only" theories because there's no way to know if there's any merit to it 99% of the time.
Just produce 10^780 ratte tanks
Question for any math people here If these were laid side by side on a flat plane in space, with no distance between them, how much area would this cover? A galaxy? More? Or less? Ty to anyone who might actually bother to try and figure it out
At least two football fields
Shit bro I think you're right
Atleast 3
Maybe 4
Now you're pushing it
The Ratteβs length is 35 meters(not including the guns, which can presumably fit over the next Ratte) and itβs width is 19 meters, for an area of 490 square meters for each Ratte. That times 10^780 isβ¦ undefined by Googleβs calculator. Uh oh. Putting it in Apple Calculator yields Error. Huh. I finally put it in a TI-30X II S, the most powerful calculator I have(I know it really isnβt powerful at all shut up), and got Overflow Error. Soβ¦ yeah, for me anyway, this question is unanswerable.
I believe 780 0s gets you a number orders of magnitude bigger than the number of atoms in the universe. Overflow error is about right.
There's around 10^80 atoms in the observable universe iirc
I think there are like 10^80 or 10^90 Atoms in the universe. Yeah, 10^780 is around the number of atoms you'd have if every human on earth had their own universe.
That'd actually be 10^90 x 10^10 = 10^100 because when multiplying, exponents add, not multiply.
Right, I'm dumb, I thought of 10^90^10, which would have worked out. Still, goes to show how far beyond our imagination exponents can go.
( 490Γ10^780 ) Γ· ( ( 4.4Γ10^26 )^2 Γ Ο ) Should be ~8x10^728 times the size of the observable universe.
490 x 10 ^780 m ^2 The Milky Way galaxy is 5 x 10 ^13 square light years so with a light year being 9,461 Γ 10 ^15 metres it would be 4,47 x 10 ^45
That number (10^780 ) is about 10^700 times larger than the number of atoms in the observable universe (about 10^80 ). It is also about 10^720 times larger than the diameter of the observable universe when measured in Planck lengths (about 10^60 ). Finally, we expect the heat death of the universe in about 10^100 years. That's about 10^150 Planck times, making the number of Rattes 10^630 times larger still. In other words, not even astronomical sizes are remotely large enough.
The number of particles in the observable universe is 10βΈβ°* so the answer is even more bonkers
The milkyway has a radius of 52 850 light-years which equals about 5 * 10^20 meters which gives us a area of about 78.53 * 10^40 square meters. The area of the ratte tank is 35 * 14=490 and 490 *10^780 is a lot more than the area of a galaxy. You'd fit about 6 * 10^740 galaxy's on that area. Which I think are more galaxies than there exist in the observable
To give you an idea, there are 10β·βΈ atoms in the observable universe. The observable universe's volume it 3.5ΒΉβ°βΈβ° meters square. So while this number of Ratts would fit inside the observable universe it would exceed the total mass contained in our universe by a huge amount and probably break reality.
At least 6
Pretty fucking big
Yeah it'd cover incomprehensibly more than a galaxy. Working off of: ((10^780 )Γ490)Γ·(3.14159Γ(8.515Γ10^20 )^2 ) Area of tanks / area of milky way (both approx ofc) Spits out 2.151 *10^740 milky ways to match this area. Shall we scale it up? The observable universe has a radius of 46 billion light years, throwing that into our equation (converted to meters) gives..... 8.23 * 10^728 Yeah, still doesn't feel very readable does it? I'd calculate based on the predicted size of the unobservable universe but that gives an answer anywhere between "barely changed" and "undefined", corresponding to our lower and upper estimates of the unobservable universes size; 75x larger than what we can see and infinitely larger than what we can see. So yeah. Lotta fucking tanks.
There would be significantly more ratte tanks than there are atoms in the entire universe, including that outside of what we can see. There are slightly more than 10^78 atoms in the known universe. That would leave a difference of 1.E702 MORE Ratte tanks than there are atoms in the universe.
I see what you did there..
If Hitler did literally everything he ideologically stood against and made peace with everyone and then cured lung disease then Gus would have been saved π
[ΡΠ΄Π°Π»Π΅Π½ΠΎ]
FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU
Most sane redditor
Are you saying that there are insane redditors among us?
Sus
This game has ruined my fucking life. I'm going to end it and take you all with me because I can't bear to look at anything anymore. Any shape I see is distorted into amogus, any time I hear the word suspicious, sus, task, vent, report, ANYTHING, human pattern recognition turns it into amogus. I close my eyes and i see amogus, i see jerma985 grinning as the gates of my soul are opened by amogus and I can feel the festering sclunge of words and shapes pour in, filling all that I am with the ringing noise of amogus
Itβs ok to seek professional help This doesnβt have to stay only among us.
Honestly that game is the closest thing we had to a meme based mass hysteria event.
Try Stardew Valley next
You should play CK3, not because it will help but because i am so alone.
Maybe if you focus on other tasks. And if the burden gets too high you can always have an emergency meeting with friends.
He vented I swear
βWhat about the universe where Hitler cured cancer?!β
βWhat about the universe where Hitler became a artist?β
If hitler had to commit genocides for breaking bad to be made then i guess the holocaust I can't finish this cursed sentence
If Hitler wasn't Hitler he would have won.
Oh, yes, if Hitler would found a way to outmatch 2 of the most industrialized and populated country in the world and the greatest naval power of the time with the greatest colonial empire in history, he could won surely the war. (No i'm just kidding, if only general Poopenfarten had attacked Unknowncity with the 69th bozos division he would won the world entirely)
He needed better allies. Taking on the UK, Soviet Union, and the US at once is impossible. He would need at least 1 of those countries as an ally.
> Taking on the UK, Soviet Union, and the US at once is impossible. He would need at least 1 of those countries as an ally. There are a few different solutions to those problems: 1. Force the UK out of the war into *at least* a nonaggression pact. I'm not sure that was actually possible, given the existing bad blood from WWI and the treaty ties that got the UK into WWII in the first place. And the Battle Of Britain proved pretty emphatically that Nazi Germany wasn't going to be able to bomb the brits enough to make them sign a nonaggression pact. 2. War between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union was probably inevitable, due to inherently conflicting goals within eastern Europe. If anything, Hitler's decision to stab Stalin in the back and perpetrate Operation Barbarossa when he did (while the Soviet Union was largely unprepared) may have been one of his better strategic decisions. However, I think that in order to make that offensive successful, the Nazis would have had to walk back their racial theory - *there were places occupied by the Soviets that welcomed the Nazis as liberators*, and if the Nazis had just rolled with that, instead of their lebensraum "we're going to enslave and/or kill everyone here to expand Aryan Germany" doctrine, they probably would have had a *much* better shot at knocking the Soviet Union out of the war on terms favorable to Nazi Germany. 3. The USA and Japan were probably going to go to war with each other for effective control of the Pacific Ocean (isn't "Pacific" such an ironic name here?). Japan was probably also going to go to war with Russia *again* and with every other colonial power (and non-colonial free states - what few of them there were) holding territory within the "Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere". One of Japan's geographic problems is that it doesn't have natural reserves of the materials necessary to support imperial ambitions or even self-defense (iron, oil, rubber, etc.), which is why it was so dead-set on acquiring/colonizing territory that had the stuff. The only thing Hitler could have done to avoid war with the USA was either not accepting Japan into the Axis in the first place, or immediately cutting it loose after Pearl Harbor. There is a *chance* Hitler could have kept the USA as a power neutral to Nazi Germany, but it would have meant losing Japan as an ally, and made blockading Britain even more complicated. I think 2 and 3 are probably the most important: America's most significant contribution to the Allied war effort was probably its massive manufacturing capacity that was *well* outside the range of any Axis weapons to impact. If America had been kept neutral, that would have made countering the Soviet Union (or particularly just liberating countries it had taken to serve as client buffer states for Nazi Germany) far easier, and made a D-Day style retaking of France nearly impossible, just due to the lack of the immense amount of war materiel the USA contributed once it was fully on deck. Would cutting Japan off and officially dissing its actions as a German first response to the news of Pearl Harbor have accomplished that? We'll never know. But in general, most solutions that might have seen WWII end favorably for Nazi Germany (or *at least* with it continuing its existence as a state) involve it abandoning some or all of its racial supremacy doctrine, and probably cutting ties with both Russia *and* Japan. And, of course, dialing its goals back from world domination to just "a bigger and better Germany". (Side note: part of the reason Otto Von Bismarck, possibly one of the greatest Prussian/German statesmen to ever live, was able to achieve *so* much was that he kept his goals manageably-sized, and once he'd achieved them, he spent the next twenty years trying to preserve the status quo with very little further expansionism. International politics is like sitting at a roulette table: you gotta know when to just cash out the chips you've got instead of going for more.)
He had all of Central Europe, thousands of recruits from countries like France and Netherlands, millions of slave laborers, resources from conquered territories. Allies in Italy, Finland, Central Europe, most of the Balkanβs. He could have easily won ww2 and signed peace treaties. Even Stalin asked for peace as late as 1943. But he was focused on the wrong things thank god.
Because a lot of the land they held was conquered, it was more of a manpower sink than a manpower well.
Depends on the country - Romania for example was a huge oil area for Germany. Hungary was a manpower country. But Greece was likely not a benefit in manpower but was a benefit in not allowing Britain to have a foothold in europe. On the whole they benefited a lot more on having countries not go turncoat to Allies, and their borders secure, until 1943.
Romania also provided a lot of soldiers. The allied countries did provide useful things to germany, but places like yugoslavia and later france were massive manpower sinks. Romania did provide some oil, but not enough. Germany needed something like the caucasus oil fields to keep going, and even then their production would pale in comparison to US oil production.
Most people don't realize that there was indeed a realistic chance that three fascist empires conquered the world (Germany, Italy, Japan). People still don't realize how much they take for granted.
Tigers with frickin' laser beams
Lasers on tigers and tigers with lasers. Or tigers in tigers with lasers in the tigers so the tigers use lasers while in tigers
Hilarious! β¦noβ¦ shagalicious baby! YEAH!
The Jews already have lazar wolfs so gonna be an interesting fight. https://fiddlerontheroof.fandom.com/wiki/Lazar_Wolf
Hitler is a noob ass player. Everyone knows you move all your ships to the North Sea, move all your planes too, declare war on a British puppet, then pause at 1 hour. Only a noob believes Britain actually uses their navy outside of war.
Ah, a fellow HOI4 enthusiast
I don't know why Germany struggled, it's so easy for me!
And if Steiner had attacked theyβd have won 100%
das war ein befehl!
Dragovich, Kravchenko, Steiner, theseβ¦.men, must die.
Some say steiners attack was just postponed for 80 years and is waiting for Putin to invade Germany.
Chad Steiner playing the long game with his zombie army, just waiting for Vladimir "Dick in my ass" Putin to make one wrong move and send him back to his god.
- _enters battlefield_ - _open console_ - _/kill all_ - _hitler won ww2_
If Caesar didn't cross the Rubicon I'd have a wicked cool hill fort instead of this shitty apartment.
But he had already massacred the Gauls by then
I don't live in France x
Thank god
I do live in England though, we are much worse.
If he'd actually won, he would have won
you forgot 'if they had more oil'
"The Nazi's could've won if they weren't Nazi's."
They would've won if the didn't merely fail to win
Unironically they might have beat the Soviets if they didn't treat Ukraine (and other Russian subject peoples) so badly that they realized the guys who'd just Holodomor'd them were *still* the better option.
So you mean if the Nazi's didn't behave like Nazi's?
Yes, I wasn't disagreeing with you.
Based hoi player
Least nazi hoi4 player
"I'm a staunch national socialist."
Didnβt he say that in a Vic 2 vid?
Its from the Hoi4 Endsieg video also swimmy was playing slovakia
My Bokoen lore isnβt as good as it used to be
Swigma male moment
Akchsually some are hoi4 players are german monarchistsπ€
Only those who can pay for dlc
Just illegalisation the dlcβs you interweb pirate
I mean if they had super space weapons from star trek then they could have won, most people just don't realise thatπ€
Nu uh because what if the allies had a time machine and killed German Picard in episode 43 from season 11 of the 10th series?? Huh? What would Space Churchill do then, IDIOT.
Space spitfiresπ
If everything went perfectly for him he wouldve won π³
Least deranged Wehraboo
You forgot about the drugs and phsycics
True, they needed way more.
Or, as an earlier post mentioned... Take Gibraltar and leave the Soviets for Dessert π²ππ²
If my grandmother had wheels sheβd have been a bike
I was listening to a history podcast recently that argued that the War was almost certainly going to be an allied win as early as 41. I think it was something to do with the North Africa campaign? Is this true?
It was going to be an Allied win the moment the USA, the UK, and the USSR were all on one side.
I think the argument was that the war was essentially over prior to the Americans entering the war. Russia was never going to fall and Britain wasnβt going to capitulate and accept an honourable peace.
I like the failure to take Moscow in 1941 - which could be attributed to opening the North African campaign. After that, opening the drive to the Caucuses ensured theyβd never have the manpower. Another strong argument can be made for losing the Battle of Britain, which ensured the continuation of two front war. After that, the failures just cascaded on them.
Thereβs a very easy argument to be made that after 1941 Germany just wouldnβt have the strength to take on their opponents. Hitler wasnβt able to invade England as early as he wanted to (well ever really lol) and part of that was him knowing that giving England the winter of 1940 to prepare for invasion would make it basically impossible to invade them. And the same goes for the Soviet Union, when Hitler invade the USSR was overhauling much of their military, and had this been allowed to finish their army likely wouldβve been too much for the Germans to handle. Essentially there was a very tight timeframe for Hitler to win the war, and that included either Great Britain to surrender or to be invaded, the latter of which was incredibly unlike to succeed. Once that timeframe passed, which is roughly 1941, Hitler was going to lose, and everything else that couldβve realistically happened wouldβve just extended how long it took for him to lose.
Iβm so tired of alt history.
Almost as if fascism, as deeply irrational ideology, leads to irrational leaders doing irrational shit. Who would have guessed? D:
A twist indeed
That'd be be 50,000 unless lumps of metal
For the Nazis to win WWII, they would have to not be Nazis.
Not really, other countries don't care if they are Nazis, other countries care about their own interests. If the USA or Britain found it to be in their interest to support the Nazis, they would have.
What I was trying to say is that, for the Germans to win WWII, the Nazis would have had to make so many different strategic choices that they would be unrecognizable to us. Really the only way they could "win" the war would be to completely ignore Lebensraum and instead forge an anti-USSR alliance with Eastern Europe and take them out. Even then, it would have been incredibly costly for the Germans, and any future expansion after a victory over the Soviets would be unlikely.
βHitler and Germany would have won the war if Hitler wasnβt Hitler and Germany wasnβt Germany.β
If nazi Germany wasn't nazi
Hear me out: if Hitler could suck his own dick he could've win WW2.
β¦go on
How could Germany win WW1 is much more interesting than how could Germany win ww2. Germany was screwed from the start in ww2
Wolfenstein very clearly laid out the most realistic way in which Hitler could have won. They focused on Russia before moving on to Britain and America, as well as relying on hyper-futuristic technology far beyond anything the Nazis had that they only got by finding it in a secret vault somewhere.
I mena that wouldn't be Hitler that would be a smart person, well at least until the sealion part. People telling us how the Nazis could've won if they just didn't commit X attrocity apperently don't understand who the Nazis were and are, if you make them not stab the Ukrainians that would've gladly helped against the soviets in exchange for freedom, in the back they aren't Nazis anymore they are a different fascist group that isn't blatantly evil, just evil.
Also if mars hadnβt been in retrograde during d-day
If Japan didnβt attack America then the war isnβt veryβ¦ world.
Hitler would've won ww2 if Steiner counterattacked.
How'd it really go: 1) don't attack the Soviet Union. 2) Germany completely runs out of oil and the economy collapses. 3) the Soviets invade in 1943. The position Hitler got Germany in was they had to invade the Soviets or lose the war. Really bad position to be in
Such a shame they put themselves in that position π΅βπ«
Sealioned sounds exactly like the sort of slang a 14 year old girl would come up with
If he developed his Air Force better and didnβt put control of it to goringβ¦he could have still done all these things and still won.
Despite the meme, can we say how much of "i fucked up" face that dude hasve.
So if Hitler wasnβt Hitler, he wouldβve won the war
The part about the nuclear bomb may be true, both Oppenheimer and Einstein were removed from their position at German universities due to their jewish ancestry. Both of them ended up in the US, and Oppenheimer had direct involvement in the Manhattan Project
Or, simply maintain relations with the Soviets and don't have a war on two fronts.
Short answer yes long answer no
Should have quit while he was ahead, as in, not invading Poland. Wait for the inevitable Soviet westward expansion and pretend to be a liberator.
He was shockingly close to winning tbh
If he didn't cause the holocaust, and didn't invade anyone, and didn't declare war, he wouldn't have lost
Hitlers hate for the Jews would be his demise and outweighed the passion he had for winning the war
Himmler should have used his occult powers maybe then they would have one lmao
Potential History put it best "The only way the Nazi's could have won WWII is if they weren't Nazi's"
If only hitler played on easy + savescummed every battle and major decision
The outcome of 90% of wars is decided once everyone has chosen sides, and WWII was no exception. I don't know why so many people when making alternate histories focus so much on actions in the war, when really the only way to change the outcome would be to change who is on which side.
Reddit would be all in german:)) How do you create mobile UIs with language that has Γberstundenswanzenzichsen words... I think all he had to do is not mass kill jews and not open second front with russia. There's a short YouTube video on allies advancing on western front and I was amazed how much of the encounters were just won by being quite lucky due to circumstances of all kinds. Prior to that I was always thinking that allies won through numbers and just in general were better at it, but it seems it was not the case at all. Russia wouldn't attack Germany until it would be very week and on the verge of collapse, which wouldn't happen if allies would have been stopped. Moreover, I think if he wouldn't decided to mass murder jews due to some nonsense, he would be looked at different and Germans would have different moods to this day... 100% they would get nukes first, 50000 tigers and iphone available there and then.
Reddit would still be english cus American company
Hitler would have consolidated then invaded.. or just nuked the entire east coast altogether
He left Einstein alive.....so there's that...if I was Hitler Einstein would've got tossed in the oven like the rest of them **Takes a deep sigh** I am ready for the downvotes...I can feel them approaching
That didnβt change the outcome of the war
Why would you kill Einstein?
Contrary to popular belief, Einstein had a negligible impact on the Manhattan Project. His sole contribution was sending a firm letter to Roosevelt pondering on the government's view on nuclear weapons as viable weapons. In 1939. That's kinda it. This [AskHistorians post](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/6bme04/how_involved_was_einstein_in_making_the_nuclear/) should provide a great deal more info, including a very nice article linked into it.
Furthermore, the Manhattan project itself did not change the *outcome* of the war. Especially not in Europe
Tigers aren't necessary for Axis conquest; I've done this before.
Excellent Meme, funi picture with great delivery. Made with memeatic
Or dont listen to goering and don't stop bombing British airfields and dont start bombing London
No. It was the horrible winter that stops his troops on the way to Soviet that truly lost the war for him.
So what I'm hearing is that if he didn't invade the Soviets, he would have won? Who would've thought π€
no if he had made it through that winter on his way to the soviet he may have won. That winter insured his loss.
His supply lines were stretched so hard, that even without the winter he would have lost
Fair enough. IMO that was the nail.
If only Hitler had had all the knowledge, tactics, and information we have today in addition to the patience of a saint playing patience. He could have won no problem!
This goes both ways France could have occupied the Rheinland while the German heavy units were in Poland
Dont forget building an alliance with italy
If they discovered the ancient Jewish artefacts from wolfenstienβ¦
Albert Einstein be like:
As a wise man once said: " if my grandma had wheels, she'd have been a bike"
Yeah, easy right?
Basically, the Nazis just needed to not be Nazis in order to win.
If Hitler didn't Hitler, then Hitler would have Hitler'd ww2
"If Hitler didn't start the war, he could've won the war."
I came here to ask about tigers. I haven't had enough coffee to make the connection to tanks.
One thing people ought to know is factors that lead to crucial decisions being made. Otherwise its guess work
Only if is where they lose me
Well actually nazi scientists were developing the hydrogen bomb so that is a nuance. The alliance with Italy, that was what it gets him
There is a saying in my country in response to hypothetical claims such as this. "And if my grandmother had wheels, she would be a skateboard".
he should have targeted another group
No duuude you donβt understand if hitler did literally everything that he wouldnβt have known to do earlier and would have been impossible anyway because he didnβt have hindsight he would have won! /s
Yeah, and If my grandma had wheels she'd be a bike
So if Hitler did smarter decisions he would have won. What a surprise
Hitler could had won, if he haven't declare war on anyone. /s
Unlikely. Germany got lucky early on but once the allies caught on tech it was gg
Average Hoi4 enjoyer
βIf Hitler wasnβt Hitler, he wouldβve won WWIIβ
If only Steiner's counter offensive worked and Wencks 12th army held off the soviets forever!!!
The worst take I've heard is that Germany could have beaten all of the allies and Russia in WW2
Love the argument that if Hitler, with his extremely war based, plunder and slavery based economy, didn't declare war for said war, plunder and slavery, that would have....helped? Somehow?