Hitler would've won the war if. . .
 

He wouldn't have made so many costly mistakes!

Do you agree?

If you include employing some totally idiotic yes men as tactical advisors (*cough* Goering *cough*) and listening to them instead of the people who knew what they were talking about (Rommel, Guderian, Doenitz) and let them do their jobs instead of constantly interfering with their strategy, then yeah...he would have had a slightly easier time of it.
Hitler knew his politics alright...but he knew jack**** about war.

Hitler lost the war on 22nd June 1941 He tried to kill the golden goose that laid the golden egg.

The attack on the Soviet Union was inevitable. The politics of the NSDAP, the rhetoric about Lebensraum and so on, plus the fact that Stalin's Soviet Union posed, or would soon pose a serious threat to Germany. It is likely that, if Hitler hadn't attacked the Soviet Union in 1941, the Soviet Union would have attacked Germany in 1942 or later, if Stalin considered it to be to his advantage.

Some other alternate timelines to consider:

- Italia doesn't invade Greece. Germany does not have to save the Italian's butt there, and Operation Barbarossa starts earlier. Moscow falls before winter and the Russians are forced to retreat beyond the Urals. They are not beaten yet, but seriously weakened.

- Battle of Britain is won by Germany for some reason. (Focus on airfields and industry instead of civil population, even more ships sunk in the atlantic :arrgh!:, the evacuation of Dunkerque fails or, I'm getting slightly nationalist here, Blücher is not sunk in the Oslo fjord, the king and government of Norway is captured, and Nortraship is never established.) Britain surrenders.

Rubbish no evidence what so ever.

Stalin would never have enterd the war if he could unless germany was weakend.

But stalin did have one thing to his advantage even if his weapons and men were inferior that one thing was weather.

And the lack of a road net work.

That too and not to mentioned the already fortified houses from the revolution.

There does exist indications that Soviet High Command was at least considering the possibility, and drafting plans for an attack on Germany. Of course, unless the competence of the lower Soviet commanders had been raised somehow, it would have failed miserably.

I agree on both.Britain is the most critical factor IMHO,because without Britain to use as base of operations,i doubt that USA would be in position to invade the occupied Europe.

Being a Greek,i must also support the theory of the 7 precious weeks which delayed the operation Barbarossa.To quote Keitel:

during the Nuremberg trials after WWII, Hitler's Chief of Staff Field Marshall Keitel stated that "The unbelievable strong resistance of the Greeks delayed by two or more vital months the German attack against Russia; if we did not have this long delay, the outcome of the war would have been different in the eastern front and in the war in general, and others would have been accused and would be occupying this seat as defendants today".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-I...n_intervention

There is a similar statement of gratitude from the Russian General Zhukov towards Greece,but can't find it right now.

Prove it.

Stalin’s winter war with Finland was a bloody mess. Poland was not a text book operation. And after the German forces swept in to Western Europe and took it in six weeks flat. On seeing that Stalin would dare not cross the border.

If he didn't attack the Soviet Union, i think Stalin would of backed hitler up or just turned a blind eye at everything, Hitler also made a mistake of making war against the USA after Japan decleared war on the US. Hitler had no reason to declear war against the US did he?. He should of just let Japan fight its own war. If hitler won the war he would of attacked Japan next anyways.
Once he took over poland hitler should of laid low for a few years. But he was bent on ruling europe.

ive listened to many opionions on hitlers decisions looking back he made so good changes to battle plans and some god awfull ones i submit that there a too many variables in any confict to sit back with hindsight and say this or that choice was wrong Steed and i have had many arguments on these topics there are occasions when the normal rules of war go right out of the window such as Rorke's Drift wher e the advantage clearly lay in zulu hands but the battle went the other way. steeds argument that hitlers attack on russia would have ended the same way what ever may have happened i reject the what if factor is too big if that was true germany initial attack on the french belgium frontier would have failed french and english forces where close to there supply lines and had more than adequate air and ground support more tanks and troops yet they failed to stop germany who where inferior in numbers and supplies , yes the generals play numbers game but i submit that the human factor ourweighs the normal mathmatics of how many tanks guns and planes you have anyway we wil never truly know because i dont think we will ever see such wars again more the pity i think france and germany need another kicking to show them how much they should value brittish efforts

Hitler was getting on in years and his health was getting worst a cock tail of drugs did not help one bit.


(In the Autumn of 41 Hitler asked Keitel to draw up plans to invade Afghanistan and Pakistan) this bit of info came from a book, but never the less this would not have surprised me.

Agree with you, might want to check your PM dude. :up: