Was Nazi Germany really doomed the start?

He seems stupid in retrospect, but his actions made sense at the time. Other countries let him take whatever he wanted, so he took more. Nobody thought the cuck Chamberlain would randomly declare war for the sake of the Polish dictatorship. And the fighting value of the Red Army was pathetic in the Winter War.

The lack of coordination between Germany and Japan against the Soviet Union was stupid, though. Japan would have signed the Pact of Steel had it been anti-Soviet. And a large Japanese force in Siberia might have draw off enough Soviet forces for Moscow to fall in 1941. But that's what happens when (despite what's always been claimed) you have no consistent long-term planning.

Kinda yeah. It's a heroic tale of one nations attempt to stop the current tyranny we live under. Jews also like rape porn, so they fap to it constantly.

Germany THE SIZE OF TEXAS
vs
TWO EMPIRES.
I'm amazed they successfully killed as many as they did.

Germany lost the war when they failed to rid the UK of it's ability to wage war on them.

If the JewSA didn't take part in the war Germany would have knocked out three empires namely Britian, France and the Soviet Union.

If they annihilated the British army at Dunkirk you can be sure the USA would have joined the war much earlier.

>Was Nazi Germany really doomed the start?
No.

It's nearly impossible to conquer the British Island.
But the bongs would never have started an offensive on the European mainland without the yanks.

Nope. Hitlers obsession with invading Russia ruined it all.

They may have lost, but they sure as hell made their enemies bleed for the victory, and they will be remembered forever, because few fought against many, even when the fight was hopeless they still fought till the end.

Maybe, maybe not. I always thought not utilizing the Soviet POWs in an actual Anti Bolshevik liberation army was a huge mistake.

England had some pretty sharp butter knives back then

Should have focused on the Ruskis.

They tried retards. 17 peace offers were made before the invasion of Russia, even ones that included a full withdrawal of German out of France to the original borders.

The war was never about german expansion, it was about destruction of the european population by the hands of the judeo-bolsheviks, the judeo-anglos and the anglo-elite.

Attached: Churchill - Heavens no, they would accept immediately.jpg (1089x644, 223K)

Hitler was an idiot and controlled opposition.

yup they lost when they trusted a socialist

The only good part of the whole ordeal is that the filthy anglo traitors will go down with the rest of us.

Attached: Human population 1940 - 2010.png (4200x6184, 1.19M)

Nobody can deny they were amazingly impressive and that fascism is stronger than other forms of government. They just went too far in, too hard, too quickly.

Imagine Fascism tried today with the lessons learned and genetics understood as we do.

>it was about destruction of the european population by the hands of the judeo-bolsheviks, the judeo-anglos and the anglo-elite.
almost. Destruction wasn't really their goal though. Selling people weapons n shit was the goal, not their problem people destroy each other with those. It's always about money don't you know?

Germany lost when they went up against the Soviets which would've ended up happening whether they started it or not.
If the Soviets had invaded Poland first and Germany were to occupy Poland under the guise of fighting the soviets back, I could perhaps see the Allies tolerating them but considering that Nazis saw Slavs as sub-human I doubt it would've ended up well for them anyway.
The only way for the Nazis to win was stop being Nazis.

No it's not. Money is for people without power.
A person with money can be powerless,
but a powerful person will never be moneyless.

100%. It's a no brainer considering the facts, Germany needed colossal amounts of ressources mainly oil to keep their factories running and supply their aerial, naval and land force, which is why they attempted to seize Romanian oil fields in 1941-1942 but were eventually pushed back by the soviet union.
Add this to the fact that they were held down tremendously by Italy and had to mobilize their forces many times in order to intervene in their aid
All in all, all the numbers and factors were against them pretty much even though they outclassed their opponants in quality on certain aspects.
Hitler himself addressed all of this in the leaked conference recording with Mannerheim

but dude, more money

Your little army was never a threat to the nazis, it was the RAF and the RN that crippled the German war economy and morale. If Dunkirk and the Blitz were successful I doubt Germany would've ended up on the losing side.

Problem was because of Versailles Germans couldn't do any acts of aggression without France kicking up a shitstorm

Why did Germany not invade or ally Turkey instead to reach the middel east oil

Probably too far for it to be efficient. Say they seize middle eastern oil fields, in order to secure their transportation pipelines, they would have to mobilize a large amount of man and materiel power, and thus spreading their forces thin in other areas, and also being vulnerable to attacks from both east and west sides.
Just my speculation

Yes. no oil.

A lot of people suffered and died after Germany lost.

youtube.com/watch?v=HQ6CNmrYyuM

Good point plus harrassment by Royal navy if they did. But it was doable if they could of kept the USSR out of the war and focused in North Africa

>Nazis saw Slavs as sub-human

That's a lie. There are zero speeches or texts by Hitler claiming this, despite hundreds even thousands of them being available. There is zero NS propaganda claiming that Slavs are subhuman. Nearly half a million Slavs fought within the german armies for the european cause, they would not have done that if what you claim is true.

Provide just 1 source of Hitler or any german official claiming that slavs are subhuman. Just 1. Shouldn't be hard right?

Attached: Aryan according to NSDAP.jpg (4000x2700, 1.51M)

Hitler's great mistake was the timing of his invasion of Poland.
He should have gotten Stalin to go first, thus legally obligating the Western Allies to declare war on the USSR. He also probably shouldn't have declares war on America after Pearl Harbor, this should have been 2 seperate although simultaneous wars. He should have never retaliated on London for the 1 raid the RAF made on Berlin, this gap in time suring the Battle of Britain allowed the RAF to rebuild. Go for the jugular.

In regards to his war on the USSR 3 things meed to be mentioned.
1) That was literally the point of the War, Lebenstaum.
2) The USSR was building to attack central Europe anyways, the timing of the war was critical to have the first strike.
3) The German offensive bogged down in the outskirts of Moscow when the fall rains began. The initial timeline for the invasion called for the laund of Operation Barbarossa to take place 6 weeks earlier, however the Italians were getting the shit kicked out of them in N Africa by the British Army. When the Africa Korp was launched it took the Germans 6 critical weeks to rebuild those numbers. He should have just gone to the jugular, then helped the Italians.

Attached: 1547055262877.gif (149x181, 836K)

Should have left Russia alone.

America was once a White living space for any European who wanted to come here.

Now it's a shit brown Communist hellhole.

The biggest mistake was Stalingrad.

It had no relevance other than the name. Just think: had Stalin named ANY OTHER city Stalingrad, maybe Moscow itself, things might have been different.

USSR joining the war was inevitable, the Germans found out in 1939-40 that the soviets had been building thousands of tanks and deploying them all along the european border, they figured that the soviets were going to overwhelm europe sooner or later and they were just preparing, so they had to strike first in order to interrupt them but it was too late, they were well to equiped now
youtube.com/watch?v=ClR9tcpKZec&t=170s

think huh? seems you can't think. the volga goes right in the middle of stalingrad, and on this river hundreds of thousands of allied equipment was sailing to moscow. also ever heard of the famous traktor factory in stalingrad? the real target were the caucus oil fields. just too big of a bite for the wehrmacht

>He should have gotten Stalin to go first, thus legally obligating the Western Allies to declare war on the USSR.

You have no idea of what you are talking about. Stalin built a 1000 airfields in Poland after capturing it, and his tanks were so heavily armored that no german equipment could pierce it. But the disadvantage of the soviet tanks was that they were too heavy for the road-less swamps of eastern europe, thus they became sitting ducks when on the defensive.

The tanks were designed for rapid advancement through the roads of central and western Europe. If Stalin had attacked first, the soviets would have steamrolled Europe all the way to Spain within weeks. The only reason for why Europe held of for as long as they did was because the massive soviet airfield-system and their humongous soviet paratrooper divisions were caught on the ground. And that their tanks kept sinking. And that their divisions were equipped with maps central Europe, meant for attack, and no maps over eastern Europe.

Nothing available on planet earth in 1941 would have been able to stop the soviet force if it had been the one attacking. The only reason they didn't get all of Europe within weeks was because Hitler attacked at exactly the time he did, when most of the Soviet forces were on leave before the coming attack.

Attached: 1510761193233.jpg (309x751, 100K)

It wasn't too late, Hitler was just retarded tried to wave his dick by taking Stalingrad instead of going straight to Moscow and then the Baku oilfields

Fuck. Missread. Thought you wrote his timing of his invasion of Soviet.

If that was true it would of been better for Germany to let USSR stike first because it would of put Germany in a better light plus because of a smaller German army it would of been better for them to fight on a smaller front and funnel the soviets into killing zones

And we deserve it.

Attached: 1544878340309.jpg (653x490, 32K)

The war with the Soviets was inevitable, so I assume that Hitler wanted to focus all forces in the east.
He knew war with the soviets would come anyway, so he put all stakes on one card.
He speculated that the soviets would capitulate or at least no longer be a threat after capturing Moskau, Leningrad and Stalingrad before 1943.
Then use the oil to fuel the German war machine to hold off the west. He knew that if they wouldn't have access to the Russian oil by 1943 the war would be lost.

Yes I assume that he thought he could take Poland without France and the UK declaring war. What is interesting is that the Soviets only entered Poland a few weeks after the Wehrmacht started the offensive.
Did Stalin trick him ?

Another thing I thought about is, why even bother building a fleet. It was clear anyway that it couldn't match the RN, so why not just built U Boote to raid convoys and save the industrial capacity ?

The execution was poor you could say, absolutely, but the idea behind it is simple and correct, you can't fight a war on two fronts, by 1942, the Germans were already cornered and running low on ressources, so they bet everything on their attack on the soviets in order to take them out of the war quickly and in doing so also seize the oil fields in the caucas.

this
he made sure germany and white nationalism would be destroyed and sympathy and support for jews worldwide would be higher than ever before. all while killing 40 million ethnic whites. He’s a jew hero

Why did he even bother going for Leningrad and Moscow.? He should just drove into Ukraine for the wheat and continued into south Russia and capture the Oil and Middle east

They still had no oil, not enough iron, nor the ability to import those from overseas. Why? Because the rest of the world was against them.

40 mil? only 7 million germans died in the war

Yes, as soon as they abandoned the tenets they ran upon through the night of the long Knives.
Hitler ran up massive debts before the war, over 30 billion reichmarks owed to the banks he promised to reform yet didn't.
Their ill-conceived currency required slave labour and forced market access for continual growth, they could not even afford their own resources, they had to steal them. The war was necessary, it was the only way to keep the house of cards standing.
Not that any of you kids in your contrarian phase give a shit about anything but emotionally-manipulative nazi propaganda.

Guessing most of the USSR's factories were in those areas. Sure they could have probably taken the oilfields in the south relatively easily but then you'd have Stalin massing a huge counterattack.

The gambit was that taking out Moscow would be a critical blow to the USSR.

Forty million ethnic whites. Who do you think fought the Germs? Black people?

>Yes I assume that he thought he could take Poland without France and the UK declaring war.
It wasn't a case of "taking Poland". It was a case of stopping the genocide of ethinc germans in eastern Prussia by the hands of jewish-polish NKVD. Germany complained repeatedly to the international community, but the League of Nations only laughed. As did the anglos and their allies. It's was all well documented, and verified by doctors from neutral countries.
archive.org/details/04951DokumentePolnischerGrausamkeit1940S.1220Auswrt.Amt_201706

>Another thing I thought about is, why even bother building a fleet. It was clear anyway that it couldn't match the RN,
The initial fleet was strong, but one of your engineers designed torpedoes for them that didn't explode. Germany lost core elements of its fleet up in Norway for this reason. Without these losses the British could have been trapped by german ships at Dunkirk, and England would have folded or been invaded.

The engineer was executed, if it is any consolidation.

Attached: wonder why Hitler put all those jews in camps.jpg (2000x1709, 1.57M)

Yes because they put their entire industry into arms production which revitalized the economy. They couldn't not go to war after funneling millions into it, the economy would have collapsed.
>T. retard

I think at the time, having a navy that's equiped with large cruisers and battle ships was more of a prestigious outlook rather than an strategical or efficient one, as these ones tended to require a large amount of men to opperate, poor manoeuvrability and consumptive, as a result, too risky to send them off into battle. And in the end, it turned out so indeed, and the KM ended up opting for u boat tactics throughout the rest of the war.
So it was mostly in a display of force and dominance over the seas which worked quite well in favour of the brits

>Because the rest of the world was against them.

You have it the wrong way around.

youtube.com/watch?v=FwCvxWGYBzA

youtube.com/watch?v=TpP5mbq65jc

Hey hitler we need long range bombers to hit britain
>No long range bombers! Use Stukkas!
No seriously we need to be able to actually reach the cities idiot preferably with fighter support so all our airmen don’t die.
>NEIN NEIN NEIN USE STUKKA
Goddammit

>The initial fleet was strong, but one of your engineers designed torpedoes for them that didn't explode.
Never heard about that. Is there any information, would love to read up on it.

Part of my family fled from Lodz so they would have had some stories. Unfortunately they are all dead now.

You dont need to go to war being arms focused.

The Soviet unions whole economy was based off of arms manufacturing too it was the only thing holding it together.

Stukas were designed for military targets, and Hitler only wanted to attack military targets. Hitler didn't want a war with Britain at all.

The warcriminal Churchill on the other hand, wanted to murder as much of the European population as possible. For three whole months, the eternal-anglo terror-bombed the civilian population centers of Europe, without retaliation in kind, while the German government hoped they would come to their senses.
youtube.com/watch?v=XtiIK_hWA7k&bpctr=1547765810

Instead Churchill imprisoned the peace-movement in England and stepped up the terror-bombing of civilians, and was just barely kept from using anthrax created towards the end of the war because the hostilities ended.

Attached: 1504112406434.jpg (500x719, 39K)

not necessarily. but there were many things that would have had to have gone right for them to win. In my opinion the major issue that lost germany the war was their mistakes regarding air force doctrine and the whole fact that every general in the germany army only planned on the tactical level (see operation fall blau for an example of this). They were at a severe disadvantage from the start regarding oil and although romania was supplying lots of oil it could not cover their needs. One of the most important strategic errors in my opinion was that they were never really interested in Africa; and along with the Italians failed miserably at securing the Mediterranean despite at the time having the capacity to do so. What securing africa and the mediteranian would accomplish is it would also secure the middle eastern countries which were aligned with germany and could have provided more oil and most importantly a path into the Caucasus where germany could take the russian oil fields directly. In this scenario germany delayed its declaration of war on the USSR seeing as though the soviets were not planing to attack within the next 5 or 10 years

By the end of ww1, a mechanized war was inevitable that the next world war would be a mechanized one, a war of movement (like the first months of 1914).
To win such a war, oil is needed, the axis had romania, but the allies managed to cut the oil production by bombing the oil fields.
So yeah, a constant and viable oil supply (or an alternative) was, and is a must.

Attached: grain.png (596x418, 624K)

*By the end of ww1, it was inevitable that the next world war would be a mechanized one, a war of movement (like the first months of 1914).

Search: "The German Torpedo Crisis"

uboataces.com/articles-wooden-torpedoes.shtml
>In the largest amphibious assault in German history, Operation Weserubung saw the deployment of the entire U-boat Force into Norwegian seas. A total of twenty oceangoing boats and twenty-two coastal boats were deployed to the confined waters of the Norwegian sea. Their mission was to repel an Allied amphibious counter invasion and to sink any Allied warships or troopships which were certain to be in the area.

>As expected, the Norwegian seas were filled with Allied ships. Almost immediately, the U-boats began attacking. Every day and every hour, U-boats were attacking warships or were being attacked themselves. Day in, day out, night after night, the U-boats fired their torpedoes one after another, relentlessly against their targets. Not one of them exploded. Their efforts remained completely fruitless. Worse yet, when the data was analyzed back at BdU, it was found that four attacks were launched on the battleship HMS Warsprite, fourteen on cruisers, ten on destroyers, and a further ten on transports – yet only one transport was sunk. Discounting marginal attacks, Donitz concluded that had the torpedoes not failed, the U-boats would have “probable sinkings” of one battleship, seven cruisers, seven destroyers, and five transports. In summary, about twenty enemy warships had escaped certain destruction because of torpedo failures.

>By the end of the Norwegian campaign, the men of the U-boat Force had lost all faith in their torpedo and had not much heart to resume the fight. On April 19, Prien refused to attack when he spotted a convoy of ten transports and several destroyers. He still had four torpedoes left, but had so little faith in them that he sailed away silently. Upon his return, in explaining his refusal to attack, he told Donitz that he “could hardly be expected to fight with a dummy rifle”

Attached: Steele - tragically, the remaining 6 million were lost.jpg (704x527, 73K)

I think if zogs didnt produce the holocaust propaganda, the US wouldve joined Germany. The US would have had a lot more to gain by supporting Germany and invading Europe from the west. Then when Europe was conquered, they would've turned their power to east Europe/Asia.

this!
based norwegian with very reasonable POVs
ppl dont blame the eternal anglos enough in Jow Forums because the majority here are anglos. the truth is that after the jew, the anglos are the biggest cancer of the world

If Hitler didnt want a war he shouldnt have made Chamberlain look so cucked the UK looked to Churchill to lead.

The holocaust propaganda didn’t even start until the end of the war what are you on? FDR was staunchly against Hitler and probably would have declared war earlier if the country had let him but until Pearl Harbor no one did

No hitler was stupid to start a two front war.

Maybe the shouldn't have invaded it in fucking winter with their engines freezing eh.
Germany could have just played defensively on the eastern side.

Why? Nothing in the West was happening until the Americans joined. It was completely static.

Why does no one ever talk about the 40 gorillion?

They couldn't win, unlike the Allies and their colonies, Nazi Germany was doomed from the start, mostly due to their lack of ressources. Germany never really had a rich territory other than a relatively flat soil ideal for farming, which is mostly why they used the blitzkrieg strategy, they couldn't allow themselves to let the war goes any longer.

Hitler didn't make Chamerlain look like a fool, the anglo-jewish media did.
Hitler clearly stated that he wanted all the lost german populations lost from the versaille treaty back under german control.

But the anglo-media never reported it like that. They just went full CNN-mode "YOU WON'T BELIEVE WHAT HITLER JUST DID HE TOOK THIS PIECE OF LAND AFTER HE PROMISED NOT TO ACCORDING TO UNNAMED SOURCES" every time he got an area back under control. Outrage all around.

The whole thing was as dumb as if Mexico would suddenly one day have annexed Mexico and California - and then after you yanks would have taken just California back, CNN would be - "enough, we got our land back. no more. If we take more orange man has to be impeached"

Attached: who do you think owns the press.jpg (1125x1111, 250K)

Attached: treaty of versailles.jpg (4115x2483, 1.12M)

>Was Nazi Germany really doomed the start?
Yes. They were fighting literally the entire rest of the industrialized world except for italy, spain, and japan.

The Nazi's didn't have any oil, they didn't have the industrial output, and they didn't have the manpower. Somehow they still almost won and their loss could arguably be said to come down to something as trivial as the fucking weather.

Attached: 1547269345271.jpg (500x459, 97K)

*annexed New Mexico and California

All that was required was starving britain out and the germans very very very nearly succeeded.

Better submarine technology and more submarines and they would've succeeded.

>entire industry
>arms production
imagine not knowing anything about public work projects

Germany should have been more ruthless more quickly.
They were too soft, too weak.
They didn't understand that in order to win, sometimes you have to do the things that make you worse than your enemies.

The soviets absolutely fucked themselves. Purging their entire military leadership ensured nobody knew how to fight a war and contributed to the staggering losses the USSR suffered early on.

The only thing that allowed USSR to continue was lend-lease from America providing them all the logistical supplies, resources, and equipment the USSR needed to keep fighting, and the massive population that allowed for the USSR's manpower losses.

>Yes. They were fighting literally the entire rest of the industrialized world except for italy, spain, and japan.

Ohboy. Remind me which side France, Finland, Norway, Denmark, Belgium, Hungaria, Netherlands, Spain, Ukraine, Romania, Croatia, Iran, Iraq, the Cossaks, Latvia, Lithuania, Estland, Slovakia and Slovenia fought on for the majority of the war.

Attached: 9731.gif (400x206, 2.94M)

Very true norway bro.
In fact they will go first.
Only about 10% of anglos are good. The rest are total bastards

>He should have gotten Stalin to go first,
Stalin wasn't total tool and he would never go first.
>he go only after Germs send communicated(not true) that Warsaw fell

WW2 was winnable with the right men.

It didn't.

The romanian oil fields came down to this:

Either Germany gets them, and they stand a chance in any future conflict with the USSR, or the USSR gets them and Germany is straight fucked because their everything relied on that oil.

The dicey part of the diplomatic situation was figuring out if the USSR/Stalin was going to invade Romania for those oil fields. If the USSR did, it put Germany in an 'unwinnable' strategic position. Hitler met with the USSR's diplomatic envoy to discuss the romania situation and he came away from that meeting with a 100% certainty that the USSR was going to invade.

It was that meeting that secured the conflict between USSR/Germany.

And considering Stalin's actions and behaviours post-war I have no doubt in my mind that Hitler made the right call. He was in a bad strategic position and tried to pull a hail-mary that almost worked.

the "Problem" is that Hitler dealth too much honorably with Britain. He should have completely crushed These traitorous rats when he still had the Chance. the USA wouldnt have been dragged into the war. Russia wouldnt have contested against Germany. We wouldn't live in a completely degenerate world right now.

>half of those names are useless slav countries
Wow yeah who could lose a war with that kind of backing?
Also vichy France literally held together with string and bubblegum

>It was a case of stopping the genocide of ethinc germans in eastern Prussia by the hands of jewish-polish NKVD
What alternate reality you are living on?
Eastern Prussia was part of Germany then. And NKWD work for USSR not for Polish second republic.