Hitler could of won ww2 if he didnt post 250,000 troops in scandanavia...

hitler could of won ww2 if he didnt post 250,000 troops in scandanavia , managed to capture st petersburg and didnt reroute his panzer divisons away from stalingrad, change my mind

Attached: 1519704036847.png (656x654, 294K)

Other urls found in this thread:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=sbim2kGwhpc
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Imagine thinking the world isn't a theater.

all he had to do to win was not invade africa with his most elite troops and held his peace treaty with russia

>if hitler did something different something different would have happened
Great post user

oh and i forgot, if japan chose northen expansion instead of attacking the britan and america

they didnt have the oil resources or airforce to sustain control of their european territory. any prolonging of the conflict, especially against russia, would have been certain defeat regardless of their decisions. it was decided by oil and inteligence

It was the Generals that diverted entire Armies and there logistics and especially reinforcements to areas that they were not suppose to go. This is why Army Group Central received the bulk of reinforcements while Army Group South, and later A and B received the least. Even though it was Army Group South, A and B, that were responsible for the primary objectives of the entire operation and received the most casualties. Why? Because Halder and many of the other German Generals had zero strategic insight and all thought that by taking Moscow, the Soviet Union would just magically surrender and lose, even though that didn't work so well for Napoleon and production had already moved beyond the Urals. It was Hitler that constantly was trying to pull their heads out of their asses and focus on the primary objectives of both Barbarossa and Blau. Halder did more to ensure German defeat in the war than any Allied general or traitor.

if they captured stalingrad they could then capture the oilfeilds in the south

>> could of

Have

Attached: 1_Vl591BLYLgWrjUfVnaPQhA.jpg (672x900, 84K)

He still wouldn’t have defeated the America s

you know nothing of world war 2

>could of
I am surprised you managed to post this thread tbqfh

>could of won
should of went

This got me laughing pretty hard.

This is correct

Attached: Jcon2OG_d.jpg (640x360, 27K)

Nope. Barbarossa was poorly organised, with little consideration for supplies or contingencies.

They failed the moment they didn't take Moscow. And even if they took Moscow, the Russians wouldn't just throw up their hands and say "well, we tried!"

D-Day celebrations sure will get funnier and funnier from here on out.

Can you believe this is still a thing 75 years after the war.

Attached: Yes.jpg (513x510, 29K)

hitler [could of] won ww2 if he wasn't a puppet of the Zionists. They financed hitler to become the leader of a movement they knew was inevitable, and in raising hitler to power, they managed to control the german people.

Attached: swastika-lederhosen.png (379x705, 224K)

This guy's a bit of an alliesboo but he's mostly correct.

allies had way more troops and way better supply chain. russia alone would of grinded them down

Shit I meant to post video

m.youtube.com/watch?v=sbim2kGwhpc

Read Richard tedors, Hitlers revolution. It will shine some light on the war

I'll tell you the truth he should of had the jews fight for germany and killed two birds with one stone .

>250000 lost troops instead of support for the war

Nordicism failed when Sweden didn't join Germany and the rest had to be occupied.

Literally worthless snowniggers other than the Finns.

He needed to take Moscow, Stalingrad was useless

>he wuz a genocidal maniac
Why should I listen to a bluepilled cuck boi

He needed oil. Leningrad was useless. Moscow was slightly less useless. Stalingrad was necessary to guard the Caucasus oil.

Hitler was right. The generals were disloyal retards. All the rants he went on were totally justified

He was stupid to attack Russia. He was scared that Russia would attack sooner or later, but thing is, Russia lost every single war that did not involve huge territory and shitty weather, so it would be easy to defend against them while dealing with Europe and Africa

>actually thinking the nazi's lost the war
what is project paperclip? its no different then the west airlifting "ISIS" members out of hot areas before they were slaughtered by the syrian army/russians

Attached: 075.jpg (1920x1080, 419K)

people need to learn some history, its repeating as we speak

Attached: 026.jpg (1024x768, 155K)

>not just using chemical weapons and fumigating Leningrad, Moscow, and Stalingrad alongside any other accumulations of Red Army forces
It saddens me that Hitler was such a humanitarian, unlike the Americans and British who firebombed and nuked entire cities full of civilians.

Hitler escaped to south America

You sound like a very intelligent person. Have a (You)

Attached: 1557180430527.gif (363x221, 1.74M)