Part 1: Gearing up for war
The war effectively began in 1918, when that bullshit capitalization they called a treaty was signed. It was exactly as Field Marshal Ferdinand Foch put it.

"This is not peace, this is a 20 year armistice. These words couldn't have been more accurate, as sure enough 20 years later both France and Germany were re-mobilizing preparing to continue the war to end all wars.

This so called treaty destroyed the fragile economy in Central Europe. It was this depression stage in Germany that sought the beginning of the war, for had it not been for the shitty economy in the 20's Germany would have never elected Hitler.

This Great Depression sought a new age of enlightenment, as countries around the world were turning from their democracy's to fascists, which seemed to prove to be more competent and turning the economy around.

Germany, although indirectly, voted in Hitler, he seemed to be the best choice for the job, and lets face it, Hindenburg, wouldn't have reduced the unemployment of the country by 30% in 5 years.

This turn of decade leading to the 30's would also see a new method of ending the depression, warfare. Permanent War economies appeared to fair well in the dark times, and mobilization did prove useful, in 1931 the Sino-Japan war began. This marked the first war since the creation of the LN and was the bigger event in those 13 years. The LN was an organization designed to achieve world peace, and yet it refused to interfere in a major war. Then Jump forward a few years, and we see Italy invading Ethiopia, a civil war in Spain, and Hitler occupying the Rhineland.

It was here that the allies made their first mistake. When Hitler scrapped the treaty of Versailles, the allies should have responded by declaring war while Germany was still weak, as the world was full aware that Germany was mobilizing for war.

September 1st 1939, a day that would go down in infamy. On the previous day Hitler sent Poland an ultimatum, asking to connect Prussia with continental Germany. Danzig or War would become to popular title of this ultimatum, promptly refusing Poland declares war on Germany, and as a result Germany invades Poland.

This was a well accomplished task by Hitler and showed the true might of Germany. Poland was no easy target, and he destroyed her in less then a month.

Germany would once again show this competence in France, destroying her in 6 weeks.

In between these two fields, Hitler invades Norway for the purpose of gaining the off shore oil needed to fund the war.

In just 2 years, Hitler does what was deemed Impossible, now all of mainland Europe was under his control. This was something that had only ever been achieved once before, and that was Napoleon.

Oh my goodness, trying to outdo me, when I didn't post a quarter of what I know. Yay, celebrate Hitler, bye-bye holocaust. An invasion of Napoleonic proportions.

I took a small break. here is my next post.

Rommel
Someone that deserved his own post. Rommel was the greatest general of world war 2, he was a hero from the world war one Italian Campaign, that failed miserably except for the battles that Rommel was in. He then participated in Poland and France maintaining an undefeated record. Time after time, he would using nothing but brilliant tactics he would drive the enemy away. This isn't the only thing Rommel was good at, if anything, he was a good all round soldier and a perfect commander.

His tactics was second to known.
He was also known to to be a panzer pilot, a good one at that.
He was the only German general to refuse to kill Jews.
He treated POW's better then any other leader.
He obeyed everyone of Hitlers orders, refusing to retreat despite being out numbered 500-20 in one battle, and manage to halt the British advance for 3 days before Hitler finally let him retreat.


This then went to France, where the greatest tank general of all time was put in command of heavy infantry, something Rommel wasn't in favor of.
He said that the Germans would need a larger air support and tanks in the front line if they were to repel an allied landing. Hitler decided to station the tanks in Paris, rather then moving them closer to the line like every one of his generals suggested.
Under Supplied and Under manned Rommel was tasked in defending Normandy. A task that would prove impossible.
10 days later he would attempt to assassinate Hitler. This would be his first major failure, and he was arrested as a result. He was then ordered to commit suicide or have his family killed. he committed suicide on October 14th.

If Rommel led Nazi Germany, that'd have been scarier. Cause then no Jews would have died, which probably would have been more soldiers for the Nazis and a better commander

Potential Russian-German Axis Pact
Operation Barbarossa is considered Hitlers biggest error, the reality is it was bigger then everyone thinks. On November 25th 1940, Stalin offers to join the Axis pact as the 4th Axis member, Hitler, who had already start plans for operation Barbarossa and was still trying to sue for peace with England, declined. This was his biggest mistake, as not only did he invade a potential ally, its cost him the whole bloody war.

wow, that I did not know. Stalin would have probably stabbed him anyway. Stalin was afraid of Hitler. But, Stalin did one thing amazingly well, throwing men to die at Germans while his big counter-attack was planned by General Zhukov thus being a Russian victory.

"If Rommel led Nazi Germany, that'd have been scarier. Cause then no Jews would have died, which probably would have been more soldiers for the Nazis and a better commander"
Even if they weren't in the army. Rommel was against Operation Barbarossa, demanded more soldiers in Normandy (which Hitler could have spared, given the garrison size in Paris), executed a perfect strategy in Africa and came to be Germany's most famous war hero of the war.
As said by Churchill:

and then right after Rommel's death
"He also deserves our respect, because, although a loyal German soldier, he came to hate Hitler and all his works, and took part in the conspiracy to rescue Germany by displacing the maniac and tyrant. For this, he paid the forfeit of his life. In the sombre wars of modern democracy, there is little place for chivalry."


He is probably my Fav general of all time.

He fought for Germany, not the Nazis. Rommel was the best. If Hitler listened to his field commanders more Germany would've done better

"wow, that I did not know. Stalin would have probably stabbed him anyway. Stalin was afraid of Hitler. "
Stalin loved Hitler. On many occasions he tried to ally with Hitler. He refused to believe British agents when they gave him warning of the Operation Barbarossa plans over a month before it was initiated. Had he actually done something Germany would have had a lot harder time.

"But, Stalin did one thing amazingly well, throwing men to die at Germans while his big counter-attack was planned by General Zhukov thus being a Russian victory."
Thats true

"He fought for Germany, not the Nazis. Rommel was the best. If Hitler listened to his field commanders more Germany would've done better"
Agree, to think we could be speaking German right now talking about a theoretical Allied victory in the WW2 had Hitler actually been a good military strategist, or at least put his army in good hands. (he was a great politician, terrible leader, poor strategist)

sorry, Germany wouldn't have had a chance against the US. If they attacked us at home, industry would pick up so much and we'd probably have units pumping out of factories as the Germans were fighting much like in Stalingrad. The Germans were a good force, but they lacked AMERICAN INDUSTRY, which should never, never, be underestimated

"sorry, Germany wouldn't have had a chance against the US. If they attacked us at home, industry would pick up so much and we'd probably have units pumping out of factories as the Germans were fighting much like in Stalingrad. The Germans were a good force, but they lacked AMERICAN INDUSTRY, which should never, never, be underestimated"
But your forgetting something more important:
Tech Race:
Stealth Bombers: Germany had then in 1944, America didn't until the 70's
Mach 2.5: German fighters could go up to Mach 2.5: compared to 1.8 for American
If the Germans invaded Britain American bombers wouldn't have the range to hit Germany, but German bombers would have the range to hit America.
Tiger II tank: Thrice the hull, Twice the gun, same speed as the American Tank.

and most importantly:
V-Weapons: V-2 rockets were deadly and the V-4 rocket would have been catastrophic. V-4 was V-1 Rocket with a nuclear warhead attached. Still being tested at end of war, but were talking about a nuclear missile that could fire from a submarine in the black pit and hit New York, the V-4 project was abandoned in 1944 when Hitler cut funding to go to more defensive measures. But some conspiracy's suggest that they were ahead of the Manhattan Project. Even if they weren't America's bombers didn't have the range to Hit Germany, but a V-4 had the range to hit New York.
If New York was nuked, America would surrender. If not, Washington DC would be nuked. If still no surrender: Miami. eventually German industry would over take American.

so what? We launched a nuclear raid on Japan but it'd be impossible against the ALL POWERFUL NAZI'S? Besides, we'd still have French resistance, British resistance, Australian help, and Canadian help in defending. Not to mention the Russians, but since Germany can produce V4's in instants yet tanks in days they could nuke the whole world huh? Sorry, but my American pride tells me Nazi's wouldn't have won.

The Germans were doomed from the outset of WW2. They never had a chance of defeating Russia, and certainly not the USA. Despite their determination, discipline, organization, technical skills etc, they did not have the necessary resources. The war could have gone on and on, but the Germans would have run of gas, while the Russians had plenty.

I wonder though, had the Germans not turned on Russia, and had America not entered the war, what would the outcome have been? My guess is that they still would have lost eventually. I would imagine the British would have been able to win for the same reason - more resources. But perhaps without Russia and America the war would have ended with the Germans negotiating favorable terms, and the map of europe would look quite different today.

"On November 25th 1940, Stalin offers to join the Axis pact as the 4th Axis member,"

You have this exactly backwards (especially since this meeting took place in Berlin, and Stalin wasn't there) - Hitler asked Molotov to join the Axis in the Sealion plan to take out the UK. The Soviet role would be helping the Axis to take out British possessions in central Asia and India, preventing the US from taking over British possessions. Molotov refused. Hitler had already been planning invading the Soviet Union after the fall of France, but this refusal solidified the German view that the USSR remained the biggest threat to Germany in Europe.

http://www.onwar.com/articles/0008.htm

I don't think it would have been possible to keep the US and USSR out of the war. The US was already effectively a belligerent before the declaration by Germany. If the UK had fallen, the US would probably have taken over her possessions around the world. The USSR was worried about Germany's action re: Finland and especially the Balkans, and the Germans was worried about Soviet action in Bessarabia/Romania, so there is little reason to believe the two wouldn't have come to blows. The Soviets had been preparing for such an eventuality, albeit entirely defensively. In order to get the British to end the war, the Germans would have had to knock out the Soviets. It could not have possibly succeeded in building up its air and naval power enough to take out Britain's imperial possessions. And an invasion of Britain was another non-starter, due to the naval supremacy of the UK.

@Putin33 do you think the Germans were doomed from the outset?

"so what? We launched a nuclear raid on Japan but it'd be impossible against the ALL POWERFUL NAZI'S? Besides, we'd still have French resistance, British resistance, Australian help, and Canadian help in defending. Not to mention the Russians, but since Germany can produce V4's in instants yet tanks in days they could nuke the whole world huh? Sorry, but my American pride tells me Nazi's wouldn't have won."
The difference is the German bombers had a superior range then the American. With the British surrender once Hitler invade London (like his generals suggested) would mean the Americans would have no air bases within range of Nazi Germany. There was a reason that it wasn't until 1944 that America didn't start bombing Japan. That reason was their bombers didn't have the range to do so until then.

"The Germans were doomed from the outset of WW2. They never had a chance of defeating Russia, and certainly not the USA. Despite their determination, discipline, organization, technical skills etc, they did not have the necessary resources. The war could have gone on and on, but the Germans would have run of gas, while the Russians had plenty."
That was the whole reason for invading Russia, they needed Russia's resources.
but had Russian been an axis nation...
Also look at Operation Barbarossa. It was succeeding before Hitler tried encircling Kiev rather then by passing the city. Had they enter Moscow in August, which they could have, Stalin would have been captured by the Germans pushing the Soviet Union into Capitulation.

"In October and November 1940, German–Soviet Axis talks occurred concerning the Soviet Union's potential entry as a fourth Axis Power. The negotiations included a two day Berlin conference between Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov, Adolf Hitler and German Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop, followed by both countries trading written proposed agreements. Germany never responded to a November 25, 1940, Soviet proposal leaving the negotiations unresolved."
Wikipedia article, I am welcome to show my other sources.

The Germans were not doomed from the outset. Given the superior discipline, technology, generals etc.

"Not to mention the Russians, but since Germany can produce V4's in instants yet tanks in days they could nuke the whole world huh? Sorry, but my American pride tells me Nazi's wouldn't have won."
Also remember this was assuming Russia was an axis member.

No. Although the chances for victory were never great, had the Germans not made a number of decisions during Barbarossa they could have won.

1 - Diverting Guderian's Panzer forces to the South when they could have marched on Moscow, possibly tipping the balance in their favor. With German control of Moscow, it would have been much harder for the Soviets to coordinate between their forces. Transportation and keeping supply lines in tact would also be difficult. Although I think had Moscow been taken, the total size of territory under German control would have been less (especially in Ukraine), as Army Group South would have been bogged down (German supply would also have been strained). However, the political effect of capturing Moscow would have been greater than these problems.

2 - Ordering a fall attack on Moscow instead of waiting until the spring. Very costly decision. They could have gotten away with point #1, and the diversion might have been considered a great decision, had they not foolishly attacked in the fall. Even if they had won, they'd have to deal with maintaining their hold over Moscow in the winter. The failure at Moscow led Hitler to take control of the Wehrmacht and surround himself with inexperienced yes-men.

3 - Hitler's order not to give any ground. This was senseless as Germany could have retreated, regrouped, and counterattacked in better weather. German forces were pushed back everywhere so this order ended up being a failure.

So your admitting that Stalin did want to join the Axis?

Huh? How on earth did you gather that from what I wrote?

"so what? We launched a nuclear raid on Japan but it'd be impossible against the ALL POWERFUL NAZI'S? Besides, we'd still have French resistance, British resistance, Australian help, and Canadian help in defending. Not to mention the Russians, but since Germany can produce V4's in instants yet tanks in days they could nuke the whole world huh? Sorry, but my American pride tells me Nazi's wouldn't have won."

Pride doesn't match up to nukes, I'm afraid. Still, I see it as being very unlikely that the Nazis would have developed nuclear weapons before the US, in that situation. Hitler and Himmler (in particular) distrusted the intellectual class, and cut funding on a lot of important (and potentially war winning) projects in favour of Hitler's own pet projects. He was obsessed with developing One Hit Wonder weapons, such as the V-series rockets, the Ratt and Maus super-heavy tanks and the proposed grand cannon in northern France that could have fired shells directly onto London.

Ironically if he'd continued with this instead of pulling back during the later years of the war he may have been able to keep up with the Manhatten Project and gotten his OHW weapon. On the other hand, the distrust between Germany's physicists and the government often led to rather unenthusiastic work.

As a side note, distrust was a commonplace thing in the upper echelons of Nazi Germany's government and armed forces. Heinrich Himmler for instance was absolutely terrible as head of the Luftwaffe, since he refused to allow the German navy to integrate any of 'his' aircraft into their forces, for fear that he'd lose some of the power he'd built up. He did well with the Blitzkrieg strategy, but he was still reluctant to give over any jurisdiction to those outside of his direct command.

"Huh? How on earth did you gather that from what I wrote?"
The fact that you ignored my post on Stalin asking to join the Axis pact.

@PirateJack: Your 100% right. However you can't deny that despite the unenthusiastic work, Germany was by far the most advanced nation in the world.

How did he manage to do that considering he wasn't in Berlin? Stalin rarely left Moscow, as he hated traveling - flying in particular.

Wasn't Herman Goering commander of the Luftwaffe?

Yes Goering was in charge of the Lufftwaffe.

write*

By the time the V-4 plans were finished the Russians were pouring shots of vodka in the Berlin Bunker kitchen.

"How did he manage to do that considering he wasn't in Berlin? Stalin rarely left Moscow, as he hated traveling - flying in particular."
He asked Molotov to attempt to join the Axis. On November 25th, Stalin, not Molotov, radioed in a request to join the axis. It wasn't responded to.

"By the time the V-4 plans were finished the Russians were pouring shots of vodka in the Berlin Bunker kitchen."

"Yes Goering was in charge of the Lufftwaffe."
Sure Pirate Jack got the names wrong, but the point is still correct.
V-4 was abbandoned in 1944. It was never finished.

"He asked Molotov to attempt to join the Axis. On November 25th, Stalin, not Molotov, radioed in a request to join the axis. It wasn't responded to."

I don't know where you get your information from, but that never happened. It was the other way around.

http://books.google.com/books?id=tFN7BR1HSIsC&pg=PA141&lpg=PA141&dq=Hitler+offered+Molotov+Tripartite&source=bl&ots=VVaaQCP6Ks&sig=TAEnpOmng-k3v-Hw-1z6HwpqLxM&hl=en&ei=CpcyTdCdFcK88gaajpXcCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CEkQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q&f=false

At the meeting there were a number of sticking points - the big one being Finland. Finland had been designated to be in the Soviet sphere on influence in the 1939 agreement, but Germany had sent troops to Finland and had steadfastly opposed any new war with Finland. These sticking points combined with Britain still being very much a powerful belligerent led to Molotov's rejection of joining the Tripartite Pact. Hitler had tried to claim Britain was finished and that the Soviets would gain territories by joining the Axis. Molotov was having none of it.