English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Becasue they almost won during 1941 and 1940 becasue hilter spread his troops out to thin So i was wondering if hilter and Rommel did not spread the nazis and the german troops out to thin do you think the natzis would had have a chance at worldwar2?

2006-06-26 14:15:09 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics Geography

15 answers

yes,
if they did not attack russa.
russa did not want to get into it.
if they would have invaded britton. the we would have had no place to land our ships.

2006-06-26 14:21:49 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Strange question .. but a question none the less. Okay, the answer is No. Had Hitler cross the English Channel and invade Dunkirk, things would have been a lot different. Also had Hitler not meddle with his Generals affairs instead of letting them do their duties, we may be speaking German now. But the truth is, Nazi Germany needed water to make steel and iron, and the allies destroyed the majority of their resources. Not enough factorys. Not enough time for research and development. They also got rid of a lot of German Jewish Scientist. Ever heard of Albert Einstein? Also, Nazi Germany could never invade Russia - they didn't do so well when the winter came. The American Allies had resources better war strategists. Eisenhower, Patton ( though some might differ on that ) MacArthur, Bradley, Marshall, to name a few. Plus Hitler and his Generals never saw D-Day coming. Oh, they knew, but they were basically sitting ducks towards the end of the war. Russia got stronger - hence the "Cold War". Remember, Germany was invading from "inward" .. The Allies were coming from "outward". It's easier to plug a hole from outside than in. The Nazis had too much on their plate. The Holocaust - Africa - Russia - The French - Poland - Resources - etc.,

2006-06-26 21:35:53 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

the real downfall for the nazis (aside from their political beliefs) was that rommel wanted to move out of north africa to invade russia in the spring of 44 but hitler refused, keeping them until mid summer, this delay caused the nazi troops to reach the main targets of stalingrad leningrad and moscow, still in summer clothes yet it was now a harsh russian winter. though the three cities did eventually fall, there was little left of the nazi war machine to defend their positions upon the arrival of the allies, who swiftly regained control, then swept toward berlin. Had hitler listened to rommel then their grip on russia would have been stronger, this may have had an impact on the outcome of the war, but the americans still had such an enormous industrial output advantage that the longer the war lasted the stronger they got relative to everyone else not to mention the eventual development of the nuclear bomb by the US and their willingness to drop it on germany if necessary. All that said however if you examine the politics of WW2 the nazis did win. for virtually all nations of the earth are some form of national socialism or another. We gave up our freedoms to allegedly save them... sound familiar.

2006-06-26 21:28:25 · answer #3 · answered by iconoclast_ensues 3 · 0 0

No, I think at best the Germans could have occupied Great Britain with fierce resistance and then would have been pushed back by the Americans, Canadians, Australians etc.

The Germans were fighting a two-front war. They had less industrial capacity than the US.

Dana

2006-06-26 21:19:37 · answer #4 · answered by Dana A 6 · 0 0

I don't think they ever could have totally 'won', but I do believe that Hitler would have been better off knowing when to stop his land grabbing. And I wouldn't blame much of that on Rommel. He was simply doing what Hitler told him to. At the end, even though he never totally have his assent to the failed assassination attempt on Hitler, he knew about it, and let them go ahead and try. He was eventually forced to commit suicide by Hitler('s henchmen).

But at the beginning, Hitler got several lands ceded to him, and if he'd stopped here, perhaps there wouldn't have even been a war, Germany would have just gotten bigger.

2006-06-26 21:21:39 · answer #5 · answered by merlin_steele 6 · 0 0

I believe that they possibly could. In fact when Germany lost World War II they were in France. This is one war that makes no sense. The only reason they surrendered was because they didn't have enough resources. If they had enough money they absolutely could have won the war. Who knows? Maybe Germany could have controlled the world like he wanted!

2006-06-26 21:22:24 · answer #6 · answered by Ericelephant 1 · 0 0

If they had been able to deploy more V1 and V2 weapons and had their jet fighters operational earlier and in greater numbers, then yes it is entirely possible that the balance of power could have shifted in their favor resulting in an entirely different outcome for WWII.

2006-06-26 21:22:50 · answer #7 · answered by shepherd 5 · 0 0

No,they didnt have the industrial capibilities,to keep up with demand,and the german designs tended to be to complicated to produce in the quantities,nessesary to sustain a two front war. Not to mention that god or karma was not with them

2006-06-27 01:17:21 · answer #8 · answered by lilnowlillater 1 · 0 0

i think maybe it couldve been possible if they didnt involve the usa so early.if the germans conquered more of the world slowly successfully i think they maybe wouldve had a good chance of taking over.....and really clever way of grabbing attention.It Worked!

2006-06-26 21:19:30 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

sure if they hadn't screwed the russians. look at d-day. our troops were being mowed down. its was onlyh a matter of luck and sheer stubborness on some parts. sooner or later, they would have gotten england and then bombing us.

2006-06-26 21:18:32 · answer #10 · answered by lizziegirl 2 · 0 0

very possible they could have won, but them falling for the fake invasion that was used to hide the real invasion of normandy had alot to do with their loss of the war.
and they" pissed of the russians"

2006-06-26 21:27:54 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers