There was no chance of Axis establishing a long-term alliance with the USSR, under any circumstances. Both sides had always planned on going to war against the other party for at least half a decade leading up to 1941; their ideologies were utterly antithetical despite a mutual enmity with the western allies. Stalingrad was a defeat for the Axis but the mere act of attempting to take it wasn't a mistake; they wouldn't have been able to hold the Caucasus without it, and the Soviets absolutely couldn't afford to lose it. Rather, the mistake the Germans made was splitting their forces rather than focusing on holding Stalingrad.
More to the point, however, there is no strategic decision or maneuver that would have allowed the Axis to win against both the USSR and the British empire even if the USA had permanently remained out of the war (which was extremely unlikely even without Pearl Harbor). The real fatal mistake that Hitler made was starting the war in the first place; even if he hadn't micromanaged anything, his generals still wouldn't have been able to win.
For Germany, WWII amounted to nothing less than willful national suicide - they only held out as long as they did due to some outrageously lucky breaks, particularly on the eastern front.
cool story kamerad
They only lost because the US and British spoonfed them supplies. Russian tankers preferred Shermans and Churchills over russian designs. The Russians didn't make their own train until after the war.
They lost because their allies were worthless
And the west was filled with edgy commies who didn't bring any manpower/took large garrisons
>>29404169
K... keep me posted
>>29404169
Well duh. One only has to look at production capacity to figure this out.
>>29404212
Wat. The T-34 scared the Germans shitless. So much so that it inspired the Panther V which came out much later. The US did supply lots of stuff to the Russians. Mainly trucks and other non frontline equipment so that Russian factories can crank out thousands of tanks per month. In return, the Russians tied up the best and most numerous German units so that D-Day could happen. It was literally win-win. There's nothing wrong or shameful about it.
>>29404169
>The real fatal mistake that Hitler made was starting the war in the first place; even if he hadn't micromanaged anything, his generals still wouldn't have been able to win.
His real mistake was coming to power in the first place.
Germany went to war because it had to, while not immediately apparent to the average citizen the economy was on the verge of another collapse.
>>29405771
>“Lend-Lease: Weapon for Victory”, the 1946 book by Lend Lease administrator Edward Stettinius where he claims that the USSR owes the victory in the war to the US program of arms, food, and equipment supplies, was reprinted in Moscow back in 2000. It contains a listing of net US supplies to the Soviet Union: in 1941-1945, they totaled $11b (in terms of the 1945 prices) and included 22,150 aircrafts, 12,700 tanks, 8,000 anti-aircraft cannons, 5,000 anti-tank cannons, 132,000 machine guns, 376,000 trucks, 51,000 jeeps, 8,000 tow trucks, 35,000 motorbikes, 472 million artillery munitions, 4.5 million tons of food, 2.1 million tons of fuel, 1.2 million tons of chemicals and explosives, 11,000 rail cars, 2,000 locomotives, 128 freight ships, 3 icebreakers, and 281 military ships. In fact, Lend-Lease was not limited to the above: the Soviet Union was receiving from the US advanced aerodrome equipment and, importantly, got 9,351 US-made radio stations for installation on Soviet-made aircrafts. In 1943, the US supplies helped equip 150 Soviet divisions with radio stations and 329 divisions – with field telephones. Soviet front and army-level headquarters along with aerodromes were fully equipped with US-made 400W radio stations (the Soviet industry started manufacturing analogous devices only by 1943). The supply of 445 US and British radars in late 1942 and throughout 1943 was also of enormous assistance considering that at the time mass production of comparable Soviet systems was just being put on track. Canned rations and the 15 million pairs of shoes supplied by the US were also appreciated by the Red Army.
all willingly given to the government who's whole and only reason for existence was to do everything in its power to undermine national hegemony and sovereignty in the world at the behest of the banks and their ilk to ensure total enslavement of mankind so that we all die on this rock.
>There's nothing wrong or shameful about it.
die in a fire
>>29405970
>Lend Lease administrator Edward Stettinius where he claims that the USSR owes the victory in the war to the US program of arms
There couldn't possibly be any self aggrandizing here.
(for what it's worth, i don't think lend-lease was insignificant and Russia would've been in a far worse postwar state if not for it, but Germany was never going to take all of Russia.)
>so that we all die on this rock.
The Soviet Union gave us the best excuse we had to rush into developing hardware for space.
>>29405771
German crews notoriously mocked the T34. Stug crews had the saying "don't worry they always miss". Some T34s didn't even have rangefinders or optics and had to walk in their fire.
>>29406113
We don't even give 1% of our GDP to NASA. Humanity will die on earth. Oh well goverment handouts to lazy slobs is more important.
>>29406421
>We don't even give 1% of our GDP to NASA.
We did from 1962-1975 since we had to outdo the Russians.
>goverment handouts to lazy slobs is more important.
Even in a much more libertarian state without welfare space travel would be limited to satellites for better TV. We're going to die on earth, but it isn't the fault of the welfare state so much as a massive lack of forward planning.
>tfw no UNMISIS (United Nations Mission In Space) funded by the international community and left to focus purely on technical issues instead of political ones.
