Yes, the alliance with the Soviet Union was basically one of necessity. It was quite obvious that if the Germans succeeded in creating a defensive
line from northern to southern Russia, say at least to Moscow or a little farther, they would have access to an extremely large amount of materiel,
which would subsequently be deployed against the US and England at a later date. The Germans knew they did not have to conquer the entire Soviet
Union, rather they only had to push so far, driving the defenders into the eastern part of that country, where they could not really sustain any war
effort, despite the large number of troops they would still possess. Stalin started giving the "no retreat" orders partially because he did not want
this to occur.
I think you are a bit mistaken in saying that the German conquest of Africa would have given them unlimited resources for fighting on the eastern
front, as this is not the case. Africa never was a huge part of the overall German strategy, and I think the fact that Rommel was constantly plauged
by a lack of supplies and reinforcements proves this point. Hitler would not route materiel to North Africa because he did not view it as being of the
same importance of the eastern front. In my opinion North Africa was important for strategic reasons. The Meditteranean allowed access to a number of
different nations, including Italy and France, and by invading Africa the US and the British forced Germany to divert resources that otherwise would
have been used on the eastern front. Another reason the US hit Africa first was because its troops were green. They got kicked around by Rommel for
quite a while before they became experienced. And truthfully, they would have continued to get kicked around by Rommel had he been properly supplied
and supported by the Hitler and the high command. To be quite honest, the African campaigns were almost a footnote to the main theatres of the war,
and there never was a lot to be gained as far as resources, at least not out in the western part of the country.
Hitler could have put more emphasis on the eastern parts of Africa, and then extending to Turkey, where he could have backdoored the Soviet oil
fields, and also could have worked down to the regions around Saudi Arabia. But the oil resources out in the deserts of western Africa were not worth
much, not when you had other oil producing regions that would have been easier to defend. You are sort of right in your reasons for why the US joined
the war. Part of the reason was that Japan attacked at Pearl Harbor, causing the US to declare war on Japan. Then you had Germany declaring war on the
US. Had Hitler not declared war on the US, it is quite likely that the US never would have declared war on Germany. Few realize this fact, and how
much the war could have been altered by Germany's declaration of war on the US. We might have got involved at some point with Germany, but things
would have been different for sure. The Germans were not diverting many resources to the western front, even after the landings at Normandy.
The allied forces who invaded the coast of France probably did not know how much their deception saved the day. They basically gave Patton a fake army
in England, and the Germans thought this was the main invasion force, which would invade at the shortest point across the channel, at Calais. Hitler
was so convinced this is where the invasion would occur, that this is where the bulk of the German forces were located. The allied forces suffered a
large number of casualties, and had somewhat of a difficult time on D-Day, mainly because of Rommel's genius. So there is a good chance that the
invasion would have been held off if one of two things had occured. First, if Hitler would have been more flexible and not so close-minded, and
second, if Hitler would have immediately started moving forces to the invasion point. So much critical time was wasted that it became too late.
Anyway, if Germany would have won in the USSR, it is unlikely that the allies could have beaten them, without the atomic bomb of course.
But the truth of the matter is that Germany should have won WWII, considering they had more chances than the allies. And the only reason for this is
Hitler himself, the person who started the entire thing. There are so many mistakes that he made that I cannot get into all of them, but the main ones
included his inability to realize that his armies were relatively good at mobile withdrawals and counterattacks, and that his forces were better on
the move. He let them get bogged down on the eastern front. Had a person like Manstein been allowed to make all the military decisions, it was game
over on the eastern front. The one time he disobeyed Hitler and retreated, he singlehandedly restabilized the eastern front. Paulus never would have
been allowed to get trapped in Stalingrad either, and there would have been an entire army that would have been retained. There were just so many
If it had to be boiled down to a single reason, why Germany lost the war, it would be that whenever Hitler was faced with a decision, he put the Nazi
party before military common sense. The entire idea of never giving up the slightest bit of ground is a prime example. This was not based on military
strategy or tactics, but was a product of Nazi ideology and Hitler's personal beliefs. He thought himself more intelligent than he actually was in my
opinion. He could not believe that he could be wrong and his generals right. So he bungled a victory on the eastern front, he bungled a sure victory
on the western front, he bunbled a victory in Africa, and he also bungled the invasion of England. Some say it never could have succeeded, but I
believe they're wrong. When England started bombing German cities Hitler switched the Luftwaffe strategy of bombing RAF targets to bombing English
cities, which gave the RAF enough time to regroup and rebuild. Had Hitler kept the same strategy, the RAF would have ceased to exist, allowing for a
channel crossing in boats. Such a crossing is only possible with air superiority. There were even other things he bungled and that cost Germany the
war. I am adamant that Germany did more to beat itself than the allies did to beat Germany in WWII. That is not to undermine the importance of what
the allies accomplished, as they did a good job, but they were simply exploiting the weaknesses that never should have existed in the first place. I
am grateful for Hitler's mistakes however, considering that the world would have been a worse place had he won the war.
edit on 12/6/14 by JiggyPotamus because: (no reason given)