Which one if them would have been the most successful replacement had Hitler been assassinated?

let me rephrase -- who could have bet carried on or come close to accomplishing Hitler's vision had he been taken out of the picture, or at least preserved the Reich in some form or another beyond the war?

best* rather, my bad

did they not know how to shave eyebrows

Hey Guys.

>

Hess sure didn't

Was Hess an Ottoman rapebaby?

Goring was a opiate addict and not a good leader. Battle of Britain loss is directly on him. As the air battle was going on Goring, the head of the Luftwaffle, went back to Germany for a party. Air campaign lost focus and turned into a pointless campaign of bombing civilians. Luftwaffe never recovered their strength for the rest of the war.

Himmler was a officer cadet school drop out and a chicken farmer. Believed in the occult stuff to such a degree. That he makes look like unbelievers. Had the administrative skills to run the SchutzStaffel through all their nasty business. Though he probably lacks the soft touch that national leadership needs.

Seriously?
>Scored lowest on allied IQ tests
>Showed no aptitude for anything except architecture / urban planning.

Why him, user?

He won the Iron Brow in WW1

Doenitz would have been best before the war started. The amount of submarines he would produce would have fucked Britain into submission, before the US could do anything .

Barbarossa was a brilliant manuever you dumb History channel drone

This thread makes me want to learn a little more about Himmler.
Was he at all interesting or just nuts?

>Barbarossa was a brilliant manuever
>results in the destruction of your """"""1000 year reich""""""""

I'm not sure the task was really possible for anyone, no matter their talents. You always see these discussions of "oh if the nazis had done this at stalingrad or kursk could they have won..." and all I can think about is that even if they're able to hold off the Russians much longer the nukes are still coming eventually and they have absolutely no answer to them.

He was a pedantic, socially awkward man who got hooked on the occult, practically worshipped Hitler, and hated the sight of blood or the thought of animals being hunted. The fact that he managed to gain so much power is extremely interesting.

He was:

>Modest.
>He knew better then to stick his nose into military affairs and this respect was reciprocated by Generals like Guderian, who allowed Speer leeway in keeping the war machine running
>relatively youthful
>Spent years at Hitler' side as a close confidant. Hitler was telling him things he didn't trust to anyone else
>Learned how to play politics. He managed to unite the radical Goebbels with the relatively conservative Goring to support total war measures when everyone else was sticking their head in the sand
>Had a wife he adored and nearly a dozen children. That meant he had a real stake in the future for his family. He would not wage war recklessly.
>extremely aware of who wanted to remove him fro the equation. Himmler was vying for direct control of the war industry under the SS and him and tried to quietly bump Speer off with his own doctor. Speer declined and powered through the illness. Eventually he threw his support in with Bormann and Ernst Kaltenbrunner and the three of them turned Himmler into a mere puppet.

Speer wasn't the brightest of the lot, but he was the most savvy. It how he did so much terrible shit, only to get a 20 year prison sentence, a pat on the head from the western allies for his work and became world renown when he was released. He was one of the few unautistic nazis.
>

To ad to the military relationship. When Hitler started getting crazy ideas in his head for production, Speer would be the only one to gently explain why he can't have it (ex: the Ratte)

Yeah, I think Donitz would have had a better relationship with Goering then Raeder did. Raeder was fucking pissed Goring was stealing resources away from his surface fleet... as though the surface fleet would have stood a chance.

Submarines and long range naval bombers would have done a real number in the early days.

I would say Goering, by far. Say what you want about his intentions, aptitude, organizational ability, drug addictions, etc, the country at the time was built around the Nazi-Hitler cult and they would have looked to someone to carry on the legacy. Who else could do so better then aggressive, charismatic, larger then life vice chancellor Goering who went back with Hitler and the boys before the beer hall putsch? Leadership in this sense was all about the social persuasion factor and Goering would have carried that out elegantly enough.

Hess is not even worth mentioning, he would have been a neurotic and anxious mess.

Goebbels would have been intellectually capable but he was socially awkward and prone to histrionic fits that would have cost him more then Hitlers episodes could.

Himmler was no leader either, total oddball without a personality. Calculating enough to handle the job but lacks that statesmen force needed for a specific nation like Nazi Germany.

Any leader that could maintain webm related.

A Nazi/facist/Communist world was within our grasp.

Goebbels.

Göring and Himmler were traitors anyway.

Civil war between who's in charge of the SS (Himmler, or whomever ends up pulling his strings), the traditional and autocratic focussed military (Goering, Donitz?), and the moderate (for Nazi standards at least) political class (Speer?).

No way these people couldve seen eye to eye without a Hitler figure lording over them.

Goering

Really the only one out the lot who could command respect within a new power structure

Is that before Hitler called them all subhumans and planned on using them as slaves for Germans?

>Göring and Himmler were traitors anyway.
How?

It was before Hitler started spending vast amount of time with the Goebbels and came away from it with a hatred for Bolshevism (more then he had professed at least)

Really, if someone had killed Goebbels just after the Fall of France, Hitler would likely kept his eye on the British.

Goring's betrayal had some merit. Berlin was surrounded and the Reich needed to have a command not under siege at the time. Hitler flew into a rage and called it a betrayal.

Himmler, terrified for his life went to Swedish ambassadors to promote a peace deal. This one was a flat out betrayal.

>Dornitz

You mean Dönitz

And no, the man was not a politician at all. In fact many speculate that this may be the chief reason Hitler chose him as the suceeding Reich president of the government in his testament, because he thought the allies would go mild on him and allow the Reich to survive rather than occupying it for 80+ years and entrapping it in a legal limbo... But we all know how that one turned out

>those soviet and german soldiers talking near the end.
fuck.

They weren't prissy 17-year old American teenage girls. I think they had more important things going on...

>uninformed memer gets found out

Speer made Germany last years longer through his production ministry

Dönitz is the only right answer to this in my eyes, the rest were maniacs like Hitler

Manscaping is total 21st century 'nu-male' SJW faggotry.

Real men let their hair grow wherever God wants it to.

>Barbarossa
>a brilliant maneuver

They sure were brilliant in failing to meets its objectives or staying in supply.

Goebbels, he had the propaganda experience to unite the German people behind him. Obviously the rest of the high command would have had greatly increased power compared to working under Hitler, but Goebbels would have been the front man