The Nazis could have defeated Engla-

Who do you think you are kidding Mr. Hitler?

If u fink ere on dur run.

Everyone here agrees. Save this for /pol/, AngloAmerica's status as Rome 2.0 is fully accepted on this board. 3/10 meme for Veeky Forums. 10/10 on /pol/.

I used to think Germany could've beaten the UK 1v1 and that they couldn't have beaten the USSR. Now I see it as the opposite. All the Brits really need to do maintain their navy and air force and stall. The German economy will collapse in a few years with no one to loot. Any attempts by them to bomb Britain into submission or navally defeat them are doomed to failure, as the UK has an industry and economy on par with Germany's yet an army 1/5 the size, so they're pretty much always going to have a much stronger navy and air force.

My prediction for how this extended conflict would go. Everything goes how it did until June 1941 of course. Mid 1941 to mid 1943, the Germans and Brits continue to flail at each other in the air, neither accomplishing much other than losing planes but the Brits holding the edge due to ease of replacing losses. German subs are still sinking British ships at high rates. The Brits still kick the Italians and Germans out of North Africa by mid 1943 and drub the Regina Marina, but are unable to continue to Italy due to lacking the resources. Even without the Americans, the Brits are still dominative enough over the Germans and Italians at sea that their victory in the Med is a foregone conclusion. And it doesn't matter how much the Germans focus on North Africa, the logistics bases they have to work with physically will not allow them to go any farther than they did.

Mid 1943 is where everything changes, as by then the Brits should've decisively learned the counters to the German U-boat tactics, as they did in the OTL. Starting from roughly late 1943 the Brits were annihilating the Kriegsmarine's U-boats and Doenitz himself admitted he was losing them for basically no return. This would continue in this timeline, and the Germans would see their odds at sea go from slim to hopeless, and with it any chance of a victory as their navy is crushed. By late 43 with the death of the Scharnost they should also have lost most of their surface fleet.

cont.

With the threat of the German navy neutralized the Brits would have free reign over the Atlantic and the North Sea. Though ground-based aviation might still be significant enough to render the Med dangerous, it would still be firmly under their control. By this point the Germans should be running very low on oil and most other vital resources. With sea and air superiority the Brits could then use their small but well-equipped army to chip off isolated German garrisons, mostly for morale reasons. Norway has about 300,000 German troops within it at this time and can be easily cut off by sea. It would make an ideal target for a large victory haul in case morale from Tunisia is wearing off.

And they can just continue doing that from there. Maybe make an attempt at Sicily or Crete later if they get ballsy. Continue blockades and the occasional air raid (which won't cause much damage, but again will at least give your people the impression that they're winning). Eventually, the German Empire won't have the resources to go on, and will implode; Adam Tooze's "Wages of Destruction" describes in detail how the German economy was always within a hair's breadth of collapse. Just wait it out. In the best case scenario, the German economy limps into the late 40s or early 50s, by which time the UK should have developed nuclear weapons... that is, if the USA doesn't do it first and then share.

There's just no way for Germany to win here.

High quality posts, props for the wages of destruction reference, that book should be required reading

>that final scene where they all look directly into the camera and toast "to the Home Guard"

The feels man. The feels.

Ah hell what's the name of this movie I can't remember.

How would you think the empire would bare in an extended no American intervention conflict? Surely Extending the navy, as powerful as it was over practically all the world's oceans would give some serious advantages to the Axis, and how would the other colonies react if the pacific dominions were left to the Japanese?

But the idea of America not intervening is retarded. And it's not like the Royal navy wasn't already extensively operating in the Med and the Atlantic.


And why would Japan attack England if not for its alliance (de facto) with the U.S. It was America cutting off the oil spigot, not the British.

Well, Japan Joined the Axis before they invaded the US, so maybe in a 1v2 scenario they would eye up the lightly defended New Zealand and Australia.

Dad's Army

Man, Imagine a british-occupied Japan

That's it. I kept thinking it was grandpas army. Thanks.

The Brits had nowhere near the necessary capabilities to totally defeat the Japanese on the other side of the world, especially if Germany still exists. The IJN was not the Kriegsmarine.

Maybe with more time to mobilise India and ship those troops to properly garrison Singapore, Hong Kong, Australia and New Zealand, the speed of a Japanese advance would be heavily reduced. That being said the Brits would need to buy a shit ton of American ships to contain their navy. Also they'd rely heavily on US industry to equip Indian and Chinese troops. However if we control the med and Suez we'd have an ok supply line.

>Childhood is thinking America won ww2
>Adolescence is thinking the Nazi's had a chance
>Adulthood is thinking the USSR won the war
>Transcendence is knowing that the Brits had the axis on the ropes from the start
>Nirvana is realizing that France had it won from the start

thing is though a 1vs2 scenario would have never happened
while it might have taken them more time to actively intervene, there is absolutely no chance the USA would have allowed Japan to extend it's influence over all British colonial territories.

Both the Japanese Navy and Military knew that an invasion of Australia or New Zealand were doomed to fail as they could neither supply their troops that far away or raise the armies required to seize and more importantly hold these vast and distant territories with strongly nationalistic populations in a guerrilla's paradise: poor communications, vast distances and hostile terrain would have combined to create a resource sucking quagmire with no benefit to the Japanese.
Let alone the still substantial numbers of reservists and volunteers that Australia and New Zealand could call upon. Besides as early as 1940 it had been decided that a Japanese attack on Dutch or British territories was to be considered an attack on the United States.

and truth is realizing that the americans fought the war in every direction, while funneling invaluable manpower, funds, resources, and machines to every corner of the earth

>Japanese attack on Dutch or British territories was to be considered an attack on the United States.
My mind still boogles with this line of thinking.

it doesn't matter now does it, the japanese went and attacked em all, brit, kiwi, aussie, and yank, in one fell swoop

Brilliant answers.