Hallo!

Wilkommen, Narr! (Welcome, crazy!) We hope to see you around oftenly.

There is no doubt, as we have discussed that we could have defeated Britain totally in autumn 1940, and partially in 1941 and 1942 with the combined attacks of Rommel and Dönitz.

The Soviet Union could have been smashed in 1941 with "Barbarossa", with the fall of Moscow and the destruction of several Soviet armies inside in the battle. But still that way, even if the communist state would have collapsed, we needed a large amount of troops which we did not have to occupy the territory and certainly, our despective treatment to the Russians did not help. You can see that it was an important thing to do, because in the Caucasus and Southern Ukraine, Ewald von Kleist ordered his troops to be as kind as possible with the people. Therefore, there were not partisan gangs and they people colaborated with Von Kleist. But we could have achieved some other victories in 1942, after the solidification of the front in winter. Even with all the industry and resources behind the Urals, the Russians could not have throw us away from Moscow and other positions for several reasons: with the government collapsed, the Red Army would have not had good cohesion, the main communication centre of the country would have been in the enemy's hands, and we know how all the counter attacks (with Moscow, Stalin and coordinated) performed in 1942... But I think as well, that it would have been enormously difficult to push far more beyond the Urals, even with Great Britain defeated...

__________________
"War is less costly than servitude, the choice is always between Verdun and Dachau." - Jean Dutourd, French veteran of both world wars

"A mon fils: depuis que tes yeux sont fermes les miens n’ont cessé de pleurir." - Mère française, Verdun