It's June first, 1941. It's just days before Operation Barbarossa was to historically commence...

If you don't attack Russia soon, there's a high probability that the Soviets would attack given the ideological differences. And when they would attack, they'd be much more prepared than in 1941.

Invade UK

Later is worse though, Russia had ripped up and begun repositioning their defenses, and was building tanks, rifles, planes and such at a frantic rate. They also ripped up their military command staff to ensure party loyalty and were in the process of replacing them. Waiting makes Russia stronger and gives the allies more time to get involved.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Britain

So would you have invaded at the historical date? What would you have done differently against the Soviet juggernaut?

Invade the middle East, collect oil and such, proceed with operation session, then proceed with Operation Barbarossa and rape Moscow.

*Sealion*, fucking autocorrect.

Invade UK more

Go all in on England, they should never have backed down from the battle of britain. Also stop wasting resources bombing london.

Definately not going to war with putin at this point, Hitler was high on crack.

Hitler actually tried to make peace with britain because he respected the british people, this is why he hesitated after driving the french and british forced off the coast of France instead of just going all in at that point on britain immediately.

I'd just enforce the Eastern border and start to help anti-communist movements in Baltics, Belarus, Ukraine and Caucasus. The commy regime would eat itself . The Great Patriotic War just unified the soviet nation and allowed the cold war and worldwide revolution to happen

You will lose anyway so no matter if you're going to attack or not.

Hitler didn't care much about Britain so the Battle of Britain was mostly a chance for eager Goering to show what he's capable of

With what?

How do you cross the channel?
How do you land when Royal Navy has total control of the channel?
How do you maintain supply lines if Royal Navy can just send few old battleships to patrol and sink everything here while defending them from any aerial attack with RAF?

I've heard this before. That Germany never had a chance to win no matter what they did.

Do other people think this, or is it just historical determinism?

Tell Mannerheim to not show so much mercy for Stalingrad. He kept a supply line open, without that the city would have starved.
If he doesn't obey, ignore Stalingrad and go for Moscow.

>there's a high probability that the Soviets would attack given the ideological differences
given that Germans have huge debt in trade with them and don't want to pay it back*

Boats

Don't care Pole just invade UK

>Mannerheim
>Stalingrad
stop drinking so much Mikko

Well, since this is a hindsight thread, I'd say I'd almost abandon supertank/cannon/jet research, and develop nukes and high altitude bombers.

Probably can't set up a several bombs/month assembly line by 1945 like the US did, but even 2-3 bombs would have scared the shit out of the allies. Guaranteed Britain wouldn't allow themselves to be used as a muster point being in range of nuclear bombers after seeing acouple Russian cities blow up.

That ends the war with Germany in utter control of most of Europe, and Eastern Europe would be much wealthier (and Russia much poorer) if Hitler prevented the looting of the East by the Russians.

it was clear pretty early on the germans had bit off more than they could chew, even if they took moscow, the leadership would have gotten out. they probably would have burned it down just to draw an ideological parallel with 1812 and Napoleon. Even if the Germans captured Moscow, it would have been impossible to hold. Russia simply cannot be conquered and held with conventional weapons.

I meant Leningrad.

Yeah, it's easy to confuse them if you're drunk, right? And for showing no mercy to Leningrad you would be turned into another soviet republic then.

An hero after arranging Goering's (((suicide))).

This.

At some point, some historians claim in July 1941, others speculate anywhere from 1943 to '45, that Stalin would have invaded western Europe. By that time Soviet industrial power, war industry, technology, etc would be unstoppable.

The only thing that could be done for Hitler is somehow conduct the Eastern campaign differently.

There is absolutely no other choice than to invade the Soviet union in the summer of 1941.

Moscow as a war goal should have been an after thought. All war effort should have been pushed towards Leningrad, Stalingrad, cutting off the Volga, and capturing the oil fields.
What was needed was a strategy that would starve the Red Army of food, fuel, and supplies so it could no longer wage war.

Hitler should have left the fight to his generals as well, Stalingrad being a good example. The army could have broken out and been saved, the Generals knew that they were about to be surrounded and needed to withdraw to save their Army, but Hitler told them no retreat.

"No retreat" is a good way to throw away an Army, Stalingrad and the AfrikaKorps are perfect examples of this. Sometimes you have to withdraw from an area so that your flanks can be secured and a solid front can be put up to regroup and a wait for the enemy to make a mistake.

blitzkrieg my panzers thru Spain, bypass Madrid, and seize Gibraltar.

Finally a Cred Forumsack who has heard of operation Groza. Tired of all these burgers not being capable of reading jackshit on their own.

>Boats
Which will be sunk in no time by RN outnumbering Kriegsmarine in all classes but submarines(which can't really operate in the channel effectively) at least 5:1.
>Do other people think this, or is it just historical determinism?
Not exactly.

Problem 3rd Reich faced was that the state was incredibly ineffective(quite the contrary of what you usually think of Germans) with "official" administration working in parallel with party administration so they weren't exactly at their peak when they went to war and started reaching their peak when they were already loosing.

The general problem was that their plans relied on luck more often than on having actual superiority over their enemies. Even in France - it was a lucky day. French sent all their reserves to low countries and couldn't address the offensive in Ardennes. Germans thought USSR will fall after 1941(come on - the casualties were ENORMOUS) but it didn't happen. They've had no resources for fighting long, continuous total war(due to long mobilisation their budget deficit was mended with loot - like they were some nomad horde or something, food reserves were running low and most of their steel came from trade with Soviet Union anyway).
>I'd say I'd almost abandon supertank/cannon/jet research, and develop nukes and high altitude bombers.
They didn't have enough uranium to do so. Majority of world's supply of uranium came from Canada and Belgian Congo back then. Germans had some of it in Belgium and Czechoslovakia(there are hills in those countries built with uranium ore only as it was commonly found in silver mines and for most of the history we used the element only for colouring glass so the demand was almost 0 and as such they've just threw it out after filtering silver from the rocks) but almost no production.

Since I'm taking over as Führer I would rather take a bet and hope for the best than follow in Hitler's footsteps and take the 100% chance of the eastern half of Europe being conquered by Soviets.

>some historians claim in July 1941, others speculate anywhere from 1943 to '45, that Stalin would have invaded western Europe
Nah. Communism as a political ideology and soviet mentality are not aggressive towards other states. Soviets were always ready to fight, but never conquer. They were quite anti-imperialistic

If NS Germany had setup a massive bomb building project, invested more money into their nuclear project earlier and followed through with it, and developed a reliable battalion of high altitude bombers they could have probably inflicted more damage on the UK than they did with conventional bomber/fighter/interceptors.. They also should have went for the oil fields of the USSR instead of Stalingrad and not held off on taking Moscow until the shock troop battalion showed up. Stalin and the other supreme soviet leaders would have left but capturing Moscow leaves them with little options to get there; from there you fund a Tsarist restoration movement and conversely have Japan attack from their positions to hit gulags and free prisoners. Makes more sense then Japan dicking around with trying to capture Alaskan Islands.

This is just not true.

Stalin's idea for the 1940's was to wait until either Germany or allies win and attack the bled-out winners.

Said who? Polish historians?
There is no way he could justify the western invasion. With Baltics and Belarus\Ukraine it was "liberation" of rightful clay, but that's about it.

>They also should have went for the oil fields of the USSR instead of Stalingrad
You don't get why did they try to get Stalingrad, don't you?

Volga river was HUGE communication route which would allow them to shop that oil easily without having to build special infrastructure for it. The closest fuckhuge railway hub on Volga was Stalingrad. That's why it was so important.

>t. Commieboo

>Finland
>Poland
>Estonia
>Lithuania
>Latvia
>what are these countries and why do they not like the Soviets???

delay=death the earlier u hit the russians, the better. time is on their side as they industrialize and recuperate from the great purge

oh, and Romania

>There is no way he could justify the western invasion.
He could. Winner takes all.

He thought WW2 will be similar to WW1. As in long slugfest where both sides end up being absolutely wrecked even if winning. Sure it would be technically illegitimate but who could oppose him? Neutral nations? Spain needed everything but war with communists(imagine republican sentiment waking up), Balkans(in general) were too weak, so what's left? Turkey? Sweden? Switzerland? Come on.

The only thing "victorious" side could hope for would be US intervention and I don't think I have to remind you that the US didn't join the war until it was attacked.

Invade Turkey, go all the way down to Saudi Arabia, have all the oil he could want, get IRAQ, then Iran too, conscript or conquer Spain, finish off the Britbongs, then go after the Soviets.

Finland and Baltics were needed for security reasons, if Baltics hadnt been occupied, the german army would have stood almost near Leningrad.
>Poland
Due to extremely anti-sovet politics during pre-war period.
>Romania
Just nazi collaborators.

>Finland
Fight for the rightful clay next to Leningrad

>Poland
They didn't attack Poland for new land. And if you mean polish-soviet war, it was basically a part of the Russian civil war.

>Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia
Baltics used to belong to the Russian Empire, so the ancient old "rightful clay" argument still applies

Surrender

Offer Stalin land.

>go all the way down to Saudi Arabia, have all the oil he could want, get IRAQ
The only place that actually produced oil out of those was Iraq and it was only in Mosul, the rest weren't a thing yet.

World's oil production in the period looked like:

Dutch East India>USA(several states)>Caucasus>>Ploesti>>>>Mosul>>>>rest

On top of it they would have to build infrastructure to transport that oil from ground-up.

>He could. Winner takes all.
I'm not talking from the historical point of view. I'm trying to say that the commie party couldn't force soviet people to concur other nations just for a new piece of land. It was completely against commie agenda of anti-imperialism and soviet mentality of justice.

>They didn't attack Poland for new land

>they didn't take half of Poland when the Germans invaded.

ok.

Maybe that wouldn't be so stupid, then again UK wanted war, they knew of intentions of Hitler, Churchill knew of Stalin-Hitler pact, but waited. Churchill only pretended he entered war because of Poland. Poland was little capitalistic bitch, Stalin didn't like it, Hitler didn't liked it. If Poland has balls then things would be different.

>Volga river was HUGE communication route which would allow them to shop that oil easily without having to build special infrastructure for it.

Which is why you take fucking Kuybyshev and the Samara bend of the Volga, not only do you get the Soviet leadership laying in wait there hiding it out while Stalin sits around in Moscow but you have the fun of having a 1.5 million strong German speaking population not removed before 1943, and it's easier to get to than fighting through hell and back to get to Stalingrad when you already lost half that front..

>they didn't take half of Poland when the Germans invaded
It was Western part of Belarus. Another issue of the "rightful clay" from the times of Russian Empire

Polish corridor was created by Americans, signed in Paris. UK wanted to rule the world. Hitler came to take it back and not be slave to UK/USA like Poland. Hitler was kind of a good-bad guy. Germany really had no choice but war if they wanted to remain relevant, since Poland didn't try to be independent. The war was brewing for some time.

>security reasons
>anti-sovet politics
>rightful clay
>basically a part of the Russian civil war
>"rightful clay" argument still applies
>Another issue of the "rightful clay"

God damn, Communists are some creepy ass motherfuckers.

I get chills reading shit like this.

>They didn't have enough uranium to do so.

Incorrect. They had something like 9 nuclear weapons/reactor projects working at different locations before they decided that they needed to spend the time & effort elsewhere. They didn't have enough for 5,000+ weapons to build a cold war level arsenal, but even a dozen bombs would have scared the shit out of every city in range of their bombers.

Any invasion can be justified with defencive excuses. Nazis justify their invasion of the soviets with the whole attack first because soviets were totally going to attack anyway. The problem is usually these kind of excuses are just used to cover more imperial reasons like wanting more resources from those areas.

I hate communism, but I'm not a blind faggot who won't look at facts from the both sides to understand each one's motives.

We could agree that taking Moscow or Leningrad would accomplish nothing since the leadership of the Soviet Union would just keep moving eastwards. This was the basic Russian strategy towards any agression towards them since Napoleon. Michael Andreas Barclay de Tolly (wrongly accounted to Mikhail Kutuzov) devised a strategy to just keep pulling the enemy forces deeper and deeper and scorch the earth. Basicly just bleed the enemy till he retreats.

So, anons, what would actually bring the Soviets down? Cutting their oil supply in Caucassus which amounted to 80% of Soviet oil production?

The industry has been moved to the Ural mountains plus they were being supplied by the Allies. Soviets had nigh infinite manpower. Their supply lines were short and they could reinforce quickly. They developed one of the better tanks of the WW2 - T34 which was superior to any German tank at the time.

Facing such odds, was there any way for Hitler to actually win?

Oh ok, I thought you were actually defending the motives.
Yes, I'm aware that these were the "legitimate" claims by the Soviets

>Nazis justify their invasion of the soviets with the whole attack first
It was the official justification for the international relationships. The eastern invasion was to the people of Reich was justified by the ideas of eternal fight with jewish-communism and Lebensraum

It wasn't time of monarchy anymore. You can push millions of your soldiers into the mindless slaughter without a solid reason for them to fight for

Tell Russia that you are planning on forming a European Union and that you have no quarrel with them. Send Stalin 500 of Germany's greatest whores and do anything he asks to avoid fighting with him.

Finish destroying GB and then stop all offensives. Defend until 1945 when America drops the bomb and then form an alliance with Russia to destroy America. War won.

Another commie living Under democracy saying how good communism is?

*You can't

Where did I say it was good?

nazis attacked without demands and without war declaration. they were trade partners with ussr in that time

finland received proposition to exchange land near leningrad on Karelia

nazi germany had shitloads of debts and trade deficit. they attacked poland and other states because they would become bankrupt otherwise.

i hate communism. but stalin proposed to uk and france to sign defence pact in 1938 to attack germany if they declare war in europe. UK and france refused.

Taking Moscow would achieve something, it was the central point for all their rail systems and if it's captured their rail network almost becomes worthless.

T-34's were superior to German tanks for pretty much the whole war. They kept improving on it while Germans kept pumping out new prototypes of different tanks and never really focused on fixing their weaknesses. Meanwhile, Soviets focused on simplifying the T-34 design and making it more easily to manufacture. T-34 and Shermans were probably two of the best tanks of the war.

Nazis should have scrapped plans to build a heavy tank or medium tank to combat the T-34 tanks and focused on improving their Panzers, it would have given them a much better chance

Poland was basically created by Germany and Austria, so no wonder Hitler thought Poland was being a capitalistic bitch for not even trying to give Germany back some land, since after all Poland was freed from Russia in 1916 by Germans.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Poland_(1916–18)
>in 1915 that German soldiers were arriving as liberators to free Poland from subjugation by Russia.
So you might find it confusing now. But Austria-Hungary and Nazi Empire are different things. It was Austria-Hungary who gave Poland land that Hitler wanted. Austria-Germany basically wanted back what Austria-Hungary gave to Poland. In both cases you have German soldiers, once giving to Poland, then taking back.

>it was the central point for all their rail systems and if it's captured their rail network almost becomes worthless
Don't think so. Commies, and soviets specifically were good at ersatz engineering

oh look it's probably the only cunt in the thread that actually cared to read about the build up to WW2

It's all Italy's fault really

Italy was the worst participant of the WWII. Dragging German forces in their fail conflicts

>Communists are some creepy ass motherfuckers.
Sure, unlike nazis who unleashed the bloodiest war due to their pathetic ideas having nothing to do with reality.
Also, who the fuck really cares about Poland or Romania?

Start helping the Japanese more so when the Soviets pull reinforcements from the East, Japan can take the land.

While the Soviets demands were mostly reasonable if Soviets were considered friendly, Stalin had been purging eastern Karelia since the 1930s and the soviets had just annexed the baltics. The demands were basically seen as insane because they required finland to dismantle all their defences and at the same time trust the soviets to not attack them. It was basically the same as Hitler asking France to trade some land at the Maginot Line.

Japan could have attacked the East anyway. The USSR put 33 divisions there just in case. When they confirmed through their spy networks that the Japanese were going to attack the USA and not USSR then they decided to pull them out for the defense of Moscow

>unlike nazis
glad we can agree on something

WW2 was a war to prevent international globalism. Japan and Italy entered the war when USA declared they want to be international and world police in 1937, Russia never liked capitalists, since they had enough of capitalism with Tsars.

Extended war with Britain only guarantees Americans enter and end it. He would have had to find a way to convince Chamberlain for a white peace. I don't know how other than deescalation and open lines of communication.

Just start deploying winter equipment earlier in autumn. Hitler delayed their deployment to the troops believing it would create a atmosphere of defeatism in the summer offense.

Let Guderian do his fucking thing, and take moscow.

Stop interfering in military strategy

Care more about the progress of the war than public perception of it.

Who else R.E.D. WWII mod for Civilization V on Diety?

>Churchill only pretended he entered war because of Poland.
This sentence alone disqualifies you from any debate on WW2, since it's clear that you don't know basic history.

>and take moscow

history.com/news/the-secret-hitler-stalin-pact-75-years-ago
>Winston Churchill later wrote. And that was just the news the world knew about, for in addition to the non-aggression pact, the Nazis and Soviets entered into a secret protocol that only came to light after the conclusion of World War II.
Stay bluepilled. Churchill knew and he waited for Nazis to be exhausted from fighting, so he can come with Americans and take over German trade. UK forced France to enter the war, since like them they were bourgeois, but not as big fish, but since everything that limited Germany was signed in France, Hitler wanted to visit France.

Pretty much the only way to do it

I see you're not familiar with history. It was Russians who abandoned Moscow and set it on fire

They're good, but not smart enough to build a completely new fucking rail and metro system after just completing "the pride of the soviet union, and a way all soviets can travel through the republic safely for first time." Fact is, Samara would have been a better attacking point because taking Moscow would have been great as a way of taking a Capital in 41 the Soviet leadership and most of the Supreme Soviet was in Samara knowing the Germans didn't know it. Even though hilariously enough Samara had 1.5 million strong German speaking population that wasn't purged until 43, taking that would have not only taken control of the Volga, it would have destroyed the Supreme Soviet and taken Stalin (who had a double in Moscow who was taller than he was and is actually in more photos than the real Stalin), and had a sympathetic population to exploit in the end people saying Stalingrad was a worthwhile battle are mistaken it was simply an insignificant city that was only to be defeated because it had Stalin's name and to be defended because it had Stalin's name. Most oil production was in the Caucs so It'd be easier to skip it all together destroy the tracks and take the fields by force, and when they move to the Urals too bad because the Urals would suck for Oil production and would have to go into the interior and construct a large chain and transport system that Stalin had neither the man power no the supplies to do, and as for the US and other countries supplying them? Giving them money and planes are great things considering one can be flown in and the other can be flown; most weapons were small arms.. and the plane they wanted they just stole from the US anyways; the US would have a hard time getting oil to the soviets by sea considering the North sea was crawling with Krauts and the Baltic sea even more so and we were too busy fighting Japanese boats against the west coast and our other possessions going from West coast through China was a nigh impossibility

You're ignorant of the subject that you're trying to discuss
It was Chamberlain who entered the war, Churchill became PM only when Germans were starting their campaign against France.

You know the government relocated secretly to Kuybyshev in 1940 right?

>the ever present "should have just captured Moscow" meme

For any amatuer historians out there, if anyone ever tells you, Hitler was close to winning in the east because his troops could see the top of the Kremlin and were only a few kilometers away from Moscow, IF ONLY they could have captured it. Immediately disregard their opinion as it shows they know all of jack and shit about WWII and warfare in general.

Capturing Moscow would have literally accomplished nothing. The entire government was ready to leave at a moment's notice. Not to mention the battle in the city would have been horrendous as it was nothing but apartment buildings.

Best example is Napoleon captured Moscow, what good did it do for him?

The real goal should have been capturing Stalingrad, cutting off the Volga, and capturing the Oil fields in the Caucuses.

Churchill was talking about Nazis years before. What matters is that Anglo knew and they dine fine back at home while you were attacked.

Too late at this point, kike tool Hitler has made enough of a mistake already.

Should not make Molotov-Ribbentrop pact.

I agree with what you're saying but it did have strategic value in that the rail system all connected to Moscow it would have been a serious punch in the gut to the USSR. But as you said, the war would be far from over as Stalin already moved the industry to past the Urals

>but it did have strategic value in that the rail system all connected to Moscow

Yes, you are correct about this.

So let me correct myself and say, it would have had minimal strategic effect.

>Churchill was talking about Nazis years before.
But he had virtually no influence on British policies since he was sidetracked after WWI and his carreer stalled when he was proven right by the Nazis.

And if Brits wanted war and had so much sway over France and Poland than why they gave up Sudetenland? A heavily fortified, mountainous region that would be hard to attack and in the meantime Germans could've been attacked from France and Poland on the behalf of Eternal Anglo.

>he had virtually no influence on British policies
Churchill was the obvious pick in monarchy:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_Churchill
>Out of office and politically "in the wilderness" during the 1930s because of his opposition to increased home rule for India and his resistance to the 1936 abdication of Edward VIII, Churchill took the lead in warning about Nazi Germany and in campaigning for rearmament. At the outbreak of the Second World War, he was again appointed First Lord of the Admiralty. Following the resignation of Neville Chamberlain on 10 May 1940, Churchill became Prime Minister.
Do you know what monarchy means? Nazis were fighting against monarchy of England and Austria-Hungary. Those politicians are doing the monarchy bidding. Collective of monarchy is the Zion that collects religious money from goys like you.

It's only a few days before, so it's impossible to initiate the invasion sooner. I can't postpone it to the next year because right now the Soviet Army is disorganized thanks to Heydrich and the SD who persuaded Stalin there was a plot against him and made him execute most of his senior officers and have the others shaking and obedient with fear, one year later this would be lost.

So I launch the attack exactly as foreseen.

But there are some modifications :

I transfer some divisions from the French coast that's not going to be attacked the some Army Group from which I can then take snow troops and add them in the North.

I insist they take Murmansk : no Arctic convoys thus, no American material help that proved vital to the Soviets.

In Leningrad, I make sure troops break the supply line over frozen Lake Lagoda : Leningrad starves and surrenders, North Army Group can move on against Moscow.

Center Army Group keeps going its way, being completed by NAG, both being warned secret Siberian troops will be coming.

Once both NAG and CAG are ready, push to Moscow, Stalin is there.

In the South, just hold as it actually happened. 1942 then went on perfectly.

Once Moscow has fallen and Crimea is lost, push to Caucasus, Astrakhan, the Volga, Kazan and Arkhangelsk, thus completing Operation Barbarossa plan.

With Stalin captured and most functioning Russia invaded (although some industry had been removed beyond the Volga by cautious Stalin), the USSR is beaten. Siberian remainging troops and divisions set up in prevision for Manchurian invasion can't do shit now, and they're not true commies, so they submit. I won.

You're literally proving me right with that quote, user.

>American education

What happened in 1920?
Why Soviets attacked Ukraine, then Poland?

>You come in and take over as Fuhrer.
>What do you do differently?
I claim to receive visions from God Himself and use this an an excuse to reform the Third Reich turning it into something more resembling HRE, at least at the outside, than Prussia 2.0

main goals would be:
- turn OKW and OKH into efficient command structures and not gigantic feudal clusterfuck
- by any means necessary converter two large ethnic groups, Poles and Ruthenians, that I am fighting currently into my allies, becouse atm my allies are either shit tier or heve meme amounths of manpower
- streamline and rationalize military production

from that point onward it's just a race to the oil fields, but this time around I would have more bodies to throw into the meat grinder

That would have been smart. I didn't know the Volga Germans weren't deported until 1943

>mannerheim in stalingrad
>finnish flag

Mitä vittua?

yes and it was actually poland who attacked germany on sep 1 1939 amirite?
If holocaust didnt happen why do you want it to happen again? :DDDDDDDDDD

Get my men some decent winter boots/coats, push twice as hard during the gaps in the rainy seasons and the winter.

They lost most of their men during the months bogged down by weather, i'd've pushed at a much higher casualty rate to save lives in the future.

Also, fucktonnes of AAguns/radars and fighter-interceptor planes. Hitler didn't plane for the brutality of the jews and their willingness to "win a war by bombing".

Leningrad.

The city did starve.

There was no supply coming from/through Finnish line direction to the city.

Force Finland to join the Leningrad siege actively.

After leningrad focus rest of the manpower to stalingrad & moscow.

I kill myself and rid the world of a racist bigot

You are all fucking good goys.

Lose the war because i have nowhere near the industrial capacity to take on the allies

Russia would eventually attack, the war was doomed from the start, if he went all out against the ussr D-day would grab him by the balls, If he decided to attack the west, Russia would be unstoppable with an organized army, even if he did nothing at all it would all fall apart from the inside due to bankruptcy, it all went too fast

not invade fucking Russia lel
Hitler thought if he 'kicked in the door' on Russia, 'the whole rotten structure would fall' I would probably think the same in his position honestly

Easy as fuck:

1) I don't kill the jews for now and I give instructions to be "gentle" with populations on the ground
2) I launch a vast operation of propaganda against communists assimilating them as jews written in russian combined with humanitarian help in the poor regions to appear as freedom fighters
3) I don't try to break Leningrand and Moscow and just rush for the Ural
4) I train, arm and organize a group of anti-communist russians and let them proclaim their Regime after the conquest of Kiev

Basically I make what we did with the british in 1776 but on a far bigger scale.

>Basically I make what we did with the british in 1776 but on a far bigger scale.
and they call us perfidious

Don't invade Russia until you have a large fleet of strategic bombers built.
Focus on developing and atomic bomb.
Attach it to V2's and watch the world bend its knees.

This. Dig in, don't give an inch. Bleed those fucking ruskies dry till spring then whoop their ass. Then dig in for winter again. Keep the supply lines protected. Not sure how you would protect the eastern front though. Aside from not doing the battle of britain and reserving your aircraft for defenses..

Can you faggots like, fuck off?

Meni Leningrad ja Stalingrad sekaisin.

>Finland's role in the siege is under dispute. Some historians hold that Finnish divisions tried to but could not push forward across Lake Ladoga to cut the well-known route and complete the siege; another argument maintains that Finnish forces intentionally left the supply route open in tacit defiance of Germany's requests. The latter argument further divides into a view supporting a high-level decision and another supporting only low-level common sense by the unit commanders on location. Regardless of the motivation, in the end the Finns did not complete the siege and cut the supply, nor did they employ artillery against Leningrad or the Road of Life.
From Wikipedia. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_of_Life
It seems like I was treating rumors of Mannerheim not wanting to do it as facts.