Recent Posts
be me, family expects CEO, i became master ji in s...
Alternate history
pux5iU
No.539262
If holocaust completely genocided jews, what kind of world would be in?
+s0Bva
No.539263
>>539262(OP)
same
iU1ZAg
No.539264
>>539262(OP)
very advanced technocracy if not for aryan larping
pCocmN
No.539265
>>539262(OP)
There were Jews beyond continental Europe, in fact the most dangerous ones were in Britain and the US. Even the most unlikely German victory scenario stays in continental Europe.
O6Yb5Q
No.539266
No one can wipe off a certain race completely
8oGIQo
No.539269
>>539262(OP)
(Text Content Sanitized Too.)
dvrQp2
No.539275
>>539266
Yes remnants always survive but they lose their distinct culture and identity and get absorbed. Mongols successfully wiped out Tangut people. Today there is no tangut people and culture.
S3TzrY
No.539279
>>539262(OP)
It would only happen if germany won the WW2 and if that did happen, you wouldn't be born after your brown ancestors gor castrated.
09qIsv
No.539283
>>539262(OP)
Nothing. White brahmins and british royals will take their place
dvrQp2
No.539290
>>539279
Hitler had no plans of expanding beyond eastern europe. He wanted germans to expand in eastern europe like anglos expanded in north america during 'manifest destiny'. All this 'he wanted to kill every non white' is bullshit to show him as a cartoonish supervillain.
O6Yb5Q
No.539291
>>539275
So you mean if jews were lesser? Then they'll stronger than ever. Forget losing culture or identity, if there existed 15,000 jews total on earth, they would barge straight into al-aqsa and blow themselves up since the lesser you are the less you have left to lose
09qIsv
No.539301
>>539290
And hitler had no control on himself. Thats why he lost to start with. He crossed lines he shouldnt have. He would most definitely expand and expand until brutally btfo
dvrQp2
No.539309
>>539301
He was a very intelligent man. All his closest confidants attest to it. All he wanted was to conquer eastern europe for its resources and to eradicate the stronghold of communism(which he saw as a jewish plot). He genuinely feared stalin was building up forces at the border to streamroll rest of europe. His attack was a pre emptive strike. He never wanted any western front to begin with. He wanted peace with british and allies but they were opposed to his annexation of poland.
dvrQp2
No.539313
>>539291
I mean if they were successfully destroyed as a people.
dvrQp2
No.539338
>>539291
>they would barge straight into al-aqsa and blow themselves up since the lesser you are the less you have left to lose.
I am talking about ww2 period not current israel conflict. And there have been successful genocides throughout history like destruction of western xia by mongols, native americans by europeans and even much earlier in prehistory such as yamnaya expansion into europe and bantu expansion in africa. When the targeted population is small genocide is likely to be successful. You dont have to hunt down last individual. You just have to wipe out enough to destroy their existence as a distinct people. Surviving remnants simply get absorbed.
MCJruZ
No.539340
There will be still tons of jews
(Text Content Sanitized Too.)
t35pav
No.539341
apni maa se puch
S3TzrY
No.539347
>>539290
Hitler thought UK was doing a good enough job. If hitler did beat UK, he would take over India and definitely not be kind to anyone here.
S3TzrY
No.539350
>>539309
Hitler literally killed European dominance over the world. He was a retard.
pCocmN
No.539353
>>539350
That was a result of total Judeo-American victory. You can't blame his ideals for what happened when he lost.
pCocmN
No.539354
>>539301
The Soviets always wanted to spread the revolution westwards. Their entire military doctrine was based on the assumption that they would be on the offensive on a massive front. Hence why they got overrun in mass during the early months of the war.
dvrQp2
No.539359
>>539347
All this is cartoonish portrayal of the man. They never had enough resources to take over rest of the world and they knew it. They succeeded in New World due to germs and because they were fighting hunter gatherer ooga boogas. They could never genocide places like india, china, mideast with large populations and civilisation. The only reason brits ruled over india was because they were ruling as an imperial government not because they could genocide us. We werent at anyone's mercy.
>>539350
He didnt kill european dominance. Ww2 did. It was churchill and allies who wanted war with germany. Hitler wasnt even interested in fighting france and UK. He only wanted to expand east.
O6Yb5Q
No.539368
>>539338
Same answer. They'll would blow up al-aqsa before getting genocided for return of anti-christ
dvrQp2
No.539371
>>539368
Who cares if they ack themselves? I am only interested in discussing an alternate geopolitical world with no jewish race and no israel.
S3TzrY
No.539395
>>539359
I already said Nazi didn't want to take over India. They considered british ownership of it as legitimate, but if they were to WW2, that would obviously change so that they conquerer it.
>He didnt kill european dominance. Ww2 did
This like that girl who said pakistan didn't kill her dad, war did.
>Hitler wasnt even interested in fighting france and UK. He only wanted to expand east.
Absolute bullshit, yes it's true regarding UK, but he absolute always wanted to fight France. He thought UK would mind it's own buisness while it took over Europe. British continental strategy has since the time of napoleon been to ensure no one state becomes too powerful. Churchill or any other decent leader would do the same as they did. Hitler also thought that he couldn't expand east until france was dealt with since it would remain a threat.
dvrQp2
No.539403
>>539395
>but if they were to WW2, that would obviously change so that they conquerer it.
Of course. By 'cartoonish portrayal of man' i meant the idea that he was some sci fi comic supervillain who would have killed all non whites had he won when in reality he was neither interested nor he had the resources for that. He only wanted a german empire in europe ruling over eastern europe and wanted to annihilate communism and jewry.
Hitler only attacked france after allies declared war on him in response to his invasion of poland.
9BlpPD
No.539405
Ideologically he did not want to fight France or Britain but saw putting them in their place necessary to ensure they don't team up with the Soviets and cause a 2-front war. That didn't entirely work because Britain stayed in the game.
9BlpPD
No.539406
>>539405
Interestingly Chamberlin had his own plans, he actually wanted exactly that, i.e Germany and Soviets duel it out, deplete each other, after which he and France would take over both of them. That didn't work because France couldn't hold up since it miscalculated the direction of German advance. Due to the humiliation he had to leave and then Churchill joined who was entirely a Judeophile and would do everything possible to ensure that the most immediate threat to the Jews is eradicated first.
9BlpPD
No.539408
>>539406
*Chamberlain
9BlpPD
No.539411
>>539406
He actually wanted them to take Poland, but also didn't want to appear too weak, hence why they declared war but didn't try any serious offensives themselves. They were hoping the larger French Army and BEF would stall the war in North Belgium and then peace out so Germany then focuses on USSR.
9BlpPD
No.539413
The rational choice for Britain was to accept the German peace offer, and then when they invade the Soviets still supply the Soviets with arms along with their US allies. So, with the more troops Germany could now bring to bear the war in the East becomes a slog and both sides suffer huge losses and bankrupt each other's resources.
tl/0+x
No.539417
>>539413
Would that have made any difference? Germany squandered Luftwaffe and oil fighting britain anyway which made things easier for soviets.
9BlpPD
No.539418
>>539406
Adding here because 99.99% of chamaars don't know that with "miscalculating the direction of advance" I don't mean them going through Belgium instead of the Maginot, they ofc wouldn't do that, France knew that and it was the point, the Maginot was supposed to force them through Belgium... The French military was largely a reservist military, its size is largely exaggerated, it would take weeks to even months to call them up and they wouldn't be too good in the immediate combat. An invasion through AlLor would lead to a situation like the Prussian war, so to avoid that they hoped Germany would again come through Belgium which would give France time to mobilize and hopefully fight them in Belgium itself.
What I actually mean is them choosing a Southward route through South Belgium and Sedan instead of attacking through Northern Belgium as the French hopes because they assumed the Germans would look for a wider frontage.
S3TzrY
No.539420
>>539406
Whatever Churchill believed is it's own thing, but british strategy that has been since the time of 16th century been to ensure no one states gets too powerful.
Britain which was at it's peak then, would wage war with anyone at that point if this was going to happen. This could be by France of Russia, too.
9BlpPD
No.539425
>>539417
Wdym? Yea they would have more troops and equipment at the start of Barbarossa but remember that the only reason they had that early success in our timeline is because it was a surprise attack. With Britain peaced out Stalin would immediately suspect a German attack, while Germans would be sure of a Soviet one. This would lead to a long war of attrition where both sides destroy each other to British advantage. Germany still does well because it was the more professional force and now also has more equipment. USSR still survives because it receives western aid. Whether it would end up as a stalemate or a victory for one side doesn't matter. Both would deplete each other's manpower and resources.
9BlpPD
No.539426
>>539420
Letting them duel each other would effectively have achieved that either way. While the British rearm, the BEF was not at all prepared for a war.
tl/0+x
No.539430
>>539425
I mean what difference does it make in outcome any different from our current timeline?
S3TzrY
No.539432
>>539426
Britain would still intervene, they'll be like kissinger in Iran-Iraq war, hope they both lose while indirectly aidding them both.
At the end of the day though, german conquest of everything, even the early days of Operation barbrosa happened so fast, it spooked everyone into thinking German domination was one inevitable if they didn't do anything.
9BlpPD
No.539433
>>539430
In our timeline the Soviets got off easier and could prevent any eastward allied advance. In this one even if they win, they would've depleted all manpower reserves. Wouldn't be hard to think that the Allies would jump in on them by the time they reach Poland or East Germany.
9BlpPD
No.539434
>>539432
That is what I said.
9BlpPD
No.539437
>>539433
Even in our timeline they had entirely run out of recruitable manpower by the end of the war.
tl/0+x
No.539443
>>539433
But allies wont be able to do shit. You will just have Cold War as usual either with Reich or USSR depending on who the victor is. Remember even in our current timeline 80% of actual fighting occured in eastern front.
9BlpPD
No.539444
>>539443
Both sides would deplete each other's resources yaar, then even if one manages to win, they can be taken out. the difference is that vast amounts of German forces are not tied down in protecting France Italy or the Balkans. They can bring their entire military to the East.
tl/0+x
No.539445
>>539444
Even in our timeline 80% of fighting occured in eastern front. Allies were on backfoot until US with its industrial might jumped in. If allies couldnt do shit about exhausted USSR in our timeline what makes you think they will be able to do anything in yours.
9BlpPD
No.539446
>>539445
USSR was not that exhausted, besides you prolly don't know that they held up millions of Germans across Italy, the Balkans, North Africa and France. They also regularly carried out bombing missions that tied air defenses and many air groups.
tl/0+x
No.539457
>>539446
Western front was a joke. Eastern front was the hell on earth even in our timeline. Largest battles, most casualties occured in east. Only like 20% of casualties occured in west. Ww2 was won by soviet blood with american arms and british intel even in our timeline so i doubt your scenario would play out any differently.
9BlpPD
No.539459
>>539457
The Western Front only opened up in 1944, but it still held vast numbers of German troops for air defense and the Atlantic wall, occupying the Balkans, protecting Italy. They couldn't just abandon them.
tl/0+x
No.539462
>>539459
Still even in our timeline 80% of fighting happened between USSR and germany yet allies didnt dare attack USSR even tho they were in better position. I can see your scenario working out if allies strategically arm ussr just enough to prolong the attrition.
