Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

TheGreatOneSea t1_j7ln0g4 wrote

Reply to comment by INITMalcanis in Would the Allies have kept fighting if the axis powers stopped? by Techno-87

Basically this. Hitler had simply lied too much for anyone to believe him, and Germany desperately needed the oil in USSR territory, without which Germany would be hard pressed to even defend itself in the future.

It's also important to remember that Germany was influenced by its past: Germany had bled itself dry fighting France in WW1, so the idea that defeating France might be effectively irrelevant to the actual outcome of war was difficult to accept. It was much easier to tell themselves that Germany was on the brink of total victory, especially with North Africa and Barbarossa seeming to go so well...

27

Cluefuljewel t1_j7lo7l7 wrote

I actually never read that hitler needed Russias oil. It makes sense though.

4

Top_Explanation_3383 t1_j7lw2il wrote

Lack of oil was Germany's biggest problem. It could produce plenty of planes but didn't have the fuel to train pilots properly.

If they still had a decent airforce in 44 Normandy would've have been far far worse

14

MansfromDaVinci t1_j7mbq29 wrote

The Berlin-Baghdad railway was mostly about getting Germany access to oil, initially for it's navy but by WW2 for it's airforce and army as well. The actions that the British empire took to stymie this are a major contributing reason for WW1

4

Top_Explanation_3383 t1_j7mmlkq wrote

From what I've read even if Rommel took Egypt and then Iran the oilfields there wouldn't be ready for years. Presumably the same in Iraq.

1

lorgskyegon t1_j7mvyfn wrote

It's the same reason Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. Japan, having little in the way of natural resources on the Home Islands, needed to keep conquering territories in the South Pacific. They hoped to bomb the US and then count on anti-war Congress to make peace and keep the US out of Japan's business in the war.

1