The Russians mass-produced one of the best tanks in history, the T-34. Nothing the Germans had came close to the T-34, and most of their tanks were vastly inferior.
The Tiger was a rubbish tank. Fine it was heavily armoured and had a big gun, but they broke down frequently, and were extremely difficult to repair. They were also incredibly slow, and took a long time and a lot of resources to construct. Both the Sherman and the T-34 were mass-produced, easy to repair, and in the case of the T-34, quite simply a better tank.
German conscripts recruited from annexed countries had sergeants armed with pistols behind them ready to shoot any who showed the slightest sign of being about to desert. And you don't seem to realise a) just how phenonemonally HUGE Russia is, and b) just how big the Red Army was. Both were massive, and required far more resources than Hitler had at his disposal to defeat, even if he was only fighting on one front. I'm not saying he couldn't have won, but doing so would have involved fighting only the Russians, and capitalising on his other advantages.
Once again, the MP44 and the German jet fighters were simply the products of Hitler's desperate need for some kind of war-winning super-weapon, instead of reliance on decet military power. Yes they were good, but there weren't enough of them and there were some crucial design flaws that meant they provided huge vulnerabilities.
V1 and V2? Don't make me laugh. They were never going to win the war, and the V1 wasn't even guided, it was scrapped almost as soon as it was launched and the V2 was designed, which also didn't prove very effective at winning the war. All it did was piss London off, which then caused the Dresden fire-bombings in retaliation.
Hmmm - you mean allies ? If the axis would win nobody knows wha would happen!
No I meant axis, the fact that nobody knows what would happen was more or less exactly my point.
But the economical boom after IIWW was natural consequence - public desire for trade goods was enourmous, some large countries like france britan and USA remained untouched by war,(especially GB and USA but France didn`t lost anything significant compared to rest of Europe) combined it with indrustry wich was highly developt by war - it wasn`t very difficult to switch from airplanes to cars, forges and mines working at 200% pre-war efficency - war was a blessing for some - obviously not for 20 million people wich died in the process, not for Russia where western part of a country was devastated,not for Poland wich lost like 20% of its citizens and biggest city was levelled to the ground,not for Czechs, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, and in some way Finland... Later came The Marshall Plan and very rapid economical development in western Europe (so called italian, german french miracle)
Leonates80
The USA benefitted, everyone else got screwed. The USA helped (although mostly out of a need to deny Communism in Europe), but every European coutnry was hit hard economically, and it took a loooong time to sort it out. France and Britain, untouched by the war? Come off it guv- both france and britain had had the crap bombed out of them, by both sides in the case of France (not that they didn't deserve it) and huge numbers of their most productive young men killed in the war.