If Hitler would have won WW2 how different would things be? Better??

It was his Japanese ‘allies’ who lost the war for Hitler.

Had the Japanese not attacked Pearl Harbour, the USA would never have got involved in the war going on in either the Pacific rim or in Europe.

Without USA involvement, Britain and the Soviets could not have defeated Hitler and the war would have ground to a bloody stalemate.

=====================

Garbage, look up how many Russians died in the war and how many Americans

Here is a summary of estimates of Iraq war deaths from a number of different sources:

war logs[edit source | edit] Classified US military documents released by WikiLeaks in October 2010, record Iraqi and Coalition military deaths between January 2004 and December 2009.[4][8][9][10][16][16][17] The documents record 109,032 deaths broken down into "Civilian" (66,081 deaths), "Host Nation" (15,196 deaths),"Enemy" (23,984 deaths), and "Friendly" (3,771 deaths).[12][18]

Iraqi Health Ministry[edit source | edit] The Health Ministry of the Iraqi government recorded 87,215 Iraqi violent deaths between January 1, 2005, and February 28, 2009. The data was in the form of a list of yearly totals for death certificates issued for violent deaths by hospitals and morgues. The official who provided the data told the Associated Press said the ministry does not have figures for the first two years of the war, and estimated the actual number of deaths at 10 to 20 percent higher because of thousands who are still missing and civilians who were buried in the chaos of war without official records.[19]

The Associated Press[edit source | edit] Associated Press stated that more than 110,600 Iraqis had been killed since the start of the war to April 2009. This number is per the Health Ministry tally of 87,215 covering January 1, 2005, to February 28, 2009 combined with counts of casualties for 2003–2004, and after February 29, 2009, from hospital sources and media reports.[19] For more info see farther down at The Associated Press and Health Ministry. More information.

Iraq Body Count[edit source | edit] The Iraq Body Count project (IBC) figure of 110,937 – 121,227 civilian deaths from violence up to December 2012 includes reported civilian deaths due to Coalition and insurgent military action, sectarian violence and increased criminal violence.[20] The IBC site states: "it should be noted that many deaths will probably go unreported or unrecorded by officials and media."[21] The IBC website currently states that, "Further analysis of the WikiLeaks' Iraq War Logs may add 12,000 civilian deaths."

Iraq Family Health Survey (with WHO)[edit source | edit] Iraq Family Health Survey for the World Health Organization.[22][23] On January 9, 2008, the World Health Organization reported the results of the "Iraq Family Health Survey" published in The New England Journal of Medicine.[24] The study surveyed 9,345 households across Iraq and estimated 151,000 deaths due to violence (95% uncertainty range, 104,000 to 223,000) from March 2003 through June 2006. Employees of the Iraqi Health Ministry carried out the survey.[25][26][27] See also farther down: Iraq Family Health Survey.

Opinion Research Business (ORB) poll[edit source | edit] Opinion Research Business (ORB) poll conducted August 12–19, 2007, estimated 1,033,000 violent deaths due to the Iraq War. The range given was 946,000 to 1,120,000 deaths. A nationally representative sample of approximately 2,000 Iraqi adults answered whether any members of their household (living under their roof) were killed due to the Iraq War. 22% of the respondents had lost one or more household members. ORB reported that "48% died from a gunshot wound, 20% from the impact of a car bomb, 9% from aerial bombardment, 6% as a result of an accident and 6% from another blast/ordnance."[28][29][30][31][32]

United Nations[edit source | edit] The United Nations reported that 34,452 violent deaths occurred in 2006, based on data from morgues, hospitals, and municipal authorities across Iraq.[33]

Lancet studies[edit source | edit] The Lancet study's figure of 654,965 excess deaths through the end of June 2006 is based on household survey data. The estimate is for all excess violent and nonviolent deaths. That also includes those due to increased lawlessness, degraded infrastructure, poorer healthcare, etc. 601,027 deaths (range of 426,369 to 793,663 using a 95% confidence interval) were estimated to be due to violence. 31% of those were attributed to the Coalition, 24% to others, 46% unknown. The causes of violent deaths were gunshot (56%), car bomb (13%), other explosion/ordnance (14%), airstrike (13%), accident (2%), unknown (2%). A copy of a death certificate was available for a high proportion of the reported deaths (92% of those households asked to produce one).[34][35][36]

Ali al-Shemari (earlier Iraqi Health Minister)[edit source | edit] Concerning war-related deaths (civilian and non-civilian), and deaths from criminal gangs, Iraq's Health Minister Ali al-Shemari said that since the March 2003 invasion between 100,000 and 150,000 Iraqis had been killed.[37] "Al-Shemari said on Thursday [November 9, 2006] that he based his figure on an estimate of 100 bodies per day brought to morgues and hospitals – though such a calculation would come out closer to 130,000 in total."[38] For more info see farther down at Iraq Health Minister estimate in November 2006.

Costs of War Project[edit source | edit] 176,000–189,000 people were killed in violence in the Iraq war, including 134,000 civilians, according to the findings of the Costs of War Project, a team of 30 economists, anthropologists, political scientists, legal experts, and physicians assembled by Brown University and the Watson Institute to study the effects of wars involving the United States since 2001. The project also examined the economic costs of the Iraq war, as well as the human and economic cost of war in Afghanistan and Pakistan.[39][40][41]

history buff and bored b4 WC wrote:

america has killed ... close to a million in Iraq,

Sorry, I didn't see you while I was there. What unit were you with?

German-American Jew wrote:

Are you asking this of those who would have been spared or those who would have been destroyed?

I fail to be impressed with your moral agenda -- hypothetical or not.

Sorry about your ennui.

well said

historical fact: the Japanese were reliant on the US for 80% of their oil and the US embargo cut their war machine off at the knees, their only hope was that the US would sue for peace and resume oil trade

historical result: the Japanese whether in stupidity, arrogance, or desperation badly misjudged American resolve

historical fact: Hitler was fighting against ideals as much as people and production

historical result: when you take someone's land you can sue for peace and subjugate as in France, a country that historically compromised

when they try to take people's religion, their race, their lives, their children, etc. they will always be met with resistance of the Liberty or death sort. Hitler set in motion events that had only 1 conclusion as Eisenhower said total victory and unconditional surrender

the "if" of the OP is not valid and could not be based on historical realities, hence that is why it did not turn out that way

First of all, I didn't say "hearts", I said minds. Secondly, when I say winning over minds I'm not just talking about the few British who outright supported Facsism. I'm talking about all the British who didn't like fascism but at the end of the day were not interested in committing thousands of lives and being on a total war footing to beat back Germany. Which in every way that matters is winning over the minds of the British. The truth is, Britain never fully had its heart into the war. They didn't like Hitler but they trusted Hitler to be Hitler. Hitler openly respected the British Empire and co-opted it as an achievement of the Aryan race. The British people were passionate about protecting their shores and having freedom of their sea lanes. But as far as invading and winning back France and unconditional surrender. That was all the U.S. doing and was only a policy put forth when the U.S. was in a position to dictate policy in the West.

Querfeldein wrote:

ryan foreman wrote:

The only chance he had of winning that war was by winning over the minds of the East European people. To a large extent he did that with France and Britain.

Never mind France, but he did what with Britain? Win the hearts and minds of the people?

Yes, there were British Fascists, but (fortunately), the vast majority of the British did not exactly fall for Hitler's "charms", to put it very mildly.

To the OP: Asking not to "play the genocide card" is a little much, don't you think? Apart from being a fascist, racist, homophobic and a mass murderer, Hitler was probably quite alright...

Well as far as the letsrun crowd is concerned it would be great. No Obama and no black kids running around. And certainly no Africans in the NCAA. An Aryan boy like Nick Symmonds would win Olympic gold. Sounds like everything letrsun wants.