>>21620
Russia was actually in a pretty bad state before the war internally. The most common argument is that the T34 outclassed the Panzer IV, but it wasn't being produced enough before 1943, they practically got boosted to full strength by the American and British lend-lease.
How Germany could've won the war in the east:
>smash the British at Dunkirk, making opinion of war in England much more negative
>Churchill doesn't come into power and keep fighting the Germans, thus they accept the peace offers with both Germany and Italy
>this means no lend-lease from Britain + more allocation to the east
>they don't have to invade Yugoslavia to get to Greece, nor invade Egypt as that was a British problem
>this means Barbarossa begins in May, and things go as well as the start, but soldiers are prepared with winter equipment
>Japan attacks the USSR from the east, forcing troops from the Siberian front to stay and fight the Japanese, meaning the Germans don't get pushed back west initially
>as Britain is out of the war, America cannot partake in a strategic invasion of Europe, even if Hitler declares war on them (which was for unprovoked attacks on German assets and lend-lease to the USSR, it only made the war official)
>with more troops allocated, Leningrad becomes much-more one-sided, and if a better German contingent + the Finns attack them at the same time, it could fall)
>Hohols, Cossacks, Tatars, and Caucasians all see this as a victory for the Axis, meaning that they would still join, possibly in much larger numbers than before
>Hitler still reroutes the 4th Panzer army early to take the oil fields in the Caucasus, the Germans would be able to take on the Soviets in Stalingrad much better
>with the Caucasus subdued, and most key-cities in the west taken, Moscow would be up for the taking, and at this point, the Red Army would collapse just like the whites in the Russian Civil War