@Adler
So Germany fought for nearly six years against nearly every European power and the US. And they had chances to win.
Well the US was also fighting a two front war and it was fighting it over a supply line that stretched thousands of miles. That was no small achievement itself.
As far as Germany's chances....well now we're dipping into the realm of "what if". The funny thing about "what if" is that it always involves some minor change that would somehow have completely altered the war. They tend to ignore the fact that WW2 was a war of production of both men and material. The amazing thing wasn't that Germany was stopped but that they got as far as they did. Also "what ifs" always involve the Axis. You could also say what if the Allies had attacked as soon as Hitler was elected? Or what if the US began the Manhattan Project and heavy bomber research in 1933 when Germany began rearming?
The kill/ losses ratio is also interesting to see.
Usually this favors whoever is defending more. And usually whoever is defending more is the one who is losing.
The Germans were technological superior indeed, but you can´t say these inventions were not reliable. Despite some minor bugs in the beginning most inventions like the Me 262 jet or the Fritz X guided bomb were used very successful.
German advances in jets and rocketry were impressive indeed. Just imagine what they would be if they hadn't gassed or driven out some of their best scientists. However, usually when speaking of the German technological edge the focus is on tanks and not "super weapons" that entered either too late or in too few numbers to have any real effect.
Many would say that the Russian T-34 was the best all-around tank of the war. This is hard to quantify and certainly up to debate. As far as the German heavy tanks many of them were too big for effective manuever and did indeed bog down in many cases. Quite often they were used as fixed guns with limited mobility. They were also fairly complex and required high maintenance and broke down quite a bit in comparison to the Allies.
The Allies had the technology to build 60 ton tanks and indeed the Russians did. But the requirements for the US (transportability, reliability, ease of field maintenance) were not met by the German or Russian tanks. Had Germany and the US been next door neighbors then the US would have been building its forces up and researching weapons technologies far earlier than they did. Detroit had no problem building heavy machinery and easily could have built heavy tanks.
That´s why the German Wehrmach is in my opinion the best army of ww2.
Like I said it's impossible to quantify. All the armies had different missions and objectives and were operating under different circumstances. All of them tailored their forces to meet their specific goals and environment.
I'll stick with the UK mostly because they beat Germany essentially one on one not only over Britain but in the Mid East too. They also forced Hitler to attack Russia before he was ready. But that's just my opinion and can't really be proven scientifically.
. I have German ancestry so I am partial to them 
for your honesty. Still a 
on the earlier post. 
