Well, to start, I’d say that there was no way Hitler would’ve attack the Soviet Union.
First, the right moment had past, and he’d sent troops that could’ve been used to invade to the Middle East and Africa. His resources were now spent on other things, making a war much more troublesome.
Second, he upset Italy when he refused to assist them in Ethiopia and then worked with Stalin to hammer out a treaty between the Ethiopians and Italians (5th of December). And thus, Italian support in a war against Russia probably wouldn’t be ensured.
Third, it is clear that Hitler sought to consolidate his Empire, the fact that on the 20th of October he pulled hundreds of soldiers off the frontiers to help crush the resistance and that he made peace with the United Kingdoms before taking Egypt, despite the fact that Rommel had Cairo surrounded, might have indicated that Hitler had put world domination on the back burners while he stabilized and legitimatize his rule over Europe.
Stalin on the other, looked to have the upper position. The Soviet’s had recently conquered Finland (5th December) and thus had not only the men on the frontline with Germany, but the position to strike at the Reich.
However, I think it would depend on how much Stalin really wanted to actually destroy Hitler.
First, he’d sacked his top commanders not to long ago, so if he had plans to invade Germany it could have probably been at a later date when Russia was ready for a full-scale invasion.
Second, Germany was now in a very good position, having taken the Middle East and North Africa, as well as several British colonies, and having already shown their military power, it would have been a very daring move to attack.
Third, if Stalin were to attack, it would have just been him against the Axis, with an attack from Japan likely.
I think that war would likely have been avoided between the two Empires. The reaffirming of the Molotov-Ribbentrop non-aggression pact indicates that the two sides sought to kept the mutual peace if at least for the time being.
Now, in the Pacific, it must be noted that Japan had not only taken Wake Island on the 11th (as opposed to “reality” where they took it on the 23rd) but also Hawaii and were gunning for Midway. This would have put them in a strategic position over the United States and given them the upper hand in the start of the war. The Japanese did not seek to conquer America, by all means that was impossible, they only sought to force the Americans into a Pacific Treaty that would have favored Japanese interests in the Pacific Ocean. With the position the Japanese had gained by taking both Hawaii and Wake on the 11th, they would have had optimal striking range/position against the Americans, and would have significantly slowed any American advance.
Now, the way I see it, America would still not have stopped until they took Hawaii, Midway, Wake Island and maybe even Iwo Jima if they were daring, but would have in the end signed a treaty that would have made the Emperor of Japan smile with satisfaction. Not to mention that Japan was likely to be aided by the Germens, and the fact that America was not at war with the Germens would not have helped all that much because (In "reality") I don’t think they really did anything over there until the Japanese were in full retreat.
Another thing to consider is the fact that Africa is now under Axis control, with the exception of Ethiopian East Africa. This meant that the Axis had a substantial resource supply line; giving time they would have been very powerful. I also think that without a war in 1941, and not likely in 42 or 3, the Germans would be likely to develop a nuclear weapon, which he might have given to the Japanese to use against the Americans.
Now, would America attack Europe? Depends on three things, how the war in the Pacific went, the position of Stalin on whether or not he wanted a war with Hitler, and on the position of the UK. However, if America did attack, it would be later on, around 1944-45 or even later, at which point the Germans would have been given enough time to rest up and be prepared for a long-term war against America.
Giving such a scenario, I don’t think America would have had the power to overthrow Germany without the help of the Soviets. Thus FRD would most likely have any plans of an invasion hang on the position of Stalin. If Stalin decided he too wanted peace like Hitler to build up his massive plans for the Soviet Union, then Nazi Germany would have gone on to the next decade and perhaps more. Now it wouldn’t have been a alliance between the Soviets and Nazis, but a “You shoot me, I’ll shoot you, so don’t shoot me” kind of Mutual Ensured Destruction that would have kept the two sides apart. Also, giving a couple years to think, Stalin may have realized that America was a greater threat then Germany and change attitude towards the two parties.
Also, to point out, Hitler did not seek to conquer Britain, note him signing that peace treaty with the King on the 7th of November? At least not at the time being.
And you can’t say that Nazi Germany would just end up collapsing eventually, there are many nations that appeared to be collapsing or should have collapsed but didn’t.
Well, That’s just my two cents.
PS: What does PoD mean?
Especially when the PoD doesn't make any sense. If Hitler were going to decide to not invade the USSR, he'd have done it in the summer and fall of 1940, and presumably the Nazis would have conducted operations against the British in the interval, thus radically altering events long before the PoD.
