They have lost but before losing they had carved a European empire.

Here is my view:

A) Sentiment in Germany was far pro war than others due to losing the war, the stabbed in the back myth and Versailes treaty. The Weimar republic was vulnerable to a dictatorial militaristic goverment.

Long story short, the Nazis rose to power and Germany was more willing than other nations to go into a more war oriented economy. Other nations and their population and leaders wanted peace more.

Due to being a dictatorship and the aggressor Germany was far more decisive than the appeasers who wanted to well appease Hitler from his militarism and their countries were more conflicted in what to do. Due to the restrictions towards Germany, Hitler's lies for peace and the appeasers wish for peace, there was also inadequate preparation not only in other ways but psychological as well. The nature of the nazi goverment also played a role when it came to France using Belgium against Germany and Germany attacking France through Belgium. The French respected the national sovereignty of the Belgians while the Germans were not. More specifically the issue was that there were multiple sides on the allies side that needed to cooperate instead of one side with one united objective.

B) The archappeasers in Europe were not only delusional by themselves and there is a clear personal responsibility but there were also some political reasons that resulted in France and Britain behaving in such way. And the fact that war with Germany is pretty damn costly. Still the fervor in which they appeased and even cooperated with Germany in the destruction of Czechoslovakia, is not to be underestimated. If Germany fought against Chechoslovakia WW2 might had taken quite a different turn as they had a powerful army. Also the defeatism of the archappeasers let them to underestimate Czechoslovakia and overestimate Germany. France and Britain also failed to attack during the invasion of Polland although they did declare war and of course they did not retaliate when Hitler moved his troops over the Rhine. Another factor is the communists in France also bringing division when the communists allied with Hitler's Germany.

C) Hitler's political skills. The man was able to both prepare for war while promising peace and convincing foreign leaders. He was able to blackmail Austria and Czechoslovakia, use the German minorities as a blackmail tactic and to expertly understand and abuse the French -British defeatism and appeasement. He was able to jump on the opportunity of Soviet Union allying with Germany when Britain and France less feverishly pursued that opportunity.
Hitler's determination also played a role as he forced others into backing down first. He knew he could take advantage of the political situation in Europe to pursue his imperialism and he had several successes. Of course this kind of political success could not last for all the duration of the war.

D) German tactics, Germany using armored divisions and modern warfare in a way unprecedented and unexpected for other nations. And they had some great generals like Manstein that the others lacked. This was decisive in their victory in France. Also, Aircraft superiority. So superior tactics and aircraft superiority and of course better communication due to radio. Of course while they did have aircraft superiority in France, they did not win the battle for Britain but this is about their victories.

E) Germany had a more populous industrious and developed country with stronger than small European countries military and in addition to the above advantages they conquered them due to that. Kind of obvious when we look at the various countries that the Germans conquered but despite being an obvious reason it is a reason.

Of course some of the above reasons or persons who were responsible for those reasons (most notably Hitler) contributed to the German defeat.

I see :a lot of platitudes and repetitions of old myths:
ONE exemple :the big Czechoslowakian army:as there was NO Czechoslowakian people,there was no Czechoslowakian army ,unless one would assume that the Sudeten and the Slowaks would fight for the Czechs .Remaining were only the Czechs :some 7.5 million,who would have to fight in a region(Sudetenland that openly was rebelling.
I also would like to see ONE proof for the claim that sentiment in Germany was far more pro war than others.
And,the old myth that Britain and France were not prepared adequately

The Germans were prepared for war, the others were not.

Trouble was brewing in Europe, even without Hitler. Stalin and Mussolini had their ambtions, as well. So Hitler might've accelearated the process of a wide-reaching conflict, but I think war was inevitable in the region. Germany, as others have stated, was ready, whle her neighbors were not.

Hitlers phrase was Guns before Butter give you some idea of what his aim was. With Europe still reeling from the recession and WW1 which was fresh in every ones mind there was not the interest in rearming for another war and the misguided thought that they talk Hitler out of starting one. You only have to watch the joy on every ones face when Chamberlain waved that bit of paper signed by Hitler proclaiming peace in our time, even Churchill's warnings were howled down. So this gave Hitler the chances he wanted to push his luck in taking over other countries and the more he got away with it the stronger he became and with the loot from these countries just swelled the Nazis war chest. By the time he went to war he had a very large well trained Army and Airforce which was second to none and the only department that was not up to 100% was the German Navy.

Originally Posted by VDKMS

The Germans were prepared for war, the others were not.

Agreed, by the time Hitler's adversaries declared war, his forces had one thing much of his adversaries armed forces did not. Combat experiance.

However, many of Hitler's highest military council tried to persuade him to allow further preperations.

Which brings to mind, what if he went to war in 1944? He could have spent that time building automatic rifles for the army, and devloping relaible engines for jet fighters for the Air Force.

He could have rearmed Scharnhorst and Admiral Scheer with advanced targeting radar, and bigger 15 inch guns as was orginally intended for them for the next war.

The list is endless, if Hitler, as became evidently clear did follow such council who knows how the war would have panned out.

A larger, more ready armed forces and larger arsenal and capabilities offered by it.

By 1944 he could have very really created a war that would last decades, and cost tens of millions of more lives than the one he prematurely started.

Taming his ego however, proved one thing he could never really master mind.

1)Waiting till 1944 would be suicidal :he already in 1940 was losing the armaments race (Britain producing more aircraft than Germany)
2)More fundamentally:I strongly object to the OP:I like to see some proofs that Germany was winning so much :IMHO,they only won some tactical victories .

I agree, 1944 would have been far too late especially if they intended expansion eastward as the Russians would have completed their reorganisation and been out producing most of the world in AFV and aircraft.

I also think it would have taken until at least 1946 to get the navy anywhere near the strength it needed to be in order to have limited parity with the Royal Navy.

Originally Posted by MontyB

I agree, 1944 would have been far too late especially if they intended expansion eastward as the Russians would have completed their reorganisation and been out producing most of the world in AFV and aircraft.

I also think it would have taken until at least 1946 to get the navy anywhere near the strength it needed to be in order to have limited parity with the Royal Navy.

I don't think Hitler could have ever went toe to toe ship for ship with the Royal Navy, at least not in his lifetime.

If events today prove anything, fighting an strong naval adversary may preclude using other means to negate your enemies strengths, cheaper means such as mines U Boats and aircraft.

The latter which proved decisive against battleships from two of the biggest sea powers at the time. The U.S. and the Royal Navy.

I am not sure about that, had the Z-Plan been completed I think the Kriegsmarine would have been able to compete with the Royal Navy certainly in the North Sea and probably the Atlantic.

For all of the Royal Navies strength it should be remembered that much of it was spread around the world defending an empire and not focused around the UK.