In the case of Britain, questionable. Britain is an island, and had a stronger navy at that time than the Kriegsmarine. Command of the air would not have been enough - Germany would also have needed command of the sea.
Hitler simply did not have the materiel to make a successful opposed landing in 1940 - we have the utter failure of Dieppe as an example of what happened to opposed landings with the technology of the time - it was because of the lessons learned then that the Allies were able to build up the overwhelming preponderance of specialised materiel that made success possible in Normandy in 1944. Turning to the Soviet Union, emphatically not. The further the Russians retreated, the more stretched German supply lines became.
The turning point would perhaps have been reached further East, but it would have been reached, and the destruction of the German army would have been aided by the Russian winter even more than was the case just short of Moscow.
That's really hard to say. There would have still been a ground war for Britain. In addition the Soviet Union, while stressed, still had an overwhelming amount of soldiers it was pouring onto the front line.
I honestly don't think Germany ever had a chance to win WWII, even if they occupied Britain it is doubtful they could take the Soviets and deal with a US military that had acquired the Bomb. Germany's production levels simply could not keep pace with both those nations.
I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.