Yes there was nothing to stop him after the fall of france the only thing he needed was air supremacy and he very nearly got it. The mistake was switching to bonbing london before of wiping out fighter command (He came damned close to doing that- Downing (in charge of fighter command) estimated fighter command would have ceased to exist as a fighting force if he had continued attacking airfields for another 2 weeks due to pilot exhaustion) with air supremacy it would not have been difficult to transport men and arms across the channel 1st take Manston airfield using parachutists with fighter and bomber support. Then you stations your own fighters and bombers there.
SInce Manston is closer to france than any other UK airfield. Then you can get support from france quicker than aircraft from the UK can attack it. With manston AND the other side of the channel under control you control ALL the english channel AND dover AND folkeston harbour AND a lot of the thames- So you could have landed equipment in dover whenever you wanted and in safety With good harbours both sides of the channel under your control - who needs landing craft?
He got tanks etc across to north africa I am damned sure he could have got tanks across the channel. After dunkirk the UK would not have been able to stop them And anybody who thinks the navy without air support would have stopped them is a fool. The pacific war showed just how useless battleships on their own were against aircraft And the UK fleet would have had to sail from scapa flow ALL the way down the north sea to get to the channel Thats about 500 miles ALL the way under air and submarine attack.. the last say 50 miles from aicraft from manston AND france AND belgium with UK out of the war germany would have had unlimited access to oil from the middle east, no middle east war and no US support for the UK to bother with In fact there is a good chance germany could have joined with the US to fight the communist menace of the USSR Even if they didn't you also have to remember - With the UK out of the war and germany supporting japan then japan would have had no problem invading right the way down SE asia into Australia AND into India With japan in control of india that would prevent the US giving any kind of support to china via the india-china route.
(or if germany were to now attack russia- to russia via the india-iran route) In those circumstances and since the whole point of the US/japan oil embargo was to support china (and resulted in pearl harbour) I think the japanese/US war would have gone in a completely different direction.
No, Russia (Soviet Union) had a lot more natural resources and land than Britain. Hitler shouldn't of spent any time attacking Britain, except for the British Expeditionary Force in France that Germany defeated in 6 weeks. Hitler shouldn't of bothered attacking Britain in the Battle of Britain.
Germany lost over 1500 planes and over 2500 experienced air crewman that would of been much more valuable during the invasion of the Soviet Union, and might of enabled them to capture Moscow, which could of ended the war in the East in 1941.
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.