Much of this thread proceeds from a series of faulty assumptions. Specifically:
1. Germany had the sole workable jet engine in the world. False.
2. Germany had the available resources to build large numbers of Jet engines. False
3. Jet aircraft would be decisive if employed on the Eastern Front. False.
4. Jet Aircraft would have utterly defeated the allied bomber offensive. False
5. The Western allies would have been unable to develop a reasonable counter to German Jets in time to prevent the fall of the USSR & the subsequent transfer of Wermacht forces to the West. False.
To conterpoint these assumptions.
1. Sir Frank Whittle (GB) invented the turbojet & patented it in 1930. Hans von Ohain (Ger.) invented and patented his version in 1936. 1st flights were in 1941 & 1939 respectively. An engineer at Junkers was able to improve on the von Ohain design. Intial engines from both inventors had nearly identical performance.
2. Germany lacked reasonable supplies of EVERYTHING, from decent rubber for tires to the rare earths needed to construct Jet engine fan blades need to truly mass produce jets. It was also short of fuel to fly the aircraft it did produce.
3. Germany HAD air SUPREMACY over the Eastern Front until late in 1943 & did not lose air parity until early 1945. The Red Army still kicked the Wermacht all the way to Berlin. It should also be noted that early jets were poorly suited to close air support due to poor responsiveness at low speeds. The short range of early jets would also have been a serious hinderance on the Eastern Front.
4. Prior to the introduction of the P-51 Daylight & until war's end Night Bombers were subject to ongoing assault by huge numbers of German fighters and even medium bombers adapted to fire large caliber cannon & rockets at the bomber formations with NO fighter cover AT ALL. This did not stop the allied attacks. Even after the introduction of the ME-262, the Allied Air offensive continued unabated. The ME-262 did not even cause a speed bump for the bomber offensive. If it had been available in 1943, Allied losses would have been higher, perhaps the Americans may have given more thought to night attacks (although I doubt it. There is no one more stubborn than a General, except a whole bunch of them) but the Reich would still have been bombed into ruin.
5. The British jet engine designs were very close to the equal of, if not superior to, anything developed in Germany during the war. The Gloster Mereor flew in early 1943, (when compared post war, it proved to be at least the equal of the Me-262 in every respect). Given the almost unimaginable production capacities of the Allies (including the oft ignored efforts of the USSR) it is easy to imagine THOUSANDS of Meteor's and other more advanced offspring filling the skies over France (and the Ukraine?) by the spring of 1944 HAD THEY BEEN NEEDED. Given how quickly Allied engineers were able to adapt designs, it would not have been surprising to have seen production B-29's & B-32's sprouting jet pods a la the B-36 and some version of the P-51 or a successor receiving a jet/prop combination power set-up that would combine range and, as needed, additional sprint speed.
The Me-262, He-162 & other German jet & rocket designs were innovative aircraft, helping to break new ground. That the Germans used them in combat 1st makes sense as they were losing the war. Many innovative American, British, and Soviet (especially British, which seemed to be a fertile ground for invention throughout the war) were not built, or only built in demonstration models, simply because they were not needed. There was no need to rush the Meteor into full production, or for American designers to throw huge resources at jet designs, they were already crushing the enemy with what they had. Change that fact, even a little, and many of the designs that are only remembered as experiements would have pummelled Germany instead of the familiar Flying Forts, Lancasters, Liberators, & Mustangs.
Germany had a lot of brilliant scientists & designers. They didn't have ALL of them.