Germans could beat Britain in Suez Canal, creating Mediterranean Sea into Axis Sea. Meaning, French North Africa, Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia could have been occupied.
Sigh.
Do you know the difference in forces at El Alamein? The British outnumbered the Germans 2-1, they had more tanks and artillery, and they were defending. Rommel had already outstripped his capacity for advance. Germany could send no more supplies, the ports of Libya were simply overstetched. Meanwhile those supplies were being shipped bya ridiculous number of trucks, over 80% of which had been captured and could not be repaired or replaced.
TL;DR no, they can't.
German forces could have seized Dakar in Senegal on the west coast of Africa, from which submarines and aircraft could have dominated the main South Atlantic sea routes.
Yes, they are going to march their army across the Sahara Desert, occupy a country, and hold it against the Royal and American Navies. Then they are going to pick up their submarines and carry them across the Sahara Desert and toss them back into the water. I assume they will then use magic carpets to fly the supplies (again, across the Sahara Desert) required to run a military operation here.
TL;DR: No, they can't.
Once the Suez Canal was taken, the way would have been open to German armored columns to overrun Palestine, Transjordan, the Arabian peninsula, Syria, Iraq, and Iran.
That's funn...oh wait, you are serious.
Look, logistics matter. Germany is overstretched as it is. Pumping more resources into a sideshow does not help them. And the ports these supplies can be shipped to? Again, they are already at capacity. Shipping even more supplies just means ships (which could be doing something useful) sitting in harbor waiting for the congestion to clear out enough for them to go back.
TL;DR: No, they can't.
This would given Germany unlimited supplies of the single commodity it needed most: oil.
Doesn't matter. Oil does nothing if they can't ship it anywhere, and they can't. Meanwhile the Allies can put more forces in the Middle East and would throw them out even if the Germans did magically take it, which they can't.
A German position in Iran also would pose a huge threat to India, agitating for independence under Mohandas K. Gandhi and other leaders. From Iran Germany could invade India through the Khyber and other passes.
No, they can't. You know what happens when you try to launch an invasion along the only route possible while far outside you're supply lines and facing hundreds of thousands of soldiers you view as subhumans deserving only extermination?
If you guessed you get slaughtered, then congratulations you are tonight's big winner.
India, while not completely happy under British rule, was content enough to have no desire to rebel. With an enemy army quite literally on their doorstep no one with any sense is going to start a civil war.
The United States would have no hope of launching an invasion against the mainland of Europe and an undefeated and waiting German army until it had spent years building a vast navy, army, and air force, not to speak of the transports, landing craft, vehicles, and weapons necessary for such a giant undertaking. It is possible that the United States would take on this task, but the chances for its success would be extremely small. Far more likely, the American people would turn first to counter the expansion of Japan in the Pacific.
They don't need to invade. By 1947 the United States has two things Germany cannot match or beat:
around 100 cans of instant sunshine and the B-36 intercontinental bomber. The question is, how much of Germany doesn't glow afterward.
Also, where is the Soviet Union in all of this? Do you think that the Germans would be able to pull off all this wizardry, and still manage to defeat the Soviets?
Here's the problem with these dies: they completely ignore logistics.
World War II wasn't won by tactics, it wasn't won by courage, it wasn't won by skill. World War II was won because one side controlled 85% of the world's wealth, industry, and scientific power in one form or another. That side was called the Allies. The United States was about half of that. The Allies could call upon larger numbers of people, factories, mines, farms, shipyards, ports, etc. than the Axis could. An often quoted (and incorrect) statistic is that it took 4 Shermans to defeat one Tiger. The United States built 50,000 Shermans. Germany built 1,400 Tigers. The United States built more shipping capacity in six months in 1943 than the Axis built in the entire war.
The United States spent more money on the B-29 bomber in 1942 than Japan's entire national budget. In total the United States spent more on the B-29 than Japan's entire national budget for the ENTIRE WAR. The United States alone controlled 60% of the world's oil supply, and nearly the same amount of steel.
The United States waged a two-front war across tens of thousands of miles and it won.
And the United States did all of this while working on the largest military project in history, the atomic bomb.
One country beat the United States in production in one category: the USSR which produced more mortars and artillery.
Meanwhile even during the height of the Blitz even Britain was outproducing Germany in every field except small arms. As for navies? Except for U-boats the Germans were behind in every single ship class. The vaunted Graf Zeppelin? Crap. Their "battleships"? Crap.
The German atomic project? So completely screwed up that if they had gotten so far as to produce a reaction (they didn't) the resulting radiation leak would have killed the entire team, their staff, any observers, and heavily irradiated significant parts of Germany.
And you notice I didn't mention the Soviet Union? Glad you did, because (while I have less to say about them) the Soviets also outproduced Germany in virtually every category. Germany hit the bottom of its replaceable manpower in 1943. The Soviet Union hit it in 1945, as the war was ending.
German victory in World War II is flat-out impossible. Japanese victory even moreso.