I disagree. Hitler always saw the US as an eventual enemy, anyone who has studied Hitler will tell you that. The key here is that we're introducing the Nazis having nukes and bombers capable of delivering them in early 1940 and what that would be likely to change (and the domino effect thereafter).

quote:
Germany didn’t have the population to hold territory far outside of Europe.

Agreed, but Hitler wasn't focused on holding and fortifying his gains nearly as much as he was focused on continuing to conquer. That would likely bite him in the arse eventually, unless he wholesale slaughtered entire conquered populations (similar to what we saw with his attempt to exterminate the Jews).

quote:
He was losing a 2 front war, had he acquired a nuke Moscow would have been target 1. Get Russia out of the way and then nuke London.

He didn't go after the Soviet Union until after the Blitz had been well under way (the Blitz began in 1940, Hitler didn't invade Russia until almost a year and a half later). If he has an active aerial bombardment of an enemy capital already going on, he's far more likely to unleash his new superweapon there (especially as it's closer) than using it to start a 2nd front. He would absolutely have used it on Moscow the moment he thought the UK was beaten, he loathed communism so Moscow would have been an eventuality. He may even have made London and Moscow his version of Nagasaki and Hiroshima (bombing them just days apart) in order to frighten them into submission.

Remember, at this time no one had seen anything even close to what Fat Man and Little Boy could do. Unleashing those had devastating emotional impacts even after years of brutal war, imagine how much bigger that impact would have been had they been dropped at the beginning and then those drops were on two national capitols.

quote:
That would have brought the Allies to the table to negotiate. US would have likely pulled out and let Europe deal with it and like I said the Cold War would have eventually been the US and German empire instead of US and USSR.

I disagree. The US population was still hungover from WWI (no one wanted to get into "another war in Europe") and was reeling from the Great Depression. The desire to remain out of the war with was incredibly high, until Pearl Harbor in December 1941. Were a nuke to be dropped on London in 1940 and then another dropped on Moscow shortly thereafter (or even if Moscow was first), that likely would have pushed the US population further into their desire for isolationism. Hitler would likely have entertained them, but it would have lasted only until Hitler was ready to break it (see also: agreements with the USSR and Poland).

quote:
US probably agrees to end hostilities with Germany if Germany agrees to let UK and France remain independent outside of their control.

Why would Germany agree to that? Hitler's goal was to take over the whole of Europe to create an Aryan eutopia. He wasn't going to take over a country just let it go, especially if he's dealing from the overwhelmingly strong stance of being the only country in the world to have (and use) nukes.

The US wouldn't have been engaged in hostilities at that time. Remember the scenario, this is 1940 and Hitler has nukes. The US was secretly sending weapons and supplies to the UK in 1940 but would not be engaging in military conflict until after Pearl Harbor. If Germany had (and used) nukes in 1940, Pearl Harbor may not have even happened in 1941.

Perhaps the ocean would have been a large enough barrier, but considering his thoughts on the US I think Hitler eventually rips up any nonaggression pact with the US, especially if he hopscotched his way to at least Greenland.