Wars and ConflictsΒ permalink
Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Β
Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Wednesday, 1st April 2009
You can't have Hitler!
Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 2
Posted by stalteriisok (U3212540) on Wednesday, 1st April 2009
hitler
Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 3
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Wednesday, 1st April 2009
AA, my old friend,
are that some deeper thoughts of yours that don't go trough in my little Belgian head.
Just a guess. Are you speaking about the big groundswells of history versus influential people in that same history? If there wasn't an Hitler there would be another guy in that time and that location? My guess as discussed before on these boards some years ago: 70 for the great groundswells and 30 for the great persons.
As an Alexander the Great and the Macedonian history. And BTW: Just been away for some days to Copenhagen and some "unhistorical" people start to insult my revered great men and women of these boards as a Nordmann, a Stoggler and a Priscilla, to call but some. Yes in some days that Ancients board is gone down in something we haven't seen since long overhere.
Warm regards from your friend,
Paul.
PS. what have serious members as a Hasse and a lol to think of all that. It will be hard work to increase the standards again.Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 4
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Thursday, 2nd April 2009
Paul since you want to stick to "historical" side why then you make reference to "Macedonian history" as if this is something separate and standing on its own? Historically, technically and logically one can talk about the "history of Macedonia" as a geographical region, but cannot talk about "Macedonian histoy" cos the later implies an independent existence. Sticking to real history means we cannot use that term.
Also pay attention cos for me "it was not 100% clear" as to "how the Ancients board resulted in something we haven't seen since long overhere".Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 5
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Thursday, 2nd April 2009
And the above said very friendly! But then I will never get tired of correcting people over and over again (and that not only for this subject). You know how I fight to tear down wrong viewings like "Romans spsreading thanx to their superior military" or "German militarism being the main responsible for WWI and WWII" or "Russians adopting communism" or "French poor sparked the French revolution" and so on...
Fortunately this is history channel and not youtube thus we can really present our opinions. Watch out who was an argument and who has not.
For example, in the case of WWII still I have not seen 1 valid argument to learn at last how on earth Germans were able to re-built their machine. At some point Suvirovetz to some extend could not but come closer to my point of view (I am not trying to speak on his behalf of course here) mentioning that there were "people out there" that profited huge by the inflation period of Germany and invested in its re-militarisation. I never claimed to know the truth as I claim it for the case of my region (where I know the complete truth any angle you see it),
But I have belief that my viewing is at least superior to what we have been taught in schools and universities - I remember my essay (I did it for a european studies student for cash - me an engineer!) on the 1945-1950s reconstruction of Germany which I had written it on the limit of my personal views (pre-WWII investment in Germany, plans for post-WWII Germany dating as early as early 1942, WWWII selective bombing of infrastructure and population, not industry etc.) and warned the student that it could be seen negatively, well his professor put an 85% noting it was the best essay he had written for years.
How to tell to this young man asking that he should not be asking for the reasons of the fall of the Third Reich if he is not at all clear about the reasons of its rise?Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 6
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Thursday, 2nd April 2009
Hi AA.
Are we limited to just one reason?
I would have to opt for Northern Hemisphere Winter.Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 7
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Thursday, 2nd April 2009
You think if it was summer Germans could take Siberia? Blitzkrieg all the way to Paris maybe... but all the way to Novosibirsk even in summer it is another question...
Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 8
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Thursday, 2nd April 2009
No.
But bailing out the Italians in the Balkans and the consequent deferral of Barbarossa screwed up the logistics catastrophically for them.
I am not aware that the German plan of conquest in the USSR was ever meant to be along the lines of its victory in France. Why do you say that?Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 9
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Thursday, 2nd April 2009
I say it because I have the view that Germans wrongly tried more or less a more inflated version of thunder-hit war to finish it quickly. But to do so they would had essentially to reach much deaper than Moscow as much of the Russian production and a large part of manpower was based on the other side of the Urals - there was nobody to think that Russians would accept ending the war just like this, all signs showed that they would fight to the bitter end.
I do not think that summer or winter would make difference for the Germans since any successful conquest would require more than 1 year (thus they would had to pass at least 1 winter). They had simply badly designed that campaign and were as bad as Persiand had been in their campaign against Greeks - perhaps it is the curse of over-inflated campaigns (my opinion is that they were bound to lose even before starting that campaign even if they won initially against Russians, one cannot fight the world)? Germans lost terribly despite having mobilised the best of the armies they had, the best of technology they had and sending there the largest army in human history.Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 10
Posted by TimTrack (U1730472) on Thursday, 2nd April 2009
Germany's problem, allowing for Hitler and his henchmen being the root cause but not the immediate cause, was that they took on nearly all their neighbours at the same time.
If you must take on all your neighbours, do it one at a time. Ironically, many historians (Kershaw, et al) now point out that Germany attacked th Soviet Union in order to force Britain out of the war. That defeating the SU was also a long term Nazi goal probably assisted in the psychology of a bad decision.
Germany, I suppose, MIGHT have defeated th SU if everything came together in the right way, or if the SU made even bigger strategic blunders. But the margin for victory was so small that the slightest piece of bad luck and it is all over.
In short, Germany was too small for the war it ended up fighting.Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 11
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Thursday, 2nd April 2009
It made a difference alright. When they got bogged down in sieges well into the Russian winter they realised just what the difference was too - insufficient clothing for the troops, equipment that became unusable, supply lines obliterated, and an enemy skilled at exploiting just those deficiencies. I have yet to read a narrative written by anyone German involved in that campaign who did not mention it as their worst problem, and I'm inclined to believe them rather than your suppositions, Nik.
Having said all that - AA did restrict us apparently to one reason, and that's why I opted for it alone. Please do not presume me so dense that I am unaware of a myriad others.
What's your one reason then? (And please don't say that Greece alone proved the undoing of the Third Reich)Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 12
Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Thursday, 2nd April 2009
Poor understanding of their own abilities and the economics and logistics of the problem?
Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 13
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Thursday, 2nd April 2009
Nik But to do so they would had essentially to reach much deaper than Moscow as much of the Russian production and a large part of manpower was based on the other side of the Urals - there was nobody to think that Russians would accept ending the war just like this, all signs showed that they would fight to the bitter end.Β Before the Wehrmacht strike in June, 1941, most of the Russian production capacity was located in the European part: Leningrad, Kharkov, etc, etc. By the end of autumn of 1941 85% of this capacity was lost. Yet, at the end of November 1941, at least a full week before the infamous Russian winter counter-offensive at Moscow, Hitler's Minister of Munitions Dr. Fritz Todt told his boss that the war had been already lost in military and economic terms. What does it tell you?
Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 14
Posted by Idamante (U1894562) on Thursday, 2nd April 2009
No historical event has just one explanation. But if you want to identify the most important factor, then the invasion of Russia has to be it
Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 15
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Thursday, 2nd April 2009
Idamante But if you want to identify the most important factor, then the invasion of Russia has to be itΒ Hitler lost the war on August 23, 1939, when Ribbentrop signed the "Non-aggresiion" Pact on his behalf and Molotov signed the very same Pact on behalf of Stalin. In other words, he lost the war even before it started.
Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 16
Posted by Parti-NG-ton Blue (U13898629) on Thursday, 2nd April 2009
I have always but it down to conflict within the Third Reich. There were too many people trying to have their hands in too many pots. Nobody trusted anybody and they all wanted to get one up on each other. No form of government will survive and prosper under such leadership.
Goring and Himmler are two prime examples of people who wanted more and more individual power rather than thinking of the bigger pictureLink to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 17
Posted by Hasse (U1882612) on Thursday, 2nd April 2009
Arnald
The Allies had more men and more guns
!!
your friend
HasseLink to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 18
Posted by ambi (U13776277) on Thursday, 2nd April 2009
Personally I would cite the shambolic and corrupt nature of the regime; competing factions, bribery, favouritism, personal fiefdoms, pet projects and the like all bely the general perception of Germanic efficiency. The Nazis gave up the main advantage of a totalitarian regime at war, i.e. a controlled economy and industry, that the Soviet Union exploited to the full. Also, setting aside the moral vileness of their policy towards the Jews and other races, their ideological unwillingness to exploit their assets is again in contrast to the Soviet Union's pragmatic ability to use every weapon available to them (despite plenty of anti-semitism of their own). The same mindset could also be seen in the regime's use of women in their war effort.
Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 19
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Thursday, 2nd April 2009
RE: Message 4.
Nikolaos,
Second paragraph: You know very well that it wasn't meant at you. As Andrew has very well dealt with that problem in my opinion and as he asked I will close that paragraph.
"Macedonian history": Nikolaos, I shamefully agree and it is not worth of my "normal" person that I wanted to spurr some reaction and as Andrew asked it will not happen again...
Warm regards from your friend,
Paul.
PS: Will deal with the funding of the Nazi regime in the thread of last week. But have first to do research on my French board about the extention of the Maginot line and the reason of the 1935 Belgian neutrality and the abolishing of the French-Belgian defense plan of I think 1920 for someone asking in that thread Virtual fletch or Lost Weekend? Have also still to answer to lol beeble in my "human ape" thread. Seek back if I can't find the specific thread on these boards about the Nazi funding too.Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 20
Posted by Spruggles (U13892773) on Friday, 3rd April 2009
How on earth do you expect to condense Barbarossa into one paragraph? There are loads of reasons but here's a quick check list; feel free to pick it to pieces.
a) Delay caused by the war in the Balkans
b) Failure by adhering to the Blitzkrieg without developing an alternative strategy
c) Disastrous treatment of the ethnic population
d) War on two fronts
e) Complete misunderstanding of the Russian people, dismissed with contempt(untermenschen)
f) The Russian ability to adapt, adopt and improvise
h) The sheer guts of the average Russian soldier.
i) German inability to accept that they were not invinsible.
j) and a good job too!Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 21
Posted by Allan D (U1791739) on Friday, 3rd April 2009
The idea that the start of Operation Barbarossa was delayed whilst the Wehrmacht struck in the Balkans is a myth. The same troops were not involved and Hitler had given the order for the Balkan Campaign in December 1940 to protect his Rumanian oil supplies, prop up Mussolini and deny the British a further Mediterranean base in Crete. Hitler's warped historicism would have persuaded him of the appropriateness of the date two days before the anniversary of the Grande Armee's crossing of the Neman in 1812, succeeding, as he thought, where the previous greatest European military genius had failed.
Where Barbarossa was really lost was in the failure to pursue a strategy of a direct assault on Moscow which was not only the seat of government (unlike in 1812) but also the hub of an industrial complex and a north-south rail communication network. Had Moscow been taken by September or October (which was quite feasible) before it was reinforced by troops from Siberia Stalin had posted against an empty threat from the Japanese European Russia would have been effectively sliced in two.
Instead of this Hitler overruled his generals and ordered a long and exhausting three-month diversion into the trackless plains of the Ukraine, obsessed, as he had been in France in 1940, with being outflanked but effectively squandering all the early gains of the invasion.
By the time the assault on Moscow was renewed the garrison had been effectively reinforced under Zhukov's command and the onset of winter had begun (with the Wehrmacht totally unprepared for a winter campaign). Any attempt to rectify this mistake was nullified by Hitler's interference. Once again the Great Miscalculator had become the Great Meddler before becoming the Great Miscarrier. Whatever the causes of the Third Reich there are only two words to describe its failure, one beginning with 'A', the other with 'H'.Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 22
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Friday, 3rd April 2009
Spruggles
of your list, d) will suffice. The rest of it has been debated here ad nauseam, with the same arguments used on both sides of every debate quite often.Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 23
Posted by suvorovetz (U12273591) on Friday, 3rd April 2009
Allan D
Moscow been taken by September or October (which was quite feasible) before it was reinforced by troops from Siberia Stalin had posted against an empty threat from the Japanese European Russia would have been effectively sliced in twoΒ Do you know how much of the Red Army troops and assets were deployed in East Europe in May - June 1941? Do you know that Stalin had made a deal with the Japanese in the spring of 1941?
By the time the assault on Moscow was renewed the garrison had been effectively reinforced under Zhukov's commandΒ Do you know in what capacity and at what front was Zhukov during the winter counter-offensive at Moscow?Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 24
Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Saturday, 23rd May 2009
Nordmann,
Hi, well my one reason is............ Enigma/Ultra.
If you can intercept the enemies intentions?
An unbreakable code that was broken?
AA.Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
-
Message 25
Posted by giraffe47 (U4048491) on Saturday, 23rd May 2009
And (even more) elderly friend of mine summed it up - WWII was won by 'thick wit'. An Irish expression for 'We had more of everything than they had, and were willing to use it to simply batter them into the ground'
Mind you, in my opinion, the simple refusal of Churchill and Stalin to recognise when they were beaten was the most important single factor. Any 'sensible' leaders would have made peace when they were staring disaster in the face, (as Hitler assumed they would) but they both refused to quit, which was the major factor in the defeat of Hitler. The German economy and manpower was OK for a short, sharp war, but was not strong enough for the long drawn out slogging match it ended up as.Link to this forum: Why not? The Reason for The Third Reich Defeat?
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Β to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ iD
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ navigation
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ links
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Β© 2014 The Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.