World War 2 TalkCalendarContact Us

Go Back   World War 2 Talk > Main WW2 Talk Forum > Theatres of War > NW Europe


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 23-05-2005, 04:30 PM   #21 (permalink)
Cheshire Yeomanry
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 31
Cheshire Yeomanry is an unknown quantity at this point
Well not dealing with Britain springs to mind.

As it is well known, without Britain as a enemy then Germany's cities are safe from bombing (from the west).
No potential Allied invasion
Potentially no war with the USA until a lot further down the line
No sideshows like Africa drawing German and Italian forces & materials away from Russia
With no need to build a huge UBoat fleet (until later) more material resources can go into tanks & planes
No need for the huge expense in men & material for the Atlantic Wall
__________________
Pro Aris et Focis
Cheshire Yeomanry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-06-2005, 06:13 PM   #22 (permalink)
Johnny_Thunder
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4
Johnny_Thunder is an unknown quantity at this point
In Speer's "Inside the Third Reich" he makes the point that Hitler never completely lost his corporal mindset and thus never had a thorough understanding of tactical matters such as supply and logistics - which in the case of the Eastern front would have assumed greater importance as the war progressed.

(also in Speer) The Nazi hierarchy was also a set of disjointed fiefdoms and the random power-grabbing nature of senior figures was actively encouraged by Hitler.

Of course this is a very inefficient way to conduct a war.

So I think Hitler's inability to leave the conduct of the war to the Generals and the purposely shambolic government structure were two big mistakes.
Johnny_Thunder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-06-2005, 06:51 PM   #23 (permalink)
Friedrich H
Senior Member
 
Friedrich H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Born in Germany, French citizen and living in Mexico...
Posts: 339
Friedrich H is an unknown quantity at this point
Quote:
In Speer's "Inside the Third Reich" he makes the point that Hitler never completely lost his corporal mindset and thus never had a thorough understanding of tactical matters such as supply and logistics - which in the case of the Eastern front would have assumed greater importance as the war progressed.
It was a Prussian tradition of the General Staff, not corporals' tradition…

Ever read Von Clausewitz? There you find how the General Staff thought: brute force is the only thing that matters, to destroy the enemy.

__________________
"Only the dead will know the end of the war" Plato
"Tempus edax rerum" (Time devours all) Ovidious
"Vivire militare est" (To live is to fight) Seneca
"Tout est perdu forst l'honneur!" (Everything is lost, but the honour!) François I of France.

\'user
Friedrich H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-06-2005, 03:39 PM   #24 (permalink)
Kiwiwriter
Very Senior Member
 
Kiwiwriter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Newark, NJ, and Christchurch, NZ
Posts: 2,431
Kiwiwriter is an unknown quantity at this point
Post

Richard Overy notes in "Why the Allies Won" that the Generalstab never did their logistics planning first. The logistics and quartermaster guys were expected to simply meet the needs of the operational plan, regardless of the situation, circumstances, or realities. Logistics was not as important as arrows on a map.

Eric Bergurud put the difference between the American and German way of war better in "Touched With Fire," which is about the ground war in the Pacific, but has vastly useful information about the US Army and its background.

He wrote that if the US Army worked for Hitler, the documents for Barbarossa would have been heavy material on railroad timetables, road and truck capacities, high-viscosity oil, and other dull but critical topics. The Americans always approached war starting with logistics. The Germans did not.

The Germans planned to fight a series of short, quick, victorious, violent wars. Between them, they would take time off from campaigning to re-stock and re-supply for the next war. Once Britain refused to give in, the Germans were in for a long and continuous war, and soon found they did not have the economic and logistical framework to support a long and continuous war. They used the French oil stocks, for example, to fuel the invasion of Russia. By 1945, German aircraft would be dragged by horsecarts from hangar to flight line, to save avgas.
__________________
"My intensity is intense." -- Roger Clemens

"We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender." -- Winston Churchill.

"I am not a hero. The heroes are all dead. I am a survivor." -- Sgt. William Guarnere, Easy Company, 506th Parachute Regiment, 101st Airborne Division.

Check out my little contributions to World War II history at my web pages:

World War II Plus 55

or

http://davidhlippman.wildbillguarnere.com
Kiwiwriter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-06-2005, 05:10 PM   #25 (permalink)
Gotthard Heinrici
Pog mo thon
 
Gotthard Heinrici's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,950
Gotthard Heinrici is just really niceGotthard Heinrici is just really niceGotthard Heinrici is just really niceGotthard Heinrici is just really niceGotthard Heinrici is just really nice
Quote:
Originally posted by Kiwiwriter@Jun 15 2005, 01:39 PM
Richard Overy notes in "Why the Allies Won" that the Generalstab never did their logistics planning first. The logistics and quartermaster guys were expected to simply meet the needs of the operational plan, regardless of the situation, circumstances, or realities. Logistics was not as important as arrows on a map.

Eric Bergurud put the difference between the American and German way of war better in "Touched With Fire," which is about the ground war in the Pacific, but has vastly useful information about the US Army and its background.

He wrote that if the US Army worked for Hitler, the documents for Barbarossa would have been heavy material on railroad timetables, road and truck capacities, high-viscosity oil, and other dull but critical topics. The Americans always approached war starting with logistics. The Germans did not.

The Germans planned to fight a series of short, quick, victorious, violent wars. Between them, they would take time off from campaigning to re-stock and re-supply for the next war. Once Britain refused to give in, the Germans were in for a long and continuous war, and soon found they did not have the economic and logistical framework to support a long and continuous war. They used the French oil stocks, for example, to fuel the invasion of Russia. By 1945, German aircraft would be dragged by horsecarts from hangar to flight line, to save avgas.
This also explains why the Germans were doomed to lose North Africa too. Whilst the addition of one or two extra divisions seem to be a logical idea when talking about what Could have happened in North Africa, the sad fact is that the German's inability to supply its Army properly in the Med. proved critical. This gives Malta and their inability to subdue it a whole new importance.

The Germans never got their logistics right from 1941 when they entered a prolonged conflict. From the inability to use the Soviet Railways with their rolling stock to the dependancy on the Rumanian oilfields at Ploesti it all smacked of Haphazard planning. Which pretty much goes to show that the Germans were soo not prepared and for all their efficiency in their fighting ability it was all for naught. Is it any wonder that the Russians believed that of all the Lend Lease items supplied, the most cherished was the American Trucks? such is the power of logistics.
__________________
"The Eastern front is like a house of cards. If the front is broken through at one point all the rest will collapse."
- General Heinz Guderian
Gotthard Heinrici is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 16-06-2005, 03:52 PM   #26 (permalink)
Kiwiwriter
Very Senior Member
 
Kiwiwriter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Newark, NJ, and Christchurch, NZ
Posts: 2,431
Kiwiwriter is an unknown quantity at this point
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Gotthard Heinrici+Jun 15 2005, 11:10 AM-->
Quote:
(Gotthard Heinrici @ Jun 15 2005, 11:10 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-Kiwiwriter
Quote:
@Jun 15 2005, 01:39 PM
Richard Overy notes in "Why the Allies Won" that the Generalstab never did their logistics planning first. The logistics and quartermaster guys were expected to simply meet the needs of the operational plan, regardless of the situation, circumstances, or realities. Logistics was not as important as arrows on a map.

Eric Bergurud put the difference between the American and German way of war better in "Touched With Fire," which is about the ground war in the Pacific, but has vastly useful information about the US Army and its background.

He wrote that if the US Army worked for Hitler, the documents for Barbarossa would have been heavy material on railroad timetables, road and truck capacities, high-viscosity oil, and other dull but critical topics. The Americans always approached war starting with logistics. The Germans did not.

The Germans planned to fight a series of short, quick, victorious, violent wars. Between them, they would take time off from campaigning to re-stock and re-supply for the next war. Once Britain refused to give in, the Germans were in for a long and continuous war, and soon found they did not have the economic and logistical framework to support a long and continuous war. They used the French oil stocks, for example, to fuel the invasion of Russia. By 1945, German aircraft would be dragged by horsecarts from hangar to flight line, to save avgas.
This also explains why the Germans were doomed to lose North Africa too. Whilst the addition of one or two extra divisions seem to be a logical idea when talking about what Could have happened in North Africa, the sad fact is that the German's inability to supply its Army properly in the Med. proved critical. This gives Malta and their inability to subdue it a whole new importance.

The Germans never got their logistics right from 1941 when they entered a prolonged conflict. From the inability to use the Soviet Railways with their rolling stock to the dependancy on the Rumanian oilfields at Ploesti it all smacked of Haphazard planning. Which pretty much goes to show that the Germans were soo not prepared and for all their efficiency in their fighting ability it was all for naught. Is it any wonder that the Russians believed that of all the Lend Lease items supplied, the most cherished was the American Trucks? such is the power of logistics.
[/b]
This is why the cliche is true: "Amateurs study tactics. Professionals study logistics."
__________________
"My intensity is intense." -- Roger Clemens

"We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender." -- Winston Churchill.

"I am not a hero. The heroes are all dead. I am a survivor." -- Sgt. William Guarnere, Easy Company, 506th Parachute Regiment, 101st Airborne Division.

Check out my little contributions to World War II history at my web pages:

World War II Plus 55

or

http://davidhlippman.wildbillguarnere.com
Kiwiwriter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-06-2005, 01:56 PM   #27 (permalink)
Johnny_Thunder
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4
Johnny_Thunder is an unknown quantity at this point
Quote:
Originally posted by Juanra@Apr 25 2005, 02:46 AM
BBC says that the errors were that hitler believed the red army was primitive,
Of course invading the Soviet Union was an error.

But I think Hitler might have been correct in his view that the Red Army was primitive... especially in 1941.... but his miscalculation was on its resilience, and the fact that Stalin was quite prepared to wipe out an entire generation fighting the Nazi threat.

I'm sure that if Hitler had been aware that the Soviet Union was prepared to suffer 15 million military casualties (possibly more than the total men of military age in Germany itself) then he might have reconsidered.
Johnny_Thunder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2005, 04:31 AM   #28 (permalink)
WorldWarFreak
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 11
WorldWarFreak is an unknown quantity at this point
Hitler made many mistakes over the course of his reign but the one that really came back and bit him was his failure to reinforce Paulus' Sixth Army when they were in dire need of supplies in Stalingrad. Paulus had pleaded Hitler for the Luftwaffe to drop a constant amount supplies to help feed the Sixth Army breakout. But the problem was that in order to feed Paulus' Sixth Army there would have needed to be 165 air drops a day. These planes were not in supply and more than half of the Ju52 supply plains were picked off. Now Paulus was surrounded and his troops were dieing and freezing in scores, the chance for the final victory in Russia was lost and Hitlers crucial mistake to under supply Paulus was a pivital point in the Russian victory.
WorldWarFreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2005, 04:54 PM   #29 (permalink)
Friedrich H
Senior Member
 
Friedrich H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Born in Germany, French citizen and living in Mexico...
Posts: 339
Friedrich H is an unknown quantity at this point
Quote:
Hitler made many mistakes over the course of his reign but the one that really came back and bit him was his failure to reinforce Paulus' Sixth Army when they were in dire need of supplies in Stalingrad. Paulus had pleaded Hitler for the Luftwaffe to drop a constant amount supplies to help feed the Sixth Army breakout. But the problem was that in order to feed Paulus' Sixth Army there would have needed to be 165 air drops a day. These planes were not in supply and more than half of the Ju52 supply plains were picked off. Now Paulus was surrounded and his troops were dieing and freezing in scores, the chance for the final victory in Russia was lost and Hitlers crucial mistake to under supply Paulus was a pivital point in the Russian victory.
Well, this is not entirely Hitler's mistake. This is one example of Hitler actually listening to his advisors and generals. The Luftwaffe High Command, Reichsmarschall Göring (C.-in-C.) and Generaloberst Jeschonnek (Chief of Staff), told Hitler that it could be done, that Paulus would get his 300 tons a-day. Then, the Führer gave green light and ordered Paulus to stay where he was (though it is very dubtious that, if given the order to withdraw, his forces would have been capable of doing so successfully).
__________________
"Only the dead will know the end of the war" Plato
"Tempus edax rerum" (Time devours all) Ovidious
"Vivire militare est" (To live is to fight) Seneca
"Tout est perdu forst l'honneur!" (Everything is lost, but the honour!) François I of France.

\'user
Friedrich H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2005, 11:15 PM   #30 (permalink)
8th KRI
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 56
8th KRI is an unknown quantity at this point
I believe that from an ideological standpoint Hitler (or indeed the whole National Socialist Ideology) was doomed to failure from the outset. Whilst Hitler came to power democratically (in theory) and was popular in Germany, this would not (and did not) continue. The entire Goverment of Germany and its ever increasing empire was ruled by oppression and fear and not by consent and this situation was worsoning as the war progressed, as witnessed perhaps by the attempts on his life. Very many of the sycophants that surrounded Hitler were morally flawed or possibly psychopathic and fled from the "bunker" when things started going wrong - and indeed were not prepared to die for their ideology and would I believe have deserted him sooner or later.

If Hitler made a mistake it was believing that an ideology based on such morally flawed principles would endure, a mistake which left him with no choice other than to take his own life at 56!

Chris.
8th KRI is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Biggest Mistake of WWII Paratrooper General 269 08-07-2008 09:52 PM
Hitler's secret musical collection Kyt World War II News Articles 4 07-08-2007 10:56 PM
Biggest Dogfight. Owen The War In The Air 16 15-02-2007 12:15 AM
Response - Biggest mistake of ww2 spidge The Barracks 35 22-03-2006 08:35 PM
Hitlers Euthanasia Programme, Showing his true colours spidge The Holocaust 4 16-01-2006 03:22 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:30 PM.
vBSkinworks


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.0.0