- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: WWII buffs: let's talk about Germany's biggest strategic blunder
Posted on 8/21/14 at 4:44 pm to GetCocky11
Posted on 8/21/14 at 4:44 pm to GetCocky11
quote:
From what I've read, the biggest strategic blunder may have occurred on the part of the Allies in 1939 during the Phoney War after Germany invaded Poland.
I think it was when they let Germany march back into the Rhineland. They were really in no position to fight a war at that time, and France could have sent them packing if they would have had the will to do it.
1
Posted on 8/21/14 at 4:52 pm to crash1211
quote:
I think it was when they let Germany march back into the Rhineland. They were really in no position to fight a war at that time, and France could have sent them packing if they would have had the will to do it.
You bring up a great point. Germany was totally unprepared for war at that point. Even while German troops were still moving into the Rhineland there were German Generals literally begging Hitler to pull back.
Posted on 8/23/14 at 10:49 am to TigerPanzer
quote:
Instead of using "rebuffed" could we say "refused"? You're making it sound as if the English spitefully and wrongly snubbed a generous peace overture by … ADOLF HITLER, a man whose credibility as a promise keeper was, at that point, about as strong as a wet tissue paper.
Rebuffed doesn't have a stronger connotation than refused does. In fact, it could be argued that the opposite is true.
"The brunette that Jack knows from work rebuffed his advances on Saturday night" -- sounds like she might capitulate to them eventually.
"The brunette that Jack knows from work refused his advances on Saturday night" -- sounds like she might be calling HR on Monday.
Stick to being a Nazi history expert, because you're not very good at the grammar Nazi role.
Posted on 8/23/14 at 10:57 am to Jim Rockford
I think the biggest blunder was taking too much territory too fast. By doing so he over extended the capabilities of his resources and man power.
Posted on 8/23/14 at 12:28 pm to Ponchy Tiger
Started too early, expanded too rapidly, declared war on America.
A series of bad decisions.
A series of bad decisions.
Posted on 8/23/14 at 12:55 pm to Jim Rockford
They started the war too early. If Hitler would have waited a year the outcome may have been a lot different
Posted on 8/23/14 at 2:48 pm to GREENHEAD22
Army Group A would have been cut off in the Caucasus when the Russians counterattacked around Stalingrad and trapped Sixth Army. They just did not have the forces necessary to hold the line along the Don River, they were mostly Italians Romanians and the like and folded when they were hit.
Moscow should have been the target, but if they had to deal with Stalingrad it should have been by passed surrounded and starved out instead of going in and fighting an urban battle which drained resources from both Army Groups A&B
Moscow should have been the target, but if they had to deal with Stalingrad it should have been by passed surrounded and starved out instead of going in and fighting an urban battle which drained resources from both Army Groups A&B
Posted on 8/23/14 at 2:50 pm to antibarner
quote:
Moscow should have been the target
Amen - it should have been a 100% effort to seize Moscow, set up a flexible, mobile defense and force the Red Army to come to them. Getting ground up @ Stalingrad on principle was the costliest military blunder in history.
(But, if he had just secured the U.K. prior to that, he might have been able to survive it...)
Posted on 8/23/14 at 2:54 pm to antibarner
Hitler should have let his generals run the war. Period.
After invading Poland he could have sued for peace in the West, done whatever necessary not to fight a two front war, and then went after Lebensraum in the East by being able to totally concentrate on the USSR. France and Britain were not going to invade Germany. No way.
Think about it. No battle of Britain. No invasion of France, Holland, Belgium, North Africa. No Battle of the Atlantic. All German resources concentrated on Stalin.
Take Moscow, hold the line at the Volga and the USSR never recovers.
After invading Poland he could have sued for peace in the West, done whatever necessary not to fight a two front war, and then went after Lebensraum in the East by being able to totally concentrate on the USSR. France and Britain were not going to invade Germany. No way.
Think about it. No battle of Britain. No invasion of France, Holland, Belgium, North Africa. No Battle of the Atlantic. All German resources concentrated on Stalin.
Take Moscow, hold the line at the Volga and the USSR never recovers.
Posted on 8/23/14 at 3:12 pm to mytigger
They started the war too early. If Hitler would have waited a year the outcome may have been a lot different
Doubt it. British plane production really started to ramp up in '38-'39. Not sure Germany would have improved its relative position compared to Britain and Russia by waiting a year.
Doubt it. British plane production really started to ramp up in '38-'39. Not sure Germany would have improved its relative position compared to Britain and Russia by waiting a year.
Page 12 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News