- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: What was Hitler’s worst blunder?
Posted on 3/9/19 at 10:56 am to Arbengal
Posted on 3/9/19 at 10:56 am to Arbengal
quote:
You can beat each decision to death and when you lose a world war there will be plenty to choose from. He took a relatively small nation into war and then proceeded to fight on multiple fronts as the forces arrayed against him began to muster resistance. Germany, like Japan, has to succeed early in the game or their resources would be overwhelmed. It was inevitable they would lose as the allies strengthened. Not enough men or material to carry the fight to that many different fronts. The fact that America provided the material for many nations uninterrupted and protected by two oceans prior to the advent of technology that would enable the axis to bring force to bear on that manufacturing power house sealed their fate and cemented our power for the past 70 plus years. They simply attempted too much with too little.
This. Nazi Germany just did NOT have the natural resources to achieve its goals.
The largest and most important resource was fuel. The Nazi war machine had to rely the conversion of coal into combustible fuel for its tanks, airplanes, transportation...they had to rely heavily on horse drawn wagon to transport supplies to the battle fronts. The use of coal for liquid fuel was taking that resource from other uses such in the production of steel.
Once the Allies bombed the coal conversion plants in Poland, it was pretty much the end of the Nazi's.
They had to rely on the oil fields of Romania and other places for there crude oil. The Allies constantly bombed those facilities all the way toward the very end of WWII.
Hitler made a huge blunder at Stalingrad, instead of having his divisions heading for the oil rich fields of the Caucasus' he instead chose to have his army attack Stalingrad for the idiotic reason it bore his enemy's name-sake.
Probably the biggest one was the lack of man-power. The Nazis had to rely on slave labor to build many of their war projects and to provide labor for the war effort.
The Russians could 'afford' to lose 50K soldiers in a battle, where as for the Nazi's, 50K men lost was catastrophic.
The US was supplying the Brits, the Russians with much needed raw materials for the war effort.
Bottom line, the Nazi's were just not capable to carry out its war goals for lack of resources and man-power.
That was the 'major' mistake of the WHOLE Nazi vision.
2
Posted on 3/9/19 at 11:01 am to Parmen
He could have stopped after France and done okay. Leave UK and Russia alone and the Nazis could still be ruling most of Europe today.
Posted on 3/9/19 at 11:08 am to VolsOut4Harambe
Invading the Soviet Union. When the Germans didn't win in that first six months and the Soviet Union didn't collapse as Hitler expected, they'd already lost the war. But Hitler had always intended on invading the Soviet Union. Lebensraum in the east was always part of his agenda, as he believed Germany needed it for its future growth.
Interestingly enough, it was revealed in the years after the collapse of the USSR in the 90's that the Soviets/Stalin very well may have actually tried to offer Hitler a settlement in the very early stages of the invasion, and supposedly Hitler and the Nazis dismissed the peace offer out of hand. In retrospect, Hitler probably should have taken that deal.
ETA: Hitler's declaring war on the United States when he didn't have to is probably a close second in terms of Hitler's worst blunder. It would have been harder for Roosevelt to commit to war in Europe and not just focus on the war in the Pacific, due to American attitudes at the time, had Hitler NOT declared war on the U.S.
Interestingly enough, it was revealed in the years after the collapse of the USSR in the 90's that the Soviets/Stalin very well may have actually tried to offer Hitler a settlement in the very early stages of the invasion, and supposedly Hitler and the Nazis dismissed the peace offer out of hand. In retrospect, Hitler probably should have taken that deal.
ETA: Hitler's declaring war on the United States when he didn't have to is probably a close second in terms of Hitler's worst blunder. It would have been harder for Roosevelt to commit to war in Europe and not just focus on the war in the Pacific, due to American attitudes at the time, had Hitler NOT declared war on the U.S.
This post was edited on 3/9/19 at 11:26 am
Posted on 3/9/19 at 11:08 am to jcaz
The Soviets were going to eventually attack
Posted on 3/9/19 at 11:12 am to cubsfan5150
quote:
The Soviets were going to eventually attack
That's not an established fact.
Posted on 3/9/19 at 11:16 am to Napoleon
quote:
Not following his passion for at and joining the military.
Had be never joined the military he wouldn't have become so nationalist. He wouldn't have been given the assignment to inflate the precursor to the Nazis and take them over
Something was going on at the time that made it mandatory to "join" the army, wait, I'll remember. Oh yeah, World War I.
Posted on 3/9/19 at 11:19 am to jcaz
quote:
He could have stopped after France and done okay. Leave UK and Russia alone and the Nazis could still be ruling most of Europe today.
Quite possibly. About 80% of Nazi Germany's military resources were tied up in fighting the Soviet Union during WWII. Not invading the Soviet Union would have also definitely bought the Germans a lot more time to successfully complete their atomic bomb program.
Posted on 3/9/19 at 11:30 am to TigersFan64
No, it's not, but we are giving opinions here based on evidence, right?
Posted on 3/9/19 at 11:35 am to Reubaltaich
quote:
Bottom line, the Nazi's were just not capable to carry out its war goals for lack of resources and man-power.
Agreed, Nazi Germany was never going to win a prolonged/protracted war. It didn't have the manpower or resources. When the Soviet Union didn't collapse and surrender in 1941, the handwriting was on the wall and Germany was doomed to defeat. About the only thing that would have turned Germany's fortunes around at that point was if the Nazis had developed the atomic bomb first.
Posted on 3/9/19 at 11:36 am to cubsfan5150
Just saying the Soviet Union would have invaded Germany eventually is not evidence, it's merely an opinion. There's really not a lot of hard evidence to show that Stalin really was intent on invading Germany.
This post was edited on 3/9/19 at 11:37 am
Posted on 3/9/19 at 11:39 am to VolsOut4Harambe
quote:
What was Hitler’s worst blunder?
The whole concept of conquering "lebensraum" was fundamentally flawed from the beginning. He completely overestimated his country's military and logistical capacity.
ETA: Now that I've read the thread I see I'm echoing what some other posters have already said. Suffice it to say I agree with them.
This post was edited on 3/9/19 at 11:41 am
Posted on 3/9/19 at 11:39 am to TigersFan64
quote:
Just saying the Soviet Union would have invaded Germany eventually is not evidence, it's merely an opinion. There's really not a lot of hard evidence to show that Stalin really was intent on invading Germany.
I think most historians agree, a German-Russian war was inevitable.
Posted on 3/9/19 at 11:47 am to doubleb
quote:
I think most historians agree, a German-Russian war was inevitable
Because of the fact that it was always in Hitler's plans to expand in the east and conquer the Soviet Union. Whether or not the USSR would have definitely tried to conquer Germany is a much harder question to answer. Maybe it would have, maybe it wouldn't. For Hitler, invading the USSR was always part of his agenda. So yes, war between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union was inevitable.
This post was edited on 3/9/19 at 11:48 am
Posted on 3/9/19 at 11:48 am to Reubaltaich
quote:
.they had to rely heavily on horse drawn wagon to transport supplies to the battle fronts.
This. Starting a war when most of your artillery is being moved by horses.
Posted on 3/9/19 at 11:58 am to Spaceman Spiff
quote:
Not the worst, but switching from military targets to civilian targets in the Battle of Britain.
This is really the right answer. Most people don't realize just how close Britain was to completely losing the Battle of Britain over the RAF losing so many bases and fighters; and just when they were on the knife's edge Hitler gives them a reprieve and switches to civilian targets.
If the RAF would've been knocked out - like they were VERY close to being - Hitler could've gone ahead with Operation Sea Lion and invaded the island almost unopposed. Britain's standing army couldn't have begun to match the Wermacht.
Not one of Hitler's blunders, but something interesting nonetheless:
There was most likely ONE person that reviewed Hitler's application to performing arts college and rejected it. It could be argued that that ONE guy's decision led to about 50-80 million deaths, as Hitler wouldn't have gone on to work on infiltrating political groups for the police and gotten interested in politics.
The butterfly effect is real.
Posted on 3/9/19 at 12:03 pm to RazorBroncs
Question
Brits don't escape at Dunkirk and 300K soldiers are captured or killed on that French beach.
Is the Battle of Britain as big of s deal? Would there have been s BOB? Would there have been a peace treaty?
Brits don't escape at Dunkirk and 300K soldiers are captured or killed on that French beach.
Is the Battle of Britain as big of s deal? Would there have been s BOB? Would there have been a peace treaty?
Posted on 3/9/19 at 12:15 pm to VolsOut4Harambe
his worst blunder was signing Indiana Jones' father's diary and giving it back instead of keeping it
Posted on 3/9/19 at 12:15 pm to doubleb
quote:
Is the Battle of Britain as big of s deal? Would there have been s BOB? Would there have been a peace treaty?
I think Churchill would be forced out of office, they reach a peace agreement, which frees up Germany significantly to deal with Russia. So it would either end with the Nazification of the continent or eventually Europe becomes communist when the Red Army rapes its way through the continent. Western Civilization was basically saved on the shores of Dunkirk.
This post was edited on 3/9/19 at 12:16 pm
Posted on 3/9/19 at 12:23 pm to RazorBroncs
quote:
There was most likely ONE person that reviewed Hitler's application to performing arts college and rejected it. It could be argued that that ONE guy's decision led to about 50-80 million deaths, as Hitler wouldn't have gone on to work on infiltrating political groups for the police and gotten interested in politics. The butterfly effect is real.
Yes, quite true and interesting. One could also say that "if Hitler had been a better artist..." The big reason they rejected him for entry into the Vienna Academy of Fine Arts was that Hitler could not draw people for some reason. His attempts at it produced what were described as crude stick figures.
Another example of the butterfly effect leading to WWI AND WWII: The driver of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife took a wrong turn in Sarejevo that led their motor car into the path of the assassin, Gavrilo Princip on that fateful day of June 28, 1914. Had the driver not taken a wrong turn that day, WWI and WWII may never have happened (since WWI directly led to WWII).
This post was edited on 3/9/19 at 12:25 pm
Posted on 3/9/19 at 12:25 pm to Roll Tide Ravens
quote:
One more specific one was attacking Stalingrad. The city had no strategic value, just the Stalin name. He gets a huge portion of his army trapped there and it becomes the rallying cry for the Soviet Union and the turning point of the war on the Eastern Front.
On a side note, it did give us one of the most badass - if not THE most badass - memorial statues in the entire world.
'The Motherland Calls' is almost twice the height of the Statue of Liberty (if she didn't have the pedestal) and stands on a hill in what was formerly Stalingrad, overlooking the city:
Page 7 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News