Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Did Rommel cost Hitler WWII?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by zraver View Post
    I don't know. However, Czechoslovakia wasn't scarred by WWI in the same way that France was. Czech performance in WWI and II, basic geography and the state of Czech armaments indicate a competent military establishment.
    Czechoslovakia was formed in 1918. The Czech's didn't like the Austro Hungarian leaders and didn't want to fight for them.


    At the outbreak of World War I, the Czechs and Slovaks showed little enthusiasm for fighting for their respective enemies, the Germans and the Hungarians, against fellow Slavs, the Russians and the Serbs. Large numbers of Czechs and Slovaks defected on the Russian front and formed the Czechoslovak Legion, organised by Milan Rastislav Štefánik (a Slovak astronomer, general of the French army and a war hero).
    Origins of Czechoslovakia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    sigpic"If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
    If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

    Comment


    • #62
      I do not believe France thought they were going to lose WWII. There was no reason for them to start a huge bloodbath over Sudentland, when they still had Poland as an ally, the Soviets as a POSSIBLE ally, the Belgians, the Dutch, and a huge, huge, huge army backing them up.

      Fuck Czechlovokia seems like a rational action then. Especially if it MIGHT appease Hitler.

      For the Czechs, fighting a hopeless war means fighting a hopeless war. Why bother?

      It all seemed very, very rational to everyone at the time.

      I'm not a WWII expert, but I do not consider a German victory over the USSR at all likely even with the additional Rommel troops there. Diplomatically, I think Stalin could've been turned southward and did not want a war with the Axis at the time, and the Germans could've kept their trade with the USSR going, then betraying the Soviets when the bulk of the Soviet army was in a pointless war against India or something. I can imagine Stalin being that stupid. At least not having the whole damn force IN Eastern Europe while you are fighting there.

      None of the WWII-era leaders strike me as particularly...smart.
      "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by JAD_333 View Post
        Unfortunately, their defensive line was in the German-speaking part of the country, the Sudetenland. Once it was gone, they had been weakened too much to take on the German army with any hope of success.
        Despite the German funded Sudentland Frei Corps there wasn't really an insurrection and the Sudentanese enjoyed full civil rights. There was some Nazi support but it was not overwhelming. More like Austria- go along to get along once the issue was decided.

        From another perspective, if England and France had seen a strong possibility that the Czechs could stop Hitler's expansion, they may have drawn the line there instead of Poland. But I suspect they couldn't count on the Czechs to do much because the majority of the population of the Sudetenland was of German extraction and sympathetic to Hitler.
        They knew the Czechs could defeat the Germans at the frontier at least in the short term. The problem was if Czechoslovakia went to war, so did France and France and the UK were not ready. France and the UK wanted more time to rearm so they offered up the Czechs as a sacrificial lamb.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Blademaster View Post
          Hitler was very stupid. He pissed off everybody and had everybody gunning for him. He basically unified two totally incompatible nations, the US and USSR against Germany, in itself an impressive feat. US's material support basically allowed USSR to overcome its obstacles and steamroll Germany.

          You are looking at this, trough a cold war perspective, it was not the case in 1930's.
          The soviet heavy industry and mechanization was done with western, particularly american assistance.
          As for weapons:
          the t-26 tank is actually a British design with a copy of the Armstrong Siddeley engine.
          the bt-series come from the Walter Christie design with Liberty engine.
          the engine in the I-16/153 fighters is licensed Wright R-1820 radial.
          the gaz-AA truck is a Ford design, zis-5 Autocar design. (both american ).
          J'ai en marre.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by 1979 View Post
            You are looking at this, trough a cold war perspective, it was not the case in 1930's.
            The soviet heavy industry and mechanization was done with western, particularly american assistance.
            As for weapons:
            the t-26 tank is actually a British design with a copy of the Armstrong Siddeley engine.
            the bt-series come from the Walter Christie design with Liberty engine.
            the engine in the I-16/153 fighters is licensed Wright R-1820 radial.
            the gaz-AA truck is a Ford design, zis-5 Autocar design. (both american ).
            Look up the Commie Red Scare in the 30s. Even though the Great Depression lessened the anti attitude towards socialism, USA was still hardcore anti-communist and viewed the USSR as a threat despite that USSR never threatened USA before. Now Germany under Hitler managed to unify USA and USSR, which is very significant. Why do you think that USA and USSR quickly went back to being enemies once WWII was over?

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by zraver View Post
              Despite the German funded Sudentland Frei Corps there wasn't really an insurrection and the Sudentanese enjoyed full civil rights. There was some Nazi support but it was not overwhelming. More like Austria- go along to get along once the issue was decided.
              I believe if you look closer at the internal political situation at the time, you'll find that the German-speaking Czechs felt excluded for the most part from participation in the government. This contributed to a lack of national solidarity and surely must have been a factor in the deliberations of the Czech's leadership.
              To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by JAD_333 View Post
                I believe if you look closer at the internal political situation at the time, you'll find that the German-speaking Czechs felt excluded for the most part from participation in the government. This contributed to a lack of national solidarity and surely must have been a factor in the deliberations of the Czech's leadership.
                What I am saying is this marginalization and lack of solidarity doesn't really arise until Heinlien's frei korps. It was manipulated by the Nazis and wasn't a true grass roots movement. As we say nowadays it was astroturf.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Blademaster View Post
                  Look up the Commie Red Scare in the 30s. Even though the Great Depression lessened the anti attitude towards socialism, USA was still hardcore anti-communist and viewed the USSR as a threat despite that USSR never threatened USA before. Now Germany under Hitler managed to unify USA and USSR, which is very significant. Why do you think that USA and USSR quickly went back to being enemies once WWII was over?
                  1930's ? No. 1919-1923 maybe.
                  During Roosevelt presidency the hardcore stance diluted to the point of none existence. It was not all because of economic reasons but a clear message in curbing
                  japanese expansionism in Asia which was viewed as largest threat to US interests.
                  Office of the Historian - Milestones - 1921-1936 - Recognition of the Soviet Union.
                  J'ai en marre.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by astralis View Post
                    i dunno. if germany was content with its holdings as of june 1940 hitler would have gone down as an utter genius.

                    hell if he was content with his holdings of 1938 he'd have gone down as another bismarck.
                    Have you read The Wages of Destruction? I haven't read it and can't speak about the veracity of its claims even if I had, but Tooze argued that after France Hitler was sitting on a timed bomb a.k.a. the German economy. Tooze basically said Hitler practiced something akin to New Deal economics but essentially spent all the money on stuff that has no economic value.

                    http://www.amazon.com/Wages-Destruct.../dp/0143113208
                    Last edited by Triple C; 19 May 13,, 23:38.
                    All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
                    -Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Blademaster View Post
                      Look up the Commie Red Scare in the 30s. Even though the Great Depression lessened the anti attitude towards socialism, USA was still hardcore anti-communist and viewed the USSR as a threat despite that USSR never threatened USA before. Now Germany under Hitler managed to unify USA and USSR, which is very significant. Why do you think that USA and USSR quickly went back to being enemies once WWII was over?
                      BM, I think you meant the Red Scare of the 20s. Very big difference.

                      The Great Depression really removed Red Baiting as an effective political tactics for over a decade. Labor Unions and FDR administration openly employed Popular Front intellectuals, organizers, and artists. The Congress of Industrial Organization for example used communist organizers for the drive to unionize steel and stockyard workers because the communists were the only people with the experience of talking to and working with black and Mexican workers. The Library of Congress and the War Information Office kept a lot of communist and socialist artists and scholars on payroll. The Labor Department also had some communists. The general thought was best expressed by John Lewis of CIO: "Who gets the bird, the hunter or the dog?" New Dealers needed people with fire and know how to push through some of their agendas (like the Wagner Act) and felt that they could use the communists to get what they wanted; lots of communists had the same thought.

                      Conservatives of course hated this, but until the beginning of the Cold War they couldn't garner enough popular support to really crack down on the communists.
                      Last edited by Triple C; 19 May 13,, 23:57.
                      All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
                      -Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Doktor View Post
                        Malta was to be given without a fight till mid '41.

                        So while it might have strategical importance, it would also mean Axis troops tied there. 22k or more I can't tell, but surely they wont be in USSR or in Africa, as they were not historically.
                        Officially, the first day of the siege of Malta was 11 June 1940.

                        In addition, in july 1939, the Island was promised 112 heavy and 60 Ack Ack guns, plus 4 sqdns of fighters and searchlights. So, I do not think that britiain was prepared to give up the island without a fight.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by zraver View Post
                          Lets assume
                          That is the big problem with this sort of thing, we are dealing with known facts, with known outcomes and by applying assumptions, you are imposing what you believe to be the correct course of action based upon your knowledge and not that of the commander etc of the time.

                          As for Malta, you forget the bravery and tenacity shown by the defenders and the efforts made to support the Island. Plus, Rommel was known for his "aggressive" attitude, so I doubt very much, if he would be prepared to sit on his bum and twiddle his thumbs, when he could be launching attacks against what was a weakened enemy.

                          As for what stopped Hitler achieving victory against Russia, the blame lies in the planning, which itself was based upon an assumption of Hitler that if you kick down the front door, then the rest of the house would collapse. Plans that said that the campaign would be over before the Winter, meant that troops were not prepared for one of the worst winters of the time.

                          Plus, many would argue that Stalin's speech to the people, where he called them "brothers and sisters" had a massive effect on both the morale and resolve of the Soviet people.

                          there are other things which have not been mentioned and did have the effect of being drains on resources and the Holocaust, the increasing effect of the bombing of Germany, and the naval blockade. The first two involved millions of personnel being diverted away from the frontline.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            When Italians started the air raids what was on and around the island?

                            Brits towed almost everything to Alexandria. Why?
                            No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                            To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by Doktor View Post
                              When Italians started the air raids what was on and around the island?

                              Brits towed almost everything to Alexandria. Why?
                              It was started by the Italians and it was on the Island. And to avoid having ships sitting about, doing nothing and which could be sunk causing problems. That left behind, ships that were of use.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                triple C,

                                Have you read The Wages of Destruction? I haven't read it and can't speak about the veracity of its claims even if I had, but Tooze argued that after France Hitler was sitting on a timed bomb a.k.a. the German economy. Tooze basically said Hitler practiced something akin to New Deal economics but essentially spent all the money on stuff that has no economic value.
                                the german economy was close to melting down in the late 30s, from 1936-1938 given the huge pace of rearmament. but hitler always viewed rearmament as an investment opportunity-- he was making those weapons so he could USE them and get more.

                                it paid off. by 1940, especially after the fall of france, the german economic situation was far better-- huge amounts of war loot, plus anschluss with a new austrian tax base. hitler was confident enough in the economy in 1940 to order partial demobilization after he beat france.

                                without fighting the USSR, the germans could have easily taken several years to consolidate her gains. not hard to economically recover when you have all of Western Europe to loot and confiscate. but hitler thought the USSR was just one hard push from falling, and he got greedy...
                                There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X