In a recent post here at The Aviary Dana Mathewson forwarded an article about the things Hitler did wrong that cost him the war. Dana was [liink=http://tbirdnow.mee.nu/hitlers_mistakes_cost_germany_the_war]a bit skeptical of them and so was I; they were rather simple and not well connected. Dana sent me the following:


And now you've got me thinking (might be a dangerous thing!): For example, Hitler was constantly hoping England would capitulate so he wouldn't have to invade, since the Battle of Britain turned out to be such a bust for him. (Historians have speculated that's why he let Britain off the hook at Dunkirk, too.) The vaunted Luftwaffe failed him big-time there, and would likely have failed to provide adequate air cover in the necessary sea-borne invasion. He lost a whole slew of men and planes and got nothing in return. And Goering's reputation lay in tatters.

Speaking of hoping Britain would capitulate, Hitler always hoped Britain would surrender and he could plug in Edward (Duke of Windsor) as King, since Edward was pro-Nazi.

Hitler's invasion of Russia was driven by his ever-present need for oil. This guy ignores that. Hitler was stupid in not preparing for the Russian winter, but no less a military genius than Napoleon screwed up on that too. (Germany and France have never had winters like Russia.) Hitler had no knowledge of the way the Soviet armies would fight -- chalk that up to lack of intelligence. Nobody fights more fiercely than a German army but they are solicitous of their men. The Russians don't care how many soldiers they lose as long as they beat off the enemy.

It's true that Hitler should have kept his grubby little fingers off operational command, but he didn't trust his generals, and for good reason: they had nothing but contempt for him. Good reason for that too. Look at the various attempts to assassinate him.

I think, too, that this guy's factoring in the Holocaust was gratuitous. I may be wrong, but I don't think the world knew about the Holocaust until after the war. Now, it could be argued that the Holocaust took too much effort away from the war.

Yes, there are some interesting facts. But the more I look at it, the more I think he's some kid who went to a liberal arts college and absorbed the new-age way of looking at things. He cherry-picks facts and doesn't tie things together well. He "wasn't there," in other words. Hitler was, although as the war went along he increasingly wasn't, if you follow me -- ordering into battle units that no longer existed.

He does get one thing right: all the war planning, both on land and at sea, was done with the idea that the war would start in about 1942. Obviously, somebody forgot to tell Hitler. If Admiral Raeder had gotten his full complement of surface ships and submarines, and if Goering had gotten all the planes he wanted, the war would have been a different story. But it's equally possible Britain would have re-armed by then and, more to the point, France would have relocated her fighting spirit. Or would Chamberlain still be PM? Mr. Peace-in-our-time? I fear THAT would be the case.

Consider this: assume that Hitler didn't start his fun-and-games until around the end of 1941 or the beginning of 1942, but that Japan did exactly the same as she did, when she did it. That would mean we would have entered the war against Japan in 1941 as before, Hitler would have been caught with his pants down having to declare war against us because of his treaties with Japan, but with a lot more toys to fight with. Our two-front war would have been a lot tougher. And one would assume we would be further asleep than we already were because nothing would have been going on in Europe to wake us up. Oy vey!

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:23 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 659 words, total size 4 kb.