Hitler's Irrational Nature

Discussion in 'General' started by fadge_eater2001, Aug 30, 2005.

  1. fadge_eater2001

    fadge_eater2001 Junior Member

    Did Hitler's irrational nature allow the Allies to gain victory more swiftly?
    For example the Battle of The Bulge - not listening to the advise of military advisers.
     
  2. spidge

    spidge RAAF RESEARCHER

    Originally posted by fadge_eater2001@Aug 30 2005, 10:49 PM
    Did Hitler's irrational nature allow the Allies to gain victory more swiftly?
    For example the Battle of The Bulge - not listening to the advise of military advisers.
    [post=38387]Quoted post[/post]


    Sure did.

    Who in their right mind would declare war on the United States when they didn't have to?

    This by the way was the only country Germany declared war on in WW2 and so gave the US an invitation to the festivities in Europe & North Africa.
     
  3. Gerard

    Gerard Seelow/Prora

    I would agree completely with Spidge. Above all else declaring war on the US and citing the reason that the Japanese had not been defeated in 800 years smacks of complete instability. Whatever about the self-serving memoirs of some Wehrmacht Generals this was one decision that was Hitler's alone and this more than anything else served to seal the fate of the "1000 year" Reich.
     
  4. fadge_eater2001

    fadge_eater2001 Junior Member

    Thanks, the reason I was asking was for my A level course work. I need a question that I can research but there needs to evidence arguing for and against the subject. I was thinking along the lines of the question i asked you or maybe:

    1. What was influence and what was the effectiveness of the Battle of The Bulge?

    2. Did the continued fighting on the Eastern Front contribute more predominately than any other factor in allowing an Allied victory?

    Can you help me in anyway?

    Thanks again for replying to my first question
     
  5. spidge

    spidge RAAF RESEARCHER

    Originally posted by fadge_eater2001@Aug 31 2005, 08:34 AM
    Thanks, the reason I was asking was for my A level course work. I need a question that I can research but there needs to evidence arguing for and against the subject. I was thinking along the lines of the question i asked you or maybe:

    1. What was influence and what was the effectiveness of the Battle of The Bulge?

    2. Did the continued fighting on the Eastern Front contribute more predominately than any other factor in allowing an Allied victory?

    Can you help me in anyway?

    Thanks again for replying to my first question
    [post=38411]Quoted post[/post]

    This probably comes down to you asking the precise question you need an answer for.

    Come back again with the exact question(s) and the sub categories if required for that/those questions.

    People on the forum can then guide you to links that explain these requirements more effectively. Remember, a broad question will get you a broad reply.
     
  6. spidge

    spidge RAAF RESEARCHER

    Originally posted by spidge+Aug 31 2005, 10:40 AM-->(spidge @ Aug 31 2005, 10:40 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-fadge_eater2001@Aug 31 2005, 08:34 AM
    Thanks, the reason I was asking was for my A level course work. I need a question that I can research but there needs to evidence arguing for and against the subject. I was thinking along the lines of the question i asked you or maybe:

    1. What was influence and what was the effectiveness of the Battle of The Bulge?

    2. Did the continued fighting on the Eastern Front contribute more predominately than any other factor in allowing an Allied victory?

    Can you help me in anyway?

    Thanks again for replying to my first question
    [post=38411]Quoted post[/post]

    This probably comes down to you asking the precise question you need an answer for.

    Come back again with the exact question(s) and the sub categories if required for that/those questions.

    People on the forum can then guide you to links that explain these requirements more effectively. Remember, a broad question will get you a broad reply.
    [post=38414]Quoted post[/post]
    [/b]
    A second thought would be to go to this sight and link down to the Ardennes, Battle of the Bulge. This will give you a good insight.

    Main Site: http://history.acusd.edu/gen/ww2_links.html#countries


    Bulge Site: http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/books/wwii/7-8/7-8_cont.htm


    Regards

    Geoff
     
  7. Dac

    Dac Senior Member

    Originally posted by fadge_eater2001@Aug 30 2005, 05:49 AM
    Did Hitler's irrational nature allow the Allies to gain victory more swiftly?
    For example the Battle of The Bulge - not listening to the advise of military advisers.
    [post=38387]Quoted post[/post]

    Hitler had a habit of reinforcing disaster which greatly aided the Allied cause. Again and again he poured troops and equipement into battles like Stalingrad, North Africa(Tunisia) and Normandy(Mortain) when there was no hope of success.
     
  8. fadge_eater2001

    fadge_eater2001 Junior Member

    Thanks everyone for responding. On another note how much do you think the existence of an Eastern Front helped in achieving an Allied victory?

    Personally I believe it is a fairly major factor as it diverted men and supplies which could have otherwise been used in other theatres of war.
     
  9. seven4eight

    seven4eight Junior Member

    Originally posted by fadge_eater2001@Aug 31 2005, 06:29 PM
    Thanks everyone for responding. On another note how much do you think the existence of an Eastern Front helped in achieving an Allied victory?

    Personally I believe it is a fairly major factor as it diverted men and supplies which could have otherwise been used in other theatres of war.
    [post=38442]Quoted post[/post]

    definitely, fighting on two fronts was to much of a strain on the germans resources. hitler did many things against the advice of his generals.
     
  10. fadge_eater2001

    fadge_eater2001 Junior Member

    Well perhaps say that it was Hitler's mistakes, for example not listening to the advice of his generals, that was the predominant factor in Germanys defeat

    Although the Eastern Front was a great strain on the German military machine it was actually Hitler's original plan to attack Russia was it not?

    It was also Hitler's belief that the tide of the war could be turned by such things as the Battle of the Bulge, the new Volksgrenadier divisions and new weapons such as the newly developed Messerchmitt ME 262A "SCHWALBE" or Swallow. The ME 262A was originally developed as a fighter and its development was prolonged due to Hitler wanting it to be developed to enable it to fufill the fighter/bomber role, thus meaning the planes could not have been utilized ,other than in small numbers, to bolster the deminshing Luftwaffe's effectiveness against the Allied bombers.

    Please inform me if any of what I have just is said is incorrect and please add your own comments, any input will be greatly appreciated.

    Thanks, Chris.
     
  11. Kiwiwriter

    Kiwiwriter Very Senior Member

    Originally posted by fadge_eater2001@Sep 1 2005, 03:51 PM
    Well perhaps say that it was Hitler's mistakes, for example not listening to the advice of his generals, that was the predominant factor in Germanys defeat

    Although the Eastern Front was a great strain on the German military machine it was actually Hitler's original plan to attack Russia was it not?

    It was also Hitler's belief that the tide of the war could be turned by such things as the Battle of the Bulge, the new Volksgrenadier divisions and new weapons such as the newly developed Messerchmitt ME 262A "SCHWALBE" or Swallow. The ME 262A was originally developed as a fighter and its development was prolonged due to Hitler wanting it to be developed to enable it to fufill the fighter/bomber role, thus meaning the planes could not have been utilized ,other than in small numbers, to bolster the deminshing Luftwaffe's effectiveness against the Allied bombers.

    Please inform me if any of what I have just is said is incorrect and please add your own comments, any input will be greatly appreciated.

    Thanks, Chris.
    [post=38477]Quoted post[/post]

    The Me 262 statement is erroneous...he did want it configured as a bomber, but the problems with its development came from the metallurgy and the engine, not the Fuhrer order. Even when deployed, the Me 262 Jumo jet engine had a lifespan of less than 24 hours, so they spent a lot of time in maintenance hands.
     

Share This Page