First of, apologies for another ww2 thread. I know there's probably like 10 of them each hour

First of, apologies for another ww2 thread. I know there's probably like 10 of them each hour.

But the saying "germany would have won the war if he would've listened to his genreals"

I fully understand that what ever the germans did they probably didin't have the manpower or the resources to fully "win" the war. I assume that maybe they could've come to an stalemate or a peace agreement ?

But was Hitler really this super retard who fucked over his generals, or is it just his generals trying to wash them selves clean for whatever failures and bad ideas themselves had and instead blamed it all on Hitler ? I mean Hitler died, it's not like he could defend his actions afterwards.

Other urls found in this thread:

dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a348413.pdf
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>I assume that maybe they could've come to an stalemate or a peace agreement ?

Unlikely, given the political situation in September of 1939. You already had a lot of ill-will towards Germany pre-existing, and Hitler rapidly re-arming and breaking several treaties just in the last few years means that very few of his peace offers would be trusted. He has to win totally, or lose.

>But was Hitler really this super retard who fucked over his generals, or is it just his generals trying to wash them selves clean for whatever failures and bad ideas themselves had and instead blamed it all on Hitler ?

A bit of both, really. Hitler also got more interfering and erratic as the war went on, when it meant less and less as Germany's position was getting increasingly hopeless.

thanks for the response !

>I assume that maybe they could've come to an stalemate or a peace agreement?

NO; THE ZIONIST ALLIES WOULD NEVER HAVE ALLOWED A NATIONAL SOCIALIST EMPIRE TO PERSIST, NOR WOULD THEY HAVE ALLOWED NATIONAL SOCIALISM ITSELF TO PERSIST IN ANY ACTUAL FORM.

THE SECOND WORLD WAR WAS NOT MERELY A SOCIOPOLITICAL CONFLICT, BUT AN IDEOLOGICAL, AND ETHICOMORAL, ONE.

>But was Hitler really this super retard who fucked over his generals, or is it just his generals trying to wash them selves clean for whatever failures and bad ideas themselves had and instead blamed it all on Hitler ? I mean Hitler died, it's not like he could defend his actions afterwards.

NO; THE POPULAR NOTION THAT ADOLF HITLER MADE MULTIPLE STRATEGIC, AND TACTICAL, ERRORS, NEGLECTING MORE INFORMED OPINIONS, AND ADVICE, FROM HIS GENERALS, IS SPURIOUS, MAINLY ARISING FROM POSTWAR RATIONALIZATIONS BY MANY OF THOSE GENERALS WHO WERE INCAPABLE OF COMPREHENDING MANY OF ADOLF HITLER'S STRATEGIC, AND TACTICAL, DECISIONS —EXEMPLUM GRATIA: DUNKIRK.

THE THIRD REICH LOST THE WAR MAINLY DUE TO LOGISTICAL DEFICIENCY, NOT TO TACTICAL, NOR STRATEGIC, ERRORS.

>HE THIRD REICH LOST THE WAR MAINLY DUE TO LOGISTICAL DEFICIENCY, NOT TO TACTICAL, NOR STRATEGIC, ERRORS.

Can you explain a bit further? English is not my first language. I've heard that 80% of the garman logistics were moved by horses. Is it stuff like that you mean ?

>Is it stuff like that you mean?

YES; OTHER EXAMPLES WOULD BE SUBOPTIMAL BASIC SUPPLIES TRANSPORTATION, SUBOPTIMAL ALLOCATION, AND PROCUREMENT, OF FUEL, AND SUBOPTIMAL INTERCOMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS, AND MILITARY BRANCHES.

Indeed, it is like the Napoleonic wars all over again- Napoleon might have been able to win some campaigns, but in the long run, he would never have been able to outdo the combined military and economic might of the coalitions- this goes for Germany in ww2 as well. Long term, Germany could not have won the war after USA joined the war and failed to subdue the british.

Alright, thank you very much my friend !

>Actually taking a shouting tripfaggot seriously.

Not your best move, user, especially since he's a well known /pol/tard who won't back up his claims.

For instance, you see him claim that Natsoc would not be allowed to exist in any form, but it's really only the ones that opposed the Allies in armed struggle that got wiped out. Portugal, Spain, and Sweden all had Facsist/Natsoc style governments, and nobody kicked them over.

Hitler did in fact make multiple strategic and tactical errors. The Halt order in 1943 was just idiotic. The separation of the Army group in Case Blue into sub-groups A and B and then treating them like they were each full army groups was absurd. The asusumption that the Soviets would fold under a sharp shove like the Russians did in WW1 without having an actual basis for that assumption, etc.

Dunkirk was Hitler following the advice of his commanders on the ground.

And Wehrmacht coordination between branches was some of the best in the war, which is one of the reasons they made CAS work to such a high degree, much better than the other major powers. Yes, their supply lines were moved primarily by horse (as were pretty much everyone in the old world). That doesn't mean that it's not a strategic blunder to not take that into account when you embark on a campaign, or to start a war against people you don't have any realistic means of delivering a finishing blow to or of converting your early battlefield success into political concessions from.

Why are you yelling?