Fall of the Third Reich

>Is there a correlation between Nazism and delusions?
The entire worldview is based on the premise that there's an international conspiracy of Jews that secretly controls the world (beyond average oppressed-peoples nepotism), and that all western democracies are infected with Judaism even though they're a bunch of Catholics and Protestants.

The experts and people with good foresight? December 41, the moment barbarossa failed and the us joined.

The general staff? Most around 43,44. The landings in Sicily and fall of Italy basically showed defeat would, eventually, come. Anyone with sanity knew after France was liberated in a month that Germany had lost.

The final realization didn't really hit everyone until Hitler shot himself. Most Germans probably had given up hope by then, but the die-hards held out until then.

The Germans in WW1 were no better, they still believed they could win a decisive battle in 1918 and force the entirety of the entente to sign a peace treaty that would favour Germany, or a white peace at least.

Most of the soldiery thought this, which is why they felt like they'd been betrayed when peace came. Everyone in charge of the war knew they were fucked, however, and ended the war when they could because they were weeks away from the soldiery figuring that out as well, which would have utterly fucked Germany way worse than the Versailles treaty ended up doing.

not to mention the German industry was at the point of death. Germany's rubber industry was only working at 3% capacity and her workers in general were only achieving 20-40% production output. Even if they wanted to go on they would've had no chance

When a US patrol crossed the German border in September 1944, it was symbolic that the end was near. Full scale advance didn't come until the following Spring, but that first incursion let the Nazis know the noose was closing.

>Although Hitler only accepted that the war was truly lost during a tantrum resulting of his generals failing to counterattack during the Battle of Berlin
>basing your historical knowledge off a movie
the current state of Veeky Forums

>not trying to wipe out your enemies while you still have a chance

>What was the moment that/when did the Wermacht and Nazi Germany realize that their fight was a lost cause?

Reportedly, generals started talking about that in private in summer 1943. Anyone else would end up badly, so rather no one expressed any doubt.

To be fair, they had just pulled back millions of men from the Eastern Front after the Russians collapsed and threw them into the West. Not to mention the fact that Operation Michael did in fact push the British back miles and even almost made it to Amiens, a major communications hub for the Entente. Haig himself said the British had their backs to the wall. If the Germans had the tank capabilities that the British had, they may have very well have forced at least a more favorable treaty. They just had nothing to exploit their tactical victories.

Hitler was really fucked in the head to think that he had a chance of winning the Battle of Berlin. Severely punishing Generals who suggested surrender and expecting to survive off of local munitions and child soldiers was beyond insane. It wasn't even like he was trying to give time for important members of the Third Reich to escape or was trying to destroy things of secret value. If it weren't for his generals and veteran officers who ordered the burning of documents/evidence containing classified information, then the whole entire thing would be no more than a final game of Prussian LARPing before death.
Adolf just really didn't ever think the war was over.

>not realizing you don't have a chance and what you need to do is preserve the Nazi ideology for future generations. To turn it into an idea that can win the victory in the classroom and pulpit that it couldn't win on the battlefield

Himmler failed miserably on both counts. Even the modern successors to the Nazis feel compelled to distance themselves from the Third Reich by denying the atrocities it committed/attempting to reinvent the German cause as a Pan-European crusade against Communism rather than a genocidal war to destroy inferior races. Neo-Nazism is so ideologically diluted at this point you might as well stop calling it Nazism altogether.

The current state you.

I wonder how many German families owe their lives to the generals and officers who drew their honor to the Prussian tradition rather than the Nazi faggotry, and risked their lives to disobey orders to instead fight to keep corridors to the west open for the civilians.

The smarter higher ups could see the shitstorm coming from '42 onwards.

Post '43 you had to be thoroughly brainwashed to think continuing on the current path was a good idea. Fuck, even Himmler knew all was lost in 1944, and the only one Hitler trusted more than him was Goebbels.

>we're about to lose a war in which we've committed multiple inexcusable atrocities
>better make sure we commit them even faster to ensure our soon to be victorious enemies will have every reason in the world to raze our entire fucking country to the ground

Nazis, really thinking in the long term

>I wonder how many German families owe their lives to the generals and officers who drew their honor to the Prussian tradition rather than the Nazi faggotry, and risked their lives to disobey orders to instead fight to keep corridors to the west open for the civilians.

Probably none because all they did was prolong the war and the suffering.

I think it was Anthony Beevor's book on the Fall of Berlin, he quotes somebody who was in a shelter who overheard a Wehrmacht soldier with several tank medals shout something like
>All of you calm down. We must win this war. If our enemies win, and they do to use even a fraction of what we've done in the occupied territories, there will not be a single German left

>dude we'll just wait for god to win the war for us lmao
Prussia was a mistake

They lost in 1942.

Most of the troops must have realized it, if not after Kursk, after the Ardennes Offensive.

Retard

>he was full of hope, optimism and determination to the very end
>tfw

he truly was autistic wasn't he?

More like he was legit insane and delusional.

Probably sometime in 1943 or 1944, once Italy was being invaded by Americans and British while the Soviets are stopping the Germans in the east and really beginning to hit back hard during the summer months at least some of the people in charge must have realized that they couldn't win a war against the three strongest powers on earth. A lot more of them must have realized the reich's days were numbered after the Invasion of Normandy and Operation Bagration.

Objectively when the US entered the war fully it was going to be over eventually. With something like 3x the manufacturing capability and several times the population, Germany would not be able to replace her losses in the long run in any conceivable scenario against the allies.

Germany conclusively lost the war on June 22nd, 1941

Military leadership was deluded enough to not see it until about late 1943

Nazi political leadership saw the writing on the wall around late 1944

Hitler/Inner circle seemed to still think victory was possible going into 1945

There's an unlikely alt-history scenario that people have played with that wonders what would happen if the US actually stayed out of the European theater. Keep in mind that Germany declared war on the US after Pearl Harbor, not the other way around. There was still a lot of isolationism present in the US, and it would have been interesting to see what would have happened if the US spent all of those resources beating the piss out of Japan and going home, instead of getting involved in Europe's bullshit.

FDR would have eventually tried to get America involved in Europe because of how much he loved his Bong bros.

Reminder that Pearl Harbor was practically forced, and the US was already heavily involved in the war in Europe including committing actual troops both warships and boots in the ground.

When they could not reach to the oil fields of southern Russia . No oil , no transportation, no transportation no moving army...

Delusional is merely optimism in the face of mounting impossibility.
Why don't you create arguments instead of twisting words dramatically, I don't like my historical criticism to read like a buzzfeed article headline.
>his Bong bros
His bankroller and essentially puppetmaster was a literal jew

>Germany conclusively lost the war on June 22nd, 1941
No, absent US involvement, that date is meaningless to Germany's status.

Except that it's completely different. The position of the Central Powers in 1918 is eons better than the remaining Axis nations were in 1944. Russia had been defeated and there existed a real opportunity to defeat the Allies in France, without which there was no point in the Allies continuing to fight.

Stalingrad, the first major strategic defeat suffered on land. While the battle of britain was a major defeat for Germany, that it was in the air and not on the land in my opinion lessened its impact. With Stalingrad, the Germans lost a tremendous amount of men, material and land in an easily identifiable campaign. During "The World At War", in the episode "Stalingrad", Germans comment on the defeat being announced on the radio, the first time the Nazi leadership had openly conceded in the media of a defeat.

With Stalingrad, not only had the Wehrmacht failed in its objective of taking Russia in one summer but now two with the added bonus of having lost a large amount of territory. I'd argue that the psychological state of the average soldier would be greatly effected in terms of morale by the long retreat west, if they were even lucky enough to head west. The news would spread through the ranks to elsewhere also.

Citadel in the next year, combined with the cumulative effects of operation husky and later on the surrender of Italy would surely in my eyes seal the fate of Germany in '43. All this assumes however that people were even aware of events happening, it's not like they had a free press.

>Even the modern successors to the Nazis feel compelled to distance themselves from the Third Reich by denying the atrocities it committed/attempting
That's why you see neo-nazis say "I prefer the term 'national socialist'" when you call them a nazi

Funnily enough it was a Waffen SS general who did that in Berlin, not some Prussian traditionalist

I mean once you’ve started you may as well finish
It’s not like you get half adeath sentence for genocide
I’m surprised there were any survivors really

>I prefer you not to use an epithet created by jews to describe my political beliefs

>Even the modern successors to the Democrats feel compelled to distance themselves from the New Deal by denying the Failures of the program
That's why you see jackasses say "I prefer the term 'democrat'" when you call them a jackass

hello my wehraboo friends

>implying neo Nazis actually read enough to know this

He was a complete junkie

>death sentence

The only ones that had to worry about that were the political heads and chief of staff who had direct involvement in the massacres. They could have surrendered to the western allies in 1943/44, but the German high command cared more about themselves than all of Germany's citizens, so they drug the war out as long as possible and got millions of Germans unnecessarily killed in the process.

didn't Goebbels literally write a book explaining nazism called "Nazi-Sozi"?

After the Battle of Britain ensured they'd have to fight on two fronts. Eventually the bongs are going to get air and sea dominance. Hitler would be in a Napoleon situation where he can win battles but not knock out his main rival

probably after stalingrad, it was obvious way before but it was clear to them and to their opponents too, after that point, theres no way back

there was no separate peace, you surrender and you surrender to everyone, mainly the USSR

Stalingrad was just the Soviet army successfully defending territory and then launching a counteroffensive during the winter, it was followed up a few months later by the Germans winning the third battle of Kharkov.

When the Germans couldn't win in the summer months due to having to defend multiple fronts while the Soviets had finally started receiving the materials they needed to launch mobile offensives in the summer, that was when the Germans were fucked.

The western allies didn't want communists to acquire more territory any more than Germany did.

You end the war early, before the USSR is literally on your front porch, and you can work with the US and Britain in keeping Soviet holdings to a minimum. But they decided to fight right up until Berlin, which led to the communists getting half of Germany itself.

after operation bagration

the only true answer

>normies: it wuz stalingrad that lost it
>alliedboos: obviously it was d-day that ended the war
>SSboos: obviously it was when hitler offed himself
>armchair generals: obviously kursk when they lost the offensive capabilities

For my Opa, it was when his sector finally retreated in 1943. He was in one of the only places where there was either forward movement or stalemating

I remember an interview with Otto Carius where he states that

"the war was lsot, everyone knew that, it was then just a matter of keeping the soviets as far away from Germany as possible."

referring to his time on the Eastern front

the only true answer

>when the US approved Lend-Lease to the Sovs
>the Nazis were holding out hope that previous US participation with the White forces in Russia would keep the US apart from the Sovs
>wrong.png

Literally the only reason Russian people physically exist is because of American "lend-lease"

without lend-lease literally saving the Russian "species", that entire region, and people would be a brief lesson in German childrens school books.

if left totally to their own devices, without a single solitary form of aid from the US or some outside interference like lend-lease, the soviet union and the core of boleshevism would have been extinguished like a small match in a hurricane.

and 1943 Ensured Soviet Victory. By 1943 Germany had "lost" the initiative it was stalemating for in 1942.

Lot was cast and the deciding factor was this aide. It broke the stalemate, and nearly every post in this thread has proven that, whether my own, or others refutations. all of them show the dead being broken by 1943. Coincidentally the height of lend-lease aide to the soviet union (into 44).

Im sure it did, when the war was fully engaged on 2 fronts. But what DID show up 1941-1943. was the deciding factor in World War II.

The Timing of the first major arrivals of lend lease during 1942 saved the Soviet Union from LOSING the protracted war of attrition, rather than winning

IT was a success, that is untill American Lend Lease kicked in. The first Campaign season was a complete success, Soviets were completely depleted of useful fighting machinery, the factories were either not running, or were in transit to their relocation in land, and would not be up to capacity for a long time, and Germans were inflicting Monumental casualties on Soviets from Ukraine on through to Russian territorial soils, every single engagement every single day. The type of casualties that, when you read them, are incomprehensible to contemporary man

Lend Lease supplied 82.5% of Soviet wartime copper production, 96% of wartime aluminum production, along with 956,700 miles of field telephone cable, 2,100 miles of sea cable, 1,100 miles of underwater cable, 35,800 radio stations, 5,899 radio receivers, and 348 radars.

The first Campaign season was a complete success, Soviets were completely depleted of useful fighting machinery, the factories were either not running, or were in transit to their relocation in land, and would not be up to capacity for a long time, and Germans were inflicting Monumental casualties on Soviets from Ukraine on through to Russian territorial soils, every single engagement every single day. The type of casualties that, when you read them, are incomprehensible to contemporary man.

Literally the only reason Russian people physically exist is because of American "lend-lease"

without lend-lease literally saving the Russian "species", that entire region, and people would be a brief lesson in German childrens school books. American lend lease was an inconceivably effective lifeline of supply.

if left totally to their own devices, without a single solitary form of aid from the US or some outside interference like lend-lease, the soviet union and the core of boleshevism would have been extinguished like a small match in a hurricane, by the end of Campaign season 1942.

the long term result of Lend-lease
>video related

Why is Martin Luther King included in there as a bad thing? If the Jews did help Civil Rights gain traction then that's a good thing.

its the great civil and social upheavel that movement is endemic too. look today, blacks STILL riot and destroy for rights they already have. American blacks are the single most easily rabble-roused socio-ethnic group on the planet. They are devoid and averted to all forms of education, law and order, both here, and in their home nations or abroad.

these are facts, not opinions.

Lend Lease was a mistake. Patton was right.

probably had dawned on most Germans by early 1944, but only a few months after Barbarossa many knew it was going badly
>The Russian colossus has been underestimated by us. Whenever a dozen divisions are destroyed the Russians replace them with another dozen
Franz Halder, August 1941