Hitler's Biggest Mistake?

[christophe1992]

id say invading rusia before winter. and he should have made better and stronger tanks to counter the kvs and t34s

[aly_j]

@Hanz_Lutz

Biggest mistake declearing war to Soviets and Americans .

japan caused usa 2 enter the war

[aly_j]

@stevey14/88

biggest and first mistake was not taking out the uk

yes thats true …i wounder if hitler was
pissed that he couldet get passed the british

[Ivaylo]

@temujin77

Out of your list, I think his biggest mistake is declaring war on Russia. Not because of Russia’s manpower or willpower to fight until the last man alive, but because it opened up a second front before he was truly able to close out the western front. He should’ve waited until he was able to starve out Britain.

Absolutely right temujin , opening a second front with the resources Germany had meant that they had to cope either with UK or USSR very fast before running out of men and resource , instead Hitler’s mania of capturing Stalingrad or Moscow wasted the little advantage he had , and as well wasted many of his troops lives .Still i don’t understand why he didn’t bypass Moscow or Stalingrad and do as the blitzkrieg doctrine say " encircle and destroy " instead he acted like he had russian army and there was no matter how many will die .

[gunner-B]

The Germans lost the war when they threw away the cream of their Luftwaffe over the UK. Also, they should have blockaded the UK with a bigger U-boat fleet rather than build that ‘white elephant’ the surface Kriegsmarine fleet. This would have detered the US from getting involved in the European war & Britain would have been starved into surrender. This in turn would have made the UK and Commonwealth troops abroad (Middle and far-East) irrelevant, thus allowing the Japanese to just walk into Burma & even India, which in turn would have allowed them the natural resources that they craved without starting a war with the US.
So I say: Hitler lost it when he failed to takeout the UK.

Paul

[aly_j]

I know other BIG mistake that Hitler made so i read-Churchill always listened too his Generals,But Hitler did not. If he listened too his smarter Generals, the out come may be different.

[royal744]

@alephh

Lot of votes so far, 139, so I just wanted to regroup my views

“Declaring war on the United States”: In short term (handful of years) stupid thing to do. But let’s see what happens (one possibility) if Hitler doesn’t declare war on US: With superior military production US conquers Japans and soon controls Asia. That would pretty much mean that US controls 2/3 (asia, america) of the world - and thus US is way too powerful to beat anymore. How to avoid that: Split US forces of course. And that can be done by declaring war on US, forcing US to split it’s military forces in two.

_

The interesting thing about this is that the US never allocated more than 10% - that’s right, 10% - of its war-making capacity to the Pacific campaign. The rest went to Europe and North Africa. So it really wasn’t an issue of splitting our forces in two, but more like fighting the Germans with both fists while letting the other guy commit suicide.

[Nickdfresh]

Reopened for discussion…

[gumalangi]

this is a fun open for every one fantasies

1. Never think strategically in all forces (removal of Adm Raeder, General Waever and never listen to his army Generals ) .
2. Declare war on Russia while not having Brits Fiasco done.

[karaya01]

i voted not prepare germany to war, and the brake of the enigma machine code. The benefits of Enigma intelligence were numerous and weighed heavily in the Allied victory over Germany whether it be in the advance planning, finding the enemy’s weak points, running operations or in the details of particular engagements.

[ABRALEX]

@Hosenfield

from a strategic standpoint though, Germany could’ve conquered the soviet union. if they took the causus oil fields by 1942. Practicaly all russia’s fuel is from this region, and with the region in german control, the russians would be doomed.

the germans invaded russia with tremendous success in 1941-1942, inflicting around 500,000 -1,000,000 causalties every month. the loss ratio in terms of men for russia and germany in the first 5 months was 18 to 1. In early 1942, this was down to 13 to 1. later on, as the russian army got better trained, this ratio dropped to around 5 to 1.
a lot this has to do with the fact that russia didn’t mobilize fullly yet, as insufficient numbers of the good t-34 were not produced yet.

Stalingrad was probably the most fatal strategic idiocy, on the part of hitler. The city could;ve been bypassed but hitler wanted it for prestigue. All stalingrad did was waste 6 months of the german armies’ time and
men and give the russians 6 more months to mobilize her industry.

Статистику сам придумал или из комиксов взял?:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

[ABRALEX]

@Hosenfield

one of the what if? things is that if germany delayed all its conquests, new powerful weapons systems would have been completed if the war was delayed by a year or two.

The tiger tank was avaliable in early 1942, the cheap and reliable MG42, the panther tank(perhaps?) in early 1943, the mp43 assault rifle by 1943, Me263 jet fighter by 1944, panzerfausts by 1943.

All this stuff would be available by then, and could be massed produced and massed armed to a greater extent.

ТИГР И ПАНТЕРА ЯВИЛИСЬ ОТВЕТОМ НА НЕОЖИДАННОЕ ПОЯВЛЕНИЕ КВ и Е34

42 ГОД
КОЛИЧЕСТВО ТИГРОВ И ПАНТЕР = 0
ТЫСЯЧИ КВ1,2 и Т34 + ОБНОВЛЕНИЕ АВИАЦИОННОГО ПАРКА = БЕЗОСТАНОВОЧНОМУ ПАРОВОМУ КАТКУ ДО БЕРЛИНА + ОЧЕРЕДНОЕ НЫТЬЕ ЗАПАДНЫХ ЭКСПЕРТОВ, ЧТО ОПЯТЬ ВИНОВАТЫ МОРОЗЫ, ПЛОХИЕ ДОРОГИ, СИБИРЬ, ТАЙГА, БАЛАЛАЙКА И ОРДА ИЗ 10 МИЛЛИАРДОВ РУССКИХ В ШАПКАХ УШАНКАХ ВЕРХОМ НА БОЕВЫХ МЕДВЕДЯХ.

НЕ ПО АДРЕСУ НО В ТЕМУ.
В ЗАПАДНЫХ ПУБЛИКАЦИЯХ НАЧИНАЯ СО ШВЕДОВ, ФРАНЦУЗОВ, НЕМЦЕВ И ПРОЧИХ В СВОИХ НЕУДАЧАХ ПОСТОЯННО ОБВИНЯЮТ МОРОЗЫ, ПЛОХИЕ ДОРОГИ И БЕСЧИСЛЕННЫЕ ЛЮДСКИЕ РЕСУРСЫ ( АТАКА КЛОНОВ НЕ РУССКОЕ ИЗОБРЕТЕНИЕ?)

1. МОРОЗЫ. ЕДИНСТВЕННОЕ ЗА ВСЮ ИСТОРИЮ ПО НАСТОЯЩЕМУ ЭФФЕКТИВНОЕ ВТОРЖЕНИЕ В РОССИЮ БЫЛО ОСУЩЕСТВЛЕНО ХАНОМ БАТЫЕМ ЗИМОЙ 1237 ГОДА.
   (ВИДИМО ТАТАР НЕ ПРЕДУПРЕДИЛИ, ЧТО ЗИМОЙ В РОССИИ ВОЕВАТЬ НЕЛЬЗЯ ;))
   РУССКИЕ В ОТЛИЧИЕ ОТ “ЕВРОПЕЙЦЕВ” МОРОЗОВ НЕ БОЯТСЯ ПОЭТОМУ ВСЮ ЗИМУ МОГУТ БЕГАТЬ ГОЛЫШОМ (ИЗУЧИТИ ПОТЕРИ ОТ ОБМОРОЖЕНИЯ В СОВЕТСКОЙ АРМИИ В ФИНСКУЮ ВОЙНУ 39г., В ПРИНЦИПЕ ДАННЫЙ ВОПРОС ВСТАЕТ И В 1812г. И В ПРОЧИХ КАМПАНИЯХ ТОЖЕ)
2. ПЛОХИЕ ДОРОГИ. РУССКИЕ ЛЕТАЮТ ? ( НАДО БУДЕТ ЗА ПЛЕЧАМИ КРЫЛЬЯ ПОСМОТРЕТЬ ) РУССКИМ НЕ НУЖНЫ БОЕПРИПАСЫ, ТОПЛИВО ДЛЯ ТЕХНИКИ, ПРОДОВОЛЬСТВИЕ И ПРОЧИЕ? БОЕВЫЕ ЧАСТИ ПЕРЕМЕЩАЮТСЯ РЕДКО, И НЕ ДАЛЕКО ОТ ДОМА, ЧТОБЫ НЕ ЗАБЛУДИТЬСЯ. ТАНКИ И ПУШКИ СДЕЛАНЫ ИЗ ФАНЕРЫ ПОЭТОМУ ИХ ПРЕДПОЧИТАЮТ НОСИТЬ НА СЕБЕ. ВСЕ ТРУДНОСТИ ЖЕ ПО СНАБЖЕНИЮ ДОСТАЛИСЬ ИСТИННЫМ “АРИЙЦАМ” :oops::lol::lol::lol:
3. РУССКИХ ОЧЕНЬ МНОГО. ИНОГДА ДЕЛАЮТ ПЕРЕПИСЬ НАСЕЛЕНИЯ НО РЕЗУЛЬТАТОМ НИКТО НЕ ВЕРИТ ДОСТАТОЧНО ВЗГЛЯНУТЬ НА КАРТУ ИЛИ ГЛОБУС ГДЕ ОНА ЗАНИМАЕТ “ПОЛОВИНУ” ИХ МЕСТА. КАК РУССКИЙ МОГУ ПОДТВЕРДИТЬ ЭТО СУЖДЕНИЕ ДОСТАТОЧНО ВЫГЛЯНУТЬ В ОКНО НА УЛИЦЕ. МНЕ ТОЛЬКО НЕ ПОНЯТЕН ОДИН ВОПРОС ПОЧЕМУ В РОССИИ МОЖНО ПРОЕХАТЬ РАССТОЯНИЕ = ПОЛОВИНЕ ЕВРОПЫ И НЕ ВСТРЕТИТЬ НИ ОДНОГО ЧЕЛОВЕКА. НЕ ПОДСКАЖИТЕ МОЖЕТ В ТАЙГЕ ПРЯЧУТСЯ?:lol:

СРАВНИТЕ СУММАРНОЕ НАСЕЛЕНИЕ ГЕРМАНИИ И ЕЕ СОЮЗНИКОВ И СССР НА НАЧАЛО ВОЙНЫ (НЕ ВПЕЧАТЛИЛО? ТОГДА ДАЛЬШЕ)
41-42 ГОДЫ. ОККУПИРОВАНА ЗНАЧИТЕЛЬНАЯ И САМАЯ НАСЕЛЕННАЯ ЧАСТЬ СССР (РАССМАТРИВАЕТСЯ ЛИШ ЕВРОПЕЙСКАЯ ЧАСТЬ И УРАЛ ВКЛЮЧИТЕЛЬНО, СИБИРЬ И ДАЛЬНИЙ ВОСТОК ДАЖЕ СЕЙЧАС ЯВЛЯЮТСЯ МАЛОЗАСЕЛЕННЫМИ РЕГИОНАМИ.

ИТОГ. 175/2 + ПАРУ ДЕСЯТКОВ МИЛЛИОНОВ ЧЕЛОВЕК = ВСЕМУ ПОТЕНЦИАЛУ СССР НА ПЕРВЫЕ ГОДЫ ВОЙНЫ. :shock:

[ABRALEX]

@alephh

Peace with Britain - wasn’t that pretty much the motive behind Hitler’s actions (stop the push)? He admired England, even told privately (to Galland for example) that England was 100 years ahead of them.

With gentle dealing of british troops he wanted to smooth things out for peace talks.

I also believe, and feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, that behind his logic was grand strategy: Germany was very powerful mainland nation, Britain very powerful naval nation. If Hitler had any desire to alter the power balance of the world - he desperately needed ally with strong naval forces.

I cannot see the attack to Soviet Union as a error - in long term german strategic point of view. As centuries have proven, there are too many people in too small area in Germany. There is not enough food. And to buy food, Germany needs something to sell, and as they do not have raw materials, the only possible solution is high level production - which requires raw materials.

Germany is a nation with two weakness - lack of food, lack of raw materials. To be genuinely strong world power one has to be self-sufficient. Only mainland place to get required raw materials - Soviet Union.

Hitler wanted to make strong Germany. This was the problem he had to solve.

There of course was one tiiiiny problem - Germany didn’t have broad border with Soviet Union - pretty much a must for blitzkrieg tactics. But that was easily “corrected” by walking over Poland - which caused a little twist - as France was getting in a way…

… And so on.

В РОССИИ НЕ РАСТУТ БАНАНЫ. ПРЕКРАСНЫЙ ПОВОД НАПАСТЬ НА “БРАЗИЛИЮ” С ПОЛНЫМ УНИЧТОЖЕНИЕМ ЕЕ НАСЕЛЕНИЯ. У РОССИИ В ДАННЫЙ МОМЕНТ ТРУДНОСТИ С ФЛОТОМ, НО ЭТО НЕ ПРОБЛЕМА - НАВОДИМ МОСТЫ НА АЛЯСКУ И ИДЕМ ЧЕРЕЗ ТЕРРИТОРИЮ КАНАДЫ И США :lol::lol::lol:

БОЛЕЕ ДВАДЦАТИ МИЛЛИОНОВ УБИТЫХ СОВЕТСКИХ ГРАЖДАН ТОЖЕ НЕ ПРОБЛЕМА?:oops:

[Nickdfresh]

ABRALEX, this is an English language board, please translate all posts in the future…

[ABRALEX]

@GermanSoldier

I would choose either attacking russia or america because they brought him to his last days.

НЕ ЛЬСТИ СЕБЕ ПО ПОВОДУ РОЛИ США В ПОБЕДЕ НАД ГЕРМАНИЕЙ :lol:
ВЕЗ ОБИД

[tankgeezer]

Abralex: Это - английский языковой форум, пожалуйста используйте матрицу перевода, регистрация в будущее. Это - требование для использования форума.

[navyson]

@tankgeezer

Abralex: Это - английский языковой форум, пожалуйста используйте матрицу перевода, регистрация в будущее. Это - требование для использования форума.

Smart TG…

[ABRALEX]

@nickdfresh

abralex, this is an english language board, please translate all posts in the future…

АВТОМАТИЧЕСКИЕ ПЕРЕВОДЧИКИ НЕ ПРОБЛЕМА. ОДНАКО ПОСЛЕ ПЕРЕВОДА ТЕКСТ ВСЕ РАВНО НУЖНО РЕДАКТИРОВАТЬ. ЕСЛИ С АНГЛИЙСКОГО НА РУССКИЙ Я ПЕРЕВОЖУ БЕЗ ПРОБЛЕМ ТО С РУССКОГО НА АНГЛИЙСКИЙ МОГУТ ПРОИЗОЙТИ ОШИБКИ. ПРОСТИТЕ НО В ШКОЛЕ И В УНИВЕРСИТЕТЕ Я УЧИЛ ДРУГОЙ ИНОСТРАННЫЙ ЯЗЫК.
ПЕРЕВЕСТИ ГОРАЗДО ПРОЩЕ ЧЕМ РЕДАКТИРОВАТЬ СВОЙ ТЕКСТ НА НЕ ПОНЯТНОМ ТЕБЕ ЯЗЫКЕ. ЕСЛИ РУССКИЙ ЯЗЫК ВАС НЕ УСТРАИВАЕТ ИЛИ 2-3 СЕКУНДЫ РАБОТЫ С ПЕРЕВОДЧИКОМ ДЛЯ ВАС ЗАТРУДНИТЕЛЬНО, МНЕ ЛЕГЧЕ СОКРАТИТЬ ОБЪЕМ ОБЩЕНИЯ ЛИБО ПЕРЕЙТИ НА ДРУГОЙ ФОРУМ ЧЕМ ПОЛНОСТЬЮ ИЗУЧАТЬ НОВЫЙ ЯЗЫК. (МНЕ ПРОСТО БЫЛО ИНТЕРЕСНО ПОСМОТРЕТЬ ВАШЕ МНЕНИЕ ПО НЕКОТОРЫМ ВОПРОСАМ СПАСИБО ЗА ОБЩЕНИЕ)

ПОЙДУ К ЯПОНЦАМ ВМЕСТИ БУДЕМ СО СЛОВАРЕМ СИДЕТЬ :d:d:d

[ABRALEX]

INTERESTING ARTICLE (IN RUSSIAN) http://www.statehistory.ru/650/poteri-v-vov/

[skorzeny57]

Ah, very interesting… It sounds that someone doesn’t realize that this is an English language board.
Tankgeezer, you keep on surprising me… Can you speak and write Russian, too? :shock: