Could Hitler have won?

[Seamus]

Originally Posted by atuanui

Hitler spent so effort in gassing Jews that it used up a lot of their resources.
my $.002

Yes, declaring war on the Jews was a stupid thing to do. If for no other reason than that it may well have ensured America got the bomb first.

The resources used in exterminating the Jews right up to the end of the war almost certainly helped Germany lose the war sooner rather than later.

Perhaps the most important cause of Germany's defeat was fighting on two fronts. Attacking Russia at that time was an error of monumental incompetence.

[wolty]

Originally Posted by Darwinsbulldog

So basically, Hitler could not win the war after mid-43 no matter what he did. The June 44 invasion was just a case of dotting the I's and crossing the T's.

I would go so far as to say after Stalingrad, 2 February 1943.

Originally Posted by Wiki

The heavy losses inflicted on the German army made it a significant turning point in the whole war. After the Battle of Stalingrad, German forces never recovered their earlier strength, and attained no further strategic victories in the East.

Originally Posted by Seamus

Yes, declaring war on the Jews was a stupid thing to do. If for no other reason than that it may well have ensured America got the bomb first.

The resources used in exterminating the Jews right up to the end of the war almost certainly helped Germany lose the war sooner rather than later.

Perhaps the most important cause of Germany's defeat was fighting on two fronts. Attacking Russia at that time was an error of monumental incompetence.

Not only the war on the jews but the scorched earth policy in the east.

[Voltairine]

Originally Posted by Darwinsbulldog

So basically, Hitler could not win the war after mid-43 no matter what he did. The June 44 invasion was just a case of dotting the I's and crossing the T's.

Also the fight had gone from many of the German soldiers, with those in British POW camps biding their time till the end of the war.

[Darwinsbulldog]

Wolty wrote:-

I would go so far as to say after Stalingrad, 2 February 1943.

Nope, I am presuming that Hitler could have only won the war if he cleaned up major Russian opposition by mid-43. Losing 22 divisions at Stalingrad was unrecoverable. Sure, most of them were rebuilt from their Home Station Depot battalions, soldiers returning from leave or courses, specialists flown out before the collapse, and the wounded from hospitals who had either been flown out or injured before the pocket formed.
Even so, some of the divisions had only slim cadres to rebuild with. Plus re-equipping a whole army when engaged in a total war from scratch is not easy, and German truck manufacturing was already way behind the demands of the war.
It is true that in numbers the divisions were replaced, and even grew in number. But they were well short of TOE, and the TOE of an infantry division was cut from 9 battalions to six.
The Luftwaffe fielded some 21 Inf divisions [not including HG1 & 2 and the real para units, which were good]. The Luft field divs were mainly ex-air and ground crew and were poorly trained. Most fought poorly, not because they were cowards, but because they didn't have a clue about Land Warfare, and should have been fed as individual men into the existing Heers divisions and trained up by the Depot battalions, and only then sent to the active divisions as reinforcements.

The German secret weapon in the war was not their Panzers or Stukas or V2 rockets or Me262's, but their training programme.

Like the Brits, the Germans had the regional recruitment system. Regiments were based on regions or large towns. So you get units like the Dukes from Yorkshire, or the 3rd [Berlin] Panzer Division. So apart from elite units like the Paras or Grossdeuchland, most of the people in their respective units knew each other.
The germans had their specialist schools and officer and NCO training units, but the bulk of German training was done by the divisional Depot battation.
More than the Brits, the germans were keen to return a soldier to his unit, and even granted leave to some during the most grave of crises. I mentioned above about soldiers who went on leave from the 6th Army pocket at Stalingrad.
For as long as possible, the German soldier was trained to act at LEAST three ranks above his current rank. This was a trend from way back-even to Bismark I think. But after WW1 the treaty limited Germany to 100,000 troops. This made them fanatical about over-qualifying their soldiers and officiers. If they thought you could not handle a Captain's appointment immediately after being commissioned as a 2nd Lt, then you did not pass. Same for the privates. If, at a pinch, a private could not make a decent plattoon sergeant, then he was a wash-out.
This was why the Germans could expand their army in WW2 so quickly, and yet retain [mostly] high quality in all their units. If you read the histories, you might see "Captain X's infantry battalion suceeded in repelling a division sized Soviet attack for 4 days".
A battalion is a Lt. Col's slot. If he was lucky, and the unit was at full strength, then he would have had about 800 men, defending against [an admittedly small] 8-10,000 men Soviet Division.
Every Wehrmacht [army] soldier did exercises with armour, engineers, infantry and artillary no matter what his own specialisation was, even if it was supply or clerical. Contrast that with the accounts of US army POW's whose first tank they laid eyes on was a Panzer!
That is why, when replacements did not come through fast enough, the Germans combed out their "REAR" and the clerks, storemen, drivers, bakers, etc....were reasonably good replacements who fought professionally. Most of the allied army units could not approach this level of efficiency.

[Darwinsbulldog]

Originally Posted by Voltairine

Also the fight had gone from many of the German soldiers, with those in British POW camps biding their time till the end of the war.

Up to a point yes. But they did not lack enthusiasm in the Battle of the Bulge, just skill and experience. Too many of the old hands were dead, and they did not have time [or fuel] to properly train the new recruits.

[wolty]

Originally Posted by Darwinsbulldog

Up to a point yes. But they did not lack enthusiasm in the Battle of the Bulge, just skill and experience. Too many of the old hands were dead, and they did not have time [or fuel] to properly train the new recruits.

I would agree with this. The German soldier in the field was fighting a defensive battle from 1943 and trying to keep the Soviets out of Greater Germany. They had already had the shit kicked out of them but were still operating at close to 80 or 90% efficiency in rear-guard actions. They certainly didn't throw in the towel in any big way. The Battle of the Bulge is a good example of this, a major counter-attack that confuddled the Allies quite heavily. The Allies really did not expect resistance of this magnitude. The will was still there for the average German soldier (who was still very very good), but the lack of supplies and oil made fighting more of a survival effort.

[Darwinsbulldog]

Originally Posted by wolty

I would agree with this. The German soldier in the field was fighting a defensive battle from 1943 and trying to keep the Soviets out of Greater Germany. They had already had the shit kicked out of them but were still operating at close to 80 or 90% efficiency in rear-guard actions. They certainly didn't throw in the towel in any big way. The Battle of the Bulge is a good example of this, a major counter-attack that confuddled the Allies quite heavily. The Allies really did not expect resistance of this magnitude. The will was still there for the average German soldier (who was still very very good), but the lack of supplies and oil made fighting more of a survival effort.

Indeed. You would have thought the destruction of Army Group Centre would have finished them. But it didn't. The only other armies that I know of that could take that much punishment were the Russians and the Japanese.

[Iseeyouthere]

Something that has been nagging my thoughts about this... It is in regards to the individuals who are fighting.


I'm talking about the soldiers themselves, commanders on the field who make split second decesions or men who managed to dodge the machine gun fire so they can flank an enemy.
Any changes in any tactic could drastically change the tide of battle completely. Kill that commander, knowledge gone, less experienced promoted, battle loses kind of thing.


Perhaps I'm looking at it too closely, but most of the time, people look at the maps and strageties instead of the fighters themselves, and more often than not, it is the fighters that could change the battle.

[Darwinsbulldog]

Originally Posted by Iseeyouthere

Something that has been nagging my thoughts about this... It is in regards to the individuals who are fighting.


I'm talking about the soldiers themselves, commanders on the field who make split second decesions or men who managed to dodge the machine gun fire so they can flank an enemy.
Any changes in any tactic could drastically change the tide of battle completely. Kill that commander, knowledge gone, less experienced promoted, battle loses kind of thing.


Perhaps I'm looking at it too closely, but most of the time, people look at the maps and strageties instead of the fighters themselves, and more often than not, it is the fighters that could change the battle.

There is something like a saying: "In any squad of ten soldiers there are two leaders, six followers and two who would rather be not there at all".
So selection and training can boost this, and that was the aim of german training. To give depth to leadership and experience. The low-number German infantry divisions [mostly regulars, with the first few waves of mobilisation & high quality recruits], most of the Panzer divisions [SS & Wehrmacht] and Para divisions [at least the first few] could sustain awful losses, and still fight. Grossdeuchland for example, experienced several "deaths" where battalions were left with maybe 100 out of 800.
The British 1st Airborne division at Market-Garden were left with about 2000 troops [out of a TOE of about 10,000] after the battle.
One of the criticisms of elite units is that they drain "normal" units of part of their leadership and experience. Certainly both the German GD div and The UK 1st Para div were not recruited by region, but were from Army/Nation-wide personnel sources.