Biggest mistake of Hitler was attacking USSR

Germany was essentially reduced to a barter system with regards to international business. For those interested in this topic I highly recommend Wages of Destruction, it's available in paperback for less than $20. Not an easy read perhaps but lots of good information. Most criticism of it relate to his understanding/analysis of military matters by the way.

 

If Hitler stayed within his borders, what reason would Britain or France have to "play hardball" with him? Even after Czechoslovakia, the most they did was issue a "guarantee" against further aggression. They weren't actively trying to bring down the Nazi regime. They were just as concerned about the Soviet Union and Communism; they only started trying to draw Stalin into an alliance when Hitler began threatening Poland. There was considerble sympathy for fascism in western countries that didn't fade until the outbreak of war (and for some people, not even then).

 

If Hitler was so right? How come Hitler lost so bad?

He should have knew his place and not tried to take on the world; and German guns, tanks weren't able to work in the cold; wrong type of lube.

But what he lacked in sanity, he made up for in vanity. He had his army push further and further and the further his army went, the further they cut themselves off from Berlin, because they didn't secure any land gained and were directed by a vanity so wrong, it allowed 5 weeks to take Moscow.
That's why history agrees his biggest mistake was his failed attempt to invade Moscow.
He saw himself as another failure called Napoleon, only his vanity got the better of him and he worked to resolve where Napoleon had failed.

Peril of the story:
"It is unwise to take advise from a defeated general."



Also.. It dawns on me...

If he could bug Britain with air raids, why not Russia?
Was it because Napoleon didn't have an air force so Hitler being a crazy romanic; didn't want to use his air force?
... Seems kind of stupid to take Russia by land, and in only 5 weeks.

 

Hitler probably was not thinking of taking the USSR in 2 months until the Winter War. After that he "realized" the Red Army was weak and could be beaten in a heartbeat...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GK419Nlp8eU

 

Toptenznet is only a collection of idiocies.

 

And time thus give rose tinted shades amigo..
Never forget. Never surrender.

 

Hitler attacked Britian by air precisely because he couldn't get to it on the ground. The early phases of the Battle of Britain were intended to pave the way for Operation Sealion, landing his army on British soil. Only when that was unsuccessful did he turn to trying to defeat Britain by air bombardment in the Blitz.

In the 1920s and 30s, air power advocates like Douhet and Seversky preached that wars could be won entirely from the air and that civilian populations subjected to aerial bombardment would crack and demand that their government concede whatever the enemy demanded. Of course it didn't work out that way.

In Russia, as in Poland or France, the army could attack its objectives directly, with tactical support by the air force. I agree it was unrealistic to expect the USSR to collapse in 5-6 weeks, but if you look at the distances, they had physically occupied most of the territory they could have bombed in a purely aerial campaign. Why bomb something when you can capture it and convert it to your own use? And of course the air bases moved forward to support the next phase of the campaign.

I've always thought it odd that it's considered strategic and air-minded and all sorts of wonderful things to bomb targets that you just have to bomb again when the enemy repairs them, but tactical and a misuse of air power to help your army capture them once and for all. I would submit that an air-ground team overrunning entire countries is conducting strategic warfare.

 

Kiev was never a target in the original plans for Barbarossa. The priority were the Soviet Armies which were to be destroyed as quickly and as many as possible before ever getting a chance to recover. Kiev became a very attractive target due to the amount of men which could be removed from battle. The Soviet Armies in Kiev (1 million men) were not all Ukrainian. Many were from all parts of the Soviet Union. To imply that these men would simply take off their clothes and "retire" can't be further from the truth. Also, had Ukraine not been secured; the Romanian oils field were now within range of the Soviet Air Force. Bye bye oil. Without Ukraine, what will all those Germans eat in Russia?

Historically the Germans had a difficult time with their supply lines. With Moscow captured how would they fair with even longer ones plus an additional million men plaguing their flank (now that no clothes are coming off )

 

Except for the fact that it doesn't.