But also a product of his nation. [/b]
Pongo, Hitler was Austrian, not German, do you remember?
Originally posted by Pongo:
Hitler didnt start by charming the nation. He terrorised it. He made it impossible to goverern. Then he "saved" it
False, and by a wide margin. Germany was terrorized by different factions as soon as in 1918 when the Spartachists (sp?) (bassicaly a bolshevik move) were rampant all over the country. WIth the army paralized after the defeat on WWI (but still not disbanded as Versalles had been still not signed) and even with soviet cells in it (the officers orders had to be approved by the correspondent cell, go figure), an anti-revolutionary internal group was started, called the Freikorps.
The Freikorps was in everything a paramilitar group but with militar atributes and many ex-soldiers on its files. The problem with them was that the soldiers of the Freikorps started feeling stronger loyalties to the men who gided them than to the German nation, and that was the first of the famous paramilitar groups in Germany, and a very strong one for that matter.
In the meantime, the loyal army officers remained on their posts, with almost no real decision power, theorically commanding soldiers wich followed none of their orders. Many of them were executed by the bolshevik cells after giving "unnapropiate orders", many of them simply had to stand insults to their honor, and to stand them in the name of the German army.
when Versailles was signed, in 1919, the German government accepted a reduction of numbers down to 100.000. That meant that many,many of the same officers who had risked their life by staying on their spots instead of joining the Freikorps, the same officers who had seen how some of them were hanged by the spartakists, now were abandoned by the government, demobilizated and sent to home with no further compensation.
Many, many of them were to join later the SAs,where they gave much needed military-organization, and some of them were to form the core of what it eventually was the Wehrmacht.
For the time the Nationalsocialist Sturm Abteilung (SA) paramilitar branch was created, there was a wide,long, painful past of street violence in germany, and many many paramilitar branches in action,some of them belonging to the different parties on the REichstag.
Hitler didnt create the violence on the streets in Germany. He took advantage of it for his own purposes using a very powerful toy, that is a quite different thing. And this also shows that he was brilliant in using the political stormy climate on the moment for his own advantage.
Eventually the Sturm Abteilung grew too strong, more than 400000 members on it by 1934 (again, officially the German defence army could be only 100000 soldiers-strong under the Versalles treaty. The SA had grown VERY powerful).
Hitler was too much conscious that the same SA wich he was using for wiping out all the political oposition in germany, were able to wipe him from the Chancellor seat at once. That was the reason why he beheaded the SA in the Long knife night in 1934 using the -for that time- small SS groups to destroy the SA leadership.
BTW in 1931-32 one bread costed one million reichmarks. Hitler didnt made that possible, either. It is true that Germany raised its head out of depression more or less at the same time than the other nations. But also is true that Germany started, by far, from the worse economical situation between all those nations, and ended up between the most dynamic economies by 1938. Not a bad work for 5 years, to take a nation so economically lost and to reactivate it to turn it into one of the world economical and industrial powers. He started the last of the list and ended in the leading ranks. Like it or not, is a BIG achievement.
Brilliant. He was brilliant. The fact that he was the instigator of the darkestpage of history doesnt mean that we can't see more than it.
REgarding its military skills, much is said about Hitler's ineptitude. Pongo, your affirmation that he was a risk taker is simply wrong. in fact he was all the way opposite. He was fearful to lose his priceless army,luftwaffe or navy.
He was not educated on military matters yet he thought himself to be a brilliant stratega. He was not. Still, he was a very decent one. He did many many blunders, but most of them not on the strategic level, but on the operative level (the blurring separation between tactical and strategic levels).
One cannot help but remember that Von Manstein's Sichelschnitt (the plan for the invasion of France wich destroyed the French army) had fallen into deaf ears until Hitler gave it full support. Brauchitsch and Halder had even "promoted" Manstein to Command an army corps, far from the western front, to not having to receive yet another petition to his plan to be examinated again.
Happened that one of the Hitler's adjutatns heard of Manstein's plan and told Hitler about it. Hitler called Manstein and asked him to explain Sichelschnitt step by step. Contrary to all the German OKW advice, Hitler called for this plan to be followed (well, in fact he claimed to be the creator of it
)
Hitler also helped the creation and develop of the Panzerwaffe in a time when many powerful elements in the Wehrmacht were,if not against it, yes against the Blitzkrieg concept. Hitler gave complete support to it, so further discussions were stopped, and we all know what happened later.
Dunkerque was not a blunder by Hitler's part,at least not in what concerns him stopping the Panzers. He was fooled by Goering to thing that the Luftwaffe could stop the evacuation single handedly, but the Panzers needed time to get back on line to the final offensive to finish off France.
The BoB failure was more mistake from Goering's part than from Hitler's. Its quite evident that the LW stopping attacks on the RAF and changing to London was a blunder, but it was a propagandistic neccesity at the time. Bombs were falling in BErlin and Hitler needed to do the same in return. Still, it was a big mistake from his part.
Barbarossa was, tough as it may sound, a bassically sound plan. The fact that it not worked was due two factors, the first was the Balkans campaign, wich delayed 6 weeks of time on Barbarossa schedule, and Hitler's orders to use the panzers on the Kiev's pocket instead of going directly for MOscow. if one of those two had not happened, Moscow would've been German in October'41.
One of the hints that the Strategist in Hitler was not that bad was Case Blue. The push on Southern Russia in summer'42. Most of this plan was designed by Hitler himselfm and as much as critized as he was, the Volga was a vital line for the USSR, and cutting it would've been proven fatal for the Soviet Union. As a strategic objective, Moscow was more tempting......but was fortressed, and no blitzkrieg could've been used there. Case blue was a very sound plan in concept, with attainable targets and sound strategical objectives.
Not in execution, though. Again Hitler showed his complete ineptitude on the operative level, giving erratic orders to the panzer formations instead of letting them achieve their specifical objectives. Stalingrad could've been taken almost bloodless in the first days of summer '42, but for that time one of the Hitler's directives had called the Panzer divisions south, for no effect because when they arrived the opposition had been crushed already. For the time the advance on Stalingrad was resumed, the city was already fortified.
The city chosen was also wrong. There is general consensus that, given that Stalingrad was fortified and would be defended till the last man standing, the Panzerwaffe could have turned left and move towards Saratov, an equally important city on the soviet Volga supply line. Saratov was almost defenceless at the moment.
But stalingrad had the name of Hitler's archenemy...and well, we all know how the battle ended
Ouch! long long post...I hope you are not asleep now
[This message has been edited by R4M (edited 04-03-2001).]
