Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: oakranger on October 28, 2009, 02:23:49 PM
-
What do you think Hitler was more obsessive: defeating the Russians or Allies on the western front?
I see him more after Russia.
-
Destroying Germany was his major obsession. After he realized he was doomed he made sure the rest of the country went before him.
-
The war in the east was a ideological war. From what I've read he was somewhat reluctant to go to war with some of the western powers, especially Britain.
-
I think that Hitler's true obsession was to create the ultimate Russia-fearing ambiguously-homoerotic super-android... A being that can defeat even the staunchest enemy by gradually siphoning off his will to live with lengthy, verbose, sporadically-coherent theories and stories.
This ambition was officially satisfied with the advent of the one they call:
Angus
-
Without question he was obsessed with the east. He easily wanted to destroy Bolshevism and International Jewry fully as much as he wanted to win the actual war. The Land/living space his new Teutonic super state needed was to the east as well.
And along with being a racist Lunatic he was also a racist pragmatist. The oil and resources the Reich needed were also to the east. Even tho Stalin faithfully delivered all he wanted in trade right up to the opening shots Hitler still wanted Romanian oil and the resource rich Soviet state. Then there was Himmler and his fantasies of all the Aryan soldier/farmer/supermen living like Lords over their vast new farm communities.
So yeah. He wanted the living space, the resources, and he wanted to turn the undesirable races of people "those he deemed to be" into soylent green. And it wasn't just Jews. It was also Gypsies/Roma and Slavic peoples as well as the Intelligentsia and leaders of the Marxist state.
And the entire thing obsessed him. To the point of committing military suicide.
-
I think that Hitler's true obsession was to create the ultimate Russia-fearing ambiguously-homoerotic super-android... A being that can defeat even the staunchest enemy by gradually siphoning off his will to live with lengthy, verbose, sporadically-coherent theories and stories.
This ambition was officially satisfied with the advent of the one they call:
Angus
:headscratch: can you be a little bit more specific? I dont understand what you mean...
SF
-
Without question he was obsessed with the east. He easily wanted to destroy Bolshevism and International Jewry fully as much as he wanted to win the actual war. The Land/living space his new Teutonic super state needed was to the east as well.
And along with being a racist Lunatic he was also a racist pragmatist. The oil and resources the Reich needed were also to the east. Even tho Stalin faithfully delivered all he wanted in trade right up to the opening shots Hitler still wanted Romanian oil and the resource rich Soviet state. Then there was Himmler and his fantasies of all the Aryan soldier/farmer/supermen living like Lords over their vast new farm communities.
So yeah. He wanted the living space, the resources, and he wanted to turn the undesirable races of people "those he deemed to be" into soylent green. And it wasn't just Jews. It was also Gypsies/Roma and Slavic peoples as well as the Intelligentsia and leaders of the Marxist state.
And the entire thing obsessed him. To the point of committing military suicide.
Closest so far. I would put killing off the Jews above destroying Bolshevism, or anything else, for that matter.
Asking whether Hitler was more interested in the West or in the East shows a complete lack of understanding of Nazi war aims.
-
He was fascinated on how the British could enslave millions around the world. He and millions around the world had much hatred towards Bolshevism for a very long time.
-
Closest so far. I would put killing off the Jews above destroying Bolshevism, or anything else, for that matter.
Asking whether Hitler was more interested in the West or in the East shows a complete lack of understanding of Nazi war aims.
Agree. From what i been reading he was totally obsess with Russia and everything it had.
-
1. to get rid of Jews, Sinti, Roma and all the other low level ethnic groups in the eyes of the Nazis
2. expand living space (Lebensraum) to the east -> it was clear for the Nazis, that Russia was the place to be
3. Lead the German master-race to a major global player
3. maybe the west, because he was "surprised" that France and England declared war after the Nazis invaded Poland
So defeating Russia was not an obsession, but a necessary factor to expand to the east.
SF
-
Agree. From what i been reading he was totally obsess with Russia and everything it had.
No. Read Hilberg (The Destruction of the European Jews). From the first day of the invasion of Russia, military strategic and tactical goals were subordinated to killing Jews (einsatzgruppen). Resources were only an accidental benefit, and if harvesting them got in the way of killing jews, then those resources were squandered. There are multiple accounts of factories that produced military goods being liquidated of the jews they employed for the purpose of extermination, without any available labor to replace them. The Ukrainians and Romanians understood this, and often had jews in ghettos before the SS even arrived. Moreover, the capture of towns with large Jewish populations took priority over the capture of targets of military/industrial value. Once you read the scholarship, it's an inescapable conclusion that everything was subordinated to extermination.
-
Closest so far. I would put killing off the Jews above destroying Bolshevism, or anything else, for that matter.
I'm not sure there was much distinction between the two for him. IIRC he believed Bolshevism was a Jewish construct in the first place.
-
He spells it all out verbatim in Mien Kampf... If you can read the thing, lol!!! I always loose it about 2/3 of the way thru, when I hit that single paragraph that lasts for 17 pages, LOL!!! But I managed suffer thru...
His weltenschouung is right on display.. There is absolutely no ambiguity!!!
Was he obsessed with the east, HELL YES!!!
RC
-
No. Read Hilberg (The Destruction of the European Jews). From the first day of the invasion of Russia, military strategic and tactical goals were subordinated to killing Jews (einsatzgruppen). Resources were only an accidental benefit, and if harvesting them got in the way of killing jews, then those resources were squandered. There are multiple accounts of factories that produced military goods being liquidated of the jews they employed for the purpose of extermination, without any available labor to replace them. The Ukrainians and Romanians understood this, and often had jews in ghettos before the SS even arrived. Moreover, the capture of towns with large Jewish populations took priority over the capture of targets of military/industrial value. Once you read the scholarship, it's an inescapable conclusion that everything was subordinated to extermination.
Western Ukraine/former Poland initially regarded the Nazis as liberators. Ukrainians building ghettos before SS arrive with Germans around having nothing to do with it, capturing Jewish towns before fighting the Red army, something doesn't make sense.
-
Hitler was a complete idiot in his pusuits and utterly insane in his ideals.
We shouldve sent a sniper team after him.
-
Western Ukraine/former Poland initially regarded the Nazis as liberators. Ukrainians building ghettos before SS arrive with Germans around having nothing to do with it, capturing Jewish towns before fighting the Red army, something doesn't make sense.
That's the point. Read Hilberg's book yourself and you will see that my summary is accurate. His scholarship is exhaustive and the standard by which subsequent work has been judged.
FYI, I have only read the abridged volume that's around 500 pages. I am sure there are plenty of other details that I missed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Destruction_of_the_European_Jews (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Destruction_of_the_European_Jews)
-
What do you think Hitler was more obsessive: defeating the Russians or Allies on the western front?
I see him more after Russia.
Neither.
He's was screwed from Sept. 1st, 1939 on. When he declared war on the US, it went from screwed to "f**ked".
-
Neither.
He's was screwed from Sept. 1st, 1939 on. When he declared war on the US, it went from screwed to "f**ked".
Yes he was. But my question was how obsess was he on the East. Look at this: he put so much men, supplies, GVs, and AC on the eastern front then he did in the west or south.
-
Yes he was. But my question was how obsess was he on the East. Look at this: he put so much men, supplies, GVs, and AC on the eastern front then he did in the west or south.
He was obsessed, but he waged War against one of the most Paranoid Leaders in existence, Stalin. Stalin chose the fools way, he'd keep his underlings on pins and needles, rather than allowing them to use logic. Most of the wartime decisions were from bravado and many Soviets paid the ultimate price.
What screwed the Germans in the end were two things. They not only outran their Supply Lines and they had no rigid supply organization structure. Milch himself had to fly out twice to the staging areas, fix the fusterclucks and return when they fouled again. Blitzkreig was good on paper, but the USSR was something that it wasn't practical for.
But take into account that Barbarossa was stalled deliberately by Bletchley Park, because of Tito & the Balkans. Hitler removed a couple of units that might have altered the outcome, had he not smacked down the Balkans, which were pointless at the time to begin with. He could have left it for rear guard units or for later. That move caused Barbarossa to be delayed for six weeks. They already knew that the Winter would be a harsh one, just not that harsh. But sadly even with the extra six weeks, Stalin was screwed because of mishandling of mobilization. Unit Commanders for the 1st 10 days of Barbarossa often lost contact with their units if they left the forward stations.
I'd recommend reading "Stain's Folly" by Constantine Pleshakov. It was written with Politburo papers before they closed the Vault. It shows Stalin for what he really was.
This better? :D
-
That's the point. Read Hilberg's book yourself and you will see that my summary is accurate. His scholarship is exhaustive and the standard by which subsequent work has been judged.
FYI, I have only read the abridged volume that's around 500 pages. I am sure there are plenty of other details that I missed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Destruction_of_the_European_Jews (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Destruction_of_the_European_Jews)
Ty sir,i'll look into it.
-
He was fascinated on how the British could enslave millions around the world. He and millions around the world had much hatred towards Bolshevism for a very long time.
you seem to mistake the word enslave with civilise Herr Kermit.
:salute
-
Western Ukraine/former Poland initially regarded the Nazis as liberators.
Hmmm... makes one wonder why :rolleyes:. Some of that same spirit existed in Baltic countries in 1941, maybe because they had recently been "civilized" ( ;) at Bruv).
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #4
unfortunately zack I can only agree with one of your ten points. :D
maybe two
-
See Rule #6
-
"We shouldve sent a sniper team after him."
AFAIK, you did. Although the spy that was to snipe Hitler at Bertesgarten, did not want to lose his life in a suicidal attempt that was not guaranteed to succeed anyway.
"Closest so far. I would put killing off the Jews above destroying Bolshevism, or anything else, for that matter."
I think Rich is correct too but I'm not sure if Hitler was so determined to destroy Jews. Maybe it was machined by the other lunatics of Nazi party and he had no objections for the solution they came up with.
-C+
-
See Rule #6
-
Hitler's Obsession was to create a pure-bred Germanic superstate, and the place for it was in the East. But the Brits got uncomfortably in the way, and that alone may have been the key to his failiure.
He was not obsessed with the conquest of France or the UK, but since they declared war on him, they had to be dealt with. And he did not plan to conquer the USA, so declaring war on them was outright mad.
Dealing with W-Europe probably postponed his Russian plan by a year. And since the UK refused to be at piece although alone, it meant that his plans for the east were different, slower, later, weaker and worse.
So in short, when I interviewed Hitler, this came out:
Name: Hitler
Occupation: Dictator
Hobby: Cleaning human breed.
Assignment: Make more lebensraum
Enemies: Inferior races, i.e. Jews, Slavs etc.
Obstacles: The British
Favourite music: Wagner
Favourite food: Vegetables
Favourite person: Hmm. Caesar?
Most hated: Churchill
Favourite place: Bavaria
What would you do if you freed a Jinni, and got one wish: Kill all ze Jews, ahh, no kill all the Bolsheviks, there are more of them.
Ok. Thank you Mr. Hitler. You can leave now :devil
-
See Rule #4
-
Hitler was first and foremost an excelent liar. A professional actor.
IMHO, his first and most powerfull obsession was controlling what people thought of him and how he would be remembered. Raising Germany above 'lower forms' of humanity was just a dream cog in his own egotistical engine.
Quick answer? His greatest obsession was himself.
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #2
-
Fritzl is an Austrian. So was Hitler :bolt:
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #6
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #2
-
Our board is not for the sale of items.
-
See Rule #2
-
See Rule #4
-
Back to the opening post, Hitler was against Communism.
In his early years, during the interwar years, there were often street battles between Communists and Fascists in Germany.
He thought he could make peace with Britain and set up a world where Britannia ruled the waves and Germania was a continental power.
-
Was he obsessed with the east, HELL YES!!!
RC
One of those reasons was the Industrial and Oil rich areas that he needed to sustain his own efforts in the war in the East.
-
See Rule #4
-
As usual in any thread about Hitler and the Nazi's, we see alot of fact, and fiction, and sillyness... The real problem is that, no one person, can pull it all together... Simply because TOO MUCH HAPPENED!!
I've had a morbid fascination with the Nazi period since I was a kid.. Own MANY books, and have read MANY more on the topic... Greater minds, and Far more knowlegeable ppl than any of us, have tried to pull it all together in one work... They CAN'T!!! Because by the time you get to the end, (the 45 end) you loose track of the beginning!
The historyline, (just from 1918 to 1939) of all the characters, and their activities, is so wound and twisted, that it is impossible to keep track of it all... Even the ppl who lived and were part of it, can't do it!!!
Sure you can mark the major events, and make sense of them, but when you try to sort out the interrelationships between those events and ppl involved, you end up going in circles, LOL!!! Truthfully, I think that was by design!
The best you can do, is take a piece at a time, and try to avoid the built in contradictions... There are MANY!!!
It could drive ya bonkers, tryin to figure it out!!! And it only gets worse, the farther we are removed from it by time..
No insult or finger pointing intended!!!
RC
-
See Rule #4
-
As usual in any thread about Hitler and the Nazi's, we see alot of fact, and fiction, and sillyness... The real problem is that, no one person, can pull it all together... Simply because TOO MUCH HAPPENED!!
I've had a morbid fascination with the Nazi period since I was a kid.. Own MANY books, and have read MANY more on the topic... Greater minds, and Far more knowlegeable ppl than any of us, have tried to pull it all together in one work... They CAN'T!!! Because by the time you get to the end, (the 45 end) you loose track of the beginning!
The historyline, (just from 1918 to 1939) of all the characters, and their activities, is so wound and twisted, that it is impossible to keep track of it all... Even the ppl who lived and were part of it, can't do it!!!
Sure you can mark the major events, and make sense of them, but when you try to sort out the interrelationships between those events and ppl involved, you end up going in circles, LOL!!! Truthfully, I think that was by design!
The best you can do, is take a piece at a time, and try to avoid the built in contradictions... There are MANY!!!
It could drive ya bonkers, tryin to figure it out!!! And it only gets worse, the farther we are removed from it by time..
No insult or finger pointing intended!!!
RC
All i asked if Hitler was obsessive with winning the war against Russia.
-
All i asked if Hitler was obsessive with winning the war against Russia.
Hey Oak
As I said earlier...
All ya have to do is, read Mien Kampf... Even 1/2 of it, It will answer that question in spades... In his own words!
RC
-
When Germany declared war on the USA we had one of the smallest standing armies in the world.
He couldn't understand American ideals or American thinking cause he had never traveled here. To him the US was hopelessly crippled by INTL Jewry, our culture decadent due to the impact of lesser races. It never occurred to him that was our strength and that we'd be able to assemble a citizen/soldier/military machine unparalleled in all history. Hitler was hopelessly ignorant about a lot of things outside Germany and was kept so by the legions of bootlickers that followed him around. He wasn't a listener. Hitler was a talker. And he had no great scholastic background behind him since he had pretty much failed at schooling. Even as an artist/architect he had failed to get into a decent school.
On the other hand he held in his hands the reigns of a tremendously capable and industrious country. One that had gladly gave away their legal/union/human rights. And one thing you cant take away from Hitler, no matter what, was that in WW-l he was a good and loyal soldier who earned his Iron Cross the hard way. Wearing it proudly until his dieing day.
But to his dieing day he bragged about how he stood up to International Jewry.
Its interesting but its very possible that Hitler, who was born out of wedlock, had a Jewish father. His mother was a maid for a rich Jewish family that had a son about her age. Even Hitlers hatred of Jews didn't materialize until after he failed in life as a young man right before the great War. After wards, despite reality to the contrary, he and many German veterans had convinced themselves Germany was stabbed in the back by the Jews and Marxists back home which forced Germany to surrender.
The actual truth is Germany was broken. The Kaiser fled the country and the govt. in place signed the armistice of 1918, agreeing to the terms imposed by the Western powers. Unfortunately by crippling the German economy, never actually defeating Germany's army, never occupying the country, and allowing the power centers of Army/Monarchy/Industry to remain intact they set the stage for an even worse war. And they put in motion the chain of events that allowed an anonymous corporal to stand on the edge of world domination.
-
All i asked if Hitler was obsessive with winning the war against Russia.
Of course he had an obsession of beating Russia and Stalin. If not before, then at least when the battle of Stalingrad was raging. It was the turning point.
-
The United States involvement in Europe was a small potato really. The USA had to raise a conscript army and ship it to the UK complete with supplies and equipment. Now the way I see it is that as soon as the Germans declared war on the USSR they were doomed, Russia is too large of a landmass to conquer and while blitzkrieg worked on the open plains once they reached urban Russia around the Volga and Moscow they were halted.
This lack of momentum followed by a crippling Russian winter combined with a HUGE planning deficiency led to the complete destruction of the German ground forces. Now had this not materialized OR had Hitler been prepared, an invasion of Europe would have certainly failed. Without Russia and the UK the USA could not have fought the German military period.
So I think of it this way. Without England and Russia, Without Hitlers Stupidity = WW2 Lost
-
See Rule #4
-
See Rule #2
-
The United States involvement in Europe was a small potato really. The USA had to raise a conscript army and ship it to the UK complete with supplies and equipment. Now the way I see it is that as soon as the Germans declared war on the USSR they were doomed, Russia is too large of a landmass to conquer and while blitzkrieg worked on the open plains once they reached urban Russia around the Volga and Moscow they were halted.
This lack of momentum followed by a crippling Russian winter combined with a HUGE planning deficiency led to the complete destruction of the German ground forces. Now had this not materialized OR had Hitler been prepared, an invasion of Europe would have certainly failed. Without Russia and the UK the USA could not have fought the German military period.
So I think of it this way. Without England and Russia, Without Hitlers Stupidity = WW2 Lost
The outcome of the Russian campaign did not get clear before 1943. Hitler was very close to beating the USSR, and might have succeeded had he listened to Guderian. But he was not a listener.
-
I wouldnt call a 3 million + men army and a vast air force "small potato". Nor would I call the contribution of brits, Free French, Canadians, Aussies....ect "small potato".
It is true however that it took the Yank machine a some time to gear up and train up to make a meaningful contribution in the land offensive. But within a year we were landing troops in North Africa. Dont forget the logistics of getting huge armies of men and materials across oceans is a little different then across land. Especially if 100 U-boats are in your path.
It could be argued that if the Germans had not split up their army north and south, started earlier and simply made Moscow their objective they would have won. We'll never know however. In Africa and the Mideast Hitler also showed his lack of strategic vision.
Got to go to work. :salute
The United States involvement in Europe was a small potato really. The USA had to raise a conscript army and ship it to the UK complete with supplies and equipment. Now the way I see it is that as soon as the Germans declared war on the USSR they were doomed, Russia is too large of a landmass to conquer and while blitzkrieg worked on the open plains once they reached urban Russia around the Volga and Moscow they were halted.
This lack of momentum followed by a crippling Russian winter combined with a HUGE planning deficiency led to the complete destruction of the German ground forces. Now had this not materialized OR had Hitler been prepared, an invasion of Europe would have certainly failed. Without Russia and the UK the USA could not have fought the German military period.
So I think of it this way. Without England and Russia, Without Hitlers Stupidity = WW2 Lost
-
See Rule #4
-
For those who are wondering why thier post got excised. It is tiresome to continually have to edit posts that should have never been quoted to begin with. So, from on, you chose to quote an obvious posting infraction of the forum posting rules, your post will get excised for the same rule infraction.
It is irritating anyone would rather quote an obvious infraction, rather than hitting the "Report to moderator" link in the post. All it does is serve to further derail a thread, and support the person who violated the forum posting rule to begin with.
I'll add that to the forum posting rules today.
Carry on.
-
Understood: don't quote rule infractions. :)
-
So, I type slower than I think. Corrected.
-
"Now the way I see it is that as soon as the Germans declared war on the USSR they were doomed, Russia is too large of a landmass to conquer and while blitzkrieg worked on the open plains once they reached urban Russia around the Volga and Moscow they were halted."
As with England and London I think that they thought that it was necessary only to get to Moscow and the whole Soviet Union would be in their grasp. Of course you can speculate if a country can be lead from elsewhere without its historical capital, but for a common man many practical everyday matters dictate where your true leader sits.
"Hitler was very close to beating the USSR, and might have succeeded had he listened to Guderian."
Guderian? Maybe in the starting phases but he should have listened to Manstein above all others, at least to save Germany from complete defeat. But of course that was not an option to Hitler -as was evident he was determined to pull the whole nation into destruction with him. Even in the retreat phases Manstein tried to get permissions to retreat their troops from places that were hopeless to defend and while Hitler denied the permission many times those situations ended in Russians able to mass huge attacking forces that depleted the defenders to a point they had to retreat anyway causing massive drain in manforce and equipment. In fact the encirclement and destruction of sixth army was no the only case where such danger was imminent but the after Stalingrad the generals somewhat knew how to deal with Hitler knowing his insistence to hold ground.
I'm not at all sure how Germany would have fared without Hitler's constant involvement in critical strategic decisions, but I'm quite confident that they would have fared much better. Hitler considered every inch of ground they lost as a political defeat and of course that's what is was for him.
The fall of France, much by Hitlers cunning decisions, helped Hitler to establish a wrong confidence in his military skills. While a few times he was right, in many critical places he was so wrong that it hastened the destruction of Wehrmachts ability even to defend their country quite a bit. In the turning point of war the generals saw that with enough defensive forces they could at least force the Russians to negotiate for peace, but of course, again, that was not an option for herr Hitler considering what other activities he had ongoing in occupied countries...
-C+
-
Guderians point was all about skipping the southern Swing and beginning with Moscow. He put his money on that if Moscow was conquered, the USSR would probably be routed, and secondly, he realized the very important seasonal difference between the south and the north, - winter is much shorter in the south and starts a month later.
While the "swing" was indeed effective, it deprived the Germans of a victory and foothold in Moscow, so instead they had to face retreat in completely horrible cirkumstances. That's where Mannstein's words were sound, although oddly enough Hitler's crazy stiffness about holding the line may have meant that retreat was much slower. (This is a whole seperate thing to ponder on).
Despite all thiss mess, the outcome was not getting clear before more than a year had passed. And there, Hitler should perhaps have listened to Von Paulus.....
-
On the "the US was a bit player" tangent, let's do a reality check.
In 1941, the US had 30% of the world's industrial output. This is on the heels of the Great Depression. By the end of the war, it was more like 50%.
The US was fighting on two fronts. We had the Japanese all to ourselves, with a couple of bit players.
The US built more than half of the ships and planes of the total built by all combatants in WW2.
(I am recalling these facts by memory from Jim Dunnegin's "Dirty Little Secrets of World War 2.")
To be fair, Russia took the brunt of the attrition in the European Theater. The British held out through Pearl Harbor very well. The Commonwealth contributed some of the finest Allied units.
But, to dismiss the US efforts in WW2 is wrong.
-
Ruff,
Noone in their right mind would dismiss the USofA in regards to their role in WW2, essentially it was the manufacturing powerhouse or the western world.
Basically the rest of the players against Germany and Japan were caught flat footed with much of their industrial power either damaged or not up to the requirements of the day, and could do no more than hold the line till the US could get up to steam. I believe the trucks sent but the US to the USSR was a very major contributor to the eventual Russian success.
However why Hitler didn't seal the Mediterrainean to win North Africa after the fall of France shows real lack of vision, imho.
Regards
-
Without question he was obsessed with the east. He easily wanted to destroy Bolshevism and International Jewry fully as much as he wanted to win the actual war. The Land/living space his new Teutonic super state needed was to the east as well.
And along with being a racist Lunatic he was also a racist pragmatist. The oil and resources the Reich needed were also to the east. Even tho Stalin faithfully delivered all he wanted in trade right up to the opening shots Hitler still wanted Romanian oil and the resource rich Soviet state. Then there was Himmler and his fantasies of all the Aryan soldier/farmer/supermen living like Lords over their vast new farm communities.
So yeah. He wanted the living space, the resources, and he wanted to turn the undesirable races of people "those he deemed to be" into soylent green. And it wasn't just Jews. It was also Gypsies/Roma and Slavic peoples as well as the Intelligentsia and leaders of the Marxist state.
And the entire thing obsessed him. To the point of committing military suicide.
Perfect answer.
-
Ruff,
Noone in their right mind would dismiss the USofA in regards to their role in WW2, essentially it was the manufacturing powerhouse or the western world.
Basically the rest of the players against Germany and Japan were caught flat footed with much of their industrial power either damaged or not up to the requirements of the day, and could do no more than hold the line till the US could get up to steam. I believe the trucks sent but the US to the USSR was a very major contributor to the eventual Russian success.
However why Hitler didn't seal the Mediterrainean to win North Africa after the fall of France shows real lack of vision, imho.
Regards
How was he supposed to "SEAL" the med? The British had the key, - Gibraltar.
3 ways.
1. Make peace with the UK. He tried in an arrogant way, and actually assumed that the Brits would step down and carry on with their lives (thereby lifting their naval embargo on Germany), but they didn't.
2. Beat the British. He tried, but he failed.
3. Get help with Gibraltar. Germany had no chance conquering Gibraltar from the air or sea, however from land if the Fascist leader of Spain, - Franco, - would allow. Hitler did try that as well, but Franco turned out to be quite difficult to deal with. Hitler could not negotiate.
So, he did not lack the vision. The opening of the med was in the mind of the Nazi planners, but it could not be done. (except for one way, - accept Franco's demands and then tell him to STFU somewhat later on, - something not at all abnormal for Hitler, at least later on)
The pont was good though. With a passage through the med and into the Black Sea, Hitler could have struck straight at the underbelly of the USSR, straight into the resources that fed the north, many months earlier, and then being able to turn the defensive logistics into a complete nightmare of transport. Exactly what the German army had to go through itself in 1941-1942.
BTW, the Battle of Gallipoli in 1917 was all about opening up to the Black sea. The Turks were in the way. In 1941 they were neutral, and if anything, pro-axis.
-
I was thinking more of getting a port in Algeria or possibly Morocco from the Vichy to operate from so as to be able to blockade the Straits. That would prevent the resupply of Malta, and put a big increase in the supply lines of the 8th Army. However I guess I am using 20/20 hindsight.
-
The Axis had ports all over the N-African coast. Those were largely recaptured during operation Torch.
It was Gibraltar who dominated, they could not enter the med with anything floating on the surface, nor return, and not return with U-boats as well.
-
Regarding the Med, weren't the Italians were supposed to take care of "Mare Nostrum?" A lot of Germany's involvement in the south came in an attempt to bail out Il Duce.
Plus, Crete was such a bloody affair for the German paratroops, Hitler lost interest in moved on to the the East.
-
The Italians were bottled in, and lost their game with the Royal Navy, which was not bottled in.