Most unsuccessful Wehrmacht General?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 сен 2018
- Who was the most unsuccessful German General in the Wehrmacht in the Second World War? A name that probably doesn't come to mind is General der Infanterie Georg Thomas. He was one of the key figures when it came to "war economic" (Wehrwirtschaft). He was one of the few officers that are sometimes called "economic professionals" or "logistics guys". Due to the operational minded German Army, he faced a lot of opposition, yet, not only from the regular officers. Thomas was an advocate of "Tiefenrüstung", whereas the operational minded generals favored a "Breitenrüstung" to achieve parity with the enemies as fast as possible.
Cover Design & Idea: by Von Kickass
»» GET OUR BOOK ««
» Army Regulation Medium Panzer Company 1941 - www.hdv470-7.com/
»» SUPPORT MHV ««
» patreon - / mhv
» paypal donation - www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr...
» Book Wishlist www.amazon.de/gp/registry/wis...
»» MERCHANDISE - SPOILS OF WAR ««
» shop - www.redbubble.com/people/mhvi...
»» SOCIAL MEDIA ««
» minds.com - www.minds.com/militaryhistory...
» facebook - / milhistoryvisualized
» twitter - / milhivisualized
» twitch - / militaryhistoryvisualized
» RallyPoint - www.rallypoint.com/organizati...
» tumblr - / militaryhistoryvisualized
Military History NOT Visualized is a support channel to Military History Visualized with a focus personal accounts, answering questions that arose on the main channel and showcasing events like visiting museums, using equipment or military hardware.
» SOURCES «
Fröhlich, Paul: Der unterirdische Kampf. Das Wehrwirtschafts- und Rüstungsamt 1924-1943. Ferdinand Schöningh: Paderborn, Germany (2018)
Ueberschär (Hrsg.) Gerd R.: Hitlers militärische Elite - 68 Lebensläufe (3. Auflage)
Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg, Band 1: Ursachen und Voraussetzungen der deutschen Kriegspolitik (English Version below)
ENGLISH VERSION: Germany and the Second World War, Volume 1: The Build-up of German Aggression
Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg - Band 5 / 1
ENGLISH VERSION: Germany and the Second World War Volume 5 / 1
Tooze, Adam: The Wages of Destruction. The Making and Breaking of the Nazi Economy. Penguin Books: United Kingdom (2006).
» CREDITS & SPECIAL THX «
Song: Ethan Meixsell - Demilitarized Zone
#wehrmacht #ww2 #general
Like the content? Consider support me on Patreon - patreon.com/mhv every single dollar helps!
Military History not Visualized they look amazing. Glad to support this channel
Military History not Visualized: why did you rename the channel
James Pilkinton he has two channels. One is not visualized and the other is visualized
I have crippling depression I’ve only been subbed to 1 and it changed
Discrepancy is my new favorite MHV/MHNV word.
Most successful U.S. Cold War generals? General Motors, General Electric, General Dynamics.
dont forget General Atomic, although that may be after the cold war
Patton
@@izygowie9526 Patton during U.S. Cold War ?
@@gromosawsmiay3000 Probably misspelled "Patent."
Thinking about it that way it made technology go faster :) We need more cold wars! (Dont launch nukes tho)
I feel like to many people are conflating "unsuccessful" for "bad". He wasn't a terrible general, at least compared to others, he just wasn't in the position to get what he wanted done.
yeah
If we had to talk about "bad" general, they have to be as bad as Joseph Stillwell and Grigory Kulik.
What was so bad about Stillwell?
Alright let start, it is agreed that Stilwell isnt a bad general in terms of being incompetent or not skilled but rather he was bad at the billet he was assigned to.
Ill quote Greg Blandino from Quora to make this simple: Source- www.quora.com/Was-General-Joseph-Stilwell-a-hero-or-a-jerk
"He was the wrong man, at the wrong place, at the wrong time. The CBI theater needed a political general like Eisenhower, and instead it got a Patton.
I'll preface this by saying I think that Stilwell would have done excellently in the European Theater of Operations, either as a corps commander or army commander of an all-American force. His single minded drive, ability to push troops to their limit, and aggression would have made for an excellent commander of armor in France. Americans are acclimated to the "loud, insulting, asshole" type, and arguably respond well to it. Chinese and British people, not so much. In Burma, these attributes pissed everyone off around him, got the units under him destroyed through sheer attrition and lack of logistical support, and eventually got him fired from his job.
The only reason he got chosen to be sent to China was because of previous time he spent in China and his ability to speak Mandarin. Personality wise, sending Vinegar Joe into a theater where he was going to loudly tell everyone whats-what, while bringing absolutely no troops to the table until nearly a year after arriving in theater, was moronic. If anything, his driving, hurry up style was unsuitable not just for the CBI theater, but the entire Pacific theater, which demanded careful logistic planning and methodical tactical moves. Again, send this man to Europe.
While "advising" Chiang Kai-Shek, you can tell clearly from his diary that he misapprehended the entire situation. He was technically correct with his strategy: opening a land route to China via Burma would allow for a greater flow of supplies, thus allowing a strengthening of the NRA, and hopefully the eventual theoretical creation of some American style, 30 well equipped division Army would have been able to win the war.
But it's insane. It's undoable. You see this type in China, the expat American who doesn't understand the problems the Chinese face, and just gives contemptuous advice of how "we do it" that is completely irrelevant and unworkable. In this case, a language barrier might have been a boon, not a burden. It would have prevented the Chinese from fully grasping how condescending Stillwell was being, which he liked to fully articulate in face-to-face meetings to his superiors. I'd like to say this doesn't go over well in Chinese culture, but to be honest, this method is ineffective in pretty much every culture.
"China proper" was being nearly fully occupied with a large proportion of the Chinese population living under the Japanese yoke. To send large portions of the Chinese army into a British colony so that maybe, a year or two later, the Lend-Lease spigot could be turned on a bit more, might seem reasonable to Stilwell, but absolutely beside the point for Chiang. The enemy is right here, let's fight him here, not in some malarial jungle that ate Chinese manpower for the benefit of the British Empire's position in India.
Also, Stilwell did not grasp or care to grasp the intricacies of the Chinese command structure that Chiang had to work with. Chiang did not have unity of command as we understand it, with large swathes of his territory and portions of his army having their first allegiance to a "warlord" who then pledged his allegiance to the central government in Chongqing. In effect, it is similar to a feudal style army, where the King has a royal guard that he brings to battle, but he relies on Dukes and Barons to provide the bulk of his forces. In that light, the 30-division plan is ludicrous, and it is also ludicrous to expect these "Dukes" to send their forces to Burma for a plan that would place more Lend-Lease supplies in Chiang's hands.
This also explains the stupidity of throwing the petty corruption of Chinese forces in Chiang's face. What is he supposed to do, start another civil war to arrest the people responsible? It's not like he can just call up some MPs and have the perpetrators arrested, for the most part.
His relations with the British were also spectacularly bad. Considering these two entities, the British Empire and NRA were bringing the vast majority of troops to the table, some humility and tact was in order, not open contempt for limeys. Again, send this man to Europe in charge of a purely American army, and watch him tear up the French countryside. Sending him to the twilight of the British Empire and the purgatory of Nationalist China was a monumentally bad decision.
All-in-all, the CBI theater ended up with all parties leaving with egg on their face. Coalition warfare is the hardest to implement. Operation Matterhorn and Ichigo made both the Chinese and Americans look incompetent, and the British defeat in Burma in 1942 is explainable only in the context of the completely unfounded British collapse in Asia due to incompetence in late 41-42. At least the British came out with a belated victory in the U-Go offensive and counterattack.
Finally, examining Stillwell's experience in China proves the old canard that we fought World War II "without politics" to be incorrect. War is intimately tied up with the fates of nations and thus is political to the core. Stillwell's failure to recognize this makes him a jerk, not a hero."
Comrade General Vladimir Pootis exactly, after watching the video I thought he was not bad but he was unsuccessful.
"General Georg Thomas."
"Who?"
"Exactly."
@ger du
Now, I know who he was, but his title does sound like a great Luchador movie. Imagine the evil dead movies played by El Santo as Ash Williams.
I don't think that is decisive - there are few if any bestsellers about generals in charge of supply services.
@ger du The first time I saw that name was in a video called "The main reason why germany lost WW2: OIL" by TIK, and the one time where he reports there's only 2 months worth of operational warfare (aka during an offensive)
Edit: Yes, the channel's name is TIK
9:09
"You're pessimistic, logistic, …"
"You're logistic" is now my favourite insult.
mine too
Wonder if germans use that as an insult?
@@fulcrum2951
Not yet. That's why I'm here to change that.
TFW some Bolshevik-admiring loser keeps babbling about resource allocation and centralizing war economy instead of pumping out a new line of super-heavy tanks
@@generalaccount6531 The chad tank driver vs the untersmencsh economic advisor
To call it a dumpster fire would imply that it had any form of functional structure to begin with.
LOL
They were morons. And to think that wehraboos actually worship these morons!
I for one still believe this channel should be called 'Military History Vocalised'.
Yeah, I'm missing his little ponies icons.
@Jim lastname You're right. I was confused.
@Jim lastname
He uses them very rarely though.
Still loved his joke about the Wehrmacht being a bunch of brownies during Barbarossa. Would've made the campaign a lot more interesting.
My little Wehrmacht, my little Wehrmacht.
Nein-Nein-Nein-Nein.
I used to wonder what spearheads would be,
Until you sheared it Panzers with me!
Big adventures,
Tons of fun,
A beautiful StuG, faithful and strong,
Sharing ammo is an easy feat,
Machine guns make it all complete!
My little Wehrmacht.
Do you know we own all of France?
I'm proud of this one.
His podcast is called Military History Verbalized, so he's probably trying to not confuse his stuff.
siphosihle madondo *military history demonetized*
"Pft, how bad could he be at his job?"
"Well, he was in charge of the war economic"
"Oh................... oh god no."
Most uncessful? Blaskowitz, when he tried to stop the war crimes in Poland...
At least he tried
He tried... unsuccessfully.
Alright, I'll show myself out
J. Blaskowitz may have failed, but B.J. Blaskowitz did not.
@@klobiforpresident2254 *Cringe*
@@RapidAssaultEuro
Ja. Zhat was zhe Plan.
When we think of a successful, or unsuccessful general, we think of battle and military strategy. Has what I was thinking when I clicked on this video. This guy was a bureaucrat.
My uncle was the top medical officer on Eisenhower’s staff during WWII. He was also a general. How many people think of that position?
Something that sobered me into realizing how little I know was realizing in the video about the “best German general” was realizing just how many generals there actually were, everyone thinks of the celebrities, Guderian, Rommel, Kesselring, Model, Manstein, they don’t realize the other few thousand there werre
NO! it was Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein!
Tomas, Fegelein, Steiner, Goring, Paulus are my bottom 5
BRINGEN SIE MIR FEGELEIN!
Nien! Ich war es Dio!!!
@@dynastywarriorlord07 leave my boy Paulus alone >:(
@@theoneduckson2312 Okay replace Paulus with Wilhelm Keitel
Thanks for your very informative historical videos. It's good to have an insight to why things turn out like they do!
Yeah but he was one of the few to say the fact that Germany would run out of fuel by November 1941, and from then on the Germans never launched an operation even close to the succeses of Barbarossa prior to November 1941.
Unseen you clearly have no idea on what Germany had for oil/fuel in 1941/42/43. You should really do so research into that. Come back when you have done yhat
you show no actual knowledge of the German oil industry nor any idea of how bad the oil shortage was. Nor do you remotely understand that it was an energy shortage since coal was also having production problems. Also you clearly have no knowledge of the fuel shortages during operation blue that slowed the German armies, nor the fact that the 1942 campaign was much smaller than 1941 with Kursk being equally smaller again in 1943. You should really read Wages of Destruction by Adam Tooze
Look at the video of TIK. He made about this topic a really deep analysis. Men were enough, fuel was low after 1941. ruclips.net/video/kVo5I0xNRhg/видео.html
Sorry dude but Barbarossa was nowhere near a success, in fact it was a colossal failure.
@@larmencio889 Even if they did reach that line, who's to say the Soviets wouldn't just push their industry further into Russia like they did in our timeline? Granted that would most likely extend the war and we probably wouldn't see Soviet operational victories until at least mid to late 1943 but the result would still be the same.
Thanks for another great video on an interesting subject!
Great video. I would like to hear more about other lesser-known generals
I wonder if his last words were "I told you so"
Great video. One topic I've never really understood in detail was the industry of the Third Reich during the Rearmament and subsequent war - would you consider doing a video on the primary manufacturers (Krupp, Daimler-Benz), their connections to the government/military, and how it compared in efficiency to the Allied war economies?
"Any respectable dumpster fire"
Well thats strange i got the book Thomas wrote, according to him he was right, everybody else was wrong and should've listened to him..
so, pretty much what Guderian et al wrote as well :D
Yup, one of the two evergreens of every german ww2 leader who wrote his memoirs..
And people say that victors write history, esp in the context of WW2. Clearly not because defeated generals were behind the most popular histories of the war in the Western world for decades.
@@Galland_ 1. I saw nothing. 2. I was only following orders. 3. They should have listened to me. Does that sum up what every German soldier said after the war?
Galland lol
He was a leading participant in planning and carrying out economic exploitation of the Soviet Union, most notably the Hunger Plan. The plan resulted in the deaths of millions of people. The plan as a means of mass murder was outlined in several documents, including one that became known as Göring's Green Folder, which quoted a number of "20 to 30 million"
Albert Speer had 2 significant advantages in ramping up wartime production. First, Hitler considered him a close personal friend, and second, Hitler didn't declare "Total War" until 1942, meaning Germany was still trying to produce consumer goods even after the invasion of Russia, perhaps because Barbarosa was only supposed to last a few months at most. Still Speer had the full resources of Germany at its zenith of conquest to work with. By contrast, the United States began full economic mobilization immediately after Pearl Harbor, at which time Russia, too was free to transfer a large amount of resouces out of Asia into Europe.
Third, the allied bombing campaign. The allies hit the german organization building in Berlin resulting in a lot of organization papers of the "dumpsterfire" war economy going up in flames. This allowed Speer to "restructure" the war economy in parts ftom scratch. One of the reasons the german production was more standartized.
Unsuccessful in that he was unable to make a big impact, but probably one of the most correct and sensible generals in his ideas and intentions?
The army in charge of the economy is not desirable.
@@ArcticTemper depends on your goals
The most unsuccessful unit would be the Abwehr. But that might have been partly intentional.
To be fair, Germany had historically bad military intelligence, but the Abwehr doing their bit to bring down the Nazi regime helped.
@@Jamie-kg8ig The one succesful German agent sure made the Germans regret their actions.
The best German spy was Richard Sorge. 🤣🤣
Not all, there are plenty of successful operations. Check up their operations with INA in afganistan
Where those the guys who had every single agent in Britain compromised?
Very interesting. Would you do a video on German oil production/ problems/ history? thanks-
I was looking up George H. Thomas from the US Civil War. I wonder if Georg was named after him as he is arguably the best General in US history being the only Gen. not to lose a battle in the Civil War? (he was ordered to retreat twice but his command was intact) I think Albert Speer followed Georg's advice shortly after he left. Wasn't Speer pushing for a war economy after Stalingrad and wasn't it implemented in late 1943? It was unique to Germany that the civilians were still driving cars, using gasoline and producing refrigerators for the public when all other nations rationed everything. The USA even stopped making copper pennies for the war effort but Germany kept civilian life quite normal much longer than any other nation. I would say that Georg had a point and should have been listened to. Thanks for this video and great channel guys.
To paraphrase your earlier statements concerning competition, infighting and inefficiencies between service groups (e.g. the Wehrmacht & the Kriegsmarine) and in the military-industrial complex of Germany at that time, was that Hitler deliberately encouraged this infighting (so his own position as dictator would not be challenged), so harbouring these inefficiencies.
This was true for all of German society. Most fields had at least 2 agencies fighting for influence: the state and party institutions.
It would be interesting to do a project where one figures his ideas being adopted and follow it out to say 1950. To see even then if it would have made any difference in the outcome.
WILL You continue on the fallschirmjager topic ?
Surely they could still standardize by getting all the companies to build things to the same designs
Underrated comment.
Some of the logistics officers were highly capable but were largely ignored when they gave opinions that others didn't want to hear and were not given sufficient resources required to correct deficiencies. Such as when detailed analysis was provided to the senior staff explaining how adequately supplying the Eastern Front was not going to be feasible and result in a stalled advance some time before it happened. Some also had a destructive and xenophobic outlook that sometimes deemphasized more sustainable and humane strategies although they were aware of such alternatives and knew they were often of greater long term economic benefit. Thorough analysis was conducted but the suggested plan may have been chosen for political survival and ideological reasons rather than effectiveness.
In terms of unsuccessful, would Thomas be above or below US general Lloyd Fredendall (Kasserine Pass)?
I only read once about him, yet, I think the author balanced him out a bit. In short not enough information and as I saw recently there are so many aspects out there that are misrepresented aka Sherman death trap that this could also be the case with Generals.
With regard to Fredendall, he had an Engineer Regiment spend valuable time building an underground concrete Headquarters for himself, while completely ignoring conditions up on the Front Line.
Edit: And I should add, the bunker was well behind the lines.
How about John P Lucas. (Anzio) (And apologies to Lucian K. Truscot)
Truscott wasn't the one in command of Anzio at first.
Thomas failures had important effects on the outcome of the war, while Fredendall merely lost a battle which had little effect on the outcome of the campaign being fought.
That dubious title belongs to General Dr. Heinz Doofenschmirtz who is the head of product development under General Thomas, the Chief REMF.
This is my first response to any of your videos, which, by the way, I find extremely informative and non-biased. Regarding General Thomas' motivation for being a part of the resistance toward Hitler, was that not the main reason several high ranking German officers were also complicit in joining the resistance? I read some time ago that many of the general staff desired to come to some kind of peaceful arrangement with the Western Allies while striking a bargain with the Soviets that would essentially, in both cases, preserve Germany from succumbing to unconditional surrender and in the words of Asian parlay "saving face" knowing that by 1944 the defeat of Nazi Germany was imminent. Your learnered response is appreciated!
well, the reasons for joining the resistance are many. The first military resistance started in 1938 under Beck if I am not mistaken, because he assumed that in an upcoming war, Germany would lose. I think I mention this in the video about Czechoslovakia. As far as I know the 20th July "group" (more like groups) wanted Germany restored to 1938 or 1939 borders.
Now you have to do one on who was the worst battlefield German general :-)
0:15 If he was in charge of the German war economics in WW2, then he was really unsuccessful. No further questions needed.
I just can't get over your accent, I love it! (nohomo)
I just like that this guy is so famous he does not even have a picture on his wikipedia page...
0:09 to hear "who" a whole lot, click and repeat. It's sweet.
A video on General Johannes Blaskowitz?
I would love that. He's an interesting figure.
what about Ernst Busch? He was such a bad general that all his superiors tried to get rid of him and only his unconditional obedience to Hitler saved him from court-martial after the collapse of the Heeresgruppe Mitte. He was also the guy that got his troops encircled in Cholm and Demjansk.
"The Wages of Destruction" is a great book for you to review.
Fighting languages here eh? It happens to me as well. Especially when German words mix into English.
''Most successful Italian generals'' next?
Perhaps Thomas was unsuccesful, but he wasn't as incompetent as some others. I'd say the worst high ranking German officer was Keitel, whose only function was to create legitimacy for Hitler's military decisions
To me its halder, he was the one during operation Barbarossa changed the direction of the Wehrmacht from the oil fields and resources in southern russia to moscow whilst the army still had momentum
@@fulcrum2951
"But but muh corporal was an strategic idiot argument. "
@@karlthebarbarian9875 I have suggested to others before that instead of Barbarossa they could have occupied Turkey through a combination of coercion and force. This would have opened the door to an offensive in the middle east which had low oil production at the time but known untapped reserves. It also would have enabled a potential Southern route of attack on the Soviets, gaining the Caucasus oil in the early part of such a campaign. This would also give time to repair any sabotage and begin production again without a long delay. The mountains and bodies of water pose a natural barrier but could also help to hide commando attackers and there were several passable routes through them. If the Soviets build up defenses in the mountains to a large extent then avoid war with them and seizing more of the Middle East would be a better return on invested resources.
@@stupidburp
I think the logistics of that were simply impossible. The British held Egypt and Palestine, the Vichy French held Syria. The were not going to be too cooperative. Turkey is a huge country to traverse and to supply as well. I don't know why Hitler really didn't just shut down the Mediterranean though. He could have risked the ire of Franco and have just taken Gibraltar and a bit of Morocco from the French. Also taking the Suez Canal would have seriously impaired goods flowing to the USSR. I think not taking Gibraltar is a topic rarely discussed.
@@karlthebarbarian9875 Stalin understand it too. Major chunk of soviet forces were strategicaly deployed on southern route, which contributed disastrous performance in front of army group center. In sumer '42 they switched their points of interests, seemingly again to the soviet disadvantage at the beggining, but relentless soviet attack on center, even proved fruitless and bloody, (and equally large as battle for stalingrad, e.g. "rzhev meatgrinder") drow too much german reinforcements, thus preventing them to make few more steps forward to victory.
I think Goering and Himmler were worse. Himmler had two commands at the end of the ear and he was trounced in the most humiliatingly possible way. Goering’s Stalingrad Airlift was terrible at best.
Can you do all major nations most unsuccessful generals?
Careful there...
zoompt 1975 w
Why? Its good to know every nations worst generals
Gamelin comes to mind with how he responded to the military exercise in regards to tanks+forest
Spot on.
Come on Thomas and not Schoenerer? Schoenerer was a golden pheasant par excellence. Say what you will about Generals like Gamelin - at least their personal courage was never in doubt. It takes courage to refuse to recognize the legitimacy of a Vichy court in the darkest days of the Occupation of France. Schoenerer was a convinced Nazi, a big fan of the Feldjagerkorps and issued a "kampfen bist zum letzen mann" order while aiming to run away to South America. Besides Keitel, I struggle to think of a bigger tool than Schoenerer.
First, question mark in the title. Second, you seem to look at mostly ethic criteria.
@@MilitaryHistoryVisualized The ethics just make Schoenerer's utter lack of battlefield success and/or poor use of existing resources compared to his peers that much more glaring. As in - not only was he a failure he was a monstrous human being to boot. He fits the stereotype of the kind of officer enlisted men despise to a t
Third, I wanted people to know about Thomas.
I support his military-economic ideas. I believe Germany might have done better if they had followed his ideas from the 30ies onwards. Germany starved to death after the conquest of Franse because of a total continental blockade. Especially oil, which they had to provide for a whole continent without naval import instead of just Germany.
Just do it like in Hoi.
Assign factories and unlock stuff via a click on a screen. That's gonna win us the war for sure!
What is your opinion on Albert Speer?
In my opinion he was a brilliant mind in the wrong time and place
Grossly overrated except for his ability to dodge his complicity in Nazi war crimes
Dylan Williams that skill was jis superpower
@@ohmyvisage The dude was an amazing con-artist. It shows how eager the post-war West was to suck Nazi dick post-mortem the Third Reich. "Oh, BUT HE SAID SORRRRRRY!"
TL:DW:
One faction wanted to spam Civilian Factories and Infrastructure to boost resource yield, while
another wanted to just spam Military Factories and occupy foreign assets.
Germany ended up flip - flopping, then got subsequently killed in USSR due to faulty frontline AI @ Stalingrad.
In August 1941 Thomas put a report in which he stated that Germany just lost the war, he was laughted at by the rest of the OKH.
Like your insight as always. Thanks for an interesting presentation.
In hindsight, it is easy to realize Germany was defeated as soon as it attacks Russia and declares war on the U.S. Its lack of raw materials, organization and equipage of the Army.Navy and Air force were not the best for attacking large countries with better manufacturing capabilities. ( Nobody or hardly any one knew this for sure then.) But Guderian and others note that the German Headquarters was not replacing lost men or equipment in Russia but still expecting these units to function as fully operational units by Nov of 41. The staff was forming new units instead.
Question.
Is this the results of a boot-lickers click at staff level or did the General Staff not have a comprehensive war strategy that went beyond the use of military force? Did they really understand complexities outside of the use of the military? I wonder as German officers of that time often say they stayed away from politics as that was not what a German officer should be involved in.... did this attitude limit their vision?
There was a visualization in the beginning! This is betrayal of not!
Knights of Ni have been called
Brace your shrubberies for your life!
You cannot expect the Sp.... *Disconnected*
Generals win battles, quartermasters win wars.
Or lose wars, for that matter.
Seems like logistics in general was a weak point for the Wehrmacht. I am interested in Erhard Milch, who I believe had a lesser "fail" in his attempts to oppose Goring. Wikipedia mentions his attempts to get a strategic bomber program going, but there may be more to it. Wikipedia accuses him of being "ineffective" in getting fighter production going, but the points you raise regarding domination by the civilian industrial elite may be involved in Milch's situation, also.
I have a PDF version of a book on my iPad, "Die Tragodie der deutsche Luftwaffe" by David Irving. I read it from time to time, trying to revitalize my lapsed German. Irving's take seems to be it was not Milch's fault, but there may be other points of view.
So he warned about limited German resources - that was only the materialistic point that made WW II a crazy idea from the first minute. It already prooved in WW I that no country can survive a two-fronts-war, with the only exceptions of the US and USSR.
But there were more points that made it insane from the start, but that was beyond _resources_ or geostrategies or heroism.
The roles of Georg Thomas was "ambivalent" as it seems: he was aware of German shortages, but the consequences he draw from that were outrageous; Wikipedia sums it up as ...
"He was a leading participant in planning and carrying out economic exploitation of the Soviet Union, most notably the _Hunger Plan_.[2] "
in which he calculated(!) that some ten millions of Russian will die because of exploitations to get their resources for Germany.
"Thomas's role in plotting against Hitler has led some historians to describe him as a member of the German resistance, while others find his record more ambiguous ..."
He was arrested for that by the SS and had only luck that WW II ended to survive it. But soon after that he died in 1946.
Well I am not into "most unsucsesfuls generals", because his doctrine of build up the army slow was common sence at that time, however as Hitler (and some other influencers I do not have the names of) understrecheted that a war like that could only be lost because intelligence reports from russia, france and England clearly revealed that those countrys too was building up their armies too for the next war. Those countries build up their armies using the same doctrine..slow but steady. And that war would only have one outcome and that would be the defeat of Germany.. So to be able to win the war there were only one choise and that was a war before England, France and Rusian was ready. So because of well know facts that Georg Thomas also noted, that the army build up needed resources from Poland and other east countries to be able to win actual gave that result we all know today. Poland and Russia had to be beaten fast and now. Before England and France and next USA would be ready. And that was a very close race Germany lost only because a couple of generals on the eastfront did not follow their orders and put some strong divisions the wrong place. Hitlers plan was from the beginning to take the oilfields in the sout east but discoverd that some generals had put some strong divisions at the front at Moscou. Because in the High command of germany there were a debate of whats most important to take and some believed that because Moscou was a logistic middelpoint of railroads and radiocumminications ect. that russia would fall apart if germany get Mosou fast. However that turned out to be totally wrong since Russian was able to move all their war industri away from there. So most uncussesfull general? Halder to blame. That was his orderes there scrued up everything so the germans did not get the oilfields fast enoufgh because he was going for Moscou.
Who was worse between Thomas, Fegelein, Goring, Paulus, and Steiner?
Wasn't Gerd von Runstedt fired like 3 times?
What about himmler on the oder front 1945? although he was a politician just randomly put incharge still counts though
Not really what I expected.
So which general lost the most battles?
Which general lost in the most spectacular way due to incompetence?
The Germans needed to adopt Marshall's approach of sacking and replacing generals. In the U.S.A in ww2 sacking wasn't terminal and Generals who were shifted or reassigned ended up doing well later on. This keeps cooperation and a more team effort type of philosophy prevalent which leads to best practice and better results. The Americans stopped taking this approach by the time of Vietnam and that continues today with pretty lackluster results.
More knowledge!!!!
Otto Remer. Who was not only an incompetent general, but a stain on the cosmos in general. When you look up his name, folks, you'll see why.
You should do a video on the military resistance against Hitler. :)
Love your videos but please do best of/worst of ... of real front line generals. You know the guys that went out there in front of flying bullets and dropping shells and conducted troop movements as if it were another days job, you know those guys ...
I wonder if there's any Allied and Soviet officers that are similar to Georg Thomas
George Thomas was the Rock of Chickamagua. Old Slow Trot. Great general. :)
“General Georg Thomas”
Never heard of him, how could he be that bad?
“He was responsible for German war economics.”
Oh, that’s how.
before watching I say:
1) von Paulus , his wife told him to refuse commandement in Africa
2) Jodl, no happy end for him...
I thought it was just Paulus as he wasn't of Prussian nobility
It is just Paulus. The von is a common mistake.
Didn't the Nazis not want anyone using noble titles anymore anyway?
Jodl was such a bald objector...
What about Hermann Goring, Hermann Fegelein, and Felix Steiner?
I thought Himmler was the unsuccessful one
Hitler’s system of competing fiefdoms lit the dumpster fire and then poured gasoline on it.
You make Hitler sound like Trump
@@grogery1570 how is Trump like Hitler? Concrete examples please, not bullshit fearmongering partisan propaganda.
Wow you Trumpsters are touchy!!!
It is well documented that Trump thrives on conflict between his staff/employees.
Which is what dangerouslytalented said about Hitler. No other comparison was made if you weren't so sensitive you would have realized that.
I hope you don't go and complain about Politically Correct Liberals after this.
Well how many of Trumps cabinet have been fired, resigned, recused themselves ordered investigations into the Trump campaign?
Is that good enough or do I need to go and get names and dates for you?
I would normally do this but every day is another disaster in Trump land and I just can't keep up!!!
I mentioned Hitler being a dumpster fire. Why is everyone talking about trump now?
Isn't a decentralised production more resistant to bombing? A few major companies and factories could more easily be taken out by bomb raids than spread out workshops. It is less efficient but more resistant so to speak.
yes, but in that case it was for pure political reasons, also a decentralized production can also be organized in a centralized way, from what I gathered it was more of a rather unstructured mess.
Most unsuccessful? I thought it would have been General Wellbeing.
German Militar Intelligence lead by general Gehlen who miscalculated the strenght of Red Army in 200 divisions only! And had no idea of the giant amount of tanks the Soviets could take on battle
I think Gehlen has got to be a candidate. Despite that he made a rather good postwar career by impressing the Americans.
Georg Thomas he was right about the loss of Stalingrad, it was the turning point of the war. After that it became a war a attrition with Germany against the British empire, USA, Russia and their combined resources, this made it very difficult Germany to win, if not impossible.
I think these wars are planned, by the powers that be. There is no reason for Americans and Britons to be fighting Germany, when our countries are heavily populated by Anglo Saxons.
Some would say Paulus but he failed thanks to Hitlers orders to stand and fight instead of retreat from Stalingrad
Interesting video, in particular his involvement with the Soviet Union before the war. A number of large mass production factories had been built by the American’s though run by the military. I think, an expectation of being put in charge of all Germany’s resources was unrealistic, the politicians, would never allow it, never mind the Nazis. Clearly, he understood, the implications of a War with the Soviet Union was difficult unless resources were obtained, particularly oil, which was consistent with the Annexation of Austria and Czechoslovakia for more production facilities such as Skoda and Styr to prepare for war. Historians are split, on their analysis, some consider him a Germany patriot because of his involvement in the military opposition. Whilst others, consider himself no better than Reinhard Heydrich, because he led the economic exploitation of the Soviet Union, most notably the Hunger Plan. Had he not died in 1946, it is plausible he would he gone to Nuremberg with a subsequent appointment with Albert Pierrepoint.
The "subscribe" and Twitter popups are a bit distracting during the video
Danke !!!
While the Prussian quick war plan did not work out for Germany in ww2 I do wonder if it was still a better plan then trying to bet a combination of Britain, the US, France, and the USSR in a war of attrition. Kind of a minmax thing. Why try to met the enemies strength poorly when you can try to negate their economic strength through a blitz. Of course the other option is just not to play the game and not go to war in the first place.
*(ERWIN ROMMEL)*
Thank Gott.
Whoever was in charge of cypher assessment/ code breaking on the Wehrmacht/Axis side must have been on a par.Never ever hear about the "Bletchly Parks" of The Axis World.Now that's a topic of discussion.
Have a look at Rommel's 621st Signals Battalion in North Africa. Once they were lost he was on the back foot all the way to Tunis.
Like when they sabotaged the long 50 mm guns?
I found this clip strange, not to say completely weird. Or rather, the statement itself.
‘One of the most unsuccessful German Generals’.
By which standards? The nazi’s? Thomas, along with Wagner, the Army Chief Quartemaster, were among the very few that not only realized Germany’s logistical problems but publicly opposed a conflict with Russia based on sound logic due to forementioned logistical issues. Wagner told OKH/OKW that in ‘41 they only had 3 months of supply and could only handle an advance of about 800km on a broad front before the logistics would break more or less down. This is precisely what happened in late August ‘41 when the Germans were starting to feel the heat around Smolensk in the center.
Sure, Thomas got kicked out of his position eventually and was seen as too pessimistc etc.
But it was his and Wagner’s arguments that historians today claim to be sound.
The fact that Thomas’ nazi career went down the drain does not make him ‘the most unsuccessful’ by relative standards imo
> The fact that Thomas’ nazi career went down the drain does not make him ‘the most unsuccessful’
> by relative standards imo
nobody talks about "nazi career", he wanted military control of the armaments industry, whereas Speer wanted civilian control; Speer won.
by the way has anyone ever even seen a dumpster fire
I would have gone with Ferdinand Schörner
Have you covered how the Germans treated their allies on the Eastern Front? For the sake of brevity, were those relationships at all cordial at the higher levels (say above Division level?) Popular stereotypes would paint the German officers lorded it over their Bulgarian, Italian, Rumanian, and even Russian allies with a pretty heavy hand. Considering the losses all of these countries suffered through the war, they had to be motivated to defeat the Soviets as much as the Germans were. It doesn't make sense these formations were mere cannon fodder.
Steiner?! Steiner...
Britain's worse is probably Percival or Auchinleck (gazala and singapore, the two main british defeats).
From the USA, probably Mark Clark, Hodges, or Fredendall
Percival definitely. Auchinleck arguably was not politically astute. His staff (especially Dorman-Smith) understood the limitations of their troops and the logistical difficulties of desert warfare. He went on to do a good job in India. And Mark Clark: if only he had some talent to match that ego!
"he was in charge of the Wehrwirtschaft" welp, that explained the title quick, I mean, P.1000 Ratte was enough a possibility to get early blueprints so... I think he was unsuccessful
Just give Goering an extra slice of the pie and a bigger buffet, problem solved. Nom-nom-nom-nom
Georg Thomas? I thought it was General von Klinkerhoffen.
Allo Allo
Is it me or is this a very very subtle response to tiks video?
I don’t think so. If he wanted to do a response he would have done so. He did it to Lindy’s video on the Bren and German Machine Guns. So I assume he would just make a video directly about it.
@@nickgray4553 Then again, Lindy was fucking daffy about it and so obviously incorrect that there was no real risk on making a response in terms of infighting. TIK has people who worship him and swallow any insight he has to give - it would be very bloody. People even buy his economic advice. That's like Jordan Peterson trying to talk history - it's not his strong-suit.
Was he "bad"? no! unsuccessful?yes! amateurs talk tactics,professionals talk logistics. I think in a German perspective he was correct, but again surrounded by many amateurs or those that could only see from their own field of expertise .If you look at Britain`s leadership role(and the USA)in ww2, appointment of the right people irrespective of what party they came from,was the fundamental in that success, not appointment by party membership.
Might I suggest "goat rodeo" instead of dumpster fire. A dumpster fire is relatively confined. A goat rodeo has no brakes.
Klink would have been worse
Ich gehe:"huh?"