new merchandise is out, including The German Squad (1941) and various Tiger, Stug & Panzer shirts and posters. Check out everything here: teespring.com/stores/military-history-visualized
As far as I know, Poland was in middle of reforming its army in 1939 and expected to finish modernization till 1941. Modernization included: * introduction of new semi-automatic rifle: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kbsp_wz._1938M * modification of current stock of Browning wz.28 * retrofit of tanketes TKS en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TKS armed with 20mm nkm ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nkm_wz.38_FK ) * introduction of 9TP tanks ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9TP ) * en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10TP * en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14TP * completing Central Industrial Region in region between Radom and Kielce, which would boost industrial capacity of Poland. Some sources state that Germany had not posses replenish losses after invasion of Poland until end of 1939. I heard that some of supply reports stated that after action in Poland, German Army had almost depleted ammunition and if Poles would destroy ammo depots near Puławy and Radom, Germany would not been able to fight after last week of September due to ammo shortage. Poland wasn't ready in 1939, Germany also, USSR also... that was the point - every country was preparing for war. Poland prepped itself against Soviet Union. If Hitler would waited till 1941-1942 (estimated that this would cause Wermaht to be at full capacity ready for war) then he would have trouble against Poland or Britain! (well, not so much against France, which lost war due to poor leadership - against popular belief leadership was at fault not courage of soldiers ;) )
Military History Visualized Could you do a video on why the Germans failed to drive back the Allies on D-Day? AKA why the German defensive plans didn't work.
@@mertaliataboyraz8933 I think France begins with the largest army. Though not fully trained, and not fully equipped. But you can Invade USSR with Germany, even in 1937, due to Stalin Purges.
one of the biggest realizations i have had about ww2 is that a great great many people only see the military and strategic/tactical aspects of the war. "had hitler done this, went with this etc etc" without realizing a crucial but generally overlooked aspect of warfare, the economy. hitler was in a race against time, his economic recovery was at worst a bubble, and at best a stop gap measure, built and propped up on loans etc. second, the biggest factor of him losing the war was a matter of economics, the allies (the US and Soviets in particular) were constantly outproducing them towards the latter stage of the war. the blitzkrieg was a genius strategy, but ultimately an extremely necessary one, they literally had to finish the wars because they literally could not afford prolonging it, hence why a center piece of hitler's grand strategy was for Britain to be knocked out in the war via capitulation or peace treaty
this youtuber has made a video that Blitzkrieg was a myth, and the way that German divisions worked during the 2nd World War was just a continuation of German military doctrine. Try this video ruclips.net/video/LCNw2e-Zehw/видео.html
Could not afford prolonging it? It took the soviets to get in berlin 5 years while germans had 4 fronts while being bombed still standed on their feet pretty well
1:40 My grandfather was one of those who joined the TA in February 1939. Poor bugger was called up on the 1st of September for ‘duration or war’ and didn’t get demobbed until 1946. He’d only joined up to earn a few extra quid to marry my nan 😂
Ha, same for my grandfather :) , TA srgt then sent to the jocks for some odd reason(he was from London) was sent home after flies bit him and made him sick during the burning of Bergan-Belsen.
Excellent video. Logistics and economics, the most important factors in modern warfare, are usually ignored in favor of a recitation of tank and airplane stats.
Remember that professional soldiers rarely discuss tactics. They discuss _logistics._ As my old police force sergeant used to say, _"Be the firstest with the mostest."_
Territory is at least as important as logistics and economics. Without open sea lanes/skies and territory in proximity to the enemy you won’t be able to employ any of those resources. For instance the USSR & China were heavily dependent on US supplies sent via the North Sea & Burma/India. If Britain had been knocked out of the war, those sea lanes and land bridges would not have been accessible. There would have been no N.African front and no invasion of Italy. There would have been no D-Day.
That’s why the British/Canadians won the war of 1812. Outnumbered 10 to one, as soon as war was declared we attacked. Some places found out their country had declared war by waking up to redcoats at the gates.
Was sitting in my armchair sipping tea watching a serious video about a serious question about WW2 when, all of a sudden and without warning, the guy pops a joke about petrol and dark humour. I almost spit my baguette out.
@@MilitaryHistoryVisualized I don't know if you've answer this question elsewhere, but I've been wondering what the outcome would have been if the General staff had opposed Hitler's plans to invade the USSR & then either assassinated him or imprisoned him? That would have left Germany only at war with the British Empire. Would Germany have been able to defeat Britain if it dramatically boosted its spending on aircraft and made a serious effort to gain air superiority over Britain and the The Channel over the following few years, basically playing 'defence' until a clear advantage had been achieved? Like maybe enticing the British navy into the range of its aircraft and then taking them out?
@JJ8KK That scenario definitely would off given Germany an advantage but would off took time for Germany to invade UK (most likely having USA join the war early) and still allowing UK to plan full on defence tactics. Hard to say but I would say it would be close.
@@SharpShadow7 Well, it's a scenario where you'd have to know & be able to project Germany's economic capacity to produce aircraft & ships and hope to be able to match/exceed Britain's capacity, even w/USA help. The extra time this would have given Germany might have made possible its ability to employ those "wonder weapons" it eventually built on a larger scale. It would have been difficult for such a Germany to take on on Britain's Empire at a distance, but UK would have been most vulnerable right at home, no? It would have also required that the "new" Germany--post-Hitler--would have had to change the one strategy that had given it so much early success: the strike fast and hard before your opponent has time to build up his defences. That change in mentality would have probably been difficult, but if the Rommel faction of the General Staff was in charge, and Hitler was out of the way, their natural sense of 'caution' might have made it possible. The simple goal of this Alternative Germany would have been to make the English Channel impassable to British ships and to nevertheless force her to bring her assets there, within range where they could be destroyed, kinda like the Verdun strategy which kinda didn't work out as planned. Avoiding outright war with the USA might not have been possible in the long run, but would have at least have been conceivable over that period of time when the Wonder Weapons could possibly have been brought online... A _lot_ of speculation here...
@@JJ8KK I agree, after all the reasons UK was trying to avoid going into WW2 was because lack off resources from WW1 & a repeat off trench warfare. UK managed to survive in home territory from taking advantage off Hitler's mistakes plus English channel advantage. UK took advantage while Germany was gathering there forces to attack but if all germans troops from the east was attacking UK instead then things would off ended badly for UK (most likely) Without UK, Germany would off had a massive advantage to win the war. Interesting to think off all the possibilities WW2 could off had and what the world would be like today if something slightly had been different.
The loose tea leaf was the norm. Tea bagging your snaggletoothed neighbors is what they were busy doing while the brown shirt was on the rise. Damn, all the institution of higher learning and not one dentist? Lazy Limey subservient fucks. Should have concentrated on Britain first, less on the eastern front. So many of you so called patriotic sheep remember why is a country in the first place. Any unwilling conscript in a German uniform is and was more patriotic than any left leaning pathetic loser liberal. Who will cry for you in 100 years. Who will write your history in books and on net ? Will the writing be in this English text or Arabic? Or???? Bunch of cry baby losers! Get over your self. And begin to consider the future for your children ( who most likely will kill you in your sleep anyway).
@@18wheels1966 Wake up Magic Merkel has a open door policy, you have two million Turkish plus in Germany and rising, that's just the turk's, its funny you call Germany patriotic but its the British who are breaking away from your liberal EU, the British who are taking back control of our borders and sea's and immigration. And you cannot win a war with patriotic fervour, how many patriotic Germans stopped bullet's on the Eastern Front millions. And here is a idea instead of bending over and taking it up the arse from Macron and the French, why not align with the UK the French are the lead weight that are pulling down Germany and the EU.
He should have actually tried to hit on Stefanie Rabatsch in person, not just write an anonymous letter. Maybe impress her with a painting, then invite her to the opera.
But you know what they say: All publicity is good publicity. Hitler sure made a name for himself for the history books. Might even surpass Caesar himself...
True, and the Panther and Tiger would never be developed and they would be crushed BUT the only reason the KV1 and T34 were able to be made were because Germany gave Russia the tech to make them so yeah, Germany would win
ehm, don't think so. Most of industry in ussr was imported from usa, and engine B-2 was developed for a bomber in 30s. What tech are you talking about? After 1933 germany sold couple of pz-1 and 2 and some fighters, nothing else.Also, in this universe Germans did cooperate with soviets early on. Also, you forget that half of oil germany had for barbarossa was delivered by soviets, so without soviets germany wouldn't have had any oil for barbarossa at all
Germany required the gold reserves of a few countries each year to pay for its rearmament and war costs. This is one of the main reasons for yearly attacks on its neighbours in 1939/40/41
They had realized you dont' need gold or money. You just need access to resources. Germany has a lot of coal and potash. And brains. Leveraging that was what they had to work with.
@CK Lim They took German machinery and other manufactures in trade. Because we live in a time marked by devotion to noclassical economics popularized by the likes of Mises and perpetuated by politicians who pretend that great powers must pay cash & carry like the average working class person - A nation like Germany or USSR did not need to pay British pounds for purchases of things like chromium or tobacco from Turkey or oil from Romania. They traded things like electrical machinery, machine tools, technical expertise, military hardware.
He attacked the USSR because of secret soviet documents leaked, the Russians were going to attack his eastern front when most of his force was in London, so I mean justified I suppose
He couldn't invade the UK due to several factors. 1, lack of air dominance 2, lack of landing craft 3, lack of naval supremacy 4, lack of oil reserves The 4th reason was the main factor in the decision to go into Russia due to their oil fields. Control of that would of been a massive asset to the German military
@@iceice1295 but why should the USSR attacked? The purge is still in full swing and all divisions are shifting to new equipment. E.g from T26 to T34 airforce moving from L15/L16 to Yak-9s etc. The equipment will be fully ready by 42 and training will be complete probably by 43. For all the sins Stalin done. He definitely didnt want to attack Germany, he trusted Hitler so much he broke in the first days of Barbarossa
From 1935-1942 Britain commissioned 5 BBs, 5 CVs, 10 CAs, 27 CLs and 117 DDs, Germans only managed 4/0/4/1/37. I think it's fair to say that had they waited longer they still would have just been outmatched by the Royal Navy and USN at war's start regardless.
mPky1 the 'wonder weapons' were never going to win the war, they could have done random damage but never defeat the allies, just anger them. Yes the V weapons were advanced but remember Britain developed the Meteor jet fighter at the same time, so the technological edge Germany had wasnt that huge as some people make out.
The Allies had "wonder weapons" of their own, like radar and fleet carriers. The fact that they WEREN'T a colossal waste of money only makes them MORE wonderful.
@@CountArtha The value of the KM was always more as a "fleet in being", requiring the Allies (esp the UK) to devote disproportionate resources to defend against them. Even with all the IRL disadvantages the KM had, they caused real problems in the Atlantic. Whilst genuinely starving the UK out was never really very realistic, they certainly did deny us easy access to resources from the Empire that we needed, making rearmament much more difficult than it could have been
@Grundy Malone You clearly need to study amphibious assaults in the European and Pacific theaters more. Germany didn't have anywhere close to enough transports and types of transports. The US didn't develop the big numbers and different types needed until later. You absolutely need naval and air superiority to protect vulnerable troop and supply transports. All the tanks and other vehicles in the world won't make a difference unless you can land them safely on another shore and supply them with gas to move, ammo to shoot, and food to feed the troops. The Allies built and transported Mulberry harbors to support D-Day. Logistics are are much more important than armchair generals realize. Just a cursory look at the massive amphibious forces of major Allied assaults will tell you tell you what the German High Command and Hitler knew - they had no hopes of invading the UK.
@Grundy Malone bet you love your little basement with the swastika flag on the wall and your nazi hentei porn bet you wear a german helmet when you play hoi4
You are to be saluted for producing clear, informative videos on subjects that are often overlooked. Many people choose to forget that war has a rather large reality component.
The whole concept of the Wehrmachts operation between 1939 and 1941 was based on one thing: The knowledge that time would work for the enemy. The High Command knew that, if one would run into a prolonged campaign against the Allies, the outcome would be the same as in 1914- 1918. In fact, that is the war the Oberkommando originally planned for against France: A war of attrition. The French planned likewise. It was only after the defeat of France that the Generals thougth everything else should be not only possible, but a piece of cake
ViceadmiralNelson Besides we have to acknowledge that since in the previous war Russia was defeated but France resisted until the bitter end and then counter-attacked, everyone thought that ir France was already defeated in one month, the soviets wont last long either...
Well researched and very well-reasoned. The only comment that I would make is that neither the U.S. nor the U.K. seemed to recognize the extent of the threat of Nazi Germany and Japan prior to the outset of the war. Both British Parliament and the U.S. Congress were divided in their perception of the risks posed by Germany and the need for extensive military expenditures. Economics notwithstanding, there would have likely been a considerable delay in any significant Allied response to Germany's continued military build-up (particularly from the U.S.) As you've pointed out: Germany faced its own internal economic limitations. Great channel. Really enjoy the vids. Keep them coming!
I just found your channel recently and am loving your content, it's very well thought out and researched, but I do have one question in regards to this, in the buildup to WW2 Germany put forth a very hostile and belligerent face toward France, Britain and much of the rest of Europe, which when combined with their rearmament saw their enemies building up their forces as well. But what if Hitler has been smart enough to put forth a less confrontational appearance and didn't push a massive rearmament program, and instead for a few years put in place much slower, and less threatening build up of their forces, at the same time putting more energy into it's military research and development? This would likely have eased tension in the allied powers, and not resulted in their committing to the buildups that they did, such that the forces that had at that time where all equipped with the best equipment possible, so when they started the massive buildup to war, they would have been in a much better starting position, and thus been faster off the mark then the allies. Note this would be taking place Japan's expansion would be continuing in the Pacific and thus the allies would likely have committed more of their forces to holding back the Japanese advance, since at that time Germany would be appearing to be less of a threat, at least until Germany surged it's preparations for war. I know there are a lot of assumptions here, but I don't think any of them are unreasonable, and since Germany would have started it's main buildup after it had already modernized most of it's existing military structure the build up would be much easier as it would just need to add to it's forces instead of trying to add to it's forces at the same time that it was modernizing it's current force. This would not solve their fuel issue, at least not directly, but it might have allowed them to gain more resources, much faster, thus resolving many of their supply issues in the early years of the war.
This is fair, but I would seriously have questioned their sanity to wait just that long; too soon, and they run the risk of not fielding enough forces to really dent the French line, too late and the french bridge some of the technical gap. My only problem here is, I do not know what french designers were planning for Tank design for the foreseeable future. Tanks were still often discussed as relic weapons or as support, rather than an independent mechanized fist. I believe a French general had recognized the utility some point near/during the war and had moved to push for further development. Too little, too late. Infantry was still king, although this isn’t to say French design was terribly far behind, as the Char B1-Bis was well armored enough to stop anything a Panzer could put out, up to the Panzer III.
David Thorp the tanks design wasn’t as much a problem as deployment, the concentrated panzer divisions quickly over whelmed the French tanks which were scattered with the infantry
@@davidthorp01 Generally most french tanks could easily beat any Panzers at the time in a 1v1, but german tactics made sure that almost never happened.
UK, France, and Poland were getting ready for war in 1941 or 1942. For UK and France they were predictions, and for Poland it was necessity. Poland was too poor to stay always ready. And, yes, the Poles knew that even if they were as ready as possible and even if they guessed when the war was going to start correctly, they still could not win on their own. Moreover, the plan to be as-ready-as-possible by late 1941 was facing delays (money). For example: Poles wanted to convert all the cavalry brigades into motorized-mechanized brigades. Since some cavalry brigades resisted transformation, it is likely that Poland would have ended up with 12 to 14 motorized-mechanized brigades and 12 to 14 cavalry brigades (to be fair, the Polish cavalry did appreciate organic armored companies of tankettes and armored cars as well as AT cannons and AT rifles). The bottom line is that the Poles were creating only 1 such motorized-mechanized brigade per year (1938, 1939, 1940, and 1941 is 4 years, so 4 brigades and not 12 to 14).
Poland could've won against the USSR, and they could've given the Germans a bloody enough nose to dissuade them from further campaigns, but facing bot together was basically impossible
Though you got your point across, when I saw this video the first thing I thought of was the Soviet Union. I felt the Germans attacked at the right time cuz if they waited any longer the soviets would just get more and more powerful, until they were at the point they were at at 1944.
@Jan Krynicky Why? He already purged every single officer and party official to the point where all that was left was people that only said yes to Stalin. having only 3 years go by until the next purge of half the armed forces wouldn't make any sense, as all of the traitors were killed in the first purge(as wel as many other innocents) and in 4-5 years time people would still remember the first purge very well, so why the fuck would Stalin do 2 seperate purges within 5 years? It makes no sense, it's not like Stalin purged his army after ww2 either, so why would he do it twice anyways? On top of that, the more hitler waited the more powerful the US would've became as well.
@Jan Krynicky Your right, it doesn't make sense for him to purge his army twice in 5 years. If that was the case, that he could be easily convinced to purge his army, why didn't he do it after world war 2? Or the many years following that? If he really was that trigger happy with purging, we would've seen another purge of the size of the first one some where in history. But we don't. Besides, Trosky was dead so there's even less of a reason to purge.
The longer Germany waited the stronger the Soviets would get yes, but they wouldn't get as strong as in the actual war for a variety of reasons, the most important being that they weren't in a major war, so they just wouldn't have such an emphasis on rushing out arms as quick as possible or conscripting as many soldiers, another reason is that America supplied pretty much all Soviet trucks, a large amount of ammunition and a lot of planes came from Britain and the USA, also a massive amount of metal came from the USA, obviously they wouldn't have all this so that means they would have to divide far more resources to their own aircraft, ammunition and especially trucks Also Stalin had massive plans for building up a navy so some resources would go there too, so overall they obviously won't be as strong in 1944 as they were in reality, it just simply isn't feasible
Actually there were hidden oil fields in German territory and countries around it. In Austria they had the Matzen oil field which reached 22 million oil barrels in just six years under a damaged Soviet economy. Next there were more undiscovered in NW Germany(Ruehle, Brandenburg, Emlicheim, Bramberge and Georgsdorf) and in Schoonebeek Holland. All within a 25 mile radius of Schoonebeek. Discovering Schoonebeek would have diacovered the other oil fields as well. The combined output of those oil field was also 22 million (9 million from Schoonebeek and 13 million from the other German oil fields just close to Schoonebeek.) All these oil fields all were discovered in the late 40s/early 50s by accident and used 1930s tech to drill it out. All the oil fields mentioned were all under a mile deep. Now the discovery of these oil fields would have dramatically have fueled a much larger portion of the Wehrmacht, ensuring their early victories and possibly give them more oil to traverse deeper in the Soviet Uniom, allowing greater capture of soldiers, factories and other military equipment. The big change will be the fuel will not synthetic based, which was expensive and horribly inefficient. A good reason for why Germany didnt discover these oil fields in the early/mid 1930s are 1.) No luck. Had more serious explorations occur they might have found it and 2.) Short sighted thinking. No one knew oil fields were there. It appeared better at the time to invest in synthetic fuel plants and not find other fields. Hitler believed time and energy was better spent into building synthetic fuel plants. So a point of divergence to occur where Germany has much more oil is not impossible. Somewhat plausible, but will require hard work. So, in essence Germany could have found more oil. I promise to deliver the sources later for the oil fields in terms of depth and production along with the tech available to showcase how they had the ability to exploit it. Just some bad luck and short sightedness stopped them.
@@molcur9658 well he is right. This is a Dutch article, but it tells a part of his story. www.geheugenvandrenthe.nl/bataafsche-petroleum-maatschappij-bpm-n-v
Man, you teach me so much about logistics and operations! I really view military history through a different light thanks to you and Hearts of Iron (not that it’s a perfect representation but it gives a good idea of certain military concepts) I was wondering, if you have the time, what you would’ve done as the French High Command previous to WWII given what we know now? And when would you have liked to begin your reforms (like you said in this vid, a build up requires both time as well as money money)?
One thing to also be noted. Is what happened to the Russians in the early part of the German invasion. They had plenty of troops and vehicles, most were obsolete. However the T-34 which was a match for the Panzers where just beginning to see service. If Russia had enough T-34's and had them deployed the early days of the war, it could have gone much different. Many of the German super weapons were a response to the Allies countering existing German arms. So you might not of known you needed to build Me 262 over Me 109's. World war 2 was only 6 years long, a relatively short period for arms development, for example the development of the F-35 started in 1992.
brgessner That is a complete misunderstanding. Russia had lots of T-34 in 1941 when the invasion happened. Over 1000 to be exact. Almost as much as panzer 3 and 4s combined. And unlike some anecdotal stories the t-34 most of the time did not propose a big threat to the Germans even if it had better armor and main gun compared to German tanks.
USSR had enough equipment to take on Germany, the problem was that the military was shit in terms of experience from the purge and Stalin didn't think Hitler would attack as soon as he did. The biggest reason for German success in the start was the surprise attack followed by USSR being out of position for a defensive war followed by excellent German strategic moves.
If Germany waited, the Soviets would have completed its own rearmament, and in Hitler's own conclusions that the Soviets would, once reforms were completed annex Romania. If Romania was annex it's game over for Germany before a war even starts.
Gendermans, we are all businessman! Well if Germany stayed the Weimar Republic or wasn't Nazi Germany, they most likely would have been fine. The reason I say this is because Mein Kampf had been out for years and Hitler's plans to invade Russia had been out for all the world to see. This understandably made the Soviets deeply insecure.
James Tang Yep, both sides were fueling their own paranoias to the point where both became partially justified. It was like trying their best to create a self-fulfilling prophecy. It's what every arms race does - but not every arms race has some crazy ideologies attached. Cold War one at least had "MAD" dangling over everyone. But given how enthusiastic Adolf was about a world where strong eat weak, MAD wouldn't have helped to sober everyone up - and communists would've declared that "12-year plan makes MAD void because Marx and Lenin predicted it" or something. Sounds like something a regime that was stupid enough to confiscate seed grain would do.
James Tang Perhaps you should look up how Stalin reacted when he was informed with the commencement of Operation Barbarossa. The Soviets were deeply insecure by Hitler's plan? That can't be further from the truth, I'm afraid. Stalin was a political realist, so he conjectured that Hitler as a dictator like him must be as politically realistic as he was, and "Mein Kampf" was rather a piece of propaganda than a blueprint of actions.
Very informative video MHV! I recall reading a quip somewhere (possibly in Alan Bullock) that Nazi Germany started its war both too early and too late - too early in the sense that its military forces had not sufficiently developed their capabilities to achieve its aims and too late in that its major adversaries had sufficiently mobilized or developed their military forces to resist or intervene against it. (I also recall reading that Hitler subsequently felt 'cheated' of victory because Germany would have been better off starting war over Czechoslovakia rather than the Allies postponing it to Poland). My own view is that Nazi Germany had a very narrow window of opportunity in starting war at all with any apparent prospect of success, effectively between its own rearmament and those of its adversaries, in which more time only favored the latter - although a more rational view of that narrow window of opportunity would have been to avoid going to war at all. If anything, it might be argued that Nazi Germany started war against Britain and France at the best possible time (and similarly attacked the Soviet Union at the optimal time of German advantage and Soviet disadvantage) - and that was as good an opportunity as it was ever going to get (both in 1939 against Britain and France - and in 1941 against the Soviet Union and arguably even in its declaration of war against the United States). I note Tooze seems to have a similar view, in that although Hitler probably would have preferred to bluff Britain and France out of their guarantee to Poland, he was certainly willing to risk war with them because German prospects would only worsen from that time. (Germany was arguably doubly lucky in its narrow window of opportunity - in that its offensive success coincided with a tactical balance in which mobile offensive firepower had gained the advantage over defence, and its defensive success coincided with the balance swinging back to defensive firepower from 1942-1943). A more interesting question might be whether the Allies - Britain and France - should have waited. That is, whether they could or should have effectively bought time or postponed war, by not giving (or acting upon) their guarantee to Poland in the manner that they did.
Someone said that, "500 years from now, future historians will call the period 1935-1945 The War for Oil". It was the conversion from coal to oil power in shipping that made evident to England-Germany-Japan-Italy that OIL was going to be a bottleneck resource, a deal-breaker. The USSR and USA had plenty of reserves and other problems to distract them from this issue for a few years, while England increased her oil reserves and Germany began synthetic research. Ultimately, the search for oil sources led to Germany increasing her military, increasing her need for oil, rinse-and-repeat until the problem reaches crisis level. War was unavoidable after Versailles, give or take a couple years. Only a rational English treaty with Germany would prevent WWII, but this was impossible after strangling the Wiemar Republic in the 1920s.
Not only this. You simply cannot develop high advanced tanks for example until you see what enemy has. Putting high caliber guns on Pancers and Tigers was result of seeing T-34 amour in battle. Without this knowledge, Wermacht would just continue to produce more Pancer 3 with some minor upgrades, but for sure they would not consider 88mm guns. Same with antitank guns. Basically you dont know what you need until you try it in a war.
yeah but the enemy would also lack the expirience to research their better units, there wouldn't be IS 2 and KV's for the soviets nor any of the late war weapons ANY of the allies had. so the playing field there is even.
Yes, his army and forces were legit still in their beta's. They tried their tactics in Poland and Spain and worked. That got to their heads and went all out against the world.
How would they do that then? Do you have a plan that could actually work? When making said plan, please take into consideration that the enemy will counter it
The Germans needed a better air force and a better navy, a lot of people say that the Germans could have taken the UK which is utter rubbish if you ask me, they simply wern't prepared and they'd have needed air and naval superiority which in reality they were far off achieving. There's so many factors going against Germany in the war that anyone who says "Germany could have won if..." is talking out of their arse
They had naval superiority later in the war until the allies discovered the Enigma machine. They had the means to invade the UK easily. But since the airborne invasion in Crete and The Netherlands didn't produce the results they'd like they went back to the drawing board. And Hitler never wanted to invade the UK really. He was raging when German bombers accidentally bombed London the first time. He preffered a peace treaty.
@@mver191 Germany had no means whatsover of making a succesful invasion of the UK at any time during WW2. Their surface fleet was hugely outnumbered...they had lost 10 destroyers in just two days when they had previously invaded Norway.. that was half of their destroyer force and all of them sunk by Royal navy ships. That was Germanys only succesful amphibious operation and yet it cost them a huge part of their surface fleet sunk as well as many transport ship losses. Any invasion of the Uk would have been suicide.
@@ggarlick46 Germany may have lost many ships, but the UK had no standing army and airforce left at some point. Anyway, Hitler didn't even want war in the first place with the UK because he was not interested in capturing it. That is why he let the allied soldiers go at Dunkirk. It was the bombardment of Berlin that made him really angry.
I tell these armchair generals that there was no way the Germany could have conquered the world in WW II! Germany just did not have the manpower or the resources to do so. At best Germany could of conquered a empire from the Atlantic to the Urals. And that's it!
As was said, Germany didn't want to conquer the world, not even western europe. Hitler was always planning expansion to the east. France and Britain suppporting Poland made the war in the west a necessity.
One issue that nobody here mentions is that if the war hadn't started until 1948 or so the British colonial empire would have already begun to unravel. Germany would have been much better served if it then had supported various independence movements, much as the USSR later did during the Cold Car. Also, Japan would have benefited if it could have imported strategic resources from newly independent countries rather than be dependent on the USA.
This makes no sense. The reason that the colonies wanted independence was because of the 2nd world war. This was because of the allies' constant propaganda of "the free world" and "free Europe" and the colonies got angry because of the hipocrisy. Not only that but the colonial empires like Britain were exhausted by the war, and had no intention to fight another. So if there was any time to ask for independence, it was during that time. And you gotta remember, that Australia, New Zealand and Canada to this day still work close together with the UK when it comes to foreign conflicts. So to say that the UK wouldn't have had any support from them if they were independent, is such a baseless claim.
@@codwawgamerzz You fail to consider that India was the most important British colony and it was the cornerstone of the empire. By the late 1930s the independence movement in India had become so strong that even many British colonial officials considered it only a matter of time before the country became independent. Moreover, Gandhi's nonviolent protest movement had also greatly resonated in the UK itself, where more and more people were willing to support Indian independence. World War II may have actually delayed Indian independence rather than accelerating it (which was probably the case in Africa). After losing India, the British Empire would have been greatly weakened, although this wouldn't have affected the UK's relations with Australia, Canada, South Africa, or New Zealand. I never made any such claim, either. Another country that needs to be considered in this respect is the Philippines. The Tydings-McDuffie Act of 1934 paved the way for Philippine independence following a ten-year transition period. As a result, the Philippines was granted commonwealth status in 1935 and would have become fully independent in 1944. World War II delayed this until 1946. After Philippine independence, anti-colonial pressure would have greatly increased throughout Asia. It's therefore hard to say whether the Dutch and French could have held onto their colonies in Southeast Asia for much longer than they actually did. What I mainly want to point out is that too many people seem to assume that the Western colonial empires could have somehow made it through the 1940s without adverse effect if World War 2 hadn't happened. This is a complete fallacy. In relative terms, the UK and France would have become increasingly weaker compared to Germany. Besides the USSR, the main long-term opponent that Hitler faced was certainly not Britain, but the United States. Despite all of Germany's rearmament efforts, the country had no chance of contending with America in the long-run. As the Naval Act of 1938 showed, the U.S. Navy would have swept the Kriegsmarine from the seas even if Plan Z could have been realized.
@@davemorgan6013 I agree with Lord Spast, you cannot assume that the colonial powers would have allowed their empire to unravel had the World War not happened. England would have had much more resources, public support, and military power to stop any such actions. While you are right, WW2 or not there would have been continued calls for independence across the British empire, that does not mean they would have been succesful. WW2 had a profound effect on the world - it is impossible to say what it would look like had it not happened.
@@so8907 The war definitely had a profound effect, but I have to disagree with you on major points. In fact, the war briefly strengthened British resolve to hang onto India because they could not let go of such a valuable asset in wartime. Moreover, it is unlikely that Churchill, who was a vociferous opponent of Indian independence, would have become prime minister without the disaster in France. Under Chamberlain, let alone under a Labour government, the UK would not have been willing to keep India at all costs. An armed uprising would have become increasingly likely in India by 1943 if the peaceful independence efforts had not borne any fruit. I do not believe that British voters would have condoned the use of massive military force to crush such a rebellion, which would have been far more severe (and costly) than the Mau Mau Uprising of the 1950s, for example.
I love your videos. I am wide open to supporting on Patreon. However, the “every reichsmark counts” thing raised an eyebrow. I’m afraid I only have East German Marks. Are those accepted?
Hitler's biggest and crucial mistake was to fight on two fronts and to underestimate the Russians. Great channel and vids. I like your accent =) Keep up the great work.
I wonder what would have happened if the soviet union attacked first, effectively making themselves the aggressor. Afterall Germany's plan was to defeat France first to concentrate on fighting Russia afterwards.
I don't think it would have mattered at that point. Germany had been in an offensive war with the allies since 1939 involving Poland, France and the U.K. along with the colonies. What's to stop Stalin from claiming to be a liberator of Poland and France?
I disagree with your conclusions over allied response readiness if Germany would have had a fleet of 300 U-Boats at the start of WW2. Just look what Germany did with those 40 U-boats and the Royal navy could not properly escort and protect merchant ships in the Atlantic until mid to late 1942. What would of happen if Germany had 120 U-boats at start of WW2, probably the Royal Navy would have been larger but would it had made that much of a difference against 3 times as many U-boats. Thankfully we will never know, my hat off to the brave men of the Royal Navy and Merchant Marine. Not that the U-boat men were not brave but hey they were the enemy. Actually the enemy were/are the leaders that sent/send men off to fight needless wars.
You missed the point, having a sizable U-boat fleet would've made the Allies more aware of the threat of u boats before the war. And the Allies would be far better prepared to deal with them once the war started.
A plan that assumes a passive enemy isn't a plan, its daydream I would just caution you that the consequences of your proposal wouldn't have gone unnoticed and thus the RN at the beginning of WW2 could have looked a lot different also. The 300 boat theory is often thrown up for discussion , but from that you would have to lose around 10-20% as training boats, with the remainder split equally between going out on patrol, coming back from patrol and R&R. Thus you may only have 80 boats actually on station, and not the mystical 300! However 80 boats would have caused more damage than in reality but the losses in U-Boat may well have been proportionally higher. Doenitz at the time when proposing 300 u boats didn't realized that airpower is going to be significant in dealing with u boats
My favorite part part of this channel is, we all get to hear a German breakdown how feeble Hitler’s plans of European domination were. If such a technical, not ideological (emotional), mind had been in play how many more people would be alive today!
It's been said Hitler had no choice but to make war in 1939-40 since the German economy would have ground to a halt not long after this period anyway. Due to lack of several resources, lack of self-sufficiency in food and fuel (Hitler/Goerring ordered the construction of the synth fuel plants in Germany during the late '30's but these plants never produced nearly enough). Also Germany was running an unfavorable trade deficit, that was inherent in an economy producing mainly war goods instead of peacetime goods. Hitler gave the main reason for starting war when he did that he would be "too old" to see the end of any conflict if he waited. But the economic reasons were much more compelling, if you were Hitler that is
Personally i think that a part of Germany's early success were a result of getting out the depression by using the military industry. (despite its hurt on the economy) I am curious if the result would have been different if the Germans attacked earlier, like 1938 if the annexation of the Sudetenland was opposed by the Allies. Although i doubt the end result would be to different as the comparative industrial capability of Germany was lacking.
They would not have built jets because they had no need to. Propeller driven aircraft was a technology that worked and there was no incentive to change. They may have turned to jets after war started in 1945 but they would still have been in the same place as they were in 1939. The same applies to the idea that by 1945 the Germans would have had Tiger and Panther tanks. Again these came about because of the war and there was no incentive to build them before the war. The T34, on the other hand, would have been a different matter. That came about through clashes with the Japanese in 1938. So the Soviet army would have had more of them by 1945. Would Hitler have been better served if he used diplomacy to deal with the West and Poland and then attacked Russia is a more interesting question. The West may well have been more open to the idea of Germany fighting Russia, especially as communism was causing such problems in their own countries. And as Poland had fought off an invasion from Russia in 1919-1920 they may well have been more open to having some sort of defence pact with Germany. The next part of this is if Hitler had gone into the Soviet Union as a liberator rather then an invader would he have been more successful. Many parts of the Soviet Union had suffered extremely badly under the communists and would have been glad to be rid of them. In fact many from the Soviet Union had joined the Germans in fighting the communists. So coming as a liberator would have made life for the German Army much easier.
@@darklysm8345 That is not what I said. I said the Tiger and Panther were a result of combat experience against the Russians. The Panzer IV went into service in 1939 but it was not until later the the longer barrel 75 mm was fitted.
@@bigblue6917 Sure but the germans would develop a new tank anyways, maybe slower but the german high command knowed about the weak turret problem if the germans invade in 1942 the surely bring better tanks.
Another thing! Germany : (Huff.. Huff..) "Having enemies on both sides sure is hard. We made a big mis-" Japan : "Let's launch multiple operations on the American Pacific regions! See if they're gonna surrender. Naval superiority goes brrrr"
They just seem to have made too many enemies too fast. But if waiting would be a help at all, they would have needed to wait unti they had access to a special weapon (like the rocket technology that was being build, or the progress in nuclear power). Focusing the arms race on just those new technologies would be a risky move, but possibly a more viable one.
The USA started building modern equipment only after the fall of Poland in 1939, and started training millions of soldiers to man this very equipment only after the fall of France in 1940. One of the biggest common misconceptions is that US car and train factories started building military cars, armored cars, and tanks overnight. In fact, it took in between a year and 2 years.
Let’s say Germany waited till they developed the a bomb then started the war they would of had a chance however sourcing the material would of taken some time
Should have focused on industrial capacity, infrastructure, and full employment in useful tasks. This would be civilian activity that could form the foundation for a rapid military build up and would improve the economic situation. Many civilian projects could have a dual use in mind. More shipbuilding capacity can be used for trade and passenger ships in the short term while creating the possibility for a shift to build more military ships at some point. More high quality road and rail networks can be used for industry as well as enabling more rapid troop movements and logistical support. More airfields might be a bit too obvious given the severe restrictions on aircraft imposed on them but improvements could be made to existing airfields. Hardening of some civilian industry and installation of minor fortifications in and around cities well back from the borders probably could be done without provoking a severe response. This could begin to provide some protection against bombers and invasion.
What if Hitler had kept to the Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement and, instead of opening up a second front, he focused his forces on Britain and North Africa. Could he have achieved victory there, thereby securing oil in the Middle-East?
No. his problem wasn't timing but resource. If he didn't attack the soviets would. His biggest mistake was not strong arming turkey and spain into joining the axis because locking down the Mediterranean and taking soviet oil wells would be a massive boost to logistics and supply lines.
they did focus on Britain but realised any invasion would fail - and had to turn to Russia instead to get their additional resources particularly fuel, food, slave labour etc etc
Operation Sealion could have been a resounding success, building up to Operation Whalrus a massive U-boat invasion of Russia from it's northern shores with the ultimate element of surprise striking them from the rear and blindsiding the Russians
People ask how Germany will invade England but never the reverse. Will England just stay in war for next 20 years even though it was bankrupt and has giant imperial area to rule over that all wants independence? lol Probably they will eventually get USA to nuke them or Russia to invade, though. That is what Hitler assumed and why he invaded Russia once Russia's demands to join German side turned out to be ridiculous.
Thos might have worked, especially if Germany went full war economy and built big enough airforce to subdue Britain. However, defeating Britain was not a big goal for Hitler.. 1st they were fellow "aryans" and nothing of value was to be gained from the island... Containment strategy which was done successfully was enough. The goal for Hitler was always the Soviet Union
My understanding is that the Germans were using synthetic oils and fuel made from coal (Fischer Tropsich process). They had 27 such plants operating. I thought there was no major shortages until Barbarossa and it's accompanying overreach.
7:40 TIK did an entire video explaining that it would be impossible for the germans to create more motorized divisions due to oil supplies. he goes much further in depth on the oil topic if anyone wants to see it here is the link ruclips.net/video/kVo5I0xNRhg/видео.html
Problem is, he only goes into the oil. There were a lot more reasons why it just wasn't possible. MHV names quite some of them (Germany being almost bankrupt for example), but there is other stuff like German companies not being experienced in assembly line production, the steel needed for such a motorization just not being there (or affordable) and on top of that...there just weren't enough drivers. Cars were still something for the higher class in Germany in the 1930s, they would have had to put hundreds of thousands of soldiers through a drivers training...and what a rushed drivers training could do to the capabilities of a mechanized force was shown in 1941 by the Red Army.
These just underscore some of the advantages the United States had. They had the resources, the production experience(after all Ford first created and used assembly line production in the auto industry) and cars were relatively common in the United States as well.
Assuming Germany had concentrated on building up its economy rather rather than military, how long until the Soviet Union invaded? There's No way Stalin would have taken an economically strong Germany lying down.
I think a large part of it was Germany not moving to a war time economy for the war. Many things went wrong, but not spending all they could have spent on the war. Had to try to keep the people happy.
It's Difficult For a modern German person to have an impartial view, when talking about Ww2. As they're taught to feel guilty about ww2 from the moment they start school.
(German here) I believe that’s a myth. I don’t know a single person who was taught that. Rather history classes teach the historical facts which in this period generally do not work in favour of the Germans. Maybe some people will start developing guilt complexes based on that evidence, but again, nobody I know, even though my social sphere is rather left-wing.
@@xXSlayzz Actions speak louder than words. Why is your country being destroyed by its own government, with the unrestricted influx of migrants, other than guilt? Also, in reading your retort, you just said "we're taught history and for the most part it doesn't favour well for Germans". Which proves my point about what you're taught.
Hitler should not have hit the British cities and concentrated on the airfields, radar and factories. As far as Russia, he waited until too long into the spring/summer, thanks to having to help Mussolini out of a jam. Russia WOULD have attacked Europe in 1941 also, Hitler caught Stalins Armies in an offensive posture, not dug in. This is why they ran through the Russian Armies early on. IF Hitler would have treated the captured Russian troops with respect, MANY of them would have fought with Germany. The SS created many atrocities and the captured Russian troops were not well fed and were used as slave labor. Hitler should have stopped as soon as winter started, pulled back 300 kilometers to shrink their lines and restocked instead of continued to attack in the brutal winter.
Yes, he should have waited over 50 years - the rest of his life. Or actually, he should have waited until he got accepted in the art school, or not, but he should have waited for those answers and not go into politics. The 2nd thought is, maybe Europe and Germany especially needed this blood letting unfortunately - to get rid of fascism. Although nationalism is rising again.
I'll very briefly write down 10 of Hitlers biggest military mistakes that cost him the war in Swedish Historical magazine: Every mistake had an indicator of how severe the mistake were up to a 5. 1.:The German army invaded the Soviet union with German troops in their summer uniforms. Not at all prepared for the stubborn resistance from his arch enemy and the merciless Russan winter of 1941, the ffolly of that mistake was given a 5 out 5 as the invasion could have taken place before 1942 if Hitler had listened to his generals. 2: He declared war against the United States of America. Also av 5 out 5 mistake as he could avoided dragging them into the world for atleast two or three years. 3: He did not destroy the trapped entirety of the British army at Dunkirk. Another 5 out of 5 mistake as the complete destruction of the British troops could have meant the end of the war for the British army. 4: He was still waiting for an invasion that already was happening. While the invasion of Normandy was taking place on June 6thm 1944 Hitler was sleeping home in Bavaria. When he got informed of the invasion he dismissed it as merely a diversion and that the real invasion would take place and the several weeks long delay to send reinforcementsm because he was waiting for the real invasion. a 4 out of 5 mistake as Hitler's iron grip on his generals prevented their forces to drive away the enemy during the first days of the invasion of Normandy. 5.; Hitler's refusal to give up the siege of Stalingrad. This mistake meant the destruction of the entire 6th German army. 5 out of 5. Hitlers illogical order to hold fast and dig in, totally negated the main advantage of the German army: it's mobility. 6: Germany went to war with old weaponry. Combined with the success of the German army during the first couple of year with Hitler's personal idea that he was a military genious and who was better then his entire taciturn generals who in actuallity knew that must be done. The belief that it was his enemy doubts and unprepared armies that was the cause of these success, he stopped almost every military development which lead to the current German weapons becoming obsolete after two years time which made Hitler in all haste gve the order to restart all weapon devoplemnts , which in turn lead to unrealiable weapons despite a few new breakthroughs in weaponry. A 4 out of 5 mistake as if the weapon development hade kept going without any stops, the German might have been able to keep the control of the war. 7: He gave the British Bombers free reign. The night towards May 31:st 1942 the Royal Air Force sen in thousand of bombers and the German anti air weapons would not even see their targets in the dark of night and the RAF destroyed 13000 building in Köln. this success would go one untill the Germans began fighters started to lurk near British airbases and ambush and shoot down when bombers returning to base. This tactic worked well untill Hitler stipped the ambushes and ordered that the enemy planes instead should be shot down over German soil as to encourage the German people with the sights the wrecks of British bombers. This was only a 3 out of 5 as with the mysterious help by Hitler the British bombers could continue their bombing operations for the rest of the war. 8: He kept German women away from the factories. While millions of American and British women worked in factories durin the war. Hitlers was of the idea that German women had no place in factories, their place was at home and taking care of children. This conservative opinon led too a severe lack of an able workforce since the male worker had been summoned to war. Even if Hitler managed to keep the industry afloat with the help of a forced foreign workforce, this solution only made up around 20% of the available workforce and the resource dwindled rapidly each year the war continued. Far too late Hitle allowed a small part women to contribute to the war effort. This mistake was a 3 out of 5 as with a even with a more modern view of women, Germany might not a won the war, but it could have prolonged for a good while. 9: He "sabotaged" his own Airforce. When Hitler gave the Luftwaffe the order for an airstrikes against Great Britain in order to destroy the Royal Airforce. Around August 1940, it seemed as this would be a success for the Luftwaffe until Hitler messed this up. Under an attack on an airplane factory killed nine civilians, Brittish responed by bombing German cities, this made Hitler furious and in his rage he ordered the bombings of British cities which in turn gave the RAF a well earned break och would soon regain contol of the skies. This was a 3 out of 5 mistake as it was Hitler's first defeat and give the British people new hope. 10: He used an advanced fighter as a mediocre bomber. Despite that the Jet fighter Messerschmitt Me 262 gave a Hitler pre-eminently Jet fighter, he instead used it for bombing raids, despite the warnings of his experts. The Messerschmitt Me 262 was the first figher in history with a jet engine was ahead of it's time in many aspects. WIth a lenght of only 10.6 meters and a top speed of kilometers an hour, it could outmanouver the best airplanes of the Allies. The Jet fighter was just what the German airforce needed in 1943 when the tides of war leaned towards the advange of the Allies. Hitler was impressed by the achivements made by German engineers and ordered the construction of the Jet figher as bomber!. Despite all objections made toward his very bad idea, Hitler insisted that he was in the right but the results were catastrophic! Even under ideal situations, the German pilots missed their taget by at least one kilometer as the Me 262 simly was too fast for the pilots be calculate where their bombs would land. When a desperate Hitler finally ordered the Me 262 as the Jet fighter is as intended for late in 1944, it simply was too late as the war was practically over for the Germans. This was a 2 out 5 as mistake as if the Me 262 had been used as intended the Germans could have hade air supremeacy in 1943. So based on what both the video and what I've written, I'd say that Hitler was a massive fool and should have either have waited for a short while or fixed Germany's most severe flaws. And Listened his his generals.
This is the Second time this week I've seen Adam Tooze's book used to excellent effect. (TIK's channel). Spot on. Brilliant and succinct once again sir. Danke!
![[Barbarossa] The Major Errors and Blunders - Or why Barbarossa Failed](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/A_3R-Rkn_98/mqdefault.jpg)
new merchandise is out, including The German Squad (1941) and various Tiger, Stug & Panzer shirts and posters. Check out everything here: teespring.com/stores/military-history-visualized
StuG Life? On a shirt? Well Im just gonna have to buy one now
Enjoy the channel, are you able to look at Operation Unthinkable? Keeping in mind the US might have had Nukes up their sleeves. Thanks!!
As far as I know, Poland was in middle of reforming its army in 1939 and expected to finish modernization till 1941.
Modernization included:
* introduction of new semi-automatic rifle: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kbsp_wz._1938M
* modification of current stock of Browning wz.28
* retrofit of tanketes TKS en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TKS armed with 20mm nkm ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nkm_wz.38_FK )
* introduction of 9TP tanks ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9TP )
* en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10TP
* en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14TP
* completing Central Industrial Region in region between Radom and Kielce, which would boost industrial capacity of Poland.
Some sources state that Germany had not posses replenish losses after invasion of Poland until end of 1939. I heard that some of supply reports stated that after action in Poland, German Army had almost depleted ammunition and if Poles would destroy ammo depots near Puławy and Radom, Germany would not been able to fight after last week of September due to ammo shortage.
Poland wasn't ready in 1939, Germany also, USSR also... that was the point - every country was preparing for war. Poland prepped itself against Soviet Union.
If Hitler would waited till 1941-1942 (estimated that this would cause Wermaht to be at full capacity ready for war) then he would have trouble against Poland or Britain! (well, not so much against France, which lost war due to poor leadership - against popular belief leadership was at fault not courage of soldiers ;) )
Military History Visualized Could you do a video on why the Germans failed to drive back the Allies on D-Day? AKA why the German defensive plans didn't work.
I was partially described in video about Atlantic wall. ;)
Only resourses germany didnt lack off was enemyes
lmfao
Well they did work very hard to earn them, so. .
And coal
And you don't lack in typos either.
Germany ended up getting itself into debt with the MEFO currency
This guy never fails to do his homework and analysis! Very well developed and presented!!
69 likes lol.
Germans are always on time and always do their homework
Except for the fact that they didn’t add Northern Ireland to the uk sure :/
@@AnEnglishPerson he's in the IRA
@@clementine7985 IRA
*The German Army isn't ready in 1939*
*Meanwhile, me in HOI4*
*Invades Soviet Union in 1938*
Me: invades france at 1936
@@mertaliataboyraz8933 I think France begins with the largest army. Though not fully trained, and not fully equipped.
But you can Invade USSR with Germany, even in 1937, due to Stalin Purges.
Best strat as germany is to almost immediately start WW2
The only way I can play that and not be offended is just go totaly weird and be Italy or Brazil.
@@paulvonhindenburg4727 You can not play a video game and not be offended? Are you trolling or do you really wear panties that thin?
"Who wants to eat baguette with sauerkraut?"
Alsace & Lorraine: **Raise hands**
Those folks wish Middle Frankia had hung on longer.
a baguette with a brat - great winning combo.
69 likes lol.
The Saarland?
@@freddyfrago2023 what do you mean?
one of the biggest realizations i have had about ww2 is that a great great many people only see the military and strategic/tactical aspects of the war. "had hitler done this, went with this etc etc" without realizing a crucial but generally overlooked aspect of warfare, the economy. hitler was in a race against time, his economic recovery was at worst a bubble, and at best a stop gap measure, built and propped up on loans etc. second, the biggest factor of him losing the war was a matter of economics, the allies (the US and Soviets in particular) were constantly outproducing them towards the latter stage of the war. the blitzkrieg was a genius strategy, but ultimately an extremely necessary one, they literally had to finish the wars because they literally could not afford prolonging it, hence why a center piece of hitler's grand strategy was for Britain to be knocked out in the war via capitulation or peace treaty
this youtuber has made a video that Blitzkrieg was a myth, and the way that German divisions worked during the 2nd World War was just a continuation of German military doctrine. Try this video ruclips.net/video/LCNw2e-Zehw/видео.html
Could not afford prolonging it? It took the soviets to get in berlin 5 years while germans had 4 fronts while being bombed still standed on their feet pretty well
1:40 My grandfather was one of those who joined the TA in February 1939. Poor bugger was called up on the 1st of September for ‘duration or war’ and didn’t get demobbed until 1946.
He’d only joined up to earn a few extra quid to marry my nan 😂
Ha, same for my grandfather :) , TA srgt then sent to the jocks for some odd reason(he was from London) was sent home after flies bit him and made him sick during the burning of Bergan-Belsen.
LtKharn grandad was Royal Hampshire’s, North Africa and Italy. (And shagged the daughter of Charles de Gaulle’s chauffeur, apparently!)
Matt Hayward So the war wasn't a total disaster.
Twirlip Of The Mists I actually lol’d at that!
I myself am from Sweden but I respect the british army a lot. Tons of respect for your grandfather.
Excellent video. Logistics and economics, the most important factors in modern warfare, are usually ignored in favor of a recitation of tank and airplane stats.
Yeah sure but those who obsess only on economics & logistics can also have a fatalistic defeatist and determinist view just as unhelpful
Military and Civilian morale and the cohesiveness of society are important factors in warfare as well.
Remember that professional soldiers rarely discuss tactics. They discuss _logistics._ As my old police force sergeant used to say, _"Be the firstest with the mostest."_
The_Answer Is yes very wise. A good logistical system helps create both speed, stamina and a good breakfast.
Territory is at least as important as logistics and economics. Without open sea lanes/skies and territory in proximity to the enemy you won’t be able to employ any of those resources. For instance the USSR & China were heavily dependent on US supplies sent via the North Sea & Burma/India. If Britain had been knocked out of the war, those sea lanes and land bridges would not have been accessible. There would have been no N.African front and no invasion of Italy. There would have been no D-Day.
Sounds like he should've invaded Saudi Arabia, first.
Alex Prokhorov, its not too late for that
@@gavnonadoroge3092 well now we have enough fuel for our armed forces...
@@bluefox9436 now we only need good armed forces.
@@MouldMadeMind That's the thing...
YOU CANNOT INVADE ABDULAZIZ IBN ABDUL RAHMAN IBN FAISAL IBN TURKI IBN ABDULLAH IBN MUHAMMAD AL SAUD
“I have heard that in war haste can be folly, but have never seen delay that was wise.” - Sun Tzu
Wars cannot be prevented, one can only delay them for the benefit of others
That’s why the British/Canadians won the war of 1812. Outnumbered 10 to one, as soon as war was declared we attacked. Some places found out their country had declared war by waking up to redcoats at the gates.
Was sitting in my armchair sipping tea watching a serious video about a serious question about WW2 when, all of a sudden and without warning, the guy pops a joke about petrol and dark humour. I almost spit my baguette out.
surprise is a key element of warfare ;)
@@MilitaryHistoryVisualized I don't know if you've answer this question elsewhere, but I've been wondering what the outcome would have been if the General staff had opposed Hitler's plans to invade the USSR & then either assassinated him or imprisoned him? That would have left Germany only at war with the British Empire. Would Germany have been able to defeat Britain if it dramatically boosted its spending on aircraft and made a serious effort to gain air superiority over Britain and the The Channel over the following few years, basically playing 'defence' until a clear advantage had been achieved? Like maybe enticing the British navy into the range of its aircraft and then taking them out?
@JJ8KK That scenario definitely would off given Germany an advantage but would off took time for Germany to invade UK (most likely having USA join the war early) and still allowing UK to plan full on defence tactics. Hard to say but I would say it would be close.
@@SharpShadow7 Well, it's a scenario where you'd have to know & be able to project Germany's economic capacity to produce aircraft & ships and hope to be able to match/exceed Britain's capacity, even w/USA help.
The extra time this would have given Germany might have made possible its ability to employ those "wonder weapons" it eventually built on a larger scale. It would have been difficult for such a Germany to take on on Britain's Empire at a distance, but UK would have been most vulnerable right at home, no?
It would have also required that the "new" Germany--post-Hitler--would have had to change the one strategy that had given it so much early success: the strike fast and hard before your opponent has time to build up his defences. That change in mentality would have probably been difficult, but if the Rommel faction of the General Staff was in charge, and Hitler was out of the way, their natural sense of 'caution' might have made it possible.
The simple goal of this Alternative Germany would have been to make the English Channel impassable to British ships and to nevertheless force her to bring her assets there, within range where they could be destroyed, kinda like the Verdun strategy which kinda didn't work out as planned.
Avoiding outright war with the USA might not have been possible in the long run, but would have at least have been conceivable over that period of time when the Wonder Weapons could possibly have been brought online... A _lot_ of speculation here...
@@JJ8KK I agree, after all the reasons UK was trying to avoid going into WW2 was because lack off resources from WW1 & a repeat off trench warfare. UK managed to survive in home territory from taking advantage off Hitler's mistakes plus English channel advantage. UK took advantage while Germany was gathering there forces to attack but if all germans troops from the east was attacking UK instead then things would off ended badly for UK (most likely)
Without UK, Germany would off had a massive advantage to win the war.
Interesting to think off all the possibilities WW2 could off had and what the world would be like today if something slightly had been different.
Military History Demonetized
: (
I just saw an ad. Was it remonetized or not demonetized in the first place?
Erugo It was a glitch in the matrix.
I laughed but I'm crying inside
What the hell for?
“Fuel is like dark humor, not everybody gets it...” hilarious and informative my man
At 3:00: Terrible graphics! Just horrible! Totally inaccurate!
The English didn't use tea-bags in 1939.
:-)
What did they use?
@@captainsternn7684 loose tea leaves!
The loose tea leaf was the norm. Tea bagging your snaggletoothed neighbors is what they were busy doing while the brown shirt was on the rise. Damn, all the institution of higher learning and not one dentist? Lazy Limey subservient fucks. Should have concentrated on Britain first, less on the eastern front. So many of you so called patriotic sheep remember why is a country in the first place. Any unwilling conscript in a German uniform is and was more patriotic than any left leaning pathetic loser liberal. Who will cry for you in 100 years. Who will write your history in books and on net ? Will the writing be in this English text or Arabic? Or???? Bunch of cry baby losers! Get over your self. And begin to consider the future for your children ( who most likely will kill you in your sleep anyway).
@@18wheels1966 Wake up Magic Merkel has a open door policy, you have two million Turkish plus in Germany and rising, that's just the turk's, its funny you call Germany patriotic but its the British who are breaking away from your liberal EU, the British who are taking back control of our borders and sea's and immigration. And you cannot win a war with patriotic fervour, how many patriotic Germans stopped bullet's on the Eastern Front millions. And here is a idea instead of bending over and taking it up the arse from Macron and the French, why not align with the UK the French are the lead weight that are pulling down Germany and the EU.
Teabag was in popular use by 1920
He attacked early because he thought Steiner would be soon ready...
der angriff steiner ist nicht erfolgt
He shouldn't have given up so quickly on art school. What if someone had said to young Hitler "Wow. You know, these paintings are really quite good."
@Hans Günther they mean what if after he got rejected he tried to get in again? or tried a different one
He should have actually tried to hit on Stefanie Rabatsch in person, not just write an anonymous letter. Maybe impress her with a painting, then invite her to the opera.
But you know what they say: All publicity is good publicity. Hitler sure made a name for himself for the history books. Might even surpass Caesar himself...
He wasn’t a very good artist tbh, a lot of his paintings looked like amateurs
He would be a dictator AND a painter
hitler invades in 1943 and is met by an armada of tens of thousands of t-34 and kv-1s.
True, and the Panther and Tiger would never be developed and they would be crushed BUT the only reason the KV1 and T34 were able to be made were because Germany gave Russia the tech to make them so yeah, Germany would win
ehm, don't think so. Most of industry in ussr was imported from usa, and engine B-2 was developed for a bomber in 30s. What tech are you talking about? After 1933 germany sold couple of pz-1 and 2 and some fighters, nothing else.Also, in this universe Germans did cooperate with soviets early on. Also, you forget that half of oil germany had for barbarossa was delivered by soviets, so without soviets germany wouldn't have had any oil for barbarossa at all
Matija Tomsic sure they would made a standstill 🤦♂️
Germaby would not win you silly Wehraboo
No they didn't. Communism is actually pretty damn good att making weapons and making war. Its everything else it fails at.
Germany required the gold reserves of a few countries each year to pay for its rearmament and war costs. This is one of the main reasons for yearly attacks on its neighbours in 1939/40/41
Yes
5 year credit was due and Hitler did not have it
Attack your creditors
They had realized you dont' need gold or money. You just need access to resources. Germany has a lot of coal and potash. And brains. Leveraging that was what they had to work with.
@CK Lim They took German machinery and other manufactures in trade. Because we live in a time marked by devotion to noclassical economics popularized by the likes of Mises and perpetuated by politicians who pretend that great powers must pay cash & carry like the average working class person - A nation like Germany or USSR did not need to pay British pounds for purchases of things like chromium or tobacco from Turkey or oil from Romania. They traded things like electrical machinery, machine tools, technical expertise, military hardware.
You make excellent videos. You perform a needed public service in the face of long-standing popular myths. Cheers to you.
thank you, if you like you can support me on www.patreon.com/mhv every single dollar helps.
Germans : *Breathes*
French : “Seems like a threat to me”
General Conscription is a little more than "breathing"
@@bobbyjoe1111 I mean... it's a conscription from a nation which at the time only recently were allowed 100'000 men in the army.
There things Hitler shouldn't have done:
1. Attacking the Soviet Union before finishing the UK.
2. Declaring war on the US.
3. Existing.
N Q H failing art school in Vienna
Yeah but how does he finish off the UK ? Literally everybody agrees that sealion would have been a suicide mission
He attacked the USSR because of secret soviet documents leaked, the Russians were going to attack his eastern front when most of his force was in London, so I mean justified I suppose
He couldn't invade the UK due to several factors.
1, lack of air dominance
2, lack of landing craft
3, lack of naval supremacy
4, lack of oil reserves
The 4th reason was the main factor in the decision to go into Russia due to their oil fields. Control of that would of been a massive asset to the German military
@@iceice1295 but why should the USSR attacked? The purge is still in full swing and all divisions are shifting to new equipment. E.g from T26 to T34 airforce moving from L15/L16 to Yak-9s etc. The equipment will be fully ready by 42 and training will be complete probably by 43. For all the sins Stalin done. He definitely didnt want to attack Germany, he trusted Hitler so much he broke in the first days of Barbarossa
From 1935-1942 Britain commissioned 5 BBs, 5 CVs, 10 CAs, 27 CLs and 117 DDs, Germans only managed 4/0/4/1/37. I think it's fair to say that had they waited longer they still would have just been outmatched by the Royal Navy and USN at war's start regardless.
mPky1 the 'wonder weapons' were never going to win the war, they could have done random damage but never defeat the allies, just anger them. Yes the V weapons were advanced but remember Britain developed the Meteor jet fighter at the same time, so the technological edge Germany had wasnt that huge as some people make out.
The Allies had "wonder weapons" of their own, like radar and fleet carriers. The fact that they WEREN'T a colossal waste of money only makes them MORE wonderful.
@@CountArtha The value of the KM was always more as a "fleet in being", requiring the Allies (esp the UK) to devote disproportionate resources to defend against them. Even with all the IRL disadvantages the KM had, they caused real problems in the Atlantic. Whilst genuinely starving the UK out was never really very realistic, they certainly did deny us easy access to resources from the Empire that we needed, making rearmament much more difficult than it could have been
@Grundy Malone You clearly need to study amphibious assaults in the European and Pacific theaters more. Germany didn't have anywhere close to enough transports and types of transports. The US didn't develop the big numbers and different types needed until later. You absolutely need naval and air superiority to protect vulnerable troop and supply transports. All the tanks and other vehicles in the world won't make a difference unless you can land them safely on another shore and supply them with gas to move, ammo to shoot, and food to feed the troops. The Allies built and transported Mulberry harbors to support D-Day. Logistics are are much more important than armchair generals realize. Just a cursory look at the massive amphibious forces of major Allied assaults will tell you tell you what the German High Command and Hitler knew - they had no hopes of invading the UK.
@Grundy Malone bet you love your little basement with the swastika flag on the wall and your nazi hentei porn
bet you wear a german helmet when you play hoi4
"Fuel is like dark humor ..." That one left me on the floor in a coughing / wheezing / laughing fit.
oh come on every hoi4 player knows Germany should have memed out the soviets in 1938
You are to be saluted for producing clear, informative videos on subjects that are often overlooked. Many people choose to forget that war has a rather large reality component.
"Fuel is like dark humor" I LOVE THIS CHANNEL
Fuel is like dark humor, not everyone gets it
The whole concept of the Wehrmachts operation between 1939 and 1941 was based on one thing: The knowledge that time would work for the enemy. The High Command knew that, if one would run into a prolonged campaign against the Allies, the outcome would be the same as in 1914- 1918. In fact, that is the war the Oberkommando originally planned for against France: A war of attrition. The French planned likewise. It was only after the defeat of France that the Generals thougth everything else should be not only possible, but a piece of cake
ViceadmiralNelson Besides we have to acknowledge that since in the previous war Russia was defeated but France resisted until the bitter end and then counter-attacked, everyone thought that ir France was already defeated in one month, the soviets wont last long either...
Well researched and very well-reasoned. The only comment that I would make is that neither the U.S. nor the U.K. seemed to recognize the extent of the threat of Nazi Germany and Japan prior to the outset of the war. Both British Parliament and the U.S. Congress were divided in their perception of the risks posed by Germany and the need for extensive military expenditures. Economics notwithstanding, there would have likely been a considerable delay in any significant Allied response to Germany's continued military build-up (particularly from the U.S.) As you've pointed out: Germany faced its own internal economic limitations. Great channel. Really enjoy the vids. Keep them coming!
I love the depth and precision in which you present your topic ,, spot on 👌
It's good to see you have more subs than Germany had in WW2! An interesting video. Thankyou.
I just found your channel recently and am loving your content, it's very well thought out and researched, but I do have one question in regards to this, in the buildup to WW2 Germany put forth a very hostile and belligerent face toward France, Britain and much of the rest of Europe, which when combined with their rearmament saw their enemies building up their forces as well. But what if Hitler has been smart enough to put forth a less confrontational appearance and didn't push a massive rearmament program, and instead for a few years put in place much slower, and less threatening build up of their forces, at the same time putting more energy into it's military research and development?
This would likely have eased tension in the allied powers, and not resulted in their committing to the buildups that they did, such that the forces that had at that time where all equipped with the best equipment possible, so when they started the massive buildup to war, they would have been in a much better starting position, and thus been faster off the mark then the allies. Note this would be taking place Japan's expansion would be continuing in the Pacific and thus the allies would likely have committed more of their forces to holding back the Japanese advance, since at that time Germany would be appearing to be less of a threat, at least until Germany surged it's preparations for war.
I know there are a lot of assumptions here, but I don't think any of them are unreasonable, and since Germany would have started it's main buildup after it had already modernized most of it's existing military structure the build up would be much easier as it would just need to add to it's forces instead of trying to add to it's forces at the same time that it was modernizing it's current force.
This would not solve their fuel issue, at least not directly, but it might have allowed them to gain more resources, much faster, thus resolving many of their supply issues in the early years of the war.
The dark horse was really the French army... if you wait until 1942 the French mechanized forces probably all have radios.
Which they would have dropped along with their rifles...
The French get bad press.
This is fair, but I would seriously have questioned their sanity to wait just that long; too soon, and they run the risk of not fielding enough forces to really dent the French line, too late and the french bridge some of the technical gap.
My only problem here is, I do not know what french designers were planning for Tank design for the foreseeable future. Tanks were still often discussed as relic weapons or as support, rather than an independent mechanized fist. I believe a French general had recognized the utility some point near/during the war and had moved to push for further development. Too little, too late.
Infantry was still king, although this isn’t to say French design was terribly far behind, as the Char B1-Bis was well armored enough to stop anything a Panzer could put out, up to the Panzer III.
David Thorp the tanks design wasn’t as much a problem as deployment, the concentrated panzer divisions quickly over whelmed the French tanks which were scattered with the infantry
@@davidthorp01 Generally most french tanks could easily beat any Panzers at the time in a 1v1, but german tactics made sure that almost never happened.
UK, France, and Poland were getting ready for war in 1941 or 1942. For UK and France they were predictions, and for Poland it was necessity. Poland was too poor to stay always ready. And, yes, the Poles knew that even if they were as ready as possible and even if they guessed when the war was going to start correctly, they still could not win on their own. Moreover, the plan to be as-ready-as-possible by late 1941 was facing delays (money). For example: Poles wanted to convert all the cavalry brigades into motorized-mechanized brigades. Since some cavalry brigades resisted transformation, it is likely that Poland would have ended up with 12 to 14 motorized-mechanized brigades and 12 to 14 cavalry brigades (to be fair, the Polish cavalry did appreciate organic armored companies of tankettes and armored cars as well as AT cannons and AT rifles). The bottom line is that the Poles were creating only 1 such motorized-mechanized brigade per year (1938, 1939, 1940, and 1941 is 4 years, so 4 brigades and not 12 to 14).
Poland could've won against the USSR, and they could've given the Germans a bloody enough nose to dissuade them from further campaigns, but facing bot together was basically impossible
Though you got your point across, when I saw this video the first thing I thought of was the Soviet Union.
I felt the Germans attacked at the right time cuz if they waited any longer the soviets would just get more and more powerful, until they were at the point they were at at 1944.
@Jan Krynicky Why? He already purged every single officer and party official to the point where all that was left was people that only said yes to Stalin. having only 3 years go by until the next purge of half the armed forces wouldn't make any sense, as all of the traitors were killed in the first purge(as wel as many other innocents) and in 4-5 years time people would still remember the first purge very well, so why the fuck would Stalin do 2 seperate purges within 5 years? It makes no sense, it's not like Stalin purged his army after ww2 either, so why would he do it twice anyways? On top of that, the more hitler waited the more powerful the US would've became as well.
@Jan Krynicky Your right, it doesn't make sense for him to purge his army twice in 5 years. If that was the case, that he could be easily convinced to purge his army, why didn't he do it after world war 2? Or the many years following that? If he really was that trigger happy with purging, we would've seen another purge of the size of the first one some where in history. But we don't. Besides, Trosky was dead so there's even less of a reason to purge.
Hate to use 'hindsight' but it obviously not the right time for Germany to invade. How do I know this? They lost!
The longer Germany waited the stronger the Soviets would get yes, but they wouldn't get as strong as in the actual war for a variety of reasons, the most important being that they weren't in a major war, so they just wouldn't have such an emphasis on rushing out arms as quick as possible or conscripting as many soldiers, another reason is that America supplied pretty much all Soviet trucks, a large amount of ammunition and a lot of planes came from Britain and the USA, also a massive amount of metal came from the USA, obviously they wouldn't have all this so that means they would have to divide far more resources to their own aircraft, ammunition and especially trucks Also Stalin had massive plans for building up a navy so some resources would go there too, so overall they obviously won't be as strong in 1944 as they were in reality, it just simply isn't feasible
Baguette with sauerkraut is actually quite nice... not exclusively, of course.
Great. Now I'm hungry.
And tons of ketchup.
English Mustard surely!
Don't forget a big fat frankfurter with that :)
definitely not ketchup ! but Moutarde de Dijon
Actually there were hidden oil fields in German territory and countries around it.
In Austria they had the Matzen oil field which reached 22 million oil barrels in just six years under a damaged Soviet economy.
Next there were more undiscovered in NW Germany(Ruehle, Brandenburg, Emlicheim, Bramberge and Georgsdorf) and in Schoonebeek Holland. All within a 25 mile radius of Schoonebeek. Discovering Schoonebeek would have diacovered the other oil fields as well. The combined output of those oil field was also 22 million (9 million from Schoonebeek and 13 million from the other German oil fields just close to Schoonebeek.)
All these oil fields all were discovered in the late 40s/early 50s by accident and used 1930s tech to drill it out. All the oil fields mentioned were all under a mile deep.
Now the discovery of these oil fields would have dramatically have fueled a much larger portion of the Wehrmacht, ensuring their early victories and possibly give them more oil to traverse deeper in the Soviet Uniom, allowing greater capture of soldiers, factories and other military equipment.
The big change will be the fuel will not synthetic based, which was expensive and horribly inefficient.
A good reason for why Germany didnt discover these oil fields in the early/mid 1930s are 1.) No luck. Had more serious explorations occur they might have found it and 2.) Short sighted thinking. No one knew oil fields were there. It appeared better at the time to invest in synthetic fuel plants and not find other fields. Hitler believed time and energy was better spent into building synthetic fuel plants.
So a point of divergence to occur where Germany has much more oil is not impossible. Somewhat plausible, but will require hard work.
So, in essence Germany could have found more oil.
I promise to deliver the sources later for the oil fields in terms of depth and production along with the tech available to showcase how they had the ability to exploit it. Just some bad luck and short sightedness stopped them.
so erm where are the sources ?
@@molcur9658 well he is right. This is a Dutch article, but it tells a part of his story. www.geheugenvandrenthe.nl/bataafsche-petroleum-maatschappij-bpm-n-v
Always easier said than done
Man, you teach me so much about logistics and operations! I really view military history through a different light thanks to you and Hearts of Iron (not that it’s a perfect representation but it gives a good idea of certain military concepts)
I was wondering, if you have the time, what you would’ve done as the French High Command previous to WWII given what we know now? And when would you have liked to begin your reforms (like you said in this vid, a build up requires both time as well as money money)?
In the words of Napoleon "The best battle plan never survives it's first encounter with the enemy". Good analysis!
EXCELLENT presentation and well documented. Thanks very much. Greetings from Mexico City.
One thing to also be noted. Is what happened to the Russians in the early part of the German invasion. They had plenty of troops and vehicles, most were obsolete. However the T-34 which was a match for the Panzers where just beginning to see service. If Russia had enough T-34's and had them deployed the early days of the war, it could have gone much different.
Many of the German super weapons were a response to the Allies countering existing German arms. So you might not of known you needed to build Me 262 over Me 109's. World war 2 was only 6 years long, a relatively short period for arms development, for example the development of the F-35 started in 1992.
brgessner That is a complete misunderstanding.
Russia had lots of T-34 in 1941 when the invasion happened. Over 1000 to be exact. Almost as much as panzer 3 and 4s combined.
And unlike some anecdotal stories the t-34 most of the time did not propose a big threat to the Germans even if it had better armor and main gun compared to German tanks.
USSR had enough equipment to take on Germany, the problem was that the military was shit in terms of experience from the purge and Stalin didn't think Hitler would attack as soon as he did. The biggest reason for German success in the start was the surprise attack followed by USSR being out of position for a defensive war followed by excellent German strategic moves.
@@bingobongo1615 Very oversimplified and naive take. There are several other factors which curbed the effect of T-34s / KV-1s in the early days
If Germany waited, the Soviets would have completed its own rearmament, and in Hitler's own conclusions that the Soviets would, once reforms were completed annex Romania.
If Romania was annex it's game over for Germany before a war even starts.
You're assuming Germany HAD to launch a European war. If they had stayed home, like a peaceful nation, none of it would have been necessary at all.
Twirlip Of The Mists
Do you know what the soviets intended to do in the first place, mate?
Gendermans, we are all businessman!
Well if Germany stayed the Weimar Republic or wasn't Nazi Germany, they most likely would have been fine.
The reason I say this is because Mein Kampf had been out for years and Hitler's plans to invade Russia had been out for all the world to see. This understandably made the Soviets deeply insecure.
James Tang
Yep, both sides were fueling their own paranoias to the point where both became partially justified. It was like trying their best to create a self-fulfilling prophecy. It's what every arms race does - but not every arms race has some crazy ideologies attached.
Cold War one at least had "MAD" dangling over everyone. But given how enthusiastic Adolf was about a world where strong eat weak, MAD wouldn't have helped to sober everyone up - and communists would've declared that "12-year plan makes MAD void because Marx and Lenin predicted it" or something. Sounds like something a regime that was stupid enough to confiscate seed grain would do.
James Tang
Perhaps you should look up how Stalin reacted when he was informed with the commencement of Operation Barbarossa. The Soviets were deeply insecure by Hitler's plan? That can't be further from the truth, I'm afraid. Stalin was a political realist, so he conjectured that Hitler as a dictator like him must be as politically realistic as he was, and "Mein Kampf" was rather a piece of propaganda than a blueprint of actions.
Very informative video MHV! I recall reading a quip somewhere (possibly in Alan Bullock) that Nazi Germany started its war both too early and too late - too early in the sense that its military forces had not sufficiently developed their capabilities to achieve its aims and too late in that its major adversaries had sufficiently mobilized or developed their military forces to resist or intervene against it. (I also recall reading that Hitler subsequently felt 'cheated' of victory because Germany would have been better off starting war over Czechoslovakia rather than the Allies postponing it to Poland). My own view is that Nazi Germany had a very narrow window of opportunity in starting war at all with any apparent prospect of success, effectively between its own rearmament and those of its adversaries, in which more time only favored the latter - although a more rational view of that narrow window of opportunity would have been to avoid going to war at all. If anything, it might be argued that Nazi Germany started war against Britain and France at the best possible time (and similarly attacked the Soviet Union at the optimal time of German advantage and Soviet disadvantage) - and that was as good an opportunity as it was ever going to get (both in 1939 against Britain and France - and in 1941 against the Soviet Union and arguably even in its declaration of war against the United States). I note Tooze seems to have a similar view, in that although Hitler probably would have preferred to bluff Britain and France out of their guarantee to Poland, he was certainly willing to risk war with them because German prospects would only worsen from that time. (Germany was arguably doubly lucky in its narrow window of opportunity - in that its offensive success coincided with a tactical balance in which mobile offensive firepower had gained the advantage over defence, and its defensive success coincided with the balance swinging back to defensive firepower from 1942-1943).
A more interesting question might be whether the Allies - Britain and France - should have waited. That is, whether they could or should have effectively bought time or postponed war, by not giving (or acting upon) their guarantee to Poland in the manner that they did.
300 infantry divisions
60 tank divisions and motorised division
s
fuel reserves for 40 years
italy player knows what he is doing
*PROFIT*
Italy should have stayed neutral like Spain.
Someone said that, "500 years from now, future historians will call the period 1935-1945 The War for Oil".
It was the conversion from coal to oil power in shipping that made evident to England-Germany-Japan-Italy that OIL was going to be a bottleneck resource, a deal-breaker. The USSR and USA had plenty of reserves and other problems to distract them from this issue for a few years, while England increased her oil reserves and Germany began synthetic research. Ultimately, the search for oil sources led to Germany increasing her military, increasing her need for oil, rinse-and-repeat until the problem reaches crisis level.
War was unavoidable after Versailles, give or take a couple years. Only a rational English treaty with Germany would prevent WWII, but this was impossible after strangling the Wiemar Republic in the 1920s.
What if Germany just skipped the whole world war and instead became a moderate imperial power and maintained relations to both east and west?
Many revisionists assert the west boxed Germany into a position they had no choice. But if this is so, that is Hitler's failing entirely.
Hitler was NOT prepared to be moderate. Besides, his re-armament was dependent on constant annexations.
@@48917032 Yeah- he was almost constitutionally incapable of taking a good deal and calling it a win. Like Napoleon. Always another hill to take.
that would require a somewhat rational approach to life, of which all extreme ideologies like nazism are incapable by definition.
Not only this. You simply cannot develop high advanced tanks for example until you see what enemy has. Putting high caliber guns on Pancers and Tigers was result of seeing T-34 amour in battle. Without this knowledge, Wermacht would just continue to produce more Pancer 3 with some minor upgrades, but for sure they would not consider 88mm guns. Same with antitank guns. Basically you dont know what you need until you try it in a war.
yeah but the enemy would also lack the expirience to research their better units, there wouldn't be IS 2 and KV's for the soviets nor any of the late war weapons ANY of the allies had. so the playing field there is even.
@@sosig6445 KV was developed before the war
Actually, even if they did try to build up their military, everybody else would've noticed. Inevitably.
This. This is the problem many 'what if nazi germany win' scenarios never took into consideration, always assuming that your enemy is passive
Yes, his army and forces were legit still in their beta's. They tried their tactics in Poland and Spain and worked. That got to their heads and went all out against the world.
They should also have secured Britain/England before invading Russia, legit they went all out.
How would they do that then?
Do you have a plan that could actually work?
When making said plan, please take into consideration that the enemy will counter it
He mostly shouldn't have messed with the UK and the USA and/or the UdSSR. Having three Super Powers as enemies is just plain stupid !
The comment section will be gold!
Indeed it is. Jewish gold sold to the Swiss to be specific.
Just kidding.
I love the Jack-in-the-box at 1.02.
Or perhaps it is a Jerry-in-the-Boche?
The Germans needed a better air force and a better navy, a lot of people say that the Germans could have taken the UK which is utter rubbish if you ask me, they simply wern't prepared and they'd have needed air and naval superiority which in reality they were far off achieving. There's so many factors going against Germany in the war that anyone who says "Germany could have won if..." is talking out of their arse
They had naval superiority later in the war until the allies discovered the Enigma machine. They had the means to invade the UK easily. But since the airborne invasion in Crete and The Netherlands didn't produce the results they'd like they went back to the drawing board. And Hitler never wanted to invade the UK really. He was raging when German bombers accidentally bombed London the first time. He preffered a peace treaty.
@@mver191 Germany had no means whatsover of making a succesful invasion of the UK at any time during WW2. Their surface fleet was hugely outnumbered...they had lost 10 destroyers in just two days when they had previously invaded Norway.. that was half of their destroyer force and all of them sunk by Royal navy ships. That was Germanys only succesful amphibious operation and yet it cost them a huge part of their surface fleet sunk as well as many transport ship losses. Any invasion of the Uk would have been suicide.
@@ggarlick46 Germany may have lost many ships, but the UK had no standing army and airforce left at some point. Anyway, Hitler didn't even want war in the first place with the UK because he was not interested in capturing it. That is why he let the allied soldiers go at Dunkirk. It was the bombardment of Berlin that made him really angry.
Minor correction : we, French, do love sauerkraut, with or without baguette.
You do? I was not aware. Is there a special name for the combination of both dishes?
@@terbentur2943 Yes, it is called "baguette with sauerkraut".
Franck Michaux bratwurst im dein sauerkraut
Hence the white flag.
I tell these armchair generals that there was no way the Germany could have conquered the world in WW II! Germany just did not have the manpower or the resources to do so. At best Germany could of conquered a empire from the Atlantic to the Urals. And that's it!
Germany was doomed to defeat in WWII.
Germany was never set on conquering the world. That is an allied lie.
As was said, Germany didn't want to conquer the world, not even western europe. Hitler was always planning expansion to the east. France and Britain suppporting Poland made the war in the west a necessity.
best facts ww2 channel, the host knows what he's talking about
Eye opening. Thank you!
Or Germany didnt have to do any of this, invading Poland (why??) Henry Ford and Charles Lindbergh knew.
One issue that nobody here mentions is that if the war hadn't started until 1948 or so the British colonial empire would have already begun to unravel. Germany would have been much better served if it then had supported various independence movements, much as the USSR later did during the Cold Car. Also, Japan would have benefited if it could have imported strategic resources from newly independent countries rather than be dependent on the USA.
But the world wars are the best what the colonies happend, because it's realy usefull when you overlords kill each other
This makes no sense. The reason that the colonies wanted independence was because of the 2nd world war. This was because of the allies' constant propaganda of "the free world" and "free Europe" and the colonies got angry because of the hipocrisy. Not only that but the colonial empires like Britain were exhausted by the war, and had no intention to fight another. So if there was any time to ask for independence, it was during that time. And you gotta remember, that Australia, New Zealand and Canada to this day still work close together with the UK when it comes to foreign conflicts. So to say that the UK wouldn't have had any support from them if they were independent, is such a baseless claim.
@@codwawgamerzz You fail to consider that India was the most important British colony and it was the cornerstone of the empire. By the late 1930s the independence movement in India had become so strong that even many British colonial officials considered it only a matter of time before the country became independent. Moreover, Gandhi's nonviolent protest movement had also greatly resonated in the UK itself, where more and more people were willing to support Indian independence. World War II may have actually delayed Indian independence rather than accelerating it (which was probably the case in Africa). After losing India, the British Empire would have been greatly weakened, although this wouldn't have affected the UK's relations with Australia, Canada, South Africa, or New Zealand. I never made any such claim, either. Another country that needs to be considered in this respect is the Philippines. The Tydings-McDuffie Act of 1934 paved the way for Philippine independence following a ten-year transition period. As a result, the Philippines was granted commonwealth status in 1935 and would have become fully independent in 1944. World War II delayed this until 1946. After Philippine independence, anti-colonial pressure would have greatly increased throughout Asia. It's therefore hard to say whether the Dutch and French could have held onto their colonies in Southeast Asia for much longer than they actually did. What I mainly want to point out is that too many people seem to assume that the Western colonial empires could have somehow made it through the 1940s without adverse effect if World War 2 hadn't happened. This is a complete fallacy. In relative terms, the UK and France would have become increasingly weaker compared to Germany. Besides the USSR, the main long-term opponent that Hitler faced was certainly not Britain, but the United States. Despite all of Germany's rearmament efforts, the country had no chance of contending with America in the long-run. As the Naval Act of 1938 showed, the U.S. Navy would have swept the Kriegsmarine from the seas even if Plan Z could have been realized.
@@davemorgan6013 I agree with Lord Spast, you cannot assume that the colonial powers would have allowed their empire to unravel had the World War not happened. England would have had much more resources, public support, and military power to stop any such actions. While you are right, WW2 or not there would have been continued calls for independence across the British empire, that does not mean they would have been succesful.
WW2 had a profound effect on the world - it is impossible to say what it would look like had it not happened.
@@so8907 The war definitely had a profound effect, but I have to disagree with you on major points. In fact, the war briefly strengthened British resolve to hang onto India because they could not let go of such a valuable asset in wartime. Moreover, it is unlikely that Churchill, who was a vociferous opponent of Indian independence, would have become prime minister without the disaster in France. Under Chamberlain, let alone under a Labour government, the UK would not have been willing to keep India at all costs. An armed uprising would have become increasingly likely in India by 1943 if the peaceful independence efforts had not borne any fruit. I do not believe that British voters would have condoned the use of massive military force to crush such a rebellion, which would have been far more severe (and costly) than the Mau Mau Uprising of the 1950s, for example.
I love your videos. I am wide open to supporting on Patreon. However, the “every reichsmark counts” thing raised an eyebrow. I’m afraid I only have East German Marks. Are those accepted?
Hitler's biggest and crucial mistake was to fight on two fronts and to underestimate the Russians.
Great channel and vids. I like your accent =) Keep up the great work.
the main reason of Hitlers defeat was to build bigger and bigger tanks instead of keeping domination in the air
As someone else pointed out, the biggest flaw in building a ship to 'match' an enemy ship is that such rivals almost never meet each other in combat.
I wonder what would have happened if the soviet union attacked first, effectively making themselves the aggressor.
Afterall Germany's plan was to defeat France first to concentrate on fighting Russia afterwards.
I don't think it would have mattered at that point. Germany had been in an offensive war with the allies since 1939 involving Poland, France and the U.K. along with the colonies. What's to stop Stalin from claiming to be a liberator of Poland and France?
I disagree with your conclusions over allied response readiness if Germany would have had a fleet of 300 U-Boats at the start of WW2. Just look what Germany did with those 40 U-boats and the Royal navy could not properly escort and protect merchant ships in the Atlantic until mid to late 1942. What would of happen if Germany had 120 U-boats at start of WW2, probably the Royal Navy would have been larger but would it had made that much of a difference against 3 times as many U-boats. Thankfully we will never know, my hat off to the brave men of the Royal Navy and Merchant Marine. Not that the U-boat men were not brave but hey they were the enemy. Actually the enemy were/are the leaders that sent/send men off to fight needless wars.
You missed the point, having a sizable U-boat fleet would've made the Allies more aware of the threat of u boats before the war. And the Allies would be far better prepared to deal with them once the war started.
A plan that assumes a passive enemy isn't a plan, its daydream
I would just caution you that the consequences of your proposal wouldn't have gone unnoticed
and thus the RN at the beginning of WW2 could have looked a lot different also.
The 300 boat theory is often thrown up for discussion , but from that you would have to lose
around 10-20% as training boats, with the remainder split equally between going out on patrol,
coming back from patrol and R&R. Thus you may only have 80 boats actually on station, and not
the mystical 300! However 80 boats would have caused more damage than in reality but the losses
in U-Boat may well have been proportionally higher.
Doenitz at the time when proposing 300 u boats didn't realized that airpower is going to be significant in dealing with u boats
"Who wants to eat a baguette with sauerkraut" is a better joke than I thought Germans could make
I interrupt this program to tell you that the MinimizeScreen button in youtube fullscreen mode is the Wehrmacht Cross
I never noticed that.
My favorite part part of this channel is, we all get to hear a German breakdown how feeble Hitler’s plans of European domination were. If such a technical, not ideological (emotional), mind had been in play how many more people would be alive today!
what if the German army demobilized, started exporting to Italy while stockpiling fuel from Soviet Union
Better yet the Germans should put a puppet in USSR or backed coup secretly
Then that's not Nazi Germany
Also, lets try to coup a nation with a secret police force willing to do horrible horrible things to their targets
It's been said Hitler had no choice but to make war in 1939-40 since the German economy would have ground to a halt not long after this period anyway. Due to lack of several resources, lack of self-sufficiency in food and fuel (Hitler/Goerring ordered the construction of the synth fuel plants in Germany during the late '30's but these plants never produced nearly enough). Also Germany was running an unfavorable trade deficit, that was inherent in an economy producing mainly war goods instead of peacetime goods. Hitler gave the main reason for starting war when he did that he would be "too old" to see the end of any conflict if he waited. But the economic reasons were much more compelling, if you were Hitler that is
Personally i think that a part of Germany's early success were a result of getting out the depression by using the military industry. (despite its hurt on the economy) I am curious if the result would have been different if the Germans attacked earlier, like 1938 if the annexation of the Sudetenland was opposed by the Allies. Although i doubt the end result would be to different as the comparative industrial capability of Germany was lacking.
They would not have built jets because they had no need to. Propeller driven aircraft was a technology that worked and there was no incentive to change. They may have turned to jets after war started in 1945 but they would still have been in the same place as they were in 1939.
The same applies to the idea that by 1945 the Germans would have had Tiger and Panther tanks. Again these came about because of the war and there was no incentive to build them before the war. The T34, on the other hand, would have been a different matter. That came about through clashes with the Japanese in 1938. So the Soviet army would have had more of them by 1945.
Would Hitler have been better served if he used diplomacy to deal with the West and Poland and then attacked Russia is a more interesting question. The West may well have been more open to the idea of Germany fighting Russia, especially as communism was causing such problems in their own countries. And as Poland had fought off an invasion from Russia in 1919-1920 they may well have been more open to having some sort of defence pact with Germany.
The next part of this is if Hitler had gone into the Soviet Union as a liberator rather then an invader would he have been more successful. Many parts of the Soviet Union had suffered extremely badly under the communists and would have been glad to be rid of them. In fact many from the Soviet Union had joined the Germans in fighting the communists. So coming as a liberator would have made life for the German Army much easier.
you really think the germans stop developing tanks bcz the pz4 good enough
lol
@@darklysm8345 That is not what I said. I said the Tiger and Panther were a result of combat experience against the Russians. The Panzer IV went into service in 1939 but it was not until later the the longer barrel 75 mm was fitted.
@@bigblue6917 Sure but the germans would develop a new tank anyways, maybe slower but the german high command knowed about the weak turret problem
if the germans invade in 1942 the surely bring better tanks.
To say "Hitler should have waited" requires an assumption that Hitler be able to not be Hitler.
I think that Germany's huge success early in the war proves that they were more ready than anyone else
And finally there is a guy who really understands "nöthing" - hätte ich auch nicht besser schreiben können hehehe. Super Content
Danke!
Another thing!
Germany : (Huff.. Huff..) "Having enemies on both sides sure is hard. We made a big mis-"
Japan : "Let's launch multiple operations on the American Pacific regions! See if they're gonna surrender. Naval superiority goes brrrr"
It was a success against the Russians...
Who wants to eat a Baguette with Sauerkraut? That killed me... ;)
That is a disturbing image.
They just seem to have made too many enemies too fast. But if waiting would be a help at all, they would have needed to wait unti they had access to a special weapon (like the rocket technology that was being build, or the progress in nuclear power). Focusing the arms race on just those new technologies would be a risky move, but possibly a more viable one.
The USA started building modern equipment only after the fall of Poland in 1939, and started training millions of soldiers to man this very equipment only after the fall of France in 1940. One of the biggest common misconceptions is that US car and train factories started building military cars, armored cars, and tanks overnight. In fact, it took in between a year and 2 years.
Let’s say Germany waited till they developed the a bomb then started the war they would of had a chance however sourcing the material would of taken some time
All the great powers, including Italy and Japan were all tinkering with the atomic bomb concept. So you'd get a 1943 nuclear war.
Should have focused on industrial capacity, infrastructure, and full employment in useful tasks. This would be civilian activity that could form the foundation for a rapid military build up and would improve the economic situation. Many civilian projects could have a dual use in mind. More shipbuilding capacity can be used for trade and passenger ships in the short term while creating the possibility for a shift to build more military ships at some point. More high quality road and rail networks can be used for industry as well as enabling more rapid troop movements and logistical support. More airfields might be a bit too obvious given the severe restrictions on aircraft imposed on them but improvements could be made to existing airfields. Hardening of some civilian industry and installation of minor fortifications in and around cities well back from the borders probably could be done without provoking a severe response. This could begin to provide some protection against bombers and invasion.
What if Hitler had kept to the Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement and, instead of opening up a second front, he focused his forces on Britain and North Africa. Could he have achieved victory there, thereby securing oil in the Middle-East?
No. his problem wasn't timing but resource. If he didn't attack the soviets would.
His biggest mistake was not strong arming turkey and spain into joining the axis because locking down the Mediterranean and taking soviet oil wells would be a massive boost to logistics and supply lines.
Taking the oil would have a more important impact of denying Russia of that oil.
What if Germany kept focusing on Britain and they didn’t invade Russia?
they did focus on Britain but realised any invasion would fail - and had to turn to Russia instead to get their additional resources particularly fuel, food, slave labour etc etc
Operation Sealion could have been a resounding success, building up to Operation Whalrus a massive U-boat invasion of Russia from it's northern shores with the ultimate element of surprise striking them from the rear and blindsiding the Russians
People ask how Germany will invade England but never the reverse. Will England just stay in war for next 20 years even though it was bankrupt and has giant imperial area to rule over that all wants independence? lol Probably they will eventually get USA to nuke them or Russia to invade, though. That is what Hitler assumed and why he invaded Russia once Russia's demands to join German side turned out to be ridiculous.
Winton Churchill. .Speech on Street fighting. .Bismarck sunk. .USA support.
Thos might have worked, especially if Germany went full war economy and built big enough airforce to subdue Britain. However, defeating Britain was not a big goal for Hitler.. 1st they were fellow "aryans" and nothing of value was to be gained from the island... Containment strategy which was done successfully was enough. The goal for Hitler was always the Soviet Union
always enjoy your content. will support you when I get some money
My understanding is that the Germans were using synthetic oils and fuel made from coal (Fischer Tropsich process). They had 27 such plants operating. I thought there was no major shortages until Barbarossa and it's accompanying overreach.
7:40 TIK did an entire video explaining that it would be impossible for the germans to create more motorized divisions due to oil supplies. he goes much further in depth on the oil topic
if anyone wants to see it here is the link
ruclips.net/video/kVo5I0xNRhg/видео.html
Problem is, he only goes into the oil. There were a lot more reasons why it just wasn't possible. MHV names quite some of them (Germany being almost bankrupt for example), but there is other stuff like German companies not being experienced in assembly line production, the steel needed for such a motorization just not being there (or affordable) and on top of that...there just weren't enough drivers. Cars were still something for the higher class in Germany in the 1930s, they would have had to put hundreds of thousands of soldiers through a drivers training...and what a rushed drivers training could do to the capabilities of a mechanized force was shown in 1941 by the Red Army.
if you have sources for the steel industry can you list them? I would like to read about that. thanks
These just underscore some of the advantages the United States had. They had the resources, the production experience(after all Ford first created and used assembly line production in the auto industry) and cars were relatively common in the United States as well.
"After all who wants eat a baguette with sauerkraut" great line, haha
Assuming Germany had concentrated on building up its economy rather rather than military, how long until the Soviet Union invaded? There's No way Stalin would have taken an economically strong Germany lying down.
I think a large part of it was Germany not moving to a war time economy for the war. Many things went wrong, but not spending all they could have spent on the war. Had to try to keep the people happy.
"Just build an outrageously huge number of the cheapest unit and rush the enemy."
- Lenin
It's Difficult For a modern German person to have an impartial view, when talking about Ww2. As they're taught to feel guilty about ww2 from the moment they start school.
(German here) I believe that’s a myth. I don’t know a single person who was taught that. Rather history classes teach the historical facts which in this period generally do not work in favour of the Germans. Maybe some people will start developing guilt complexes based on that evidence, but again, nobody I know, even though my social sphere is rather left-wing.
@@xXSlayzz Actions speak louder than words.
Why is your country being destroyed by its own government, with the unrestricted influx of migrants, other than guilt?
Also, in reading your retort, you just said "we're taught history and for the most part it doesn't favour well for Germans".
Which proves my point about what you're taught.
Hitler should not have hit the British cities and concentrated on the airfields, radar and factories. As far as Russia, he waited until too long into the spring/summer, thanks to having to help Mussolini out of a jam. Russia WOULD have attacked Europe in 1941 also, Hitler caught Stalins Armies in an offensive posture, not dug in. This is why they ran through the Russian Armies early on. IF Hitler would have treated the captured Russian troops with respect, MANY of them would have fought with Germany. The SS created many atrocities and the captured Russian troops were not well fed and were used as slave labor. Hitler should have stopped as soon as winter started, pulled back 300 kilometers to shrink their lines and restocked instead of continued to attack in the brutal winter.
Waited? How about not at all?
Just kidding, think of all the cool war movies we'd have missed out on?
Yes, he should have waited over 50 years - the rest of his life.
Or actually, he should have waited until he got accepted in the art school, or not,
but he should have waited for those answers and not go into politics.
The 2nd thought is, maybe Europe and Germany especially needed this blood letting unfortunately - to get rid of fascism. Although nationalism is rising again.
Should have had a Full Functional JET.
Excellent and Outstanding!!!
I'll very briefly write down 10 of Hitlers biggest military mistakes that cost him the war in Swedish Historical magazine: Every mistake had an indicator of how severe the mistake were up to a 5.
1.:The German army invaded the Soviet union with German troops in their summer uniforms.
Not at all prepared for the stubborn resistance from his arch enemy and the merciless Russan winter of 1941, the ffolly of that mistake was given a 5 out 5 as the invasion could have taken place before 1942 if Hitler had listened to his generals.
2: He declared war against the United States of America.
Also av 5 out 5 mistake as he could avoided dragging them into the world for atleast two or three years.
3: He did not destroy the trapped entirety of the British army at Dunkirk.
Another 5 out of 5 mistake as the complete destruction of the British troops could have meant the end of the war for the British army.
4: He was still waiting for an invasion that already was happening.
While the invasion of Normandy was taking place on June 6thm 1944 Hitler was sleeping home in Bavaria. When he got informed of the invasion he dismissed it as merely a diversion and that the real invasion would take place and the several weeks long delay to send reinforcementsm because he was waiting for the real invasion. a 4 out of 5 mistake as Hitler's iron grip on his generals prevented their forces to drive away the enemy during the first days of the invasion of Normandy.
5.; Hitler's refusal to give up the siege of Stalingrad.
This mistake meant the destruction of the entire 6th German army. 5 out of 5. Hitlers illogical order to hold fast and dig in, totally negated the main advantage of the German army: it's mobility.
6: Germany went to war with old weaponry.
Combined with the success of the German army during the first couple of year with Hitler's personal idea that he was a military genious and who was better then his entire taciturn generals who in actuallity knew that must be done.
The belief that it was his enemy doubts and unprepared armies that was the cause of these success, he stopped almost every military development which lead to the current German weapons becoming obsolete after two years time which made Hitler in all haste gve the order to restart all weapon devoplemnts , which in turn lead to unrealiable weapons despite a few new breakthroughs in weaponry.
A 4 out of 5 mistake as if the weapon development hade kept going without any stops, the German might have been able to keep the control of the war.
7: He gave the British Bombers free reign.
The night towards May 31:st 1942 the Royal Air Force sen in thousand of bombers and the German anti air weapons would not even see their targets in the dark of night and the RAF destroyed 13000 building in Köln. this success would go one untill the Germans began fighters started to lurk near British airbases and ambush and shoot down when bombers returning to base. This tactic worked well untill Hitler stipped the ambushes and ordered that the enemy planes instead should be shot down over German soil as to encourage the German people with the sights the wrecks of British bombers. This was only a 3 out of 5 as with the mysterious help by Hitler the British bombers could continue their bombing operations for the rest of the war.
8: He kept German women away from the factories.
While millions of American and British women worked in factories durin the war. Hitlers was of the idea that German women had no place in factories, their place was at home and taking care of children. This conservative opinon led too a severe lack of an able workforce since the male worker had been summoned to war. Even if Hitler managed to keep the industry afloat with the help of a forced foreign workforce, this solution only made up around 20% of the available workforce and the resource dwindled rapidly each year the war continued. Far too late Hitle allowed a small part women to contribute to the war effort. This mistake was a 3 out of 5 as with a even with a more modern view of women, Germany might not a won the war, but it could have prolonged for a good while.
9: He "sabotaged" his own Airforce.
When Hitler gave the Luftwaffe the order for an airstrikes against Great Britain in order to destroy the Royal Airforce. Around August 1940, it seemed as this would be a success for the Luftwaffe until Hitler messed this up. Under an attack on an airplane factory killed nine civilians, Brittish responed by bombing German cities, this made Hitler furious and in his rage he ordered the bombings of British cities which in turn gave the RAF a well earned break och would soon regain contol of the skies. This was a 3 out of 5 mistake as it was Hitler's first defeat and give the British people new hope.
10: He used an advanced fighter as a mediocre bomber.
Despite that the Jet fighter Messerschmitt Me 262 gave a Hitler pre-eminently Jet fighter, he instead used it for bombing raids, despite the warnings of his experts. The Messerschmitt Me 262 was the first figher in history with a jet engine was ahead of it's time in many aspects. WIth a lenght of only 10.6 meters and a top speed of kilometers an hour, it could outmanouver the best airplanes of the Allies. The Jet fighter was just what the German airforce needed in 1943 when the tides of war leaned towards the advange of the Allies.
Hitler was impressed by the achivements made by German engineers and ordered the construction of the Jet figher as bomber!. Despite all objections made toward his very bad idea, Hitler insisted that he was in the right but the results were catastrophic! Even under ideal situations, the German pilots missed their taget by at least one kilometer as the Me 262 simly was too fast for the pilots be calculate where their bombs would land.
When a desperate Hitler finally ordered the Me 262 as the Jet fighter is as intended for late in 1944, it simply was too late as the war was practically over for the Germans. This was a 2 out 5 as mistake as if the Me 262 had been used as intended the Germans could have hade air supremeacy in 1943.
So based on what both the video and what I've written, I'd say that Hitler was a massive fool and should have either have waited for a short while or fixed Germany's most severe flaws. And Listened his his generals.
This is the Second time this week I've seen Adam Tooze's book used to excellent effect. (TIK's channel). Spot on. Brilliant and succinct once again sir. Danke!
Yes but Hitler REALLY should have waited and built up his forces prior to the Munich Beer-hall attack.
never have clicked so fast
Fuck off
Undead Tornado z