Report, edit, etc...Posted by Zombie on 2006-01-18 at 20:00:10
QUOTE(BeeR_KeG @ Jan 18 2006, 05:22 PM)
Still worng.
"Ein Reich, Ein Volk, Ein Fuhrer"
One Empire(Could be Nation), One People, One Leader
The first step into writting a thesis is to read from many different sources, not just one.
The first reason to back my thesis based on Hitler, don't read History books written by the goverment. Who in the hell said that the US goverment would write good things about their past enemies and bad things about themselves? All you see in those books are the American point of view and of course they would change a few things.
I've read a great deal of books about WWII and Hitler and they are far different than what American School History books have to say.
A few examples:
Dr. John Pimlott (English) - Wehrmacht
Adolf Hitler (Austrian) - Mein Kampf
Adolf Hitler (Austrian) - Unpublished Sequel to Mein Kampf
Rainer Karlsch (German) - Hitler's Bomb
-- And most important of all --
German newspaper clippings of my grandfather.
My first thesis is based on Hitler's rise to power.
Hitler had a very excellent and logical reason in which to wage his campaign against the Jews. The jews have been hate by caucasian europeans since the Middle Ages. they were banned from England for almost 400 years until Oliver Cromwell headed Parliament during the English Civil War. Hitler was an Austrian born German politician in the most ruined country in the world at the time, both economically and structurally. The Germans wanted to fix their problems, and the Jews were one of them. Everybody thought and it was most probably true, that at the time, the jews were the greedy middle class composed of Bankers and Shopkeepers that wanted profits for themselves and their kin, but not to the European nations.
You now have a common problem for the Europeans, and in Hitler's goals, Germans. The German people needed a leader that would fix any of their problems, they were in such desperate times that any fix in any problem would work. Hitler used the Jews as the main problem in which to fix. By implementing his goal, the german people thought that it was true and then they elected him Chancellor in 1933.
History has shown that a single man cannot change the views of any society. In 1727, Jonathan Swift proposed a very logical, persuasive and problem fixing pamphlet called "A Modest Proposal", in which in order to fix the economicall status of Ireland, people would sell their one eyar old babies for 10 shillings and they would be used for food. If you read it, you would completely agree with what he said, he points all possible issues in favor of his thesis and then he counters possible counter-issues that may be presented. The project never took place.
"You can change the views of a man, but you can never change how society acts or thinks."
With this, we can conclude that Hitler used the views of society into leading him to power. People already thought in this way about Jews, so Hitler proposed himself to be the person to fic the Jew problem.
Now to the second thesis, "Why did Hitler loose the war?".
Militarily speaking, Hitler knew nothing about naval warfare. This already puts Germany at a big disadvantage because there couldn't be full coordination between all military forces.
Second, Germany was allied with Italy against all nations in the world. You can't really count Japan because they were fighting their own separate war. You can say that the Axis powers controlled far more land, resources, men than all the other countries agaisnt him, but he had to defend the newly acquired lands against the people living there. So he had to wage two wars, military and civil. You had 4 powerfull nations against the Axis domination over Germany: USA, USSR, Great Britian and Canada. This means that you are already outnumbered on men and resources. You can say that Hitler had more numbers of each, but for him to succesfully wage war, he had to use greater numbers than his counterparts, meaning that he will run out of men and resources faster.
The third reason for Hitler's loss of the war was the Soviet Union itself. The Soviet Union marked many obstacles for the Germans, it mean opening another flank and thus another war for the Germans, it had to stretch supply lines to unheard of distances in previous wars and Hitler had to split his resources and men. Many historians think and write about "Hitler's Invasion into the Soviet Union". This is a flase statement. Hitler's "Operation Barbarossa" intially was planned to take over the Baltic states, the countries in the Black Sea area and those in the Black Steppes (the ones in between), but it did not include such an early invasion of the Soviet Union. Once Hitler started invading the countries surrounding the Soviet Union, the Soviets counter-attacked, but it was not en-masse and they soon retreated. Meaning that the Soviets took the chance in taking a country currently waging war against Germany. This meant that Stalin was eager to advance west and take over German held lands. This obliged Hitler to attack the Soviets.
[right][snapback]410049[/snapback][/right]
"Ein Reich, Ein Volk, Ein Fuhrer"
One Empire(Could be Nation), One People, One Leader
The first step into writting a thesis is to read from many different sources, not just one.
The first reason to back my thesis based on Hitler, don't read History books written by the goverment. Who in the hell said that the US goverment would write good things about their past enemies and bad things about themselves? All you see in those books are the American point of view and of course they would change a few things.
I've read a great deal of books about WWII and Hitler and they are far different than what American School History books have to say.
A few examples:
Dr. John Pimlott (English) - Wehrmacht
Adolf Hitler (Austrian) - Mein Kampf
Adolf Hitler (Austrian) - Unpublished Sequel to Mein Kampf
Rainer Karlsch (German) - Hitler's Bomb
-- And most important of all --
German newspaper clippings of my grandfather.
My first thesis is based on Hitler's rise to power.
Hitler had a very excellent and logical reason in which to wage his campaign against the Jews. The jews have been hate by caucasian europeans since the Middle Ages. they were banned from England for almost 400 years until Oliver Cromwell headed Parliament during the English Civil War. Hitler was an Austrian born German politician in the most ruined country in the world at the time, both economically and structurally. The Germans wanted to fix their problems, and the Jews were one of them. Everybody thought and it was most probably true, that at the time, the jews were the greedy middle class composed of Bankers and Shopkeepers that wanted profits for themselves and their kin, but not to the European nations.
You now have a common problem for the Europeans, and in Hitler's goals, Germans. The German people needed a leader that would fix any of their problems, they were in such desperate times that any fix in any problem would work. Hitler used the Jews as the main problem in which to fix. By implementing his goal, the german people thought that it was true and then they elected him Chancellor in 1933.
History has shown that a single man cannot change the views of any society. In 1727, Jonathan Swift proposed a very logical, persuasive and problem fixing pamphlet called "A Modest Proposal", in which in order to fix the economicall status of Ireland, people would sell their one eyar old babies for 10 shillings and they would be used for food. If you read it, you would completely agree with what he said, he points all possible issues in favor of his thesis and then he counters possible counter-issues that may be presented. The project never took place.
"You can change the views of a man, but you can never change how society acts or thinks."
With this, we can conclude that Hitler used the views of society into leading him to power. People already thought in this way about Jews, so Hitler proposed himself to be the person to fic the Jew problem.
Now to the second thesis, "Why did Hitler loose the war?".
Militarily speaking, Hitler knew nothing about naval warfare. This already puts Germany at a big disadvantage because there couldn't be full coordination between all military forces.
Second, Germany was allied with Italy against all nations in the world. You can't really count Japan because they were fighting their own separate war. You can say that the Axis powers controlled far more land, resources, men than all the other countries agaisnt him, but he had to defend the newly acquired lands against the people living there. So he had to wage two wars, military and civil. You had 4 powerfull nations against the Axis domination over Germany: USA, USSR, Great Britian and Canada. This means that you are already outnumbered on men and resources. You can say that Hitler had more numbers of each, but for him to succesfully wage war, he had to use greater numbers than his counterparts, meaning that he will run out of men and resources faster.
The third reason for Hitler's loss of the war was the Soviet Union itself. The Soviet Union marked many obstacles for the Germans, it mean opening another flank and thus another war for the Germans, it had to stretch supply lines to unheard of distances in previous wars and Hitler had to split his resources and men. Many historians think and write about "Hitler's Invasion into the Soviet Union". This is a flase statement. Hitler's "Operation Barbarossa" intially was planned to take over the Baltic states, the countries in the Black Sea area and those in the Black Steppes (the ones in between), but it did not include such an early invasion of the Soviet Union. Once Hitler started invading the countries surrounding the Soviet Union, the Soviets counter-attacked, but it was not en-masse and they soon retreated. Meaning that the Soviets took the chance in taking a country currently waging war against Germany. This meant that Stalin was eager to advance west and take over German held lands. This obliged Hitler to attack the Soviets.
[right][snapback]410049[/snapback][/right]
ill say this for beer, gg no re.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Rantent on 2006-01-18 at 20:12:16
I'd just like to say it was not hitler who started the anti-jewish sentiment, it was Julius Streicher, who was originally a school teacher, and who is famous for making childrens books that basically badmouthed jewish cultures and traditions. Written soon after the end of World War 1, these were a great influence to the youth of areas in Europe before World War 2.
I did a report a few years ago on child propoganda, and we (in america) were making many cartoons and things against germany at that time too. Just given by the childrens shows of bugs bunny and daffy duck, you could have seen that a war would be soon comming.
I did a report a few years ago on child propoganda, and we (in america) were making many cartoons and things against germany at that time too. Just given by the childrens shows of bugs bunny and daffy duck, you could have seen that a war would be soon comming.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by 00cnr on 2006-01-18 at 20:18:20
If you are a genius then you would know the #1 rule of war, that being: don't 
with Russia.
Also, dont take on two fronts at once.
with Russia.Also, dont take on two fronts at once.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Arbitrary on 2006-01-18 at 20:31:10
Anti-semitism has been around for thousands of years. Streicher started the trend in 20th century Europe, you mean to say?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Kashmir on 2006-01-18 at 21:34:03
Also it was himmler I believe who thought of the final solution. What a coward to have commited suicide.. Uh ya I'm going to plan out the killing of millions of people, then when it comes time to pay up and take responsibility, I'll kill myself... 
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Arbitrary on 2006-01-18 at 21:53:20
Yeah, Himmler (director of the SS) laid the basic plan for the mass extermination, which the SS then swiftly carried out with ever-increasing efficiency.
And Himmler was very likely to be hanged for war crimes and the like if he didn't kill himself first, so he was dead either way.
And Himmler was very likely to be hanged for war crimes and the like if he didn't kill himself first, so he was dead either way.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Rantent on 2006-01-18 at 22:06:45
QUOTE(Arbitrary @ Jan 18 2006, 04:31 PM)
Anti-semitism has been around for thousands of years. Streicher started the trend in 20th century Europe, you mean to say?
[right][snapback]410200[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]410200[/snapback][/right]
Streicher was the one who started the nazi party. He started activist movements against the jewish culture.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Septhiroth on 2006-01-18 at 22:07:08
Well Yeah Meh, that's what basically happened there. O well it was mainly his fault that the extermination of the Jews were planned . (Ok i'll stop going off topic here)
But Yea Hitler really have proven himself as a Genius as he controlled his people with his Voice and his Iron Fist. As he became the Voice of Germany, convincing Germans to belive his ways and the Third Reich. If they didn't agree with his Beliefs he would kill them.
But Yea Hitler really have proven himself as a Genius as he controlled his people with his Voice and his Iron Fist. As he became the Voice of Germany, convincing Germans to belive his ways and the Third Reich. If they didn't agree with his Beliefs he would kill them.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Falcon_A on 2006-01-18 at 23:20:32
As many people have been saying, his war "plans" were very good, but his implentation didn't work out as much as he had hoped...
he switched from bombing airfields to terror-bombing in england...didn't work...
he eventually captured moscow...but the russians didnt really give a shiz, they just moved their capital like 2000 miles east. the winter killed more than russian bullets...as it always has in history.
but aside from that...i think the way that people followed him is surreal...
Incredible, in fact...not that I'm a nazi either, but seriously...what if he won? We'd all be speaking German, but...all of humanity would be unified. Working together...
Under an iron fist whether we want to or not...but after a few generations of that, thoughts of rebellion dissapate...people don't know how bad they're living because they've never had "good". Maybe the human race as a whole would accomplish more, but you never know.
But anyone that influential is truely amazing...
However, you can't change how he killed like 6 million jews. And how he was a ruthless person. And how he exploited his whole country, and only came to power because he made a scapegoat on the jews for losing WWI.
Not a good guy, but some interesting ideas...
You can only rule through respect or fear. And he chose the latter.
he switched from bombing airfields to terror-bombing in england...didn't work...
he eventually captured moscow...but the russians didnt really give a shiz, they just moved their capital like 2000 miles east. the winter killed more than russian bullets...as it always has in history.
but aside from that...i think the way that people followed him is surreal...
Incredible, in fact...not that I'm a nazi either, but seriously...what if he won? We'd all be speaking German, but...all of humanity would be unified. Working together...
Under an iron fist whether we want to or not...but after a few generations of that, thoughts of rebellion dissapate...people don't know how bad they're living because they've never had "good". Maybe the human race as a whole would accomplish more, but you never know.
But anyone that influential is truely amazing...
However, you can't change how he killed like 6 million jews. And how he was a ruthless person. And how he exploited his whole country, and only came to power because he made a scapegoat on the jews for losing WWI.
Not a good guy, but some interesting ideas...
You can only rule through respect or fear. And he chose the latter.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Arbitrary on 2006-01-18 at 23:24:49
For the future, I would advise that you use fewer ellipses.
Fewer meaning next to none.
And really, his only good "plan" was that of the Polish campaign and the 1940 blitz on France and the Low Countries.
Fewer meaning next to none.
And really, his only good "plan" was that of the Polish campaign and the 1940 blitz on France and the Low Countries.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by 5(U) on 2006-01-19 at 04:01:27
QUOTE(BeeR_KeG @ Jan 18 2006, 07:22 PM)
Still worng.
"Ein Reich, Ein Volk, Ein Fuhrer"
One Empire(Could be Nation), One People, One Leader
The first step into writting a thesis is to read from many different sources, not just one.
The first reason to back my thesis based on Hitler, don't read History books written by the goverment. Who in the hell said that the US goverment would write good things about their past enemies and bad things about themselves? All you see in those books are the American point of view and of course they would change a few things.
I've read a great deal of books about WWII and Hitler and they are far different than what American School History books have to say.
A few examples:
Dr. John Pimlott (English) - Wehrmacht
Adolf Hitler (Austrian) - Mein Kampf
Adolf Hitler (Austrian) - Unpublished Sequel to Mein Kampf
Rainer Karlsch (German) - Hitler's Bomb
-- And most important of all --
German newspaper clippings of my grandfather.
My first thesis is based on Hitler's rise to power.
Hitler had a very excellent and logical reason in which to wage his campaign against the Jews. The jews have been hate by caucasian europeans since the Middle Ages. they were banned from England for almost 400 years until Oliver Cromwell headed Parliament during the English Civil War. Hitler was an Austrian born German politician in the most ruined country in the world at the time, both economically and structurally. The Germans wanted to fix their problems, and the Jews were one of them. Everybody thought and it was most probably true, that at the time, the jews were the greedy middle class composed of Bankers and Shopkeepers that wanted profits for themselves and their kin, but not to the European nations.
You now have a common problem for the Europeans, and in Hitler's goals, Germans. The German people needed a leader that would fix any of their problems, they were in such desperate times that any fix in any problem would work. Hitler used the Jews as the main problem in which to fix. By implementing his goal, the german people thought that it was true and then they elected him Chancellor in 1933.
History has shown that a single man cannot change the views of any society. In 1727, Jonathan Swift proposed a very logical, persuasive and problem fixing pamphlet called "A Modest Proposal", in which in order to fix the economicall status of Ireland, people would sell their one eyar old babies for 10 shillings and they would be used for food. If you read it, you would completely agree with what he said, he points all possible issues in favor of his thesis and then he counters possible counter-issues that may be presented. The project never took place.
"You can change the views of a man, but you can never change how society acts or thinks."
With this, we can conclude that Hitler used the views of society into leading him to power. People already thought in this way about Jews, so Hitler proposed himself to be the person to fic the Jew problem.
Now to the second thesis, "Why did Hitler loose the war?".
Militarily speaking, Hitler knew nothing about naval warfare. This already puts Germany at a big disadvantage because there couldn't be full coordination between all military forces.
Second, Germany was allied with Italy against all nations in the world. You can't really count Japan because they were fighting their own separate war. You can say that the Axis powers controlled far more land, resources, men than all the other countries agaisnt him, but he had to defend the newly acquired lands against the people living there. So he had to wage two wars, military and civil. You had 4 powerfull nations against the Axis domination over Germany: USA, USSR, Great Britian and Canada. This means that you are already outnumbered on men and resources. You can say that Hitler had more numbers of each, but for him to succesfully wage war, he had to use greater numbers than his counterparts, meaning that he will run out of men and resources faster.
The third reason for Hitler's loss of the war was the Soviet Union itself. The Soviet Union marked many obstacles for the Germans, it mean opening another flank and thus another war for the Germans, it had to stretch supply lines to unheard of distances in previous wars and Hitler had to split his resources and men. Many historians think and write about "Hitler's Invasion into the Soviet Union". This is a flase statement. Hitler's "Operation Barbarossa" intially was planned to take over the Baltic states, the countries in the Black Sea area and those in the Black Steppes (the ones in between), but it did not include such an early invasion of the Soviet Union. Once Hitler started invading the countries surrounding the Soviet Union, the Soviets counter-attacked, but it was not en-masse and they soon retreated. Meaning that the Soviets took the chance in taking a country currently waging war against Germany. This meant that Stalin was eager to advance west and take over German held lands. This obliged Hitler to attack the Soviets.
[right][snapback]410049[/snapback][/right]
"Ein Reich, Ein Volk, Ein Fuhrer"
One Empire(Could be Nation), One People, One Leader
The first step into writting a thesis is to read from many different sources, not just one.
The first reason to back my thesis based on Hitler, don't read History books written by the goverment. Who in the hell said that the US goverment would write good things about their past enemies and bad things about themselves? All you see in those books are the American point of view and of course they would change a few things.
I've read a great deal of books about WWII and Hitler and they are far different than what American School History books have to say.
A few examples:
Dr. John Pimlott (English) - Wehrmacht
Adolf Hitler (Austrian) - Mein Kampf
Adolf Hitler (Austrian) - Unpublished Sequel to Mein Kampf
Rainer Karlsch (German) - Hitler's Bomb
-- And most important of all --
German newspaper clippings of my grandfather.
My first thesis is based on Hitler's rise to power.
Hitler had a very excellent and logical reason in which to wage his campaign against the Jews. The jews have been hate by caucasian europeans since the Middle Ages. they were banned from England for almost 400 years until Oliver Cromwell headed Parliament during the English Civil War. Hitler was an Austrian born German politician in the most ruined country in the world at the time, both economically and structurally. The Germans wanted to fix their problems, and the Jews were one of them. Everybody thought and it was most probably true, that at the time, the jews were the greedy middle class composed of Bankers and Shopkeepers that wanted profits for themselves and their kin, but not to the European nations.
You now have a common problem for the Europeans, and in Hitler's goals, Germans. The German people needed a leader that would fix any of their problems, they were in such desperate times that any fix in any problem would work. Hitler used the Jews as the main problem in which to fix. By implementing his goal, the german people thought that it was true and then they elected him Chancellor in 1933.
History has shown that a single man cannot change the views of any society. In 1727, Jonathan Swift proposed a very logical, persuasive and problem fixing pamphlet called "A Modest Proposal", in which in order to fix the economicall status of Ireland, people would sell their one eyar old babies for 10 shillings and they would be used for food. If you read it, you would completely agree with what he said, he points all possible issues in favor of his thesis and then he counters possible counter-issues that may be presented. The project never took place.
"You can change the views of a man, but you can never change how society acts or thinks."
With this, we can conclude that Hitler used the views of society into leading him to power. People already thought in this way about Jews, so Hitler proposed himself to be the person to fic the Jew problem.
Now to the second thesis, "Why did Hitler loose the war?".
Militarily speaking, Hitler knew nothing about naval warfare. This already puts Germany at a big disadvantage because there couldn't be full coordination between all military forces.
Second, Germany was allied with Italy against all nations in the world. You can't really count Japan because they were fighting their own separate war. You can say that the Axis powers controlled far more land, resources, men than all the other countries agaisnt him, but he had to defend the newly acquired lands against the people living there. So he had to wage two wars, military and civil. You had 4 powerfull nations against the Axis domination over Germany: USA, USSR, Great Britian and Canada. This means that you are already outnumbered on men and resources. You can say that Hitler had more numbers of each, but for him to succesfully wage war, he had to use greater numbers than his counterparts, meaning that he will run out of men and resources faster.
The third reason for Hitler's loss of the war was the Soviet Union itself. The Soviet Union marked many obstacles for the Germans, it mean opening another flank and thus another war for the Germans, it had to stretch supply lines to unheard of distances in previous wars and Hitler had to split his resources and men. Many historians think and write about "Hitler's Invasion into the Soviet Union". This is a flase statement. Hitler's "Operation Barbarossa" intially was planned to take over the Baltic states, the countries in the Black Sea area and those in the Black Steppes (the ones in between), but it did not include such an early invasion of the Soviet Union. Once Hitler started invading the countries surrounding the Soviet Union, the Soviets counter-attacked, but it was not en-masse and they soon retreated. Meaning that the Soviets took the chance in taking a country currently waging war against Germany. This meant that Stalin was eager to advance west and take over German held lands. This obliged Hitler to attack the Soviets.
[right][snapback]410049[/snapback][/right]
Thanks a lot for your add to the thread.. everyone here (north america) made their opinion based on what they learned at school, or by their parents and all.. how can the americans have a good image of hitler when he was "the enemy".. when i realized that (i cant remember when it was..
) i started seeing the things differently about that person (hitler) what if i was german?.. so i realized how he was a genius of his own kind.. the only problem (my opinion) was: he was too extremistthanks a lot about that beer_keg.. i would like to hear the opinion of a german who survived to that war.. what he thinks of hitler, his ways to reach germany's goal, etc..
im sure its totally different of what the north american people think
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CaptainWill on 2006-01-19 at 08:12:31
The issue of whether Hitler was a genius or an incompetent lunatic is much debated by historians.
One thing that can be said conclusively about Hitler is that he was a terrible military leader. He got involved in the army leadership (especially in Russia - whom he always considered to be his main enemy) and, to put it bluntly, ruined Germany's chances of winning the war. Hitler had some great generals - Von Manstein, Rommel and Mödel to name but a few - but he didn't let them do their job effectively. After Germany's incredible success at the beginning of Operation Barbarossa, he did not follow the advice of his generals, who wished to fall back to safe positions for the winter. Instead, he forced them to press on, losing many men. It is worth mentioning that the invasion of Britain (Operation Sealion) would probably never have been successful, given the massive size of the Royal Navy and the Kriegsmarine's utter lack of viable invasion barges and transport ships. The Germans did try to assemble a fleet of invasion vessels, but some of them didn't even have engines and would have been towed. I was estimated that the invasion fleet would take 18 hours to get to Britain, and 48 hours to land a force large enough to establish a beach-head. The failure of the Ju-87 Stuka to be effective at anti-ship operations over Britain meant that the British Home Fleet could sit in the English Channel and comfortably destroy any invasion fleet.
Stalingrad is another good example of Hitler's tactical incompetence (and his lack of sanity). Everybody knew that Von Paulus' army in Stalingrad would be doomed unless a retreat was ordered. Hitler refused to authorise a retreat and ordered Paulus to commit suicide if the Russians won.
In terms of Hitler's domestic leadership of his country, it is debateable whether he was a successful leader through his own conscious efforts or by accident.
He was, of course, a charismatic speaker who knew exactly what to say to the German public to rally them behind him, but his day-to-day running of the country was a mess. The Nazi administration was incredibly chaotic - nobody really knew where they stood.
Hitler rarely gave any orders to his subordinates. He would make general statements like 'The Jewish question must be solved,' and his men interpreted them in their own ways. It is telling that Hitler was not at the Wannsee Conference in 1942 where Nazi leaders decided on a policy of mass-extermination of the Jews (named Operation Reinhard in memory of the assassinated Reinhard Heydrich - one of the most sinister Nazis). Nobody really knows whether Hitler even authorised the Final Solution.
Hitler himself hardly had anything to do with the running of the Nazi state - he was man of vision, not details. He was also very lazy, spending most of his time on holiday in the mountains. He tended to sleep until the early afternoon and spend the rest of the day watching films and going on walks, a fact which surprised his assistants who had been taken in by the propaganda image of Hitler as the god-like and energetic leader of Germany.
Hitler also farted a lot.
One thing that can be said conclusively about Hitler is that he was a terrible military leader. He got involved in the army leadership (especially in Russia - whom he always considered to be his main enemy) and, to put it bluntly, ruined Germany's chances of winning the war. Hitler had some great generals - Von Manstein, Rommel and Mödel to name but a few - but he didn't let them do their job effectively. After Germany's incredible success at the beginning of Operation Barbarossa, he did not follow the advice of his generals, who wished to fall back to safe positions for the winter. Instead, he forced them to press on, losing many men. It is worth mentioning that the invasion of Britain (Operation Sealion) would probably never have been successful, given the massive size of the Royal Navy and the Kriegsmarine's utter lack of viable invasion barges and transport ships. The Germans did try to assemble a fleet of invasion vessels, but some of them didn't even have engines and would have been towed. I was estimated that the invasion fleet would take 18 hours to get to Britain, and 48 hours to land a force large enough to establish a beach-head. The failure of the Ju-87 Stuka to be effective at anti-ship operations over Britain meant that the British Home Fleet could sit in the English Channel and comfortably destroy any invasion fleet.
Stalingrad is another good example of Hitler's tactical incompetence (and his lack of sanity). Everybody knew that Von Paulus' army in Stalingrad would be doomed unless a retreat was ordered. Hitler refused to authorise a retreat and ordered Paulus to commit suicide if the Russians won.
In terms of Hitler's domestic leadership of his country, it is debateable whether he was a successful leader through his own conscious efforts or by accident.
He was, of course, a charismatic speaker who knew exactly what to say to the German public to rally them behind him, but his day-to-day running of the country was a mess. The Nazi administration was incredibly chaotic - nobody really knew where they stood.
Hitler rarely gave any orders to his subordinates. He would make general statements like 'The Jewish question must be solved,' and his men interpreted them in their own ways. It is telling that Hitler was not at the Wannsee Conference in 1942 where Nazi leaders decided on a policy of mass-extermination of the Jews (named Operation Reinhard in memory of the assassinated Reinhard Heydrich - one of the most sinister Nazis). Nobody really knows whether Hitler even authorised the Final Solution.
Hitler himself hardly had anything to do with the running of the Nazi state - he was man of vision, not details. He was also very lazy, spending most of his time on holiday in the mountains. He tended to sleep until the early afternoon and spend the rest of the day watching films and going on walks, a fact which surprised his assistants who had been taken in by the propaganda image of Hitler as the god-like and energetic leader of Germany.
Hitler also farted a lot.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Stalingrad on 2006-01-19 at 15:13:41
Hitler was definately not a Genius. He made "great" speeches which told people the Jews are the roots of Germany's debts, suffering, and dying people. Blaming others to brainwash people is not really that hard if you were in the same situation as him. But keep in mind, only about 9% of Germany were related to the NAZI party in anyway. The other 89% didn't care what really happened, as long as they were given a job and hot meals. Hitler eventually came into power and he pretty much did what he promised, even if it was through scare tactics (burning of the Reichstag being a good example).
The war part... Would a Genius really kill/fire all his superior war Generals that new how the Second World War should be fought? If Hitler was smart, he would have gone straight for the oil fields in Southern Russia, not spread his forces out so much.
The war part... Would a Genius really kill/fire all his superior war Generals that new how the Second World War should be fought? If Hitler was smart, he would have gone straight for the oil fields in Southern Russia, not spread his forces out so much.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by BeeR_KeG on 2006-01-19 at 17:56:10
QUOTE(5(U) @ Jan 19 2006, 05:01 AM)
Thanks a lot for your add to the thread.. everyone here (north america) made their opinion based on what they learned at school, or by their parents and all.. how can the americans have a good image of hitler when he was "the enemy".. when i realized that (i cant remember when it was.. ) i started seeing the things differently about that person (hitler) what if i was german?.. so i realized how he was a genius of his own kind.. the only problem (my opinion) was: he was too extremist
thanks a lot about that beer_keg.. i would like to hear the opinion of a german who survived to that war.. what he thinks of hitler, his ways to reach germany's goal, etc..
im sure its totally different of what the north american people think
[right][snapback]410511[/snapback][/right]
) i started seeing the things differently about that person (hitler) what if i was german?.. so i realized how he was a genius of his own kind.. the only problem (my opinion) was: he was too extremistthanks a lot about that beer_keg.. i would like to hear the opinion of a german who survived to that war.. what he thinks of hitler, his ways to reach germany's goal, etc..
im sure its totally different of what the north american people think
[right][snapback]410511[/snapback][/right]
To put things short, many German's regard Hitler as the main character which got Germany out of ruins. The main consequence to this was loosing a war and the division of the country into East and West.
From a social standpoint, the tradeoff was good because the economy boomed, since almost every building in Germany was bombed, this gave them an extremely good chance to modernize Germany.
If you eliminate the deaths of people, I'd say that it was a 100% well paid off trade.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by PCFredZ on 2006-01-19 at 18:45:03
Meh, Hitler took advantage of Germany's economic failure after WWI, it can atmost qualify him as an opportunistic person, not a strategic genius.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Septhiroth on 2006-01-19 at 19:37:08
Yea that is True. Soooo basically his Field Marshalls (Generals) were the Strategic Genius? Such as Rommel Erwin ? Which lead him to his majority of victories though out the North African Campaigns?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Kashmir on 2006-01-22 at 17:38:21
QUOTE
his war "plans" were very good, but his implentation didn't work out as much as he had hoped...
We didn't mean war plans... we meant his plan for one land, one people, one belief. That is the unity people need. His plan for carryng it out was horrible but his idea was great. Also 5(U) thats how I think too. Majority of the american people believe w did nothing to deserve 9/11. Which is not true. You have to look at it from the perspective of the "enemy".
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Demaris on 2006-01-22 at 20:47:45
Hitler was brilliant, simply for being able to galvanize an entire nation into action.
But that doesn't excuse him for being a farkhead.
Rommel was a military genius. Yay Panzers.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CaptainWill on 2006-01-23 at 09:43:40
QUOTE(Septhiroth @ Jan 20 2006, 12:37 AM)
Yea that is True. Soooo basically his Field Marshalls (Generals) were the Strategic Genius? Such as Rommel Erwin ? Which lead him to his majority of victories though out the North African Campaigns?
[right][snapback]410891[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]410891[/snapback][/right]
Hitler's generals were quite skilled (especially Rommel and Von Manstein - read my post on the previous page) but Hitler himself interfered in the German army's operations, leading to disaster.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by (DI)Yulla on 2006-01-23 at 10:30:17
QUOTE(CaptainWill @ Jan 23 2006, 09:43 AM)
Hitler's generals were quite skilled (especially Rommel and Von Manstein - read my post on the previous page) but Hitler himself interfered in the German army's operations, leading to disaster.
[right][snapback]411531[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]411531[/snapback][/right]
Meaning, Hitler himself was an idiot to finish off his own teammates...
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Cloud on 2006-01-23 at 18:41:57
QUOTE(5(U) @ Jan 18 2006, 06:04 AM)
So here's why Adolf Hitler is a genius.. i want to know what do u think of that..
A guy able to lead an entire country needs a lot of charism... Hitler had that
his war strategies were really good too.. he started with nothing and became one of the most ingenious country leader who commanded the whole europa (for a while)
+ a genius doesnt have to be "good"..then why does people disagree with that: hitler is a genius
[right][snapback]409536[/snapback][/right]
A guy able to lead an entire country needs a lot of charism... Hitler had that
his war strategies were really good too.. he started with nothing and became one of the most ingenious country leader who commanded the whole europa (for a while)
+ a genius doesnt have to be "good"..then why does people disagree with that: hitler is a genius
[right][snapback]409536[/snapback][/right]
anyone that can trick half a country(Germany) into creating a world war is a genius. nough said
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Septhiroth on 2006-01-23 at 19:03:17
Well that...........Kinda deppends really... This partically proves he's a Genius because, can (You) trick about 90% of people in Germany, to believe whatever you want the to believe back then? But on the other hand of course it would be simply easily to trick others during that time since people were all deppressed, since of the Great Depression. I dunno really its hard to say... Since Germany demanded someone like him to take control back then, inorder to expand Germany to become rich. Soooo yea I dunno really 
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Staredit.Net Essence on 2006-01-23 at 23:48:02
He had the power to brainwash a whole nation. So yes, he's a genius.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Arbitrary on 2006-01-23 at 23:54:18
I thought we already discussed this. Being able to control a nation through fear and might does not make you a genius. It makes you an opportunist.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Deathawk on 2006-01-23 at 23:58:36
He could talk people into doing what he wanted then, does that make him a genius, no it makes him savvy 