What are some misconceptions about World War II?

My favorite is the misconceptions about Hitlers decisions.After WWII, many former generals painted Hitler off as an irrational idiot who should never have been in charge of Germany and the Wehrmacht. And at first glance, these old generals are right:

  1. Verover Moscow instead of south Russia. If the Germans had attacked instead of South Russia Moscow, the logistics centre and the capital of the Soviet Union were in German hands, which would give the Soviet Union a surrender.
  2. If the Germans had not fallen into the Soviet Union at all, the Nazis could focus all their attention on England, allowing them to secure the West front and invade the Soviet Union at a later date.

Just don’t attack the Soviet Union.

  • If Hitler had not declared war on the USA, Germany did not have to take into account the overwhelming force, Air Force and naval forces of the U.S. declare no war to the US .
  • Sounds logical right?”Just don’t fall to the Soviet Union”, “just learn Moscow instead of South Russia”, “Just don’t declare war on the V. S”. However, what these answers are missing is the right perspective. From a looking perspective, these were indeed logical choices. But from the time perspective, these were not logical choices. Hitler had, in many of these cases, equal.

    Disclaimer; I say that Hitler was right, but I am not saying that I sympathize with Hitler.Let’s be honest, Hitler was a genocidal maniac who had delusions about what the world had to look like and what his role was in this new world. But if you look at how he made strategic choices during WWII, it turns out that he often had the right end; Especially during the beginning and middle of the war.

    Let’s pass the above points one by one and explain why Hitler had it at the right end:

    1. Verover Moscow instead of South Russia.

    Although it is a good argument that Moscow was the capital and logistics centre of the Soviet Union, and therefore a good target for the Wehrmacht, Hitler knew better.Hitler knew where he had begun; A total extermination war against the Soviet Union for Lebensraum (living space). Stalin also knew that this was not an ordinary war, but a war where only one could survive. Stalin had to stop and at any cost the Germans; Not only to preserve his dictatorial position, but also to protect the people of the Soviet Union (which of the two was more important to him is questionable…). Stalin could put any man, woman and child that could carry a rifle between him and Hitler. The conquest of Moscow would of course be painful for the Soviet Union and make the war harder for them, but conquering Moscow would not make the Soviet Union capitulate. The Soviet Union would continue to fight until the bitter end, and the conquest of Moscow would not change this.

    Hitler knew that the Soviet Union would continue to fight until the end, and therefore focused on the south of the Soviet Union, where there was a lot of oil.If Hitler could conquer the oil, he could fuel his tanks and trucks, so the Wehrmacht would not be with its fuel shortages, and the offensive against the Soviet Union could go on. Whether the Germans would win if they had conquered the south is another question, but Hitler was indeed right in this respect. Go for the oil, not for a city that ultimately doesn’t matter so much strategically.

    2.Just don’t attack the Soviet Union.

    Sounds logical yet again?At the time, however, this was impossible. Stalin and Hitler both knew Donders well that Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union could not exist next to each other. The Nazis hated Communists, and the communists had the same feelings for the Nazis. The two stood straight opposite each other, making a war between the two simply inevitable. Hitler saw himself as the great savior of the Aryan race, the Messiah of the Germans, and to liberate the Germans, the Soviet Union and the untermenschen who lived there had to be eradicated.

    The question was, however, who would be the first to attack, which was in our timeline Nazi Germany.If the Nazis did not invade the Soviet Union, the Soviet Union would, in the long term, invade Nazi Germany. Hitler knew that a war between the two was inevitable, and wanted to attack as quickly as possible and as effectively as possible, so that Germany had the initiative. The longer Hitler and the Nazis waited for their attack, the more and better the Soviet Union could prepare for the defence of the Soviet Union/the attack on Germany.

    The point that critics of Hitler miss here is that of the inevitability of the war between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.These critics believe incorrectly that the two could exist next to each other, that Hitler shot himself in the foot as soon as he ordered the Soviet Union to attack, while Hitler did so precisely to ensure that the Soviet Union could not invade Germany.

    3.Do not declare war to the USA.

    Is again logical at first glance.However, what is missed (or omitted) is that the V. S in 1940 was already practically on the side of the Allies. Lend-Lease to England and the Free French, the sharing of military technology, and the natural allies that the U.S. had before World War II actually drove the V. S before the outbreak of the Second World War on the Allies ‘ side. Hitler knew that the V. S would not remain neutral, and sooner or later would join the Allies. Declaring the war on the V. S was only a formality after the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941.

    TL; DR:

    Hitler often made strategically correct decisions.Critics of Hitler criticize him for tactical mistakes, while Hitler thought of the “Big Picture”. As a result, he made decisions that could be militarily stupid, but strategically very logical. Hitler was not a soldier, but a politician, and as a politician he often made the right choices that do not seem logical in retrospect, but were right at the time.

    There are obviously quite a few.Some of my favorites:

    • “Blitzkrieg”.

    It is a post-fabricated term; No strategy that the Germans had imagined beforehand. The expectation was that it would all go much slower in France. It is true that the typical German/Prussian way of warfare by the better technology initially worked very well, so it can give the impression that ‘ Blitzkrieg ‘ was a pre-conceived strategy. So it was not, and if you have the books of BV. Guderian reads, you will notice that the term practically does not occur.

  • The ground cause is the Treaty of Versailles.
  • Many think that Hitler was the pick-up, and that is, of course, somewhere, but he could do this because the Treaty of Versailles had loosened so much anger with the Germans. This treaty was not actually a peace treaty, but a 20-year armistice. As Llyoyd George said: “” We shall have to fight another war again in 25 years time “. He was not far apart. Harold Nicolson called the creators of the Treaty “stupid”. [1 It is understandable, of course, that the Allies (and especially the French) were on revenge, but a good head commander must be great, especially after the victory, and the Allies were certainly not.The Nazis are partly able to stand up by Treaty of Versailles (and later the crisis of 1929).

  • The importance of D-Day and subsequent invasion.
  • The Germans had already lost the war long before D-Day had taken place. The German have lost the war in the Eastern Front, not in the Western Front. When D-Day took place, it was no longer a victory over the Germans, but to limit the rise of the Soviets. I do not want to completely write down this invasion as unimportant, but I think that in our parts we often overestimate the importance of the Western Front.

  • The motorisation.
  • Many underestimate what role horses still played, especially in Germany. This is partly due to propaganda (the motorized forces were shown much more often), partly to the fact that the cavalry charges of yesteryear were past tense. Horses played a different role, but still have an important role.


    [1 Opinions of Versailles

    That France has partly defeated Germany and thus belongs to victors.

    After the major losses at the German invasion of northern France, the French state chose to cooperate with the Germans in June 1940.This period is also referred to as Vichy France. A part of the country was occupied (north and west), the rest of the country and the colonies did not. The French existence retained the civilian authority across France with the exception of the territories bordering Germany which were added to Germany. The French state was therefore not a victorious but a collaborator. This does not detract from the heroism and sacrifices of the French Resistance and the Free French.

    The first day of the 2nd World War was July 7, 1937, with the invasion of Japan in Manchuria.The fact that we hold 1 September 1939 I can not mention anything else as Eurocentrism.

    Arians are a people of Indo-Iranian origin.Hitler has stolen the word to denote Germans, just like the swastika.

    Leave a Reply