TRENDING NEWS

POPULAR NEWS

Are There Any Army Reserve Transportation Companies Or Detachments In Or Around The Chicago Area I

Military Bases, Atlanta Georgia?

Fort Benning Fort Gillem Fort Gordon Fort McPherson Fort Stewart MCLB Albany Moody AFB Naval Air Station Atlanta Naval Submarine Base - Kings Bay Robins AFB

Military Bases, Atlanta Georgia?

Fort Benning Fort Gillem Fort Gordon Fort McPherson Fort Stewart MCLB Albany Moody AFB Naval Air Station Atlanta Naval Submarine Base - Kings Bay Robins AFB

How Effective was Hitler as a Military leader?

I would like to counter the idea that Hitler was a 'military genius'.

Yes, he had united Germany behind his ideas and indeed, his economic agenda did get the country back on tracks after the Great Depression. But to claim that he was a military genius, is a tad to far.

First off all, he barely had any commanding experience. He never got further than the rank of corporal in the German army in WW I. Actually, his superiors commented on his performance that they doubted if this man could ever lead any army.

Furthermore, Hitler was certainly not the mastermind behind the German success in 1939/1940. The Blitzkrieg was a operational/tactical approach to war that someone named von Manstein designed (although who exactly thought of blitzkrieg first remains yet to be discerned). The Battle of France, the highpoint of German success was fought by senior German officers who knew what they were doing (such as Guderian and his panzer division). But by 1942, Hitler assumed control over the army, and had many senior officers retire from command. It was Hitler who then pushed on to attack Russia with a similar Blitzkrieg tactic, but in Russia this does not work. Furthermore, he rashly declared war on the US after Pearl Harbor, which sealed Germany's fate in the end. It was Hitler who, by controlling everything, not allowing his generals some say in anything, that Germany's command was ofter stubborn and sluggish. The Russian counterattack, Operation Uranus in Stalingrad, which surrounded the entire German Sixth army, could, for example, have been broken by a well-timed sortie by the German army. But Hitler refused General Paulus of the sixth army to break out of their situation, and in the end the entire army there surrendered. Furthermore, Hitler made more blunders than he actually made succesful decisions. For example, his persistance to focus on building battleships while U-boats were more succesful until 1942. When the allies had surrounded Rommel and his Africa Corps in Tunesia, he decided to send an elite force of German soldiers to hold the region. However, everyone could see that the region would fall and yet another elite German army was now stuck in a position from which it could not escape. Lastly, Hitler refused to commit Germany's full resources to war until later in the war. German military production peaked only around 1944, when it was too late.

How Effective was Hitler as a Military leader?

I would like to counter the idea that Hitler was a 'military genius'.

Yes, he had united Germany behind his ideas and indeed, his economic agenda did get the country back on tracks after the Great Depression. But to claim that he was a military genius, is a tad to far.

First off all, he barely had any commanding experience. He never got further than the rank of corporal in the German army in WW I. Actually, his superiors commented on his performance that they doubted if this man could ever lead any army.

Furthermore, Hitler was certainly not the mastermind behind the German success in 1939/1940. The Blitzkrieg was a operational/tactical approach to war that someone named von Manstein designed (although who exactly thought of blitzkrieg first remains yet to be discerned). The Battle of France, the highpoint of German success was fought by senior German officers who knew what they were doing (such as Guderian and his panzer division). But by 1942, Hitler assumed control over the army, and had many senior officers retire from command. It was Hitler who then pushed on to attack Russia with a similar Blitzkrieg tactic, but in Russia this does not work. Furthermore, he rashly declared war on the US after Pearl Harbor, which sealed Germany's fate in the end. It was Hitler who, by controlling everything, not allowing his generals some say in anything, that Germany's command was ofter stubborn and sluggish. The Russian counterattack, Operation Uranus in Stalingrad, which surrounded the entire German Sixth army, could, for example, have been broken by a well-timed sortie by the German army. But Hitler refused General Paulus of the sixth army to break out of their situation, and in the end the entire army there surrendered. Furthermore, Hitler made more blunders than he actually made succesful decisions. For example, his persistance to focus on building battleships while U-boats were more succesful until 1942. When the allies had surrounded Rommel and his Africa Corps in Tunesia, he decided to send an elite force of German soldiers to hold the region. However, everyone could see that the region would fall and yet another elite German army was now stuck in a position from which it could not escape. Lastly, Hitler refused to commit Germany's full resources to war until later in the war. German military production peaked only around 1944, when it was too late.

How was William the Conqueror related to Britain and the Vikings?

Normans were of viking descent. Like William and like Harold Godwinson, Harold Hardrada (also a viking king) also had a claim to the throne. His claim was based upon an alleged agreement between the last viking king of England, Harthacanute, and his nephew, Magnus I of Norway.

He was the illegitimate son of Robert II, Duke of Normandy, but legal heir to Robert II's title, per Robert II's will. From the omnipotent Wikipedia: "William believed that once the childless Edward the Confessor was dead, he would be the rightful king of England. Particularly, William argued his blood relatedness, linking himself to Emma (Ethelred's wife). It is probable that Edward, who was Robert II's cousin, had promised him the throne. William claimed that this had occurred, visiting London in 1052. Also, it is known that in 1064, the powerful earl of Wessex Harold Godwinson, who was an English paladin for the Saxon culture against the Normans, had pledged his allegiance to William."

TRENDING NEWS