Discussion in 'What If - European Theater - Western Front & Atlan' started by Fred Wilson, Feb 3, 2016.
Why do I suddenly feel like rereading Richard Harris' "Fatherland"?
Belasar, I feel details are lacking
Did he steal that from me!?! Where's my Lawyer, I'm gonna sue!
Actually I never read that book, nor saw the entire film so I'm claiming original thought and that's my story.
Nag ,Nag, Nag.
great point here......must agree....Germany took over France and went into ''friendly'' Yugoslavia, ...there was still resistance...Yugolsavia gave Germany a hard time to say the least.......and look at Yugolavia's size compared to Russia....it would also be a big mess as we see what happens when government control ceases in countries...as usual, I think people play wargames on tv and computer....not thinking of real life....politics, economy, religion, emotions, terrain, etc...and most importantly--the human factor.......who was it that just recently posted ''humans do not act logically in war'' ?? ...something like that...... exactly....
this is not correct
yes and no : more no than yes
So what are you saying...
The date is important?
Or, we should not presume that Hitler had an IQ and would have declared war on the US?
Mind, you, I am not that I am expecting a thoughtful logical answer.
"Definite Maybe" from you then.
How so? Germany was under no obligation to enter into war with the United States. The Axis pact did not require it, any more than it had required Japan to join in the war against the Soviet Union.
The German leadership was no doubt frustrated by the long list of un-neutral actions by the US, but this did not compel them to go to war. Nor did declaring war allow Germany to eliminate these provocations. The only benefit was the ability of U-boats to operate freely in the westsern Atlantic "neutral zone", and that hardly compensated for turning the Arsenal of Democracy into an active belligerent. The 'Second Happy Time" was transitory, lasting only a few months, while America was in the war for the duration. American industry and economic power remained out of Germany's reach.
Prior to December 7, Hitler had recognized that putting up with America's semi-belligerency was better than making her a full-fledged enemy. His mistake was thinking that the entry of Japan into the war justified abandoning that position.
I blame Beria.
Beria probably would have claimed to have killed him, but I don't see Beria as the actual triggerman.
It is not a question of legal obligation:such a thing did not exist for Hitler .
But,one must look at the facts : on 6 december there was no German DOW on the US .On 7 december there was PH,and on 11 december (4 days later !) there was a German DOW .
This proves that what happened on 7 december,influenced /determined what happened on 11 december ,because we can assume that without PH there would be no DOW on 11 december .
The questions now are :
1) Why did Hitler declare war on the US?
2) Was it a mistake (without hindsight !) ?
The answer on the first question is that Hitler (IMO) rightly was convinced that a war with Japan would result in a war with Germany :it was impensable that ,when the US would fight together with Britain against Japan, they would not ally with Britain against Germany .
Besides,already in 1940 the Germans were convinced that if the war with Britain was not over in 1941,there would be a war with the US not later than 1942.
Was it a mistake ? This question is not correct ,because the alternative was to remain neutral and look while the US would finish Japan and hope that after their victory, the US would disarm and remain neutral .
Besides ,what was the immediate result of the German DOW ? There was noone : it would take more than a year before the first US soldiers were fighting against the Germans (february 1943 in Tunesia) .
The fact that Hitler declared war on the US does not mean that he had no IQ .If he had no IQ,he would not have become dictator of Germany and make Germany the number one of Europe in 1939.
People do act logically in war,but they use an other logic .
Declaring war on a country when one is extremely limited in the ability to operate offensively against the opponent, means that one is in possession of a rather limited IQ.
Becoming a dictator does not require you to have an IQ...It requires those around you to have one.
I agree Takao, to a degree.....history shows people will vote for and follow idiots......they'll die for idiots and their idiotic ideas.....Jim Jones, the Comet people, David Koresh, hilter, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, etc....these idiots will have sycophants all around who want to share the power....these dictators,etc, and a lot of their followers do not necessarily have to have a high IQ to get and remain in power....remember hitler used the SA to strong arm to get their way....and they had organization....being organized does not take high IQ
we're not talking rocket scientists here, but people--politicians-thugs-- who knew how to manipulate the pliable masses.....manipulating the masses does not take a high IQ....just look at all the commercials on TV and the NEWS!! they can and do make people believe night is day!....
however..... high IQ does not always equal common sense, sanity, and/or morally correct...you can have a high IQ and do something idiotic...John Nash and A Beautiful Mind come to mind...also Ted Kaczynski, the Unibomber --a Harvard graduate at age 20. PHD math genius extraordinaire who murdered people..his IQ--167........160-175 is the highest, extraordinary genius
murderers with high IQ
even if hitler had a high IQ, doesn't mean he'd do anything different
No : it means that the alternative was worse .
I think one of the things missing when discussing genocidal dictators and people like Jim Jones is the impact of trauma. People who are truly traumatized will do what seems like crazy things to keep themselves safe. That dictator (Hitler) may seem to be safety, or people don't rise up against them in order to keep themselves safe.
How the mind and body reacts to trauma is something that is difficult for those who haven't experienced extreme trauma can understand. Germany was a traumatized population after WW1 from a variety of standpoints. Loss of War (was shocking), economic chaos, then the rise of extremism. Hitler's genius and of those around him took over a nation. Their genius put them in a bind that to stay in power they had to become more and more bold.
Japan, is a completely different case.
You are correct that Pearl Harbor precipitated Hitler's DoW, but what follows is deeply flawed.
Most of Hitler's political successes were founded upon a understanding that the West could be feckless in response to bold moves by Germany. First the Munich Agreement, in exchange for the Sudetenland the Czech nation would get to survive only they didn't and yet no action by the West.
Not good enough, well how about the Nazi-Soviet Pact which led to a Russian invasion of eastern Poland. Despite being engaged in a war to preserve Polish freedom, the west fails to even offer a token DoW. Sure they talk about it but their suggested plan are so absurd to belie any seriousness in their intent. It gets revived by the Soviet attack upon Finland, yet they trot out the same silly proposals which can/will never be undertaken.
Still not convinced? There is Finland's co-belligerency with Nazi Germany (who Britain is at war with) against the Soviet Union (who Britain is now Allied with), yet no DoW in response or any meaningful action against Finland.
Funny this occurred well before December 7th, 1941.
And yes it was a mistake. Period.
Operation Drumbeat was in the end a shadow of what it could have been. In nearly every case Germany went to war with a nation on her terms and only after extensive preparations. She didn't declare war and then try to figure out just how they could actually go about doing it.
You yourself point out that it was near;y a year before the US could make a meaningful military impact on the European war, but by declaring on the US he allowed America to make a huge impact upon the moral of the Alliance against Germany. Through out 1941 first Britain (and her Commonwealth), the occupied countries and then the Soviet Union suffered a nearly unbroken series of military disasters and Germany seemed almost unbeatable.
Finally he wasted the chance to allow Japan to force the US to act primarily against her. When he declared most of Japan's conquests were yet to happen. We, and he, will never know just what impact these victories might have had upon American political thought if he had waited 6 months to see if Japan alone could dominate the US.