Stalingrad :Was the order given not to retreat correct?

[DeistPaladin]

Thank you for your upbeat assessment of america's future.

I hope I'm wrong and perhaps there is hope in how Obama has dialed back some, but not all, of the swaggering bully attitude of the W Bush administration.

but you didn't consider much of what I wrote. Germany did not declare war on England and france in 39..

Did Germany take on these countries or did they take on Germany.

I mean ,why thrust a world war on a smaller country for trying to recover stolen territory or over the status of one city?

What exactly did a "dictator" do that any American president would not be obliged to do ;and that is to recover states that were forcibly taken at gun point. ?

I'm fully aware of the events of the second world war, as I studied first hand the German history books on the subject, taught by my high school German teacher who lived under the last days of the Third Reich (her family managed to flee to America before the Berlin Wall was erected).

Hitler used the "schampf und schande" (shame and disgrace) of Versailles in his political propaganda but his ambitions were far more extensive than just redressing Germany's grievances with the treaty. Why else attack Russia? Germany lost no territory to them. Why else did Germany go beyond annexing the Sudetenland and fully swallow the Czech nation? Neither did Germany rule over Warsaw but that didn't stop Hitler from annexing all of Poland that he didn't give to Stalin.

Britain and France only declared war after issuing an ultimatum to Hitler to cease his attacks on Poland and withdraw. I can't prove this but my speculation is that Chamberlain was hoping Nazi Germany would be a bulwark against Communist Russia. There was a "red scare" in the western world in the 20s and 30s, no less potent than the one in the 50s and 60s. The doctrine of "appeasement" may have been to deliberately rebuild Germany under the assumption that Fascism would oppose Communism. It was only when Hitler and Stalin made a pact that this policy changed. This is just pure speculation. Others have thought that the policy was out of guilt over Versailles. Others have said they were simply naive and finally had enough with the invasion of Poland.

Regardless of the motive, the policy of appeasement shows that a diplomatically savvy Germany could have used peaceful means if redressing the grievances of Versailles were the objective. Germany could have played Britain and France against Communist Russia. Were I the Chancellor of the Wiemar Republic, I would have been far more concerned with renegotiating the crippling war reparations that spanned three generations than the territorial loss. But that's beside the point. The point is that Nazi Germany's aspirations were clearly world conquest.

Speaking of "what if" scenarios, when I studied the first world war, I thought about an alternative strategy to the Schlieflen plan which would have been deal with a Russian invasion and leave a garrison in the Alps against a possible French invasion.

I imagine the French would have attacked, having ambitions of their own to retake Alsace-Lorraine. However, progress through such mountainous territory as the Bavarian Alps was almost guaranteed to be slow and costly and easy for Germany to defend. Let the other side "throw the first punch" and avoid being the aggressor. Britain and Italy might not have entered the war. America might not have been so sympathetic to France. Militarily, it would have been a terrible risk I know. Letting the other side throw the first punch always is. But diplomatically, I think it would have paid off. It usually does.

But my musings of what I might have done are not consistent with the motives of ambitious conquerors. I'm not as versed with the motives of the Kaiser but I do know there was a "pan-German" sentiment that ran through the Junker (pronounced "Yun-ker") ruling class of Germany. The assassination of the Archduke seemed to me to be just a pretext. A good pretext but a pretext nonetheless.

[downbeatplumb]

I'm not as versed with the motives of the Kaiser but I do know there was a "pan-German" sentiment that ran through the Junker (pronounced "Yun-ker") ruling class of Germany. The assassination of the Archduke seemed to me to be just a pretext. A good pretext but a pretext nonetheless.

The war was by then inevitable. There were many different factors that could have started it but the Balkans is always a good bet for a fight.

I learn't recently that the whole assassination had a comedy element. The car carrying the Archduke had passed one would be assassin who had given up, but they came back because of other incidents and had to do a three point turn just in front of him.

The Archduke's chauffeur was following the mayor's car. They passed the sixth assassin, Grabez, at Imperial Bridge. He merely watched as the car sped by. The mayor's driver made a wrong turn. Where he should have taken the Appel Quay, he turned onto Francis Joseph street, a street named for the Archduke's uncle. Potiorek, riding with the Archduke and Sophie, cried out:

"What's this? We've taken the wrong way!"

The driver applied the brakes and the car came to a stop not five feet from Gavrilo Princip. Unlike his cohorts, Princip acted quickly and precisely, drawing his pistol and firing twice before the car could complete its turn. The shots made little noise and the car sped off. Potiorek looked at the couple and, at first, thought that they were unhurt. In actuality, the Archduke had been hit in the neck and Sophie in the stomach. The Archduke opened his mouth and a stream of blood poured out.

http://www.worldwar1.com/tlsara.htm

[Minimalist]

a testimony to how well they could fight.

Or how unprepared the rest of the world was.....

[downbeatplumb]

a testimony to how well they could fight.

Or how unprepared the rest of the world was.....

Hitler managed to fluke a few early battles by not doing what sane military tacticians expected like attacking through the Ardenne with tanks, tanks are open country killers you should not push them through a forest.

[DeistPaladin]

Or how unprepared the rest of the world was.....

Hitler managed to fluke a few early battles by not doing what sane military tacticians expected like attacking through the Ardenne with tanks, tanks are open country killers you should not push them through a forest.

Often great military victories are achieved by crazy generals doing crazy things the other side never expected.

[Minimalist]

The early German successes were the brainchild of Heinz Guderian who was formulating the idea of tanks supported by mechanized infantry and artillery as early as the late 1920's.

While the British and French tended to group their tanks into what were, effectively, antique cavalry divisions in which tanks replaced horses, the Germans were combining tanks, mechanized infantry, assault guns... and the added little contribution of ground attack aircraft.

[Artur Axmann]

What folLows this , And I didn't intend for it ,is how a dispute between two countries[poland and gemany] over the status of a city[Danzig and the upper silesia region] stolen from germany was blown out of proportion and allowed to become a world war.

Those who pushed for a major war ,benefitted the most.

[Jackalope]

What folLows this , And I didn't intend for it ,is how a dispute between two countries[poland and gemany] over the status of a city[Danzig and the upper silesia region] stolen from germany was blown out of proportion and allowed to become a world war.

Those who pushed for a major war ,benefitted the most.

Suggesting that Gdansk/Danzig was 'stolen from Germany' ignores damn near a millennium of history prior to the annexation of Gdansk by Prussia in 1793.

[Artur Axmann]

What folLows this , And I didn't intend for it ,is how a dispute between two countries[poland and gemany] over the status of a city[Danzig and the upper silesia region] stolen from germany was blown out of proportion and allowed to become a world war.

Those who pushed for a major war ,benefitted the most.

Suggesting that Gdansk/Danzig was 'stolen from Germany' ignores damn near a millennium of history prior to the annexation of Gdansk by Prussia in 1793.

German speaking Danzig speaks for itself.