Why Btonze Age?

[Gawdzilla]

I identify with the grunts on the ground myself.

[Anomalocaris]

I was referring to the ability of the German military to influence the actual grand strategic decisions during the war, such as when and against whom to go to war, and once a front is created, whether the German army should stand in the defensive, or undertake offensive, etc.

German military certainly planned pretty well for a future war considering the circumstances, and were tactically and operationally the best in the world in 1939-1942. But starting from sept 1939, it had far less influence on Germany's overall war fighting strategy than the the German army had during WWI.

[abaris]

German military certainly planned pretty well for a future war considering the circumstances, and were tactically and operationally the best in the world in 1939-1942.  But starting from sept 1939, it had far less influence on Germany's overall war fighting strategy than the the German army had during WWI.

Yes, that was Hitler doing his damage. Luckily for the allies and luckily for the German population, since if the generals had stayed in charge, the war would have been longer and the first nuclear bomb would have been dropped over Europe.

But Hitler worked his voodoo starting with the decision to halt before Dunkirk. Before that he didn't interfere.

[Anomalocaris]

German military certainly planned pretty well for a future war considering the circumstances, and were tactically and operationally the best in the world in 1939-1942.  But starting from sept 1939, it had far less influence on Germany's overall war fighting strategy than the the German army had during WWI.

Yes, that was Hitler doing his damage. Luckily for the allies and luckily for the German population, since if the generals had stayed in charge, the war would have been longer and the first nuclear bomb would have been dropped over Europe.

I am not sure about that.  If the German Army had the reins over Germany's grand strategy in the 1930s, there would not even have been a Rhineland crisis, much less anything that came after.  At its highest level, the vaunted Prussian militarists were strategically not at all overly aggressive, they were very clearly aware of profound unpreparedness of Germany for a real war, and World War One left them with a healthy respect for the military capabilities of France.

Once the war started, the German army probably wouldn't have opted to attack France in May-june 1940.  Also, once Germany opted to fight the French under hitler's insistence, the bulk of German senior officer Corp and the general staff did not embrace Menstein's sickle cut plan through the Ardennes.  Hitler's role was actually instrumental in adopting the Ardennes plan.   So fundamentally hitler did have a crucial role in the German success in battle of France, although it is attributable more to his gambling instinct than his strategic insight.  So without hitler, Germany probably would have ended up in a protracted slug feast with France in Belgium, similar to German attack in the 1943 battle of Kursk.  And I am not sure the Germans would have done better in Belgium than at Kursk.

After the battle of France, it seems unlikely German army without hitler's insistence would have opted to prop up Italy in North Africa, or have invaded Russia without th guiding paws of hitler.   So it's not clear that the war would have become a real all out war to the finish but for hitler.

Once Germany attacked Russia, the German army probably would have focused on Moscow and taken the Russian capital but for hitler's interference. But if Germany didn't take Moscow, the German army probably would have sought a negotiated peace with Russia once attack on Moscow failed.

So at almost all stages of 1935-1945, Germany was worse off with hitler than if the German army had mastery over German for and strategy.

[Gawdzilla]

AND some of the Junkers were ready to try a putsch if the other powers reacted violently to Hitler's move into the Rhineland.