The anxiety European Nations felt about America and her rise from the late 19th Century on is something that I feel is often overlooked when discussing European Affairs. It was very clear to Western Europeans that they had missed their chance to adequately contain America and it was only America's self-imposed restraint and isolationist bent that was enabling Europe's Empires to more or less ignore the US in their planning. The reason why America along with Russia became the Superpowers of the 20th Century was because both of them possessed large populations and industrial capacity combined with domestic resources that need not be imported and therefore could not be disrupted. Germany had men and factories, but lacked resources.
The odd thing is that you're right for contental Europe. The British empire saw USA as preferable to everyone else so they could be useful business partners. One of the best historical books I remember reading was about how USA basically enabled the British Empire to declare victory in the new world over all other European powers. For example the scramble for Africa never happened in south America because of the Monroe alliance where USA said any new colony in the Americas would be seen as an attack on the USA. After the British empire was the only remaining major presence cutting the costs of British naval policing as the USA did all of that for free for all the Americas. While there was a fear from the US side the British one was more of it wasn't worth the trouble to fight someone who they saw as basically a 2nd UK, like Canada. While the US really pushed the be scared of the Brits 4th of July sorta stuff the Brit's didn't really care as nothing really changed from there POV. At worst the British lost some taxes in the 1750s but they gained the US as an English speaking ally as a mediator within European politics. Later on by the rise of the US it often came at the expense of the Empire as the biggest loser in WW2 was Britain as that misguided view from the UK of the US will eventually wake up and understand what's going on with the rest of the world. As to the UK the fall of France was the last remaining major democracy left so if the USA wanted to maintain the balance of power it had to act but the UK underestimated just how big the ocean was compared to the English channel. The UK never wanted war with the US they were way too useful in every other situation.
@@kino6395 The British foreign policy stance toward America in the later half of the 19th century was more reluctant acceptance than welcoming embrace. There was always a prevailing sense that America - especially after it had secured hegemony over the North American continent at the end of the Manifest Destiny period - would eventually rise to begin to dictate its terms to the Empire. But the truth was simple: they had missed their chance. The War of 1812 was in many ways a lost opportunity for both powers involved, despite the claiming of victory on either side. The United States had failed to remove British presence on North America through the conquest of (what would become) Canada, and the British, distracted by Napoleon and only half-committing its capacity failed to check American ambitions west of the Mississippi. Had they succeeded in doing so - either in establishing indigenous protectorates across the Mississippi basin or in seizing New Orleans, the entrepot to Louisana, America would have been a far more amenable partner to swallow. Instead, America became a sleeping monster. By the American Civil War, despite some minute British vacillation on the issue, it was already much too late. America was going to have its destiny writ large against the congress of powers and there was nothing to be done to stop it. So, they came to an understanding.
Hitler overlooked the fact that America was already ramping up production of military equipment for almost 2 years: supplying England and Russia. It was a smaller step than expected to ramp up to a full scale military economy.
@ I’m absolutely sure that he was. My point is that he seems to vastly underestimate how quickly America could ramp up to full speed production of military hardware. He seemed to plan on America starting from zero.
In discussion with a British official, Roosevelt said the US would build 6M tons of shipping per year. When asked by his own people where this number came from, Roosevelt said he just pulled it out of air as a goal for them to achieve. And it was done. I believe Doenitz used this number when he said Germany must sink 600,000 tons of shipping per month
@@kraKowD and liberty ships everyday starting 1943 until the war was over. There was so many that some of them were used as target practice or sacrificial ships for atom bomb tests.
The coming collapse of America's logistical economic and financial capability will surprise no who was smart enough to vote against the next president. We are fucked.
@@morningwoody4514 i think it’s you. though the commenter you responded to is a bit dramatic, if that guy follows through on half his FoPo promises it will be a headache. oh populism…
US planners estimated Japan's production capacity at the beginning of the war to be 30% that of the United States. Turned out to be a whole lot less than that. In 1944 US war production was greater than the rest of the world combined.
@@Dianasaurthemelonlord7777Brazil is far smaller than the US (even when ignoring the Amazone which takes up an enormous part of the country) and doesn’t have the same geopolitical advantages as the United States (i.e. being the main arms supplier to the allied forces during WW1 which made them very rich and then join in on a war that was already almost over to “save” western Europe and get even richer from it)
Hmm, maybe it's taught differently now, but as a teenager learning this back in the 1990s, this was almost exactly what I was taught. That he admired certain parts of the US, it's economy and technology especially and knew it was a threat and later as the war began and dragged on he began to down talk it in public and to ramp up his negative views on the US's ethnic make up. The three things he actually underestimated that cost him the war was how tenacious the UK would be, how long/hard conquering the USSR would be and how fast the US (or any democracy) could get ready for total war.
@@CAROLDDISCOVER-2025 Also he never took Gibraltar and sealed off the Meditterranean. A stupid oversight if you are going to wage war in N. Africa against GB who has a great, well supplied base in Egypt. If he wanted to get oil out of the Caucusus, the Black Sea to the Med is the best way. Defeating GB in Egypt would have encouraged Turkey to join the axis, imo.
Basically the same thing the Hitler chan-... i mean History Channel was saying in the 90's. Its funny how bad of a wrap that channel gets now, when most of its 90's ww2 stuff was spot on.
@@fazole He lacked the means to try it. The sea defenses were incredibly strong, and the main weakness (attacks from land) were non-factors because Franco wouldn't let Hitler move troops through Spain to invade Gibraltar since Franco wanted to remain neutral, and letting one side use you to stage an invasion force is picking a side.
I'd say there might not have been a shift in late 1941 in what Hitler was thinking to himself, but rather a shift in what he needed to tell others. In 1928 he had little real power and his influence only went so far, so what he wrote then probably reflected his personal thoughts, especially since the document was never edited for publication. By late 1941, and especially after declaring war on the US, Hitler could not admit to others any admiration for the US (let alone an expectation of US success), but rather was essentially compelled to deliver anti-US wartime propaganda, even when addressing small high-level audiences. Also, Hitler was not well-known for admitting to his own mistakes to others.
This exactly. When looking at statements made by leaders, one must understand the politics at play. Getting everyone to believe that they could still win was necessary to keeping up the fight, even if that win wasn't possible. Hitler's denial of his own failures was so significant that in 1945, sitting in the Furherbunker, he would even say that a loss would be due to the German People not being as great as he thought -- and that they deserved it for betraying his trust in them. He tried to break the Nazi ideology before he would admit that his decision-making was wrong. It's also relevant to note that as the war raged on he became more addicted to drugs and more prone to erratic mood shifts. In the bunker he would make moves on maps that were simply not possible, just to keep an illusion of control over the war. Whether this was to maintain hope in those around him or just keep up his own delusions isn't for us to know, but it shows again that he couldn't fathom being wrong by then.
I don't think the older stuff is any more legitimate than the newer stuff. Every word that Hitler wrote or said was done with an audience in mind, and when Hitler had an audience, he also had a motive, ALWAYS
Actually admitting mistakes in public would be death sentence for any politicians, especially in a strong, militaristic, and unforgiving society that was WW2 Germany then. Not to mention he was more than a politicians or chancellor, to the German public he was somewhat close to a religious figure, he had to keep up the facade of such and remaining steadfast and without doubt till the very end - While he could try to correct or adjust for some mistake but it had to come with twisting the narrative or playing blame game - straight up "sorry" was out of question.
@@dropandy1453And to be fair...and that stage he was probably the most stressed human in history. To have the weight of that burden on you has to be something else to handle....and it definitely took it's toll in places. He said alot of things at the end that maybe be a bit crazy....but also insanely "in tune" with the metahistorical reality at play. He was destined to fail....but that allows us the chance for a way out
This was a very interesting video. i am surprised by the views on Hitler presented. Thank you for having the fortitude to air this video in light of UA-cam censorship.
What a deadly presentation. This is one that I will be coming back to for years like your interview with the Australian staff officer about what staff officers actually do.
The impression I got from the Second Book was that Hitler understood that a hegemonic clash with the U.S. was next to inevitable. The open question was what kind of clash, and this means asking whether the United States could become the dominant world power if Germany dominated Europe. Having dissected Hitler's thoughts, it would be interesting to dissect Roosevelt's.
No. There was not a real contrast. The US Folk and German Folk movement supported each other after the American Civil War. This was also due to the effect of migration, but mostly through the technology transfers and corporations. While the US already had some of it's modern-day popular universities, the real quality back then was private and only then these private people went to these universities, translated the books and teached them. That became only after the 2nd WW really an establishment. The clash came from the politics of Roosevelt only, not from the ongoing US development. The German companies (mostly aligned to some sort of local governor) did already invest much in the US in the 1860's, because the goods could come back and lower the effects of inflation and political rampage. And it also reduced the US poverty and inflation largely.
@@urlauburlaub2222 I agree with you as to the strong German-American demographic, cultural, economic, scientific, educational and commercial ties which managed to survive even the Wilsonian pogroms... I was perhaps being too cryptic, but I think it is understood, at least by some, that FDR headed what was de facto a pro British "war party." Certainly, neither German nor Irish Americans wanted war. What I meant about hegemony was to be taken in the context of Roosevelt's world view. He saw Japan and Germany as rivals in the Orient and Europe respectively. In 1940 Roosevelt imposed an oil and iron embargo on Japan in an obvious attempt to cripple her industrial production. In July 1941 (six months before Pearl Harbor) he froze Japan's assets in the U.S. As for Germany everyone knows about Lend Lease and the undeclared war in the Atlantic. It's hard not to draw the conclusion that FDR thought that U.S. world hegemony could only be achieved by defeating Japan and Germany.
To be fair, Woodrow Wilson warned the Allies in 1919, that what they were doing to Germany would cause another war. It only took 18 years to prove himself right.
It's not the US economy that gets underestimated. It's just their ability to use it for a common goal that surprises us every time. Probably because there are times when it seems a miracle they get anything done at all.
Oh look it another quipy, self-righteous ad hominem jab at the U.S.A that "feels about right" to the European youths reading it. Basis in truth not needed. Followed my something...something.. "well Churchill said so"🧐. Good grief.
A ww2 style domestic production expansion is not possible anymore in the US. The US is firmly in decline which the Trump admin will rapidly accelerate.
As an American who consumes this stuff and learns something every day, I'd like to offer my opinion. I'm 57 and wasn't alive back then so I'm limited to what I've been able to watch and read. I think he knew we could bring a real fight, but I don't think he thought we'd ever want to. What I don't understand is why Hitler didn't invade Great Britton? If he had overrun them then our ability join would have been greatly limited.
Japan's window of opportunity was never as open as assumed by SOME Japanese on the eve of war. Significant leaders within the Japanese navy and foreign service believed the war was lost before it even started.
My father (soldier in the German army from day one as a radio operator) once told me when Germany declared war on the US, he knew the war was lost. Germany had to declar war after Pearl Harbor since it was alies with Japon.
By the end of 1941 Hitler almost certainly felt the USA was hostile anyway. There was little doubt that Roosevelt was actively helping the British, particularly in the Atlantic, reporting on the movements of German surface ships etc. Hitler probably thought (wrongly) that war with the USA was inevitable, so he made the gesture of declaring first.
It sounded to me like the positive earlier quotes were about the people, and the later negative quotes were about the government. I don't see a contradiction.
Everything was going to plan, except for that part where the USSR would collapse and save them a whole lot of problems. He was probably thinking that with the resources and farmland west of the Urals, throw in a few million untermench slaves, and the USA does not look that tough.
The Caucasus oil fields were of especially great importance. During the battle of bulge, the Germans only had enough fuel for a week of attacking, and so the plan hinged on looting fuel from enemy fuel depots. And of course with so little fuel they couldn't have much air cover, so the plan also hinged on poor weather protecting them from the enemy air forces. Having the Caucasus would have solved such problems.
He was counting on force projection. With the soviet union out of the war, He figured he would be able to hold off the British and America and get a negotiated peace.
@@KristianKumpula In 1932, the U.S.A. produced three fifth of the global crude oil, the USSR one fifth (Doktor Oetker's Warenkunde, 1934). So, no. The Caucasian oil fields didn't matter. Not to mention the need and the capacity to refine crude oil etc.
@@fars8229The Wehrmacht, with the limited amount of planes and armor due to a lack of fuel, managed to hold off the Western Allies surprisingly well. Add to that the more experienced forces from the eastern front and adequate fuel for their planes and panzers and suddenly they stand a pretty decent chance
@@Ranyick Your judgement is made out of thin air. How do you define "performing surprisingly well"?? If you believe fighting meatwaves of Soviet soldiers in the swamps and woods of Northern Russia makes you an expert in fighting ANZAC's in the deserts in North Africa or fighting U.S. airborne troops in the Norman bocage landscape - be my guest. The performance of the Wehrmacht was far from surprising or astonishing. They did blitzkrieg through France in 1940, so did the Western Allies in 1944. Blitzkrieg through Western Russia in 1941, so did the Soviets, too, in 1944 (Bagration). The Wehrmacht lost decisively, therefore their performance was overall poor. Period. Wars are economic wars. Show me a military force which was able to compensate political, social or economic deficits on the battlefield. Was the Wehrmacht capable to undo the flaws of a short-term armament policy? No (and no-one can); To compensate the bureaucratic overhead or the political inflexability of a totalitarian régime?
Great video. From what I know, he had similar view of GB as well. Not as long and, maybe, not as strong. But, from what I understand, Hitler felt he could be allied with the British empire
Hitler tried to negotiate peace with GB after the fall of France. It was somewhat possible until Churchill was elected and promised to never negotiate.
@jeffkardosjr.3825 genetically. However, german descent Americans have historically identified as German despite often being 1/4 or 1/8 so most records would make you believe we're mostly German.
He did say America was going to be a power house country in the future and ge wasn't wrong. He wanted to also see America as not the only one in that position of power on the world stage.
i remember the texts praising america way to dealing with natives and the reservation model as a direct inspiration as it was also the manifest destiny for Lebensraum
yep. hitler and many other nazi officials failed to understand that America's abuse of naitives would be responded to much differently by the european powers than doing the same to poland (A state and peoples who's freedom had been championed for by western powers since the napoleonic era).
He seriously underestimated the USSR which led to Germany losing the war. The eastern front sapped the limited resources of Germans to the extent that Hitler could not adequately respond to the D-Day invasion at the same time that they needed to hold back the Russians.
@@gumdeo "The Wehrmacht in general underestimated the Red Army." Not just the Wehrmacht. After the Soviet blunder against Finland the common stance of the world was that the USSR is very weak. Back in the day France was supposed having the strongest army in the world.
No? Axis success in the eastern feon was greater than the most optimistic warplans. What he did underestimate is Stalin's willingness to keep losing land me an matériel and yet not sue for peace.
It was less an underestimation of the Red Army than an underestimation of the basic humanity of Soviet citizens. The USSR and Stalin knew they couldn't surrender. The Nazis were putting out propaganda saying "Go East, my son!" as a direct mirror to the propaganda the US put out about stealing indigenous land in its west. Their plan, from the beginning, was the elimination of the Soviet Union and all its cultures and their wholesale replacement with Germans. There's no surrenduring, when presented by that threat. The USSR was going to fight to the last man, woman, and child, to the last pound of steel and drop of oil. Because they would eventually lose all of that anyway in any defeat scenario, so the only option was victory. The Nazis knew this was their plan, and they invaded because they thought the Soviets weren't really people and wouldn't make the completely rational decision of total, 100% commitment of the entire population to military resistance. That was their failing.
I often wonder how the War would have developed, had the USA pursued a partial mobilization (similar to that of the Germans prior to 1943) for a year or more in 1941. The Germans (and everyone else, with perhaps Churchill being a pointed exception) underestimated the resolve with which the American continent threw themselves economically, politically and socially into Total War immediately upon the reality of Pearl Harbor coming into wider focus.
Probably not much differently. American production, wile a factor in victory, was absolutely not the winning factor in the war. The US troops performed abysmally in North Africa in comparison to the British. Gen. Patton was 100% carried by Gen. Montgomery, the actual mastermind of the final victory in North Africa. The Army throughout the entire war was seen as pitifully incompetent (backed up by how many men were lost on average from their units compared to others). The Marines, however, were excellent. Secondly, its hard to convince a people of total war, especially when said people desires freedom over all else. FDR was the closest the US came to falling. FDR federalized the housing market, destroyed all black wealth made during the war, and even had a office of censorship whose remnants live on in the FBI and DOJ and continue to control democrat culture even now. The people were fed up with the war after it was obvious we had won both sides and did not believe total war was necessary anymore. Living on rations, being forced to work in factories was wearing on people who wanted to go home, raise kids, and be left alone.
Місяць тому
with the way the " battle for the atlantic " was going in 1941-43 , hitler probably didn't think the americans had much of a chance at getting men and equipment over to europe to fight germany. england was in deep trouble with all the ships the u-boats were sinking. it was the japanese that really screwed up by forcing america into the war. both the germans AND the japanese were quite arrogant with regard to american physical and mental capacity to engage in " total war". churchill knew america , because he had been over here visiting and speaking about europe and its problems many times. read " churchill and america ", martin gilbert , 2005.
@@goldenhate6649 Both Roosevelts were the worst presidents this nation has ever seen. They poisoned the philosophy of this nation. Unleashed Pandora’s box.
No, a Brit (Anglo-Saxon) is genetically more predisposed towards having the abilities needed to create social environments where sailing is an activity.
Hitler: "The Americans are an unpredictable lot. When the going gets tough, the English are much braver than the Americans. No comparison at all! Where do the Americans get off accusing the English of anything?" Me, an Englishman: He's not that bad after all.
I always had the impression that his views on a nation depended on who he was aligned with versus who he was in conflict with at the time. Meaning for all his other evil things he was rather practical in the notion of no permanent entangling alliances if that makes any sense. Just like certainly he always said that he had a favorable view of the British people but certainly despised the British government under Winston Churchill because they refused to roll over. And then of course spoke ill later during the war of FDR even though many of the economic planks of FDR's New Deal were not too far removed from domestic economic planks for national socialism.
I remember a similar quote from Hitler reported by Jodl according to a French historian. According to him, Hitler told Jodl that the war was lost in early January 1942. Perhaps Mr. Schmider is referring to the same episode. Where do we get it from? Jodl's interrogations? I would be curious to know more about this.
@@emberfist8347 Still according to this French historian, by lost it was meant that annihilating the Bolshevik state had become impossible at this stage and not that Berlin was going to end up conquered by the Red Army or that the regime was threatened. (on your response) btw they are still planing on that in 1944 : the war goals as defined before the war won’t be achieved but the Nazis think they will manage to obtain military successes in such a way that they will be able to come out on top.
A guess to explain some of it... are the sources for his wartime comments from British sources? They always try to write the history, and it usually involves efforts to completely shift or shape major beliefs.
I really don't blame hitler for being scared of America. As much as he looked up to us for our power, its daunting when a nation like america alone has nearly half of the industrial power on earth. The city I'm from Pittsburgh, literally produced more steel every year than the ENTIRE axis powers combined. That type of superiority would scare me to death
There are two versions of that story. In germany they congratulated Jesse Owens and people were really impressed. At least that's what my father told me, who was born in 1936 and heard those stories from his mother (his father passed away in 1945 on the eastern front).
Germany dominated those games (not always in an exactly fair manner). Hitler was not upset about Owens at all because otherwise the Germans did excellent. I mean you can't win EVERYTHING. Fact is Hitler was congratulatory towards Owens while it was FDR who refused to have him at the White House as was initially planned because Owens was black. Basically they thought about bringing Owens to the White House, a few racist Southern politicians had something to say, and FDR quickly caved to the small amount of pressure. The US took a Jewish athlete off their relay team so as not to offend Hitler. Many other countries did similar. Not letting Jews compete even though Germany wasnt putting any pressure on them. A lot of people all over the world were quite happy to go along with and praise Hitler and the Nazis and their racial policies and fascism. A lot of people like Ford or Limbergh who hid their fascist Nazi sympathies behind isolationism. Who, again, praised Hitler before WW2.
I bought Hitler’s Fatal Miscalculation a couple of years ago after listening to the Dr. on this channel, and I can't recommend it enough. I had to read many of the pages twice because my brain couldn't keep up with my eyes.
The first ww2 documentary i watched stated clealy that privately he was immensely disappointed by the pearl harbour attacks because he knew it was big trouble for germany
I’d love to see the source on that because I don’t think it’s true. It doesn’t make any sense since Hitler decided to declare war on the US. If he thought it was trouble then he didn’t need to declare war. He actually thought things were proceeding great at the time. He thought the Soviets were about to collapse and thought war with the US was inevitable.
7:30 Even in the modern day with immigration from all around the globe, H-man kinda has a point. Most newer Americans come from the absolute cream of the crop of their ancestors. The best most talented from Europe and Asia immigrate to the US. While not entirely genetic quality. The cultural quality of being an country of immigrants keeps the drive, cunning, and competition of the Nation alive. Valuable traits that usually diminish when the population doesn't have frequent shocks.
He always had good points. How else do you think he ever got in power? The only reason all the censorship and butthurt exists today clearly wouldn't exist if there were not legitimate points being made. Who is threatened by someone if they truly make no sense? Someone with no valid points isn't a threat at all, especially not someone already vanquished. Look at what people do, not what they say, especially when they are not free to speak properly.
You should go read Adam Tooze. Germany was very well aware of the industrial aspect of the war. They understood beating Americans was a long shot but decided giving it a try was worth it.
The fact is that Germany, Japan and Italy, if you believe that they were really out to conquer an empire for themselves weren't doing anything that the British, French, Americans, Belgians, Dutch yes even the Kaiserreich Germans were doing only 50 years earlier. Hypocrisy never ends!
Yes but litterally nobody cares, because were American, and naturally were gonna say America is good. Your free to believe what you want. Nothings stopping you. Whats worse is betraying your people in favor of some goofy moral reasoning.
Hitler did underestimate the US. That is partly prejudice, he thought that "national will" was an important factor in war. But more pointedly, he fundamentally misunderstood how completely such dull matters as industrial output, resource availability, good logistics and so forth are basically determinative in modern war. In the end, the Allies were pointedly not walking, but rather driving, all over Germany. Literally. That's resource dominance.
Hitler's delusions are on full display in this book. He constantly talks about racial value while minimizing or outright denying materialist explanations.
This is not really a falsifiable statement as you could make the exact opposite point and it would be just as valid. It's the classic nature vs. nurture argument where both have rougly a 50% influence of predicting outcomes for people.
Based on this, you can't say Hitler properly estimated US capabilities or overestimated them. And if he didn't estimate accurately or overestimated, then he underestimated(but maybe not as much as thought).
To be fair, in general Hitler, along with many other German generals and officials, didn't underestimate the Western Allies, unsurprisingly given it was UK, France, and American that dealt them a hard blow at the end of WW1. Hence he always had planned to go East and tried to avoid conflicts with the West, but the UK and France didn't allow Germany to go anywhere and as such he had no choice - Germany in late 1930s simply had no room to navigate out of the cage set up by the last war treaty of Versailies.
@@emberfist8347war with the USSR was inevitable. Look at who "gobbled up" half of Europe at the war's end. Churchill was a warhawk and is almost singularly responsible for the death of that empire.
@@betrayer1350 No the death of that Empire was the Suez Crisis after Churchill left office. And the USSR only got gooble up half of Europe because Hitler gave Stalin the provocation. It was inevitable only because the Nazis couldn't stand the USSR existing.
@@emberfist8347 That's a bit inaccurate on the Soviet aggression on Eastern Europe - The USSR ambition on expanding further into Europe was already there and in no means "provoked" by Germany as if it was some excuses - Or else why would the Soviets started Winter War with Finland in the Arctic Circle? And then there was the reason why most of Eastern Europe lend a hand to Germany on its Ost invasion - Hungary, Romania, Baltic states - they were all threatened by the expanding USSR states. And then a bit of illusion that Germany "had a choice" in avoiding the trap - other than taking back its Rhineland the rest of Germany progress was towards the East, and away from UK and France - and they declared war on Germany either way In fact it was the declaration of war from UK and France provoked Germany to occupy most of Europe continent, rather than other way around - Belgium, Norway, France, Denmark, etc, Germany had to occupy these countries or else the Allies would and surrounded Germany effectively.
@ Stop you Nazi apologist. You got it all wrong. Germany didn’t need to expand. And the main reason Ost Batallions exist is because the Nazis conscripted them from the areas they occupied including the Baltic States. Romania joined because they agreed to hand Germany the keys to their economy and Hungary was a sore loser after World War I like Germany. Also the Winter War was fought with Finland you know the former client state of the Russian Empire. And they weren’t even asking for the whole nation. And why did France and Britain declare war? Oh yeah Germany invaded Poland to seize an internationally recognized free city aware that the Allies were not happy with Germany annexing multiple nations and how Hitler constantly lied such as annexing Czechoslovakia when the Munich Agreement said he could only have certain parts of it and claiming he was done with territorial expansion.
I think Hitler took advice from Donitz on the lack of American anti submarine defenses. He figured he could cripple the US merchant fleet severely limiting America's power projection. Donitz came real close to doing that.
Its not that they didn't think the Soviets could get powerful, but he didn't think the Soviets could get powerful before he gave them a knockout blow. He knew time was against him.
@@mouthpiece200 Initially they estimated the amount of Soviet divisions to about 140, when it fact it were 220. Btw Goering and Raeder were strongly against the invasion.
I would say the axis and central powers always underestimated the Americans. We hadn’t proven our self much yet, they also thought we wouldn’t be involved. Remember, at the beginning and the middle of the wars, America was neutral, giving them the false belief we wouldn’t join the war, not one but twice. Surprise is one of the main principles of battle
Hitler was a gambler, and often acted on impulse - declaring war on the USA was one such example. His knowledge of the USA was very basic, having never been there, and relied purely on books and even comics that he read as a boy. His main reason to declare war on the USA was that he accepted that he would have to fight them as well, and he also wanted to solidify the alliance with Japan by joining them in their war. Lastly, he was being pressurised by the navy chiefs to allow German U-Boats free rein in the Atlantic. Hitler was well aware of American industrial might, but doubted that they could intervene in Europe for a couple of years, by which time the Soviet Union would be defeated and he would be ready to deal with America. He was of course totally wrong, and it took just less than a year for American troops to land in north Africa, while Germany's campaign against the Soviet Union was doomed at Stalingrad.
America never had industrial might remember everything there were using was pre ww1 .. that's not industrial might Everything the Americans was selling the allies from ww1 . Hitler never made a mistake declaring war on America.
@@stevecooper7883 Actually they had better ones, Hungary, Romania, and even Finland on the Eastern Front, though it seems since fighting American was a pre-requisite for being mentioned in Western WW2 history at all they were often overlooked -Pretty much most Eastern Europe countries not occupied were on Axis side fighting the Soviets, and many contributed way more than the other two of the "Big Three Axis"
@@stevecooper7883 The Japanese were dealt a bloody nose by the Soviets during the Soviet-Japanese Border Wars, particularly at Khalkhin Gol, with both sides eventually signing a neutrality pact (that was later broken by the Soviets when they invaded Manchuria.)
Hitler was well-aware that the Soviets were being supplied millions of tons of resources and war material by the Americans, and yet he did not order his U-boats to unleash hell in the Atlantic before declaring war, because he had put his signature on that piece of paper called the Geneva Conventions.
Given the state of the US in the 1920s (huge racial tensions, Jim Crowe Laws riots, arguably the nadir of race relations in the US since the US CiviL War) it says much that Hitler viewed it as "a role model"
Just because he could make reasonable assessments of governmental policy doesn't mean he couldn't commit some of the most heinous acts of butchery in history. You don't become a popular figurehead by being completely irrational. As the US Navy teaches it: Hitler was a great leader, he got millions of people to follow him, but he was an absolutely horrific person. Also, he wasn't on meth yet.
Honestly take away the racism, and he doesn't seem that unhinged in all honesty. Your average dude would tweak tf out if they saw their country undergo Weimar conditions. Hitlers biggest blunder was being nostalgic and invading France/Britain, and not focusing his efforts onto eradicating the USSR. I would much prefer a cold war with Germany than one with the USSR. We would be fighting our wars on Mars instead of in the sandbox if we weren't in the bad timeline.
But they did underestimate America. They knew we had enormous capabilities, but thought we were soft. I believe it was Goering that said "All the Americans know how to make are refrigerators and razor blades"
US armed forces prior to WW2 maybe 250k but by the end of WW2 the armed forces was 8-10 million. 17 million Americans served during WW2 and most served overseas.
I never knew that Hitler wrote or dictated a second book. It does not make a lot of sense why Hitler declared war on December 11, 1941 on the United States (in hindsight) and much to the relief of Churchill. except as pressure via the Anti-comintern Pact that Germany signed with Japan in September 1940 for Germany to fulfill it's Axis alliance obligations. It is true that the Americans would not be able to do much (in Europe) in 1942 as their armament procurement and manpower recruitment had only started in 1940 for their army and air force, but later in the war (if there were no collapse of the Soviet Union that the Nazis and Wehrmacht had contrariwise expected), the increasing pressure that the Americans in concert with the British was going to be a serious problem for Nazi Germany in 1943. Hitler was reactionary in that December 1941; his armies stood at the gate of Moscow and it looked as if the end of the Soviet Union was ney. Also noted in this video that Hitler and the Nazis geopolitical views were always tainted by ideology. Using idology as a filter for rational decision making was unhelpful.
It misaligned with Japan unnecessarily.. fr. Declaring war on the US after that literally moved back the frontline towards Germany reversing liebensbraun.
It seems very unwise, in the long term, to distort history to make him seen more villainous. Education on him is inconsistent across generations, and many young people feel lied to, which makes his positions seem more justified to them.
Generally speaking, the world view of socialists on US was largely painted by anti-monarchism, french revolutionary idealism and the idea of preference of republics over monarchies and therefore was not initially hostile. The Cold War era perspectives weren't established in stone yet as US wasn't yet the pillar of global status quo which the revolutionary socialists always sought to tear down regardless of whom enforced it. Now Hitler had his own racial doctrine of socialist totalitarianism which might focus more on racial legislation on US, but the values which dominated in Europe at the time were focused on the viability of imperialism and monarchy. Ultimately fascism and marxism were both cut from same revolutionary cloth hoping to elevate society to a position of strength by establishing a state that has full control of economy, which is where the main point of difference between American Republic and New Ambitious European Republics would emerge. At the time, they all sought an answer to the same question, that of contesting those old imperial powers with US being at forefront of doing so successfully. After British empire collapsed however and other Imperial powers began dropping like flies, this paradigm no longer was truly relevant. Europe also began favoring cooperation above wars over territory which considerably lowered the political pressures that favored authoritarian thinking. US became the global hegemon, and therefore target for revolutionary ire.
Time passes and people start to forget some details of history, then the part that isn't forgotten is remembered more by the people in the future and then history repeats... Lebensraum, that is the fundamental idea Hitler once used as a banner to lead the germans, that is the part of Hitler going to be remembered and rehabilated by the future humankind
Hitler literally said he wanted to emulate the US on what they did to the natives, disparaged Spain for not doing the same "all of America could've been 100% white or near white" (paraphrasing) and he wanted to replicate it with the Slavs.
@@didymussumydid9726 in Generalplan Ost he basically laid the plans for the colonisation of eastern Europe displacing and killing the mayority of slavs living there
@@didymussumydid9726 Generalplan Ost guaranteed the deaths of millions of Slavs based on food supplies. Since the political assumption behind the plan was eventual German colonization of the East, I doubt that it would have been the end of the decimation.
so because hitler sometimes said nice things about the US, he therefore didnt underestimate it? clearly hitler did underestimate the US in some areas, you even said in the video that he underestimates the US ability to switch between peace and wartime economies
💯 check out the WW2 channel's recent video WW2 By The Numbers. The allied vs axis GDP ratio started at 2.5:1 and dramatically grew as the war carried on. Not to mention the allies' focus on developing the atom bomb... Edit: also check out their video "Interview with a German WW2 Veteran." The veteran recounts that when The war began his father told him to go and get his school textbooks for a discussion. As a family they looked over the international production statistics, and his father showed them how much more the rest of the allies/neutral countries could produce. His father explained that Germany's only hope for victory would be a swift, limited war. He described how if the United States were able to tool up production and enter the war that they would lose. If it was this obvious to this ordinary upper middle class German family, I would say that Hitler very much underestimated not just the United States but the Allies in general.
Hitler's willingness to go to war was based on two assumptions, ironically the same as the Kaiser made in WWI; that is, that it would take the U.S. about a year to fully mobilize and intervene in the European/African theater; and secondly, that Germany would win the war before then. Both times, the assumption that the U.S. intervention would take a year was correct (Pearl Harbor in December of 41, and the Invasion of North Africa 11 months later in November); but Germany was unable to defeat her other adversaries in that time. I think, if you could visit Hitler and get a few beers down his gullet, he would have to admit that there was no way for Germany to win as soon as America showed up in strength.
@@edgarhilbert4797 Never heard that and can't find it by googling it. If you could provide a reference I'd appreciate it. But even if true, Belgium was a sovereign country and can let anyone they want fly over their territory; this would not give Germany a legitimate cause for war. Also, even if it's true, the Germans were following the Schlieffen plan, which showed that the Germans intended to invade France through the low countries. This plan was in place decades before the start of the war, so your thoughts that Germany would have left Belgium alone except for the French air force flying over them at the start of the war is impossible. This was so obvious a move by Germany that Britain attempted to keep the peace by guaranteeing Belgian neutrality; the Kaiser ignored it, calling the treaty "a mere scrap of paper", and he therefore brought down the wrath of the entire British Empire down on Germany. This would be a pretty odd decision to make for a Kaiser who was doing everything he could to keep the peace.
![Captain Richard Winters - Bastogne Final Thoughts And Memories [Band of Brothers/Easy Company]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_mMm3J66Oq0/mqdefault.jpg)
The anxiety European Nations felt about America and her rise from the late 19th Century on is something that I feel is often overlooked when discussing European Affairs.
It was very clear to Western Europeans that they had missed their chance to adequately contain America and it was only America's self-imposed restraint and isolationist bent that was enabling Europe's Empires to more or less ignore the US in their planning.
The reason why America along with Russia became the Superpowers of the 20th Century was because both of them possessed large populations and industrial capacity combined with domestic resources that need not be imported and therefore could not be disrupted. Germany had men and factories, but lacked resources.
The odd thing is that you're right for contental Europe.
The British empire saw USA as preferable to everyone else so they could be useful business partners.
One of the best historical books I remember reading was about how USA basically enabled the British Empire to declare victory in the new world over all other European powers.
For example the scramble for Africa never happened in south America because of the Monroe alliance where USA said any new colony in the Americas would be seen as an attack on the USA. After the British empire was the only remaining major presence cutting the costs of British naval policing as the USA did all of that for free for all the Americas.
While there was a fear from the US side the British one was more of it wasn't worth the trouble to fight someone who they saw as basically a 2nd UK, like Canada.
While the US really pushed the be scared of the Brits 4th of July sorta stuff the Brit's didn't really care as nothing really changed from there POV. At worst the British lost some taxes in the 1750s but they gained the US as an English speaking ally as a mediator within European politics.
Later on by the rise of the US it often came at the expense of the Empire as the biggest loser in WW2 was Britain as that misguided view from the UK of the US will eventually wake up and understand what's going on with the rest of the world. As to the UK the fall of France was the last remaining major democracy left so if the USA wanted to maintain the balance of power it had to act but the UK underestimated just how big the ocean was compared to the English channel.
The UK never wanted war with the US they were way too useful in every other situation.
@kino6395 Can you tell me what book that was please?
@@kino6395 The British foreign policy stance toward America in the later half of the 19th century was more reluctant acceptance than welcoming embrace. There was always a prevailing sense that America - especially after it had secured hegemony over the North American continent at the end of the Manifest Destiny period - would eventually rise to begin to dictate its terms to the Empire. But the truth was simple: they had missed their chance. The War of 1812 was in many ways a lost opportunity for both powers involved, despite the claiming of victory on either side. The United States had failed to remove British presence on North America through the conquest of (what would become) Canada, and the British, distracted by Napoleon and only half-committing its capacity failed to check American ambitions west of the Mississippi.
Had they succeeded in doing so - either in establishing indigenous protectorates across the Mississippi basin or in seizing New Orleans, the entrepot to Louisana, America would have been a far more amenable partner to swallow.
Instead, America became a sleeping monster. By the American Civil War, despite some minute British vacillation on the issue, it was already much too late. America was going to have its destiny writ large against the congress of powers and there was nothing to be done to stop it. So, they came to an understanding.
Why do you say "need not be" as if you are some kind of intellectual?
@@Aex3f4when you read books they tend to bleed into your vocabulary when writing.
Hitler overlooked the fact that
America was already ramping up production of military equipment for almost 2 years: supplying England and Russia. It was a smaller step than expected to ramp up to a full scale military economy.
He was aware of lend lease.
@ I’m absolutely sure that he was. My point is that he seems to vastly underestimate how quickly America could ramp up to full speed production of military hardware. He seemed to plan on America starting from zero.
Yeah.
@hydroplaneing Main TLDR basically
In discussion with a British official, Roosevelt said the US would build 6M tons of shipping per year.
When asked by his own people where this number came from, Roosevelt said he just pulled it out of air as a goal for them to achieve.
And it was done.
I believe Doenitz used this number when he said Germany must sink 600,000 tons of shipping per month
America’s explosion of logistical economic capability, surprised even itself.
you couldn't tell Franklin that we would be making an aircraft carrier every 12 days under his term in office in 1938.
@@kraKowD and liberty ships everyday starting 1943 until the war was over. There was so many that some of them were used as target practice or sacrificial ships for atom bomb tests.
The coming collapse of America's logistical economic and financial capability will surprise no who was smart enough to vote against the next president. We are fucked.
@@RalphKramden-il5pfRight. Cool. Is it me, or do hard leftists become goose-stepping fascists when the vote doesn’t go their way?
@@morningwoody4514 i think it’s you. though the commenter you responded to is a bit dramatic, if that guy follows through on half his FoPo promises it will be a headache.
oh populism…
US planners estimated Japan's production capacity at the beginning of the war to be 30% that of the United States. Turned out to be a whole lot less than that. In 1944 US war production was greater than the rest of the world combined.
Not impressive considering their geological advantage
@MaticTheProto Brazil has the same geological advantage and look what they've done. The United States is very impressive.
@@ReclinedPhysicist lmfao, incorrect.
@@MaticTheProtoBrazil has nearly equal amounts of resources, is a similar age, and has and had a comparable population to the US
@@Dianasaurthemelonlord7777Brazil is far smaller than the US (even when ignoring the Amazone which takes up an enormous part of the country) and doesn’t have the same geopolitical advantages as the United States (i.e. being the main arms supplier to the allied forces during WW1 which made them very rich and then join in on a war that was already almost over to “save” western Europe and get even richer from it)
Hmm, maybe it's taught differently now, but as a teenager learning this back in the 1990s, this was almost exactly what I was taught. That he admired certain parts of the US, it's economy and technology especially and knew it was a threat and later as the war began and dragged on he began to down talk it in public and to ramp up his negative views on the US's ethnic make up. The three things he actually underestimated that cost him the war was how tenacious the UK would be, how long/hard conquering the USSR would be and how fast the US (or any democracy) could get ready for total war.
He didn't have the Navy to invade England and that was his problem. Angel became a giant aircraft carrier made of land for the allies
@@CAROLDDISCOVER-2025
Also he never took Gibraltar and sealed off the Meditterranean. A stupid oversight if you are going to wage war in N. Africa against GB who has a great, well supplied base in Egypt. If he wanted to get oil out of the Caucusus, the Black Sea to the Med is the best way. Defeating GB in Egypt would have encouraged Turkey to join the axis, imo.
Basically the same thing the Hitler chan-... i mean History Channel was saying in the 90's. Its funny how bad of a wrap that channel gets now, when most of its 90's ww2 stuff was spot on.
@@fazole He lacked the means to try it. The sea defenses were incredibly strong, and the main weakness (attacks from land) were non-factors because Franco wouldn't let Hitler move troops through Spain to invade Gibraltar since Franco wanted to remain neutral, and letting one side use you to stage an invasion force is picking a side.
Yes, this. All of this.
Mussolini's icon is a pizza?
And they say Germans have no sense of humor...
What'sa'matta'yoo?!?
Mama mia!
lore accurate
They don't, but Austrians do. *giggle*
I'd say there might not have been a shift in late 1941 in what Hitler was thinking to himself, but rather a shift in what he needed to tell others. In 1928 he had little real power and his influence only went so far, so what he wrote then probably reflected his personal thoughts, especially since the document was never edited for publication. By late 1941, and especially after declaring war on the US, Hitler could not admit to others any admiration for the US (let alone an expectation of US success), but rather was essentially compelled to deliver anti-US wartime propaganda, even when addressing small high-level audiences. Also, Hitler was not well-known for admitting to his own mistakes to others.
This exactly. When looking at statements made by leaders, one must understand the politics at play. Getting everyone to believe that they could still win was necessary to keeping up the fight, even if that win wasn't possible.
Hitler's denial of his own failures was so significant that in 1945, sitting in the Furherbunker, he would even say that a loss would be due to the German People not being as great as he thought -- and that they deserved it for betraying his trust in them. He tried to break the Nazi ideology before he would admit that his decision-making was wrong. It's also relevant to note that as the war raged on he became more addicted to drugs and more prone to erratic mood shifts. In the bunker he would make moves on maps that were simply not possible, just to keep an illusion of control over the war. Whether this was to maintain hope in those around him or just keep up his own delusions isn't for us to know, but it shows again that he couldn't fathom being wrong by then.
I don't think the older stuff is any more legitimate than the newer stuff. Every word that Hitler wrote or said was done with an audience in mind, and when Hitler had an audience, he also had a motive, ALWAYS
Have you heard the mannerheim recordings? He does admit to mistakes, at least privately
Actually admitting mistakes in public would be death sentence for any politicians, especially in a strong, militaristic, and unforgiving society that was WW2 Germany then. Not to mention he was more than a politicians or chancellor, to the German public he was somewhat close to a religious figure, he had to keep up the facade of such and remaining steadfast and without doubt till the very end - While he could try to correct or adjust for some mistake but it had to come with twisting the narrative or playing blame game - straight up "sorry" was out of question.
@@dropandy1453And to be fair...and that stage he was probably the most stressed human in history. To have the weight of that burden on you has to be something else to handle....and it definitely took it's toll in places. He said alot of things at the end that maybe be a bit crazy....but also insanely "in tune" with the metahistorical reality at play. He was destined to fail....but that allows us the chance for a way out
This was a very interesting video. i am surprised by the views on Hitler presented. Thank you for having the fortitude to air this video in light of UA-cam censorship.
You tube's something else
The German experts advised Hitler on USA capacity and were short about 90%, because they forgot about our women!
What a deadly presentation. This is one that I will be coming back to for years like your interview with the Australian staff officer about what staff officers actually do.
The impression I got from the Second Book was that Hitler understood that a hegemonic clash with the U.S. was next to inevitable. The open question was what kind of clash, and this means asking whether the United States could become the dominant world power if Germany dominated Europe. Having dissected Hitler's thoughts, it would be interesting to dissect Roosevelt's.
No. There was not a real contrast. The US Folk and German Folk movement supported each other after the American Civil War. This was also due to the effect of migration, but mostly through the technology transfers and corporations. While the US already had some of it's modern-day popular universities, the real quality back then was private and only then these private people went to these universities, translated the books and teached them. That became only after the 2nd WW really an establishment. The clash came from the politics of Roosevelt only, not from the ongoing US development. The German companies (mostly aligned to some sort of local governor) did already invest much in the US in the 1860's, because the goods could come back and lower the effects of inflation and political rampage. And it also reduced the US poverty and inflation largely.
@@urlauburlaub2222 I agree with you as to the strong German-American demographic, cultural, economic, scientific, educational and commercial ties which managed to survive even the Wilsonian pogroms... I was perhaps being too cryptic, but I think it is understood, at least by some, that FDR headed what was de facto a pro British "war party." Certainly, neither German nor Irish Americans wanted war. What I meant about hegemony was to be taken in the context of Roosevelt's world view. He saw Japan and Germany as rivals in the Orient and Europe respectively.
In 1940 Roosevelt imposed an oil and iron embargo on Japan in an obvious attempt to cripple her industrial production. In July 1941 (six months before Pearl Harbor) he froze Japan's assets in the U.S. As for Germany everyone knows about Lend Lease and the undeclared war in the Atlantic. It's hard not to draw the conclusion that FDR thought that U.S. world hegemony could only be achieved by defeating Japan and Germany.
Allies: Germany started WW2 because of its collapsing economy
Germany: no u
Allies: no u
No u? By a gaming youtuber? In the comment section of a history video? In 2024?
To be fair, Woodrow Wilson warned the Allies in 1919, that what they were doing to Germany would cause another war. It only took 18 years to prove himself right.
@@saber1885Localized entirely within your kitchen?!
LOL!
@@Kasfas yes
It's not the US economy that gets underestimated. It's just their ability to use it for a common goal that surprises us every time. Probably because there are times when it seems a miracle they get anything done at all.
As Churchill said, the Americans can always be trusted to do the right thing, after trying everything else first.
@@ethanyeung6216 By the "right thing" he meant plz save us quickly
Oh look it another quipy, self-righteous ad hominem jab at the U.S.A that "feels about right" to the European youths reading it. Basis in truth not needed. Followed my something...something.. "well Churchill said so"🧐. Good grief.
A ww2 style domestic production expansion is not possible anymore in the US. The US is firmly in decline which the Trump admin will rapidly accelerate.
America is full of movers and shakers. The stiffs of Old World Europe are the ones who stagnate.
Unless Hitler predicted the US would build an atomic bomb he definitely underestimated the US to some extent.
Germany helped build the atomic bomb.
@mouthpiece200 only by driving away good scientists from Europe and giving the Allies a reason to build it.
The phrase "Cramp his style" made me grin. Thanks for the content and have a good day.
Glad you enjoyed it.
This is why I love this channel. Not a single second was filled with personal opinion or bias. Just pure documentation and research.
Chapeau. Hut ab!🎉
As an American who consumes this stuff and learns something every day, I'd like to offer my opinion. I'm 57 and wasn't alive back then so I'm limited to what I've been able to watch and read.
I think he knew we could bring a real fight, but I don't think he thought we'd ever want to.
What I don't understand is why Hitler didn't invade Great Britton? If he had overrun them then our ability join would have been greatly limited.
Thanks for using manually created English closed captioning. Auto-generated English captioning is usually poor.
Especially with a heavy accent
This channel just keeps on being relevant. year after year after year...
Japan's window of opportunity was never as open as assumed by SOME Japanese on the eve of war. Significant leaders within the Japanese navy and foreign service believed the war was lost before it even started.
Excellent analysis! I appreciate the combination of primary sources & expert (guest) commentary. A rare combination on YT....More please!!!!
Was just thinking about this today! Always happy to see your videos. Hope you are well MHV :)
My father (soldier in the German army from day one as a radio operator) once told me when Germany declared war on the US, he knew the war was lost.
Germany had to declar war after Pearl Harbor since it was alies with Japon.
By the end of 1941 Hitler almost certainly felt the USA was hostile anyway. There was little doubt that Roosevelt was actively helping the British, particularly in the Atlantic, reporting on the movements of German surface ships etc. Hitler probably thought (wrongly) that war with the USA was inevitable, so he made the gesture of declaring first.
@philiphumphrey1548 No, Japan already declared after provocations so his hand was forced
War with the USA was inevitable. But Hitler was just making his doom days came sooner.
The story goes that he did that so the Japanese would declare war on the ussr. As the notsees were outside the gates of Moscow.
@@longiusaescius2537Hitler had a defensive with Japan. There was no obligation to declare war after Pearl Harbor.
@@longiusaescius2537 Afrika corps was already fighting Americans in the Africa, so no, he was not really forced
It sounded to me like the positive earlier quotes were about the people, and the later negative quotes were about the government. I don't see a contradiction.
Fitting I guess to have Ike's bust in the background.
Everything was going to plan, except for that part where the USSR would collapse and save them a whole lot of problems. He was probably thinking that with the resources and farmland west of the Urals, throw in a few million untermench slaves, and the USA does not look that tough.
The Caucasus oil fields were of especially great importance. During the battle of bulge, the Germans only had enough fuel for a week of attacking, and so the plan hinged on looting fuel from enemy fuel depots. And of course with so little fuel they couldn't have much air cover, so the plan also hinged on poor weather protecting them from the enemy air forces. Having the Caucasus would have solved such problems.
He was counting on force projection. With the soviet union out of the war, He figured he would be able to hold off the British and America and get a negotiated peace.
@@KristianKumpula In 1932, the U.S.A. produced three fifth of the global crude oil, the USSR one fifth (Doktor Oetker's Warenkunde, 1934). So, no. The Caucasian oil fields didn't matter. Not to mention the need and the capacity to refine crude oil etc.
@@fars8229The Wehrmacht, with the limited amount of planes and armor due to a lack of fuel, managed to hold off the Western Allies surprisingly well. Add to that the more experienced forces from the eastern front and adequate fuel for their planes and panzers and suddenly they stand a pretty decent chance
@@Ranyick Your judgement is made out of thin air. How do you define "performing surprisingly well"??
If you believe fighting meatwaves of Soviet soldiers in the swamps and woods of Northern Russia makes you an expert in fighting ANZAC's in the deserts in North Africa or fighting U.S. airborne troops in the Norman bocage landscape - be my guest.
The performance of the Wehrmacht was far from surprising or astonishing. They did blitzkrieg through France in 1940, so did the Western Allies in 1944. Blitzkrieg through Western Russia in 1941, so did the Soviets, too, in 1944 (Bagration).
The Wehrmacht lost decisively, therefore their performance was overall poor. Period. Wars are economic wars. Show me a military force which was able to compensate political, social or economic deficits on the battlefield. Was the Wehrmacht capable to undo the flaws of a short-term armament policy? No (and no-one can); To compensate the bureaucratic overhead or the political inflexability of a totalitarian régime?
In 1938, Henry Ford was awarded the Grand Cross of the German Eagle by Hitler.
What was ford up to in '42?
@@senorpepper3405Being the number 1 contractor for the American War Effort.
@@emberfist8347 there you go
America helped the soviets to industrialize prior to the war too
@@kenneth9874Speaking of Ford, he transported an entire factory from America to the Soviet Union.
The professor was very helpful and economical with words, thank you both.
This is a well thought out video!
Dr Schmider continually recommends your channel to his Sandhurst students
Great video. From what I know, he had similar view of GB as well. Not as long and, maybe, not as strong. But, from what I understand, Hitler felt he could be allied with the British empire
He was an Anglophile
The perfidy cured him of that too late sadly
Hitler tried to negotiate peace with GB after the fall of France. It was somewhat possible until Churchill was elected and promised to never negotiate.
During WWII American people that identified as having German ancestry was the largest group. The third largest was Italian.
And hundreds of thousands of em signed up to unalive germans. America > pathetic larp
Pay no attention to the large amounts of English and Scots though?
@@jeffkardosjr.3825 English were the second largest group.
@501Mobius English and the Scots are the largest groups.
@jeffkardosjr.3825 genetically. However, german descent Americans have historically identified as German despite often being 1/4 or 1/8 so most records would make you believe we're mostly German.
He did say America was going to be a power house country in the future and ge wasn't wrong.
He wanted to also see America as not the only one in that position of power on the world stage.
Thanks for the detailed explanation about interpreting the sources.
A very interesting video, thanks for making this!
i remember the texts praising america way to dealing with natives and the reservation model as a direct inspiration as it was also the manifest destiny for Lebensraum
Don't forget Jim Crow
yep. hitler and many other nazi officials failed to understand that America's abuse of naitives would be responded to much differently by the european powers than doing the same to poland (A state and peoples who's freedom had been championed for by western powers since the napoleonic era).
Well, Hitler’s actions were nothing similar to the reservation system. So even if he liked it he didn’t model Germany after it
@@fruitingfungi Jim crow isn't about expansion and wouldn't apply to Lebensraum.
@@goldenhate6649 yeah I know. I was adding that Hitler and dem Boyz also used Jim Crow when constructing the Nuremberg Race Laws.
He seriously underestimated the USSR which led to Germany losing the war. The eastern front sapped the limited resources of Germans to the extent that Hitler could not adequately respond to the D-Day invasion at the same time that they needed to hold back the Russians.
The Wehrmacht in general underestimated the Red Army.
@@gumdeo "The Wehrmacht in general underestimated the Red Army."
Not just the Wehrmacht. After the Soviet blunder against Finland the common stance of the world was that the USSR is very weak. Back in the day France was supposed having the strongest army in the world.
No? Axis success in the eastern feon was greater than the most optimistic warplans. What he did underestimate is Stalin's willingness to keep losing land me an matériel and yet not sue for peace.
Def a failure of military intelligence, they thought they would be facing roughly 155 soviet divisions but by the end of Bararossa had Identified 360
It was less an underestimation of the Red Army than an underestimation of the basic humanity of Soviet citizens. The USSR and Stalin knew they couldn't surrender. The Nazis were putting out propaganda saying "Go East, my son!" as a direct mirror to the propaganda the US put out about stealing indigenous land in its west. Their plan, from the beginning, was the elimination of the Soviet Union and all its cultures and their wholesale replacement with Germans.
There's no surrenduring, when presented by that threat. The USSR was going to fight to the last man, woman, and child, to the last pound of steel and drop of oil. Because they would eventually lose all of that anyway in any defeat scenario, so the only option was victory.
The Nazis knew this was their plan, and they invaded because they thought the Soviets weren't really people and wouldn't make the completely rational decision of total, 100% commitment of the entire population to military resistance. That was their failing.
I often wonder how the War would have developed, had the USA pursued a partial mobilization (similar to that of the Germans prior to 1943) for a year or more in 1941. The Germans (and everyone else, with perhaps Churchill being a pointed exception) underestimated the resolve with which the American continent threw themselves economically, politically and socially into Total War immediately upon the reality of Pearl Harbor coming into wider focus.
Probably not much differently. American production, wile a factor in victory, was absolutely not the winning factor in the war. The US troops performed abysmally in North Africa in comparison to the British. Gen. Patton was 100% carried by Gen. Montgomery, the actual mastermind of the final victory in North Africa. The Army throughout the entire war was seen as pitifully incompetent (backed up by how many men were lost on average from their units compared to others). The Marines, however, were excellent.
Secondly, its hard to convince a people of total war, especially when said people desires freedom over all else. FDR was the closest the US came to falling. FDR federalized the housing market, destroyed all black wealth made during the war, and even had a office of censorship whose remnants live on in the FBI and DOJ and continue to control democrat culture even now. The people were fed up with the war after it was obvious we had won both sides and did not believe total war was necessary anymore. Living on rations, being forced to work in factories was wearing on people who wanted to go home, raise kids, and be left alone.
with the way the " battle for the atlantic " was going in 1941-43 , hitler probably didn't think the americans had much of a chance at getting men and equipment over to europe to fight germany. england was in deep trouble with all the ships the u-boats were sinking. it was the japanese that really screwed up by forcing america into the war. both the germans AND the japanese were quite arrogant with regard to american physical and mental capacity to engage in " total war". churchill knew america , because he had been over here visiting and speaking about europe and its problems many times. read " churchill and america ", martin gilbert , 2005.
@@goldenhate6649 Both Roosevelts were the worst presidents this nation has ever seen. They poisoned the philosophy of this nation. Unleashed Pandora’s box.
So Hitler apparently thought different people of Europe really have different RPG stats in their genes, like a Brit is just born with a +10 Sailing?
Yeah, have you missed the whole national socialism part? Turns out that's a pretty big deal in the second world war.
+4 in Longbow too
No, a Brit (Anglo-Saxon) is genetically more predisposed towards having the abilities needed to create social environments where sailing is an activity.
And apparently America was a Gish
This is kinda how eugenics works, yeah [edit: spelling]
True, he did not underestimate the USA, he underestimated the USSR. The German military couldn't handle taking it from both ends...pun intended.
Hitler: "The Americans are an unpredictable lot. When the going gets tough, the English are much braver than the Americans. No comparison at all! Where do the Americans get off accusing the English of anything?"
Me, an Englishman: He's not that bad after all.
Maybe..... the United States wins. In the 1940s there was many Powers now look who's the last one standing
Valuable presentation. Great video!
I always had the impression that his views on a nation depended on who he was aligned with versus who he was in conflict with at the time. Meaning for all his other evil things he was rather practical in the notion of no permanent entangling alliances if that makes any sense. Just like certainly he always said that he had a favorable view of the British people but certainly despised the British government under Winston Churchill because they refused to roll over. And then of course spoke ill later during the war of FDR even though many of the economic planks of FDR's New Deal were not too far removed from domestic economic planks for national socialism.
Fascinating. Great video!
I remember a similar quote from Hitler reported by Jodl according to a French historian. According to him, Hitler told Jodl that the war was lost in early January 1942.
Perhaps Mr. Schmider is referring to the same episode.
Where do we get it from? Jodl's interrogations?
I would be curious to know more about this.
I am not sure if that is necessarily true. Hitler held out hope in negotiating a separate peace with the West.
@@emberfist8347 Still according to this French historian, by lost it was meant that annihilating the Bolshevik state had become impossible at this stage and not that Berlin was going to end up conquered by the Red Army or that the regime was threatened.
(on your response) btw they are still planing on that in 1944 : the war goals as defined before the war won’t be achieved but the Nazis think they will manage to obtain military successes in such a way that they will be able to come out on top.
Our Adi, such a character!
A guess to explain some of it... are the sources for his wartime comments from British sources? They always try to write the history, and it usually involves efforts to completely shift or shape major beliefs.
I really don't blame hitler for being scared of America. As much as he looked up to us for our power, its daunting when a nation like america alone has nearly half of the industrial power on earth. The city I'm from Pittsburgh, literally produced more steel every year than the ENTIRE axis powers combined. That type of superiority would scare me to death
Back when we were great in 1940s
I wonder if the 1936 Summer Olympic Games may have had an influence with Hitler's opinions about the US and Americans?
There are two versions of that story.
In germany they congratulated Jesse Owens and people were really impressed. At least that's what my father told me, who was born in 1936 and heard those stories from his mother (his father passed away in 1945 on the eastern front).
@justicartiberius8782 that's the truth
Germans won the most gold yes
Germany dominated those games (not always in an exactly fair manner). Hitler was not upset about Owens at all because otherwise the Germans did excellent. I mean you can't win EVERYTHING. Fact is Hitler was congratulatory towards Owens while it was FDR who refused to have him at the White House as was initially planned because Owens was black. Basically they thought about bringing Owens to the White House, a few racist Southern politicians had something to say, and FDR quickly caved to the small amount of pressure. The US took a Jewish athlete off their relay team so as not to offend Hitler. Many other countries did similar. Not letting Jews compete even though Germany wasnt putting any pressure on them. A lot of people all over the world were quite happy to go along with and praise Hitler and the Nazis and their racial policies and fascism. A lot of people like Ford or Limbergh who hid their fascist Nazi sympathies behind isolationism. Who, again, praised Hitler before WW2.
Awesome video!!
14:51 LOL, you always pick funny symbols for the visualization, such as, in this case, a slice of pizza to represent the Italians. 😄
That and the AR-15 as the American stereotype symbol.
I bought Hitler’s Fatal Miscalculation a couple of years ago after listening to the Dr. on this channel, and I can't recommend it enough. I had to read many of the pages twice because my brain couldn't keep up with my eyes.
The first ww2 documentary i watched stated clealy that privately he was immensely disappointed by the pearl harbour attacks because he knew it was big trouble for germany
His opinions in general are not really allowed to be heard because they generally just make sense.
Of course, he wanted Japan to attack the USSR instead.
Not really. Afrika corps was already fighting US (unofficially) in Africa. MHV has done a video on that, watch it
@@HateBear-real bullshit.
I’d love to see the source on that because I don’t think it’s true. It doesn’t make any sense since Hitler decided to declare war on the US.
If he thought it was trouble then he didn’t need to declare war. He actually thought things were proceeding great at the time. He thought the Soviets were about to collapse and thought war with the US was inevitable.
Thanks to all you thanked and in an adult, heads-up manner.
Hitler didn't, but Xi Jinping did underestimate the United States.
No, I think he knows he can beat the American economy, China has almost everything it needs.
Thank you, that was very informative.
7:30 Even in the modern day with immigration from all around the globe, H-man kinda has a point.
Most newer Americans come from the absolute cream of the crop of their ancestors. The best most talented from Europe and Asia immigrate to the US.
While not entirely genetic quality. The cultural quality of being an country of immigrants keeps the drive, cunning, and competition of the Nation alive.
Valuable traits that usually diminish when the population doesn't have frequent shocks.
He always had good points. How else do you think he ever got in power? The only reason all the censorship and butthurt exists today clearly wouldn't exist if there were not legitimate points being made. Who is threatened by someone if they truly make no sense? Someone with no valid points isn't a threat at all, especially not someone already vanquished. Look at what people do, not what they say, especially when they are not free to speak properly.
Thank you for the video!
isn’t the fact that he lost Morocco, Southern Italy, Southern France, Normandy, etc. a prime indicator he did infact underestimate the US?
You should go read Adam Tooze. Germany was very well aware of the industrial aspect of the war. They understood beating Americans was a long shot but decided giving it a try was worth it.
Well he also lost Berlin. Lol
@@0thPAg why declare war though? Japan would be better off at war with the USSR.
I see the words of Carl Schmitt and Evola in some of those quotes.
The fact is that Germany, Japan and Italy, if you believe that they were really out to conquer an empire for themselves weren't doing anything that the British, French, Americans, Belgians, Dutch yes even the Kaiserreich Germans were doing only 50 years earlier. Hypocrisy never ends!
Unlike the Germans, we did not murder six million jews, to say nothing of the millions of others Germany murdered
Yes but litterally nobody cares, because were American, and naturally were gonna say America is good.
Your free to believe what you want. Nothings stopping you.
Whats worse is betraying your people in favor of some goofy moral reasoning.
Hitler did underestimate the US. That is partly prejudice, he thought that "national will" was an important factor in war. But more pointedly, he fundamentally misunderstood how completely such dull matters as industrial output, resource availability, good logistics and so forth are basically determinative in modern war. In the end, the Allies were pointedly not walking, but rather driving, all over Germany. Literally. That's resource dominance.
Hitler when European peoples mix - >:(
Hitler when Americans mix - :D
The south sucks
USA was far more Nordic than Europe was...
@@gumdeopretty much german and Anglo/ celtic at the time
The Wages of Destruction by Adam Tooze (2006) is still really interesting on Hitler's views on the US.
Hitler's delusions are on full display in this book. He constantly talks about racial value while minimizing or outright denying materialist explanations.
This is not really a falsifiable statement as you could make the exact opposite point and it would be just as valid. It's the classic nature vs. nurture argument where both have rougly a 50% influence of predicting outcomes for people.
Magnificent content
Based on this, you can't say Hitler properly estimated US capabilities or overestimated them. And if he didn't estimate accurately or overestimated, then he underestimated(but maybe not as much as thought).
Yeah this is contrarian trash, channel blocked
Mr. Schmider is the most german person i've seen
To be fair, in general Hitler, along with many other German generals and officials, didn't underestimate the Western Allies, unsurprisingly given it was UK, France, and American that dealt them a hard blow at the end of WW1. Hence he always had planned to go East and tried to avoid conflicts with the West, but the UK and France didn't allow Germany to go anywhere and as such he had no choice - Germany in late 1930s simply had no room to navigate out of the cage set up by the last war treaty of Versailies.
They did. Don’t go gobbling up half the continent was all they needed to do to avoid the “trap”.
@@emberfist8347war with the USSR was inevitable. Look at who "gobbled up" half of Europe at the war's end.
Churchill was a warhawk and is almost singularly responsible for the death of that empire.
@@betrayer1350 No the death of that Empire was the Suez Crisis after Churchill left office. And the USSR only got gooble up half of Europe because Hitler gave Stalin the provocation. It was inevitable only because the Nazis couldn't stand the USSR existing.
@@emberfist8347 That's a bit inaccurate on the Soviet aggression on Eastern Europe - The USSR ambition on expanding further into Europe was already there and in no means "provoked" by Germany as if it was some excuses - Or else why would the Soviets started Winter War with Finland in the Arctic Circle? And then there was the reason why most of Eastern Europe lend a hand to Germany on its Ost invasion - Hungary, Romania, Baltic states - they were all threatened by the expanding USSR states.
And then a bit of illusion that Germany "had a choice" in avoiding the trap - other than taking back its Rhineland the rest of Germany progress was towards the East, and away from UK and France - and they declared war on Germany either way
In fact it was the declaration of war from UK and France provoked Germany to occupy most of Europe continent, rather than other way around - Belgium, Norway, France, Denmark, etc, Germany had to occupy these countries or else the Allies would and surrounded Germany effectively.
@ Stop you Nazi apologist. You got it all wrong. Germany didn’t need to expand. And the main reason Ost Batallions exist is because the Nazis conscripted them from the areas they occupied including the Baltic States. Romania joined because they agreed to hand Germany the keys to their economy and Hungary was a sore loser after World War I like Germany. Also the Winter War was fought with Finland you know the former client state of the Russian Empire. And they weren’t even asking for the whole nation.
And why did France and Britain declare war? Oh yeah Germany invaded Poland to seize an internationally recognized free city aware that the Allies were not happy with Germany annexing multiple nations and how Hitler constantly lied such as annexing Czechoslovakia when the Munich Agreement said he could only have certain parts of it and claiming he was done with territorial expansion.
I think Hitler took advice from Donitz on the lack of American anti submarine defenses.
He figured he could cripple the US merchant fleet severely limiting America's power projection. Donitz came real close to doing that.
Most Euros and even a few Americans don't so it's not that unusual
Is the duck and bunny at 15:42 an homage to that optical illusion that's both at once? Cuz that's genuine (oh wait... rabbits are fast?? Still lol)
He and most of his staff underestimated the Soviet capacity by about 50%
Its not that they didn't think the Soviets could get powerful, but he didn't think the Soviets could get powerful before he gave them a knockout blow. He knew time was against him.
@@mouthpiece200 Initially they estimated the amount of Soviet divisions to about 140, when it fact it were 220. Btw Goering and Raeder were strongly against the invasion.
I would say the axis and central powers always underestimated the Americans. We hadn’t proven our self much yet, they also thought we wouldn’t be involved. Remember, at the beginning and the middle of the wars, America was neutral, giving them the false belief we wouldn’t join the war, not one but twice. Surprise is one of the main principles of battle
Hitler was a gambler, and often acted on impulse - declaring war on the USA was one such example. His knowledge of the USA was very basic, having never been there, and relied purely on books and even comics that he read as a boy. His main reason to declare war on the USA was that he accepted that he would have to fight them as well, and he also wanted to solidify the alliance with Japan by joining them in their war. Lastly, he was being pressurised by the navy chiefs to allow German U-Boats free rein in the Atlantic. Hitler was well aware of American industrial might, but doubted that they could intervene in Europe for a couple of years, by which time the Soviet Union would be defeated and he would be ready to deal with America. He was of course totally wrong, and it took just less than a year for American troops to land in north Africa, while Germany's campaign against the Soviet Union was doomed at Stalingrad.
Germany had the worst allies ever in Italy and Japan 😅. Japan didn't even help fight the Soviets at all!
America never had industrial might remember everything there were using was pre ww1 .. that's not industrial might
Everything the Americans was selling the allies from ww1 .
Hitler never made a mistake declaring war on America.
@@stevecooper7883 Actually they had better ones, Hungary, Romania, and even Finland on the Eastern Front, though it seems since fighting American was a pre-requisite for being mentioned in Western WW2 history at all they were often overlooked -Pretty much most Eastern Europe countries not occupied were on Axis side fighting the Soviets, and many contributed way more than the other two of the "Big Three Axis"
@@stevecooper7883 The Japanese were dealt a bloody nose by the Soviets during the Soviet-Japanese Border Wars, particularly at Khalkhin Gol, with both sides eventually signing a neutrality pact (that was later broken by the Soviets when they invaded Manchuria.)
Hitler was well-aware that the Soviets were being supplied millions of tons of resources and war material by the Americans, and yet he did not order his U-boats to unleash hell in the Atlantic before declaring war, because he had put his signature on that piece of paper called the Geneva Conventions.
Given the state of the US in the 1920s (huge racial tensions, Jim Crowe Laws riots, arguably the nadir of race relations in the US since the US CiviL War) it says much that Hitler viewed it as "a role model"
These quotes seem very reasonable for someone history has portrayed as unhinged.
Just because he could make reasonable assessments of governmental policy doesn't mean he couldn't commit some of the most heinous acts of butchery in history. You don't become a popular figurehead by being completely irrational. As the US Navy teaches it: Hitler was a great leader, he got millions of people to follow him, but he was an absolutely horrific person.
Also, he wasn't on meth yet.
Honestly take away the racism, and he doesn't seem that unhinged in all honesty.
Your average dude would tweak tf out if they saw their country undergo Weimar conditions.
Hitlers biggest blunder was being nostalgic and invading France/Britain, and not focusing his efforts onto eradicating the USSR.
I would much prefer a cold war with Germany than one with the USSR.
We would be fighting our wars on Mars instead of in the sandbox if we weren't in the bad timeline.
he was probably quite a bit more intelligent than the average modern western european or american
But they did underestimate America. They knew we had enormous capabilities, but thought we were soft. I believe it was Goering that said "All the Americans know how to make are refrigerators and razor blades"
That comment about America being a depraved and corrupt state was way ahead of its time.
That's what rac..ist fashies think. U're the problem.
Not really. Think of lawless, corrupt Chicago in the roaring 20s.
Listen to "hitlers warning to the usa translated to english"
You will get chills
@@l7986 cause NAZI Germany was so much more moral, right?
@@l7986 do you know why he formed that opinion?
Carl Sagan himself reincarnated for this episode :D
Actually, we talked on the phone and he told me “US war production potential is nothing. Nein, it is nozzing!” I said “woah, Addy baby. Chill.”
Super interesting!
He was under the impression that his reverse engineering programs were fast enough for them to make a ship that could change the war.
US armed forces prior to WW2 maybe 250k but by the end of WW2 the armed forces was 8-10 million. 17 million Americans served during WW2 and most served overseas.
I never knew that Hitler wrote or dictated a second book. It does not make a lot of sense why Hitler declared war on December 11, 1941 on the United States (in hindsight) and much to the relief of Churchill. except as pressure via the Anti-comintern Pact that Germany signed with Japan in September 1940 for Germany to fulfill it's Axis alliance obligations.
It is true that the Americans would not be able to do much (in Europe) in 1942 as their armament procurement and manpower recruitment had only started in 1940 for their army and air force, but later in the war (if there were no collapse of the Soviet Union that the Nazis and Wehrmacht had contrariwise expected), the increasing pressure that the Americans in concert with the British was going to be a serious problem for Nazi Germany in 1943. Hitler was reactionary in that December 1941; his armies stood at the gate of Moscow and it looked as if the end of the Soviet Union was ney.
Also noted in this video that Hitler and the Nazis geopolitical views were always tainted by ideology. Using idology as a filter for rational decision making was unhelpful.
It misaligned with Japan unnecessarily.. fr. Declaring war on the US after that literally moved back the frontline towards Germany reversing liebensbraun.
"oh hitler was positive about the us in '20? was it the racism and eugenics" "it was racism and eugenics"
It was the American people which Hitler was positive about.
@@EricNapoli-z3dspecifically their racism and eugenics
@@Bobdd0 Ok based American people
@@Bobdd0 based american people
The USSR was a bigger model
It seems very unwise, in the long term, to distort history to make him seen more villainous. Education on him is inconsistent across generations, and many young people feel lied to, which makes his positions seem more justified to them.
Generally speaking, the world view of socialists on US was largely painted by anti-monarchism, french revolutionary idealism and the idea of preference of republics over monarchies and therefore was not initially hostile.
The Cold War era perspectives weren't established in stone yet as US wasn't yet the pillar of global status quo which the revolutionary socialists always sought to tear down regardless of whom enforced it.
Now Hitler had his own racial doctrine of socialist totalitarianism which might focus more on racial legislation on US, but the values which dominated in Europe at the time were focused on the viability of imperialism and monarchy.
Ultimately fascism and marxism were both cut from same revolutionary cloth hoping to elevate society to a position of strength by establishing a state that has full control of economy, which is where the main point of difference between American Republic and New Ambitious European Republics would emerge.
At the time, they all sought an answer to the same question, that of contesting those old imperial powers with US being at forefront of doing so successfully. After British empire collapsed however and other Imperial powers began dropping like flies, this paradigm no longer was truly relevant. Europe also began favoring cooperation above wars over territory which considerably lowered the political pressures that favored authoritarian thinking.
US became the global hegemon, and therefore target for revolutionary ire.
Hitler just over-estimated Germany’s capabilities.
I am starting to believe Hitler is getting rehabilitated
Supposedly his final words were, "My spirit will rise from the ashes and they will know that I was right"
It takes about 100 years for these things to truly change.
@@gumdeo yeah
And we are seeing it with our eyes
I am genuinely shock
@@elarmino6590what are you guys talking about I’m genuinely curious
Time passes and people start to forget some details of history, then the part that isn't forgotten is remembered more by the people in the future and then history repeats...
Lebensraum, that is the fundamental idea Hitler once used as a banner to lead the germans, that is the part of Hitler going to be remembered and rehabilated by the future humankind
‘ You veelll sign zee papers’ 😂
“Stereotypical views of the USA”
*AR15 Icon*
Its important to remeber that Hitler never visited north america. Travel solves ignorance.
Hitler literally said he wanted to emulate the US on what they did to the natives, disparaged Spain for not doing the same "all of America could've been 100% white or near white" (paraphrasing) and he wanted to replicate it with the Slavs.
Where did he say he wanted to get rid of slavs
@@didymussumydid9726 His book series that shall not be named
@@NathanDudani page number then?
@@didymussumydid9726 in Generalplan Ost he basically laid the plans for the colonisation of eastern Europe displacing and killing the mayority of slavs living there
@@didymussumydid9726 Generalplan Ost guaranteed the deaths of millions of Slavs based on food supplies. Since the political assumption behind the plan was eventual German colonization of the East, I doubt that it would have been the end of the decimation.
Another really good deep div
so because hitler sometimes said nice things about the US, he therefore didnt underestimate it?
clearly hitler did underestimate the US in some areas, you even said in the video that he underestimates the US ability to switch between peace and wartime economies
💯 check out the WW2 channel's recent video WW2 By The Numbers. The allied vs axis GDP ratio started at 2.5:1 and dramatically grew as the war carried on. Not to mention the allies' focus on developing the atom bomb...
Edit: also check out their video "Interview with a German WW2 Veteran." The veteran recounts that when The war began his father told him to go and get his school textbooks for a discussion. As a family they looked over the international production statistics, and his father showed them how much more the rest of the allies/neutral countries could produce. His father explained that Germany's only hope for victory would be a swift, limited war. He described how if the United States were able to tool up production and enter the war that they would lose. If it was this obvious to this ordinary upper middle class German family, I would say that Hitler very much underestimated not just the United States but the Allies in general.
@@suddenwall GDP doesn't translate into being able to win a prolonged war with the European continent.
Uncle Adi loved American movies & Henry Ford
Nothing has changed in 100 years, we have still political enforced ridiculous wages.
With tariffs we could largely get rid of minimum wage bc we wouldn't be in wage competition with literal slav3ry in Asia.
Hitler's willingness to go to war was based on two assumptions, ironically the same as the Kaiser made in WWI; that is, that it would take the U.S. about a year to fully mobilize and intervene in the European/African theater; and secondly, that Germany would win the war before then. Both times, the assumption that the U.S. intervention would take a year was correct (Pearl Harbor in December of 41, and the Invasion of North Africa 11 months later in November); but Germany was unable to defeat her other adversaries in that time. I think, if you could visit Hitler and get a few beers down his gullet, he would have to admit that there was no way for Germany to win as soon as America showed up in strength.
But Adi's a teetotaller :)
Kaiser was forced to war. He did everything is his power to avoid the War.
@@edgarhilbert4797 Except maybe invading neutral Belgium, which brought England and eventually America into the war.
@@davidfinch7407 Belgium "invaded" first, as it allowed the French Air Force to use it's air space.
@@edgarhilbert4797 Never heard that and can't find it by googling it. If you could provide a reference I'd appreciate it. But even if true, Belgium was a sovereign country and can let anyone they want fly over their territory; this would not give Germany a legitimate cause for war. Also, even if it's true, the Germans were following the Schlieffen plan, which showed that the Germans intended to invade France through the low countries. This plan was in place decades before the start of the war, so your thoughts that Germany would have left Belgium alone except for the French air force flying over them at the start of the war is impossible. This was so obvious a move by Germany that Britain attempted to keep the peace by guaranteeing Belgian neutrality; the Kaiser ignored it, calling the treaty "a mere scrap of paper", and he therefore brought down the wrath of the entire British Empire down on Germany. This would be a pretty odd decision to make for a Kaiser who was doing everything he could to keep the peace.