German Army: Why No Collapse
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 лис 2020
- The Wehrmacht during the Second World War sustained two times the deaths of the Imperial German Army in the First World War, yet it did not collapse, quite on the contrary it fought until the bitter end. Why was this the case? Why did the Wehrmacht and particularly the German Army did not collapse in the Second World War.
Disclaimer: I received a pre-release ebook of Prof. Neitzel’s Book “ Deutsche Krieger. Vom Kaiserreich zur Berliner Republik - eine Militärgeschichte ”.
»» SUPPORT MHV ««
» patreon - see videos early (adfree) - / mhv
» subscribe star - www.subscribestar.com/mhv
» paypal donation - paypal.me/mhvis
» UA-cam Membership - / @militaryhistoryvisual...
»» MERCHANDISE ««
» teespring - teespring.com/stores/military...
» SOURCES «
Neitzel, Sönke: Deutsche Krieger. Vom Kaiserreich zur Berliner Republik - eine Militärgeschichte. Propyläen: Berlin, Germany, 2020.
McBree, Brendan B.: Improving Unit Cohesion: The First Step in Improving Marine Corps Infantry Battalion Capabilities. 23 May 2002.
www.2ndbn5thmar.com/coh/mcbree...
OKH: H.Dv. 130/2a: Die Schützenkompanie. Ausbildungsvorschrift für die Infanterie - Heft 2a. Verlag „Offene Worte“, Berlin, Germany, 16. März 1941.
Overmans, Rüdiger: Deutsche militärische Verluste im Zweiten Weltkrieg. R. Oldenbourg Verlag: München, Germany, 2004.
Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg - Band 9 / 1 - Deutsche Kriegsgesellschaft 1939 bis 1945.
Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg - Band 9 / 2 - Deutsche Kriegsgesellschaft 1939 bis 1945.
Yelton, David K.: Hitler’s Volkssturm. The Nazi Militia and the Fall of Germany 1944-1945. Kansas University Press: Kansas, US, 2002.
Biddle, Tami Davis: On the Crest of Fear: V-Weapons, the Battle of the Bulge, and the Last Stages of World War II in Europe. In: The Journal of Military History. Vol. 83, No. 1, January 2019.
Yelton, David K.: Hitler’s Volkssturm. The Nazi Militia and the Fall of Germany 1944-1945. Kansas University Press: Kansas, US, 2002.
Mawdsley, Evan: Thunder in the East. The Nazi-Soviet War 1941-1945. Second Edition. Bloomsbury: London, 2016.
www.cmohs.org/medal/faqs, last accessed: 19th October 2020
National Defense Research Institute: Sexual Orientation and U.S. Military Personnel Policy. An Update of RAND’s 1993 Study, RAND Corporation: CA, USA, 2010.
www.rand.org/content/dam/rand...
#Wehrmacht,#WhyNoCollapse,#GermanArmyWW2
Because they knew that Steiner was preparing his counterattack
Lol
Yes, but I heard Steiner konnte nicht genügend Kräfte für einen Angriff massieren and der Angriff Steiners ist nicht erfolgt
@@user-xq5og9lt8p yes, but the Volksschturm battalions still hold the bridgea
lollllllllllllll
Is this Downfall or Cross of Iron? Both great movies.
“Tis’ but a scratch”
“Your bloody 6th army’s off!”
“No it isn’t”
[separates Germany into east and west]
"Right, we'll call it draw"
XD
@@cleanerben9636 hahaha facts
Come along, Patsy
Is that Ricky Gervais?
*1944*
*UA-cam censored name* : ''How bad it is?''
*german HQ* : ''Like 2 Stalingrads and then some.''
Mein Gott!
"UA-cam censored name" 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Barbarossa, Army group North and South had priority, Hitler wanted Leningrad, and the occupation of the Ukraine(food, minerals, etc). But Halder foolishly prioritized Army group centre, as if Moscow's capture would have resulted in collapse for the Red Army. No, cut the Don & Volga= Seperation of Caucasus from Russia= This would allow Germany to continue the war at full capacity, no scaling down of operations due to fuel shortage.
@@harrisonlincoln8343 Even if Army group South achieved reaching Caucasus, Soviet will blow up any oil installation.
And as german was already struggling to supply their troop so far away, bringing oil back would increase logistical problems ...
@@harrisonlincoln8343 Germany had no fuel shortages until September 1944 when the Romanian refineries were destroyed by allies flying over from Italy. German production continued to rise until this incident. Synthetic fuels accounted for over half of the fuel usage and until this incident German reserves continued to rise. A rise in reserves up until Sept 1944 indicates there was no shortage like you are expressing in your opinion which was more of a late 1942/early 43 period.
16:31
Maybe the true Wunderwaffe were the friends we made along the way?
😂
Simple, they chose to keep Prussia's ideas of 150% discipline
*150%
eu4 references are cringe at this point
@@kamilvankravv5524 Indeed they are at- Oh! Did you see that comet?! THE END TIMES ARE NEAR!
And honor plus the Russians were coming.
Yeah the German idea set is not good.
"Four brave men who do not know each other will hesitate to attack a lion; four less brave men, but knowing and trusting each other, will do resolutely."
Damn I haven't heard a concept explained so succinctly in a long long while.
Do you realize that says more about your reading habits than the statement?
@@johnsmith1474 no need for that mate. I also thought this was deftly done.
To understand a complex idea is smart.
To summarise and explain the same is true genius
@@JackTalyorD Fully agree.
@@johnsmith1474 Mind sharing a reading list so that we can all reach your intellectual heights? From your comment, it sounds like you’ve transcended the limits of human understanding.
I never knew that about the cohesion. They were so ahead of the time. Contrastingly, the Americans constantly rotated men in Vietnam in order to prevent the drop in morale, creating a trend where no one cared about anyone as they were all strangers to one another. Fascinating.
Makes perfect sense when you think about Vietnam was a war to sustain for MIC, not to win.
Sometimes it can work. The french army rotate in Verdun and without that, I don't think they could resist the german offensives.
@@mitridi8422 I think Verdun could very well be the worst possible battlefield to be for the entire history, right next to Stalingrad. Kind of an outlier
The romans made their troops cook and sleep together, this isn’t like, super ahead of the time
@Fish poem Same thing with Afghanistan basicallt
Another thing sometimes overlooked is that, for all intents and purposes, many of the soldiers of the Wehrmacht believed themselves to be fighting in a literal end-of-the world scenario for survival, so of course they would fight harder.
You mean throw down their arms and run harder .
You mistook them for French soldiers
Any sources on that or are you just LARPing ? lol
@@TheAtmosfear7 antony beevor mentions this in his book about D-Day the german propaganda machine was extremely powerful on making their soldiers believe the german nation and its people would be utterly destroyed if defeated
@@martimnunesmartinho6788 they were and still are.
Germany 1944-45: "Yeah, that's me, you're probably wondering how I got myself into this mess."
@Deborah Meltrozo mess*
"It all started with an Art School that didn't like Architectural Paintings..."
@@ragnarokstravius2074 “it all started with a guy named Charlemagne...”
“Wait what? What’s that gotta do with the Wehrmacht?”
“WE GET THERE WHEN WE GET THERE!”
cue teenage waste land.
Small hat tribe banksters, that's how.
There is a book called "The Forgotten Soldier" by Guy Sajer, a german-french draftee at the Eastfront after Stalingrad. And his experiences seem to confirm most of the points here: For large parts of the war he fought with the same guys and while he is often very critical about the treatment of the soldiers by their own army (stuff like three of his comrades dying in basic training (!)), he is mostly describing his officers as fair and competent. He is also quit clear that apparently the execution of soviet prisoners was absolute normality and they expected every german soldier to be in turn instantly executed, therefor explaining much of their will to resist.
Great book that, agree with what you say
" they expected every german soldier to be in turn instantly executed"
You mean every SS soldier?
@@simplicius11 Guy Sajer (pen name) wasn't in the SS but he was part of an Elite Formation for a while and he comments that both sides were unbelievably brutal to each other, prisoner or not kinda just depended if you surrendered to a particularly angry unit
@@simplicius11 Not just the SS committed atrocities against prisoners of war, partisans and civilians, especially on the Eastern front.
@@simplicius11 Soviet don't care if they're SS or not they're give all enemies same kind of treatment.
Could you do a video on the German medical system? Including the transport of a wounded man from the frontline to hospital and how individual medics were deployed with fighting units
got some sources etc. on it and did some reading in summer, it will happen eventually.
@@MilitaryHistoryVisualized ua-cam.com/video/wT8RPphCtiw/v-deo.html
There is a german book called „die unsichtbare flagge“ ( the invisible flag)
by peter bamm on this subject. It is a first hand account of bamm, a field medic on the eastern front through most of the war.
@@pedersackheim4913 BUENOS ARIANS ARGENTINIEN ÜBER ALLES
@Oke Ihenacho youre wrong. Mengele and combat medics dont have snything in common. One was killing people and the other one was saving his friends and fellow soldiers, sometimes they helped civilians
The concept of keeping soldiers from similar areas together to create cohesion sounds a lot like the British “Pals battalions” of WW1. Seems a great idea until someone calls for a less than ideal offensive and a town loses all of its young men in one go.
Better get those baby makers ready
Dude right. I remember a german soldier who survived speaking about hearing his best friend cry for him, wounded on the battlefield. They sent in medics and three tanks to save him but the tanks and the medics also didnt return. He could hear his best friend screaming in pain and all the time repeating his own name. He says he cant sleep in till this day wirhout hearing his then best friend cry for him.
I would not like to go to war losing my best friends there. Lets never go to war again my fellas.
The German Wehrkreise encompassed a much larger area than the recruitment areas that the pals battalions came from, which meant that something like that wouldn't happen as easily. Still, due to the gigantic overall losses many of the small towns and villages lost a large proportion of their young men that much is true.
Bro that idea is old as fuck, Swedish army used it already in the 1600's
It was probaly a far greater area Probaly even as big as half as a state
My two grandfathers fought in the Wehrmacht. One was the driver of a panzer 4 and later Panther. He always said he and his comrades didn't want to fight any longer, however they only surrenderd when their commander gave them the permission in late 1944. He said they were lucky to surrender to the Americans. Fighting on the western and not eastern front probably saved his live.
A lady who was a friend of a Dutch Panzer driver for the SS
Saw Russian women castrating captured German soldiers
@@brandbienedell7971 oof.. and another war crime. I could think about it like a continuation of the Russian morale fed by fury: « We will exist despite your attempt at the extermination and inflict immeasurable pain onto you»
@@kosatochca Can't tell if you're being ironic or Russian.
Family was from East Prussia. All of my grandfather’s brothers never came back and they evacuated in 46.
Be proud as you fought like tigers right to the end, im British but have the upmost respect for Germany & your grandfathers 👍
"Why don't they just quit?"
"Would you?"
If the opposite does
If the germans had any sense then they would have sought peace with the soviets in late 1942 or early 1943. When the soviets still were considering it. After Tehran though, in late 1943, that was out of the question. At Tehran the allies agreed to not accept a separate peace with germany, they agreed to only accept an unconditional peace, and they somewhat outlined how post war germany would look.
@@beninwarrior4579 I think they were still underestimating the soviets in 43. In the beginning, at least. I don't think that was really an option either. They controlled almost all of Europe and now they're just gonna suddenly pull millions of troops out of the east and hope to god that the soviets don't attack?
that would never happen.
@@ProfShibe Stalin was apparently preparing to attack in 1949 after he had finished industrializing his country. He also thought Hitler was smart enough not to attack the Soviet Union while fighting the British. Stalin was wrong.
@@Samm815 Hitler sued for peace with Churchill more than once, was turned down every time. The Brits wanted to drag the US into it (again), and Hitler knew Stalin was going to attack sooner or later and figured a preemptive strike before they finished industrializating would be better than waiting for the inevitable red tide after they grew too strong.
I seem to remember reading somewhere (maybe Beevor) that the Wehrmacht soldiers were also scared shitless of being captured by the Red army. And i mean, given the choice of fighting to the death and spending the rest of their lives in a gulag...
@@vivaan7653 they also saw what the Russians did to the Russians . If they could do that to their own people imagine what they’d do to the enemy .
The Russian POWs were left to starve to death by the Germans, so the Germans could only expect the same.
It is unlikely that they would have got to a Gulag. Those that weren’t killed on capture were starved
POW of Soviets never spent the rest of their lives in camps. Yes, some died, but what can you expect from a country that was half-destroyed, with thousands of cities and villages burnt to ground with people living there?
@@strakhovandrri we learn lesson. Everyone is homosexual now.
Had an insight as a child growing up that if you want people to die for your country, have a population that trusts each other implicitly. Flavor that trust with respect and intimacy. That way, you create a sentiment, a feeling worth fighting for until the bitter end. External pressure, applied from a chain of command or coercion applied from without will rarely, if ever, achieve the same result.
The soviets still managed to defeat the germans
@Pig Mask No soviet trusted any other soviet. Especially not after Stalin's purges. The fear of death still drove them forward and routed the Germans.
If you want a loyal army, you need ideals. Country, trust, belief, hope; Whatever ideal you use isn't important what matters is that the troops believe the ideal. The German ideal was other soldiers, the Soviet ideal was the homeland as a whole.
@@user-gu1hl2kx2k -- with unlimited funding from the West and a demoralized drone population. We'll never know the magnitude of Soviet war crimes, but knowing only a fraction of it can make any man greatly enjoy the bundle of sticks
Do you have a very high IQ? This is a complicated concept beautifully explained!
Sorta like post-911 America but permanently
Chainsword! There is also a scene in "Downfall", which Hitler and his loyalists were doomed in the final days, but he still comes out of his bunker for a few minutes to award a young German boy-soldier with a Knights Cross, I think for destroying a tank.
SEVERAL tanks!
The scene and movie u are talking about ua-cam.com/video/oThJTLpZWlA/v-deo.html
What's truly amazing, that even at the end, Hitler could visit the frontline without fear of being shot by his own men. Now compare that to the so called 'leaders' of today.
@@harrisonlincoln8343 Probably because of that darn propaganda, and not the fact that they were fighting the most gruesome terror regime humanity has ever experienced. Oh, and of course - its enablers -- us.
@@harrisonlincoln8343 No no, therer were a large amount of his army who tried to kill him. He, i think, survived around 40 assasination attempts.
I think you forgot one MAJOR reason for maintaining cohesion. You should have added that during the last months of the war German soldiers were defending their own home land, the places where they grew up, their own families. Especially at the eastern front where German soldiers feared for their own families due to the fate many eastern families suffered during German occupation. German soldiers knew about what had happened - scorched earth was almost harmless in comparison.
This stabilized or even increased the morale to keep fighting, defending in particular. Much in contrast to WW-I where German soldiers kept occupying/defending foreign soil in FraBeNeLux.
I thought about this for a bit and i asked myself: if this was only about fighting for you country, why didn't the french fight harder? Or the polish army. Of course they fought bravely in many battles. But if you look at the statistics for example in Poland you see that of 1.000.000 Men in the Army, 66.000 died, ~700.000 were captured, 133.000 were wounded and around 100.000 seemingly were able to get away. Not really an example of fighting to the last men for your home country.
I'm sure they didn't lack courage. So what was it that made them incapable of fighting on after their chain of command and supply line was brought down? I think it was indeed the unit organization. German squads were trained to fight and think independently even if they lost contact to the rest of their battalion. If you're not trained to fight without orders, what will you do? If you then bring in good unit cohesion, like described in this video, it explains why those squads, separated from their leaders wouldn't just give up. They'd try to withdraw and gather somewhere else. They'd also try to damage the enemy if they see an easy target. Or - if they cannot get away - they'd just fight on to the last man. It would turn the battlefield into a enormous guerilla operation with hundreds of thousands of little squads trying to kill you wherever you go and turn it into living hell for the enemy.
@@kln1 well for one, the germans defeated the french very quickly and didn't treat them or the population badly so the french had no good reason to fight to the last. The germans however knew how the Sovjets would just massacre and rape their families and how they'd get killed in captivity and they knew how russians treated each other plus they knew of the insanity of communism. Quite a lot of reasons to fight. Germans weren't nearly as motivated to defeat the Americans and British since they mutually treated each other well and respected military code. Germans frequently surrendered with only few or even no losses to the allies, something they'd never do to sovjets. The solution would have been to have the germans not surrender but withdraw all troops to the eastern front while allowing the usa and uk to take over Germany. The war could have ended a lot sooner like that. Another theory would be if the allies had not supported Russia and left Germany alone doing its thing, Germany could have defeated the russians and then subsequently the germans would have lost further reasons to fight and would have gradually yielded control back to the population of occupied territories with pressure from the allies. They' would have deposed of Hitler anyway, just a question of time really, particularly troops returning home would have been keen to just waltz in and kick him out. Plans were actually made for that, thousands had already planned on fighting the SS and storming the capitol. I think a really big problem was how the allies killed so many german civilians. They couldn't be trusted as also proven by the actions of the us government in the years after the war, they irresponsibly pushed civilization very close to a all out nuclear war, tested bombs on their own populations and own soldiers and until this day have pulled Sheanigans meddling in other countries causing wars and mischief. In other words had the allies been such angels like they were portrayed to be in Hollywood movies, the germans might have never bothered fighting them so intensely. In all honesty who really trusts the us government, even their own people don't, what do us citizens fear the most? their government.
@Lex Bright Raven Joseph Goebbels told the Germans in his total war speech that if the Germans lost the war the Soviets would rape and kill their families. He was right, I'd hardly call that propaganda. The only propaganda here is the ones propagated by the Allied powers. 2 million German women raped from ages 6 to 60. Don't be gross and defend this, I'd fight to the death too
@@kln1 I’d say the Germans held a significant advantage in maneuverability, allowing them to capture and encircle entire enemy armies. Essentially cutting huge portions of enemy combatants out of the fight. The Soviet Union generally could not out-maneuver the Germans-especially on their home territory. It simply became an unstoppable force hitting an immovable object. Not only that, but the German army had more squad autonomy-whereas once the officers fell in the French or Polish, the Unit would begin to fall apart while the German army had sufficient NCOs. At least in my view.
@@witoldschwenke9492 > didn't treat them or the population badly
(except the French Jews)
when your army fights to the end thats a true loyal army
Or truly fanatic
Or truly desperate
@@vake1234
Bullshit.
They defend there family's and th want to protect Germany.
@@konradlllstaufer156 Nah, if Germany would have surrendered early on or the soldiers would have rebelled, Dresden and other places might have survived. Nobody was protected by the ongoing war, they brought shame to the country by not rebelling against a leadership that had lost their minds.
@@dabozzcrg i am sure you would have rebelled.
Really? Loyalty to the Nazi cause? Ah, that's absolutely wrong! They were under a brutal Dictatorship and were forced to fight. There was nothing loyal about it. Now SOPHIE SCHOLL should be a SAINT! Her and the White Rose group are heros. They made the ultimate sacrifice.
More troops died in captivity, rather than on the battlefield. More after 1945 when the war was already over. Many knew what is coming and preferred to fight to the bitter end.
Check out the channel Crocodile Tear. Excavation of mass burial of German fatalities in Austria.
Not true, around 430k-500k german soldiers died in captivity, whereas, 5.3M German soldiers died during WW2
@@bussolini6307 source ?
Source?
ua-cam.com/video/rS_59PHhO4M/v-deo.html
That little symbol for "fanaticism"... was that a 40K chain sword? How appropriate!
It is the emperors will!
@@principedelamuerte3235 you mean the "fuhrers" will
word
Myes
Nah bruh not only that. I need you to know when he surrender that means he Will get shot or get captured by SS and go to jail they cant go to home.
Ich wollte dir immer schon mal schreiben, dass ich deine Videos klasse finde. Ich höre mir deine Videos ganz gerne beim Kochen oder bei langen Autofahrten an. Es ist schon bemerkenswert, wie viel Recherchearbeit du in deine Videos reinsteckst. Auch das Angeben von Quellen ist einfach der Hammer. So eine Qualität sieht man selten auf UA-cam.
Ich freue mich schon auf dein nächstes Video.
For those viewers who do not speak German:
"Ive always wanted to tell you, that i think your videos are great. I like to listen to your videos while cooking or on long drives. It's remarkable how much work goes into the research for your videos. The naming of sources is easily the best aspect. Such quality is seldom seen on youtube"
Sorry if my translation isn't perfect, I'm not a native speaker
@@Roronoa79 Thank you.
Ich finde es sehr traurig, dass ein UA-cam der das als hobby macht, mehr arbeit und recherche da rein steckt als die ganzen N24 dokus, und sich dabei dann auch noch kürzer hält und mehr informationen verständlicher rüber bringt
Sein Englisch ist nur sehr gewöhnungsbedürftig. Möchte das lieber bei ihm auf deutsch hören.
@@principedelamuerte3235 Jop. Ich schau mir die Videos immer nur ohne Ton an, kann ich mir leider nicht anhören auch wenn die Videos toll sind. Ein deutscher Channel wäre nett.
This is exactly what I was told by a panzer commander. Born in Austria he was drafted and because of his college education he was put in charge of an assault gun. He said they knew the war was lost but they kept fighting in order to not let their comrades down. He fought on the Eastern front but in April of 45 he and his crew were able to get to American lines due to a Black "Red Ball express" driver who piled them in back and got them across the Elbe. He was an MD and the chief toxicologist for Pennsylvania when I met him.
"Dying its not very tactical"
Sad krieg gas mask noises
Ah, man of culture aswell
Lt gather your men... We're out of sandbags.
Ah, I see.. You're a man of culture
They didn’t have enough e-tools.
My Russian grandfather’s village was drafted in 41 and of 300 something men under 100 returned. My dad’s grade had 2 classes and next grade had only 1 class because no one to have children from those years.
I heard of a Russian saying: Mjasma boedjin. Terrible spelling probably. It means something like: plenty of meat. We all know of the numbers Russia used, but bringing it to this personal level hurts.
@@sjonnieplayfull5859 I have never heard of it and I can literally not read what you mean.
@@Alsemenor "мяса поедим"? Я тоже без понятия, что он несёт
@@user-xq5og9lt8p Пургу просто несет, вот и все. Эксперт хренов
@@user-xq5og9lt8p да тут 90% комменторов тупари
Ive never thought of someone who died in battle as "tactically failed" but it is a valid viewpoint
*Existentially impaired*
what did Patton say, you don't win wars by dying for your country, you win wars by making the other poor bastard die for his
Except war tactics often expect a percentage of casualties for many situations. One does not charge a village with suspected multiple hidden machine gun nests without expecting casualties.
@@Wassenhoven420 one flattens it with artillery, giving the casualties to the other site
@@theonlymadmac4771 when one does not have artillery tho
My father was a senior officer on the Allied side, rising to Major by the end .... He talked very little about WW2 although he did D-Day, Caen, Market garden and so forth.
One of the few things he would say however was that he was happy to lead his men into a battle from the front and did. Because he explained .... "My boys liked me and I wouldn't get a bullet in the back, indeed they looked after me as well as they could .... unlike most of the officers who were appalling idiots and often got mysteriously shot"
Komet sighted
“The end is near for our enemies”
Stability -1 ‘a vase fell over’
Stability +1 ‘I didn’t like that vase anyway’
Ah yes Hoi4 references
This just goes to show that a successful military is built from the bottom up.
like most succesfull things
True
Only that the wermacht was not succesfull. They failed in all their strategic goals and lost the war, which costed their nation an immense price in men and material and led to them being divided and occupied.
@@Vlad_-_-_ I mean successful as in they were a very professional, effective fighting force that achieved great success despite oftentimes overwhelming odds. The war only lasted to 1945 because of how effective the Wehrmacht was. If the Wehrmacht was more like the Italian army, I suspect the war would’ve ended by 1943 at the absolute latest.
@@ShortVideosRUs 1943?
I wouldn't think of Italy being able to conquer Poland, let alone France.
10:32..."He was almost Führious"...I zee vhat you did zere!
My grandpa fought in stalingrad and died in march 43 as pow. He was an officer and I think due to that he was allways informed about the strategic situation. Nevertheless, the letters from the Kessel to my grandmother were written in a style that never gave an idea of the tragedy that happened in Stalingrad. Nobody would write that like that today. what I mean by that is that this generation was totally different from ours today. That's why it's so difficult for us to understand why they fought to the end. To write it in current language: They were just tougher than us.
@@freebidou Yeah and because the Nazis wanted too burn/gasing the People they saw as non human, like Women and Children this people without honor.
A different breed of men
Tougher or naive ?
@@goatface6602 naive in Stalingrad?
@@petermannheim6527 false meme
Tbh that organizational theory is so useful. I did marching band in college, and the interaction between the students/leadership/staff/university definitely resembles that described in this video. We always performed a lot better when we felt that we had a good group, and that the staff and university weren't making silly university politics power moves.
I seem to remember that John Keegan wrote that the Wehrmacht in WWII was the only army in the world where the officers and men ate the same food. I can't remember which one of his works I read that though.
That would actual have a bigger impact than most may think at first glance
It’s the easiest way for the common soldier to see the difference, it was common for officers of merchant fleets centuries ago to eat good while the basic sailors ate watery flour essentially and that was never appreciated
@@looinrims Want to give both of you an example about this, and what was said in the video. First background: I was a platoon sergeant of a tank platoon in the Bundeswehr, and maybe you might know, a lot of habits in leadership are basically the same like in the Wehrmacht.
We once had an exchange program with the Canadien army. Can't actually remember, but all Canadien army personnel has to go to the arctic for a winter warfare training. Our company was invited as guests to join this. It was 2 weeks training and preparing at the Canadien homebase, and then 2 weeks on an island in the arctic ocean (january, 700km north of polar circle, no daylight. up to -50°C at lowest, but that's another story). In exchange, after this 4 weeks the Canadiens came to Germany to our homebase and trained them on the Leo 2, including gunnery, etc.
First and above all: the Canadiens were extremely hospitable! After more than 20 years I am still most impressed if I think back. And, apart from what I write following this, they were good men and soldiers!
Second: First difference, the Sergeants and WO's of the C. had quite a high reputation, experience, were old (average I would say 35) and were highly respected, BUT had comparebly (for their service time) low responsibility. They mostly served as platoon sergeants or were involved in assisting the company commander/lead. Platoon leaders only were officers, while only one of them was ... I would say half ways experienced. Company lead was a Major, I would assume arround 40 years.
On contrary we, "ze Germans": Me for example, I was 26, Oberfeldwebel with little over six years in service, platoon sergeant (trained as platoon leader which back in my time all "Feldwebel" were) and had the same position like one of the Canadien, old sergeants. 2 of our 3 platoon leaders were NCO's as well, and they were both younger than 35, say 12 to 14 years in service, while the only officer leading a platoon was an "older" first luey, with like 8 or 9 years of service. Our captain turned 30 years back in this year.
First example of leadership:
One of the corporals was ordered to take care of the fuel status of the platoon snowmobiles. I was very close to the sergeant and his young luey when this happened: The sergeant suggested and advised his lieutenant to not forget the fuel of the snowmobiles. The luey acknowlegded, then ordered his sergeant to order somebody (!), to check and refuel if neccessary. The sergeant again ordered one of the corporals to take the platoon, and check/refill fuel. The corporal now, took every soldier in the platoon (18 men, with us 4 Germans on their pltn), went outside and ordered everybody to check the fuel status/refill. Outcome: more than half of everybody was just standing arround, doing nothing. Senseless action in our view, which we Germans couldn't really understand. Most likely, if it would have been a German platoon, the leader would have just tasked 3 or 4 men to make sure tomorrow morning every snowmobile is full with fuel, and report execution afterwards.
Best example:
One day we headed out for a trip to wherever on the island. The whole company on snowmobiles. As we started, the Canadien Major stood outside, cup of coffee in his hands, and waved with his other hand ... he never attended any trip on the outside, like life fire, ice fishing, seal hunting, nor did he share any day in a tent when we were in the bivouac.
This is absolutely unthinkable for a German company commander, even if he would be the greatest asshole! The Major even asked our officers to stay and join him on the base camp, which they politely refused. A German CO would have been at the front of the column, would have given the "forward march" sign, and would have been the leading vehicle.
Especially this Captain we had this time was one of the most aggressive ones I had in tank warfare. He really led from the front, means he was in every attacking drill the first tank, ruthless - but for sure not headless - attacking. Imagine the Canadien major ... would he be the first as well? Trustfully leading and carry his company? I don't know (actually irdk, maybe it could be) ...
A pretty big claim. Would prefer it if there was more than 1 source.
@@9thbloodandfire508 your first hand experience is very insightful. Thanks for sharing, I’ve such high respect for the Bundeswehr.
@@looinrims an extreme exampl here: WWI, Battles of Isonzio. The italian officers were having lavish meals, while the troops were starving in the trenches.
A VERY interesting and crucial subject. Tons of books are written about military hardware, operations and strategy, a lot less about the human factors like psychological mindsets, training and organization.
This is why China had better start a war with India NOW because the Indians, although behind the curve logistically and technologically, have the advantage in terms of cohesion. In 20 years, the number of combatants will greatly favor the Indians and they will have caught up technologically as well.
@@rembrandtshadows Why does China need to attack india? India will not be a world aggressor.
I wonder if genetics plays a role. The stereotype of Germans is that of efficiency, conscientiousness, diligence etc. Stereotypes don't appear from nowhere. If you visit Germany it is a very clean, well-maintained place. There are strong taboos concerning things as minor as dropping litter. I wonder if their refusal to surrender reflects a natural tendency to work extremely hard, follow instruction etc.
@@transamination Its more intrinsic then you think. An example: i dont throw litter around because i dont want to wade in litter, i dont care if anyone watches. This place is also mine or someone elses in a way, even in a city. Therefor i respect it, as if it were mine. I have been educated since i was a little kid to respect everyone and behave honorable and give my best, especially in my work, regardless of profession. Not for someone else, but for my own pride and honor. I consider this mindset typical german. The resulting taboo is more of a pity towards contrary behaviour. To stay with the litter example: you would not get frowned upon (at least not the same way as if you showed your dick around) but earn more of a cold reservation by the observers.
It's because NOBODY wants to talk about it. My grandad didn't talk about his experiences in the war until I came around.
I served in a US Marine Corps Reserve unit for 6 years. When you serve together that long, you really become brothers. Many were promoted from within and based on performance. Despite how long we knew each other there was accountability. In the upper ranks, if they made one significant mistake, your run was over. I still keep in touch with my Marine brothers 20 years later...
"Once a Marine, ALWAYS a Marine". Semper Fi!
I think you overlooked the primary reason the Germans fought to the end: The Potsdam Conference produced the unconditional surrender ultimatum. Motivating the German nation to fight on was a simple task for the propoganda machine. Also, fear of Soviet brutality left them little choice. Observing the events of both fronts, it is obvious that units were far more willing to surrender to the West and often fought to the last against Soviets. Many German veteran memoirs lament the resources used in the Battle of the Bulge not being used against the Soviets.
Overall, I would have to say that fear, combined with your points here, allowed Germany to fight to the bitter end.
"Why No Collapse?"
- Good question!
Well kinda collapse but very late.
Because it didn't
most the nazis in power remained in power in the allies part
TIK history revised
I guess they knew how badly their leader had behaved and so believed they were fighting for their lives.
"Forgotten Soldier"
Guy Sajer
Why you don't lose.
Brilliant book
Great book but I hear a lot of it is disputed. Even if it's fiction it's still a great read
I want to read it so bad, but its a expensive book in my country
@@jackobrien47 Some of it reads as a bit suspect, but it's usually obvious when it's real. Overall, I think it paints a great picture of what a German soldiers experience would be in 1943-45
Yes! A phenomenal book, I read it decades ago and its still invades my thoughts from time to time.
My father once said to me , You don't shoot to kill , But to wound . It takes men out of the battle to assist the wounded .
Interestingly enough this seems both humane and coldly calculated. I guess it can be both.
@@IudiciumInfernalum or inhumane if you remember that being injured instead of killed outright doesn't guarantee survival. It only guarantees you'll live long enough to die in panic while your friends die trying to drag you to safety.
Who are still armed & can kill you, no, it's war & shoot to kill & remove the threat
@@TheWESTSIDE1967 Your belief goes against military tactics and training. You shoot to eliminate the threat. Wounding them is a bonus.
@@roberth3094 really, so seeing as most wars are won in the air i think you'll find that wounding would be a bit hard as the objective is to kill, & a wounded soldier would just be a magnet for the enemy to shoot allies trying to retrieve him
I knew you were worried about your videos seeming too click baity, but I think this particular video did a good job combining both the at a glance interest, and the well researched information. Good work; you make this website better.
Wow, Sönke Neitzel is like THE guy you always see on german TV in documentaries on ww2 and the wehrmacht, really awesome for him to be on the channel!
Bernhard is really good at this, and is gradually working his way toward being a member of the top tier of history broadcasters. His hard work will pay off.
He wrote some really interesting books that I can highly recommend.
He sounds exactly like every Nilfgaard Character in the Witcher 3 video game
Seeing an expert on TV is very often a sign of relative incompetence.
Sönke said that the German Empire was the main reason for WW1...
I was happiest in the Navy when my shipmates were competent, my officers were personable and cared about us, the Navy was giving us great food (I'd been through an Army base on the way there and the food was awful), and the civilians focused on the Army and Vietnam. When my leaders got worse and Vietnam soured everyone I got out to a military hating public. Just my experiences
Agree 100%. USN 1974-1978
Thank you for ur service sirs
I worked for LtCol McBreen, smart dude. I was pleasantly surprised to see you reference him.
Best fighting troops ever, all modern armies since have attempted to emulate the German battle groups.
My dad who fought from Kasserine to Sicily, etc Normandy and Germany , said the same. Had nothing but respect for them, but He killed plenty. Only one death bothered him to his grave.
Also said the officers were always the best dressed even in losing.
If they had been led by Patton , The whole world would be American, at least those who survived.
@@bloodyspartan300 I think Israel has the best army and the best-trained troops because of the countries they are surrounded with
@@lman3983 That might be true now , but back then If they had listened to Patton, and we had the Germans with us there would be no communism today and the US would not have fallen as it is in the process now.
Ok wehraboo, go lick some boots
@@bloodyspartan300 Thank to god the world isnt american, biggest nightmare i can imange
A good comparison would be how the US Army treated replacement soldiers and how it reconstituted units in WWII. The US Army did not keep units together and it issued individual replacements to units rather than reconstituting the unit as a team as Germany did.
tell that to the grandpa German 716th Static Infantry Division = the majoority of this team were elderly Germans and conscripts from other German occupied countries, especially Ukrainians. Then there was the 709th Static Infantry Division another winning team organized by the wehrmacht consisted of conscripts or veteran personal either previously wounded, 'older' men, lacking combat experience, conscripts suffering from medical conditions, like ulcers etc. what a team.
I think it's generally recognized now that the replacement depots (ReppleDepples in GI parlance) were a bad idea. What is interesting is that the U.S. National Guard divisions, which were generally recruited from the same states or regions, fought as well as regular troops, probably because of that regional identity shared by the troops.
@@chrisschultz8598 It may have been bad for unit morale, but I don't think the war department had much of a choice. Once a unit landed in Europe, that was it, they were in for the long haul. With high attrition rates, no one could afford to rotate whole divisions or even regiments off the line for any substantial period of rest and refitting. The only hope for men in the rifle companies was if their division commander was perceptive enough to establish in-house programs to acclimate replacements, which did happen more often than people give the US Army credit for.
@alfred lauridsen LMAO? The US entered Europe in 1941, when their enemy was NOT weak by any stretch of the word.
@@J01123 You realize Italy's in Europe, right?
This is confirming my own theory and experiences as an R.A.F. member in the early 60's. I was never in a war but was in a bad situation - isolated in the Libyan desert for 2 years. The officers left us entirely alone. We and the N.C.O.'s controlled everything - and even they would be reasonable if argued with or defied over some genuine and intelligent reason - all the silly discipline was ignored. But we did our actual jobs better than when we were posted to a less pressured yet more formally disciplined environment. We also behaved in a very eccentric manner.
Your story reminds me of the one Twilight Zone episode
@@n8wolf575 Well I googled your acronym's translation - we knew it as the Baader Meinhof gang so you can try the same regarding my acronym but I'm surprised at your ignorance. Also as I mentioned never being involved in any war that should have told you that I did not mean the organization which you suggested. Also I said the early 60's the terrorist organization you mention wasn't founded until the 70's.
@@2011littlejohn1 your answer doesnt change anything. its just bullshit :)
@@n8wolf575 Do you not know what the RAF is?
@@n8wolf575 It's the bloody Royal Air Force you muffin
In relation to cohesion, Antony Beevor writes that officers would ensure that some level of Christmas celebrations took place in the Stalingrad Kettle even giving up their own rations so that their men could have a little bit more food.
Myths die hard .
They slaughtered their horses, but had no heat to cook the meat.
Beevor is full of crap
Curiously Finland did the same in the Winter War; units made out of men that are practically neighbors. This was discontinued in the Continuation War, I believe, because it would leave some areas especially devastated when their region would take all the casualties of a particularly deadly battle.
I would presume that medals to still living soldiers has a better motivating factor then posthumous ones.
But what I found quite ignored in the video even it was mentioned shortly at the beginning was the societal cohesion. I am sure that all Wehrmacht soldiers were quite aware of the big difference of the war in the East to the one at the Western front. The war in the East was a war of extermination and was incredible brutal.
I think that as the Soviets pushed them more and more back towards Berlin that the soldiers felt also the fear of bloody revenge not just for themselves but for the country they fought for (to some degree) and that knowledge of brutal revenge against themselves as a fighting force but also civilians (which could include relatives and friends) let them fight with a bigger motivation as well as when you would fight just for yourself and your close buddies around you.
agreed, both sides of the eastern front were likely motivated by the horrific nature of the fighting and that probably in part explains the continued resistance in the face of immense casualties both the russians and germans faced.
@das datics When you sow wind, you're gonna reap the whirlwind.
Tbf on the western front you’d think this would manifest as a desire to just surrender the gentleman’s contest before the barbarians batter down the hatches in the east. But they still fought hard.
@@jmass4207 except the Allies often seemed to be talked about as a house of cards right? Both the German and Japanese military strategy was geared towards a fast and brutul conflict assumed to expose the western allies as soft and febil in battle. Further, there was an assumption that the civilian populations would withdraw there support for armed conflict once casualties began mounting. Logic on the Western Front may have been something like: smash the allies with the support of new superweapons (again, rhetoric around the Ardenne offensive was a fast and brutual conflict) and once they have withdrawn, return to the East which is now one front.
This is a good point. I saw on UA-cam an interview with former German soldiers of WW2, talking about their experiences. They were in the interview old men. One of them said they tried hard to stop the Russians, particularly to protect the civilians and especially the women. "But we could not", he said. By the end of the battle of Berlin, there was no more ammunition left. The economy was destroyed. There was no means left with which to continue fighting, against overwhelming odds. Many men held the last bullet in reserve, to use it on themselves rather than be captured. Some units were still fighting, when they discovered that the city had surrendered. Some men committed suicide on the spot. Others were taken POW.
The US MoH posthumous award percentage comparison is flawed in my opinion. While the numbers you give are correct, that it for the entire time it has been awarded, from the US Civil War, up until today.
But if you just look at WWII, the time period that the Knights Cross was awarded, out of 471 MoH awards, 273 were posthumous, or 58%.
The reason for this is because for a long time it was really the only award that could be given, the US military didn’t have dozens of metals and awards. So sometimes it was even awarded for non combat actions for example Thomas Ryan Jr got one for saving a woman from a burning hotel. It was also over awarded for political reasons in the early days as well. In an effort to boost public opinion of the occupation of Veracruz in 1914, 54 MoHs were awarded for an action where only 21 Americans were killed.
You could argue that the reverse happened during the Iraq war when people who should have gotten it didn’t because that would have made it a ‘real war.’
Yup, though the Department of the Army has gone back to some of the older awards and revoked them as MoH.
Thank you, but a source would be appreciated!
Mind giving some of those iraq war examples? I already feel like I should be angry about something but I don't know exactly what.
@@brenokrug7775 Wikipedia TBH. I knew enough about this history of the medal to tell that that comparison was suspect and I knew about Veracruz and that a huge percentage was posthumous in WWII. So I just went to Wikipedia to verify the specific numbers for WWII and Veracruz. So yea, kinda shady but enough for a youtube peanut gallery comment.
It’s worthwhile to point out that this is all public record so if you really wanted to, you could verify those numbers with primary sources. Although some of the super early records, like from the Civil War are potently incomplete because it was so long ago and because it wasn’t as big a deal back then as it is today.
@@Betrix5060 Here are some examples. Some of this might be political like I said before. But I also think that part of it is that it has become so associated with being given posthumously, that they are generally less likely to give it to people who lived.
www.wearethemighty.com/articles/medal-of-honor-heroes/
Good video, still some aspects are missing, for example 1. Defending in Germany against the Bolsheviks and everything that came with them 2. Knowing that a defeat would be ultimate and not just another lost war. 3. Not wanting to surrender "too early" like in WW1 one.
All those points originate in Nazi propaganda.
@@Monferrato94 you are an idiot if you don’t think Stalin was trying to expand his influence. Hell they already tried to invade Europe in 1920 but were too green and lost.
@@yeedbottomtext7563 i am not arguing the imperialism of USSR, but what the common german soldiers thought about what was going on in WW1 and the fate of germany after WW2 both come from NAzi propaganda. Germany does still exists today doesnt it? and germany surrendered to late in WW1, else we would have gotten a better peace deal.
And an insane leader who cared nothing for his soldiers survival
@@Monferrato94 sure but it was partially true. just look how terrible the eastern block fared. all the eastern former udssr countries were horribly poor and still are. Had the germans known what would happen afterwards they certainly would have fought even harder against the sovjets, i know i would have, the existence of the communists almost destroyed the world as we know it
It's simple, in 1918 they believed it would be like other previous wars with France, they did not unconditionally surrender, they signed an armistice. They thought the French would take Alsace Lorraine and maybe some other disputed territory and everyone would go on with their lives. When Germany/Prussia defeated the French several times in the 1800s they didn't screw the French, they just took Alsace Lorraine and everyone moved on. In 1944 they had seen what had happened in 1918 with the Versailles Treaty where they had taken 1/3rd of Germany and made Germany pay all their GDP as tribute. Plus they had intercepted western allied plans to destroy Germany permanently. Plus they knew what the communist USSR would do to Germany if they lost. So they didn't surrender. The Germans had a saying in 1944 and 1945, "Enjoy the war, because the peace is going to be hell".
I like that saying, very true
Enjoy the war, cuz the peace is going to be hell hahaha
I can imagine a ww3 if the Marshall plan didn’t help German to rebuild.
It's actually simpler, they just needed to know what THEY themselves did. And that soviets were going to make them for everything they've done:D That alone was more then enough even if irl it didn't end up as dark as expected. Maybe for worse...
@@TheArklyte dont attack stalin I guess
I appreciate the use of relatable examples as opposed to just numbers for us Americans
but you misunderstand, we only comprehend quantities in terms of loaded buses, foot ball fields, and Texas.
15,541 loaded buses.
13 foot ball fields
2.57% of Texas's population
We Germans use Soccer Fields and Saarlands. For comparison, one Texas is 270.7 Saarlands
Don't forget Olympic swimming pools
We also won all of the super bowls that were hosted.
Would those buses be the standard British vague quantity unit of double-decker London buses? Or some US-only thing like yellow school buses or Greyhounds?
And where does that other British standard of vagueness “so many times larger/smaller than Wales” fit in?
Or in atomic bomb casualties
A very interesting review of the question, as usual!
The great war, wow I'm a fan of both of your cutaneous.
Wow, EXCELLENT break-down of Facts & Figures, and how it/this was Presented - a lot of hours & hard work - Vielen Dank ! !
I think this is my favorite video yet!! Excellent work
11 minutes in - the one thing that all soldiers demand of their superiors is fair treatment. In its absence, there is no trust, and leadership is diminished.
I’m sure the fear of the same outcome after the first war played a part
Well, by resisting until the end the outcome became much much worse than it would have been had Germany surrendered, say, in July 1944 after a successful Operation Valkyrie.
but its turns out the outcome is better then the collapsed of the german empire, i mean yeah german got divided after the war, but still economicly stable.
@@Lawbringer. Oh, please! Germany didn't exist between 1945 and 1990. Before the Marshall Plan the allies wanted to starve the Germans to death 'till there were half of them, and they were all supposed to be subsistence farmers. East Germany wasn't economically stable at all and is in fact, to this day, one of the poorest areas of Europe, comparable to Romania or Ukraine. Nobody in Germany has the pride of being German anymore and all traditions were and still are on their way to be eradicated from the face of the Earth.
Unconditional surrender as a concept and demand made any sort of compromise impossible, even if members of the German High Command wanted to reach an agreeable peace with the Western Allies. Talk which was seriously considered-in particular the infamous book "Germany Must Perish!"-gave credence to this idea and ironically it may have been the Soviet threat that prevented them from being carried through. Nonetheless destruction was massive as can be seen in the documentary "Hellstorm."
You mean the establishment of a liberal democracy (Weimar) and free parliamentary governed society?
the best channel on youtube for German military history!
sadly i only found the channel a couple of months ago so im playing catch up.
They were "Bands of Brothers" from the same regions, town and schools who fought to the end for the survival each other.
Excellent analysis, right to the point. Many years ago I had a chance to meet a Polish guy from Slask (Silesia) who fought on both sides: first as a conscript in Wehrmacht, then - after his unit surrendered in Italy, as a volunteer in Polish forces in the West. He earned an Iron Cross on the Eastern Front as a Wehrmacht soldier and Krzyz Walecznych (Cross of the Brave) on the Polish side - and he was an excellent, loyal soldier on both sides. Why? Because he was a honest man; he fought for his friends, who covered his back, for his officers, who were strict, but fair and who shared the risk. The magic of unit cohesion. Propaganda had nothing to do with it, he was never a nazi, a lifetime social democrat; trust and loyalty to people he met personally were a deciding factor. He had no regrets after the war, he just tried to do what he believed was right at the time.
OKW (Oberkommando der Wehrmacht) was also very smart about units allocation to various theatres of war; Poles from Slask, posted to the Eastern Front, had absolutely no problem fighting Russians, who invaded Poland in 1939 two weeks after the Germans did; Russians were seen as an enemy by most. Some of the ex-Wehrmacht soldiers who joined Polish units in Italy were allowed to display their German decorations on Polish uniforms, if they were earned on the Eastern Front; the Brits were not impressed.
That's amazing! Also I refer you to Lauri Törni, "the man who fought in 3 armies" ua-cam.com/video/Uz2Am9Ahy14/v-deo.html
That is not the sign of an "honest man." It is a sign of a man of low character who will kill for pay to get along. Wake up.
All volunteer forces, which include most NATO nations, then consist of men (and women) of low character. Wake up.
@@matztertaler2777 Well then I would like to see what you would have done in his situation. Either fight both the russians and germans and probably die, or go along with them and hopefully live. Sometimes life isnt about a country or flag but really just staying alive. Wake up to reality
@@matztertaler2777 okay god. Whatever you say
I love your work because of this, it is not just some clickbait but has some academical value in it.
Thanks for your work. Very professional, detailed and informative
It was a delight to view a video that actually cites its sources. Very few videos go that far - and most only use a single source. Thank you for the interesting video!
I thought it was the same reason the red army didn't collapse
It was a fight for survival, more than a war especially since the red army would show no mercy
Well, turns out such a fight for survival was only perceived, considering the Red Army did show relatively more mercy.
@@artificialintelligence8328 They were equal to the Germans. They shot the Waffen-SS on sight, raped by the hundreds.
@@obiwaankenobi4460 At least they didn’t exterminate the German populace like the Nazis were going to do to the Russians for lebensbraum.
@@raptordoniv6779 ha, they exterminated their own population instead so the nazis wouldn't have to
@@obiwaankenobi4460 you misspelled millions
Great content ! As usual !
Excellent as always, thank you! Fröhliche Weihnachten!
Military sociology is faschinating. I'm glad you included Professor Neitzel's discussion, which was quite thoughtful (well-reasoned). It reminded me of my old college advisor, Professor Charles Moskos, who has been deceased for a while now but was one of the truly founding members of the field of military socieology.
Cohesion: Everything I was missing in my army time (not u.s.)
Not much trust between each other
No trust between subordinate to leader
Identifying myself with the armed forces would've been the last to happen after I die
(i was conscripted fyi, no shiny mustangs in my contract)
Under what Flag?
Millions of American enlistedmen wish they were you and didn’t buy a mustang at 40% interest
@@looinrims I’m sorry, what?
@@SantaClaus-kk8zr a joke in the us military is recruiters trick people with promises of stuff like free cars which isn’t true so they buy them at horrid interest rates as a low pay low rank soldier cuz...they’re dumb I guess
I've missed my infographic fix. Glad to see the format still going.
Fascinating video, so happy to see someone cover this topic
Well, fighting to avoid/escape Soviet reprisal is a pretty intense motivator.
Deserved soviet reprisal
@@christophmaier4397 not really, it was a preemptive strike. The Soviets wanted war regardless, by their own doctrine they had a duty to spread. A lesser known fact was that many of the western allied leaders wanted the war too.
@@MALICEM12 stop trolling and release sources, stalin was nowhere close to declaring war in june 1941 and the allies leaders most certainly did not want war, in france war was completely out of question, chamberlain tried his best to avoid it and the US was in total isolation
@@christophmaier4397 Its such common knowledge that Germany and USSR were going to war no matter what. You look like a fool, go read. The only shocking part was the Germans attacked so early.
@@christophmaier4397 Stalin was preparing for war with Germany. But he was nowhere near ready in 1941 (thanks to himself for killing or demoting half or more of his senior staff in the army). And the western allies knew war was coming and started preparations. France even "invaded" Germany when they attacked Poland (not much came out of that obviously as they had terrible command and understanding of modern war). Anyone with at least a little interest in WW2 knows that...
Robert Citino touches on this in some detail with the officer corps and why they fought to the end.
Another great video man! This is why I will always stop what I'm doing to watch your videos. Keep up the good work!
Fascinating. Thank you for another superb and informative video based on solid research and sources.
This channel is so good! I really appreciate the thorough, clear, well- supported explanations and the lack of mythologizing or demonizing that sometimes goes along with these topics.
Glad you enjoy it!
Nearly 40 years ago, I wrote my (Brit) Army Staff College Commandant's Paper on the cohesion of soldiers, sub-units and units in combat. The research and thinking that I did in the course of that project utterly changed my understanding - and ever since then, it has been quite clear to me that most/nearly everything that is said about the British Regimental System being fundamental to British fighting power is mostly hot air spouted passionately in defence of a thoroughly outdated (but very cosy) system which has much more to do with preservation of privilege than it has to do with combat power.
Even at 6 minutes into this I'm hearing loud echoes of what I learned waay back then.
Correlli Barnett made the same argument in 'The Desert Generals' in around 1960, I believe.
I'm reading 'Das Boot' at the moment and while in part fiction, it has similar themes of the basic crew trusting their officers without knowing what actually was going on outside the boat and just bonding among each other over the 'conquests' they made on leave. Actually, it paints the one guy who ate up the Nazi propaganda as an outsider, who had difficulty integrating into the crew. They were fighting for each other. Once the boat gets hit 'der Alte' basically just walks around keeping up the morale while the crew does its job.
The people in the submarines believed that they were an indomitable elite and were treated as such by the nazi propaganda. If they had won the war, they would have received great medals and an estate in the enslaved eastern territories. That is why they fought, all this comradeship nonsense was just there to make the suffering and mass death more bearable.
@@ThePurzlina Well life in a submarine was abysmal and a huge proportion perished underneath the waves.
@@Zorro9129 75% of those who chose to go to subs died..... that's a huge death count.
@@ThePurzlina I take it you never felt true camaraderie before? Because that doesn't even resemble what normal people think. It almost sounds like...propaganda.
@@googleshill9343 Sorry, what are "normal" people in your opinion? People who kill each other with tanks and bombs?
I like your focus on stats as well as anecdotal evidence to make your points. I was a little surprised that you didn't mention music as a prop in soldier morale. As I understand it, the Germans had songs for each branch of the service and individual components, like Panzer and Luftwaffe. I had a software instructor who was a submariner in the German Navy. He told me that, indeed, his branch of the service had their song, but he was unwilling to talk about it. I ended up failing the class, by the way. Cobol. Coming back from class one night, I met a two cars drag racing on a bridge. I planted the brakes. We just missed, but the decks of cards (that's the way programs were recorded in those days) scattered over the floor of the car. All the cards mixed together. No time to fix it because I was transferring to a new duty station within two weeks. Anyway, say what you want to about Germans or Germany--they know music. And they're good at it. ua-cam.com/video/u0bCqjlcgM4/v-deo.html
Thanks for the very informative video!
Wie immer ein top recherchiertes und fundiertes Video. Weiter so!
Ich kann das zitierte Buch "Kampfkraft" von Martin van Creveld sehr empfehlen.
Also, I'd be interested to know if Prof Nietzel's book looks closely at the 'mechanics' of das Heer's way of training recruits, and integrating them into their front-line units.
As I understood it (in general, and obviously changing over time, as Germany's fortunes declined), recruitment was regional, and so was training (civilian Regions tied to military Divisions?), but that was further reinforced in wartime: Recruit training schools were tied to the Regional Division, and some/many/most/all [?] recruit trainers in those schools had recent combat experience (ISTR many were convalescing, pending return to combat duties?)
More important (but again, as I recall): upon completion of training, cohorts of trained soldiers were - as a matter of Standard Operating Procedure - formed into tactically coherent/self-defence-capable March Battalions (Marschbataillone) to make their way to the Front, and some of their instructors would invariably make the journey with them, to rejoin the fight.
It struck me that (even if they couldn't influence it) those instructors were at least participating in the integration of 'their' recruit into the Gruppen/Züge/Kompanieen of their fellow NCOs. The knowledge that 'this is how we do things around here' would - in itself - sharpen the motivation of instructors: they would know that at least some of 'their' recruits would land in the Gruppe/Zug of a friend/friends in the front line, and that they themselves would eventually do likewise - powerful incentives. Nobody wants to be wind up back in a front-line unit to find they are known as the guy who has been sending second-rate soldiers to the Front, to make life there more difficult for eveybody else . . . . .
I am certain doing business in that way - taken together with all other observations in this short video - was a significant factor in maintaining the motivation of the instructors, and stregthening the coherence of whole Divisions, in all dimensions.
Well, there was a massive collapse in 1944 - particularly in France. Then came the drawn out death phase (late '44 and early '45).
Thank you for this video. The book is not yet available in English, so I rely on your video. Much appreciation!
18:57 bonus points for subtle w40k reference
No. No there isn't.
Yep .. small unit camaraderie and 'sense of belonging' is very important. The Section / Platoon becomes your family .. your home. Reinforced when cemented by a competent Platoon Sergeant and well lead by the Platoon Commander.
I find information here to be a very interesting and provided in extremely professional manner, subject it's generally not a pleasurable one, but well explained
When I was in the US Army in Korea, we had a soldier join our platoon who had been a driver at brigade headquarters. I had to school him on how line units work: a platoon is a family. The platoon sergeant and LT are out mom and dad. We live, eat sleep, and work together. We know each other's strengths and weaknesses. We may not always like each other, but we stick together and look out for each other.
Later I became a unit armorer, and found out that even in a line company, the headquarters platoon was a bunch of backbiting Blue Falcons with no sense of camaraderie.
look what happened to berlin and you can see pretty clearly why they would rater die than surrender
Fuck right off, the Germans murdered 20 million Soviet civilians, how do you expect them
to react?
@Felipe Scheuermann en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties_of_the_Soviet_Union#:~:text=World%20War%20II%20losses%20of,official%20during%20the%20Soviet%20era.&text=This%20includes%208%2C668%2C400%20military%20deaths,the%20Russian%20Ministry%20of%20Defense.
There's my source.
@Felipe Scheuermann 14 million is the
very highest estimate of military casualties,
the vast majority of estimates say it was
between 8-10 million, meaning civilian
casualties were between 17-19 million,
while the Soviet invasion of Germany
killed between 1-2 million civilians, so the
Wehrmacht killed 10x as many civilians
as the Red army, as for rape, the Germans
kidnapped women as sex slaves in military
brothels, then there's this quote 'Author Ursula Schele estimates that up to ten million women in the Soviet Union could have been raped by the Wehrmacht, and one in ten could have become pregnant as a result'.
@@edmiesterful The Bolsheviks killed 30 million Russian civilian during the Bolshevik Revolution and Stalin was preparing to overrun Europe and expand the Soviet union, that probably had something to do with the way the Germans reacted.
@@UnholyWrath3277 “unbias yourself” you have zero self-awareness. You and everybody else who touts the victors version of history and call themselves objective.
I would argue the German army did collapse on the western front, at the end they offered little resistance and surrendered in mass. Sun Tzu once said, "put your soldiers in a position of no escape, and they will prefer death to flight". That would sum up the eastern front, even when cohesion broke down, morale remained "high", they knew they had no hope of survival and death fighting would be preferable to the horrors of being a soviet prisoner - if even lucky enough to be taken alive and the desire to try to protect the civilian population further reinforced that idea.
@@HA-gu1qk Cringe
I like the little Warhammer 40K reference in your use of a chainsword icon to represent "blind fanaticism" at 18:56.
Thanks for the video, fantastic thinking material again
I love your content keep it up
Hey @Military History Visualized. Something I've always wanted information on was to what degree was the great variety of German armoured fighting vehicles "mixed" together in tactical situations? In lots of ww2 media including games, movies, miniseries we see a large variety of German armoured vehicles present in tactical engagements that vary between company or battalion level. Is this just game devs wanting to let us play with all the german toys, and filmmakers using whatever good mockups and running vehicles they can get their hands on? Or is there truth to this with German Panzer units being broken up and mixed up with tank destroyers, heavy tanks etc when committed to battle? Does a tiger company or even heavy tank battalion operate all together or are they doled out to support other tank units and infantry? Does a regiment of Panthers and a Regiment of Panzer 4s in the same division generally operate in their own areas?
Vielen Dank für diese Episode. You brought questions and answers I never heard about before about Wechmacht. I am going to check right now if you have an episode about the links and relations between Wehmacht and Waffen SS :)
Sonke looks exactly how I'd expect a leading professor of military history to look.
Indeed.
@typo pit are you just claiming that Neitzel is part of 'a government funded hate campaign'? :D Do you know any of his research?
@typo pit Literally zero connection between Neitzel and IM Victoria. Do you have persecutory delusions? "Forgers"?
Like a book worm? All scholars look like that, they have to be.
"Not for Blind Fanatism"
*Picture of a Chainsword*
äijä
Maukka - If you don't mind me asking, what is a "chainsword"?
@@karlmuller3690 Exactly what it sounds like, a sword with a blade of a chainsaw, chainaxes are even superior ;)
@@TheZINGularity - Ouch!! Sound bloody
painful, I can tell you!! Thank for the
(gruesome) reply!! : ()
@@karlmuller3690 If you're interested in science fiction, I recommend checking out Warhammer 40 000. That's the universe the chainsword is from and it's all about everything gruesome and miserable!
@Military History Visualized Will an English version of Soenke Neitzel's book be available? From the segments shared, it seems quite interesting.
there is something in the works
Interesting analysis; thanks for sharing!
That was one of the most informative features i have seen on here. It actually answered some of the questions i had as an avid war historian. It also debunks tge annoying myths about fanatics and blind loyalty. The German army of ww2 was just basically very good. To fight on 2 fronts against 3 superpowers for as long as it did deserves examination. Thanks to the channel.