Why Germany Was Doomed to be Defeated in 1941
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 жов 2024
- Award-winning journalist, Andrew Nagorski, explains why 1941 was a pivotal year not only for the fate of World War II, but for the course of history itself.
Learn more: www.simonandsc...
CONNECT WITH HISTORY IN FIVE
Web: ow.ly/V7Sw309A8Gx
Twitter: / historyinfive
Instagram: / history_in_. .
Facebook: / historyinfive
CONNECT WITH SIMON & SCHUSTER
Web: ow.ly/V7Sw309A8Gx
Twitter: / simonschuster
Instagram: / simonandsch. .
Facebook: / simonandschu. .
Simon & Schuster Studio 4:
Twitter: / simonstudio4
Instagram: / simonschust. .
Want to stay connected with Simon & Schuster? Subscribe: / simonsch. .
No.1 Fighting too many enemies on all sides at the same time!
America Creating enemies for itself
History repeats itself, allied forces simply overwhelmed the Germans.
Fashipe Akinwumi who shit in your cornflakes
always that dude who brings the US in a conversation with it having nothing to do with anything jealousy their parents did settle here my guess
*Laughs in Israeli who had 7 fronts*
@@epic9256 I'm not trying to smear US with evil. All the country of the world look up to US as their leader. But if leader is leading with sanctions upon sanctions. The followers will find another means to survive. Once they can survive on their own, the leader is USELESS. If you Lead with LOVE not with sanctions, there will be PEACE and HARMONY in the world. US is a Great nation. Showing good leadership can make it GREATER.
I'll give you two. Shouldn't have invaded Russia. Shouldn't have automatically declared war on the USA just to show solidarity with Japan.
Especially since Japan didn't attack the USSR when Germany did. Not doing that allowed Stalin to strip the Far East of defensive troops and throw them in against the Nazis.
@@stevearmstrong5324 The only time the Japanese battled the soviets they lost
Faster and yet FAR better explanation than this video. . Usually fast and simple is not better, but here it is as this guy is confusing the issue and giving too much importance to things that are not nearly as crucial.
In mid 1941 Stalin had infantry and artillery deployed in attack formation along German/Soviet border at 2km and 4km depths. A Lend-Lease arrangement (like that with Britain) with the US was already being finalized without a shot having been fired. What would you have done, xr6lad? Hitler's only option was a pre emptive strike. The Soviets were not in formation for defensive operations This is why the initial German advance was so successful..... The German navy had been wanting to attack US ships almost since the war began as they had been protecting and chaperoning British shipping on the Atlantic as well as giving them information on German naval positions. Hitler would not allow it but, the US declaration of war on Japan gave Hitler, under the Tripartite Pact, a legitimate reason to attack US vessels.
What could've been better is not opening two fronts at the same time. They should've learned that from WW1. Knock out the western front first then open the eastern front with Russia.
"Against the world, you usually lose" underrated statement
TODAY UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS THE MODERN NAZI ESTABLISHMENT . , IMPOSING ECONOMIC SANCTIONS ON SEVARAL COUNTRIES cz their interests of resources are threatened,, eg Zimbabwe, Iran, venezula,Cuba etc - CAUSING POVERTY ,UNEMPLOYMENT ,CIVIL UNRESTS, INACCESS TO MEDICATION HENCE DEATHS, STARVATION AND CORRUPTION ON innocent ordinary civilians.-GOING AROUND THE WORLD WARMONGERING -extrajudicial killings of foreign officials, civilians. DENYING TRIAL AT ICC AND VICTIMISING THE JUSTICE OFFICERS WHILE DOING CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY IN THE MIDDLE EAST....MAY GOD BE WITH US AND DEAL WITH THE EVIL,selfish ESTABLISHMENTS FOR GOOD.
@@blessingchena2554 God won’t do shit now. WE have to deal with this ourselves
@@bobynado69 IF WE HAVE GOD WE WILL CONQUER AND HE ACTS WITH JUSTICE AND ACCORDINGLY. WE MAYBE DEFEATED IF WE DONT HAVE GOD AND GOD IS NEVER DEFEATED.
Take note, Chinese Communist Party...
I mean he has a point
Number 1 invading the Soviet Union with really bad Logistics
LVRaiders 1 Not really. Germany would still lose to USSR. Just look at the year 1944. Same scenario as you just mentioned, Western allies would of just landed in France creating a second front. AGAIN.
Blame the Soviet roads and allied bombing and the weather in the east and oil!
all germany plan was doomed at the eastern front in 1943
@Fascist Philippines bruh what
The Soviet Union was not bad logic! Invading in the winter was bad logic!
6 , Germany didn't have enough oil. A main reason for Stalingrad, and invading Russia , Caucasus oil.
Hitler didn't need Stalingrad trying to take that city doomed him
Oil supplies was needed in Africa, but in Eastern front nazis had a lot of oil. It s prioritising fronts. Eastern front has a #1 priority. All of resourses was sent in to east
spot on!
Romania?
And to have full control of europe
My late father, a nazi concentration camp survivor was an expert on world war II. Germany lost the war in 1941 on two grave errors. When Churchill sent a bombing run on Berlin, Hitler was infuriated and ordered the bombing of London which spared British factories to continue to churn out weapons. After the battle of Britain where Germany lost many planes, Hitler decided to turn his attention on Russia. German generals, familiar with Napoleon's failed invasion of Russia, knew Germany could not win a two front war. Despite their pleas against it, Hitler went ahead with the invasion of Russia.
🎩🥸🚿💨🔥💀
No, it was always Hitler's plan to go after the Soviets. He knew the Communists wanted to conquer Europe and had to be destroyed. He never intended to fight a war against England and tried to make peace with them.
@@vincentmcardell8183 Also, his generals were on-board with invading the Soviet Union, being just as arrogant about their chances as he was. Only the logistics office showed nervousness, but Hitler ignored them.
@@pyromania1018 No, Hitler did not want a two-front war. In his book, Mein Kampf, he stated that fighting on two fronts was one of the reasons for Germany losing the First World War. However, he knew the Soviets were planning a strike on Eastern Europe and Germany, so he made a pre-emptive strike against them first.
The front that Hitler did not want to fight on was the Western front. He wanted peace with England.
Yep,.
Germany lost the War because of bad leadership, and fighting too many Countries.
Not really. Logictics was prime reaosn for failure of leadership.
Naaah..they would loose by russians anyway!
@@milelemi8725 probably would.
@@milelemi8725 ya bad logistics and lack of oil.
@@milelemi8725 why if german military was better than russian military
“War against the world you usually loose”
*Laughs in Mongolian
Mongol empire collapsed under its own colossal weight.
*conquers the russian winter in mongolian*
@abis8 alpha8 And Eastern Europe; they are no match for the tall European man on the plains.
@abis8 alpha8 You can't say: "European castles would have fell like domino's had the Mongols had their heavy equipment" because that dynamic could have changed the European response -- it may have compelled the European King's to unite earlier and retake the lands.
@abis8 alpha8 So why didn't the mongols get their heavy weapons there, despite the opportunity presenting itself for half a century; from their first invasion of Europe, to their eventual defeat? -- the answer is simple; the harsh northern weather forbid the mobilisation of their horses to efficacy: the mongol defeat in Europe was assured as soon as they became intent on conquering it, plus fighting against a highly intelligent, and phenotypcally big and strong race of men is never going to be a clean affair.
'' Hiler lost a war to allies ''
'' This enraged his father who punish him severely ''
haha oversimplified tribe
Yes, of course, the Americans did everything. Especially when you consider that the Axis forces suffered almost as many casualties at Stalingrad as they did on the Western Front during the entire war. I would not even talk about quality of forces in Eastern and Western fronts....
@@viktor8395 lol what triggered you
1. He attacked the Soviets, especially Gen. January, Gen. February and Gen Stalin.
2. He pissed the Americans.
3. He belittled the British Grit.
he tried to
not did
Yup big mistake he did.
4. He did not ally China. Instead allied Japan who did Nanjing Massacre. So it gave US full green light to attack Germany.
@@makemap Pearl Harbour*
@@ashrafulchomok749 he did trust me
1. Don't let a corporal command a whole armed forces.
Athan Detablan
Very true just like you don't pick a second rate reality show host as president and then wonder why he is out of his depth when he faces a crisis.
Tridhos before that I would say don’t vote for a candidate only because he’s black, then come up with the same bright logic vote for a candidate only because she’s a woman then following that same thinking nominate a candidate even though he’s sexually assaulted multiple women and probably some kids.
Tony S And maybe a goat or two. And who knows what else 😂😂😂😂
No way , this comment is just faaar too right
Yeah buddy 1234 do you actually think people voted for Obama and Hillary because of their gender/race? Hurr durr
Interestingly, there is a fact, that often goes forgotten: almost simultaneously, in the late autumn of 1942 two changes were done: Hitler took over the higher command and started to issue direct orders to armies, while Stalin stepped back from the same role and passes the military decisions over to Stavka, consisting of professional military staff.
It showed
He did make some competent decisions though.
He did it because his army commander of the Eastern army Group during the summer offensive of 41 did not follow his orders to capture the south with its grain and oil. Instead he concentrated on capturing the capital as he did in France.
@@wimpotter9657 which probably was a big mistake, but it also lead to the destruction of many Soviet forces, because Stalin anticipated an attack in the south to take the grain and other materials in the Ukraine.
But taking Moscow wouldn't have lead to the defeat of the USSR anyways.
Hitler should have halted his troops on September 30th 1941. Then Hitler could sue for peace with Stalin. He could create a new Poland with Warsaw still as its capital and Memel as its new port with some of Belorussian lands or to rear of the Baltic states incorporated. Britain would then have to sue for peace as the Polish question would have been resolved with no more Russian involvement in the war. There are other permutations of course, with the Baltic states and the Ukraine becoming independent or becoming part of the New German Empire.
Hitler's big mistake was in his attack on Russia. Even his generals warned him of this adventure and reminded him that Napoleon's army had lost their way in Russia's vast lands. This is exactly what happened to the German army. Besides, no one of them got any attention to what was hide by general winter in Russia.
Ali Al-Bagdadi indeed this is a very good reason why the Nazis lost the war
Attacking Russia was definitely what sealed Germany's defeat--except it wasn't a "mistake", in the sense of being a misstep that could have been avoided. Invading Russia to gain Lebensraum and destroy the Bolsheviks was so core to Hitler's belief system that he simply couldn't NOT do it. So I would argue that Germany lost WWII the minute he took power in 1933. Starting the war, and losing the war, was unavoidable at that point.
Yeah... your dumb, invading Russia was no mistake but the mistakes Hitler made in Russia, if Hitler supplied his armies winter clothes they could have taken Moscow and if they was no surrender go south and take the oil fields and keep pushing east to the river and leave Stalingrad alone because the was the main reason why he lost the war
Also Germany had no choice but to invade they where running out of food and they needed the agriculture in Ukraine
And one other reason you simply order your men not to kill civilians you want them on your side or they will revolt and fight against you
I'm glad he brought up the fact that Hitler could have gone into the Soviet Union as German liberators but instead chose to terrorize them just as bad or worse as Stalin had. Giving them none of the support they could have had from the peoples there who initially cheered because Stalin was so bad.
Hitler had always thought of the Slavic peoples as sub-humans. In his book Mein Kampf and in many of his writings and speeches it is clear his goal was always to exterminate the Slavic peoples. The only way that was not going to happen was if Hitler was not Hitler and the Nazis were not Nazis.
We all knew this in the 70s as teenagers. Good to see a historical claim that hasn't been overturned.
That's why they love Stalin? today in Russia?
We don't know He was Bad or Good because the CWW make exaggeration on Stalin?
Stalin was hated in the Ukraine because he starved them in the late 20's and early 30's for not embracing communism.
@@pkereszt That is a complete lie, ukraine was full of russians and that region when famine hit in 1932 was populated mainly by russians. Stalin gave Ukraine lands taken from Poland, Romania and Czechoslovakia. Kruschev gave Crimea to Ukraine. Return back the teritories given by communists, then you can shit - talk them.
That superior thought led them to failure. He bet everything on his his people in some blind and arrogant manner.
legends never die correct. it even got to the point where the Slavic partisan who was secretly hoping Hitler would free them from Stalin's grasp, was, discreetly hampering the German advance because the Germans were treating the Slavs as they would, according to their ideology (which was to treat them as shitty as possible because Germans are the best in the world)
You are both essentially correct.
If they had never invaded russia and declare war on america, and used a "pick them off 1 by 1 method", i think we will all be speaking either german or japanese.
Hauptmann Theaaron they would still lose to both America and russi
@@Jonathan-cz4ky Yes, but i said if they didnt attack america and the Soviets, they could have won
Germany lost of one simple reason: Oil.
Agree
I wouldn't say that's no.1 reason, I mean oil is important but moving to another front without dealing with the other was his biggest mistake.
TIK
@@carloshdez1613 Germany would have been capable of fighting on many fronts if it had enough oil to operate their equipment.
America joins the chat: did i hear oil.. oo no what i mean is freedom?
Hitler blew it when he let the British Expeditionary Forces escape from Dunkirk. If he had sent in his panzers, which were waiting on the outskirts of Dunkirk, Germany would have pretty much eliminated GB and France from the war.
Neither was a major factor in the war. The war in Europe was between Germany and The Soviet Union.
Hitler blew it when the British Air Force defeated the German Air Force (battle of Britain) nothing to do with Dunkirk.
@@robertward2047 Go back and read up on some history. Wiping out the British and French at Dunkirk would have essentially ended the war in Europe, enabling Germany to focus its military resources on the Soviet Union.
Wiping out the French and pushing 333.000 British troops into the sea at Dunkirk which is essentially what happened meant nothing: as Britain's RAF still had to be defeated before any invasion could be launched, which it wasn't. Therefore WWII was won and lost in the summer skies over southern England. Not at Dunkirk.
perhaps
Yep... totally agree with that... the ‘Halt Order’ from Field Marshal von Rundstedt allowed 300,000 fighting men to escape to safety.. if he had forced a surrender, Britain would have been effectively out of the war and American would not have had the UK as an aircraft carrier.. but most German Nobility had links with the British royalty so they were reluctant to promote total war on Britain... that’s why Hitler hated most of his generals because they were from Noble families..
Germany fought a war on drugs..literally...
And the allies didn't?
Kinda what happens when you have 13 million men to hold 3-4 fronts against 50+million men.
Number 4 is SOO underestimated.. The Germans practically had most of Ukraine in their hands also, but decided to implement a parasitic relationship with the inhabitants through grain export policies and often harsh treatment. The could have easily played "British" and acted like the gave a damn for a bigger objective.
I've heard of going up to the biggest guy in the prison yard and punching him but I've never heard of going up to the three biggest guys and trying to fight them all at once.
I don't think they were doomed to lose that war at all I think the main reason they lost that war was their strategic blunder in invading Russia
They had already lost by that point due to previous blunders, all invading Russia did was accelerate the inevitable (as Russia were planning to invade them eventually anyway).
yes but 1941 was also a moment the russians were very weak so if you want to make a change of defeating such a great power like russia the germans strike just on a very good moment to do so. but its unlikely afcourse that the sovjet unie is going to surrender completely because their country is so big that the germans never can take it whole. so the germans could have won by inflicting heavy losses to the sovjets in order to negotiate a peace treaty favouring germany and allowed the germans to take western russia. but you know that hitler wanted a complet victory and that was not going to happen most likely
m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1321917974511399&id=100000796268944
Noo... Russian campaign could be successful if they had a fight only between GERMAN and SOVIETS... Germany had enough RESERVED OILS/MAN POWER/ ARTILLERIES/SUPPLIES/ TANKS,ETC...for that invasion...but because of Fighting AMERICAN/BRITAIN/ CANADIAN/etc...in both WESTERN FRONT and in ITALY...Germans are Forced to Deployed all their RESERVED RESOURCES to these FRONTS at the same Time while fighting in RUSSIA... they even took out Large amount of ARMIES and RESOURCES from RUSSIA and Deployed it in ITALY for a SECOND MATCH...
@@miminhangsing6636 at the end of the day the losses they suffered in Russia work till 3 so at the same time also have to fend off the British in the American it was just a huge mistake invading Russia there's a huge tactical mistake
At least 12 million Russian soldiers (maybe even 15 to 19 million) sacrified their lives in the fight against Hitler. It was the main reason he lost.
8 million soldiers*
Glory to the Red Army. Their sacrifice will always be remembered in eternity.
@@Anonymous-qj3sf 14million*
@@Anonymous-qj3sf don't try to downgrade casualties
Don't make fun of my country
@@vladimirivaniovich5024 What? Recorded losses are 8 million. 12.14 million are just rumors and unofficial statistics
He made a huge mistake after his troops caught my grandad holed up in a wine cellar....my grandad was a right hard bastrd when he'd pissed
Love it !
Another main reason why Operation Barbarossa was a failure was because it aimed to take Moscow rather than taking the Soviet oilfields in the Caucuses and in Baku. If the Germans had cut off the Soviet oil supply in 1941 when the Nazi war machine was at it's fullest offensive potential, it would have been all but over for the Soviets by the end of the year. Britain would have fallen, and the mass extermination campaigns would have taken place as Hitler had planned.
Luckily, this failure partially occurred because Hitler put his trust in his generals to carry out this operation; Hitler would have likely aimed to cut off the Soviet oil supply, while his generals aimed to take the traditional approach of taking the enemy capital.
It was only after the failure of Barbarossa when Hitler started taking direct control of military command, but by then, Germany had exhausted much of it's already dwindling oil reserves. This is why in 1942, the German army groups near Moscow and St. Petersburg did not conduct any further offensives, as Hitler diverted all remaining oil to Army Group South in a last-ditch quest to take the Soviet oil-fields, but ultimately ended in failure with the decisive German defeat in Stalingrad.
Not true Hitler lost bc he wasn’t a belieber
I don't think Germany would have won but the war would probably be longer
Britain was safe from invasion from September 1940. The RAF and Royal navy was just too strong for Germany to launch a successful amphibious invasion of Britain. The capture of Soviet oil fields wouldn't have made a big difference to Britain as it would take Germany years to produce anything like a fleet capable of taking on the Royal navy. However it would have pu German forces in the east closer to Britain's middle Eastern colonies. That would have been a major disadvantage to the British empire but wouldn't have directly threatened the UK
One mistake his staff made was concentrating on moscow more than stalingrad.
The south had all the oil that germany needed to operate it's tanks, aircraft, motorizing units.
Wasn’t that his plan to attack from the south too from the Ottoman Empire correct me if I’m wrong but I heard something like that in another world war 2 vid
@@Forthrmany123 Ottoman empire collapsed in ww1, not sure if it came back in ww2.
But what I meant was the army group south was not receiveing the reinforcements it was entitled to while army group center received a lot of replacements.
I saw a video explaining these statistics in detail, I'll find the link.
@@Forthrmany123
ua-cam.com/video/VQ3-TqeZqeA/v-deo.html
Thats the link
He shouldn't have wasted more time in stalin grad .
Attacking Russia was more stupid decision than Japanese attack on Hawaii..
Nah Germany Vs Ussr 1 vs 1 Germany will crush them with all their resources focus on Ussr only not on many front
@@joshycasuga2555 9/10 of Germany's soldiers died in the hands of the USSR. It wouldn't have mattered if it was a one on one. Hitler couldn't even make it to Stalingrad and you expect for him to take on the USSR one on one?
@@funfofa tf is that so? How about soviet fucking 24 million casualty at the hands of german alone compare to 8 million of theirs against ussr Usa Uk france and the Other 20+ country.. and without US supply ussr is done Hitler will turn them into a resources of human experiment and mutation plus hitlers hasty decison makes them suffer but considering this time all their power concentrated at soviets they have the upper arm they even manage to survive until '45 fighting alone against half of the wolrd
@@funfofa If we go by death ratio, then 1 Soviet solider was a monkey compared to a German soldier. It's amazing how people overestimate the Soviets in WW2.
I don’t think Hitler believed that Germany can win, but he simply wanted to raise hell and be forever remembered for it.
If u think so then u know nothing about history.
@@AmanSingh-qj3ss
Oh hush up, professor. It’s only a comment, so chill. 🙄 sheesh.
I think I better way to think about this is Hitler didn’t know when to stop and only wanted more power just like Walter White in Breaking Bad. Originally, Hitler only wanted to restore Germany to its former glory after WW1. However after seizing power he got carried away and became reckless. It was a literal drug to him.
believe me germany can 100% win the war.hitler is just so arrogant in his orders
@@acap4395
The tragedy is he could’ve made Germany a great superpower nation had he not been so overly ambitious. Germany might’ve still be under fascism today.
1 Poland, 2 Russia, not oil, Manu enemys. Imposible
Agreed, but, POLAND, why POLAND? :)
germany wasn't going to win the war in russia from the moment the sovjets defeated them at the gates of moskou. and followed by hitlers declaration of war to the united states germany was going to be defeated.
Hitler did have one advantage against Russia, Stalin was even crazier than he was. You ever hear the term Don't Shoot the Messenger? Stalin didn't believe in that. He not only shot the Messenger, he shot half the Messengers family then sent the other half to a Siberian Gulag. Anybody Stalin felt had the stones to take over from him he killed, that left the Army and the Government filled with a lot of Functionaries too afraid to do anything without Stalin's okay, and left Russia in an economic mess. Still going against Russia in Winter was a No Win Situation, especially when fighting on other fronts
At least 12 million Soviet soldiers (maybe even 15 to 19 million) sacrified their lives in the fight against Hitler. It was the main reason he lost.
1. J.Stalin
2. W.Churchill
3. D.Eisenhower
4. B.Montgomery
5. G.Patton
There’s your 5 reasons
6. Fegelein
Fegelein The Antic Master
6. G.Zhukov
This guy's indeed a journalist and not a real historian.
Dude he’s reading a script you’re insulting the wrong man
@@epic9256 Nagorsky is reading t he script of his own free will.
Yeah respectfully you'd be right there as you say, a journalist not a real historian & therefore one hell of a difference!!
Don't insult a guy if u don't have facts to back it up with sources.
@@NeoConNET7 ... which this bloke didn't supply. Nice own goal.
I believe that if he would have waited 3-4 years more, before going into Poland, and still continued build up arms , and invest in technology, .....
he might have won.
Did you listen and learn? no chance of a victory because USA, Great Britain, Australia, Canada, India, African Colonies, New Zealand, Brazil and of course Russia is going to war with the world. He bit off more than he could chew even 3-4 years later. Wasted well trained soldiers in -40 degrees in Stalingrad with no winter clothing. Gross negligence, Hitler was a megalomaniac
Mike Haz
Had he continued......
He might have had the winter gear.
He would have GDR Jets , plenty more V-1, V-2, V-10, perhaps a Heavy Bomber, expanded Radar programs....
While the rest of the world would continue to be complacent, as if there was no threat.
Once England herself would have been defeated, the colonies would not have been able to help, because of Japan. Stalin , as it was, did not think Germany would invade, even though he was warned.
So another 4 years, the other nations would be back to sleep.
Jeff King but it would be the same for the soviets and other countries they would have been getting more upgrades and becoming more powerful and those another 4 years would probably make Germany sleep
Father Of Joseph Stalin I don’t really think so.
Joseph Stalin was totally un prepaired for war.
As was most of the rest of the world ( except for France, who did invest all into the “Magino line).
England was unprepared.
It took a “Vote-Of-Confidence “ to essentially “ oust”
Chamberlain, AFTER hostilities had begun.
America may have been very much tied up with Japan, so 4 more years of “ Peace “, may have been the key to continue “ appeasement “, as there was no more demands from Hitler.
( Personally, I’m glad he was defeated. He really had to go [ not that Stalin was any better].).
Jeff King Ight man thx for giving me sum to do in this boring quarantine
The old saying, they bite off more then they can chew.
Barborossa was the biggest and best example of "kharmatic consequence" in history
Hitler's fate was sealed on December 8, 1941 when he declared war on the United States while already fighting a two-front war. He unleashed possibly the largest industrial machine in history against his regime (also don't forget America's lend lease agreements that shipped equipment to both the British and the Soviets). America rolled out warplanes like cars.
You are correct, he didn't believe the US had the stomach to fight a war against him.
In the dictators lounge in Hell, Hitler loves to sing "My Way."
@@thunderbird1921 only 6-7 % of soviet total equipment was made in USA. USSR actually did a lot more than we expected if we study more on this topic. Post war propaganda in cold war did the soviets dirty. American media used to praise how courage of the soviet men and women saved humanity back then. Im not joking.
Hilter basically made 2 mistakes.
1) attacked Soviet Union.
2) declared war on USA.
Admitting it has been some time since I read Churchill's memoir, my memory is that upon hearing news of Pearl Harbor he wrote "so, we had won after all" [past tense].
Churchill did help control early histories and pop history with his prolific writing, slanting everything to his view. The loser German Generals we took captive were even worse publishing excuses that cold war USA eagerly ate up.
@@leechristy7003 Yes, but is the quote accurate? It has been a long time since I read this, have given the books to my history oriented son.
Hitler told one of his close associate s upon hearing of Pearl Harbour bombing by Japan, " we cannot now lose".
@@senakaweeraratna741 And if he had not then declared war on America?
@@davidllewis4075 If the Russian counter offensive which started on December 5, 1941 had taken place one month before, say, on November 05, 1941, and had bogged down the Germans, at that time, then the Japanese may not have bombed Pearl Harbour on December 07, 1941.
According to David Irving's book on Himmler, when Hitler had heard of the attack on Pearl Harbour by Japan, Hitler is supposed to have told Himmler " Now, we cannot lose the war". This statement was probably made before Germany declared war on USA on December 11, 1941. The week between December 5 - 12, 1941 was the worst week for the Axis powers in the whole war from a long term perspective. On December 05 the Soviet Union counter attacked Germany in Moscow, on December 07 Japan bombed Pearl Harbour and on December 11 Germany declared war on USA. These two decisions of both Japan and Germany led to their final defeat in 1945.
Rumor has it for an encore after invading russia and declaring war on america, hitler was so convinced of victory he would declare war on himself....
2 reasons Germany lost the war. 1.Hitler ignored his generals 2.Stalin learned to listen to his. Churchill did nothing materially to win the war.
Hitler didnt side with stalin when he had a chance. Imagine if he did, hitler and stalin would be idolized like ghandi or Martin Luther king and they would've probably won the war
Thomas Malin Hitler and Stalin signed the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact that announced a non-aggression pact between Nazi Germany and The USSR and enabled the two powers to divide Poland between them in 1939. He always planned to deceive Stalin as he was throughly driven by an ideology that detested communism and the slavic people. The two would have never been idolised regardless if they made a peace treaty, as Hitler always planned to fuck over Stalin, oh and they were also terrible people. History was always going to deem Stalin and Hitler as awful...
@@Tommymanner Stalin didnt side with hitler. Hitler proposed to stalin after france was defeated that stalin should join the war effort and defeat brittain together and then split the remais under them.. stalin refused that.
I agree With you, Churchill was just holding out , until either Russia or the United States entire to do the actual fighting while they provide support
The Blockade by the Royal Navy was a huge factor in limiting the Nazi resupply in Russia. No oil, no Blitzkrieg
1. Oil Shortage
2. Many fronts to defend
3. Men shortage due to a great portion being thrown at the eastern front
4. The luftwaffa not being dominant in the air
5. The Germans were unable to produce the tanks the Soviet Union and the United States could build
6. Besides Uboats,the German navy wasn’t good at defeating the Royal Navy and American navy
7. The allies had the technology to repel German attacks via land,air,and sea
8. The Germans were arrogant in believing they would be winning
9. The allies were able to sneak under the German’s noses to launch famous attacks
10. The spy network the allies had
11. The German’s massacres on the eastern and western front fueled the partisan and resistance movements throughout the continent,wrecking havoc on industry,supply,information,etc
12. The Soviet Union not only saw the war as just another war,but as revenge for attacking and slaughtering their people. To which Stalin and Zhukov were on top of turning the axis advances to a halt. Not only would it be seen as revenge,but a good propaganda tool
13. Hitler taking the role of “military commander” and doing drastic and out of proportion plans and his plans failing
14. The members of the German high command like Herman Goering and other members not fulfilling their plans to Hitler to supply the German army in Stalingrad and finishing the British at Dunkirk
15. Hitler modeling the Russian campaign like the French campaign
16. Hitler not realizing how much of a enemy the Soviet Union can be
17. Hitler believing the United Kingdom and Germany can be in a alliance
18. Hitler pouring the luftwaffa in to Britain which only strengthened the British people against Germany
19. The Italians with the North African campaign and the invasion of Greece,not to mention how the Germans were unable to secure the area due to allied attacks and being squeezed from Egypt and Algeria out of the continent
And this doesn’t even get into Germany taking over Italy’s botched campaigns in Greece and North Africa.
Germany lost because after the night of the long knives, everyone was a “Yes”man.
No, the Long Knives had nothing to do with Germany's fall, quite the opposite really. Quick history lesson for those who don't know: When the German Nazi Party was in its early days they used a paramilitary force called the Sturmabteilung (Storm Brigade) or Brown Shirts as their chief muscle. Led by one of Hitler's longtime friends Ernst Rohm they were really little more than thugs and bully-boys with delusions of grandeur, good for intimidation and beating up civilians but little else. When Hitler became Chancellor and the Nazi's took over the SA became more of a liability, their thugish brutality made business and political allies Hitler needed nervous and their increasing arrogance and belief that they were going to take over the military offended the career Army officers, and while Hitler was still fond of Rohm everybody else in the senior staff despised him. Hitler finally was convinced to shut the SA down, so on June 30, 1934 Hitler ordered the beginning of Operation Hummingbird, also known as the Night of the Long Knives. The senior leadership of the SA were gathered for a meeting at the Hanselbauer Hotel in Bad Wiessee where they were promptly arrested with many of them shot, with Hitler personally supervising the execution of Rohm himself. The SA itself continued to function under new leadership until the end of the war but under greatly reduced authority. Getting rid of Rohm didn't weaken the Nazi regime, it stabilized them
He declares war on Russia AND the US in 1941. That is why Germany sealed its defeat
Nick H that mistake was merely a catalyst for Nazi Germany's inevitable defeat and the hands of the Allied forces due to Hitler's other mistakes
If Russia wasn't engaged, he would've totally succeeded in Europe. Russia was the major player.
@@Baresi-Unico-Capitano Russia was nearly defeating, almost frontier and reserved force destroyed by Nazi advance, it was the winter and bad weather bought some time to stand back,, The immense russian winter turned the game.
Nick H Germany was defeated after the fall of France. It did not have the resources for a prolonged, global war.
EL GRECO 777 they invaded in the summer though champ😉
Two main military reasons of Hitler's failure:
1. Stopping Guderian from taking Moscow in October and turning him to encircle soviets in kiev.
2. Not enough troops in Africa to take Egypt. That could possibly destroy the British fleet in the Meditearrenian and enable Wehrmacht to take Caucasus, middle eastern oil, and maybe even attack India establishing direct connection with the Japanese.
With a little common sense we can understand why attacking Kiev before Moscow was so important. The Soviet army in Kiev had over 600,000 men, and more artillery than the entire German military. This city was on the flank of the path to Moscow. Ignoring it and pushing ahead to Moscow would inevitably lead to the Soviets hitting the German flanks, with an incredible amount of firepower due to the aforementioned fact that the Kiev army had more artillery and mortars than the entire German military.
By Encircling Kiev, this huge artillery force was cut off from ammunition and unable to effectively fight back, and was subsequently lost, not encircling it would leave it a very powerful force, perhaps the most powerful concentrated artillery force in the world.
You really think that by Nazi conquered Moscow then it will be all over ? no,Stalin and his cadres were ready to throw everything at Germany and turning it into a war of attrition, paving the way for the british to take invasion on the western europe.
@@SelfProclaimedEmperor battle of Kiev was the biggest military victory in the history of the world. In terms of pows for sure. But it wasnt the main objective of the campaign. It was a delicious aperitif. The main meal was Moscow. Actually Hitler had 3 goals in mind. Group Army North had to take Leningrad. Von Bock had to take Moscow. And Von Rundstedt (Group Army South) - Ukraine and Caucasus. All 3 at once were impossible. OKW thought that Moscow is a necessity. Firstly, because it was center of communication. All main railroads were connected to Moscow. Without the capital, Red Army would be doomed. Supply lines for Wehrmacht were strechted. But with Moscow they would be the ones with the upper hand.
Second reason - Moscow was the center of communist ideology, hq for government, and 10 mln people industrial city. In November there was chaos on the streets. Documents were being burned, shops were being robbed. Only thing that was working properly were hairdressers. "Russian women wanted to look good for the Germans." Even a few months after the beginning of Barbarossa, there were plenty of people who wanted Ussr to collapse. After the fall - morale would weaken.
And the third reason - taking moscow would gave the Germans warm shelter before Winter.
Anyway, guderian could take Moscow even in september. And he was furious that Hitler stopped him. Jodl, Halder and the rest of OKW shared Guderians opinion. Only Hitler was against the idea to continue Guderians march.
@@rafliriansyah719 yeah, it would be over. Both Russian and German generals had that in mind. Thats why Stalin sent almost all troops from Siberia only to defend Moscow.
@@janemler5798 nope,France and Russia are different entities,France capitulated when the germans took paris but you can't apply the same thing to Russia.They would fight to the end just like how they fought Napoleon.
What a big lie to say everything was decided in 1941... Stalingrad and Kursk were the main deciding factors of Germany's defeat.
Even before Stalingrad the war was unwinable. Germany was in an oil crisis. According to Wehrmacht's own calculations they had just enough fuel to keep the Bewegungskrieg going until September 1941. Operation Barbarossa was flawed in its main objective - inflict such widespread damage that the red army disintegrates and stops fighting within the first two months. And when that somehow didn't happen Halder and Hitler had no plan B other than slowly bleed out in a defensive war of attrition.
Rocco Siffredi yes it Was winnable afrer they would have taken Stalingrad they would have reached Caucasus oil fields but they let romanians and hungarians defens the flanks at Stalingrad and they were ill prepared
Andrea Berni He made the same mistake Napoleon did.
@@flakka1685 its so much more complicated than that. But its also so much more complicated than saying it was lost from the jump. If they had exectued case blue properly its possible they seize the Caucasus or at the very least cut it off. So idk if they could have beaten the soviet union but to say theres no way i think is ignoring reality.
Tyler Saunders But let s not forget about moscow if would have fallen than the morale of the soviets would have been on the ground But Hitler never sens Winter uniforms to his soldiers
Germany lost the War because he started Barbarrosa too late and not going for the defeat of Moscow first.
Darth Scipio- Best decision Hitler ever made was to attack Russia. His end was in sight. Too bad, however, it still took so long to bring Germany to it's knees and so many deaths. God Bless Russia and the sacrifice of its citizens.
He had to cross Poland to get to USSR, the polish wouldn’t let them through, so he invaded Poland the the UK and France declares war on Germany because of that
I am almost certain Hitler still would have lost even if he captured Moscow. Napoleon took Moscow in the year prior, yet he still lost the war. Russia is a HUGE landmass, and taking that one city didn't mean as much as taking Paris from France, which its entire infrastructure relied on. The Soviets could just keep going and going. In my mind, once Hitler failed to take Britain, followed by their refusal to negotiate peace terms, the war was over.
Taking Moscow would not have accomplished anything. In fact, he had the correct target in mind, but his generals talked him into going for Moscow. The following year, they had to go for his intended target, but it was too late. The real need for Germany was oil, which was the aim in 1942. Once that failed, it was game over. The Soviets were figuring that would be his main goal when they attacked in 1941, and that is one reason the Germans had success going North and toward Moscow, but once it became obvious Hitler was not going for the oil, the Soviets moved forces North and stopped the Germans before Moscow. Hitler also made a big mistake on the way to capture the oil fields, by diverting his attention toward Stalingrad, when he should have kept the thrust going South to Baku.
@@xero4158 I agree. The taking of Moscow would only matter if Stalin and company were willing to give up, and that was highly unlikely.
Main reason was breaking peace treaty with soviet and trying to fight with all countries together
I thought I read that this would have been successful and wasn't necessarily a bad move by hitler, something about he over estimated how easy it would be and decided to move his forces somewhere else which added several weeks onto the invasion of Russia wish I find alot of people to speculate would have been won, if it was just a little bit earlier.
@@ert-wert hitler thought that occupying Soviet will bring britain down but he was wrong attacking britain would be better because Soviet would never intervene in Britain war with germany
The war was lost for Germany between June 1940 and June 1941. That one year, as Manstein wrote, was a year wasted and a year Germany could not recover. Hitler needed to weaken England to a point of near-irrelevancy by gaining control of both ends of the Mediterranean Sea, thereby protecting Italy, holding North Africa, and having a gateway to the oil of the Middle East...and at least looking as though it might go into Persia and India, beyond...would England have then been more open to considering a peace treaty? We'll never know.
This is the solution. I think the same. A full year passed uselessly. Yet England was already on the brink of defeat in 1941, it just had to end; instead of the Russian campaign.
@@tamasujvari1073 the closed Atlantic meant that Germany was doomed anyway unless any of the gambles for oil would have worked out .. with strategic oil reserves set at appr. 3 months in 41, there was no way the army or the Luftwaffe could have reached Persia and retrieve Persian oil ... given their transport / long range capabilities ... thus the gamble for the Caucasus oil ... . they even seriously discussed retiring some of the Panzer divisions prior to the Russian campaign while the campaign was discussed ... due to the lack of oil ... via conquest of some European states, they got their strategic oil reserves ... which payed for the oil burned in these campaigns .. which however were not really enough for what was planned. thus, Russia was a somehow "logic" decision, unfortunately for both. the Russian campaign failed when Stalin did not give up / even taking Moscow would not have ended the war with Russia as the Russians knew that it is the Caucasus oil they are really after ... check mate unless there would have been a lucky punch ...
Manstein was an idiot
@@MrDead00 Surely you have made the dumbest comment I have ever come across...
@@julianmarsh1378
Sorry mate, but Kursk was lost from the start, Manstein was a fool to believe he could win that battle.
_Against the world you _*_usually_*_ lose!_ "Usually?" The understatement of the millenium.
You can win against the world if you smart enough. Just destroy one per one. Pretend to be liberator. Don't just declaring war to all of the countries. Tbh he doesn't need to take poland just discuss with the west (USA,Britain,France,etc) to attack Soviet Union. They will absolutely agree and by that just telling them they need to cross poland for that. Hitler may not take the lands from poland but he can attack Soviet Union via Poland with the help of the west nonetheless. Then began betraying them one by one. But sadly in order to do that germany have to be not nazi.
@Makabayang Pilipinas always thought the war was lost in the spring of 39, after that there was no negotiation
@@Ersdown_Liberia Seems far fetched. Nazi's just marching along through polish towns on the way to Russia. Its not liable. Italy seemed useless as an ally and Japan had an emperor who climbs a ladder to Heaven and speaks with God. Imagine believing shit like that lol
Rursus
“Impossible is a word found in the dictionary of fools” - Napoleon Bonaparte
Usa is doing it and calling it Freedom.
@@Ersdown_Liberia At first Hitler followed this path but then for over confidence and war addiction according to German foreign policy Hitler became wrong
" war against the world, you usuallly lose " featuring the CCP.
India: Am I the new Poland!!!
@@truthseeking6611 Nah, 4th best army in the world.
@@clumsygallium6104 china will destroy india
@@coke_d Nuclear weapons.....ever heard of that?
@@jindajatt4545 both india and china have nukes
Never fight on three fronts at once. Then it's only a matter of time before your men and vehicles get exhausted.
Battle of France May 1940. North African campaign June 1940. Barbarossa June 1941. Then it went downhill.
6. Fighting with limited supplies and oil against the superpowers that had most if not all of those.
My Dad was fighting for the U.S. Army against the Nazi. That is why they lost.
Better reason that what some people believe here...
Among all the comments here, this one is true! No joke, that's how this has to be answered. The same is for my grandpa, small jewish artillery commander from Odessa and other millions of simple people. Damn, men, your comment is really brilliant!
Imagine if Hitler was patient and allowed his scientists time to develop a nuclear arsenal.
Doomsday Scenario
@@faizan2394 lol no
europe would have probably been a better place to live in
@@cocacoladog10 how?
@@jwdominionpyroraptor4775 do you like where Europe is heading? or the world for that matter
No oil, by 1944 thousands of planes were stuck on the ground while allied bombers pounded cuties because they had no oil to fuel them
Sure, but the war was hopelessly lost by then
@@DanLetts97 why didn't Hitler and Germany surrender by then?
Pounded cuties. lol
In a nutshell. Hitler just took on too much, too soon. Taking on too many Fronts at once. Resources of any sort, are always limited.
It was inevitable, what the final outcome would eventually be.
Hitler was a narcissist who believed that only he could lead Germany to victory and had to do it while in good health.
they didn't have the oil. this was pointed out at the very beginning of the war by Churchill
You don’t Invade Russia in the winter. Of all countries, he just HAD to break the treaty and invade in the middle of winter.
Germany invaded Russia in June but Hitler believed the Soviet Union would capitulate within a few months. But they didn't and the war carried into winter; devastating the under equipped, under prepared German troops.
He didn’t invade in the middle of winter, it was June, also he had to delay the invasion due to saving the Italians who were getting their arses kicked bb the Greeks!
PDIDSTA German clothing was even better than Russian clothing. Many Soviet troops had to cross dense forests with only some rain jackets and still had to fight.
@@patrickryce1225 I thought they invaded in May, Russia biggest nation on earth just kept retreating eastwards, but those winters -20 Celsius in summer uniforms, Ouch !
Dude the soviet Union would have turned against germany sometime in the future so Hitler didn't waste time plus the lebensraum was a logistical problem plus you can't make a world with only german People
when germany invaded russia many russian were happy the germans were there ..i dont get it why you say they were all against germany..russian people were starving and under communist
Not Russian, the Ukraine and other Baltic nations.
one thing that was not mentioned that Hitler was over a month late in attacking the USSR because of going to help Italy in the Balkans if he had had that extra month I believe outcome would have changed so lets thank Mussolini for this.
Amateurs often write this, but it's not the case. Large scale german military operations were possible for only 4 months, after that Germany had not enough oil to continue with Blitzkrieg and this is independent of weather conditions, your statement is wishful thinking. The only way to conquer Russia would be to either have more oil and more troops or to attack in 1939 when Soviet Union had only one third of the divisions it had in 1941 but Germany could not do it back then. Even without Lend-Lease Soviet Union could not be overrun, the war would only be protracted, Lend-Lease enabled the Sowiets to push back and conquer Berlin.
I quess it is because I am an amateur I didn't hear of the German army running out of oil or men in 1941 and if so another reason to stay out of the Balkans. Also I am not saying they would have had certain victory if they had started on time,failing to do so sealed Hitler's fate.A stronger push for the oil fields in the Caucases,a plan for winter fighting better treatment of some of the civilian populations prob would have helped.And when Hitler went to war at the end of 1941with the U. S. it was done. Even an arm chair quarter back like me could not have helped him. Game over go to bunker blow out brains.
@@donaldmason7081
It was the spring rains that delayed the attack, not Balkans, as the German units that went to the Balkans weren't earmarked for the opening phase of Barbarossa and none of them missed their deployment.
Also the Germans were forced to deal with the Balkans as the Allies could threaten Romania from the Balkans and the Germans didn't want their main supplier of oil to be in danger.
@@Pikkabuu Hitler's generals had planned for a May attack . Did they not check the weather reports and it was not the lack of troops that stalled the German advance it was the rain,then snow and -40 cel temp of a Russian autumn . Split the diff start attack June 1 and we may and I say may having been speaking German today. The final nail in Hitler's coffin was when he decided to declare war on U. S. Even if he got Russia to surrender like 1917 he was doomed . One slight chance if he got the A bomb total defeat could have been stalled.
@@donaldmason7081
No. The Germans attacked when it was possible. Earlier wasn't possible as the ground wasn't properly dry.
And the Germans weren't even halfway to atomic bomb when they ended their nuclear program.
Hitler thought that the ussr would crumble and revolt against communism. He didnt realise how strong Russia. Would of been great to see a germany vs Russia 1vs1.
That's why they lost to Germany in ist world war
@Heinz Guderian In fairness, in WW1 Russia were fighting Germany AND Austria/Hungary AND Turkey at the same time, IIRC the only member of the central powers Russia didn't share a border with was Bulgaria.
The USSR would defeat Germany regardless.
Oman victory
On the contrary and that was the point that was made by the narrator. Many of those countries that Hitler stormed through were under the iron fist of Stalin and would have joined the Germans against Stalin but he never gave them the chance he treated them all the same as Untermensch to be worked to death.
@@levvy3006 I agree. 'not one step backwards'.... never underestimate the other mans resilience
My Opinion (I'm no historian). Hitler had some chances to end it/"win" against Britain with a few simple different decisions. But the second America entered the war It truly became a world war, the world against Hitler and it was lost for Hitler.
I agree, although this is actually quite intelligent video. They could have supported Ukraine's independence.
Nagorski is not a historian either so you are just as good lol
Ah yes just take it from the historian K&C2UT
Whatever it may be but no one can beat Hitler's fame
still shot himself in the head looool
Hitler was "famous". So are serial killers. Only children, idiots and psychopaths believe that fame is the most important accomplishment.
@@davidhoward4715 hey coward😂
By 1945 America had more war time manufacturing capability then the rest of the world combined (including Russia and England which were either 2nd or 3rd depending on the specifics of the calculation). The bottom line is once America entered the war it was a fait accompli. Even without "The Bomb", it was a matter of when not if we would be the decisive party in the war (a Ph.D. Engineer who works for a large American defense contractor's Missile Systems company.
@Steve Fowler the nazis were already beaten by the time the Americans got there.
@@obinnaezealah2465 USA should have destroyed the communists when they had the change, instead of helping them win the war. they were the real enemy not Germany. too late when they realised it
@@IbarraAlejandro No. Nazism is a destructive ideology with zero redeeming qualities, it had to be put down. The communists did a good job of destroying themselves.
The atomic bomb merely shortened the war.
The attack in 1941 happened because it was realized that the Soviet Union was arming for a massive offensive westward, intended to sweep over the entire European continent. That's why the USSR couldn't be defeated -- it had already stockpiled massive amounts of war material for their intended forthcoming offensive. It was believed that only by a surprise attack was there even a *chance* of preventing this offensive and defeating the Soviet Union. It worked for a little while, but ultimately, the lend-lease arrangement, which provided the USSR with near unlimited resources in addition to the incredible amount of war material that it had already prepared by 1941, meant that the USSR simply couldn't be beaten. But had the attempt at a surprise attack not been made, the USSR armies would have rolled over all of Europe -- likely all the way to the Channel. This had always been Stalin's ultimate plan.
✅ right
u r wrong.
I take it you read Stalin's War.
No. 1: They had a crazy corporal making the military decisions. 2. He declared war on U.S. 3. He declared war on USSR. 4. See #1.
No 1 is only because of Germany attacked USSR
It was actually well known in strategic planning that Germany was doomed by 1942 and the Germans knew it too but did not know how to let go of the Tigers tail. The confidence of the allies soared once it was realized that Germany had shot it's bolt in Russia and the US entered the war. The rest of the war was more of a police action in appending criminal Japan and Germany. Unfortunately there would still be a great cost in doing so. Frankly, had the West and Soviet Union not squared off after 1942, a lot more German and Japanese war criminals that would have been punished for extending the war and other criminal acts were spared.
and what he didn't say at Number 5 was that 3 days after Pearl Harbor, Hitler declared war on the US, which was a massive error
Sooner or later a state of war would exist anyway... He was defeated by the USSR with no hope of winning before he felt the real weight of the USA. The USA made it happen faster. They also pushed Churchill who was always stalling about a real Second Front.
This guy talking like hitler made every decision down to the smallest detail. Especially in 41 the Wehrmacht was still completely organised by generals and army hirachy, perhaps the best in history. So the germans not taking winter clothing wasn’t hitlers fault but of higher command.
He basically told them he wants to attack and destroy the Soviet Union to then occupy the land west of the Ural make me a plan.
And they came up with Operation Barbarossa
God always wins at the end. It was a war of Evil Nation against the will of God.
And it was for Germany’s own good.
@@DANIELLE_BREANNA_LACY To loos Germany for ever to Russia. Мы владеем Германией.
Germany could won if fighting one enemy at the time
Yes
No it would never have happend cause the Germans did not come prepared!
@@Moonytoon1979 even if they prepared they still woodnt.... USA was already mile ahead and Britain also,,
Germany could never won
2 reasons why they lost was 1 japan was suppose to attack russia from the east ! But it failed to do so because it was busy expanding in the Pacific 2 was the moment the germans lost the oil fields in the Caucuses region they could no longer fuel anything
Because they decided to attack america instead because America stop selling them oil and they could no longer expand in china nor attack russia and that's why japan attacked pearl harbor and got america into the war has america intended
1. Allowed 350,000+ Allied soldiers to escape in Dunkirk
2. Didn’t invade Malta, Gibraltar or Cyprus
3. Tiny navy, nearly impossible to invade countries across the sea
4. Failed to take Stalingrad causing low oil supply and lack of supply for the southern army to advance further into the caucasus region
5. USA joined the allies
Usa would still provide for the missing troops for d day how do you expect to take a fortress island when you have a small navy and talking Stalingrad would change nothing they would still lose the war learn to think please and thank you
No. 6 Hitler did not listen to the advice of his generals. No. 7 Hitler did not believe in strategic retreat, when retreat would have saved hundreds of thousands of troops, and gained an advantage later.
#6) Hitler underestimated the industrial capacity of the United States. Hitler said it would take the US 75 years to mount an effective campaign against Germany. Instead, near the end of the war, the US was producing as many airplanes and bombers as all other nations combined.
Japan made the same mistake.
Hitler always overestimated himself and underestimated others. With all the Allied nations against him, he can’t go on fighting forever.
Spread too thin, Blitzkrieg was effective when the full power of Germany was focused on one front otherwise it looses its effectiveness is this somewhat reasonable ?
People often say Germany's Invasion of the USSR in 1941 was a mistake and it cost them the war. I think it was their best chance to win the war, but even if they had succeeded they would have lost the war anyways because..... America is OP as fuck. TIK did a video about Germany's chronic oil shortage which explains why the Germans had no choice but to invade the Soviet Union in 1941. In 1941 Germany was already on the brink of running out of oil, they only had enough oil to support military operations until the end of 1941. Past that time, Germany would no longer have the oil to support anymore massive military operations. So Germany's only chance to survive the war was to take the Ukrainian Oil fields. In 1941, The Soviet Union was also in the middle of a massive military modernization program and would not be ready to fight a war until at least mid 1942, so it was the perfect time to attack the Soviet Union. Germany had limited options by 1941: Don't do anything and 100% lose the war to aforementioned oil shortage. Or massively escalate the war against the USSR and attempt to take the oil you need to continue the war. Hitler took a calculated gambit on Operation Barbarossa and the Germans almost made it work, but it was simply too much and was never meant to be.
In the end, the reality is Germany is just a small country with too few people and too few resources to be able to win a war against the world. The Germans bit off way more than they could chew and the Axis powers where doomed once America came into the war. America's industrial might alone is just something that the Germans and Japanese could never dream of matching. Once America got the Atomic Bomb, it wouldn't have mattered if Germany defeated the Russians and took the entire Soviet Union and/or if Japan took all of China. The Americans would have used Atomic bombs to level Germany and Japan and force an unconditional surrender anyways. America's atomic weapons program was just way too far ahead of everyone else, the closest nation to matching America's nuclear weapon program was the Soviet Union, and they only did so via massive spying by communist sympathizers in the US. Even then, the USSR couldn't detonate a nuke until 1949. In the best case scenario for the Axis powers, America would have had 6-8 years of unchallenged nuclear hegemony. Germany and Japan would have no chance of surviving that many years of nuclear fire no matter how much resources they had, or how much land they conquered.
WWII was always a lost cause for the Germans and Japanese. America is just that great.
And why not saying that if Germany didn't declare war on USA and took all over Europe then America would make peace with Hitler instead of nuking all Europe which won't change anything anyway cause Hitler wouldn't care if millions died and this wouldn't have made him surrender anyway and after all he never wanted to invade america
All this without taking in consideration that German scientists were also near to develop a nuclear bomb and were developing Cruz missiles and had pretty developed rocket science ahead all the world then
Germans r talented look at Albert eienstein ,what if he stayed in Germany and help hitler
It astonishes me that highly experienced German Generals took strategic decision orders, from a WW1 Austran artist , who held the rank of Corporal...!
Most definitely the invasion of Russia after the Luftwaffe suffered huge losses during the Battle of Britain was Germany's doom. Not only because of the Russian brutal winter and severely under estimating Soviet military strength but from the Lend Lease from the western Allies.
Stalin was about to invade Germany, Hitler had no choice, he had to go in first or face certain destruction. Hitler didn't know about lend-lease, if he had known he might have changed his plans but one thing is sure, Barbarossa saved Europe from a total communist invasion.
My dad who was a WWII US Army veteran would get so mad at me when I would tell him that if Germany and the US fought 1-on1 Germany would have won easily. He would get so angry with me, but I think it's the truth.
Not a chance. If nothing else, the US developed nuclear weapons. Nazi Germany never came close.
DO things one by one. And be patient. don't be crazy. look at whether one by one. be slow let them make a mistake. Don't let anything behind. If you want
to concord the world.
Comes from a Coke drinking kid who plays COD and thinks he’s a military general.🤣
@@cleopatravii2385 but seems correct
@@cleopatravii2385 dont look at the person look at the message.
When the Germany’s ally (Japan) attacked the US... the US does what the US does
@Wai Kei Luu The USA usually loses; Korea, Viet Nam, Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq and Niger.
Its not losing you Idiot its money making
@@crose7412 lmao this has to be the dumbest comment on UA-cam I’ve ever seen. You take the cake buddy congrats 🎉🍾 .
@@raleighmason7211 Disprove it!
@@crose7412 Nah, Russia is the master at losing. Japan, Germany (WW1), Poland, Finland, Afghanistan. Truth hurts.
The fight the Britain gave Hitler in the summer of 1940 was crucial -- up to that point the Nazi's knew only victory, but Britain, stubborn as she always is, refused to surrender. They held on by there fingernails but by the end of the summer Hitler had largely lost the battle for Britain.
Bonjour a tous du Canada At the end of the war German fight against 26 country
like U.S.A. U.S.S.R. Great britain with the commenwealt (Canada Australia and many more) its impossible fight against all this country an win
1941 THE YEAR OF MADNESS !♣
Didn't allow his amazing Generals do their job. The outcome was inevitable.
His generals were as almost all as incompetent as Hitler. Even Rommel was a hopeless strategist. They blamed Hitler for their mistakes.
@@davidhoward4715 Incompetent only in the fact that they were too afraid to challenge Hitler on his strategy. But hey..that's what happens when one man has too much power.
The entire country was fed methamphetamines by the state, the end result was WWII.......this was major, glossed over,,
You must be American 😂
Attack against Russia wasn't the major reasons of defeat it could have been a victory. According to my opinions the axis forces including japan shouldn't have triggered the sleeping giant United states by attacking pearl harbour this way they wouldn't be overwhelmed by the allies. Instead they should have ignored both u.s.s.r and USA and cooperate to finish the British empires colonies by starting the war of north Africa and Japan should have attacked asian colonies of Britain for example India this would have made the axis much more powerful. After this Britain would be alone and would surrender. So now Germany and Japan should have launched a joint attack on Russia from both their fronts this way the u.s.s.r would be finished achieving both of their goals. War with the United states wasn't nessecary at all.
Japan felt they had to attack the U S because of the oil and trade embargo which the U. S. was pushing for They knew they had to defeat the Allies in 6 months or loose. Germany did not have to go to war with the U. S. . Yes they had a pact with Japan but they also had a pact with the Soviets
No. Both Germany and Japan were short on supplies and so needed to attack their respective foes. Not doing so wont do anything except doom both of them to collapse.
If churchill and England didn’t take charge at the beginning every one would of jus sat on their arses an then it would of bin to late
It was that Brit Churchill, that woke the world.
Some argue Germany was doomed the moment it invaded the Soviet. There is an awful lot of evidence to support this, in hindsight, and I think it's probably correct.
That's the number one reason. Strange how this historian doesn't really identify it.
@2:16 holy crap! I never once thought of that! Yeah, that and an advisor who knew Napoleon and what happened to his campaign in Russia.
Pure and simple he extended his army too far... Stalingrad was the key. He had no idea how cold and how big the Soviet Union was. The Germans were completely out of their element.
Genius German Commanders should have red rhe books instead of burning them. Inability to compare the strength if your logistic with the size of the landmass you want to control doesn't speak for brilliance. The same for the winter. Ok, they might have hoped to win by autumn 41. But how the hell they failed to supply their troops with some coats four winters in a row?
He probably remembered the Soviet map more precisely than you, so he knew how big it is
Should have honoured the treaty to split poland with the USSR. Then invaded north Africa and taken Malta to secure the Mediterranean and taken eygypt to sucure the suiz canal and fortify the island with minefields, airfields, aircraft guns, bunkers and howitzer etc. Then the Germans should have invaded Britain. Then moped up by invading all of Scandinavia and Switzerland. Then invaded Saudi Arabia and Iraq which had started to pump oil for the British empire. Now the Germans can wait until next spring while dropping propoganda leaflets on Russian slavs and invade the USSR from Finland, Eastern Europe and through the Caucasian mountains. The Germans also have Swedish steel, Middle Eastern oil, British coal and ship building yards and the suez canal for imports and to send materials, troops, experts and technical plans to the Japanese. Before the Germans invade they can raise infantry regiments from occupied territory and replace hitler with in a coup. I'm not saying I Wanted the nazis to win but tactically for intellicts sake it was a waste.
No. 3.... Really? That has to be the dumbest statement you could make regarding why Operation Barbarossa failed....
Fact is, frontline unit's were reduced to 20-30% personnel, working on shoestring logistics, of which the priorities were ammunition, fuel and food, in that order. The offensive was officially called off in the first week of December and the Germans intended to winter in place, buildings, trenches, holes, etc. The Soviet counter offensive forced them outside to fight and that is when frostbite became a major issue, not before. The offensive has already failed by then.
The winter uniform story makes no sense because even if they had won the German Army would have still needed them
I've never seen a comment section with so many people that can't write in English but know exactly how the war would have went. Germany lost the war the day they invaded Poland, even nukes wouldn't have helped them.
They lost the war that they they invaded Russia
Everyone here who says "germany should just not have invaded the Soviet Union" should watch this m.ua-cam.com/video/sbim2kGwhpc/v-deo.html
@Mahir Hussam Invading the USSR didn't really make any difference to the outcome they had already lost by then. When they defeated France if they had just forced France to agree to a truce instead of occupying them they could have convinced Britain to agree to a truce as well and they could have ended the war in profit (territorially). Occupying France meant Britain would never agree to a truce and as they couldn't possibly invade Britain that caused a stalemate that would have lasted until the USSR eventually invaded Germany.
@Mahir Hussam But then the ussr invades germany
Once Britain won the Battle of Britain Hitler’s defeat was inevitable. Had he sought a better peace with France he could have done better.
Even in 1940 British manufacturing capacity far exceeded Germany, throwing in the Soviets and later America greatly skewed things against Hitler.
We are fortunate I’ll Duce was a Nazi ally as he cost them diversions in the Balkan’s and Africa which weakened Barbarossa sifnificantly
Stalingrad was the turning point and later Kursk losing the Battle of Britain just insured Britain’s survival not the end of germany
@@myguy6762 No thats somewhere not true. In Stalingrad the Wehrmacht lost the 6 Army thats right. But that wasnt that significant. In Kursk happend literally nothing. The battle is only known for a lie that it was the biggest tank battle. It wasn't, it was the battle of Dubno. And at Kursk the German Panzerwaffe wasnt significantly Damaged. In the Battle of Britain Germany lost a big Part of the Air Force and the simple fact that Britian got air supremacy for Bombing raids trough the entire War in the German War Industrie. The Battle of Britian was a massive Turning Point with Africa, Moscow and D-Day. Stalingrad and Kursk where victorys for the Soviets but they where not near the importenc of the Stationed ones i listed.
WallnussChef however the Battle of Britain did not destroy the ground army. Stalingrad and the soviets did. We can argue but honestly both were turning points but in my opinion Stalingrad was the true change. Germany went from expanding to retreating.
The Germans had a very small navy and never had a hope of controlling the seas. Secondly their logistics were appalling and relied so much on horse drawn transport. The stupid excursion into the vast expanse of Russia stretched their supply lines till they virtually snapped. The there is the technology of the Germans as today in their cars too much of it. Too many varieties of tanks and too sophisticated meaning breakdowns that couldn't be fixed by the crew resulting in the total loss of the vehicle. Add to the mix Bletchley park giving the Russians the German battle plan.
They could have won the seas if Doenitz had got all the U Boats he wanted in good time (instead of building the big ships) The other problem was Bletchley Park (not to mention the British skill at misinformation)
@@g8ymw British sunk all there major Warships and the U-boot fleet
No 8. Germany did not have access to the huge oil resources that it required for its army, air force and navy.