Germany lost the war in 1940

The idea of collective responsibility and collective superiority served the Germans well during the initial victorious stages of the war. German soldiers killed many hostages in reprisal for attacks against the Wehrmacht, they committed many atrocities. At the end of the war, when the war fortunes changed, the German changed the rules, the collective responsibility was substituted with individual irresponsibility. Individually the Germans did not know about the atrocities or could prevent them. The Germans were not responsible for the atrocities they did not commit, the individual murderers were not responsible for all the murders committed on orders from above. An order cannot be refused. Suddenly each SS-man saved some inmates, each German had a Jewish friend.

This explains the German psyche very well but what it doesn't explain is why today the German war effort is better known by most people than their own countries efforts, why is that in many cases German war "myth" (The atomic bomb etc.) is being accepted as fact when clearly it wasn't, it is almost as though there is a certain regret that Germany lost.

I find it incredibly strange that there is almost a glorification of the Wehrmacht while all that failed was "Hitler's incompetence", everything that went right was because of Rommel, Guderian or one of the half dozen socially acceptable Generals everything that went badly was Hitler, Goering etc.
 
Monty.
My own theory is that the romance with the German army is based on the idea of "The lost Cause", the same as the attraction for the Confederate army particularly the Army of Northern Virginia under R.E. Lee. The romantic notion of a doomed fight by great warriors against insurmountable odds has a great pull on the imagination. One needs to look past "the good fight" to see the rotten political system behind the great warriors.
 
Monty.
My own theory is that the romance with the German army is based on the idea of "The lost Cause", the same as the attraction for the Confederate army particularly the Army of Northern Virginia under R.E. Lee. The romantic notion of a doomed fight by great warriors against insurmountable odds has a great pull on the imagination. One needs to look past "the good fight" to see the rotten political system behind the great warriors.

I think you are probably correct but surely it does not take a great amount of effort to realise that in both cases had the "under dog" won it would have been a nightmare on a global scale.

Also this does not explain the continuing animosity towards the Japanese soldier of the period because I am not entirely certain Japanese atrocities were any worse than the corresponding German ones, certainly the war in Russia was just as bad as anything the Japanese managed to do.
 
This explains the German psyche very well but what it doesn't explain is why today the German war effort is better known by most people than their own countries efforts, why is that in many cases German war "myth" (The atomic bomb etc.) is being accepted as fact when clearly it wasn't, it is almost as though there is a certain regret that Germany lost.

I find it incredibly strange that there is almost a glorification of the Wehrmacht while all that failed was "Hitler's incompetence", everything that went right was because of Rommel, Guderian or one of the half dozen socially acceptable Generals everything that went badly was Hitler, Goering etc.
This is not strange :it started with LIddell Hart,and it still is continuing :it is an anathema,social and political suicide to even suggest that Hitler could have some military capabilities .
Thus,every one is continuing the old and false theories that the victories were due of the generals and the defeats because of Hitler .
 
Once Hitler took over from the high command, he became too involved as a supreme commander.
The modern term is "Micro manage"
He wouldn't just give the orders for an offensive, but he would give orders down to a tactical level, such as the placement of machine gun position, troop tactics etc, reducing his field commanders to nothing more than messengers.
The only way for commanders to exploit situations in combat was to disobey direct orders, and hope his gamble worked.
The role of Ultra was vital, most historians agree it took two years off the war.
If you ever get a chance to visit Bletchley Park, its well worth it. Such a fascinatining place, and sadly very run down, needing as much financial input as possible.
The English are renowned for not preserving places or equipment of historical significance. Is there one WW2 battleship or cruiser preserved? The TSR2 a plane of great importance destroyed on orders from the Government.What other places have been destroyed?
 
You know what?
I think there is far too great a tendency to blame Germany's defeat on Hitler, there is no doubt he was a poor strategist but there were multiple reasons for Germany's defeat.

For example people refer to the Lotzen decision as the one that cost Germany the war in the East yet I personally can not find fault in Hitlers decision to send Guderian South rather than on to Moscow as the capture of Moscow would have left Army Group Centre in a huge salient with AG-North back at Leningrad and AG-South outside Kiev, if any mistake was made here is was Guderians insistence that he take all his forces South when they were not needed so there is a possibility that both objectives could have been reached.

The demise of the 6th Army at Stalingrad is another area Hitler takes the rap for, yet had the 6th Army withdrawn from Stalingrad while it could a sizable portion of Army Group A and B would have been trapped in the Caucasus and that would have been a far greater loss than that of the 6th Army, as it was they only just got back in time even with the sacrifice.
Once again in my opinion while harsh Hitler's decision was the right one with respect to the over all situation.

Overall while I do not consider Hitler a great soldier but the decisions people seem to attack him over are possibly some of the few he actually got right and had the likes of Goering been more realistic in their abilities, Paulus not stopped for a 2 week rest outside Stalingrad allowing the city to be defended and von Richthofen not thought it was a great idea to bomb Stalingrad to rubble prior to the assault on the city thus turning it into a defenders paradise things may well have turned out differently for the 6th Army.
You mention Guderan not going on to Moscow. Was Moscow the holy grail? Napoleon actually took Moscow and look what happened to him.The Russians would only have retreated east and waited and when the German supply lines were too extended, swooped and destroyed his supplies.No, the war was over when Hitler invaded Russia.
 
You mention Guderan not going on to Moscow. Was Moscow the holy grail? Napoleon actually took Moscow and look what happened to him.The Russians would only have retreated east and waited and when the German supply lines were too extended, swooped and destroyed his supplies.No, the war was over when Hitler invaded Russia.

I agree completely yet there are a number of people here who believe that the Lotzen decision was the turning point of the war, their view is that Moscow was the heart of Soviet Russia as well as an indispensable communications and transport hub and that Moscow's capture would have led to Russia surrender.

I tend to agree with you that capturing Moscow without securing either of its flanks (Army Group North was back at Leningrad and AG South around Kiev) would in all probability led to AG Centres destruction at the end of 1941.

However there is also a school of thought that says both Moscow and the drive south (to surround Kiev which would have secured the AG Centres Southern flank) could have been achieved had Guderian not insisted on taking his whole force south but instead split them.

The English are renowned for not preserving places or equipment of historical significance. Is there one WW2 battleship or cruiser preserved? The TSR2 a plane of great importance destroyed on orders from the Government.What other places have been destroyed?

HMS Belfast (Cruiser - London).
HMS ALLIANCE (Submarine - Gosport).
HMS X24 (X Class Submarine - Gosport).
HMS CAVALIER (Destroyer - Chatham).


:)
 
Last edited:
The English are renowned for not preserving places or equipment of historical significance. Is there one WW2 battleship or cruiser preserved? The TSR2 a plane of great importance destroyed on orders from the Government.What other places have been destroyed?

Its the British, not just the English.

I agree with you totally, it's a damn shame that not one battleship has been preserved. However, there is HMS Belfast moored on the River Thames. Not much I know considering Britain Naval history.

Ah the TSR2. She ticked all the right boxes apart from the political one. It can be laid at the feet of Churchill's idiot son in law Duncan Sandy's who stated in a white paper that piloted aircraft are a thing of the past. The TSR2 was scrapped as well as a crap load of other projects on the drawing board.

As I have said many times, politicians should stick to what they know, getting drunk, shouting abuse at the opposition and fiddling their expenses.

So much of British history has been lost because of idiotic British Governments always pleading poverty, yet can find millions to give to despotic leaders like Mugabe.

HMS Belfast (Cruiser - London).
HMS ALLIANCE (Submarine - Gosport).
HMS X24 (X Class Submarine - Gosport).
HMS CAVALIER (Destroyer - Chatham).:)

I was totally unaware of the last three.

The Battle of Britain flight has at least kept a few WW2 aircraft in the air, but there are still too many omission's, such as the Mosquito, the Wellington, Halifax and Sterling.
 
Last edited:
The English are renowned for not preserving places or equipment of historical significance. Is there one WW2 battleship or cruiser preserved? The TSR2 a plane of great importance destroyed on orders from the Government.What other places have been destroyed?

Thats a bit unfair.
There are numerous museums such as Hendon, Cosford, Duxford, Imperial War Museums in London and Manchester, the Cabbinet War Rooms, the National Army Museums, the Mosquito Museum, the Shuttleworth Collection, the Muckleborough Collection etc.
HMS Belfast is a Cruiser preserved in the Pool of London and there are numerous other smaller private museums.
Nearly every regiment of the British Army have their own museums, all open to the public.

The UK was turned into a huge Airbase, Army camp, and Naval base during WWII. Farm land was taken and villages evacuated to build military instalations. When the war ended, people wanted their land and homes back.
I live in an area surrounded by old 8th Airforce bomber bases. These were all built on farm land. The airfields may have gone but magnificent memorials stand on the sites and in nearby villages.
Glenn Millar was based in my home town, there ar memorials to him there and at the site of the old Twinwoods airfield, where he took off from when he disappeared, there is a fantastic museum:
http://www.twinwoodairfield.co.uk/twinwood-airfield-aviation-museum.html

We have a museum to the 306th Bomb Group USAAF nearby too:
http://www.306bg.co.uk/history.html

Bletchley Park was closed down and Station X's existence hidden for so long because the Soviet forces were using captured Enigma machines and we were reading their messages and as they never knew we had cracked Enigma, we dismantled Station X and shifted it all to a pupose built location that became GCHQ.
It would have been daft to advertise we could read their codes by creating a museum to the work and efforts of Bletchley Park.

The UK had suffered greatly in WWII and wanted to get back to normal as soon as they could. They weren't thinking of preserving things for prosperity, but of rebuilding and the future, but there are a multitude of Museums, national and private collections, so I would say we are renowned for preserving places and equipment of historical significance.

By the way, TSR2 was cancelled by the government on political grounds. Two airframes exist in Duxford and Cosford, and to be honest, they were not that great an aircraft! AND don't forget the only airworthy Vulcan is based in the UK http://www.vulcantothesky.org/

And finally! There is a team building a full size replica of the Short Stirling as none survived intact after the war, while RAF Cosford is fully refurbishing a Wellington and, the privately owned Lancaster "Just Jane" http://www.lincsaviation.co.uk/ is being restored to flying status so there will be three airworthy Lancasters in the world! AND! there is a number of DH Mosquitos being restored to airworthy status.
 
Last edited:
The point is Trooper, the Vulcan for example should be kept in the air by government grants, not relying on public donations.

There shouldn't be just replica's of aircraft, there should be airworthy examples. The only Wellington that comes to mind is one that pancaked into a Scottish Loch, yes she was recovered but only being rebuilt to static display standard.

I must admit I am highly chuffed that another Lancaster is being made airworthy.

Once again though, I firmly believe that all of these projects should be funded by government including the Mosquito's.
 
I was totally unaware of the last three.

The Battle of Britain flight has at least kept a few WW2 aircraft in the air, but there are still too many omission's, such as the Mosquito, the Wellington, Halifax and Sterling.

HMS Alliance was almost a post war submarine, it was launched in July 1945 but not commissioned until early 1947.

As for Mosquito's it still amazes me when I look at the photo's of RNZAF ones being sold as firewood, basically they stripped them and sold off the shells, however as I mentioned in another thread the restoration group I joined has a pair of the engines they recovered from a pit and one day who knows maybe they will get one back in the air.
 
Last edited:
The point is Trooper, the Vulcan for example should be kept in the air by government grants, not relying on public donations.

There shouldn't be just replica's of aircraft, there should be airworthy examples. The only Wellington that comes to mind is one that pancaked into a Scottish Loch, yes she was recovered but only being rebuilt to static display standard.

I must admit I am highly chuffed that another Lancaster is being made airworthy.

Once again though, I firmly believe that all of these projects should be funded by government including the Mosquito's.

The goverment are more interested in lining their own pockets rather than putting money into these worthy causes, unfortunately:( But they are happy to bask in the reflected glorry of the hard work of the private individuals :bang:
I am just glad that their are so many people in the country who have such a passion for the past that these projects exist.
And I am proud to say I have contributed to a number of local projects.

The Wellington Cosford is restoring, is a complete airframe previously on display at Hendon. This is as well as the one pulled out of Loch Ness.
Another thing that needs to be remembered, is that these machines were never meant to last.
Our heavy bombers had the second highest casualty rate of any fighting unit in the war, the U-Boat crews have that dubious distinction.
The Stirlings were quickly withdrawn from bombing duties as the Lancaster became available. The Stirlings were moved to transport duties and the production was wound down, 2,383 were built compared to 7,377 Lancasters.
So by the end of the war their role as a bomber was largely forgotten and no one thought "lets stick one in a museum"
After they finished filming "The Dambusters" the five Lancasters used in the film were flown to a maintenance unit for scrapping!
They had just made a film of the contribution they, and their crews had made to the war, and then scrapped them:(.
Then maybe the feeling was "Lets move on, we need domestic goods and we want to forget the war" now, people are scouring the world for wrecks to restore and when none are suitable for this, they will build from scratch.
There is a Hallifax III in a museumin the UK http://www.yorkshireairmuseum.org/. I think its part original, part replica.
There is one in Canada, and Hendon has a wreck of one.
As the Hallifax was second fiddle to the Lancaster, few people out side the crews, know of them. I have seen documentaries using film of Hallifaxs and referring to them as Lancasters!
 
Last edited:
The goverment are more interested in lining their own pockets rather than putting money into these worthy causes, unfortunately:( But they are happy to bask in the reflected glorry of the hard work of the private individuals :bang:

Tell me about it, it really pisses me off big time.


I am just glad that their are so many people in the country who have such a passion for the past that these projects exist.
And I am proud to say I have contributed to a number of local projects.

The Wellington Cosford is restoring, is a complete airframe previously on display at Hendon. This is as well as the one pulled out of Loch Ness.
Another thing that needs to be remembered, is that these machines were never meant to last.

I was stationed at Hendon when the museum was being built, then it was just a mud pile. Another famous station reduced to a shadow of it's former self, that also pisses me off. I got my discharge from Hendon. Well done for helping with local projects.


Our heavy bombers had the second highest casualty rate of any fighting unit in the war, the U-Boat crews have that dubious distinction.

55,000 aircrew died if my memory is correct, that horrendous losses. I also believe the US 8th Air Force lost about the same. Its so damn sad that so many young men lost their lives, on both sides.


The Stirlings were quickly withdrawn from bombing duties as the Lancaster became available. The Stirlings were moved to transport duties and the production was wound down, 2,383 were built compared to 7,377 Lancasters.
So by the end of the war their role as a bomber was largely forgotten and no one thought "lets stick one in a museum"
After they finished filming "The Dambusters" the five Lancasters used in the film were flown to a maintenance unit for scrapping!
They had just made a film of the contribution they, and their crews had made to the war, and then scrapped them:(.
Then maybe the feeling was "Lets move on, we need domestic goods and we want to forget the war" now, people are scouring the world for wrecks to restore and when none are suitable for this, they will build from scratch.
There is a Hallifax III in a museumin the UK http://www.yorkshireairmuseum.org/. I think its part original, part replica.
There is one in Canada, and Hendon has a wreck of one.
As the Hallifax was second fiddle to the Lancaster, few people out side the crews, know of them. I have seen documentaries using film of Hallifaxs and referring to them as Lancasters!

The Halifax was a very good aircraft but had a smaller bomb load then the Lancaster, 13,000 pounds as opposed to 20,000 pounds for the Lancaster. However, the Halifax gave wonderful service in the RAF but also other air forces around the world.

I suppose the Lancaster v Halifax is the same as Spitfire v Hurricane debate. German aircrew shot down always claimed they were shot down by a Spitfire, when in fact they had been shot down by Hurricanes. Hurricane pilots called it (quite rightly) "Spitfire snobbery."

HMS Alliance was almost a post war submarine, it was launched in July 1945 but not commissioned until early 1947.

As for Mosquito's it still amazes me when I look at the photo's of RNZAF ones being sold as firewood, basically they stripped them and sold off the shells, however as I mentioned in another thread the restoration group I joined has a pair of the engines they recovered from a pit and one day who knows maybe they will get one back in the air.

Thanks for the info Monty.

Well done for joining a restoration group, I hope you chaps do manage to get one airworthy.

I don't think there is anything more sad then seeing famous aircraft on the scrap heap.
 
Last edited:
I don't think there is anything more sad then seeing famous aircraft on the scrap heap.

On the A1 at Newark there is a large scrap yard.
When the Lightning went out of service, the RAF flogged them off to the highest bidder and this place got one.
The Lightning sat there for years, rotting away and despite many offers from museums and private collectors, he wouldn't sell until the thing rotted away and was finaly scrapped:cry:
These scrap dealers can out bid museums and collectors and to be honest, the value of these things once broken down can't be that much.

We have a local farmer who has a Stalwart and a Saladin on his property, again rotting away. i know offers have been made by AFV collectors, but he refuses to sell.
I've watched these two vechiles decompose over years. its so sad.
 
Thanks for the info Monty.

Well done for joining a restoration group, I hope you chaps do manage to get one airworthy.

I don't think there is anything more sad then seeing famous aircraft on the scrap heap.

There are approximately 30 Mosquito's being restored Worldwide including the one being done locally.

http://www.mossie.org/articles/CWD/Mos.html


http://www.mossie.org/Mosquito_loc.htm

http://tvnz.co.nz/close-up/mosquito-bomber-builder-bitten-2961374/video?vid=2961440
 
Last edited:

If I remember correctly there was a restoration bloke in Aussie, who sends his crew around the world to look for crashed or good condition aircraft for clients. Once he has found the aircraft he gets it back into airworthy condition.

I remember him saying the biggest problem with the Mosquito they don't do too well in humid countries, as the wood and the glue rots badly.

I see that there is one at Duxford that wasn't there when I was there last in 1993. I hope they get the old girl airworthy, even if she was only a target tower.

On the A1 at Newark there is a large scrap yard.
When the Lightning went out of service, the RAF flogged them off to the highest bidder and this place got one.
The Lightning sat there for years, rotting away and despite many offers from museums and private collectors, he wouldn't sell until the thing rotted away and was finaly scrapped:cry:
These scrap dealers can out bid museums and collectors and to be honest, the value of these things once broken down can't be that much.

We have a local farmer who has a Stalwart and a Saladin on his property, again rotting away. i know offers have been made by AFV collectors, but he refuses to sell.
I've watched these two vechiles decompose over years. its so sad.

There was a bloke here who had a Saracen, the ANC nearly had a heart attack. I haven't seen it for quite awhile.

Jeremy Clarkson had a Lightning in his garden, wasn't he told by the local council to get rid of it?

When the aeroplane arrives his missus was bitching, he retorted along the lines of, "These aircraft and their pilots stopped the Russians in their tracks."

I forget how much a Lightning weighs now, but take away her engines and there's not much left. But it is a damn shame they are left to rot.

At least here at Thunder City Lightning's, Hunters and Buccaneers kept airworthy and flown quite often. I have heard that Thunder City have caused a little bit of concern for the ANC though, they say no one knows where the Aden gun packs are for the Hunters. The gun packs were delivered with the aircraft, but suddenly vanished.

Nice one.
 
Last edited:
If I remember correctly there was a restoration bloke in Aussie, who sends his crew around the world to look for crashed or good condition aircraft for clients. Once he has found the aircraft he gets it back into airworthy condition.

I remember him saying the biggest problem with the Mosquito they don't do too well in humid countries, as the wood and the glue rots badly.

I see that there is one at Duxford that wasn't there when I was there last in 1993. I hope they get the old girl airworthy, even if she was only a target tower.

Here is information on the company doing the restoration and a few of their other projects.

http://www.warbirdrestoration.co.nz/
 
I think that any one that can remember the war, can remember all the ,military equipment that was around. The Skies black with aircraft and their engine noise would shake your whole body, convoys of trucks that would take hours to pass the end of road. Even ten years later there were still a lot of the knocking around and no one every really thought about a time when there would not any left. I can remember them dumping Spitfires in the sea of Malaysia in the 1950's just to get rid of them when newer aircraft came along. There again the people where looking for consumer goods after the war and there was this huge pile of metal just sitting around, so it was turned into goods, and I think after what those people had gone through they were just looking for a better life. Also it was all these people who had given up so much to make all these weapons of war and all they wanted was a better life afterwards.
 
To bring us back on track I have just picked the book...

Why Germany Nearly Won: A New History of the Second World War in Europe (War, Technology, and History) by Steven D Mercatante which looks quite interesting, I expect it to be somewhat revisionist but it has received a number of good reviews.

Why Germany Nearly Won: A New History of the Second World War in Europe (War, Technology, and History) [Hardcover]
Steven D Mercatante (Author)
Book Description
Publication Date: January 16, 2012 | ISBN-10: 0313395926 | ISBN-13: 978-0313395925
Why Germany Nearly Won challenges today's conventional wisdom explaining Germany's Second World War defeat as inevitable primarily for brute force economic or military reasons created when Germany attacked the Soviet Union. Taking an entirely new perspective on explaining the Second World War in Europe, and its outcome, at its core Why Germany Nearly Won offers the reader three interrelated, unique, and potentially ground-breaking arguments. First, qualitative differences between the combatants proved more important in determining the War's outcome than have the quantitative brute force measures so commonly discussed in the past. Second, attacking the Soviet Union represented Germany's best opportunity to win a War which, by commonly cited measures of military potential, Germany never should have had even a remote chance of winning. Third, for reasons frequently overlooked and misunderstood Germany came far closer to winning the War than has previously been recognized.

http://www.amazon.com/Why-Germany-Nearly-Won-Technology/dp/0313395926/ref=pd_sim_b_4
 
To bring us back on track I have just picked the book...

Why Germany Nearly Won: A New History of the Second World War in Europe (War, Technology, and History) by Steven D Mercatante which looks quite interesting, I expect it to be somewhat revisionist but it has received a number of good reviews.

Why Germany Nearly Won: A New History of the Second World War in Europe (War, Technology, and History) [Hardcover]
Steven D Mercatante (Author)
Book Description
Publication Date: January 16, 2012 | ISBN-10: 0313395926 | ISBN-13: 978-0313395925
Why Germany Nearly Won challenges today's conventional wisdom explaining Germany's Second World War defeat as inevitable primarily for brute force economic or military reasons created when Germany attacked the Soviet Union. Taking an entirely new perspective on explaining the Second World War in Europe, and its outcome, at its core Why Germany Nearly Won offers the reader three interrelated, unique, and potentially ground-breaking arguments. First, qualitative differences between the combatants proved more important in determining the War's outcome than have the quantitative brute force measures so commonly discussed in the past. Second, attacking the Soviet Union represented Germany's best opportunity to win a War which, by commonly cited measures of military potential, Germany never should have had even a remote chance of winning. Third, for reasons frequently overlooked and misunderstood Germany came far closer to winning the War than has previously been recognized.

http://www.amazon.com/Why-Germany-Nearly-Won-Technology/dp/0313395926/ref=pd_sim_b_4

Hi Monty, I hope you are well.

I'm not sure there will be anything new in that book, although the ideas in it are not the majority view and it sounds quite interesting. BTW, I see nothing wrong with a revisionist view as long as it's objective and seeks to correct widely-held misnomers and half-truths with either new evidence or new interpretation of existing evidence.

After looking at Barbarossa it is evident that the Germans lost the war in 1941, not 1940. Adopting a 2 season campaign and taking advantage of 'liberating' oppressed peoples under the Soviets might have won the European war for Germany. If you were taking part in a simulation or wargame and you were trying to win in 1941 from the Germany's historical start these points are almost no-brainers to me. However, the nature of the Nazi regime never would have allowed these two decisions to be made in the first place. Thus we have a paradox where the Nazi regime was both necessary to foster a Germany with the potential to dominate the European continent but at the same time was the reason for it's ultimate failure.

Although Germany lost the war by virtue of the actions they undertook against the Soviet Union in 1941, it was still absolutely necessary that they attacked when they did. Another paradox in a sense.
 
Back
Top