Greatest waste of resources by Nazi Germany
MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
Of those choices I think obviously the Atlantic Wall would be the winner given the amount of men and materials tied up in making it but given that it really was a necessity I am not sure it is the right answer.
The V1 and V2 were excellent weapons that were misused.
Bismarck and Tirpitz for all their lack of success still tied up a lot of allied resources so I am not sure they can be considered a waste of resources.
I can't remember the secondary source (a documentary) but the primary source was a long-lost audio-recording of Hitler on a train with ....I think...Norwegian or Finnish or Swedish....or some other nationality's officials... and Hitler in an unusually unguarded display of pessimism was saying his Intelligence had grossly underestimated Russia's manufacturing capacity especially its ability to mass produce tanks and its missile technology (Stalins organs) and that had he known this he would never had attacked the Soviet Union (but he added he felt he had to because Russia in diplomatic communiques were making threats or bullying Germany over access to oil - according to Hitler).
So I think the opening of a second front in Europe and taking on the might of the Soviet Union (which took awhile to reach full strength) was the greatest waste of human and military industrial materiel for Germany's war effort.
In fact, slightly off topic, I believe if Germany had not declared war on USSR, Germany would have either won WW2 or forced an agreeable armistice (agreeable to Germany that is), or at the very least would have meant Germany could have kept on fighting well into 1946 and as some might know, she may then have been the first to have jet fighters in mass production, and possibly developed the A-bomb and with such weapons won the war or forced a peace on its terms (keeping Poland, maybe most of France and eastern European states).
So I think the opening of a second front in Europe and taking on the might of the Soviet Union (which took awhile to reach full strength) was the greatest waste of human and military industrial materiel for Germany's war effort.
In fact, slightly off topic, I believe if Germany had not declared war on USSR, Germany would have either won WW2 or forced an agreeable armistice (agreeable to Germany that is), or at the very least would have meant Germany could have kept on fighting well into 1946 and as some might know, she may then have been the first to have jet fighters in mass production, and possibly developed the A-bomb and with such weapons won the war or forced a peace on its terms (keeping Poland, maybe most of France and eastern European states).
I agree with what you have said. Declaring war on the US was also
a major mistake. After Pearl Harbor, the focus of the US was on Japan, not Germany. Had a little more common sense been used on the Eastern
Front, breaking up conquests into more into smaller more diagestable chucks, some sort of uneasy peace or armistice, might have occured
or been forced on Great Britain.
If they hadn't attacked the Russians I don't think The US & UK would have had much chance of sucsessfully invading the Continent, if we keep the A-Bombs out of the mix.
Yin717
Active member
I would still argue it was still a waste of resources. It was originally created because Hitler wanted a big battleship. Then he realised that the British would sink them easily and so obviously went back to the U-Boat, but not before he wasted lots of precious resources protecting the ships that would pretty much do nothing. The fact that the British kept searching for it was an unforeseen consequence. Arguably it even helped the British in that during, what I call, the 'Quiet Era' of 1941 to 1944 it could give it's special force's experience in assaulting the ports where these ships were held. So that probably outweighed the run around the British did. It was a classic example of where Hitler wanted to show the world that he appeared strong but just made himself weaker in the process.Just imagine where the resources of those ships and those of guarding them could have actually gone?
Maybe, but the war started prematurly for the plans of the Navy to bear fruit. The Navy didn't expect War untill '45-50. Had the War started in '48 the Navy would have had 6 Type H , 4 Gneisenau/Bismarck Battleships, 3 Deutschland Armored Ships, 12 Type P Battle Cruisers, 8 Aircraft Carriers, 5 CA, 24 CL & 36 Scout Cruisers, & 70 DD, 78 Torpedo Boats & 249 subs.
LeEnfield
Active member
The Atlantic wall was a necessities for them and it was only the allies hitting them where it was the weakest that helped carry the day, yet in the American sector is caused them a lot of problems.
The Bismark and Tirpitz.....Now just being there tied up a huge amount of the Royal Navy just in case they came out for a raid. This in turn gave the U Boats a free run for quite a while in the Atlantic
V1 & V2 now living in London during this they did not seem to be a waste of money and they tied up huge amounts of men and guns manning the batteries all along the south coast and a large number of RAF Squadrons either shooting them down, and for looking and attacking launch pads and bombing there R & D Labs and places of manufacturer.
It is rather like the Allied raids on Germany that tied up a million Germans on air defence rather than fighting the allies on the ground
The Bismark and Tirpitz.....Now just being there tied up a huge amount of the Royal Navy just in case they came out for a raid. This in turn gave the U Boats a free run for quite a while in the Atlantic
V1 & V2 now living in London during this they did not seem to be a waste of money and they tied up huge amounts of men and guns manning the batteries all along the south coast and a large number of RAF Squadrons either shooting them down, and for looking and attacking launch pads and bombing there R & D Labs and places of manufacturer.
It is rather like the Allied raids on Germany that tied up a million Germans on air defence rather than fighting the allies on the ground
muscogeemike
Active member
I would think that the greatest waste of recourses, by the Nazi’s, was their failure to use ethnic populations to their advantage,
Instead of the genocidal treatment of Jews, Slav’s, Poles and others, treating these people better would have resulted in less trouble for the Germans least. These people may well have cooperated more in their war against the USSR in particular.
Early in the German occupation of France they weren’t so savage in their policies towards the French people. Despite the popular view of the “French Resistance”, from what I’ve read, most French people just wanted to live their lives, to be left alone. They were mostly passive, and even supportive in the German’s Eastern venture’s and in their anti-Semitic policies.
I don’t see why other occupied people wouldn’t have re-acted in the same manner.
Instead of the genocidal treatment of Jews, Slav’s, Poles and others, treating these people better would have resulted in less trouble for the Germans least. These people may well have cooperated more in their war against the USSR in particular.
Early in the German occupation of France they weren’t so savage in their policies towards the French people. Despite the popular view of the “French Resistance”, from what I’ve read, most French people just wanted to live their lives, to be left alone. They were mostly passive, and even supportive in the German’s Eastern venture’s and in their anti-Semitic policies.
I don’t see why other occupied people wouldn’t have re-acted in the same manner.
I thought the Germans / SS, did in fact make good and surprising use of Slavic and even moslem recruits on the Russian front - and in large numbers ??? I remember reading or seeing it somewhere and being surprised because of the Nazi doctrine of non-Germanic races being inferior and yet they made up some entire batallions of the SS or regular army. In fact didn't they even recruit Cossacks to fight for them (Germany) ???
Panzercracker
Active member
Epic comment mate.
papasha408
Active member
The biggest waste or at least one of them was the concentration camp system. Since at least 250,000 members of the Wehrmact were Jews or part Jews, Hitlers racial policies created a terrible waste of manpower. It is interesting to note, a person of Jewish ancestry could be declared Aryan on a whim. Both Hitler and Goering declared many Jewish citizens Aryan. The term for Jewish individuals who fought for the Wehrmact was Mishling or Mishlinge.
papasha408
Active member
You very well may be right as far as the numbers go. Martin Rigg in his very interesting book, ' Hitler's Jewish Soldiers' mentions a little more than 150,000 Mishlinge in service with the Reich. The number 250,000 comes up as a possibility. The explanation is those who hid their Jewish blood and of course those who had no idea, they had Jewish blood in the first place. Whatever the number it is, the whole phenomena of soldiers in the Wehrmact who had Jewish blood is very, very interesting.
150.000 Mischlinge was possible,that would be ONE percent of all men who served inthe Wehrmacht .
samneanderthal
Active member
I think these were the most wasteful aspects:
1) Had Hitler mass produced VWs, Condors, railroad engines, fertilizers, merchant ships, armament, etc, for export in 1939, he would have expanded his economy and industry enormously and been in a much better position to start the war in 1942.
2) Hitler did not use Stalin or Poland to full advantage in 1939. He should have offered Stalin all of Poland (Stalin would have lost a lot of troops, tanks, etc, capturing it). Germany could attack France in 1939, without any British expeditionary force there and even less prepared. Then in 1941 Hitler could have liberated Poland, armed the Poles and used them to invade the USSR.
In 1939, Hitler should have also urged Stalin to invade weak Persia and deprive Britain and France of Persian oil.
3) Hitler wasted his most important resource, his brilliant experts. For example, he got rid of Schacht the brilliant economist who fixed his economy and put the useless Göring in his post. Similarly, he ignored, contradicted or dismissed his field marshals and generals throughout the war. For example he dismissed Guderian, List, Leeb, Manstein, etc, extremely bright strategists and tactitians who had achieved wonders in spite of Hitler's stupidity and constant interferance.
4) Hitler wasted his most important, mobile and expensive armament rather daftly, his airplanes and their crews. He should have been able to defeat France, Belgium and Holland losing a small fraction of the 2,000 planes he lost. He should have eliminated the allied planes before invading, just like the allies did with the Luftwaffe in Sicily, France, Germany, etc, so that the planes concentrate first on destroying enemy planes with few losses and then on supporting the advancing tanks, etc, also with few losses.
Most importantly, Hitler wasted 2,000 planes in the BoB totally pointlessly. These airplanes would have been invaluable first in the Mediterranean and then in the USSR.
The USSR was invaded with ridiculous numbers of planes, after losing 2,000 over France, as many over Britain and several hundred in Poland, Norway, Greece, Yugoslavia, etc, So that the largest country in the world with 28,800 tanks and 20,000 planes was invaded with ridculous numbers of tanks and planes.
Even when attacking the USSR, Hitler did not spend a few days destroying thousands of planes before sending in the army, so that the few German planes had to concentrate on destroying Soviet planes and the tanks received very defficient support during their advance along the huge front, very much weaker than the support afforded Guderian in France. This caused considerable losses in German tanks from the outset, so that by DEcember the Germans were running out of tanks and planes and the offensive ground to a halt all along the front and soon lost a lot of territory gained at a great cost.
5) Hitler also wasted a most valuable thing: time. Instead of going around Sevastopol, Kiev, Smolensk, etc, which were very heavily fortified, Hitler wasted a great many resources capturing these cities, including 8 months of Manstein's time (the first 3 being the most critical time in the war) just capturing Sevastopol, which was arguably the strongest fortification ever built and which could not present any threat to a Blitzkrieg offensive.
By the way, the extremely expensive 800 mm double rail gun used to bombard the fortress cost a fortune to build and transport and required a whole division and its armor piercing shell weighed 7 metric tons, talk about waste. In contrast there were never enough of the useful 88 mm FLAK at the front.
1) Had Hitler mass produced VWs, Condors, railroad engines, fertilizers, merchant ships, armament, etc, for export in 1939, he would have expanded his economy and industry enormously and been in a much better position to start the war in 1942.
2) Hitler did not use Stalin or Poland to full advantage in 1939. He should have offered Stalin all of Poland (Stalin would have lost a lot of troops, tanks, etc, capturing it). Germany could attack France in 1939, without any British expeditionary force there and even less prepared. Then in 1941 Hitler could have liberated Poland, armed the Poles and used them to invade the USSR.
In 1939, Hitler should have also urged Stalin to invade weak Persia and deprive Britain and France of Persian oil.
3) Hitler wasted his most important resource, his brilliant experts. For example, he got rid of Schacht the brilliant economist who fixed his economy and put the useless Göring in his post. Similarly, he ignored, contradicted or dismissed his field marshals and generals throughout the war. For example he dismissed Guderian, List, Leeb, Manstein, etc, extremely bright strategists and tactitians who had achieved wonders in spite of Hitler's stupidity and constant interferance.
4) Hitler wasted his most important, mobile and expensive armament rather daftly, his airplanes and their crews. He should have been able to defeat France, Belgium and Holland losing a small fraction of the 2,000 planes he lost. He should have eliminated the allied planes before invading, just like the allies did with the Luftwaffe in Sicily, France, Germany, etc, so that the planes concentrate first on destroying enemy planes with few losses and then on supporting the advancing tanks, etc, also with few losses.
Most importantly, Hitler wasted 2,000 planes in the BoB totally pointlessly. These airplanes would have been invaluable first in the Mediterranean and then in the USSR.
The USSR was invaded with ridiculous numbers of planes, after losing 2,000 over France, as many over Britain and several hundred in Poland, Norway, Greece, Yugoslavia, etc, So that the largest country in the world with 28,800 tanks and 20,000 planes was invaded with ridculous numbers of tanks and planes.
Even when attacking the USSR, Hitler did not spend a few days destroying thousands of planes before sending in the army, so that the few German planes had to concentrate on destroying Soviet planes and the tanks received very defficient support during their advance along the huge front, very much weaker than the support afforded Guderian in France. This caused considerable losses in German tanks from the outset, so that by DEcember the Germans were running out of tanks and planes and the offensive ground to a halt all along the front and soon lost a lot of territory gained at a great cost.
5) Hitler also wasted a most valuable thing: time. Instead of going around Sevastopol, Kiev, Smolensk, etc, which were very heavily fortified, Hitler wasted a great many resources capturing these cities, including 8 months of Manstein's time (the first 3 being the most critical time in the war) just capturing Sevastopol, which was arguably the strongest fortification ever built and which could not present any threat to a Blitzkrieg offensive.
By the way, the extremely expensive 800 mm double rail gun used to bombard the fortress cost a fortune to build and transport and required a whole division and its armor piercing shell weighed 7 metric tons, talk about waste. In contrast there were never enough of the useful 88 mm FLAK at the front.
Last edited:
captiva303
Active member
Just for point 2 wouldn't that give Stalin a massive buffer zone? Stalin would also have to base troops in Poland to keep control of it further complicating the Germans inevitable invasion of Russia. It would also of been inconceivable for it to happen under Nazi ideology where the Nazis believed they would obtain there "lebensraum" in the east....