Hitler's Decisions

Discussions on High Command, strategy and the Armed Forces (Wehrmacht) in general.
Post Reply
Starace
Member
Posts: 38
Joined: 14 Feb 2009, 21:38

Hitler's Decisions

#1

Post by Starace » 13 Nov 2009, 15:05

I am curious to know what military decisions were directly made by Hitler during the war. I know for instance the order to not attack the retreating English troops at Dunkirk and his decision not to retreat from Stalingrad were both his but what were some other ones he directly made.

In particular I would like to know about the decisions at the start of the war with regards to France and Belgium. Did he come up with the idea to attack through the Ardennes as if often credited or was it one of his generals?

User avatar
Optiow
Member
Posts: 66
Joined: 27 Jul 2009, 09:04
Location: New Zealand

Re: Hitler's Decisions

#2

Post by Optiow » 17 Nov 2009, 05:04

It was indeed Hitlers decision to invade both France and Poland. He also personally gave the order for the attacks against Denmark and Norway. He did Barbarossa as well. I am not sure, but I believe he was also the one who gave the order to help out the Italians in Greece.


User avatar
The_Enigma
Member
Posts: 2270
Joined: 14 Oct 2007, 15:59
Location: Cheshire, England

Re: Hitler's Decisions

#3

Post by The_Enigma » 17 Nov 2009, 16:00

Il_Duce wrote:I am curious to know what military decisions were directly made by Hitler during the war. I know for instance the order to not attack the retreating English troops at Dunkirk and his decision not to retreat from Stalingrad were both his but what were some other ones he directly made.

In particular I would like to know about the decisions at the start of the war with regards to France and Belgium. Did he come up with the idea to attack through the Ardennes as if often credited or was it one of his generals?
No to be picky but during Dunkirk the German Army was fighting the British Army - made up of British people, not just Englishmen :wink:

As for Dunkirk, iirc, Hitler ordered his armoured divisions to halt their attack due to terrain and logistic issues. I have also read due to the need to use them for the attack into France proper. Hitler didnt call off the attacks on the BEF or trapped Frenchmen. Iirc Göring infromed him the Luftwaffe could ensure they did not escape. I will conceed it has been a while since i have read about the subject so hopefully someone can correct me if i have been wrong here.

As for the Ardennes (1940) i dont believe it quite correct to say that Hitler is given the credit for the attack, it is rather well known that Eric von Manstein came up with the plan.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15583
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Hitler's Decisions

#4

Post by ljadw » 17 Nov 2009, 19:31

It is not that simple:on 23 may,Rundstedt and Kleist ordered their troops to stop;that order was cancelled by Halder and the tanks were taken away from Rundstedt and given to Bock,this without the knowlegde and approval of Hitler . Hitler cancelled the order of Halder . Afterwards the halt order was again cancelled and the army (without the tanks )got the order to capture Dunkirk .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15583
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Hitler's Decisions

#5

Post by ljadw » 17 Nov 2009, 19:39

Concerning the Ardennes :as far I rememberManstein had a developped plan but Hitler was thinking in the same direction;the plan of Manstein was rejected by Halder(a personal enemy of Manstein )and Manstein was transferred to the east,but he got an interview with Hitler and explained his plan to Hitler .

H@wkeye!
Member
Posts: 45
Joined: 14 Oct 2009, 08:38
Location: Canberra ACT Australia

Re: Hitler's Decisions

#6

Post by H@wkeye! » 27 Nov 2009, 01:28

There is no doubt that Manstein came up with the Ardennes plan, it was just Hitler who approved it. It was, however Hitler's idea to find another plan. The original plan was much like the plan to invade France in 1914, the Schlieffen Plan, with a few modification. Hitler didn't much like this plan, so had another one developed, and the result was the Ardennes offensive.

Another notable 'intervention' of Hitler, something i'm currently researching for my thesis, is Hitlers stop directive of late July 1941, where the drive to Moscow was stopped, and the armoured units, 2nd Panzer Army moving south, which resulted in the massive defeat at Kiev for the Russians, but critically delayed the drive on Moscow. The failure to take Moscow, is viewed by many Historians as the true failure of Germany in the East, no other time did they really have a chance of winning the war.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15583
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Hitler's Decisions

#7

Post by ljadw » 27 Nov 2009, 05:27

It has been proved on this forum that in july 1941 the Germans were unable to advance to Moscow and there is no proof that the fall of Moscow would have meaned that the war was over

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15583
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Hitler's Decisions

#8

Post by ljadw » 27 Nov 2009, 05:29

see:the war in eastern Europe:the case against Moscow

Galt
Member
Posts: 2
Joined: 22 Dec 2009, 02:38

Re: Hitler's Decisions

#9

Post by Galt » 22 Dec 2009, 02:54

I'm not sure that enough emphasis has been put on Dunkirk, in spite of everything that has been written about it.

Reading Guderian's memoirs, or those of Dr. Hans Bake, the famous panzer commander, who's tanks were closest to Dunkirk, there was no resistance worth mentioning in the 10 km between Durkirk and German panzer forces ordered to stop at the Aa Canal.

There is some truth that to the fact that Hitler did want to focus his troops for the conquest of the rest of France, but without Goring's assurances of the Luftwaffe being able to destroy the British, he would probably not have ordered this, and it would have been a relatively easy task to capture Dunkirk. The Germans had plenty of strength to do so.

If that would have happened, History might well have been different. If Germany and England make peace in the summer of 1940 (without the BEF, parliment might have forced Churchill to do so), the Battle of Britain is not fought, Norway is not garrisoned with a dozen divisions, or is France. The Afrika corps does not come into existance, and the Balkans to do not need to be invaded.

A much more powerful and focussed German Army and Luftwaffe, would then have been deployed against Russia, leading in all probability to a different outcome in the East.

User avatar
Hossbach
Member
Posts: 39
Joined: 01 Oct 2008, 12:21
Location: U.S.A.

Re: Hitler's Decisions

#10

Post by Hossbach » 31 Dec 2009, 02:22

Rundstedt later said that Hitler had given a speech about the importance of maintaining the existence of the British Empire, that it would be a tragedy for the 'white race' if Britain's Empire were destroyed, since Japan (a "yellow" race) would inherit her far east possessions. Hitler the racial-theorist thus feared his ally (Japan) and time after time allowed his philo-Anglicism to let Britain play him in hopes of finding a 'peace party' and 'reasonable Englishmen'. The Hess flight was another boneheaded consequence of Hitler's Anglophile character.

Britain on the other hand had no compunction about killing Germans. Hers was not a 'racial war', but rather the age-old doctrine of balance of power that dictates that Albion will not countenance any power too strong on the continent. Hitler hoped that the British, seeing Dunkirk as a magnanimous gesture on his part, would 'come to their senses'.

I have read conflicting accounts, including the blame being laid on Goring's doorstep for Dunkirk, but I think the above the most likely explanation, as ridiculous as it might seem to any 'rational' person outside of Hitler's peculiar conceptions of race and his admiration for the British Empire.
War is the Father of All Things.

User avatar
bf109 emil
Member
Posts: 3627
Joined: 25 Mar 2008, 22:20
Location: Youngstown Alberta Canada

Re: Hitler's Decisions

#11

Post by bf109 emil » 07 Jan 2010, 09:38

ljadw wrote:It has been proved on this forum that in july 1941 the Germans were unable to advance to Moscow and there is no proof that the fall of Moscow would have meaned that the war was over
this i agree with, but likewise without the fall of Moscow their was no chance for a German victory without having done so? Likewise without the Fall of Berlin or the capturing of this city, was Germany even pounded in every other region going to surrender, both capitals held a key position in the war and both would need to be conquered if any chance of surrender was going to happen. Stalin showed and proved that huge losses of lives and material inflicted by Germany was not going to be a determining factor, nor was their any chance for an uprising by Soviet citizens to topple Stalin and force this...likewise goes for the same scenario by Hitler and the NSDAP Party as he was willing to have Germany destroyed and it's citizens perish prior to his surrendering...

User avatar
westerhagen
Banned
Posts: 98
Joined: 18 Jan 2010, 17:42

Re: Hitler's Decisions

#12

Post by westerhagen » 18 Jan 2010, 17:55

ljadw wrote:It has been proved on this forum that in july 1941 the Germans were unable to advance to Moscow and there is no proof that the fall of Moscow would have meaned that the war was over
If Hitler had not decided to attack towards the south,then the attack against Moscau could have started in august with a chance of capturing it.Nobody knows with certainty what the consequences would have been.

User avatar
westerhagen
Banned
Posts: 98
Joined: 18 Jan 2010, 17:42

Re: Hitler's Decisions

#13

Post by westerhagen » 18 Jan 2010, 17:57

Optiow wrote:It was indeed Hitlers decision to invade both France and Poland. He also personally gave the order for the attacks against Denmark and Norway. He did Barbarossa as well. I am not sure, but I believe he was also the one who gave the order to help out the Italians in Greece.
As this is about military history,it is about hitler's military decisions.The decision to go to war against whatever country always belong to the political authority.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15583
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Hitler's Decisions

#14

Post by ljadw » 18 Jan 2010, 19:25

westerhagen wrote:
ljadw wrote:It has been proved on this forum that in july 1941 the Germans were unable to advance to Moscow and there is no proof that the fall of Moscow would have meaned that the war was over
If Hitler had not decided to attack towards the south,then the attack against Moscau could have started in august with a chance of capturing it.Nobody knows with certainty what the consequences would have been.
I can only refer to my post of 27 november 2009 :the impossibiliti for advancing to Moscow was caused by a) logisticks b):the Red Army :it was not defeated,but was becoming stronger :there was very bitter fighting in august :the Germans lost 190000 men in that month (see :German casualties in Barbarossa in 1941 )
I agree with your last sentence : :) :'Nobody knows with certainty what the consequences would have been'

User avatar
westerhagen
Banned
Posts: 98
Joined: 18 Jan 2010, 17:42

Re: Hitler's Decisions

#15

Post by westerhagen » 18 Jan 2010, 19:41

there was no impossibility of advancing on moscow in august.If an advance was possible to the south then an advance to the east would also have been possible.The OKH had proposed an advance on Moscow but that was rejected by Hitler.There was a major disagreement between army leaders and Hitler.
Let's have Guderian speak 'panzeroperations pp199-200:
"Hitler agreed and i therefore explained basically and in detail the points that favored a continuation of the advance on moscow and that spoke against the Kiev operation.I maintained that,from a military point of view,the only question was that of finally defeating the enemy forces which had suffered so heavily in the recent battles.I described to him the geographical significance of Moscow,which was quite different as that of,say Paris,.Moscow was the great russian road,rail and communication centre;it was the political solar plexus;it was an important industrial area;and its capture would not only have an enormous psychological effect on the russian people but on the rest of the world as well.I dwelt on the attitude of the soldiers;they expected nothing but an advance on moscow and had already made the necessary preparations for for such an advance with the greatest enthousiasm.I tried to show how a victory in this decisive direction and the consequent destruction of the enemy's main forces,would make the capture of the Ukranian industrial area an easier undertaking;once we had seized the communication hub of Moscow,the russians would have extraordinary difficulty in moving nort to south.
I pointed out that the troops of AGC were now poised for an advance on Moscow;that therefore they could start on the alternative operation towards Kiev,a great deal of time would be wasted in moving to the south-west,that such a move was towards germany,i.e; in the wrong direction;and that for the consequent attack on Moscow,the troops would have to retrace their steps(from Lochvitsa to Roslavl,that is to say 275 miles),with consequent wear to their strength and equipment.I described the condition of the roads over which the Group would have to move,giving as example the ones I knew as far as Unecha ,and the unending supply problems which would become greater with everery day's march towards the Ukraine.Finally,I touched on the enormous difficulties which would arise if the proposed operation were not terminated as fast as we now planned and were to be protracted into the period of bad weather.It would then be too late to strike the final blow for Moscow this year."
A quote from carl Wagener(who was chief of staff of the third panzer army )in 'moskau 1941' p20:
"Panzergroups 2 and 3 reported that,after a short refit,they would be ready to advance again between the 15th and 20th august.
They meant hereby:advance on Moskau......"

And general Heinrici ,in his diary entry of the 25th october1941(published in Viertelsjahrhefte fur zeitgeschichte 2000 p382) says the following:"Everything stops because of the wetness of the roads.....
I say to the chief Blumentritt(chief of staff 4th army):we now miss the 4 weeks of the campaign in Serbia.Yes,he answers,but also the 3 weeks that our superior command talked away in the second half of july/first half of august when they could not agree,if the objective of our further attack should be moscow or the industrial area of the donets.Then we missed weeks of beautiful weather.Then an operational pause was announced.It were these unpleasant weeks for us in Bobruisk,in which it was amways talked about the fact that the highest command was doubting about what to do.The Führer wanted the industry,Brauchits Moskau."

Post Reply

Return to “German Strategy & General German Military Discussion”