Hitler 's Wehrmacht or Kaiser 's Imperial army better ?

Discussions on High Command, strategy and the Armed Forces (Wehrmacht) in general.
Kelvin
Member
Posts: 3117
Joined: 06 Apr 2007, 15:49

Hitler 's Wehrmacht or Kaiser 's Imperial army better ?

#1

Post by Kelvin » 28 Jul 2011, 07:37

Hitler 's Wehrmacht and Kaiser 's Imperial Army all were German army , but I always heard many German units of Hitler 's Wehrmacht but the units of Kaiser 's army were rarely mentioned by some people, did Hitler 's Wehrmacht was more famour than those of Kaiser and Hitler 's army was better than Kaiser 's ?

Anyone have ideas ?

User avatar
Panzerkampfwagen
Member
Posts: 221
Joined: 23 Dec 2010, 15:43

Re: Hitler 's Wehrmacht or Kaiser 's Imperial army better ?

#2

Post by Panzerkampfwagen » 28 Jul 2011, 08:07

IMHO, I don't think a definitive conclusion can be made from your question. Logically, if both of them went to war, the Wehrmacht should win, as the Wehrmacht had better modern weapons, was more mobile, had much better air support and better infantry weapons. I think the static artillery must have been about par at both the eras. The only quantitative advantage that the Kaiser may have had was the Imperial Navy over the Kriegsmarine.


nebelwerferXXX
Member
Posts: 1256
Joined: 31 Jul 2010, 07:39
Location: Philippines

Hitler's Wehrmacht or Kaiser's Imperial army better ?

#3

Post by nebelwerferXXX » 28 Jul 2011, 08:51

Can a hypothetical answer be allowed in this topic just to make sure before I can post my opinion ? Why the Wehrmacht ? It covers the Heer, Luftwaffe and KM, while the Kaiser is only the Imperial Army. Is that what you mean ?

User avatar
AVV
Member
Posts: 3849
Joined: 31 Mar 2009, 20:25
Location: Kiev, Ukraine

Re: Hitler 's Wehrmacht or Kaiser 's Imperial army better ?

#4

Post by AVV » 28 Jul 2011, 09:42

Hello!
In any case, it's hard to deny that Wehrmacht had higher morale than Kaiser's Army.

Best regards, Aleks

Kelvin
Member
Posts: 3117
Joined: 06 Apr 2007, 15:49

Re: Hitler 's Wehrmacht or Kaiser 's Imperial army better ?

#5

Post by Kelvin » 28 Jul 2011, 12:23

AVV wrote:Hello!
In any case, it's hard to deny that Wehrmacht had higher morale than Kaiser's Army.

Best regards, Aleks
Hi, Aleks, I absolutely endorse your view on that. :)

User avatar
Tim Smith
Member
Posts: 6177
Joined: 19 Aug 2002, 13:15
Location: UK

Re: Hitler 's Wehrmacht or Kaiser 's Imperial army better ?

#6

Post by Tim Smith » 28 Jul 2011, 13:23

The morale of the Kaiser's Imperial armies (Prussian, Bavarian, etc) was definitely higher in August 1914 than the morale of Hitler's Heer was on Sept 1 1939. The Kaiser's army expected eventual victory - the Heer expected eventual defeat.

Not even the soldiers of the Heer expected France to completely collapse in 1940 prior to the start of the offensive in the West. Their joy of victory in June 1940 was all the greater because it was unexpected. They were amazed at their own achievements.

But before this, the morale of the German army and the German people in 1939 was low. They were depressed at the thought of another long, hard war. There were no cheering crowds in Berlin on September 1, 1939 as there had been on August 1, 1914. The regular German divisions performed well in Poland - but the second-line reserve German divisions performed poorly.

Also, the Kaiser's army was armed in depth for a long war, prioritising replacements of men and materiel. Hitler's Heer was armed in breadth for a short war, putting everything possible in the front line and devoting little resource to long-term training and replacements. The Heer's preparations anticipated a total Soviet collapse at the end of 1941, and when that didn't happen, the Heer was very poorly prepared for a long war of attrition. The Kaiser's army did not make that mistake, and managed a two-front war better than the Heer did.
Last edited by Tim Smith on 29 Jul 2011, 09:12, edited 1 time in total.

Kelvin
Member
Posts: 3117
Joined: 06 Apr 2007, 15:49

Re: Hitler 's Wehrmacht or Kaiser 's Imperial army better ?

#7

Post by Kelvin » 28 Jul 2011, 14:15

However, Hitler 's army fought their war longer than Kaiser's army. Liddell Hart suggested that British naval blockade played a vital role in the defeat of Imperial Germany. He said four years blockade dismoralized the German people and despite the fact that Imperial Germany made a preparation for long war but the German people suffered from hunger since 1916 and home front collapsed gradually. In 1918, after the withdrawal of Russia from war, German army still had 240 divisions in the Western front and she was far from defeat , then the defeat of Ameins made the morale of German army collapsed without delay.

I endorse that Hitler 's German army 's morale was weak initially. But this weak morale only lasted for less than a year, After Hitler conquered Poland, Denmark, Norway, Luxembourg, Belgium, Holland and France, the morale of German army and German people was boosted up. They began to think their army and their leader , Hitler were invincible.

Even in the later period of war, German still fought to last bullet. Of course , many reason for that :

The popularity of Hitler since 1936 and reached its peak in 1940, German people still believed that he still could alter the course of war, especially so called wonderful weapon.

The fear of Russian revenge.

I would think to some extent, Hitler cared very much about public opinion of the German people. Hitler always want to fight his war quickly and hesitate to go to war time economy as he learn from the mistake of Imperial Germany. Hardship suffered from German people in WWI made the collapse of Home Front made the defeat of Imperial German inevitable though Imperial German army still very powerful and far from defeat. So if said Hitler was less prepared than Imperial Germany for longer war, it was mistake and would said was Hitler 's deliberate political consideration.

Regarding the morale of Hitler's German army, it was also higher than those of Kaiser's army. It also caused by Hitler 's policy of opening career to talent. Most of posts of officers were occupied by nobles and junker landowner classes in Kaiser 's army. Hitler's fuhrer selection called for every soldiers could get promotion based upon their combat records, regardless of their background, social classes and education. Hitler's army was really people army and the support came from below and very much broader than Kaiser 's army.

Just my 2 cents.

User avatar
Terry Duncan
Forum Staff
Posts: 6270
Joined: 13 Jun 2008, 23:54
Location: Kent

Re: Hitler 's Wehrmacht or Kaiser 's Imperial army better ?

#8

Post by Terry Duncan » 29 Jul 2011, 01:09

It also caused by Hitler 's policy of opening career to talent. Most of posts of officers were occupied by nobles and junker landowner classes in Kaiser 's army. Hitler's fuhrer selection called for every soldiers could get promotion based upon their combat records, regardless of their background, social classes and education.
Germany had few combat veterans among the troops in 1939, so the idea people at this point had been promoted based upon combat records is wrong.

It is also worth considering just how many German senior officers had been trained in the Kaiser's army, as this is a good indicator of the quality of officer training in that army. Very few men of this level of ability arose from Hitler's army.

Kelvin
Member
Posts: 3117
Joined: 06 Apr 2007, 15:49

Re: Hitler 's Wehrmacht or Kaiser 's Imperial army better ?

#9

Post by Kelvin » 29 Jul 2011, 04:07

Hitler 's fuhrer selection decree was sent in 1942. so I mean from 1943

User avatar
Panzerkampfwagen
Member
Posts: 221
Joined: 23 Dec 2010, 15:43

Re: Hitler 's Wehrmacht or Kaiser 's Imperial army better ?

#10

Post by Panzerkampfwagen » 29 Jul 2011, 05:12

I think this factor also needs to be taken into operation. The Imperial army had greater freedom of operation and most of its decisions were taken by generals Ludendorff and Hinderburg, with the Kaiser playing a smaller role in on field decision making, where as it was the reverse with the Wehrmacht.

Kelvin
Member
Posts: 3117
Joined: 06 Apr 2007, 15:49

Re: Hitler 's Wehrmacht or Kaiser 's Imperial army better ?

#11

Post by Kelvin » 29 Jul 2011, 11:31

Hitler only took freedom of operation from generals, lower grade officers like commander of battalion, company, squads, still enjoyed their freedom of operation. German tactical brilliance was caused by this.

Kelvin
Member
Posts: 3117
Joined: 06 Apr 2007, 15:49

Re: Hitler 's Wehrmacht or Kaiser 's Imperial army better ?

#12

Post by Kelvin » 29 Jul 2011, 11:32

Hitler only took freedom of operation from generals, lower grade officers like commander of battalion, company, squads, still enjoyed their freedom of operation. German tactical brilliance was caused by this.

User avatar
Panzerkampfwagen
Member
Posts: 221
Joined: 23 Dec 2010, 15:43

Re: Hitler 's Wehrmacht or Kaiser 's Imperial army better ?

#13

Post by Panzerkampfwagen » 29 Jul 2011, 15:12

True. But a decision like splitting army group south leading to no substantial operational reserves for both the tasks at Stalingrad or the Caucasus can never be over come by tactical brilliance.

User avatar
stg 44
Member
Posts: 3376
Joined: 03 Dec 2002, 02:42
Location: illinois

Re: Hitler 's Wehrmacht or Kaiser 's Imperial army better ?

#14

Post by stg 44 » 29 Jul 2011, 20:10

In 1939 Hitler asked his generals whether his army was better than the Kaiser's. When told no he went into a rage, but the ultra fast expansion of the Wehrmacht ensured that it would not have been up to the standards of the army of 1914. Poland for example was very telling in the deficiencies in training, which the Wehrmacht made herculean efforts to correct between campaigns with rigorous training exercises. Obviously the results paid off, so I'd say the training staff and planning staff were top notch in 1939.
At least at the start of the world wars the Kaiser's Heer was better.

User avatar
Terry Duncan
Forum Staff
Posts: 6270
Joined: 13 Jun 2008, 23:54
Location: Kent

Re: Hitler 's Wehrmacht or Kaiser 's Imperial army better ?

#15

Post by Terry Duncan » 29 Jul 2011, 23:20

At least at the start of the world wars the Kaiser's Heer was better.
You could also make a good case that it was the better force at the end of its war too, as it was still intact. The WWII army probably had a period in mid war where it was very efficient and maybe better, but it is hard to tell, as the army in WWI also learnt a lot and evolved as that war went on.

Post Reply

Return to “German Strategy & General German Military Discussion”