When did Hitler lose the War?

[ambulnick]

Although Germany didn't surrender until May 1945, when did Hitler actually lose World War II?

To be unlocked 16th Jan.

[ambulnick]

Unlocked. I know it's a day early for many of you, but it's Wednesday here already, and I'm feeling generous!

Happy discussing

[Dara]

I have my opinions of when, but I'm not a historian and know there are parts of the war that I might not know much about. I look forward to reading the comments in this thread though.

[mac]

Probably with the entry of the States into the fighting war. Beginning of the end anyway. Thoughts?

Mac.

[Lieutenant Norgård]

There are many meanings about this subject. One is that he lost the war already when he halted the offensive into france, allowing the british to evacuate their troops.

I believe that it is impossible to state one specific event that caused the outcome that we luckily ended up with. But there is a couple of events that I belive is more important than others, and here is my list.

- The reason i mentioned in the beginning of the post.
- When he had to give up taking over the british isles.

The two most important reasons:

- When he sent soldiers into the russian winter without proper clothing and equipment for the conditions. As a Norwegian I know a bit about how stupid that is, even though I haven't been out in the russian winter.
- The most important event: D-DAY. An event that most definitly turned the war around. If this operation had failed, the war would have lasted for many more years, and it is good reason to belive that the outcome would have been different.

A major thanks to the guys on the picture and to all the orther soldiers who fought for our liberty

[Dara]

The two most important reasons:

- When he sent soldiers into the russian winter without proper clothing and equipment for the conditions. As a Norwegian I know a bit about how stupid that is, even though I haven't been out in the russian winter.
- The most important event: D-DAY. An event that most definitly turned the war around. If this operation had failed, the war would have lasted for many more years, and it is good reason to belive that the outcome would have been different.

These above reasons were what I was thinking, but I thought I was going to sound like a noob. lol I feel that he could have fought a two-front war if he would have allowed, perhaps, more decisions to be made by his commerades. I think that improperly dressing his troops to fight over in Russia wasn't very smart and this could have changed the outcome of the war majorly. I also feel that many mistakes were made during D-Day. The fact that it was Rommel's birthday the day before (right?) and that he was not on the front to give orders to the troops who were supposed to wait for orders to come to them. They could do nothing in certain areas and did not have the numbers that they could have had, had Hitler heeded the warnings. I also believe that his diet, his doctor and other reasons affected the decisions he made overall during this point in the war.

[Lieutenant Norgård]

You are mostly right about what you are saying. Especially about letting his officers making desicions is very important. Hitler was a control freak, and he wanted to make all the desicions.
I am not sure if it was Rommels birthday, or if it just was a social happening for the generals that found place on june 5th, but it was definitly an event that kept them too far away from the battlefield. An other strange desicion by Hitler was that he personally was to command the tanks reserves in Normandie. Tanks that was badly needed in Battle, who just stood still because Der Führer didn't wanted to be woken.

A little picture of Erwin Rommel

[jwhit172]

I would have to say that Hitler lost the war when opened the eastern front. That to me was his biggest blunder of the war. D-Day may have never happened if he would have continued to fight in the west until he defeated the allies.

[Dutchman]

I fully agree with jwhit172

[Dara]

I'm glad you understood my point Lieutenant Norgård. I completely agree with your thoughts and with jwhit172 as well. I think that D-Day would have been much different or non-existent had there not been the war on the eastern front as well.

[padraigmc]

Have to agree with everyone who has said that he lost the war through his obsesive control of the minutia of the war from his interference in the production of aircraft to his control over the Panzers in France on D-Day.

but i think he actually lost the war in 1939.

I seem to remember reading somewhere that the plan was to actually start the war in 1942 or 1943 and that it was Hitler's decision to go in 1939 .By 1942/1943 they would have had an even greater qualitive & numeric superiority in the Air( if the Battle of Britain had taken place in 1942 the FW190 would have made life very much more difficult for the RAF ), The production of AFVs would have been greater (and the Tiger would probably have been around ),they might actually have produced sufficient motor transport to replace the horse transport that was so prevelent right up to 1945, By then the rocket & missle technology ,that Germany had such a lead in, would have been available probably in '43... never mind the V1 & V2 there was the Amerika bomber and Atomic weapons.

If WW2 had started in 1943 I doubt if France or Britian would have been in much better condition to fight off an even better armed Germany than they were in 1939 & 1940. With no offshore aircraft carrier ( the UK !)...no eighth airforce..no base for D-Day..no invasion.

But it was also a case that the Axis alliance dragged Germany into various conflicts that it might not otherwise have entered.Japan's attack on America left Germany with no chance of victory against the world's greatest Industrial power which though it had displayed a rather baised nutrality was not intent on entering WW2. Italy....attacks Greece and gets trashed...Hitler has to save his buddies pride and opens another front.Italy gets the c**p beaten out of it in Ethopia & Libya...again Hitler steps in and Rommel nearly wins what could have been the most vital battles of the war.

Yes Hitler would have attacked the Middle East at some stage , he would have wanted to deny the British the oil supplies of Iraq, cut off the Suez Canal route from the Empire and eventually link up with the Japanese. But he had already decided on attacking Russia and therefore committed Germany to war on yet another major front and one were the British inflicted their first major ground defeat on the Nuts.

Once he had commited troops to Western Europe,North Africa,The Balkins & especially Russia he had committed his nation and people to certain defeat. Therefore signing up to an alliance with Japan & Italy was also a fatal mistake.

So i suppose you could say that Hitler lost WW2 in the early 20's when he decided that his warped thinking was the only way forward for Germany.

[Dara]

Interesting. I had never heard of Hitler's thoughts to start he war later. That certainly puts a new spin on things. Thanks for the information, I guess I have more research to do.

[padraigmc]

Interesting. I had never heard of Hitler's thoughts to start he war later. That certainly puts a new spin on things. Thanks for the information, I guess I have more research to do.

Think it was more the advice of the Senior Command of the armed forces (ie;below the politcal appointees such as Goring ) that the forces would not be fully ready untill later than 1939 .In particular I forgot to mention the Kreigsmarine.The German Navy was in no way ready for the War with small numbers of U boats and this was only made worse by the huge losses in Destroyers during the Norwegian campaign:

When the war started, Dönitz had recently (28 January 1939) been promoted commodore (Kommodore) and leader of submarines (Führer der Unterseeboote). The German Navy was unprepared for war, having anticipated the war to begin in 1945, as anticipated by previously established war plans which the Z Plan was tailored for. It called for a balanced fleet with a greatly increased number of surface capital ships, including several aircraft carriers. At the time war did start, Dönitz's U-boat force included only 57 boats, many of them short-range, and only 22 oceangoing Type VIIs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_D%C3%B6nitz

[Lieutenant Norgård]

The German Navy was in no way ready for the War with small numbers of U boats and this was only made worse by the huge losses in Destroyers during the Norwegian campaign:

We are very proud of that here in Norway. We did destroy Blücher in the Oslofjord when they invaded. A big blow for the german marine. They also lost some ships in other battles along the Norwegian costline.

[Dara]

Thanks for the link padraigmc.