Why was the German army so strong??

T3sting

Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
17
The Germans were irresistible in the World War especially WW2 and ultimately it took a vast co-coalition of the Worlds great powers (along with vastly superior manpower) to defeat the Germans. On many occasions the Germans achieved quick, decisive tactical victories when they had inferior manpower (numerically-speaking).

What was the single most important factor which made the German army (man-for-man) so brilliant?
 
Werbung:

southside

Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2007
Messages
22
i don't think that the germans are strong because they are germans, rather it is because their location as a western country and they are influenced by their location
 

USMC the Almighty

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2007
Messages
2,070
I remember my high school latin teacher telling me that they were so strong in the ancient times because they drank beer and ate meat.
 

Truth-Bringer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2007
Messages
880
The Germans were irresistible in the World War especially WW2 and ultimately it took a vast co-coalition of the Worlds great powers (along with vastly superior manpower) to defeat the Germans. On many occasions the Germans achieved quick, decisive tactical victories when they had inferior manpower (numerically-speaking).

What was the single most important factor which made the German army (man-for-man) so brilliant?

You people are completely and totally ignorant of true history. You've been indoctrinated in the public fool system, and it really shows.

That's why I'm here - because you need the truth.

Germany couldn't mass produce enough equipment to make their army fully mechanized. They couldn't even build a single aircraft carrier. We could mass produce "BIG IRON." Read the following details from the Early Warning Report of October 2006 by Richard Maybury:

"In World War II, one of the most famous German
tank units was the fearsome Panzer Lehr Division. On
the morning of July 25, 1944, Panzer Lehr was in the
path of Allied forces moving eastward across France
near St. Lo.

Panzer Lehr had 2,200 men and 45 operational tanks.
The Allied attack on Panzer Lehr began with waves
of P-47 Thunderbolt fighters, fifty at a time. Every two
minutes a wave would sweep across Panzer Lehr,
dropping a hurricane of napalm.

The P-47s departed, and were replaced by waves of
medium bombers dropping 500-pound bombs.

After the medium bombers were through, the
surviving Germans heard 1,500 heavy four-engine B-17
and B-24 bombers. Try to imagine the sound of 6,000
engines headed directly at you.

The B-17s and B-24s laid a carpet of bombs across
Panzer Lehr, churning the earth into a landscape of
craters and wreckage; 55-ton tanks were thrown into the
air, landing in pieces upside down.

After the heavy bombers departed, another 300 P-38
Lightning fighters swept across the remnants of Panzer
Lehr, dropping incendiaries and anti-personnel fragmentation
bombs.

Then hundreds of artillery pieces opened up. After
them, battalions of Allied tanks came in.

The 45 tanks of Panzer Lehr had been attacked by
more than 2,000 planes.


In war as in peace, humans have two general ways to
get things done — use labor, or capital. To destroy
Panzer Lehr, US generals could have sent legions of
troops, and suffered hundreds of casualties. Instead
they used machinery.

Labor vs. Capital on the Battlefield

Ever since the Civil War, which was the world’s first
industrial war, the US armed forces have always chosen
“big iron” over body bags. Big iron is expensive, but
the American taxpayer has been willing to pay for it.

A World War II four-engine B-24 bomber contained
1.5 million parts. Henry Ford’s Willow Run plant
turned out one B-24 every 63 minutes.

A total of 18,188 B-24s were built at all aircraft
plants, in addition to 12,729 B-17s and 3,970 B-29s.
That’s a total of 34,887 four-engine heavy bombers.

The number of four-engine heavy bombers put into
the air by technological pipsqueaks Germany and Japan
together was 204. Their gadget shops produced impressive
inventions, but these little countries had sparse
ability to mass produce them.


Of the 46 divisions Hitler had in France in 1941, 1.5
were mechanized; the other 44.5 were foot soldiers and
horses. When the Americans invaded Normandy in
June 1944, the entire US military force was mechanized;
the Germans were dependent on 1.25 million
horses.

The most powerful and decisive weapon of World
War II (and still today) was the aircraft carrier. The
Germans tried to build one, but failed to solve the
technical problems. The Americans built 146 carriers
in 44 months.
Laid end-to-end, they’d stretch 17
miles end - to-end, total US tanks built in WWII would
stretch 300 miles.

Wingtip to wingtip, total planes, 3,600 miles.

At any given moment, the average Japanese soldier
deployed in the Pacific was accompanied by two
pounds of supplies. The American, four tons.

Generals Patton, MacArthur, Eisenhower and their
associates have received the credit, but it was really
General Motors, General Dynamics and Rosie the
Riveter who buried the enemy — under a Himalaya of
US hardware.

Washington’s amazing ratio of capital to labor is
why less than 1% of the people killed in World War II
were Americans."

http://www.chaostan.com

Hitler could have never conquered the world. NO NATION HAS THE ECONOMIC CAPABILITY OF SUSTAINING A WORLD-WIDE OCCUPATION. No population would work under the taxes to fund such a "machine". Also, the superiority of the German army was based on several myths. The facts are that Hitler was being routed on the Eastern front after the beginning on 1942. German factories couldn't meet the demands of the troops with equipment and supplies, as they were running low on almost everything due mainly to the severe Russian winter. Hitler had been so confident of his ability to defeat the Russians he had ordered cutbacks in war production in 1941, this from a supposedly brilliant leader.

The following quotes are from "World War 2, The Rest of the Story" by Richard Maybury: "A little known fact is that the Germans actually had two armies. One was the high tech mechanized force you have seen so often in movies. The aircraft, tanks, and artilleries are impressive, no doubt about it. But this force was small. It was only the tip of the spear. The rest of the spear, the main body of the army, was foot soldiers and horses. Yes, horses. When Hitler's massive invasion force was poised on the Soviet frontier in June 1941, it was at its peak. Lined up ready to strike at Stalin were 3,350 tanks. And 650,000 horses. Hollywood devotes a lot of film to the tanks, but how often have you seen the thousands of horses? Most of the horses were used as substitutes for trucks, but the Germans did have a horse cavalry division that was thrown against the Russians. (In contrast) when the British and Americans invaded Normandy in June 1944, they were fully mechanized, while the German army was still dependent on 1,250,000 horses."

No one has ever truly conquered the world. Taking it and holding it are two different things. Even the Roman Empire didn't control the entire world. The "Pax Romana" was a myth--there was actually no such thing. There were constant insurrections, revolutions, uprisings, assassinations, and all manner of violence. There was never any true lasting peace or freedom. It's an historical illusion. To say that the Romans ruled the world is false and it never really happened that way. That's why I say no one can conquer the world in a complete and lasting way--especially a centralized or socialized economy.
 

Iolo2

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2012
Messages
545
Location
Rhondda
The Germans were irresistible in the World War especially WW2 and ultimately it took a vast co-coalition of the Worlds great powers (along with vastly superior manpower) to defeat the Germans. On many occasions the Germans achieved quick, decisive tactical victories when they had inferior manpower (numerically-speaking).

What was the single most important factor which made the German army (man-for-man) so brilliant?

Fundamentally, a militarist, Prussian tradition going back at least to Fredrick the Great, and probably to the Thirty Years' War. The lack of democracy also helped. The key thing, though, I'd guess is that intelligent men actually wanted to be soldiers and study strategy. We had a job always to beat them.
 

dogtowner

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 24, 2009
Messages
17,848
Location
Wandering around

pocketfullofshells

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2008
Messages
12,009
Location
land of 10,000 lakes and 2 senators again
Germany was the most powerful nation in EU, 2nd possibly only to UK. Poland was still fighting on horseback and WWI military. France was asleep at the wheel. It was not that they where strong it was that they took on the weak at first. Also Italy helped for a while so its not like they went alone. Spain was also not a Factor, and the British where also trying to hold on to Ireland and to spread out.

Germans would have won had 2 things happened. 1 Japan does Bomb Pearl. And 2 Someone killed Hitler and put a real General in charge ( say Rommel had he not been killed by Hitler) Hitler was to blinded by Ego to be effective, and the British used that to save themself. Had Germany kept with Targeted Air attacks the British would have fallen, but the British used indiscriminate bombing to piss off hitter into the same, and by doing so actuly saved alot of important targets.

When you have one of the biggest econs, and you spend it all on war machines and war prep while the rest are trying to fix themself...your going to win early and often. Not because your strong though
 

Aus22

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 22, 2008
Messages
1,844
anyone who has studied individual battles in WW2 will know that who was the winner is often down to luck. The evacuation of allies forces at Dunkirk was successful , The battle of Britain,the D Day attack was successful and the campaign in New Guinea was successful for the allies. But it could have gone either way.
The fact that the allies had better radar information did help
In the end the USA if it enter the war had more capacity. It could build a plane a day a ship a week. I think it would have enter the war even without Pearl Harbour as the USA and Britain under Churchill l were close.
Russia won the battle of Moscow but if Germany had been more patient in its attack on Leningrad , Russia it could have won eventually.
I agree no nation could control Europe.
Sources An Incomplete History of World war 11 By Edwin Kiester,There are also articles on Military History in my web Site Aus22,com
 
Last edited:

Stalin

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
1,086
Not strong enough to beat the Soviet Union.

Close, adolf, but no cigar.

Comrade Stalin
Kursk
 
Werbung:

Stalin

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
1,086
You people are completely and totally ignorant of true history. You've been indoctrinated in the public fool system, and it really shows.

That's why I'm here - because you need the truth.

Germany couldn't mass produce enough equipment to make their army fully mechanized. They couldn't even build a single aircraft carrier. We could mass produce "BIG IRON." Read the following details from the Early Warning Report of October 2006 by Richard Maybury:

"In World War II, one of the most famous German
tank units was the fearsome Panzer Lehr Division. On
the morning of July 25, 1944, Panzer Lehr was in the
path of Allied forces moving eastward across France
near St. Lo.

Panzer Lehr had 2,200 men and 45 operational tanks.
The Allied attack on Panzer Lehr began with waves
of P-47 Thunderbolt fighters, fifty at a time. Every two
minutes a wave would sweep across Panzer Lehr,
dropping a hurricane of napalm.

The P-47s departed, and were replaced by waves of
medium bombers dropping 500-pound bombs.

After the medium bombers were through, the
surviving Germans heard 1,500 heavy four-engine B-17
and B-24 bombers. Try to imagine the sound of 6,000
engines headed directly at you.

The B-17s and B-24s laid a carpet of bombs across
Panzer Lehr, churning the earth into a landscape of
craters and wreckage; 55-ton tanks were thrown into the
air, landing in pieces upside down.

After the heavy bombers departed, another 300 P-38
Lightning fighters swept across the remnants of Panzer
Lehr, dropping incendiaries and anti-personnel fragmentation
bombs.

Then hundreds of artillery pieces opened up. After
them, battalions of Allied tanks came in.

The 45 tanks of Panzer Lehr had been attacked by
more than 2,000 planes.


In war as in peace, humans have two general ways to
get things done — use labor, or capital. To destroy
Panzer Lehr, US generals could have sent legions of
troops, and suffered hundreds of casualties. Instead
they used machinery.

Labor vs. Capital on the Battlefield

Ever since the Civil War, which was the world’s first
industrial war, the US armed forces have always chosen
“big iron” over body bags. Big iron is expensive, but
the American taxpayer has been willing to pay for it.

A World War II four-engine B-24 bomber contained
1.5 million parts. Henry Ford’s Willow Run plant
turned out one B-24 every 63 minutes.

A total of 18,188 B-24s were built at all aircraft
plants, in addition to 12,729 B-17s and 3,970 B-29s.
That’s a total of 34,887 four-engine heavy bombers.

The number of four-engine heavy bombers put into
the air by technological pipsqueaks Germany and Japan
together was 204. Their gadget shops produced impressive
inventions, but these little countries had sparse
ability to mass produce them.


Of the 46 divisions Hitler had in France in 1941, 1.5
were mechanized; the other 44.5 were foot soldiers and
horses. When the Americans invaded Normandy in
June 1944, the entire US military force was mechanized;
the Germans were dependent on 1.25 million
horses.
The most powerful and decisive weapon of World
War II (and still today) was the aircraft carrier. The
Germans tried to build one, but failed to solve the
technical problems. The Americans built 146 carriers
in 44 months.
Laid end-to-end, they’d stretch 17
miles end - to-end, total US tanks built in WWII would
stretch 300 miles.

Wingtip to wingtip, total planes, 3,600 miles.

At any given moment, the average Japanese soldier
deployed in the Pacific was accompanied by two
pounds of supplies. The American, four tons.

Generals Patton, MacArthur, Eisenhower and their
associates have received the credit, but it was really
General Motors, General Dynamics and Rosie the
Riveter who buried the enemy — under a Himalaya of
US hardware.

Washington’s amazing ratio of capital to labor is
why less than 1% of the people killed in World War II
were Americans."

http://www.chaostan.com

Hitler could have never conquered the world. NO NATION HAS THE ECONOMIC CAPABILITY OF SUSTAINING A WORLD-WIDE OCCUPATION. No population would work under the taxes to fund such a "machine". Also, the superiority of the German army was based on several myths. The facts are that Hitler was being routed on the Eastern front after the beginning on 1942. German factories couldn't meet the demands of the troops with equipment and supplies, as they were running low on almost everything due mainly to the severe Russian winter. Hitler had been so confident of his ability to defeat the Russians he had ordered cutbacks in war production in 1941, this from a supposedly brilliant leader.

The following quotes are from "World War 2, The Rest of the Story" by Richard Maybury: "A little known fact is that the Germans actually had two armies. One was the high tech mechanized force you have seen so often in movies. The aircraft, tanks, and artilleries are impressive, no doubt about it. But this force was small. It was only the tip of the spear. The rest of the spear, the main body of the army, was foot soldiers and horses. Yes, horses. When Hitler's massive invasion force was poised on the Soviet frontier in June 1941, it was at its peak. Lined up ready to strike at Stalin were 3,350 tanks. And 650,000 horses. Hollywood devotes a lot of film to the tanks, but how often have you seen the thousands of horses? Most of the horses were used as substitutes for trucks, but the Germans did have a horse cavalry division that was thrown against the Russians. (In contrast) when the British and Americans invaded Normandy in June 1944, they were fully mechanized, while the German army was still dependent on 1,250,000 horses."

No one has ever truly conquered the world. Taking it and holding it are two different things. Even the Roman Empire didn't control the entire world. The "Pax Romana" was a myth--there was actually no such thing. There were constant insurrections, revolutions, uprisings, assassinations, and all manner of violence. There was never any true lasting peace or freedom. It's an historical illusion. To say that the Romans ruled the world is false and it never really happened that way. That's why I say no one can conquer the world in a complete and lasting way--especially a centralized or socialized economy.

One word proves your snotty arrogant argument completely wrong.

Vietnam.

The US played a minor part in the european theatre - arriving late, as usual.

Comrade Stalin
Ukraine
 
Top