The Second World War.

[deepsepia]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

This is indeed intriguing, and the actual writing of this unknown soldier is eloquent and shows intelligence of a high order; so much more surprising (and yet not really surprising) that he was deceived by the Nazi dream.

Unfortunately, the Germans never released the names of the people-- family names are redacted from the letters. So we don't know the backgrounds. While the Nazis certainly had their base among mediocrities, there were more than a few cultured, literate well educated folks who signed on (Baldur von Schirach, for example)

One cynical/skeptical question would be: Did the German archivists in 1950 choose the letters which showed Germans in their most sympathetic, humane light, at a distance from Hitler and Nazism?

I sort of suspect that they did. The book had a considerable impact -- Germany was at the time trying to work its way back into "the community of nations" and there was considerable international political motive for the Germans to have "cherry picked" among what must have been many letters.

We have considerable evidence from other sources of distinctly less philosophical and more savage characters-- but we don't see letters from such types included in this collection.

My impression is that these letters are authentic, but that other equally authentic but less flattering letters may have been "lost".

[haroldeye]

What ifs are always contentious but let's say;

Halifax got his way and Britain sued for peace after Dunkirk. The British Empire became non combatant (not occupied, just non combatant). There would have been no Battle of Britain (with it's loss of men and machines), no fighting in North Africa, Yugoslavia, Greece and Crete with no degradation of Nazi forces and combat power. The Nazis would have reigned supreme from North Cape to Europa point and the Med would have been their pond. They would have had more men, war machines and resources and would have been able to cross their start lines much earlier. Additionally Britain and America would not have been able to provide the huge amount of resources to the Soviets that they did.

Let us also say what if Hitler had not played the slav untermensch card but had welcomed the peoples of Eastern Europe into something approaching a Greater Eastern Europe Co-prosperity sphere. Even treating the Slavs as he did he still managed to recruit sizeable forces from their populations. People who hated the Communists more than they did the Nazis.

Let's also say that when the Japanese attacked the Americans, Hitler had the good sense not to declare war on the US. Anti communist feelings in the US were high and the American people would have been difficult to persuade that a war against Germany was the right thing to do when the Japanese were killing Americans in the Pacific.

Given the above the Soviet Union would not have survived as it did.

[palo5]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

...Superior resources need to be controlled by a people whose leadership do not have their heads stuffed up their own posteriors and in 1941, if you were looking for Uncle Joes head, the place to find it was up his own derriere.

And where were Britain & France's heads in 1940, and America's in 1941 - not in their derrières?

Anyway, the USSR still destroyed 80% of the fascist army. Imagine what it could have done if it didn't have its head 'up its derrière'

[haroldeye]

Palo - we are all trying to talk objectively. No one should decry the immense effort and fortitude of the Russian people in their struggle against the fascist. Nor indeed their success. WW2 was won on many levels by many factors. Stalin was part of the Soviet problem in 1941, he had made a pact with the Germans and for some reason he believed Hitler would stick to it. That very fact mean't that when Hitler invaded the Soviet forces were on the backfoot and had to play catch up.

What I cannot understand is why a man like Stalin whose left foot didn't trust his right foot trusted Hitler.

[palo5]

Originally Posted by haroldeye

...What I cannot understand is why a man like Stalin whose left foot didn't trust his right foot trusted Hitler.

He never trusted Hitler, and always knew the USSR would be attacked. It was no secret, because Hitler published it in his books. But the schizophrenic relationship with Germany was necessary because their machines and engineering skills were needed to beat them

The West used the same technique - it allied itself with the 'Commies' because our manpower was needed to beat the Germans

Both techniques worked

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by palo5

And where were Britain & France's heads in 1940, and America's in 1941 - not in their derrières?

Anyway, the USSR still destroyed 80% of the fascist army. Imagine what it could have done if it didn't have its head 'up its derrière'

Britain's head-up-derriere phase was most pronounced during the early 1930s. As late as 1937 the Baldwin government was publicly denying that it needed to revise its entire strategy and speed up re-armament and in fact was resolutely refusing to do so. Britain had nearly seven years between the rise of Hitler and the start of WW2 but was really only seriously re-arming after the fall of Baldwin and much as I utterly dispise the man, I have to acknowledge that Neville Chamberlain did re-arm Britain much more energetically than his predecessor, Stanley Baldwin (Mr Benign Neglect) and that when he went to Munich in 1938 he held very few good cards and Germany knew what cards he held. Even so, his determination to seek a peaceful solution lost sight of the basic truth of human life, that those who seek peace at any price always get war instead. War is what Chamberlain got and less than a year later and in a far more unfavourable international situation.

But in 1940, what happened was that Britain and France reaped their just desserts for all those years before of having their heads stuffed up their derriere. France paid the ultimate price of overwhelming defeat and occupation. Britain would have too, but was saved by the English Channel. By the late winter of 1940-41, Britain knew exactly what she was up against and also knew what Hitler was planning for Russia. We wouldn't ordinarily have given a damn, but in that situation Russia and Britain had a vital shared interest; the British government knew it, but Stalin and his minions didn't and couldn't believe it was even possible. Their heads were up their derrieres.

Stalin and his politburo hated Britain and everything Britain stood for; in a world of individual liberty and civil peace they themselves would be nothings. They were tyrants who rules by fear and force and whose real motive was the unadulterated lust for power, and the only thing they related to about Britain was our worst face, the Empire. It was natural for them to want to be Hitler's cheerleaders while Hitler tore down the decadent edifice of western democracy. Later, they could console themselves with the truth that our partnership was as every bit distasteful to us as it was to them. Stalin did the vast majority of his business with the western allies directly with Churchill, who was polite but made no secret of his dislike; Stalin was often very rude indeed in telegrams to Churchill, yet he was nearly always businesslike and constructive. I suspect that the unctuous flattering tone of Roosevelt's administration was creepy and disgusting to Stalin and that he felt much better talking to a man who wouldn't have given him the time of day, and to whom he wouldn't have given the time of day in return, except that they both knew they had a higher duty and therefore had to behave like grown-ups. Theirs was a good example of keeping friends close, but keeping enemies even closer; sometimes your enemy is the only one you can really trust and depend on.

[Ennath]

July 21, 1921
Morocco A Spanish army of 20,000 is defeated by Riff tribesmen in northern Morocco. The disaster rocks Spain, discrediting the monarchy and leading to the rise of dictator Miguel Primo de Rivera. The Spanish in Morocco are pinned to coastal enclaves. Not until 1926, with hefty French aid, is the revolt suppressed.
United States Colonel Billy Mitchell leads a bomber group that sinks the ex-German battleship Ostfriesland in a demonstration intended to show that strategic air power makes large navies obsolete.

July 21, 1937
Palestine The Grand Mufti visits the German consul, asserting his support for Germany and seeking support against the Jews and British.

July 21, 1940
Germany, Planning In an OKH conference Hitler again states that Germany must prepare to attack the Soviet Union. Although the generals would prefer to deal with Britain first, they raise no objections. Later in the month, Jodl tells an OKW planning section that Germany will attack in the east in the spring of 1941 and that planning for the movement of forces to Eastern Europe should be begun.
Baltic States The Soviet Union formally annexes all three states and they become constituent republics of the USSR.

July 21, 1941
United States, Politics Roosevelt asks Congress to extend the draft period from one year to 30 months and to make similar increases in the terms of service for the National Guard. These measures pass on August 12 only after considerable debate. Indeed, the bill is only passed by one vote (203-202) in the House, so it would be wrong to say that American political opinion is strongly in favor of a more militant policy at this stage.
Eastern Front There are more German air attacks on Moscow; Strong AA fire restricts their effectiveness.. Soviet authorities announce that they have withdrawn their forces from the line of the Dniepr.
Syria De Gaulle ends the subordination of French forces to British command and orders his commanders to resume mandatory authority.

July 21-27, 1941
Mediterranean A major operation, code-named Substance, is mounted to bring supplies to Malta. There are seven transports in the convoy from Gibraltar covered by Force H, which has been reinforced to one carrier, one battleship, one battlecruiser, four cruisers, and 17 destroyers. The force sails on July 21. On the 22nd, part of the convoy is spotted by Italian planes, but the Italian fleet stays in port, expecting only a repeat of earlier operations to fly aircraft to Malta. On July 23, one destroyer is sunk and one cruiser and three destroyers are hit in Italian air attacks. On the 24th, one transport is hit before entering harbor at Malta. Empty ships from previous trips join Force H for the return to Gibraltar where they arrive on July 27.

July 21, 1942
New Guinea Japanese troops of General Horii’s 18th Army land at Gona. The Allies have also planned landings here but have been forestalled.
North Africa Rommel sends reports to OKW detailing his shortages of men, equipment, and supplies. The front can be held, he says, but the situation will remain critical until the promised arrival of German 164th Division. He considers the Italians so unreliable that their units should be broken up and the troops incorporated into German units. The British, through Ultra, are aware of his position and have therefore decided to attempt a major attack. 8th Army now has more than 300 tanks; the Germans and Italians have about 50 each. As the actions during the last three weeks have worn out the Italians, Auchinleck decides to complete the job by attacking the Germans directly. At first there is some progress in infantry attacks, but as happens all to often, the supporting armor fails to arrive in the right place at the right time. The Australian and New Zealand infantry (perhaps the best troops in 8th Army) are growing disillusioned by these failures. The front is increasingly covered now with minefields and the action becomes less mobile.
United States Command Admiral Leahy is appointed Roosevelt’s personal Chief of Staff. Leahy has been ambassador to Vichy and continues to favor dealings with Vichy or ex-Vichy Frenchmen, working to undermine De Gaulle.

July 21, 1943
Sicily The Allied advance continues. The British take Gerbini, the Canadians Leonforte, and the Americans Corleone and Castelvetrano. The Italian naval base at Crotone on the mainland is bombarded.
Eastern Front The Soviets capture Bolkhov.
Yugoslavia German authorities in Belgrade offer a massive reward for Tito.

July 21-22, 1943
Solomons A small American force is sent to Vella Lavella to examine the possibility of major landings, thus bypassing Kolombangara. On New Georgia, Griswold lays plans for a large offensive.

July 21, 1944
Western Front Operation Goodwood ends. The British have gained about 12,000 yards and secured Caen, but have lost 5500 men and 400 tanks. German paratroops and glider troops attack the Free Republic of Vercors.
Italy The French Corps is taken out of the line to prepare for the invasion of southern France.
Eastern Front Soviet troops take Ostrov south of Lake Peipus. In north Karelia, Soviet troops reach the 1941 border.
German Command General Zeitzler resigns as Chief of Staff at OKH and is replaced by Guderian.
Marianas Troops of III Amphibious Corps land on Guam. The supporting naval force includes six battleships. 3rd Marine Division is landed west of Agana at Asan and 1st Marine Division lands near Agat. Eventually 55,000 American troops are committed. The Japanese garrison is some 19,000 strong under 29th Division of 31st Army under General Obata. There is only moderate resistance on the beaches.
New Guinea The Japanese attack again over the Driniumor near Aitape. They achieve some initial success but are later held. In night attacks some US units are surrounded near Afua.

July 21, 1945
Borneo The Australians complete the capture of Balikpapan. Bombardments cause fires at Jesselton.

[palo5]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

...But in 1940, what happened was that Britain and France reaped their just desserts for all those years before of having their heads stuffed up their derriere...

That's what your books tell you. But isn't it true that the French built the Maginot line between the wars; and that England & France had armies already at war for six months, yet still were surprised when they were attacked. It is true, isn't it. That is real 'head up derrière', imho

So is it right to criticize the USSR for being 'surprised' when we were still massive trading partners with Germany until the moment of attack?

Stalin and his politburo hated Britain and everything Britain stood for...

As a Communist he couldn't be an Imperialist-lover, that's true. But Roosevelt wasn't a true fan either - that was because he wanted to take over your Empire, or at least your influence, even though he didn't admit it to himself

[tygrkhat40]

Originally Posted by palo5

And where were Britain & France's heads in 1940, and America's in 1941 - not in their derrières?

Anyway, the USSR still destroyed 80% of the fascist army. Imagine what it could have done if it didn't have its head 'up its derrière'

I don't think America's head was up it's collective derrière in the time before Pearl Harbor, but more in the clouds thinking that we could keep apart of the happenings in Europe. Remember that the US had a deep isolationist streak up until 12/7/1941 and it would have continued had Hitler not declared war on America. Indeed, there were many in the US that would have preferred to join the war on the Axis side; German-American bundists, Irish-Americans who hated the British and Italian-American Fascist sympathizers. Ironically, the most excoriated ethnic group in the US was the Japanese, who were the most loyal of the lot.

Roosevelt wanted to intervene in Europe, but could not because too much of the country was opposed to that. Haroldeye posted some "what-if" scenarios, here's another one: Roosevelt loses the 1940 election, Wendell Wilkie becomes President. Much of the conduct of the war is changed because of the lack of connection between Wilkie and Churchill, if there is even an alliance.

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by palo5

That's what your books tell you. But isn't it true that the French built the Maginot line between the wars; and that England & France had armies already at war for six months, yet still were surprised when they were attacked. It is true, isn't it. That is real 'head up derrière', imho.

In respect of General Gamelin and the French high command I cannot deny it. Many French soldiers fought valiantly but their commanders placed them in situations in which they were inevitably defeated. It is sad, but the French people were not at all ready for WW2; in their minds they weren't ready. It is ironic that the experience of occupation helped France to get her mojo back, to rediscover her martial spirit. By 1944, millions of Frenchmen who in 1940 had been apathetic or actively opposed (remember the Communists were influential and campaigned vigorously against the Capitalist-Imperialist War) had been occupied for a long time and were plenty steamed about it.

As for we British, Case Yellow did not surprise us at all; we had planned for our part in Gamelin's counter offensive into Belgium. the Ardennes offensive did surprise us as well as the French Army, but the Ardennes sector wasn't our responsibility; we only had about ten divisions in France and were no more than a component in the French army until Lord Gort took the fateful decision to repudiate General Weygand's authority and act independently to preserve his forces from captivity. The RAF lost heavily in a failed endeavour to destroy the Maastrich bridges, which for some reason the French Army did not demolish before retreating, but other than this there was little the BEF could do to help out with that situation. Our campaign in France in 1940 consisted mainly of a fighting retreat to preserve an army we could never have replaced.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEDWDAMRBeU

Originally Posted by palo5

So is it right to criticize the USSR for being 'surprised' when we were still massive trading partners with Germany until the moment of attack?

I think so. Absolutely I do. Stalin was naive and believed what he wanted to believe, and in that set-up it was dangerous to contradict him. Britain gave him fair warning both directly and through Ivan Maisky in London; he just assumed we were lying. He was a very silly boy.

In the American idiom, if you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas. This is what happened to Britain in 1939-40 because we signed up for "peace in our time." We made just the same mistake Stalin made. The Non-Aggression Pact turned out to have the same face value as the Munich Agreement.

I'm not arguing this case in any anti-Russian spirit, Palo; I am merely exploring my understanding of cause and effect in the historical events which we all know about. It's true I detest the idea of Stalin and I instinctively recoil from any political system which denies individuals their human right to freedom, and that I emphatically identify Communism as just such a system, but I hugely admire the Russian nation for what it achieved in WW2 and I don't want anyone to think otherwise.