German Combat Doctrine of WW II

[Roosevelt45(the 2nd)]

So you do acknowledge(or whatever) the fact that compared to the democratic armies Germany was pretty though?

I'm not disagreeing with you on the fact that the Germans are way overrated but if you look at the state the armies of the UK and France were in, don't you think that Germany looks a lot better.

[Panzeh]

The only problem with the French was their desirable operational speed. The French were well-prepared for a fight, but their command was slow and exacerbated by Gamelin, who simply didn't command.

If the Germans walked into Belgium and swung wide as in the Schlieffen plan, the French would move up and engage them(the standing orders were basically to madly rush into Belgium as soon as the Germans did), and at the very least slow things down.

[Comrade Trapp]

The 1940 French ? Give me a break; they couldn't be more than a speed bump to anyone in the chaotic state they were in, the entire war for that matter.

Is that your answer?

lol, that’s a nice opinion and all, but do you have any actual facts to support that statement?

BEF ? Hardly even a bump, due to their size.

The British Expeditionary Force consisted of about 394,165 men (source) by May 1940, I think they were a little more than just a bump, wouldn't you say?

Yeah, the Germans did great....in Poland, Low Countries, Norway, France, Balkans......wow, impressive

And they did all that within a year, so yeah, I'd say its impressive.

But hey, I couldn't care less if you agree or not, but nice try

I know the truth must be frustrating(or why the anger ?); thats what happens when bubbles burst.

lol , funny, not once in this entire 2 page thread have you posted any facts or sources supporting your argument, all I see is your baseless opinions.

Better luck next time.

[Roosevelt45(the 2nd)]

The British Expeditionary Force consisted of about 394,165 men (source) by May 1940, I think they were a little more than just a bump, wouldn't you say?

I would have to disagree with you on this one,

just look at what the Germans had and you'll notice that 400.000 men doesn't look like that much anymore.

Found a pretty good,non-political site about the German army(1919-1945).

Feldgrau.com

[SoDak]

Originally posted by Comrade Trapp:

[QB]

Lol, any third grader who's studying the subject already knows the facts about 1940

France. You ?

One hint has already been given, started with the letter V.

No, I wouldn't. A single poorly prepared army sized force compared to an entire military ?

Don't know what planet you live on where that math wouldn't make a difference.

I'm sure you would, being a myth believer and all.

Anyone else realizes all those countries militarys together didn't amount to squat, and the Germans still came close to losing in Norway.

Pot, kettle, etc. mean anything to you ? Here's a fact; your German supermen got their asses kicked........twice.

By the incompetant, moronic allies no less.

Do keep trying though.

[ July 13, 2004, 02:16 PM: Message edited by: SoDak ]

[SoDak]

Originally posted by Roosevelt45(the 2nd):

So you do acknowledge(or whatever) the fact that compared to the democratic armies Germany was pretty though?

I'm not disagreeing with you on the fact that the Germans are way overrated but if you look at the state the armies of the UK and France were in, don't you think that Germany looks a lot better.

Definately. But then, thats not some inherent, superior genetic or whatever, German military trait as so many like to believe.

Thats simple politics.

[Retributar]

Your right SoDak ...its got nothing to do with an INHERENT SUPERIOR GENETIC TRAIT...it has to do more with Location-Timing-and other events and circumstances that make one nation or another rise above the others.

There is less than 1% or something like that between us and Apes in Genetic Make-up...so all human beings are closer to being exact images of each other than some might believe!.

[SeaMonkey]

"Thats simple politics."

Finally, something intelligent. Exactly Sodak, Germany being an historical military power, in the recent few decades, developed a superior military system due to their military ideology of their political system. This is not about Supermen or genetics, its about training, that's why I'm a better chemist than you.

[Roosevelt45(the 2nd)]

If I understand correctly,you guys have been fighting over a subject that you actually all agreed on.

Nice way to spend your free time,guys .

[Comrade Trapp]

lol , funny, not once in this entire 2 page thread have you posted any facts or sources supporting your argument, all I see is your baseless opinions.

I think this statement still stands. Like I said before, you have posted nothing but your baseless opinions, which without supporting facts or sources, means nothing.

[SoDak]

Originally posted by SeaMonkey:

"Thats simple politics."

Finally, something intelligent. Exactly Sodak, Germany being an historical military power, in the recent few decades, developed a superior military system due to their military ideology of their political system. This is not about Supermen or genetics, its about training, that's why I'm a better chemist than you.

<shrug> Yes and no. It wasn't a superior military system, as events proved, twice.

In terms of training, disagree. The only "superior training" they had was that they were looking for a fight, while everyone else was wanting to avoid one.

Not hard to appear to have "superior training or tactics" in that scenario.

Once the scenario changed to both having the same political mindset, show was over. Twice.

[ July 13, 2004, 02:14 PM: Message edited by: SoDak ]

[SoDak]

Originally posted by Comrade Trapp:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> lol , funny, not once in this entire 2 page thread have you posted any facts or sources supporting your argument, all I see is your baseless opinions.

I think this statement still stands. Like I said before, you have posted nothing but your baseless opinions, which without supporting facts or sources, means nothing. </font>

[SoDak]

Originally posted by Roosevelt45(the 2nd):

If I understand correctly,you guys have been fighting over a subject that you actually all agreed on.

Nice way to spend your free time,guys .

Fighting ? Nah. Not even close

[Sirocco]

In broad terms, the Germans spent the first half of WW2 teaching lessons, and the second half suffering at the hands of their attentive students.

[Queipo de Llano]

I would not use the 1940 campaign in and of itself as conclusive evidence of German superiority. As in any military campaign, a large number of factors came together to bring about the eventual outcome. It even has been argued that if the French had better units along the Meuse than their 55th division and a Colonial unit or if even these units had refrained from basically fleeing upon first contact then perhaps the Allies could have reacted in sufficient time to prevent the breakthrough.

I will certainly agree that the Germans were ahead of the Allies in a number of respects in 1940. As well as all the factors we are all familiar with, often overlooked is the fact they had actual combat EXPERIENCE gained versus the Poles going in their favor.

In my opinion, a better case can be made for German tactical superiority vis-a-vis the Allies in WW ONE than in the sequel. But that is perhaps a topic better addressed when someone gets a quality WWI Mod up and running.

[Comrade Trapp]

In my opinion, a better case can be made for German tactical superiority vis-a-vis the Allies in WW ONE than in the sequel. But that is perhaps a topic better addressed when someone gets a quality WWI Mod up and running.

I agree.

[Retributar]

There are WW1 MODS available , but you will need to download and install the Graphics for WW1 before you can play them!.

http://ww2n.com/schq/

[ev]

Originally posted by SoDak:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Shaka of Carthage:

SoDak

...the recent US military reorganizations, are doing nothing more than implementing things the Germany military did in WWII...

Care to supply some links for this assertion ? I'm really interested in your "claim" that recent US military reorgs are based on German items from WW2, but the "everyone copied them" is a good one too. </font>

[Desert Dave]

As originally posted by Ev:

Recognizing this terrible historical coincidence is not a matter of infatuation, but, one of the greatest lessons of WWII and a most dramatic warning for our own future.

Very well stated.

Of course, ALL of EVERY single historical incident that EVER happened, is... coincidence.

There is simply NO SUCH THING as... deliberate cause and effect.

That is an arrogant human conceit, and applied, as per political or social inclination... AFTER the FACT.

But, you are quite right to suggest that we might LEARN from "history."

Ever better to stare "the brute" directly in the face.

Even, and especially, the one we each can almost see in our mirror.

Once that bemused and surly Brute is acknowledged, and confronted, then there surely WILL be fewer back-brain entanglements.

The Nazis existed simply because "the good German society" allowed them to.

Same way the thieves and thugs are on the rampant rampage, just now.

Unless we each... INDIVIDUALLY admit to "the shadow" in our own nature, then there will NEVER be any collective enlightenment.

Merely... a very, very few wandering souls, reminding all and each that it IS possible to reach a new and more advanced state of "being."

Usually, however, we like - no! We compete! to throw such "outcasts" into the deepest well, or, as now, accuse them of being unpatriotic or hardly in accord with the prevailing tendency to "get it all while the gettings good."

Best by far... each can appreciate and fully realize that they THEMSELVES are... an animal.

A beautiful beastly animal with... unlimited POSSIBILITY.

[Avatar]

SoDak, you obviously know little of military history and are an amateur at best. You contend to know everything about the German Army (and Allied Armies), but have written little to show for it. You've probably read a book or two at most, and probably got whatever you know about the subject from annectodal information on the history channel. Not to brag, but I've read every major book on the subject, read dozens of manuals from every major participant of WW2, not to mention a few dozen documentaries.

First things first, the belief that the German Army had developed some 'revolutionary' type of warfare on the outset of WW2 is total nonsense. This was Allied propaganda from the beginning as a reason for 'why' Poland, Denmark, Norway, France, etc... fell. They couldn't understand why the germans had done so well and so fast. The REASON is simple and complex: THERE WAS NO SINGLE REASON.

German Army doctrine was formulated long before even WW1. It wasn't the Tank, the Airplane or Radar that changed war, it was the TRAIN and the TELEGRAPH. The US Civil war was the first war to ever fully utilize these new technologies to the fullest, and 'total war' was the outcome. Clausewitz wrote much about this subject. The Germans won the first 2 years of the war with little bloodshed through a variety of factors, a few of which I will state here:

- Initiative: Germany invaded Poland. Germany invaded Denmark. Germany invaded Norway. Germany invaded France. Germany invaded Russia. Almost ALL their early war victories were based on complete/partial suprise on the part of the defenders.

- Luck: Germany got lucky in quite a few instances during the war, the earliest of which was the breakthru in the Ardennes in '40. They also could have easily lost in Norway if the Franco-British expedition had left earlier than it had and/or was stronger than that of which was sent. The attack on Russia was a complete suprise to Stalin in spite of information from quite the variety of sources that indicated to him that Germany would attack. Lucky. Very lucky indeed. Of course, they did have their share of bad luck as well. But overall, early in the war, luck had definitely favoured them.

- Superior Army Doctrine/Training:

Last but not least, the Germans held the advantage in ALMOST every category of a modern army. Although they lacked numbers and armaments, german training was second to none. It began from lessons in WW1 (They almost whipped the Allies in 1918, but failed on the Marne due to their exhausted/overextended supply system), and continued into the Weimar Republic with the REICHSWEHR. This 100,000 man army knew it's numbers were small, so they made up for this by taking only the best/smartest men, and training them into an elite force. Those in the Reichswehr eventually rose to take control of the Wehrmacht in terms of officers. Their professionality was unparalled, and undoubtedly led to the many successes that the Wehrmacht enjoyed in its campaigns.

And SoDak, don't believe the US Military took any of the Wehrmachts tactics into it's own books? Wrong again. The US hired/forced many ex-Nazi Generals into writing pamphlets (translated later of course) on their experiences against the USSR. The USA needed to know the best ways to combat the USSR should war between the superpowers come. By and large, almost every American general agreed that superior German leadership (not at the top top tho) had allowed them to avoid disaster multiple times when confronting vastly superior (number-wise) Soviet troops. This vast collection of pamphlets and documents were collected and published in some of the most renown US military books, and are still used today. Goodbye. Oh, and by the way, try writing something more constructive than your one-two liners. They're boring and bring nothing to the conversation. However, maybe you're just being the antagonist here and want some attention. I think that's it huh?

[Comrade Trapp]

Well written Avatar.

[SeaMonkey]

He still ...."won't get it"! Where do you think the word "Blockhead" came from? Look in the dictionary under "Blockhead" and you will see Sodak's picture as the definition, no need for words, a picture is worth a thousand ....."Blockheads".