AXIS: Why did they lost WW2? Mistakes?

[NoemiChan]

You probably know I often post "war topic", because I love arguments.

Please comment on a particular Axis (Germany, Italy and Japan), or in general and then answer the question.

Argument Open!!!!!

[yezhanquan]

The main problem was that they took on too many opponents at the same time. Japan taking on China was already bad enough, but throw in the United States and it becomes unbearable. Similarly, Germany taking on the Soviet Union was pushing it; throw in the US and Hitler effectively said "GG." to his generals.

[Jaden]

You can go in to detail like how Germany didn't have the proper weapons to fight England with, how they lacked oil for their army, how their allies were few and incompetent, but...

The truth is they were just too ambitious, if they had set themselves more realistic objectives than taking over the world, they may have been able to, in some ways, "win" a war.

[roriconfan]

They thought they could take over the world in a decade; here is your mistake. They were not the only bigshots around either as Russia, England and America were of equal if not higher military power.

[yezhanquan]

Also, co-ordination between Japan and Germany was vastly weaker than the teamwork between the USA and the USSR. Can't deny that contributed to the final defeat.

[Ending]

IMO, they swallowed more than they could chew when they started operation Barbarossa. I.e: started a war against Союз Советских Республик, fully knowing that they still had a lot on their plate. If they hadn't done this, they wouldn't had necessarily been squeezed between two fronts.

Also remember, despite USA being very noisy about their part, that it was a coalition. Anyone got the demotivational poster to remind us?

[yezhanquan]

The US did quite a bit of work, but the Aussies and the Canadians did more than their fair share. The Soviet Union took more than their fair share of death and destruction.

[Tsuyoshi]

The other issue with the AXIS powers was its leadership. In the case of Hitler, he rose to power when Germany was in its darkest hour. With the hyperinflation and the war debt, Germany was in serious financial difficulty, and Hitler gave the people the promise to regain everything they had lost during the war. He was popular and the people believed him. However, Hitler's ambitions bit him from behind and he started to lose battles Hitler promised he would win. Sending his best troops to Russia was his biggest mistake. The people eventually lost faith and didn't fight with the fervor they had when the war began.

The same happened in Italy and Mussolini. While Italy was on the winning side in WW1, they felt they deserved more reward for their effort during the war. Mussolini gave the people the promise that he would give Italy the power it deserved, even going as far as claiming he would recreate the Holy Roman Empire. As time went on, people began to lose faith in him too, and the entire fascist structure crumbled.

[Irenicus]

Have fun!

You'll probably get a livelier discussion in a place where people meet up just to discuss the stuff. Given that they spend a whole lot of time trying to play out a scenario whereby the Axis *could* win, they'll, logically, have thought a lot about why they didn't.

I'd rather not repeat the one thousand and one ways that things went wrong and should have been right -- or should I say, retrospectively, thank goodness things went wrong? I must admit a certain disagreement with the viewpoint of the leaders of the Axis powers on, oh, how to treat human beings for one.

Although, because the OP says he wants arguments...

Originally Posted by Ending

IMO, they swallowed more than they could chew when they started operation Barbarossa. I.e: started a war against Союз Советских Республик, fully knowing that they still had a lot on their plate. If they hadn't done this, they wouldn't had necessarily been squeezed between two fronts.

It has often been argued that if Hitler didn't take the first stab, Stalin would, in more prepared circumstances, as the Red Army was itself rearming rapidly at the time. A major, well, alternate history topic...

Originally Posted by Tsuyoshi

...Holy Roman Empire...

I feel like a horrible nitpicker, but the Holy Roman Empire is a Medieval "Germanic" construction, evoked nostalgically by German nationalists, including by the Nazis as the "First Reich" to Hitler's Third (hence a legendary Medieval King gets to have his name be used for Operation Let's Take This Outside, Why Don't We, Russia, I'll Bring A Million Friends And You Can Too); the Second, incidentally, being the Bismarckian/Wilhelmine German Empire. Italian nationalists generally evoke the spirit of the original Roman Empire itself. It was bigger and badder anyway.

Also of note is that, unlike Italy which indeed collapsed upon itself with the Allied invasion, the German people as a whole did not turn against the regime in the same way. To be fair, it's hard to act out civil disobedience when your regime can still shoot you for it and your regime's enemy will also shoot you for it anyway.

[MeoTwister5]

Personally Barbarossa could have worked at the time considering that Russia was in a mess with most of its forces bordering Germany at Poland were poorly trained and poorly equipped. They may have outnumbered the Germans almost 5:1 but you don't win a war when you don't know how to shoot the weapon you have that's older than you are.

What made them win and pretty much turned the tide of the war was the very same thing that beat Napoleon ages prior, the winter. At this time the assault had taken to long, stretched Germany too thin, and when winter hit they were unprepared compared to the USSR which was now in full gear and fighting in the element that nearly every Russian has seen since they were kids. After that with Stalingrad and Kursk in the bag, it was eventual that Berlin would be in the sights of the Mosin-Nagant.

Oh and Overlord helped too. Sort of. Seriously though much of the war and the victories were won in the Russian snow, as opposed to how it tends to get downplayed in Western text.

[Tsuyoshi]

Originally Posted by Irenicus

I feel like a horrible nitpicker, but the Holy Roman Empire is a Medieval "Germanic" construction, evoked nostalgically by German nationalists, including by the Nazis as the "First Reich" to Hitler's Third; the Second, incidentally, being the Bismarckian/Wilhelmine German Empire. Italian nationalists generally evoke the spirit of the original Roman Empire itself. It was bigger and badder anyway.

Also of note is that, unlike Italy which indeed collapsed upon itself with the Allied invasion, the German people as a whole did not turn against the regime in the same way. To be fair, it's hard to act out civil disobedience when your regime can still shoot you for it and your regime's enemy will also shoot you for it anyway.

Well yes, ergo Mussolini pretty much got the idea of the Roman Empire wrong. As for the Germans, I agree, they did not revolt in the same way as the Italians, merely that they weren't as motivated to fight like they once were due to Germany's stream of losses.

[grylsyjaeger]

It just wasn't their day.

/thread

[Kamui4356]

Why did they lose?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militar...ground_weapons

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militar...ar_II#Aircraft

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militar...II#Naval_ships


There was literally no way they could have won. Not only were they outproduced, for the most part the allies were throwing greater numbers of equal or superior weapons at them. Now before someone points to Tigers and panthers vs Shermans and T-34s, please remember that they where at least 20 tons heavier than the Sherman or T-34, and a better comparison would be an American Pershing or Soviet IS series.

[Kaze]

I'm just going to throw this out here,

This is the T-1000 Landkreuzer:

a Super heavy tank with a crew of 100+ crewmembers.

Spoiler for Image Heavy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landkre...._1500_Monster


Now imagine 500 of those (with german air superiority gained by superior fighter jets) versus any country.


It's good the war ended when it did, otherwise we'd all be screwed.

[Kamui4356]

Originally Posted by Kaze

I'm just going to throw this out here,

This is the T-1000 Landkreuzer:

a Super heavy tank with a crew of 100+ crewmembers.

Spoiler for Image Heavy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landkre...._1500_Monster


Now imagine 500 of those (with german air superiority gained by superior fighter jets) versus any country.


It's good the war ended when it did, otherwise we'd all be screwed.

First of all, how exactly was Germany going to build them? Their industry was under constant bombardment from allied bombers and the design was never practical to begin with. They were never a serious design. Second of all, what superior jets? The ME-262s had engines that lasted 10 hours. The British had the meteor, which saw service in WWII, and was faster with a much better rate of climb than the 262, and the US had the P-80, which just missed seeing active service and could have been rushed if it was needed and was faster, more maneuverable, and had a somewhat better rate of climb than the 262. The only edge the ME-262 had were its swept wings, which went a long way to making up the deficiencies against allied jets with superior engines, but it still didn't match them.

[MrTerrorist]

Another was the end of the Nazi-Soviet alliance. Before Operation Barbarossa, both regimes were working together in the invasion of Poland which made both Britain and the USA fear they were facing an powerful enemy. However, with the failure of Operation Sealion and not to lose their new confidence, Hitler decides to attack their ally which was a big mistake (literally) because they over estimated the size and capabilities of the Soviet Union. It was a good thing the alliance was broken cause facing not one but two brutal dictatorship is just a nightmare to face off.

[Asuras]

Hitler failed in Russia. Instead of going for the oil field to the East he chose to attack Moscow. His men tried to siege the city for days but failed to defeat the patriotic Russian foes that held the walls. Supplies couldn't be delivered because of proximity to enemy territory and they weren't allowed to retreat.

Dressed in summer clothing during a Russian winter, they mostly froze to death.

[Kaze]

Originally Posted by Kamui4356

First of all, how exactly was Germany going to build them? Their industry was under constant bombardment from allied bombers and the design was never practical to begin with. They were never a serious design. Second of all, what superior jets? The ME-262s had engines that lasted 10 hours. The British had the meteor, which saw service in WWII, and was faster with a much better rate of climb than the 262, and the US had the P-80, which just missed seeing active service and could have been rushed if it was needed and was faster, more maneuverable, and had a somewhat better rate of climb than the 262. The only edge the ME-262 had were its swept wings, which went a long way to making up the deficiencies against allied jets with superior engines, but it still didn't match them.

I was not saying during wartime, I meant if they had those capabilities 3-4 years earlier, even before the US was involved.
And ME-262? worthless
I'm talking about the Me 163 Komet, which was unrivalled at the time in terms of potential (Not talking about fighting)

[Kamui4356]

Originally Posted by Kaze

I was not saying during wartime, I meant if they had those capabilities 3-4 years earlier, even before the US was involved.

They didn't. Designing something doesn't mean you can actually build it. You're talking about a country that had plans for battleships too large to be produced in any of its drydocks. Nazi Germany was rife with designers working on what amounts to flights of fancy.

And ME-262? worthless
I'm talking about the Me 163 Komet, which was unrivalled at the time in terms of potential (Not talking about fighting)

The 163 wasn't a jet, it was rocket powered, briefly. After that it became a glider. It was also a bigger threat to its ground crews and pilots than the enemy thanks to its volatile fuel mixture. Its potential was non-existent and it was rightfully abandoned. Maybe with another decade of work could have produced a usable rocket powered fighter, but such would have been a far different aircraft from a 163, and its telling that neither the US nor USSR ever produced a rocket powered fighter during the cold war. Some experimental craft, notably many of the US X-series were rocket powered, but no actual fighters.

[Ithekro]

Easiest way to have won the war....not to have fought it when they did, but for when they expected to start it (six years after it did). The Z-Plan for the naval arm of the German build up would have completed in 1945 or 1946 depending on materials and such factors. Basically they tried to take something (that had once been theirs) and instead of being waved away by a treaty, had war declared on them. Not that the declaration of war helped Poland much at all...nor did it really help France or the Low Countries...since the Germans plowed them under. Britain is a hard place to invade and the Royal Navy is rather large so starving them out is only viable if you have the navy and air arm to do it with. Fighting Russia, while not the best idea in the universe, could have worked...if they could follow their own rules about the invasion. (invade on your own terms. If you are delayed, don't go. If Italy gets you stuck in the Balkans....finish up in Greece, then wait until the next spring to invade Russia).

Japan was already at war with China, but was trying to calculate who they could gain the resouces to continue that war by taking on the Dutch, but every act would likely get the British and Americans involved (the French seemed to be mostly out by 1941 as Indo-China and Thailand were nominally Japanese allied if I recall). Focus on the Americans and you get the British on your flank. Focus on the British and you give the Americans time of mve in. So they tried to knock out the Americans and British as once with the goal of getting the Americans at least out of the war entirely via a strong push and negotiation. It is...unfortunate...for Japan, that the negotiations part was late to the table, and they underestimated American rage. They didn't underestimate American production ability...they knew exaclty how long they had to defeat the Americans. They just didn't know the Americans mentality. Also they forced themselves to take on the British and Dutch at the same time as they were fighting the Americans and Chinese.