A tale of two cities...

[Mark]

Not being an expert historian Zollis, I venture to suggest an answer your question. Germany was under imminent threat of immediate invasion from the West more so than from the East. But how can any of us know why Hitler did what he did. Looking back, it often seems that his military choices were far from rational and often contrary to the advice of his Generals. Think of it like being attacked by two blokes at the same time. You would tend to hit back first at the guy who is stood nearest to you.

On paper though, Germany ought to have been able to repell the Allies during the Bulge. I like to think that the missing, uncalculable factor in our victory, was the strength of the average Allied Soldier (plus all of our Peoples in supporting roles) and their belief that they truly were defending the world from evil darkness. That was our real, combined, strength. I am not talking politicians. I mean the people. Again, the people. You know, we, the people.

 

[Jeff Young]

The answer to "Why the Ardennes" is fairly straighforward. Hitler's general staff, and even Hitler himself, realized that the US/UK would be far more reasonable in a peace negotiation than the Soviets. After Market Garden failed in the fall of 44, Hitler and his best generals saw an opportunity in the gap in the Ardennes.

The plan was to drive north to coast and attempt to cut off a portion of the Allied forces in northeast France/the low countries. Even Hitler didn't expect to "win" the war with the US/UK, but rather hoped to negotiate a peace with them and concentrate on a defense against the Soviets.

 

[Keith]

Chocolate cake.

A telling fictional moment in the Battle of the Bulge film, when Robert Shaw looks at a package containing a freshly baked chocolate cake dropped by parachute to the besieged American units in Bastogne realising that the Wermacht could never succeed against such logistical capability. Clever script.

The shrewder of the Japanese military also realised even 48 hours following Pearl Harbour that this was a war they could never win for the same reasons.

And since Jeff brought it up, consider the inadequately equipped Parachute Brigades during Market Garden desperate for heavy weapons and radio comms that actually worked, receiving containers full of thousands of Red Berets instead.

The fighting spirit and capabilities of respective national units is a bit of a misnomer really, as German and Japanese had actively trained or had been in action for many years in professional armies, whereas the Allies consisted of many "Bakers & Candlestick Makers" who achieved remarkable things considering their sparse experience.

Logistics was the big force multiplier that "won" WWII. IMHO of course.

 

[Jeff Young]

Yamamoto knew before the war started -- he counciled against it -- that Japan would lose. Two quotes:

Right after Pearl Harbor: "We have awoken a sleeping dragon."

And before: "For six months I will run wild. After that, all bets are off."

Prescient really given that Midway came just over six months from Pearl Harbor.

The situation in Europe was much more in doubt. If Hitler had not invaded the Soviet Union it is entirely possible the western Allies end up in a stalemate with a free Britain supported by the US and a "peace" like that of North/South Korea with mainland Europe.

 

[Keith]

The situation in Europe was much more in doubt. If Hitler had not invaded the Soviet Union it is entirely possible the western Allies end up in a stalemate with a free Britain supported by the US and a "peace" like that of North/South Korea with mainland Europe.

That's my take too, and I sometimes wonder whether that would have been the preferred outcome (for the UK), with hindsight of course.

This scenario would also have saved us from the eventual disaster of the EEC. At least in a declared war situation, one knows who one's enemy really is.

 

[Jeff Young]

Fair point.

I would suggest though that having an armed enemy across the Channel for the last 70 years is probably even worse than a dysfunctional EC...lol...

My totally American-centric take on the situation is that the "rich" countries in the EC -- France, Germany, UK, low countries, Norway, Sweden, Finland, maybe some of the Eastern European countries -- could make it work. But the banking and financial and social systems in Italy, Spain, Greece etc. will be the death of the whole thing.

 

[Keith]

I would suggest though that having an armed enemy across the Channel for the last 70 years is probably even worse than a dysfunctional EC...lol...

Marginally...

 

[jyrki sulka]

My totally American-centric take on the situation is that the "rich" countries in the EC -- France, Germany, UK, low countries, Norway, Sweden, Finland, maybe some of the Eastern European countries -- could make it work. But the banking and financial and social systems in Italy, Spain, Greece etc. will be the death of the whole thing.

I`ll sign this. Sad but true

 

[Keith]

Or perhaps, more graphically

 

[Keith]

Pythagoras' theorem - 24 words.
Lord's Prayer - 66 words.
Archimedes' Principle - 67 words.
10 Commandments - 179 words.
Gettysburg address - 286 words.
US Declaration of Independence - 1,300 words.
US Constitution with all 27 Amendments - 7,818 words.

EU regulations on the sale of CABBAGE - 26,911 words