How Hitler screwed up German Logistics

[Cap.Miller]

Hitler could never take over the world, as some WW2 maniac told me (here in the forums) that 75% of the german forces were on the eastern front, and russia still had no really problem sending more and more and more soldiers and cheap tanks to the front, and of course all other countries. It would have been other by an alliance of 2 contries, like they would have fought together with the russians then it would have been bad...

And I don't understand most of u guys still thinking "how could the germans won the war" there are so much similar threads, just be happy that they don't.

[Scope02]

Originally Posted by Heydude235

Im not so sure. When the germans took france. They should of gone to england so the americans could not land there. So if Hitler and the japan command planed more. They could of taken over the world. It would of ended up who invented the atom bomb first.

umm...Germany and Japan were NOT fighting together...if Japan was fighting alongside of Germany...
Pearl Harbor would have happened in 1939

and the A-Bomb was invented by German scientists who were taken to the US

My opinion, I think Germany would have taken over all of Europe if Pearl Harbor didn't happen. I mean that is the main reason why the US went to war.
Say if Pearl Harbor didn't happen, it would give Germany about another year of war until the US joins in because of Britain. By then, Germany would have their jets, their bombs, and all of their other technologies. It would be allllllllllll over.

[Cpt Butterpants]

Anyway i was just wandering -i really am quite glad he was a war planning moron it really worked out better. The history channel is ok for a quick over view of things they have some pretty good shows -of course it is not as good as books but that is obvious.

[jumjum]

Taken literally, the title of your thread means "How Hitler screwed up the German supply system." "Logistics" means what you need to make war (weapons, vehicles, ammo, food, uniforms, medical supplies, etc.), how you acquire it, how and where you store it, and then, most importantly, how you get that "war stuff" to your troops when and where they need it.

Hitler did monkey with logistics some, but from the content of your post, I think you mean something much greater than just supply. More like, "How Hitler screwed up German strategy", or even "How Hitler screwd up Germany".

Words count. Always glad to help.

[Dios]

The only way the Germans could have had a minimal chance of winning the war in the long run, would have been by getting the Russians to join them somehow, and I'm not talking about keeping them neutral but actually fighting in their side.
Sealion was just useless, for it to work the RAF had to be defeated first, but if the RAF had been defeated, then Sealion would have not been necessary, that's why I like so much Battle of Britain, first turning point in the war, and one of the most important ones in my opinion.

And I doubt the Germans would have taken over Europe if Pearl Harbor hadn't happened, first of all, the Brits and the Russian would have stopped them the same, just would have taken them a bit longer, and only with the A bomb the germans could have had a chance against them, and second, the USA, who were already sending equipment to the allies, would probably had entered the war anyways, if the germans had set foot in England. Now imagine the USA fighting with the rest of the Allies against Germany, without being engaged with the Japanese at the same time. Of course that maybe if the USA had jined the war in Europe then the Japs would have attacked them (after all, they didn't even need that to do), but hey, if we're gonna start coming up with What Ifs, they don't always have to be in favor of the Germans.

[Mazz]

Agreed, Hitler was a terrible tactician and was best suited to lead the people orally. If he understood this and didnt waste Rommel in the desert with his extended supply lines, he could have greatly contributed to the Eastern front. If Hitlers real generals had more say on the East, Hitler could have knocked the Russians out with the right blows. A push to the Causasus Mts through Russia and not a joint push through Africa and Russia probably could have secured the oil fields and greatly changed the war.
To say that the US entering the war in Europe/Africa changed its outcome is false, really. Yes, it decreased the timeline, but the the UK was already starting to come back in Africa and both the UK and Russia were already getting great amounts of aid through the Convoys from the US.
Also, If at Leningrad the Germans blocked the main frozen lake the Russians used to resupply the city every winter it might have fallen.

May questions could be poised about what might have happened if Hitler didnt act as supreme commander, but questions like that could be poised for every little thing, such as if the Russians had no T-34 or the Germans listened to Rommel at Normandy.

[czech speacial forces]

i dount think britan had enough men to fight germany with effectiveness. a winter was what stoped germany from defeating russia. the germans had the A bomg tech but the uranium plant (or something) kept getting bombed.einstein was a german who fled the nazis and told the president that the germans had the technolodgy to made the A bomb. japan had no chance to fight america effectively. the still had bolt action rifles which were very uneffective in the jungles of the islands they fought.(the germans mostly fought over pastures of europe so the k98 was still good) the americans could have just surrounded the islands where the japanese were and just wait for them to run out of food and supplies. the worst decision by anyone of wwII was when germany went to war with russia. the luftwaffe was also being weakend so the bombers could bomb europe and the factories. if there was a year more the germans would have had all those heavy tanks, jet planes, super u boats that could stay underwater much longer, after russia was won then the troops would mass for either an attach of britan or a defese of germany and with that many men it would be very hard for the allies to get off the beaches let alone when the got off the shore and faced all these high tech tanks. but as history has shown this just dousnt happen. there is one mistake that changes everything. well now that is an essay worthy of an A+

[ANZACSAS]

hilter never screwed any thing up dont bag the furer (lol i cant even spell it)

[Christian von Schalburg]

If Hitler had not attacked Russia, Europe would possibly still be under Nazi control today.

[[BFE]Adder]

Originally Posted by Neumann

If Hitler had not attacked Russia, Europe would possibly still be under Nazi control today.

Stalin had plans to take Hitler out, however he wanted a few more years for his Army and build up public support for the attack.

Or so he said after the end of the war.

As for the points made above.

If the U-Boat war had worked Sealion would not have been nessary. If the Battle of Britian had worked(And screwup number 1# here when Hitler ordered attacks switched from the RAF to bombing London... which did almost nothing to damage the war effort.) then Sealion would have not been nessary.

Likewise if Guridian(sp I know I'm at work) had gotten his way(Non-stop drive on the Captial and Stalin) and had taken Moscow in 41' then the war might have ended there in Europe at least.


As for the A-Bomb, Germany was in no condition to produce an A-Bomb in 1945 as they were still taking some fundmental problems. If the war had turned out diffrently prehaps they would not have gone down the same blind paths.

What they did have though was both a pratical method of delivering the bomb to the US(A modified V-2) and a workable missle sub design in 1945(Which of course would be first tested by auctaly firing a rocket and considering the design it might or might not have worked, but it most likley would have sunk the sub in the best case senario.)