Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

Discussions on High Command, strategy and the Armed Forces (Wehrmacht) in general.
ljadw
Member
Posts: 13122
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

Post by ljadw » 16 Dec 2021 06:53

Jackson is contradicting himself :he said that the ML was build in service of a defensive strategy and that France was preparing for the offensive which would ultimately win the war .
And the second part of this sentence is not correct .
The French advance in Belgium (the Dyle line ) was dependent on what Germany would do (no German invasion of Belgium= no French advance in Belgium ),it was also politically motivated (France could not remain idle when Germany invaded Belgium ) and it was also militarily needed ,as France had not the means to defend its long border with Belgium and as the Dyle Line was shorter .
The offensive which would ultimately win the war is an invention :France had no intention for such an offensive :the French wanted to win the war without fighting,without an offensive :there would be an economic siege of Germany and Germany would collapse :the workers would revolt and the generals would start a coup .
In WW 1 France lost 1,5 million dead . It could not afford another 1,5 million dead .
In 1929 it decided to build the Maginot Line ( implicitly accepting the German rearmament):east of the Rhine there was nothing that was worth the bones of a poilu .This was nothing knew :it was the same strategy as before 1914 .
The French never had the intention to sacrifice the lives of their soldiers for the survival of other countries .

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 7157
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

Post by wm » 19 Dec 2021 23:08

So the Allies were going to sit behind the Maginot Line till the Sun turns into a supernova. An interesting strategy.

Still, it has nothing to do with the subject at hand. That Hitler wanted war with France and sought an opportunity to trigger it. And didn't care if the French were going to conduct an offensive or not.

Poopstain
Member
Posts: 2
Joined: 02 Jan 2022 20:27
Location: California

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

Post by Poopstain » 02 Jan 2022 20:30

Regarding the original question, my sense is that while Hitler did not expect the UK/France to declare war, he was prepared for it. He was a gambler who knew what the risks were, even if he incorrectly judged the odds on this occasion. As others have pointed out I think he was a bit ambivalent as to actual "wanting" war at that time--but I do not believe he "feared" it.

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 7157
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

Post by wm » 02 Jan 2022 21:24

Hitler badly wanted war with Czechoslovakia (and the resulting war with France) a year earlier. It wasn't the first time.
As the deadline for Hitler’s ultimatum approached, Goebbels decided to head him off.

The British and French ambassadors got to Hitler first, bringing fragrant fresh proposals. Ribbentrop was furious that war might be averted.

‘He nurtures a blind hatred of Britain,’ decided Goebbels. 

‘Göring, Neurath, and I urge Hitler to accept. ... You can’t get into what may well turn into a world war over procedural issues.
Göring ... totally shares my viewpoint and gives Ribbentrop a piece of his mind.’ 



‘Mein Führer,’ he blurted out over lunch in Hitler’s chancellery on the twenty-eighth, ‘if you think that the German public is thirsting for war, you are wrong. They watch its approach with a leaden sense of apathy.’

In that instant, Hitler changed his mind. 


According to Ribbentrop’s Staatssekretär Ernst von Weizsäcker, it was primarily Goebbels who persuaded Hitler to back off from war at this, the eleventh hour.


David Irving Goebbels Mastermind of the Third Reich


Boby
Member
Posts: 2719
Joined: 19 Nov 2004 17:22
Location: Spain

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

Post by Boby » 06 Jan 2022 16:30

ljadw wrote:.
You still do not understand/refuse to admit that Britain and France started WW 2 not for strategical ,military reasons but for ideological reasons : they would not have declared war before 1914 if Germany attacked an independent Poland .
The fact is that before 1914 and even in 1914 ,war was considered as a continuation of politics by other means .AFTER 1918 war was considered,by the influence of Wilson and such people, as a crime .
That's why Britain and France declared war in 1939 .
That's why Neville Chamberlain said on September 3 1939 that the war could only finish with the destruction of Nazism .
Asquith did not say in 1914 that the war could only end with the destruction of the Imperial German regime .
Where is the evidence Britain+France would declare war if, Stalin, not Hitler, on 1 September invaded

a) Poland
b) Romania
c) Lithuania, or Latvia, or Estonia or all 3 at the same time
d) Finland

rcocean
Member
Posts: 605
Joined: 30 Mar 2008 00:48

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

Post by rcocean » 06 Jan 2022 16:49

The offensive which would ultimately win the war is an invention :France had no intention for such an offensive :the French wanted to win the war without fighting,without an offensive :there would be an economic siege of Germany and Germany would collapse :the workers would revolt and the generals would start a coup .
In WW 1 France lost 1,5 million dead . It could not afford another 1,5 million dead .
You can throw in the fact that the Luftwaffe was stronger than the Combined British/France AF, the allies had no great superiority in tanks, and above all France had 50% of the military manpower. The French, IRC, fielded about 100 Divisions, the Germans had 175-200 in total (counting those in the East). Given the standard 3-1 superiority needed at the point of attack, it was never possible for the French to destroy the Siegfried line and march into Berlin or even the Ruhr. Meanwhile, the British had only planned for a "limited committment" in ground forces. They were NOT interested in anymore Somme's or Pachendahels (sic).

Its hard to think of more reckless and stupid declaration of war then the one against Germany in 1939. A war against Germany only made sense in 1939, if the Allies had either the USA or the USSR as their allies. They had neither. And we all paid the price for their stupidity.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 13122
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

Post by ljadw » 06 Jan 2022 17:09

Boby wrote:
06 Jan 2022 16:30
ljadw wrote:.
You still do not understand/refuse to admit that Britain and France started WW 2 not for strategical ,military reasons but for ideological reasons : they would not have declared war before 1914 if Germany attacked an independent Poland .
The fact is that before 1914 and even in 1914 ,war was considered as a continuation of politics by other means .AFTER 1918 war was considered,by the influence of Wilson and such people, as a crime .
That's why Britain and France declared war in 1939 .
That's why Neville Chamberlain said on September 3 1939 that the war could only finish with the destruction of Nazism .
Asquith did not say in 1914 that the war could only end with the destruction of the Imperial German regime .
Where is the evidence Britain+France would declare war if, Stalin, not Hitler, on 1 September invaded

a) Poland
b) Romania
c) Lithuania, or Latvia, or Estonia or all 3 at the same time
d) Finland
As I did not say that B +F would declare war if Stalin invaded the countries you mention, I have not to give evidence .
The FACT is that Stalin did not invade Romania or the Baltics, that there was no war between Poland and Romania.Finland was an exception .
The FACT is also that Stalin did not invade these countries before September 1939.And, one can ask the question : why ?
One of the answers is that Stalin ( who was influenced by the Marxist dogma's ) believed that an attack on a capitalist country would result in a coalition of all capitalist countries against the USSR .
There is always a danger for those who spread lies ,which is that they will believe themselves these lies .
That B + F declared war on Germany because they considered war started by someone else, as something immoral,does not mean that they would have declared war on Russia if Russia had done the same (which it did not ) ,one of the reasons being the strong anti German, anti fascist hostility of the liberal French and British public opinion,increased and even manipulated by the media .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 13122
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

Post by ljadw » 06 Jan 2022 17:11

rcocean wrote:
06 Jan 2022 16:49
The offensive which would ultimately win the war is an invention :France had no intention for such an offensive :the French wanted to win the war without fighting,without an offensive :there would be an economic siege of Germany and Germany would collapse :the workers would revolt and the generals would start a coup .
In WW 1 France lost 1,5 million dead . It could not afford another 1,5 million dead .
You can throw in the fact that the Luftwaffe was stronger than the Combined British/France AF, the allies had no great superiority in tanks, and above all France had 50% of the military manpower. The French, IRC, fielded about 100 Divisions, the Germans had 175-200 in total (counting those in the East). Given the standard 3-1 superiority needed at the point of attack, it was never possible for the French to destroy the Siegfried line and march into Berlin or even the Ruhr. Meanwhile, the British had only planned for a "limited committment" in ground forces. They were NOT interested in anymore Somme's or Pachendahels (sic).

Its hard to think of more reckless and stupid declaration of war then the one against Germany in 1939. A war against Germany only made sense in 1939, if the Allies had either the USA or the USSR as their allies. They had neither. And we all paid the price for their stupidity.
And, the 100 French divisions were spread from Dunkirk to Saigon while Britain send TWO (yes :TWO ) divisions who arrived at the ''front '' on 22 September .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 13122
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

Post by ljadw » 06 Jan 2022 17:24

On 3 September France had 56 ID and 5 ''armoured ''divisions on the north eastern front (Dunkirk-Alpes ),most of them non operational .
12 ID were in NA and 13 at the border with Italy .
Even with more allied divisions, the DOW was very questionable,as no essential French and British interests were threatened : Poland did not exist in 1914 but this did not prevent B + F to win .

Boby
Member
Posts: 2719
Joined: 19 Nov 2004 17:22
Location: Spain

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

Post by Boby » 06 Jan 2022 19:48

ljadw wrote:
06 Jan 2022 17:09
Boby wrote:
06 Jan 2022 16:30
ljadw wrote:.
You still do not understand/refuse to admit that Britain and France started WW 2 not for strategical ,military reasons but for ideological reasons : they would not have declared war before 1914 if Germany attacked an independent Poland .
The fact is that before 1914 and even in 1914 ,war was considered as a continuation of politics by other means .AFTER 1918 war was considered,by the influence of Wilson and such people, as a crime .
That's why Britain and France declared war in 1939 .
That's why Neville Chamberlain said on September 3 1939 that the war could only finish with the destruction of Nazism .
Asquith did not say in 1914 that the war could only end with the destruction of the Imperial German regime .
Where is the evidence Britain+France would declare war if, Stalin, not Hitler, on 1 September invaded

a) Poland
b) Romania
c) Lithuania, or Latvia, or Estonia or all 3 at the same time
d) Finland
As I did not say that B +F would declare war if Stalin invaded the countries you mention, I have not to give evidence .
The FACT is that Stalin did not invade Romania or the Baltics, that there was no war between Poland and Romania.Finland was an exception .
The FACT is also that Stalin did not invade these countries before September 1939.And, one can ask the question : why ?
One of the answers is that Stalin ( who was influenced by the Marxist dogma's ) believed that an attack on a capitalist country would result in a coalition of all capitalist countries against the USSR .
There is always a danger for those who spread lies ,which is that they will believe themselves these lies .
That B + F declared war on Germany because they considered war started by someone else, as something immoral,does not mean that they would have declared war on Russia if Russia had done the same (which it did not ) ,one of the reasons being the strong anti German, anti fascist hostility of the liberal French and British public opinion,increased and even manipulated by the media .
Well, you are saying that after 1918 war was considered a crime, but we know it is almost certain they would't declare war on the Soviet Union if it did the same as Germany. So your argument is not very convincing. It seems there were crimes and "crimes".

ljadw
Member
Posts: 13122
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

Post by ljadw » 06 Jan 2022 21:36

Hm :and WHY did the Soviets not the same as Germany ?They did not invade Poland and Romania between 1920 and 1938 .
Stalin did not believe that the West would not declare war on the Soviet Union if it did the same as Germany .
Stalin believed the fable that all Western Powers were ruled by valets of a mysterious capitalist group . Hitler believed that it was a Jewish group .
OTOH,and in defense of Stalin : he remembered that US,Japan, France, Britain ,Poland and Germany did send troops to Russia to crush the Bolchevist revolt .
And about war being a crime : it was Briand who said : guerre a la guerre :war to war .
That there were crimes and ''crimes '' : yes but the wars of Germany ,Japan and Italy were considered as immoral,while there was a lot of understanding for what did Stalin,but this is not a proof that if Stalin had done what the others did,his actions would also have been considered as immoral . How do we know that it is almost certain that ...?
The hostility to Germany was much stronger than the hostility to Stalin : the Germans had killed 750000 British and 1,5 million French,while Stalin had killed '' only '' Russians .And after the war .

Boby
Member
Posts: 2719
Joined: 19 Nov 2004 17:22
Location: Spain

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

Post by Boby » 06 Jan 2022 23:21

Imho, because it was the british policy in the late 30s not to antagonize Stalin, even if they were suspicious about him. The ultimate enemy was Germany, while the rest (except Italy) can be included as potential allies for the so-called "anti-agression front"

The Soviet Union was a far away land, much less dangerous than Germany. And, it would be mad to declare war to 200 million people.

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 7157
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

Post by wm » 06 Jan 2022 23:52

ljadw wrote:
06 Jan 2022 17:09
Where is the evidence Britain+France would declare war if, Stalin, not Hitler, on 1 September invaded
Wasn't that you who consistently claimed that a Czech-German war in 1938 would trigger European war?

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 7157
Joined: 29 Dec 2006 20:11
Location: Poland

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

Post by wm » 06 Jan 2022 23:58

Boby wrote:
06 Jan 2022 23:21
Imho, because it was the british policy in the late 30s not to antagonize Stalin, even if they were suspicious about him. The ultimate enemy was Germany, while the rest (except Italy) can be included as potential allies for the so-called "anti-agression front"
Exactly, everybody loved Stalin. After all the US, the British, the Germans industrialized the Soviet Union.
And when Stalin wrote the super progressive Soviet constitution of 1936 it was basically orgasm time.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 13122
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

Post by ljadw » 07 Jan 2022 07:59

wm wrote:
06 Jan 2022 23:52
ljadw wrote:
06 Jan 2022 17:09
Where is the evidence Britain+France would declare war if, Stalin, not Hitler, on 1 September invaded
Wasn't that you who consistently claimed that a Czech-German war in 1938 would trigger European war?
A Russian-Czech war was not possible .
A Czech-German war would result in the intervention of Britain and France, while Stalin would remain neutral .

Stalin was afraid of an attack by all capitalist countries against the SU,that's why he presented himself as a left wing liberal with whom the West should do business ,there were enough useful idiots in the West to believe him :the Duchess of Athol,the Dean of Canterbury, H.Wallace,Wells, Keynes,Shaw,etc,etc

Return to “German Strategy & General German Military Discussion”