What were Hitler's plans for after the war?

[ljadw]

Of course,this is to be expected from a goose-stepping defender of the reputation of the brilliant German generals

[ljadw]

The origin of the halt order at Dunkirk was in AGB (v Rundstedt) what Guderian is denying in Panzerleader
And about Guderian (one of those generals who proved their competence (or is it incompetence ?) in the war,in 1943,as IG of the tanks ,he wanted to reconstituate the PzD of 1939,with 400 tanks,and he was pleading to stop the production of the AG,and to produce more tanks .
And should we mention his strange quotes in PL?
That the Pz had lost at Citadelle heavily in men and equipment,and were unemployable for a long time.The truth is that the PzD had lost some 10% of their tanks and 7 % of the men,and that the strength of the PzD was increasing after Citadelle .
That Citadelle was a decisive defeat,while it only was a minor battle.
That the increase of the PD (after the fall of France) was resulting in a halving of the average tank strength per division,while in may 1940,the average tank strength per division was 240 (2400 for 10 divisions),in june 1941,it was 200 (3400 for 17 divisions)
IMHO,the half of 240 is 120,of course,some people,having learned special accounting principles,will claim that 50 %of 240 =200,ot that 3400 :17 =120 .

[mellenthin]

Of course,this is to be expected from a goose-stepping defender of the reputation of the brilliant German generals

Keep your insults for yourself. Germans generals have a very good professional reputation which will not be sullied by attempts at slander.

[mellenthin]

The origin of the halt order at Dunkirk was in AGB (v Rundstedt) what Guderian is denying in Panzerleader
And about Guderian (one of those generals who proved their competence (or is it incompetence ?) in the war,in 1943,as IG of the tanks ,he wanted to reconstituate the PzD of 1939,with 400 tanks,and he was pleading to stop the production of the AG,and to produce more tanks .
And should we mention his strange quotes in PL?
That the Pz had lost at Citadelle heavily in men and equipment,and were unemployable for a long time.The truth is that the PzD had lost some 10% of their tanks and 7 % of the men,and that the strength of the PzD was increasing after Citadelle .
That Citadelle was a decisive defeat,while it only was a minor battle.
That the increase of the PD (after the fall of France) was resulting in a halving of the average tank strength per division,while in may 1940,the average tank strength per division was 240 (2400 for 10 divisions),in june 1941,it was 200 (3400 for 17 divisions)
IMHO,the half of 240 is 120,of course,some people,having learned special accounting principles,will claim that 50 %of 240 =200,ot that 3400 :17 =120 .

Guderian was a great commander and a real tank specialist. Accusing him of incompetence is so far out of sync with known history that it is to be considered as slander.
Runstedt gave the halt order in the name of Hitler so subordinate commanders in good faith considered it an order by Hitler.
Guderian certainly did not want the production of assaultguns to be stopped,rather the contrary(Panzer leader p.297).
When you consider the battle of Kursk a minor battle, you are on your own in the desert.
And there are no strange quotes in Panzer Leader. Memoirs are written out of memory so nitpicking on details is only proof of maliciousness.

[Freebooter]

Hello,
It has always been my understanding that the order to halt and not anihilate the British at Dunkirk came from Hitler because at that early stage he was still hoping for an alliance with the British, or at least some sort of understanding and non agression so he could deal with the Russians and the communists, etc..

And Mellenthin, I saw that comment about "goose stepping guy taking up for German Generals" etc.. That was typical. Watch out for some of these guys. If you say ANYTHING in defence of a German or Germany, its armed forces, etc, during WWII, even just discussing documented facts, you will be branded a "closet-nazi' at the least. Several of us were in a thread started about Rudolph Hess and different guys were discussing things about him, the Germans, the war, social programs and the economy under National Socialists, etc, documented facts some said, but still some got irritated as if the guys talking about it were neo nazis and went so far as to not lock the thread but had it entirely erased and removed. And a lot of very interesting facts came out in that discussion. To me, when people are simply discussing a war, talking about documented things they had read or studied, etc, and to be shouted down and the whole thread iliminated, they are the ones that acted like Nazis. Remember, the Nazis were big on suppression of free speach, ideas or discussion that differed from their own mode of thought!
Dave

[ljadw]

The origin of the halt order at Dunkirk was in AGB (v Rundstedt) what Guderian is denying in Panzerleader
And about Guderian (one of those generals who proved their competence (or is it incompetence ?) in the war,in 1943,as IG of the tanks ,he wanted to reconstituate the PzD of 1939,with 400 tanks,and he was pleading to stop the production of the AG,and to produce more tanks .
And should we mention his strange quotes in PL?
That the Pz had lost at Citadelle heavily in men and equipment,and were unemployable for a long time.The truth is that the PzD had lost some 10% of their tanks and 7 % of the men,and that the strength of the PzD was increasing after Citadelle .
That Citadelle was a decisive defeat,while it only was a minor battle.
That the increase of the PD (after the fall of France) was resulting in a halving of the average tank strength per division,while in may 1940,the average tank strength per division was 240 (2400 for 10 divisions),in june 1941,it was 200 (3400 for 17 divisions)
IMHO,the half of 240 is 120,of course,some people,having learned special accounting principles,will claim that 50 %of 240 =200,ot that 3400 :17 =120 .

Guderian was a great commander and a real tank specialist. Accusing him of incompetence is so far out of sync with known history that it is to be considered as slander.
Runstedt gave the halt order in the name of Hitler so subordinate commanders in good faith considered it an order by Hitler.
Guderian certainly did not want the production of assaultguns to be stopped,rather the contrary(Panzer leader p.297).
When you consider the battle of Kursk a minor battle, you are on your own in the desert.
And there are no strange quotes in Panzer Leader. Memoirs are written out of memory so nitpicking on details is only proof of maliciousness.

On P 297 of PL ,Guderian was not telling the truth,here is the proof :
When the situation demands it,the Panzer IV can also be used as an Assault Gun;the reverse is never possible...Proposal:no changeover in production,however,within the scope necessary,tanks to be deployed for assault gun tasks.
Der Generalinspekteur der Panzertruppen:Notizen fur Fuhrervortrag(5 september 1943)

[ljadw]

Hello,
It has always been my understanding that the order to halt and not anihilate the British at Dunkirk came from Hitler because at that early stage he was still hoping for an alliance with the British, or at least some sort of understanding and non agression so he could deal with the Russians and the communists, etc..

And Mellenthin, I saw that comment about "goose stepping guy taking up for German Generals" etc.. That was typical. Watch out for some of these guys. If you say ANYTHING in defence of a German or Germany, its armed forces, etc, during WWII, even just discussing documented facts, you will be branded a "closet-nazi' at the least. Several of us were in a thread started about Rudolph Hess and different guys were discussing things about him, the Germans, the war, social programs and the economy under National Socialists, etc, documented facts some said, but still some got irritated as if the guys talking about it were neo nazis and went so far as to not lock the thread but had it entirely erased and removed. And a lot of very interesting facts came out in that discussion. To me, when people are simply discussing a war, talking about documented things they had read or studied, etc, and to be shouted down and the whole thread iliminated, they are the ones that acted like Nazis. Remember, the Nazis were big on suppression of free speach, ideas or discussion that differed from their own mode of thought!
Dave

Your ideas on Dunkirk are totally wrong :the real explanation is that the German units were totally exhausted and were unable to conquer Dunkirk .
If you would know me,you should hide in a corner (for months) and be ,because,what I am reproaching Mellenthin,is his childish attitude (for which he has been banned on a lot of forums)which is :without the intervention of the stupid Hitler,the German generals would have won the war .And,of course,this is BS.
If one is claiming that all the German victories were due to the genious German generals and the defeats to the stupid Hitler,one has a problem and one deserves the appellation of "goose-stepping defender of the reputation of the German generals".
If one is denying that the first who was giving the halt order for Dunkirk,was Rundstedt,if one is denying that Citadelle was an unimportant battle (with few German losses),if one is claiming that the doubling of the German PzD was resulting in the halving of the average divisional tankk strength,if....,if ....,well,one is proving that one has no notion of WWII,unless the belief that,without Hitler,Germany would win .

[mellenthin]

The origin of the halt order at Dunkirk was in AGB (v Rundstedt) what Guderian is denying in Panzerleader
And about Guderian (one of those generals who proved their competence (or is it incompetence ?) in the war,in 1943,as IG of the tanks ,he wanted to reconstituate the PzD of 1939,with 400 tanks,and he was pleading to stop the production of the AG,and to produce more tanks .
And should we mention his strange quotes in PL?
That the Pz had lost at Citadelle heavily in men and equipment,and were unemployable for a long time.The truth is that the PzD had lost some 10% of their tanks and 7 % of the men,and that the strength of the PzD was increasing after Citadelle .
That Citadelle was a decisive defeat,while it only was a minor battle.
That the increase of the PD (after the fall of France) was resulting in a halving of the average tank strength per division,while in may 1940,the average tank strength per division was 240 (2400 for 10 divisions),in june 1941,it was 200 (3400 for 17 divisions)
IMHO,the half of 240 is 120,of course,some people,having learned special accounting principles,will claim that 50 %of 240 =200,ot that 3400 :17 =120 .

Guderian was a great commander and a real tank specialist. Accusing him of incompetence is so far out of sync with known history that it is to be considered as slander.
Runstedt gave the halt order in the name of Hitler so subordinate commanders in good faith considered it an order by Hitler.
Guderian certainly did not want the production of assaultguns to be stopped,rather the contrary(Panzer leader p.297).
When you consider the battle of Kursk a minor battle, you are on your own in the desert.
And there are no strange quotes in Panzer Leader. Memoirs are written out of memory so nitpicking on details is only proof of maliciousness.

On P 297 of PL ,Guderian was not telling the truth,here is the proof :
When the situation demands it,the Panzer IV can also be used as an Assault Gun;the reverse is never possible...Proposal:no changeover in production,however,within the scope necessary,tanks to be deployed for assault gun tasks.
Der Generalinspekteur der Panzertruppen:Notizen fur Fuhrervortrag(5 september 1943)

I believe Guderian as you are clearly misinterpreting. The truth is that Guderian did not want the Panzer IV production to be stopped because this would hae meant that only Tiger and Panthers would be produced and the production of those was low.
On the other hand he wanted all infantrydivisions to have assaultguns for AT tasks.
He was absolutely not against assaultguns,rathr the contrary.

[mellenthin]

Your ideas on Dunkirk are totally wrong :the real explanation is that the German units were totally exhausted and were unable to conquer Dunkirk .

Which is factually untrue. If this was true panzer commanders would not have protested the order.

[mellenthin]

If you would know me,you should hide in a corner (for months) and be ,because,what I am reproaching Mellenthin,is his childish attitude (for which he has been banned on a lot of forums)which is :without the intervention of the stupid Hitler,the German generals would have won the war .And,of course,this is BS.
If one is claiming that all the German victories were due to the genious German generals and the defeats to the stupid Hitler,one has a problem and one deserves the appellation of "goose-stepping defender of the reputation of the German generals".
If one is denying that the first who was giving the halt order for Dunkirk,was Rundstedt,if one is denying that Citadelle was an unimportant battle (with few German losses),if one is claiming that the doubling of the German PzD was resulting in the halving of the average divisional tankk strength,if....,if ....,well,one is proving that one has no notion of WWII,unless the belief that,without Hitler,Germany would win .

Here you are putting words in my mouth which I never uttered. You are therefore a liar.
You put the same words into the mouth of german commanders who never uttered them either.
You may choose to believe that Kursk was an unimportant battle. You are on your own in the desert with that opinion.

[ljadw]

keep dreaming

[mellenthin]

keep dreaming

At least you have been shut up. You can obviously not prove the statements you have imputed to me and german commanders.

[ljadw]

Your ideas on Dunkirk are totally wrong :the real explanation is that the German units were totally exhausted and were unable to conquer Dunkirk .

Which is factually untrue. If this was true panzer commanders would not have protested the order.

Which Panzer commanders ? And when did they protest ? After the war of course .
The distance Trier-Dunkirk (in bird's-eye view) was 335 km;that means that a lot of tanks had fallen out because of mechanical defects.Of the remainder,29 % were total loss.
The 1st PzD (present at Dunkirk) had the following tank strength on 10 may
PzI :52
PzII :98
PzIII:58
PZIV/40
at Dunkirk,the total strength would be
PzI:36
PzII:70
PzIII:40
PzIV:28
We can leave PzI +Pz II (tin boxes),thus the strength of the first PzD would be:68 tanks ,minus the mechanical defects,that would be less than 60 tanks .
And you are claiming that with that number,the Germans could capture Dunkirk?
And,what about fuel,ammunition,artillery,infantry ?

[mellenthin]

Your ideas on Dunkirk are totally wrong :the real explanation is that the German units were totally exhausted and were unable to conquer Dunkirk .

Which is factually untrue. If this was true panzer commanders would not have protested the order.

Which Panzer commanders ? And when did they protest ? After the war of course .
The distance Trier-Dunkirk (in bird's-eye view) was 335 km;that means that a lot of tanks had fallen out because of mechanical defects.Of the remainder,29 % were total loss.
The 1st PzD (present at Dunkirk) had the following tank strength on 10 may
PzI :52
PzII :98
PzIII:58
PZIV/40
at Dunkirk,the total strength would be
PzI:36
PzII:70
PzIII:40
PzIV:28
We can leave PzI +Pz II (tin boxes),thus the strength of the first PzD would be:68 tanks ,minus the mechanical defects,that would be less than 60 tanks .
And you are claiming that with that number,the Germans could capture Dunkirk?
And,what about fuel,ammunition,artillery,infantry ?

This is a denial of known history. The panzer units considered themselves very capable of continuing the attack. The whole matter is very well documented including the resistance to the order.
A very detailed article about this was published in Viertelsjahrhefte für Zeitgeschichte 1954 Heft 2. The article can be downloaded.
http://www.ifz-muenchen.de/heftarchiv/1 ... elcker.pdf

[ljadw]

No,the article proves my point :as colonel Frieser (of the Bundeswehr ) pointed in the Blitzkrieg Legend P292/293:the Panzers were already stopped by Kluge and Rundstedt on 23 may,and,in his note 25 on P422,Frieser ( not a Hitler lover ) writes the following:
Hans-Meier-Welcker in "Entschluss zum Anhalten der Deutschen Panzertruppen in Flandern 1940"(Viertelsjahrehefte fur Zeitgeschrifte 2^[1954] 278 ff as early as 1954 pointed outthe agreement between Hitler's and Rundstedt's views.
Jacobsen writes the following about the decisive scene at noon on 24 may:"Hitler thus approved what Rundstedt proposed".(Dunkirchen,95 and 203) .
Unless you can prove that Frieser and Jacobsen are lying to shift the responsability from Hitler to Rundstedt,the case is closed .
Btw ,in your article it is written that following Kleist,the Panzerlosses were some 50 %,thus even more than I was thinking;the fact that a lot of them were repairable after a "short" time,is irrelevant ,the point is that at the moment the halt order was given by Rundstedt,the Panzerlosses were 50 %.
Other points,the article is not giving any information about the available number of panzers,artillery,infantry,and,there is nothing available on the British side.Conclusion :NOBODY can claim that at the moment of the halt order,the Germans could capture Dunkirk .Thus,the halt order cannot be considered as a mistake.
The post war claims that at Dunkirk Hitler was throwing away Germany's chances to win the war ,are wrong .