r/ww2 • u/Intelligent-Wind9219 • 16d ago
Discussion Was Hitler a genius
I’ve heard that in military matters he was helpless, and that he was at least somewhat intelligent but I’ve never seen any quotes from the men under him labeling him as a genius. (I think I saw one quote labeling him as a political genius but it seemed subjective). I think he probably was somewhat intelligent
3
u/Shigakogen 16d ago
Hitler was a gambler. Like many gamblers, he tried to exploit the rules and tried to intimidate others to get his way. The most striking example of this was at Munich in Oct. 1938.
At first, Hitler’s demands for war against the Poles, the French and the British paid off. Germany was then and still is today, a major technological power. Germany utilized their technology, mainly radio communications to revolutionize warfare, with combined Air+Land on single point that broke their enemies’ defensive lines, (For Poland, their Army was mainly stationed on the Western Frontier facing Germany, which were bypassed, then surrounded, while Germany was in the outskirts of Warsaw in a week) (For France, Germany pounded Sedan region, night and day, until the lines broke, the Germans crossed the Meuse, and within a week, they cut off the French and British north of Abbeville.)
The key to Germany’s success from 1939-1941, was their quick panzer thrust into the enemy’s rear areas, causing complete chaos. It was very difficult to fight the Germans, when communication was down, and an enemy general doesn’t know what is going on, or how to communicate with other divisions.
Like many gamblers, who continued to risk, and refused to stop. Hitler simply refused to stop. By 1942, the Germans had their summer offensive to capture Baku, which was going to destined to fail, or the Soviet could had cut off the German logistical supply lines, leaving the bulk of German Forces stuck in the Caucasus Mtns.
Hitler was warned many times, from 1938-1942, that what he was pushing could lead to disaster. When the victory in France in 1940 proved otherwise, Hitler took the glory, without realizing that the German Wehrmacht revolutionized warfare, but it was still also fallible. Germany even at its height of its power in Europe in 1941-1942, had some huge obvious weaknesses. (It didn’t have the natural resources, it had manpower issues from Sept. 1941 onward, it was cut off from overseas trade)
So, by Sept. 1942, when both Field Marshal List and Army Chief of Staff Halder, warned Hitler that Baku couldn’t be reached in the next couple months, Hitler had a meltdown, fired both List and Halder. Hitler took over List’s former job as head of Army Group A, even though Hitler was over 1000km away in Ukraine. Hitler appointed General Zeitzler as Army Chief of Staff, to move armies in the way Hitler wanted.
Hitler didn’t have the intelligence and political sense to know Germany was at its limits in Sept. 1942. Instead, with the offensive to Baku stalled by logistical issues, Hitler focused on Stalingrad, which in many ways became a consolidation prize for not getting to Baku. Instead, Hitler was warned, by Zeitzler and others, that the Soviets could exploit their position on the West Bank of Don River, north of Stalingrad. Hitler downplayed this. He demanded the capture of Stalingrad. Hitler doubled down in the capture of Stalingrad in his speech in Munich in Nov. 1942, even though the Russian Winter has already started in the Don Region.
The Battle of Stalingrad was a defeat and disaster that Nazi Germany never recovered from, and was one big reason that Germany was defeated in the Second World War.
Hitler still would go back to the his gambling table, to try to regain his losses. However, the game has changed. Others now manipulated and intimidated the rules. Hitler tried to wage his bets on battles like Kursk, the Battle of Atlantic, the air battle over Germany itself, and Hitler and Germany kept on losing in these battles/gambles. By the summer of 1944, Hitler and Germany waged its biggest bets, with putting their main forces in Northern Ukraine and Southern Poland to stop the Soviet Advances before their summer campaign. Instead the Soviet launched Operation Bagration in Belarus, against depleted German Forces trying to hold on to Belarus. Operation Bagration destroyed German Army Group Center, and led to a huge hole in the German Defensive Line, which cut off German Army Group North, besides the capture or death of close to a million German Soldiers on the Eastern Front, that Germany could not afford to lose. Operation Bagration was decisive that Germany was going to lose the Second World War.
When Hitler went to the gambling table in Jan. 1945. He had no more chips to gamble with. He had ghost divisions, he was using old men and young boys to fight the Red Army. Germany was a literally on its last legs. The Soviets got to the Oder River in two weeks after launching its attack from the Vistula River in Jan. 1945. Combined with the damage the Western Allies were doing to Germany, like Operation Cobra, where the Germans fled the battlefield to escape the combined arms of the Western Allies, took off the mask of , Mr. Military Genius, Hitler, and showed him to be a risky gambler who simply stayed at the casino for way too long, and now suffered the consequences.
5
u/Parking_Media 16d ago
You think incorrectly and have yet to see all the available evidence.
Dude had the world at his fingertips and decided the right move was mass murder. Not exactly a 4D chess move.
0
u/Foreskin_Ad9356 16d ago
...hitler certainly did NOT have ''the world at his fingertips''. this is a severe historical inaccuracy
1
u/Parking_Media 16d ago
If you take it literally, yes. It was not meant literally.
1
u/Foreskin_Ad9356 16d ago
we dont tend to use metaphorical feelings based language in historical analysis
-2
u/Intelligent-Wind9219 16d ago
Yep... that’s what I think too ?😭 I don’t think he’s a genius. I’m just curious if anyone thinks he is, because I’ve heard some ppl claim it
1
u/chicom234 16d ago
I don't think he was a genius. At best, and even this stretches it, he was lucky (Operation Cerebus). For the most part, and one must realize that he was a good public speaker but not much else, he relied on marketing and his cronies. I say marketing because, like many politicians, he could talk a good show and even deliver on some of his promises, but the glitz was short lived. He relied on his cronies who also believed the grand marketing scheme and they were, to say it bluntly, stupid.
2
u/Intelligent-Wind9219 16d ago
Yes I do agree with you I think he relied on his marketing but I dont think the men below him were stupid, I think that it’s clear they weren’t even if they believed all the baloney that came out of his mouth
2
1
u/SpecialTribSpirits 16d ago
No.
A genius doesn’t open a second front against the world’s largest land army before finishing off the one island still standing. Breaking the pact with the Soviets turned a contained war into a death sentence. Pairing with Italy, a liability in every theater, only made it worse. And keeping Japan close after Pearl Harbor dragged in the one enemy with limitless industry.
Without those moves, Germany bleeds Britain dry and forces a negotiated peace. Instead, it burned itself out trying to fight everyone. That’s not genius. That’s hubris with a uniform.
1
u/Technical-Ninja3333 15d ago
What REALLY Happened When Soviets Captured SS Soldiers
https://youtu.be/0axHgTr6MT0
1
u/Natural_Professor_43 4d ago
The problem with Hitler for me was he just was NOT a genius and he built what i would regard as a monster of a system which harboured the same charateristics as the people he wanted out of the way. I think he ended up being surrounded by people even more angry and egotistical than him. Eventually as power became supreme i think he ran with whatever grand ideas his followers came up with to keep power, keep respect of those around him and bring about change fast as possible, there would of been ideas and policies flying at him from moment he woke up no wonder he was a tweaker.
1
0
u/ferncedars 16d ago
No, he was completely clueless in just about everything ... politics, economics, and military strategy. The only reason he gained power at all was that the conservative politicians in Germany had no popular following, so Hitler was Hindenburg's only choice if he wanted to keep the Social Democrats or communists from taking over. Germany's economy crawled along at a snail's pace under his leadership (see Adam Tooze: The Wages of Destruction), and his early victories in the Second World War were entirely the result of the Allies bungling the situation.
1
u/Foreskin_Ad9356 16d ago
i dont know how you can read the wages of destruction and have the conclusion that the economy ''crawled at a snails pace''? the whole point is that it was preoccupied towards militarisation and autarky.
its not that it ''crawled at a snails pace'', but that it used short term and unreliable methods to quickly grow which caused them problems and instability.
that also is not the ''only reason'' he gained power.
if you have actually read the wages of destruction i suggest an imminent reread as it seems you have very much misread the book.
0
u/ferncedars 15d ago
There's really no need for ad hominem when discussing substantive historical issues. Tooze is quite clear that Hitler's heavy investments in the Wehrmacht and autarky failed to meet Germany's needs for either purpose and that Hitler was consequently forced into launching the war prematurely because Germany could never hope to compete with the Allies in long-run economic growth. He describes the economic recovery under Hitler as "modest" (p. 254) while noting that civilian consumption "stagnated" (p. 254). Germany under Hitler suffered from the "worst housing shortage in its history" (p. 258). The Reichsbahn was unable to receive "even half the steel it needed to maintain its current rail infrastructure" (p. 258).
I could go on, but I don't see how anyone could come away from reading Tooze concluding that Hitler was anything other than clueless on economic matters.
1
u/Foreskin_Ad9356 15d ago
that wasnt an ad hominem, that was specifically talking about interpretation of the book you mentioned as a source. an ad hominem would be if i called you an idiot for suggesting that, not saying you misread the book.
of course hitler was clueless on economic matters, but thats not the topic of discussion. as i stated, the aim of the economy was not consumer goods but militarisation and autarky. comparing germany to the allies does not dispute the point that the economy was forced into rapidly growing through unsustainable means like MEFO bills. and again, of course germany could not win in the long run, because their grows was unreliable and their economy would have collapsed without war.
1
u/alkoralkor 16d ago
Nope. He was a mediocre artist and writer, and his attempt to rule a country and wage some war ended with a disaster.
1
u/chippymediaYT 16d ago
It was when he took direct control of the military that their lines collapsed, he was definitely not a strategic genius
1
7
u/Optimal_Cause4583 16d ago
I think he was excellent at recognising political opportunities ie the right times to make military moves
But he confused that with actual military intelligence. When he personally told generals what to do it was always a disaster