The German Army During the Interwar Period Essay

General von Steuben established the precedent of NCOs as trainers and wrote much the doctrine that the Army used until the early 19th Century, and that still forms the basis of much of the Army’s current doctrine. The purpose of this paper is to observe the legacy left by Major General von Steuben, to show how that legacy has impacted me as an Army leader, and to reflect on the legacy that I plan to leave on future Army leaders. Background While serving as Ambassador to France, Benjamin Franklin selected Friedrich von Steuben, a former Prussian military Officer, to come to the Colonies to help in the fight

This paper discusses a brief overview of the events that occurred during the Battle of the Bulge, which was a surprise offensive attack conducted by the German forces. In it, we will review the success and shortcomings of the Germans as well as the Allied forces. Also explained will be some major factors that benefited and hindered each side, such as weather, composition, and more importantly intelligence. Lastly, we will look at how the Germans could have potentially won the battle and ultimately World War II if they used intelligence assets to their advantage.

Ongoing efforts to continue developing the skills needed to promote efficiency and effectiveness continues. The Army White Paper: The Profession of Arms (2010) notes that “as the Army reflects now on what it means to be a profession in the midst of persistent conflict, a central questions frames major challenges now facing the Army’s strategic leaders: the sergeant

We will be exploring and providing insight into the structure of the 82nd Airborne Division. The time frame that we will be analyzing for will be 1940-1945. The reason that I chose this time frame was because it heavily influenced the structure, tactics and methods of employment of an experimental fighting formation in the United States Army. We will explore the organization using Bolman and Deal?s (1997) four frames as a guiding conceptual

Three of the most impressive concepts that support innovation base on need rather than technology are the rise of armored warfare during World War II, and the evolution and creation of two notable tanks designs, the Germany Panzer V, and the American M1. These three innovations

Unique systems of finance such as nation state resources, levee en masse, and alliances provided the means to build, strengthen, and maintain military forces for war. Innovation was used to change organizational design and maneuver practices which allowed the command and control of large military forces and successful engagements of the enemy. Discipline allowed forces to understand and study tactics through Bildung and Nationalism among troops allowed forces to move great distance by pillaging for logistic resources without deserting their units.

he video title the “WWI Germany Secret Gambles “was enlightening in my opinion. Prior wars were fought force on force, not at the strategic level for the majority of the time. Preceding WWI battles were the won by the infantry soldiers who has the possibility of fighting hand to hand with the opposing soldier. The major change that was noticed during WWI is the war was fought on multiple fronts. A lot of thinking went into how battles were supplied, and sustained by German leadership not just what is happening on the battlefield. Intelligence played a major role in German military tactics, it was used outsmart enemy forces. Hindering the supply effort to the front line was a major issue that the United States were not ready to thwart.

The Blitzkrieg was one of the most powerful weapons in World War II. Hitler used it to quickly defeat whole countries in a matter of weeks, before any defenses could even be thought of, much less deployed. Poland, Norway, and Belgium all fell before Britain had time to defend them. Later on, after D-Day, when the allies had massed great amounts of troops and combat weapons in France, the allies started there own blitzkrieg which quickly pushed the Germans back to the Rhine River at a rate of 40 miles per day. The blitzkrieg at the beginning of the war doomed Hitler at the end. Blitzkrieg tactics gave Hitler an overwhelming amount of confidence that made him send troops out ill prepared for long battles, and it

World War 1 was a time of great bloodshed, and no battle demonstrated this fact more than the battle of Verdun (Feb 21, 1916 – Dec 18, 1916). The near half a million casualties suffered during the battle of Verdun displayed the futility and uselessness of past battle tactics. France for the most part did not change its tactic, but along with the British began development of the tank. The tank was a terrifying tool for warfare, but Germany had a different solution to the problem. Through study of battle tactics used during the Russian Brusilov offensive (Jun 4, 1916 – Sep 20, 1916) and the Italian Arditi (The daring ones) they developed the Sturmtruppen.

A major factor that caused the early failure of the French was the poor leadership that headed the Nation's army. In Heinz Guderian's writing - "French Leadership... Could not grasp the significance of the tank in mobile warfare", he blames almost all of the failure on the French leaders. He brings up points that even though "France may have had the strongest land army, and possessed the numerically strongest tank force in Western Europe." "The French were preoccupied with concepts of positional warfare." The "French had 4,000 armored vehicles to the German 2,800, and which the French tanks were superior to the German ones in both armor and gun caliber, but were inferior in control and speed." The problem was that they were also preoccupied with the amount of losses that they faced in World War One, they didn't even think to advance with the rest of the world on their strategy of war. Guderian also goes on to talk about how the "German Leadership could safely rely on the defenses of the French being systematically based on fortifications." That they were carried out according to a ridged doctrine. That doctrine states that from the results of the lessons that the French had learned from the first world war, they attached to fire power, and underestimated movement. No longer was there a "no man's land" or

Germany, a country rich in culture and heritage, yet plagued by the fallout of World War I and World War II, has progressed to become the centerpiece of the European Union and the world’s third richest economy. The first German Empire dates back to the Roman Empire starting in the 8th century AD. During the Middle Ages the German Empire fended off many attacks against their soil from the Hungarians and the Slavs. Fighting and power struggles continued until the 1400’s, when the modern world gradually came into existence with intellectual, economic and political changes.

Leading into the Fall of 1914, tactics on both sides of the line involved the rapid mobilization, maneuver and envelopment of the opposing side.10 Pre-1914 doctrine took little into account the effects of emerging new technology and their impact on both defensive and offensive operations. This disconnect between doctrine and technology contributed to the failure of early offensive operations in the Fall of 1914 and resulted in staggering casualties.11 Both sides developed doctrine that took into effect the unique terrain and technology that had been developed prior and during World War I. However by the end of the war, a combination of flexibility, decentralized control, and counterattack at every echelon made the German defensive system the most effective.12 This “elastic defense” had three unique characteristics; dedicated counter-attack force at all levels, decentralized command and control, fluid defensive belts and integrated artillery support at the Division level. Under this new doctrine, Corps headquarters had the role sustaining subordinate units, but not directing their actions during battle.13 This defense-in-depth and the lessons learned during the Verdun battles of 1918 were so successful that British forces adopted many of the German tactics with a special emphasis on their counterattack capability.10 Utilizing the new doctrine, by August 1918, Germany had made substantial gains, however had

This mission command analysis evaluates the battle of Team Desobry at the town of Noville, Belgium. These events took place 18-19 December 1944, and later impacted the battle fought at Bastogne during World War II. It is the goal of this review to discuss and analyze three mission command principles displayed during this battle: Create shared understanding, exercise disciplined initiative, and the acceptance of prudent risk. One of the main characters that took part in this story was the 20th Armored Infantry Battalion, 10th Armored Division. The commanding officer of this element was Major William R. Desobry. During the events of World War II, the German forces were trying to gain control of the Ardennes to cut off the allies’ supply lines in order to isolate British forces from the American troops. A pivotal task for German forces to attain this goal was to gain access and take control of the Belgian town of Bastogne. However, an important strategic stepping stone to get there was Noville, which is just seven kilometers northeast of Bastogne. Two main reasons made Noville such a critical location for the Germans: First, it had a junction of roads that were important for displacement of German forces to the West. Second, it provided an alternative road to access Bastogne from the north.1

As stewards of our profession, commanders ensure that military expertise continues to develop and be passed on to aspiring professionals through operational development. It is during this developmental phase that Professional Soldiers put their knowledge and skills to the test. Operational Army units certify and recertify their Professional Soldiers through repetitive and realistic training events including the Combat Life Saver Course, platoon live fires, and exercises at the National Training Center. In the course of these challenging and realistic experiences, the Army’s operational units develop Soldiers and leaders prepared to maintain high standards, discipline, and operational readiness. Operational development and adaptability will continue to drive changes in Army doctrine, organization, leadership, and education as we enter the post-war era. Without this kind of development, the Army could not maintain a well-disciplined professional fighting force.

The defeat of Germany in World War Two was due to many factors. All of these factors were influenced by the leadership and judgment of Adolf Hitler. Factors such as the stand fast policy, Hitler’s unnecessary and risky decision making in military situations, for example when attacking the USSR, and the declaration of war on the US. Plus other factors, like Hitler’s alliance with Italy, despite its obvious weaknesses, and the pursuit of the final solution, can all be attributed to the poor leadership and judgement of the Fuhrer, which would eventually lead to the downfall of the Third Reich.