Why Did Germany Lose Ww2 Research Paper

postwar damage and the Versailles Treaty. Along with those factors, the humiliation of losing did

The German Command, in planning for a short and swift war, found themselves in a bind when the war started to prolong itself. From the very beginning, their plan started to fall apart, as Belgium, who they assumed would just let them march through to France, took up arms in resisting their approaches (Hull, 2005). The war would get longer and longer and seemed farther away from its conclusion as the months grew colder. As a result of this as well as their Prussian roots, they resorted to dangerously risky and destructive tactics, trying to bring the war to a quicker end while putting more of their resources in jeopardy, a move that eventually did not pay off and ended up leading to the German Empire’s demise (Hull, 2005).

     The object of the German offensive was to push through the Belgian Ardennes, cross the Mousse, retake Antwerp and its harbor facilities, thrust to the north and reach the sea which they almost succeed in doing. This would cut off the Allied troops in Holland and Belgium, making it impossible for them to withdraw. The success of the operation depended on three important

There are many different factors attributed to Germany’s early success during the Second World War. While some factors were more significant to the German’s success, there is no debating that all of them contributed to the German’s attacking and conquering of Europe. It took quite a while for the Germans to begin to have trouble winning battles. The early success of Germany from 1939 to 1941 was due to Western Europe being afraid to have another World War, America’s lack of initial intervention, the Blitzkrieg, and Adolf Hitler’s intelligent militaristic strategy.

While the Germans had the upper hand in technology, this condition did have its drawbacks. This advanced weaponry was costly to manufacture, so the German Army could not afford to produce them in large quantities. On top of that, this new weaponry was also more difficult to repair and maintain, which reduced its efficiency even further (Stewart, 6).

The Schlieffen Plan is commonly – though misleadingy – identified with the German western offensive at the start of the First World War in August 1914, which began as a campaign of rapid movement but ended in deadlock and trench warfare. The plan is generally seen as a desperate gamble almost certain to fail, and its recklessness is counted as part of Germany’s war guilt – the plan held out the false promise of a quick victory, and so it underpinned the “short war illusion” that led Germany into a long war of attrition, ending with her defeat and collapse in 1918. This analysis confuses two quite different moments in history. The Schlieffen Plan was not designed to meet the strategic challenge Germany faced in 1914,

<br>During the early stages of the war, most of Germany's victories were because of the success of blitzkrieg, or lightening war. Blitzkrieg

Another important reason for the defeat of Germany is the effective integration of technologies which the Allies had employed by the end of the war. By the end of the war Allied (particularly British) command had improved technologies and had learnt to use them better than earlier in the war. Technologically, the Allies had a great advantage in 1918 onwards: Germany had some very high quality, but very few tanks and aircraft. By the war's end, Germany had 45 tanks whilst the Allies had almost 3,500, and even Germany's 45 tanks were mostly Allies tanks in disrepair or Germany's notoriously unreliable A7V. The Allies also had an air advantage: by late 1918

In this essay I will assess the significance of strategic bombing of Germany. I will do this by evaluating four key areas of the German war effort. This will include German and British moral, German economy, its effect on the outcome of the Eastern Front and the results of the preparation for D-Day. Overall allied bombing did not have a significant impact on the outcome of the war as for the majority of the war bombing techniques and technology were primitive and so had little effect. It only became a threatening tool latter on in the war, when the allies had effectively won.

The Battle of Britain as a Turning Point in the Defeat of German in World War Two

The factors that made the Allied victory happen include the Germans beginning to effectively organize industrial production at the very least six months too late to give them a chance at victory. By the time they got the production to be swiftly working on weapons such as fighter planes, the Allies were in firm enough control of the air space. This meant that the Allied bombing prevented the German economy from reaching it’s full potential. Another flaw in the German production meant that tanks such as Tigers and Panthers, of which dominated tactical situations on the battlefield, had logistical and maintenance nightmares. If the Germans were to overcome their problems in production then it would have stood them in much greater stead, giving them an advantage over the Allies.

1. Why was the German advance into Western Europe so effective? The German advance into Western Europe was so effective because of Germany’s strategic speed and efficiency with a blitzkrieg. They also incorporated panzer divisions that consisted of three hundred tanks with additional supplies and forces into their invasions to other nations.

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

During World War II, production was a major factor in military success. On the war’s pivotal Eastern Front, the Soviet Union recovered from the losses of the initial invasion and produced a high quantity of war material. Germany continued to produce the high quality it was renowned for. The difference in production systems tended to align with the national ideology of each country: Communism and German National Socialism. Each production system had its strengths and weaknesses, but in the end the Soviet Union simply outproduced Germany.

Germany was not able to claim victory during World War II due to poor military guidance. Hitler’s military tactics led