Thread:Cyrannian/@comment-25890179-20180111235940/@comment-25890179-20180116211548

My big point was Hitler didn't have to target all the Slavs, just the Russians. Sure, the Croatians, Serbs, Slovakians, and lots of Caucasian people joined him, but he alienated Ukrainian and Russian support when he ordered his troops to destroy and kill everything. Had he not done this, he would have had more Slavic volunteers, which might have helped. I'm not arguing your point that Stalin used nationalism as well and had a large loyal base; I'm saying that Hilter's wanton destruction cost him thousands of potential allies who, before the invasion, hated Stalin more than anyone and saw the Nazis as liberators, but quickly sided with Stalin once the Einsatzgruppen arrived.

Hitler's political strategy destroyed him, that's a fact. He continuously made decisions against what his generals, some of the best in the world, told him, resulting in spectacular defeats like Stalingrad. He was a great politician, but a terrible military leader, and his ego led to him believing he actually had good ideas. Seriously, when you spend all your money on giant, useless tanks when you could build ten times the number of weaker ones and swarm the Russians, you're a bad leader.

Yes, Hilter was well insulated. But his leadership was so bad I just have a hard time believing that after all these failed assassination attempts (over forty I think), nobody just thought about walking up to him at his desk and putting a pistol round through his dome. The guy who did it would be executed, sure, but somebody better might take over. That's why the Brits never went through on killing him; they were terrified that someone who was actually competent at military strategy would take the helm.

I wasn't suggesting the Nazis should have waited to attack until after winter; they should have went in on the original planned date. Mussolini was a terrible ally whose troops only fought remotely well when under German command. He plunged into conflict after conflict the Nazis had to yank him out of. Hitler had no really good reason whatsoever to botch Barbarossa to invade Greece when he could have sidelined that to the Bulgarians.

You're right that many of these blunders were a direct result of the Axis' very nature. However, Hitler's arrogance was not one of these things. Had he been sane enough to recognize that he didn't know everything about strategy and tactics, he might have had a fighting chance. Of course, had the man actually been sane, an Axis victory might not have been such a bad thing. Or, the war would never have happened. Again, we'll never know.

I don't know for sure if Stalin planned to invade before Barbarossa could happen, and neither do the historians, but I'm sure you and I can agree that conflict was inevitable. It would have happened, no matter what treaties Molotov and Ribbentrop scratched out, and it was better for the Axis to strike first and be the offensive party, not the defensive one. However, diverting the attack on Moscow doomed that whole operation, another terrible blunder that Hitler could have avoided.