Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Why did Hitler declare war on US ?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Why did Hitler declare war on US ?
    Posted: 28-Dec-2005 at 13:11
I've read that actually a big deal of the US Pacfic Fleet, with base in Pearl Harbour, was out of port in some sort of maneouvres precisely when the Japanese attacked. There were some ships in port, many if you wish, but a good deal of the Western Fleet was doing something else. 

NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4221
  Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Dec-2005 at 16:53

Originally posted by Maju

I've read that actually a big deal of the US Pacfic Fleet, with base in Pearl Harbour, was out of port in some sort of maneouvres precisely when the Japanese attacked. There were some ships in port, many if you wish, but a good deal of the Western Fleet was doing something else. 

The three aircraft carriers with the fleet at Hawaii were on exercise along with their escorts, I think north and east of Oahu (not sure how far).  They were engaged in intensive training of air crew for dive bombers and torpedo bombers and had minimal live munitions aboard.  Of the 9 battleships, 8 were docked in Pearl, and one was refitting in the U.S.

When the first wave of Japanese planes returned to their carriers after attacking the battleships, and it was reported that the American carriers were not at Pearl Harbor, it was debated whether the Japanese should return again as planned to strike the oil storage facilities and further damage the air fields.  Admiral Nagumo as fleet commander decided that since they did not know the whereabouts of the American carriers, it was too risky to remain longer, and that the main objective of the operation had been successfully met.  Part of their orders I believe included not engaging American forces "unnecessarily."  Preserving the major units of the fleet was crucial as Japan did not have the industrial capacity to replace losses as fast as the U.S.

 

Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4221
  Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Dec-2005 at 13:23
Originally posted by Genghis

Originally posted by tommy

You stated that Hitler was cheated by the Japanese. May you tell me where do you find the source. Then I can carru out study on this.

I originally heard this on the History Channel, but here's a website about it with quotes by Hitler and the Japanese foreign minister.

http://www.thirdreichpages.com/unitedstates.htm

Genghis:

That is one of the best summations of the entire matter.  It seems to answer the question of the topic.

 



Edited by pikeshot1600
Back to Top
Mosquito View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar
Suspended

Joined: 05-Aug-2004
Location: Sarmatia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2537
  Quote Mosquito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Dec-2005 at 16:00
I think that Germans were irrated by the fact that USA was sending convoys with help for Britain and that together with these convoys were american escort ships. This and the fact that USA and its ships were neutral was a pain in ass for u-boats crews. Hitler belived that without help from USA and Canada, Britain would be unnable to continue the war against Germany.

Edited by Mosquito
"I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood" - Friedrich Nietzsche
Back to Top
Iranian41ife View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 24-Dec-2005
Location: Tajikista
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1832
  Quote Iranian41ife Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Dec-2005 at 19:05
wait, werent the germans and the americans alraedy fighting an undeclared naval war prior to 1942 (for example, USA ships would try to sink U-boats, U-boats would try to sink USA ships and cargo ships)? or was that WWI?

Edited by prsn41ife
Back to Top
Genghis View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2656
  Quote Genghis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Dec-2005 at 23:55

Originally posted by prsn41ife

wait, werent the germans and the americans alraedy fighting an undeclared naval war prior to 1942 (for example, USA ships would try to sink U-boats, U-boats would try to sink USA ships and cargo ships)? or was that WWI?

Yes, pretty much it was true of both wars.  In World War II, as stated, it was one of the reasons Hitler declared war, to a large extent we already were at war and if it became official he could really let our convoys to Britain have it.

Member of IAEA
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Jan-2006 at 16:49

I don't want to comment on what plans may have been laid by whom prior to Pearl Harbour.

However, the fact that the aircraft carriers - of all the ships - were at sea the day of the attack was to prove of overwhelming importance. Without those carriers, with so many of the battleships gone, Midway would almost certainly have gone the other way, with somewhat unpredictable consequences.  In fact if the carriers had been sunk and the surface ships not, Midway would have certainly gone the other way.

As it was, Nimitz on taking over was forced to reorganise the fleet and his tactics around the carriers, and recognise - as the Japanese to a great extent already had - that the day of the battleship, except as an artillery platform in support for amphibious landings, was over.

From 1941 to 1945 the US proceeded to build over ten times as many carriers as Japan did. With inevitable results.

Back to Top
Praetorian View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 28-Nov-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 190
  Quote Praetorian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Jan-2006 at 18:32

After Pearl Harbour, Us declared war on Japan, but not Germany. Many american did not want to declare war on germany. But Hitler declared war on US. This was strange.Since Hitler had known that Germany was no match with US.He once reminded those officiers the lesson of WW1, that Us entered the war due to the sinking of her ships,and let to the final downfall of the Germany Empire. so he asked the submarine officiers to handle the Us ships carefully. But after Pearl Harbour, why didi he declare war on US, founding trouble for himself, since he had already have great trouble-- the giant of the East Russia. This did not make sense.He did not need to fulfill the alliance with Japan, since Japan did not declare war on Russia. He knew that the mighty industrial power of Us could handle two enemies at the same time, but German could not co-operate with japan effectively.Then why. Did the medicine he take creat illusion to him,letv him thought that he was so great, that mean he totally lost his mind when he made such decision.

Actually, Germany was in one to one, but they were fighting to many countries. As for the German Empire, it was the same, but the US were just tie barkers. Germany did not want to go War with the US because they can not sack it like they did with the other countries



Edited by Praetorian
Caesar si viveret, ad remum dareris
--If Caesar were alive, you'd be chained to an oar.

"game over!! man game over!!"
Back to Top
QueenCleopatra View Drop Down
Earl
Earl
Avatar

Joined: 03-Apr-2006
Location: Ireland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 292
  Quote QueenCleopatra Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Apr-2006 at 03:47
Hitler declared war on the USA because USA had gone to war against Japan over Pearl Harbour and Japan was Germany's ally.
Her Royal Highness , lady of the Two Lands, High Priestess of Thebes, Beloved of Isis , Cleopatra , Oueen of the Nile
Back to Top
edgewaters View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Snake in the Grass-Banned

Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2394
  Quote edgewaters Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Apr-2006 at 07:07
I'm pretty sure Hitler was prodding the Japanese to honour their (admittedly vague) obligations under the Anti-Comintern Pact and declare war on the USSR, by way of making an example about how allies are supposed to act ... I think he felt declaring war on the US made little difference to Germany's situation, since the worst thing about the US was its industrial output, which was already headed to Britain. I don't think he really believed American industry would be mobilized a whole lot more, he probably felt America would be distracted with Japan and unwilling to really mobilize its economy and lifestyle and go to rationing etc. That's why the "Sleeping Giant" was such a surprise, it was unexpected. Judging by the general disposition of German forces and the small number of mostly garbage units they had on the Atlantic Wall, he really didn't seem to feel the West was much more than a nuisance whose worst was to tie down alot of the Luftwaffe and divert some of Germany's limited resources to the production of submarines.

Edited by edgewaters
Back to Top
QueenCleopatra View Drop Down
Earl
Earl
Avatar

Joined: 03-Apr-2006
Location: Ireland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 292
  Quote QueenCleopatra Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Apr-2006 at 08:43

I think he felt declaring war on the US made little difference to Germany's situation, since the worst thing about the US was its industrial output, which was already headed to Britain. I don't think he really believed American industry would be mobilized a whole lot more, he probably felt America would be distracted with Japan and unwilling to really mobilize its economy and lifestyle and go to rationing etc[Quote]

For man so oppsessed with righting the wrongs done in WW1 he doesn't seem to have done much research does he? If he had he'd have seen that it was the USA entering the war in 1917 that was responible for Germany's defeat. So it was almost a given that the same would happen second time round especially since the US was more advanced militarily than it had it been back then.

And America not ready for war ? Come on!

Her Royal Highness , lady of the Two Lands, High Priestess of Thebes, Beloved of Isis , Cleopatra , Oueen of the Nile
Back to Top
Genghis View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2656
  Quote Genghis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Apr-2006 at 11:36

Originally posted by QueenCleopatra

For man so oppsessed with righting the wrongs done in WW1 he doesn't seem to have done much research does he? If he had he'd have seen that it was the USA entering the war in 1917 that was responible for Germany's defeat. So it was almost a given that the same would happen second time round especially since the US was more advanced militarily than it had it been back then.

According to the Nazis the Jews and Commies were the only reason Germany lost World War II.

Member of IAEA
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4221
  Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Apr-2006 at 11:58
Originally posted by Genghis

Originally posted by QueenCleopatra

For man so oppsessed with righting the wrongs done in WW1 he doesn't seem to have done much research does he? If he had he'd have seen that it was the USA entering the war in 1917 that was responible for Germany's defeat. So it was almost a given that the same would happen second time round especially since the US was more advanced militarily than it had it been back then.

According to the Nazis the Jews and Commies were the only reason Germany lost World War II.

I thought that was the reason they lost WW I.

Professor Dennis Showalter, a specialist on German history, and on German military history, maintains that Germany as a nation showed limited understanding of strategic factors in making and executing war plans...the same in WW I as in WW II.

For some reason (he does not explain it clearly to me) the German military ethos of the officer corps was concentrated on their social role, and in maintaining the prestige and position of the aristocratic officer corps.  Rather than strategic thinking, the army concentrated on efficiency and on the absolute professionalism of the army at the tactical level.  That is the reputation of German soldiers in the last 150 years.

Showalter maintains that German military thinking was too wrapped up in military efficiency as an end in itself, and that, because of the nature of modern technological war, Germany twice found herself waging "total war for limited objectives."  Exhaustion of relatively scarce resources, disposed of in struggles against strong enemies on multiple fronts, resulted in the wreckage of German war plans in both wars.

 

Back to Top
Renegade View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 09-Apr-2006
Location: Toronto, Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 132
  Quote Renegade Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Apr-2006 at 21:18
Originally posted by tommy

He once reminded those officiers the lesson of WW1, that Us entered the war due to the sinking of her ships,and let to the final downfall  of the Germany Empire. so he asked the submarine officiers to handle the Us ships carefully. But after Pearl Harbour, why didi he declare war on US, founding trouble for himself, since he had already have great trouble-- the giant of the East Russia. This did not make sense.


In 's declaration of war it said that he declared because America was giving too much help to Britain and attacking German ships. Really, I think wanted to conquer Ameria because it was the world's most powerful and famous democracy.

"I kill a few so that many may live."

- Sam Fisher
Back to Top
Genghis View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2656
  Quote Genghis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Apr-2006 at 22:08
Originally posted by pikeshot1600

Originally posted by Genghis

Originally posted by QueenCleopatra

For man so oppsessed with righting the wrongs done in WW1 he doesn't seem to have done much research does he? If he had he'd have seen that it was the USA entering the war in 1917 that was responible for Germany's defeat. So it was almost a given that the same would happen second time round especially since the US was more advanced militarily than it had it been back then.

According to the Nazis the Jews and Commies were the only reason Germany lost World War II.

I thought that was the reason they lost WW I.

Professor Dennis Showalter, a specialist on German history, and on German military history, maintains that Germany as a nation showed limited understanding of strategic factors in making and executing war plans...the same in WW I as in WW II.

For some reason (he does not explain it clearly to me) the German military ethos of the officer corps was concentrated on their social role, and in maintaining the prestige and position of the aristocratic officer corps.  Rather than strategic thinking, the army concentrated on efficiency and on the absolute professionalism of the army at the tactical level.  That is the reputation of German soldiers in the last 150 years.

Showalter maintains that German military thinking was too wrapped up in military efficiency as an end in itself, and that, because of the nature of modern technological war, Germany twice found herself waging "total war for limited objectives."  Exhaustion of relatively scarce resources, disposed of in struggles against strong enemies on multiple fronts, resulted in the wreckage of German war plans in both wars.

 

Oh sorry, I meant WWI of course.  But Hitler also blamed the Jews for WWII in his political testament, so I guess he blamed them for both wars, and pretty much every other bad thing that's happened ever.

What does he mean by "limited objectives"?  I'd tend to say their objective was general European hegemony, something that doesn't lend itself to the word "limited".



Edited by Genghis
Member of IAEA
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22-Apr-2006 at 20:13
Why? Because Hitler believed it would ultimately be to his advantage. By declaring war on the U.S., he was forcing the U.S. into a two-front war. Remember, at this point, Germany had taken over Europe and Northern Africa, and was preparing to take control of Britain. I don't think Hitler ever fully realized the power that the U.S. would be able to put against him and he also knew that the U.S. public didn't support a war against Germany at that time (it was Roosevelt who could use the excuse that Germany was allied with Japan and therefore a direct threat to the U.S.). Hitler was simply being egotistical. By splitting American forces, he thought the Japanese navy would be able to defeat the Americans. I don't think he ever thought the U.S. would be able to reassemble such a powerful navy as fast as it did following the attack on Pearl Harbor. Therefore, Hitler thought that the Japanese could defeat the Americans in the Pacific and he would easily be able to defeat any American forces sent his way.

I believe it even looked as if Hitler may have been on to something in 1942. The U.S. military strategy was initially to lose as little lives as possible, and therefore they suffered some terrible struggles in the beginning of the war.


Edited by tekmonkey
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4221
  Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Apr-2006 at 13:40
Originally posted by Genghis

Originally posted by pikeshot1600

Originally posted by Genghis

Originally posted by QueenCleopatra

For man so oppsessed with righting the wrongs done in WW1 he doesn't seem to have done much research does he? If he had he'd have seen that it was the USA entering the war in 1917 that was responible for Germany's defeat. So it was almost a given that the same would happen second time round especially since the US was more advanced militarily than it had it been back then.

According to the Nazis the Jews and Commies were the only reason Germany lost World War II.

I thought that was the reason they lost WW I.

Professor Dennis Showalter, a specialist on German history, and on German military history, maintains that Germany as a nation showed limited understanding of strategic factors in making and executing war plans...the same in WW I as in WW II.

For some reason (he does not explain it clearly to me) the German military ethos of the officer corps was concentrated on their social role, and in maintaining the prestige and position of the aristocratic officer corps.  Rather than strategic thinking, the army concentrated on efficiency and on the absolute professionalism of the army at the tactical level.  That is the reputation of German soldiers in the last 150 years.

Showalter maintains that German military thinking was too wrapped up in military efficiency as an end in itself, and that, because of the nature of modern technological war, Germany twice found herself waging "total war for limited objectives."  Exhaustion of relatively scarce resources, disposed of in struggles against strong enemies on multiple fronts, resulted in the wreckage of German war plans in both wars.

 

Oh sorry, I meant WWI of course.  But Hitler also blamed the Jews for WWII in his political testament, so I guess he blamed them for both wars, and pretty much every other bad thing that's happened ever.

What does he mean by "limited objectives"?  I'd tend to say their objective was general European hegemony, something that doesn't lend itself to the word "limited".

Genghis:

I'll post on Showalter's thesis after I re-read the piece in question.  I don't exactly remember his reasoning, and Showalter is not easy to read.

 

Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4221
  Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Apr-2006 at 15:59

Genghis (and anyone else):

Dennis Showalter's essay, in a volume on grand strategy (Paul Kennedy, ed.), makes the following points:

Prussia from the 18th century had always understood war making as having to remain within Prussia's limited resources.  The Silesian Wars were relatively short, and ended with negotiated settlements.  Efficient army - quick victory - gains solidified by negotiation.

In the Seven Years War, Prussia barely escaped defeat and dismemberment when the war became far beyond her resources.

In an era of nationalistic war, with the concept of the nation-in-arms, after the debacle of Jena (1806), the aristocratic officer corps and the royals feared the social dilution of the army with middle class attitudes, and also revolutionary activity that was dangerous to the monarchy, and to the position and status of the officer corps.  The longer armies were under arms in these conditions, the more likely revolutionary unrest.

Showalter makes two points here: (1) The armies must end future wars as quickly as possible; (2) As Clausewitz maintained that no war plan survives the "first contact," or early engagements, that contact had to be made to count.  Both of these points made sense to the aristos in the officer corps.

The wars of 1864, 1866 and 1870-71 were wars of this type.  The war plan of 1914 had similar objectives.  Swift, efficient strikes, decisive punishing victories and negotiated settlements consolidating Prussian (German) gains.

Showalter maintains that despite conventional wisdom, Germany sought pre-eminence, not hegemony in Europe.  You might disagree.

Because of unforseen results of technological advances, and also because other armies by 1914 were as large, well equipped and about the same in training (if not doctrine), Germany could not hope to match French-Russian manpower, and had to achieve a decisive end to the war quickly.  The inability to win the war in August and September resulted in a two front war of attrition in which Germany's relatively scarce resources were insufficient.

Similarly, in 1939-41, the inability to drive home decisive victory against enemies resulted in a multi-front war of annihilation and unconditional surrender.

In both of these 20th century wars, the ARMY sought to achieve success within limited resources, and for negotiated gains.  The NAZIS who were basically anti-aristocratic, and anti-army, were possessed by fantasy goals that could not reconcile ends and means.

Thus, because of deadlock in 1915-16, and Nazi megalomania in WW II, Germany found herself fighting total war for limited objectives, because those were all she was capable of.

Showalter blames the officer corps heavily, particularly in WW II.  The army in the East acted as a Nazi goon squad in far too many cases, and that behavior corrupted the officers of the Wehrmacht and destroyed the credibility and morale of the officer corps.  They were reduced to doing their best in retreat, and just postponing disaster and the inevitable defeat.

Hope this makes some sense.

 



Edited by pikeshot1600
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.068 seconds.