Questions About WWII Axis Powers Bad Strategies
Posted: 12 Oct 2013, 10:30I've studied WWII battles for a long time, but I find that there are some things related to strategy that don't make sense and seem foolish. It's as if the Axis powers were trying to lose and did not follow basic logic. Perhaps someone can shed light on this. Here are the questions.
1. I've never understood why in 1941, when England was a sitting duck and the last country in Europe still standing, why Hitler suddenly decided to invade Russia instead. This was very stupid and illogical. Hitler was on a roll and winning every battle. He did not need to squander his lead.
Russia is the biggest country in the world. There's no way a small country like Germany could occupy it. No matter how many battles you win in Russia, they will always retaliate eventually. It's an unwinnable war that will squander all your resources and armies.
Instead, why didn't Hitler send his 3 million man army to invade England in a D-Day type invasion, and finish it off so he can force Winston Churchill to surrender so he could stop begging Roosevelt to enter the war? He could have invaded Scotland too, and then march into England from there. Then, after conquering England, Hitler could fortify his conquests in Europe and build defenses to prevent any invasion from America.
That would have been the smart and sensible strategy, and the most logical one too. Squandering a 3 million man army in Russia was a total waste and senseless strategy. Why didn't he learn from Napoleon's mistake?
Basic logic says not to bite off more than you can chew, or create too many fronts in a war. But Hitler seemed more driven by emotion and delusion than logic.
However, Genghis Khan somehow got away with it. Under him, a small country like Mongolia was able to conquer the vast territories of Russia and China, making him the greatest conqueror ever, topping even Alexander the Great's conquests. How was Genghis Khan able to pull that off?
2. Why is it that when both Hitler and Stalin invaded Poland and occupied it in 1939, the Allies only declared war on Hitler and not on Stalin? What was their excuse or reasoning? Is it because they are impartial arbitrators of truth and justice? lol
3. Why didn't Hitler try to make Stalin an ally instead of an enemy? If Germany were allied with Russia, together they would be invincible against the allies. Why all the personal emnity between two dictators?
4. I don't understand Japan's strategy during WWII. Why did it attack Pearl Harbor? Why did it need to bring a giant like America into the war, when its objective was to conquer Asia? Why bring arouse a "sleeping giant" as the Japanese Admirals said in the movie "Tora Tora Tora"? Wasn't that highly detrimental to their goals? Were they trying to lose the war?
If they hadn't done that, America would not have had an excuse to enter the war, and the American public would not have supported it. Roosevelt's problem of looking for an excuse to enter the war would not have been solved.
5. Historians say that Japan was suffering under an oil embargo carried out by America, to punish it for its occupation of China and the Philippines. But I don't get this. How can the US block all oil shipments to Japan? Japan doesn't have to trade oil with America. Why can't Japan just get oil from any other country directly, such as the Middle East?
If it did that, it could then sink any US ship blocking oil tankers from reaching Japan, under the justification of self-defense, which would have been acceptable to the rest of the world. So why didn't it just do that? How could a US issued "oil embargo" block all oil from reaching Japan? Why couldn't Japan get around that? I don't get it. How can the US be "all powerful" like that? How can it prevent all oil in the world from reaching one country, without using any naval ships? Is the USA God? Wtf? Can anyone explain?
6. After Pearl Harbor, when America and Japan were officially at war, why did Hitler feel the need to declare war on America too? What did he have to gain from a war with America, which would be a costly distraction from his goals? Why declare war on a superpower unnecessarily and squander all your military resources? Isn't that self-destructive and nonsensical?
Was Hitler trying to lose the war and make Germany lose? Why were his decisions highly self-destructive? Why didn't he have someone SPAM BLOCK him in basic chess strategy? Why didn't he read Sun Tzu's "Ancient Art of War"? Sun Tzu would never have made stupid decisions like that.
7. When the Japanese planes attacked Pearl Harbor and destroyed most of the American fleet except for the carriers, why did the Japanese suddenly withdraw? Did the Japanese commanders want to leave with their carriers intact, so they can claim the honor of a one-sided total victory?
It would have been smarter for them to continue attacking Pearl Harbor while waiting for the American carriers to return. They must have known that the US carriers would return to try to defend Pearl Harbor. So why didn't they wait for them to come? With an advantage in ships, and with the American carriers outnumbered, they had a great opportunity to destroy the US carriers and complete their victory.
At least that would have been far smarter than playing hide-and-seek later on in the Battle of Midway and let luck decide the outcome, which ended up not being in Japan's favor.
8. The Battle of Midway made no sense either, in several ways. (See the film "The Battle of Midway" or numerous documentaries about it to learn about it.)
First, with a 3 to 1 advantage over the Americans, why would the Japanese want to play hide-and-seek around Midway, and let luck decide the outcome of the decisive battle? That was really stupid. Instead, they should have just sailed toward Pearl Harbor again for another attack. Doing so would have FORCED the US carriers toward Hawaii to defend it, thereby drawing the US carriers OUT IN THE OPEN. Once out in the open, the Japanese would have an a great advantage in an open battle of planes and carriers, and would likely have won.
Either way, it would have been far better than the disastrous result they had at Midway, losing three carriers in five minutes because they were caught by American planes with bombs on their flight deck. Luck was not on their side at all. So why didn't they take advantage of their advantage in an open battle instead of relying on luck?
Second, the Japanese actions during the Battle of Midway were stupid and wasted valuable time. They could not decide whether to load their planes with bombs and attack Midway, or load them with torpedos and attack the American carriers. So they kept changing their plane armament from bombs to torpedos and then back to bombs, wasting valuable time in the process which got them caught flatfooted when the US planes arrived. After shooting down two or three US squadrons, they were caught with bombs on their flightdeck, which the next US squadron easily blew up, taking out three Japanese carriers. It was a terrible loss which turned the tide of the war in the Pacific.
Instead of this stupid mistake and waste of time, why didn't the Japanese just arm their planes with bombs? Bombs could have been used on BOTH Midway and the US carriers. There was no need to switch back and forth, wasting valuable time and exposing themselves to attack.
Even during the attack of Pearl Harbor, the Japanese planes used bombs to sink US ships in the harbor. So why couldn't they do that during Midway as well? Why all the switching back and forth between bombs and torpedos? What a waste of valuable time.
9. In the movie "Tora Tora Tora" about the attack of Pearl Harbor, which was historically accurate, the Japanese planes were able to drop bombs on the US ships from high up in the air, out of the range of the ship's cannons.
So why didn't they do that during Midway too? During the Battle of Midway, it seemed that planes on both sides had to get within close proximity of the carriers in order to drop torpedos or bombs, which often led to them being shot down by cannons. Why didn't they drop bombs from high in the air like they did during Pearl Harbor, to keep themselves out of the range of the ship's cannons?
10. Rather than attack that tiny island of Midway in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, why didn't the Japanese go for a bigger and more useful target instead, such as the naval ship building facilities in San Diego or along the West Coast of continental America?
Logically, the US fleet had to be constructed on the West Coast in order to fight in the Pacific. So their naval ship building facilities had to be on the West Coast, not the East Coast. The Japanese must have known that. Surely they could spot those facilities, or use spies to find them, so they could launch attacks on them. In doing so, they could greatly impair America's ability to rebuild their ships.
Once in the war, the Japanese should have gone all out and taken advantage of the situation, using the advantage they had after Pearl Harbor, instead of squandering it with withdrawal, overcaution and stupid guessing games. Why didn't they capitalize on their strategic advantage instead of playing guessing games? Surely they were versed in Sun Tzu's "Ancient Art of War" right? So why were their tactics so stupid? Were they trying to win the war or lose it?
Can anyone explain all these bad strategies of the Axis powers during WWII? Thanks.
1. I've never understood why in 1941, when England was a sitting duck and the last country in Europe still standing, why Hitler suddenly decided to invade Russia instead. This was very stupid and illogical. Hitler was on a roll and winning every battle. He did not need to squander his lead.
Russia is the biggest country in the world. There's no way a small country like Germany could occupy it. No matter how many battles you win in Russia, they will always retaliate eventually. It's an unwinnable war that will squander all your resources and armies.
Instead, why didn't Hitler send his 3 million man army to invade England in a D-Day type invasion, and finish it off so he can force Winston Churchill to surrender so he could stop begging Roosevelt to enter the war? He could have invaded Scotland too, and then march into England from there. Then, after conquering England, Hitler could fortify his conquests in Europe and build defenses to prevent any invasion from America.
That would have been the smart and sensible strategy, and the most logical one too. Squandering a 3 million man army in Russia was a total waste and senseless strategy. Why didn't he learn from Napoleon's mistake?
Basic logic says not to bite off more than you can chew, or create too many fronts in a war. But Hitler seemed more driven by emotion and delusion than logic.
However, Genghis Khan somehow got away with it. Under him, a small country like Mongolia was able to conquer the vast territories of Russia and China, making him the greatest conqueror ever, topping even Alexander the Great's conquests. How was Genghis Khan able to pull that off?
2. Why is it that when both Hitler and Stalin invaded Poland and occupied it in 1939, the Allies only declared war on Hitler and not on Stalin? What was their excuse or reasoning? Is it because they are impartial arbitrators of truth and justice? lol
3. Why didn't Hitler try to make Stalin an ally instead of an enemy? If Germany were allied with Russia, together they would be invincible against the allies. Why all the personal emnity between two dictators?
4. I don't understand Japan's strategy during WWII. Why did it attack Pearl Harbor? Why did it need to bring a giant like America into the war, when its objective was to conquer Asia? Why bring arouse a "sleeping giant" as the Japanese Admirals said in the movie "Tora Tora Tora"? Wasn't that highly detrimental to their goals? Were they trying to lose the war?
If they hadn't done that, America would not have had an excuse to enter the war, and the American public would not have supported it. Roosevelt's problem of looking for an excuse to enter the war would not have been solved.
5. Historians say that Japan was suffering under an oil embargo carried out by America, to punish it for its occupation of China and the Philippines. But I don't get this. How can the US block all oil shipments to Japan? Japan doesn't have to trade oil with America. Why can't Japan just get oil from any other country directly, such as the Middle East?
If it did that, it could then sink any US ship blocking oil tankers from reaching Japan, under the justification of self-defense, which would have been acceptable to the rest of the world. So why didn't it just do that? How could a US issued "oil embargo" block all oil from reaching Japan? Why couldn't Japan get around that? I don't get it. How can the US be "all powerful" like that? How can it prevent all oil in the world from reaching one country, without using any naval ships? Is the USA God? Wtf? Can anyone explain?
6. After Pearl Harbor, when America and Japan were officially at war, why did Hitler feel the need to declare war on America too? What did he have to gain from a war with America, which would be a costly distraction from his goals? Why declare war on a superpower unnecessarily and squander all your military resources? Isn't that self-destructive and nonsensical?
Was Hitler trying to lose the war and make Germany lose? Why were his decisions highly self-destructive? Why didn't he have someone SPAM BLOCK him in basic chess strategy? Why didn't he read Sun Tzu's "Ancient Art of War"? Sun Tzu would never have made stupid decisions like that.
7. When the Japanese planes attacked Pearl Harbor and destroyed most of the American fleet except for the carriers, why did the Japanese suddenly withdraw? Did the Japanese commanders want to leave with their carriers intact, so they can claim the honor of a one-sided total victory?
It would have been smarter for them to continue attacking Pearl Harbor while waiting for the American carriers to return. They must have known that the US carriers would return to try to defend Pearl Harbor. So why didn't they wait for them to come? With an advantage in ships, and with the American carriers outnumbered, they had a great opportunity to destroy the US carriers and complete their victory.
At least that would have been far smarter than playing hide-and-seek later on in the Battle of Midway and let luck decide the outcome, which ended up not being in Japan's favor.
8. The Battle of Midway made no sense either, in several ways. (See the film "The Battle of Midway" or numerous documentaries about it to learn about it.)
First, with a 3 to 1 advantage over the Americans, why would the Japanese want to play hide-and-seek around Midway, and let luck decide the outcome of the decisive battle? That was really stupid. Instead, they should have just sailed toward Pearl Harbor again for another attack. Doing so would have FORCED the US carriers toward Hawaii to defend it, thereby drawing the US carriers OUT IN THE OPEN. Once out in the open, the Japanese would have an a great advantage in an open battle of planes and carriers, and would likely have won.
Either way, it would have been far better than the disastrous result they had at Midway, losing three carriers in five minutes because they were caught by American planes with bombs on their flight deck. Luck was not on their side at all. So why didn't they take advantage of their advantage in an open battle instead of relying on luck?
Second, the Japanese actions during the Battle of Midway were stupid and wasted valuable time. They could not decide whether to load their planes with bombs and attack Midway, or load them with torpedos and attack the American carriers. So they kept changing their plane armament from bombs to torpedos and then back to bombs, wasting valuable time in the process which got them caught flatfooted when the US planes arrived. After shooting down two or three US squadrons, they were caught with bombs on their flightdeck, which the next US squadron easily blew up, taking out three Japanese carriers. It was a terrible loss which turned the tide of the war in the Pacific.
Instead of this stupid mistake and waste of time, why didn't the Japanese just arm their planes with bombs? Bombs could have been used on BOTH Midway and the US carriers. There was no need to switch back and forth, wasting valuable time and exposing themselves to attack.
Even during the attack of Pearl Harbor, the Japanese planes used bombs to sink US ships in the harbor. So why couldn't they do that during Midway as well? Why all the switching back and forth between bombs and torpedos? What a waste of valuable time.
9. In the movie "Tora Tora Tora" about the attack of Pearl Harbor, which was historically accurate, the Japanese planes were able to drop bombs on the US ships from high up in the air, out of the range of the ship's cannons.
So why didn't they do that during Midway too? During the Battle of Midway, it seemed that planes on both sides had to get within close proximity of the carriers in order to drop torpedos or bombs, which often led to them being shot down by cannons. Why didn't they drop bombs from high in the air like they did during Pearl Harbor, to keep themselves out of the range of the ship's cannons?
10. Rather than attack that tiny island of Midway in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, why didn't the Japanese go for a bigger and more useful target instead, such as the naval ship building facilities in San Diego or along the West Coast of continental America?
Logically, the US fleet had to be constructed on the West Coast in order to fight in the Pacific. So their naval ship building facilities had to be on the West Coast, not the East Coast. The Japanese must have known that. Surely they could spot those facilities, or use spies to find them, so they could launch attacks on them. In doing so, they could greatly impair America's ability to rebuild their ships.
Once in the war, the Japanese should have gone all out and taken advantage of the situation, using the advantage they had after Pearl Harbor, instead of squandering it with withdrawal, overcaution and stupid guessing games. Why didn't they capitalize on their strategic advantage instead of playing guessing games? Surely they were versed in Sun Tzu's "Ancient Art of War" right? So why were their tactics so stupid? Were they trying to win the war or lose it?
Can anyone explain all these bad strategies of the Axis powers during WWII? Thanks.
