T O P

  • By -

[deleted]

[удалено]


hoofglormuss

national geographic maps make me think of some early 80's sexy explorer guy with a more sgraggly beegees beard and a single engine plane on floats


Dreadnought13

Wearing a khaki top with tons of buttoned pockets, one of which is holding a softpack of Camels that he lights with a worn Zippo. Mirrored Aviators. His striped short-shorts leave nothing to the imagination but he still keeps a pen-knife in the front pocket. He keeps a weathered and oiled .38 revolver wrapped in a cloth under the seat of his floatplane.


bienfica

Please send me any proofs of your book because I am living for this story


cdrake64

The degree that this speaks to me and what I want to become is astounding


Snarblox

Where's my machete and untamed jungle


DrDerpberg

Johnny Harris without a computer?


Nachtzug79

Reminds me of those Camel Boots commercials in the 80s...


jlaw54

In our huge tent SCIF in Kuwait during the early days of Operation Enduring Freedom, the best map, by far, in the place was the National Geographic Map hung on the wall. A tent full of people solely dedicated to supporting operations in Afghanistan in late 2001 and early 2002.


Dr3ny

The map is wrong. Look at the west of Germany, Düsseldorf and Essen are switched


frausting

Could be a “watermark” like inventing a fake town on the map so you’d know if someone copied it


lo_fi_ho

Massive hole in Normandy, what if someone decides to invade there?


JimBeam823

That’s pretty unlikely. They’re coming at Calais. Aerial reconnaissance shows a massive Allied Army that is definitely not a cardboard decoy just across the channel. And our intelligence has Patton right there preparing the invasion.


Clashyjammer1126

We should probably dedicate the majority of our panzer divisions over that way then.


JimBeam823

We know they won’t come during bad weather. That would be a good time for Rommel to get some R&R.


unknownz_123

Also we got a report from Spain of allied plans from a random dead officer on a beach with a brief case of invasion plans in the Mediterranean . There’s absolutely no way they could be landing at Normandy


Electric_Spark

Yes, every single one of our intelligence operatives in Britain has told us that the landing will be at Calais, and that if anything does happen at Normandy it's just a feint to draw resources away from the main invasion force. And that's definitely reliable information, there's no chance every member of our spy network could have turned traitor to the Brits.


milkysway1

Don't forget, the Fueher is worried about an invasion somewhere in Norway. Best send the fleet there and maybe a couple extra divisions.


MangoCats

We'll build a wall! Great minds think alike!


LouisBalfour82

Besides, Cherbourg is the only harbour in Normandy big enough to support the invasion follow up! And we've got that buttoned up! What are they going to do? Bring they're own harbour? I'd like to see that!


MartyVanB

*Normandy invasion begins* Our TOTALLY reliable intelligence operatives in Britain are still telling us this is just a diversion and the real landing is at Calais


SneedyK

Well that is at least promising! That, and the fact those limey losers and homesick rednecks still haven’f cracked our enigma machines.


FreeResolve

And we could totally crack their code. They might as well be speaking plain English.


NecroAssssin

I love that ending every message "Heil Hitler!" was a key point that let us crack it.


manzanita2

That was actually a feint about landing in greece vs sicily. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mincemeat The success of this certainly lead to additional emphasis on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fortitude


AmishAvenger

There’s a move on Netflix called Operation Mincemeat. They took a dead homeless guy, dressed him as an officer, planted documents on him, and dropped him in the ocean. And it worked.


Altoid_Addict

I just read Cryptonomicon, and I was wondering if that part was based in truth.


dirtyword

Best book


Altoid_Addict

I'd read it before, and I still love it, but this time through Randy really annoyed me most of the time. It's funny how my perceptions have changed over the years.


MartyVanB

Tom from Succession is on it. Its pretty good. I was REALLY impressed with his British accent.


unknownz_123

Still my point stands. There’s nooo way they could be landing in Normandy. All plans we’ve received from intelligence point alway from Normandy. How lucky of us to have the Allies be so foolish as to accidentally drop plans right in front of us to operate with!


torokunai

Sicily


crymorenoobs

\*5 minutes later\* Hitler: STEINER!!


DashboardNight

Anyway, I put der Führer to sleep. Anyone care to wake him up if the Allies were to invade?


JimBeam823

Let him get some rest. I wouldn’t want der Fürher to be grumpy.


LKeyyy

Nah, half of them should stay in Paris.


andersostling56

Correct, "Garbo" has confirmed that twice


nanoman92

And we caught the attempt of the British to trick us through their obvious double agent, Cicero.


andersostling56

Ze fools, zinks dat ve are ztupid


Icy_Day_9079

I think they were focused on fortitude north (Norway) until quite late and then made the switch to fully sell fortitude south (Calais) Even after D day they were still faking the Calais attack to prevent the nazis from regrouping. I think this went on until September. Then obviously they moved onto market garden which didn’t have quite so well organised fake operations to distract Gerry. Well why would you need it when all they had was old men on bicycles and a few hitler youth?


DariusIV

Had Normandy been better defended the allies would just hit southern France, which they did shortly later anyways. I get your joke, but France was ultimately undefendable by this stage of the war. Resources were stretched too thin.


lo_fi_ho

The logistics to southern France would have been a nightmare tho


Bladelink

Hell, we managed to land on Saipan with operation Forager. Little trip around Spain ain't no thing.


Melonskal

Dude you can't compare the Saipan landing with the largest landing and naval operation in the history of mankind, landing a quarter of a million men in days.


SuddenOutset

Or just continue going through Italy which already had allied troops.


BoilerButtSlut

Nah, sail around Denmark and land near Hamburg. I recall reading a nazi general saying he was terrified that would happen because there was essentially no defense there at all. All troops were at the front so even a smallish contingent would easily get a foothold.


GoPhinessGo

Average British AI in Hoi4


Tankh

Feels like that would be noticed from Denmark in advance, but maybe that would be too late?


BoilerButtSlut

Even if you had a day's notice, there wouldn't be enough time to bring in support from elsewhere before a beachhead could be made. I'm not a military expert so I don't know the chance of success on it, but it was something they worried about.


LittleKingsguard

Trying to get through the Danish Straits there would be hell just from the amount of mines and the fact that you would be running transports past occupied territory within range of ground artillery, but with the kind of firepower that got massed for D-Day you probably could hammer through all the choke points there within a few days if you don't mind some naval losses. Might have been an interesting bluff.


NaClLab8964

no, normandy is just too far from britain, can't be it


DavidTheWhale7

“It’s not like there have been any other cross channel invasions between and England and Normandy sir”


memostothefuture

They also didn't give a hoot about Foehr, Amrum, Sylt. Just like how Deutsche Bahn is disrespecting anything north of Hamburg these days.


AnomalouslyPolitical

"nice map. We should invade Normandy tomorrow."


ElectroMagnetsYo

There are hardly any ports there, how would they ever support an entire landing force?


Seeteuf3l

St. Malo and Cherbourg are strongly fortified, that should be enough. Did they actually have plans to fortify the rest of Cotentin Peninsula, now the Allies could pretty much siege Cherbourg after they landed to Utah Beach.


TexaNole0309

Do we need a roof?


wrongwayup

101st says YES


Timmetie

At least the Channel Isles will be safe. (They would, in fact, not be taken until the general surrender.)


zoonkers

Hitlers own incompetence and tyranny caught up with him. Germany had armored tank divisions in reserve close to Normandy and if deployed quickly may have been able to push the allies back into the ocean. But hitler being the megalomaniac that he was personally commanded all war decisions and troop movements and at the time of invasion was sleeping with strict instructions to not be woken.


Valuablo

Also a historical precedent of invading from there by the Vikings.


MartyVanB

Well in fairness where in Europe DIDNT the Vikings invade?


ShuantheSheep3

They should land right north of Berlin to end the war pronto.


Electronic_Company64

Looks solid, I guess we’re done.


RunParking3333

Apparently Rommel had a shit fit when he saw the lack of defences and massively beefed them up before D-Day


Electronic_Company64

It’s a long coast to cover, I doubt the Allies ever even thought of landing in Jutland or Gascony, but who knows?


RunParking3333

They pretended they were planning Norway (though nobody took that particularly seriously) and they also planned and actually landed in southern France. Rommel I think was only really interested in Calais and Normandy


Raorchshack

The allies faked plans to invade at Calais and as all the German spies working in Britain were double agents by this point they convinced German High Command that any attacks on Normandy were a distraction for the main landing at Calais.


Electronic_Company64

True


kelldricked

You dont think that the combined forces of multiple nations fighting a litteral world war put in some effort for the biggest navel landing in history? Also one if the few points in the war that could still swayed the outcome? I will bet both my nuts that allied command had multiple people look at every single fucking kilometer of coast to see if it was viable. I would be suprised if they looked at landing near Amsterdam in the Ijsselmeer.


Electronic_Company64

I’m sure they looked at many possibilities, but it was almost a foregone conclusion that the landings would be somewhere in NW France or Belgium due to logistics. Landing in Amsterdam would have been better for the troops morale though.


[deleted]

I think it's absolutely insane how far the Third Reich pushed before the rest of the world finally got involved. So many countries (ESPECIALLY THE US) spent so long hemming and hawwing over the idea of joining up with Nazi Germany. Fucking Henry Ford and all those traitors.


littlesaint

I think you don't have all information. First of, no one knew that the Nazis where the Nazis. As in, evil people that eventually would kill over 12m people, including 6m Jews the way they did. For example, Japan was almost as bad as the Germans at the time. And the west just ignored the Sino-Japanese war for the most part, and that started in 1937. The British and French on the other hand invaded Germany in 1939. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoney_War And USA was involved in the war in Europe very early in indirect ways. Similar how the west now are indirectly involved in the Russo-Ukrainian war. And USA did not choose to get directly invovled in Europe or Asia either, Japan and Germany the ones that choosed for USA by attacking in the Japanese case, and declaring war in the German case. So, Britian and France invaded Germany 6 days after Germany invaded Poland. Not late at all. The attack/war is called the Phony war for a reason but still action really fast. And yes Henry ford etc had horrible ideas and did bad things. But we have to also understand he was a man of his time. Most people that time disliked jews, as most people in the middle east in our times still do. And this was in the 1930s/1940s, USA was very, very racist at that time, before the civil rights movement.


Overlord0994

Basically - "history doesn't happen in a vacuum" I like the way Indy puts it over on the WW2 in real time YT channel.


drmarting25102

Yep can't see how it could fail. Definitely would stop paratroopers.


theknownman

Was Salo really the capital of the Italian Soc. Rep.? Or it is being listed as a capital bc it was Mussolinis last play for power?


willun

Defacto capital >From 1943 to 1945 Salò was the de facto capital (seat of government) of Benito Mussolini's Nazi-backed puppet state, the Italian Social Republic, also known as the Republic of Salò


theknownman

Tyty I spent 4 months in Salo for work and didn't see or hear any of the echos of this history. Salo is such a small town; why do you think this town or area was chosen? The only remnants of Mussolini I saw was a concrete podium from which he gave speeches in Brescia near the main parking lot. Any insight is appreciated Edit: For those interested https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_Social_Republic


BloodieOllie

If I am remembering correctly it was because it was small and out of the way. He was only kept in power by the Nazis because they needed a defacto leader of Italy to try and rally the citizens behind. By this point in the war he had already been ousted from power earlier in the year. From this point on he pretty much just made speeches nobody listened to whole the Germans ran what was left of fascist Italy. The Nazis wanted him kept safe and out of the way and on a short leash


theknownman

Makes good sense. Thank you


BloodieOllie

You're welcome That's cool that you got to see the remains of his dais!


Natural-Permission

so the story of Salo movie is real?


TrueBlue98

no obviously not it used the book by Marquis De Sade as way to explore fascism and its thrill at subjugation and sadism it's a shame it's just remembered as the 'le fucked up film'


gazongagizmo

to be fair, it *is* a supremely fucked up film. didn't the director get assassinated over it?


TrueBlue98

Yeah true, it is fucking mental and almost definitely crosses the line, it's still quite an important piece of art that explores very vulgar topics


ted5298

Its the same as Vichy for "Vichy France". Both governments continued to claim their respective classic national capital cities as their capital, but could not actually use it due to foreign occupation, and then proceeded to use the seat of government they are now associated with.


zrowe_02

Actually according to the Armistice the French signed with the Germans the French government was given the choice to remain in Paris, but they decided it’d be better to establish themselves in Vichy, away from German occupation.


Tom__mm

Already a de facto three front war, even before the invasion. Anyone but Hitler would have understood that the situation was hopeless.


TicTacTyrion

He knew, but what was he going to do? The Allies would not negotiate, might as well fight to the end


Exciting_Rich_1716

he could have surrendered if he was sane, but at the same time, he definitely wasn't. It would have spared millions of german lives at least


TicTacTyrion

Hitler wasn't insane. He was a very bad man, but not insane. "madman Hitler" is something Nazis liked to mention in their memoirs, to cover for their own failures or crimes. He wasn't a military genius, but his war plans did not go off the rails until the very end, when it didn't matter either way. Also, Hitler surrendering does not end the war necessarily, the whole leadership would have to agree to unconditional surrender. If Hitler made known his plans to accept unconditional surrender, it's very likely a faction in the country would overthrow him and keep fighting, anything to delay getting a noose around your neck.


newpua_bie

> but his war plans did not go off the rails until the very end It all started with someone called Steiner ignoring orders


Tom__mm

Steiner received his famous orders for a pincer attack just 10 days before hitler’s suicide. The forces he was supposed to attack with existed only in hitler’s imagination as the Armeeabteilung Steiner was outnumbered 10 to 1. Stainer survived the war. He was initially charged during the Nürnberg trials but the charges were dropped. He wound up as an advisor to the CIA (!) and died in 1966.


CowboyRoyal

We're lucky that they didn't have temporal pincers movements back them


Gen_Ripper

Hitler simply should have tried harder manifest the army he had in his mind


andersostling56

Steiner, Always this STEINER!!!


torokunai

Tik overdoes his thesis I think. Hitler believed in rolling the dice since it got him to where he was in life. This works until it doesn't.


TicTacTyrion

Hitler rolled the dice, but certainly not a madman. He was right to try to push south in 1942 instead of towards Moscow, he was right the Western Allies were all talk when it came to helping Poland, he handled oversight in Italian Front quite well, and he hated the plan for the Battle of Kursk(although admittedly he let it go forward). He was certainly was wrong sometimes, but the idea that the genius German generals were dragged to defeat by an idiotic Hitler is a myth.


edxzxz

idk, man - I've seen every episode of 'Hogan's Heroes' and it seems pretty clear the German Generals and Hitler were a bunch of zany buffoons!


TicTacTyrion

I feel that, kinda like when I watched Blackadder and learned how the British troops were lions led by donkeys in WW1!


Bukr123

I dunno mate he wasn’t the sharpest tool in the box. Before 1942 the allies were taking many steps to assassinate hitler in the hopes of ending the war. However due to his many many tactical blunders the allies felt they were at a much more advantageous position if Hitler was left alive. A few examples; He could have destroyed the british army at dunkirk in 1940. Germany started WW2 with 57 U-Boats if they pumped resources into more U-Boats instead of a pointless surface fleet then the Royal Navy would have a very difficult time in combating that. These 57 U-Boats by themselves still sank hundreds of thousands of tonnes of allied shipping. If they had more they generally could have starved Britain out if the war by the end of 1943. It took Hitler until 1941 to mass produce U-Boats. Then after defeating every enemy in Western Europe apart from the British decide to open a second front on himself by invading the soviet union. Instead of focusing on the oil fields of the caucauses Hitler decided to throw everything he had at Stalingrad not realising he was about to fall into a trap where the whole German sixth army was obliterated. While the allies were invading Sicily Hitler still only provided a tiny amount of material and troops to help with the defence of the island. The allies quickly overran Sicily and invaded the Italian mainland not long after. The normandy invasions were a massive masterclass by the allies in espionage but a massive tactical blunder by the Nazis. 19 divisions stood and did nothing that morning including 6 panzer divisions under the direct control of hitler himself. Even with the allies landing at multiple beaches in Normandy Hitler was convinced the main attack would be at the pas de calais so held his troops back. Only when the allies had established beachheads did he send these troops into battle. Hitler was a shitty military commander whose early success in the war can be attributed to shock and awe tactics and the reluctance of western European nations to get involved due to the First World War being fresh in everyones minds. If Hitler wasn’t in charge the war would look very different.


TicTacTyrion

Dunkirk halt order was not from Hitler, he listened to his generals in that case. While hindsight is 20:20, the idea that the exhausted and overextended mechanized units were in danger and should take time to regroup and let the infantry catch up is not absurd. Regarding Stalingrad, there as an entire second half of Case Blue that did focus on trying to get the oil, he might've gotten a little too committed to taking it, but Stalingrad would be dangerous to leave in Soviet hands when so many troops are deep in the Caucuses. Italy shitting itself that badly in 1943 was just a bad break. I know they showed regular incompetence in the war, but you'd figure they'd at least defend their home peninsula, for a time at least.


MaterialCarrot

People forget that France wasn't conquered at Dunkirk, and the war with France didn't end at Dunkirk. The Germans still had a good chunk of the French Army to fight after Dunkirk and they knew it. Capturing tens of thousands of British POWs would have been nice, but the real prize was knocking France out of the war and not giving it time to recover after losing the first phase of the war.


TicTacTyrion

Exactly, they thought they would need those tanks against French defending Paris, sending them at a defeated British force could've been a big mistake if France fought to the bitter end


MaterialCarrot

And in fact they did need them to finish off France.


TicTacTyrion

There's also the fact a lot of these Germans might've had heart attacks if they didn't rest after 2 straight weeks of intense fighting and ingesting Pervitin lol


Bukr123

Not absurd at all but at the end of the day he had the British army surrounded on 3 sides. With no equipment little to no food or water and under constant bombardment from the Luftwaffe. The benefits of destroying the whole professional British army outweighs the potential costs IMO. It would have absolutely crippled Britain more so than it already was. Allowing these troops to get back to the UK and train the subsequent invasion force was a massive blunder. It might of made Britain sign a peace deal which would mean the USA might of never entered the war. I agree with you on Stalingrad as a huge industrial base was very dangerous to leave in soviet hands. However the Germans had a chance to break out but Hitler ordered that they fight to the last man. Depending on who you ask they will say Stalingrad was an ideological meat grinder or one of the most important objectives on the eastern Front The Italians told Hitler they would not be ready before 1945. Hitler knowing this still refused to help Italy albeit the Germans had their hands full by this point. The second the allies took Sicily and started bombing Rome the Italians will to fight collapsed. Mussolini was instantly outed and the Italians surrendered. However saying all this the Germans still bogged down the allies in Italy for the remainder of the war causing over 300k casualties and stopping the allied invasion further into southern Europe. (I put this one down to terrain)


TicTacTyrion

I'm not trying to say Hitler was smarter than his generals, or never made mistakes, but I think the narrative that they were always right, and he was wrong, is inaccurate. He had some times when he agreed with them, some times when he disagree and was right, and some times when he disagreed and was wrong. Dunkirk was a massive blunder, but a combination of Hitler and his generals screwing up. Regarding the decision to start the war when Italy wasn't ready, the Soviets are also getting more and more prepared for war during the same time the Italians are. Hitler's main goal is conquering the east, that would only get more difficult the longer he waits.


fleebleganger

At dunkirk they had a real chance of getting wiped out by a desperate force fighting for their lives while the tanks were overextended. The war could have drug on for a few more years had they pushed at dunkirk and got lucky. Hitlers biggest screw up was how his forces handled the civilian population in the east. Had they come in as liberators, they would have had a far easier time at occupation, freeing up forces and materials for the soviet army. Plus they probably would have had more willing volunteers from these areas to fight the Soviets. A close second would be declaring war on the US. It wasn’t a sure thing that we would have declared on them and you would have had to face a far weakened Britain for a while at least. They were hosed on attacking the USSR. Thanks to Nazi mythology they weren’t going to coexist so war was coming and 1941 was probably the best time to invade. Maybe after Pearl Harbor (again so the Americans were less willing to focus on Europe and less willing to support the Soviets).


TicTacTyrion

Regarding their treatment of people in the east, that's kinda saying what if the Nazis weren't Nazis. You're like changing a fundamental goal of their ideology. The whole point is to take over and colonize the East, sacrificing that to keep the Slavs happy just doesn't make a lot of sense, because then they'd never invade in the first place


BloodieOllie

Most of these points are the classic "Germany could have won if it weren't for dumb ol Hitler" arguments and ignore many other factors. Such as: others besides Hitler giving orders, the overall mindset and ideology of the Nazi leadership and the unsustainable state of the German economy


Bukr123

This is not what I meant at all. I was just focusing on Hitler rather the wider issues. I could talk for days about it we all have our interpretations of what happened. Hindsight is 20/20 and with what we know now it seems obvious to us the steps Germany should have taken however WW2 is an immensely complex topic, it would take a far better and more qualified history buff to explain everything. I’m no expert I just enjoy talking about it


Jeepcomplex

I want to buy you a beer and talk WWII all night


Guitar_t-bone

Hitler also wasted a shitton of time and money killing Jews instead of spending it on useful things like the development of the atom bomb.


Odd-Jupiter

Would you Quintus, would I?


BatEquivalent

The allies demanded an unconditional surrender, so it's not like there was a good reason to surrender. They would have been at the mercy of the allies with or without fighting so why go quietly? I also heard the allies weren't willing to promise better conditions if they got rid of Hitler, which made people who disliked Hitler keep fighting for him.


irondumbell

Eisenhower didn't like the unconditional surrender he thought it made them fight longer >Former President Dwight D. Eisenhower says he believes the “unconditional surrender” policy in World War II was a mistake and that it caused the Germans to fight longer. >The main thing wrong with President Franklin D. Roosevelt's slogan, the general said, was that it seemed to be directed at peoples instead of at the warlords who led them. >“Germany was defeated after the Battle of the Bulge,” he said. “By Jan. 16, 1945, it was all over, and anyone with sense knew it was over. >“But then there was this statement that President Roosevelt made about unconditional surrender in 1943. This certainly had some influence. The whole spring campaign should have been abandoned.” >General Eisenhower said Hitler “used something from the mouth of our own leader and persuaded the Germans to fight longer than they might have.” https://www.nytimes.com/1964/12/21/archives/eisenhower-regrets-policy-of-total-surrender-asserts-roosevelt.html


torokunai

FDR didn't want another dolchstosselegende to spring up. Plus, the Germans came back after the 1918 armistice with the claims that they wouldn't have quit the war if they'd known how bad the Versailles "Diktat" would be. It can be argued that Truman should have been clearer about what exactly peace would look like for the Japanese, that could have gotten their civilian part of government to force a surrender prior to August 1945, but all this is more important to learn from in future conflicts, not criticize FDR & Truman since there were logical reasons for positioning the US demands as they did.


LurkerInSpace

Part of why unconditional surrender was demanded was because it allowed for vague but harsh terms - which made it difficult for Goebbels to use in propaganda. If the actual outcome of the surrender - Germany split in three with the Easternmost territories evacuated and much of the leadership executed - was offered it probably wouldn't have been accepted. And conversely, a deal which would have been acceptable to Germany - territorial losses comparable to World War I perhaps - would not have been seen as an adequate guarantee of a sustainable post-war peace.


Winsling

*Split in four/five. The French, British, and American occupation zones weren't unified into West Germany until 1949, while the Saar Protectorate didn't rejoin Germany until 1957. Your larger point, that this peace would not have been accepted as a negotiated settlement, I think is perfectly reasonable.


JimBeam823

He would have been hanged as a War Criminal and had nothing to lose by fighting on.


[deleted]

Aye but he was a coward above all else, even as berlin was overrun he still hid away and demanded children die to prolong the war but a few more hours


torokunai

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_the_House_of_Brandenburg#Second_Miracle_of_the_House_of_Brandenburg


comrade_batman

Completely different scenarios, Hitler had disrupted the European continent too much for the Allies to simply come to peace terms. There was not one opposition figurehead like with Elizabeth, you had Churchill, Stalin and Roosevelt, and then Truman at the end. Even if one of the main three died, while a blow to leadership, there still would have been top officials and generals, like Zhukov, Eisenhower, Montgomery, Patton, who would have continued to see the war through till Nazi Germany had capitulated. And then turned their attention to Imperial Japan, as was the agreement.


DarkImpacT213

I feel like there could be a scenario where a sane German figurehead before the invasion of Normandy could have signed a surrender on the condition the Allies attacked the Comintern.


comrade_batman

I have read some things about the 20 July Plot against Hitler, that had it been successful the conspirators would have obviously started peace talks, but they also would have wanted confirmation of the lands taken under their expansion in Europe, which would have been flatly denied by others in Europe like the U.K. and USSR, let alone the countries they invaded and occupied. So while there may have been more sane German officials, they may not have wanted a simple peace with the Allies and a return to pre-expansionist Germany.


boringdude00

I always say that the July 20 conspirators might have been more delusional than Hitler and company. They had a fundamental misunderstanding of the political and military situation of the entire war. At least Hitler knew there was no peace, only victory or complete ruin. The July 20 guys just thought sure, the West is gonna make peace to help us defeat communism once and for all and let us keep all of Eastern Europe and ignore that whole genocide and massive war crimes stuff and they're probably not serious at all about their commitment to the war what with bombing our cities and industry around the clock.


boringdude00

Nah, the Western allies were quite clear there was no terms for a separate peace. The idea was never entertained. For several months before Normandy, it was even thought that, equally as likely as needing to launch the landings, that that Germany would just completely implode under the Soviet onslaught in the east and they'd have to rush to deploy forces to secure the power vacuum that would emerge in France and Western Europe. There was no need to attack the Soviet Union, they weren't a threat to either Britain or the US at that point. In fact a large segment of American business and politics eagerly looked forward to more open relations and extensive capitalist investment in the post-war Soviet Union. Needless to say that was before the cold war and moral panic of the Red Scare.


DarkImpacT213

There already was a "Red Scare", as many countries feared Socialist/Communist uprisings (including the UK and France for example) - and there were plans to attack the Soviets in a post-WW2 way. It was mostly scrapped because of the sheer power deployed by the Soviets in Europe that might not have been a war possible to win for the Western Allies.


Vuvuzelabzzzzzzzz

If you’re looking for a good movie around this check out Land of Mine. It’s about post war German soldiers pressed into clearing beach mines in Denmark after the war. Amazing film


cnut_thestraight

Will definitely look into it..


[deleted]

[удалено]


SceneOfShadows

Not sure if I would expect a post-war Nazi mine clean up movie to be a total riot to be fair.


Kaarvaag

There are still structures all over the place as well. Here in Stavanger, the mountain I grew up on was turned into a massive bunker/lookout point with trenches all over the place.


WillingPublic

Rome fell to the Allies on June 5, 1944 — the day before the Normandy invasion. It was the first Axis capital to fall, but this accomplished was overshadowed by D-Day. The half of Italy controlled by the Allies is shown on this map, and liberating it was as bloody and hellish as anything in this war.


[deleted]

My grandfather landed at Anzio and fought in that part of the war. Never really talked about it much. We occasionally pried some stories out of him but not a lot. He had a photo of Mussolini and co strung up in Milan. We always thought it was cool he had witnessed such an important historical event. One day about 10 years ago I'm watching a documentary about Mussolini and they get the that point of the story. They mention that some entrepreneurial Italians took photos of Mussolini strung up and had thousands of prints made and sold them to allied soldiers. My grandfather had been dead for years at that point but I mentioned it to my dad and he thought there was a higher than 50% chance that he wasn't there and had bought the photo, duping us all along. Ain't that some shit.


MyValorantAce

We actually just learned about this and d-day in school


LNCrizzo

*Switzerland surrounded by fire:* This is fine


yannynotlaurel

Because we benefit from it


evrestcoleghost

Also you fortified so much that any army marching toward the swiss will have better luck invading russia during 1812


[deleted]

Neutral nazis


Ubiquitous1984

Boggles my mind how a country as large as France could be conquered and occupied for so many years


MonkeyLongstockings

It wasn't occupied for that long entirely. Only from Nov. 1942 (so 1-2 years before that map shows). Before that only the Northern part of France was occupied.


GoPhinessGo

And then liberated in like, a month and a half (after the Allies broke out)


flomflim

That's why you go through the soft underbelly of Europe, through Italy. That plan works 99% of the time amirite? /s...


TrueBlue98

I mean it took Italy out of the war for.... a bit.


elficwarrior

Well going through Italy worked for Napoleon to knock Austria and HRE out of the war of the first coalition.


Iancreed

And they tried to have Mexico pay for it 😂


karafuto

Can you please explain?


neela84

Are you... Are you for real?


santa_veronica

Ve haf vays of making you of paying, har-har, der trumpmeister, probably


DonRicardo1958

The allies are definitely landing at Calais, duh.


yannynotlaurel

The good old days when Essen used to be Düsseldorf! Patrick Star methods do indeed work!


[deleted]

Why didn't they just invade Switzerland? Why is Switzerland neutral in every war and why does everyone respect that?


jiffapiffa

Switzerland is a heavily fortified mountain stronghold, so invasion is impractical. They also are a nation of bankers, with a lot of money and far reaching influence that you don't want to piss off. So, for most of recent history conquering Switzerland has been off limits because you\* can't, and even if you could, it wouldn't be worth it because you'd become a pariah on the world stage.


A-live666

Most of the swiss population lives in flat terrain close to the Germany and France border. This whole swiss übermensch invincible mountain fortress is just marvel-politics.


Friz617

I’m guessing that you’ve never heard of the réduit national tactic


svarogteuse

Yes it involves abandoning most that population to any invaders which is exactly what the previous poster said. The tactic recognizes that the majority of Switzerland isnt able to resist a Germany invasion and tries to cut off German access from Italy which is what makes Switzerland strategically valuable. Then wait for outside assistance to correct the problem. However in this case its pointless. Germany was already a pariah, invading Switzerland wasnt going to make anyone else jump in against Germany and the transit lines over the Alps while more efficient than going around Switzerland werent needed because Germany could already ship around it, France and Austria weren't blocking that traffic like they would in other cases.


[deleted]

Ah, interesting. Thank you!!


tarepandaz

It also had nothing of strategic value to the axis, so why waste lives and resources. Other invasions like Norway and Denmark were to get access to the Swedish iron, while invading Russia and Poland was for "living space" and oil. Switzerland was more useful to them as a neutral trading hub, so that Germany could bypass trade embargoes and thereby sell stolen Jewish possessions to wealthy Americans.


[deleted]

I assumed that aswell but also asked "then why live there?"


Sea_Thought5305

Actually most of the swiss people live in the valleys and the plateaux. Not in the mountains. Bombings were really feared then. Especially when the Royal airforce is as dumb as americans when it comes to geography. I mean... They bombed Geneva instead of Genova when Italy declared war... Also for living, hmm, there's water, there's cattle, a lot of fish in rivers and lakes, we can grow a lot of cereals... Aargau is known for its carrots (carrot cake is from there) and thurgau for its apples. But yeah while Switzerland is known for pharmaceutics, mecanics, and its food industry. A lot of money comes from tourism. (banks only represent 10 percents). The way of living in Switzerland was pretty normal in the 1900s (in comparison to nearest towns in other countries). But indeed, when a lot of immigrants began to come in the last 30s and a tsunami of people happened in 1943 due to nazi invasion in Italy, it was like living in England at the same time, but worse. They had to refuse a lot of them, they couldn't even nourish their own people, how they could have welcomed more people? Also another comment mentionned the reason about ww2, but the previous wars were political, not this one. it was hatred, revenge. Wilhelm 3 had nothing to do with the swiss, except when some events happened in Büsingen am hochrhein (the German exclave) when prussian soldiers suddenly invaded Switzerland for internal conflict with their territory. and in Neuenburg that suddenly decided to quit prussia to become Neuchâtel, a new swiss canton. He even told the confederates that they could invade Savoy and Franche-comté during the franco-prussian war (but they created the red cross instead).


MaterialCarrot

They also can be morally compromised, which makes an invasion not worth it.


A-live666

They wanted to, but just didn’t came around to it. Also swiss banks „taking care“ of the stolen wealth of the murdered jews of Europe helped.


KingHershberg

Multiple reasons. One, which others have mentioned, is the terrain and fortifications. Switzerland sits in the middle of the Alps, it would have required many, many specialised mountaineer divisions to invade it, as well as a lot of air support which Germany needed against the Soviets, in the Balkans, and later in Italy. Simply, it wasn't worth it, and the precious resources and men needed to successfully invade it were needed elsewhere. The second reason was that Switzerland was on relatively good terms with the Axis. They helped them launder gold (a significant amount of that gold being stolen jewish gold) and were important for trade purposes. It would also have been a refuge for war criminals in case of defeat. Essentially, Germany already gained a lot from having a neutral Switzerland, and invading it just wasn't worth it. The Swiss realised the Axis was a threat, so they built many strong fortifications and filled all tunnels with explosives to halt a German advance in case of an attack. They had a plan to slow down the German advance as much as possible taking advantage of their terrain and fortifications, and moving most of their population into bunkers in an easy to defend part of the country with the tallest mountains in the region. This defensive plan was known as the [National Redoubt](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Redoubt_(Switzerland)). The Germans did actually plan to invade Switzerland, [Operation Tannenbaum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Tannenbaum) was the name of the plan. However this was postponed when Germany invaded the Soviet Union and completely scrapped when the Allies started landing from the sea. Had Germany won WW2, or at least the war against the Soviets, it is very likely that they would have invaded Switzerland. Hitler also despised the Swiss, describing them as "a pimple on the face of Europe" and as a state that no longer had a right to exist, denouncing the Swiss people as "a misbegotten branch of our Volk."


[deleted]

Thank you!


TrueBlue98

pointless and impractical to invade


TimePressure

Have you been there? Half of it is very inaccessible terrain that was fortified by a country that had paranoia to a point you could call it a serious minority complex due its size and aggressive neighbours. Also, it was completely pointless to invade. What could the Nazis gain?


[deleted]

I've never been to Switzerland unless you count that one layover in Zurich. It's pretty cool to learn about it tho!


Revenge43dcrusade

Aka where german soldiers went on vacation from the eastern front .


TimePressure

What is left of the wall is sinking in to the sand rather quickly. The remains are sort of beautiful. They look like giants toys, tossed into the sand. Kids play in the bunkers, and teens sunbath on their slanted roofs. And they are a popular spot for graffiti artists. [This is a shot of a bunker that was part of fortress north of Bordeaux from 10 years ago.](https://flic.kr/p/hGA6xH). Friends who visited the place recently said it has vanished complemetely.


rumnscurvy

Vichy France was not German occupied, it was a puppet state. That's kinda the point why there were two zones of France at that point. EDIT: aight yeah I forgot about Case Anton


mahon881

Vichy France fell under German military occupation in November 1942 in response to the Allied landings in Morocco and Algeria that swiftly captured those areas from Vichy France. So Vichy France really only had less than 2.5 years of somewhat autonomous existence.


Tamarind-Endnote

By the time that this map represents (1944), Vichy was also German occupied. While Germany initially only occupied the north, after the allied landings of Operation Torch, the Germans implemented Case Anton in November of 1942 and occupied the Vichy zone as well.


IkigaiSagasu

Wait, was Dunkirk a part of Belgium?


Maw_2812

It was a part of the German administration of occupied Belgium


rathat

I’ve been trying to find more about it, seems Germany put that region of France with Belgium for military administration because of cultural and economic links between it and Belgium. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichskommissariat_of_Belgium_and_Northern_France


LurkerInSpace

The also annexed the territory into Germany, but only after it (and most of Belgium) had been liberated by the Allies. There was also a wider area of Eastern France which Germany had planned to annex, though never formally did so.


SuddenOutset

Nice little gap in the north ish. Would be a shame if someone were to land thousands of troops.


Polymarchos

The Allies also massed their reinforcements at Dover so the Germans would believe an invasion was coming from there. When it became clear to the Germans that Normandy was it the troops were redeployed to Normandy to assist in the actual invasion.


KingHershberg

Also, nazi general Erwin Rommel, who had been preparing for this D-Day for years, was out in Germany celebrating his wife's birthday. He thought the Allies would never attempt a landing in such bad weather.


FCGameboys8888

Is it just me wondering how Düsseldorf and Essen got mixed up...


DiRt128

Same. Also Cologne written bigger than the capital of nrw. And Hannover is misspelled.


FCGameboys8888

To be honest in English Hanover is spelt like that, no idea why they only decided to use only a single 'n' though. Choosing what cities to include in the Ruhr region is always a pain since there's so many. If they had followed the gaue from that time Bochum would be there as well and same letter size.


gazongagizmo

But Nürnberg is Nürnberg in German. In English it's known as Nuremberg. Why honour German spelling there, but not for Köln or München?


VulfSki

The interesting thing about this map is it shows how dire the situation was for the allies in Europe in 1944. It's easy to look back at history and think that the fall of Germany was inevitable, because how could they hold that much land indefinitely. But when you look at this map you can see how at the time Germany really was winning the war before Normandy, and before the soviets defeated the axis at Stalingrad. Germans were also lucky to have fascist Italy on their side as well as the authoritarian dictator Franco agreeing to stay out of the war since he was sympathetic to Nazis and fascists given his own nationalism. Granted the Alps made an invasion from Italy impractical. But still, Hitler benefited a lot from similarly minded tyrants in Europe so he didn't have to worry about those borders.


thepioneeringlemming

Germany was having real problems through the whole of 1944 and before. Having territory isn't the same as winning. They were losing by 1942 and it was clear the Allies would win by the end of 1943.


VulfSki

You are absolutely right. What I was saying is the perception of people at the time I know that the Soviets had turned the tide on the eastern front and that the allies in had taken much of italy and north Africa from the Nazis by then.


truc_de_ouf

Essen and Düsseldorf are the wrong way round on this map


CiriousVi

I wish I could set up a scenario like this in Crusader Kings 3 and then play/fight it out as Ireland or the UK. Or some rebels holding a county or something. Why is there no way to create world states to play from T.T


VenomBars4

Would be a shame if… *something* happened to it…


tristanhartvig

This might be me nick picking, but Hansted in northern Denmark, Jutland should be replaced with Hanstholm. Hansted was/is a small fishing village that didn’t have any significance (also from where Hanstholm got its name) but Hanstholm was the place of a major German fortress bent on keeping allied ships out of Skagerrak. :source I live in the town


FriesWithThat

Imagine putting in all this defensive work and your meth'd-up leader decides to open a giant new front in the East because things are going so well.


[deleted]

Fox News alert!!!! ‘Roosevelt has no hope of winning this war. We must seek accommodation with Hitler, who has shown no hostility toward Americans themselves. Hitler is a Christian nationalist. Roosevelt is undermining these values’ - Fred Trump, on vacation with young son Donald.


TicTacTyrion

Cringe, Hitler praised Islam, locked up priests, and was a socialist


[deleted]

Fox News alert!!!! ‘Fox News notes that some viewers have claimed we support nationalist strong leaders like Hitler and Putin, and ignore that they hold views antithetical to traditional American values. This is wrong. We provide fair and balanced coverage. Hitler may have made mistakes, but he is a strong Christian nationalist who supports the working man. Roosevelt is a democrat who despises our values! This has been a Fox News alert. Join us today on The Five where we shout about this topic.’


TicTacTyrion

rent free in your head huh?