• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

To what extent were Hitler's successes in 1939-1940 due to the weaknesses and mistakes of Germany's opponents?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

To what extent were Hitler's successes in 1939-1940 due to the weaknesses and mistakes of Germany's opponents? I think that Germany's successes from 1939-1940 were largely due to the weaknesses of her opponents, however some credit has to be given to the German military and Hitler's leadership/planning. Clearly the weakness of Germany's opponents in preparation for war greatly aided Germany's success. Hitler's first success in Poland showed the lack of preparation by Germany's opponents. On September 1, 1939, Germany invaded Poland. The Polish army expected the attack to come along the Polish frontiers, but Hitler introduced blitzkrieg. This caught the Poles unaware whilst at the same time waves of German bombers targeted railways and the Polish transport network, which crippled Polish military mobilization. Hundreds of tanks smashed through Polish defences and rolled deep into the country. The Poles fought hard, but on September 17, the Soviet Union invaded their country from the east. By the end of the month, Poland had fallen. The success of this campaign was mainly due to the weakness of the Polish military, planning and the failure of Britain and France to come to their allies aid. ...read more.

Middle

Similarly the decision to defend would prove to be a major mistake. Experiences such as Verdun in the First World War had led the French to believe that a line of trenches and an immense amount of firepower would hold against any attack. France was convinced that defence was the best strategy and so vast sums of money were spent on constructing the Maginot Line to protect France's border. However they stopped once they reached the Belgium border for fear of upsetting their neighbour by leaving them to the mercy of the Germans. This showed weakness on the part of the French government in the failure to be ruthless for the sake of France. The decision to invest in the Maginot Line meant that investment in armoured divisions and mobile armies was over looked as an offensive army would not be needed. However this is precisely what France needed in 1940. This was yet another mistake by Germany's opponents that played into the German's hands. Also the fact that doctrines of static defence were obsolete even before the Maginot Line was complete would prove to be another poor judgement on the part of the French to invest in defence. ...read more.

Conclusion

He faced much opposition form his cautious generals about the concept of blitzkrieg and of his plans to invade France. For example, Hitler came up with the plan 'Sickle Stroke'- the invasion of France through the Ardennes. At the time he faced opposition from generals such as Bock who believed it left the army vulnerable to counter attack. Hitler also placed trust in the airborne in creating a diversion by invading Holland this would prove to be a masterful tactical decision diverting allied attention away from the main invasion in the Ardennes. Hitler's determination and believe in his armies as well as his willingness to gamble proved to be one of the reasons behind his success. He also ensured that there was little bureaucracy within his armies. He gave orders from his headquarters (OKH) to the army high command (OKW) which then sent the orders to the officers in the field. He also ensured the officers were taught to be innovative. In comparison the allied armies had 4-6 tiers of command structure this weakened the army and the air force, even more so. Overall emphasis has to be placed on the weakness of Germany's opponents in 1939-40 allowing for Hitler's successes. However, some credit has to be given to Hitler and his armies in their tactics and strength especially in terms of leadership. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Modern European History, 1789-1945 essays

  1. Reasons for Napoleon's Success (to 1807).

    * Napoleon only narrowly averted disaster. At Essling, he was outnumbered and forced to retreat onto an island in the Danube. He lost 20,000 men in a bloody exchange which again sapped French prestige. * By July, with preparations complete, Napoleon met the Austrians again - this time at Wagram.

  2. Assess the view that the failures of the Congress of Vienna outweighed the successes.

    In some ways, there was no real balance of power, and Adam Zamoyski argues that Britain emerged vastly stronger and invulnerable, while Austria was highly vulnerable, and entirely dependent on the good-will of her neighbours.51 Austria's financial and military resources were inadequate to defend against likely challenges from France and

  1. Hitlers Germany

    This declaration of Comrade Stalin," the article added, ''was properly understood in Germany." It is now known not only that this assertion was true but also that Stalin's declaration fell on already receptive Nazi ears. Until the end of 1938 Hitler hoped for a compact with Poland at Soviet expense,

  2. Did Germany Lose WWII Due Mainly To Hitler's Mistakes

    was held including Mussuloni to decide what the allies should do, without consulting the Czechs, France and Britain decided to give

  1. "Hitler's foreign policy successes between 1936 and 1939 rested on his remarkable tactical skills ...

    Hitler had further reason for believing this move would be a successful one. Little action had been taken by the League of Nations at Manchuria in 1931, and they were unlikely to taken any at this point either; also, Germany now benefited from friendly relations with Italy, following Hitler's support for the invasion of Abyssinia.

  2. "Foreign success; domestic failure." How fair is this summary of Bismarck's governance of Germany

    Much action was taken from the Prussian Landtag and the Reichstag. By 1872, Catholic schools were brought directly under control of the sate and the Reichstag had forbidden the Jesuit order. In May 1873, Dr. Falk, the Prussian Minister of Religion and Education, introduced a package of measures known as the May Laws.

  1. To what extent was Hitler responsible for the outbreak of the Second World War ...

    The USA, Russia and Germany were not members despite the fact that they were the largest and most powerful nations on earth. When faced with a serious challenge as happened in Manchuria the League showed that it had no real power.

  2. 'Stalin's leadership was the most significant reason for Soviet victory over Germany in the ...

    It was an inexhaustible supply. The USSR even used Penal Armies with berserkers, who the Nazis were terrified of, and even People?s Militias were used. The USSR had superior tanks, the T-34, and superior planes, the MIG?s. The USSR were also well organised and had better tactics.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work