• 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, however, nursed the most serious grievance. Russian trade had been badly affected by the Continental System. At the end of 1810, Alexander wrecked Napoleon's trade embargo. He put tariffs on French imports and let neutral ships (no doubt carrying British goods)

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

    However, this would have had serious implications for the balance of power in Eastern Europe, and suggests that the powers failed to put aside their national interests for the greater good of Europe, implying that the failures of the Congress outweighed the successes.

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

    the other, he would be faced with a choice and the other would seek France as the alternative. Bismarck faced foreign problems, but enjoyed far more the control in foreign affairs than in domestic matters. However, not all of Bismarck's foreign policies were a success.

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

    There was a small amount of protest from Britain and France, but as Hitler had presumed, they were unwilling to take any real action against him. France was war weary; Britain was suffering economically and concerned with the defence of their empire in the east.

  1. To what extent was Wilhelmine Germany an entrenched authoritarian state?

    was utilised by to give Adolf Hitler a lenient jail sentence and can be seen to have had a substantial effect upon the future of Germany. This shows how the prevalence and power of the elites continued, as did their right wing influence.

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

    Hitler it can be argued invaded Poland as a first step towards the invasion of Russia. Historians therefor like Roper and Bullock have used the memorandum as evidence that Hitler planned a war from the start. This is the basis of the Intentionalist argument.

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

    Because of the rapid industrialisation, the coal industry, for example, had unskilled and inexperienced workers and poor working conditions. Also there was a fall in productivity as one eighth of factories were moved to be secured. But many were too close.

  2. Stalins leadership was the most significant reason for the Soviet victory over Germany in ...

    Had Stalin chosen to follow Hitler's more idealistic methods, the defense of Russia would have been far weaker in strategy; while his leadership was certainly hands-on in approach (Stalin was chairman of the central war agencies), Stalin understood that unified command was more important than a dictatorship of his own ego.

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