Nothing can ultimately beat a citizen military force with moto and a give em hell leader. Not my dumb say-so, of course--
Read Victor Davis Hanson's SOUL OF BATTLE for detailed well-documented proof.

to patoloco's statement: it was brought to my attention that he could be partialy right. See i would imagine lots of soilders drank, probably to a slight addictive level, so when the US cutsoff the "addicts" addiction it would effect there level of effectiveness.

just a theory brought to my attention by a friend

GO ARMY

The primary reasons the Germans were so good in WWII?

-Hitlers ability to make/force people to follow him.
-Superior Tanks/planes/vehicles.
-Superior Training
-New tactics/Superior Tactics/Panzer Tactics (Infantry create hole in the line, and armor exploits this hole.)
-And the generally warsome manner of a German.

Ok but it seems to me that hitler wasn't actually brilliant at all, in fact many of his executive descisions such as the attempt to make the ME262 into a bomber, his initial opposition to the STG44 (possibly the best small arm of the war), his immense folly at dunkirk, his descision not to send paratroopers to supress our naval bases which were harressing rommel and only use planes, and his attempts to capture russian cities for political, not strategic reasons, HE was actually a very bad general, the reason he gets credit is he the uncanny ability to pick the best staff ever. his generals, ministers of propaganda were utter geniuses. I'd actually attribute the initial german success to their superior training to both the french and the russians (not sure about the training of the british) and the fact that the french strategic plan greatly overestimated the protection of natural features such as the ardennes, this left weak points in their defenses.

Hyperion is right.

To add to what he said (This is gonna piss the Nazis off):
Hitler is responsible for the Germans losing WWII.

Aufklaker, except one last thing, there is a good chance they could have lost anyway, the soviet union had near endless reserves of resources, and if america got involved, there's no way, not with TWO giant countries attacking it. Granted Germany COULD have won without hitler, but it's far from assured. Also as for pissing off nazi's, who cares?

As for pissing off Nazi's:

It's fun.

Yes, yes it is.

I might be reviving a dead topic but----
The germans had the better tactics yes. A good combination of troop training and motivation. Discipline and morale is good. Eh... command structures so so... specially since you've got hitler(Who single handedly repeatedly ended up losign the war for the germans) Being able to override EVERYTHING. Not faster tanks, not really. Better weapons? Well.. depends on which your considering the better. Aircraft? Not really. The whole reason the german army was so great was because of its revolutionary tactics "blitzkrieg". As Erwin rommel said "You outnumber my tanks 6 to 1, but what use is that when you line your tanks up instead of concentrating them". The germans concrentated their tanks, which was one of the main reasons. That is the short version. better tactics. Thats the keypoint. tactics and doctrine

Actually the German Army was not as powerful or modern as was France. At the time France had a military 3 times the size of Germany. It was tactics pure and simple combined with the use of a modern marvel call film. The French were still stuck in WW1 while Germany studied a new concept called Blitzkrieg. An Englishman came up with it. Can you guess who?

They were strong becuase we weren't there to stop them until much later.

quote:

The French were still stuck in WW1 while Germany studied a new concept called Blitzkrieg. An Englishman came up with it. Can you guess who?

Lord Blitkrieg?

British theorists J.F.C. Fuller and debatably Captain B. H. Liddell Hart have often been associated with blitzkrieg's development, though this is a matter of controversy. The British War Office did permit an Experimental Mechanised Force, formed on 1 May 1927, that was wholly motorized including self propelled artillery and motorised engineers.


Is Wikipedia correct?

Here's a PS--

http://www.lonesentry.com/intelbulletin/index.html

Intel Bulletins on Axis Armed Forces. Includes tactics, propaganda, weapons systems and more. Awesome little collection here of great stuff.

Yet another interesting link patoloco. Captain B. H. Liddell Hart is ( was ) one of the best Military Analyst of our time. Reading his books gets one thinking.

i've noticed in the books i read lately such as panzer commander, panzer battles and how hitler could have won world war 2 that the germans admit that thier tanks were inferior numberically and qualitatively to the american and british tanks in the african conflict, and the panzer mark IV was inferior vs the sherman if i remember right. not to mention the fact that the british had an anti aircraft gun capable of equaling the 88mm but they just well.. never used it

the worst weakness of the americans in the africa war was unfortunately in experience, and the reason hitler was so widely accepted was because he had gotten germany out of its depression, and because everyone was getting jobs and were off the streets so on and hes fighting the Versailles's treaty etc.
they didnt notice that during all of these new programs and stuff that he was streamlining the german economy for war and its people. If i remember it right, colonel vans von luck claimed the labor forces were almost paramilitary. I dont have the book with me so unfortunately i'm not able to get the exact quote

Before the invasion of Poland the Germans were fantastic at exporting propaganda and the fear that came with it. Once the world was at war the Germans sold it to themselves and considered the rest of the world void. Big mistake.

Religious conspiracy other government conspiracies.

Another thing I might add they where not tuff and died rapidly without opposition.
This one soldier who was in the war who basicly train me told me stories on how they just walk over the Hitler army so fast they would half to wait for stories to be fabricating in the paper to pretend their was a war and not just a straight slaughter of Germans.
He stated they never even had to fire a shot his tactics where so devasting and they are still good here today.

While one can marvel at the sight of most German weapons, massive tanks did nothing more than quicken the battle of the bulge etc,. Half of them were in line just to get through most little cobbled villages. Great targets. Had they used the exact forces as in 1940, they may have achieved their silly goals. But, alas..WE WON!