Misconceptions of World War II

[Chasseur]

Actually slight tweaking on the Maginot Line misconception. By the late 1930s the French knew the Germans would go into Belgium (or really before its what they did in 1914 afterall). The whole British-French war plan for 1940 was once the Germans invaded was to rush their best combat units into Belgium to fight the Germans there. The Maginot line was the shield and the Anglo-French armies were the sword, so by forcing the Germans to avoid the shield they would force the Germans to fight where they wanted. One also has to understand that in WWI the Germans occupied the industrial heartland of France in 1914 (since its close to the German and Belgian borders) so France had to fight that war without some 60-70% of its industrial capability. So the French plan called for keeping this area free from fighting and German occupation so fighting the war in Belgium seemed quite attractive. What really shocked the French and British leadership was not the German move into Belgium but the last minute modification (often called the 'Manstein Plan') of the plan to put the main German effort into the Ardennes forest to the south of the original plan but still north of the Maginot line (we can talk about the crash landed German observation plane on 10 Jan. with the German war plans, which lead to Hitler's last minute changing of the plan but that almost deserves its own post). So when the German Army Group A crashed through the Ardennes it met with second and even third line French troops while the best of the Anglo-French forces (7th Army, 1 Army and the BEF) essentially ran into Belgium and were in the wrong place. Essentially the Germans hit the French and British in perfect place for the so-called Blitzkreig to work.
I think the Fall of France is one of the areas with the most misconceptions that drive many Anglo-American views of France to this day (ie the French are cowards and don’t have a military etc.) and also in France as well since it feeds into Gaullist conceptions of history (ie. 3rd Republic was rotten etc.).

I can go into more detail but I have to rush to lunch... More on popular misconceptions when I get back...

 

[Story]

That Allied soldiers were Saints - I'd often read on this very forum, comments (by folks who never spent a day in uniform or deployed to a combat zone) like "I respect the American soldiers of WWII, but not the ones of today".

Uh huh.

My High School French teacher told us unvarnished, unpleasant accounts of his travels from Normandy to Berlin that could have been scenes cut out of Kelly's Heroes.

Also recommended, for similar Commonwealth shenanigans in NW Europe, "To the Victor the Spoils: D-Day to VE Day, the Reality Behind the Heroism".

http://www.amazon.com/Victor-Spoils-Reality-Behind-Heroism/dp/1844370380

 

[AmateisGal]

That Allied soldiers were Saints - I'd often read on this very forum, comments (by folks who never spent a day in uniform or deployed to a combat zone) like "I respect the American soldiers of WWII, but not the ones of today".

Uh huh.

My High School French teacher told us unvarnished, unpleasant accounts of his travels from Normandy to Berlin that could have been scenes cut out of Kelly's Heroes.

Also recommended, for similar Commonwealth shenanigans in NW Europe, "To the Victor the Spoils: D-Day to VE Day, the Reality Behind the Heroism".

http://www.amazon.com/Victor-Spoils-Reality-Behind-Heroism/dp/1844370380

Another excellent suggestion, Story. Thanks. And that book looks good...

 

[dhermann1]

I'm glad that someone who really knows the details of the Fall of France can comment here.
Something else I'd like to comment on here is that there's very good chance that if the Allies had stood up to Hilter when he invaded the Sudetenland, he could have been stopped. Not many people realize that the Czechs had a really first class air force at the time, and a good military in general. And the German war machine was still in a very infantile state as well. There has always been talk that the German generals were ready to ouster Hitler, and a reverse in Czechoslovakia might have given them the needed pretext.
We'll never know.

 

[Cobden]

I'm glad that someone who really knows the details of the Fall of France can comment here.
Something else I'd like to comment on here is that there's very good chance that if the Allies had stood up to Hilter when he invaded the Sudetenland, he could have been stopped. Not many people realize that the Czechs had a really first class air force at the time, and a good military in general. And the German war machine was still in a very infantile state as well. There has always been talk that the German generals were ready to ouster Hitler, and a reverse in Czechoslovakia might have given them the needed pretext.
We'll never know.

Indeed; however, it's worth bearing in mind that western intelligence was primarily directed towards the Soivet union (we must not forget the first Red Scare was in the 20's and 30's) - the real state of German forces was an unknown quantity, and Hitler was excellent at making the German forces seem rather more formidable then they were; the prevalence of the belief even today that Germany was more militarily-technologically advanced in 1940 then the UK is one perhaps an example of how masterful Hitler's propaganda was in this area.

Plus, of course, the desire of the people and thus politicians in the western democracies to avoid war - not unreasonably - is perhaps the most important factor.

Chasseur; an excellent summation of the situation in 1940. COuldn't put it better myself.

Now, if we were to move onto misconceptions about the First World War...

 

[Shangas]

May we? I'm sure there were plenty of them.

 

[Widebrim]

Sure, I see the difference there, but even so, in the present day US - a democratic country, as opposed to the dictatorship Hitler had established by the time he became militarily engaged - there must be many military men who have served in campaigns ordered by a CiC whom they may not personally support, and yet whose orders they must carry out, even if not personally pledged to him directly (In that respect, yes, the British Crown is probably a closer direct comparison). In short, I think it over-simplified and mistaken to assume that all in a given country's army at any one time fully supports the leadership / those calling the shots on foregin (or, indeed, domestic) policy.

I can personally attest to that, Edward, and I wasn't the only one in my troop who felt that way...But I still remind veteran friends that even if they don't agree with the current head-of-state, he is still the commander-in-chief and needs to be respected.

 

[Widebrim]

As we could add "all italians were fascist".

With italians everything was softer... They couldn't speak in italian in streets (here in São Paulo there were so many italians that you could think to be in an italian city!), and of course some clubs were closed (these clubs were stimulated before, because the dictator here, Getulio Vargas, was really a fascist). But nothing happened with italian reastaurants. Why? Everybody loves italian food...

Sim, e certo, Martin. Here in the States, Italian became an "enemy" language," as well as Japanese and German. In California, travel restrictions were placed upon Italian nationals, especially in the north with its fishing industry. It has often been pointed out (ironically) that while Joe DiMaggio was playing ball all over the U.S., his father (an Italian national who was a fisherman) was barred from San Francisco Bay, and couldn't travel more than five miles from his house...

 

[Shangas]

The idea that all Germans were at war or were Nazis or were hateful is a big misconception, I think. There was a significant number of Germans who were opposed to Hitler, but who couldn't say anything about it. They did, however, join resistance groups and they would try and go against the German war-effort by committing acts of sabotage, or helping Jews to escape the Holocaust. Famous examples include Capt. Wilm Hosenfeld (who sadly died in 1952 in a Soviet POW camp because the Reds refused to believe that a German soldier could be so nice), Oskar Schindler, a member of the Nazi Party who rescued hundreds of Jews by employing them in his factories and who did double-duty as a saboteur, sending the German military defective weapons and ammunition which wouldn't fire. And Claus Von Stauffenberg, who was the intiate of the famous July 20 Plot (July 20, 1944), to try and asassinate Hitler.

And in fact, a LOT of people (German and other nationalities) tried to asassinate Hitler. I believe that Stauffenberg and other German army chaps tried something like three or four times to kill Hitler but they never succeeded.

A brother of one of the most senior Nazis, Albert Goering would actually forge his brother (Hermann's) signature on documents so that Jews could escape the Nazis and Germany during the War. Albert was intensely Anti-Nazi, as was Hermann's other brother, Karl. Karl actually moved to the USA. Karl's son Werner was a pilot in the USAAF (United States Army Air-Force) and flew fighter-planes against his uncle's Luftwaffe. Apart from forging his brother's signature, Albert Goering collaborated with Anti-Nazi resistance groups and even helped rescue Jews from concentration-camps. As a factory-manager, he claimed he needed them as manual labour (which was probably true). What Jews who were transported from the camps in trucks were either taken to the factories to work or were otherwise released and allowed to escape from occupied Europe.

 

[Harp]

...even if they don't agree with the current head-of-state, he is still the commander-in-chief and needs to be respected.

Agreed.
Shame about McChrystal (shoulda' known) though...

 

[Smithy]

Probably the greatest one I'm aware of is that if the RAF hadn't won the Battle of Britain, Britain would have been invaded by Germany. Several stories have come out lately pointing out that if the RAF had been entirely wiped out, the Royal Navy was so overwhelmingly strong that any invasion fleet would have been annihilated. That, on top of the fact that Germany never had anything like a realistic plan for the invasion, make it pretty certain that Britain would have been safe.

Sorry bit late to this thread but wanted to respond to this post as it's simplistic at best.

The idea that the RN could have saved Britain if RAF Fighter Command had have been decimated is frankly nonsense. Yes, Britain had a strong navy but maritime operations (as with land) are still dependent on air superiority for successful completion - this was something which had already been discovered by military commanders by 1917. Indeed that is the reason why the RN was primarily stationed and dispersed throughout the north of Britain during the Battle of Britain. They were not going to station fleets in Plymouth, Southampton, etc which were within 12 to 15 minutes flying time from Luftwaffe bases in France.

In terms of the the invasion of Britain, Hitler really only wanted this as an absolute last resort as he wanted to force a conditional truce with Britain. It's one of the reasons why he was still appealing for peace even after Adlertag.

To say Britain was safe is very, very far from the truth. If the Luftwaffe had obtained air superiority over southern and south-eastern Britain then invasion would have probably been unnecessary as it would have given the LW free range to bomb that part (and more specifically London) at will. It would have been very difficult for Churchill to maintain public support for the war if Britain's legislative and administrative centre was being bombed at will by Germany.

Even if Britain had not have capitulated politically, Germany's unopposed supremacy over southern England would have neutralised the RN's ability to respond to an eventual German invasion.

 

[Zemke Fan]

I'm monitoring this thread carefully. Remember to stay away from discussions of current day politics. Also, the whole "both sides committed atrocities" line of debate (Story) has been beaten to death with a 65 year-old-stick. If ya'll cross into THAT territory again, your comments will be deleted.

 

[Spitfire]

Thank you Smithy! My thoughts exactly.

 

[AmateisGal]

A brother of one of the most senior Nazis, Albert Goering would actually forge his brother (Hermann's) signature on documents so that Jews could escape the Nazis and Germany during the War. Albert was intensely Anti-Nazi, as was Hermann's other brother, Karl. Karl actually moved to the USA. Karl's son Werner was a pilot in the USAAF (United States Army Air-Force) and flew fighter-planes against his uncle's Luftwaffe. Apart from forging his brother's signature, Albert Goering collaborated with Anti-Nazi resistance groups and even helped rescue Jews from concentration-camps. As a factory-manager, he claimed he needed them as manual labour (which was probably true). What Jews who were transported from the camps in trucks were either taken to the factories to work or were otherwise released and allowed to escape from occupied Europe.

I had no idea Hermann's brothers did this. Wow. Another great tidbit of history unmasked. Thanks, Shangas!

 

[dhermann1]

Sorry bit late to this thread but wanted to respond to this post as it's simplistic at best.

The idea that the RN could have saved Britain if RAF Fighter Command had have been decimated is frankly nonsense. Yes, Britain had a strong navy but maritime operations (as with land) are still dependent on air superiority for successful completion - this was something which had already been discovered by military commanders by 1917. Indeed that is the reason why the RN was primarily stationed and dispersed throughout the north of Britain during the Battle of Britain. They were not going to station fleets in Plymouth, Southampton, etc which were within 12 to 15 minutes flying time from Luftwaffe bases in France.

In terms of the the invasion of Britain, Hitler really only wanted this as an absolute last resort as he wanted to force a conditional truce with Britain. It's one of the reasons why he was still appealing for peace even after Adlertag.

To say Britain was safe is very, very far from the truth. If the Luftwaffe had obtained air superiority over southern and south-eastern Britain then invasion would have probably been unnecessary as it would have given the LW free range to bomb that part (and more specifically London) at will. It would have been very difficult for Churchill to maintain public support for the war if Britain's legislative and administrative centre was being bombed at will by Germany.

Even if Britain had not have capitulated politically, Germany's unopposed supremacy over southern England would have neutralised the RN's ability to respond to an eventual German invasion.

Mmm . . . very well stated, Soren. I was merely reiterating some of what I had recently read. What you say makes a lot of sense.

 

[martinsantos]

From these stories one of the most interesting (and almost unknown) is the help that the owners of the Leitz factory made, saving the life of a lot of Jews from Wetzlar town, before the beggining of war. Mr Leitz just gave a "Leica kit" (camera and lenses) to each Jew and contracted them as sales representatives outside Germany. In this way they could go out of Germany (most to NY). A kit like this meant a good amount of money on those days. Because this kind of procedure Leitz' daughter and the factory chief were arrested by Gestapo, and only back to freedom after severe fees.

The idea that all Germans were at war or were Nazis or were hateful is a big misconception, I think. There was a significant number of Germans who were opposed to Hitler, but who couldn't say anything about it. They did, however, join resistance groups and they would try and go against the German war-effort by committing acts of sabotage, or helping Jews to escape the Holocaust. Famous examples include Capt. Wilm Hosenfeld (who sadly died in 1952 in a Soviet POW camp because the Reds refused to believe that a German soldier could be so nice), Oskar Schindler, a member of the Nazi Party who rescued hundreds of Jews by employing them in his factories and who did double-duty as a saboteur, sending the German military defective weapons and ammunition which wouldn't fire.

 

[Shangas]

Hi MartinSantos,

A friend of mine is a camera-afficianado. He told me this story once. He's Jewish, so it probably meant quite a bit to him. The version he told me was that the cameras were given to the Jews not only as 'business samples' but also as something to sell once they reached New York to get some quick 'start-up cash' for their new lives in a foreign country.

Albert Goering died in 1966. He was arrested and imprisoned several times during the War, but always managed to use his brother's influence to get him out of the clink and went right on plotting against the Nazis. Werner Goering, Hermann's nephew, is still alive today. He's nearly 90 years old (born 1924).

 

[mwelch8404]

How about a more general misconception...for instance, that Stalin was a "good guy" merely because he was on the Allied side. I think as a high schooler learning WW2, I had no idea that Stalin was just as bad if not worse than Hitler.

Meh, what's killing 50 million of your own people to stay in power got to do with it? ;-)

 

[mwelch8404]

The idea that the Allies won simply by throwing numbers at the Axis is the biggest one I've come across. . .

In some ways true. But look at the photos in Alstair Cook's America of late war US and German aircraft factories. One picture is worth a thousand words.

Edited to add, after reading the thread to see if it was mentioned: FDR knew the Japanese were going to bomb Pearl Harbor and "let it happen" just to get the US into the war...

 

[Chasseur]

Some of the work of historian Marc Stoller is quite good on dealing with misconceptions and problems in WWII history: http://www.amazon.com/Major-Problems-History-World-War/dp/0618061320

Gerhard Weinberg ‘s work is also useful.

Some of the larger ones I often deal with in the classroom:

(1) That the US fought the war without allies. Not true even in the Pacific, but its easy to forget the ANZACs, the British (in particular Slim in Burma), the Chinese, the Dutch, the local Asian resistance fighters, etc. Even in the Atlantic the role of the Soviets, the British, the Canadians, etc. can be minimized in US.

(2) “Teutonic fetishism” or as Guttersnipe calls it “Panzer porn” the almost mythic view of German military superiority that fills much general readership on WWII. No doubt the Heer was a fine fighting force, but the idea that the American and Soviet Army remained at their the skill level they were respectively in 1942 and 1941 for the whole war is simply not true.

(3) While I agree with the earlier posts about not all Germans or German soldiers in WWII being Nazis. There is a pretty common misperception, especially among WWII buffs, of a "pure non-Nazi Army, and all the war crimes were committed by the SS.” One thing that has come to light in the past 10-20 years is that the German Army, or Heer, on the Eastern Front changed significantly in 1942-45, compared to what it was in 1939-41. While replacing the massive loses and dealing with the large scale of the Eastern Front the German Army become much more inculcated with National Socialism than was conventionally thought in the in1950s and 60s. When the Germans shifted units from the Eastern Front in 1944-45 to deal with the Western Front there was quite a contrast in the old garrison army of the West and the tougher, but also more ideologically driven Eastern Front units.

(4) Related to this are the myths perpetrated by a number of German Generals who sold their memoires in the 1940s and 50s claiming they were ‘always against Hitler’ etc. while at the same time agreeing in private with the ideology (even if not formal Party members), conveniently leaving out their knowledge of anti-Commissar or anti-Partisan orders, or taking large “personal monetary gifts from the Fuhrer (ie large cash bribes and seized property in Eastern Europe).” Linked to this is the myths of some of the ‘invincible German commanders who shaped Western understanding on several issues about the origins Blitzkrieg, or how their strategic genius was blocked by Hitler’s incompetence, etc (Guderien being perhaps the worst offender, read his memoires with caution…)

(5) The myth of Soviet/Red Army incompetency and the Soviets (and to a lesser degree even the US) ‘only beat Germany by having more men, tanks, and stuff. Because no one fought as well as the Germans, etc.” The Red Army got quite good at the operational level and even the tactical level by 1943-45, in particular 44-45.

(6) Similar to above, while WWII was mostly a war of attrition, the US Army from the Normandy campaign also was good tactically and often was more than a match for the Heer in 1944-45.

(7) Totally agree on the earlier posters about the misperception dealing with the Polish, French and Italian armies. The reality is much more complicated than the conventional wisdom of Polish cavalry charging tanks, and French and Italian soldiers breaking out white flags every time they were shot at.

(8) Lastly, I would have to say a lot of the throw away judgments of leaders that are based more in 1950s-70s American movies set in WWII than serious studies: “Monty was an overrated prima donna,” “If only that politician Ike had listened to Patton the war would have been over in 1944,” “Rommel was the best general since Hannibal (or ever) if only Hitler had given him the supplies he would have conquered the whole Middle East” etc.