The last of a very brave bunch dies

[DrunkenMonki]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7380365.stm

The last known survivor of the plot to kill Hitler and stop the war has died aged 90. I've so much respect for these guys, its just a pity it failed. More people died in the last 10 months of the war than died in the first 5 years, so it could have saved millions.

RIP.

 

[Mad Pierre]

The failure of the bomb plot was not a bad thing.
Had Hitler died he would not have been able to continue his disastrous handling of the war and the Wehrmacht may well have been able to surrender, leaving Germany in a similar situation as it had been at the end of 1918, able to bring its 'undefeated' troops back from the front and able to sew the seeds of WW3.

Germany needed to suffer invasion and utter defeat in order to silence the militarists who had been running the country since its inception at the hands of Bismarck.

The failed attempt was a good thing, it removed Rommel and many other good gifted Officers from the war, it also increased Hitlers paranoia to scale that was unheard of even by his standards and in effect weakening the top of the whole rotten regime.

 

[vim_fuego]

Or it may have free'd up the position of supreme commander to a capable and sane career officier who could then have gone on to win WW2....

 

[Ex-Bay]

At least he was bold & brave enough to try. I can't help wondering how he managed to survive. Hitler went spare and ordered hangings all over the place. (Read "The 20th of July" by H H Kirst).

RIP.

 

[Irritant]

The failure of the bomb plot was not a bad thing.
Had Hitler died he would not have been able to continue his disastrous handling of the war and the Wehrmacht may well have been able to surrender, leaving Germany in a similar situation as it had been at the end of 1918, able to bring its 'undefeated' troops back from the front and able to sew the seeds of WW3.

Germany needed to suffer invasion and utter defeat in order to silence the militarists who had been running the country since its inception at the hands of Bismarck.

The failed attempt was a good thing, it removed Rommel and many other good gifted Officers from the war, it also increased Hitlers paranoia to scale that was unheard of even by his standards and in effect weakening the top of the whole rotten regime.

Spot on. The plan (documentary shown not so long ago) was to have a cease fire with Britain and the US (allowing the yanks to finish Japan). Whilst sending everything against Russian. The British Government suspended all attempts at killing Hitler as it was better for the war effort if he lived. There would not have been a sudden end to it all. Just a nazi free Germany as we had in WW1.

 

[Scaley brat]

Or it may have free'd up the position of supreme commander to a capable and sane career officier who could then have gone on to win WW2....

Imagine if Admiral Raeder had conducted the later part of the war, or even Irwin Rommel..... we would have suffered severe losses. Neither man was a micro manager and both were superb tacticians. especially Rommel.

 

[Ex-Bay]

But Rommel got caught out at Normandy, didn't he?

 

[DrunkenMonki]

If Rommel had been in power, he'd have seen the futility of fighting on 2 fronts.

But he wasn't in power, Hitler was. Whatever the wehrmacht had done wrong up to that point, quite a few tried to put it right with a bomb. In a totlatarian state, can you imagine the bravery involved? Some of this chaps co-conspiritors were hanged with piano wire. Ouch.

Just as a question, who was worse, Hitler or Stalin? If you play a numbers game, we should have been Hitlers best mate. Himmler et al hoped that the western allies would see the sense of a combined assault against Russia. Where would that have left Europe? A warzone for years.

Hitler dead would have opened a power vacuum. The wehrmacht, the SA or the SS all had people capable of filling the void, but in all cases the alternative was probably better (for us) than Hitler. A quicker end to the war would have meant less deaths.

 

[Chilliboy]

But Rommel got caught out at Normandy, didn't he?

Actually Rommel pushed for the Normandy beaches to be reinforced, it was Hitler who insisted that the attack was going to come at Calais and so diverted possible reinforcements away from the landing zone. Rommel was away on leave when the landings happened and no-one else had the balls to wake Hitler to tell him the landings had happened until it was too late.

Hitler mismanaged the war by interfering to the extent that he probably cost Germany a win by over-ruling professional soldiers on strategic matters. Hence it was probably a good thing that he survived as long as he did (although a lot of people will disagree).

 

[Irritant]

Actually Rommel pushed for the Normandy beaches to be reinforced, it was Hitler who insisted that the attack was going to come at Calais and so diverted possible reinforcements away from the landing zone. Rommel was away on leave when the landings happened and no-one else had the balls to wake Hitler to tell him the landings had happened until it was too late.

Hitler mismanaged the war by interfering to the extent that he probably cost Germany a win by over-ruling professional soldiers on strategic matters. Hence it was probably a good thing that he survived as long as he did (although a lot of people will disagree).

And Hitler refused Rommels requests to counter attack the beach heads until it was too late. The panzers could not be deployed without his specific permission.

Also look at the M262. A super fighter that would have swept the American daylight bomber aircraft from the skies. However it was late into service because Hitler interfered and wanted a fighter/bomber.

 

[Irritant]

If Rommel had been in power, he'd have seen the futility of fighting on 2 fronts.

But he wasn't in power, Hitler was. Whatever the wehrmacht had done wrong up to that point, quite a few tried to put it right with a bomb. In a totlatarian state, can you imagine the bravery involved? Some of this chaps co-conspiritors were hanged with piano wire. Ouch.

Just as a question, who was worse, Hitler or Stalin? If you play a numbers game, we should have been Hitlers best mate. Himmler et al hoped that the western allies would see the sense of a combined assault against Russia. Where would that have left Europe? A warzone for years.

Hitler dead would have opened a power vacuum. The wehrmacht, the SA or the SS all had people capable of filling the void, but in all cases the alternative was probably better (for us) than Hitler. A quicker end to the war would have meant less deaths.

What history does hide is the fact that we went to war with Hitler because he invaded Poland. At the very same time that Stalin did.

 

[Mad Pierre]

A quicker end to the war would have meant less deaths.

You're forgetting that the vast majority of those deaths were German and Russian.
Whatever had happenned to Hitler would not have made those figures any the less.

You're also forgetting my first point about the end of WW1.
The allied nations were so sick of the war that we allowed the Germans to sue for peace thereby dooming the fledgeling Weimar republic with the myth that the German Nationalists had been stabbed in the back by communists and Jews while they were winning the war. Had the war against Germany ended while the Germans had owned even a square metre of foreign territory this myth would once again have been perpetuated.

Worse than that, Hitler would have been the martyr, stabbed in the back by his cowardly Generals who failed to see his bold master plan that would eventually have given them 'final victory'.

Once heard a former British army Colonel state that there was only one world war, with the Germans taking 20 years off to regroup. There's a lot of truth in his words.

 

[Mad Pierre]

What history does hide is the fact that we went to war with Hitler because he invaded Poland. At the very same time that Stalin did.

A slightly naive approach if technically almost correct.
We went to war with Hitler after losing patience over the Rhineland, Austria, Sudetenland and eventually the rest of Czechoslovakia. Everytime he expanded Germany he said it was the last of his demands. Now we were a bit slow on the take up, again mostly a result of fear over another WW1, combined with having a Prime Minister since described as 'a town hall clerk promoted beyond his ability'.
The Russians on the other hand, despite being a little naive themselves, were quick to realise the benefit of having Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and half of Poland handed to them on a plate. They also realised that the only real threat to their existance, despite the annoyance of Japan, was Germany and having a really wide buffer zone wasn't a bad idea. Turns out they were right.

 

[Shugster]

A bit Off Topic but I think we could do with the same in Zimbabwe.

How many more will that save from murder and starvation?

Problem is there are no end of nutters ready to fill his boots, so things probably wouldn't improve that much.

 

[True Blue Jack]

What history does hide is the fact that we went to war with Hitler because he invaded Poland. At the very same time that Stalin did.

You have forgotten that much of East Prussia ended up inside Poland as a result of the Versailles Treaty so Hitler was only taking back what was his.

History does strange things to the memory. Chamberlain took a lot of flak - and eventually lost his job - because of his policy of appeasement. What is often overlooked is that in 1938 we had just 70 Hurricanes and only 28 Spitfires (which were not yet operational). Appeasement bought us the time we needed to prepare.

 

[Mad Pierre]

You have forgotten that much of East Prussia ended up inside Poland as a result of the Versailles Treaty so Hitler was only taking back what was his.

History does strange things to the memory. Chamberlain took a lot of flak - and eventually lost his job - because of his policy of appeasement. What is often overlooked is that in 1938 we had just 70 Hurricanes and only 28 Spitfires (which were not yet operational). Appeasement bought us the time we needed to prepare.

Some good points TBJ, however, if you go back a little further you'll see that Hitler was actually taking back what was Polish before the Prussians stole it and created Germany. It was in the interests of both Germany and Russia to dissolve Poland, a country they had previously fought over, divided and shared between themselves.

Chamberlain took some well deserved flak, sure the appeasement gave us time to develop our own forces, but the Germans weren't exactly ready either, and had we not appeased Hitler over the Rhineland he would have been kicked out of office by his own people who were also desperate to avoid a war with the Anglo-French alliance.

We really did hand him Europe on a plate.

 

[True Blue Jack]

Some good points TBJ, however, if you go back a little further you'll see that Hitler was actually taking back what was Polish before the Prussians stole it and created Germany. It was in the interests of both Germany and Russia to dissolve Poland, a country they had previously fought over, divided and shared between themselves.

Chamberlain took some well deserved flak, sure the appeasement gave us time to develop our own forces, but the Germans weren't exactly ready either, and had we not appeased Hitler over the Rhineland he would have been kicked out of office by his own people who were also desperate to avoid a war with the Anglo-French alliance.

We really did hand him Europe on a plate.

It's all a mess really, isn't it? We could argue the toss about European History all day and still not agree on where borders should actually be.

To go back to DM's original point, however, regardless of the motivation of von Stauffenberg's group it took a lot of balls to attempt what they did in the regime under which they were living. Failure meant certain death. Success would have put a very different face on the world of today - whether better or worse is a matter for philopsophical debate.

 

[MontyPlumbs]

If your interested in such things, watch a film called Sophie Scholl, it's about the little known White Rose resistance group inside War Time Germany. The group was all about peaceful resistance, being comprised of scholars, students and other intellectuals. It still didn't stop them being executed by the regime after being tried in "peoples courts". A very good film, worth seeing.

So, imagine the courage it took to attempt an assassination when even peacful resistance was met with crushing force.

 

[Scaley brat]

Hitler dead would have opened a power vacuum. The wehrmacht, the SA or the SS all had people capable of filling the void, but in all cases the alternative was probably better (for us) than Hitler. A quicker end to the war would have meant less deaths.

The SA were annihilated before the war even started mate. Most of the leaders of the SA were having a homo love in at a hotel when Himmler turned up with the Gestapo to arrest them. Two trucks turned up, heavily loaded with SA troops. Himmler stood his ground and ordered them back to barracks and amazingly they complied. From that point onward Hitler was virtually unopposed.

Had Rommel been allowed to run the defence of Normandy the way that he had wanted too, the slaughter would probably have been unparalleled. It could have, even at that late stage, turned the course of the war back in Germany's favour.

 

[Mad Pierre]

To go back to DM's original point, however, regardless of the motivation of von Stauffenberg's group it took a lot of balls to attempt what they did in the regime under which they were living.

True, I wouldn't deny their outstanding bravery when it would have been so much easier to go with the flow as the many other millions did.

I do think it necessary though to counter the point that ending wars saves so many lives. It's the way you end a war that determines the lasting peace, not how soon you end it. WW1 being the obvious case in point, if they'd sorted that out properly it would likely have saved the millions who died in an otherwise uneccessary rematch.