Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > European History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

European History European History Forum - Western and Eastern Europe including the British Isles, Scandinavia, Russia


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 5th, 2012, 01:04 AM   #31
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by tjadams View Post
I wonder if there are different answers in the two exact same threads?
IMHO it's just the natural evolution of any academic research once more & more relevant hard evidence is becoming available to us.
sylla1 is offline  
Remove Ads
Old November 5th, 2012, 03:12 AM   #32
Archivist
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 134

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
It should be remembered that, as stated all along this thread by yours truly & other historumites, the German declaration of war against the US was hardly "preemptive"; the Roosevelt administration was already in a state of undeclared war.
All I meant by use of "preemptive" (not the best choice of words, perhaps) is that Hitler could declare war, but that is all he could do. He could not attack America in any way. There was nothing that he could do to support the Japanese. All he could do was sit back and wait for us to bring the fight to him. Roosevelt was going to find some pretext to get us directly into this European war, granted. But Hitler gave us this pretext immediately: we did not have to search for a pretext at all, because Hitler just declared war, and handed us our pretext on a golden platter.

That does not strike me as a rational decision. Would it not have been better to wait, sever all ties with the Japanese, betray the diplomatic agreement, even denounce their attack in the press? If these Americans want to fight, fine - but don't give them an excuse: make them work for it.

On the de facto state of war that was already in place before these events, regardless of what the declarations of government said, yes, I agree wholeheartedly, and in fact, you are preaching to the choir. There is a book called Human Smoke that examines industrial war-development in the 30's in America - well before hostilities were openly declared (on our side).
Student is offline  
Old November 5th, 2012, 06:17 AM   #33

tjadams's Avatar
Epicurean
 
Joined: Mar 2009
From: Texas
Posts: 25,394
Blog Entries: 6

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
IMHO it's just the natural evolution of any academic research once more & more relevant hard evidence is becoming available to us.
True, but usually when two exact threads are asking the same exact
question, they are merged, like with the Death Mask one. More answers
in one spot for the benefit of the curious members. Just trying to help
keep things tidy.
tjadams is offline  
Old November 8th, 2012, 04:48 AM   #34

funakison's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Oct 2012
From: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 2,839
Blog Entries: 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Student View Post
All I meant by use of "preemptive" (not the best choice of words, perhaps) is that Hitler could declare war, but that is all he could do. He could not attack America in any way. There was nothing that he could do to support the Japanese. All he could do was sit back and wait for us to bring the fight to him. Roosevelt was going to find some pretext to get us directly into this European war, granted. But Hitler gave us this pretext immediately: we did not have to search for a pretext at all, because Hitler just declared war, and handed us our pretext on a golden platter.

That does not strike me as a rational decision. Would it not have been better to wait, sever all ties with the Japanese, betray the diplomatic agreement, even denounce their attack in the press? If these Americans want to fight, fine - but don't give them an excuse: make them work for it.

On the de facto state of war that was already in place before these events, regardless of what the declarations of government said, yes, I agree wholeheartedly, and in fact, you are preaching to the choir. There is a book called Human Smoke that examines industrial war-development in the 30's in America - well before hostilities were openly declared (on our side).

There is a distinct difference between intervention and invasion. In other words just because America was helping us Brits with thousands upon thousands of tons worth of hardware and supplies it does not mean that an escalation of events was inevitable. Indeed the act of infamay by Japan so galvonised American public against Japan that hostilities with Germany would have had little public support.
I agree that German condemnation of Japanese actions may well have served Hitler well, they may not have impressed FDR but would have made any escalation of hostilities harder to sell to the American people.
funakison is offline  
Old November 8th, 2012, 05:29 AM   #35
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by Student View Post
All I meant by use of "preemptive" (not the best choice of words, perhaps) is that Hitler could declare war, but that is all he could do. He could not attack America in any way. There was nothing that he could do to support the Japanese. All he could do was sit back and wait for us to bring the fight to him. Roosevelt was going to find some pretext to get us directly into this European war, granted. But Hitler gave us this pretext immediately: we did not have to search for a pretext at all, because Hitler just declared war, and handed us our pretext on a golden platter.

That does not strike me as a rational decision. Would it not have been better to wait, sever all ties with the Japanese, betray the diplomatic agreement, even denounce their attack in the press? If these Americans want to fight, fine - but don't give them an excuse: make them work for it.

On the de facto state of war that was already in place before these events, regardless of what the declarations of government said, yes, I agree wholeheartedly, and in fact, you are preaching to the choir. There is a book called Human Smoke that examines industrial war-development in the 30's in America - well before hostilities were openly declared (on our side).
Declaring war against a power that has overtly massively helping your mortal enemies for months and that is attacking your naval units and even crippling your critical naval strategy the moment it is busy dealing with another war in the other side of this Planet frankly doesn't sound particularly "irrational".

IMHO Herr Hitler could have had a better timing, but that's another story.
His declaration of war could have been bad strategy, but hardly not rational.

Just remember any time the US itself has been in any analogous position.
sylla1 is offline  
Old November 8th, 2012, 05:42 AM   #36

funakison's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Oct 2012
From: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 2,839
Blog Entries: 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
Declaring war against a power that has overtly massively helping your enemies for months and that is attacking your naval units the moment it is busy dealing with another war in the other side of this Planet frankly doesn't sound particularly "irrational".

Just remember any time the US itself has been in any analogous position.


Sorry i cant agree, i fully understand the point you are making. But Adolf could not back up his declearation of war. He could not bomb the continental Unites States, he could not engage its troops, and the supply of munitions and supplies to Britain would eventualy be suplemented by the arrival of troops extra hardware and planes that most definately could attack Germany.
funakison is offline  
Old November 8th, 2012, 06:07 AM   #37
Historian
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,095

Clearly a mistake by Hitler, which made it easier for the US to deploy forces against Germany. Also, typical of the awkward political and diplomatic moves of Germany in both world wars. However, the US was taking an extremely provocative approach with both major Axis powers for most of 1941. Japan and Germany made mistakes in taking the bait.
betgo is offline  
Old December 17th, 2012, 06:02 AM   #38

Albert Leo Schlageter's Avatar
Citizen
 
Joined: Dec 2012
From: Germany
Posts: 18

Quote:
Why did Germany declare war on the United States?
Prehistory:

Already in 1937 the American president Franklin D. Roosevelt had himself decided against the Appeasement policy of Great Britain and France towards Germany, Italy and Japan with his 'Quarantine the Aggressor' speech.

The German Empire calculated on an intervention of the USA in a European war. The imperial Minister of Finance Graf Schwerin of Krosigk wrote in a letter (1st September 1938) to Adolf Hitler:

'In America two trends meet presently, an every measure crossing, basically from Jewish side fed hatred propaganda against Germany and the long-term crisis of the economy, towards all attempts Roosevelt's fail and from which one sees a solution at the moment only in a European war. The American industry busy only now to 25% would be converted immediately in quite different circumference than in 1914/1918 into a war industry of inconceivable efficiency.'

Few days before the declaration of war, on the 7th December 1941, Japan had stepped in the war with the United States with the attack on Pearl Harbor. On the 5th December 1941 the Red Army had lined up to the counteroffensive near Moscow. Germany, Japan and Italy had concluded before the tripartite agreement (Dreimächtepakt).

The war explanation takes general realations on incidents with the American warships 'Greer', 'Kearny' and 'Reuben James' in the north Atlantic and Roosevelts 'Shoot-on-sight' order against ships of the Axis powers.

Hitler pursued up to November 1941 towards the USA a widely defensive policy. He had hoped up to Soviet counteroffensive on the 5th December 1941 before Moscow, to keep out the USA of the European war events to finish first, as planned, enterprise 'Barbarossa' against the Soviet Union, so that no war on two fronts would originate.

Reasons:

Then the point of view of Hitler changed within less weeks for three different reasons:

- The failure of the Blitzkrieg strategy against the Soviet Union,
- the tensions by the open American support for Great Britain and the Soviet Union,
- the more and more often growing preventive measures of the US-Navy against German submarines in the north Atlantic.

The state secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Ernst von Weizsäcker noticed on the 10th December 1941:

'One lays value on the fact, that the U.S. not us, but we tell them the state of the war.'


Source:

Bernd Wegner: Hitlers Strategie zwischen Pearl Harbor und Stalingrad, in: Der Globale Krieg - Die Ausweitung zum Weltkrieg und der Wechsel der Initiative 1941–1943, Stuttgart 1990.

Gerhard L. Weinberg: Die deutsche Politik gegenüber den Vereinigten Staaten im Jahr 1941, in: Jürgen Rohwer/ Eberhard Jäckel (Hrsg.): Kriegswende Dezember 1941, Koblenz 1984.

Internationales Militärtribunal Nürnberg: Der Prozess gegen die Hauptkriegsverbrecher. Nürnberg 1947, Band 36, S. 492. Dokument EC-419.

Leonidas Hill (Hrsg.): Die Weizsäcker-Papiere 1933 – 1950, Frankfurt am Main, Berlin, Wien 1974.


Best regards

Albert Leo Schlageter is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > European History

Tags
declare, germany, states, united, war


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why Did Germany Declare War on the US? tjadams War and Military History 48 December 19th, 2012 06:22 AM
World War I: India, United States, and Germany Houhie History Help 9 July 20th, 2012 05:33 PM
What if France and Britain didn't declare on Germany over the Invasion Of Poland? pip21 Speculative History 16 April 17th, 2012 06:14 PM
Argentina, declare war against Germany WW2? Stuart War and Military History 5 December 8th, 2010 03:02 AM
The Invasion of the United States Lucius Speculative History 21 January 19th, 2007 12:18 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.