# Another WWII Question **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 29, 2011, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-wwii-question/583677 "2011-05-29T17:57:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Wakinyan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wakinyan/32/352_2.png) [@Wakinyan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wakinyan)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2011, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-wwii-question/583677/41 "2011-05-31T20:42:33Z")
Everybody – civilians and generals alike – were so scared of the Red Army they rather died than gave up. It was an overwhelming army of atrocities approaching, avenging the atrocities commited by the Germans. Hitler had declared a “total war”, a war of extermination on the East, and that didn’t go well, and now the Red Army came bringing this total war thing into Germany, showing no mercy to civilians (mass rape was standard for instance, women drowned themself in rivers rather than letting themself get caught) or military personell, naturally. Officers not only killed themself, but also their families. – In the west, on the other hand, people turned themself in to the enemy _en masse_; but on the East, and Berlin was on the Eastern front, they rather died, by fighting or by suicide. The nature of the war on the East and on the West is almost uncomparable in numbers and in brutality. ---
**Author:** ![Askance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/askance/32/8281_2.png) [@Askance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askance)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-wwii-question/583677/42 "2011-06-01T01:31:45Z")
> [@Gorsnak](#): > > If that were really the case (wanting to lose to the western allies instead of Soviets), it would seem there could have been significantly less effort put into the western front. Not that the bulk of the Wehrmacht weren’t in the east, but there was still a lot of stiff resistance put up in the west, not to mention the Battle of the Bulge and various other last gasp offensive efforts. I was referring to the period after the battles of Hürtgen Forest and the Bulge, when everyone rational knew the war was lost. The resistance on the Western front declined rapidly from Feb/March 1945 until the end, and the Wallies could have made it to or near Berlin had they wanted to. But that would have been explicitly against the agreements reached at the Yalta Conference with the Russians, and so _may_ have precipitated WW III. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-wwii-question/583677/43 "2011-06-01T02:11:29Z")
> [@Askance](#): > > I was referring to the period after the battles of Hürtgen Forest and the Bulge, when everyone rational knew the war was lost. The resistance on the Western front declined rapidly from Feb/March 1945 until the end, and the Wallies could have made it to or near Berlin had they wanted to. But that would have been explicitly against the agreements reached at the Yalta Conference with the Russians, and so _may_ have precipitated WW III. The idea that the allies gave away Berlin to the Soviets isn’t realistic. Berlin was never ours to give away. The Soviets were closer to Berlin and had more troops in the area - why assume we would have won a race to Berlin is we had tried to run it? ---
**Author:** ![Elmer\_J.Fudd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/elmer_j.fudd/32/1211_2.png) [@Elmer\_J.Fudd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elmer_J.Fudd)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-wwii-question/583677/44 "2011-06-01T03:03:38Z")
Don’t forget that even in April, 1945 the Nazis had one of the most effective propaganda organizations in human history. Most Germans and I suspect even a good number of generals and government officials were convinced that there were wonder weapons in the pipeline that would turn the war back in Germany’s favor if they just held on long enough. ---
**Author:** ![Koxinga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/4af34b/32.png) [@Koxinga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Koxinga)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-wwii-question/583677/45 "2011-06-01T03:13:12Z")
Something pertinent from [here](http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/defeat/enter-bunker.htm), though I think it’s mainly drawn from William S. Shirer’s Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: > [@](#): > > Nevertheless, Hitler and those around him in the bunker clung to the hope of a falling out among the Allies, buoyed in part by the memory of Frederick the Great, the German military leader who had heroically held out against overwhelming odds, until the alliance against him abruptly dissolved back in 1761. A painting of Frederick the Great was fondly kept by Hitler in his private quarters in the bunker and he liked to gaze at it, finding inspiration – one great leader to another. > > A further hope those in the bunker clutched onto as everything fell apart was astrology. Encouraged by his Propaganda Minister, Joseph Goebbels, the Führer requested to see the two horoscopes that Himmler, who dabbled deeply in such things, had stored away for him. And according to the star charts, Hitler would experience victory through 1941, then a series of setbacks through the first half of April 1945, when something great would happen to bring him unexpected success. > > Coincidently, on Thursday, April 12, 1945, President Franklin Roosevelt fell ill and died from a cerebral hemorrhage while visiting Warm Springs, Georgia. Upon hearing the news, Goebbels telephoned Hitler and congratulated him. This had to be the turning point. Without Roosevelt, the delicate British-American-Russian alliance would surely disintegrate. After this, the less hostile Harry Truman would be open to the possibility of talks with Nazi Germany. ---
**Author:** ![dolphinboy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dolphinboy/32/330_2.png) [@dolphinboy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dolphinboy)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-wwii-question/583677/46 "2011-06-01T03:34:28Z")
Thanks Koxinga. That actually makes sense to me. Hitler was a real believer in Astrology and may have had reason to believe that the allies might fall apart if somehow the Germans could hold on long enough. Unfortunately for him, the Russians were heading to Berlin and there’s wasn’t any way of stopping them short of an atomic weapon. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 4:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-wwii-question/583677/47 "2011-06-01T04:48:06Z")
You can see the small portrait of Frederick the Great in Hitler’s living quarters in several scenes of _Der Untergang_ (_The Downfall_). ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-wwii-question/583677/48 "2011-06-01T04:55:15Z")
> [@dolphinboy](#): > > Hitler was a real believer in Astrology and may have had reason to believe that the allies might fall apart if somehow the Germans could hold on long enough. Actually Hitler was not a big believer in astrology or the occult. His belief system was pretty Hitler-centric and he didn’t concede that there was anything that was controlling him. ---
**Author:** ![Askance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/askance/32/8281_2.png) [@Askance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askance)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 5:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-wwii-question/583677/49 "2011-06-01T05:07:57Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > The idea that the allies gave away Berlin to the Soviets isn’t realistic. Berlin was never ours to give away. The Soviets were closer to Berlin and had more troops in the area - why assume we would have won a race to Berlin is we had tried to run it? I did say to _or near_ Berlin. The Russians [didn’t take Berlin until 2 May](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Berlin), only 6 days before the final German surrender. Soviet casualties during that battle alone are estimated at over 360,000 men and 2,000 armoured vehicles. The Elbe, which the western Allies first reached on 11 April (9 days before the Russians _started_ the Battle for Berlin), is only 80k from Berlin. [Resistance was light or quickly by-passed](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Allied_invasion_of_Germany): > [@](#): > > As was the case throughout the campaign, the German ability to fight was sporadic and unpredictable during the drive to the Elbe-Mulde line. Some areas were stoutly defended while in others the enemy surrendered after little more than token resistance. By sending armored spearheads around hotly contested areas, isolating them for reduction by subsequent waves of infantry, Eisenhower’s forces maintained their eastward momentum Also note that > [@](#): > > fighting continued to the north-west, west and south-west of the city until the end of the war in Europe on 8 May (9 May in the Soviet Union) as **German units fought westward so that they could surrender to the Western Allies rather than to the Soviets** ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2011, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-wwii-question/583677/50 "2011-06-01T06:00:29Z")
> [@Askance](#): > > I did say to _or near_ Berlin. The Russians [didn’t take Berlin until 2 May](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Berlin), only 6 days before the final German surrender. Soviet casualties during that battle alone are estimated at over 360,000 men and 2,000 armoured vehicles. The Elbe, which the western Allies first reached on 11 April (9 days before the Russians _started_ the Battle for Berlin), is only 80k from Berlin. And the Red Army was only 20km from Berlin. And I realize the Soviets waited before launching their final attack - but that’s because they could afford to take more time to prepare. But they were ready to launch an immediate offensive if the Americans or British started heading towards Berlin. ---
**Author:** ![Askance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/askance/32/8281_2.png) [@Askance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Askance)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2011, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-wwii-question/583677/51 "2011-06-03T05:12:22Z")
Sure, but the Germans were resisting them more fiercely than they were the Wallies. I’m sure they could have covered that 80k faster than the Russians could their 20k, almost everything the Germans had left by that times was facing the Russians… That’s why I emphasized the casualties the Russians took (in the last battle of the war!). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-wwii-question/583677.md?page=2)