Soviet-Empire.com U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Login ] [ Active ]

test question

POST REPLY
Log-in to remove advertisement.
Post 18 Apr 2007, 16:48
I don't have it in front of me, but it was something along the lines of what was Hitler's biggest mistake early on in the war?

I said out of the options given that it was abandoning the Battle of Britain; however the test said it was Hitler declaring war on the U.S. immediately after Pearl Harbour.

So am I right? As of now I'm arguing that it is just a bad question. fyi: there wasn't any answer about invading the USSR.
Post 18 Apr 2007, 17:19
Early on in the war, Hitler's biggest mistake was his allowing French and British troops to be evacuated at Dunkirk. He had them surrounded with their backs to the English Channel...and he let them evacuate.
Post 18 Apr 2007, 17:21
Quote:
I said out of the options given that it was abandoning the Battle of Britain; however the test said it was Hitler declaring war on the U.S. immediately after Pearl Harbour.


The Battle of Britain wouldn't have led anywhere, except for pissing off Brits even more.

I'd say the test was correct, because declaring war on the US made it a two-front war for the Germans. Had he not done so, the US wouldn't have declared war on Germany, but rather just have declared war on Japan.
Post 18 Apr 2007, 17:38
hitler had a penchant for fragging himself over, first he attacks america which had no intention of joining the war and then he attacked russia who he had a non-aggression pact with. What a dumb frag.
Post 18 Apr 2007, 17:50
Hitler made many quite serious mistakes during war in my opinion.
1) Starting the war at all
2) Letting the British and French escape from Dunkirk, although not that fatal mistake, crushing those troops would had not changed anything in my opinion.
3) Concentrating too much forces in defense of Norway
4) Changing air raid targets from RAF to civilian targets, fatal for Germany in Battle of Britain, after this continuing it would had been waste of resources.
5) Attacking Soviet Union
6) Not concentrating troops enough on the Russian front, holding Stalingrad as major point of attack.
7) Declaration of war to USA
8) Obsession with special weapons like King Tigers and V2

I am sure you guys can counter-point some of these though.
Post 18 Apr 2007, 21:29
rebel, I agree with you.

Germany (if memory serves correctly) abandoned the battle of britain to invade the Soviet Union..thinking that they could reach moscow before the winter set in.

I had this same question on a History test in 1986ish and This was the correct answer..
Post 18 Apr 2007, 21:37
But Germany had lost Battle of Britain after abandoning the bombings on RAF airfields giving the RAF chance to strike back. Even if they had continued the Battle they would had lost more.
Post 18 Apr 2007, 21:53
Ok, now that question is subjective and it often times depends on your point of view or rational. To be honest its BS. If I had to answer that (after arguing about it being BS) I'd put failing at the Battle of Britain.
Post 18 Apr 2007, 22:04
The 'correct' answer seems very nationalistic. The answer to the question in Britain would be, "starting the battle of Britain, or failing to beat Britain" in Russia it would be "beginning Operation Barbarossa" etc. Because it's a completely subjective question, and impossible to prove empirically it all depends on point of view, and the test makers clearly took the American-angle.
Post 18 Apr 2007, 23:40
5) Attacking Soviet Union

This was absolutely insane. Given an existing non-agression pact, and a fairly quite Eastern Front? Had the idiot been patient - he could have destroyed Britain and America, "talked cute" to appease everyone else, consolidated power, and conquered the world.

The stupidity of attacking the USSR saved every one of us.
Post 18 Apr 2007, 23:42
Quote:
and impossible to prove empirically it all depends on point of view, and the test makers clearly took the American-angle.


Lensovet's got it pinned. Its a very subjective question.
Post 18 Apr 2007, 23:46
The question is too subjective.

But let's simplefy this. The Battle of Britain indirectly led to Nazi Germany invading the USSR. The invasion of the USSR was more dangerous than fighting the US.

Compared to the Eastern Front, the Western Front is childplay. The actions of the US can not compare with the actions of the USSR in WWII, simply because of the fact that the USSR fought a much harder and tougher war, and contributed way more to Nazi Germany's defeat than any other country.
Post 18 Apr 2007, 23:58
and stalin didn't give a frag how many soldiers died to do it.
Post 19 Apr 2007, 01:21
Quote:
and stalin didn't give a frag how many soldiers died to do it.


I suppose a small part of Bush dies every time a soldier gets injured/killed by the glorious resistance in Iraq?

Jeez, stop with the Stalin-bash already. You're trying to mock the greatest most achievable moment throughout modern history.
Post 19 Apr 2007, 01:25
no, but the american people have just enough say that he can't pull a stalinesque charge.
Post 19 Apr 2007, 01:34
Quote:
no, but the american people have just enough say that he can't pull a stalinesque charge.


Care to explain that term, or is that just another retarded outburst I should be ignoring?
Post 19 Apr 2007, 01:39
i often ask myself the same thing when I see your posts

But aside from pathetic insults uh... there is no real rule to adding 'esque to the end of a name.
Post 19 Apr 2007, 02:12
This is off topic but...

Are you in some way insinuating the Red Army should have surrendered resistance and given up?
Post 19 Apr 2007, 02:36
Hitler may have been a very charismatic and shrewd politician, but he was absolutely no a military tactician. The biggest dumbass mistake he made was attacking the Soviet Union. Had the Night of the Long Knives not happened and the Strasser Brothers and Goebbels had their way, the non-aggression pact would have turned into an alliance with the Soviet Union.

Why ruin such a possibility? A Nazi-Soviet alliance would have been unstoppable and Hitler would have had only one front to worry about.
Post 19 Apr 2007, 02:59
"Alliance"? I don't think so.
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.
[ Top ]