The early strategy of the Germans was to secure their physical borders and improve their economic situation. Thus the Germans occupied Bohemia to lock down the southeast border. Poland added some resources and food production but mainly secured a military buffer zone against the expantionist Soviets. Actions to the north in Norway were taken to stop aggression by the British who had designs on blockading German iron ore imports from Sweden. In the west, German efforts were to defeat the large armies of France and Britain and thus secure that border area. Once these quick and decisive actions were accomplished, Germany was relatively secure border-wise and had greatly improved her economic position. The German national strategy then becomes much more problematic. Supposedly the war with the Soviets was to further strengthen eastern border security while obtaining large new economic benefits. However, the methods by which the war was conducted led to a long drawn out affair with high attrition, thus negating the potential benefits. Actions in the so called "battle of Britain" and the north African campaign are so puny in comparison that they had no real 'strategic' value. They were mainly diversionary, tactical actions, to keep the British tied up. The British history book writers love to play up these two tactical arenas and as such they typically take up about half of any 'history' account provided by the English. IMO they played zero strategic importance as to the outcome of the war. As the war expanded to include the USA, the German strategy becomes even more muddled. Supposedly, Germany hoped to stalemate the Russians into a position favorable to Germany, probably along the Volga River. This was within reach by late 1941 and possibly could have been done in 1942. By the spring of 1943 however, it was impossible. Against the west, the best that could be obtained was another stalemate along the English channel and in the Mediterranean Sea and Atlantic Ocean. This was to be accomplished by a strong strategic initiative involving Atlantic Ocean submarines. On land, occupation troops and a competitive air force in the north of France would prevent British/American invasion. In the event, the British largely defeated the German submarine force and the Americans destroyed the German air arm over France and western Germany. The large German occupation army in France was incapable of stopping the western Allies by itself. Thus a successful strategic Allied invasion via Normandy and a quick end to the war (about ten months). The lack of a long term coherent strategy by Germany is one of the reason she lost the war.
hit the Germans where they did not expect.........................
Isolate the Germans
it was called blitzkrieg, which literally means lightning.
using their shables as their hidding place and snippers
Unrestricted submarine warfare.
If you mean by 'what was the Allies strategy to beat Germany'? Their strategy was to push Germany to the center (Berlin) where the Allies can close in on the Germans and wipe them out. Hope this helped!
They blared Justina Beaver on the loudspeakers to the Germans.
To Stop the Germans at all costs from ruling the world.
To my fellow bloggers; To capture and hold Stalingrad which in turn would give the Germans access to and control of the waterway and all shipping that used that waterway.
Blitzkrieg was a military attack strategy designed by the Nazi Germans. The Allied Forces adapted this method too.
The strategy of Overlord was to confuse the Germans as to where and when landings would take place, and to land the maximum number of men and armoured vehicles by sea and air on the FIRST day. The sheer power of 175,000 men with many AFV's worked and forced the Germans back.
The French were considered as weak opponents by the Germans who had good military strength and ammunition. But poor war strategy by the Germans and counter offensive moves by the French along with help from Britain led to the French victory.
It took the Germans 4 weeks to occupy Poland during World War 2, using the Blitzkrieg strategy.
Good strategy, bad strategy, well-defined strategy, outdated strategy, coherent strategy, sophisticated strategy, aggressive strategy...
One Strategy used was Blitzkrieg. Which basically means focusing on one point of your enemies base and attack it with everything you have.
the germans plan was to bomb the navy so british supplies were down and then get rid of the air fields so they could attack by boat.
to defeat the japanese first and then turn attention to the germans
if your strategy is affecting strategy itself then the strategy is not worth implementing
No, the bombings were not in retaliation for anything, it was part of their war strategy to cause panic, break morale and destroy factories and other war assets.
Germans used the strategy known as blitzkrieg (As I recall it's german for lightning war), which was highly effective. Blitzkrieg is a highly mobile form of infantry and armour working together in combined arms teams and was heavily supported with close air support.
The Allied Forces did not have a strategy until after they were attacked because the Generals did not believe there was a major offensive going on in the Ardennes. This was to their peril. Since I am not a military strategist and do not know the military lingo I am sending you to some links to help you understand how the Germans and the Allied Forces fought the battle.
* Germans - Deutsche * the Germans - die Deutschen
No, all Germans are not fat. Some Germans are fat, but the majority of Germans are not fat.