Where to start with this…?

Have you read (and more importantly comprehended) "The Wages of Destruction"? The answer is right there…

War with the USA was inevitable in Hitler's mind. With hindsight we can sit back and recognize the rashness of his declaration but at the time, I'd venture to say that it was not a matter that was taken lightly; the declaration was NOT made on a whim.

To imply such is to foster and foment the ignorant…

Sensationalism sells but if you're trying to represent yourselves as some bastion of informed history, then I would expect a little more in the direction of jurisprudence on your part…

Just my opinion, Robert…

Cheers, Ron

By Iron on Nov 8, 2009 at 7:38 pm

Clearly the decision was not made on a whim, but look at the tactical situation – where was the US going to engage Germany? Africa?
I am not saying that Hitler was rational in his declaration of war, but he was never a Grand Strategic thinker – I think it is unlikely Hitler had anything but the vaguest thoughts of a conflict with America, more of a fantasy or daydream I should think. In the short term, the US was not going to have an impact on the war. In that time the USSR would be dealt with and then Germany's attention could be turned to Britain. As a preparatory step for all out conflict with the UK, it would be prudent to limit the amount of supplies and materiel they received. It makes short term operational sense to wage unrestricted submarine warfare. By this line of thought, the US really didn't matter that much.
Clearly the most dangerous enemy to Germany was the USSR – throughout the entire war. Not to minimize the role played by the US, but even at the end of the war, with thousands of Germans fleeing the Soviets into the arms of the Americans, it is reasonable to conclude that Americans were viewed more as rescuers than conquerors.

By Cap'n Dave on Nov 10, 2009 at 11:03 am

One theory that I have heard espoused is that Hitler entered the war against the US as an incentive for Japan to declare war on the Soviets After all, the German drive on Moscow had been blunted by the Siberian units brought from the east. Richard Sorgi had informed the Soviet powers to be that Japan would not intervene, allowing STAVKA to risk this shift in forces. According to the theory, Hitler was using the premise of being a loyal Axis member as the carrot to bring the Japanese in against the Soviets and to finish off the Russians-their demise was always his prize. He not only overestimated Germanys military capabilities, but the Japanese as well. The bulk of the Japanese Army was imbedded in China, and they had difficulty enough finding units to attack US and European colonial objectives, let alone pursuing a war against a third enemy, which had ravaged them severely in Mongolia in 1939.

By paul penrod on Nov 10, 2009 at 11:39 am

Good point Paul, but doesn't that theory give too much credit to German / Hitler forward thinking? By all accounts I am aware of, the Germans were completely surprised by the Moscow counter-offensive, I don't think Hitler was banking in early December on the Japanese turning a tide that he believed was going his way.

though as Dennis Miller says, I might be wrong

By Cap'n Dave on Nov 10, 2009 at 5:33 pm

Ron is absolutely right. The Wages of Destruction is the definitive book on World War II. I never knew anything about WWII, and then I read that book and now I understand everything perfectly. That book is absolutely SENSATIONAL. To imply otherwise is to foster and foment the ignorant…

By Adam Rinkleff on Nov 11, 2009 at 12:24 am

I LIKE TO KNOW ABOUT EVERY THING WORLD WAR 2 & TO USED WEPONES & SS ARMY

By dakshitha on Nov 11, 2009 at 4:53 am

I think Rob's depiction of Hitler as unconcerned about the threat posed by America is realistic, and there is another facet of that opinion. Considering the political situation in 1941, perhaps the question should be why did Hitler wait so long to declare war.

Considering Roosevelt's actions toward Germany during the period of American neutrality, it is not a great stretch to think that Hitler considered America a belligerent without declaration. I certainly will shed no tears for Germany's loss, but, to play Devil's advocate, consider Roosevelt's actions relative to Germany in 1940-1941:

-persuaded Congress to modify the Neutrality Acts to permit a 'cash and carry' policy for American armaments

-approved the 'Destroyers for Bases Deal' that provided the British with 50 destroyers to sink German U-boats and created a safe haven for British shipping in the western Atlantic

-signed the Selective Service Act into law and began expanding the military for a war where Germany seems the obvious enemy

-created Lend-Lease to provide Germany's enemies with weapons and munitions free of charge

-attended a summit with Winston Churchill leading to the Atlantic Charter, which contains language that reflects planning for when American enters the war, not if

-ordered U.S. Navy ships to escort convoys into hostile waters, leading to the Green Incident and a major escalation of tensions

Rob is correct that selling an attack on Pearl Harbor as justification for war on Germany was not going to happen (regardless of what John Belushi thinks). But if you poke even the most reluctant dog enough times, you can get him to bite you.

By Steven Ramold on Nov 11, 2009 at 9:44 am

sorry for typo–"Greer Incident"

By Steven Ramold on Nov 11, 2009 at 9:46 am

Where is Cap'n Dave's rant about intelligence? Hitler correctly assessed his situation and had good reasons from his stand point in going to war with the United States. However, his great failure is to assess the political situation that Roosevelt was in during 1941. Dr. Citino correctly points out that Roosevelt desperately wanted a Europe first strategy and would have a hard time declaring war on Germany while the American public wanted revenge for Pearl Harbor. Hitler's failure to assess his opponent's political situation in 1941 is similar to Colonel Andrews' failure to assess the strength of the German forces on Crete. I now wait for Dave's rant on the failure of Axis intelligence that I have just set up.

By Luke Truxal on Nov 11, 2009 at 6:52 pm

Luke, in order for intelligence to fail, it has to be extant and functioning. It has been well established that German Intelligence (so to speak) couldn't identify the number of planes available to England during the Battle of Britain, I hardly think they would have a much better view into America.

Having said that, there is quite a difference between Military Intelligence and Political estimates that should have been done by the German Foreign Ministry. The real question here should be what was Ribbentrop telling Hitler? As Ribbentrop is usually depicted as a Hitler lackey, I would think he was saying what he thought Hitler wanted to hear.
Which takes us back to the original question of What was Hitler thinking? I think you can find a good discussion of that at:

http://www.historynet.com/hitlers-dark-december-1941.htm

or in the book "The Wages of Destruction" which many consider to be the definitive book on World War II.

By Cap'n Dave on Nov 11, 2009 at 9:32 pm

Steven–

Do you think Roosevelt would have even asked for a declaration of war on Germany, if Hitler hadn't declared war first?

By Rob Citino on Nov 12, 2009 at 10:14 am

No, I do not believe that Roosevelt would have asked Congress for a declaration of war on December 8, when Congress issued the declaration of war on Japan, but he might not have needed to.

Germany was doing a damned good job of pressing the issue on their own. Thirty-seven days before Pearl Harbor, the U-522 sank the destroyer Reuben James, killing 119 men of her crew. Fourteen days before that, U-568 put a torpedo into USS Kearny. The ship did not sink, but 11 men lost their lives. Neither of these incident equat to a Luisitania type sinking, but after the Greer Incident, the U.S. Navy received permission to fire at German submarines in self-defense. A few more torpedo attacks or the sinking of a U-boat or two, and war might have happened anyway.

On December 8, in his speech to Congress requesting a declaration of war on Japan, Roosevelt stated that since the attack the day before "a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese Empire." If Roosevelt believed that a war already existed with Japan, then why did he need Congress to declare war? There are obvious political and public reasons for doing so. But could Roosevelt have used the same logic against Germany? Considering the heightened tensions and the loss of American lives by German hands, Roosevelt might have simply stated that, for all practical purposes, a state of war existed between the U.S. and Germany. Roosevelt could then have escalated military operations against Germany without a formal declaration.

This would be, of course, a potentially dangerous political action to take. From a historical standpoint, in our era of debate over the war-making powers of the President, it is also Constitutionally problematic. For a politician like Roosevelt, however, that would certainly free his hands.

By Steven Ramold on Nov 12, 2009 at 11:53 am

Thanks, Steve. Good reminders about the "pre-war" war in the Atlantic. Woody Guthrie wrote a great song about the sinking of DD-245:

"Tell me what were their names,
tell me what were their names?
Did you have a friend
on the good Ruben James?

By Rob Citino on Nov 12, 2009 at 5:20 pm

As a reader of this scholarly blog, I have been tempted to respond over the past week from comment #1, because I have been reading Adam Tooze and I have some serious concerns regarding some of the data presented. For the past week I have witnessed what was obviously intended to be a thought provoking catalyst for discussion by one of Military History’s highly respected and preeminent scholars quickly de-evolve into this offensive comment by John Karr. My question is why would any serious scholar of WWII history squander such a rare opportunity to engage in scholarly debate with the vanguard in the field?

By Lee on Nov 17, 2009 at 4:45 pm

Did you know? Just some food for thought. If Adolf Hitler was never rejected -twice- by the Vienna school for Architecture, he probably would have never done everything he's done. (Not to say that I'm not aware of everything he's done, but rather, I don't want to spend a lot of time getting into it, because I'm in the library.)

By Matt-The-Sixteen-Year-Old-Pretentious-Bigot on Nov 19, 2009 at 11:56 am

I agree with matt but also think his mother didn't love him

By WWII Man on Nov 19, 2009 at 12:01 pm

My, now. That is open for debate.

By Matt-The-Sixteen-Year-Old-Pretentious-Bigot on Nov 19, 2009 at 12:02 pm

On December 7th, the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. Hitler declared war on the United States.

Why??

Very Simple: to save face and cover up the retreat and defeat from Moscow; and he achived it to a certaint extent.

He did it again with Kursk; he called it off to "help" the italians against the sicily invasion. Actually Germany was defeated.

pepe

By pepe villarán on Jan 1, 2010 at 8:56 pm