4 ms·

It's a bit silly that the author doesn't make a link to an obvious parallel: South Vietnam's completely dysfunctional military. Mistrust at all levels? Check. L

by alricb 11y ago

It's a bit silly that the author doesn't make a link to an obvious parallel: South Vietnam's completely dysfunctional military. Mistrust at all levels? Check. Lack of consideration for the lives of conscripts? Check. Lack of cooperation between units? Check. Rampant corruption, disappearing supplies? Check. Legitimate fear of military coups? Check. Promotion based on contacts, not competence. Check. Essentially this is a pathology of the militaries in countries were the government lacks legitimacy, where survival of the most paranoid is the rule. The paramount example of this is Saddam Hussein, who would deliberately promote incompetent idiots to the highest positions to protect his own ass and surrounded himself with sycophants. Mussolini's Italy is another good example, and so is the Iran of Mohammad Reza Shah.

jernfrost 11y ago
But before being too smug about these "stupid" regimes, it is shocking that American leadership could not see these problems. That you can't win a war with a weak colonial puppet regime. So many American policies have blown up because one tried to prop up regimes with zero legitimize whether South Vietnam, the Shah of Iran or leader of Cuba before Castro. I also keep wondering why a tyrant like Hitler seemed to have an awful lot of talented people running stuff. Why did Hitler not replace brilliant military commanders with loyal idiots? It is one of the ironies, that the Nazi regime seen as as being built on cadaver decipline had a lot of independent decision making at the lower levels.
- dforrestwilson 11y ago
  Hitler did start to replace/subvert his highest ranking military staff, and it's a big reason why he lost the war. Early on he did not micromanage the various theaters, which is partly why the Wermacht did so well early on. As the war went on, several of Hitler's best commanders were removed for railing against his out of touch orders. Perhaps the best example of a promotion which detracted from the war effort was putting Hermann Goring in charge of the Luftwaffe. You are right though that at the lower levels, the Wermacht could think flexibly.
- alricb 11y ago
  Hitler owed a lot to Ludendorff, who created the stab-in-the-back legend just as soon as he asked for the armistice. He was also taking power in a somewhat democratic way, adding to his legitimacy, and he was able to keep the Army as an ally by doing stuff like getting rid of the brownshirts. So for the first few years of the war he was able to avoid the classic dictator syndrome, especially after the early successes. But later on, as another poster notes, he started to turn on his better officers and vice-versa. American hubris is quite awesome. The US establishment really has a thing for picking the worst losers and assholes for allies.

by alricb 11y ago

jernfrost 11y ago

But before being too smug about these "stupid" regimes, it is shocking that American leadership could not see these problems. That you can't win a war with a weak colonial puppet regime. So many American policies have blown up because one tried to prop up regimes with zero legitimize whether South Vietnam, the Shah of Iran or leader of Cuba before Castro. I also keep wondering why a tyrant like Hitler seemed to have an awful lot of talented people running stuff. Why did Hitler not replace brilliant military commanders with loyal idiots? It is one of the ironies, that the Nazi regime seen as as being built on cadaver decipline had a lot of independent decision making at the lower levels.

dforrestwilson 11y ago
Hitler did start to replace/subvert his highest ranking military staff, and it's a big reason why he lost the war. Early on he did not micromanage the various theaters, which is partly why the Wermacht did so well early on. As the war went on, several of Hitler's best commanders were removed for railing against his out of touch orders. Perhaps the best example of a promotion which detracted from the war effort was putting Hermann Goring in charge of the Luftwaffe. You are right though that at the lower levels, the Wermacht could think flexibly.
alricb 11y ago
Hitler owed a lot to Ludendorff, who created the stab-in-the-back legend just as soon as he asked for the armistice. He was also taking power in a somewhat democratic way, adding to his legitimacy, and he was able to keep the Army as an ally by doing stuff like getting rid of the brownshirts. So for the first few years of the war he was able to avoid the classic dictator syndrome, especially after the early successes. But later on, as another poster notes, he started to turn on his better officers and vice-versa. American hubris is quite awesome. The US establishment really has a thing for picking the worst losers and assholes for allies.