The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - January 8, 2009

Dunnigan's and Bay's Latest
Advertisement
New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

Online Giving

Utah SEO Firm

Xango

Smiley Gifts for Babies
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
Intelligence Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: German performance WWII
jastayme3    4/27/2004 11:43:57 AM
From what I've read it seems to me that the German performance during the
war was more than a bit off. Everybody seemed to be able to penetrate them while British counter-intell ate up their assets like pac-man. Is that impression wrong?
 
Quote    Reply
 Latest
 News 		  Most
 Read 		  Most
 Commented		  Hot
 Topics

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted
jastayme3    RE:German performance WWII   5/12/2004 12:42:54 PM
Is their anyone interested in this subject? What explains the German's sseeming lack of competance. Are "Vie have Vays" Nazi's just naturally bad at being subtle? Or is "Perfidious Albion"* just unusally good at being "perfidious". Those sarcasms do have an element of truth to them. The Gestapo was full of party people while the Abwehr was riddled with rebels though to what extant is unclear(but then everything is unclear in this line of work-even the CIA memorial is on a fog-colored wall). And the British intelligence was quite good, with all those Great-Game imperialists to supply experience. So it could be said that "Perfidious Albion"* was good at being "perfidious". However everyone seemed to be able to penetrate them including several neutrals. In a celebrated case Franco was able to prevent Hitler demanding that he go to war without directly refuseing(few neutral rulers of the time felt able to directly refuse for obvious reasons) by claiming that if he was given certain resources he would agree. Conveniently those were exactly the resources Hitler felt he most needed. In short one gets a suspicion that German performance in WWII intell was not up to snuff. However I would be curious to hear other comments by those with an interest in this field. *A nickname for England given by the French who are of course noted for their extreme devotion to honesty in statecraft
 
Quote    Reply

jastayme3    RE:German performance WWII   5/17/2004 7:28:44 PM
For instance what was Canaris' game? Was he really the noble reverse-patriot fighting to restore Germanys' honor? Or was he an opportunist? Or was he simply incompetant? Or was he trying to make sure he had a place to run to when Germany lost? Or for that matter was he trying to set up a trap for the Allies that somehow failed? Canaris does seem to have been linked somehow with Germanies intell failure. Naturally if the head of German intell really was a mole it would explain a lot but that does sound like a to-good-to-be-true. Or was he continueing his job while feeding others bits of information for reasons of his own. Or perhaps was he simply making a lot of bargains and ended up put-bargained.
 
Quote    Reply

jastayme3    RE:German performance WWII   5/17/2004 7:30:38 PM
Or perhaps was he simply making a lot of bargains and ended up put-bargained .............. ............................ that is out-bargained: I make a lot of typos
 
Quote    Reply

Carl S    RE:German performance WWII   10/30/2005 9:35:40 AM
My take is Canaris actions reflected the divisive internal politics of the Nazi state. Historians regularly run across bits of evidence that Goering, Himmler, Hess, Donetz, Heydrich, and all the rest were regularly spying on and backstabing each other. In some cases these actions reflected an individuals personal distatste towards some policy of the Nazi state. Canaris seems to have been particularly disgusted by the extermination policy towards the Jews & others. Canaris did not have a strong background in Intellegence. His previous billet had been as a crusier commander. When tapped for the Abwher role he was expecting to get a senior admisitrative billet within the Kriegsmarine, perhaps a naval squadron command if he was very lucky, or retirement. He did serve in some sort of intelligence billet in the KM for a couple years, but I doubt this was much better preperation for the Abwher role than my own intel. service would be in preperation for the Abwehrs equivalent in the CIA. Beyond Canaris Germany did not have a strong track record in the intel field. In WWI there was a failure to grasp that the Brits had compromised the naval codes. Both then & through the early 20th Century there seem to be a higher number of intel failures by German agencys than with its enemies. In WWII there was no unified coordinating intel agency so coordination was abysmal, the attitiudes at all levels seemed to place arrogance first, and there was a clear inability in many agencys to look at certain aspects of intellegence collection and security.
 
Quote    Reply

stratego    RE:German performance WWII   12/2/2005 12:45:25 AM
As I understand it, Canaris was a traitor. Of course, that was a good thing to be in Nazi Germany, morally. I read that Hitler tolerated him to provide competition to the Gestapo and other groups. Probably German intel failure can be laid to the foot of Hitler Paradoxically, you have to trust people to have a real intel service. Hitler never did.
 
Quote    Reply

Carl S    RE:German performance WWII   12/3/2005 8:43:34 AM
Yes Hitler could have led with better policy in the intel, as he could have done better at so many other things. Beyond that there appears to be a long term trend at poor intellegence work by the Germans in the first half of the 20th Century. To repeat a earlier question I posted;; does anyone have any knowledge, and refrences, for German penetration of the Red Armys radio codes?
 
Quote    Reply

StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy