Why Was Germany So Powerful in WWII? It’s NOT Blitzkrieg! D

On September 1st, 1939, Germany launched a sudden invasion of Poland, marking the official outbreak of World War II. Throughout this deadliest conflict in human history, Germany committed countless horrific war crimes, bringing immense suffering to nations across the globe.

But from a purely military perspective, the German military’s combat prowess was truly impressive, especially in the early stages of the war. At a relatively low cost, Germany seized vast swads of European territory. Looking at the entire course of the war, the total number of German troops was far smaller than that of its opponents.

So why exactly was the German military so formidable in World War II? Keep this in mind. Germany had far fewer soldiers than its enemies. And honestly, their military equipment wasn’t as overwhelmingly superior as modern movies and TV shows make it out to be. In the later stages of the war, Germany did field advanced weaponry like the Tiger tank, but these excellent vehicles entered service far too late and were always produced in extremely limited numbers.

When it came to logistics and transportation, the German military even relied heavily on horsedrawn transport most of the time. This funny quirk has earned it the playful nickname the Holy Roman Empire among military enthusiasts today. It seems totally illogical. So, what was the real source of Germany’s incredible military strength? Today, we’re going to uncover the hidden secrets of the German military’s combat effectiveness, and the answer might surprise you completely.

Make sure to watch until the very end. When it comes to the German military’s combat strength, most people attribute it to their powerful blitzkrieg tactics. This is a widespread and reasonable claim, but it can’t fully explain the German military’s overall combat capability, nor does it reveal the core essence of its strength. The reason is simple.

Blitzkrieg is an offensive tactic that relies on air superiority and deploys fast mechanized units to launch concentrated strikes. There’s no denying that Germany’s early war victories owed partly to Blitzkrieg tactics. But starting from the second half of 1943 when Germany switched to defensive warfare, it still maintained an excellent casualty exchange ratio against its enemies.

This success cannot be simply explained by any single tactic. Here’s a key point I’ve mentioned in previous episodes. War is a confrontation between complete military systems and the overall quality of a system determines victory or defeat. While Germany faced massive flaws in national economic strength and manpower mobilization during World War II, its armed forces, the Vermacht, operated as an extremely efficient military system.

To understand this high efficiency, we have to start with Germany’s defeat in World War I. Germany paid an enormous price in World War I, yet still ended up losing the war. Faced with the extremely harsh sanctions imposed by the Allied powers, a devastated Germany began a thorough self-reflection on its wartime failures.

German military officers kept asking themselves, why did we lose the war? This spirit of reflection persisted throughout the 20-year interwar period between World War I and World War I. It was during these two decades that the German military achieved a complete transformation and overhaul. So what exactly did the German military change and improve? First of all, German military leaders confirmed that their core military framework, the Prussian general staff system, was fundamentally sound.

They decided to retain this system entirely and carried out comprehensive top-to-bottom reforms. The first reform targeted internal military relations as the most fundamental element of any military system. Personnel formed the foundation of every army. Back in that era across Europe, most military officers came from aristocratic families while ordinary soldiers were common civilians.

This created a huge class divide within every European army. The German military was no different. From the Prussian era through German unification and World War I, army officers were almost exclusively aristocrats. As you can imagine, nobles saw themselves as fundamentally different from ordinary folk and deliberately kept their distance from rank and file soldiers.

But after World War I, German military leaders realized this rigid class gap severely undermined combat effectiveness. Their solution was simple yet transformative. Unity between officers and soldiers. This change immediately set the German military apart from all other European armies of the time.

There are countless vivid examples of this shift. Before the war, German generals often attended military social events alongside British and French officers. During meals, German generals would sit and dine together with their drivers and ordinary soldiers. British and French officers were utterly shocked by this scene and found it unbelievable.

They couldn’t understand why a high-ranking general would eat at the same table as ordinary troops. German generals simply replied that this was standard and normal practice in their military. This small detail clearly shows the huge gap between the German military and its British and French counterparts. The internal military terminology also reflects this unique bond.

German troops use the word comerd to address one another. While it feels similar to the English word comrade, this German term carries a stronger sense of mutual belonging and solidarity. Soldiers and officers of all ranks use this term equally to refer to each other. On the battlefield, German officers always led from the front.

Junior commanders of platoon and companies regularly charged ahead of their troops and even senior generals fought on the front lines. Famous German generals like Gderian and Raml often directed battles from frontline command vehicles. This fully embodied the principle of officer soldier unity. German officers never stayed safely in the rear to issue orders from afar.

They fought side by side with their troops. This crucial institutional reform greatly boosted the German military’s overall combat effectiveness. Secondly, the German military revived and strengthened its long-forgotten core military traditions. Many people assume German troops were strong simply because they were rigorous, following strict battle plans with absolute precision.

But this common perception is completely wrong. The true core tradition of the German military is the exact opposite. Dating back to the Prussian era, German military doctrine always emphasized operational autonomy for every combat unit. The core concept here is Alfrag’s tactic or mission type command.

Under this rule, superiors only clarify the ultimate goal of a mission for their subordinates. They never dictate specific methods or procedures, leaving subordinates free to accomplish the task in whatever way works best. This was the genuine essence of Prussian and German military tradition.

However, in the years leading up to World War I, the German military gradually abandoned this valuable tradition. Troops became increasingly rigid, formulaic, and unwilling to take independent action. After suffering a crushing defeat in World War I, German military leaders resolved to revive and strengthen this lost tradition.

In 1933, Germany issued a new military field manual called Troopenfong, which perfectly encapsulated the core of its traditional military philosophy. This manual strongly emphasized individual initiative and flexibility during military operations. It explicitly ruled out overly detailed orders from superiors, granting junior commanders full authority to decide how to complete assigned objectives.

It officially codified the mission type command system as formal military doctrine. Additionally, it required all commanders to plan operations from their superiors perspective. For example, a company commander receiving a mission had to think like a battalion commander. They needed to analyze their units role and tactical value in the overall battle plan instead of simply ordering their troops to charge blindly.

This manual became the universal guiding principle for all German military training and operations. It unlocked the full potential of individual soldiers and commanders, maximizing battlefield initiative and flexibility. It allowed German troops to complete complex combat tasks efficiently with flexible tactics amid chaotic and fastchanging battlefield conditions.

Surprisingly, the US military extensively studied and adopted Germany’s 1933 field manual after World War II. The modern US military’s mission command system originates directly from this German doctrine. US senior commanders only assign core mission goals and explain operational purposes without restricting specific implementation methods.

This grants frontline commanders greater operational autonomy and decision-making power. Former US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Martin Dempsey, once stated that mission command is essentially an adaptive, learned behavior embedded in the DNA of professional militaries. This fully proves how forwardthinking and advanced Germany’s 1933 military doctrine was.

This also perfectly explains why German troops were always more flexible and proactive than their enemies on the battlefield. They had been rigorously trained and shaped by this advanced doctrine long before the war even began. The final key factor is Germany’s early and comprehensive implementation of combined arms coordination tactics.

In essence, the famous Blitzkrieg is nothing more than high-speed mobile combat built on full combined arms coordination. Centered on mechanized armored units coordinated with motorized infantry and close air support from the air force. German troops would break through weak enemy defensive points, advance rapidly, bypass heavily fortified enemy positions, and cut off enemy supply lines and command systems.

This tactic surrounded and annihilated enemy forces, triggering a total collapse of their combat capability. But it’s crucial to remember that Blitzkrieg would never have been feasible without the German military’s people- centered institutional reforms. Many other nations including Britain, the Soviet Union, and France were also researching and developing mobile warfare tactics in the same era.

As early as 1932, British military theorist JFC Fuller published the book Armored Warfare, which became the direct blueprint for Germany’s later Blitzkrieg tactics. This book was translated into German and widely studied within the German military. Yet, it was largely ignored in its home country of Britain. Meanwhile, the Soviet Union’s Great Purge completely destroyed its mature military command system.

Soviet commanders became overly cautious, only following rigid, dogmatic orders without any independent judgment. This forms a stark contrast with the flexible and proactive German military. By now, you must understand why the German military was so dominant in World War II. Its strength stemmed entirely from the profound reflections and thorough reforms during the interwar period.

By overhauling its core personnel system, internal team culture, and tactical doctrines, Germany fully upgraded its entire military system, achieving a qualitative leap in combat effectiveness. This history lesson still holds great value for us today. Whether it’s a military unit or a corporate team, continuous progress and development rely on systemic upgrades.

Prioritizing people as the core element is especially critical. An army without capable soldiers is just a pile of useless weapons and equipment. A company without dedicated employees is nothing more than empty office furniture. Sticking to old ways and refusing to reform will never lead to long-term success.

Surprisingly, this simple truth is rarely put into practice in reality. This explains why only a handful of military forces and enterprises can achieve lasting excellence. That’s all for today’s video. Feel free to leave your comments and opinions below. If you enjoyed this video, please subscribe and share it.