Hitler visits the Eastern front (Feb 1945)

[askjiir]

Rare to see 1945 footage of Hitler in public.

[Tiaxthemighty]

Haha for a second I looked at the posting date and expected it to say February 1945.

[ModellMeister]

wooohoooo

[geertwildersful]

JUNGE KOMM BALD WIEDER!!!

[mawel1955]

Hitler simply did not understand the concept of space and time as it related to the Eastern Front. Large scale withdrawals and counterattacks against pursuing Soviet armies, as advocated by Von Manstein in 1943 would probably have convinced Stalin that stalemate was his only option. Hitler resisted the idea of large scale, strategic withdrawals which resulted in the loss of hundreds of thousands of irreplacable men and equipment.

[alunhughes147]

@mawel1955 Hitlers ' hold fast ' order against the Soviet offensive probably saved Army Group Centre in front of Moscow in the winter of 41.This 'success' of his stayed embedded in his mind until the end of the war and the Eastern front would be littered with destroyed German armies that obeyed his 'hold fast' orders .Had he given Von Manstein command of the Eastern front then l think that you are right ,a more mobile defence may have wore the Soviet armies down and a stalemate may have happened

[mawel1955]

@alunhughes147 The 'hold fast' order of winter '41 was Hitler's only option. His troops had nowhere to retreat to anyway. Hitler's greatest mistake was not responding to Stalin's peace feelers of November where he offered the Ukraine, White Russia and the Baltic states in return for peace and economic aid. Hitler could then have built his 'eastern wall' and prepared for war with the US who was already openly shooting at German ships.

[kentamitchell]

@mawel1955 Wow! Great plan...until August 6, 1945.

[mawel1955]

@kentamitchell The simple fact is that Hitler failed to sufficiently appreciate and plan for the following when he attacked the U.S.S.R.

1) He was initiating a war on two fronts - a potential disaster if things went wrong

2) It was only a matter of time before the U.S.A. entered the war

3) Because of it's immense size, it might not be possible to defeat the U.S.S.R.

Hitler was correct when he planned for a short campaign. It's just that he didn't do enough to make sure of that.

[rampking1]

@mawel1955

1) I believe this is why Hess went on this peace mission to Scotland.

2) Japan did not clue in the Germans in regarding an attack on the USA.

3) Hitler delayed the attack to help Italy against Greece, lost precious months of good weather in 1941. Also most Panzer groups logistics still by horse, the same as Napoleon's army, same speed as well. Should have concentrated on Moscow only, would have cut the Soviet rail system in two pieces.

4) No German war economy until early 1942.

[mawel1955]

@rampking1 If you read Col. Albert Seaton's book 'The Battle for Moscow' he points out that the loss of Moscow would not have meant the defeat of the Soviet Union. Stalin was already building and re-routing rail lines should the Moscow rail net been captured. Stalin even told Churchill once that if Moscow had been lost, he would have continued the war from the Urals.  As long as he knew Roosevelt would back him up, he was going to keep on fighting and eventually bleed Germany to death.

[rampking1]

@mawel1955 Thanks for the feedback but I disagree with the author. You just don't re-organize your rail networks that quickly.

The Germans themselves found that out, as the rail gauge of the Soviet System was not compatible with German locomotives and rolling stock resulting in a massive re-building program.

So you had slashing Panzer divisions backed up by trucks on inferior dirt roads and slow moving horse drawn equip.

This was a tank war and the #1 way of transporting tanks was by rail.

[rampking1]

@mawel1955 Moscow was not just an important rail center, this was a hub and spoke situation where all rail traffic had to routed thru Moscow from every point on the compass.

Plus it is not just a matter of throwing huge amount of manpower at laying track and foundations, a whole new rail system would need to be organized, logistics supplied.

I will question any author who takes a monster like Stalin as the last word on anything.

The same man worried about Hitler purged his own Generals. ;-)

[wboquist]

@mawel1955 For sure, Stalin didn't care a whit about how many millions of Russian lives were lost in his quest for self-preservation. The individual existed for the purposes of the state, and the state existed for the purposes of Stalin. It is hard from this vantage point to imagine how the U.S would have been allied with such a beast, and how our citizens could have been encouraged to think of him as "Uncle Joe", almost on a par with "Uncle Sam".

[mawel1955]

@wboquist The history books are still very kind to Stalin for that reason. The Western World simply does not want to face up to the fact that 'Uncle Joe' Stalin was, in reality, a murderous, evil maniac and that Roosevelt was more than happy to hand over half of Europe to this monster for fifty horrific years. Only now the truth is coming out that Roosevelt's assistant, Harry Hopkins, was an NKVD spy and informer and encouraged Roosevelt in his subservience to the Stalin regime.

[wboquist]

@mawel1955 That is the first I have ever heard of "peace feelers" coming from Stalin - at any time. Would you point me to a book or some other source of documentation? I would like to know more. Thanks.

[mawel1955]

@wboquist In answer to your question, John Toland alluded to Stalin's peace feelers in his 1973 book 'Adolf Hitler'. It was not until 1990 however that Soviet historian Professor Alexander Samsonov confirmed it in the WGBH/Thames Broadcasting documentary 'Stalin' . He stated that Soviet archives show that Stalin did indeed attempt, through King Boris of Bulgaria, to end the war through negotiation, offering the Ukraine and Belarus for starters in return for peace and economic aid.

[dreamcastII]

@wboquist I recall the Oxford Companion to WW2 also gives evidence of Stalin offering peace for territory. (I seem to remember he did it twice, after Stalingrad and I think after Krakow in March 1943).

[wboquist]

@dreamcastII Thanks to both of you for the references!

[mawel1955]

@dreamcastII Thanks for the additional corroboration. Also don't forget that Soviet archives also reveal that Stalin did intend to attack Germany in the summer of 1941. Barbarossa was, in fact, a preventative measure. German intelligence became aware that the USSR was massing offensive armament and troops in western Ukraine. The reason Soviet troops fell back so easily after June 22 was that they were unprepared for 'defensive' war as opposed to 'offensive' war. There is a difference.

[mookins45]

@mawel1955 Soviet wargames showed that their armed forces were no match for Germany's. They had no offensive capability and they knew that; the whole world knew it. This pro-Nazi falsification of history isn't surprising, but it is annoying,.

[mawel1955]

@mookins45 I cite as my source an article by Viktor Suvorov, former member of the Soviet General Staff. Survorov writes in the June 1985 issue of the Journal of the Royal United Services Institute for Defence Studies that Stalin was, in fact, preparing "the biggest troop movement by a single state in the history of civilization" in order to launch an attack on Germany sometime in the summer of '41.

Your pro-Soviet falsification of history is just as annoying.

[mookins45]

@mawel1955 That sounds like a perfectly valid source, but whatever Stalin's desires, his forces couldn't fulfill them given the state of their equipment, and that of their command structure after the purges. Stalin wished to make a move after what he expected would be an exhausting war in the West, that would leave Germany ripe for the taking. But when that didn't happen, we know he tried to buy time, placating by allowing overflights etc. A '41 attack went by the wayside with France's fall.

[persona1974]

Гитлер - КАПУТ!!!)

[mistersmith6000]

The front line was VERY close to Berlin in February 1945. The Soviets reached - and actually crossed - the river Oder in late January, less than 60 miles away from the bunker. Of course the line was not even and some pockets and areas were well due east of it. It's still amazing that a convoy of cars could make it out there without being mauled by the soviet ground attack planes - perhaps they were not as concentrated as the western front, where, if a cow even farted it would be shot up.

[IustitiaPax]

@mistersmith6000 Nonsense. The Upper Silesian Offensive of the 1st Ukrainian Front was not completed until March 31, 1945. The Battle of the Seelow Heights commenced on April 16, 1945, and only then was the broad Oder near Berlin crossed by the Soviet forces. You mean the Lower Silesian Offensive probably, near Breslau. Breslau is far from Berlin. And while the Soviets won on Febr 24, by March 2nd, Lauban and other towns had been regained by the Wehrmacht. Crossing Oder near Oppeln isn't Berlin!

[mistersmith6000]

@IustitiaPax I think you are very wrong!! Here is a quote from wikipedia, Wistula to Oder offensive," The 2nd Guards Tank and 5th Shock Armies reached the Oder almost unopposed; a unit of the 5th Shock Army crossed the river ice and took the town of Kienitz as early as January 31.[30]"

[IustitiaPax]

@mistersmith6000 You are correct on the capture of Kienitz on Jan 31, 1945, across the Oder, but the Soviet offensive was halted. The bridgeheads of the Soviets inside the Oder were moved back and from, lost and gained again, and before April 16, no large offensive in the direction of Seelow and Berlin could be launched. Unternehmen Sonnenwende prevented the Soviet units at the Oder from crossing and advancing to Berlin. There were only incidental crossings of the Oder, repelled by the Germans.

[IustitiaPax]

@mistersmith6000 Kienitz is 91 kms from Berlin. So it is not "very close to" Berlin, as you alleged. Also, Kienitz was in the Oderbruch, a drainaged Oder River swamp. Kienitz was in its middle, and already, the Oderbruch had been inundated by the German defense forces by January 1945. So yes, the Vistula-Oder-Offensive reached the Oder and crossed it, but physically, the wide Oder swamp was too great a barrier and German defence from central Pomerania (Arnswalde, Stettin) attacked.

[IustitiaPax]

@mistersmith6000 So theoretically you are right, as geographically, Kienitz is just west from the Oder central path, but it is inside the inundatable Oder Swamp (Oderbruch), and not yet the "other side". However, Seelow is on "dry ground", and that is why that Battle on the Seelow Heights was of so great importance.

[IustitiaPax]

@mistersmith6000 Breslau is not Berlin. The Siege of Breslau commenced on February 13, 1945. But the Soviets never succeeded in nearing the Lusatian Neisse river until late March. Until that time, Lauban and Striegau in Lower Silesia were reconquered by the German Army. Really, the Battle of the Seelow Heights on April 16, 1945 announced the Battle of Berlin and its Fall to the Soviets. Not already in February. In early January, not even central Poland was yet taken by the Red Army.

[mistersmith6000]

@IustitiaPax I think it is well known that the Soviets reached the Oder the end of January and parked there until April 16th. It was a deliberate strategy on the part of the Soviets to stop. Pommernia counter-attacks to the notth did influence it. You are discussing places in Silesia, well south and east. Silesia, of course was not conquered until March and the re-capturing of a few towns was a minor matter for the Soviets. They re-took them in days. Breslau was a thorn but not a bad one. 

[mistersmith6000]

And I agree, the Battle of Seelow did indeed announce the Battle of Berlin, but the Soviet presence on the Oder throughout February and March was very real and the Germans were very aware of it. Goebbels propaganda speeches even mention it. The battles in Silesia and elsewhere were a sideshow as the Soviets built up there millions on the Oder - the east bank - . The Germans made the most out of their minor victories like Lauban, but never threatened the soviet juggernaut.

[IustitiaPax]

@mistersmith6000 I agree, but the Oder-Vistula spearhead held only some islands in the Oderbruch Oder Marsh, and divisions were not yet assembled by the Soviets there. Instead, the Germans could organized a northern flank attack from Stettin. The millions were not built up until starting with March 25, 1945. Again, the Soviets never "parked" in the Oder Swamp, but held some isolated islands, in an inundated region. You were right, but not that the Soviets already had crossed the Oder militarily!

[mistersmith6000]

@IustitiaPax Mmn, I think the soviets were better established at the Oder than you assume. By the way, my figure of 60 miles away from Berlin was wrong, it was much closer according to this account - form the site, World War 2 wwii, "The First Belorussian Front bypassed Poznan on January 22, and by February 3 had drawn up to the Oder on a broad front 36 miles east of Berlin. A week earlier, the First Ukrainian Front had reached the middle Oder and established several bridgeheads. "

[IustitiaPax]

@mistersmith6000 The info on "36 miles" is wrong. 91 kms is 60 miles, not 36 miles. Well, the Oder Swamp was broad. They never established bridge heads or centres of military activity WEST of the Oder Swamp until April 15, 1945. The bridge heads they established, were inside the Oder Swamp. Months of mutual shooting occurred, like in the WW1 Fields of Flanders and its ditches. But then from Oder island to another. Fanatic Hitlerjugend units fought the Soviet islands in Swamp. I know survivors.

[mistersmith6000]

@IustitiaPax That's interesting. I am no expert on the matter, but it seems that it might be interesting to look at the facts. You seem to be quite close to the action, on the other hand, I have always read it was, to my surprise bridgeheads west of the ODer, and not just one but several. I believe you when you say that they fought over patches of land in the swamp, but that doesn't mean that bridgeheads weren't established. i'm going to do some more reading and thanks for the information!

[mistersmith6000]

@mistersmith6000 Looking at "Zhukov at the Oder" It reads, In the dying months of the Second World War on 31 January 1945, the first Red Army troops reached the River Oder, barely forty miles from Berlin. ... a bloody stalemate persisted for two months. At the end of this time the Soviet bridgeheads north and south of Kustrin were eventually united, and the Nazi fortress finally fell." So here we have two bridgeheads west of the Oder, north and south of Kustrin.

[IustitiaPax]

@mistersmith6000 Please remind yourself, that a lot of WW2 accounts is based on propaganda too. The forty miles allegation is a false estimate of the distance. Great Berlin was at least as an agglomeration over 50 miles away. Of course in January 31, 1945, they reached the Oder from the east. But counterattacks prevented large transports of Soviet troops and material.

[michaelwright999]

@IustitiaPax come on old boy, It was over at Stalingrad. the lads should have all gone to Brazil. Eh with the loot.

[IustitiaPax]

@michaelwright999 Stalingrad was a turning point and for the Wehrmacht, Romania, Hungary it was a battle of annihilation of their very best men. But the world war was far from won. In retrospect, this battle decisively weakened the Germans, but it was not the Germans' defeat, nor was it their Waterloo per se. Numerous Waterloo-like battles would be needed. And please remember the Battle of Kursk.

[michaelwright999]

@IustitiaPax I agree but still Hitler should have done a runner with his gang , in a u,boat filled with gold etc, they must have all seen what was on the cards, ok lets say after Kursk.

[IustitiaPax]

@mistersmith6000 Thanks, my pleasure. Thanks for reminding me that you meant Kienitz. Permanent bridge heads were never established until early and mid April. Of course numerous islands in the Oder Swamps were held by Soviet soldiers, often alone or with two to defend an Oder island against German counterattacks and snipers. A true bridge head is a bridge head, which can secure landing of military material and forces. This did not happen until months later.

[mistersmith6000]

@IustitiaPax Interesting you should say that. The Wikipedia might be allied propoganda, but it does say, the soviets were established along a long stretch of the Oder by Feb 2, 60km from Berlin, and maps confrim this, so my original assertion that the Soviets were VERY close to Berlin stands according to that. As for the bridgeheads, it is quite interesting. Here is another quote, "Kustrin stood between two major Soviet bridgeheads across the Oder" referring to the task facing the Germans there

[mistersmith6000]

So you say, 'thanks for reminding me' as a rhetorical gesture, well, I wasn't reminding you of anything. I don't even know the names of towns there As for Kienitz, Kurstin etc..I have no preference, I just tell you that the Soviets had crossed the Oder and had bridgeheads. You say otherwise and I am quite willing to believe you and advance my understanding.

[IustitiaPax]

@mistersmith6000 Yes, they had bridge heads on islands, but they never crossed the Oderbruch (Swamp) definitely until April 16, 1945. Küstrin is east of the Swamp and was not taken definitely before March 31, 1945. The eastern bridge heads were united on March 27, 1945 though. Our entire discussion depends on how you define "crossing the Oder". I think crossing the Oder means having regular troops on the western (non-inundated) banks. But this did not happen until April 16, 1945.

[IustitiaPax]

@mistersmith6000 Oh I never stated Wikipedia is all Allied propaganda. I just meant, that the quote you gave is on the Soviet effort, and reports were often biasedly pro-Soviet. I concede, that there were Soviet pockets in the Oder Swamp by Febr 2. As for Küstrin: the city of Küstrin east of the Oder was not captured and enclosed finally before March 22, 1945, although the Soviets established some bridge heads nearby. The German Army smashed numerous of them and the city remained unenclosed.

[IustitiaPax]

@mistersmith6000 Küstrin was never encircled totally, despite the Oderbruch (Swamp) Soviet bridge heads on islands. Küstrin was a saillant until March 27, 1945. On March 30, 1945, the town of Küstrin (east of the Oder and Oder Swamp) was taken by the Soviet Army. So indeed, it took until March 31, 1945, to unite the Soviet bridge heads around Küstrin.

[mistersmith6000]

Yes, it was a salient, and the Germans also had bridgeheads over the Oder in the other direction. None of the propaganda denies it. I think Stettin or Strettin (sorry, don't know the spelling, but I mean way up north near the Baltic (if that is the name of that sea)also was a signiifcant one, well into the month of March and maybe even April. It is good to learn at anytime and from anyone. Your assertion that my claim that the Soviets were close to Berlin in February was 'nonsense' struck me.

[IustitiaPax]

@mistersmith6000 Yes, until early April, Stettin and central Pomerania including Politz and other major regions remained in German hands east of the Oder. Again, we disagreed on what is "close to Berlin". 60 miles is quite far off from Berlin, and being inside the Oder Swamp does not mean being militarily close to Berlin yet in January 31, 1945. But in aerial terms, you may have been right. Militarily I was right. But I think we can agree that the Soviets were "approaching".

[mistersmith6000]

@IustitiaPax 36 miles, not 60 miles! not close? ( as I corrected myself) "Zhukov at the Oder: the decisive battle for Berlin" by Tony Le Tissier, not propaganda and is critical of Soviet depictions of events. But it clearly says that within an hour on Jan 31, the soviets crossed the ice and established a bridgehead 2 by 4 km. No tanks, but guns, and within a day 184mm guns and mortars crossed too, now 6km wide and 2.5 deep, and that is just one of them. see chapters 'The Bridgeheads'

[IustitiaPax]

@mistersmith6000 Kienitz is not 36 miles from Berlin-Centre. Maybe 45 miles from the extreme eastern border of the Berlin district (Gross-Berlin), but not 36 miles. I do not know Le Tissier, I know topography though. Yes, they had Oder Swamp bridgeheads without any military material. Guns could not win the Seelow Heights ever....

[JumalanMyrsky]

In today's world, loyalty, honour and determination are unknown things, at least in the Western world.

[purleses]

the jews always implement some colossal fraud whenever the world is topsy-turvy such as 1945. William Dudley Pelley wrote "The 45 Questions Most Frequently Asked About the Jews" in 1939 which footnoted that 8 million european jews were transported to America during the 1930s. Another 1.2 million european jews were moved to Palestine during the 1930s. When Mikhail Gorbachev unsealed the USSR archives it was revealed that the Soviets were only aware of 76,000 jews who died during WW2.

[HypersonicWave]

@UKRod Well said. However, had he not existed there would probably be no WW2 and no holocaust and Europe would be divided today as always before in history. Europeans and jews learned something from WW2 after all and today we have European Union so to prevent further wars between nations on this continent and the rebirth of nation Israel.

[FUFFYthekiller]

there fuhrer ist dhar lol

[the82spartans]

And 3 months later he shot himself.

[DUXNOBISHONORIS]

@5000433

LOL!

[5000433]

What a bizarre freak.

[5000433]

Nazis were such boring little retards.

Their idea of of a big saturday nite - some Jew hating and then marching up and down, looking really GAY.

Comedy scum.

[5000433]

Jews are the master race. Goy are scared of them because they are inferior. Everyone knows that.

[clintonearlwalker]

I suppose this could be Hitler on the Eastern front in Feb. 45. Auschwitz in Western Poland fell to the Red Army on Jan 27. Certainly if this film is from Feb 45, Hitler couldn't be very far from Berlin, especially with the Battle of Berlin looming.

I like the translation of the last 2 words of this vid, "future ruler".

[iluvflagunlaws]

I think the Eastern front visited Hitler is more like it. Hitler wasn't visiting anywhere in Feb 45.

[birdandthe]

those soldiers were under fucking strict orders to cheer like fuck.......... or else.....  i agree with one veiwer who doubts this is feb 1945

[ian59715]

Well at least most of the white Germans

new what Hitler meant ?

[1914sologub]

der fuehrer ist da - es ist wirklich nichts anders zu bemerken

[the82spartans]

One well place bullet.

But unfortunatly Dur Furher waited another 3 months to bite the poison pill as he shoot himself in the noggin with his Walter PPK.

What a dope.

The dude really was a cartoon.

[AzWaCaFla]

1930s Germany was only 1 of over 100 nations in the last 1750 years that had to expel all of their jews to save themselves from extinction. Since WWII the jewish plague has steadily grown into a survival issue for the entire human race.

"While all other religions endeavor to explain to the people by symbols the metaphysical significance of life, the religion of the Jews is entirely immanent and furnishes nothing but a mere war-cry in the struggle with other nations." - Schopenhauer

[VitaminsAndPiss]

Why do you hate Jews so much?

I mean they give me the shits, but I don't think its right to exterminate them.

[rampking1]

I see many people remarking about where the front lines were in February

1945. My question is the authenticity of the DATE of the recording of this film.

To me the Nazi propaganda machine was showing Hitler from a healthier time....not showing the advance state of his Parkinsons or the effects of a grocery list of drugs his doctor had him taking.

[Bellicose27]

Due to the economic downturn we all lose our jobs!!

[Greenandscaly]

Hitler visits the Eastern front in February 1945? Berlin WAS the Eastern front in February 1945! By then all Hitler had to do was walk outside his bunker to visit the front lines!

[fmanh]

He probably took the stairs to the reichtag :-)

[tonidmc]

until the first week of april Berlin wasn't surrounded... in february the front was still in east prussia and poland before the final Zhukov ofensive.

[osalcido85]

@tonidmc That's not true. The East Prussian offensive of the Red Army concluded in February 1945.. with the Red Army only 50 miles from Berlin

[saiyanman45]

your right lol

[wboquist]

Great clip. In today's world, a commander-in-chief who had delivered his nation into such disastrous circumstances would probably be shot by the troops he was visiting.

[aribenzane]

Bush? :P

[DCMclarenFan]

he has so much comedy potential; shooting him would be such a waste

ah...texas hick

[chinchonchinchon]

@wboquist

Hitler was and still is, sadly a legend-like figure to many. No wonder Hitler considered man just as obedient dogs.

On the other hand we can see in this film how stiff his hand was, probably showing symptoms of Parkinson's disease.

[gracer99]

@wboquist well said

[IustitiaPax]

@wboquist Hitler was at least never hiding in some far away resorts like Roosevelt (who never visited any fronts) and like the bought politicians Churchill and Edvard Benes. Joseph Stalin never even dared to approach the front line. He was (rightly so!) afraid to be lynched, toppled, killed by pro-Axis anti-Bolshevik native Russians. I am no fan of the dictator Hitler, but like Mannerheim, Franco and king Christian of Denmark, he was not a coward while hiding.

[wboquist]

@IustitiaPax I don't disagree, but keep in mind that Roosevelt was in a wheelchair. I think Stailn would have been smart to avoid mingling with his countrymen even before the war started.

[IustitiaPax]

@wboquist That is what I meant to say. Hitler was not liked by many Dutchmen, many French and British, but in other parts of Europe (Spain, Portugal, Italy, Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Baltic states, Slovakia, Ukraine, parts of Belarus, Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Slovenia, Bosniak enclaves of Bosnia, Hungary) he was popular. Hitler was a populist and very popular until the bitter end. A real cult of personality, unlike the fake Stalinist one.