> letting the british soldiers just go after trapping them in belgium was pure retardation what was the "advice from his generals" in that case? > backing out on the aerial pressure against the uk when it was working was pure retardation. yeah, possibly, thought both cases involved competing factions of generals, there wasn't ever a "consensus of generals" -- which ties back to my earlier hypothesis that having too many "divas on stage" can be counterproductive; he had many brilliant generals, but many were primadonnas and they were all in competition rather than unified purpose. > his generals told him those moves were pure retardations. his generals famously disagreed more than they didn't, that's why the "hitler vs. generals" myth is nonsense once you've progressed beyond the pulp propaganda histories they flood western schools with. i think the most famous example of hitler listening to his generals, and overruling them too late was the timetable changes for operation barbarossa. they botched that shit before it even started. that's what degrelle was seething about, but few recognized it until more was published in the 1970s about internal conflicts in hitler's general staff (werner maser, david irving, and others)
United States