Mixing
What pretext did Hitler use to justify Operation Barbarossa?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
16
down vote
favorite
At the beginning of WW2, Nazi Germany orchestrated the infamous Gleiwitz Incident, which was used by Hitler to publicly declare, that since 5:45 we are returning fire.
The invasion of Poland triggered the UK and France to declare war on Germany. The USSR, on the other hand, was in a non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany.
Was there any justification provided to the public by the government or Hitler himself as to why the Wehrmacht was invading the USSR? Or by this stage of WW2, had the war already progressed beyond the point where there was any need for reasons as to why attack another country?
Both the German and the English Wikipedia are quite silent on the topic of the public justification of Operation Barbarossa. They discuss the planning and the timeline, yet there is no mention of any propaganda activities.
Only Hitler's views on Bolshevism, which were made public in his book, are discussed.
world-war-two war nazi-germany hitler
edited 33 mins ago
Davislor
96919
asked 10 hours ago
Dohn Joe
782213
add a comment |Â
up vote
16
down vote
favorite
At the beginning of WW2, Nazi Germany orchestrated the infamous Gleiwitz Incident, which was used by Hitler to publicly declare, that since 5:45 we are returning fire.
The invasion of Poland triggered the UK and France to declare war on Germany. The USSR, on the other hand, was in a non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany.
Was there any justification provided to the public by the government or Hitler himself as to why the Wehrmacht was invading the USSR? Or by this stage of WW2, had the war already progressed beyond the point where there was any need for reasons as to why attack another country?
Both the German and the English Wikipedia are quite silent on the topic of the public justification of Operation Barbarossa. They discuss the planning and the timeline, yet there is no mention of any propaganda activities.
Only Hitler's views on Bolshevism, which were made public in his book, are discussed.
world-war-two war nazi-germany hitler
edited 33 mins ago
Davislor
96919
asked 10 hours ago
Dohn Joe
782213
2
What has your research shown you so far? Where have you already searched? Please help us to help you. You might find it helpful to review the site tour and help center. You may improve your question to better comply with site guidelines with an edit and the help of How to Ask. Thanks!
– LangLangC
9 hours ago
1
Seems to me that the title might need an edit? How about "attempts at exculpatory justification", or a more streamlined one I can't think of right now? But "domestic reasoning" sounds too much like "please the crowd to kep em quiet"
– LangLangC
7 hours ago
2
They are likely quiet about it because everyone both then and now knew his public excuse for the attack was nothing more than a big steaming pile of propaganda. It matters about as much as the bully's excuse for why he's taking your lunch money matters.
– T.E.D.♦
7 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
16
down vote
favorite
up vote
16
down vote
favorite
At the beginning of WW2, Nazi Germany orchestrated the infamous Gleiwitz Incident, which was used by Hitler to publicly declare, that since 5:45 we are returning fire.
The invasion of Poland triggered the UK and France to declare war on Germany. The USSR, on the other hand, was in a non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany.
Was there any justification provided to the public by the government or Hitler himself as to why the Wehrmacht was invading the USSR? Or by this stage of WW2, had the war already progressed beyond the point where there was any need for reasons as to why attack another country?
Both the German and the English Wikipedia are quite silent on the topic of the public justification of Operation Barbarossa. They discuss the planning and the timeline, yet there is no mention of any propaganda activities.
Only Hitler's views on Bolshevism, which were made public in his book, are discussed.
world-war-two war nazi-germany hitler
edited 33 mins ago
Davislor
96919
asked 10 hours ago
Dohn Joe
782213
At the beginning of WW2, Nazi Germany orchestrated the infamous Gleiwitz Incident, which was used by Hitler to publicly declare, that since 5:45 we are returning fire.
The invasion of Poland triggered the UK and France to declare war on Germany. The USSR, on the other hand, was in a non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany.
Was there any justification provided to the public by the government or Hitler himself as to why the Wehrmacht was invading the USSR? Or by this stage of WW2, had the war already progressed beyond the point where there was any need for reasons as to why attack another country?
Both the German and the English Wikipedia are quite silent on the topic of the public justification of Operation Barbarossa. They discuss the planning and the timeline, yet there is no mention of any propaganda activities.
Only Hitler's views on Bolshevism, which were made public in his book, are discussed.
world-war-two war nazi-germany hitler
world-war-two war nazi-germany hitler
edited 33 mins ago
Davislor
96919
asked 10 hours ago
Dohn Joe
782213
edited 33 mins ago
Davislor
96919
asked 10 hours ago
Dohn Joe
782213
edited 33 mins ago
Davislor
96919
edited 33 mins ago
Davislor
96919
edited 33 mins ago
Davislor
96919
96919
asked 10 hours ago
Dohn Joe
782213
asked 10 hours ago
Dohn Joe
782213
asked 10 hours ago
Dohn Joe
782213
782213
2
What has your research shown you so far? Where have you already searched? Please help us to help you. You might find it helpful to review the site tour and help center. You may improve your question to better comply with site guidelines with an edit and the help of How to Ask. Thanks!
– LangLangC
9 hours ago
1
Seems to me that the title might need an edit? How about "attempts at exculpatory justification", or a more streamlined one I can't think of right now? But "domestic reasoning" sounds too much like "please the crowd to kep em quiet"
– LangLangC
7 hours ago
2
They are likely quiet about it because everyone both then and now knew his public excuse for the attack was nothing more than a big steaming pile of propaganda. It matters about as much as the bully's excuse for why he's taking your lunch money matters.
– T.E.D.♦
7 hours ago
add a comment |Â
2
What has your research shown you so far? Where have you already searched? Please help us to help you. You might find it helpful to review the site tour and help center. You may improve your question to better comply with site guidelines with an edit and the help of How to Ask. Thanks!
– LangLangC
9 hours ago
1
Seems to me that the title might need an edit? How about "attempts at exculpatory justification", or a more streamlined one I can't think of right now? But "domestic reasoning" sounds too much like "please the crowd to kep em quiet"
– LangLangC
7 hours ago
2
They are likely quiet about it because everyone both then and now knew his public excuse for the attack was nothing more than a big steaming pile of propaganda. It matters about as much as the bully's excuse for why he's taking your lunch money matters.
– T.E.D.♦
7 hours ago
2
2
What has your research shown you so far? Where have you already searched? Please help us to help you. You might find it helpful to review the site tour and help center. You may improve your question to better comply with site guidelines with an edit and the help of How to Ask. Thanks!
– LangLangC
9 hours ago
What has your research shown you so far? Where have you already searched? Please help us to help you. You might find it helpful to review the site tour and help center. You may improve your question to better comply with site guidelines with an edit and the help of How to Ask. Thanks!
– LangLangC
9 hours ago
1
1
Seems to me that the title might need an edit? How about "attempts at exculpatory justification", or a more streamlined one I can't think of right now? But "domestic reasoning" sounds too much like "please the crowd to kep em quiet"
– LangLangC
7 hours ago
Seems to me that the title might need an edit? How about "attempts at exculpatory justification", or a more streamlined one I can't think of right now? But "domestic reasoning" sounds too much like "please the crowd to kep em quiet"
– LangLangC
7 hours ago
2
2
They are likely quiet about it because everyone both then and now knew his public excuse for the attack was nothing more than a big steaming pile of propaganda. It matters about as much as the bully's excuse for why he's taking your lunch money matters.
– T.E.D.♦
7 hours ago
They are likely quiet about it because everyone both then and now knew his public excuse for the attack was nothing more than a big steaming pile of propaganda. It matters about as much as the bully's excuse for why he's taking your lunch money matters.
– T.E.D.♦
7 hours ago
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
18
down vote
accepted
Hitler gave his reasons to the German people via a radio broadcast on the morning of June 22nd, 1941.
At 0500 GMT, an hour after the invasion began, the Nazi Minister for
Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, went on national radio to read a
proclamation by Adolf Hitler
The proclamation can be seen here in full. Basically, Hitler argued that the Soviets were a threat to Germany and had broken the peace. Thus, Germany was 'forced' into a preemptive strike.
Below are some excerpts for those who (understandably) don't wish to wade through the entire proclamation:
Moscow not only broke our treaty of friendship, but betrayed it!
I was forced by circumstances to keep silent in the past. Now the
moment has come when further silence would be not only a sin, but a
crime against the German people, against all Europe.
Today, about 160 Russian divisions stand at our border. There have
been steady border violations for weeks, and not only on our border,
but in the far north, and also in Rumania. Russian pilots make a habit
of ignoring the border, perhaps to show us that they already feel as
if they are in control.
During the night of 17-18 June, Russian patrols again crossed the
German border and could only be repelled after a long battle.
Now the hour has come when it is necessary to respond to his plot by
Jewish-Anglo-Saxon warmongers and the Jewish rulers of Moscow’s
Bolshevist headquarters.
There was no build-up propaganda prior to the invasion - after all, why give the Soviets any hints? On the contrary, German propaganda focused on attacking Britain.
The absence of any reference to Bolshevism, Stalin and his empire,
even for the purpose of negative integration or diversion from the
evident failure of the regime’s anti-British strategy, had been
conspicuous in the output of NS propaganda for a while – and it
remained so until 22 June 1941, that is after the start of the war in
the east....Although the time of the invasion of the
Soviet Union was drawing near, Goebbels continued to deceive not just public
opinion but everyone involved in the dissemination of information.
Source: Aristotle A. Kallis, Nazi Propaganda and the Second World War
answered 9 hours ago
Lars Bosteen
33.3k8162222
So, Hitler's justification was a "They are the bad guys, and they did bad things. Believe me!"? There were no false-flag operations, no propagandistic build-up; or any other propagandistic claims, e.g. alleged atrocities?
– Dohn Joe
8 hours ago
8
@DohnJoe as Lars pointed out in the quote provided from the proclamation, there were alleged violations of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and alleged border incursions by Soviet forces (those are propaganda claims). Keep in mind too that Hitler needed the element of surprise for Barbarossa to succeed. Long build-up at home would have tipped off the Soviets. Although the Soviets were tipped off by the UK from Ulra decrypts (but ignored this).
– Kerry L
7 hours ago
1
@DohnJoe Kerry L just beat me to it with a partial response to your comment. I'm not aware of any false-flag operations. On propaganda build-up, I'll edit that into the answer.
– Lars Bosteen
7 hours ago
7
@DohnJoe The false flag operation at the start of the Polish war could be used to give justifications to those in Britain and France who did not want a war. But by June 1941 the only major power outside the war was the USA, and it was very unlikely that it would enter the war to defend the Soviet Union. In fact I find it surprising that Hitler even bothered with justifying the attack as a defensive action instead of just saying "Well, I have told you for years that I was to attack the SU so now it is the time".
– SJuan76
7 hours ago
1
The build-up angle is just icing. The Poland justification read "since 5:45 we're shooting back". While the exact same principle is at work in the proclamation (border incursions, inciting the Serbs (recall '18!), the Molotow questions etc) it is still salient that most of this is framed as a pre-emptive strike (troops amassed).
– LangLangC
6 hours ago
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
18
down vote
accepted
Hitler gave his reasons to the German people via a radio broadcast on the morning of June 22nd, 1941.
At 0500 GMT, an hour after the invasion began, the Nazi Minister for
Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, went on national radio to read a
proclamation by Adolf Hitler
The proclamation can be seen here in full. Basically, Hitler argued that the Soviets were a threat to Germany and had broken the peace. Thus, Germany was 'forced' into a preemptive strike.
Below are some excerpts for those who (understandably) don't wish to wade through the entire proclamation:
Moscow not only broke our treaty of friendship, but betrayed it!
I was forced by circumstances to keep silent in the past. Now the
moment has come when further silence would be not only a sin, but a
crime against the German people, against all Europe.
Today, about 160 Russian divisions stand at our border. There have
been steady border violations for weeks, and not only on our border,
but in the far north, and also in Rumania. Russian pilots make a habit
of ignoring the border, perhaps to show us that they already feel as
if they are in control.
During the night of 17-18 June, Russian patrols again crossed the
German border and could only be repelled after a long battle.
Now the hour has come when it is necessary to respond to his plot by
Jewish-Anglo-Saxon warmongers and the Jewish rulers of Moscow’s
Bolshevist headquarters.
There was no build-up propaganda prior to the invasion - after all, why give the Soviets any hints? On the contrary, German propaganda focused on attacking Britain.
The absence of any reference to Bolshevism, Stalin and his empire,
even for the purpose of negative integration or diversion from the
evident failure of the regime’s anti-British strategy, had been
conspicuous in the output of NS propaganda for a while – and it
remained so until 22 June 1941, that is after the start of the war in
the east....Although the time of the invasion of the
Soviet Union was drawing near, Goebbels continued to deceive not just public
opinion but everyone involved in the dissemination of information.
Source: Aristotle A. Kallis, Nazi Propaganda and the Second World War
answered 9 hours ago
Lars Bosteen
33.3k8162222
So, Hitler's justification was a "They are the bad guys, and they did bad things. Believe me!"? There were no false-flag operations, no propagandistic build-up; or any other propagandistic claims, e.g. alleged atrocities?
– Dohn Joe
8 hours ago
8
@DohnJoe as Lars pointed out in the quote provided from the proclamation, there were alleged violations of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and alleged border incursions by Soviet forces (those are propaganda claims). Keep in mind too that Hitler needed the element of surprise for Barbarossa to succeed. Long build-up at home would have tipped off the Soviets. Although the Soviets were tipped off by the UK from Ulra decrypts (but ignored this).
– Kerry L
7 hours ago
1
@DohnJoe Kerry L just beat me to it with a partial response to your comment. I'm not aware of any false-flag operations. On propaganda build-up, I'll edit that into the answer.
– Lars Bosteen
7 hours ago
7
@DohnJoe The false flag operation at the start of the Polish war could be used to give justifications to those in Britain and France who did not want a war. But by June 1941 the only major power outside the war was the USA, and it was very unlikely that it would enter the war to defend the Soviet Union. In fact I find it surprising that Hitler even bothered with justifying the attack as a defensive action instead of just saying "Well, I have told you for years that I was to attack the SU so now it is the time".
– SJuan76
7 hours ago
1
The build-up angle is just icing. The Poland justification read "since 5:45 we're shooting back". While the exact same principle is at work in the proclamation (border incursions, inciting the Serbs (recall '18!), the Molotow questions etc) it is still salient that most of this is framed as a pre-emptive strike (troops amassed).
– LangLangC
6 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
18
down vote
accepted
Hitler gave his reasons to the German people via a radio broadcast on the morning of June 22nd, 1941.
At 0500 GMT, an hour after the invasion began, the Nazi Minister for
Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, went on national radio to read a
proclamation by Adolf Hitler
The proclamation can be seen here in full. Basically, Hitler argued that the Soviets were a threat to Germany and had broken the peace. Thus, Germany was 'forced' into a preemptive strike.
Below are some excerpts for those who (understandably) don't wish to wade through the entire proclamation:
Moscow not only broke our treaty of friendship, but betrayed it!
I was forced by circumstances to keep silent in the past. Now the
moment has come when further silence would be not only a sin, but a
crime against the German people, against all Europe.
Today, about 160 Russian divisions stand at our border. There have
been steady border violations for weeks, and not only on our border,
but in the far north, and also in Rumania. Russian pilots make a habit
of ignoring the border, perhaps to show us that they already feel as
if they are in control.
During the night of 17-18 June, Russian patrols again crossed the
German border and could only be repelled after a long battle.
Now the hour has come when it is necessary to respond to his plot by
Jewish-Anglo-Saxon warmongers and the Jewish rulers of Moscow’s
Bolshevist headquarters.
There was no build-up propaganda prior to the invasion - after all, why give the Soviets any hints? On the contrary, German propaganda focused on attacking Britain.
The absence of any reference to Bolshevism, Stalin and his empire,
even for the purpose of negative integration or diversion from the
evident failure of the regime’s anti-British strategy, had been
conspicuous in the output of NS propaganda for a while – and it
remained so until 22 June 1941, that is after the start of the war in
the east....Although the time of the invasion of the
Soviet Union was drawing near, Goebbels continued to deceive not just public
opinion but everyone involved in the dissemination of information.
Source: Aristotle A. Kallis, Nazi Propaganda and the Second World War
answered 9 hours ago
Lars Bosteen
33.3k8162222
So, Hitler's justification was a "They are the bad guys, and they did bad things. Believe me!"? There were no false-flag operations, no propagandistic build-up; or any other propagandistic claims, e.g. alleged atrocities?
– Dohn Joe
8 hours ago
8
@DohnJoe as Lars pointed out in the quote provided from the proclamation, there were alleged violations of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and alleged border incursions by Soviet forces (those are propaganda claims). Keep in mind too that Hitler needed the element of surprise for Barbarossa to succeed. Long build-up at home would have tipped off the Soviets. Although the Soviets were tipped off by the UK from Ulra decrypts (but ignored this).
– Kerry L
7 hours ago
1
@DohnJoe Kerry L just beat me to it with a partial response to your comment. I'm not aware of any false-flag operations. On propaganda build-up, I'll edit that into the answer.
– Lars Bosteen
7 hours ago
7
@DohnJoe The false flag operation at the start of the Polish war could be used to give justifications to those in Britain and France who did not want a war. But by June 1941 the only major power outside the war was the USA, and it was very unlikely that it would enter the war to defend the Soviet Union. In fact I find it surprising that Hitler even bothered with justifying the attack as a defensive action instead of just saying "Well, I have told you for years that I was to attack the SU so now it is the time".
– SJuan76
7 hours ago
1
The build-up angle is just icing. The Poland justification read "since 5:45 we're shooting back". While the exact same principle is at work in the proclamation (border incursions, inciting the Serbs (recall '18!), the Molotow questions etc) it is still salient that most of this is framed as a pre-emptive strike (troops amassed).
– LangLangC
6 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
18
down vote
accepted
up vote
18
down vote
accepted
Hitler gave his reasons to the German people via a radio broadcast on the morning of June 22nd, 1941.
At 0500 GMT, an hour after the invasion began, the Nazi Minister for
Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, went on national radio to read a
proclamation by Adolf Hitler
The proclamation can be seen here in full. Basically, Hitler argued that the Soviets were a threat to Germany and had broken the peace. Thus, Germany was 'forced' into a preemptive strike.
Below are some excerpts for those who (understandably) don't wish to wade through the entire proclamation:
Moscow not only broke our treaty of friendship, but betrayed it!
I was forced by circumstances to keep silent in the past. Now the
moment has come when further silence would be not only a sin, but a
crime against the German people, against all Europe.
Today, about 160 Russian divisions stand at our border. There have
been steady border violations for weeks, and not only on our border,
but in the far north, and also in Rumania. Russian pilots make a habit
of ignoring the border, perhaps to show us that they already feel as
if they are in control.
During the night of 17-18 June, Russian patrols again crossed the
German border and could only be repelled after a long battle.
Now the hour has come when it is necessary to respond to his plot by
Jewish-Anglo-Saxon warmongers and the Jewish rulers of Moscow’s
Bolshevist headquarters.
There was no build-up propaganda prior to the invasion - after all, why give the Soviets any hints? On the contrary, German propaganda focused on attacking Britain.
The absence of any reference to Bolshevism, Stalin and his empire,
even for the purpose of negative integration or diversion from the
evident failure of the regime’s anti-British strategy, had been
conspicuous in the output of NS propaganda for a while – and it
remained so until 22 June 1941, that is after the start of the war in
the east....Although the time of the invasion of the
Soviet Union was drawing near, Goebbels continued to deceive not just public
opinion but everyone involved in the dissemination of information.
Source: Aristotle A. Kallis, Nazi Propaganda and the Second World War
answered 9 hours ago
Lars Bosteen
33.3k8162222
Hitler gave his reasons to the German people via a radio broadcast on the morning of June 22nd, 1941.
At 0500 GMT, an hour after the invasion began, the Nazi Minister for
Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, went on national radio to read a
proclamation by Adolf Hitler
The proclamation can be seen here in full. Basically, Hitler argued that the Soviets were a threat to Germany and had broken the peace. Thus, Germany was 'forced' into a preemptive strike.
Below are some excerpts for those who (understandably) don't wish to wade through the entire proclamation:
Moscow not only broke our treaty of friendship, but betrayed it!
I was forced by circumstances to keep silent in the past. Now the
moment has come when further silence would be not only a sin, but a
crime against the German people, against all Europe.
Today, about 160 Russian divisions stand at our border. There have
been steady border violations for weeks, and not only on our border,
but in the far north, and also in Rumania. Russian pilots make a habit
of ignoring the border, perhaps to show us that they already feel as
if they are in control.
During the night of 17-18 June, Russian patrols again crossed the
German border and could only be repelled after a long battle.
Now the hour has come when it is necessary to respond to his plot by
Jewish-Anglo-Saxon warmongers and the Jewish rulers of Moscow’s
Bolshevist headquarters.
There was no build-up propaganda prior to the invasion - after all, why give the Soviets any hints? On the contrary, German propaganda focused on attacking Britain.
The absence of any reference to Bolshevism, Stalin and his empire,
even for the purpose of negative integration or diversion from the
evident failure of the regime’s anti-British strategy, had been
conspicuous in the output of NS propaganda for a while – and it
remained so until 22 June 1941, that is after the start of the war in
the east....Although the time of the invasion of the
Soviet Union was drawing near, Goebbels continued to deceive not just public
opinion but everyone involved in the dissemination of information.
Source: Aristotle A. Kallis, Nazi Propaganda and the Second World War
answered 9 hours ago
Lars Bosteen
33.3k8162222
edited 7 hours ago
answered 9 hours ago
Lars Bosteen
33.3k8162222
answered 9 hours ago
Lars Bosteen
33.3k8162222
answered 9 hours ago
Lars Bosteen
33.3k8162222
33.3k8162222
So, Hitler's justification was a "They are the bad guys, and they did bad things. Believe me!"? There were no false-flag operations, no propagandistic build-up; or any other propagandistic claims, e.g. alleged atrocities?
– Dohn Joe
8 hours ago
8
@DohnJoe as Lars pointed out in the quote provided from the proclamation, there were alleged violations of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and alleged border incursions by Soviet forces (those are propaganda claims). Keep in mind too that Hitler needed the element of surprise for Barbarossa to succeed. Long build-up at home would have tipped off the Soviets. Although the Soviets were tipped off by the UK from Ulra decrypts (but ignored this).
– Kerry L
7 hours ago
1
@DohnJoe Kerry L just beat me to it with a partial response to your comment. I'm not aware of any false-flag operations. On propaganda build-up, I'll edit that into the answer.
– Lars Bosteen
7 hours ago
7
@DohnJoe The false flag operation at the start of the Polish war could be used to give justifications to those in Britain and France who did not want a war. But by June 1941 the only major power outside the war was the USA, and it was very unlikely that it would enter the war to defend the Soviet Union. In fact I find it surprising that Hitler even bothered with justifying the attack as a defensive action instead of just saying "Well, I have told you for years that I was to attack the SU so now it is the time".
– SJuan76
7 hours ago
1
The build-up angle is just icing. The Poland justification read "since 5:45 we're shooting back". While the exact same principle is at work in the proclamation (border incursions, inciting the Serbs (recall '18!), the Molotow questions etc) it is still salient that most of this is framed as a pre-emptive strike (troops amassed).
– LangLangC
6 hours ago
add a comment |Â
So, Hitler's justification was a "They are the bad guys, and they did bad things. Believe me!"? There were no false-flag operations, no propagandistic build-up; or any other propagandistic claims, e.g. alleged atrocities?
– Dohn Joe
8 hours ago
8
@DohnJoe as Lars pointed out in the quote provided from the proclamation, there were alleged violations of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and alleged border incursions by Soviet forces (those are propaganda claims). Keep in mind too that Hitler needed the element of surprise for Barbarossa to succeed. Long build-up at home would have tipped off the Soviets. Although the Soviets were tipped off by the UK from Ulra decrypts (but ignored this).
– Kerry L
7 hours ago
1
@DohnJoe Kerry L just beat me to it with a partial response to your comment. I'm not aware of any false-flag operations. On propaganda build-up, I'll edit that into the answer.
– Lars Bosteen
7 hours ago
7
@DohnJoe The false flag operation at the start of the Polish war could be used to give justifications to those in Britain and France who did not want a war. But by June 1941 the only major power outside the war was the USA, and it was very unlikely that it would enter the war to defend the Soviet Union. In fact I find it surprising that Hitler even bothered with justifying the attack as a defensive action instead of just saying "Well, I have told you for years that I was to attack the SU so now it is the time".
– SJuan76
7 hours ago
1
The build-up angle is just icing. The Poland justification read "since 5:45 we're shooting back". While the exact same principle is at work in the proclamation (border incursions, inciting the Serbs (recall '18!), the Molotow questions etc) it is still salient that most of this is framed as a pre-emptive strike (troops amassed).
– LangLangC
6 hours ago
So, Hitler's justification was a "They are the bad guys, and they did bad things. Believe me!"? There were no false-flag operations, no propagandistic build-up; or any other propagandistic claims, e.g. alleged atrocities?
– Dohn Joe
8 hours ago
So, Hitler's justification was a "They are the bad guys, and they did bad things. Believe me!"? There were no false-flag operations, no propagandistic build-up; or any other propagandistic claims, e.g. alleged atrocities?
– Dohn Joe
8 hours ago
8
8
@DohnJoe as Lars pointed out in the quote provided from the proclamation, there were alleged violations of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and alleged border incursions by Soviet forces (those are propaganda claims). Keep in mind too that Hitler needed the element of surprise for Barbarossa to succeed. Long build-up at home would have tipped off the Soviets. Although the Soviets were tipped off by the UK from Ulra decrypts (but ignored this).
– Kerry L
7 hours ago
@DohnJoe as Lars pointed out in the quote provided from the proclamation, there were alleged violations of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and alleged border incursions by Soviet forces (those are propaganda claims). Keep in mind too that Hitler needed the element of surprise for Barbarossa to succeed. Long build-up at home would have tipped off the Soviets. Although the Soviets were tipped off by the UK from Ulra decrypts (but ignored this).
– Kerry L
7 hours ago
1
1
@DohnJoe Kerry L just beat me to it with a partial response to your comment. I'm not aware of any false-flag operations. On propaganda build-up, I'll edit that into the answer.
– Lars Bosteen
7 hours ago
@DohnJoe Kerry L just beat me to it with a partial response to your comment. I'm not aware of any false-flag operations. On propaganda build-up, I'll edit that into the answer.
– Lars Bosteen
7 hours ago
7
7
@DohnJoe The false flag operation at the start of the Polish war could be used to give justifications to those in Britain and France who did not want a war. But by June 1941 the only major power outside the war was the USA, and it was very unlikely that it would enter the war to defend the Soviet Union. In fact I find it surprising that Hitler even bothered with justifying the attack as a defensive action instead of just saying "Well, I have told you for years that I was to attack the SU so now it is the time".
– SJuan76
7 hours ago
@DohnJoe The false flag operation at the start of the Polish war could be used to give justifications to those in Britain and France who did not want a war. But by June 1941 the only major power outside the war was the USA, and it was very unlikely that it would enter the war to defend the Soviet Union. In fact I find it surprising that Hitler even bothered with justifying the attack as a defensive action instead of just saying "Well, I have told you for years that I was to attack the SU so now it is the time".
– SJuan76
7 hours ago
1
1
The build-up angle is just icing. The Poland justification read "since 5:45 we're shooting back". While the exact same principle is at work in the proclamation (border incursions, inciting the Serbs (recall '18!), the Molotow questions etc) it is still salient that most of this is framed as a pre-emptive strike (troops amassed).
– LangLangC
6 hours ago
The build-up angle is just icing. The Poland justification read "since 5:45 we're shooting back". While the exact same principle is at work in the proclamation (border incursions, inciting the Serbs (recall '18!), the Molotow questions etc) it is still salient that most of this is framed as a pre-emptive strike (troops amassed).
– LangLangC
6 hours ago
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fhistory.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f49216%2fwhat-pretext-did-hitler-use-to-justify-operation-barbarossa%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
2
What has your research shown you so far? Where have you already searched? Please help us to help you. You might find it helpful to review the site tour and help center. You may improve your question to better comply with site guidelines with an edit and the help of How to Ask. Thanks!
– LangLangC
9 hours ago
1
Seems to me that the title might need an edit? How about "attempts at exculpatory justification", or a more streamlined one I can't think of right now? But "domestic reasoning" sounds too much like "please the crowd to kep em quiet"
– LangLangC
7 hours ago
2
They are likely quiet about it because everyone both then and now knew his public excuse for the attack was nothing more than a big steaming pile of propaganda. It matters about as much as the bully's excuse for why he's taking your lunch money matters.
– T.E.D.♦
7 hours ago