Why did Germany not surrender until the very end in WWII #wwii #history

[charlie_browns_malitia]

"Gentlemen, I have come this morning to the inexcusable conclusion that we have fought on the wrong side. This entire war we should have fought with the fascists against the communists and not the other way around.
I fear that perhaps in fifty years America will pay a dear price and become a land of corruption and degenerate morals."
General George S. Patton (July 21, 1945)

[TheDesertFox_]

"It is necessary that I shall die for my people. But my spirit will rise from the grave and the world shall know that I was right."

[rakantopinibl]

And also because the Soviets were known to be barbaric...Staline did allowed them to rape for 3 days, so it's understandable why everyone was fighting to the end.

[BryceJose]

Because they fought for something bigger than themselves

[RegurgiNate]

Now look at Germany. Dont know if it Germany or Pakistan. I dont adhere to Aryan supremacy but I believe in maintaining your culture, national identity and sovereignty. Look at all the wonders communism and cultural marxism has done for the world.

[fredo]

They could have surrendered to the Americans.

[darkbullet]

The soviets didn't accept a surrender of Germans, fight and you could live or surrender and you would surely die.

[adanis]

Hitler asked Britain to join him on 3 occasions which we refused, imagine if Britain did join them, would of been game over.

[jimbokilo]

Germans also knew the Soviets were not going to take prisoners. Many Germans fighting, who werent for the mustache man, knew they had to fight just to survive long enough to hope the Westerns allies moved in, or they could escape to their lines.

[str.]

The "Red Army" capturing "their parliament building" is so inconsequential to Germany's surrender.

[willmartin]

Thank goodness we've learnt the lessons of history and don't propagandise our populations into supporting cynical wars today!

[ghosttheprogram]

There are many reasons, one is very much fear of the treatment they would receive (and they had very good reason to seeing what happened to many prisoners of war) another is the ideal they tried hard to aspire to and where they were coming from, going from economic collapse to a revitalised society within a single generation isn't something most countries can say today but it was something they achieved and clearly the people who lead them to it had gotten the people's faith given that delivery
It could also be there could have actually been no option to surrender reasonably (a similar reason we see happening in today's Ukraine war as to why Russia and Ukraine stop talking many times it's brought up) if compromise can't be made then clearly it is unlikely it will end till one side has no other choice at all

[enochschildren]

You don’t need to say “ for gods sake “ have some respect . You’re English !

[history_revealed]

There are obviously a range of factors that meant Germany fought on. So hopefully this video will be the opening one in which we discuss the ongoing debate around this topic. As there are many competing and contradictory theories

[historybuff]

Didn't want the same humiliation from the first world war.

[elizabethgeorge]

Reminds me of the love for the turban and sword man.
Evil is so attractive and appealing for the fallen men.

[christopherneufelt]

I think that having difficulty these days to define what a woman is, is the reason why they fought until the end. For war, it was said Good Hunt. For incapacity and to all of people, good luck.

[Shotgun_Gospel]

Because, after their barbaric conduct on the offensive, it no doubt seemed sensible to them that their enemies would enact the same brutal designs on them in turn.

Towards the end, it was fear and love. The naive love of country that would compel schoolchildren to march for the final defense of their homes, and the gruesome cowardice of the pompous old men throwing them under the red army's treads trying in vain to buy themselves a few more days to muster up the guts to eat their sidearms.

[captccklap]

Had I have been in a command position, and I'd have said this even without the benefit of hindsight, I'd have advocated for removing all troops in France and sending the entire western front to fight on the east.

The allies would not pillage and destroy. Not erm... 'corrupt' our womenfolk. Not assert a despicable ideology on our people. The allies would have accepted some conditional surrender, and better to them than the vile communists (although I wouldn't have mention surrender at the time). I would have made an argument along racial lines against barbarous slavs as well, although by that point in the war I would have been quietly disabused of the notion that they were inferior after their multiple victories in the East.

It wouldn't have been admitting defeat, either. Merely focusing on punishing the worst of 'our' enemies with what strength the Fatherland could still muster.

[perseus]

Churchill's classified letters may shed light on this subject.