total war (WW2)

avatar
Created by
Isabelle

Cards (8)

  • How can total war be argued to be more important than generalship in terms of outcome?

    A nations ability to fight a protracted total war was more hindering to the outcome than generals who were unable to achieve victory down to their skills. Seen with Rommel in North Africa where he needed 10,000 tons of petrol to continue his fight against Britain but only received 600. This led to German defeat at the Second Battle of El Alamein and the start of the end of the Afrika Korps, allowing the Allies to mount an offensive in Italy
  • Was it a total war?
    yes absoultely
  • Civilians targeted?

    Bombing campaigns- the Blitz 40000, Dresden 25000 in 48hrs, firebombing of Tokyo 80-100,000 in one night 1945, atomic bombs Hiroshima 140000 & Nagasaki 75000, Holocaust 14 million- HUGE IMPACT
  • All means to achieve victory?
    Churchill famously stated he wanted victory at all costs, politicians used full force to wage war
  • Civilian involvement?

    Hundreds of British civilians volunteer to help withdraw British forces at Dunkirk 1940
  • Scale of carnage?

    Effective end of British and French empires. 70 million casualties with 2/3 being civilians
  • Full mobilisation of economy?
    Entire industries were geared towards the war effort, Allied superior industrial capacity brought victory (60%)
  • Lend Lease Act 1941?

    Full mobilisation of the economy and any means to achieve victory- $50 billion lent by US so Allies could continue fighting