What pretext did Hitler use to justify Operation Barbarossa?











up vote
28
down vote

favorite
1












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.










share|improve this question




















  • 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
    Nov 7 at 13:20






  • 3




    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.
    Nov 7 at 15:21








  • 1




    I thought Dohn’s question was about the collapsing Germany/NSDAP economy and its drive for plunder to avoid crisis.
    – Samuel Russell
    Nov 8 at 2:33















up vote
28
down vote

favorite
1












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.










share|improve this question




















  • 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
    Nov 7 at 13:20






  • 3




    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.
    Nov 7 at 15:21








  • 1




    I thought Dohn’s question was about the collapsing Germany/NSDAP economy and its drive for plunder to avoid crisis.
    – Samuel Russell
    Nov 8 at 2:33













up vote
28
down vote

favorite
1









up vote
28
down vote

favorite
1






1





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.










share|improve this question















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






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Nov 7 at 22:12









Davislor

96919




96919










asked Nov 7 at 12:37









Dohn Joe

863413




863413








  • 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
    Nov 7 at 13:20






  • 3




    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.
    Nov 7 at 15:21








  • 1




    I thought Dohn’s question was about the collapsing Germany/NSDAP economy and its drive for plunder to avoid crisis.
    – Samuel Russell
    Nov 8 at 2:33














  • 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
    Nov 7 at 13:20






  • 3




    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.
    Nov 7 at 15:21








  • 1




    I thought Dohn’s question was about the collapsing Germany/NSDAP economy and its drive for plunder to avoid crisis.
    – Samuel Russell
    Nov 8 at 2:33








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
Nov 7 at 13:20




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
Nov 7 at 13:20




3




3




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.
Nov 7 at 15:21






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.
Nov 7 at 15:21






1




1




I thought Dohn’s question was about the collapsing Germany/NSDAP economy and its drive for plunder to avoid crisis.
– Samuel Russell
Nov 8 at 2:33




I thought Dohn’s question was about the collapsing Germany/NSDAP economy and its drive for plunder to avoid crisis.
– Samuel Russell
Nov 8 at 2:33










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
34
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:




...the invasion was presented as a pre-emptive defensive move that the
Wehrmacht leadership had to undertake in order to avert a Soviet
attack on the Reich...




Source: Aristotle A. Kallis, Nazi Propaganda and the Second World War



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: Kallis



Attacks on Bolshevism had essentially ended with the 1939 non-aggression pact but were now renewed, bundled together with anti-semitism in a




‘Jewish–Bolshevik–plutocratic’ conspiracy




with the added ingredient of Germany protecting Europe's "civilization and history".



How much of this the public believed or felt justified the invasion is hard to determine. Kallis suggests that the public was wary at first of taking on such a large opponent but, when reports came in of a series swift victories, attitudes changed. The article Attack on Russia cites the recollections of one German girl:




Maria Mauth, a 17-year-old German schoolgirl at the time, recalled her
father's reaction: "I will never forget my father saying: 'Right, now
we have lost the war!' " But then reports arrived highlighting the
easy successes. "In the weekly newsreels we would see glorious
pictures of the German Army with all the soldiers singing and waving
and cheering. And that was infectious of course...We simply thought it
would be similar to what it was like in France or in Poland –
everybody was convinced of that...




This new optimism of a quick victory didn't last, of course.






share|improve this answer























  • 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
    Nov 7 at 13:46






  • 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
    Nov 7 at 14:57








  • 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
    Nov 7 at 15:00






  • 11




    @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
    Nov 7 at 15:07








  • 2




    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
    Nov 7 at 16:07


















up vote
3
down vote













In addition to Hitler's speech addressed to German people and National socialists,
there exists a
formal declaration of war
delivered by Ribbentrop to the Soviet ambassador.






share|improve this answer




















    protected by Community yesterday



    Thank you for your interest in this question.
    Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).



    Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?














    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    34
    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:




    ...the invasion was presented as a pre-emptive defensive move that the
    Wehrmacht leadership had to undertake in order to avert a Soviet
    attack on the Reich...




    Source: Aristotle A. Kallis, Nazi Propaganda and the Second World War



    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: Kallis



    Attacks on Bolshevism had essentially ended with the 1939 non-aggression pact but were now renewed, bundled together with anti-semitism in a




    ‘Jewish–Bolshevik–plutocratic’ conspiracy




    with the added ingredient of Germany protecting Europe's "civilization and history".



    How much of this the public believed or felt justified the invasion is hard to determine. Kallis suggests that the public was wary at first of taking on such a large opponent but, when reports came in of a series swift victories, attitudes changed. The article Attack on Russia cites the recollections of one German girl:




    Maria Mauth, a 17-year-old German schoolgirl at the time, recalled her
    father's reaction: "I will never forget my father saying: 'Right, now
    we have lost the war!' " But then reports arrived highlighting the
    easy successes. "In the weekly newsreels we would see glorious
    pictures of the German Army with all the soldiers singing and waving
    and cheering. And that was infectious of course...We simply thought it
    would be similar to what it was like in France or in Poland –
    everybody was convinced of that...




    This new optimism of a quick victory didn't last, of course.






    share|improve this answer























    • 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
      Nov 7 at 13:46






    • 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
      Nov 7 at 14:57








    • 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
      Nov 7 at 15:00






    • 11




      @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
      Nov 7 at 15:07








    • 2




      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
      Nov 7 at 16:07















    up vote
    34
    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:




    ...the invasion was presented as a pre-emptive defensive move that the
    Wehrmacht leadership had to undertake in order to avert a Soviet
    attack on the Reich...




    Source: Aristotle A. Kallis, Nazi Propaganda and the Second World War



    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: Kallis



    Attacks on Bolshevism had essentially ended with the 1939 non-aggression pact but were now renewed, bundled together with anti-semitism in a




    ‘Jewish–Bolshevik–plutocratic’ conspiracy




    with the added ingredient of Germany protecting Europe's "civilization and history".



    How much of this the public believed or felt justified the invasion is hard to determine. Kallis suggests that the public was wary at first of taking on such a large opponent but, when reports came in of a series swift victories, attitudes changed. The article Attack on Russia cites the recollections of one German girl:




    Maria Mauth, a 17-year-old German schoolgirl at the time, recalled her
    father's reaction: "I will never forget my father saying: 'Right, now
    we have lost the war!' " But then reports arrived highlighting the
    easy successes. "In the weekly newsreels we would see glorious
    pictures of the German Army with all the soldiers singing and waving
    and cheering. And that was infectious of course...We simply thought it
    would be similar to what it was like in France or in Poland –
    everybody was convinced of that...




    This new optimism of a quick victory didn't last, of course.






    share|improve this answer























    • 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
      Nov 7 at 13:46






    • 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
      Nov 7 at 14:57








    • 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
      Nov 7 at 15:00






    • 11




      @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
      Nov 7 at 15:07








    • 2




      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
      Nov 7 at 16:07













    up vote
    34
    down vote



    accepted







    up vote
    34
    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:




    ...the invasion was presented as a pre-emptive defensive move that the
    Wehrmacht leadership had to undertake in order to avert a Soviet
    attack on the Reich...




    Source: Aristotle A. Kallis, Nazi Propaganda and the Second World War



    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: Kallis



    Attacks on Bolshevism had essentially ended with the 1939 non-aggression pact but were now renewed, bundled together with anti-semitism in a




    ‘Jewish–Bolshevik–plutocratic’ conspiracy




    with the added ingredient of Germany protecting Europe's "civilization and history".



    How much of this the public believed or felt justified the invasion is hard to determine. Kallis suggests that the public was wary at first of taking on such a large opponent but, when reports came in of a series swift victories, attitudes changed. The article Attack on Russia cites the recollections of one German girl:




    Maria Mauth, a 17-year-old German schoolgirl at the time, recalled her
    father's reaction: "I will never forget my father saying: 'Right, now
    we have lost the war!' " But then reports arrived highlighting the
    easy successes. "In the weekly newsreels we would see glorious
    pictures of the German Army with all the soldiers singing and waving
    and cheering. And that was infectious of course...We simply thought it
    would be similar to what it was like in France or in Poland –
    everybody was convinced of that...




    This new optimism of a quick victory didn't last, of course.






    share|improve this answer














    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:




    ...the invasion was presented as a pre-emptive defensive move that the
    Wehrmacht leadership had to undertake in order to avert a Soviet
    attack on the Reich...




    Source: Aristotle A. Kallis, Nazi Propaganda and the Second World War



    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: Kallis



    Attacks on Bolshevism had essentially ended with the 1939 non-aggression pact but were now renewed, bundled together with anti-semitism in a




    ‘Jewish–Bolshevik–plutocratic’ conspiracy




    with the added ingredient of Germany protecting Europe's "civilization and history".



    How much of this the public believed or felt justified the invasion is hard to determine. Kallis suggests that the public was wary at first of taking on such a large opponent but, when reports came in of a series swift victories, attitudes changed. The article Attack on Russia cites the recollections of one German girl:




    Maria Mauth, a 17-year-old German schoolgirl at the time, recalled her
    father's reaction: "I will never forget my father saying: 'Right, now
    we have lost the war!' " But then reports arrived highlighting the
    easy successes. "In the weekly newsreels we would see glorious
    pictures of the German Army with all the soldiers singing and waving
    and cheering. And that was infectious of course...We simply thought it
    would be similar to what it was like in France or in Poland –
    everybody was convinced of that...




    This new optimism of a quick victory didn't last, of course.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 2 days ago

























    answered Nov 7 at 13:40









    Lars Bosteen

    33.7k8163224




    33.7k8163224












    • 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
      Nov 7 at 13:46






    • 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
      Nov 7 at 14:57








    • 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
      Nov 7 at 15:00






    • 11




      @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
      Nov 7 at 15:07








    • 2




      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
      Nov 7 at 16:07


















    • 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
      Nov 7 at 13:46






    • 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
      Nov 7 at 14:57








    • 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
      Nov 7 at 15:00






    • 11




      @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
      Nov 7 at 15:07








    • 2




      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
      Nov 7 at 16:07
















    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
    Nov 7 at 13:46




    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
    Nov 7 at 13:46




    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
    Nov 7 at 14:57






    @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
    Nov 7 at 14:57






    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
    Nov 7 at 15:00




    @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
    Nov 7 at 15:00




    11




    11




    @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
    Nov 7 at 15:07






    @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
    Nov 7 at 15:07






    2




    2




    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
    Nov 7 at 16:07




    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
    Nov 7 at 16:07










    up vote
    3
    down vote













    In addition to Hitler's speech addressed to German people and National socialists,
    there exists a
    formal declaration of war
    delivered by Ribbentrop to the Soviet ambassador.






    share|improve this answer

























      up vote
      3
      down vote













      In addition to Hitler's speech addressed to German people and National socialists,
      there exists a
      formal declaration of war
      delivered by Ribbentrop to the Soviet ambassador.






      share|improve this answer























        up vote
        3
        down vote










        up vote
        3
        down vote









        In addition to Hitler's speech addressed to German people and National socialists,
        there exists a
        formal declaration of war
        delivered by Ribbentrop to the Soviet ambassador.






        share|improve this answer












        In addition to Hitler's speech addressed to German people and National socialists,
        there exists a
        formal declaration of war
        delivered by Ribbentrop to the Soviet ambassador.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered Nov 8 at 2:42









        Alex

        25.8k14897




        25.8k14897

















            protected by Community yesterday



            Thank you for your interest in this question.
            Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).



            Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?



            Popular posts from this blog

            鏡平學校

            ꓛꓣだゔៀៅຸ໢ທຮ໕໒ ,ໂ'໥໓າ໼ឨឲ៵៭ៈゎゔit''䖳𥁄卿' ☨₤₨こゎもょの;ꜹꟚꞖꞵꟅꞛေၦေɯ,ɨɡ𛃵𛁹ޝ޳ޠ޾,ޤޒޯ޾𫝒𫠁သ𛅤チョ'サノބޘދ𛁐ᶿᶇᶀᶋᶠ㨑㽹⻮ꧬ꧹؍۩وَؠ㇕㇃㇪ ㇦㇋㇋ṜẰᵡᴠ 軌ᵕ搜۳ٰޗޮ޷ސޯ𫖾𫅀ल, ꙭ꙰ꚅꙁꚊꞻꝔ꟠Ꝭㄤﺟޱސꧨꧼ꧴ꧯꧽ꧲ꧯ'⽹⽭⾁⿞⼳⽋២៩ញណើꩯꩤ꩸ꩮᶻᶺᶧᶂ𫳲𫪭𬸄𫵰𬖩𬫣𬊉ၲ𛅬㕦䬺𫝌𫝼,,𫟖𫞽ហៅ஫㆔ాఆఅꙒꚞꙍ,Ꙟ꙱エ ,ポテ,フࢰࢯ𫟠𫞶 𫝤𫟠ﺕﹱﻜﻣ𪵕𪭸𪻆𪾩𫔷ġ,ŧآꞪ꟥,ꞔꝻ♚☹⛵𛀌ꬷꭞȄƁƪƬșƦǙǗdžƝǯǧⱦⱰꓕꓢႋ神 ဴ၀க௭எ௫ឫោ ' េㇷㇴㇼ神ㇸㇲㇽㇴㇼㇻㇸ'ㇸㇿㇸㇹㇰㆣꓚꓤ₡₧ ㄨㄟ㄂ㄖㄎ໗ツڒذ₶।ऩछएोञयूटक़कयँृी,冬'𛅢𛅥ㇱㇵㇶ𥄥𦒽𠣧𠊓𧢖𥞘𩔋цѰㄠſtʯʭɿʆʗʍʩɷɛ,əʏダヵㄐㄘR{gỚṖḺờṠṫảḙḭᴮᵏᴘᵀᵷᵕᴜᴏᵾq﮲ﲿﴽﭙ軌ﰬﶚﶧ﫲Ҝжюїкӈㇴffצּ﬘﭅﬈軌'ffistfflſtffतभफɳɰʊɲʎ𛁱𛁖𛁮𛀉 𛂯𛀞నఋŀŲ 𫟲𫠖𫞺ຆຆ ໹້໕໗ๆทԊꧢꧠ꧰ꓱ⿝⼑ŎḬẃẖỐẅ ,ờỰỈỗﮊDžȩꭏꭎꬻ꭮ꬿꭖꭥꭅ㇭神 ⾈ꓵꓑ⺄㄄ㄪㄙㄅㄇstA۵䞽ॶ𫞑𫝄㇉㇇゜軌𩜛𩳠Jﻺ‚Üမ႕ႌႊၐၸဓၞၞၡ៸wyvtᶎᶪᶹစဎ꣡꣰꣢꣤ٗ؋لㇳㇾㇻㇱ㆐㆔,,㆟Ⱶヤマފ޼ޝަݿݞݠݷݐ',ݘ,ݪݙݵ𬝉𬜁𫝨𫞘くせぉて¼óû×ó£…𛅑הㄙくԗԀ5606神45,神796'𪤻𫞧ꓐ㄁ㄘɥɺꓵꓲ3''7034׉ⱦⱠˆ“𫝋ȍ,ꩲ軌꩷ꩶꩧꩫఞ۔فڱێظペサ神ナᴦᵑ47 9238їﻂ䐊䔉㠸﬎ffiﬣ,לּᴷᴦᵛᵽ,ᴨᵤ ᵸᵥᴗᵈꚏꚉꚟ⻆rtǟƴ𬎎

            Why https connections are so slow when debugging (stepping over) in Java?