The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich question

Hitler is easier to say than Mussolini and perhaps easier to remember than Stalin. We care because people from that era who battled against Fascism are considered heroic in working for the better cause. We like symbolism and an identity to blame for bad decisions, like sending people to gas chambers. The bureaucrats at work in the Third Reich frequently stated they were just obeying orders, so the chain of command pointed to the top.

Hitler lost because he was overwhelmingly out gunned, strategically routed and outmanoeuvred by forces which threw fourteen times the number of soldiers and materiel against the forces thrown back by the German armed forces.

The Third Reich had no chance against the enormity of the Soviet Union, now reinforced by the Siberians, regardless of the events of the Pacific or Western Europe, The Soviets soaked up every last reserve in the German forces, and bled Germany dry, down to the Volksturm.

And also Hitler was a boaby.

Hitler tried to conduct the war on too many fronts and diverted resources that could have been to try to destroy a race.

Andrew wrote: "He is History's quintessential "evil doer" so why do we even care?"

The question has the answer contained right inside of it. Why even ask it? Why are we interested in Julius Caesar, Napoleon Bonaparte, Ozymandias, or Lenin? Of course we're interested in evil and power and the strange circumstances which sometimes nearly allow evil to triumph. If we don't study these dilemmas, then we give evil the chance to repeat itself anew.

In technical terms alone; he almost pulled it off. He was foiled by the merest handful of misfortunes; he missed beating Russia by a matter of a few months. He fell victim to a few bad decisions of his own making. Had he not interfered with his highly-competent general staff, the results today might be different. Pacts might have been signed; resignation might have set in. Whether he could have sustained the empire he nearly gained, is this 'other outcome' about which no one can say.

Why did Hitler lose? The Soviets...

This is an interesting question and very difficult to answer in this kind of environment. History tells us that Germanys defeat was essentially caused by the failure in Russia. The obsession with Stalingrad (for no military significance) the fear of an over extended supply line and the halt of the advance in the suburbs of Moscow. Then once the Russian counter offensive started Hitlers failure to listen to his generals who could have halted the offensive steadied the front line and probably won a decisive victory at Kursk. Instead 100 or 1000s of German troops were wasted in senseless fighting to the last man and no retreat. History may also suggest that even had Germany succeeded in Russia, the American entry into the Western theatre would have ultimately ended in a crushing defeat. Interesting