this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2024
68 points (86.2% liked)

History

1891 readers
2 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 018118055@sopuli.xyz 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I don't think it's about moral hazard. If he was killed he would likely have been replaced by someone more competent, who would carry through the vision and potentially have a better chance of winning the war.

[–] Mikelius@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

In 1944 there was no way in hell Germany could come back and win, and the allies had publicly declared they were not going to stop until there was an unconditional surrender. At best the german people would have “just” gotten a similar occupation as 1945 with less of their territory bombed to shit.