This Historian Said Hitler Won World War II Before He Lost @DavidHoffmanFilmmaker

Uploaded June 2026 | Updated September 2026, 3 weeks ago

This is one of the experts who spoke in my documentary film "Why Hitler Lost the War," which you can see here.- youtu.be/C-jiKdFjNH0

I was hired to produce a television documentary based on several books which had been written when this was made (1998) on how Hitler lost World War II because of careless, idiotic, incorrect military decisions that time and again cost Germany lives and treasure in battles that they might have won. Most armchair historians know that it was unwise for Hitler to open up two fronts, one to battle the West in Europe, the other to battle the east and Russia. And many know about his unwise decision to pull back the Luftwaffe from the battle of Britain. To get to the deeper issues of why and how Hitler made these mistakes, I obtained the support of major British and German historians and some of those military leaders who worked with Hitler directly. They give a picture that makes the points the film is making, credible.

This is a 1 hour PBS television documentary I made called " How Hitler Lost the War." The film takes a unique point of view. Rather than talking about who won the war, my colleagues and I explored what Hitler did that helped lose Germany the war. Although it happened so long ago, it is still a frightening story. Some of the interviews I conducted in this segment were fascinating to me and I hope they are to you as well.

Earl Frederick Ziemke, the speaker, was an American military historian known for his detailed studies of World War II, especially the Eastern Front and the Soviet-German conflict. He was born in 1922 and served in the U.S. Marine Corps during World War II, fighting in the Pacific. After the war, he earned a Ph.D. in history and became a prominent researcher at the U.S. Army's Office of the Chief of Military History.

Ziemke wrote several influential books, including "Stalingrad to Berlin: The German Defeat in the East" and "The Red Army, 1918–1941." His work was known for being thorough, based on military records, and focused on operational-level analysis. He was also a professor at the University of Georgia, where he taught for many years. Ziemke's research helped shape American understanding of Soviet military operations during the war. He died in 2007.

This Historian Said Hitler Won World War II Before He Lost

Long Distance Operator-The Most Important Job For A Woman In The 1950s

How 1950s Teens Secretly Learned Societys Hidden Rules

Texas Spring Break Secrets From the 190s Revealed

Confronting the Lazy Stereotype: Black Men Speak Out 1960s

1969. Wildest Prime Time Television Experiment- Ghetto Jive Talk Test

$1964 Wife Complained About Marriage To Husband. Was She Right? See the whole program go here https://youtu.be/RyNeMRMwIAg This television show was made in 1964. I did some of the filming on it. It was called The Parents, and it was looking at the generation gap, which was becoming obvious at that time. It was part of a series called The Values in America. We gained access to real families, showing what things were really like. The Parents was a groundbreaking television documentary produced by WGBH as part of the series The Values in America. The film serves as an intimate, raw look at the burgeoning American generation gap of the mid-1960s. Rather than relying on detached academic commentary or staged scenarios, the production gained unprecedented access to real families to capture the authentic friction, evolving ideals, and shifting dynamics between parents and their children. For audiences today who didnt live through the 1960s, it can be difficult to grasp just how seismic the generation gap actually was. It wasnt just a difference in musical tastes or clothing; it was a fundamental fracturing of how two generations viewed reality, morality, and the American Dream. Produced at the very precipice of this cultural shift, The Parents (1964) serves as a living time capsule. Here is how the film vividly captures that historical divide for a modern viewer: The documentary catches a raw, transitional moment in American history. Measuring marital success or unhappiness in 1964 is a complex challenge because official demographic statistics only capture legally recorded events. If unsuccessful is defined as ending in legal separation or divorce, the official numbers for 1964 show a very low rate on paper compared to later decades—though this is misleading. The National Divorce Rate: In 1964, the U.S. divorce rate was roughly 2.4 per 1,000 people (or about 450,000 divorces nationwide that year). There was approximately 1 divorce for every 4 marriages occurring in the early-to-mid 1960s. Cohort tracking by the U.S. Census and Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that for couples who married in the early 1960s, roughly 35% to 40% eventually ended up divorced over their lifetimes, particularly as laws changed in the late 1960s and 1970s. In 1964, no U.S. state had no-fault divorce (California became the first in 1969). To get divorced, a spouse had to prove specific legal grounds, such as adultery, extreme cruelty, or abandonment. Most married women had limited independent earning power, minimal access to credit without a male co-signer, and faced immense financial pressure to stay married. Divorce carried heavy societal and religious ostracization. In their landmark study Husbands and Wives: The Dynamics of Married Living, researchers Robert O. Blood and Donald M. Wolfe found that marital satisfaction for wives declined rapidly after the first few years of marriage, reaching its lowest points during the child-rearing years. A substantial minority of wives reported feeling chronically unappreciated or lacking a voice in major decisions. Psychiatrists in the early-to-mid 1960s frequently documented high rates of anxiety, depression, and psychological distress among suburban housewives—a phenomenon dubbed the housewife syndrome. Because direct opinion polling on marital happiness was rare and heavily filtered by social desirability (people were hesitant to tell pollsters their marriage was failing), researchers use four major proxy indicators to measure dissatisfaction in 1964: In the early-to-mid 1960s, drugs like Miltown (meprobamate) and Valium (approved in 1963) were heavily marketed to women. By the mid-1960s, minor tranquilizers were prescribed to women at nearly double the rate of men, frequently targeted by pharmaceutical ads as solutions for housewife anxiety, tension, and domestic frustration. The clearest proof of hidden unhappiness in 1964 was what happened as soon as the laws changed. When California introduced no-fault divorce in 1969, followed by most other states in the 1970s, the national divorce rate more than doubled between 1965 and 1979 (peaking at 5.3 per 1,000 in 1979). The immediate flood of petitions—predominantly filed by women—demonstrated that millions of marriages that were legally intact in 1964 were already functionally broken. In 1964, observational documentaries and unscripted interviews like this one began capturing real families speaking candidly about domestic life.$

Skaters Share Raw Homemade Videos From 1996

Why 1968 Changed Everything for Liberal Democrats

Historic Union Fight Reveals Worker Power in 1965

Pig Farmer Makes Pigs Pray Before They Eat