Old Dominion University
A to Z Index  |  Directories


James V. Koch




HIST 368/396

ECON 202

ECON 301

ECON 456/556

ECON 604




HIST 396


COURSEWORK»PROBLEMS

Problem I

  • Due: 16 January 2007

More than one historian of Germany has exclaimed that Adolf Hitler would have been regarded as the "greatest of all Germans" had he never gone to war in September 1939 or thereafter. Do you agree? Why or why not?

Problem II

  • Due: 23 January 2007

Germany's dash through the Ardennes to the Atlantic in 1940 has been referred to as "a huge gamble." Do you agree? Why or why not? What risks did the Germans face and how important were they?

Problem III

  • Due: 30 January 2007

Some military historians argue that the very success that Japan experienced in 1941 and early 1942 in gaining control over a huge area of the Pacific also contained the seeds of its defeat. Do you agree? Why or why not?

Problem IV

  • Due: 6 February 2007

Several prestigious historians of the war in the Pacific contend that it is quite possible that war might never have broken out between the U.S. and Japan except for Magic. Explain this argument. Do you agree or disagree? Why?

Problem V

  • Due: 20 February 2007

Go the University Library and find a weekly news magazine such as Time. Then, look at the issue for the week in the year 1942 in which you were born, i.e., if your birthday is October 7th, then find the issue nearest October 7th. Examine the war-related reporting in the issue critically.   This assignment applies to the entire issue, not a single article in that issue.

  • Was the reporting of events accurate and/or non-propagandistic? (Cite examples.)
  • Were important events ignored? (Cite examples.)

Problem VI

  • Due: 27 February 2007

In January 1942, German armaments production could be represented by an index of 100. In
July 1944, the same production index had risen to 322.

  • What does this imply about the mobilization of the German economy in the early years of the war?
  • What does this imply about the effectiveness of Allied bombing of Germany?
  • Was there any bombing strategy that might have worked better for the Allies?

Problem VII

  • Due: 13 March 2007

More than one prominent historian has speculated about what might have occurred if Adolf Hitler had adopted a "Mediterranean Strategy" (MS) in 1940 instead of attacking the USSR on 22 June 1941. An MS would have involved taking Gibraltar from the rear, occupying parts of NW Africa and off-shore islands such as the Canaries, driving the British out of North Africa and closing off the Suez Canal, and continuing to the east to conquer the oil fields that reside in modern Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, etc. Perhaps, they speculate, the Germans might even have linked up with the Japanese in some future year.

  • Is the MS a plausible military vision? Why or why not? What would it have accomplished? Be concrete.
  • Provide your evaluation of the likely response of the USSR and the USA to an MS.

Problem VIII

  • Due: 20 March 2007

The internment in 1941 and 1942 of approximately 120,000 Japanese nationals and Japanese Americans (plus approximately 10,000 similarly situated Germans and German Americans) and some smaller number of Italians has been subjected to fierce criticism since then.  Most authorities agree that these actions were unconstitutional, at least as they applied to U.S. citizens, despite favorable action by the U.S. Supreme Court in both 1943 and 1944.

Nonetheless, after the events of 11 September 2001, and recent terrorism involving Arabs and Muslims throughout he world, some individuals called for the profiling and/or internship of selected citizens of Arab countries and Muslims within the United States, saying that the good of the many trumps the rights of the few during wartime. They argue that many rights and freedoms must be curtailed or suspended during wartime and no one seriously argues against this in war zones. They argue that many American presidents have promoted or approved such curtailments, including especially Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War. Thus, they say, it is all a matter of defining where the war zone begins and ends, and in less conventional wars, that definition is fuzzy.

Recently, U.S. newspaper columnist Michelle Malkin, an Asian American, has argued that the internments were sensible, given the circumstances ( In Defense of Internment: The Case for Racial Profiling in World War II and the War on Terror, Regnery, 2004). As one part of her argument, she cites instances of Japanese Americans who were conspicuously disloyal and/or who directly assisted the Japanese military. She argues that national survival was more important than civil liberties.

  • Argue for or against the internments of 1941 and 1942.
  • Do wartime conditions permit the suspension of liberties and rights? Why or why not? Be precise about the conditions under which such action can or cannot be taken.
  • Should profiling (e.g., special attention to Arabs and/or Muslims at airports) be regarded differently than internments?  Explain why or why not. 

Problem IX

  • Due: 27 March 2007


In March 1943, German U-boats sank 627,000 tons of Allied shipping in the Atlantic. This loss of tonnage exceeded the Allies' rate of building and replacement. 15 U-boats were lost in the same month from a U-boat fleet that now numbered more than 300.

In May 1943, however, the Germans lost 41 U-boats, and sank only about 100,000 tons. The turnabout reflects improved Allied defensive measures, especially air cover of Allied convoys by escort aircraft carriers. But, it also reflects Allied dominance in certain important technologies related to U-boat warfare and to the effects of Ultra.

After this date, while Germany constantly innovated with improved submarine technology, and utilized a variety of strategies, the loss of U-boats became staggeringly high. By the end of the war, approximately 31,000 of 39,000 U-boat personnel who had gone to sea had died there.

ADM Karl Dönitz, the head of the German submarine arm, and the commander of the entire German Navy after 1943, argued that he should not withdraw U-boats from the Atlantic despite the high rate of sinkings. To do so, he said, would free up tremendous Allied resources that could be used elsewhere. So, he continued to order thousands of German U-boaters to their deaths, even in May 1945.

  • Was Dönitz' judgment correctly military and economically? Why or why not?
  • Is it immoral for a commander to order his troops to virtually certain death? Why or why not? Does it make a difference if the issue (the war) is already decided, for example, Germany in April 1945?

Problem X

  • Due: 3 April 2007


Three of the bloodiest island battles of the war in the Pacific were Peleliu in 1944 and Iwo Jima and Okinawa in 1945. Some military historians have argued that it actually was unnecessary to fight these battles.

  • Consider Peleliu first. What did the U.S. expect to gain by undertaking this invasion? What alternatives were available? Did the benefits that accrued from the Peleliu invasion exceed the costs?
  • Now, consider Iwo Jima. Same questions.
  • Now, consider Okinawa. Same questions.
  • Explain what the atomic bomb had to do with these decisions. Should it have been taken into account?

Problem XI

  • Due: 17 April 2007

Several years ago, historian and author John Keegan appeared in my World War II class at Old Dominion University. A member of that esteemed class asked Keegan whether Great Britain and the USSR could have defeated Germany without the United States being a co-belligerent. Keegan replied, "No, Great Britain and the USSR could not have defeated Germany without the help of the United States."

Consider the other side of this coin. Could Germany have defeated Great Britain and the USSR if the United States did not enter the war? Specifically, if Germany had not declared war on the U.S., and the U.S. did not enter the war in December 1941, would Germany have defeated Great Britain and the USSR?