ORIGINAL: brian brian
A great perspective Peter, thanks. It helped me realize something not mentioned in that book "The End" at all, but the movie was leading me to thinking - there is a lot of hubris in that question "Why did they keep fighting?" And that is because the Americans in particular, when asking this question, can't understand the other side. The Americans were in the war for noble purposes - how could anyone oppose that? Couldn't the Germans see what was the right thing to do? The USA is always doing the right thing, right? Why don't they just quit fighting and sign up with Uncle Sam? Such hubris can be found in many other historical questions of the 20th century.
I wouldn't say that this did only happen in the 20th century. It is something of all ages. Look at the Crusades, the 100 year war or the 80 year war or at the Islamic State. All sides fight for what they think are "noble" causes...
I've concluded you can't fight a war for a noble cause. A war is always for the bounty you can get. Napoleon once stated: "You don't always get good soldiers for your gold, but good soldiers can always get you more gold". The Germans called it "Lebensraum" and the developed nations now call it our "interests"...
And there is something else to consider too... Ever thought of how history is put down in writing? Isn't the victor always the good guy on the long term? I've made a small study of the Neurenberg processes and at one time there was a German lawyer who stated some pretty nasty war crimes done by the allied forces of the three major participants (US, British and especially the Soviets) on his defense of his client. The court put him down at once, but his client was charged for being responsible for the exact same thing those Allied forces did. Those commanders were never tried, the German commander was send to prison for this. Strange behaviour, don't you think?