I'd say Hitler was euphoric about his stunning victories at the beginning of WWII : the Anschluss, Czechoslovakia, the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, Poland, France, Belgium, Netherlands, Norway, Denmark and soon England so that he might have felt that overwhelming Russia wasn't such a big deal, not to talk about Hitler's need of raw materials and the prospective of a swift victoryHowever Hitler totally disregarded Napoleon's invasion of Russia in 1812, starting an ill-considered attack

Agreed... on all counts.

Ego might be the term, but I think “hubris” fits better…Hitler had focused on eastward expansion for Germany since Mein Kampf - so it really shouldn't have been a surprise to anyone.  Great Britain had an edge on Hitler's invasion plans through ULTRA intercepts and they gently "nudged" Stalin to be on alert for German aggression - but Stalin (paranoid as ever, especially where Churchill was involved) thought that Great Britain was trying to provoke him into initiating the conflict with Hitler.  Not wanting to even give a shadow of a hint that they had ULTRA, the British were reluctant to push the issue.  Of course, I believe that Stalin was getting corroborating evidence through the Lucy spy network, but chose to ignore it too, along with all the reports from the frontier listing German preparations (the Germans claimed 1) the forces being built up were there in preparation for an invasion of Great Britain, and were here on the frontier to be out of range of the British bombers, and 2) that their positions were strictly defensive - but as the Soviet frontier forces reported, there was no barbed wire in front of the German positions and German reconnaissance flights - and later foot patrols - continually invaded Soviet territory).  So, another great question here is why was Stalin so adamant to not see the threat of the impending German invasion?Just my personal interpretation of your original question - I think that Hitler had been thrown off track by the British response to the fall of France.  He had expected Britain to accept a separate peace with Germany - not to resist at all costs.  I don't think he intended to ever see the British Empire fall - that would have created a vaccuum that would have benefited all of the other powers, but not Germany - he needed Britain, if not as an ally, at least as a balance on the world power scene.  When Great Britain did not seek / accept terms after the fall of France, I don't think Hitler new how to proceed - it was his temper that drove him to start bombing Great Britain and to start planning SEALION.  Every other operation up until that point had followed a pretty specific pattern - diplomatic isolation, economic and political pressure, and the imposition of German troops -- by force or by threat of force.  Everything had been carefully planned up until that point.  I think that some of his timing and rashness in launching BARBAROSSA when he did might have been aimed at isolating Britain -- if the Soviet Union were knocked out of Europe (and maintained only a greatly weakened Asian position) - then perhaps Britain would be further isolated and more receptive to accepting a separate peace.  In actuality, it is highly unlikely that Britain ever would, as German expansion into the Middle East, Bessarabia, and Greece would continue to drive conflict with the interests of the British Empire - but I don't think anyone ever accused Adolf Hitler of thinking clearly and rationally after 1940.

Vulture,I can't plus one all your posts here but your analysis so far fits in almost exactly with mine.  In large measure Stalin got lucky that Hitler did not sustain the drive on Moscow.  Hitler and the Wehrmacht wasted vital campaigning time driving south around Kiev and in Fighting in the Yelnya Pocket that could have been fruitfully used to drive on and capture Moscow.  I am convinced that if Hitler had locked up Moscow that first year Russia might have fallen.  Moscow was and is THE key city in Russia something like 90% of the Russian transportation net runs through there, that alone makes it a key target.  Capture Moscow and you literally cut Russia in two, which lets you defeat the enemy in detail.  Hitler made many mistakes but that was his second, his first was invading in the first place.  The Wehrmacht might have defeated Russia, but they needed a lot of luck and a good commander, they were missing one of those vital elements and it was not luck at least in a tactical sense.

Vulture 6–excellent post–concise, complete and a pleasure to read–thank you.WillyDP.S.  There is a thesis floating bout that the key to ALL of Hitler's actions was that he was, at heart, alazy bohemian artist.  I do not remember to book that posited this, but I do recall that at the time itmade a lot of sense.  I was always open to theories that countered Alan Bullock.

One of the things that saved Stalin from defeat in 1941 was his continually throwing units at the Germans and his series of “fight to the death” type orders.  It takes time to defeat and corral even incompetent units and time is the one commodity that the Germans absolutely lacked.  He kicked off the attack almost six weeks late because of both the Invasion of Greece and a longer than usual spring rasputitsa in and around the Pripet Marshes.