The same term "Blitzkrieg" was not invented by Germans (it was first used by British press) , and is composed by two words. Hovever, the term is not grammatically incorrect, and is not offensive, even if Hitler disliked it
.
Its origins for the west are believed to have originated from an italian journalist and first appeared just after Poland. May well have been coined in the british press as well. ther is some doubt as to the origins . However, the term had already made an appearance as early as 1935, in a German military periodical Deutsche Wehr (German Defense), in connection to quick or lightning warfare. As a concept, however, "blitzkrieg" is a bit of a myth anyway, since it was never an officially a formalised or codified military doctrine.
Senior officers of the Wehrmacht, including Kurt Student, Franz Halder and Johann Adolf von Kielmansegg, dispute that the blitzkrieg was ever an organized military concept and most certainly it was never a military tradition attracting tradional values or respect as such. Many contemporary German officers instead asserted that what many regarded as the blitzkrieg was nothing more than "ad hoc solutions that simply popped out of the prevailing situation" (Johann Adolf von Kielmansegg) and ideas that "naturally emerged from the existing circumstances" (Kurt Student) as a response to operational challenges.
German historian Frieser summarized the blitzkrieg as "simply the result of German commanders blending the latest technology in the most beneficial way with the traditional military principles and employing the right units in the right place at the right time" on the operational level of warfare, and that it was in no way a brand-new military doctrine or concept
The origins of the term blitzkrieg are obscure. It was never used in the title of a military doctrine or handbook of the German army or air force. It was rarely used in the German military press before 1939. There are only two military articles from the 1930s in which it is employed. Neither article advocates any radically new military doctrine or approach to war. Both use the term simply to mean a swift strategic knockout.
Another relatively early use of the term in a German-language work was in a book by Fritz Sternberg, a Jewish Marxist political economist who was a refugee from the Third Reich. Entitled Die Deutsche Kriegsstärke (German War Strength), it was published in Paris in 1939. It had been preceded by an English-language edition of 1938 called Germany and a Lightning War. The German edition uses the term blitzkrieg. The book's argument is that Germany is not prepared economically for a long war but might win a lightning war. It does not treat in any detail operational and tactical matters, and does not suggest that the German armed forces have evolved a radically new operational method. It offers scant clues as to how German lightning victories might be won.
Regardless, from the german perspective (or at least from Hitlers pespective, it was an incorrect term and rather offensive...though because it riled hitler, I really dont care on that score...
Hitler, in a speech in November 1941, said "I have never used the word Blitzkrieg, because it is a very silly word", and it seems even at the beginning of 1942 he dismissed it as 'Italian phraseology'
Given that "Blitzkrieg" is really a bit of a myth, its hard for anybody to argue that using a new term to describe an imaginary doctrine is something offensive.
The fact is that nothing as a foreign word is capable to explicate fully the meaning of a new thing. It was way more aesy to say "kamikaze" than "Japanese suicide pilots that crash on our ships with aircrafts full of explosive", and "blitzkrieg" than "tactical use of mechanized units developed by the Germans in the '30s"
No one is suggesting that you do. Officially the 'Kamikazes' were referred to as Shinpu tokubetsu kogeki tai. A better more contemporary description for Blitzkrieg might be Kesselschlacht. There was another name also given to it by Guderian, but i forget what it was.
Its just that we westerners really like to denigrate things that are foreign, and one way we do that is by calling it by a differnt name, which has inferred in it some kind of insult. It goes back to our days in the school yard. You know, the kid with the red hair might be blue or carrot top, the tall kid might be 'stretch' or 'tiny', the black kid as a boong or ******. Its not offensive to the person saying it....they might use it as a term of endearment or even think that its respectful or funny. but for the person on the receiving end, it is usually taken as an insult. they might try and hide it, or not respond, but its still an insult that has been done.
And just to reiterate.....most definately, there is no difference between 'special suicide attack corps" and kamikaze.