Barbarossa

[Imperious Leader]

OK how do you see as the primary failure of this campaign by Germany?

Was there any chance for victory?

Other options?

[Imperious Leader]

top 10 list:

1. should have enlisted the Soviets into the Axis block by assigning territorial spears of influence to each partner. Molitov and Von Ribbentrop had such a discussion in late 1940 of this and Molitov was more worried about Finland and Bessarabia to give it the reflection and potential it deserved

2. Left Yugoslavia alone ( save 6 weeks for barbarossa)

3. should not have demoblised 40 divisions after the fall of france

4. began total war mobilization ( didnt start till jan 1943 and the results were not achieved untill 1944)

5. making Leningrad and Moscow the prize. No shift of forces in Oct 41 from AGC to AGS ( e.g the Kiev pocket). The loss of moscow was a central tie to all other parts of western Russia and deployments in the south would have been cut off to the north. Archangel would have fallen and Finnish troops would have been freed up– and more couragious for garrison duty in Leningrad and archangel, while Whermacht forces would still have cut the kiev pocket and bagged even more Soviet armies.

6. stripped reinforcements from western front ( allies had no prospect of landing in 1942 and a few additional forces would have carried the campaign to conclusion)

7. preparations for winter fighting. In the first winter hitlers no retreat order saved the german army, but he still had horrible loses due to inefficient logistical systems, and all germanys victories were “on the cheap” they had no intention of long term campaigns.

8. The unity of command was a blessing and a curse. The original strategy should have been maintained and any flexibility should have been decided by the generals in charge … not a corporal from WW1

9. Hitlers declaration of war on dec 11th 1941 was a waste of unimaginable proportions

10. Inability to create a 5th column in Ukraine. Germany treated the slavs as cattle and that the campaign was a war of extermination. A total waste of potential manpower and the ability to sap the vital strength of the Soviet system with a replacement system that would potentially impart less harsh conditions for ordinary people. That could have been the propaganda and it would have been taken at face value. Soviet forces would have surrenderd much easier if the whole affair was a crusade against communisim.

[Coronel Cool]

I pretty much think you had all the most important issues in you post. Also the way you list it.

But for the debate, let me, address point 2)

Hitler could If he had prepered for it, have moved into balkan, soon after taking France. If Hitler had concentrated  on Balkan, instead of planning the invation of Britain, then Yugoslavia and Greece, could have been seized maybe as early as oktober/november 1940, Thus these operations would’nt have been in the way of preparation for Barbarossa, and a cancelling of yogoslavia/Greece wouldn’t have been on this list.

Well, I don’t really think Yugoslavia was worth taking. Greece, however, could be considered more important.

Well, The Islands of dodecanese Rhodos, Kos & Kharpathos etc. were already Italian (booty from ital/Turk war of 1912).

[Imperious Leader]

In the case of Greece Hitler had no choice. Italy invaded w/o consultation of her partner and was soundly defeated and proven not ready for a general war in 1940.

Yugoslavia was becoming a minor axis ally untill her pro german gov. got thrown out of power.

[Guest]

It was a huge gamble to begin with, because the Soviet Union was simply so much larger than the German Reich, but the main mistake was in oppressing the Russian population. The Russians welcomed the Germans with open arms and would have helped them considerably if Himmler hadn’t started murdering them by the hundreds.

[balungaloaf]

the russians love to be under a cruel oppressive strong man.  it makes them feel russian.  :-P

but i think the main point, even with all the others mentioned going wrong, has to be not taking moscow.  some german tank leaders on the tip of the drive could see church spires in their binoculars.  they were that close.  i would have not worried about the north flank as much.  keep the south and central drives, but get the finns and get some romanian divisions to just kind of sit there.  keep german europrean divisions on the ready to move quick if the russians try to swing north and then south to cut off supplies.  instead of using so much equipment on a worthless siege of leningrad.  just have 2 finnish divisions just sit around the city, permanently.

use all remaining material to drive right to moscow.  make sure to have enough to get there.  and when you take it, the soviet government would run away.  and when governments lose their base of power, they usually stay out of power.  the russians may have given up.  may not have.  but the psychological blow would be devastating.

[saburo sakai]

One thing IL touched on but I think needs greater emphasis is enlisting local populations in the fight against the Soviets.  I believe that the only way the Germans could have won was to accept the role of liberators, especially in places like Ukraine and the Baltic states.  There was no love of the Russians in those places.  If the Germans had moved in and permitted local populations to have some autonomy in governing themselves and invited them to participate in their own war of liberation and the defeat of Stalin, they would have had a much greater resource of soldiers to draw upon and a much easier time controlling their rear areas.

Stalin induced a famine in the '30’s that killed millions in Ukraine.  The survivors were ready to rise up against the Soviets and would have made fanatical and willing allies.  Instead, Hitler saw the Ukrainians and other slavs as an inferior race, not worthy of the National Socialist ideal.  As such, he missed an opportunity to greatly strenghthen the attacks on Moscow, Leningrad and Stalingrad and probably his best chance of forcing Russia out of the war in 1941.

SS

[saburo sakai]

I posted my previous message as my assessment of one factor leading to the failure of the German campaign in Russia.  I then went looking for a source to back me up and lo and behold, it seems there are no original thoughts because Bevin Alexander, an author on military history, comes to the same conclusion:

His most disastrous error was to go into the Soviet Union as a conqueror instead of a liberator. The Soviet people had suffered enormously at the hands of the Communist autocracy for two decades. Millions had died when the Reds forced people off their land to create collective farms. Millions more were obliged to move great distances to work long hours, under terrible conditions, and little compensation in factories and construction projects. The secret police punished any resistance with death or transportation to horrible prison gulags in Siberia. In the gruesome purges of the 1930s, Joseph Stalin had systematically killed all leaders and all military officers who, in his paranoid mind, posed the slightest threat to his dictatorship. Life for the ordinary Russian was drab, full of exhausting work, and dangerous. At the same time, the Soviet Union was an empire ruling over a collection of subjugated peoples who were violently opposed to rule from the Kremlin.

Vast numbers of these people would have risen in rebellion if Hitler’s legions had entered with the promise of freedom and elimination of Soviet oppression. Had Hitler done this, the Soviet Union would have collapsed.

http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/wwii/articles/barbarossa.aspx

SS

[Coronel Cool]

In the case of Greece Hitler had no choice. Italy invaded w/o consultation of her partner and was soundly defeated and proven not ready for a general war in 1940.

Of course Hitler had a choice concerning Greece, and consequently he initially decided not to intervene at the time the italians was pushed back through Albania. Instead he decided to invade Greece as late as april 1941. If he had invaded greece much earlier (fx. by overseas landings from Italian territory), it can be argued that the invation of Yugoslavia could have been avoided since the political situation on the Balkans then probably would have been much different by march 1941.

Yugoslavia was becoming a minor axis ally untill her pro german gov. got thrown out of power.

That’s my point. It’s very thinkable that the Yugoslavian change in power would not have appeared in circumstances were the Germans and the Italians would already control Creece (practically surrounding Yugoslavia).

[Zooey72]

I would have waited until 1942 to attack and done 3 things to prepare.  1)Get Spain to declare war and take Gibralter.  2)Cleared out the Med so it was safe to reinforce Africa. 3)  Pushed the Africa Korp up through into the middle east. (establishing more ports to cut logisitics.

That way when the invasion happened the Caucus would be in immediate danger.  As a bonus this could have also potentialy lost Britian India with the threat of the Germans from the west and the Japs from the east.

[Imperious Leader]

I would have tricked Stalin into a joint attack on Turkey and the middle east helping out Rommel and removing the Brits from the middle east… then while the Soviets were getting beaten by Turkey… i would conclude a treaty with them ( Turkey) and attack the entire eastern front while getting Turkey to fight with me. This would have thrown the Soviets off balance.

Then Rommel would reach Mosul and attack the caucasus from the south with Turkish help and i would have the oil in 1941.

[cyan]

@Imperious:

I would have tricked Stalin into a joint attack on Turkey and the middle east helping out Rommel and removing the Brits from the middle east… then while the Soviets were getting beaten by Turkey… i would conclude a treaty with them ( Turkey) and attack the entire eastern front while getting Turkey to fight with me. This would have thrown the Soviets off balance.

Then Rommel would reach Mosul and attack the caucasus from the south with Turkish help and i would have the oil in 1941.

like stalin was that stupid. stalin and hitler hated each other and there were plans for a major russian adttack to break the treaty. communists and facists can’t work  together on anything.

[Imperious Leader]

This is not true at all. Discussion in Dec 1940 were in initial stages of progress, however Stalin did not want to have any agreements of the sort unless Germany renounced any and all ties to Finland. Stalin claimed it was in his sphere of influence but Hitler didnt like the fact that it might have also influenced Sweden (by new diplomatic pressures by the Kremlin) to stop Iron Ore shipments to the Reich.

Stalin was quite interested in Persia and getting a natural warm water port in Europe. That is a historical Russian objective since modern times and Turkey was but one factor in its way. Stalin mistrusted the British more than Hitler and more than anybody. He loathed Churchill and considered them duplicitous.

If Stalin was smart he would have allowed and accepted the diplomatic correspondence coming from British and American Intelligence warning Stalin of inpending German aggression. He feared that if he was too mobilize he would make the same mistake as the Czar had done in 1914 and ordered full mobilization which forced the Kaisers decision to also mobilize and begin the chain that started WW1. Stalin did not want to be provoked into a general war with Germany at this time. Thats why they basically got chumped in the first 2 weeks of the campaign. Stalin didnt listen and he was Stupid at times.

Of course Zhukov ordered a study of a preemtive attack on the Reich but this was rejected out right by Stalin for the time being. In my opinion he was eventually preparing for such a conclusion, but if those talks with Von Ribbentropp went well and Germany released Finland to “the wolves” then i feel Stalin would have been much more receptive to co-axis cooperation in the middle east.

[Guest]

If anybody cares, the 22nd was the 66th anniversary of Barbarossa.

[Guerrilla Guy]

POP QUIZ!

What was Operation Barbarossa named after?

[crusaderiv]

Operation winterstorm. (Attack againt moscow 10-02-41)

AL.

[Imperious Leader]

It was called Operation Typhon if im not mistaken

[Guerrilla Guy]

Operation Winter Storm was an attack on Stalingrad, and Typhoon was the Soviet Defense and Counter attack around Moscow.

I was more referring to what “Barbarossa” meant…

GG

[murraymoto]

@cyan:

like stalin was that stupid. stalin and hitler hated each other and there were plans for a major russian adttack to break the treaty. communists and facists can’t work  together on anything.

Don’t forget that the Nazi party’s official title was, “National Socialist German Workers’ Party”.

[crusaderiv]

operation barbarossa was in the honor of frederik barbarossa a german king of 12th century.

About Operation Typhoon. Imperious Leader is right.
About Operation Winter storm. You’re right.

AL.