@SuperbattleshipYamato hard to argue against any of this really. The IJN was so far gone by this point in the war that there’s not really much they could have done to salvage their situation one way or another. The bit about the allies not having many LSTs in general is something I never knew before though.
Barbarossa
-
hehe, of course not… :)
-
@Imperious:
mass genocide based on hair color and relgion
mass prison camps based on conspricy to commit treason.?Stalin killed like 22 million of his own people for those same reasons and more, Germany also killed but only after the Allies charged and increased their fees on taking the people as refuges and forced immigration. Part of History that has been whitewashed in books was until very late 1941 Germany was also expelling people they didn’t want. Of course this was not the only method and as time wore on the conquests led to many new refugees. Stalin just killed people for even less reasons. Mao also killed way more than Hitler but the Chinese people themselves whitewash this to not look like hypocrites.
Stalin had gulags that performed the same barbaric acts as anything under the nazis.
ever read one day in the life a Ivan Denisovich?
-
That is why Patton didn’t support alliances with the Russians, and suggested that we continue the Invasion after we conquered Germany (into Russia)… Of course no one listened to him…
GG
-
@Guerrilla:
That is why Patton didn’t support alliances with the Russians, and suggested that we continue the Invasion after we conquered Germany (into Russia)… Of course no one listened to him…
GG
i think it was called operation unthinkable or something like that. churchill actually gave it alot of thought.
-
Actually Patton wanted the Germans to help him do this. He hated the Soviets worse than the Germans who he respected more as soldiers.
German propaganda played up this hope thinking Patton actually had more clout than he did because under the German military tradition a successful military leader did have more clearance for such initiative and they respected Patton as well. And to add the Soviet also felt some tricks were yet to be played by the western allies at some point.
-
the soviets were already using women in their army, b/c all men 16-40 were about dead. the eastern tribes they subdued were also used.
2 years of war with the soviets and they’d crumble. who’d run their factories? who’d be left to fight for them?
an a-bomb could take out a division. and an a-bomb could take out cities with factories.
the soviets would’nt of stood a chance.
our bombers and fighters would reign supreme in the sky, harassing their armor columns. and we’d have the industrial capacity to make the german tigers and king tigers in mass.
it would be us, the brits, germans, and fins against ussr for sure. hell maybe we could get the japanese to help after they were beaten. the turks would’ve loved to get back territory lost to russia and the chance to make the black sea theirs.
no way the russians could do anything about anything.
-
Yes but after only 2 years I doubt we would have enough A-bombs for that
-
I’ve played a senario like that on hearts of iron, I got everyone except japan, south america, to declare war on the Soviets, when it got to 1947 (as far as you can get on the game) Turkey took most of the ukraine, half of china fell, I (germany) pushed them all the way to the urals, then I actually ended up linking up with china, cuting the kazikstan area, off from siberia and Nothern USSR. With the help of the brits in india, kazakstan area was taken, and the Soviets called it quits (I annexed the communists).
All thanks to the help of both mine and the U.S.s Nucleur bombs. :evil:
-
Try “Hearts of Iron: Doomsday” it goes to 1953 and is setup to allow that senario.
-
Yea I know, it’s on my list of things to buy next, about 6-7th.
-
:-o
On the Subject of,“The Eastern Front” as it is commonly known, Since we are talking about the entire, (German) War with Russia and not just the opening campaign now. I would like to quote a german veteran of that front.
While riding a bus in Frankfort, Germany and upon seeing a young american carrying a book titled “The loss of the Eastern Front” He voluteered his assesment of that long and bloody Crusade.
When rose from his seat, cain in hand, He asked the young man; Do you want to know why we lost in Russia? Sure! replied the American,“Then I’ll tell you why ve lost in Russia. It vas too damnt Big, It vas too damnt colt, and zer vere too damnt many of zem!”
Well, that pretty well puts it in a nutshell by a man who was there. and although The German High-Command and Hitler could have done many things different, It was the artic winters, the great distances to attack, defend, and get limited supplies across, and of course the hundreds of millions of men that they could throw at the Germans, ( hell, the Russians had more men than rifles!).
A good movie to see, if you haven’t already, is “Enemy at the Gates”. Mostly about Stalingrad, but you’ll get the feel for most of what it was like on that front. another good one is " Cross of Iron" with Clint Eastwood.
Also, as noted, Germany wasn,t geared up for a war of this magnitude in 1941. It’s Industry just could not build enough equipment to support the amount of men it would have required to do the job.
Hitler was hoping to force Stalin to terms with the Blitzkrieg, as he had done in Poland, France, and the Balkans. But as all invaders of Russia learned the hard way, It is too damned big, too damned cold and there are just too damned many of them.
Crazy Ivan :roll:
Oh, and as for the Code name; I think it was the Birthdate of the German Emperor, ( Holy Roman) Fredrick Barberossa, who led an invasion into Russia in the 15th century, give or take a century. -
I recommend the book “Armageddon” about the battle for Germany in 1945. The Russians did unthinkable things. The suffering we could have saved the German people if only we had ended our silly crusade against Fascism and turned on the real enemy, the Soviet Union.
-
@Imperious:
top 10 list:
-
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
-
Left Yugoslavia alone ( save 6 weeks for barbarossa)
-
should not have demoblised 40 divisions after the fall of france
-
began total war mobilization ( didnt start till jan 1943 and the results were not achieved untill 1944)
-
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.
-
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)
-
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.
-
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
-
Hitlers declaration of war on dec 11th 1941 was a waste of unimaginable proportions
-
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.
- should have enlisted the Soviets into the Axis block
This may not have been an option. Evidence strongly suggests Stalin was planning to expand westward at Germany’s expense. Stalin might have agreed to join the Axis bloc–right up until the day his tanks rolled across the Nazi-Soviet border.
- Left Yugoslavia alone ( save 6 weeks for barbarossa)
I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, six extra weeks of invading the Soviet Union before winter sets in sure sounds like a good idea. On the other hand, my understanding is that spring rains had been heavy that year, and that the six weeks in question might have been associated with muddy roads and a bogged down advance. I don’t like the idea of getting only partial benefit from the first six weeks of surprise.
- should not have demoblised 40 divisions after the fall of france
Agreed. According to Suvorov, Hitler did not anticipate a Soviet invasion of Germany in 1940. (Which would explain the demobilization of those divisions.) But due to massive Red Army troop movements to the Nazi-Soviet border, and due to forcible Soviet annexation of Finnish and Romanian territory, Hitler figured out what Stalin had brewing. Then decided to launch his own invasion of the Soviet Union, before the Soviets’ preparations to invade Germany were complete.
- began total war mobilization ( didnt start till jan 1943 and the results were not achieved untill 1944)
In addition to agreeing with the above, I also feel that Albert Speer should have been put in charge of armaments production several years earlier than had been the case.
- making Leningrad and Moscow the prize. No shift of forces in Oct 41 from AGC to AGS
Another good point. Also, von Manstein should have been placed in charge of Barbarossa. Von Manstein was the best general on either side of the war. Had he been in charge of the invasion of the Soviet Union, Moscow and Leningrad would have fallen.
- stripped reinforcements from western front
Agreed. Too many troops were tied down in places like France and Norway.
- 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 system
You make a good point, but this is a rather complex subject. Germany has almost no oil deposits. During WWII, it relied partly on synthetic fuel (made from coal), and partly on Romanian oil. But even in combination, those fuel sources were not sufficient for more than the first 2 - 3 months of Barbarossa. After that, there was a need for Germany to alter the tempo of its operations due to fuel shortages.
It’s possible to have an oil-free supply line. A coal-powered train moves supplies most of the way to the soldiers. Horses then carry the supplies the rest of the way. However, the Soviets’ rail system used a different gauge than Germany’s, and Stalin’s scorched earth policy resulted in the destruction of a significant portion of Soviet rail lines. As a result, supplies often had to be transported over long distances via petroleum-powered trucks. Manufacturing large numbers of winter uniforms in Germany was not necessarily as big a challenge as was getting those uniforms to Germany troops. By the time winter set in, German soldiers lacked ammunition, food, medical supplies, and yes, winter uniforms. The supply situation was abysmal due to lack of petroleum, inadequacy of rail lines, and the difficulty of moving supplies during a Russian winter.
- The unity of command was a blessing and a curse.
Agreed. But it would have been strictly a blessing, had command been unified under von Manstein.
- Hitlers declaration of war on dec 11th 1941 was a waste of unimaginable proportions
Obviously, war against the United States offered no possible benefit for Germany. Hitler had recognized this, and had exercised restraint in the face of FDR’s undeclared naval war against Germany. But it was felt that sooner or later American political and economic leaders would succeed in getting America into a war against Germany–regardless of the wishes of the American people. Herbert Hoover noted that prior to the election of 1940, FDR made numerous promises about keeping America out of war. After FDR won that election, he ceased providing such assurances, and his rhetoric became more warlike. Had Hitler not declared war in late '41, America would probably have gone to war eventually–much like it had in 1917.
Hitler felt that since war against the United States was inevitable anyway, better to speed the process up a bit so that he could sink the Lend Lease aid being sent to the Soviet Union and to Britain. To put the quantity of that aid into perspective: Erich Hartmann was the highest scoring fighter ace in history. He fought exclusively on the eastern front, and all his victories were against Soviet-operated aircraft. About 1/3 of the aircraft he shot down were American-made.
- Inability to create a 5th column in Ukraine. Germany treated the slavs as cattle
I disagree with your use of the term “fifth column.” Do we call America’s Founding Fathers “fifth column” because they lacked loyalty to King George III? No! Neither should we apply that label to the brave Ukrainian men and women who resisted Stalin’s evil regime. Some of the chief complaints against George III involved his tax on tea, and the fact that British soldiers were sometimes quartered in Americans’ homes. Some of Ukrainians’ chief complaints about Stalin involved the fact that he used an artificial, government-created famine to murder 7 million Ukrainians, including 3 million children. The Boston Massacre (five people killed) was an important factor in many Americans’ decision to rebel. Stalin murdered over a million Ukrainians for every one victim of the Boston Massacre. If the men and women who stood up to George III were “patriots,” why not also use that word to describe the men and women who stood up to Stalin?
Germany’s opportunities to treat the Slavs well were limited by its severe wartime food shortages. That being said, there were a number of German government officials assigned the task of administering the eastern occupied territories. Those officials should have been drawn from the more pro-Slavic ranks of the Nazi Party or the German government. Instead of that, Hitler often appointed officials who were strongly anti-Slavic in their outlook. Those who saw Slavs as potential allies against the evil of communism might have been able to garner far more support and cooperation than those who viewed Slavs as cattle.
-
-
You are quoting a post from 2007? WTH?
Germany’s opportunities to treat the Slavs well were limited by its severe wartime food shortages. That being said, there were a number of German government officials assigned the task of administering the eastern occupied territories. Those officials should have been drawn from the more pro-Slavic ranks of the Nazi Party or the German government. Instead of that, Hitler often appointed officials who were strongly anti-Slavic in their outlook. Those who saw Slavs as potential allies against the evil of communism might have been able to garner far more support and cooperation than those who viewed Slavs as cattle.
Those food shortages were deliberately manufactured as part the the Nazi hunger plan which deliberately sought to make excuses to murder people. That was already proven to you. Nazi fake overtures of helping the Slavs was only to make them die easier for Hitlers long term plan of extermination.
I think i have posts from 2004 if you like to reply to those as well…
-
@Imperious:
You are quoting a post from 2007? WTH?
Germany’s opportunities to treat the Slavs well were limited by its severe wartime food shortages. That being said, there were a number of German government officials assigned the task of administering the eastern occupied territories. Those officials should have been drawn from the more pro-Slavic ranks of the Nazi Party or the German government. Instead of that, Hitler often appointed officials who were strongly anti-Slavic in their outlook. Those who saw Slavs as potential allies against the evil of communism might have been able to garner far more support and cooperation than those who viewed Slavs as cattle.
Those food shortages were deliberately manufactured as part the the Nazi hunger plan which deliberately sought to make excuses to murder people. That was already proven to you. Nazi fake overtures of helping the Slavs was only to make the die easier for Hitlers long term plan of extermination.
I think i have posts from 2004 if you like to reply to those as well…
Those food shortages were deliberately manufactured as part the the Nazi hunger plan which deliberately sought to make excuses to murder people. That was already proven to you.
We’ve discussed this in other threads. I don’t think this thread’s OP would be very happy with either of us if we derailed this thread by debating it here.
What’s that? You’re the OP? Never mind then.
I think i have posts from 2004 if you like to reply to those as well…
Definitely! :) Clicking on the last page of this forum’s posts only brings me back to 2007. If there’s a way to get earlier posts than that, let’s do it!
-
I don’t think this thread’s OP would be very happy with either of us if we derailed this thread by debating it here.
funny man :-D
Suggested Topics
