Conversation
Notices
-
Ask us about the Eastern Front 1941-45. We're here to help.
-
@Punished_Potatus @didymus @NailBomb I haven't seen anything about officers not being given a strategy, its more that Generals didn't want to follow it as evidenced by Bock, Halder, Guderian etc. all trying to go for Moscow despite Hitler's plan to not do so before other objectives and especially Halder secretly trying to do so against Hitler's wishes while deceiving him, I just finished reading a book (Stahel- Barbarossa) that covers this. Unless you mean officers were given too much room to achieve local objectives on their own- then that's just Auftragstaktik which was their doctrine.
I disagree on the latter part, Finland was threatened by the UK/US to not cut off the Murmansk railway (see: Operation Silver Fox) and had far too little manpower to do more than they did in terms of an offensive, not that actually taking Leningrad was even the primary goal rather than besieging it to prevent casualties in urban fighting as can be seen from Hitler's directive on Leningrad.
Also they relied too heavily (no choice to be fair) on their weaker allies which led to Stalingrad rather than the other way around, the axis minors lacked the equipment to do anything against mass tank forces.
-
@GoodBoyUV @Punished_Potatus @NailBomb i think we've mentioned this before, but although the eastern front was undone by treachery, the greatest victories of the war (the great battles of encirclement in center and south in summer/fall 1941) were also made possible by the same treason. the intelligence that stalin got about german plans was the officers' version, and then when hitler recovered from his dysentery he countermanded those orders and there was a return to his original plan. that caught the soviet command flat-footed and their armies were destroyed. this could never be faked or recreated, since it required the verifiable and reliable traitors to seemingly transmit 100% wrong intelligence, which they hadnt really done before and obviously would never intend on doing
-
@didymus @Punished_Potatus @NailBomb Very interesting I didn't know about that, still learning new stuff
-
@Punished_Potatus @didymus @NailBomb What would you have done differently in the planning? *without hindsight*
-
@GoodBoyUV @didymus @NailBomb The fatal flaw of Barbarossa was a lack of unified strategic planning. Officers were given objectives across a wide front without a single driving strategy. Hitler had the correct idea of a campaign against Russia. His generals, for the most part, despite great tactical experience, did not. Hitler understood the need to destroy the Russian army quickly, secure the oil resources of south Russia and the Caucuses, and deny the ability of Russia and her allies to form a new army.
There are other strategic problems, such as the German diplomatic failure on almost every front. Germany failed to get Finland to commit enough forces to take Leningrad, in part due to the poor performance of the forces in Murmansk (again, due to poor German intelligence). Germany failed to rely more heavily on their Balkan allies and Italy, which would prove to be disastrous at Stalingrad. Operation Typhoon's first phase was a great success, but German overambition again proved to be fatal. This is more hindsight, although I would argue that this operation did little but delay the more important southern push.
-
@NailBomb @GoodBoyUV @Punished_Potatus agreed w/ goodboy and nailbomb
hitler democrat, this is all dealt with in great detail by bernd schwipper in his recent and currently unrivaled 3 volumes of work on the subject. stalin originally planned to invade western europe in 1942 or 1943 depending on how the war was going for the west. when france got fucking rolled in 1940 the ussr high command and stalin panicked because they were nowhere near ready. they had to do a massive military expansion on an unprecendeted accelerated timeline, which is why they did a new conscription plan and didnt have enough officers and they were totally disorganized when germany beat them to the punch in summer 1941. in the final revision, it seems like stalin was going to invade in july or august 1941 and the germans, with the grace of god, invaded first
-
@didymus @NailBomb @GoodBoyUV There is no idea of an invasion of the Reich in July or August of 1941. This is also a terrible time to invade via Poland, as the rain season is at its peak. However, the main problem would be a total lack of logistics and, as you mentioned, officers.
The USSR would have been ready to confront Germany in mid 1942 with American backing, at the earliest. Which is why Barbarossa was a very reasonable decision, despite being carried out with poor intelligence and fundamentally flawed planning.
-
@NailBomb @GoodBoyUV There was no idea of a westward attack in 1941. The Soviets had hoped to let Germany and France bleed each other dry for 2 years. This was not the case.
The preventive attack on the east was not primarily instigated because of a Soviet imminent threat (it did not exist, the Russians were in no position to launch an offensive war against Germany) but because of the United States. The United States was assumed to enter the war between 1942 and 1943, and at this point they would have Russia squarely in their camp.
-
>No idea of a westward attack
Early 1941 the Red Army was performing war games simulating an invasion of Germany from a western Ukraine launch point, they were building multiple air bases near the border, had increased aircraft production
"State Defense Plan" called for a troop build up on the Western border
Reserves called up in June.
Units ordered to concentrate at border moving only at night.
Fuel storage depots and tank parkades constructed near border.
All for defensive purposes of course.
-
@NailBomb *1941-45
-
I thoughr 1941 was the uncontroversial part, but I keep forgetting that people still don't understand that it was the Soviets who were intending to break the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact and launch a surprise attack on the Reich, and Hitler simply got the jump on the jew and their treachery. Thank you for the correction.
For me, 1942 and 1944 are the two most important years - '42 for the arming of the Soviets by the Allies and 44 for the mass sabotage by NS traitors who were working for the Communists. Everything else is pretty much obvious during the course of a war.
-
@GoodBoyUV @Punished_Potatus @NailBomb yeah i just checked the timeline and this is what i remember. it led to the kiev encirclement. hitler was incapacitated during the first two weeks of august.
according to zogopedia:
"On 18 August, the OKH submitted a strategic survey (Denkschrift) to Hitler, regarding the continuation of operations in the East. The paper made the case for the drive to Moscow, arguing once again that Army Groups North and South were strong enough to accomplish their objectives without any assistance from Army Group Center. It pointed out that there was enough time left before winter to conduct only a single decisive operation against Moscow.[11]
On 20 August, Hitler rejected the proposal based on the idea that the most important objective was to deprive the Soviet Union of its industrial areas. On 21 August, Alfred Jodl of Oberkommando der Wehrmacht (OKW) issued a directive, which summarized Hitler's instructions, to Walther von Brauchitsch, commander-in-chief of the Army."
of course the real version is, as we know, they were doing whatever they wanted without checking with hitler, especially while he was unable to supervise them
NailBomb Patriotism 🐍 WWG1WGA
GoodBoyLyle :ov: :sonnenrad: 🚪 :catnoears:
didymus
HITLER DEMOCRAT
All ０７６萌ＳＮＳ content and data are available under the