re: 73 Years ago today: Battle of Stalingrad ends with the surrender of 6th Army

They had no winter clothing either, if I recall

quote:

---

What was wrong with Pearl Harbor? was it fake?

---

It was probably one of the most historically inaccurate war movies ever made.

quote:

---

The real blunder came when Hitler had to support Mussolini in the balkans. That delayed his invasion of Russia by a few months and made them run into the winter

---

This wasn't a blunder, it was a situational necessity for the Germans. Pretty much everything the Italians did in WWII was a blunder though.

But your point is an astute one that most people don't understand when they utter the cliche "Hitler invaded Russian in the winter" nonsense. Not only did he invade in the summer, but behind the original schedule and having to allocate combat resources to a campaign in the Balkans. The time lost possibly changed the entire outcome of the war. Pretty remarkable.

quote:

---

This wasn't a blunder, it was a situational necessity for the Germans. Pretty much everything the Italians did in WWII was a blunder though.

But your point is an astute one that most people don't understand when they utter the cliche "Hitler invaded Russian in the winter" nonsense. Not only did he invade in the summer, but behind the original schedule and having to allocate combat resources to a campaign in the Balkans. The time lost possibly changed the entire outcome of the war. Pretty remarkable.

---

I believe Hitler's Balkan adventure pushed Barbarossa back about 6-8 weeks. Imagine had the German's arrived at Moscow when it was still warm and dry and long before the Soviets had moved the Siberian reserves from the Far East. It's most likely the Germans would have taken Moscow which means the Soviets would either have to use for peace or try to set up a defensive line behind the Urals. And with the fall of Moscow, it's likely Leningrad, Stalingrad, and even more importantly the Baku oil fields would likewise have fallen. The importance of Moscow cannot be overstated. Not only was is the seat of Soviet power. More importantly it was the central north/south hub of anything and everything moving through European Russia.

BTW it wasn't the Italians that caused the Balkan campaign that delayed Barbarrossa but the internal overthrow of the pro-German government.

The Italian misadventure was in 1940 if I recall.

quote:

---

Russia was able to ship troops from the Far East because their intell indicated the Japanese were not going to attack Russia.

Germany and Japan had a screwy alliance. Japan never declared war on Russia and did not threaten Russia, but as soon as Japan attacked the US Hitler jumped in and declared war on the US three days later.

If Germany stayed out of the Japanese war with the US how would history have changed? How long could Germany have gone against Russia without D-Day, Italy, African campaign involving the US, etc?

---

I read this book called "The Prize" about the history of drilling for oil and in it they alluded to this. Germany wanted Japan to attack Russia from the east, but Japan wanted the oil rich lands of the Philippines. Japan f*cked up majorly attacking Pearl Harbor, but they did so only to ensure that the U.S. Would not flank them while holding onto these islands. If Japan attacks Russia instead of the U.S. It would have affected the outcome of the war and history as we know it.

quote:

---

I read this book called "The Prize" about the history of drilling for oil and in it they alluded to this. Germany wanted Japan to attack Russia from the east, but Japan wanted the oil rich lands of the Philippines. Japan f*cked up majorly attacking Pearl Harbor, but they did so only to ensure that the U.S. Would not flank them while holding onto these islands. If Japan attacks Russia instead of the U.S. It would have affected the outcome of the war and history as we know it.

---

The Japanese had two choices in 1941. They could withdraw from China and resume getting imports of vital materials like rubber, scrap iron, and most importantly oil. Or they could stay in China and go to war with the U.S. before their current stocks of these items ran out. They chose to go to war and hope to secure the supplies of these items by seizing the Philippines and more importantly the Dutch East Indies. They chose war and thus sealed their ultimate fate.

LINK

Glantz says that there is solid evidence supporting the idea that Mars was supposed to be the main Soviet offensive at that time. Reason: the Soviet forces committed to Mars were stronger then the forces committed to the Stalingrad counter-offensive.

quote:

---

The Russians were lucky to have over 700K men and 1400 tanks to commit to a diversion if that was what Mars was.

---

At that stage of the war, Zhukov was the man that Stalin always chose to lead the most important battles. So, with Mars, we have Stalin's most trusted commander, and the most powerful offensive forces marshaled and ready to attack. But the attack was utterly defeated.

That's why Glantz says that Mars was the main event and, after it failed, Soviet propaganda touted Mars as a mere diversion.

This would not be the only time that Soviet propaganda has defined the mililtary history of WW2's Eastern Front. Until about 20 or so years ago, the history of the Battle of Prokhorovka told us that the Germans lost about 600 tanks in that battle. That was also Soviet propaganda and is not true.

Glantz's book When Titans Clashed is the best single book on the War in the East.