Started By
Message

OT History Buffs, I have a ?

Posted on 7/22/14 at 12:40 am
Posted by WeeWee
Member since Aug 2012
40087 posts
Posted on 7/22/14 at 12:40 am
If Erwin Rommel was considered one of the best tank commanders the Germans had and the eastern front was mainly a tank front, why wasn't he given a command on the eastern front?
Posted by Jones
Member since Oct 2005
90442 posts
Posted on 7/22/14 at 12:41 am to
Is this yalls sneaky way of pushing for a history board?
Posted by WeeWee
Member since Aug 2012
40087 posts
Posted on 7/22/14 at 12:42 am to
quote:

Is this yalls sneaky way of pushing for a history board?


It is needed
Posted by 9Fiddy
19th Hole
Member since Jan 2007
64022 posts
Posted on 7/22/14 at 12:46 am to
Because Hitler touched himself at night.
Posted by biglego
Ask your mom where I been
Member since Nov 2007
76170 posts
Posted on 7/22/14 at 12:48 am to
Bc he grew his own pot
Posted by Grizzley
Member since May 2014
935 posts
Posted on 7/22/14 at 12:51 am to
The doctor is the boys mother, thus making it her son that she can't operate on.
Posted by Jobu93
Cypress TX
Member since Sep 2011
19202 posts
Posted on 7/22/14 at 6:44 am to
A couple of things...

1. Rommel was their best commander. period.
2. The Nazis were a discriminatory people; they looked at the Russians as inferior.
3. The Nazis were kicking Russias arse all over the steppes so there was no need of sending in their ace to mop up a bunch of jokers, in Hitler's view.
4. It wasn't until there was street to street fighting in Stalingrad that the Germans met their demise.
5. Hitler saw the Brits and Americans as the bigger threat and he had Rommel oversee the refortification of defenses in France.

All this said, Hitler had no strategic thought. You'd think that the Germans would make a strategic bomber, but they never did.
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
64382 posts
Posted on 7/22/14 at 6:45 am to
Well that's a good question. The simple answer to it is that Rommel was already busy elsewhere and then the timing was just never right to send him East. Let's start at the beginning. The invasion of the Soviet Union started in June of 1941. At that time Rommel had already been in North Africa for months trying to shore up the situation there. The decision was still very much in the balance in North Africa and thus it would have been a mistake to pull him out and replace him with someone else. Rommel remained in North Africa until his deteriorating health forced him back to Germany in the Spring of 1943.

After this the situation still dictated that Rommel was still needed elsewhere. When he recovered from his illness he was first sent to Greece to take over the defenses there because the Germans feared a British invasion in that area. (In fact Churchill wanted to invade there in what he called the "soft underbelly" so that the western allies could "shake hands with the Soviets as far east as possible".) But when it became apparent that there would be no invasion of Greece, he was instead briefly sent to Italy before ultimately being sent to France to prepare the defenses of the Atlantic Wall for the coming allied cross channel invasion.

So really the real reason Rommel never fought in the East (other than staying by Hitler's side during the invasion of Poland at the start of the war) was simply due to events in first the Mediterranean and later the Western Fronts dictating that he was needed there instead of the East.
This post was edited on 7/22/14 at 6:47 am
Posted by WalkingTurtles
Alexandria
Member since Jan 2013
5913 posts
Posted on 7/22/14 at 7:02 am to
Heinz Guderian was one of the finest tank commanders of the war. He got all the way up to the outer suburbs of Moscow.
Posted by soccerfüt
Location: A Series of Tubes
Member since May 2013
65517 posts
Posted on 7/22/14 at 7:04 am to
Darth, you magnificent bastard, I read your book.
Posted by jscrims
Lost
Member since May 2008
3546 posts
Posted on 7/22/14 at 7:06 am to
Hitler was also too much of a control freak to give up control of the eastern front. He wouldn't allow the tanks to move without his command. Since Hitler stayed up until all hours of the night, when D-Day started, Hitler was still asleep and was not woken up in time to move the tanks into position. Always thought that was an interesting tidbit of history.
Posted by Spaceman Spiff
Savannah
Member since Sep 2012
17450 posts
Posted on 7/22/14 at 7:42 am to
quote:

So really the real reason Rommel never fought in the East (other than staying by Hitler's side during the invasion of Poland at the start of the war) was simply due to events in first the Mediterranean and later the Western Fronts dictating that he was needed there instead of the East.


^This.
Posted by TigerNlc
Chocolate City
Member since Jun 2006
32487 posts
Posted on 7/22/14 at 7:45 am to

So Biff wants to be a buff
Posted by tigerman03
Metairie
Member since Jul 2008
3745 posts
Posted on 7/22/14 at 7:50 am to
If Hitler wasn't an egotistical maniac, there wouldn't have been an Eastern front for Rommel to go to.
Posted by Tchefuncte Tiger
Bat'n Rudge
Member since Oct 2004
57128 posts
Posted on 7/22/14 at 7:57 am to
quote:

If Hitler wasn't an egotistical maniac, there wouldn't have been an Eastern front for Rommel to go to.


Too bad he diverted resources to quell an uprising in Yugoslavia and to rescue Mussolini from the Greeks.
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
64382 posts
Posted on 7/22/14 at 8:27 am to
quote:

If Hitler wasn't an egotistical maniac, there wouldn't have been an Eastern front for Rommel to go to.


But that's the thing, there was always going to be an Eastern Front. From the very earliest days when Hitler was just a nutjob who staged an absurd coup attempt in Munich, one of the central goals he and the Nazis had was to gain Lebensraum.
This post was edited on 7/22/14 at 8:29 am
Posted by LucasP
Member since Apr 2012
21618 posts
Posted on 7/22/14 at 8:31 am to
Interesting question. According to the History Channel it was due to extraterrestrial visitors. Fun fact, absolutely no document in world war two actually says that there was not alien intervention. If there were no aliens fighting in the war, then why would this be the case?
Posted by mizzoukills
Member since Aug 2011
40686 posts
Posted on 7/22/14 at 8:40 am to
soccerfüt

quote:

Darth, you magnificent bastard, I read your book.



ISWYDT and it was brilliant timing!
This post was edited on 7/22/14 at 8:41 am
Posted by mizzoukills
Member since Aug 2011
40686 posts
Posted on 7/22/14 at 8:52 am to
The LSU posters defending the thread were trolled by non-LSU fans. The LSU posters were proud and brave but they couldn't hold the thread. They were trolled and massacred. Outsiders stripped the thread of its dignity and reliability. The thread lay in waste on TigerDroppings.

Two thousand years ago. I was here.
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
64382 posts
Posted on 7/22/14 at 8:56 am to
quote:

Too bad he diverted resources to quell an uprising in Yugoslavia and to rescue Mussolini from the Greeks.



Very good point. It was the diversion of resources allocated for the upcoming invasion of the Soviet Union to Balkans that pushed the initial launch date from early May to late June. Had the Germans hit the Soviets when they originally intended they would have found the Soviets in an even worse state of readiness and would have reached Moscow even faster than they did when they invaded in late June. And with Moscow in German hands, the Soviets would have either had to sue for peace or tried to withdraw their remaining forces behind the Ural Mountains and try to continue the fight from there. But then this would have been an exercise in futility due to the following reasons;

1. The earlier launch of Barbarossa would have meant the Soviet defenses would have been even more woefully prepared and thus would have allowed the Germans to advance faster. This means the Soviets probably would not have had time to evacuate so much of their industrial facilities east. Thus, after the fall of Moscow, the Soviets would have had little industrial capacity left to try and support and supply it's armies.

2. With the fall of Moscow, the posts of Murmansk and Archangel would have been isolated not able to hold out. This would have been a disaster the Soviets could not have recovered from due to the fact virtually all supplies from the west to the Soviets came through these two ports. Considering the fact that it was US made boots on the feet of almost all Soviet troops and US made Spam that fed almost all Soviet troops, and it was US made Studebaker trucks that kept Soviet armies mobile, without these staples, the Soviets would not have been able to maintain their armies in the field. They would have been tramping around in the snow barefoot while starving to death.

3. Just as the fall of Moscow would have cut off the northern ports, likewise the Soviets would have been cut off from the oilfields to the South as well. So while their solders would have no shoes, nothing to eat nor any transport, the few vehicles the Soviets did posses would have had empty fuel tanks.

The importance of Moscow was more than just the symbolic fact that it was the capital of the USSR. It's real importance from a military standpoint was the fact it was THE main connecting hub of all river, road, and rail traffic in European Russia. It connected everything. To get really anywhere in European Russia, you had to go through Moscow. In short, if you controlled Moscow, you controlled all of Russia west of the Urals.

When you add everything up, it becomes pretty clear that had the Germans not delayed Barbarossa, the chances that the war would have had a far different outcome becomes highly likely.
This post was edited on 7/22/14 at 9:01 am
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram