- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 73 Years ago today: Battle of Stalingrad ends with the surrender of 6th Army
Posted on 2/2/16 at 12:54 pm to Darth_Vader
Posted on 2/2/16 at 12:54 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
I remember being so fired up for this movie to come out. Went to see it opening night and wanted to vomit within the first 15 minutes.
What was wrong with Pearl Harbor? was it fake?
Posted on 2/2/16 at 1:00 pm to CadesCove
quote:he also believed that you didn't want to capture cities, you wanted to capture armies in the field. That's why there were some points during barbarosa that they captured up to 100k of the red army but went right past cities. The biggest blinder was hitlers order to not have a tactical retreat during the winter months and to not capture Moscow and instead, pushing to the south which ultimately led to stalingrad
Hitler believed that Blitzkrieg would work in Russia and they would have things sewed up long before winter truly set in.
quote:this actually did happen in some places like the baltics and down in ukraine. The people actually thought the nazis were liberators at first
I have read that he genuinely believed that the Russian people wouldn't fight for the Soviets and would help his forces
Posted on 2/2/16 at 1:01 pm to Darth_Vader
They had no winter clothing either, if I recall
Posted on 2/2/16 at 1:02 pm to WestCoastAg
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
Posted on 2/2/16 at 1:04 pm to mikelbr
quote:
What was wrong with Pearl Harbor? was it fake?
It was probably one of the most historically inaccurate war movies ever made.
Posted on 2/2/16 at 1:08 pm to LoveThatMoney
quote:
They had no winter clothing either, if I recall
I think you're thinking of the Battle of Moscow (Operation Typhoon) in December 1941. The Germans had not made any plans to issue winter weather clothing or gear to their troops because they fully expected the war to be over before it was needed.
Many soldiers in the 6th Army likewise found themselves without proper winter clothing one year later in Stalingrad. This time though instead of being because the German's thought it was not needed, it was due to the 6th Army being cut off from it's supply depots far to the German rear before all of it could be issued.
Posted on 2/2/16 at 1:18 pm to WestCoastAg
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.
Posted on 2/2/16 at 1:19 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
It was probably one of the most historically inaccurate war movies ever made.
What?! You mean we didn't have a pilot who flew for the British in the BoB, got airborne and engaged the Japanese at Pearl Harbor, and flew a B-25 off the deck of a carrier in the Doolittle Raid?
Posted on 2/2/16 at 1:25 pm to ChewyDante
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.
Posted on 2/2/16 at 1:34 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
I've always wondered why Hitler would do something as stupid as declaring war on the U.S.
Part of the reason why is because the US Navy was already waging a shooting war against Nazi German seapower assets for a while before Hitler declared war.
The USA was a declared neutral, but, was working very hard to help Great Britain. This help included US Navy involvement in shipping convoy protection, and anti-German submarine operations.
Of course, it was still a stupid move to declare war on the USA.
This post was edited on 2/2/16 at 1:35 pm
Posted on 2/2/16 at 1:37 pm to ChewyDante
quote:
What?! You mean we didn't have a pilot who flew for the British in the BoB, got airborne and engaged the Japanese at Pearl Harbor, and flew a B-25 off the deck of a carrier in the Doolittle Raid?
Bingo.
Nor was the P-40 Warhawk able to turn and maneuver with an A6M Zero.
Nor were there any Japanese torpedo bombers attacking the American airfields at Pearl Harbor.
Nor could people back at Pearl Harbor listen to the radio traffic between the bombers while they made their runs over Tokyo on the Doolittle Raid.
Posted on 2/2/16 at 1:40 pm to WestCoastAg
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.
The Italian misadventure was in 1940 if I recall.
Posted on 2/2/16 at 1:41 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
Nor was the P-40 Warhawk able to turn and maneuver with an A6M Zero
It could outdive the frick out of anything else in the air at the time though.
Posted on 2/2/16 at 1:41 pm to doubleb
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.
Posted on 2/2/16 at 1:47 pm to Godfather1
quote:
could outdive the frick out of anything else in the air at the time though.
Exactly. A P40 pilot would always try to make high level diving attacks at a Zero because this was his one huge advantage. What they'd never do, at lest not without getting shot out of the sky was get into a low altitude turning dogfight with a Zero.
Posted on 2/2/16 at 2:22 pm to GeauxLSUGeaux
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.
This post was edited on 2/2/16 at 2:22 pm
Posted on 2/2/16 at 2:27 pm to GeauxLSUGeaux
quote:
If Japan attacks Russia instead of the U.S. It would have affected the outcome of the war and history as we know it
Japan did engage the Soviets in 1939, but were soundly defeated - they wanted no part of a war with the Soviet Union.
Battles of Khalkhin Gol
Posted on 2/2/16 at 4:37 pm to blueridgeTiger
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.
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.
Posted on 2/2/16 at 5:00 pm to Champagne
The Russians were lucky to have over 700K men and 1400 tanks to commit to a diversion if that was what Mars was.
Contrast that with the US and England who had a General (Patton), radios and inflatables to divert the Germans at Calais.
Contrast that with the US and England who had a General (Patton), radios and inflatables to divert the Germans at Calais.
Posted on 2/2/16 at 5:25 pm to doubleb
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.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News