Started By
Message

re: 77 Years Ago Today: Operation Barbarossa

Posted on 6/22/18 at 10:37 am to
Posted by GetCocky11
Calgary, AB
Member since Oct 2012
53509 posts
Posted on 6/22/18 at 10:37 am to
quote:

The Germans never thought that weather would be a cause that would ruin their chance at victory.


Hitler never read War and Peace.
Posted by rt3
now in the piney woods of Pineville
Member since Apr 2011
148006 posts
Posted on 6/22/18 at 10:38 am to
the Germans got to well within range of Moscow... some even saying they could see the golden domes of the Kremlin

but then... Hitler just NEEDED to take control of Stalingrad even though it had no real tactical importance... only b/c of the city's name

stay focused on Moscow instead of getting distracted by Stalingrad and who knows how the war turns out

Stalingrad ended up being the first major German defeat of the war overall... certainly turned the war on the Eastern Front into the USSR's favor
Posted by Klark Kent
Houston via BR
Member since Jan 2008
75945 posts
Posted on 6/22/18 at 10:39 am to
i don't think anyone has mentioned that Germany also had vastly better infrastructure than Russia and France. Their trains and rail system allowed them to throw thousands of troops a day to whatever front necessary in less than a week.

quote:

So basically it came down to a matter of Hitler seeing it was “now or never” when it came to achieving his longtime goal of crushing the Soviet Union and establishing is dreamed of German Empire in the East. In his gamblers eyes he saw a window of opportunity that would not stay open for much longer. Thus, he decided to strike while he could.



that entire post is a very good summary Darth.
Hitler felt the Western Europe Front was secure, he knew eventually Russia could ramp up their army and supplies, it was exactly as you put it, his "now or never" decision.
This post was edited on 6/22/18 at 10:44 am
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
74618 posts
Posted on 6/22/18 at 10:39 am to
quote:

Bear in mind that Operation Barbarossa refers to the opening 1941 offensive and is not the name for the entire War on the Eastern Front from 1941 to 1945


You’re right. As I said in the OP, Barbarossa was the opening of the Eastern Front. Barbarossa itself ended in early December of 41 just shy of Moscow.
Posted by HempHead
Big Sky Country
Member since Mar 2011
56772 posts
Posted on 6/22/18 at 10:41 am to
quote:

stay focused on Moscow instead of getting distracted by Stalingrad and who knows how the war turns out



Moscow was definitely more important than Volgograd, but capturing the natural resources in Ukraine/Crimea/the Caucasus would have been much more important in crippling Soviet war capability.

If playing Hearts of Iron IV has taught me anything, it's that resources for manufacturing are the lifeblood of any warmonger.
This post was edited on 6/22/18 at 10:43 am
Posted by beerJeep
Louisiana
Member since Nov 2016
39230 posts
Posted on 6/22/18 at 10:41 am to
I’m so upset. I had the full 6 book set of Winston Churchill’s accounts off WWII, but the first two books disappeared when I moved

It was the first two books, so at least i already read them. But still pissed they ran off
Posted by rt3
now in the piney woods of Pineville
Member since Apr 2011
148006 posts
Posted on 6/22/18 at 10:42 am to
quote:

It worked until they got bogged down and the weather changed, at which point the Russians said “We have reserves” and started bleeding the German military of men and resources through prolonged battles in places like Stalingrad.

for once... Stalin ACTUALLY listened to his commanders and spec ops guys

they had reserves waiting on a Japanese attack... but they got work from the Far east that Japan had no plans for Russia... so they decided it was ok to move troops awaiting a Japanese attack to help fend off the Germans

it was those troops who really turned the Battle of Stalingrad IIRC
Posted by Darth_Vader
A galaxy far, far away
Member since Dec 2011
74618 posts
Posted on 6/22/18 at 10:43 am to
quote:

Here's the main reason it failed.

On 30 July 1941, which is only eight days after invasion, the spearhead of the German Army Group Center was 447 miles away from the nearest railhead.

Supplies were delivered to a railhead and then to the fighting forces by ground transport. Most ground transport was horse drawn wagons. Some ground transport used motor lorries such as trucks.

In 1941, the Germans were never able to get the railheads close enough to the fighting forces to provide adequate supply. 447 miles is a long way from the front, and, the Germans could only build the railroad track eastward very slowly


There was a rather extensive rail network in the Soviet Union. But it was virtually worthless to the Gemrans for one simple reason, the gauge (width of the tracks) of the Soviet Rails were different from those of the rest of Europe. This meant that while trains from Germany could travel just about anywhere in the rest of Europe, they could not move into the Soviet Union.
Posted by teke184
Zachary, LA
Member since Jan 2007
105178 posts
Posted on 6/22/18 at 10:44 am to
I’d argue the oil fields of the Caucasus were far more important than Stalingrad or Moscow.

The Russians going scorched earth on their retreat meant that taking Moscow or Stalingrad would only be a symbolic victory. While taking either could have theoretically fixed logistical issues, I doubt the Russians were leaving rail lines in good enough condition for the Germans to use.


As far as the oil goes, the Nazis were dependent on the Romanian oil reserves for their war effort.

As a Sandhurst instructor put it to me, “The fact that you don’t see Romanian oil barons in casinos all the time tells you how much oil they had.”

Getting the Caucasus would have meant fuel for the tanks and for industrial production.
Posted by beerJeep
Louisiana
Member since Nov 2016
39230 posts
Posted on 6/22/18 at 10:45 am to
Hey now. I didn’t just say that or anything
Posted by TigerFanInSouthland
Louisiana
Member since Aug 2012
28065 posts
Posted on 6/22/18 at 10:47 am to
quote:

This is a very good question. The long-held German nightmare had always been the dreaded “two-front” war. This fear had dominated Germany military thought since the 19th century and was why the conflict that started in the Balkans in 1914 had turned into WWI.


Which is why the Schlieffen Plan was put into effect. They gambled that the Russians couldn’t mobilize fast enough for them to knock France out, they lost that gamble but still beat the Russians either way. They should’ve never gone away from that plan.
Posted by Klark Kent
Houston via BR
Member since Jan 2008
75945 posts
Posted on 6/22/18 at 10:47 am to
quote:

But it was virtually worthless to the Gemrans for one simple reason, the gauge (width of the tracks) of the Soviet Rails were different from those of the rest of Europe


was this intentional?
Posted by teke184
Zachary, LA
Member since Jan 2007
105178 posts
Posted on 6/22/18 at 10:48 am to
Given Russian history, I would guess it was more of them being backward and stubborn than intentionally screwing possible invaders.
Posted by rt3
now in the piney woods of Pineville
Member since Apr 2011
148006 posts
Posted on 6/22/18 at 10:48 am to
quote:

Hey now. I didn’t just say that or anything

yeah but you didn't mention that Stalin finally made an informed decision instead of a unilateral decision





Posted by IT_Dawg
Georgia
Member since Oct 2012
26809 posts
Posted on 6/22/18 at 10:49 am to
quote:

Never understood why the Germans thought they could fight on so many fronts simultaneously. Cocky SOBs


Well, let’s be honest, that raped EVERYONE quickly....very quickly. I can see why they thought this. Also, they absolutely dominated Russia too, they just didn’t expect Russia to be able to convince their millions of people to hold out until Winter.

IMO - If Hitler had swallowed his pride slightly and pulled back as winter approached, he would’ve been able to own them the following summer and we would not have been able to push through the med line.

Crazy how just a little thing and decision changed the landscape of the world as we know it.
Posted by prplhze2000
Parts Unknown
Member since Jan 2007
58830 posts
Posted on 6/22/18 at 10:49 am to
Hitler also wasted resources in North Africa. Generals made that point after the war.
Posted by beerJeep
Louisiana
Member since Nov 2016
39230 posts
Posted on 6/22/18 at 10:49 am to
quote:

they lost that gamble but still beat the Russians either way.


No. The Russians beat the Russians in wwi. The Germans were simply able to wait that out.
Posted by rt3
now in the piney woods of Pineville
Member since Apr 2011
148006 posts
Posted on 6/22/18 at 10:50 am to
quote:

was this intentional?

this was before everything was standardized


hell... even in the US... different railroad companies had different gauges so only "my" trains could run on "my" tracks
This post was edited on 6/22/18 at 10:56 am
Posted by beerJeep
Louisiana
Member since Nov 2016
39230 posts
Posted on 6/22/18 at 10:51 am to
quote:

was this intentional?


Absolutely.

quote:

different railroad companies had different gauges so only "my" trains could run on "my" tracks


Aka intentional in Europe it was different countries not companies.

No you have to pay x amount to switch over to MY train to get your goods across MY country.

Also helps in defense as the attackers rail cars can’t and won’t work.
This post was edited on 6/22/18 at 10:53 am
Posted by Klark Kent
Houston via BR
Member since Jan 2008
75945 posts
Posted on 6/22/18 at 10:51 am to
cool. thanks for info. interesting tidbit.
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 7Next pagelast page

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

FacebookXInstagram