- 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: 77 Years Ago Today: Operation Barbarossa
Posted on 6/22/18 at 11:22 am to Darth_Vader
Posted on 6/22/18 at 11:22 am to Darth_Vader
Hitler made so many mistakes on the Eastern front. He only went after Stalingrad because of its name. He diverted forces causing the German advance toward Moscow to stall. Once the Red Army went on the offensive, he didn’t allow his commanders to fall back and regroup, leading to those troops being killed or captured.
0
Posted on 6/22/18 at 11:22 am to Darth_Vader
I imagine some German baws had a nice K/D going
Posted on 6/22/18 at 11:23 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
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.
Yes, of course, the different gauge issue is common knowledge, and is an important point.
My point remains because what is not common knowledge is that the Germans needed to re-build the Russian railways, but, the Germans had insufficient means to do so and that this logistical failure was egregious and fatal.
This post was edited on 6/22/18 at 11:36 am
Posted on 6/22/18 at 11:24 am to rt3
quote:
Hitler didn't HAVE to declare war on the USA after the US declared war on Japan
This is true- but in reality you could make the argument he was already at war with America on the high seas. It was inevitable. He was hoping to subdue all of Europe- then focus on us on his own terms. Ambitious fricker, wasn't he?
Posted on 6/22/18 at 11:25 am to ChewyDante
Also can we just marvel at the might that is the t-34 and the kv-2? 
Dem angles and dat 152mm
Russian and German tanks >>>> American tanks
Dem angles and dat 152mm
Russian and German tanks >>>> American tanks
This post was edited on 6/22/18 at 11:27 am
Posted on 6/22/18 at 11:26 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
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.
Darth, what is the time frame for the casualty figures you posted in the OP? 1941 alone? The German tank losses in particular seem high for 1941. They began Barbarossa with about 3,000 tanks. The German air losses seem high for 1941, too.
What prompted my post about the time frame for Barbarossa was I got the impression that you posted losses for the entire War on the Eastern Front 41-45.
This post was edited on 6/22/18 at 11:29 am
Posted on 6/22/18 at 11:29 am to The Boat
quote:
Then after Barbarossa started Army Group South was moving slowly so Hitler diverted men south to help them push through Ukraine. That delayed the move to Moscow. Both events killed precious time that likely would have allowed them to reach Moscow before they froze over.
This is a tougher event to judge as a bad move IMO. With hindsight we know Germany lost, so it makes sense to say the move on Moscow and not diverting those armored forces was the better move. Guderian's memoirs have had a huge influence on this historical POV as well. But the rationale was reasonable. That move resulted in the encirclement and destruction of massive Soviet armies in the Ukraine that had the potential to collapse Soviet resolve and absolutely decimated Soviet combat power in the southern zone of battle. At that point in the offensive, it's hard to say that with a few more weeks time the Germans would have successfully taken and held Moscow, especially considering the Soviets had already begun massing Siberian forces for the Dec. 5th counterattack around Moscow. German supply lines would remain stretched and vulnerable. German forces would still be unsuited for the frigid conditions. And German armor and troops would still be in a weakened state as a result of the continuous fighting from June-November which took a toll on equipment and manpower.
Posted on 6/22/18 at 11:29 am to oleheat
quote:
This is true- but in reality you could make the argument he was already at war with America on the high seas. It was inevitable.
hence why I added...
quote:
(yes I know realistically the US had already been in Europe)
Posted on 6/22/18 at 11:33 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
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.
Learn something new every day
Such a seemingly small detail but so huge in the overall outcome.
Posted on 6/22/18 at 11:38 am to AUTimbo
Stalin was a huge pussy and had a mental breakdown and didn't talk to anyone for days after Hitler invaded. Not a good look, comrade.
Posted on 6/22/18 at 11:40 am to Champagne
quote:
What prompted my post about the time frame for Barbarossa was I got the impression that you posted losses for the entire War on the Eastern Front 41-45.
Those loss numbers have to be for the entire German/Soviet war.
Posted on 6/22/18 at 11:51 am to The Boat
quote:
Stalin was a huge pussy and had a mental breakdown and didn't talk to anyone for days after Hitler invaded. Not a good look, comrade.
LINK
He was a massive hypocrite psychopath. He had gobs of men shot for "incompetence" for making "mistakes" that led to defeats, yet he himself was entirely responsible for not anticipating the German invasion which Soviet intelligence had warned him about.
It's fortunate for him his Politburo was a group of cowards who could murder at will on Stalin's orders but had zero courage to challenge him. Ever.
Posted on 6/22/18 at 11:52 am to ChewyDante
When everything else around you degrades to the point that nothing works, a Mosin-Nagant still will. 
Posted on 6/22/18 at 11:53 am to oleheat
Fact
Posted on 6/22/18 at 11:57 am to oleheat
quote:
When everything else around you degrades to the point that nothing works, a Mosin-Nagant still will.
And an absolutely beautiful rifle to boot. They can be picked up at almost any gun shows for a couple hundred bucks. I recommend anyone who likes history and rifles to buy one.
Posted on 6/22/18 at 12:08 pm to beerJeep
quote:
Thank god for Ivan and his will to just throw man after man into the jaws of death.
"Even a meat grinder can get clogged," he thought. Apparently, he was right.
Posted on 6/22/18 at 12:17 pm to beerJeep
quote:
Also can we just marvel at the might that is the t-34 and the kv-2?
While the T-34 was a nasty surprise initially due to it's overall superiority to the Pz. III & early models of the Pz. IV, it was even by early 1943 surpassed by the up-gunned version of the Pz. IV. It's did have good armor protection and it's 76mm (later 85mm) gun could deal with German tanks.
However, the T34 did have serious drawbacks comparative to it's German counterparts that made it vulnerable. Chief among it's drawback was the limitations imposed on it by it's poor optic. This limited the range in which Soviet tanks could engage their German adversaries. On the other hand the Germans had the world's best optics at that time which allowed German panzers to pick off Soviet tanks oftentimes even before the Soviet could so much as even see them. This, along with better trained panzer crews, accounts for the disparity in losses between the Germans and Soviets when it comes to tanks.
As for the KV-2, it was actually designed for infantry support. While it did have a massive 152mm gun, it was a low velocity gun as opposed to a high velocity gun designed for tank on tank combat. It could stand up to older more lightly armored German tanks. but against new models it was a sitting duck
quote:
Russian and German tanks >>>> American tanks
Throughout most of the war, this would be the case. However, as was shown later on in the Koran War, the M4A3E8 "Easy 8" was actually very effective against the T34/85.
This post was edited on 6/22/18 at 12:17 pm
Posted on 6/22/18 at 12:20 pm to Champagne
quote:
Darth, what is the time frame for the casualty figures you posted in the OP? 1941 alone?
The casualties figures I posted are for the entire war. I posted those to give a sense of real scale of the whole conflict that started with Barbarossa.
Posted on 6/22/18 at 12:22 pm to prplhze2000
quote:
Germans needed a trick at the end to beat them.
Imagine if they had more time to develop their own A-bomb...things may have turned out quite different
Posted on 6/22/18 at 12:26 pm to Darth_Vader
Had the Germans not massacred the locals on the lands they had passed through the population would’ve helped them take Stalin down
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News