- 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: Today is the 81st anniversary of the launch of Operation Barbarossa
Posted on 6/22/22 at 10:02 am to beulahland
Posted on 6/22/22 at 10:02 am to beulahland
quote:
And the Ukrainians welcomed the German.
Ukrainians are Nazis, so…..
0
Posted on 6/22/22 at 10:04 am to Jack Ruby
quote:Germany’s entire reason for starting WW2 was to expand east. The western war was like a side mission. The existence of Communism/Jewry/Slavic people in Europe was incompatible with Nazi ideology so the invasion was inevitable. If the Nazis were smart they would have destroyed British air capability and the BEF at Dunkirk and seek peace, and they should have added Ukrainians to the army who hated the USSR instead of killing then. Would have been easier to hold territory and reinforce the frontline. And then they should have started digging in and fight a defensive war once they reached Moscow, then renew the offensive in spring.
It wasn't D-Day that ended Hitler's campaign.... It was Barbarossa. Had he never attacked Russia, he likely would have stretched the war out long enough to possibly introduce jet fighters and V2 rockets and maybe even a nuke. Who knows.
Posted on 6/22/22 at 10:42 am to ChewyDante
Every year the same issues are brought up and explained away, but, each year, we have to again and again, explain that: 1) a spring start to Barbarossa was not militarily feasible; and 2) turning Guderian South and away from Moscow was a sound decision for several reasons.
The logistical support for Guderian heading further East in August was not available. The logistical support system barely supported the German units at Yelnya at that point in the campaign. It's very doubtful that Guderian and Hoth could have captured Moscow at that point in the campaign. It's probable that, by leaving that long right flank open as Guderian and Hoth approached Moscow, a Soviet counter-attack into that long flank would have necessitated Guderian and Hoth responding to defeat that flank attack.
I personally, really and face to face had the chance to meet Stephen Ambrose and ask him what Nazi Germany could have done to conquer the Soviet Union. He told me that it was an impossible task. Nazi Germany never possessed enough military power to conquer the Soviet Union.
The logistical support for Guderian heading further East in August was not available. The logistical support system barely supported the German units at Yelnya at that point in the campaign. It's very doubtful that Guderian and Hoth could have captured Moscow at that point in the campaign. It's probable that, by leaving that long right flank open as Guderian and Hoth approached Moscow, a Soviet counter-attack into that long flank would have necessitated Guderian and Hoth responding to defeat that flank attack.
I personally, really and face to face had the chance to meet Stephen Ambrose and ask him what Nazi Germany could have done to conquer the Soviet Union. He told me that it was an impossible task. Nazi Germany never possessed enough military power to conquer the Soviet Union.
This post was edited on 6/22/22 at 10:47 am
Posted on 6/22/22 at 11:26 am to Champagne
People watch a couple YouTube videos and are convinced that the German leadership, who overachieved greatly based on their strategic footprint, were incompetent. 
I think people also voluntarily fall victim to the “Hitler was a moron and if he’d only have listened to his generals” theory of the war. In reality, the decisions were extremely complicated, the generals did not uniformly agree, and often all outcomes were likely to be bad. Hitler’s attitude was often not helpful or realistic, but often it was and many of Germany’s most spectacular successes required Hitler to agree with the right commander on a particular course of action. It requires a lot less thinking to just say “Hitler was an idiot and his commanders knew everything!”
Occupying all of the USSR certainly was not possible. But collapsing the Soviet war machine or regime such that the political structure either changed or was forced to grant concessions to Germany in order to preserve their own survival I think was very much attainable. Certainly had the United States not entered the war or not been successful in providing the USSR the extent of aid that we ultimately did, I think Germany could have withstood the Soviet complete destruction of Germany, which would have protracted the war and led to any number of future outcomes.
In my estimation, the outcome of WWII could have gone in a great many number of directions absent U.S. entry. Once the U.S. entered and the policy was unconditional surrender only the outcome was decided absent Germany attaining nuclear weapons. The geopolitical dynamic was simply impossible to overcome at that point.
I think people also voluntarily fall victim to the “Hitler was a moron and if he’d only have listened to his generals” theory of the war. In reality, the decisions were extremely complicated, the generals did not uniformly agree, and often all outcomes were likely to be bad. Hitler’s attitude was often not helpful or realistic, but often it was and many of Germany’s most spectacular successes required Hitler to agree with the right commander on a particular course of action. It requires a lot less thinking to just say “Hitler was an idiot and his commanders knew everything!”
quote:
I personally, really and face to face had the chance to meet Stephen Ambrose and ask him what Nazi Germany could have done to conquer the Soviet Union. He told me that it was an impossible task. Nazi Germany never possessed enough military power to conquer the Soviet Union.
Occupying all of the USSR certainly was not possible. But collapsing the Soviet war machine or regime such that the political structure either changed or was forced to grant concessions to Germany in order to preserve their own survival I think was very much attainable. Certainly had the United States not entered the war or not been successful in providing the USSR the extent of aid that we ultimately did, I think Germany could have withstood the Soviet complete destruction of Germany, which would have protracted the war and led to any number of future outcomes.
In my estimation, the outcome of WWII could have gone in a great many number of directions absent U.S. entry. Once the U.S. entered and the policy was unconditional surrender only the outcome was decided absent Germany attaining nuclear weapons. The geopolitical dynamic was simply impossible to overcome at that point.
Posted on 6/22/22 at 12:23 pm to ChewyDante
quote:
Hitler was a moron and if he’d only have listened to his generals” theory of the war.
A good example of how this old saying is proven false is the fact that in mid November 1941, it was the German Generals themselves who persuaded Hitler to continue the offensive towards Moscow. This offensive failed and resulted in defeat.
As for some who might disagree with Ambrose on whether Nazi Germany could have defeated the Soviet Union, I respect their opinion on this, but, Stephen Ambrose is a very well-respected WW2 wonk, so, his opinion carries great weight.
IMHO his thinking is sound. In 1941, Nazi German military power was insufficient for a Blitz Victory over the Soviet Union. Germany's economy was not even placed on a full-wartime footing in 1941. That didn't happen until early 1943 after the Battle of Stalingrad.
In summer 1942, Nazi Germany attacked again, but, this time, they didn't even have enough military power to attack along the whole East Front. Also, by then, the USA had entered the war. Did Nazi Germany really have a chance to defeat the Soviet Union in 1942? Ambrose says "no" and I agree with him.
After 1942? Nazi Germany had no hope of defeating the Soviet Union.
I'm not prepared to discuss possibilities and scenarios in which the USA doesn't enter WW2. The USA was supplying war materiel such as 100 octane fighter airplane fuel to the Royal Air Force starting in mid 1940. The US Navy was conducting war missions against German U-boats by 1940. The USA was always going to enter the fight against Nazi Germany.
I'm also not prepared to discuss scenarios involving Germany forcing a Stalemate on the East Front, at least not in this thread. It might have been possible but, here, we are discussing Nazi German prospects for defeating the Soviet Union, something like Imperial Germany had done to Czarist Russia back in World War I.
The prospects for achieving a Stalemate on the East Front is a good topic for a separate thread.
This post was edited on 6/22/22 at 12:43 pm
Posted on 6/22/22 at 12:50 pm to Jack Ruby
quote:
Hitler was also heading right for Moscow in the summer but turned his armies at the last minute to the more "strategic" cities south and north. He was advancing like 50 miles/day at one point and had decimated all of Russias Air Force. If he kept going on course, Moscow would have fallen in a matter of days.
This was the only hope of victory for the Germans. The strategic importance of Moscow to the Soviets was paramount.
Their road, railroad, and river traffic if all of European Russia all converged at Moscow. Moscow was the central logistics hub for the Soviets. It literally connected the country together. Losing Moscow would have meant that the Soviet Forces in the North would be effectively cutoff from those in the south. Each isolated sector of European Russia could have been defeated in detail. It would have been impossible for the Soviets to put up an effective defensive line west of the Urals. And bringing all their forces from Siberia would not have been enough to form a defensive line even if their wanted to.
Along with Moscow’s importance from a logistics standpoint, it was also the heart of Soviet power. Losing it would possibly bring about the collapse of the Soviet government, or at least caused them to sue for peace.
Yes, taking Moscow didn’t help Napoleon over a century earlier. But much had changed between 1812 and 1941. And the situations in the ground were far different. While in 1812 the Russians had fought delaying actions as they sucked the French deeper into Russia, slowly bleeding the French armies while keeping Russia’s armies intact, in 1941 the Red Army was a shattered demoralized force by the time the Germans reached the gates of Moscow. The massive calutron battles the Germans had pulled off had erased numerous armies from the Soviet order of battle. Add in the fact the Red Air Force had been eradicated as an effective fighting force in the opening day of the war, and you see how different the situation for the Russians was in 1941 than in 1812. Had the Germans reached Moscow in say August or September the outcome would have very likely been far different. This is especially true when you consider the fact if had the Germans struck in say April, they would have found the Red Army even less prepared than was the case in June. Remember, in the days right before the German invasion the Soviets had started making at least some defensive moves. I’m April they were completely unprepared for anything.
I’m not saying there is a 100% chance the Germans would have won if they had not delayed Barbarossa until late June. But they would have at least at a chance.
This post was edited on 6/22/22 at 12:53 pm
Posted on 6/22/22 at 1:14 pm to Champagne
quote:
After 1942? Nazi Germany had no hope of defeating the Soviet Union
^But you can’t make this statement
quote:
I'm not prepared to discuss possibilities and scenarios in which the USA doesn't enter WW2.
^And then follow it with this statement, because the first statement is entirely contingent upon the United States being in the war. So really, the first statement should actually read, once the United Sates entered the war, Germany had no realistic avenue to victory over the combined American, British, and Soviet powers. The United States entry into the war is what makes it an accurate statement yet the statement that “the Soviet Union could not be defeated after 1942” implies that their inevitable victory was not reliant on American entry but their own inherent power and leaves out the fact that the only reason it is true is because of the strategic and military realities that existed now BECAUSE of the United States explicitly. If the war continued absent American entry it is not at all certain the Soviets would come out victorious.
Hence the failure of Barbarossa to defeat the Soviets in 1941 cannot be viewed as some evidence of the futility of the continued German war against the Soviets since the war only became unwinnable when the United States entered. The Germans were quite capable of carrying on a competent war effort against the Soviets even after the Soviet counteroffensive in winter 1941.
Even the political situation in the United States did not make war in Europe inevitable. FDR was engaged in an incessant propaganda campaign which included the absurd and provocative claims that the Germans were planning to invade and occupy the Western hemisphere and yet still there was not popular support for American entry into the war.
Posted on 6/22/22 at 1:21 pm to Champagne
quote:
I personally, really and face to face had the chance to meet Stephen Ambrose and ask him what Nazi Germany could have done to conquer the Soviet Union.
Ambrose was a monument builder, not a serious historian.
This post was edited on 6/22/22 at 1:26 pm
Posted on 6/22/22 at 1:39 pm to ChewyDante
quote:
^And then follow it with this statement, because the first statement is entirely contingent upon the United States being in the war. So really, the first statement should actually read, once the United Sates entered the war, Germany had no realistic avenue to victory over the combined American, British, and Soviet powers. The United States entry into the war is what makes it an accurate statement yet the statement that “the Soviet Union could not be defeated after 1942” implies that their inevitable victory was not reliant on American entry but their own inherent power and leaves out the fact that the only reason it is true is because of the strategic and military realities that existed now BECAUSE of the United States explicitly. If the war continued absent American entry it is not at all certain the Soviets would come out victorious.
Without American aid it’s doubtful the Soviets would have made it though 1942 without the Red Army collapsing from lack of transport, fuel, and even food.
Yes, the Soviets moved huge portions of the industrial base east to prevent them from falling into German hands. And once those factories were up and running they churned out mountains of tanks, guns, and other weapons. And the Russians had more than enough oil.
But that oil is useless without sufficient refining capacity, especially high octane aviation fuel. The Soviets lacked in that regard. Also, the loss of most of Ukraine cost the Soviets a huge portion of their food production. And the Soviets were completely lacking in truck and tire production. So while the Soviets could pump out tanks and artillery pieces at a rate the Germans didn’t imagine possible. The Soviets lacked the means, on their own, to produce the trucks needed to follow those tanks and cannons to keep them fueled up and supplied with ammo. They lacked the ability to either produce enough food or supply it to the armies in the field. Without American Studebaker trucks, American Spam, American radios, American tires, American fuel, and on and on, the Red Army would have by late 1942 been a barefoot, starving, foot borne mob, shouldering rifles without ammunition, with tanks abandoned due to lack of fuel, and planes grounded for the same reason.
Posted on 6/22/22 at 1:59 pm to Alltheway Tigers!
quote:
Didn’t the Greek campaign delay the start of Barbarossa?
Yes.
Barbarossa was slated to begin in May, but Hitler had to pull Mussolini's chestnuts out of the fire in Greece and Albania.
This post was edited on 6/22/22 at 2:02 pm
Posted on 6/22/22 at 2:05 pm to Darth_Vader
Based on what I’ve just read, both Germany and Russia lacked in logistics. Neither had the means or the goods to fight a modern war along the same lines as what the US had. Both had to be using horses. Neither party had near enough trucks. Feeding these huge armies and keeping them armed had to be an enormous under taking.
Without the US they could have fought for a decade.
Without the US they could have fought for a decade.
This post was edited on 6/22/22 at 3:28 pm
Posted on 6/22/22 at 2:11 pm to beulahland
quote:
And the Ukrainians welcomed the German.
How incredibly short-sighted Hitler’s worldview was. He could’ve used all those Ukrainians that welcomed him as a liberator in the years to come.
If only there were a way for Hitler to not go through Poland, thus Britain and France possibly not getting involved. How much better might it have been.
Posted on 6/22/22 at 2:17 pm to Jack Ruby
quote:
Had he never attacked Russia, he likely would have stretched the war out long enough to possibly introduce jet fighters and V2 rockets and maybe even a nuke. Who knows.
Germany launched 3000+ V2s during the war.
Posted on 6/22/22 at 2:26 pm to beulahland
Everyone under Stalin initially welcomed Hitler's armies. The fact is that Stalin killed way more citizens on purpose than Hitler ever dreamed of
Posted on 6/22/22 at 2:57 pm to CitizenK
Germany wins if Japan joins the attack in 1941.
Posted on 6/22/22 at 3:01 pm to Barbellthor
quote:
Should've started in March. Guess the madman figured overwhelming numbers would speed the advance up?
The roads were mud till summer. They tried to avoid the rains of spring and fall. Thought Russia was a France, when they still hadn’t beaten England. Should have waited till ‘44.
Posted on 6/22/22 at 3:26 pm to Fat Harry
No Pearl Harbor, no USA entering the war
Posted on 6/22/22 at 4:28 pm to ChewyDante
I'm not really sure why we seem to be stuck on talking about the unlikely hypothetical scenario in which the USA never enters the war against Nazi Germany. BUT, if you'd like, I can make a statement on that: If the USA never entered WW2 and halted all weapons and war materiel assistance to Great Britain and the Soviet Union, then, Germany might have been able to defeat the Soviet Union in a long war, but, certainly not in 1941.
But, once Germany invaded the Soviet Union, the USA was going to war against Nazi Germany one way or the other, and it didn't matter what the American People wanted.
But, once Germany invaded the Soviet Union, the USA was going to war against Nazi Germany one way or the other, and it didn't matter what the American People wanted.
This post was edited on 6/22/22 at 4:29 pm
Posted on 6/22/22 at 4:31 pm to beulahland
quote:
And the Ukrainians welcomed the German.
I guess they did! Or haven’t you heard that Stalin had killed 20 million of them!
Posted on 6/22/22 at 4:34 pm to Darth_Vader
LINK
In 1942 alone, I'm not sure that the Allies sent so much aid to the Soviets as to literally save their country. This view doesn't seem to be a majority view.
In 1942 alone, I'm not sure that the Allies sent so much aid to the Soviets as to literally save their country. This view doesn't seem to be a majority view.
Page 2 of 4
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News