- 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: Was Stalingrad necessary for Hitler to grab when he did?
Posted on 11/27/19 at 12:48 pm to whitetiger1234
Posted on 11/27/19 at 12:48 pm to whitetiger1234
Case Blue was likely doomed from the start since Army Group South (later A and B) didn't have the man power to maintain a continuous front all the way to Baku.
Stalingrad was key for Army Group B to maintain flank protection as A drove south, the problem is the Germans needed to keep sucking Heer units into the 6th Army and left strung out poorly equipped Axis Allies to maintain flank protection. Once the Soviets massed units on the flanks of the 6th army the Axis Allies crumbled and the pocket was sealed. If not for Manstein, it's possible Army Group A could have been cut off from the front.
The true disaster of Stalingrad was leaving the 6th army in the pocket, not rapidly breaking out and pulling back Army Group A to stabilize the front.
Stalingrad was key for Army Group B to maintain flank protection as A drove south, the problem is the Germans needed to keep sucking Heer units into the 6th Army and left strung out poorly equipped Axis Allies to maintain flank protection. Once the Soviets massed units on the flanks of the 6th army the Axis Allies crumbled and the pocket was sealed. If not for Manstein, it's possible Army Group A could have been cut off from the front.
The true disaster of Stalingrad was leaving the 6th army in the pocket, not rapidly breaking out and pulling back Army Group A to stabilize the front.
This post was edited on 11/27/19 at 12:59 pm
0
Posted on 11/27/19 at 12:56 pm to mastersoftext
quote:
Hitler had no choice but to invade Russia. He knew Russia couldn’t be trusted as they were responsible for polish incursions and attacks on German soil and for atrocities against Germanic people in Danzig.
Just wait until they look up Operation Pike...
Posted on 11/27/19 at 12:59 pm to whitetiger1234
It doesn't matter. When Hitler lost the air battle with Britain he lost the war. Had he not attacked Russia they would have continued to arm themselves and eventually attacked him.
Germany was a medium size country, and unlike Napoleonic France, they could not mobilize their conquests to fight for them. Fighting the entire Anglo-sphere was not sustainable with just Italy and Japan helping.
Germany was a medium size country, and unlike Napoleonic France, they could not mobilize their conquests to fight for them. Fighting the entire Anglo-sphere was not sustainable with just Italy and Japan helping.
Posted on 11/27/19 at 1:08 pm to whitetiger1234
Hitler thought that by taking Stalingrad, the loss of life would break the USSR. What he failed to realize was that Stalin was more than willing to let Stalingrad burn to the ground. He had already moved his forces to defend the oil fields. He had killed millions of his own people before the war started. What’s another city full to him?
Had Hitler gone full steam to the oil fields, they may have captured it all and had the fuel to power his armor to beat the USSR. Instead, his forces were bogged down in hellish urban fighting.
Had Hitler gone full steam to the oil fields, they may have captured it all and had the fuel to power his armor to beat the USSR. Instead, his forces were bogged down in hellish urban fighting.
Posted on 11/27/19 at 1:11 pm to whitetiger1234
No matter where he pushed ahead at that time Hitler had out pushed his supply line,
Logistics was his problem not military ability.
Logistics was his problem not military ability.
Posted on 11/27/19 at 1:48 pm to whitetiger1234
No, it was an egotistical blunder on his part and cost him dearly.
Posted on 11/27/19 at 1:57 pm to 14&Counting
quote:
That and he should have delivered the knock out punch and taken Moscow
I’m not saying you’re wrong, because we’ll never know; but I don’t think Stalin would ever acquiesce.
Furthermore, Napoleon burned Moscow to the ground for all the good it did him. Russia is virtually impossible to defeat on her home turf. She’s so vast that her troops can just continually pull back while your logistics keep getting stretched further and further until you’re no longer able to get food, ammo, etc to your guys fighting on the front.
ETA: and I think Stalin’s orders numbering 270 and 227 show proof that he would never accept defeat.
This post was edited on 11/27/19 at 2:00 pm
Posted on 11/27/19 at 2:31 pm to Penrod
Why didn't Japan fiigjt in Europe
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News