- 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: WWII hypothetical: could Britain have defeated Germany by itself after June 1940
Posted on 4/26/16 at 11:02 am to Tom288
Posted on 4/26/16 at 11:02 am to Tom288
quote:
Dietrich
One of the best commanders of the war, at least at Divisional level. The amazing part of it is he had no real training as an officer. His only formal military training came as a member of the Imperial Army during WWI where served on one of the very few German tanks during the war, becoming one of their first tank aces while raising to the rank of Sergeant. That was the extent of his military training. After the war he did odd jobs, including time as a cop before joining the Nazi Party and becoming Hitler's bodyguard and driver.
1
Posted on 4/26/16 at 11:05 am to CoachChappy
quote:
No, Germany screwed the pooch when they went up against Russia. Given the model of war far in the day, they were committing the well known mistake of invading Russia. Winter does come in Russia, and it's unforgivably cold. If Russia stays neutral, Germany finishes off the Battle of London with a victory.
No, they didn't. They didn't attack Russia because they were bored. It was inevitable and they couldn't let Russia get the oilfields. If they screwed the pooch anywhere, it was not attacking Russia soon enough. That was due in large part to the Italians.
Posted on 4/26/16 at 11:08 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
One of the best commanders of the war, at least at Divisional level.
Yeah, Dietrich reminds me of Nathan Bedford Forrest, in ways.
Posted on 4/26/16 at 11:20 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
Yeah, Dietrich reminds me of Nathan Bedford Forrest, in ways.
another interesting tidbit about Dietrich is his name. His name in German roughly means "skeleton key". To honor him, the 1st SS Panzer Div took this as it's unit insignia...
Later the 12th SS which was raised by taking Hitler Youth and joining them with a cadre from 1st SS, likewise honored Dietrich with their insignia...
And finally the 1st SS Panzer Corps likewise used the Dietrich in it's insignia as well...
Posted on 4/26/16 at 11:26 am to Darth_Vader
Speaking of the Waffen-SS - Steiner is really going to turn things around.
Posted on 4/26/16 at 11:27 am to Darth_Vader
Well I'll be damned, Darth. I've always wondered what the hell the significance was of the Leibstandarte's insignia. I definitely assumed it was something deeper than that.
Posted on 4/26/16 at 11:29 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
They actually resorted to having BF-109s escort the BF-110s
And who was one of the biggest backers of the "Destroyer" (110) concept? None other than the Fat One.
Posted on 4/26/16 at 11:31 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
Speaking of the Waffen-SS - Steiner is really going to turn things around.
BTW, when looking up those Waffen SS unit crests, I came across this interesting tidbit.
Here's the unit crest for the 31st SS...
Look a bit familiar? Well, it should...
Posted on 4/26/16 at 11:32 am to TheSexecutioner
quote:
That was due in large part to the Italians.
The German Achilles' heel in both wars were their "allies". It was worse for them to have allied with whom they did than it would have been for them to go it alone. In the first WW the Germans were constantly having to rescue Austria-Hungary and in the second WW it was the Italians who couldn't hold their own.
Posted on 4/26/16 at 11:33 am to TheSexecutioner
quote:
That was due in large part to the Italians.
The Italians in WWII have to go down as one of the worst allies that could be considered a major power in modern military history. If anybody deserves to be mocked and ridiculed for terrible performance and lack of will to fight, it was the Italians in WWII. They also created predicaments that forced the Germans to bail them out at their great inconvenience. They only invaded France after the Germans had already achieved the breakthrough successes that made French collapse imminent. They were vultures of the most ineffective sort.
Posted on 4/26/16 at 11:38 am to Darth_Vader
Hitler never should have tried to invade Russia over such a wide front. By not targeting specific places, and just by trying to move East in one great wave; he spread his forces out too thin,
For instance if he had ignored Stalingrad and pushed South into the oil rich Caucasus, the Germans may have gained a valuable source of oil that they could use later on.
But trying to take Moscow, Stalingrad, and lay siege to Leningrad was over the top. Perhaps if he would have kept his flanks in order and made every attempt to capture just Moscow it would have been a better plan.
In the end, Russia was allowed to take trained troops from their Eastern armies and move them West. They were well outfitted and had plenty of tanks and artillery.
Russia could counterattack wherever they chose. The front was too broad, and the Germans had to rely on their allies to help man it. Russia had a vast reserve of manpower and weaponry and when they put this to good use Germany had little chance.
For instance if he had ignored Stalingrad and pushed South into the oil rich Caucasus, the Germans may have gained a valuable source of oil that they could use later on.
But trying to take Moscow, Stalingrad, and lay siege to Leningrad was over the top. Perhaps if he would have kept his flanks in order and made every attempt to capture just Moscow it would have been a better plan.
In the end, Russia was allowed to take trained troops from their Eastern armies and move them West. They were well outfitted and had plenty of tanks and artillery.
Russia could counterattack wherever they chose. The front was too broad, and the Germans had to rely on their allies to help man it. Russia had a vast reserve of manpower and weaponry and when they put this to good use Germany had little chance.
Posted on 4/26/16 at 11:43 am to ChewyDante
quote:
The Italians in WWII have to go down as one of the worst allies that could be considered a major power in modern military history. If anybody deserves to be mocked and ridiculed for terrible performance and lack of will to fight, it was the Italians in WWII. They also created predicaments that forced the Germans to bail them out at their great inconvenience. They only invaded France after the Germans had already achieved the breakthrough successes that made French collapse imminent. They were vultures of the most ineffective sort.
Agree 100%. There were a few exceptions where the Italians proved effective. Well, actually i can only really think of two and that's their employment of the SM.79 Sparviero as a torpedo bomber.
And their raid on Alexandria in 1941 by Italian divers using human torpedos...
I've got to admit, that took guts.
Posted on 4/26/16 at 11:43 am to doubleb
quote:
By not targeting specific places, and just by trying to move East in one great wave; he spread his forces out too thin,
Well, it is steppe. Hard not to move forward, generally, as you would generate a salient that can be easily turned or flanked. But, to not make a 100% push to take Moscow, while holding north and south at the grads appears to have been strategically unsound.
Posted on 4/26/16 at 11:44 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
But, to not make a 100% push to take Moscow,
That was his biggest mistake other than pushing back the invasion several weeks.
Posted on 4/26/16 at 11:46 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
Short-sighted, Hitler should have focused 100% effort on Moscow, and invested both Leningrad and Stalingrad by siege. He was thinking Stalingrad was the symbolic target, because he'd made the struggle personal between Stalin and himself. But, seizing Moscow would have split the Red Army in half - the defenders in Leningrad and Stalingrad might have called it a day if that happened.
He went 0fer - and it's difficult to recover from that. The delay was huge, but so was the divided focus. 3 kinds of effort: Main (Decisive), Supporting (Shaping) and wasted. Stalingrad was the costliest "wasted" effort in military history. When you dwarf Napoleon's winter campaign in Russia or Pickett's Charge, you've failed enough to stay in the history books forever.
Guderian claimed that it was his opinion that the three major cities targeted by Barbarossa should have been the central aims of the campaign over the destruction and attrition of Soviet armies. He was completely against diverting forces from Army Group Center to aid in the encirclements in the Ukraine. In his mind, capturing Moscow in particular was the most significant aim and would have provided a greater strategic victory than the complete destruction of the armies in their path.
Posted on 4/26/16 at 11:50 am to ChewyDante
quote:
Guderian claimed that it was his opinion that the three major cities targeted by Barbarossa should have been the central aims of the campaign over the destruction and attrition of Soviet armies. He was completely against diverting forces from Army Group Center to aid in the encirclements in the Ukraine. In his mind, capturing Moscow in particular was the most significant aim and would have provided a greater strategic victory than the complete destruction of the armies in their path.
I believe he would have been proven correct if Hitler would have listened to him, which he rarely did.
Posted on 4/26/16 at 11:53 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
That was his biggest mistake
IMO, Hitler's biggest mistake was starting the war too soon. When the German army invaded Poland, most of it's artillery was still horse-drawn
The original plan was war in 1941, if I remember correctly, but he got cocky.
Posted on 4/26/16 at 11:58 am to doubleb
quote:
Hitler never should have tried to invade Russia over such a wide front. By not targeting specific places, and just by trying to move East in one great wave; he spread his forces out too thin,
For instance if he had ignored Stalingrad and pushed South into the oil rich Caucasus, the Germans may have gained a valuable source of oil that they could use later on.
Stalingrad wasn't a target until the second summer offensive in 1942. Kiev was Army Group South's objective.
The Stalingrad campaign actually did significantly narrow and focus the geographic scope of the offensive, but the Germans couldn't just dive into the Caucasus without securing their northern flank or they stood to be completely cut off by a Soviet offensive. If you look at a map of the area you'll see this clear as day.
Posted on 4/26/16 at 12:10 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
I believe he would have been proven correct if Hitler would have listened to him, which he rarely did.
As do I. Easy to say now but it still was recognizable then too obviously.
And not listening to a commander like Guderian was rather foolhardy. Hitler may have been justified in his criticisms of other generals for their excessive caution and timidity, but that certainly was not an issue with Guderian. And not just regarding targeting Moscow over destruction of Soviet armies, but after the failure to reach Moscow, Hitler denied Guderian's efforts to move his forces back to a more defensible line in preparation for the upcoming Soviet winter and counterattacks sure to follow. This was the beginning of Hitler's decision making becoming truly irrational IMO. And it only got worse from there
Posted on 4/26/16 at 12:15 pm to FightinTigersDammit
quote:
IMO, Hitler's biggest mistake was starting the war too soon. When the German army invaded Poland, most of it's artillery was still horse-drawn
The original plan was war in 1941, if I remember correctly, but he got cocky.
Well, you've got to remember what his ultimate goal was from the beginning, namely the conquest and subjugation of most of European Russia. Poor Poland was simply in the way.
Hitler saw that at that time in the late 30's that the Soviet Union was at it's weakest due to the recent famines and the Red Army purges. He knew that the longer he held back, the more the Soviets would have time to recover. He did not want to give them that chance so he struck.
Page 11 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News