|
|
Post by peterh on Jul 12, 2007 23:00:04 GMT
The Eastern Front of WW2 was home of some of the bloodiest and most brutal battles of WW2. This is a thread for the general developments prebattle and it's eventual consequenses in the war. So, I'll start out by stating that the war on the eastern front was off to a bad start from both parts.
Stalin apparently felt sure that the Germans wouldn't attack in 1941, though he might have suspected an attack eventually. Therefore he ordered defensive preparations to be halted since Hitler could deem this an act of aggression.
On the German side the army, while huge, wasn't as well armored as could be. I've read some interesting notes by Albert Speer that the armory industry was so inefficient and corrupted by Göring that production actually fell during those years. Once Speer was appointed production rose and during the Nürnberg trials Speer stated that had he been in charge the German armor could've been twice as good.
Am I wrong here and what else went wrong during the preperation?
|
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jul 12, 2007 23:06:24 GMT
The main thing that went wrong on the Russian side was Stalin murdering most of his officer corps in one of the most senseless bloodbaths of all time.
The main thing that went wrong on the German side was that Hitler made the same stupid mistake Napoleon did - he planned to invade in the wrong place. You want to actually beat Russia, you have to go in through the Crimea and grab the Ukraine, which is their breadbasket. This is how Britain & France beat them in the Crimean War.
But Hitler was too full of himself to learn from history, whilst Stalin was a paranoid psychopath. Expecting sense from either would be asking too much...
|
|
|
|
Post by peterh on Jul 12, 2007 23:17:41 GMT
Indeed Elliot. Stalin killed of the very vast majority of capable officers during the purge in the 30ies. This led to the Soviets embarrasing performance against the Finn's and that gave Hitler the impression that the Soviets would be crushed easily.
And so they looked to be for a while. But unlike Hitler, Stalin actually did learn from his mistake and gave the military leaders a certain degree of autonomy that helped rebuild the soviet army - and at that time the german was losing due to hitler's groos incompetence as a leader.
Actually Hitler had it wrong from the beginning as he expected a blitzkreig win. The German army was not equipped for a long fight and they had to change the strategy accordingly.
And the Germans DID grab Ukraine early on, Elliot. There was a lot of resistance against the Soviets at the time and it could be used to make a pro german army. Rosenberg argued this but to no avail - Himmler and hitler did not want these untermenschen in the German Army. Too bad for them, though, as one general (name escapes me atm) argued that a Ukrainian pro-german army of one million was a probably outcome had the residents been treated well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jul 12, 2007 23:21:05 GMT
Not early enough - and as you said, the Germans could have had Ukraine entirely on side if they'd gone in as liberators rather than conquerors. Stalin's purges in the Ukraine had won him no friends.
The German campaign was ultimately an abysmal strategic misjudgement on just about every level.
|
|
|
|
Post by peterh on Jul 12, 2007 23:23:17 GMT
Hell no- Stalin deliberatly starved the Ukrainians during the purge in the 20ies. Was it over two million people who died as a result? I can't remember offhand and can't be arsed to look it up  Oh, and Joachim Fest summed it up best when he said that Hitler viewed the Ukrainians as the enemy and he would be sure they knew that... |
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jul 12, 2007 23:25:36 GMT
I thought it was closer to ten, but I can't remember off the top, either... Too darn many, however you wanna cut it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jul 25, 2007 19:00:49 GMT
On the German side the army, while huge, wasn't as well armored as could be. I've read some interesting notes by Albert Speer that the armory industry was so inefficient and corrupted by Göring that production actually fell during those years. Once Speer was appointed production rose and during the Nürnberg trials Speer stated that had he been in charge the German armor could've been twice as good.
Am I wrong here and what else went wrong during the preperation?
You're right in that German industrial production was at its heights in '43 and '44 - in spite of constant Allied bombing. But then, wars are fought by people, not machinery.
The German Military Command was highly against attacking the Soviet Union (before England was defeated, at least) - but the 'greatest military genius of all times' overruled them - and, unfotunately, they followed (one could also say luckily, in a way, though).
Imagine what would have happened to Britain, if Rommel had had the resources tied up in Russia in '42 - or if the whole military might used in Russia would have been concentrated across the Channel. Sorry guys, with artillery bridging the channel, that would not have been the navy's call.
Not the I deplore that history went as it went - though it could also have turned out a lot more peaceful.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jul 25, 2007 19:59:54 GMT
If the German generals had been in charge of the war, they'd likely have won it. Germany had most of the best generals in the war, and Nazism had a lot of sympathisers throughout Europe. Combine with Napoleon's old trick of 'liberating' nations already burning under a foreign yoke (As with most of the Russian provinces) and there is no real reason Germany could not have triumphed. It's very lucky for the rest of us that Hitler thought he was a military genius  |
|
|
|
Post by Terrordar on Jul 26, 2007 2:17:30 GMT
It wasn't JUST that.
Even in Urkraine, they HATED the Russians (Or rather the Novgrod Rus) by the end of the war, the Kievan Rus despised the Germans. Why?
Oh, you know, that little ethnic cleansing thing they had going on.
|
|
|
|
Post by tempest1944 on Apr 4, 2008 23:04:49 GMT
Barbarossa.....that was, such an interesting campaign. I'm enjoying reading all this, 'cause I'm learning little facts I never really knew. But yes, it was a disaster from the start, but still, it was a close call.
In the air, the Red Air Force had nothing able to stand up to the Me-109 or FW-190 at first...both in planes & pilots. It took them a while to train good pilots, and to build new plane types, to replace their outclassed Polikarpov I-16s. But when done...wow!!! The Yakovlev Yak-3, got this reputation: German pilots were told, to 'avoid combat with any yak fighter lacking an oil cooler under the nose". It was short-range, but could out-maneuver anything on either side.
So it took them a while, but the Russians pulled through in good form. Just...Germany could have won it, long before that happened.
|
|
.com
