History discussion: Barbarossa

[chuckwood]

Good post, but there is more to it.

Some additions to your post:

1) There was no real war on two fronts when Germany invaded Russia. The British were holed up on their Island fortress, the US were not involved yet and would not really make their presence felt until well into 1943. Sure, there was some fighting in Africa, but Hitler never really saw Africa as a true front. Hence the horrific supply problems Rommel faced there.
Yep sure, but you also have to take into account the Mediterranean theatre-what delayed Barbarossa? Italy and its attempts at taking over large swathes of Africa/Balkans. The UK was actively bombing Germany in 1941, even if it was small what happened when Molotov visited Berlin to discuss the non aggression pact?

2) The US would have declared war on him anyway. But still, it doesn't help to pick a fight with a giant. The US needed to be shoved, there was clandestine help [protection of convoys, Land lease but the US would not declare war unless it was threatened. Isolationism was rife, this had a major issue of the 1940 elections and the US had to tread very carefully.

3) The Russian officer corps WAS a mere shadow of what it was, thanks to Uncle Joe (Stalin). Stalin had singlehandedly almost lost the war before it even started.
Absolutely but Mongolia was a reminder that the Russian officier corps was not completely devoid of talent-Zhukov anyone? The cuts allowed talented officiers to shine and once the invasion started many were let out of the gulags to fight again.

4) The Germans learned that the Russians were unafraid of large amounts of casualties very quickly. Beating Japan was no big feat though. The Japanese army in central Asia wasn't their best and even the best Japanese troops were not comparable to the Russian and German juggernauts. The Japanese had cookie jars with tracks for tanks...

Yes, but the method of destroying the Japanese by the Russians spooked them so much after their outstanding victories in 1905 they never threatened the USSR ever again-a big issue for the Germans.

5) Yep.

6) Something like that. It's a little more complex than that, but it sums it up.

There were more reasons and Germany could have beaten Russia in 1941 (which was the plan anyway).
Here's a hint, look at dates.

My new additions in red, I love debating this stuff!

7. What also lead to the German defeat was what started happening in November 1941 also. The worst winter that century hit the Germans who had not been allowed to prepare for the winter nor had they thought about it properly. what had happened before this was torrential rains also that turned the ground into mud and stopped the movemnet of an essentially horse drawn supply chain. Chaos!

 

[Buddha 3]

The UK actively bombing Germany? You're kidding right?
Sure, they had raids, they dropped bombs, but nothing major was achieved...
In fact, it is still argued to this day that throughout the war the combined bombing campaigns of the US and the UK did not truly influence German war production. Though I hasten to add I do not subscribe to that notion.
What is fact though is that until late 1943, early 1944 the bombings did very little.

Yes, the US needed to be shoved. They were... Remember Pearl Harbour? Yes I know, that was the Japanese, but there is no way that the US would not fight Germany if it got dragged into the war anyway. Don't forget that German ships had already attacked US ships.

You're gonna drag Zhukov up as proof that there was talent? Sure, there was talent, but not much. For every Zhukov there were a shedload of Von Mannsteins and so on. No contest, no comparison. Though the Russians did have one incredible talent: Doggedness.

The Japanese not threatening Russia an issue for the Germans? Not really, they already knew this. If it was an issue, they would not have attacked...

You have however touched upon the real reason: The Balkans campaign. Hitler's generals wanted to start the war with Russia far earlier and wanted to ignore the Balkans. Hitler wanted the Balkans... So the invasion started later, resulting in a campaign that dragged on into the winter. Had the Germans started even 1 or 2 months earlier, they would have taken Moscow and that, most likely, would have been the end of it... (simplified)

I'll post up a far more extensive narrative tomorrow.

Good posting by the way.

 

[chuckwood]

The UK actively bombing Germany? You're kidding right?
Sure, they had raids, they dropped bombs, but nothing major was achieved...
The UK dropped about 22,000 tonnes of Bombs in 1941. It was active and it was the biggest offensive weapon they had at the time after the reverses in the Western Desert and the Balkans. It was active enough to still make the Luftwaffe install radar systems and have hundreds of fighters stationed throughout the western European theatre right till the end.

In fact, it is still argued to this day that throughout the war the combined bombing campaigns of the US and the UK did not truly influence German war production. Though I hasten to add I do not subscribe to that notion.
What is fact though is that until late 1943, early 1944 the bombings did very little.
Actual German production increased to new levels due to Albert Speer's appointment as head of manufacturing. The bombing was a way to attack the enemy only and not anywhere accurate as it is today. That debate will go on for ever!

Yes, the US needed to be shoved. They were... Remember Pearl Harbour? Yes I know, that was the Japanese, but there is no way that the US would not fight Germany if it got dragged into the war anyway. Don't forget that German ships had already attacked US ships.

They had and the US had stated they would fire back if fired upon. Yet it still took them Pearl Harbour to enter the fray even after most of Europe had been taken by the Nazis.

You're gonna drag Zhukov up as proof that there was talent? Sure, there was talent, but not much. For every Zhukov there were a shedload of Von Mannsteins and so on. No contest, no comparison. Though the Russians did have one incredible talent: Doggedness.

And lots and lots of cannon fodder. But you do not give the Russians credit where it is due. They developed from a ramshackle army into arguably the best equipped mechanised force in Europe at that time. They learnt from the Germans and developed their own divisions to match the German way of attacking.
The Germans did not just give up, They were eventually beaten by superior firepower and a better armed and led foe. we simply do not know as much about as the Russian generals due to Stalin's paranoia and the cold war.

The Japanese not threatening Russia an issue for the Germans? Not really, they already knew this. If it was an issue, they would not have attacked...

Yet it infuriated Hitler that the Japanese signed a non aggression pact with the USSR, thereby ruling out an attack from both sides.

You have however touched upon the real reason: The Balkans campaign. Hitler's generals wanted to start the war with Russia far earlier and wanted to ignore the Balkans. Hitler wanted the Balkans... So the invasion started later, resulting in a campaign that dragged on into the winter. Had the Germans started even 1 or 2 months earlier, they would have taken Moscow and that, most likely, would have been the end of it... (simplified)

Agreed.

I'll post up a far more extensive narrative tomorrow.

Good posting by the way.

Cheers Buddha, it is a fascinating period and one that has always lots more questions that answers about why it happened the way it did.

 

[Dave284]

isn't he that guy from pirates of the Caribbean?

 

[Cube]

What happened? What went wrong? How come the Germans lost?

I know the answers, but I'm curious to know what you guys think.

OK I'm not a history buff, and I know Jay will kick anyones' a$$ here but I watch too much of the documentory channels and here's my 2p

The war could be seen to have been lost pre-1939, in fact in the build up to hostilities in the air arena.

Germany built a huge air armada, true, but never really created a truly effective long range bomber. The UK suffered at the hands of the medium range bomber armadas but the war was IMHO, (and a distant memory of my O level history) effectively lost when the Russians moved their war production to behind the Urals.

Without the ability to strike at the war production areas of Russia the Germans were fighting a losing battle, the Russians could pour manpower and resources into weapons production and, without the apparent concern of the other powers for losses, could use this production to simply overwhelm to German forces without concern for the costs.

If the Germans had the ability, early into Operation Barbarossa, to strike deep into the Soviet Union things might have been different so the lack of a long range bomber certainly contributed to the downfall.

So there you go a slightly different opinion

 

[Bon]

I think the fact of it the nuclear arms race was the end all. Even if germany had of invaded russia successfully, I think the prospect of 3 nuclear devices per month after Hiroshima and Nagasaki would have seals victory for the Allies none the less. On the other hand, if Germany had managed to get its nuclear weapons program finished before hand, then I think they would have won it.

I do realise that the bombs were dropped a month after the war ended in europe, but I think that these acts were the final nail in the coffin to speak and seal victory once and for all.

 

[Kitch]

The Russian 'scorched earth' pretty much broke the Germans logistics, nothing left when the germans got there, everything they needed to operate as an effective fighting force they had to bring with them all the way from the fatherland. And as we all know an army marches on its stomach, what I would like to hear is B3's take on a what if.

What if Hitler hadn't been so controlling over his generals and let them have more of a free hand, do you think that the Russian campaign would have been a different story

 

[crazy-lacey]

Okay, here's one for the history buffs...

World War II was undoubtably the greatest conflict in human history. In reality this war was several conflicts rolled into one, with some nations fighting several wars at once.

Within this conflict, there was no greater war than the titanic struggle of Germany versus the USSR.

On the 22nd of June, 1941 Germany launched Operation Barbarossa, the invasion of the Soviet Union. We all know the eventual outcome, Germany was utterly defeated, with the Russians claiming half of Europe.

How could this have happened? Despite the Soviets having far greater numbers in manpower, the Germans had the better cards. Their army was trained to a far greater level and was far more modern in its equipment and tactics. Up until the end of 1942 the German army captured Russians by the hundred thousands on a regular basis.
What happened? What went wrong? How come the Germans lost?

I know the answers, but I'm curious to know what you guys think.

i was told it was mainly because they couldnt stand russias cold winter and they kept retreating further into russia bringing the germans inland more making it further for them to escape the winter.

 

[Buddha 3]

1)The UK dropped about 22,000 tonnes of Bombs in 1941. It was active and it was the biggest offensive weapon they had at the time after the reverses in the Western Desert and the Balkans. It was active enough to still make the Luftwaffe install radar systems and have hundreds of fighters stationed throughout the western European theatre right till the end.

2)Actual German production increased to new levels due to Albert Speer's appointment as head of manufacturing. The bombing was a way to attack the enemy only and not anywhere accurate as it is today. That debate will go on for ever!

3)They had and the US had stated they would fire back if fired upon. Yet it still took them Pearl Harbour to enter the fray even after most of Europe had been taken by the Nazis.

4)And lots and lots of cannon fodder. But you do not give the Russians credit where it is due. They developed from a ramshackle army into arguably the best equipped mechanised force in Europe at that time. They learnt from the Germans and developed their own divisions to match the German way of attacking.
The Germans did not just give up, They were eventually beaten by superior firepower and a better armed and led foe. we simply do not know as much about as the Russian generals due to Stalin's paranoia and the cold war.

5)Yet it infuriated Hitler that the Japanese signed a non aggression pact with the USSR, thereby ruling out an attack from both sides.


Cheers Buddha, it is a fascinating period and one that has always lots more questions that answers about why it happened the way it did.

1) Well ofcourse you'll do some fighting if the Brits come over and drop bombs on your noggin...
Seriously though, the bombing campaign (even when the US first joined in) did not legitimise the amount of planes and crew lost by the damage it did. It was more a case of being seen to fight back. More about morale than anything tangible.
Although later on the bombing campaign was stepped up to such an extend that the Luftwaffe was forced to defend Germany, thereby giving up the skies over France and giving the Allies air supremecy (not just superiority) come invasion time.

2) Yes, German production was at its peak in late 1944, when the bombing campaign was at its peak too...

3) I'm convinced that if Pearl Harbour hadn't happened, something else would have triggered US involvement. FDR was quite willing, even if the general public was on the fence at best. Kinda like 9-11 when you think about it...

4) And you give them more credit than they deserve. The Russians were screaming for the Allies to open a second front, because they knew that despite some big victories, things were still looking grim. If the Kursk operation (Zitadelle or Citadel) hadn't been leaked to the Russians, that would more than likely have been the end for Uncle Joe. Don't fall in the trap of Russian propaganda, they make us believe that Kursk was a pushover. In reality the great tank battle at Prokharovka was a resounding thrashing for the Russians. They keep telling us they won...
I give the Russians the credit they rightfully deserve. They won. Though not on their own...
Russian sources even state that if the Allies had decided to continue the war after Germany's defeat and would throw the Russians out of Eastern Europe, there would have been little they could do about it... Though that's going into the realm of what ifs.

5) Ofcourse it did. You'd be angry too if your mate didn't have your back in a barfight, even if he is puny.

Big post hopefully tonight.

 

[Buddha 3]

isn't he that guy from pirates of the Caribbean?

No, that's Barbosa.
Barbarossa means Redbeard.