Question About Western Contribution to the War

Discussions on WW2 in Eastern Europe.
Kelvin
Member
Posts: 2211
Joined: 06 Apr 2007 14:49

Re: Question About Western Contribution to the War

Post by Kelvin » 01 Jan 2018 08:49

No the whole of Europe, but Most of Europe, Napoleon and Hitler did dominate this in the past in a short period of time.

jesk
Member
Posts: 591
Joined: 04 Aug 2017 08:19
Location: Belarus

Re: Question About Western Contribution to the War

Post by jesk » 01 Jan 2018 20:48

Don't see in a subject of the analysis of fighting. Indistinct generalizations of space scale Great Britain+USSR+USA = defeat of Germany

ljadw
Member
Posts: 8344
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Question About Western Contribution to the War

Post by ljadw » 02 Jan 2018 12:11

Kelvin wrote:No the whole of Europe, but Most of Europe, Napoleon and Hitler did dominate this in the past in a short period of time.

From the Pyrenees to Wladivostok is the whole of Europe : Napoleon did dominate from the Atlantic Ocean (Spain and Portugal included ) to the Prussian-Russian border for a few years . Hitler increased his domination to a very small part of the SU :the line Leningrad-Moscow, Stalingrad , but the Germans could not occupy most of European Russia = the region between the line Leningrad-Moscow-Stalingrad and the Urals .

Besides: Vladivostok is not Europe .

And if Hitler had won and increased his domination to the Urals, his empire would have collapsed before 1953 for the simple reason that Germany had not the resources to conserve its conquests .

The Third Reich would not last 20 years .

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 1445
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Question About Western Contribution to the War

Post by Richard Anderson » 02 Jan 2018 19:20

ljadw wrote:1) Re Dieppe : LAH was already in the West before Dieppe . It was not a high quality division .
Yes, LAH was already in the West, beginning its journey on 1 July 1942. And yes, it was not a "high quality division", since it was not a division at all - it was a motorized infantry brigade of five infantry battalion (including the Berlin Wach Batallion) and strong supporting arms units.

You still have not established what your criteria for a "high quality division" is, although apparently what it is not is whatever you arbitrarily choose it to be. :roll:
Afaics 7 airborne (also not a high quality division ) was not in the east .
Yet again, why, other than you arbitrarily declaring it so, is 7. Flieger Division not a "high quality division"? No, 7. FD was not in the East in August 1942. The bulk of the division returned to Germany in late December 1941 from the Leningrad where it had suffered some 3,000 casualties, but 2. FJR and IV/Luftlande-Sturm-Regiment and other elements remained in the east until June 1942 when it returned to Germany before joining the rest of the division, which had gone to Normandy in April. The re-united division returned to Germany in September and then to Minsk in October.
The remainings of the LSS were withdrawn from the east to be refitted and to be transformed in a Motorised (or Infantry ? ) division . The withdrawal started already in the spring of 1942 but there was a delay because of transport problems . Units of the LSS paraded already on the Champs Elysées in Paris in July 1942, before Jubilee .
SS-Brigade SS-LAH was withdrawn and expanded into SS-Division (mot) SS-LAH. The decision to do so was on or about 21 February 1942. The brigade meanwhile remained north of Taganrog until 24 May 1942 when it moved to Mariupol and remained for coast defense until entraining for France on 1 July. The Parisian parade was 29 July. It remained in France until 11 January 1943 when it entrained for the East. At the time its strength was 20,844. Was it a "high quality division" then?

MarkN
Member
Posts: 1162
Joined: 12 Jan 2015 13:34
Location: On the continent

Re: Question About Western Contribution to the War

Post by MarkN » 02 Jan 2018 19:33

Richard Anderson wrote: You still have not established what your criteria for a "high quality division" is, although apparently what it is not is whatever you arbitrarily choose it to be. :roll:
Criteria???

if it is necessary to cover his prior historical buffoonery March and April are to be considered summer months!!!!

Anything is possible as far as ljadw is concerned.

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 1445
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Question About Western Contribution to the War

Post by Richard Anderson » 02 Jan 2018 19:54

ljadw wrote:Your question : how long would it be before the allies launched a second attack " ? is not correct :my opinion is not relevant,what is relevant is what the Germans were thinking about this.
Indeed your opinion is not relevant. Why then do you keep expressing your opinion and then claim it is more relevant than facts?
2 months after a successfull Overlord, the Allies launched a succesfull Dragoon .
Yes, ANVIL was launched some ten weeks after NEPTUNE. However, the decision to launch it was predicated on a successful NEPTUNE, rather than as a standalone operation. ANVIL was de facto placed on hiatus on 8 April 1944. It was not restored until 2 July 1944 when it was evident the NEPTUNE lodgement was secure and Churchill continued to militate against it until as late as 11 August when the final authorization was issued.

The best evidence - rather than your opinion - is that ANVIL required NEPTUNE and was not a standalone.
Where would the Germans get these 20 ID and these PzD ?

In June 1941, when the situation in France was better for the Germand, they still left 38 divisions to defend a territory that was smaller than in 1944,when Vichy France also was occupied :if they would transfer 20 ID and X PzD to the East, who would defend the French coasts against a second landing ?
No, those "38 divisions" as of June you plucked from the AH compendium were in Germany and included the 34-division BARBAROSSA operational reserve. The forces defending the west were the 40 divisions there as of 1 July, which was a number that remained fairly constant until the emergency draw-downs in winter 41/42. From a low of 27 in June 1942 it then increased steadily to June 1944.

Meanwhile, the composition of the divisions is important - the core of them remained the 32 divisions of the 13.-15. Welle (albeit many of the 13. Welle divisions were later upgraded to bewegungs divisionen and sent to active theaters) and the ten Divisions-Nummer (later Reserve Divisionen) established in France, Belgium, and Denmark as dual-purpose occupation and advanced training units.

Those were what would defend the French coast...its what defended them in reality.
All they could do would be to send a few divisions, which would not help AGC and who would arrive too late .
No I'm afraid that is your opinion, but remember it is what the Germans thought they would do that is important. :roll:
reality is that the threat of a landing was as important as a landing .
No, the prospect of defeating a landing is what was important to German thinking.

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 1445
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Question About Western Contribution to the War

Post by Richard Anderson » 02 Jan 2018 20:04

MarkN wrote:
Richard Anderson wrote: You still have not established what your criteria for a "high quality division" is, although apparently what it is not is whatever you arbitrarily choose it to be. :roll:
Criteria???

if it is necessary to cover his prior historical buffoonery March and April are to be considered summer months!!!!

Anything is possible as far as ljadw is concerned.
Yep, which is why I would like to get this pinned down, but he just keeps evading the issue as usual. AFAICS a "high quality division" is whatever he chooses to say it isn't. It's the epitome of sophistry. :roll:

MarkN
Member
Posts: 1162
Joined: 12 Jan 2015 13:34
Location: On the continent

Re: Question About Western Contribution to the War

Post by MarkN » 02 Jan 2018 22:53

Richard Anderson wrote: Yep, which is why I would like to get this pinned down, but he just keeps evading the issue as usual. AFAICS a "high quality division" is whatever he chooses to say it isn't. It's the epitome of sophistry. :roll:
Exactly.

It is a completely meaningless description put out by someone with a rather superficial understanding in reality - but a self-belief of (near) expert status.

I imagine it flows from something like this: all units in the west must be sub-quality status since to win the war a soon as possible all "high quality" units are needed on the front line.

Remember, it was the Italian Army who stopped O'Connor in February 1941 at el Agheila even though the nearest Italian at the time was almost 300kms distant! Britain was fighting Italy. British troops stop. QED Italians stopped them. Superficial understanding and completely infallable logic. :lol:

ljadw
Member
Posts: 8344
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Question About Western Contribution to the War

Post by ljadw » 03 Jan 2018 11:11

Richard Anderson wrote:
MarkN wrote:
Richard Anderson wrote: You still have not established what your criteria for a "high quality division" is, although apparently what it is not is whatever you arbitrarily choose it to be. :roll:
Criteria???

if it is necessary to cover his prior historical buffoonery March and April are to be considered summer months!!!!

Anything is possible as far as ljadw is concerned.
Yep, which is why I would like to get this pinned down, but he just keeps evading the issue as usual. AFAICS a "high quality division" is whatever he chooses to say it isn't. It's the epitome of sophistry. :roll:
There is no such thing as a high quality division.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 8344
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Question About Western Contribution to the War

Post by ljadw » 03 Jan 2018 11:12

All this has already been discussed on this forum,and the conclusion was that a failed Overlord would be a Pyrrhic victory for Germany .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 8344
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Question About Western Contribution to the War

Post by ljadw » 03 Jan 2018 11:15

Richard Anderson wrote:
No, those "38 divisions" as of June you plucked from the AH compendium
Not correct

MarkN
Member
Posts: 1162
Joined: 12 Jan 2015 13:34
Location: On the continent

Re: Question About Western Contribution to the War

Post by MarkN » 03 Jan 2018 15:26

ljadw wrote:All this has already been discussed on this forum,and the conclusion was that a failed Overlord would be a Pyrrhic victory for Germany.
ljadw wrote:This has already been discussed here in 2009 in a What IF thread : Operation Overlord failure and the conclusion was that the failure of Overlord would be a Pyrrhic victory for Germany .

I like to add that it would also be the same if Bagration had failed, or if Barbarossa had succeeded .
Are these your opinions now or what the German high command believed at the time?

Remember...
ljadw wrote:... my opinion is not relevant,what is relevant is what the Germans were thinking about this.

MarkN
Member
Posts: 1162
Joined: 12 Jan 2015 13:34
Location: On the continent

Re: Question About Western Contribution to the War

Post by MarkN » 03 Jan 2018 15:39

ljadw wrote: From the Pyrenees to Wladivostok is the whole of Europe : Napoleon did dominate from the Atlantic Ocean (Spain and Portugal included ) to the Prussian-Russian border for a few years . ...
March and April are summer months... :lol:

Now Spain, Portugal, Great Britain, Eire and Scandinavia are not part of Europe. And so on. How much of central and South-Eastern Europe did Napoleon conquor?

Once again, ljadw throws out the most humungous of blatant lies and hopes others are too stupid to notice.

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 1445
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Question About Western Contribution to the War

Post by Richard Anderson » 03 Jan 2018 18:24

ljadw wrote:There is no such thing as a high quality division.
Why am I so incredibly not surprised? :roll:

The logical corollary then is there is only such things as low and average quality divisions. :roll:

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 1445
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: Question About Western Contribution to the War

Post by Richard Anderson » 03 Jan 2018 18:26

ljadw wrote:All this has already been discussed on this forum,and the conclusion was that a failed Overlord would be a Pyrrhic victory for Germany .
When, where, and by whom? Who drew that conclusion other than yourself? :roll:

Return to “WW2 in Eastern Europe”