The Logistics of Barbarossa (or lack of it)

Discussions on High Command, strategy and the Armed Forces (Wehrmacht) in general.
User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 861
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 08:46
Location: Brussels

Re: The Logistics of Barbarossa (or lack of it)

Post by Aida1 » 14 Feb 2020 22:13

ljadw wrote:
14 Feb 2020 21:45
That the Barbarossa plan/execution could not bring on Endsieg,is something that we know with hindsight: in August 1945 the German cities would be nuked .But,it is irrelevant,as Germany was in a desperate situation ,and needed a desperate solution .Rationality was a luxury Germany could not afford .
1 Germany's situation was desperate
2 The only chance ( very small chance ) was to defeat the SU .
3 The defeat of the SU could only be caused by the collaps of the regime.
4 The collaps of the regime could only happen if the Red army was defeated west of the DD line
5 The defeat of the Red Army west of the DD line depended on the willingness of Stalin to send the Red Army west of the DD line
The German leadership agreed with these points and started the war with the USSR with the belief that the Soviet regime would collaps in the summer
because it had to collaps in the summer ,as,if the war lasted east of the DD line the Soviet regime would not collaps, the Red Army would continue the war and Germany would lose .
The SU was potentially stronger than Germany , thus time was essential .
Your obsession that it needed to be this way. German planners were more flexible than that.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 10075
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: The Logistics of Barbarossa (or lack of it)

Post by ljadw » 15 Feb 2020 20:55

Plans are depending on facts, facts are not depending on plans .
And, plans do not win wars .

User avatar
AbollonPolweder
Member
Posts: 199
Joined: 09 Jan 2017 20:54
Location: Russia

Re: The Logistics of Barbarossa (or lack of it)

Post by AbollonPolweder » 16 Feb 2020 11:05

BDV wrote:
14 Feb 2020 18:13
AbollonPolweder wrote: That is, the Germans from the spring of 1941 actively collaborated with the Russians in the "creation" of machina (Pact M-R), and at the end of August they were very surprised at the appearance of this machina, this "unexpected miracle" as you mean :)
Of course you mean 1939. Also, it is not within the power of Adolf to make Mr. Molotoff's signature appear on the papers in question.

As such, Sovjet Russia acquiescence to the Pact was completely outside of their control. That Molotoff-vRibentropp is not a fait accompli at the time Germany starts its mobilization against Poland was shown in 1940 Molotoff visit to Berlin. Sovjets COULD change their mind, that is.

The Deus ex Machina of vRibbentropp-Molotoff cannot happen without the negotiation; that is clear. But likewise the Deus ex Machina of Sovjet Collapse cannot happen without Barbarossa.

(Is there agreement that neither Barbarossa plan, nor Barbarossa execution could be rationally expected to bring on EndSieg?)

We are reduced to ljadw logic; once Germans chose their course of action everything depended on Sovjets, nothing on Germans.
1.Of course! I apologize for my typo. And yes, of course, Hitler could not force Molotov to sign the pact, just as Stalin could not force Ribbentrop. Hitler and Molotov did not just conclude a non-aggression pact, they made a deal to divide prey (Poland). Stalin was interested in this deal no less than Hitler.
2. This is a very controversial statement. In 1940, Stalin no longer needed Hitler; Adolf had already done his job of unleashing a war in Europe. And in 1939, Stalin (Molotov) was very negotiable and accommodating.
3. We have a different understanding of the expression Deus ex machina. For me, this is something incredible, almost a wonderful event. For example, in 1939 at the end of August after long negotiations with the USSR Hitler would conclude a pact with Poland on an attack ... on the USSR. That would be a real surprise for me. But I do not insist on such "radicalism." :milwink:
4. I believe that Barbarossa could lead to an "EndSieg".
5. This is the logic of either a jollier or, more likely, a paid troll.
https://sites.google.com/site/krieg1941undnarod/
Better to lose with a clever than with a fool to find

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 861
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 08:46
Location: Brussels

Re: The Logistics of Barbarossa (or lack of it)

Post by Aida1 » 16 Feb 2020 11:20

ljadw wrote:
15 Feb 2020 20:55
Plans are depending on facts, facts are not depending on plans .
And, plans do not win wars .
You obviously win wars without plans. :lol: :roll: No source given as usual. :lol:

ljadw
Member
Posts: 10075
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: The Logistics of Barbarossa (or lack of it)

Post by ljadw » 17 Feb 2020 06:42

Aida1 wrote:
16 Feb 2020 11:20
ljadw wrote:
15 Feb 2020 20:55
Plans are depending on facts, facts are not depending on plans .
And, plans do not win wars .
You obviously win wars without plans. :lol: :roll: No source given as usual. :lol:
As usual a reply to what I did not say .
Continue . :P

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 861
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 08:46
Location: Brussels

Re: The Logistics of Barbarossa (or lack of it)

Post by Aida1 » 17 Feb 2020 09:42

ljadw wrote:
17 Feb 2020 06:42
Aida1 wrote:
16 Feb 2020 11:20
ljadw wrote:
15 Feb 2020 20:55
Plans are depending on facts, facts are not depending on plans .
And, plans do not win wars .
You obviously win wars without plans. :lol: :roll: No source given as usual. :lol:
As usual a reply to what I did not say .
Continue . :P
You made your usual unsourced posting which means not a thing

User avatar
BDV
Financial supporter
Posts: 3699
Joined: 10 Apr 2009 16:11

Re: The Logistics of Barbarossa (or lack of it)

Post by BDV » 17 Feb 2020 16:59

AbollonPolweder wrote:And yes, of course, Hitler could not force Molotov to sign the pact, just as Stalin could not force Ribbentrop. Hitler and Molotov did not just conclude a non-aggression pact, they made a deal to divide prey (Poland). Stalin was interested in this deal no less than Hitler.

2. This is a very controversial statement. In 1940, Stalin no longer needed Hitler; Adolf had already done his job of unleashing a war in Europe. And in 1939, Stalin (Molotov) was very negotiable and accommodating.
Be that as it may, it was Germany that was mobilizing and thus unable to alter the timetable. Also, Sovjets/Comrade Vissarionovitch could be very accommodating until they weren't.

3. We have a different understanding of the expression Deus ex machina. For me, this is something incredible, almost a wonderful event. For example, in 1939 at the end of August after long negotiations with the USSR Hitler would conclude a pact with Poland on an attack ... on the USSR. That would be a real surprise for me. But I do not insist on such "radicalism." :milwink:
Or Jucoff losing it after one last imbecilic directive from Djugashvilli and crushing his skull with a vase. We're in agreement. Point is, no Barbarossa, no Deus ex Machina.

As an aside, Sovjetunion had been thoroughly purged of disobedient or revolutionary elements. That is probably one of the "secrets" of the resiliency of Sovjetunion in WWII. By purging the state apparatus of tsarist elements, and then of old/revolutionary era bolsheviks and non-russian elements, Stalin eliminated both people with a strong incentive to rebel and those with the know-how of successful rebelling. Further, replacing those executed with post-revolution bolsheviks of largely russian extraction infused the state apparatus with a group of people both ideologically "trustworthy" and bound by ethnic solidarity.

I am unaware of proof this development was adequately understood by the Fuhrer and his underlings; given how they kept rambling about judeobolshevismus.

4. I believe that Barbarossa could lead to an "EndSieg".
Russians begged to differ. Barbarossa failed by a such wide margin from the task at hand, that major deviations from historical truth are needed to even faintly approach OstFront Endsieg with some non-zero probability.
Nobody expects the Fallschirm! Our chief weapon is surprise; surprise and fear; fear and surprise. Our 2 weapons are fear and surprise; and ruthless efficiency. Our *3* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency; and almost fanatical devotion

Return to “German Strategy & General German Military Discussion”