Germany winning on the Eastern Front

Discussions on High Command, strategy and the Armed Forces (Wehrmacht) in general.
Paul Lakowski
Member
Posts: 1441
Joined: 30 Apr 2003 05:16
Location: Canada

Re: Germany winning on the Eastern Front

Post by Paul Lakowski » 12 Aug 2018 21:06

Boby wrote:
12 Aug 2018 13:19
When Hitler turned South in August, the german high command knew that the SU would, in all probability, NOT collaps in 1941. See the OKW document dated 27 August (pp. 423 ff.) and approved by Hitler:

https://archive.org/stream/DocumentsOnG ... page/n521/

Thank you very much for this link , it looks valuable.

User avatar
AbollonPolweder
Member
Posts: 247
Joined: 09 Jan 2017 20:54
Location: Russia

Re: Germany winning on the Eastern Front

Post by AbollonPolweder » 12 Aug 2018 21:46

Boby wrote:
12 Aug 2018 13:19
When Hitler turned South in August, the german high command knew that the SU would, in all probability, NOT collaps in 1941. See the OKW document dated 27 August (pp. 423 ff.) and approved by Hitler:

https://archive.org/stream/DocumentsOnG ... page/n521/
Look at these words:
Image
They rather mean that "... the german high command knew that the SU would, in all probability, ... collaps in 1941.' But in case it (SU) would not the german command developed the plan "B" or "C". Usual thing.
https://sites.google.com/site/krieg1941undnarod/
Better to lose with a clever than with a fool to find

gracie4241
Member
Posts: 96
Joined: 03 Aug 2018 16:16
Location: USA

Re: Germany winning on the Eastern Front

Post by gracie4241 » 14 Aug 2018 16:41

Was that the same OKH that estimated Russian strength at 250 divisions total, or their tank strength at 10,000? No one claims that economic collapse has Immediate effects. Heck, germany was showing signs of total economic collapse in late 44 and launched an offensive in the Ardennes,By late may they would have been down to their last jerrycan of gas.Somebody once joked that Hitler having his, Eva's, and Blondie's corpses burned used up their entire strategic reserve of gas.Having lost "access to most of his coal, oil, and a large part of his food sources, Stalin would have been largely reduced to using(as Hitler did 44-45) up his inventory and stuff in the pipeline.Assuming an inability to retake these areas my estimate is that he would have been willing to sign on to a BREST -LITOVSK 2 by late Spring 1943 to preserve his regime(like Lenin did in 1918) Russia would then look like.....well Putin's Russia.So a two year campaign was ALWAYS in the offing given the late start and much larger Russian Forces than estimated.If the estimates had been close this discussion would be moot and victory in 41 likely-but they weren't.

benwi
Banned
Posts: 152
Joined: 11 Aug 2018 19:50
Location: belgium

Re: Germany winning on the Eastern Front

Post by benwi » 14 Aug 2018 18:14

gracie4241 wrote:
14 Aug 2018 16:41
Was that the same OKH that estimated Russian strength at 250 divisions total, or their tank strength at 10,000? No one claims that economic collapse has Immediate effects. Heck, germany was showing signs of total economic collapse in late 44 and launched an offensive in the Ardennes,By late may they would have been down to their last jerrycan of gas.Somebody once joked that Hitler having his, Eva's, and Blondie's corpses burned used up their entire strategic reserve of gas.Having lost "access to most of his coal, oil, and a large part of his food sources, Stalin would have been largely reduced to using(as Hitler did 44-45) up his inventory and stuff in the pipeline.Assuming an inability to retake these areas my estimate is that he would have been willing to sign on to a BREST -LITOVSK 2 by late Spring 1943 to preserve his regime(like Lenin did in 1918) Russia would then look like.....well Putin's Russia.So a two year campaign was ALWAYS in the offing given the late start and much larger Russian Forces than estimated.If the estimates had been close this discussion would be moot and victory in 41 likely-but they weren't.
Taking the Ukraine does not take away the warfighting capacity of the USSR.It did not depend on it.You would make people believe that the USSR lived on its stocks until the Ukraine was taken back two years later.Hardly.

User avatar
AbollonPolweder
Member
Posts: 247
Joined: 09 Jan 2017 20:54
Location: Russia

Re: Germany winning on the Eastern Front

Post by AbollonPolweder » 27 Aug 2018 14:52

gracie4241 wrote:
14 Aug 2018 16:41
If the estimates had been close this discussion would be moot and victory in 41 likely-but they weren't.
Yes, Sir! They weren't. You're absolutely right! But to say that the quantitative miscalculations of the OKH made it impossible to surround Moscow in September 1941, is absolutely wrong. Compare the losses of the Red Army and the Wehrmacht in September 1941. The desire to fight for Stalin by Russian soldiers was minimal. The spirit of the troops plummeted. And note that the Soviet Union lost about half of its regular army, and had to be replaced it by young untrained soldiers. Therefore, the resistance of the Red Army was significantly reduced. You only consider quantitative factors, and that's a mistake.The Soviet high command demonstrated a complete inability to organize large-scale offensive operations. Hitler's mistake was to waste time fighting a fictional threat from the North ( Leningrad) and South (Kiev) flanks, giving up the blitzkrieg and moving to an economic war of attrition.
https://sites.google.com/site/krieg1941undnarod/
Better to lose with a clever than with a fool to find

User avatar
BDV
Financial supporter
Posts: 3704
Joined: 10 Apr 2009 16:11

Re: Germany winning on the Eastern Front

Post by BDV » 19 Sep 2018 19:53

AbollonPolweder wrote:But to say that the quantitative miscalculations of the OKH made it impossible to surround Moscow in September 1941, is absolutely wrong. Compare the losses of the Red Army and the Wehrmacht in September 1941.
Please explain the logical connection between the two.

The desire to fight for Stalin by Russian soldiers was minimal. The spirit of the troops plummeted.
Source for such statement?

And note that the Soviet Union lost about half of its regular army, and had to be replaced it by young untrained soldiers. Therefore, the resistance of the Red Army was significantly reduced.
Axis lost large numbers of trained fighting force (e.g. Gyorshadtest lost 50% of its personnel during the Ukraine campaign). Combined with logistical difficulties and that materiel was not properly replaced, effectiveness of Axis armies was also significantly reduced.

Hitler's mistake was to waste time fighting a fictional threat from the North ( Leningrad) and South (Kiev) flanks, giving up the blitzkrieg and moving to an economic war of attrition.
Trade-off Moscow for Kiev/Kharkov/Leningrad industrial centers (which would have been the trade off in a Moscow-centric operation) favors the Soviet side economically.

Moscow-myth, like the Dunkirk-myth convinced me that the Nazi generals who created it are shameless incompetent liars, who take their readers for fools.
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

jesk
Banned
Posts: 1973
Joined: 04 Aug 2017 08:19
Location: Belarus

Re: Germany winning on the Eastern Front

Post by jesk » 19 Sep 2018 20:03

BDV wrote:
19 Sep 2018 19:53
Moscow-myth, like the Dunkirk-myth convinced me that the Nazi generals who created it are shameless incompetent liars, who take their readers for fools.
Moscow and Kiev are myths invented by Hitler. He linked large cities with the enemy's resistance force. Not taken Leningrad should not surprise, because it is the cradle of Bolshevism, former capital of the Russian Empire and there is a fortress. The big city exalted the enemy and justified lack of initiative.

jesk
Banned
Posts: 1973
Joined: 04 Aug 2017 08:19
Location: Belarus

Re: Germany winning on the Eastern Front

Post by jesk » 19 Sep 2018 20:20

Yes, it is important. This is Hitler's trap. When you talk about Moscow, not about Ryazan, for example, it automatically exaggerates the enemy. Moscow = the strongest Russian force.

jesk
Banned
Posts: 1973
Joined: 04 Aug 2017 08:19
Location: Belarus

Re: Germany winning on the Eastern Front

Post by jesk » 20 Sep 2018 04:21

The large city at Hitler justified lack of an initiative on this direction. The fame of the city substituted assessment of fighting capacity of the opponent. Kiev can't be taken now, the Russian bear there.
Hitler was the ideal machine of deception. The cleverest person in the world. He was never an idiot! His mind is the highest than his critics combined.

Image

To avoid deception, it is correct to call probably fighting without binding to settlements. Kalinin front, Western, Southwest. Kiev, Moscow prevent to estimate the opponent. It is visible even on discussions at a forum. "Moscow" is enough to tell and conclusions are ready.

Return to “German Strategy & General German Military Discussion”