von Bock and Voronej

Discussions on High Command, strategy and the Armed Forces (Wehrmacht) in general.
jesk
Banned
Posts: 1973
Joined: 04 Aug 2017 08:19
Location: Belarus

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by jesk » 15 Mar 2019 20:13

DavidFrankenberg wrote:
15 Mar 2019 19:26
Halder, 6 july "von Sodenstern refers to "slanted reports".
You can show at least one "slanted reports". Or is it just the logical conclusions Halder?

Image

Image

DavidFrankenberg
Member
Posts: 1061
Joined: 11 May 2016 01:09
Location: Earth

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by DavidFrankenberg » 16 Mar 2019 00:35

It is the opinion of von Sodenstern and Halder which sound very true and accurate.

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

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by jesk » 16 Mar 2019 06:52

As at the very beginning of the discussion, you have one source - Halder's diary. Is every word in it a testimony !? But the diary of von Bock, he also led it, does not support this thesis:
DavidFrankenberg wrote:
10 Feb 2019 20:01
The orders about Voronej were given the 3rd in Poltava during a meeting between OKW, OKH and VB.
Unfortunately, on that day 2 people recorded in a diary. Von Bock entries make your logic tight.

http://militera.lib.ru/db/bock_f/19.html
3/7/42
The Fuhrer arrived at 07.00; despite the fact that he had to leave his headquarters around 04.00, he was very lively and complacent. He confirmed what Halder told me yesterday, and gave me the freedom to abandon the capture of Voronezh in the event that on the approaches to the city our troops meet especially fierce resistance. He wants only one thing: that large aviation factories located in the city, as well as huge depot and other railway structures, will be disabled. He will not mind if the 4th Army, for example, goes to Don south of the city.
We discussed the groundwork of the Supreme Command of the ground forces we received during the night regarding future operations. They even considered the idea of ​​conducting “Blau” operations by infantry forces in order to avoid wasting time. I indicated that such a method would not allow for the encirclement of an adversary who had recently learned something. Under such conditions [457], the enemy will be on time out of the blow, which he is already trying to do, but not always successfully, throughout this year. In this regard, it is extremely important that we attack as quickly as possible with the connection of mobile forces and hit the enemy behind the Aydar River, for which he may begin to retreat as soon as he realizes that they are trying to get around the flanks. The Fuhrer agreed.

DavidFrankenberg
Member
Posts: 1061
Joined: 11 May 2016 01:09
Location: Earth

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by DavidFrankenberg » 16 Mar 2019 10:56

It is clear that Hitler wanted arm. forces to go south in order to encircle the enemy.
It is clear that Hitler allowed VB to strike Voronej only wth inf. and only if Voronej was not defended.
The action should happen the 4th july. If VB didnt succeed during the 4th, he should absolutely abandon Voronej with all forces and just send south the arm. div.
Glantz argues that VB "misunderstands" Hitler's orders. But what if a soldier misundertsands an order and retreat instead of attacking ? It is not a misunderstanding but a disobedience.

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

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by jesk » 16 Mar 2019 11:51

DavidFrankenberg wrote:
16 Mar 2019 10:56
It is clear that Hitler wanted arm. forces to go south in order to encircle the enemy.
It is clear that Hitler allowed VB to strike Voronej only wth inf. and only if Voronej was not defended.
The action should happen the 4th july. If VB didnt succeed during the 4th, he should absolutely abandon Voronej with all forces and just send south the arm. div.
Glantz argues that VB "misunderstands" Hitler's orders. But what if a soldier misundertsands an order and retreat instead of attacking ? It is not a misunderstanding but a disobedience.
It is clear only that Voronezh could be taken quickly. And why only 4th of July? When von Bock received orders, he immediately obeyed. Von Bock in diary did not write about order. Only about words of the Fuhrer.

3/7/42
The Fuhrer arrived at 07.00; despite the fact that he had to leave his headquarters around 04.00, he was very lively and complacent. He confirmed what Halder told me yesterday, and gave me the freedom to abandon the capture of Voronezh in the event that on the approaches to the city our troops meet especially fierce resistance.

DavidFrankenberg
Member
Posts: 1061
Joined: 11 May 2016 01:09
Location: Earth

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by DavidFrankenberg » 16 Mar 2019 16:30

jesk wrote:
16 Mar 2019 11:51
DavidFrankenberg wrote:
16 Mar 2019 10:56
It is clear that Hitler wanted arm. forces to go south in order to encircle the enemy.
It is clear that Hitler allowed VB to strike Voronej only wth inf. and only if Voronej was not defended.
The action should happen the 4th july. If VB didnt succeed during the 4th, he should absolutely abandon Voronej with all forces and just send south the arm. div.
Glantz argues that VB "misunderstands" Hitler's orders. But what if a soldier misundertsands an order and retreat instead of attacking ? It is not a misunderstanding but a disobedience.
It is clear only that Voronezh could be taken quickly.
It could not.
VB thought like you : he sabotaged Fall Blau pretending to take it quick. He failed.
And why only 4th of July? When von Bock received orders, he immediately obeyed. Von Bock in diary did not write about order. Only about words of the Fuhrer.

3/7/42
The Fuhrer arrived at 07.00; despite the fact that he had to leave his headquarters around 04.00, he was very lively and complacent. He confirmed what Halder told me yesterday, and gave me the freedom to abandon the capture of Voronezh in the event that on the approaches to the city our troops meet especially fierce resistance.
Mr Glantz thinks he misunderstood Hitler's orders in order to explain his failure. But, what apeears is a big pretention and self-esteem of VB.
He thought he were smarter than Hitler. He was not.

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

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by jesk » 16 Mar 2019 17:15

DavidFrankenberg wrote:
16 Mar 2019 16:30
It could not.
VB thought like you : he sabotaged Fall Blau pretending to take it quick. He failed.
You have already spoken about the suspicion of Halder. And suspected Bock of forging reports. Halder did not write about it, he blamed Hoth. Von Bock did not need to falsify reports for order to take Voronezh. He supervised the entire operation and no one except him could be interested in the report.
Von Bock answered all charges there. The operation took less time than planned. Although the Fuhrer complained about the loss of 48 hours, but this is few. In addition, Hitler was bluffing, claiming Russians escaped from the encirclement. The South-Western Front was completely destroyed until mid-July. The number of armies on July 20 in the range of several thousand..
Mr Glantz thinks he misunderstood Hitler's orders in order to explain his failure. But, what apeears is a big pretention and self-esteem of VB.
He thought he were smarter than Hitler. He was not.
Hitler allowed not to take Voronezh. Then put it in von Bock's guilt. Сan not take Voronezh = not take it at all. In this way von Bock justified himself. Can not take Voronezh does not mean an order not to take Voronezh.

DavidFrankenberg
Member
Posts: 1061
Joined: 11 May 2016 01:09
Location: Earth

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by DavidFrankenberg » 17 Mar 2019 00:55

jesk wrote:
16 Mar 2019 17:15
The operation took less time than planned.
The operation failed.
Although the Fuhrer complained about the loss of 48 hours, but this is few.
VB made Hitler lose 48 hours at least.
He should have taken Voronej the 4th july. And the 7 it was still not taken. The ailroad was never taken at all. It was a total failure.
Above all : VB immobilized the motor. div. whereas they should have attacked down the south...
VB messed it up completely.
Hitler allowed not to take Voronezh. Then put it in von Bock's guilt. Сan not take Voronezh = not take it at all. In this way von Bock justified himself. Can not take Voronezh does not mean an order not to take Voronezh.
The orders were clear : do not strike Voronej if it is defended plus send motor. div. south.
VB insisted in taking Voronej whereas Soviets were sending troops there...
He kept motor. div. there for 2 days for nothing...
He completely messed up the whole operation.

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

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by jesk » 17 Mar 2019 06:03

DavidFrankenberg wrote:
17 Mar 2019 00:55
The operation failed.
Already on July 6, the battalion of the 24th Panzer Division passed through Voronezh and occupied almost the entire city without a fight. Von Bock spoke about this. On the same day, Halder gave the order to stop the offensive. Von Bock lacked several hours for complete control over the city. Why did the operation fail?
VB made Hitler lose 48 hours at least.
He should have taken Voronej the 4th july. And the 7 it was still not taken. The ailroad was never taken at all. It was a total failure.
Above all : VB immobilized the motor. div. whereas they should have attacked down the south...
VB messed it up completely.
Why did von Bock have to take Voronezh on July 4? This is your speculation. No time frame was set on July 3. 48 hours - the baseless accusations of Hitler.
The orders were clear : do not strike Voronej if it is defended plus send motor. div. south.
VB insisted in taking Voronej whereas Soviets were sending troops there...
He kept motor. div. there for 2 days for nothing...
He completely messed up the whole operation.
Voronezh was not protected. Even if, as Halder wrote, Hoth falsified the reports, this only concerned 40 corps of the 6th army and its movement to the east. The 24th Panzer Division and Great Germany were sent to Voronezh in any case.
Halder backdating tried to support Hitler in empty accusations with speculation about falsifying reports, but this is empty. 24 pd and GD went to Voronezh and without the opinion of Hoth.

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

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by jesk » 17 Mar 2019 06:17

Hitler said von Bock, if the offensive is particularly strong. He did not say how you post if the Soviets send troops to the city or if it is defended. Plus there was no order to move divisions to the south. You repeat mistakes.
3/7/42
The Fuhrer arrived at 07.00; despite the fact that he had to leave his headquarters around 04.00, he was very lively and complacent. He confirmed what Halder told me yesterday, and gave me the freedom to abandon the capture of Voronezh in the event that on the approaches to the city our troops meet especially fierce resistance.

DavidFrankenberg
Member
Posts: 1061
Joined: 11 May 2016 01:09
Location: Earth

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by DavidFrankenberg » 17 Mar 2019 11:08

jesk wrote:
17 Mar 2019 06:03
DavidFrankenberg wrote:
17 Mar 2019 00:55
The operation failed.
Already on July 6, the battalion of the 24th Panzer Division passed through Voronezh and occupied almost the entire city without a fight. Von Bock spoke about this. On the same day, Halder gave the order to stop the offensive. Von Bock lacked several hours for complete control over the city. Why did the operation fail?
The entire city was not under control : soviet fought till 7th july within Voronej.
Why did VB need the 24th Pz if there were no fight ? Why did he need motor. div. to take one city ? Such a poor commander !
Why did von Bock have to take Voronezh on July 4? This is your speculation. No time frame was set on July 3. 48 hours - the baseless accusations of Hitler.
Blitzkrieg relies upon quickness ! Orders were clear : do not insist on taking Voronej, do not use motor. div. in city, just send them south...
In other words : DO NOT LOSE TIME WITH VORONEJ !
Voronezh was not protected.


You still refuse to look at the reality : soviets fought still 7th july within the city.
Even if, as Halder wrote, Hoth falsified the reports, this only concerned 40 corps of the 6th army and its movement to the east. The 24th Panzer Division and Great Germany were sent to Voronezh in any case.
There was no need to use 24th Pz and GD in a city like Voronej ! They were useful down the south to encirrcle the troops.
Halder backdating tried to support Hitler in empty accusations with speculation about falsifying reports, but this is empty. 24 pd and GD went to Voronezh and without the opinion of Hoth.
Hoth was against the use of motor. div. in the city of Voronej. Like Hitler and Halder, he knew it was stupid. He feared losses because tanks are not made to take cities. In order to get support from VB he falsified reports. It is VB's fault since he should not order Hoth to strike Voronej.
Halder denounces the VB treason by writing the very 5th july. That very day Hitler could not stand anymore the treason of VB : the motor. div. were still immobilized in Voronej, whereas they were supposed to go south !
Halder certainly worte under the influence of the terrible ange Hitler should have expressed at the HQ the 5th.

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

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by jesk » 17 Mar 2019 21:56

DavidFrankenberg wrote:
17 Mar 2019 11:08
Blitzkrieg relies upon quickness ! Orders were clear : do not insist on taking Voronej, do not use motor. div. in city, just send them south...
In other words : DO NOT LOSE TIME WITH VORONEJ !
Such orders were not. From the instructions of Halder and Hitler, received July 2-3, can make 50 options of actions. Von Bock was accused that he did not choose "correct". This kind of accusation is at least unethical.
The entry of Halder on July 5 is meaningless. left it to the judgment of army Gp/ von Bock tolerated Hoth' senseless rush for Voronezh. At the same time can step on Voronezh and can not!?
DavidFrankenberg wrote:
21 Jan 2019 20:25
Hi,
von Bock was dismissed after he disobeyed and tried to take Voronej with a lot of troops, especially the 24th arm. div and Grossdeutschland division. This try delayed the moves of those armored divisions and prevented the encirclment of soviet troops in the south.
This could be read in Halder's diary :
3 July
At the front of Heeresgruppe Mitte, the enemy appears to be dragging off forces from the front of the 2. Panzer-Armee to the Voronezh region. Operation "Seidlits" is developing very slowly.
To take Voronezh by no means under any circumstances.
5th july
the Führer himself at the conference made it emphatically clear' that he did not attach any particular importance to Voronej and left it to the judgment of army Gp that objective go if it could be had only at great cost, von Bock tolerated Hoth' senseless rush for Voronezh and even encouraged it.

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

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by AbollonPolweder » 18 Mar 2019 14:34

DavidFrankenberg wrote:
16 Mar 2019 16:30


It could not.
VB thought like you : he sabotaged Fall Blau pretending to take it quick. He failed.
...
It is not correct. Do not refer to the plan Blau and do not refer to the genius of the commander Hitler. He was not a military genius .
https://sites.google.com/site/krieg1941undnarod/
Better to lose with a clever than with a fool to find

DavidFrankenberg
Member
Posts: 1061
Joined: 11 May 2016 01:09
Location: Earth

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by DavidFrankenberg » 18 Mar 2019 18:59

jesk wrote:
17 Mar 2019 21:56
DavidFrankenberg wrote:
17 Mar 2019 11:08
Blitzkrieg relies upon quickness ! Orders were clear : do not insist on taking Voronej, do not use motor. div. in city, just send them south...
In other words : DO NOT LOSE TIME WITH VORONEJ !
Such orders were not. From the instructions of Halder and Hitler, received July 2-3, can make 50 options of actions. Von Bock was accused that he did not choose "correct". This kind of accusation is at least unethical.
The entry of Halder on July 5 is meaningless. left it to the judgment of army Gp/ von Bock tolerated Hoth' senseless rush for Voronezh. At the same time can step on Voronezh and can not!?
DavidFrankenberg wrote:
21 Jan 2019 20:25
Hi,
von Bock was dismissed after he disobeyed and tried to take Voronej with a lot of troops, especially the 24th arm. div and Grossdeutschland division. This try delayed the moves of those armored divisions and prevented the encirclment of soviet troops in the south.
This could be read in Halder's diary :
3 July
At the front of Heeresgruppe Mitte, the enemy appears to be dragging off forces from the front of the 2. Panzer-Armee to the Voronezh region. Operation "Seidlits" is developing very slowly.
To take Voronezh by no means under any circumstances.
5th july
the Führer himself at the conference made it emphatically clear' that he did not attach any particular importance to Voronej and left it to the judgment of army Gp that objective go if it could be had only at great cost, von Bock tolerated Hoth' senseless rush for Voronezh and even encouraged it.

You have to recognize that :
1-the 3d Hitler forbade any strike on Voronej ; Halder perfectly understood it
2-VB wanted to take Voronej since it was a key point possibly threatening the rear of VB's progression
3-Hitler allowed him to try to take Voronej but only with inf.
4-VB wanted to use motor. div.
5-Hitler allowed him to use it under the condition that the take of Voronej be quick and that the motor. div. will be send south ASAP

You can see that at every order coming from Hitler Von Bock nitpicked on all points !
VB usurpated his general's position refusing to listen to his leader. He led to the failure of FB.

AbollonPolweder wrote:
18 Mar 2019 14:34
DavidFrankenberg wrote:
16 Mar 2019 16:30


It could not.
VB thought like you : he sabotaged Fall Blau pretending to take it quick. He failed.
...

It is not correct. Do not refer to the plan Blau and do not refer to the genius of the commander Hitler. He was not a military genius .
In that case, he was more the "military genius" than VB was.

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

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by jesk » 18 Mar 2019 23:02

DavidFrankenberg wrote:
18 Mar 2019 18:59
You have to recognize that :
1-the 3d Hitler forbade any strike on Voronej ; Halder perfectly understood it
This is already funny. You lie to the face. For example, what von Bock wrote.

The Fuhrer arrived at 07.00; despite the fact that he had to leave his headquarters around 04.00, he was very lively and complacent. He confirmed what Halder told me yesterday, and gave me the freedom to abandon the capture of Voronezh in the event that on the approaches to the city our troops meet especially fierce resistance. He wants only one thing: that large aviation factories located in the city, as well as huge depot and other railway structures, will be disabled. He will not mind if the 4th Army, for example, goes to Don south of the city.

July 3 Halder allowed the possibility of capturing Voronezh.
3-Hitler allowed him to try to take Voronej but only with inf.
On the evening of July 6, Hitler spoke of infantry divisions. At that time, the Germans already controlled the right bank, where 80% of the population of Voronezh lived.

Return to “German Strategy & General German Military Discussion”