von Bock and Voronej

Discussions on High Command, strategy and the Armed Forces (Wehrmacht) in general.
jesk
Member
Posts: 1811
Joined: 04 Aug 2017 08:19
Location: Belarus

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by jesk » 24 Mar 2019 18:10

DavidFrankenberg wrote:
24 Mar 2019 17:29
jesk wrote:
24 Mar 2019 16:59
DavidFrankenberg wrote:
24 Mar 2019 16:41
In front of VB's stubbornness Hitler finally allowed him to do so if :
-easy and quick capture
Yes, even on July 6, von Bock spoke about ahead of the time of occupation of Voronezh. We are not military experts and do not know how long it took to seize the city. Von Bock considered the task coped quickly.
Only Hitler, Halder and Hoth appeared to have been military experts in that case. Not VB.
Facts are important, not opinions. Already on July 6, the Germans controlled 80% of Voronezh. While that day received a categorical order to withdraw divisions from battle and send south. If not intervention of Halder, Voronezh could have been fully occupied on July 6. Von Bock considered such a date as a quick capture of the city.
-send the motor. div. south
On July 3, nothing was said about it.
Of course it was. Why do you think Hitler forbade him to strike Voronej and rather go south if not to allow the fast shipment of motor. div. down the south in order to encircle soviet troops ?
In the 4th tank army 3 infantry divisions. This would be a fundamental decision to ban the use of motorized divisions. It took time to regroup the divisions for blow by infantry on Voronezh. It is surprising that apart from your logic, no other indications of a similar order on July 3.

Order of battle (24 June 1942)

XXIV. Armeekorps (mot)
- 377. Infanterie-Division
- 9. Panzer-Division
- 3. Infanterie-Division (mot)
XIII. Armeekorps
- 82. Infanterie-Division
- 2/3 385. Infanterie-Division
- 11. Panzer-Division
XXXXVIII. Armeekorps (mot)
- Infanterie-Division “Großdeutschland”
- 24. Panzer-Division
Your last arguments are empty. You have lost the discussion and do not want to admit it. Crimea, Rostov, now unfortunately and Voronezh. It is difficult to prove the moments of superiority of Hitler over his generals ..
It is very easy when we look at Voronej's events.
There are no documents and in fact you only operate with Halder’s diary. At the same time accusing von Bock of anti-Nazism. His information cannot be trusted. He's lying! Halder is telling the truth. It is necessary to choose from sources. They are highly polar. And my choice is in favor of von Bock.

DavidFrankenberg
Member
Posts: 656
Joined: 11 May 2016 01:09
Location: Earth

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by DavidFrankenberg » 24 Mar 2019 18:21

jesk wrote:
24 Mar 2019 18:10
DavidFrankenberg wrote:
24 Mar 2019 17:29
jesk wrote:
24 Mar 2019 16:59
DavidFrankenberg wrote:
24 Mar 2019 16:41
In front of VB's stubbornness Hitler finally allowed him to do so if :
-easy and quick capture
Yes, even on July 6, von Bock spoke about ahead of the time of occupation of Voronezh. We are not military experts and do not know how long it took to seize the city. Von Bock considered the task coped quickly.
Only Hitler, Halder and Hoth appeared to have been military experts in that case. Not VB.
Facts are important, not opinions. Already on July 6, the Germans controlled 80% of Voronezh. While that day received a categorical order to withdraw divisions from battle and send south. If not intervention of Halder, Voronezh could have been fully occupied on July 6. Von Bock considered such a date as a quick capture of the city.
The 6th it was 2 days too late.

-send the motor. div. south
On July 3, nothing was said about it.
Of course it was. Why do you think Hitler forbade him to strike Voronej and rather go south if not to allow the fast shipment of motor. div. down the south in order to encircle soviet troops ?
In the 4th tank army 3 infantry divisions. This would be a fundamental decision to ban the use of motorized divisions. It took time to regroup the divisions for blow by infantry on Voronezh. It is surprising that apart from your logic, no other indications of a similar order on July 3.

Order of battle (24 June 1942)

XXIV. Armeekorps (mot)
- 377. Infanterie-Division
- 9. Panzer-Division
- 3. Infanterie-Division (mot)
XIII. Armeekorps
- 82. Infanterie-Division
- 2/3 385. Infanterie-Division
- 11. Panzer-Division
XXXXVIII. Armeekorps (mot)
- Infanterie-Division “Großdeutschland”
- 24. Panzer-Division
You didnt need time to regroup the div for blow by inf on Voronej, u didnt need motor. div. since YOU WERE ALLOWED to strike Voronej ONLY if it was FREE...
Your last arguments are empty. You have lost the discussion and do not want to admit it. Crimea, Rostov, now unfortunately and Voronezh. It is difficult to prove the moments of superiority of Hitler over his generals ..
It is very easy when we look at Voronej's events.
There are no documents and in fact you only operate with Halder’s diary. At the same time accusing von Bock of anti-Nazism. His information cannot be trusted. He's lying! Halder is telling the truth. It is necessary to choose from sources. They are highly polar. And my choice is in favor of von Bock.
Sure, one year after the events, how convenient it is !

jesk
Member
Posts: 1811
Joined: 04 Aug 2017 08:19
Location: Belarus

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by jesk » 24 Mar 2019 18:41

DavidFrankenberg wrote:
24 Mar 2019 18:21
The 6th it was 2 days too late.
4th of July is too early. If only tanks fly through the air. Your logical conclusion about July 3-4 claims a discovery in science. Nobody until you previously not wrote, von Bock was allowed to capture Voronezh by motorized divisions until July 5th. I need more evidence, other than your logical reasoning, to try to believe.
You didnt need time to regroup the div for blow by inf on Voronej, u didnt need motor. div. since YOU WERE ALLOWED to strike Voronej ONLY if it was FREE...
But this is a repeat of error. Halder wrote in his diary about the demands of Hitler at the meeting on July 6. Take the city by infantry if it is empty.
Sure, one year after the events, how convenient it is !
Entries in July 1942 also ignore indications of errors. As if they were not there at all.
Last edited by jesk on 24 Mar 2019 19:23, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
AbollonPolweder
Member
Posts: 145
Joined: 09 Jan 2017 20:54
Location: Russia

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by AbollonPolweder » 24 Mar 2019 18:50

DavidFrankenberg wrote:
24 Mar 2019 17:29
...
It is very easy when we look at Voronej's events.
The key word here is events. Voronezh is mentioned in the diary von Bock 14/10/41:
This morning came a new directive from the High Command of the Army. It contained nothing new, except for one point: the High Command of the Land Forces, which is obsessed with the idea of ​​capturing Voronezh, proposed to consider the idea of ​​capturing the city with the forces of the right wing of an army group.
This clearly shows the awareness of the OKH and its adequacy in giving orders. But the question is: who and for what reason included Voronezh in the Fall Blau ? Having received the answer to this question, we will be able to evaluate Hitler’s decision to abandon the capture of Voronezh.
It is necessary to follow the events, using KTB, connected with the 24th Panzer Division and Grossdeuchland to answer the question: how many days have they really lost near Voronezh. You have not done this. All your conclusions are purely logical and are based on several premises.
- Hitler and Halder are military geniuses
-von Bok is a profane
- Voronezh wasn't to be taken
- the failure of operation Blau was clear to Hitler already in the middle of July
The first and last are false and this can be proved now on the basis of a document:
Besprechung des Führers mit dem Generalfeldmarschall W. Keitel über die Ursachen der erfolglosen Operationen der Wehrmacht in Kaukasus und über die Versetzung der Generale im Oberkommando der Wehrmacht (OKW) und an der Front vom 18. September 1942.
Reading it, you will learn that even on September 10, Hitler had no doubts about the success of Operation Blau. You will also learn that Halder, according to Hitler, was not able to command a division.
https://sites.google.com/site/krieg1941undnarod/
Better to lose with a clever than with a fool to find

jesk
Member
Posts: 1811
Joined: 04 Aug 2017 08:19
Location: Belarus

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by jesk » 24 Mar 2019 19:17

In logic of the opponent, irreversible failures are observed, as in the old Windows. Abstracts are not consistent.

1. Hitler allowed to take Voronezh motorized divisions on July 4.
2. Hitler ordered to take Voronezh by infantry.
3. Take Voronezh by infantry, if it is free.
4.
Look at what Halder writes the 3rd july :
-the task to take Voronej is no more
-does not take Voronej under any conditions

He writes it TWO TIMES ! Cant be clearer.
5.
Whereas Hitler and Halder agreed not to strike Voronej, VB didnt agree.
In front of VB's stubbornness Hitler finally allowed him to do so if :
-easy and quick capture
-use only infantry
-no soviet opposition
-send the motor. div. south

DavidFrankenberg
Member
Posts: 656
Joined: 11 May 2016 01:09
Location: Earth

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by DavidFrankenberg » 24 Mar 2019 19:29

jesk wrote:
24 Mar 2019 18:41
DavidFrankenberg wrote:
24 Mar 2019 18:21
The 6th it was 2 days too late.
4th of July is too early. If only tanks fly through the air.
Why would you need tanks if city is free and you are only allowed to use inf ???
Your logical conclusion about July 3-4 claims a discovery in science. Nobody wrote to you before, von Bock was allowed to capture Voronezh by motorized divisions until July 5th. I need more evidence, other than your logical reasoning, to try to believe.
All evidences are quoted there.
You didnt need time to regroup the div for blow by inf on Voronej, u didnt need motor. div. since YOU WERE ALLOWED to strike Voronej ONLY if it was FREE...
But this is a repeat of error. Halder wrote in his diary about the demands of Hitler at the meeting on July 6. Take the city by infantry if it is empty.
Yep.
Sure, one year after the events, how convenient it is !
Entries in July 1942 also ignore indications of errors. As if they were not there at all.
VB said he made no mistake ? How convenient it is !

DavidFrankenberg
Member
Posts: 656
Joined: 11 May 2016 01:09
Location: Earth

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by DavidFrankenberg » 24 Mar 2019 19:33

AbollonPolweder wrote:
24 Mar 2019 18:50
DavidFrankenberg wrote:
24 Mar 2019 17:29
...
It is very easy when we look at Voronej's events.
The key word here is events. Voronezh is mentioned in the diary von Bock 14/10/41:
This morning came a new directive from the High Command of the Army. It contained nothing new, except for one point: the High Command of the Land Forces, which is obsessed with the idea of ​​capturing Voronezh, proposed to consider the idea of ​​capturing the city with the forces of the right wing of an army group.
This clearly shows the awareness of the OKH and its adequacy in giving orders. But the question is: who and for what reason included Voronezh in the Fall Blau ? Having received the answer to this question, we will be able to evaluate Hitler’s decision to abandon the capture of Voronezh.
It is necessary to follow the events, using KTB, connected with the 24th Panzer Division and Grossdeuchland to answer the question: how many days have they really lost near Voronezh. You have not done this. All your conclusions are purely logical and are based on several premises.
- Hitler and Halder are military geniuses
-von Bok is a profane
- Voronezh wasn't to be taken
- the failure of operation Blau was clear to Hitler already in the middle of July
The first and last are false and this can be proved now on the basis of a document:
Besprechung des Führers mit dem Generalfeldmarschall W. Keitel über die Ursachen der erfolglosen Operationen der Wehrmacht in Kaukasus und über die Versetzung der Generale im Oberkommando der Wehrmacht (OKW) und an der Front vom 18. September 1942.
Reading it, you will learn that even on September 10, Hitler had no doubts about the success of Operation Blau. You will also learn that Halder, according to Hitler, was not able to command a division.
The capture of Voronej was part of the plan until the 3rd july. Hitler changed his mind, as Halder did.
http://militera.lib.ru/db/halder/1942_07.html

jesk
Member
Posts: 1811
Joined: 04 Aug 2017 08:19
Location: Belarus

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by jesk » 24 Mar 2019 19:35

You didnt need time to regroup the div for blow by inf on Voronej, u didnt need motor. div. since YOU WERE ALLOWED to strike Voronej ONLY if it was FREE...
But this is a repeat of error. Halder wrote in his diary about the demands of Hitler at the meeting on July 6. Take the city by infantry if it is empty.
Yep.
This is the 6th item. On the evening of July 6, when the Germans already controlled 80% of Voronezh, Hitler allowed Voronezh to take infantry. His statements on the evening of July 6 absolutely nothing new in the earlier events do not contribute.
Your logic has stopped working. Write absurd things.

jesk
Member
Posts: 1811
Joined: 04 Aug 2017 08:19
Location: Belarus

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by jesk » 24 Mar 2019 19:41

DavidFrankenberg wrote:
24 Mar 2019 19:33
AbollonPolweder wrote:
24 Mar 2019 18:50
DavidFrankenberg wrote:
24 Mar 2019 17:29
...
It is very easy when we look at Voronej's events.
The key word here is events. Voronezh is mentioned in the diary von Bock 14/10/41:
This morning came a new directive from the High Command of the Army. It contained nothing new, except for one point: the High Command of the Land Forces, which is obsessed with the idea of ​​capturing Voronezh, proposed to consider the idea of ​​capturing the city with the forces of the right wing of an army group.
This clearly shows the awareness of the OKH and its adequacy in giving orders. But the question is: who and for what reason included Voronezh in the Fall Blau ? Having received the answer to this question, we will be able to evaluate Hitler’s decision to abandon the capture of Voronezh.
It is necessary to follow the events, using KTB, connected with the 24th Panzer Division and Grossdeuchland to answer the question: how many days have they really lost near Voronezh. You have not done this. All your conclusions are purely logical and are based on several premises.
- Hitler and Halder are military geniuses
-von Bok is a profane
- Voronezh wasn't to be taken
- the failure of operation Blau was clear to Hitler already in the middle of July
The first and last are false and this can be proved now on the basis of a document:
Besprechung des Führers mit dem Generalfeldmarschall W. Keitel über die Ursachen der erfolglosen Operationen der Wehrmacht in Kaukasus und über die Versetzung der Generale im Oberkommando der Wehrmacht (OKW) und an der Front vom 18. September 1942.
Reading it, you will learn that even on September 10, Hitler had no doubts about the success of Operation Blau. You will also learn that Halder, according to Hitler, was not able to command a division.
The capture of Voronej was part of the plan until the 3rd july. Hitler changed his mind, as Halder did.
http://militera.lib.ru/db/halder/1942_07.html
On July 3 almost nothing changed. The task of capture of Voronezh was not removed.

DavidFrankenberg
Member
Posts: 656
Joined: 11 May 2016 01:09
Location: Earth

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by DavidFrankenberg » 24 Mar 2019 20:20

jesk wrote:
24 Mar 2019 19:41
DavidFrankenberg wrote:
24 Mar 2019 19:33
AbollonPolweder wrote:
24 Mar 2019 18:50
DavidFrankenberg wrote:
24 Mar 2019 17:29
...
It is very easy when we look at Voronej's events.
The key word here is events. Voronezh is mentioned in the diary von Bock 14/10/41:
This morning came a new directive from the High Command of the Army. It contained nothing new, except for one point: the High Command of the Land Forces, which is obsessed with the idea of ​​capturing Voronezh, proposed to consider the idea of ​​capturing the city with the forces of the right wing of an army group.
This clearly shows the awareness of the OKH and its adequacy in giving orders. But the question is: who and for what reason included Voronezh in the Fall Blau ? Having received the answer to this question, we will be able to evaluate Hitler’s decision to abandon the capture of Voronezh.
It is necessary to follow the events, using KTB, connected with the 24th Panzer Division and Grossdeuchland to answer the question: how many days have they really lost near Voronezh. You have not done this. All your conclusions are purely logical and are based on several premises.
- Hitler and Halder are military geniuses
-von Bok is a profane
- Voronezh wasn't to be taken
- the failure of operation Blau was clear to Hitler already in the middle of July
The first and last are false and this can be proved now on the basis of a document:
Besprechung des Führers mit dem Generalfeldmarschall W. Keitel über die Ursachen der erfolglosen Operationen der Wehrmacht in Kaukasus und über die Versetzung der Generale im Oberkommando der Wehrmacht (OKW) und an der Front vom 18. September 1942.
Reading it, you will learn that even on September 10, Hitler had no doubts about the success of Operation Blau. You will also learn that Halder, according to Hitler, was not able to command a division.
The capture of Voronej was part of the plan until the 3rd july. Hitler changed his mind, as Halder did.
http://militera.lib.ru/db/halder/1942_07.html
On July 3 almost nothing changed. The task of capture of Voronezh was not removed.
Halder 3rd july :

1. Задача по взятию Воронежа снимается{570}.
the task to take Voronej is removed

1. Брать Воронеж отнюдь не при любых обстоятельствах.
do not take Voronej by any means

jesk
Member
Posts: 1811
Joined: 04 Aug 2017 08:19
Location: Belarus

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by jesk » 24 Mar 2019 20:32

phrase "Брать Воронеж отнюдь не при любых обстоятельствах", means how if from 10 options of capture of Voronezh it is possible to use only 5.

jesk
Member
Posts: 1811
Joined: 04 Aug 2017 08:19
Location: Belarus

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by jesk » 24 Mar 2019 20:48

Interesting logic. On the evening of July 6, Hitler said to seize Voronezh by infantry if he is free. The events of July 6th can be projected on July 3rd. The order of Hitler was the same. But this is a dubious way to prove the past with events from the future. Criticized von Boсk for attempts to justify oneself in a year. Much can come up with.

DavidFrankenberg
Member
Posts: 656
Joined: 11 May 2016 01:09
Location: Earth

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by DavidFrankenberg » 24 Mar 2019 20:50

jesk wrote:
24 Mar 2019 20:32
phrase "Брать Воронеж отнюдь не при любых обстоятельствах", means how if from 10 options of capture of Voronezh it is possible to use only 5.
ok
direct english translation from german :

1) operation no longer contingent on capture of Voronej


In other words : no need anymore to take Voronej

jesk
Member
Posts: 1811
Joined: 04 Aug 2017 08:19
Location: Belarus

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by jesk » 24 Mar 2019 20:54

DavidFrankenberg wrote:
24 Mar 2019 20:50
jesk wrote:
24 Mar 2019 20:32
phrase "Брать Воронеж отнюдь не при любых обстоятельствах", means how if from 10 options of capture of Voronezh it is possible to use only 5.
ok
direct english translation from german :

1) operation no longer contingent on capture of Voronej


In other words : no need anymore to take Voronej
this is a phrase out of context no more

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quoting_out_of_context

Quoting out of context (sometimes referred to as contextomy or quote mining) is an informal fallacy and a type of false attribution in which a passage is removed from its surrounding matter in such a way as to distort its intended meaning.[1] Contextomies may be either intentional or accidental if someone misunderstands the meaning and omits something essential to clarifying it, thinking it to be non-essential.

Arguments based on this fallacy typically take two forms:

As a straw man argument, it involves quoting an opponent out of context in order to misrepresent their position (typically to make it seem more simplistic or extreme) in order to make it easier to refute. It is common in politics.
As an appeal to authority, it involves quoting an authority on the subject out of context, in order to misrepresent that authority as supporting some position.[2]

DavidFrankenberg
Member
Posts: 656
Joined: 11 May 2016 01:09
Location: Earth

Re: von Bock and Voronej

Post by DavidFrankenberg » 24 Mar 2019 21:42

jesk wrote:
24 Mar 2019 20:54
DavidFrankenberg wrote:
24 Mar 2019 20:50
jesk wrote:
24 Mar 2019 20:32
phrase "Брать Воронеж отнюдь не при любых обстоятельствах", means how if from 10 options of capture of Voronezh it is possible to use only 5.
ok
direct english translation from german :

1) operation no longer contingent on capture of Voronej


In other words : no need anymore to take Voronej
this is a phrase out of context no more

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quoting_out_of_context
What context ?

Hitler and Halder simply agreed that the seizure of Voronej was not anymore obligatory.

Return to “German Strategy & General German Military Discussion”