The Logistics of Barbarossa (or lack of it)

Discussions on High Command, strategy and the Armed Forces (Wehrmacht) in general.
ljadw
Member
Posts: 10500
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

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

Post by ljadw » 29 Dec 2019 08:19

Your argument is an argument of authority ,thus not valid .
US were able to supply their forces in the Iraqi wars and in Afghanistan over a distance that was several times the distance the Germans had to supply their forces and which they could not do it or had the biggest problems to do it .
The forces the US used in these wars were as different from the WWII Axis forces as the forces of Napoleon were from the WWII Axis forces .
The means the Germans had to supply their forces were,compared to the today' s means,totally insignifiant = trains driving at a speed of 20 km and carrying 400 tons .With the means the Germans had, US could not supply its forces in Iraq and Afghanistan .
Thus: both situations are totally different and can not be compared .As the technology was different, the principles are different .
Military concepts are subordinated to the type of war that is fought and to the technology that is used/that is available and to the political aims . The armies were also different, the same for society .The war in Iraq is totally different to the war in Afghanistan .
The military concepts of the war in Vietnam and of the war in Iraq are totally different .

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 1013
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 08:46
Location: Brussels

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

Post by Aida1 » 29 Dec 2019 10:54

ljadw wrote:
29 Dec 2019 08:19
Your argument is an argument of authority ,thus not valid .
US were able to supply their forces in the Iraqi wars and in Afghanistan over a distance that was several times the distance the Germans had to supply their forces and which they could not do it or had the biggest problems to do it .
The forces the US used in these wars were as different from the WWII Axis forces as the forces of Napoleon were from the WWII Axis forces .
The means the Germans had to supply their forces were,compared to the today' s means,totally insignifiant = trains driving at a speed of 20 km and carrying 400 tons .With the means the Germans had, US could not supply its forces in Iraq and Afghanistan .
Thus: both situations are totally different and can not be compared .As the technology was different, the principles are different .
Military concepts are subordinated to the type of war that is fought and to the technology that is used/that is available and to the political aims . The armies were also different, the same for society .The war in Iraq is totally different to the war in Afghanistan .
The military concepts of the war in Vietnam and of the war in Iraq are totally different .
You are digging yourself a very deep hole by trying to get into a discussion with somebody who did logistics as a job :lol:

ljadw
Member
Posts: 10500
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

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

Post by ljadw » 29 Dec 2019 12:53

Today's logistics are not the logistics of 75 years ago . And I would be surprised if Appleknocker worked in 1941 for the logistic services of the Ostheer .

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 1013
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 08:46
Location: Brussels

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

Post by Aida1 » 29 Dec 2019 13:25

ljadw wrote:
29 Dec 2019 12:53
Today's logistics are not the logistics of 75 years ago . And I would be surprised if Appleknocker worked in 1941 for the logistic services of the Ostheer .
You are obviously specialised in logistics. :lol: :lol: You are setting yourself up for a deep fall i think.

User avatar
Appleknocker27
Member
Posts: 627
Joined: 05 Jun 2007 17:11
Location: US/Europe

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

Post by Appleknocker27 » 30 Dec 2019 03:44

Aida1 wrote:
29 Dec 2019 10:54
You are digging yourself a very deep hole by trying to get into a discussion with somebody who did logistics as a job :lol:
This is nothing new... Also, I am still a Logistician and most recently spent 2016-17 in Iraq.

User avatar
Appleknocker27
Member
Posts: 627
Joined: 05 Jun 2007 17:11
Location: US/Europe

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

Post by Appleknocker27 » 30 Dec 2019 03:55

ljadw wrote:
29 Dec 2019 08:19
Your argument is an argument of authority ,thus not valid .
No, it isn't an argument from authority, it is from EXPERIENCE and that rare commodity of common sense. Being a professionally trained practitioner of Military logistics/doctrine gives me the tools of the trade, from which I can relate to historical references and understand how things were done. You and I could read the same book, but I will read it from an experienced Logisticians' perspective, you won't because you can't.
You opine about things you never did, were never trained to do and will never do, then want to explain how I can't relate to historical examples within my profession (which you have no education or experience with)... Brilliant! :thumbsup:
During Command and General Staff College and multiple schools at ALU (Army Logistics University at FT Lee) I wrote a lot of historical papers, took part in Staff Rides on site at battlefields, etc. So don't think for one moment that we (the Army Logistics professional community) don't study the history of military logistics from Alexander to the Gulf War and relate it to our profession.
You clearly don't know what you don't know and you keep proving it...
If we can dispense with the ruffled feathers and territorial stuff, perhaps we could discuss Barbarossa.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 10500
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

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

Post by ljadw » 30 Dec 2019 08:02

Appleknocker27 wrote:
30 Dec 2019 03:44
Aida1 wrote:
29 Dec 2019 10:54
You are digging yourself a very deep hole by trying to get into a discussion with somebody who did logistics as a job :lol:
This is nothing new... Also, I am still a Logistician and most recently spent 2016-17 in Iraq.
Iraq 2016-2017 is not the SU 1941 .
You are arguing as a Logistician of 2019 with the knowledge and bias of 2019 about what happened 78 years ago in an other country,but you forget that only the German logisticians of 1941 with the knowledge and bias of 1941 could decide ,judge the importance of logistics of 1941 . The logistics of the Ostheer in 1941 are not the logistics of the US army in the ME .
You make the big mistake of assuming that there are universal logistic laws and that what is used in 2019 could also be used in 1941 .
1941 was an other world with other laws,where the principals and concepts of 2019 had no place .
You know the outcome of Barbarossa, the logisticians of 1941 did not, thus you should not judge or condemn them . You would not have done better because your knowledge, your MA would be useless .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 10500
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

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

Post by ljadw » 30 Dec 2019 08:20

Appleknocker27 wrote:
30 Dec 2019 03:55
ljadw wrote:
29 Dec 2019 08:19
Your argument is an argument of authority ,thus not valid .
No, it isn't an argument from authority, it is from EXPERIENCE and that rare commodity of common sense. Being a professionally trained practitioner of Military logistics/doctrine gives me the tools of the trade, from which I can relate to historical references and understand how things were done. You and I could read the same book, but I will read it from an experienced Logisticians' perspective, you won't because you can't.
You opine about things you never did, were never trained to do and will never do, then want to explain how I can't relate to historical examples within my profession (which you have no education or experience with)... Brilliant! :thumbsup:
During Command and General Staff College and multiple schools at ALU (Army Logistics University at FT Lee) I wrote a lot of historical papers, took part in Staff Rides on site at battlefields, etc. So don't think for one moment that we (the Army Logistics professional community) don't study the history of military logistics from Alexander to the Gulf War and relate it to our profession.
You clearly don't know what you don't know and you keep proving it...
If we can dispense with the ruffled feathers and territorial stuff, perhaps we could discuss Barbarossa.
You can't understand how things were done 78 years ago because you were not there 78 years ago .
The future logisticians, those of 2100 will also not understand how things were done in 2016 ,because they were not there .
It is already very difficult for the present generation of logisticians to understand how things were done in Vietnam , thus how would they understand how things were done in 1941 . It takes more, much, much more than being a logistician of today ,to know how things were done in 1941 . To know this, one must have a very exhaustive knowledge of European ,and especially German and East European history, also fron national socialism ,a knowledge of geography, of the available technology,etc,etc . You must place yourself in the position of the logisticians of the Ostheer . And I doubt that an American could do this , because Europe and America were and are two totally different worlds . Only a European could try to do this, and the chances of success are very small . Barbarossa is a part of the European heritage, not of the American heritage .
It is the same for thhe US Civil War : only an American historian can understand the why and the what, the outcome of this war ,and European historians should be very modest when they are talking about the US Civil War .Something which they are not ,of course .

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 1013
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 08:46
Location: Brussels

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

Post by Aida1 » 30 Dec 2019 09:06

Appleknocker27 wrote:
30 Dec 2019 03:44
Aida1 wrote:
29 Dec 2019 10:54
You are digging yourself a very deep hole by trying to get into a discussion with somebody who did logistics as a job :lol:
This is nothing new... Also, I am still a Logistician and most recently spent 2016-17 in Iraq.
So he is in for a very deep fall. :lol:

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 1013
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 08:46
Location: Brussels

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

Post by Aida1 » 30 Dec 2019 09:08

ljadw wrote:
30 Dec 2019 08:02
Appleknocker27 wrote:
30 Dec 2019 03:44
Aida1 wrote:
29 Dec 2019 10:54
You are digging yourself a very deep hole by trying to get into a discussion with somebody who did logistics as a job :lol:
This is nothing new... Also, I am still a Logistician and most recently spent 2016-17 in Iraq.
Iraq 2016-2017 is not the SU 1941 .
You are arguing as a Logistician of 2019 with the knowledge and bias of 2019 about what happened 78 years ago in an other country,but you forget that only the German logisticians of 1941 with the knowledge and bias of 1941 could decide ,judge the importance of logistics of 1941 . The logistics of the Ostheer in 1941 are not the logistics of the US army in the ME .
You make the big mistake of assuming that there are universal logistic laws and that what is used in 2019 could also be used in 1941 .
1941 was an other world with other laws,where the principals and concepts of 2019 had no place .
You know the outcome of Barbarossa, the logisticians of 1941 did not, thus you should not judge or condemn them . You would not have done better because your knowledge, your MA would be useless .
I think you are a Kamikaze pilot when you go down this road. A bit of modesty and realism would do you good.

Max Payload
Member
Posts: 541
Joined: 21 Jun 2008 14:37

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

Post by Max Payload » 30 Dec 2019 10:52

ljadw wrote:
30 Dec 2019 08:20
You can't understand how things were done 78 years ago because you were not there 78 years ago .
The future logisticians, those of 2100 will also not understand how things were done in 2016 ,because they were not there .
...
Europe and America were and are two totally different worlds . ... Barbarossa is a part of the European heritage, not of the American heritage .
It is the same for thhe US Civil War : only an American historian can understand the why and the what
So, to clarify: only an American historian can understand the why and what of the American Civil War, but even he/she could not understand the how, while a European historian could not understand the why, the what nor the how.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 10500
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

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

Post by ljadw » 30 Dec 2019 11:30

NO : an American historian has more knowledge about the Civil War than an European Historian, but an American historian of 2019 has less knowledge about the ACW than an American historian of 1919 . Time is making us more difficult to understand what happened in the past .
Chinese/Japanese historians know more than European/American historians about the Chinese/Japanese war, but the more time is passing,the less their knowledge becomes .
About Barbarossa : not only time is making it more difficult to understand,even for European historians, but also the fact that we had 50 years of Cold War, and this was and still is colouring what American ( and also European ) historians are saying about Barbarossa and WWII.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 10500
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

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

Post by ljadw » 30 Dec 2019 11:34

Aida1 wrote:
29 Dec 2019 10:54
ljadw wrote:
29 Dec 2019 08:19
Your argument is an argument of authority ,thus not valid .
US were able to supply their forces in the Iraqi wars and in Afghanistan over a distance that was several times the distance the Germans had to supply their forces and which they could not do it or had the biggest problems to do it .
The forces the US used in these wars were as different from the WWII Axis forces as the forces of Napoleon were from the WWII Axis forces .
The means the Germans had to supply their forces were,compared to the today' s means,totally insignifiant = trains driving at a speed of 20 km and carrying 400 tons .With the means the Germans had, US could not supply its forces in Iraq and Afghanistan .
Thus: both situations are totally different and can not be compared .As the technology was different, the principles are different .
Military concepts are subordinated to the type of war that is fought and to the technology that is used/that is available and to the political aims . The armies were also different, the same for society .The war in Iraq is totally different to the war in Afghanistan .
The military concepts of the war in Vietnam and of the war in Iraq are totally different .
You are digging yourself a very deep hole by trying to get into a discussion with somebody who did logistics as a job :lol:
Logistics did not decide the outcome of Barbarossa .The outcome was decided by the Soviets, not by the Germans .

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 1013
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 08:46
Location: Brussels

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

Post by Aida1 » 30 Dec 2019 12:41

ljadw wrote:
30 Dec 2019 11:30
NO : an American historian has more knowledge about the Civil War than an European Historian, but an American historian of 2019 has less knowledge about the ACW than an American historian of 1919 . Time is making us more difficult to understand what happened in the past .
Chinese/Japanese historians know more than European/American historians about the Chinese/Japanese war, but the more time is passing,the less their knowledge becomes .
About Barbarossa : not only time is making it more difficult to understand,even for European historians, but also the fact that we had 50 years of Cold War, and this was and still is colouring what American ( and also European ) historians are saying about Barbarossa and WWII.
This is obviously entirely untrue. If a historian can read the sources, he can certainly understand. The latter paragraph is entirely ridiculous given more access to russian archives and the revisionism in Russia.

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 1013
Joined: 04 Aug 2019 08:46
Location: Brussels

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

Post by Aida1 » 30 Dec 2019 12:43

ljadw wrote:
30 Dec 2019 11:34
Aida1 wrote:
29 Dec 2019 10:54
ljadw wrote:
29 Dec 2019 08:19
Your argument is an argument of authority ,thus not valid .
US were able to supply their forces in the Iraqi wars and in Afghanistan over a distance that was several times the distance the Germans had to supply their forces and which they could not do it or had the biggest problems to do it .
The forces the US used in these wars were as different from the WWII Axis forces as the forces of Napoleon were from the WWII Axis forces .
The means the Germans had to supply their forces were,compared to the today' s means,totally insignifiant = trains driving at a speed of 20 km and carrying 400 tons .With the means the Germans had, US could not supply its forces in Iraq and Afghanistan .
Thus: both situations are totally different and can not be compared .As the technology was different, the principles are different .
Military concepts are subordinated to the type of war that is fought and to the technology that is used/that is available and to the political aims . The armies were also different, the same for society .The war in Iraq is totally different to the war in Afghanistan .
The military concepts of the war in Vietnam and of the war in Iraq are totally different .
You are digging yourself a very deep hole by trying to get into a discussion with somebody who did logistics as a job :lol:
Logistics did not decide the outcome of Barbarossa .The outcome was decided by the Soviets, not by the Germans .
Another one of these oneliners which are typical for you.

Return to “German Strategy & General German Military Discussion”