Askey's Operation Barbarossa - strategic arguments, logistics, etc.

[TheMarcksPlan]

I tried to look for a thread title on this work but didn't see one...

IMO it's a great series for references and has some great insights - Glantz said it will be "without peer" when complete.

It's a not a book one reads through sequentially, however, so I might have missed some things here and there.

Questions:

• Askey is a "Go for Moscow guy." Where (either in Op.Barb or elsewhere online) does he make a full argument for this approach?
• AFAIK Askey's logistics proceeds from the railheads out. Where does he discuss getting supplies to the railheads? Or do supplies just magically emanate from railheads?

[TheMarcksPlan]

Askey is a "Go for Moscow guy." Where (either in Op.Barb or elsewhere online) does he make a full argument for this approach?

For those unfamiliar with the work, a bit of context: Op.Barb is organized acccording to headings like "Soviet Supply Distribution Efficiency" or "Reinforcements dispatched after July 5, 1941." In the midst of this technical stuff, there will be tangentially-related asides like "the Moscow-Gorkii region produced 1/3 or Soviet divisions raised during Barbarossa." So to find narrative bits amidst all the data isn't easy...

[marthus]

Hello
see jean lopez's book "barbarossa"
over 1000 pages on this subject ......

[TheMarcksPlan]

Hello
see jean lopez's book "barbarossa"
over 1000 pages on this subject ......

I read a (Google-translated) review stating that Lopez's conclusion is Barbarossa could have succeeded had Hitler treated Ukrainians/Balts well and enlisted their help. ...which is a "Nazis win if they're not Nazis" solution, which I find uninteresting. Is that an accurate characterization of the book?

If so, that sounds like like a Cold War propaganda narrative about Good Capitalism instead of perverted capitalism. Like millions of Russian/German deaths would have been worth it to extirpate evil Communism...