Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I would suggest that after the Battle for Moscow, Stalin learned to give his generals much leeway particularly in tactical decisions but also in stratigic ones. Looking at the careers of Zhukov and Shtemenko, how they managed to accomplish what they did and their comments and the recorded observations of British and Americans who were there makes me suggest that. Of course Stalin was involved, more than Roosevelt, but certain less than Hitler, and I would suggest less than Churchill who appointed himself Minister of Defense.
I have thought that the venture into Russia was winnable, just not by the Nazis. Their treatment of all who were not German as inferior and not worthy of concern guaranteed the German failure.
And I feel the same way about Japan. They doomed themselves, and may have actually been able to win at one point.
Yep. I agree with this.
Had the Nazis been smart, they would have given Red Army POWs and Russian civilians humane treatment. Stalin was so feared and detested that I bet that the Soviet Army would have simply given up in many instances, particularly in seemingly hopeless situations such as the Siege of Leningrad. In many places during the early days of Barbarossa, the Germans were hailed as liberators. Even later in the war, there was a sizable Russian Army as part of the German order of battle. Just imagine what might have happened had Hitler treated the conquered Russian lands with a little more foresight.
Had the Nazis been smart, they would have given Red Army POWs and Russian civilians humane treatment. Stalin was so feared and detested that I bet that the Soviet Army would have simply given up in many instances, particularly in seemingly hopeless situations such as the Siege of Leningrad. In many places during the early days of Barbarossa, the Germans were hailed as liberators. Even later in the war, there was a sizable Russian Army as part of the German order of battle. Just imagine what might have happened had Hitler treated the conquered Russian lands with a little more foresight.
I highly doubt it. First, during the early part of the war the Red Army's defeats were not influenced by the Soviet troops dispositions towards Stalin or the Nazis. Therefore it is unlikely that they would have "given up" if only they were treated better.
Second, Nazis didn't really need any more cannon fodder. They needed well trained and equipped troops.
The Problem us Americans have with WWII History, is that it started at Pearl Harbor. By Dec 7th 1941, The British had already won the Battle of Britain. The Royal navy was second to none, while having U-Boats the Nazi's had much else. They had lost the Graff Spree in 1939, the Bismark in May of 41, For the most part the Kreigsmarine failed to engage the Royal Navy, and chose to stay in Port. The Pocket BattleShip Admiral Scheer was probably the most succsessful German surface ship, fighting until 1945, before British planes sank her in port.
So ultimatley while unable to defeat the German's alone the British were far from being defeated themselves, and let's not forget North Africa, where Montgomery whipped Rommel despite what the Movies show Patton doing....
The British are some tough SOB's always have been, glad they are on our side..
If it weren't for the Americans there would be no England today.
Not saying the British aren't tough.....
The u-boats were the main component of the Kriegsmarine not it's surface fleet and almost won the war for Germany.
I would suggest that after the Battle for Moscow, Stalin learned to give his generals much leeway particularly in tactical decisions but also in stratigic ones. Looking at the careers of Zhukov and Shtemenko, how they managed to accomplish what they did and their comments and the recorded observations of British and Americans who were there makes me suggest that. Of course Stalin was involved, more than Roosevelt, but certain less than Hitler, and I would suggest less than Churchill who appointed himself Minister of Defense.
The Germans wanted to capture Leningrad for the reasons already mentioned. It could have served as an important transportation hub for the northern sector. They never quite had enough forces to capture it, though. The terrain around Leningrad is full of lakes, swamps and forests and not suitable for blitzkrieg tactics. Also, other targets like Moscow (fall 1941) and Stalingrad (fall 1942) took priority. After summer of 1941 the Germans could no longer afford to attack everywhere at once.
There was one opportunity in late summer of 1942. 11th Army under Erich von Manstein just captured Sevastopol in the Crimea. The German high command decided to use this formation to capture Leningrad and transferred it all the way north. Unknown to them, the Soviets were planning their own operation in the area to break the siege and relieve Leningrad. The Soviets also were not aware that the 11th army had just been transferred there. The Soviet offensive began first and met with some initial success. The German units facing them were insufficient to hold the line. Manstein was forced to pivot and use his own forces to stabilize the situation. The Soviet offensive was turned back with heavy casualties (including many POWs). However the German plan to take Leningrad was postponed indefinitely.
I highly doubt it. First, during the early part of the war the Red Army's defeats were not influenced by the Soviet troops dispositions towards Stalin or the Nazis. Therefore it is unlikely that they would have "given up" if only they were treated better.
Second, Nazis didn't really need any more cannon fodder. They needed well trained and equipped troops.
-----
Germans devoted much of their resources to fight against partisans. Had he treated Russians humanly, Russians would not have fought they way they did. Of course, Germans would have lost sooner or later.
Just wrong estimates since the beginning. The USSR was not a poor country in disarray, but a huge industrial power with a countless number of divisions.
It would as been as if Japan would have tried to invade US, plain nonsense.
The big winner was the Soviet Intelligent Service.
It is interesting to look at how much of German "occupied" areas were actually controlled by they partisans. I can't cut and paste the map since it is copywrited.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
