WW II Historical Thread, Discussion, Pics, Videos

[chuck731]

Thanks for you opinion, chuck731. Authors of that special issue of a military history journal (finally I found the time to read it) say more or less the same as you did here! I hoped I would learn more about the negative role of Erich Hoepner (executed on August 8, 1944) and Günther von Kluge (commited suicide on August 17, 1944), but didn't ... and as one of my SDF posts got deleted yesterday, perhaps I should not start talking conspiracy theories here but do you think it's just a coincidence and back in 1941 those two didn't intentionally protract the decisive attack or nothing?

I don't think Hoepner or Kluger intentionally sabotaged the attack on Moscow. Hitler's war with Russia was wildly popular in all segments of the Wehrmacht in 1941, including conservative anti-NAZI fractions. The Wehrmacht expected certain and relatively easy victory and with it vast glory, promotions, prestige, and monetary and estate rewards for its senior officers even greater than what was bestowed upon it by Hitler upon the senior military ranks after the victory over France. At the beginning of Operation Typhoon, the optimism of the senior staff remains undimmed.

The sabotage of senior German army officers to Hitler in operational matters of the army only became significant in the lead up to Stalingrad, when it was becoming clear that:

1. Russia is very tough to defeat, and may be impossible for Wehrmacht to defeat it.

2. Hitler's operational directives were nonsense and is exposing German army to predictable diseasters.

3. Hitler suffer serious tunnel vision and mission fixation and can not see deadly opportunities his plans gives to Russians.

I think the first instance of Kluger actively sabotaging German operational plan was in Operation Zitadelle, or battle of Kursk. He intentionally colluded with Model to hold back critical forces that had been intended by Hitler for use in the northern Pincer in order to provide a reserve for the inevitable Soviet counterattack. So you could argue he sabotaged operation zitadelle. But he recognized Zitadelle was going to fail anyway, and following Hitler's orders would only have made the consequences of its failure worse.

 

[richardparker07]

Battle of Staligrad (of world war II) the deadliest battle ever happened in 20th century in which Red Army surprised and defeated Germany army resulting huge causalities...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

of ten worst military disasters in the 20th century based on the reported casualties.

A destroyed battle tank and buildings (background) on the streets of the city remain as witnesses to the intensity of the Battle of Stalingrad

 

[chuck731]

The west tend to adopt a Wehrmacht-centric histriography, and see the battle of Moscow as over when Wehrmacht operation typhoon to capture Moscow failed and Germans were driven back from Moscow. Once the Germans were driven back in jan 1942, the german overall strategic objective became blurred, and thus no longer focused on Moscow. So for the Wehrmacht the battle of Moscow was over.

For the soviets, the focus remained on Moscow through june of 1942. The red army launched a series of offensives in spring 1942 to consolidate their gains and eliminate bridgeheads from which the Germans might renew their attack on Moscow. These spring offensives were huge, and red army bled badly in it, losing around a million men. For Russians this is all part of grand champaign to secure Moscow and thus form part of battle of Moscow. Battle of Moscow didn't end for the Russians until german summer offensive of 1942 finally shifted the focal point of eastern front from central section ahead of Moscow to between Donets and Caucasus. With these the battle of Moscow thus became easily the largest land battle ever fought in history in terms soldiers involved on both sides as well as the most deadly in terms if total combatants killed.

 

[Jura The idiot]

... So for the Wehrmacht the battle of Moscow was over.

For the soviets, the focus remained on Moscow through june of 1942. ...

I knew I had heard this, the Soviet point of view I mean ... and I just realized I had been actually taught this! In a high school, almost 30 years ago, by a female history teacher who still believed in Communism -- in the Socialistic country in mid 1980s LOL
It's fascinating, I mean it, to hear it here, especially from an American who I suppose you are, chuck731. It's also interesting what you said about current Western historiography, how it presents the Eastern Front in WW2.

 

[Jeff Head]

It's fascinating, I mean it, to hear it here, especially from an American who I suppose you are, chuck731. It's also interesting what you said about current Western historiography, how it presents the Eastern Front in WW2.

Most Americans do not have the slightest knowledge, or comprehension of the Eastern Front and its magnitude, or severity, when talking about World War II.

For most, in their primary and secondary education, it is simply skimmed over at best...and not covered at all in many cases.

For those who want to learn of it, there is so much material available to enlighten those seeking that education.

There were significant battles in western Europe, in Southern Europe, Afirca, etc. And they were absolutely vital and critial to the defeat of Nazi Germany.

But in terms of shear magnitude, longevity, and scope of the entire conflict and individual operations, the Eastern Front was sginifcantly more intense, more deadly, and more demanding. And even with both fronts draining Germany as they did...it was still extremely difficult to put them down.

 

[Jura The idiot]

Battle of Staligrad (of world war II) the deadliest battle ever happened in 20th century in which Red Army surprised and defeated Germany army resulting huge causalities...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

of ten worst military disasters in the 20th century based on the reported casualties.

...

OK, I confess, I clicked on that link and it's horrible, richardparker07, are you sure there were no other operations (in addition to those listed) during the last century with more than, for example (#9 on your list): "The Allies failed to cross the Rhine River in sufficient force and, as a result, suffered over 17,000 casualties. The German casualties and losses were estimated at about 9,000."

 

[chuck731]

OK, I confess, I clicked on that link and it's horrible, richardparker07, are you sure there were no other operations (in addition to those listed) during the last century with more than, for example (#9 on your list): "The Allies failed to cross the Rhine River in sufficient force and, as a result, suffered over 17,000 casualties. The German casualties and losses were estimated at about 9,000."

Off the top of my head I can name at least ten battles from each of the two world war that's not present on that list but which incurred more casualties that that. I can also name ten more battles of the 20th century not from either of the world wars that also incurred more casualties.

That's thirty battles without looking up any references.

 

[asif iqbal]

People also tend to forget the Soviet Invasion of Manchriia as per the Yalta agreement

With a few short months the Soviets rearch the door step of Imperial Japan

Just wondering what would have happend if Japan didn't surrender probably would have ended up like Korea, a Soviet controlled North and Allied control South what a disaster that would have been

Japan had a lucky escape

 

[asif iqbal]

The west tend to adopt a Wehrmacht-centric histriography, and see the battle of Moscow as over when Wehrmacht operation typhoon to capture Moscow failed and Germans were driven back from Moscow. Once the Germans were driven back in jan 1942, the german overall strategic objective became blurred, and thus no longer focused on Moscow. So for the Wehrmacht the battle of Moscow was over.

For the soviets, the focus remained on Moscow through june of 1942. The red army launched a series of offensives in spring 1942 to consolidate their gains and eliminate bridgeheads from which the Germans might renew their attack on Moscow. These spring offensives were huge, and red army bled badly in it, losing around a million men. For Russians this is all part of grand champaign to secure Moscow and thus form part of battle of Moscow. Battle of Moscow didn't end for the Russians until german summer offensive of 1942 finally shifted the focal point of eastern front from central section ahead of Moscow to between Donets and Caucasus. With these the battle of Moscow thus became easily the largest land battle ever fought in history in terms soldiers involved on both sides as well as the most deadly in terms if total combatants killed.

Problem was that Hilter split his attack force North army group went for Moscow and South army group went for the oil fields in Baku which basically meant that Germany never managed to muster all thier forces and concentrate them into one battle

Had Hitler thrown both army groups for one single unified objective to capture Moscow Germany probably would have taken Moscow

The split in Germany army groups weakens the flanks which were lightly guarded by Italians and Romanians diviisions which allowed the Soviets to out flank the Germans during thier counter attack

Stalingrad well what can I say, the city hat swallowed Hilters 6th army

 

[asif iqbal]

But in terms of shear magnitude, longevity, and scope of the entire conflict and individual operations, the Eastern Front was sginifcantly more intense, more deadly, and more demanding. And even with both fronts draining Germany as they did...it was still extremely difficult to put them down.

Simple reason for that is because Hitler threw his best and well equipped divisions at the Soviets which he really wanted to stop at all costs, it was personal battle between Hilter vs Stalin and both sides went toe to toe for the distance and both sides gave it thier all

On the Western front there just wasn't that sense of urgency and brutalness plus Germans knew if they let the Soviets come they are going to avenge what the Germans did to the Soviets in the early stages of the war German divisions would rather surrender to Allies but not the Soviets

Soviets were wanting payback and revenge and Nazis knew it as a result it became a battle of wills