Why did Germany fight in the west?

Well, neither did Hitler and what happened to him?

</font>[/QUOTE]lol. funniest thing ive heard today.

geez anyone with idiots knowlege of ww2 knows that it was the soviet union that did the lionshare of defeating germany. to say the the SU, which inflicted 75 percent of all german casualties in the entire war, was not to be taken seriously or whatever is a joke.

[ 18. December 2003, 06:30 AM: Message edited by: Kaiser Heer ]

 

Welcome in this forum, Kaiser Heer!

Right from the start a few questions, as your 75% figure is very interesting: What's your source? Does this include civilian losses, or military only? Do you know the percentages for the other nations invloved?

 

German military KIAs in the eastern front - within the borders of the Soviet Union and Poland - 2.742.909.

German military losses in the mediterranean and west european theatres: 507.000

Not to mention German losses - superior to 1,5 million men - within the borders of the Reich - mainly engaged against the Soviet Union -, the Balkans and Finland.

But yes, the Russians didn't do much in WWII...

 

Try reading what I wrote, it would not work because even if Germany had surrendered to the Western Allies Russian troops would still have marched across from the east and taken over eastern Germany, Berlin would still have been split up, the Berlin Wall etc would still have been built. The Germans knew they would still be invaded by the Russians from the east, hense they had to continue fighting.

 

[*]"Respect for Veterans: This is the most strictly protected rule of this site. Veterans of both sides of the Second World War often visit these forums, when they do, they must be treated with the utmost respect and dignity. ..."

oh yes i NEVER RESPECT VETS! that's why I reenact, I hold Vets in a higher regaurd than any normal person today, and the influential tank comment, the Germans NEVER made an influential tank? and the Tiger would have never exsisted? the tiger didnt have any or atleast very much slanted armor on it other than the little lip above the treads, now the King tiger had slanted armor. and also the russians didnt have "real" tanks until germany invaded poland, the germans were superior tank enginers the 88mm could easily poke holes through russian armor (in most cases) as well as American armor, and British armor! and the 75% also just as Knight said where are you getting that from? i never said that the Russians never killed anyone, they killed alot but the Germans gave them hell i mean it was 1 German for every 6 Russians and they were knocking on the doors of mosscow, now if Hitler wasn't so bull headed and demanded the capture of Stalingrad they could have bypassed it taken mosscow and mopped it up later such as patton did to the germans on the western front, and if you're calling me an idiot i'd beg to differ, i'll challenge u on WWII any day but yes i'm VERRY SORRY if i sounded racist, and i with draw any comments that you consider "racist" which i am not!
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by 5-0-duce:
... an open forum IS a matter of ones opinion and almost anything can be said in it [[Razz]] and if i wanted to be racist i would've said that i was going to dress up in my mama's white bed clothes and lynche the russians!...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
but remember a forum is ones own opinions, and i never said that i would dress up in KKK clothes and attack russians, so do not make it sound like i said that i would,

and what is that [[Razz]] thing in there? i'm lost on that, if you quote someone please dont change the quote.... and also if you dont believe me that the russians copied a lot of things look it up, and i do respect the Russian vets i respect all vets EVEN French resistance! but i will still say that i do not agree with the soviet occupation of Germany and most of eastern europe

 

Warning to you and Knight move. settle your problems by private e-mails please !

Erich

 

Yes, they did. It was called PzKpfw III. From 1939 until 1942 they conquested most of Europe with it.

There are some very interesting threads about tanks of some one year ago which came to conclussions such as the T-34 and M4 been the most inluential tanks of the war, not in technology.

I invite you to visit and revive the old threads of "War in Russia" and "What-if" forums for these matters, because I know this forum would object your statements.

No one has.

That's what this forums are for. I gently invite you to revive any old thread about anything you want and we'll discuss it. Just don't posts we've discussed a thousand times. It's too much worthless typing.

NOT in every case. If there's a thread about favourite battles, planes, tanks then it IS a matter of opinion, but when you're discussing historical reality what matter are facts, not opinions.

I don't think no one around here agrees with that. But I know we also do not agree with Hitler and nazism starting the war in the first place.

But please, let's keep the subject going and if someone wants to discuss about Moscow, tanks and war philosophy, there are very good old threads and special forums.

 

i took Kaiser Heer's comment "geez anyone with idiots knowlege of ww2 knows that it was the soviet union that did the lionshare of defeating germany. to say the the SU, which inflicted 75 percent of all german casualties in the entire war, was not to be taken seriously or whatever is a joke." as him calling me an idiot, although i'm not the one that thinks that the russians caused 75% of German casualties

[ 18. December 2003, 07:09 PM: Message edited by: 5-0-duce ]

 

i never called you an idiot. anyone with idiots knowlege means anyone with basic knowledge.

 

anyway, heres some sources you all wanted:

http://www.eisenhowerinstitute.org/programs/livinghistory/SovietExperienceww2.htm

refer to paragraph four for some stats.

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/ww2stats.htm#Campaigns

in this one you have "Battle Deaths in Major WW2 Campaigns" which have stats in various campaigns.

all the sources for the stats are down the bottom of the page.

Ok, now the maths!

According to the eisenhower institute:

Germans killed by soviets: 2,415,690
Germans killed by allies: 834,314
Total Germans killed: 3,250,004

Percentage killed by soviets: 74.33%

According to John Ellis, World War II : a statistical survey (Facts on File, 1993))

Germans killed by soviets: 2,415,690
Germans killed in other theatres: 707,416
Total Germans killed: 3,123,106

Percentage killed by soviets: 77.35&

Kaiser Heer

[ 22. December 2003, 06:24 AM: Message edited by: Kaiser Heer ]

 

oops i forgot an article i found at this very site!

http://www.ww2n.com/archives/art-20010426.shtml

[ 18. December 2003, 09:31 PM: Message edited by: Kaiser Heer ]

 

Werent the Tiger and Panther both around before the T-34? It is kinda hard to say they wouldent have existed..if they came first? And I know that they Germans really werent expecting the T-34 because it was such a secret project..And I still fail to see how its all that amazing in it being sloped. The Sherman was sloped in the front.

 

T-34 mass production started summer 1940 and Russians had about 1,000 by the beginning of Barbarossa.

Tiger first showed up in Leningrad region late 1942.

Panther first action in Kursk July 1943.

The T-34´s sloped armor is much discussed because it caused the Germans during Barbarossa quite alot of headache as Germans did not have weapons to deal with it. One of interesting topics would be if Russians had radios on their tanks, commander cupolas, and their tactics would have been to use the tanks in large numbers together from the beginnig of Barbarossa. By using T-34 in providing cover for infantry mostly and not amassing them gave the advantage to Germans in the battles.

 

Ok a few things:

1- Yes the Russians destroyed the vast majority of the Germany armed forces on their own, and did significantly more to win the war than every other nation in the world combined. I concur with previous posters about the percentage of German war dead caused by the Russians.

2- Yes, the Russians did copy several German weapons, as well as the B-29 in 1947. Your point being? The Americans copied German weapons (MG-42, Panther, V-2, etc) as well. Post war, the Soviets copied US weapons and the US copied Soviet weapons. What exactly is your point? Even until the end of the Cold War the US and the USSR were copying each other. Where do you think the US got the technology for CACR helicopters, or MAD sub detection?

It may come as a surprise to you that even today in 2003, Russia still has technology (though not much as R&D has largely shut down) that the US does not possess. Their new Squall torpedoes are revolutionary, and the US is desperate to get their hands on one to reverse engineer it.

Yes the USSR was not as technologically advanced in many ways as the US in 1945, but then again the US had not had a war waged for 4 years on the heart of its agricultural and industrial land. What the USSR accomplished during and after the war is nothing short of remarkable, and I personally doubt if other nations in the same situation could have done as well.


Back to the original question, I am surprised nobody took this up: Germany largely did NOT fight in the West until they had to. Once Normandy fell the Germans abandoned all of France and pulled back to the Rhine, a clear and obvious defensive barrier. Once the Rhine was broached, they fought to defend the Ruhr, Germany's Industrial and military heartland. On the Eastern Front Hitler was making Festungs everywhere and the Germans contested every foot of ground when they could.

Except for strategic strokes like the Ardennes offensive, the vast majority of the resistance WAS taking place in the East. In the end almost nothing was guarding Berlin from the West, the Allies could have advanced to the city, but it was they who made the political decision not to.

 

This sounds like it was a well-balanced retreat. Actually, I think the Germans RAN after Falaise and they did not know with which forces they could defend against the allied. One of the miracles on the west front ( 1944 ) to me seems to be how on Earth von Rundstedt was able to make some sort of defence line at all. Hitler surely did not want to give an inch of France away...

The Allied knew Germany was in trouble and the Ultra gave the secrets to them. That is why Monty started to require the " straight attack" as he knew that Germans had nothing to put against them at the time.

One of the things that stopped the Allied was the shortage of supplies. Unbelievable but true. That´s why Patton could not continue his attack, not that he would not get any because they
( Eisenhower,Bradley ) wanted Monty to carry on battling instead of him as Patton claims.

The Siegfried line was stolen of guns to the Atlantic wall and as such could not be of much barrier as it used to be. I don´t know how true this story is, but as the Germans ( Hitler probably ) wanted to man the Siegfried line, nobody knew at first even where the keys were...???

As well I think the fact that Hitler started to plan the attack to West by september shows how keen Hitler was on getting France back and kicking the Allied out of the mainland.

 

Huh??????

I have to strictly protest against this warning. I have not done anything justifying any kind of complaint.

 

Then we have to mention why did Hitler launch an offensive in the first place and why did he lauch it in the west. Germany needed a military victory at the time to improve the morale and show the Allies how hard it was going to ultimately defeat them. But such a victory was more than impossible against the Red Army.

Of course he didn't. But he finally accepted the retreat when there was no other choice and when it was actually already happening. As always...

And Kai, remember also than the 'Siegfried Line' , the 'Maginot Line' was refitted to be use to defend the German part of the border too.

 

The relative introduction dates of T-34/panther have been well-detailed above. I thought it worth quoting from a source usually taken to be authoritative, F.M. von Senger und Etterlin's 'German Tanks Of World War II' :-

'The Russian T-34 had a profound effect on all succeeding German tank design. When it first appeared, few tanks, tank guns or anti-tank guns could match it. The design of the 'Panther' was thus greatly influenced by this vehicle. The T-34 was the most advanced AFV of its time and confirmed the optimum virtues of firepower, armour and mobility. Among its disadvantages, however, were the sometimes faulty transmission and the inadequate crew of four men'. ( A&AP edition, p.60 ).

 

Huh??????

I have to strictly protest against this warning. I have not done anything justifying any kind of complaint. </font>[/QUOTE]yea actually what did he do wrong?

 

Friedrich, others,

how much was it possible to change the Maginot line to defend against the west and how much was done on this?

I thought it was quite impossible without huge effort put into it ( and maybe not worth it at the time ) as it was to defend it against the Germans in 1940? And the big guns were in Normandy and Calais areas (?!). Were any of the weapons removed and transferred to protect the Reich?