The myths of WWII (Eastern Europe)

That is quite possible on the very idea that the Wehrmacht captured Moscow, and concentrated solely on the Russians.The plan of attacking the Baltic countries,just made the pro-German factions in those countries disappear.Knowing that the people that were subordinate to Stalin,were placed by him to be his faithful followers,their loyalty wasn't complete, it would last until the moment their existence was threatened.

 

@steverodgers801

Thanks Steve for mentioning the Balkans campaign in this thread.

The end result of the operation »Revenge« was almost 100% expulsion of ethnic Germans from territories of the former Yugoslavia just four years later. There was a sinister symbolism in the name of that operation: »Revenge« inflamed revenge.

Ferocity of the attack exceeded any reasonable level needed to guarantee success. Bombing of Belgrade was a premeditated crime; its aim was to maximize casualties among civil population. The attack was early in the morning, without declaration of war. The operation was successful; there is no doubt about that. But this, along with murderous actions of SS-Prinz Eugen consisting of Yugoslav ethnic Germans has resulted in justified anger and resistance.

What Prince Eugene of Savoy conquered for the Germans, was reverted by Nazi brutality. Descendants of colonists from Germany had to return to the Fatherland.

 

If I may be permitted to mangle two famous quote's,

"In war everythingg is simple, but the simplest things are very hard" von Clauswitz

"Ask me for anything but time!" Napoleon Bonaparte

The true cost of the Balkan Campaign lays not in time but in loss of men and equipmebt to Germany and her Allies for a battle that need not have been fought. While the new Yugoslav regime might not have been friendly to Hitler, I have seen little evidence that they were foolish enough to risk a war they knew they could not win by cutting off Hitler from Rumainian oil. Greece also was quite interested in a end to its war with Italy without joining into a wider war which it too knew it would lose.

 

The Greeks may have had a small chance of a settlement until they received British help. It is ironic that the very speed of the victory meant that there were a lot of soldiers who were never called up and had a chance to head for the hills and form the best resistance against the Germans

 

That's entirely correct. Yugoslavs and Greeks did not want alliance with the Germans; traditionally they preferred alliance with England. What the Royal government wanted was opportunistic policy of waiting for more favorable conditions. However, under harsh conditions of occupation people decided for uprising and that was the right decision despite horrible losses. While the whole Europe was waiting for better times, Yugoslav partisans gave their modest contribution to the final victory over Nazism.

 

A myth: "If only Hitler listened to his generals ... the allies would have lost the war."

Of course he listened but he couldn't accept every advice; some had to be discarded. He rejected some but also accepted some. That's quite logical and normal. For example: Göring and Speer told Hitler that the war at the east could be continued only if the resources at the south of USSR were captured. He accepted the idea and his generals have prepared the Case Blue. That was a failure but not entirely Hitler's fault.

Another example: Manstein boasted that he persuaded Hitler to attack through the Ardennes but he also groaned that the Führer rejected his great plans that could save the Reich from 'lost victories'. Ironically, all these plans came when he started 'losing victories'.

In my view, German generals have used different yardsticks to take away credits for victories and blame the Führer for their defeats.

 

Agreed, in the case of Leningrad if the Generals had been allowed to attack the city directly the city could easily have been taken at some point. But Hitler wanted to starve the populace.

In the case of Moscow onwards, I somewhat disagree. The German cause in the East was illogical any way you look at it. Even if the Generals DID succeed, the Soviets already had Partisan groups galore in the Ukraine and Belorussia that were causing the Germans trouble. If the Germans had taken Moscow it would not just be Stalin who would have wanted to retake the city, the Muscovites would most likely have fought back pretty viciously. When the Polish pretender took power in the 1600s, the Muscovites murdered him, cremated his corpse, and fired his ashes out of a cannon back in the direction of Poland.

The Russians do not treat invaders well.

 

The problem with an assualt on Lenningrad is that AGN did not have enough men to attack the city and guard the flanks. remember that tanks are of limited value in the terrain south of Lenningrad

 

The starvation of Leningrad came only after direct assault on the city failed along with the attempt of shelling it into submission.

 

Anyone mention the myths of Polish surrendering immediately? They put up a good fight and when they realized it was all lost they leave to fight again.

I think the Germans would have had a chance if they didn't deport mass populations, murder Jews and enslave those who remained. Other than that they didn't have a chance.

 

Myths? That the Germans ever had a chance to defeat the Soviets. Despite their skill they lacked every resource that a victory would have required. Ura!

 

Which facts do you have for your point view?

I disagree - after the 1. Armored Division captured Alexandrowka - the place of the last station of the tram of Leningrad - only 12 kilometers (!) from the center of the city away, after it succeeded a breakthrough to the fortifications of the city of Leningrad it was ordered to stop - and then sent to take part on operation Taifun as armored group 4 ... it will be one big mistake not to take Leningrad at this moment. The limited value of tanks in the terrain southeast of Leningrad had no meaning for the assault on Leningrad ...

 

What do you mean by mention that "it´s significant" (?) that the Luftflotte 4 had been comitted to the compaign in the Balkans as well as later to bomb Stalingrad???

 

I just wanted to stress the strenght of that formation.

 

I see - but you probably know that the Luftflotte 1 was a stronger formation than Luftflotte 4 (beginning 1942) ... The main reason that Luftflotte 4 was committed in the Balkans and later in Stalingrad was that the Luftflotte 4 was subordinated nearly all operations in the southern sector (Balkans, Armeegroup South (for example crimenea, Romania 1944, etc.)

 

THerewere continuedasssaults on the south flank of AGC. Tanks sure can take a place but with out infantry support they cannt hold it. Tanks lsoe their advantages fighting in streets, especially when the building are damaged and street are clogged.

 

There were assaults on the southflank of AGC?? Okay - there were many assaults on many places on the ostfront at this time. But what the hell do you mean? The southflank of AGC was I guess - more than 1.500 miles away from Leningrad or do you need a map ? And the 1. Armored dvision wasn´t sent for a counter-attack - it was sent because Hitler decided to start the attack on Moskau (Operation Taifun) - the units called now Armored Group 4 for this assault.
Yes, naturally tanks need the support of infantry and yes you´re right that tanks loses their advantages in streets- especially when the bulidings are damagedand streets are clogged - Stalingrad is good example for that - but Leningrad wasn´t destroyed like Stalingrad. It was a completely different situation ... no higher german officer why Hitler decided to stop the assault at this moment. Probably he thought about what happened after the Germans captured Kiew - heavy losses by booby traps, remotely detonated mines etc. etc.

 

Bock planned Operation Typhoon as a classical pincer assault whist Hitler has foreseen to use the Luftwaffe afterwards to destroy the city by bombing. There were no plans to enter the city with infantry before the fall of Moscow.

 

The assault of Leningrad was halted by the defenders and not Hitler. The Germans were simply unable to break through.

 

okay so tanks are running through the streets of Lenningrad, with out infantry support they are very vulnerable and how are the supply units suppoose to get to them. Also are you just assuming that there will be no fighting at all. Once people start sniping at men they react by shooting the building causing damage.