Could the loss of one kept victory from the others?

Interesting. Well, so you do not think you have a God given right to have hold of some superior information not available to us poor mortals, my mother also happened to date a then artillery lieutenant, and what I got left from it was some wartime German and allied propaganda and my father's spurs. Later on I was able to acquire some of those Department of the Army pamphlets, I'm showing some of these below so you can't say I'm lying.



I bought this "Restricted" material quite openly in the American Ebay. Even then, later on I found a number of these reports had become freely available here and there in the Internet, so they are really nobody's privilege, but if you think otherwise then feel free to believe what you want.

It's funny when you read these reports, one does get the idea that the Russians were simply miserable. However if we don't take the coin at face value look a bit deeper, we see that these reports were written by German generals who were writing the news that their audience wanted to hear, or worse than that simply could not take in the fact that they had been defeated by that rabble. We can see the same thing in Liddel Hart's "The Other Side of The Hill", which if you are not familiar is a collection of his interrogations of Guderian, v.Rundsedt, Halder, Zeitzler, etc. They could not take defeat in, and/or were playing to an audience, or just trying to justify themselves to themselves. More or less the same with v.Manstein's and Guderian's memoirs. Full of details from the Polish campaign until sometime in Barbarossa, when the subject became unpleasant and the book is unashamedly rushed to its end.

These pamphlets as I said look very much like they were what the authors' captors wanted to hear, certainly they were not written in an impartial and detached way which is something we expect nowadays. So I'll just limit my credence of these to whatever lower tactical details may interest me, and not draw any broader strategical level conclusions, as these are above the poor pamphlets level.

So, you are not the only owner of old books here (I have others too), but I do prefer to balance what I read in these with more modern research. Or simply I'm stupid because as you say "A lot of modern authors try to revise everything just to have an excuse to sell their book." Of course we all know that authors before our modern times were completely exempt of this temptation to sell paper.

Seatco, contrary to what you said before you do seem to be quite a web pugilist. As this does not seem to be the usual tone in this forum I take my leave and let you to speak alone to your heart's content. Maybe you will find other congenial posters here who still dwell in your Cold War mentality, that's quite possible. Or as you seem to already know it all and we who disagree are either Russians or commie-lovers, I don't see why you even bother coming to these places.

Farewell.

 

If anybody wants to read the full document (and many others) it's available online here:
Operations of Encircled Forces - German Experiences In Russia-No.20-234.

From the excellent US Army Centre for Military History along with many other interesting and free works. Click 'online bookshelves' for the full list.

Cheers,
Adam.

 

Za Rodinu - Far out! Check the inside cover of those books and see if there are names inside that begins with M & B. I sold most of those off back in the early 80s to used book stores. I have only two left, one about German operations in the Balkans and the one about encircled German forces.

Ok, you could be right - I have to admit. Obviously Patton really hated to see the end of the glory days for his ivory-handled revolvers. Before his car hit the truck it is possible he and his cadre of war-hawk generals may have skewed things to make the US government more likely to go their way. SO I lower my German chance of victory from an 'Oct. To Nov. 1944 Brit and American peace deal' from 1.4 to 1.0 to a lower figure of 1.18 to 1.0.

However there was always one other flaw in my calculations which hit me yesterday anyway - the German generals only kept obeying Hitler's orders after late 44 because they were trying to hold off the Soviet horde in hopes the Americans would come in to take Berlin and join them in a holy war to save Europe. So - If Germany did attain a static front and actually moved it back toward Belorussia, the whole reason for them putting up with Hitler kicking chairs around would have come to an end. Of course with Hitler removed the whole Nazi scheme would soon tumble in and so the very best the Germans could hope for would be a draw. But in the long run the Germans would likely collapse.

But all these silly exercises into what IFs of history are about as valid as early war battle plans - which as everyone knows are valid only until the first bullets are fired. Actually these exercises are even less valid - which is why I kept posting lol. In fact there is no real reason to get bent out of shape over history, since its all over and past, and is a done deal anyway. The only value of war history is to help young men either learn why they should avoid war or if they still lust for adventure and War’s adrenaline-rush, they should at least realize that they should complete their schooling so that they can become officers in the war AT THE VERY LEAST.

 

Now that is welcome news. I really have no desire to buy from E-Bay and this makes everything much easier.

 

I don't know - it looks like from my last post on that subject - whether my WWII alternate world theory was correct or not, that I more or less admitted I was wrong - IS THAT WHAT YOU CONSIDER PEACE? I ended those postings where I was trying to prove my theory (is that wrong?) with lol (is that wrong too?). And the person in question that belittled my reading of old books even sounded sweeter last thing I read. What kind of forum IS THIS? Very little negative has been said here. I certainly don't need to be here of course - perhaps you should ban me http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Forum+Nazi&defid=13996 or delete me. Wouldn't cost me anything, I'm a bit old for the need for Show-And-Tell anyway. I was just amusing myself - but I have other things I can be doing - you can return your forum to its former SLEEPY self that is certainly appeared to me when I began reading the older postings.

 

Sure he got under my skin a time or two - but he actually forced me to think. I liked what he did. All this polite 8 year old girl stuff drives me nuts. Za Rodinu stood for something and wasn't afraid to kick me in the behind. I still think he was wrong here and there, but he'll learn. Za Rodinu rocks.

 

Quite defensive aren't you? Otto wasn't pointing the finger at you in his post, but you seem to think he was. Relax, no one is out to get you.

Again with the Nazi thing. Godwin would be proud. You seem quick to ask for a ban, why would you do this? By the tone of your posts, you seem to be expecting some sort of confrontaion. Not a good first impression in my opinion.

You are right it wouldn't cost you a thing, you are here because other are nice enough to create a place where you can easily discuss WWII with others.

What ego! You mean to say that this Forum has been around for seven years, but once you got here it became worth visiting? LOL. We need you here for comic relief alone.

I guess you will have to put up with us Forum Nazi's if you want to stay here.

 

***deleted***

 

Back on topic, let's see the possibilities (or the impossibilities...)

UK in, URSS in, USA out

That would be very difficult to maintain, if we assume a USA completely out of the picture. In the West bombings by the RAF would continue but at only half the scale. On the East, well, not so much because Lend Lease only became to be seriously felt in 1943, and the Germans had been stopped in the end of 1942, with much less LL. It would be a tremendously difficult slog, but manageable.

USA in, URSS in, UK out

East front better than previous scenario, as LL in force. On the West it would be much more difficult as the USA would have to get a toehold elsewhere. Perhaps in Russia, with a closer joint effort, perhaps starting from West Africa, NW Africa, Ireland, Portugal. Anyway, the lack of the eminently well placed floating aircraft carrier and depot that was Britain would make a terrible difference.

USA in, UK in, URSS out

This would be an awful proposition, as most of the Axis resources instead of being bled white in the East Front would be safely quartered at home. Also as there was no East Front the Germans armed forces would only need to be a fraction of their size, which implied much higher resources to be spent elsewhere, perhaps in decent bomber and submarine forces putting the UK out of action.

In any case, What-ifs are the stuff dreams are made of, we can suppose anything. We could suppose a competent German High Command, we could suppose a competent Soviet Air Force, or we could assume a reality as it if fact existed, with a German defeat. History is written, things have run their course. Trying to rewrite history is pointless unless we want to leave in the 5th dimension and dream of might-have-bens [rant mode off]

 

These guys just dont seem to last very long....