Which city should hitler have gone for on the russian front?

German campaigns and battles 1919-1945.

Moderator: sniper1shot

Post Reply
User avatar
von_noobie
Associate
Posts: 630
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 5:47 am
Location: victoria

Which city should hitler have gone for on the russian front?

Post by von_noobie » Fri Jul 08, 2005 6:20 pm

In operation barboosa hitler planned for a 3 amry group advance
1 army to go for leningrad, the 2nd army for moscow, and the 3rd army for stalingrad

In his original plan he wanted to attack leningrad 1st thus freeing up an entitre army and making contact whith a large number of finnish troops(estimate-100,000) which i belive tobe exelent winter fighters and would have to be to the standered as paratroopers as they are used to fighting outnumbered whith almost no support from arti and NO tanks. by making contact with the fins he could also put them deeper into the war and be able to amase a large part of that army behind the army heading for moscow which was meant to begine as soon as both liningrad and stalingrad were both secured. Even if they were still fighting for stalingrad they could have made the assault on moscow with ease. But becouse of hitlers lack to let his generals decide what to go for he on numerouse occasions called a stop to the drive on leningrad for up to 2 weeks at a time allowing the citizens of leningrad to prepare anti-tank ditches and dig fox-holes. Had these stops not been ordered by hitler they would have been in side leningrad with ease and would have taken away an extremely important number of factoys cousing a massive blow to te russians this could have all been done even thoe he lunched the invasion of russia 5 weeks late becouse of his exlploration through the balkans which lost germay vital forces and equiptment and nearly destroyed 2 panzer division's. Even thoe in a way this was necessary he still could have set aside a sum of fighters to nock out the british bombers which were heading for oil fields in romania or could have invaded russia in 1942 which would have allowed him to rest his forces deatroy the british 8th army in north africa and increase there number of tanks invading russia plus by destroying the 8th army extra supplies would go to russia along with tanks arti and most importantly MEN!!

So could peaple please tell me what they think

thanks

Pirx
Associate
Posts: 975
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 7:46 am
Location: UK/Poland

Re: Which city should hitler have gone for on the russian fr

Post by Pirx » Sat Jul 09, 2005 8:55 am

von_noobie wrote:In operation barboosa hitler planned for a 3 amry group advance
1 army to go for leningrad, the 2nd army for moscow, and the 3rd army for stalingrad
I'm not sure that Stalingrad was targed for Army Group South in Barbarossa.

User avatar
Ironclad
Member
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 10:58 am
Location: Heeten, The Netherlands

Re: Which city should hitler have gone for on the russian fr

Post by Ironclad » Sat Jul 09, 2005 10:32 am

Pirx wrote:
von_noobie wrote:In operation barboosa hitler planned for a 3 amry group advance
1 army to go for leningrad, the 2nd army for moscow, and the 3rd army for stalingrad
I'm not sure that Stalingrad was targed for Army Group South in Barbarossa.
During the summer offensive of 1942, Heeresgruppe Süd (Army Group South) was split up in Heeresgruppe A and B. Heeresgruppe B was ordered to capture Stalingrad, and Heeresgruppe A was ordered to take the Caucasus.
During operation Barbarossa the target of Heeresgruppe Süd was Rostov. Ironically, Leningrad, Moscow and Rostov all weren't captured during the summer offensive of 1941.

User avatar
Nibelung
Patron
Posts: 1361
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2004 8:37 am
Location: Slovenia, Europe

Post by Nibelung » Sat Jul 09, 2005 11:05 am

Rostov was captured, but evacuated on 3rd December 1941 on Rundstedt's orders - for which he was dissmised by Hitler.

best,
Nibelung
There are no desperate situations, there are only desperate people. - Heinz Guderian
-- Sine doctrina vita est quasi mortis imago. --

User avatar
Ironclad
Member
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 10:58 am
Location: Heeten, The Netherlands

Post by Ironclad » Sat Jul 09, 2005 11:11 am

Nibelung wrote:Rostov was captured, but evacuated on 3rd December 1941 on Rundstedt's orders - for which he was dissmised by Hitler.

best,
Nibelung
Yes, I know.
Ironclad wrote:Ironically, Leningrad, Moscow and Rostov all weren't captured during the summer offensive of 1941.
I added 'during the summer offensive of 1941.' I didn't count December 1941 as a part of the summer offensive of 1941.

User avatar
Nibelung
Patron
Posts: 1361
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2004 8:37 am
Location: Slovenia, Europe

Post by Nibelung » Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:35 pm

I didn't doubt one bit that you knew that...just wanted to make that clear to the starter of this thread. Look at it as an addition... :wink:

best,
Nibelung
There are no desperate situations, there are only desperate people. - Heinz Guderian
-- Sine doctrina vita est quasi mortis imago. --

User avatar
von_noobie
Associate
Posts: 630
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 5:47 am
Location: victoria

Post by von_noobie » Sat Jul 09, 2005 10:20 pm

thanks for the info guys but do use recone hitler should have waited till '42
to build up more material

corderex
Enthusiast
Posts: 443
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 7:01 am

Post by corderex » Sat Jul 09, 2005 11:03 pm

Hi Ironclad
During operation Barbarossa the target of Heeresgruppe Süd was Rostov
Actually, the city of Rostov per se was never mentioned as the target for Army Group "South". There was a more general directive regarding the capture of the Donetz basin, without mentioning any city in particular. Take a look at what directive 21 says.
The Fuhrer and Supreme Commander of the Armed forces
OKW/WFSt./Abt.L(I) Nr.33 408/40 g.Kdos. 18 December 1940
9 copies
Top Secret.

Directive No. 21. Operation Barbarossa

The armed forces of Germany must be prepared, even before the conclusion of the war with England, to defeat Soviet Russia in one rapid campaign ('Operation Barbarossa')...

...

I. General Intention
The mass of the Army stationed in Western Russia is to be destroyed in bold operations involving deep penetrations by armored spearheads, and the withdrawals of elements capable of combat into the extensive Russian land spaces is to be prevented.

By means of a rapid pursuit a line is then to be reached from beyond which the Russian air force will no longer be capable of attacking German home territories. The final objective of the operation is to be the attainment of a line sealing off Asiatic Russia and running, in general, the Volga-Archangel. From such a line the one remaining Russian industrial area in the Urals can be eliminated by the Air Force should the need arise...

...

III. The Conduct of the Operations

(A) Army (in approbation of the intentions submitted to me):

...

The army group south of the Pripet Marshes will make its point of main effort from the Lublin area in the general direction of Kiev, with the object of driving into the deep flank and rear of the Russian forces with strong armored formations and of then rolling up the enemy along the Dnieper. The German- Rumanian group on the right flank will have the task of

(a) protecting Rumanian territory and thus of covering the southern flank of the whole operation;
(b) in co-ordination with the attack by the northern of Army Group south of tying up the enemy forces on its sector of the front; then, as the situation develops, of launching a second thrust and thus, in conjunction with the air force, of preventing an orderly enemy withdrawal beyond the Dniester.
Once the battle south or north of the Pripet Marshes have been fought, the pursuit is to be undertaken with the following objectives:

In the south the rapid occupation of the economically important Donetz Basin, in the north the speedy capture of Moscow.

...
best regards,

corderex

User avatar
Ironclad
Member
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 10:58 am
Location: Heeten, The Netherlands

Post by Ironclad » Sun Jul 10, 2005 4:02 am

Yes corderex, you're right. But this topic is named 'Which city should hitler have gone for on the russian front?', so that's why I wrote Rostov. :wink:
von_noobie wrote:thanks for the info guys but do use recone hitler should have waited till '42
to build up more material
No, I don't think so. The moral was quite high and I don't think that by waiting a year it would have been higher.
June 1941 however wasn't a great moment. Hitler should never have invaded the Soviet Union before Great Britain was defeated. And June was quite late in the year. The invasion of the Balkans, shortly before operation Barbarossa, was a huge mistake, because it delayed Barbarossa.

User avatar
von_noobie
Associate
Posts: 630
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 5:47 am
Location: victoria

Post by von_noobie » Sun Jul 10, 2005 5:06 am

ironclad , i admit that by waiting till '42 would bring the moral down but u cant help the fact that italy invaded the balkans and got there ass kicked so the germans had to come and help, which would have taken 5 weeks out of there 10 week campaign which led to the defeat of german forces . so what would you do, wait till '42 and re-build damaged panzer divisions , allow more men and tanks to attack the 8th army in north africa and destroy them allowing even more forces for russia in '42 along with men , plus more TANKS , ARTI , MEN , AIR-CRAFT.they were under strength and low on almost everything . and i believe by the defeat of britain in north africa would couse a MASSIVE scare to the british as the threat of invasion would be ever more true and moral would drop in the british army while the moral lost from postponing operation barboosa would double with the defeat of the british forces . u also have to under stand they had only around 1 million men in the army and they would have lost 150000 men or more plus large sums of tanks and other material. plus as the germans advanced deeper into north africa they met large amounts of people who thanked them for releasing them from the british rulers who stayed there in there countrys for so long. so by releasing the people of the british rule they could have formed another million + men for the german army.

User avatar
Nibelung
Patron
Posts: 1361
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2004 8:37 am
Location: Slovenia, Europe

Post by Nibelung » Sun Jul 10, 2005 5:28 am

I don't know from where you get your info, but there is no chance that the Balkans costed the Wehrmacht 2 whole panzer divisions. By the time Hitler sent Rommel to Africa there were intense preparations for the Russian Campaign and Africa was just a small aide - The Afrikakorps was counted 2 divisions and it was there to help a local crissis due to the Italian collapse. Hitler surely had no real intentions with Africa in any way!

The volunteers from Africa to the Wehrmacht are more wishful thinking than anything close to reality.

Barbarossa wasn't just delayed because of Yugoslavia but also due to russian weather which caused many rivers to flood and change roads into mudbaths in May 1941. When Barbarosssa was launched the Germans had all of their divisions reorganised and up strenght. There were no shortages in fuel, ammo, men, vehicles or anything else; I wonder where did you get that from?

It would be good if we could persuade Qvist to join in with his extensive knowledge on the matter...

Otherwise do a forum search, this was all discussed more or less before.

best,
Nibelung
There are no desperate situations, there are only desperate people. - Heinz Guderian
-- Sine doctrina vita est quasi mortis imago. --

User avatar
von_noobie
Associate
Posts: 630
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 5:47 am
Location: victoria

Post by von_noobie » Mon Jul 11, 2005 4:34 am

[quote]nearly destroyed 2 panzer division's.

i said (nearly)

if you belive my info is wrong tell me what happened to 2 whole panzer divisions. out of 21 panzer divisions formed from the once large and mighty panzer divisions 17 were used in operation barboosa and 2 were sent to north africa so what happened to the other 2 divisions , according to my info the remains of the divisions were left in greece for the mopping up of pockets of resistence.

and i never ment that hitler was interested in north africa , what i ment was it would have been the more suitable thing to do as it would destroy the enemy at there flank .

yes i admit that the russian weather did also delay the german advance but im pretty sure with my knowledge gained from 12 russian kids that me and my family have helped over the years becouse if chernobel has defintly allowed me to find out what there weather is like over there . they have ONLY 10 weeks of good weather before the bad comes which starts with the turning of roads into mudbaths and rivers to flood . it only starts after the tenth week THAT IS ON THE 71st day . some times a LITTLE before or a LITTLE after . but the germans waisted 5 weeks on the balkans which coused a massive fault in there plan . becouse of the balkans they lost much needed materials becouse of the british,german,yugoslavian and australian soilders , possibly new zealand troops as well , and there divisions were low becouse they only had only approx 3800- tanks which had like 50mm guns , and only 10,000 guns .

and while yes they may have had alot of trucks to supply there armys they still were gonna go deep into russia with almost none of the roads being were they were ment to be and the rest having had the panzers roll over them were almost destroyed or destroyed and unpassible by none tracked vehicles . adding to the supply problems . and they had only 3 million men for the invasion . russia could at the time call on 12 million men and be able to call on more if need be .

User avatar
Nibelung
Patron
Posts: 1361
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2004 8:37 am
Location: Slovenia, Europe

Post by Nibelung » Mon Jul 11, 2005 4:52 am

I don't really buy that nearly 2 panzer divisions were destroyed. With what? The Yugoslav army didn't even manage to mobilise in full strenght, not to mention the lack of modern anti tank weapons, tanks and any mobile equipment on their part.

The Afrikakorps didn't get 2 panzer divisions as you seem to think. They got 5. leichte Division (mot) which was later renamed 21. Panzer Division and 15. Panzer Division.

http://chrito.users1.50megs.com/kstn/okh/barbarossa.htm

As you can see here no panzer divisions were in Greece at the outbreak of Barbarossa. There were, however, some divisions in OKH reserve.

best,
Nibelung
There are no desperate situations, there are only desperate people. - Heinz Guderian
-- Sine doctrina vita est quasi mortis imago. --

corderex
Enthusiast
Posts: 443
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 7:01 am

Post by corderex » Mon Jul 11, 2005 5:21 am

Hi,
if you belive my info is wrong tell me what happened to 2 whole panzer divisions. out of 21 panzer divisions formed from the once large and mighty panzer divisions 17 were used in operation barboosa and 2 were sent to north africa so what happened to the other 2 divisions , according to my info the remains of the divisions were left in greece for the mopping up of pockets of resistence.
I wonder if I may ask where do you get "your info"?

regards,

corderex

User avatar
von_noobie
Associate
Posts: 630
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 5:47 am
Location: victoria

Post by von_noobie » Mon Jul 11, 2005 11:19 pm

if you must know i get my info from a range of books such as Hitlers Generals and there Battles and i go to a whole range of sites through google and add up which say what and go for the most said info

Post Reply