Germany's Best Victory

von_noobie · Post by **von_noobie** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 4:58 am

Through out ww2 German had many victorys and many more defeats, but i would like to look at Germany's victory's, so please feel free to post what you beleive to be germanys best victory and why.

And if you feel like it you may post what you beleive to be Germany's worst defeat and why.

Cheers.

jscott · Post by **jscott** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 6:03 am

France 1940. They conquered it in 6 weeks and had the whole of Western Europe under their control. It also brought in many of the wars future leaders. General Rommel of the later Afrika Corps, and many others.

Alex Coles · Post by **Alex Coles** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 12:28 pm

Germany's best victory was the Anschluss (Annexation) of Austria, for they gained land which was against the treaty of Versailles and nobody did anything.

Helmut Von Moltke · Post by **Helmut Von Moltke** » Sun Mar 19, 2006 6:41 am

I think that Germany's best victory was the Kiev encirclment of 1941, even though it could not decide the fate of the war, the Wehrmacht captured 600000 prisoners, and so much material it would be too much to describe here. It at least gave the Wehrmacht a free hand in the South sector for a few months. just my 2 cents....

helmut

Tom Houlihan · Post by **Tom Houlihan** » Sun Mar 19, 2006 6:43 am

17SS has a good point, and you could add the Sudetenland in there as well. I'd say a victory achieved without the associated costs of war is a very good victory indeed!

Benoit Douville · Post by **Benoit Douville** » Sun Mar 19, 2006 7:43 pm

Well I agree that any victory achieved without blood and in this case the annexation of Austria and the Sudetenland was impressive but I think the original question was during World War II.

The victory at Kiev in 1941 was impressive but we tend to forget that the Germans lost was also huge: 100 000 dead and casualties. The victory in Western Europe in 1940 was not complete since they didn't defeat England so I would have to say that the defeat of Yugoslavia in April 1941 was Germany best victory, there was absolutely no failure by the Germans in that operation. Here is an excellent article about that Battle on this site:

http://www.feldgrau.com/yugowar.html

Regards

Helmut Von Moltke · Post by **Helmut Von Moltke** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 12:56 am

Benoit Douville wrote:Well I agree that any victory achieved without blood and in this case the annexation of Austria and the Sudetenland was impressive but I think the original question was during World War II.

The victory at Kiev in 1941 was impressive but we tend to forget that the Germans lost was also huge: 100 000 dead and casualties. The victory in Western Europe in 1940 was not complete since they didn't defeat England so I would have to say that the defeat of Yugoslavia in April 1941 was Germany best victory, there was absolutely no failure by the Germans in that operation. Here is an excellent article about that Battle on this site:

http://www.feldgrau.com/yugowar.html

Regards

good point there about Yugoslavia, I remember from a source that the Wehrmacht only lost 125 men in this campagin?

helmut

jscott · Post by **jscott** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 2:23 pm

Nothing more than an understrengthed company. Not bad odds.

Qvist · Post by **Qvist** » Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:04 am

Well I agree that any victory achieved without blood and in this case the annexation of Austria and the Sudetenland was impressive but I think the original question was during World War II.

The victory at Kiev in 1941 was impressive but we tend to forget that the Germans lost was also huge: 100 000 dead and casualties. The victory in Western Europe in 1940 was not complete since they didn't defeat England so I would have to say that the defeat of Yugoslavia in April 1941 was Germany best victory, there was absolutely no failure by the Germans in that operation. Here is an excellent article about that Battle on this site:

Hi Benoit

We've already been through this, haven't we?

If we understand the Kiev battle as the German envelopment operation: The overall German combat losses in September were just above 140,000. If one adds up the reported losses of the army commands between 6 September and 6 October, you get an essentially similar figure. More than 40,000 of these were incurred by HG Nord (including PzGr 4). HG Mitte suffered a little above 45,000, while HG S lost almost 50,000.

Of course, some of the formations of HG Mitte took part in the Kiev battle, while some of HG S did not, depending on how you define the scope. Timewise, the period used here is a little bit on the long side. If you define the force scope as AOK 2, AOK 6, AOK 17 and Pzgruppen 1 and 2, the German losses come to ~45,000. Most of the AOKs who lost most heavily did not fight at Kiev; AOK 11, 6, 4, 9, 16 and 18 all lost between 15 and 20,000 men during this month.

If we apply the same "long" definition as used by Krivosheev for the Kiev defensive operation, which includes basically all fighting in the Ukraine except on the southernmost sector between 7 July and late September, then we must add the July and August losses (or to be precise, losses between 6 July and 6 September) of AOK 6, AOK 17 and PzGr 1, which come to roughly 100,000.

In other words, if we define the battle as encompassing the German envelopment operation, 100,000 is a much too high figure. If we define it, as Krivosheev, as encompassing basically the whole major battle in the south for a period of more than two and a half months, it is much too low.

In simple terms - if you define "Kiev" so broadly that it is basically synonymous with the summer campaign in the Ukraine minus the border battles, you get a big figure. If you define it narrowly, as the September envelopment operation, you get a small figure. Either way, in the context of the war in the East at the time, there's nothing special about them - it's basically what you would expect anywhere in the East for a force that size for that such a period of time. That also goes for the overall relation between the German and Soviet losses (by the long definition), which is roughly the same as for the year in general. Of course, this is also an argument against the Kiev battle being any special German achievement. But this would look different by the short definition, since a much larger part of the Soviet losses took place in September.

cheers

cheers

sid guttridge · Post by **sid guttridge** » Mon Mar 27, 2006 7:22 am

Hi Guys,

I think 17th SS PG is on the right track.

Sun Tzu wrote that "To defeat the enemy without fighting is the acme of military art".

The list of such virtually bloodless achievements by the Germans before and during WWII was considerable: Rhineland, Austria, Czechoslovakia, Memel, Denmark, Vichy France, Italy, Hungary..............

They are too little studied on the military level.

Cheers,

Sid.

Doktor Krollspell · Post by **Doktor Krollspell** » Mon Mar 27, 2006 11:49 pm

Hello Gentlemen!

If you look at the Federal Republic of Germany for the past almost 60 years that have gone by, one could argue that the best German victory in WWII was that of May 1945... Unconditional surrender and the total overthrow/annihilation of one of the most totalitarian and evil regimes in history. The result today being one of the largest, richest and most democratic nations in the world.

And fellas, I'm not trying to start a heated debate on this! I think that you all have made valid claims for the "Best victory" category. I'm just trying to find some different angles...

With best regards,

Krollspell

von_noobie · Post by **von_noobie** » Mon Mar 27, 2006 11:57 pm

I was actually leaning this topic towards WWII, But since this forum is for topics about Germany between 1918 and 1945 i dont have any objections.

2nd SS Panzer Das Reich · Sat Apr 08, 2006 9:22 pm

even though Kiev is probably the greatest victory in a single battle (not campiagn). I would think that the recapture of Kharkov was pretty awesome feat of arms as well. the II SS Panzer Korps took on the Soviets who (IIRC) outnumbered them 7:1!

Alex Coles · Post by **Alex Coles** » Sun Apr 09, 2006 12:42 am

Quite a few of you guys need to study. You are saying battle X was the best, but it costed casualties. When you compare it the Sudetenland Annexation, the Hungarian receiving of Ruthenia, the German occupying of Bohemia-Moravia, the Anschluß, re-occupation of the Rhineland, occupation of Denmark and the claiming of Memel it's incredible. In all ones I mention here they were bloodless, or nearly bloodless.

Alex Coles · Post by **Alex Coles** » Sun Apr 09, 2006 12:44 am

Doktor Krollspell, yes!

If Germany hadn't lost that war they would of still been run by the crazy dictator, Hitler. Still though, Hitler could of been assasinated instead. He actually would of if these Germans who were going to wanted Himmler as well.