One aspect that is often overlooked is how reduced in strength the German forces were at the start of Barbarossa. Sure, they took Poland and France very quickly, but they suffered enough losses that Barbarossa started at reduced strength, and once the initial maneuvers of the invasion were over Germany was pretty much running on fumes manpower-wise.
Comment on A kick right in the selbstbild
TSG_Asmodeus@lemmy.world 4 months ago
I just want to say, for all the discussion of ‘could they have…’ it’s important to remember that Germany was never going to conquer Russia, it was a stupid (racist) idea to get Hitlers ‘lebensraum’ and take out Stalin’s ‘Jewish Bolshevist’ nation (heavy on the eye-roll there). Keep in mind that Germany didn’t even get Moscow, which Napoleon had actually managed to (mostly) do, and Napoleon still lost for the same reason that Germany would have regardless – they did not have the logistical ability to support an army in an area the size of Russia. Partisan/army elements would absolutely pick apart a logistical train that long, which Germany couldn’t have done any way. We have to remember Germany wasn’t an actual mechanized army, it was entirely dependent on horses, and to try to use horses to haul ammunition/food/clothes/medical supplies/artillery shells/etc ~1500 kilometres from Germany to Moscow alone would be insane, especially with the millions of men and women the Soviet union had constantly attacking you.
The entire invasion was never going to work, and people give the idea it could have worked way too much credit. And this is all assuming no other nation would step in either; it’s entirely on the ‘nobody is in an alliance anymore’ sort of fantasy world. This failed for the exact same reason that the Russian invasion of Ukraine has – they planned for a short, easy war, because their entire ideology requires that they underestimate their foes at every available opportunity.
neidu2@feddit.nl 4 months ago
Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 4 months ago
and once the initial maneuvers of the invasion were over Germany was pretty much running on fumes manpower-wise.
And, ironically, fuel-wise
TSG_Asmodeus@lemmy.world 4 months ago
once the initial maneuvers of the invasion were over Germany was pretty much running on fumes manpower-wise.
Germany’s main problem wasn’t manpower (at this point), it was materiel. Germany’s generals (mostly) wanted to go as quickly as possible to mitigate this. The problem was their ancient supply train running on ~350,000 (‘supply trucks’) and 2.75 million horses. In their glee to send the army attacking everyone they could around themselves to fuel their extremely inefficient economy with more loot, they got into a cycle of needing to be fast, but having no reserve of fast moving vehicles to facilitate that.
And to be clear, I am not a ‘pro-Russia’ person, I’ve just read everything I could on the issue, and I’ve never read a way for Germany to get out of Russia that didn’t involve them making zero mistakes.
I’m just extremely wary of people saying ‘Nazi Germany could have won if…’ and the reason would require them to not be fascist and racist, and we start to sort of legitimize Nazi Germany. The fact was they were always going to pick stupid fights, because fascist governments always do. And they idea that they could somehow *hold *Russia while also constantly picking fights with everyone else is insane.
Seriously, they had an awful economy, their logistical train was terrible, the leader of each area would just outright lie about their capabilities (see Goering’s Stalingrad Airlift)
If you want to talk about what ‘Nazi Germany could have won if…’ how about: - If they didn’t expend time, resources, and their own souls making literal mobile gas chambers for the civilians of the Soviet Union (‘Accordingly, it was a partially secret but well-documented Nazi policy to kill, deport, or enslave the majority of Russian and other Slavic populations and repopulate the land west of the Urals with Germanic peoples, under Generalplan Ost (General Plan for the East) The Nazis’ belief in their ethnic superiority pervades official records and pseudoscientific articles in German periodicals, on topics such as “how to deal with alien populations.”; if they didn’t alienate every single ally they could have had by invading smaller neighbours as a stop-gap for their crumbling finances; if they weren’t constantly fighting Partizans and Resistance members (thanks Grandma!); I read (but can’t find the article) that British Intelligence credits Nazi Germany’s sadism and want for torture as key reasons the Nazi’s lost the information war, as their Information networks were terrible.
So yes, anyway, there wasn’t a way it was going to work unless they un-became Nazi Germany.
Justas@sh.itjust.works 4 months ago
Some Germans wanted to ally themselves with Poland and fight against Soviet Union together. Without Germany attacking Poland, France and United Kingdom would have not entered the war and history might have gone very differently.
TSG_Asmodeus@lemmy.world 4 months ago
It is true, if they hadn’t done Nazi things and had actual allies they could have done better, for sure.
someguy3@lemmy.world 4 months ago
We get into how you define victory over USSR. He thought the state would collapse, the infamous “kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will fall down”. Then they would doubtlessly ethnic cleanse.
There was a difference between Napoleon’s and Hitler’s strategy. Napoleon went straight for Moscow like an arrow, ignoring everything else. He got it, and then what? Hitler saw that and knew that didn’t work, so he launched a broad invasion on the North, Central, and South all at once. The goal was a total collapse, so that there wasn’t much to do military activity (not on any significant scale like with tanks and planes). Course there were other problems with that.
rambling_lunatic@sh.itjust.works 4 months ago
Another thing to note is people keep saying that if ideology didn’t gimp the war effort, the Nazis would’ve won. However, the ideology was the whole reason the war even happened in the first place.
TSG_Asmodeus@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Exactly. It’s Fascism 101 - you invade anyone smaller than you to get slaves/money/etc, you pick scapegoats to blame for any issues you have, and you steal everything not nailed down, and then you move on to the next place. Eventually you pick a fight you can’t win, and then you lose.
Part of them losing that fight was two of my grandparents, and I’m kinda pissed we’re dealing with them again. So I want to reinforce: If a country goes fascist, this shit is coming. Nazi Germany was never going to win anything with an ideology that flawed.
gimsy@feddit.it 4 months ago
Except for Gengis Khan, he never lost
nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de 4 months ago
He wasn’t really fascist though:
Temüjin formally adopted the title “Genghis Khan”, the meaning of which is uncertain, at an assembly in 1206. Carrying out reforms designed to ensure long-term stability, he transformed the Mongols’ tribal structure into an integrated meritocracy dedicated to the service of the ruling family.
Later:
Genghis Khan remains a controversial figure. He was generous and intensely loyal to his followers, but ruthless towards his enemies. He welcomed advice from diverse sources in his quest for world domination, for which he believed the shamanic supreme deity Tengri had destined him. The Mongol army under Genghis killed millions of people, yet his conquests also facilitated unprecedented commercial and cultural exchange over a vast geographical area. He is remembered as a backwards, savage tyrant in Russia and the Arab world, while recent Western scholarship has begun to reassess its previous view of him as a barbarian warlord. He was posthumously deified in Mongolia; modern Mongolians recognise him as the founding father of their nation.
-Wikipedia
Junkhead@slrpnk.net 4 months ago
Also yes the eastern front was absolutely a hell death grinding machine for the soldiers of the red army its wayyyyy overblown how they just used soldiers as cannon fodder and with no sense of tactic. Probably a result of anti communist propaganda after the war
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 4 months ago
The “meat grinder” narrative was intentionally pushed forward by the west, as they were only strategic allies with the USSR. In an ideal scenario (for the west), the USSR would have collapsed alongside Nazi Germany. As a result, the “orc horde” narrative was based in racism.
In reality, the Soviets and the Nazis hated each other far more than any other side, the fighting was far more brutal and on a much grander scale.
Junkhead@slrpnk.net 4 months ago
exactly, alot of people dont know also that stalin approached the allies asking for help before ww2 and when they refused he pretended to make nice with hitler all the while preparing for war. The whole stalin was caught off guard by hitlers blitz is also a false narrative
Live_your_lives@lemmy.world 4 months ago
“In the first few days of the invasion of the Soviet Union, the Luftwaffe destroyed some 2,000 Soviet aircraft, most on the ground, at a loss of only 35 (of which 15 were non-combat-related).” Wiki.) How did this happen if they weren’t caught off guard?
Lemminary@lemmy.world 4 months ago
I like how passionate you are about this one detail about history. And, honestly? I would read your book about it. Lol
TSG_Asmodeus@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Thanks, I appreciate that :)