What went wrong in Russia?

I know that more than one thing went wrong but what was the main thing that killed Germany’s chances of winning in the first place?

The Austrian corporal had rather a lot to do with it…

The mistaken belief and arrogance that the Soviet Union would collapse as soon as a Jackboot entered the country. The attitude that all Slavs were sub human, which led to the appalling treatment of many like the Ukranians who intiially saw the Germans as liberators. And of course the Austrian Cpl who refused to believe he was ever wrong.

Also, attacking at the wrong time. The german forces should’ve not helped Mussolini in his failed campaigns monthes before and attacked the Russians at least early spring.

The Russian winter of 41’, most brutal, caused german forces to essentially stop in front of moscow for lack of supplies and mobility.

German forces were not prepared with adequate clothing starting in the winter of 1941. The germans supposed that the Russians would be over by autumn and 2/3 of the soldiers would leave the front. The other 1/3 prepared with clothing should stay to “control” the land. But obviously this didn’t happen. This may be one reason for the later defeat.

thats just my guessing, maybe they aren’t ready yet in spring? they are just defeated in stalingrad, so moral must be very low. Their equipment and food supply would need time to re-supply too. So it might be even worse to attack russia in spring time?

I think the Germans could have won the war in russia. If they had just taken Moscow in the first 4 months, the Russians would have lost. The Ruskies had already been caught with their pants down. The fact that the germans failed to take Moscow allowed the Russians to “pull their pants up” with Stalin’s winter offensive.

When Guderians Panzergruppe 2 flung out across the River bug and seized the forts at Brest Litovsk, they quilckly drove straght for the city of Minsk, curving up from the South to meet Hoth’s Panzergruppe 3 coming from the north. thus the soviet forces were immedietely behind their attack fronts, and were isolated in a huge cauldron in which, once their supplies had run out, they would have little alternative but to surrender.

This was all achieved in five days. However, the pockets of Soviet troops were not as inclined to surrender as their counterparts in France. When the decision to destroy these soviet pockets came by, Hoth and Guderian thought that the clean up should be left to the infantry of the 4th and 9th armies, and that the Panzer spearheads should continue on to Smolensk and then to Moscow. Guderian grew impatient, and launched his Panzers toward the river Beresina, and thei to the River Dniepr. They reached river Dniepr in 4 days, but then were immediatelly bugged down with fighting. Guderian had lost contact with Hoths Panzergruppe. Smolensk was captured on the 16 of July and the next target was Moscow. However, on the 29th of July, Hitler gave the order to go no further east, and to redirect attention to Ukraine.

29th of JULY like a month after the german invasion began! So close to Moscow!

At that time, Moscow was very poorly defended, and all of the Soviet government had fled, except for Stalin and some of his commanders, including Zhukov.

For me, the two big tactical mistakes were failing to take Moscow and attempting to take Stalingrad. The amount of manpower and material wasted attending to take a city which had no strategic military importance when it could simply have been bypassed. Had the Austrian corporal not been rather more interested in political gestures than strategic importance, of course.

It is interesting point to note that both supreme commanders were complete amateurs whose success varied in inverse proportion to the amount of personal control they took. As the war progressed, Hitler took more a more personal control over the army and Stalin less and less.

I would definately go with the failure to take Moscow. At the time it was a major communications hub and as rail was the prime mover in that time, to take out Moscow would not just have been symbolic, but quite literally cut the country in half.

would definately go with the failure to take Moscow. At the time it was a major communications hub and as rail was the prime mover in that time, to take out Moscow would not just have been symbolic, but quite literally cut the country in half

I fully agree. That was the major mistake that many people overlook when presented with the mistakes at Stalingrad and Kursk. Of course the Germans made many mistakes after the first year, but their failure to take Moscow is what I believe to be their most foolish one.

The reason that they didn’t take Moscow, is because Hitler changed the focus of attention to the Ukraine. He wanted the farmlands for food and the Bakr oil fields were not far from there as well.

What happened to all the Wehrmacht’s supplies! It was only a month into Barbarossa.

I think the way they heavily bombed Stalingrad made it even more difficult for them to take and had they been able to pull out of Stalingrad when they were becoming surrounded this would have saved thousands of their troops and equipment. I believe the morale of the Germans was greatly affected by the defeat there.

able to pull out of Stalingrad when they were becoming surrounded this would have saved thousands of their troops and equipment. I believe the morale of the Germans was greatly affected by the defeat there.

Indeed. If Hitler hadn’t been so stubborn and forced Paulus to stay there, then the 6th army wouldn’t have suffered so terrible a fate.

And yes, Stalingrad was a huge moral drop for the Germans. Soldiers on all front were affected by the loss.

Many things went wrong in Russia but you can talk about winter clothing, Caucasian oil, Stalingrad, T34s and all the rest. But nothing will alter the fact that there were too many Russians and not enough Germans.

This article will help…

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

I think that the most problem was the late beginning of Barbarossa.

Hitler feared his open side at the balkan and so he decided to go to the balkan first and cleared is right wing.

So Barbarossa had started 6 weeks too late. And this was for me the most problem. And Hitler didn’t recognize the warnings of a two-front-war which causes a “man-power-problem”. What we had since the landing on d-Day.

The Germans can thank Mussolini for the late start of Barborossa… But Greece and Yugoslavia were not part of the Axis… so no matter what … i believe the Germans had to take them out… if not the allies would of had a foothold on the continent… which would of caused serious problems down the road…

Agreed.

Of course it was necessary for Hitler to help Mussolini. But if the Italians had done the job alone, Hitler could have started Barbarossa earlier. And I think it was planned earlier?

Well if Mussolini was not such a stupid asshole and have done his part Hitler could have smashed into Russia and also had more men to fight the war, but it was actualy a good thing because then we would have been ruled by Nazis. Hitler should have left Mussolini alone like he did with Hitler.

Henk

Too much trust in Mussolini’s troops, theres no back up. :arrow:

Huh!? Didn’t over a million Soviet Red Army soldiers surrender in the opening days of the invasion? :shock:

The main difference was that France is perfect tank country, and not a very large area compared to the vast expanses of the USSR. The Red Army could afford the blunders of it’s high command, the French had no such luxury.

…More than 2.4 million Soviet troops had been taken prisoner by December 1941, when German and Soviet forces fought in the suburbs of Moscow.

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Barbarossa