Moscow

Why didn't the Germans first make a drive for Moscow and then after putting the government and army in turmoil strike at the economic targets?

 

Why didn't the Germans first make a drive for Moscow and then after putting the government and army in turmoil strike at the economic targets?

As originally planeed the germans did believe that Russia would fall within six to eight weeks.

When Russia did not fall then Germany had to make new plans. Hitlers biggest mistake in Russia was his move towards Stalingrad as a propaganda target and not go for the oilfields

 

The target always was the Caucasian oil fields, Panzer Divisions need oil and Hitler knew that. Stalingrad was a place that was not expected to be the deathbed of the Sixth Army as it was. Hitler's obession with the city was because that Stalingrad was the most Eastern advance made by the Whermacht and of course it hold's Stalin's name.

Even if Moscow fell to the Whermacht in 1941 it's probable that the Soviet Union would have carried on fighting.

 

wasnt moscow the center of russia's massive railway network? wouldn't have losing it seriosuly hampered russia's abilitty to fight the war?

 

wasnt moscow the center of russia's massive railway network? wouldn't have losing it seriosuly hampered russia's abilitty to fight the war?

Yes, it was. But how in the world could Germany take Moscow? Germany failed miserably at taking a miserable little town in the Volga called Stalingrad and a city, as large as Moscow but completely unfavoured by georgraphy, called Lieningrad!

 

Originally posted by Friedrich H@May 6 2005, 10:19 PM
wasnt moscow the center of russia's massive railway network? wouldn't have losing it seriosuly hampered russia's abilitty to fight the war?

Yes, it was. But how in the world could Germany take Moscow? Germany failed miserably at taking a miserable little town in the Volga called Stalingrad and a city, as large as Moscow but completely unfavoured by georgraphy, called Lieningrad!
[post=34165]Quoted post[/post]
Yes but before that little skirmish in Stalingrad they did try to take it and nearly succeeded!!!!

 

Yes but before that little skirmish in Stalingrad they did try to take it and nearly succeeded!!!

Are you referring to Moscow or Stalingrad?

Because, even if Stalingrad was about to fall in several ocassions, Moscow was not.

 

Originally posted by Friedrich H@May 10 2005, 01:05 AM
Yes but before that little skirmish in Stalingrad they did try to take it and nearly succeeded!!!

Are you referring to Moscow or Stalingrad?

Because, even if Stalingrad was about to fall in several ocassions, Moscow was not.
[post=34319]Quoted post[/post]

sorry Friedrich I was referring to Moscow and they werent too far off if I'm not mistaken. I never claimed that they would, I said NEARLY. And they nearly did!! :P If the situation was never in doubt why did Stalin consider leaving the Capital?

 

sorry Friedrich I was referring to Moscow and they werent too far off if I'm not mistaken. I never claimed that they would, I said NEARLY. And they nearly did!! If the situation was never in doubt why did Stalin consider leaving the Capital?

Stalin did consider leaving the capital, but he changed his mind in the last minute, even if his train was ready, and stayed.

Yes, scout units were only 17 km away of the city's centre and some German units had already captured streetcars' stations in the outskirts. But they absolutely couldn't go into the city, surround the city and win the battle. Why? Because German units were simply too weak to move on. They didn't have proper winter equipment and clothing (the fight for Moscow would have taken place in the midst of winter), enough ammunition, enough food, proper shelter (though, the soldiers could always throw away peasants from their huts) and, above all, reinforcements. German units were down to 50% or 40% of their numbers. If we add to this that the size of the battle would have been like that of Lieningrad and fiercer than Stalingrad, then there we have an immense and brutal urban fighting in the middle of the winter in which the Germans lose all their advantages and don't have the capacity to support a fighting Army inside the city, 2.000 km away from the supply depôts.

 

In the spring of 1941,Hitler was still optimistic that he could achieve some sort of armistice with British.His wish was to fight on one front only and an understanding with GB would give him a free hand in his lebensraum ambitions in the East and to discharge his ideology of smashing the Soviet system.Further he was aware from US postures that the US might be brought into a European War.Hitler considered that a Russian war would be swift and prove victorious for Germany and would be over before the US could intervene.It was reported that he declared the Soviet system was rotten and one had "only to kick in the door and the house would collapse".There was a failure to understand that Russian communications were inferior to those in the West and there would be added complications of a different railway system gauge.

Consequently the Wehrmacht lost a valuable 6 weeks of operations in the posponement of Barbarossa and before the Wehrmacht could take Moscow, the Russian winter had closed in.The Wehrmacht were not equipped at this stage for intense operations in the depth of a Russian winter.Had the Wehrmacht moved against Russia in early May, then it is more than likely that Moscow would have fallen.As it was by 4th December,advanced Wehrmacht units had reached Moscow's western suburbs as the bad weather severely limited operations in Germany's favour but were of advantage to the Red Army.

Wehrmacht operations were not helped from mid December 1941 when Hitler in addition to his other state titles assumed the role of Commander in Chief. There would be no professional leadership of the Wehrmacht from this date to the collapse of the Nazi Regime.

 

Consequently the Wehrmacht lost a valuable 6 weeks of operations in the posponement of Barbarossa and before the Wehrmacht could take Moscow, the Russian winter had closed in.

That's not entirely true. It was NOT the winter the factor that defeated the Germans. Freezing temperatures (of -40º) did not come until mid-December. On December 4th the German advance had been brought to a complete halt, and two days later the Soviet massive counter-offensive was launched.

Had the Wehrmacht moved against Russia in early May, then it is more than likely that Moscow would have fallen.

Not really… First, the offensive would have faced a whole sea of mud (defrost came very late that year) and German motorised units wouldn't have been completely equipped. That means they would have gone into battle without 50% of their motor vehicles…

Besides, how could attacking a month and a half earlier had affected Soviet resistance and improved the German lousy logistical system? Also, what about the German High Command's lack of an overall strategy?

The most important things for the German defeat are still there. I don't see how the schedule could have made a difference.

 

I completely agree with the previous post. A lot of historians blame Russian winter for the German defeat. I disagree with that reasoning. Yes, Russian winter is harsh but it was difficult for both Russians and Germans. Plus a big percentage of soldiers in a Soviet army were people from Uzbekistan, Georgia, Azerbaidjan, Armenia who never seen snow before.
In my opinion the biggest problem that Germans had was logistics and high losses. Soviet army of 41/42 was not well trained, it suffered huge losses to Stalin's purges of 1937, airforce was utterly destroyed but even during the retreat to Moscow it managed to inflict high losses.
I think the only thing that Hitler could have done to avoid the defeat on the Eastern Front was to never invade Soviet Union. It was simply too big.
Even if Germans took Moscow it would not have stopped the war. If my memory serves me well Moscow was lost to invaders twice before. Once to France and once to Poland. However, Russia ended up winning both wars.

 

The lack of a coherant strategy by OKH certainly contributed to the fact that Barbarossa failed. Not knowing which objective had the priority didnt help and of course the arguments between the Army Group Commanders and the Panzer Generals were another disadvantage to contend with.

Friedrich is right though. The extra month wouldnt have made a difference.

 

I've read that the weather -the rains- made impossible an earlier barbarrossa anyway, even without Balcans campaing. The only real chance the germans had was to keep Moscow as the main target. In august, after the battle of Smolensko, the soviets had very little forces an unprepared defences in front of Moscow. Hitler ordered his troops to head south and deal with the soviet forces in Ucraine. As is known, he choosed the latter, achieved one of the greatests victories in history (more than 600.000 prisoners) but when he gave the order to take Moscow it was too late.
Some writers claim that he was right to do so, that the Kiev forces would have smashed its flank if left untouched. Other say that those forces, harrased by Gruoup Army South and under a Luftwaffe-controlled sky, where no real threat. We will never know if the fall of Moscow in the summer of 1941 would have meant a soviet collapse: it was, anyway, the political and economic center of the country, the center of rail communications and (with its surrounding area) a main center of manpower. In my opinion, the germans should have bet stronger, gone for Moscow and take the maximum advantage of the disastrous situation of the Red Army, in continuos retreat and poorly directed. If Hitler had a chance in the war, that was the one.

 

The big thing that the Balkan Campaign did was destroy the German parachute arm. After Crete, the Germans made no large-scale drops. I think the 7th Flieger Division could have played a key role in Russia.

 

The Balkan Campaign also ensured that the British couldnt defeat the Axis forces in the Mediteranean when the Gateway to Tripoli was glaring at them following their route of the Italians.

 

BUMP - I'm bringing this thread up because Owen has started reading about the Battle and I feel it would is an informative thread about the Battle, especially Friedrich's posts.

 

Guys, first of all, plz, watch interactive show of Great Patriotic War available on link in my signature to recall how germans moved day by day. There u can see in what days what events has happend. After this u can have full picture of battle for Moscow.
In addition, as I understand battle for Moscow, I'll say that nazis lost their blitzkrieg 'killing spree' long before battle for Moscow when reached centres of resistance like Kiev and Brest's Fortress and the problem of germans were very complex: their logistics were broken - supplies almost always were far from vanguard, absence of good roads, autumn mud after rains, and as I know that mechanization of Wehrmacht in first 2 years where very poor, troops moved on horse power of course infantry often was in back of armor units, trying to swim out russian mud
If I am wrong feel free correct me

 

Haven't got to far into the book yet but it's already been stated it was the rasputitsa ,"the time the roads dissolve" , the autumn (or spring) mud that caused huge problems.
It was the mud not the winter that halted Napoleon and Hitler's armies, and Russian flesh and blood.

Here's a quick comparison with Napoleon and Hitler's invasions.
Maybe not relevant but interesting notheless.
Napoleon invaded Russia on Wednesday 24th June 1812
Reached Smolensk in 54 days on 16th August.
Reached Borodino in 76 days on 7th September.
Reached Moscow in 83 days on 14th September.

Hitler invaded Sunday June 22nd 1941.
Reached Smolensk in 27 days on 18th July.
Reached Brodino (Mozhaisk) in 101 days on October 11th.
Reached Moscow in 166 days on 4th December.

Good comparison
Yes, I can confirm as a witness that such rasputitsa (btw, Lingvo gives me bad roads ; slush for this word) makes any cross-country road almost impassable even for tractors with tracks.. especially when on such road tried to drive befor u )
Think germans was prepared for this after good roads of europe?

or

or