Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What if Hitler put more support behind Rommel?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What if Hitler put more support behind Rommel?

    What would have happend if Hitler gave more troops to Rommel. Whould he have been able to counter american and british forces in north africa? From there he could have captured the suez canal and forced the royal navy out of the mediterranean. Then on to the middle east and an almost limitless supply of oil. Plus he could attack russia into the caucasus. If that happend, would it have been possible to stop nazi germany?

  • #2
    You are, of course, assuming that a few more soldiers could have helped Rommel over come his severe shortages in supplies, heavy weapons, and oil, not to mention that the Allies controlled the skies and the sea approaches, nor to even consider that much of his command was made up of the highly unreliable Italians, and to remember that the Russians were busy grinding the major portion of the German Army into dust at that very same moment is right out, eh?

    Comment


    • #3
      Hitler could have easily diverted more troops to North Africa......don't attack Russia
      Lance W.

      Peace through superior firepower.

      Comment


      • #4
        No, the primary problem for Rommel remains, getting supplies. The only solution would be command of the Mediterranean for the Germans, thus, uninterrupted supplies - not to mention supply troubles for the Americans and British.
        Mens Est Clavis Victoriae
        (The Mind Is The Key To Victory)

        Comment


        • #5
          The supply problem could have been solved or greatly reduced by the taking control of Malta.

          Comment


          • #6
            cpgor is right. if you'd take out malta, the british would lose their only major airbase in the area. tanks and troops could safely cross the mediterranean. I think if that Rommel was sent more troops, and barbarossa was delayed until next spring, rommel could have become a 4th army group in the invasion of russia. of course then he'd have to take tanks throught he caucacus mountains( or however you spell them) and there was only one practical road. but the oil would ahve been reached earlier.
            Hell was full, so I came back.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by cpgor
              The supply problem could have been solved or greatly reduced by the taking control of Malta.
              Malta was definately the key to controlling the Mediterrean, that's why the British defended it so staunchly. One of the best uses of ULTRA was in protecting Malta.
              Lance W.

              Peace through superior firepower.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by erwin_rommel
                cpgor is right. if you'd take out malta, the british would lose their only major airbase in the area. tanks and troops could safely cross the mediterranean. I think if that Rommel was sent more troops, and barbarossa was delayed until next spring, rommel could have become a 4th army group in the invasion of russia. of course then he'd have to take tanks throught he caucacus mountains( or however you spell them) and there was only one practical road. but the oil would ahve been reached earlier.
                It probably would have been easier going across deserts and over mountains than thru millions of Russians.
                Lance W.

                Peace through superior firepower.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Malta solution

                  In fact the General Staff wargamed an invasion of Malta, oddly enough with German and Italian forces. From what I remember, there was enough doubt of the feasibility of invading Malta (would have been a joint amphib/airborne operation), that they resolved an invasion of the "unsinkable aircraft carrier" would have sunk them.
                  Mens Est Clavis Victoriae
                  (The Mind Is The Key To Victory)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    In his book 'Lost Victories' Manstein states that peripheral theaters could not in themselves be decisive. In addition,
                    England would have the advantage with control of the sea.

                    He felt that this combination would lead to eventual overextension. Drawing Germany away from legitimate objectives.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Malta was a key to getting supplies to the Axis forces in Africa. As long as the British controlled it, they had a stranglehold on how large a force could be supported by the Germans and Italians in North Africa. The Germans were wary after Crete about any large scale airborne operations and the Italian amphibious capability was marginal at best. The Axis could exert air control over Malta at will (as they did several times during the war with X Fliegercorps). However, with a concerted air campaign, and a strong showing from the Italian Navy, a concerted airborne effort by both German and Italian troops may have succeeded. It would have been close....

                      Assuming Malta fell after a bloody fight, Axis supplies would have flowed more easily and been able to support several more divisions in the desert. Would these have been enough to defeat the British? possibly.... The initial battles around Alamein were close affairs....

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        If General Student's fallschirmjagers had attacked Malta rather than Crete in 1941 who knows how the rest of the fight in North Africa might have played out...........
                        Lance W.

                        Peace through superior firepower.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Although it is commonly assumed that Hitler's greatest mistake was invading the USSR, I doubt that is the case. Had Hitler given Rommel the support he needed, then Germany would have risked an overwhelming assault from the USSR. I quote Hitler's speech to the Reichstag on on Dec 11, 1941 announcing his decision to declare war on the United States:

                          "Already in 1940 it became increasingly clear from month to month that the plans of the men in the Kremlin were aimed at the domination, and thus the destruction, of all of Europe. I have already told the nation of the build-up of Soviet Russian military power in the East during a period when Germany had only a few divisions in the provinces bordering Soviet Russia. Only a blind person could fail to see that a military build-up of unique world-historical dimensions was being carried out. And this was not in order to protect something that was being threatened, but rather only to attack that which seemed incapable of defense ...

                          When I became aware of the possibility of a threat to the east of the Reich in 1940 through [secret] reports from the British House of Commons and by observations of Soviet Russian troop movements on our frontiers, I immediately ordered the formation of many new armored, motorized and infantry divisions ...

                          We realized very clearly that under no circumstances could we allow the enemy the opportunity to strike first into our rear. Nevertheless, the decision in this case was a very difficult one ...

                          A truly impressive amount of authentic material is now available that confirms that a Soviet Russian attack was intended. We are also sure about when this attack was to take place. In view of this danger, the extent of which we are perhaps only now truly aware, I can only thank the Lord God that He enlightened me in time, and has given me the strength to do what must be done. Millions of German soldiers may thank Him for their lives, and all of Europe for its existence.

                          I may say this today: If the wave of more than 20,000 tanks, hundreds of divisions, tens of thousands of artillery pieces, along with more than 10,000 airplanes, had not been kept from being set into motion against the Reich, Europe would have been lost ..."

                          Hitler's attack on Russia was therefore a necessary preemptive strike. Though his arguments for going to war can be disputed, it makes sense to me that Europe wasn't big enough for a man like Hitler and a man like Stalin to live together in peace and harmony. Sooner or later they would have fought. Hitler knew that he needed to strike first before the Russians could mass their forces along the border and so he tried to use economy of force as best as possible by using Rommel and his small Afrika Corps and the U-Boat fleet to keep the Allies pinned down long enough for Germany to bring down the sledgehammer onto Russia and eliminate the threat to the East first. It was a good plan, and perhaps if it were executed flawlessly Germany could have triumphed. But they failed.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Rogue16
                            Although it is commonly assumed that Hitler's greatest mistake was invading the USSR, I doubt that is the case. Had Hitler given Rommel the support he needed, then Germany would have risked an overwhelming assault from the USSR. I quote Hitler's speech to the Reichstag on on Dec 11, 1941 announcing his decision to declare war on the United States:

                            "Already in 1940 it became increasingly clear from month to month that the plans of the men in the Kremlin were aimed at the domination, and thus the destruction, of all of Europe. I have already told the nation of the build-up of Soviet Russian military power in the East during a period when Germany had only a few divisions in the provinces bordering Soviet Russia. Only a blind person could fail to see that a military build-up of unique world-historical dimensions was being carried out. And this was not in order to protect something that was being threatened, but rather only to attack that which seemed incapable of defense ...

                            When I became aware of the possibility of a threat to the east of the Reich in 1940 through [secret] reports from the British House of Commons and by observations of Soviet Russian troop movements on our frontiers, I immediately ordered the formation of many new armored, motorized and infantry divisions ...

                            We realized very clearly that under no circumstances could we allow the enemy the opportunity to strike first into our rear. Nevertheless, the decision in this case was a very difficult one ...

                            A truly impressive amount of authentic material is now available that confirms that a Soviet Russian attack was intended. We are also sure about when this attack was to take place. In view of this danger, the extent of which we are perhaps only now truly aware, I can only thank the Lord God that He enlightened me in time, and has given me the strength to do what must be done. Millions of German soldiers may thank Him for their lives, and all of Europe for its existence.

                            I may say this today: If the wave of more than 20,000 tanks, hundreds of divisions, tens of thousands of artillery pieces, along with more than 10,000 airplanes, had not been kept from being set into motion against the Reich, Europe would have been lost ..."

                            Hitler's attack on Russia was therefore a necessary preemptive strike. Though his arguments for going to war can be disputed, it makes sense to me that Europe wasn't big enough for a man like Hitler and a man like Stalin to live together in peace and harmony. Sooner or later they would have fought. Hitler knew that he needed to strike first before the Russians could mass their forces along the border and so he tried to use economy of force as best as possible by using Rommel and his small Afrika Corps and the U-Boat fleet to keep the Allies pinned down long enough for Germany to bring down the sledgehammer onto Russia and eliminate the threat to the East first. It was a good plan, and perhaps if it were executed flawlessly Germany could have triumphed. But they failed.
                            :crazy: Whew do you need a SERIOUS debriefing. Have you ever heard of propaganda? Hitler isn't exactly known for telling the public at large what was really going on. I suspect you doubt the validity of the Holocaust.

                            I do not doubt that Stalin would have had designs on Eastern Europe at some point, but 1941 was NOT the time. That's why The non-agression pact was signed between the USSR and Germany.
                            Stalin knew the USSR wasn't ready for war and he was stalling as his war industry geared up. Thats why he followed the non-agression pact to the letter and supplied Germany with important resources his own country's industry could have easily used. That's why the border areas were so poorly defended, so as not to antaganize Germany.
                            German resources in the Spring/Summer of 1941 could have been used to much better result in North Africa and the Middle East (see thread regarding the Axis in Iraq).
                            Even IF the threat was real in 1941 Russia was an unwinable campaign for Germany. Its simple math, 50 million people Vs. 140 million people.
                            Lance W.

                            Peace through superior firepower.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              For propaganda to be truly effective there must be some trace of truthfulness in whatever claim you are making. I suspect that this is the case here. As for my doubting the Holocaust I think you are way off base. You should examine your line of thinking if you must criticize a person by making such inflammatory statements designed to set off a certain emotional response.

                              Clearly 1941 was not the time nor did I imply that it was in my statement. Perhaps Stalin was planning for 42 or 43. Who knows? But it is definitely possible that had Russia had the time to buildup her military might to its fullest, then Germany would have been crushed. "It's simple math 140 million v. 50 million". Whether or not Russia was planning such a campaign is still debatable. We have no way of independent confirmation. We can either believe Hitler was telling the truth or that Stalin wasn't doing any dirty tricks. That's not a very nice choice and unless we have access to certain secret documents in Russia, we'll never know for certain.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X