Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Limited Barbarossa

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

  • Limited Barbarossa

    Rather than go for the "germanization till urals"

    If germany only goes for ukraine , and helps the nationalistic movements there... in exchange for part of their wheat and oil.

    and helps romania and finland ( by material and some ground units) in getting their territorites back from USSR which ties up significant number of red army units

    central front german army stays on defensive ... with their flexible defense concept using thier AT guns and artillery to good effect. Keeping the panzer and panzergrenadier divisions as a mobile reserve


    advantages
    less german causalties
    russian population less anatagonized communists may collapse
    more forces avaliable in the west ( less or no chance the allies would attack at that time anyway)
    More countries willing to join germans if they are not seen as exploiters
    panzer divisons are not spread thin but remain concentrated
    logistical nightmares avoided no deep inroads into russia
    Last edited by nastle; 07 Jun 09, 14:19.

  • #2
    rather than go for extermination of USSR ...the germans may fight the red army to a stalemate in central europe and the gain favorable peace terms.

    Chances of a second revolution against communits ? anyone
    Last edited by nastle; 07 Jun 09, 14:30.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by nastle View Post
      rather than go for extermination of USSR ...the germans may fight the red army to a stalemate in central europe and the gain favorable peace terms.

      Chances of a second revolution against communits ? anyone
      I reckon this would only work (even as a 'what if') had Hitler been capable of rational thought on the subject of the Soviet Union. The total and utter destruction of the people and the erradication of its culture upto the urals was his sole aim. You are right when you suggest that a more sensible (from a German perspective) approach would have paid huge dividends but Adolf just wasn't capable of seeing this through.
      HONNEUR ET FIDÉLITÉ

      "Believe me, nothing except a battle lost can be half so melancholy as a battle won." - Duke of Wellington at Waterloo.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by nastle View Post
        Rather than go for the "germanization till urals"

        If germany only goes for ukraine , and helps the nationalistic movements there... in exchange for part of their wheat and oil.
        There's no oil in the Ukraine, to begin with. Its other valuable asset is industry, which is concentrated in the Eastern part of the province, and the Germans still have to get there.

        Moreover, most Soviet troops were concentrated in the Ukraine, for this is exactly where Stalin expected the invasion.
        www.histours.ru

        Siege of Leningrad battlefield tour

        Comment


        • #5
          Also a limited attack on Russia would still lead to the Russians coming west. They & the Germans loathed each other and if Hitler hadn't kicked off OP BARBAROSSA on22/06/41 Stalin would have, eventually come west. 2 equeally nasty dictators .

          "To all who serve , have or will serve , Thank You"

          Comment


          • #6
            Okokok. Now this is how Germany wud have easily won WW2 with a few changes.

            France falls, the German army turns focus on Yugoslavia and Greece Immediatly. Germany sends the X Aircorps to Scicily and it stays there.

            By doing this no time and equipment is lost fighting the RAF, Yugoslavia ana Greece are taken meaning Barbarossa can be launched earlier, and the X aircorps can screw the British up in Malta since it wud not be needed in the balkans.

            Rommel is sent to Afrika in January with 2 Panzer and 1 Light Divisons meaning that all 3 of them could have been completely disembarked by March.

            Then Germany invades Russia in May 1941 with the same strategy but priority is given to Army group Central and South. Why?
            Linking up with the Fins is not nearly as important as the wheat of Ukraine or the political importance of Moscow. All German generals are to be given a free hand. By doing this Guderian and Hoth, the armored geniuses are able to rapidly advance. Army group North should have the least amount of panzers definatly.

            3.3k Panzers at the start of barbarossa no? So it should be 800 Army Group North, 1000 for Army group South, then 1500 for Army Group central. Having such a large amount of panzers at Hoth and Guderian's dispossal means they can maximize their offencive capabilities and and still have a reserve to stop counterattacks or to reinforce the front when it gets tough.

            I think that reserves should always be kept strong and hidden. Your enemy might see 6 exausted panzer divisons at the front, something that could be whiped out without too much difficulty and would cripple the enemys offensive power, but then they might have 2 more in reserve and at maximum strength. The difference between German Generals and Russian ones in 1941 is they used their armor much more effectively. 1 Panzer division could do alot more damage then a Russian one in 1941 because the germans used their tanks well.
            A wild liberal appears! Conservative uses logical reasoning and empirical evidence! It's super effective! Wild liberal faints.

            Comment


            • #7
              You know nastle, I often wondered about this as well. The problem with invading Russia has always been deciding where exactly do you stop your advance?

              Pretty much what's being suggested here seems to be a replay of Brest-Litovsk; where the Germans did play upon the nationalist feelings of Ukrainians and other nations subject to the Russian Empire to its advantage.
              "To be defeated and not submit, is victory; to be victorious and rest on one's laurels, is defeat."
              --Marshal Józef Piłsudski

              Comment


              • #8
                ^ exactly , i stole part of the scenario from there but its not too unrealistic

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by strathnaver View Post
                  Also a limited attack on Russia would still lead to the Russians coming west. They & the Germans loathed each other and if Hitler hadn't kicked off OP BARBAROSSA on22/06/41 Stalin would have, eventually come west. 2 equeally nasty dictators .
                  true, but his advances wud have been blunted at very wellprepared german defences in central front ...plus the pripet marshes wud have protected the northern flank of their thrust into ukraine

                  there were huge armies in ukraine but they were easily routed by army group south ...no reason to believe that in a limited scenario it wud have been much harder

                  and the forces allocted to army group north and center ( includes 10 mot div and 10 pz divs ) cud be used to reinforce the defence in poland and east prussia against any russian advances.

                  problem wud be more political rather than military in my scenario i think ...how to keep the romanians and hungarians from not fighting each other.And how to motivate the finns to attack without commiting german forces in that sector.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Dogsbody67 View Post
                    I reckon this would only work (even as a 'what if') had Hitler been capable of rational thought on the subject of the Soviet Union. The total and utter destruction of the people and the erradication of its culture upto the urals was his sole aim. You are right when you suggest that a more sensible (from a German perspective) approach would have paid huge dividends but Adolf just wasn't capable of seeing this through.
                    i know ! hate that f---ing hitler ...my other what if scenario is a more democratic nazi party ...with a politburo kinda thing and not so much power concentrated in one hand...solves part of this problem lol

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      In other words, if the SA overthrew Hitler? Or if the Strasser brothers took command of the Nazi Party?
                      "To be defeated and not submit, is victory; to be victorious and rest on one's laurels, is defeat."
                      --Marshal Józef Piłsudski

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        yes kind of like that ... in many ways i think the personal glorification of hitler went against many tenets of national SOCIALISM ....
                        personally i dont think the SA in power wud be so organized to launch germany in a successful war, as many of them were thugs and idealistic revolutionaries.If they abandoned their loathing for the general staff and cooperated more with army ( as was the suggestion of some generals) there was hope.
                        A national militia SA like army of germany if they got power wud have been hopelessly defeated even by the red army of 1941
                        Last edited by nastle; 07 Jun 09, 23:10.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I don't know about that per se. After all, many SA members were veterans of the First World War and the Freikorps. I know the Strasser brothers wanted a militarily strong Germany, but had no time for the SS or waging wars of aggression.
                          "To be defeated and not submit, is victory; to be victorious and rest on one's laurels, is defeat."
                          --Marshal Józef Piłsudski

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            ^ that makes a lot of sense to me as well...but i think conquest of poland was essential and so was the campaign against france.

                            Probably norway denmark was unneccesary diversion as was campaigns in balkans/africa

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Actually Norway was important to protect Sweden. Germany got her Iron from Sweden so they wanted Norway as a Luftwaffe base to keep Sweden fearful of invasion and GB's bombers away. Because they were thinking about bombing the mines then demanding to continue if Sweden didn't agree to cut trade with Germany. Denmark was just in the way so they took it to use af more Luftwaffe bases. Also Denmark was known to have the greatest butter in Europe and many high ranking Generals wanted the best everything. =P The balkans weren't really nessesary but they became so after Mussolini screwed up! LETS GO INVADE GREECE IN NOVEMBER!!!! R I not teh pwnage leader? YAY ITALY! Our Generals are stupid are soldiers cowards and our navy are full of anti facist pro British pplz.
                              A wild liberal appears! Conservative uses logical reasoning and empirical evidence! It's super effective! Wild liberal faints.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X