Back into the fire again!!!
Kein Problem, crazy! I am a bit stupid sometimes
Logistics are a very important tactic level. But all those things some of you posted at the beggining of this thread about T-34s and 88mm guns are minor tactical details and they can be ignored. That thing could be resumed in saying that the thing Mark III vs T-34 is like the thing Sherman vs Panther. It did not matter. But logistics do make a big difference. I have never said the opossite.
Indeed, we did bomb London with petrol from the Caucausus. And we ate grain from the Ukraine, etc.
That thing about Hitler and the resources. That shows that Hitler was a strategist, and a good one. And as I have pointed out, he ruined things when he got down to the minor tactic levels, because of his tremendous lack of experience. But the main ironny here is that Hitler knew that the USSR could only be defeated by a single lightning campaign. Then why did he want to secure strategic points needed for a long war like the fields of the Ukraine and the Caucasus' petrol? That would have come later... But anyway.
All of you have good points on several things. But let me say something, crazy. If production in 1944 was higher than 1941 that means that more resources were used in 1944, right? And by 1944 the railroads, trade and sea lines had been destroyed by Allied aircrafts, right? All those things did not happen in 1941. Would have been possible in 1941 to have more resources from wherever (Norway, Hungary, Romania, etc.) easily? Fine railroads and no air attacks would have meant that those resources could have reached their destination safely. Do you get my points here? I know about the dependence of Germany on other countries in many important resources and I will not deny the fact that even with undisturbed supply lines, the resources needed would have been pretty hard to get.