I always felt there was only one man who should have been the commander in chief of the Eastern Front that man Eric Von Manstein if he had this post and a free hand without Hitler butting in the outcome could well have been different.

__________________
Regards, Richard

Depends on the point of view. IMHO things were very well as they should be

__________________
There is an ass in my avatar.

True everyone has a different view why I made this decision the over all chief of the eastern front Manstein under him would be the three army group commanders so why did I select Manstein well I read a lot of books on the Generals and Field Marshals and he stood out even the real experts feel he was there best after all after the war and when Manstein was released from prison he went on to become a military advisor for the west German army. [img]smile.gif[/img]

__________________
Regards, Richard

Maybe Manstein could have handled it, maybe not. At least he knew how to give the enemy a hard time...


(Personally I think the Soviet Army should have continued its 1938 policy of ending officer careers short...Why did you stop it Stalin?)

__________________

You know, I wasn't realy thinking of stopping, actually I got a bit sidetracked with a slight rebalance of the number of Jewish doctors and old checkists for a breather when these idiots from the west decided to call in. Anyway, as soon as I saw them off was I then able to whittle down a few more marshalls...

__________________
There is an ass in my avatar.

I see....minor disturbances in the west 1941-45. Too bad you yourself had your career stopped before you could get on with the next( =last? ) round of enemies of the nation.

-------

Churchill said: "I collect the jokes people tell about me". "That's a coincidence - said Stalin, - I collect the people who tell jokes about me!"

__________________

Field marshal Von Manstein was certainly the best strategist and master of the field the Germans had in WWII, no doubt.

However, Manstein was a typical megalomaniac Prussian general traumatised with Von Clausewitz's theories about war: it is brute force and violence, not resistance, the main ingredients of victory. That kind of thought was still there, the poor German economy was also there, as well as the caothic structures of a totalitarian State, the typical German disregard for logistics, the anti-utilitarian and anto-practical war objectives in Hitler's mind…

Manstein wouldn't have wasted men and matériel the way Hitler did, but maybe he would have done so in the way Ludendorff did in 1917-1918…

__________________
"War is less costly than servitude, the choice is always between Verdun and Dachau." - Jean Dutourd, French veteran of both world wars

"A mon fils: depuis que tes yeux sont fermes les miens n’ont cessé de pleurir." - Mère française, Verdun

Yes Hitler was not keen on the Prussian generals, as for Manstein I think some of those poor mistakes may not had happen.

__________________
Regards, Richard

Well, Hitler did have the choice back in 1934 to make Röhm and SA the main structure of the future German army. I guess Hitler did the wise choice here even if it was the hated Prussian vons etc...

__________________

Hitler made alot of mistakes, and should have let his generals fight on the Eastern Front without butting in and changing their plans. Stalin's Great Purge of Russian officers didnt help him either.

__________________
http://s13.invisionfree.com/AirCombat_WWII

It seems even in the most difficult situations Hitler did not get the information he would have needed , but lies...??

-----------

Heinz Guderian was interviewed by Basil Liddell Hart after the war for his book The Other Side of the Hill (1948)

On December 20th, 1941, I had a five hours' discussion with Hitler at his headquarters in East Prussia, in order to inform him of the situation of the and Panzer Army under my command. The mission given to this army was to encircle
Moscow from the south and south-west, and then to push forward to Gorki (300 miles beyond Moscow). In view of the condition of the troops and the supply possibilities this task could not be fulfilled.

I tried to convince Hitler of the correctness of my report - but without success. I got the impression that the reports from the front did not reach him unaltered, and suggested to him that he should relieve the officers of his operational staff and appoint officers with fresh experience from the front line. After tile audience, Hitler told Keitel: "This man, I have not convinced."

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/GERguderian.htm

__________________

Over the winter I have read three books on the war that I have really enjoyed. One was on Stalingrad, one on the Falise pocket and one on the Market-Garden Allied operation. In all of these books the German high command and Hitler are charecterized by delusional thinking and dicision making. The staff officers and aides sent to gather information are ignored on their return. Bad news is charecterized as coming from a defeatest traitor or from Allied spies that have infiltrated the communication network. The general feeling I got was not quite that they shot the messengers that brought bad news but they would certainly use selective hearing. Put on top of this Hitler's dogged insistance that he would rather throw away entire armies rather than retreat and you have a perfect recipe for an allied victory.

__________________
PEOPLE SLEEP PEACEABLY IN THEIR BEDS AT NIGHT ONLY BECAUSE ROUGH MEN STAND READY TO DO VIOLENCE ON THEIR BEHALF. GEORGE ORWELL

The Master Race, Propaganda, Arrogance, hatred, Pride.

It's incredible how German forces in Russia were able to operate, Hitler had lost the war by his own sub arrogance and delusion.

__________________
Regards, Richard

In many situations Hitler was presented with the info but either chose to ignore it or was shouted down. However I dont buy the Assertions that are some of the German Generals memoirs that they knew what was best but were held back by the rantings of a raving lunatic. There is a pattern to the memoirs, take credit for the successes and blame Hitler for the failures.

Manstein may have been a good Commander in Chief East but I'm not so sure he would have changed the course of the war. But if any German Commander was to take charge then Manstein was probably the ablest.

Gotthard, the generals had their bacon to save so naturally they piled all the faults on top of the obvious target, who could not defend himself anyway. The Other Side of the Hill is a strange book, where the German generals seem quite happy to spread their "not me, I knew better" view, aided by an author quite happy to hear them say what he wanted to hear.

__________________
There is an ass in my avatar.

well then lets just thank god he wasnt in command.

__________________
"When we come to a minefield, our infantry attacks as if it were not there. The losses we get from personnel mines we consider equal to those we would have gotten from machine guns and artillery if the Germans had chosen to defend that particular area." - General Zukhov to Eisenhower

I didn't quite catch your drift...

__________________
There is an ass in my avatar.

I think he means thank god von Manstein wasn't the commander in chief or else historical events might have played out very differently.

__________________

Not sure about that, I suspect there would had been a lot less bad decisions made and the war may had dragged on a little longer.

__________________
Regards, Richard

Not sure about that, I suspect there would had been a lot less bad decisions made and the war may had dragged on a little longer. </font>[/quote]Yeah I agree with you Richard, I was just explaining what Eagle was trying to say.

__________________

Would it have dragged on longer? Looking at the hardware the Soviets poured over the german lines they would have had it anyways. If the Germans had entered the Soviet Union as liberators from Communism (as Richard suggests) then it may have been a different story.

__________________
'We march. The enemy is retreating in transport. We follow on foot.' Lt.Neil McCallum 5/7 Gordons 19th November 1942

Even with the Soviet war production rate, quantity of men and supplies etc. there is no doubt that different decisions would have been made on the battlefield that would have prolonged the fighting. Who is going to make better decisions? Hitler the corporal or von Manstein the Field Marshall?

__________________

When are we talking here? 41-42-43-44-45?

If Von Manstein was in charge in 41, there might be possibilities. But nothing would have had a more profound impact on the campaign than the German army beeing viewed as liberators rather than the bestial butchers that they were.

In 42 the Soviets had played catch-up long enough.

From that point there was no other 'victory' than keeping the war going for the nazis.

I have to agree with Za. The Generals have placed a lot of blame on the Fuhrer, but steal all the glory. If these generals were so brilliant why is it that all allied generals beat the crap out of them ??? The Germans were defeated on the battlefield werent they? I mean Hr. Hitler did not tell his soldiers to retreat from Russia, North Africa, Italy, France and the Low Countries did he ?? No the German Army was defeated. Every nation had meddeling bosses. Churchill was on the blower constantly to every commander in the 8th Army. His requests for instant action was accepted by most commanders. Monty played it his way and won. There are many American paralells too. Stalin had the sense to give his generals a bit of leeway and make competition between them to ensure that they did not relax. Point is that it wasn't just the German generals that had to fight with one hand tied to their back from time to time.

__________________
'We march. The enemy is retreating in transport. We follow on foot.' Lt.Neil McCallum 5/7 Gordons 19th November 1942