Let's imagine that Hitler goes mad and appoints YOU C.-in-C. of all the Axis armies in the eastern front and gives you the task of preparing and launching 'Operation Barbarossa' and winning the war there.

What would you have done (taking into account the available forces and resources of Nazi Germany in 1940)?

Regards. [img]graemlins/armcar.gif[/img]

__________________
"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

--- start with mad scientist type laugh ---

Assuming that Hitler listens to everything I say and I can't create a long range bomber force? I can't end the persecution of the jews, etc to build a more enthusiastic work force? Unfortunately, some of my strategies work against Nazi doctrine/ideology - but Hitler's crazy, right?

First, I would urge Hitler to announce Barbarosa as a war of liberation for the Ukraine and Georgia - thus breaking the "common" bond the Soviets had defending the Rodina (of course, I'd insist that the SS be nice).

Second, I would focus the initial attack in the south east to - throwing blocking attacks north and east - the aim to capture the industrial centers and oil fields first. Then trust north and engaging population centers from the south, west and east (expecting a longer campaign and equiping men for winter fighting).

__________________
"I die for my fatherland. I have a clear conscience." - Admiral Wilhelm Canaris

The biggest problems , as I assume, were

1. No reserves for a longer campaign i.e. men, tanks etc

2. No clear cut objective ( changing all the while...today Leningrad, tomorrow caucasus, the next Moscow)

3. the race politics

4. the supply system

Unfortunately not getting very adventurous but I suppose you´d need a decent number of men in reserves and definitely alot more tanks and tank engines to replace the lost/worn ones.

Getting one objective is better than not getting any so I´d put my money on getting Leningrad first, then Moscow. By getting Leningrad the army would get a huge moral boost and Stalin would lose the birth place of his empire. Huge propaganda victory for Göbbels and his co.Also this would free the Finns from the Karelia section to attack in full force with the Germans to Murmansk which would free ( if successful )the German forces in Lapland to move in an attackt owards Moscow from the North....

Of course getting the Russian people against Stalin would be a job for the mastermind Göbbels. We can always afterwards do the dirty laundry....

Just some thoughts...

__________________

I clearly would have waited for the North African situation to be resolved, considering I hope to recieve as many resources as possible. I would not wish to compete with Rommel for resources. Clearly though the main target(s) are the Caucuses(oil) and Moscow(to demoralize the Russian people). Leningrad is obviously not important enough to recieve its own front, although conquering the Baltic states would be of some help to ending the Red Navies career.

[ 29. March 2005, 08:10 PM: Message edited by: us11thairborne ]

As a political center taking Leningrad would mean a huge political victory and a morale booster, I think though.

__________________

Who? Me? Of course I'd declare war on the US in June '40 and invade Switzerland, Sweden and Spain! [img]tongue.gif[/img]

__________________
Bah!

I would use the air force as they had to initially destroy the red air force on the ground. Then smash my way across the Ukraine, Romania and the other coutries under Russian control. And treat them as liberated countries thus ensuring the enlistment of people to fight against the Russian army. And finally i would have secretly talked to the Japanese about starting a front in the siberian area. Although this would have been a fearful trouncing for the Japanese it would have kept valuable resources from fighting the Germans, thus giving them a rapid advance across the country.