In the recent edition of Armchair General it seems to imply had Hitler allowed Manstein to do as he wished Germany might have won on the eastern front. Now I'm not expert but I would like to read some thoughts on this from some who understand this stuff in detail.
Manstein favored a "fluid" defense that favored tactical withdrawls in which the Germans would pull back, wait till the Soviets overextended themselves and their supplies and, and then attack with fresh forces to annihilate the Soviets, advance and regain the lost ground. An example of such fluid defense is Manstein's victory after Stalingrad, when the overextended Soviets were eliminated at Khrakov. After Stalingrad with Manstein at the helm, the Reich could have still (argueably) won a stalemate. In contrast Hitler favored to hold all ground until death leading to all the great German disasters, Stalingrad, Bagration etc.
The basic pattern of Hitler's static defense was this: German units would hold off vast number of Soviets, then when near the breaking point request to withdraw, Hitler would refuse, the Germans fight on killing even more Soviets, Hitler continues to refuse withdraw, the Soviets waves pour around the shrinking German defense and trap them, Hitler allows outside German units (usually elite Panzer or SS divisions) to break the circle. Then, depending on the situation, some or none of the encircled German units would break out. The Soviet fronts advance. Repeat until Berlin.
I believe if Manstain was allowed freedom to conduct the war in the East it would have saved many more losses in men and material but the end would still have ended the same with perhaps the Western Allies getting to Berlin ahead of the Soviets. The German Eastern armies would have slowed down the advance of the Soviets but without fuel and ammo, not more could be done and definitely there would be no victory over the Soviets.
Maybe this is worth checking out again.... http://www.ww2f.com/wwii-general/10285-von-manstein-critical-assesment.html
If Stalin allowed his Generals to act with as much freedom as Manstein had ( in the beginning of the war ) then perhaps the Red Army would not have suffered such a catastrophe at Kiev? It still amazes me though that so much credit is given to German generals and Hitler's blunders while virtually neglecting the mention of their Soviet counterparts. Afterall, Manstein's potential future break through to Stalingrad and possibly Moscow was a bit complicated due to Operation Mars.
Yes and we could argue that had Stalin not insisted on the Purges in the Red Army and making the army a political weapon summer of 41 would be the recorded date for the defeat of Germany. With Generals in front as Mikhail Tukhachevsky Germany would have a tough time gaining such ground. Cheers...
Or maybe he got rid of a lot of political hacks and guys too involved in the theories and practices of previous wars, thereby unwittingly clearing the ground for a generation of officers much younger than the opposition. "It still amazes me though that so much credit is given to German generals and Hitler's blunders " Hitler wasn't the only blunderer, the generals didn't all have to be geniuses, and besides there wasn't much they could have done about the strategic supply situation. It was all fine and dandy for Manstein and his wide moves, but when the fuel pinch started to bite then no more wide moves. And we must also not forget that in Kursk, for instance, Manstein was commander of AG South who was defeated at Kursk, was embroiled in the Mius river diversionary battle, and then was again defeated in the post-Kursk Sov offensives in Ukraine. So?
Manstein was not defeated at Kursk, both Soviet and German forces still had reserves left for the last critical round of the battle. Hitler called off the offensive due to allied landings in Italy, ending the battle in a German tactical victory and strategic defeat.
No doubt Germany's early massive victories against the Soviet Union were in a large part due to Stalin's purges and his reluctance to let troops carry out strategic withdrawals. Personally I think the Reich's best chance for victory in WWII and against the Soviet Union was in 41, when they should have shot straight for Moscow instead of diverting the Panzers of AGC south to complete the Kiev encirclement. In the bigger picture the Reich should have come as liberators of communism (as they were first perceived by the Soviet population) in which case the Soviet Union would surely have collapsed. Instead, after the combat troops came the Nazi officials who were even worse oppressors than the communists. Either that or the Reich should have remained on friendly terms with the Soviets and finished of the Brits first. Of course either scenario is a fantasy since Hitler's whole agenda was based on race expansion to the east at the expense of the so called subhuman Slavs.
