Germany's lost war

oh well...i don't have the best knowledge of this theater. However i am reading a book called "The Forgotten Soldier" in which he writes about his own expierences during the war in the East. Details that i noticed was the horrible supply system of the germans (greatly hampered by the weather), The large amount of training on the soldiers, and the unending supply of men by the russians.
But also...if the germans were that prepared for the winter...then why did SO many men die of the cold and of starvation?
I think they realized the weather...i just think they underestimated the effect it would have...

 

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ron:
But also...if the germans were that prepared for the winter...then why did SO many men die of the cold and of starvation?
I think they realized the weather...i just think they underestimated the effect it would have...


<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

German winter equipment was designed for Central European winter conditions. Extreme harsh weather conditions were of disadvantage for Germany’s “Sunshine army”. The equipment was there, but couldn’t be shipped to the front because of rail transport limitations. The trains were busy transporting men, material, fuel for TYPHOON instead winter equipment.

Rail (and any other) infrastructure in Russia was bad. The Germans knew that, but can’t do anything about it. (How long and how many men would it have taken to built new railway lines and streets?). The limited rail and street system was a fixed factor one can’t easily change. You have to deal with it or leave it.

It’s like saying: “We would have won the Russian war if Russia would have had France’s infrastructure and size, if there wouldn’t have been Russian manpower but French’s and if there wouldn’t have been mud when it rains, frost in winter, heat in the summer etc...”

 

ok i see what your getting at. I guess in the long run the end result is....Hitler should never have invaded in the first place!

 

When Germany decided to Invade Russia whilst still fighting Britain-GAME OVER!!!!
All it meant from that point was that the world would suffer countless dead before Germany inevitably lost the war.
Basically, the Eastern offensice drew resources away from the conquest of Britain, that once overthrown, could be used as a mass staging area for a springboard to any future endeavours the Germans wanted to launch-had they held out, and attacked England effectively, instead of trying to morally break England down....may have led to a very different outcome in WW2.

 

Maybe we should make a difference between the defeat of the moral of the war and actually losing the war.

At the defeat of Stalingrad, the Germans knew that it would be very difficult to win this war. But there was always a change to a cease-fire.

At the defeat of Kursk the Germans knew that they couldn't win this war anymore.