joespaniel
Jul 15, 2004, 08:29 PM
Well they planned to do it ...
As we now know it was unachievable , they couldn't hold Moscow so long as the long term initiative required to . :D
RL is not like CiVs guys ... :lol:
The Nazis starved to death millions of Russians, Poles, Jews and others in a deliberate plan to reduce the populations of the conquered territories.
Read this:
http://www.dac.neu.edu/holocaust/Hitlers_Plans.htm
It doesn't go into detail, but it clearly illustrates what I am talking about.
Adler17
Jul 16, 2004, 12:45 AM
But Vrylakas in 1914 the Germans tried to avoid a two front war by capturing France before the Russians would come. In 1914 nobody expected the Russians would attack with two not ready armies without guns and supply. But they did. So the only army protecting East Prussia had to retreat and reinforced by soldiers of the western front, which were miissing at the Marne.
Nevertheless Hoffmann, Hindenburg and Ludendorff were able to beat the Russians at Tannenberg...
Adler
joespaniel
Jul 16, 2004, 12:43 PM
But Vrylakas in 1914 the Germans tried to avoid a two front war by capturing France before the Russians would come. In 1914 nobody expected the Russians would attack with two not ready armies without guns and supply. But they did. So the only army protecting East Prussia had to retreat and reinforced by soldiers of the western front, which were miissing at the Marne.
Nevertheless Hoffmann, Hindenburg and Ludendorff were able to beat the Russians at Tannenberg...
Adler
Actually, the two corps that Moltke pulled from the right wing did not arrive in time for Tannenburg, and they were badly missed at the Marne. A huge blunder from the German perspective.
Gelion
Jul 25, 2004, 06:30 PM
The US could never have fielded an army of 10 million men, ever. However, the fact that it did put an army into France at all in June 1944 is amazing considering that in 1941 the US army was ranked 17th in the world (tied with Portugal).
The German soldiers could not understand how the Russians would keep on fighting even when they were so obviously beaten, especially when they lived under the murderous regime of Stalin.
The Soviet soldier fought for his basic right to exist against a German invader that viewed him as subhuman, good only for slavery and death. The Soviets fought for their homes and families, and each other. Few really believed in communism, but many believed in Mother Russia.
I do so agree :). Hitler made one other huge mistake. If he didn't treat most of Soviet citizens like animals people might have abandoned Stalin. But he made the war a war on the people of USSR and lost :).
And joespaniel, US did field an army of 14 million men. Quite possible for the most powerfull country in the World since 1918 (all aspects combined).
frekk
Jul 25, 2004, 07:05 PM
I'd have to say that neither the British, Americans, or Russians could have won the war on their own.
However, the group that did the most fighting and directly engaged Nazi ground forces more than any other group would be the Soviets. And I think that without the Eastern Front, D-Day wouldn't even have been considered.
rilnator
Jul 26, 2004, 02:11 AM
They'd just wait around for 'the bomb' to arrive instead
Colonel
Jul 26, 2004, 01:42 PM
Its simple though America couldnt win without england acting as an immobile aircraft carrier and without Russia diverting troops niether of them could win without America we supplied a good portion of all Allied Military Economy----Also they didnt know the Atomic Bomb would have been a success or its destructive power and had the waited the Germans might have devolped it first they were alot closer then us for a majority of the war