How Hitler Saved the Wehrmacht: The Battle of Moscow 1941-1942
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 фев 2025
- Support Blitz of the Reich. Check out our online store!
teespring.com/...
The Battle of Moscow is often relegated to history as some sort of fuzzy gap between the lightning fast warfare of Operation Barbarossa, the initial invasion of the USSR, and the Battle of Stalingrad. Even later 1942 offensives in the Rzhev salient are obscured in history, vanished from Soviet historical chronology. This is even further confirmed by the lack of videos covering the decisive battle and the horrendous inaccuracies portraying late 1941 and early 1942 in world war 2 mapping videos. Even with such lack of coverage this could be further from the truth, as Moscow was evidently the most decisive battle the entire war, even eclipsing the magnitude of the later Battles in Stalingrad and Kursk.
With the full brunt of the chillingly cold winter, this video will take you from start to finish. It starts by describing the dilemma often created by the myth that Hitler always made poor strategic decisions, and how German Generals could have won the war had he not intervened. I know there are many other examples other than Moscow, but this video will cover this decisive engagement.
The next portion of the video covers the general Soviet defense via the Mozhaysk line and echelon style defense system around Moscow. Little do people know that the German attack on Moscow (Operation Typhoon) occurred in two phases primarily because of the rasputitsa: in October and November. Equally so, the Soviet Winter Counter-offensive occurred in two stages, with the second being somewhat improvised. Initially the December offensive was responsible for pushing back the German pincers at Tula and Klin, however this spread into a second more ambitious January offensive, along the entire Eastern Front.
It is in the second offensive that started in January, where we see the creation of the famed Rzhev salient and the formation of the Demyansk and Kholm pockets. This was mainly due to efforts by the Kalinin Front to attack via Toropets. The documentary as a result is primarily focused oh the Western Front, commanded by Georgy Zhukov, although it also includes the Bryansk and Southwestern Fronts. I do not cover the fronts parallel Army Group North and Army Group South.
What I hope viewers can take away from this video is that Hitler was not always irrational and impulsive although he was by no means a Napoleon. It is also meant to show that German commanders were just infallible to ill-thought out judgement just like their Soviet counterparts.
Although the music I include may seem cheery compared to other videos, it follows the theme of Russian invasion highlighted by Tchaikovsky's 1812 overture. I thought it was the most appropriate historic music.
[Sources]
When Titans Clashed - David Glantz/Jonathan House
The Battle of Moscow 1941-1942 The Red Army's Defensive Operations and Counter-Offensive Along the Moscow Strategic Direction - Soviet General Staff
The German Campaign in Russia - US Department of Defense
vlastitel.com.r...
Operation Typhoon: Hitler's March on Moscow, October 1941 - David Stahel
Why Germany Nearly Won: A New History of the Second World War in Europe - Steven Mercatante
Kiev 1941: Hitler's Battle for Supremacy in the East - David Stahel
ccnmtl.columbia...
The Defense of Moscow 1941: The Northern Flank - Jack Radey, Charles Sharp
victory.sokolni...
warwick.ac.uk/...
www.armyupress....
• How the Red Army Defea...
[PATREON]
/ blitzofthereich
[Paypal]
www.paypal.me/...
[Amazon]
www.amazon.com...
[Discord]
/ discord
Palpatine: Ironic. He could save the Wehrmarcht, but not himself.
please introduce more Star Wars memes here.
Lol
I'm being serious
Oh. Okay.
The Tragedy of King Tiger the Heavy
ruclips.net/video/ha8CGw9nkTY/видео.html
click settings and change speed to 1.25x youre welcome
thanks Senpai
sounds like youre reading from a book. but its all good, plenty of original animation work. GJ
Put it on 0.5 speed and enjoy with wodka.
1.5x is even better! :)
@@jamesdigriz5449 no 2× its more better
There are 2 rules about War;
Don't Fight Russia in Winter
Don't Fight China in Land War
Funny Fact,
Mongol did both and WIN
The whole winter joke is a bit over blown
It should be changed to dont fight russia unless its politically unstable
chad brown you watch cracked don’t you
Zavid Al Rasyid ?
Germany already defeated russia in winter during WW1.
Peter Lustig-Deutscher Patriot but not in Russia mainland
As for the economy, as far as I know, the price of t-34 reduced by half during the war as a result of numerous improvements in production.
Even then the Soviet production of tanks just eclipsed Germany by 1942.
that would be a very interesting idea/case study. that being said the Soviets mobilized their armaments much higher than Germany and nearly crashed their economy since there was mediocre concentration on the consumer industry. Lend lease defo alleviated that more than I thought.
On the other hand, Germans produced twice the Soviet production of gunpowder and high caliber shells during 1942, resulting in many casualties on Soviet side because of German artillery fire. At Rzhev they were firing 2-3 shells for each Soviet.
Also the quality in 1942 dropped considerably, because of using low skilled workers including women and children, relocation of plants to the east and general lack of resources. There were huge problems with optics for tanks, for example.
Lendlease was mostly important from 1943, in 1941 it was nearly inexistant. In 1944 it was like 30% of Soviet gunpowder production, similar ratio for trucks and explosives.
That's true although GDP does offer some metric on economy size. This does not equate to production capacity but the Soviet consumer economy was very fragile by 1942 and nearly collapsed. This led to inflation due to lack of supply. Lend lease wasn't really about just sustaining the armament economy. It was really about sustaining the consumer economy in order to ensure that the total economy wouldn't collapse.
ger du:
The effects of Lend-Lease is hard to quantify and also hard for the Soviets to admit it. However, let's make a little assumption: if Lend-Lease is "that" useless, why do the Soviet keep ports, that requires fuel, energy, staff, manpower to run and keep the shipment flowing?
Food, uniform, boots, raw materials, all have their contributions. At the simplest, they allow the Soviet Union to allocate fewer men, who otherwise will be needed to produce all of those to be send somewhere else: like weapon manufacturing, munition manufacturing, or simply fighting.
Directly important to the war fighting efforts are trucks. Trucks are extremely important in war: they carry everything from men, weapons, munitions, fuel, to rocket launchers. The Red Army received 745,000 trucks during the war; it had 270k at the beginning of the war. Out of the 745k, 150k were new domestic production, 221.5k drafted from the industry and agriculture sectors (meaning those sectors have fewer trucks, no doubt limiting their productivity), 60,6k captured enemy's trucks and 312.6k lend-lease trucks. These trucks allowed the Red Army to be completely motorised, as compared to the Germans who had to haul everything around using horses. Germany produced a total of around 350k trucks during the whole war.
American trucks and jeeps were probably of quite decent quality since the Soviets used them. Studabaker and Jeeps entered the Russian language as well.
I was born and live near Volokolamsk. The Germans managed to stay here for a few months. Just a hundred kilometers west, the city of Rzhev was occupied untill 1943. There were 150 citizens remaining after liberation. My grandmas got really lucky they weren't occupied that long. I fear they would be dead
Thanks for watching and sorry to hear that.
Oh please. The USSR treated their population far worse than the Germans ever would have.
I can only imagine the insufferable misery from the cold weather.
war shouldn't be glorified. :(
@Phil Hall FYI, while the Soviet soldiers in the reserves, Shock Armies, eetc., which were brought up to the front were dressed properly for the especially brutal winter of '41/'42, the Soviet soldiers who were west of the Volga at the start of the Axis-Soviet War were not. Consequently, many Soviet soldiers suffered as much as the Germans when winter arrived, and they also experienced similar problems with their equipment. Sadly, the lack of winter clothing also applied to the millions of Soviet POWs who were not given shelter or food by their German captors, leading to mass starvation & countless deaths due to exposure/hypothermia. 😞
@@BlitzOfTheReich This does not glorify war. It simply tells what happened.
@@rimshot2270 I wasn't saying that the OP's comment glorifies war. I was simply agreeing with them.
@@BlitzOfTheReich In that case, my bad.
Very nice visual style and presentation. Seems you've put a lot of effort into it.
I put an incredible amount of effort into it. I have set up a patreon by the way so if you are interested in donating feel free. :)
Hope you're not just reading someone else's work. I say this because your pronunciation is shocking.
yes I haven't introduced any original analysis at all simply because my pronunciation is poor (I speak 3 languages. I have enough trouble with pronunciation and by the looks of it, most Russians who watch this don't mind).
I personally have no problem understanding you though English is not my native language. And MHV has much worse pronunciation than you, for example, and it doesn't seem to be any problem to him or his subscribers though I personally sometimes can hardly understand what he says.
@@indicasativafusion gemini
Great video but I firmly believe that Hitler's initial desire to turn away from Moscow during the Summer of '41 was the correct decision. He called it 'merely a mark on the map' and, given the size of the Soviet Union, where the capital could have been easily moved as far East as the war demanded, he was absolutely right. Of course, Moscow was a major rail hub but it's capture would certainly have not meant the defeat of the Soviet Union. However, it was generals like Von Bock, Halder and Guderian, eager for the prestige and ego gratification the capture of the Soviet capital would bring them, who badgered and finally convinced Hitler into going for Moscow. Not sufficently appreciated was the fact that the attacking forces could not be deployed until the end of September, making it impossible to reach the city before winter. Why the OKH ignored this important fact as well as the approach of the rainy season in only two to three weeks is hard to understand especially since it meant that German forces would have been forced to fight a tough, street-by-street slugfest in the midst of bitter cold weather, something the troops were unequipped for. Given this, the best thing to do would have been to simply dig in after the Kiev encirclement and try to coax Stalin to the negotiating table. Here, Ribbentrop failed miserably as Foreign Minister for he should have been warning Hitler that it was only a matter of time before the USA intervened on the Allied side, thus making it imperative to bring the Eastern Campaign to a close as soon as possible.
machinewrecker Soviet Russia was Moscow with an Empire around it with Petersburg as another center. That is Russia.
True. Moscow was a poor primary objective for Barbarossa and it really illustrates how tradition bound Hitler's senior staff officers like Halder were. Yes there was certainly some glory hunting by the senior staff selecting Moscow as you say but Halder and the general staff chose it because in Europe historically that's how wars were won. You take your enemy's capital and they sue for peace. However the Soviet Union was unlike any entity any European power had ever faced. Stalin would have fought on if Moscow fell and Germany would still be hopefully overextended in a war of attrition they could not win. Allowing his staff to choose Moscow as the objective - though he did direct them to strengthen Army Group South - was the last time - for better and for worse - that Hitler acquiesced to his senior officers.
The book Stalin shows just how much on the verge the Soviet Union was of collapse. The leadership would have eaten each other if Moscow had been taken.
It all went south after Hitler decided to change the initial engagement plan, diverting 2 panzer groups from Army center,1 north to Leningrad, 1 South to surround huge Soviet forces near Kiev.
This was hitlers plan, but it backfired, because after this there wasn’t any time left for Moscow, and the snow came.
This is what Manstein describes in his book too. Sounds logical.
@@bingobongo1615if you think so than you are an i"iot
Such a well documented and superbely illustrated video. I love it!
Great work and congratulations .
thank you! be sure to check my other videos out!
This is too awesome. I love YT, we get TV quality shorts like these for free. Thank you!
thank you! Be sure to watch my other videos!
We pay when we watch ads on TV, we pay here when we watch ads. I am interested where you see the difference.
It’s amazing there are young people who have really grasped the significance of WW2 and the Eastern Front in such a comprehensive video. Facts and the truth about the events in this part of WW2 are so important since in the west there was very little recognition of these battles even though their outcome were key to the allies total victory. Thanks and hope you keep your research coming.
thank you very much for the compliment. Feel free to subscribe and watch my other videos!
its not even per se young ppl the generization is becoming more of a stereotype only a group of ppl do ive heard old and young say that what this guy said in the first few seconds fact is these ppl are wanna be historians that say that to actually grasp the situation and the reality a lot of research and knowledge is required something those ppl dont have
While stationed in Germany, I got to meet and talk with a lot of German veterans, many of whom were officers. One thing the German veterans did not understand was why we held their Generals as 'Great Commanders", "If he had such great generals, then why did we lose the war?' they would ask. But, I applaude your research on this Eastern front campaign. You have done your home work. Significant was the early December 1941 operations, where the Russians were holding, and when we were attacked at Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7th, no one can explain why Hitler decided to declare war on the United States 3 days later.
There is a nice video by military history visualized explaining Hitler's decision to declare war on the US. I'd recommend it. That being said I don't like Hitler at all but there has been a myth propagated that German Generals were these Gods that could never be defeated.
@@BlitzOfTheReich Well you cant really blame them. After all they took almost all of Europe with an army that was build up in 4 years from 1935 to 1939. Germany 1933 had 100.000 men army , no tanks , no air force and only very small navy. US Elite Military Schools are still teaching "Nazi" Tactics and there are Channels out there that believe Hitler was in contact with Aliens.
@@larsonpartisan2855 Yes, but the Americans managed to do the same thing didn't they? In 1940, they had an army smaller than Bulgaria. Yet within 3 years they had crossed oceans to launch simultaneous, overwhelmingly successful invasions on opposite ends of the planet.
I think the reason hitler declared war on the us is because they would declare war on Japan who were allies and the Japanese would be happy if they did
Falk M they already used u boats to sink the ships tho
I like your content, you really put an effort into the research of this. Subbed
thanks! :)
ur analyses are among the best i have seen on the topics, well done!
thank you!
Good work, Oberleutnant!
thanks I guess
That was a fantastic quick rundown but I like hearing the diaries to understand how they overcame all the small challenges they faced
Nice Job in explaining the battle of Moscow in such detail. You did a really good job.
thank you. be sure to check out my other videos!
Surprisingly accurate video and don't be offended but the age of the narrator seems very young, so double surprise. Congratulations !
Don't worry, I will take it as a compliment although I am 26.
@@BlitzOfTheReich Hahah, older than me :D
Wow, you like, did research. how dareeeee yuo!
Don't whip me gucci l0rd.
indeed, we cant have the peasants thinking for themselves old boy.
AYYYY I WATCH UR VIDEOS
@@electrom.1703 hello
Why say, “like”?
thanks for the documentary......this is a new perspective for others since I always thought that Hitler's stupid mistakes were the main reason that the Russians won like moving the army to Stalin grad which gave Moscow some breathing space. anyway, WW II is full of interesting stories and surprises mainly in the eastern front which is rarely told to the world audience.
Yes. The idea of this video was to show that not everything was his fault (from the start to the end of the war). Toward the end he definitely got controlling and encouraged mistakes but the idea of this video is to show just one battle where he wasn't entirely wrong. He maybe did it for the wrong reasons, but it was a correct decision.
Love your choice of background music
Grazie. Glad someone catched on to it.
Great choice indeed:D
Look, I appreciate the time and effort you put into this presentation; but.... It was Hitler's insistence on continuing offensive operations during the Raputitsa that gutted the German logistical carrying capacity from the railheads to the frontlines. Recently, within the last year, I read a very dry, extremely long winded treatise by a German author who basically gave the weekly strength reports down to corp and even division level of the German Army from 6-41 thru 3-42. It was like wading thru concrete and the graphics were horrible. In fact it was so bad I reviewed it on Amazon and promptly deleted it, as I really didn't need a reference guide as to how many MG-39s were available for shipping in August 41 to Army Group North. Yet one thing was clear, I mean REALLY JUMPED OUT....The final link in the German logistics chain for Army Group Center completely collapsed between the 3rd week in October and the middle of November. Period. Full stop. AND IT NEVER RECOVERED. What most people fail to realize is the difference in railroad gauges between Russia and western europe forced the Germans to reconstruct the entire rail line as they advanced. Also Russian train engines because of the vast distances they traveled had longer ranges than their German counterparts, so watering and coaling points had to be built, sidings built from scratch etc. Also blown bridges and deliberate destruction of track beds had to be repaired/replaced. So it wasn't simply a matter of shoving the rails closer together as some authors have implied. As a result already inadequate German truck and primarily HORSE drawn supply units were stretched to their limits working from the advancing railheads to the ever more forward frontlines Round trips of 300 miles over unimproved Russian "roads" were routine. Then came the Raputitsa..... And the big, grain fed German horses began to die... first hundreds, then thousands, then tens of thousands. At the same time the polyglot collection of trucks the Wehrmacht had collected from all over Europe began to break...REALLY BREAK...suspensions, transmissions, even ladder rails in the frames...break as in CAN'T BE FIXED BREAK... and yet still Hitler ordered Army Group Center forward.
Hitler and most of his high command had fought on the Western Front in WW1 in an area that before the war had one of the densest railnets in the world. The Ruhr was only two hundred miles from the trenches. Shells made one day could and were literally fired the next. Prior to Barbarossa the Wehrmacht Quartermaster Corps stated categorically that the Smolensk/Vyazma AO was the farthest they could support a single season campaign. They weren't blowing smoke... they were dead on the money. Apparently they did have officers in senior positions who HAD fought in Russia in WW1. They knew Russia had six seasons not four; Summer, MUD, frost, blizzard, frost MUD, summer. Which meant as conceived Barbarossa was doomed at inception. Barring an unlikely regime collapse by Stalin and company Germany wasn't capable of knocking off the Soviet Union in a single campaign. AND since the communists had total control of the "media" in the USSR, the people weren't going to rise up just because the Red Army was getting slaughtered in job lots. Finally, Stalin had one overwhelming advantage militarily the Germans lacked, and no it wasn't T-34s or KV-1s... The Red Army had 15 classes of reserves it could call up. The Wehrmacht because of Versailles restrictions and the 35-39 expansion....HAD NONE. Which is why everytime; after Minsk, Smolensk, Kiev, Bryansk... the Germans thought the way ahead was clear... up pops another line of Red Army armies... Were they poorly equipped??? Yes, and not even close to German standards... Yet as Stalin himself so famously said; "Quanity has a quality of it's own."
SSSOOO... Finally, did Hitler's "Stand Fast" order "save" the German Army? MEH... He sorta/kinda saved the tattered remnants of one he'd already wrecked. He saved an Army that couldn't break contact; difficult to be sure, because it's transport needed to break contact was broken or dead lining the roads from the railheads to the front. He, Hitler casually remarked at one point that, "It was just as cold fifty miles to the rear". It completely misses the point. Falling back would have put them at their supply base, while at the same time forcing a Red Army to advance far beyond theirs. At that point the Russians were every bit as reliant on railheads as the Wehrmacht. It wouldn't be until late 43, early 44 with the benefit of tens of thousands of American Lend Lease 2/1/2 ton Studebaker all terrain trucks that the Red Army became capable of pursuit at an operational level. Another thing... the "Stand Fast" order also resulted in an insane waste of manpowere and resources after the battle. For the better part of two years Hitler would insist on maintaining all the convoluted salients it created, particularly the main one at Rhzhev that would tie down over a dozen desparately needed German divisions until finally abandoned just prior to Kursk.
In conclusion, the absolute kindess thing that can be said about Hitler "saving the army" with the "Stand Fast" order... Is to claim virtue out of necessity....He partially "saved" an army he himself had placed in such peril.... Finis.
ABTW; I've also read Stahel, Citino, most everything Glanz has written and pretty much all the "self-serving Hitler blaming" post-war biographies of Manteufal, von Mellinthen, and of course Manstein as well as dozens of others. Recently Glanz has become the revisionist "flavor of the week", primarily due to his access and research at Frunze, the home of Red Army archives. There are however significant problems with those archives some of which Glanz addresses, but a huge one he rarely if ever does... A lot of it is staight up, flat out lies. Especially the ones concerning the first 18-24 months of the war, and particurlarly the ones covering Barbarossa. First off huge numbers of Red Army units didn't survive it to produce detailed after action reports and a good many that did were self-serving CYA efforts to avoid a fatal counseling session with Staliin after yet another disaster. One in particular that Glanz fixates on was the tank battle around Brody that was bigger than Prokurovka during Kursk....IT NEVER HAPPENED. Not at least as Glanz depicts it. Only about 60% of the Soviet armor even made it to the battlefield. Partly it was confused orders, but mainly it was because of mechanical breakdowns and POL shortages that led to almost half the Red Army armour being abandoned in the general area of engagement. The myth arose because surviving Soviet officers excused their performance by wildly inflating the German armour engaged, and the Germans counting as "kills" all the Soviet armour they came across after the shooting stopped. Look, this was a problem for all sides throughout the war. The winners didn't count as killed ANY tank they eventually returned to service, and counted EVERY AFV they found afterwards as one "they got". Even Kursk, which is about as thoroughly documented as any battle of the war....German and Russian numbers are wildly at variance. One of the more famous lines from the battle from the Russians was, "The Tigers are Burning"... The specific area where it occurred??? The Germans lost TWO to enemy fire; another nine were temporarily disabled due to mines knocking tracks out. They were all reccovered. During the entire battle the Germans lost less than 15...TOTAL. Likewise during Normandy Allied soldiers, arty spotters, and aircrew routinely mistook Mk4g series for Tigers. It was so bad even SHAEF with Ultra thought there was over 6 hundred Tigers in theater... the actual number never exceeded 120, and averaged less than 80. I'm not surprised. As a combat infantry veteran (82nd Abn); at the moment of combat you tend to naturally believe the worst possible thing that could happen..."OMG it's a F@CKING TIGER!!!", is what you're faced with. It's especially true of green troops, but veterans just as easily succumb to it under unimaginable stress "in the moment". Hell, during Falaise the American and Brit fighter bomber pilots claimed hundreds and hundreds of "kills". The survey after the battle concluded less than one hundred German AFVs had been knocked out from the air. The vast majority had run out of fuel and been destroyed by their own crews. It's war, "sh!t happens". I guess what I'm getting at is anytime I come across a "New and Definitive" account of events that occurred over seventy years ago, based on self-serving confused after action reports....Well, I take it with a heaping bowl of salt. About the only thing you can do is read and study as many different sources from BOTH sides and merge it into an overall narrative than can be reconciled with what hard facts are indisputable. And then be prepared to be utterly wrong...LOL
Regards, Art
But I don't object to that. Glantz even pointed that gauges affected logistics. I disagree on the matter of Hitler's insistence on continuing during the Rasputitsa as that is the same old 'blame Hitler' narrative hashed out from German historians. He didn't even care about going to Moscow on the onset of the invasion and just wanted to destroy as many Soviet units as possible. He also wanted to prioritize the South and not the Center of the front. It further shows in his insistence on simply starving out Moscow. If he truly wanted it that much he would have done an assault. It is a fact of the matter that his Generals like Guderian were to blame. Also I also mention lack of German reserves as being critical.
' SSSOOO... Finally, did Hitler's "Stand Fast" order "save" the German Army? MEH... He sorta/kinda saved the tattered remnants of one he'd already wrecked. '
I disagree with this. he prioritized the South knowing the war would be prolonged against the recommendation of Hadler. The more I read the more it seems he didn't care too much about Moscow. I also think your conclusions are simply baseless. At least I offered concrete evidence. It is debatable that he wasted manpower and resources given that the first large scale destruction of German units on the front happened because of a withdrawal. Also large scale artillery losses occurred because of withdrawal. As you know during the Winter and rasputitsa the frontlines bogged down both in 41 all the way to 45. Temperature's were very abnormal during this time and you are pretty much suggesting the Germans withdraw to positions that are not entrenched. His stand fast order really did help a tattered army although it wasn't just him who made the priority of pushing toward Moscow. I really recommend you read Houses's work because I feel you are again giving a German centric narrative that has been influenced by the Cold War. Are you going to blame Hitler for Stalingrad next?
Additionally even with the rasputitsa if the Germans wouldn't have attacked during the rasputitsa they would have encountered a reinforced Mozhaysk line which was not even half way complete in certain areas.
He objected to losing artillery that had lost it's "prime movers" trying to move supplies forward during the "Raputitsa". It's a self-inflicted circular argument. You posit Hitler didn't care about Moscow. Yet the final version of Barbarossa placed the bulk of German forces; 2 Panzer Groups and it's stongest infantry armies 4th and 9th on a direct course for the Smolensk/Vyazma land bridge to Moscow. And his final conception of a deep enveloment of the city was pure fantasy. As you pointed out Guderian at the end had less than 50 tanks, of THOSE only a handful were the critical MK3s and 4s. That's your "southern wing"??? At the start of Typhoon they barely had the fuel TO REACH THE CITY. The infantry formations were basically immobile. Stahel gives an excellent account of the extrordinary problems the infantry formations were having merely to survive, much less advance. You point out that German divisions averaged roughly 3,000 men under establishment.... Who do you think those missing men were??? I can tell you who they weren't... they weren't the cooks, mechanics, supply clerks, driver/drovers and admin types... They were the assault infantry... You make the mistake of many in concluding 80% strength, eh...not TOO bad. Let me share a little factoid with you... out of the entire 12k plus members of the 82nd ABN at full strength, no sick outs, leave, hurt or temporarily lame; less than 5,000 are actual trigger pullers. To have a paper strength of 80% means you're marginally capable of limited offensive operations; that's only if it's evenly spread throughout the division. In this case the missing 3 thousand represented over HALF of the combat strength. Not only that, the ones left were half starved and thoroughly frozen. AND THEY COULD NOT BE REPLACED. In fact they never were. The problem in the south was just as acute not so much in terms of manning strength, but the terrain. The farther east you go the Ukraine opens like a huge reversed funnel. The Germans even with the 6th, 11th and 17th, the largest of the 4 Panzer Groups AND 2 Rumanian Armies the 3rd and 4th... literally couldn't even form a continuous front by the time they reached Stalino... much less Rostov AND trying to take the Crimea. The whole "single season" campaign was a delusion. Hell it was almost a mass psychosis infecting all of OKW/OKH. Robert Citino who's written three pretty good survey level books on the Eastern Front and the Wehrmacht was asked in a Carlyle lecture when he thought Barbarossa "failed"... His answer??? "At conception". You wanaa point a finger at Guderian?? Fine by me. He was insubordinate and routinely falsified his readiness reports to comport with his desired course of action... Wanna blame Halder??? Go ahead, he KNEW better but went along. At least he never wavered in Moscow as the main goal. Whether it would have won the war?? Stalin certainally wasn't going to surrender over the loss of Sevastopol or the entire Donbass. The only way to get him out was the result of an internal coup the loss of Moscow might have triggered. Yet the essential fact remains... the Wehrmacht couldn't get to Moscow in one years campaign. The fact it was an unusually severe winter not withstanding... the damage had already been done. The fighting strengths of the infantry was less than 50% and the logistic tail had been destroyed BEFORE Typhoon ever started. Absent Typhoon the Germans ARE in prepared positions, and while tenuous, a livable supply situation. After Typhoon their were NO OTHER OPTIONS, but "Stand Fast". I've seen figures as high as 500,000 non combat casualties for the Wehrmacht during the 41/42 winter... I think that number is too high. Yet the fact remains that the Germans themselves only rated 25 divisions as capable of sustained offensive operations by spring of 42, and only after giving them absolute priority of re-inforcement and supply. Likewise only two of the 4 panzer groups could be reconstituted for "Fall Blau". We can "play" counter factuals all day long. The fact remains that in WW1, after the Brusilov Offensive of 1916 effectively knocked the Austro-Hungarians out of the war, a refocused Germany took a little less than two years to finish of the Russians. NOT with grand sweeping offensives, but short sharp attacks on positions the Russians would have to fight for... and essentially the German Army fought defensively letting the Russians feed themselves into the woodchipper. Had the Germans stopped aside from minor tactical line adjustment after the Raputitsa... there's no doubt in my mind Stalin would have done the same with the Red Army.... with ultimately the same result. Leaving the Third Reich with it's own version of a new "Treaty of Brest-Litovsk". NOT a permanently gutted Wehrmacht that staggered on another 3/12 blood drenched years.
Look, I admire the hell out of the time and effort you put into this...Truly. The only thing I'm really arguing is rather than "Did Hitler Save..." is a more pertinent question and presentation might be... "How in God's name did the Wehrmacht end in that position and need to be "Saved". Best of luck...Art Brogden
Yes objected to losing artillery that had lost its prime movers after the rapsutitsa because the Germans couldn't produce artillery enough and they would need it to stabilize the front. Supplies would have been an issue even without Hitler because the Officers wanted to prioritize Moscow, not Hitler. Just because the strongest units were placed in Army group center does not mean he defacto cared much about Moscow. Your same source Glantz even said Hitler initially ordered German units to just encircle as many red army units as possible whilst finally making Moscow an objective after Bialystok-Minsk. It is further supported by the fact that he wanted to besiege the city and not just take it. There is the same lack of conviction as with Stalingrad. You cannot conclude Objectives like that based on initial order of battle in June, 1941.
' And his final conception of a deep enveloment of the city was pure fantasy. As you pointed out Guderian at the end had less than 50 tanks, of THOSE only a handful were the critical MK3s and 4s. That's your "southern wing"??? '
It's fantasy in being successful but it was his plan. Is that not why the pincer movements were introduced in the first place?
'You make the mistake of many in concluding 80% strength, eh...not TOO bad.'
No I don't because Soviet units were suffering similar shortages. They had less tanks and airplanes in the area of Operations and had more troops over all at one point. You are making the assumption that Soviet units were 100% full strength. Also remember Soviet divisions were also a lot smaller than German ones.
'Not only that, the ones left were half starved and thoroughly frozen. AND THEY COULD NOT BE REPLACED. In fact they never were. '
That is true which is why they couldn't abandon entrenched positions and I stated that they needed replacements and were short 300k in this video. I am not disagreeing. But by spring 1942 the Germans actually increased replacements along the whole front. It is not feasible what you are saying because Stalin did try to negotiate a peace with Hitler, so even without Moscow the Soviet leadership was already contemplating negotiations. I believe Beevor and Peter Kenez stated this. I am not arguing in this video that Hitler saved the Wehrmacht offensively but very much saved them defensively. Plus because of Typhoon German units actually used parts of the Mohaysk line which helped stall things. the Eastern Front could only be one in a blow or none at all as you point so it would be futile to say for the Germans to stay in Smolensk and construct imaginary defensive lines.
Moscow was Halders idea. Guderian didn't complain when he attacked in Typhyoon at least in the beginning. Hitler wanted to prioritize the South. Jonathan House has a very good lecture on this.
Thank you for your last compliment though.
Just a last amusing antecdote about Germany's chronic artillery shortage... After his release from Spandau Speer gave a series of intervews and in one he was specifically questioned why he could never "Solve" that particular problem. He smiled and replied that Germany after 42 NEVER had a shortage of artillery or artillery ammunition. Period. End of story. The problem he said, was that the vast majority of it was in Germany, pointing straight up.... Further, he estimated it took over 20,000 shells PER BOMBER brought down by "Flak". Interestingly, that's actually a little better than the British admitted to after the war. Probably because the Germans actually got to shoot at the Eigth AF in daylight. There was over 10,000 88, 100, and 120mm guns assigned to Flak units by mid 44.... thats A LOT OF FRICKIN GUNS... jist sayin...
That part I do absolutely agree with. An insane amount of flak and art equipment was kept in German from 1943 onward, however the problem is I am mainly speaking more about the early war in this video.
Pretty decent job. Thanks for posting this.
thanks!
My mothers uncle was wounded on 6-12-1941in his ankle by a shrapnel at Meshkovo, west of Moscow. he was a grenadier in the 4th Panzer armee, motorized unit. He had a MG-34 and a K98 as weapons. I have his soldiers booklet (Wehrpass) with every day almost written in there. I also have his medals. He gave this al to me in 1990.
Wow. Please post if you can. I love reading primary resources.
@@BlitzOfTheReich its still in the Netherlands. I live in Belgium in the Battle of the Bulge area. Almost about every day is written in the Wehrpass. He started with the army group North towards Leningrad. Small sentences like: einnahme von Dunapils. Or: durchbruch durch die Stalinlinie. And then they put the dates with it.
@@gerhard6105 Oh that's very cool. I went to Bastogne once.
@@gerhard6105 Leningrad?? He must be a Duch/Belgian volunteer of Waffen SS Westland.
@@igorabasjidze1194 No, he was the brother from my German grandmother. Near Dresden. My grandmother already lived in Holland since 1931 to work. He was at the Panzergruppe 4 from Erich Hoepner as a motorized Grenadier. "vorstoss ueber die alte Reichsgrenze...einnahme von Duenaburg/Pils, etc. Verlegung im Raum zwischen Vjazma und Brjansk, etc..
Why does this video sound artificially slowed down lmao
1.25x speed sounds so natural
because people complain that I often go to fast so I tried speaking calmer so people could read what I wrote. Plus it isn't that slow minus the first part.
Fair enough. Keep up the good work!
Thanks. Again I've gotten like 2 or 3 people pointing this out but I also speak slower and put gaps so that people have time to read the information on the screen which is as important as my sexy voice.
Going too fast as the blitzkrieg to the point that the supply rope snap
In October/November of 1941, after Smolensk and Kiev it was time to dig, rebuild the railroads, switch to full wartime mobilization, form the Free Russian Army and the Ukrainian Army, draft the minor axis and make an ultimatum to Japan: either attack the Soviets or relationships will be broken. Also ask the British for terms. It was very clear that a major change was needed.
wow, you sound like you wanted them to win imao
@@erenliebert4576 analyzing strategy is always more interesting on the side of the loser: what would Napoleon need to do different, what would Tsar Nicolas I need to do different in the 1850s, what would Napoleon III need to do, where did Bismarck go wrong (1878), how could the Central Powers have won WW1, what would have been a better strategy for the Whites in Russia, what would a good French plan would have been in 1940, what could Stalin do differently to avoid war (the key is 1940 November), how could the Soviets not lose the cold war, etc. Analyzing how the winners could have won better is not that interesting because ... well, they won - even without interesting ideas, with their existing strategy. A student always learns more from the exams it fails.
Come to think of it, I should fail my students a lot more often.
@@andraslibal yeah, you are right, alternative history is really interesting. It's just sometimes I see so many Nazi apologists on RUclips so often, I am very ok with anyone else, - but glorifying the bunch of people who wanted to kill and enslave my nation just because we were not "Aryan", - that makes me kind of sick.
But yeah, even though I am Russian, I am a huge fan of Kaiser Germany and often wish they won the war as they planned, so many horrors could have been avoided.
@@erenliebert4576 I sympatize to the suffering that your people had to endure during that terrible war. That beeing said there's way too much "nazi witch hunting" and false assumptions going on nowadays. It's HEAVY. Let's accept that evreybody doesn't have to comply to your sensitive take on the matter and treat the subject on your terms because of your own personnal emotional struggles. ✌️
bro you're not gonna believe this... (about proposing peace to britain)
1:32 Unit, right face..... Comrade Pavlovich, your other right.
interesting observation
Comrade
Can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen that in a JROTC formation.
@@Crusader-tg1wx I bet it happens all the time. It's just funny, and awesome that this "fail" reached us some 80 years later, you know what I mean? 😉
@@PavelKahun Oh yes. Things like this are the secret joy of drill instructors the world over. Gives them a perfect excuse to “straighten them up”.
very well made video and very precise maps and battle details
thank you! be sure to watch my other videos.
Reads title:
Now that is highly unusual
maybe so.
Superb. I am 60 (+) yo who has lived on WW2 documentaries all my life (never learned how to read, well, more a problem of chronic cannabinoids), and have been hoping to see a Goddamn Documentary that in a simple way brakes down what happened in front of Moscow in 1941, and, this morning, in the middle of the Goddamn Pandemonium 2020 I got to see one, one that was superb. I want this added to every classic Eastern front documentary, overdubbed on Sir Larry reading the World at WAr! In every goddman language. Each detail that would have (has been) left out was frigging GREAT. Never heard the logistical Front to Army problem. Or the tank problem. And those Soviet rounds. Each detail, superb, engrossing. Loved the graphics, with the pix of the Soviet front generals, was simple, was easy, anyone could have done it, but you did!!!!!!!!!! Thanks man, many many thanx. Really enjoyed it. Will watch a dozen times, and get out my credit card and get (the hell) over to patreon. Never have, and it's time i did.
Comments like this one are what keep me doing what I'm doing. Thank you so so much and I hope to continue providing good content.
What I love about this video is you focus on the Soviets problems and really emphasize them while also stating Germanys problems
What I hate about other easter front videos is that they focus way too much on Germanys flaws and barely talk about the Russians problems and sometimes make it seem they have a wild card all the time or make it seem tge russians were 100% problem free when the Winter came
this is very very true. thank you for such a nice comment.
Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev wrote in his autobiography, “Without Spam, we wouldn’t have been able to feed our army.”
Georgy Zhukov: entered the chat
Germany: left the chat
Japan: left the chat
Can you please make 'How Hitler Destroyed the Wehrmacht: The Battle of Stalingrad 1942-1943". Thanks.
Haha yes I would be more than happy to!
@@BlitzOfTheReich Was it his generals who wanted to stay but Hitler at first wanted to leave but he was convicted otherwise.
Exactly
LOL he didn't resulting in the destruction of the sixth army
Thanks.
for what? :)
1812 - The perfect match of music for this historical event. ^^
on purpose haha
@@BlitzOfTheReich Exactly what I thought! xD
Check out my latest video on the most DECISIVE operation in World War 2 - Operation Bagration. ruclips.net/video/E2HjXa6Xkvs/видео.html
Support Blitz of the Reich. Check out our online store!
Get $3 off at teespring by typing in promo code: spicyblitz
teespring.com/stores/blitzs-obshchina
In Glantz's updated version of 'When Titans Clashed' he removed the Mongolian reference to the 44th cavalry division citing that most of the troops did indeed come from Central Asia, but from other ethnic minorities like the Tajiks. However, the division did exist and it was acknowledged as having taken heavy casualties. Apologies for this.
I made a typo for Maloyaroslavets. Apologies. If you would like to support the vitality of this channel please consider supporting me through patreon and paypal; also check out my book recommendations via Amazon. Thanks!
www.patreon.com/blitzofthereich
www.paypal.me/blitzofthereich
www.amazon.com/shop/blitzofthereich
I made a typo on 10:26. I meant to say February, 1942.
nalchik 1994 thats whats im trying to tell him, if anything Hitler doomed Germany as Seen at the battles of Stalingrad and the battle of the Buldge
Hitler last stand on Moscow? You do realize the Generals didn't listen to the logisticians, wanted to prioritze Moscow whereas Hitler wanted the resource abundant Ukraine? Also you realize Stalingrad was also partially the fault of Manstein? Hitler didn't even want to really pursue the Battle of Kursk. The guy isn't a strategic genius and was mediocre at military strategy but the point of this video is that sometimes Hitler made the right calls, even against military consensus. They may have been for the wrong reasons but they worked. Demyansk was another case that worked although a similar strategy was tried and failed in Stalingrad. May I ask where your sources are?
Sad to hear this from a Circassian.. If anything this channel treats North Caucasians with tact given the Russian governments treatment of you in the past.
nalchik 1994 buddy you just proved my point, you just said "Hitler turned them away" that is my point and that is why Germany list because Hitler is a military idiot
they are literally on the video and in the description. I never called him a military genius. The whole point of the video was to show that he wasn't always to blame for every military situation.
Great video - thanks for producing it. You've made good points using good sources. I would work on your pronunciation of some of your words...especially for Cossacks.
It's difficult as I speak multiple languages, so I always mix the pronunciation of these languages. For example, in French they pronounce cossack like I do.
When i most of the time refereed of Hitler making bad tactic decisions where at the end of the war
Good content bro
🤝Cheers mate!
Will you make a vid about 1943-1945 I would like to see wtf happend to army group center
If it is in reference to Operation Bagration then I might.
Great video - subbed.
thanks Man!
well done video, tons of info,
interesting stuff about Hitler vs Generals 👍
thank you
Claro comprensiva gráfico, precisión análisis .Excelente . Thanks a lot
Muchas gracias por el comentario. Si te gusto este video tal vez deberias ver la serie Operation Bagration.
Patton said "We defeated the wrong enemy!" He was murdered for speaking the truth
So humble and so informative. Sub.
thank you so much! be sure to watch my other videos.
Will do kind Sir! Have a lovely day!
@@normanprotorczyn5017 you too!
That music's reminding me of a certain Patriotic War of 1812. 😃
you right though.
Except this time, way more people died and russia didn’t run away and burn down all their city.
More like a broken clock is right twice a day. Manstein was right, Hitler’s WW1 positional command jargon was anachronistic. I wonder what would have happened if Hitler had given Manstein Ober-Ost after the back-hand blow and let him use mobility and C&C superiority to wear down the Soviets. Can’t have been worse than Hitler’s efforts and probably much better.
Love your videos, loved you showing your town. Nice to see that you are getting some recognition, ie. views. It seems you live in Europe, yet your English is without an accent, also you look older with the beard, better look. As for the economy, Germany over engineers products while the Soviets made them easier to produce.
Yep I would agree with your last statement. And thanks for the compliment. Yes I do live in Europe. My partner is French so I live in a small French town although I am an American (hence no accent). I've lived in Europe for about 6 years (5 in the England/Scotland and 1 in France). Part of the success of this video was a combo of old subscribers like you supporting me and me marketing on reddit hehe.
I enjoyed this, hope you do more.
Thank you. I in fact have. You can check my newest video that I uploaded today.
I see lots of effort was gone to making this video, nice! I think a pedagogic improvement would be to don't mix text and speech. It's hard to read and listen at the same time. I had to pause a lot to be able to take in all the information.
yes the reason I do that in my videos is so people can use my videos like dictionaries and not necessarily as documentaries. I want them to be constant study resources for people to be able to look back and check. If I don't use it like this the video could have easily been 30 minutes.
Von Runstedt said after the war that Hitler had indeed saved the German Army at this time, but then again, he added, whose fault was it that the army was in this mess, in the first place?
Hitler + the Generals. Nobody listened to the logisticians.
@@BlitzOfTheReich Actually, there was a recognition that the German forces would need to pause, perhaps around the end of July, to be resupplied. It was assumed that during that respite, the German High Command and Hitler would evaluate the progress to date, and arrive on a unified strategy to follow resupply. I doubt that Hitler, for all his talk, really expected to take Russia out in one campaign (even France had required two campaigns). If he really believed he needed to reach the oil fields a.s.a.p., he did not allot von Runstedt enough forces; Runstedt said in an interview that he started Operation Barbarosa with 700 tanks, of which only 144 were Mark IVs...the army of course wanted to go for Moscow so perhaps more forces might otherwise have gone to von Runstedt. But even so, going for the wells and passing on taking Moscow is tantamount to admitting the war was not going to end in 1941 or perhaps even in 1942. If Hitler felt in his heart of hearts this to be the case, he certainly was not going to announce it to his generals, many of whom were not crazy about this venture into Russia in the first place.
C'est fou comme t'as pas d'accent, super boulot continue.
merci! mais quel accent ? Je suis Americain mais j'habite dans le Sud-ouest de la France. Si tu veux tu peux traduire mes video. ;)
Je viens de me rendre compte en voyant tes autres vidéos... le village ou tu vis m'a induit en erreur. Not sure about the translation but I'll try my best to spread the word ;). I especially enjoyed your video on Jews and Bolshvism. Great analysis of socio-political conditions, of why many were the spearhead of organized labour unions and eventually a natural opponent of conservatism. I wonder if the same pattern exist across Europe and especially in pre WW1 Germany, could go a long way in explaining the rise of german anti-semitism after WW1
thank you so much. the reason I live in this village is because my girlfriend is French so it's a living. I am unsure I can explain the rise of antisemitism in Germany because it already existed before WW1, however it was more like a casual antisemitism. Thanks for watching my videos though!
Just to mention the German side show in Greece had a timetable effect and equipment wear factor. Also not to throw mud on the Russian officers we have to mention the terrible effect that Stalins purge of the armed forces had, not just in removing so many experienced officers but in the mindset of the remaining officers...pure fear of making a on the spot decision.
Thank you for all of your work....well done
Excellent work
danke!
This was the only time that Hitler made a military decision himself that actually proved to be very successful. If he had listened to his Generals the Soviet counter attack would have enveloped Army Group Center and destroyed it. By forcing them to dig in he grounded the Soviet's into a stalemate around Rzhev and inflicted heavy casualties on them.
it's definitely not the only time, but it is one of the only times. The generals were equally as incompetent in certain regards.
Damn. Check out that soilder water skiing behind that T-34 at 6:05. That looks way cool. And I have never seen that before ever. Thanks.
No problem. Glad you enjoyed it.
@@BlitzOfTheReich TIK turned me on to you just recently. He mentioned like a half dozen military utube channels. And I was already familiar w all of them, other than yours and one other.
I saw that. Thank you so much for visiting me!
3:17 actually, General Mud kind of helped Germans because they had half-tracks so they could move while Soviet trucks often got stuck in the mud and lost as the result because army was retreating.
Problem is vast majority of German trucks weren't half tracks and most troops relied on horses. The Germans wouldn't risk isolating advance armored units without sufficient infantry support.
You are right it definitely slowed down Germans but it didn't stop them as some people think, and the effect of mud was even worse for Soviets.
Also in November it became possible to move at night when temperature drops below zero and mud freezes.
Well in the video I pretty much say the Rasputitsa was in October but you are right that it affected both sides as shown with the Spring Rasputitsa in 1942 where the Soviet offensives ground to a halt. That being said the Soviets were on the defensive in 1941 which negated the Rasputitsa's effects, especially that they wanted to finish building the Mozhaysk line. The Soviets also had a lot of cavalry that could help with mobility. Not too sure about that last point regarding mud though.
*"Problem is vast majority of German trucks weren't half tracks and most troops relied on horses."*
No. Horses pull less weight, less far then a truck in a day. If a truck goes twice as far as a horse and carries twice as much a truck is worth 4 horses, just for example . ~95% of freight output, in terms of tonne km's per day, relied on trucks. Even with a hypothetical 80% fall in truck usability trucks would still generate 80% of the freight capacity. I would recommend you look at Nigel Askey's series on operation Barbarossa, or use incredibly basic logic to derive the essentials of this conclusion.
Please cite the exact page and source of this because you are really downplaying the role of horses in the German military. It didn't matter if horses pulled less wait, it is still very true that the Germans relied primarily on horses. They had at most thousands of trucks, whereas they had millions of horses. Even then horses transported a majority of logistics . ' or use incredibly basic logic to derive the essentials of this conclusion.' This comment sounds incredibly sassy, especially when Germans lacked oil reserves to use trucks efficiently. They had to use horses. Thus, I think it is you that needs to use basic logic.
6:16 the Germans had actually lost air superiority by the start of December because they didn't have the right lubricants to run their engines in the winter. While the Soviets did. It was the first time the Soviets enjoyed air surperiority since the start of Barbarossa
I would say it had more to do with runways that were made for the winter.
@@BlitzOfTheReich perhaps that too. I mentioned lubricants because that was a major determinant in the winter for the panzers and German motorized divisons who could not hope to get the engines started because the oil froze. Some would light fires under their truck engines before they could try and start them. On the other hand, contrary to Hitler's rhetoric that the Soviet army was on its last legs too, the soviets had the right sort of oil for their engines. This is a paraphrased excerpt from Antony Beevor's 'The second world war'. But I agree, the runways might have posed a much a greater problem when we talk about the Luftwaffe.
Someone read their glantz....
I hope that's a compliment but here I give homage to Jonathan House.
Definetly a compliment. I just myself went through some of his books and I can say that this was a very informative video, wich visualized some things. And since I am not a fluent English speaker it cleared many things up!
The Hitler blame game many German generals plsyed after the war was pretty pathetic - Halder and Guderian being the worst.
About half way in and I have to say this is really high quality. I hate that so many people praise Germany while simultaneously slandering the Soviets, and that the Wehrmacht were merely 'stopped' at Moscow instead of being beaten hard
Lord Meowric you can praise soviet performance without praising Stalin or communism. I view this purely from military technicality. I appreciate your comments on all my content. If you can I would be highly grateful if you can share this video on reddit or other mediums.
Blitz Of The Reich I'll see what Reddit board I can out it on. You and TiK both do history of this war that is hardly covered and are criminally underwatched
Lord Meowric btw if interested I opened a Patreon. That being said I’m considering a forum or something to invite long term watchers as I am scared of ‘losing touch’ when this channel grows.
Blitz Of The Reich The forum would be interesting. I'll see about Patreon as well I don't have any of that setup yet
No pressure at all. It's voluntary but would still help. :)
One greatest moment of Russia's war: when Stalin watches the troops in Red Square give a mighty shout of defiance against the invaders at Moscow's doorstep. Bone-chilling courage.
It's easy to be brave when you outnumber your enemy and your leader will shoot you and punish your family if you run.
@@rimshot2270 "Easy to be brave"? Don't think so.
@@37Dionysos I was referring to acting brave, not being brave. The average Soviet/Russian soldier was no braver or more motivated than any other soldier on either side of the war.
@@rimshot2270 Whatever you say.
The Soviets did not outnumber the Germans in late 1941 Moscow. Did you not see the video?
Why doesn't this channel has more subscribers
I don't know, but I am still happy to have subscribers like you, who give me all the support I need. :)
they are in the description and I can assure you the information is not wrong. All academic.
I know, right! Just subscribed.
Great video! Why not do Rzhev next? It's not covered much.
I have :D I may redo but take a look!
I get increasingly irritated at the way German generals are lauded. Sorry, but in modern warfare, the Nazi German military was woefully INCOMPETENT. Let me explain:
In WW2, much of Victory laurels of the Allies should go to two significant generals - George C Marshall, and General Lucius D. Clay. Who was Clay, you ask??? They were the ones that put us in a position to win.
If you recall, within months of declaration of war, the US was producing a prodigious amount of war material - planes, tanks, ships, etc. That was the work of Lucius D. Clay. HE WAS AMAZING. And, no one knows about him.
The Germans were HORRIBLE at production. They NEVER got mass production down. The lauded Tiger tanks had no effect on the war since they were not built in sufficient quantity (yes they impacted battles, but no contribution to the overall war.) The Panther tank was in larger numbers, but still not near enough.
Q: Why did the Germans have no winter gear, or even winter weight oil on the Russian Front come winter?? What idiot let that happen?? That shows incredible incompetence up and down the officer ranks of the German military.
I am tired of hearing about their brilliant field maneuvers, when that is only a portion of what victory needs in modern wars.
Thank you thank you thank you thank you for seeing the point to my videos. You are 1000% correct in saying the Germans never got mass production down. They had an economy that was much larger than the Soviet economy yet they produced a fraction of their material. Even taking into account for the needs of the consumer economy this seems rather dubious to me that the Soviets produced at one point around x4 the tanks the Germans produced yet had a smaller economy. People will say the quality was worst which is slightly true, but even then the Soviet tanks were formidable opponents.
This is why you don't let 12 year olds discuss history.
Both of you are completely off-base, and have your heads 110% up your own asses.
Yes so off base. I'm not 12, I'm 24 and have academic qualifications to at least be talking about things revolving around Russia. I also read plenty of scholarly literature. Instead of insults how bout you prove me wrong? (ps I am sure Craig isn't anywhere near 12)
Well they lost the war because they didn't have enough OIL!
you can make 10000 of tanks and not move them.
you can make 20000 planes and not move them.
They were in an oil-crisis!
And I also agree, the german generals don't have any scope about logistics, fighting is only 2/10 of a war. They prepare for months for an attack and in the meanwhile they're soldiers are dead in the cold! You gotta watch TIK some more.
Me and TIK know each other (not personally).
This is the biggest ,most savage,brutal war ever.Unrelenting offensives by both sides facing tenacious defences that had to be held at all costs. Enemies that hated and feared each other.Terrible but fascinating and epic
It's unfortunate that such great videos attract such asinine comments
It is the reality of the anonymity of youtube.
15:10 what do you mean you own the picture? Like the actual original photograph?
12:03 "Calvary corpse"
Really great video as always
thanks Erik. Glad to have such a supportive audience!
Good video. I kept looking for 'Smolensk' as a reference point using 'Vyazma' as a starting site....at 11:39 lo and behold there is 'Smolensk' according to this guy 'NW of Vyazma' but the reality is it is NE of it. No mention made when he states the CCCP outproducing the Germans at the 13:48 mark why it was they (CCCP) still hadn't enough arms to supply their troops in June 1942 at the beginning of the Stalingrad debacle. If anyone let the German troops down it was the German quartermasters such as Paulus who should have ensured there was enough clothing for the winter. He was a First World War veteran as was von Manstein. von Manstein had spent time on the Eastern front in the First World War and reminisced along with his follow-on memories when he was part of the exchange per the Treaty of Rapallo training and testing of German armament in the Soviet Union.
Wish someone would do a full study of that era - 1920 - 1933 of what went on between Weimar Germany and the Soviet Union
Erm Smolensk is SW of Vyazma.
' still hadn't enough arms to supply their troops in June 1942 at the beginning of the Stalingrad debacle. '
This is just a myth as I show, since the Soviets were already outproducing the Germans by a lot in late 1941. There was enough Winter clothing, but the problem was that the logistic lines got clogged up.
Well not according to Suvorov in 'The Chief Culprit' .... state planned economy under socialism in any setting is always a mess - promotion based on party loyalty and repression. Overall an excellent video...as we say stateside 'no one bats 1.000..no one...' well done mein herr! @@BlitzOfTheReich
You really need to check your pronunciations!!!
I aint a Rusky though :3
There was already considerable tension and disagreements between Hitler and his high command about exact strategic and operational goals. This vagueness, vacillation lead to numerous problems.
Hitler was indeed not completely stupid, foolish or wrong when it came to the goals of Barbarossa. He understood it was an economic war, he understood (as many of his generals did) that if history was any meaningful reference point, it wouldn't matter how much territory or red army resources were destroyed, they would never surrender. (of course, he took this too far and didn't realise until 1944 that he had had many anti-Soviet resources at his command in '41 and '42 - I speak of Vlasov who commanded an army of a quarter of a million men, and that was just one group)
He understood that this war would be a war of control of resources, of economics, and he was correct. The war-winning moment would be when you possess vastly superior resources, production capacity and ability to keep morale high.
Further, Hitler wanted army group south to be the most lavishly equipped as capturing all the mineral, food and industrial prizes lay in the south, but the staff planners deliberately stacked army group centre as many of them believed Moscow was the more important prize.
After the Battle of France many in the armour design, engineering and production centres realised the panzer arm was seriously under - gunned. Hitler agreed, and ordered the immediate fixing of a longer barreled 50mm gun for the Pz III's. This order was half-heartedly implemented, probably due to over-confidence and complacency.
It's certainly a good thing and makes more rational sense that the blame for the failure in the East is to be shared somewhat evenly, in this case it wasn't just the victors who wrote history but those who were defeated and survived.
*gasp Are those SOURCES?
the choice is yours..
Impossible. But I thought armchair historians don't need sources.
Yes which is why I use 10 other sources on the topic. I focused on Russia in university, so jokes on you.
Oh poo. :(
people think any young guy on youtube talking about history is automatically some armchair guy. my channel is about Russia since I studied Russian politics in uni with some history and did my dissertation on Russia.
I think Hitler is blamed for more than he should be, I sometimes hear people say why go into Russia, he had decent reasons
I mean he was no general, but his reasoning was sometimes valid.
Very good. Thank you
Thanks for watching!
If Guderian's 2nd Panzer Group was reinforced by Kleist 1st Panzer Group from the southern sector, in a manner like Hoth's 3rd Panzer Army was reinforced with 4th Panzer Group from the northern sector, it would be gg for Tula, and quite possibly even Moscow.
I am unsure because of the fresh reserve army by Kashira. As this video stated he only had about 50 tanks left at one point. Maybe enough to pass Tula but definitely not Moscow.
My reasoning is that the pair of 3rd and 4th Panzer Group performed fairly well initially and had advanced by far the most, but the 2nd was stopped at Tula at offset almost. The Soviet 49th and 50th Army defending Tula would very likely be encircled if a whole another Panzer Group was present, and the 33rd and 43rd Army heavily beaten. It is very difficult to tell if Moscow would have been encircled immediately, but it would definitely present grave problems for Soviets. Their counteroffensive wouldn't be as nearly concentrated as it was in reality.
Remember however the Germans were having difficulty in the South in the Rostov region so sending a Panzer Group from the South would be quite risky especially since the order of battle in that region seemed to favor the Soviets. But yes their counter offensive was relatively weak especially the 2nd phase. The 3rd and 4th Panzer Armies did well too but that is why the Soviets also committed 2/3 reserve armies in that sector. I don't think they would have survived for long especially with pressure from the Kalinin Front. It even goes to say that the Germans barely had any troops at all between Leningrad and Kalinin once the offensives began, so the left flank of 3rd/4th Panzer Armies were already too weak for them to continue advancing.
I'm aware of the 1st Panzer Group defeat at Rostov, but that was a best a hastily executed counter-attack at the lone and overextended enemy that produced very little in the terms of casualties. The Soviet forces opposing the 1st Panzer Grop at the Rostov regions were very weak forces from Southwestern and Southern Front which were basically just recreated after they were destroyed at Kiev, Uman, and Mariupol, and were not in a condition to launch any major strategic offensive, since the Southern Front was already very busy to put it mildly at Crimea, and the first Southwestern Front offensive occurred at Kharkov in May the following year.
In my opinion, Germans could afford to transfer Kleist armoured group to the Army Group Centar because at best the Soviet could only achieve a relatively shallow penetration at best.
I'm also aware the effort Soviets undertook to defeat the panzer duo of the 3rd and 4th group, but in this scenario, Germans would have two equally numerous armored pincers converging at Moscow and Soviets would have very difficult times defeating both.
I'm certain that alternative single move would have drastically changed the strategic outlook for 1942.
It is not necessarily the casualties but the fact that an army corps was nearly encircled. it could have led to a very disastrous situation. I don't think it would have been wise. Also the 44th through to the 47th armies were deployed in the Transcaucasus by July, and in August the 56th army was deployed in Rostov. You also had the 6th and 12th armies reform in Eastern Ukraine in August. In October you had an additional 57th army deployed in Stalingrad as well. And like I said the reformed 10th army was guarding the Ryzan sector. In the Rostov sector you had the 12th, 37th, 18th, and 56th armies stationed by December plus a couple of Armies right to the North. It is true that adjacent to Voronezh the Soviets only had the 21st, 40th, and 13th armies guarding via the SW front, but by these numbers alone the Southern Front was by no means weak. All those Soviet armies were put there for a reason (and arguably why the 1st Panzer Group couldn't withdraw North. It would leave a huge cap for 5 Soviet armies).
Very well done.
thank you!
What to send: ammo, food, fuel, spare parts OR warm clothes? It's tempting to prioritize the first 4 items and to ignore the warm clothes. Especially when you lack the logistic line to bring everything at the same time.
well they did have warm clothes but the logistics lines got clogged up and they couldn't reach the front.
i love your channel
grazzie :D
Can I ask you a few books YOU would suggest?? My favorites are, "Barbarossa" by Alan Clark. "Stalingrad" by Antony Beevor. "The Last 100 days" by John Toland ...Is there a book you would say is a "must read"?? Minus "Rise & Fall of the Third Reich" ...I just can't commit to 1,500 pages. Hopefully you reply! I am at kind of a roadblock on what to read now. I am open to memoirs as well. Read Albert Speers books, Tradul Junges (which was AMAZING) and a few others...Memoirs dont interest me AS much though, just because they're so bias from the authors POV.
I have Stalingrad but haven't chosen to read it. It would have to depend on whether you want a full grasp of Russian history or just WW2. I really liked 'When titans clashed' by David Glantz & Jonathan House. I would recommend anything from those authors. For general Russian history 'Russia A History' by Gregory Freeze is excellent.
Antony Beevor is my favorite, you HAVE to read his "Stalingrad"!!! Dude, you have no idea...I have looked so...so...so...so...sosososossososososossooooo hard for "When Titans Clashed" and it's just not in my area at all! If you'd ever like to do a book swap sometime, I'd totally be down for that!
As far as what area I focus my reading/research...I try to stay on the Eastern Front, & I tend to more enjoy a more heavy German side. I find that too much of the Soviet writings are too bias, and too much of it is just Soviet bull crap. In the way so many of Hitlers Generals after the war said it was Hitlers fault, he didn't know what he was doing, etc etc...well they had to say that, duh lol...they were under the boot of the Soviets, what were they gonna say...? Hitler knew what he was doing? So for that reason I avoid memoirs & lots of Soviet leaning especially cold war era works...or read it with a suspicious mind at least.
Have you read "Hitler vs Stalin" by John Mosier? I know it's a wonky title, but I really enjoyed how he comes right out and says "much of the history we know is just a step away from Soviet propaganda" ...I don't think it all is...but I do sense a heavy, unjust, unfair Soviet bias in most mainstream work. Any thoughts on that???
I have Stalingrad on my shelf but have not gotten around to reading it, as I have been focusing less on military history. Here is a link to when titans clashed that I found. --> zodml.org/sites/default/files/%5BDavid_M._Glantz%2C_Jonathan_M._House%5D_When_Titans_C_0.pdf
The problem is a lot of German Generals who started the myth about Hitler were actually living in the west. It was just classic scapegoating tactics. And yes Soviet sources by themselves are very biased but when you cross reference with other perspectives they are actually generally okay. For example, I don't rely on Soviet numbers for axis troop strengths but use them to give me an indication of Soviet troop strengths. I also use them more for narrative building.
I have not read the book you mentioned but I actually think at least in the West there is much more heavy German bias than Soviet bias.
Good video overall! but 2 important parts I think you missed was the fact that of the time if the Soviet counter offensive, they outnumbered the Germans by a considerable amount. In addition you didn't mention the fact that the Soviets were only able to produce more because large finacial help from the United States.
The financial help in 1941 by the US was minimal. US lend-lease helped the Soviets in the late war, not the early stages. Also, the Soviets did outnumber the Germans in the counter offensive, but it is still impressive how they managed to hold the Germans back while reserve armies were deployed. I mean I'd have to review the exact numbers but I'm 100% sure about lend-lease as I read the actual US government reports.
Guiderian to hitler regarding kursk
"Is it really necessary to attack Kursk, and indeed in the east this year at all? Do you think anyone even knows where Kursk is? The entire world doesn't care if we capture Kursk or not. What is the reason that is forcing us to attack this year on Kursk, or even more, on the Eastern Front?"
@The Bad Ass its beyond not important, i heard a joke come from some stavka soviet in regards to them knowing tje germans intentions at the kursk salient keeping in mind how capable the Soviets espionage was at the time
"It would be faster for a german commander to receive their orders from us than their own high command.
The Soviets knew exactly what the germans plans were, and planned accordingly.
Its sad knowing how many men (on both sides) were needlessly thrown into that meat grinder.
Largest mechanized battle in history
@The Bad Ass i dont think it hurt having communist sympathizers in all levels of civil and military constructs internationally
plot twist:he didnt saved him, he sended them in death since he didn t brought winter equipment early enough there
Very interesting. Certainly something to think about.
Great video, but maybe try using more historical tanks for the time period in the future :)
It's difficult finding public domain imagery. I had to use a t 34-85 because I couldn't find t 34-76 images.
Check out www.tanks-encyclopedia.com , they have a lot of good illustrations and if you contact site admins im pretty sure they will allow you to use them if you credit them for their work. They allowed me to do it in the past. Keep up the good work.
thanks for the resource! Although I am still pretty bad at I identifying all the different variants of tanks in the war. I am much better at distinguishing aircraft types like BF109 E4's, G6's, K4's, Spit Mk 8's, etc.
Tanks are kind of my hobby so maybe I can help.
would be great although I don't focus on weapon specific topics on this video. I mainly focus on Russian and Eastern European history over all. (Economic, military, political, legal).
The vision of the German General Staff has been limited since the unification of Germany, and that is exactly why they have not taken factors such as securing raw materials and the total annihilation of the Soviet military as a whole into account which they should've learned after WWI. Hitler, on the other hand, did possess a somewhat grander view of the entire war rather than seeing them as individual border battles. That was the reason why he insisted on securing "secondary" objectives like Greece and the Caucasus in order to maintain a steady flow of crucial material supply although that somehow ended up damaging the integrity of Operation Barbarossa and led to the failure of Case Blau due to his lack of realization of the limitation of his forces(as did the military elites). However, Hitler really did not have a clue when it comes down to the details of Germany operational-tactical level defenses in particular. As you pointed out that he had the WWI mentality that emphasized on stationary trench warfare, and such mentality led to the issuing of all the halt orders including interfering with tactical operations details as low as battalion level which was absolutely absurd. These conduct restricted the Ostheer leadership to perform a more flexible and less ambitious operational level mobile defense. By doing so, Hitler wished to retain both time and space and he lost both in numerous catastrophes during the following years. Of course, I consider the post-war arguments against Hitler made by all the generals halfly laughable as well. There is a small mistake you made around 14:25 stating that the Soviet start to reintroduce the "Small combine-arm Mechanized Corps" in March, 1942. Those were actually "Tank Corps" which fits your descriptions as "too little even for a Panzer Division". The STAVKA did rebuild the Mechanized Corps later that year after they realized that the Tank Corps lack sufficient stamina due to the disproportionate ratio between tanks and infantry in the unit. The 2nd generation Mechanized Corps had a much healthier combination included around 200 tanks and 14000 personnel in full strength along with powerful artillery/rocket batteries and support units. This formation was widely qualified as a true equal to the German Panzer Divisions. Really nice video. I can see you put a lot of effort into it, keep it up, buddy!
Good to see I'm not the only person who uses Powerpoint to this extent :D
I believe you when you say this took a lot of time to produce. (The program gets really quirky and fiddly, depending on how you layer stuff) How come you haven't moved on to a different platform like what most people end up doing? (Just curious)
I am clueless as to what other platform I could be using. Also I actually have gotten used to powerpoint to the point where It's comfortable to me.
Good video! But one thing that might really help you is taking the time to learn the Russian alphabet. It's something you can do within 30-60 minutes (look up "read Russian in 30 minutes" or something similar) and it'll help you get your pronunciation on-point. Listening to you pronounce "Mozhaysk" as "Mozz-aysk" when it's spelt with a ж in the middle (Zh, like "Zzhuh") was a bit off-putting.
I did laugh at calling Giorgiy Zhukhov "Georgey" though :)
It's not as easy as you think. I do know the Greek alphabet and the Cyrillic is quite different. I already speak enough languages as is so I need to perfect the ones I know (English, Spanish, French) before I proceed. :P Thanks for the recommendation though.
Gratz, that’s an excellent review. 👌
Glad to find operational perspective of this less popular period on eastern front, it’s few documented compared to others (and i never understood why such often dec41 to may42 are such few considered by historical reviews), it’s great u did !
It’s true AH saved the day there, it’s mostly fixing mistakes he did himself by starting Typhoon in 41 instead of spring42, but it’s true historians (such critics about « no retreat » AH way of thinking in further years) tend to forget he was right to do in winter 41...
That probably driven AH to be overconfident with himself and it’s one of major moments who drove to complete submission of OKH to AH in further years...
But its one of these - rare - moments where AH doesn’t look so incompetent. 😏
Unfortunately, ability of the Wehrmacht to recover from serious defeats will strongly decrease next ;
even in tough position, winter 41 still was the climax of Wermacht strengh... after, mostly after Kursk, lacks of AH in terms of theory & skill weren’t able to be absorbed by tactical & operational skills or simply by best part of his manpower in active service...
But here, winter 41-42, it’s true he saved the ag center.
Good video 👍
kilen someone gets it
Blitz Of The Reich 😄 ... eastern front & ww2 is an old passion (own library is well documented), so I get the time to learn lol 😆
If u are interested by Luftwaffe, I advise u to check « German Air Forces Airlift Operations » (in English) by Fritz Morzik. It’s about all airlift learnings/failures/challenges Germans (and all militaries with time, somewhere) did during ww2 on Easter front... it’s exciting, I enjoyed this book !
Am sure airlift challenges and ops during ww2 could be a good topic for new videos if u like the idea.
I am mostly interested by high scales matters, « HQ perspectives », and first experiences of airlift dilemmas/surreal challenges during ww2 worth to be presented... it’s very exciting ! 🙂
And the french Historian, Jean Lopez, did also excellent books (7 or 8) and resumes in last ~15years. the way he presented Eastern front matters is also great.
Unfortunately it’s all in french, could be problematic if u don’t read french, but it worths reading if u have the occasion 👍
Cya
I do speak some French but It isn't that fluent. I live in France so could be worth it. Thank you for the suggestions.
Neither the 95th, nor the 45th or 134th german infantry divisions were destroyed at Jelez as you state. They came under inmense pressure and retreated west. They did not have to be rebuilt as it happened to units destroyed at Stalingrad.
I have various sources proving it including casualty figures. Over 50% of these divisions were virtually wiped out during the battle around Yelets. Before that they were already severely depleted, so it is a question of semantics.
I was not talking about casualty percentages as basically most of german units in the way of Thypoon suffered greatly on top of their previous barbarossa depletions. I just saw your otherwise very good clip and was surprised about this destruction of these three divisions I had not heard about before. I did some digging and all of them kept on being front line units after the Jelez retreat. Surely severely depleted but not written off or reformed behind the front.
Well the way I used 'destroyed' was in terms of being severely depleted, even more so than other units. In Wray's article on German elastic defense he writes of them being 'partially' destroyed and Glantz writes and the destruction of the corps being one of the few successes of the counter offensive. It constitutes destruction if half of a corps is captured or killed.
It wasnt just Generals but in all of the ranks there were many who were surviving and fighting at the front who totally disagreed with Hitler and the okh.They conveyed in their letters and diaries at great personal risk that Hitlers insisting on holding ground to the last man instead of retreating at the right time,caused excessive death and loss of nearly all motirized equipment
Franz Halder ( one of the architects of the "Blame Hitler" narrative ( along with Von Manstein) thinking that the capture of Moscow would lead to victory, shuffled units to army Group Center, Hitler found out, and sent Panzers north and south, this is what led to Hitler distrusting his generals..
TIK covered part of this
people always wanna portray hitler as a madman who ruined the war but how easy do you think it is to spend year after year with generals who do not listen and act behind your back. it get's very hard to know who you can trust, who is actually good and who is an incompetent idiot.
Great video, no wehrabooism or senseless soviet bashing, only facts. I'm gonna check the rest of this channel :D keep it up and thanks.
no problem! Enjoy it!
Excellent video. At least on the video side, have watched many a WWII documentary. And yes, it was monotonous how documentary after documentary, Hitler was blamed for losing significant battles in the Soviet Union. However, American and English generals were, while also fighting against this self same incompetent, described in flattering and heroic ways. But as House and Gerhard Weinberg, have stated, Hitler pretty much followed his generals.
To be fair he did diverge and got autocratic toward the end of the war but it has become a cliche of documentaries which signals laziness.
@@BlitzOfTheReich From what I understand, prior to the unsuccessful assassination, Hitler generally trusted his generals on tactical matters, but he believed that he had a better understanding of 'big picture'/strategic issues. After the attempt on his life, Hitler's relationship wiith his generals soured significantly. IMHO, near the end, Hitler's outbursts & irrationality could be explained by the fact that he had found out that his doctor was including metaphetamines in the vitamin B injections Hitler received on a daily basis,, so Hitler unwisely stopped receiving doses of metaphetamines 'cold-turkey'. So, rather than being a madman like surviving generals later claimed, Hitler seemed to be demonstrating a lot of behaviours consistent with severe narcotics withdrawl symptoms during the last few months of his life. (BTW, many people don't know that Hitler was a vegetarian who...unlike many top Nazis & high-ranking officers...never drank booze, never took narcotics, and was never s*xually promiscuous. I also wonder if the stories I heard many years ago re: Hitler's untreated syphillus were actually bogus.)
The bottom line...Hitler certainly was a morally repugnant & evil man, but he was not unintelligent, delusional, or incompetent when it came to politics, strategic issues & understanding Germany's greatest needs.
I have never seen anyone really disagree with the idea that the whole thing went off the rails when the German command decided to prioritize the destruction of Soviet forces along Rudstedt's AGS front instead of busting through toward Moskva when there was almost nothing in their way but militia.
WAIT WAIT WAIT HOLD UP
YOU MEAN GERMANY WAS ATTACKED BY 4 NATIONS ?
ENGLAND
USA
RUSSIAN (EASTERN FRONT)
CANADA
why music in background? Because of the background music the quality of speech is really distorted and silent. Sad!
It avoids a monotone appearance. Also nobody has really complained before and I have always kept it quite low.
this is better than your car reviews!
that means the world to me.
Very nice video, keep them coming! One thing I would do is talk a little faster, I put the video on 1.25x speed and it was better, but I'm not sure if you get this suggestion more often or not so it's up to you!
Yes i've gotten this suggestion like 10x now but I don't mind. I usually talk faster in my other videos but people say I talk to fast and If I talk too fast people can't digest the information on the screen. Anyway It should be fine. Glad to meet a new sub. ;)
Of course! I live for history videos, can't wait to see more
thanks! be sure to check out my other videos as I have plenty.