Stalingrad

[renton]

6 minutes ago, NotThePars said:

 

I think in Zhukov’s memoirs it’s claimed that Stalin initially ordered the storming of Berlin on February 5th for the 15-16th when they were 40 miles from Berlin across open country then reneged on them as he didn’t want to ruffle the feathers of the Allies hence why it occurred, what, two months later? It’s clear that Stalin and co felt they had held back.

 

It was, as far as I can tell, March before the Russians started planning the eventual Berlin operation.  The Vistula-Oder offensive had only finished up in early February and the Soviets had paused while they sorted out their forces for the next push. 

In February the Allies cleared the Rhineland and by early March were across the Rhine. The difference at this point is that German resistance in the west utterly crumbled. 

US 9th army got to the Elbe, within 50 miles of Berlin and was facing only a very thin crust of resistance by that point.

It's possible the Russians could have kept on pushing in February, although at the cost of many more men than with the pause. I think they were taken by surprise at how quickly German forces collapsed in the West. 

Ultimately, allied discord prevented a concentrated push on Berlin.

[Dunning1874]

The ambition of the counter offensive was incredible, Zhukov v Paulus was the original example of playing 5D chess while some other c**t was playing draughts. They went from being a few square miles of rubble away from losing the Volga to encircling an entire army with the Germans having no idea that was what they were attempting until it was too late. Turning that situation into the biggest defeat the Germans ever suffered, creating the platform to take Russia back and for Zhukov to personally stroll into Berlin a couple of years later.

The Soviet Union. A great bunch of lads.

[Newbornbairn]

Stalin set two generals the task of capturing Berlin - Zhukov and Konev, pitting them against each other. In the race to please their boss they willingly and needlessly killed their own troops and even fired on each other. Zhukov "won" but because of the popularity this brought, he was sacked and Konev put in charge post-war.  The absolute worst guy to be in WWII was a Soviet infantryman as there was as much chance of being shot in the back as the front. 

[NotThePars]

The ambition of the counter offensive was incredible, Zhukov v Paulus was the original example of playing 5D chess while some other c**t was playing draughts. They went from being a few square miles of rubble away from losing the Volga to encircling an entire army with the Germans having no idea that was what they were attempting until it was too late. Turning that situation into the biggest defeat the Germans ever suffered, creating the platform to take Russia back and for Zhukov to personally stroll into Berlin a couple of years later. The Soviet Union. A great bunch of lads.

 

 

And his reward? Being played by the king.

 

 

 

 

 

[NotThePars]

It was, as far as I can tell, March before the Russians started planning the eventual Berlin operation.  The Vistula-Oder offensive had only finished up in early February and the Soviets had paused while they sorted out their forces for the next push. 
In February the Allies cleared the Rhineland and by early March were across the Rhine. The difference at this point is that German resistance in the west utterly crumbled. 
US 9th army got to the Elbe, within 50 miles of Berlin and was facing only a very thin crust of resistance by that point.
It's possible the Russians could have kept on pushing in February, although at the cost of many more men than with the pause. I think they were taken by surprise at how quickly German forces collapsed in the West. 
Ultimately, allied discord prevented a concentrated push on Berlin.

“Towards the end of March, Zhukov found him very tired, tense and visibly depressed. His anguish was hardly alleviated by the thought that all the uncertainties might have been avoided if he had allowed the Red Army to attack Berlin and possibly end the war in February, as originally planned”

That seems to correlate with much of what you’re saying although it does seem to suggest that Stalin could, and wished, have pushed on but didn’t.

Anyway, imagine Berlin was fully Red. Wild.

[GordonS]

49 minutes ago, renton said:

It was, as far as I can tell, March before the Russians started planning the eventual Berlin operation.  The Vistula-Oder offensive had only finished up in early February and the Soviets had paused while they sorted out their forces for the next push. 

In February the Allies cleared the Rhineland and by early March were across the Rhine. The difference at this point is that German resistance in the west utterly crumbled. 

US 9th army got to the Elbe, within 50 miles of Berlin and was facing only a very thin crust of resistance by that point.

It's possible the Russians could have kept on pushing in February, although at the cost of many more men than with the pause. I think they were taken by surprise at how quickly German forces collapsed in the West. 

Ultimately, allied discord prevented a concentrated push on Berlin.

Am I right in remembering reading that the Western allies left Berlin to the Red Army for two main reasons - it was always going to be very bloody, and because they wanted to secure territory down into Bavaria and Austria rather than waste time on just one city?

As others have said here, the Western narrative on WW2 is just mince and it's a sorry indictment on school curricula. Stalingrad and Kursk are where it was won and lost, and the real Western contribution was materiel and intelligence. D Day wasn't the turning point or the breakthrough, it was the back door getting kicked in when the Soviets were already in the living room.

(pun intended)

[Fullerene]

1 hour ago, NotThePars said:

Imagine if Stalin hadn’t held Zhukov and co back when they were on the outskirts of Berlin. Possibly Red Flags over the Eiffel Tower?

Stalin was an opportunist who gained more than he could ever have hoped for.  Remember he is the guy who refused to believe that Hitler would attack.

The Soviets held control over all the countries that they "liberated" including East Germany and North Korea.  It took a while for everyone to realise what Soviet Liberation actually meant.

A cynic might suggest that D-Day was a plan to liberate France, the low countries and West Germany before the Soviets could.

Even more cynically Hiroshima and Nagasaki were intended to get Japan to surrender before the Soviets could liberate it too.

Edited September 10, 2020 by Fullerene

[Boo Khaki]

There were American Generals pushing for Berlin to be captured by the Allies ASAP because they felt it was essentially being left as an open house for them, and also, capturing the capital could be seen as as something that would likely ensure post-war Germany became more enmeshed in the Allied sphere of influence than Soviet. 

Eisenhower had reservations about the probability of losing Allied personnel in a street by street meatgrinder battling Nazi fanatics, and also, he was deeply concerned about how Stalin and the USSR would react if the Allies were seen to deny them their 'prize'.

There was a definite and deliberate slowing up of the Allied advance across Germany in April 1945, no doubt about that. It's been excused as being concerns about supply chain etc, but it was a political decision.

[Newbornbairn]

There was no point in the Allies taking Berlin. The stop lines had been agreed at Yalta and the plan was to divide up Berlin between Russia, America, us and the French. Why take the city then retreat? Let the Russians pay the butcher's bill.

[NotThePars]

Stalin set two generals the task of capturing Berlin - Zhukov and Konev, pitting them against each other. In the race to please their boss they willingly and needlessly killed their own troops and even fired on each other. Zhukov "won" but because of the popularity this brought, he was sacked and Konev put in charge post-war.  The absolute worst guy to be in WWII was a Soviet infantryman as there was as much chance of being shot in the back as the front. 

Dunno about this one like

[renton]

28 minutes ago, GordonS said:

Am I right in remembering reading that the Western allies left Berlin to the Red Army for two main reasons - it was always going to be very bloody, and because they wanted to secure territory down into Bavaria and Austria rather than waste time on just one city?

As others have said here, the Western narrative on WW2 is just mince and it's a sorry indictment on school curricula. Stalingrad and Kursk are where it was won and lost, and the real Western contribution was materiel and intelligence. D Day wasn't the turning point or the breakthrough, it was the back door getting kicked in when the Soviets were already in the living room.

(pun intended)

A lot of how the Allies came to miss out on Berlin comes down to the personalities of the Allied Commanders.

Eisenhower had always fancied himself a field commander, though he had never actually commanded anything, ever (a career staff officer) and had tried combining overall command of the three Allied army groups with his duties as Supreme Commander from several hundred miles away. His strategy through 1944 had been a muddle of compromise.

Montgomery had led allied land forces through Normandy. He had won a fairly resounding victory but had survived a crisis of confidence in his own command. Though he had been consistent in his own mind with his strategy, the air force officers, Tedder and Conongham who had a cordial and mutual detestation with Monty had harried an increasingly panicked Eisenhower into nearly removing the British General. That had obviously left a sour taste in Montgomery's mouth, and when Eisenhower took over direct field command from Montgomery once there was a majority US forces in the field, he had further infuriated the military professional Montgomery with his broad front strategy. Monty began a long running, barely civil battle with Eisenhower over strategy and leadership which again nearly got Monty sacked after the Battle of the Bulge. Monty in an attempt to over ride Ike's strategy and end the war on his terms had over extended himself at Arnhem.

The third major player was Omar Bradley, who had commanded the US army under Montgomery in Normandy and then stepped up to be his opposite number commanding the three US armies in the 12th Army group - the single largest concentration of combat power on the Western front. Shy, diffident and probably in over his head (he had commanded a corp in combat for 6 weeks, an army in combat for three months before becoming army group commander) he was over shadowed by Ike, Monty and even his own subordinate, Patton, who he personally detested but was professionally reliant upon. He had been given, after Monty ran into trouble at Arnhem the job of winning the war, and his brilliant strategy of throwing three armies head on at the Seigfried line had led to stalemate and infantry shortages in the US army. His armies unbalanced, he was caught with his pants down, well and truly in the Ardennes, and further humiliated when Montgomery was brought in to command his northern armies, leaving him only Patton's army who didn't need Bradley to function. 

Montgomery, a personally difficult character with his contemporaries had compounded his lack of diplomacy by telling Bradley exactly what he thought of his handing of the Ardennes battle.

So, huge preamble there, but to get across the fact that the principal commanders could no longer work together by the time all were across the Rhine. Any assault on Berlin would have to come from Montgomery's 21st Army group, yet that command would need to keep hold of the US 9th army to have sufficient force to do it. Bradley became obsessed with the so called Bavarian redoubt, supposedly a mountain fortress where Hitler and the other Nazis would make their final stand. Seeing that as an opportunity to score the final big win for the US army and deny Montgomery any credit in the final victory he persuaded Ike that Berlin would be a price not worth paying for something they'd have to give up, got 9th army back to his commabd and turned south, leaving Montgomery without sufficient force to occupy North West Germany and advance to Berlin. During this time, US 9th army had got to the elbe with little opposition, its commander, William Simpson believed he could gotten to Berlin in under 48 hours. Bradley forbade it.

Of course, there was no Bavarian redoubt and the Americans went off on a wild goose chase, Montgomery got the consolation prize of having Doenitz and the German armed forces surrendering to him. Eisenhower was always a better statesman than a General but in that moment he failed as both. He, and the rest of the US government naively assumed the Soviets would honour various promises and in many respects saw more kinship with the Russians than they did with the British, who's colonialism they found distasteful. Only Patton disagreed with Eisenhower's decision on the US side, but was in no position go do much about it.

Having Berlin would have forced far more consessions on the Russians than not having it, and the cold war that came about afterwards may have had a much different tempo to it. 

Of course, the Russians already had the strategic advantage after Kursk and had broken the backs of the Germans during operation Bagration, but the Western allies could and should have won it in 1944, but for the lack of leadership shown by Eisenhower after Normandy.

[tintax]

Any history enthusiasts like me, should give 20th Century Battlefields a watch. It was on years ago, but I often re watch them on YouTube. The episode on Stalingrad is especially good. 

[tongue_tied_danny]

5 minutes ago, tintax said:

Any history enthusiasts like me, should give 20th Century Battlefields a watch. It was on years ago, but I often re watch them on YouTube. The episode on Stalingrad is especially good. 

Is that the one with Dan Snow?

 

[tintax]

51 minutes ago, tongue_tied_danny said:

Is that the one with Dan Snow?

 

Aye, and his dad 

[Sergeant Wilson]

6 hours ago, NotThePars said:

Zhukov found him very tired, tense and visibly depressed. 

 

Welcome to my world!

[tongue_tied_danny]

On 09/09/2020 at 20:53, NotThePars said:

 

Have always been on the lookout myself for good stuff on the WW1 Eastern Front but haven't had much luck outside of chapters here and there in histories of the Russian Revolution.

 

I recently picked up a copy of Fortress- The Great Siege of Przemysl by Alexander Watson the other day and I'm currently around halfway though it.

It covers a pretty horrific five month siege, in the winter of 1914/15, of the titular fortress city, which is close to the present day border between Poland and Ukraine.

This book has been a bit of a revelation for me. I was unaware of the subject matter. It's written in a similar style to Antony Beevor's various books, with a strong focus on how the events affected individual soldiers and civilians. It's highly critical of the Austro-hungarian high command. They're depicted as a bunch of incompetent buffoons. It also goes into a fair bit of detail about the religious and ethnic intolerance that went on and how particular groups were made into scapegoats leading to violent massacres.

If you're looking for anything regarding the eastern front in ww1 then I would strongly recommend this book.

 

[expatowner]

Awesome Soviet memorials probably deserves it's own thread tbh.

There are some great museums in and around St Petersburg and Moscow that showcase the Russian war efforts. Get yerself over there and take a good look. Maybe do them as part of the Siberian Railway experience.

 

[Lurkst]

Discovered this website featuring fairly recent interviews with survivors from both sides. Has kept me gripped this evening...

https://facingstalingrad.com

 

[Saigon Raider]

I have not, what is it called?  I have only one book so far, Stalingrad by Anthony Beever.  About halfway through, its outstanding.  Best book about a war I've read since maybe A Bridge Too Far.

Cheers for the tip, just finished Stalingrad - outstanding and proved I knew very little about that conflict (also proved I would be absolutely useless in a war).

[Dee Man]

On 16/09/2020 at 16:31, expatowner said:

This one looks like he's in primary school and is showing his mate's how high he can piss when he pulls his foreskin back.