Officer of Engineers

The same apply in reverse. The Red Army would not have lost a million and a half men and the associated materials in that battle. Situation equalized.

However, I'm still trying to think this through. Army Group North and Army Group South were not affected by Stalingrad. Even if Stalingrad was bypassed, would we not have Stalingrad somewhere else? Moscow?

The point remains that the Wehrmacht had to march to the Urals. Could they have left all those garrison cities in the path of their LOCs?

__________________
Chimo

Officer of Engineers

The Battle of Berlin is considered from the Vulga to Berlin itself. The Red Army lost 600,000 in that assualt.

Anon

"The same apply in reverse. The Red Army would not have lost a million and a half men and the associated materials in that battle. Situation equalized."

Not really because the Wermacht would still be shelling the hell out of stalingrad...they just wouldn't attack directly into the city. If i'm the Nazi's i pull a reverse Kursk, and fortify the avenues out of the city. Keep them bottled up. Remember, the attacker historically needs the 4:1 advantadge in manpower, not the defender.

"However, I'm still trying to think this through. Army Group North and Army Group South were not affected by Stalingrad. Even if Stalingrad was bypassed, would we not have Stalingrad somewhere else? Moscow?"

Moscow would've been worth the effort though. Aside from the political ramifications, Stalingrad was not.

"The point remains that the Wehrmacht had to march to the Urals. Could they have left all those garrison cities in the path of their LOCs?"

The US left some 30 mechanized/Armored divisions in it's rear during ODS. That worked out OK.

Most of the troops at stalingrad were poorly armed and trained conscripts and partisans. good troops for defending a city from cover, very bad troops for advancing into the open and taking on a much higher quality Wermacht encircling force with supporting air and armor.

Officer of Engineers

Intrigueing. Absolutely intrigueing. And things I will never have thought of, simply because I know the personalities so well.

Forgive me, M21, but for your scenario to work, Paulis got to be replaced ... but who says he could not have been replaced? Actually, right now thinking about this, Hitler. Hitler didn't replace him when he couldn't take Stalingrad and he even in fact promoted him to Field Marshall when Stalingrad was about to fall (expecting Paulis to committ suicide).

The 2nd question that would come up is that would Chuikov prove himself to be a manouver general as good as he was as a MOUT general?

I've got to think this through ... but good show ... damned good show.

lemontree

Sir,
That is correct. I just included the casulties that took place in Berlin city. 70,000 is a very steep price to pay for a race.

__________________

Cheers!...on the rocks!!

Officer of Engineers

We are all correct.

Captain, your figure is the Russian KIA in the actual city itself. They also sufferred some 275,000 WIAs.

My 600,000 figure is KIAs from the Vulga to Berlin. That means the Russians sufferred over a million WIAs.

Anon

Yeah, i was only counting casualties for Berlin proper, which was about 300k.

Glad ya found my theory worthy mind fodder Sir.

BlueDiamonds

I don't see how the timeline could have changed. Hitler was at war with Britain. Roosevelt was begging for a reason to enter the war, tried several times to invent one, then eventually got his wish at Pearl Harbor due to Japan's treaty with Germany. Japan precipitated the US entry, not Germany. Germany tried very hard to keep the US out for as long as it could. I'm not overly familiar with the Soviet preparations prior to Barbarossa, but it seems reasonable to assume that the opportunity Hitler had in June 1941 would not have been present at a later date. In any case, Germany's position was fairly stable in the West, and he had already written off an invasion of England. He despised the Soviets and wanted their resources, so at some point he was going to invade. He expected that he could accomplish his goals in Russia before the end of 1941, then turn his attention back to the West. Had he accomplished this, even by the end of 1942, he would have been in an incredibly strong position in the West.

As the one who said that, I should clarify based on my recent research into SEALION. The British expected that if the Germans reached their shores in force, they would overrun Britain in a short period of time. However, the Germans would have been mauled in the channel due to their lack of sea superiority and transport. See my post below on what I learned about SEALION.

To defeat the British Navy and gain the needed sea superiority, Germany needed air supremacy. They attempted to get it but failed, in large part due to the short range of their fighter force, not due to the number of aircraft. This did not change significantly throughout the war. The Germans needed a long range fighter and long range bomber fleet that they did not possess until the Me-262 came along.

BlueDiamonds

There are others here more knowledgeable on this than me, however ...

during the blitz through France, during the Bulge, and Desert Storm, the forces that were bypassed were not a danger to the flanks of the bypassed enemy. I do not believe this was true of Stalingrad. The danger in trying to "hem in" or bypassing enemy armies is that if they are too strong, they pose a significant threat of being able to counter-attack on the flanks or rear.

BlueDiamonds

I read some more about SEALION.

First off, Hitler did not really want to invade Britain at all. He admired the British people and its empire, and wanted to peacefully coexist with it. He believed that the defeat of England would only benefit the USSR, the US, and Japan. So his enthusiasm was lacking from the very beginning.

In the words of Gerd von Runstedt, who would have commanded the operation, "The military reasons for its cancellation were various. The German Navy would have had to control the North Sea as well as the Channel, and was not strong enough to do so. The German Air Force was not sufficient to protect the sea crossing on its own. While the leading part of the forces might have landed, there was the danger that they might be cut off from supplies and reinforcements."

This is in fact what was found when an extensive wargame was done by the British military in the 1970s.

Anon

Agreed that is the threat, however, i do not agree that the Svt forces at stalingrad had anything like the mobility or training to be a useful offensive force for anything more than local counter attacks.

BlueDiamonds

I'd like to rephrase the discussion a bit, because a few things have been bothering me.

What would have happened in 1942 had Hitler allowed a withdrawal to strong defensive positions, in order to prevent large losses over the winter of 1941 and to regroup and resupply? I think that it is undeniable that the Werhmacht would have been in better condition, but what would the Red Army have done? Would they have beaten themselves on the dug-in Germans? If the Germans had done so, would they have been able to advance further in '42? Could they have used the time to leverage the resources they had already captured?

Given that they did not do the above, could Germany have taken Stalingrad in 1942? I personally believe that if Hitler had not detached the 4th Panzer Army for an ill-advised and untimately fruitless venture south toward the Caucasus, he probably would have had the force necessary. That, however, is speculation.

If Germany had taken Stalingrad, what next? Could they have then taken the Caucasus? If so, what after that? Would that have, as Hitler supposed, crushed the Soviets? I believe it would have, if Germany had consolidated its gains and made use of the incredible resources they would have had available to them at that point? Taking Moscow would have been the next logical step.

Let's say that occurred - the Wermacht took Moscow, Stalingrad, and the Caucasus. Would the Red Army still be a threat? Could Hitler have redeployed men and materiel west?

Lastly, if the Wermacht had stabilized the front in the east with the above stated gains, what would have become of the war in the west? Given that Hitler did not believe the A-bomb was possible (thanks to Heisenberg and others who lied to him), when would he have learned of it and what would Truman have done with a vibrant Germany in 1945?

Officer of Engineers

I believe that once Zhukov got recalled, the war was over for Germany. The man was an immaculate logistician and a cunning strategist. He was defeated by Von Manstein at Operation Mars, Zhukov's biggest military disaster and yet, he subsquent forced Von Manstein to retreat in order to consolidate his lines.

Also recalled that Chuikov never got all the men and material he wanted, Stalin gave him just enough to bait Paulis which allowed Zhukov to attack with overwhelming force.

There were also 45 divisions still in Siberia. A debate whether they were there to watch Japan or to act as a reserve. In any case, if things could have been desperate enough, they would have been withdrawn to Europe since after the pounding Zhukov gave the IJA, they were never a threat afterwards.

Blademaster

What?! When Hitler invaded Poland, he had no choice but to fight against Britain because willing or not willing, Britain was gonna come and kick German's ass no matter what.

When someone's coming to kick your ass, you don't dither or dather dallying about not wanting to hurt the other guy or not.

If I was in Hitler's shoes, I would have tried to destroyed the harbours of Britain and mined them and destroyed the airfields and the oil depots. Just concentrate all the firepowers into those areas. Other areas don't matter that much. Without harbours or airfields or oil, Britain got no way to come to mainland Europe and kick German's ass.

Speak of the devil, how and where did Britain get their oil back in WWII?

OOE, how come the Germans were not able to kill everyone in Stalingrad and then move on?

I mean like reducing the city's infrastructre into rubles with no way of supporting the population to feed themselves. Why was it impossible for the Germans to shut off the route into the city?

Anon

The Germans did just that. The Soviets lost over 1,000,000 dead at Stalingrad.