Author Topic: Barbarossa or D-Day?  (Read 5743 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline GDS_Starfury

  • Musketeer
  • *****
  • Posts: 36798
  • Sons of Punarchy
Re: Barbarossa or D-Day?
« Reply #15 on: June 23, 2013, 09:18:25 AM »
ya'll might want to pick up this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Allies-Had-Fallen-Alternate-Scenarios/dp/1616085460

it goes into some detail as to why Germanys defeat cant all be placed at the foot of Hitler.
my only issue with the books scenerios is the part covering Kursk and written by Glantz.
Gus - I use sweatpants with flannel shorts to soak up my crotch sweat.

Banzai Cat - There is no "partial credit" in grammar. Like anal sex. It's either in, or it's not.

Mirth - We learned long ago that they key isn't to outrun Star, it's to outrun Gus.

Martok - I don't know if it's possible to have an "anti-boner"...but I now have one.

Gus - Celery is vile and has no reason to exist. Like underwear on Star.



Offline Martok

  • Arquebusier
  • ***
  • Posts: 12335
  • All that is gold does not glitter.
Re: Barbarossa or D-Day?
« Reply #16 on: June 23, 2013, 09:38:34 AM »
Damn you Star, for making me add to my already-absurdly long "to read" list.  That looks good. 

"Like we need an excuse to drink to anything..." - Banzai_Cat
"I like to think of it not as an excuse but more like Pavlovian Response." - Sir Slash

"At our ages, they all look like jailbait." - mirth

"If we had lines here that would have crossed all of them. For the 1,077,986th time." - Gusington

"Government is so expensive that it should at least be entertaining." - airboy

Offline GDS_Starfury

  • Musketeer
  • *****
  • Posts: 36798
  • Sons of Punarchy
Re: Barbarossa or D-Day?
« Reply #17 on: June 23, 2013, 12:03:59 PM »
oh its perfect for the bathroom as each scenerio is 5 to 10 pages max.

the overall jist is that no, Germany and the Axis couldnt have won WW2.  I disagree but they have some interesting arguments.
except for Glantz whos just a Soviet suck up all day long.
Gus - I use sweatpants with flannel shorts to soak up my crotch sweat.

Banzai Cat - There is no "partial credit" in grammar. Like anal sex. It's either in, or it's not.

Mirth - We learned long ago that they key isn't to outrun Star, it's to outrun Gus.

Martok - I don't know if it's possible to have an "anti-boner"...but I now have one.

Gus - Celery is vile and has no reason to exist. Like underwear on Star.


Offline LongBlade

  • Unsanctioned Psyker
  • Blunderbuster
  • ****
  • Posts: 27192
  • No Regerts
Re: Barbarossa or D-Day?
« Reply #18 on: June 23, 2013, 03:26:03 PM »
except for Glantz whos just a Soviet suck up all day long.

How else is he going to get access to their glorious archives?

Offline Longdan

  • Condottieri
  • ******
  • Posts: 3279
Re: Barbarossa or D-Day?
« Reply #19 on: June 23, 2013, 03:49:19 PM »
Some love the Soviets some love the Germans.
digni enim sunt interdicunt

Offline LongBlade

  • Unsanctioned Psyker
  • Blunderbuster
  • ****
  • Posts: 27192
  • No Regerts
Re: Barbarossa or D-Day?
« Reply #20 on: June 23, 2013, 03:53:58 PM »
Some love the Soviets some love the Germans.

 ::)

Offline GDS_Starfury

  • Musketeer
  • *****
  • Posts: 36798
  • Sons of Punarchy
Re: Barbarossa or D-Day?
« Reply #21 on: June 23, 2013, 03:56:33 PM »
except for Glantz whos just a Soviet suck up all day long.

How else is he going to get access to their glorious archives?

cash like everyone else  ;)
Gus - I use sweatpants with flannel shorts to soak up my crotch sweat.

Banzai Cat - There is no "partial credit" in grammar. Like anal sex. It's either in, or it's not.

Mirth - We learned long ago that they key isn't to outrun Star, it's to outrun Gus.

Martok - I don't know if it's possible to have an "anti-boner"...but I now have one.

Gus - Celery is vile and has no reason to exist. Like underwear on Star.


Offline LongBlade

  • Unsanctioned Psyker
  • Blunderbuster
  • ****
  • Posts: 27192
  • No Regerts
Re: Barbarossa or D-Day?
« Reply #22 on: June 23, 2013, 04:13:13 PM »
In Soviet Russia archives study you!

Offline GDS_Starfury

  • Musketeer
  • *****
  • Posts: 36798
  • Sons of Punarchy
Re: Barbarossa or D-Day?
« Reply #23 on: June 23, 2013, 04:22:50 PM »
well he needs to study a concept called objectivity.
there is not one person here that hasnt wargamed Kursk and won as the Germans.  not only won but won across a large number of models, stats, platforms and levels of play from squad to front level strategy.  I say Sir!  the history of wargaming proves Glantz is worng.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2013, 04:27:25 PM by GDS_Starfury »
Gus - I use sweatpants with flannel shorts to soak up my crotch sweat.

Banzai Cat - There is no "partial credit" in grammar. Like anal sex. It's either in, or it's not.

Mirth - We learned long ago that they key isn't to outrun Star, it's to outrun Gus.

Martok - I don't know if it's possible to have an "anti-boner"...but I now have one.

Gus - Celery is vile and has no reason to exist. Like underwear on Star.


Offline pawelj

  • Viking
  • ****
  • Posts: 469
  • Sideways Bus Driver
Re: Barbarossa or D-Day?
« Reply #24 on: June 28, 2013, 06:55:57 AM »
When Barbarossa failed the war was lost by Germany.  When Overlord succeeded the War was won  (sort of) by the Western Allies.
Germany lost the war on the day they declared the war on the US in December 1941. Barbarossa and in fact the entire Eastern front qould be considered a rather bloody side show. It may seem counterintuitive, but Eastern Front was pretty irrelevant to the defeat of Nazi Germany.
There would have been no Eastern Front progress without the Western Front, but the Western Allies would be able to defieat Germany without Eastern Front. The reason is the quality disparity between German and Western Allies, particularly in the area of Artillery support and Air power.
Soviets had numbers, but they had very bad combined arms tactics which resulted in huge casualties. Any progrss on the eastern front only happened after July 1943 when the Allies landed in Italy. From that point Hitler lost real interest in the East and the best units were sent or held in the West. He was essentially refighting WW I when Germany lost in the West, but won in the East.
"Britain and France had to choose between war and dishonour. They chose dishonour. They will have war." - Winston Churchill

Offline bayonetbrant

  • Chief Arrogance Mitigator
  • Musketeer
  • *****
  • Posts: 37052
  • Loitering With Intent
Re: Barbarossa or D-Day?
« Reply #25 on: June 28, 2013, 07:08:50 AM »
Soviets had numbers, but they had very bad combined arms tactics which resulted in huge casualties. Any progrss on the eastern front only happened after July 1943 when the Allies landed in Italy. From that point Hitler lost real interest in the East and the best units were sent or held in the West. He was essentially refighting WW I when Germany lost in the West, but won in the East.

You could also make the argument that the Russians simply improved from 1941 to 1943, and that as the war went on, Russian troops improved, and the incompetent ones were Darwinized out of the force.  I know a lot of folks (we're talking "PhD in Soviet Studies" and "PhD in Military History with dissertations on the Eastern Front" kind of dudes) that would point out substantial improvements in Soviet combat prowess that came about after Stalin quick arbitrarily screwing with the leadership and let the generals fight, as well as the dissemination of the lessons learned from 41-42.
The key to surviving this site is to not say something which ends up as someone's tag line - Steelgrave

"their citizens (all of them counted as such) glorified their mythology of 'rights'...and lost track of their duties. No nation, so constituted, can endure." Robert Heinlein, Starship Troopers

Offline LongBlade

  • Unsanctioned Psyker
  • Blunderbuster
  • ****
  • Posts: 27192
  • No Regerts
Re: Barbarossa or D-Day?
« Reply #26 on: June 28, 2013, 07:24:48 AM »
You could also make the argument that the Russians simply improved from 1941 to 1943, and that as the war went on, Russian troops improved, and the incompetent ones were Darwinized out of the force.  I know a lot of folks (we're talking "PhD in Soviet Studies" and "PhD in Military History with dissertations on the Eastern Front" kind of dudes) that would point out substantial improvements in Soviet combat prowess that came about after Stalin quick arbitrarily screwing with the leadership and let the generals fight, as well as the dissemination of the lessons learned from 41-42.

It's difficult to argue with this.

The major difference that I see is that although Hitler and Stalin were alike in many ways, Stalin somehow found the courage (can we call it that?) to let go of micromanaging his paranoia. I haven't read up on him enough to know why, but it seems to me that as Stalin let go, Hitler doubled down on the practice. The results speak for themselves.

Had Stalin attempted to run the war as he had the Winter War it seems unlikely that the Soviet Union would have survived.

Offline GDS_Starfury

  • Musketeer
  • *****
  • Posts: 36798
  • Sons of Punarchy
Re: Barbarossa or D-Day?
« Reply #27 on: June 28, 2013, 08:20:25 AM »
the Eastern Front was hardly a side show.  if the Western allies had to face Germany without Russia I think the war itself would have lasted longer if the allies were able to stomach the casualties.  and thats a big if.  look at the historic level of German forces in Italy and France.  then quadruple them.  think of all of that airpower spread out across the steppe and then concentrate it back in western Europe.
Babarossa arguable lost Germany the war, D-Day did not.
« Last Edit: June 28, 2013, 08:23:22 AM by GDS_Starfury »
Gus - I use sweatpants with flannel shorts to soak up my crotch sweat.

Banzai Cat - There is no "partial credit" in grammar. Like anal sex. It's either in, or it's not.

Mirth - We learned long ago that they key isn't to outrun Star, it's to outrun Gus.

Martok - I don't know if it's possible to have an "anti-boner"...but I now have one.

Gus - Celery is vile and has no reason to exist. Like underwear on Star.


Offline W8taminute

  • Landsknecht
  • *******
  • Posts: 4390
  • Aboard the Praetor's Pride
Re: Barbarossa or D-Day?
« Reply #28 on: June 28, 2013, 09:21:55 AM »
Interesting discussion gentlemen.  I'm going with Barbarossa on this for mostly the same reasons that others have so elegantly explained. 

Based on my studies I've always believed that Barbarossa was winnable but H messed everything up, and without 75% of German assets tied up in the east the Western Allies would have had a tough time winning.


Had Germany the time to develop it's atomic program (and it would have without a Barbarossa), and with it's V2 rockets to carry them, Germany could have captured the world.  Hence Edith Keeler must die.  (Oh and Barbarossa needed to happen)   8)
Forgive me my old friend.  But I must use all my experience...to get home.

Offline undercovergeek

  • Arquebusier
  • ***
  • Posts: 12426
Re: Barbarossa or D-Day?
« Reply #29 on: June 28, 2013, 09:34:17 AM »
the Eastern Front was hardly a side show.  if the Western allies had to face Germany without Russia I think the war itself would have lasted longer if the allies were able to stomach the casualties.  and thats a big if.  look at the historic level of German forces in Italy and France.  then quadruple them.  think of all of that airpower spread out across the steppe and then concentrate it back in western Europe.
Babarossa arguable lost Germany the war, D-Day did not.

not that its a realistic reason but playing HOI III i always tried to stay away from Barbarossa - it was a massive mistake

Question then - without Barbarossa, and a western europe focused Germany, would Russia have come to the allies aide without a reason to declare war on Germany?