Who defeated Germany?

[BigPlay]

My understanding is that Russian textbooks are firmly of the opinion that the USSR deserves the lion's share of the credit for defeating Germany (no surprise there), but part of their argument is that the USA and UK were reluctant to help and desired to see Russia defeated before they attacked Germany.
Mostly because of their vastly different post-war strategic aims.  One liberated Europe, and the other did the opposite, but that's for another thread.

There is a book called "Swastika in my Gunsights" or something like that that was written by a Russian pilot. It's pure propaganda almost to a laughable degree. This guy totally down plays everything from how superior soviet training was to how much more advanced Russian aircraft was. I also read about another book on German armor and how the King Tiger as far as this Russian tanker was concerned was poorly constructed tank and was not even in the same category as Russian tanks. You can decide for yourself how valid Russian books are in dealing with reality regarding the Eastern war.

[Chalenge]

Hitler kept waiting for the ENY to kick in but he got screwed by server code. 

[FLOTSOM]

Hitler kept waiting for the ENY to kick in but he got screwed by server code. 

 

 

 

 

[oakranger]

Allies did

[glock89]

Allies did

Who would of know.

[oakranger]

Who would of know.

Well, i first thought that the Spartans did.

[glock89]

Well, i first thought that the Spartans did.

Now your getting some were. 

[Nisky]

Well general paulus was kinda screwed by hitler because hitler didnt allow his 250,000 man army breakout from being encircled at Stalingrad. Paulus's army was pretty much had a huge chance of breaking out but hitler waited to long and paulus's troops were running outta supplies they were suppose to receive from air support, but due to the weather they could not. A 250,000 man army just written off there was no way Germany could recover from that. So i believe USSR won the war with the help of hitler. On another note A quote from Otto Carius "We were glad that our comrades in the east continued to fight bitterly to hold up Ivan for as long as possible. Unfortunately, their sacrifices were in vain! The Americans stopped at the Elbe. Our hopes for a joint struggle against the Russians dwindled with that. How easy this advance would have been and how willingly our units would have marched east! All the units were still together. The Yanks would only have had to takeover the supply! The last opportunity to lead a low-risk preventative war was thrown away, when, blinded by hate , the allied themselves with the devil against germany. The only goal that held the Allies together had been reached: Germany ceased to exist. The Americans could not have war anyway; it had already been decided before their intervention. They had the option of losing the peace." From the book " Tigers in the Mud" written by Otto Carius German Tiger Commander.

[FLOTSOM]

Well, i first thought that the Spartans did.

well in reality the coalition of all of the Greek city states banding together to fend off the invasion of an overwhelming aggressor is one of the first in recorded history.

without a coalition of all the allies involved then germany would have dominated each in its turn independently. actually i don't believe that America would have ever entered the European theater of the war if Britain had fallen in the early part of 1940.

this is also the first time in recorded history that the strategy of the few holding the line at a bottle neck so that the many will gain time needed to gather their forces and prepare for the advance of the invaders.

had Britain not held the line and stay in the game then the back of germany (in the west) would have been protected by distance from the US for at least 5 years or more. leaving the Russians to face the full onslaught of the German military alone. as well as had the Russians not held the line and chewed up the German strength and resolved for war in battles such as stalingrad then the military might of germany without an enemy at their back (to the east) would have been overwhelming to any beach head attempt made in Europe.

knowing that all of the most important commanders (excluding Stalin) of the allied forces were classically educated and believed in the romantic war, and that the coalition that was created resembles the one originally crafted by the Greeks thousands of years before, well in your jest you may be more correct than you think.

FLOTSOM

[shreck]

I'm bringing this topic over from the general forum:  Who deserves the most credit for defeating Germany in WWII?  The Western Allies, i.e. USA and UK, or the USSR?  We're all pretty familiar with the arguments and counterarguments, so this should be interesting.

Arguments in favor of the USSR:

• 80% of the Wehrmacht was deployed in the East.
• German aircraft production peaked in '44 underneath allied bombing
• More German military died fighting Russia than the allies.

Arguments in favor of the Western Allies:

• Destroyed more of the Luftwaffe than the VVS
• Disrupted German military production and supply with strategic bombing
• Gave large quantities of raw materials and military hardware to the USSR, and therefore partly responsible for its success.

The larger question is whether the USSR could have repelled Germany without the help of the USA and UK.  As an armchair historian, I tend to think the USSR could have prevailed without western help because of its unflinching ally, the Russian winter, not to mention all that Germany (Hitler) did to defeat itself with strategic blunders like the Fall advance of '42.  However, I know a lot of you are experts in this stuff, and would love to hear your view.

ITALY was to blame!! If those morons could have just made headway in afrika and stayed away from the greeks!! would have been a different story!

[FLOTSOM]

ITALY was to blame!! If those morons could have just made headway in afrika and stayed away from the greeks!! would have been a different story!

The greatest tool the Allies had in their pocket was the Italians. carrying the burden of the Italian army was without a doubt the next greatest hindrance that the Germans had to suffer under after Hitler and his cronies.

hell the mechanised Italian army lost to the Ethiopians carrying spears!!!!!!

If that kind of incompetence isn't a burden to your allies i don't know what would be.

FLOTSOM

[Anaxogoras]

Well general paulus was kinda screwed by hitler because hitler didnt allow his 250,000 man army breakout from being encircled at Stalingrad. Paulus's army was pretty much had a huge chance of breaking out but hitler waited to long and paulus's troops were running outta supplies they were suppose to receive from air support, but due to the weather they could not. A 250,000 man army just written off there was no way Germany could recover from that. So i believe USSR won the war with the help of hitler. On another note A quote from Otto Carius "We were glad that our comrades in the east continued to fight bitterly to hold up Ivan for as long as possible. Unfortunately, their sacrifices were in vain! The Americans stopped at the Elbe. Our hopes for a joint struggle against the Russians dwindled with that. How easy this advance would have been and how willingly our units would have marched east! All the units were still together. The Yanks would only have had to takeover the supply! The last opportunity to lead a low-risk preventative war was thrown away, when, blinded by hate , the allied themselves with the devil against germany. The only goal that held the Allies together had been reached: Germany ceased to exist. The Americans could not have war anyway; it had already been decided before their intervention. They had the option of losing the peace." From the book " Tigers in the Mud" written by Otto Carius German Tiger Commander.

Stalingrad was not just a military catastrophe, but also a human tragedy.  Only a small handful of the thousands taken prisoner survived the Soviet POW camps and lived to see their families again.

As for the western allies uniting with Germany to defeat Russia...yeah right.   I do agree that Churchill and Roosevelt vastly underestimated what the post-war Soviet Union would be like; they replaced one evil country with another.

[BlauK]

According to Richthoffen, Paulus (an old school general) also screwed the Stalingrad campaing by himself. He failed to capture it in the initial attack when it was still capturable. He advanced too cautiously (avoiding casualties) and allowed the enemy to retreat into the suburbs where they dug in began their determined resistance. Instead he could have encircled a whole army before it got to the suburbs.

Hitler had also made it more difficult at Caucasus area by spreading the forces too thin. They could have captured one target at a time, but not Stalingrad and the southeastern targets (oil fileds etc.) at the same time. The supply lines grew too long. The air support grew too thin while receiving too few replacements, spare parts and too little fuel.

Destiny of a megalomaniac corporal's army.

[RipChord929]

There were huge differences between the 41 opening assault,
and the 42 offensive in the south... The Germans played the
same pattern.. But the Russians played it differently...

In 41, Stalin had personal control of the frontier armies.. He sat
in his bedroom weeping like a child for 45 days, while his field
officers were screaming for orders, and being slaughtered..
He honestly thought that his commie buddies were going
to put a tokarev bullet in his ear for trusting Hitler... Then, when he
finally realized how cowed his lackies were, begging him "save us
comrade stalin" he came out and ordered whole armies to
hold their ground, (Kiev).. Or make idiotic attacks, (Smolensk)..
Wasting what forces had survived the initial German assault...

Almost cost the whole shebang...

In 42 stalin had given control of field ops to his Marshals...
Zhuchov and Koniev had shown their worth at Moscow and
Leningrad, so (luckily for all involved) Stalin was allowing
them to make militarily LOGICAL decisions.. In the spring
of 42 the Russians launched a sizable offensive in the south..
But it ran headlong into the German army that was staging
for the their big 42 push.. The Russian marshals realized what
was happening, and called their offensive off... Then Switched over
to Delay and run/scorched earth tactics as the gemans marched
forward.. German generals made comment in reports that they
knew major Soviet forces were in their area, but refused to fight..

When Russian troops quit running, (stalingrad) we all know what happened...
It was perfect gameplay by the rooskies, the same as they worked
against Napoleon.. Space for time!!!

The diff between victory and defeat was made by Stalin, when he decided
to let his generals DO THEIR JOB... Didn't matter to him, he took all the credit
for winning the war anyway... But he was sooo afraid of Zhukov, that he
couldn't kill him, had to send him away instead... To vacation land by the black sea..
All credit to the Russian ppl, they properly honor Zhukov now...
Now that the Egotistical Maniac Stalin is dead...

RC

[Fishu]

As for the western allies uniting with Germany to defeat Russia...yeah right.   I do agree that Churchill and Roosevelt vastly underestimated what the post-war Soviet Union would be like; they replaced one evil country with another.

Churchill didn't really fancy the SU either. But the enemy's enemy is a friend. However Germany wasn't a declared enemy to the britons until the war of France. Had the germans stopped after Poland they could have had a chance to stay at peace with France and the UK until the SU attacks germans. With a succesful propaganda campaign demonizing the communists germans could've had a chance to draw the UK, France and perhaps the USA into war against the SU. The question is what would've happened after the attack at Pearl Harbour - it would've allied the UK and USA against the japanese, while the SU could been a potential ally - without a war in the west they could have launched a full scale attack against the japanese. Unless the SU attacks japanese before they decide to attack due to lack of resources, which would further demonize the communists, leading to the US and UK to back up Japan with resources. Although it could be that Japan would've never suffered from the lack of resources in the first place, if the USA wouldn't have had to preserve oil due to war in Europe and therefore cut off the oil to the japanese.