Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MontyB I agree with these points although I am sure the counter will be that Germany quickly regained the initiative in spring/summer of 1942 |
Well, it depends on how would be developed situation in the front in the winter 1941/1942.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Doppleganger However, what can't be disputed is that the Red Army failed to dislodge AGC from the Rzhev salient and suffered heavy casualties in the process. They did however, force the Germans to use their depleted reserves to blunt the Soviet attack. |
Yes, generally I do agree.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Doppleganger You see no difference between the Red Army of 1941/42 and the same army in 1944 |
You forget one significant factor. Due to German offensive to East, Soviets were forced to evacuate their industry for to East. Generally, to Ural mountains. If Germans stopped at Dnieper with no signs to move further, it certainly made less difficult evacuation of industry or no request it at all. This means Red Army received more weapons and sooner than actually in 1941/1942. This factor could make hypothetical Red Army of 1941/1942 more alike Red Army of 1943/1944...
In reality Red Army of 1941/1942 and first part of 1942 were forced to fight with lack of heavy weapons, all due to industry evacuations, which caused delays in production and Army did not receive weapons to compensate their loss in defeats of 1941 summer.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Doppleganger The force relations between the 2 sides is of no importance when determining the outcome of a battle |
Sorry, didn't got that.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Doppleganger It is better to over-extend yourself, fight on knowing that you have barely enough ammunition, food and fuel, moreover to do this in winter when you know you are not adequately equipped to fight in winter, than to dig-in, reequip and resupply and wait for weather that suits your strengths |
In the way `Barbarossa` was planned - yes, Red Army had to be defeat asap, if Germans had a wish to won the war...
The problem is that Red Army could re-equip and re-supply FASTER than dug-in Wermacht. Due to factors such as:
- Total mobilization;
- Non-stretched or nearer communications;
- Less part of Soviet industry would be evacuated than if Germans countinued their offensive.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MontyB If Antony Beevor is to be believed perhaps there wasn't that great a difference between the two periods, certainly the Red Army was better equipped by 1944 but I am not certain it was anymore professional. |
Well, even Red Army of summer 1941 was professional enough, although less professional than Germans, since Germans had greater experience of modern warfare. Then occured a fall of army professionalism because of defeat of professional army and mobilization of reserve armies. Reserve armies of course were less professional, but at the end of 1942, at Stalingrad, level of professionalism of Red Army was restored.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MontyB This leads me to believe that a large part Germany's problems late in the war came from a degradation of its ability to fight rather than an improvement in the Russians ability. |
Germans lost war because of economics. Have You ever compared amounts of tanks produced during the war?