Biggest Blunders in Military History - Page 5




 
--
 
March 9th, 2005  
godofthunder9010
 
 
Hurried paths of conquest always seem to die out faster. I wonder if Hitler ever thought of that?
March 9th, 2005  
Doppleganger
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charge_7
Speculation now is that Hitler's health issues are what "forced" his hand. Parkinson's disease was much more deadly in the '40s than it is now and Hitler knew his life expectancy was limited. He had to rush his plans of conquest accordingly.
Did a quick search and found the following link. I'm not sure about how much of a hold Parkinson's had on him but if it is true it would go some way in explaining why Hitler went so downhill as the war progressed.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/h...lish_40131.htm
March 9th, 2005  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
But they probably couldn't, even if they had won the Battle of Britain. Besides, I think a war between Germany & the USSR was inevitable. Even so, I agree that ultimately Barbarossa was a major blunder, if only because Hitler completely underestimated the USSR and its will to resist.
I dont entire agree, a theory I have had for quite a while is that the Italians did as much to defeat Germany as the allies did.

Lets face it:
- The entire balkans campaign had to be carried out because of Italy's failed attacks on Albania and Greece which dumped British troops in Greece thus making it a priority German intervention. This delayed Barbarosa by at least six weeks (in summer) and depleted the reserves available to the Russian campaign.

- The North African campaign was another Italian fiasco which cost Germany a good 200-300000 troops which if available on the Russian front through 1942-43 may have made a noticable difference especially in the Staligrad area where oddly enough the Russian counter offensive ran right through the middle of an Italian/Spanish division and ended in the destruction of the 6th Army.

Basically the Italian war effort killed more Germans (approx 700000) than it killed Allies.
--
March 9th, 2005  
serbianpower
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
Quote:
But they probably couldn't, even if they had won the Battle of Britain. Besides, I think a war between Germany & the USSR was inevitable. Even so, I agree that ultimately Barbarossa was a major blunder, if only because Hitler completely underestimated the USSR and its will to resist.
I dont entire agree, a theory I have had for quite a while is that the Italians did as much to defeat Germany as the allies did.

Lets face it:
- The entire balkans campaign had to be carried out because of Italy's failed attacks on Albania and Greece which dumped British troops in Greece thus making it a priority German intervention. This delayed Barbarosa by at least six weeks (in summer) and depleted the reserves available to the Russian campaign.

- The North African campaign was another Italian fiasco which cost Germany a good 200-300000 troops which if available on the Russian front through 1942-43 may have made a noticable difference especially in the Staligrad area where oddly enough the Russian counter offensive ran right through the middle of an Italian/Spanish division and ended in the destruction of the 6th Army.

Basically the Italian war effort killed more Germans (approx 700000) than it killed Allies.
you can not blame only italians for stalingrad. german lines would be run over anyway. it is not italians fault but hitler stupid orders.

on the other hand, german balkan campaign was not caused only by situation in grece. germans had to atack yugoslavia anyway because they refused to join germans.
March 9th, 2005  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
on the other hand, german balkan campaign was not caused only by situation in grece. germans had to atack yugoslavia anyway because they refused to join germans.
Thats true however the Greece/Crete section that extended the campaign was purely Italian driven.


Quote:
you can not blame only italians for stalingrad. german lines would be run over anyway. it is not italians fault but hitler stupid orders.
No doubt but my point is that bailing the Italians out in Greece and North Africa essentially cost the Germans the 6th Army and the Africa Corps.

The main problem with the theory is that it is pure "what if" work ie If Germany had had 6 extra weeks at the start of Barbarosa and before winter would it have allowed the capture of Moscow, had the Africa Corps been available for service on the eastern front would it have sped up the advance in that 6 weeks to avoid a Stalingrad altogether.
[/quote]
March 9th, 2005  
The Other Guy
 
 
There was tension between Hitler and Stalin to find out who could kill more of their own people.
March 9th, 2005  
serbianpower
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
Quote:
on the other hand, german balkan campaign was not caused only by situation in grece. germans had to atack yugoslavia anyway because they refused to join germans.
Thats true however the Greece/Crete section that extended the campaign was purely Italian driven.


Quote:
you can not blame only italians for stalingrad. german lines would be run over anyway. it is not italians fault but hitler stupid orders.
No doubt but my point is that bailing the Italians out in Greece and North Africa essentially cost the Germans the 6th Army and the Africa Corps.

The main problem with the theory is that it is pure "what if" work ie If Germany had had 6 extra weeks at the start of Barbarosa and before winter would it have allowed the capture of Moscow, had the Africa Corps been available for service on the eastern front would it have sped up the advance in that 6 weeks to avoid a Stalingrad altogether.
[/quote]


there is some logic, but I think there is too much `if`. what if stalin believed to informations he recieved from west about german atack, what if he left his best generals and CO in comand...
March 9th, 2005  
Doppleganger
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Guy
There was tension between Hitler and Stalin to find out who could kill more of their own people.
In that case Stalin easily won!
March 10th, 2005  
The Other Guy
 
 
While we're in word war II, how about the Kasserine Pass, in tunisia?
March 10th, 2005  
redcoat
 
 

Topic: Re: Biggest Blunders


[quote="Doppleganger"]
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Guy
To y I also heard that the popular story of the Charge of the Light Brigade was a myth and it was actually more successful than is commonly accepted.
Recent research has shown that it was far less costly in casualties for the Light Brigade than had been assumed, with around 150 killed out of approximately 600 cavalrymen.

Its still one of the most stupid cavalry charges in military history though