rommel---africa or russia? - Page 2




View Poll Results :should Rommel have been sent to the eastern front?
yes 16 64.00%
no 9 36.00%
Voters: 25. You may not vote on this poll

 
--
 
March 27th, 2005  
Vitaly
 
I agree completely
March 27th, 2005  
Mike Main
 
From Rommel's point of view, Africa was fine. Lots of glory for a lifetime soldier.
From Germany's point of view, perhaps Russia would have been better. Hitler needed and wanted to take the USSR out as soon as possible. They were the biggest threat once the eastern front opened up. I would have put my best people on it.
Rommel, like Patton, was good at covering turf. Lord knows there was plenty of that in the east.
The only way for anybody to have ever beaten the USSR was to keep the heat on and keep them on their heels. That was one of Rommel's strengths.
March 27th, 2005  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Main
From Rommel's point of view, Africa was fine. Lots of glory for a lifetime soldier.
From Germany's point of view, perhaps Russia would have been better. Hitler needed and wanted to take the USSR out as soon as possible. They were the biggest threat once the eastern front opened up. I would have put my best people on it.
Rommel, like Patton, was good at covering turf. Lord knows there was plenty of that in the east.
The only way for anybody to have ever beaten the USSR was to keep the heat on and keep them on their heels. That was one of Rommel's strengths.
I think this post pretty much covers it, I would only add that if Rommel had followed orders in North Africa which were to not leave Libya he probably would have become Rommel who? as well.
--
March 27th, 2005  
Doppleganger
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Main
From Rommel's point of view, Africa was fine. Lots of glory for a lifetime soldier.
From Germany's point of view, perhaps Russia would have been better. Hitler needed and wanted to take the USSR out as soon as possible. They were the biggest threat once the eastern front opened up. I would have put my best people on it.
Rommel, like Patton, was good at covering turf. Lord knows there was plenty of that in the east.
The only way for anybody to have ever beaten the USSR was to keep the heat on and keep them on their heels. That was one of Rommel's strengths.
Putting Rommel on the Eastern Front would have made very little difference without other big changes in Germany's grand strategy. For example, putting German industry on a war footing in 1939, not diverting Army Group Centre to capture Kiev in 1941, not diverting Panzergruppe 4 in July 1942 when it had a great chance of capturing Stalingrad virtually unopposed. Rommel on the Eastern Front might have done better than von Kleist but not much better, seeing as Army Group South was under-strength to begin with. And he would not have done any better than Messers. Guderian, Hoth or Hoeppner, the other 3 Panzergruppe Generals. Rommel was fine where he was and it got him noticed and got him promoted to Field Marshall faster than any other German general.

I'm sure if Rommel were alive to debate this matter he'd much prefer to remain in Africa too. There was a much higher chance of failure or even death in the field in Russia, especially after 1942. As Redcoat stated too, we'd be asking Rommel who? had he been assigned to the Eastern Front. I'm assuming the purpose of this thread is whether Rommel assigned to Russia would have made any noticeable difference to Germany's fortunes. The answer in my learned opinion is no.
March 28th, 2005  
behemoth79
 
 
we would be asking rommel who because he would be in the same category as the other generals like guderian and von manstein. this isnt a popularity contest. i dont think he would have cared how famous he became. he is a military general. all he cared about was victory. whether or not he would go down in history as the desert fox is not under debate here. he would have been much more usefull on the eastern front than in north africa. besides. italy should have taken care of africa and not needed rommels assistance.
March 31st, 2005  
Damien435
 
 
I don't think it would have mattered who was leading the troops on the Eastern Front, Hitler would have over ruled them anyways causing Germany to at least miss the chance to take Moscow and probably cost Germany the war.
March 31st, 2005  
behemoth79
 
 
anyone ever think of how the war might have ended if hitler had let his generals control the military aspects and he take care of the politics? we might all be typing in german instead of english right now.
April 1st, 2005  
Young Winston
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien435
I don't think it would have mattered who was leading the troops on the Eastern Front, Hitler would have over ruled them anyways causing Germany to at least miss the chance to take Moscow and probably cost Germany the war.
I agree.

IF Rommel had been resourced better by Hitler in Africa then we probably would have been in serious trouble there.
April 20th, 2005  
Farseer
 
I voted yes, because I think that Rommel wouldn't have obeyed Hitler's most foolish orders. Maybe there would not have been Stalingrad as we remember it if Rommel would have been there instead of Paulus. Or maybe in northern flank Leningrad would have fallen if tactician like Rommel would have been there. Still it might have happen that Rommel would have been dismissed after he had denied Hitler's orders.

I doubt that Axis never had true chance to take Alexandria and Rommel was mainly just wasting his time there. Someone like Kesselring would have been suitable to stabilize situation there and hold forces of Western Allies.
April 20th, 2005  
Doppleganger
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Farseer
I voted yes, because I think that Rommel wouldn't have obeyed Hitler's most foolish orders. Maybe there would not have been Stalingrad as we remember it if Rommel would have been there instead of Paulus. Or maybe in northern flank Leningrad would have fallen if tactician like Rommel would have been there. Still it might have happen that Rommel would have been dismissed after he had denied Hitler's orders.
Rommel would been dismissed in December 1941, as Guderian was, had he refused to obey foolish orders. The situation at Leningrad was decided by stout Soviet defence assisted by the guns of the Soviet Baltic Fleet, as well as the fact that von Leeb's Army Group was the weakest of the 3. Lack of tactical skill didn't play any part.

Rommel was a very able mobile commander but Germany had lots of 'Rommels'. Hoth, Hoeppner, Balck, Hausser, von Kleist, von Manteuffel and of course Guderian were all excellent panzer commanders, as good as Rommel if not better.