behemoth79
Active member
im not sure if this one has been done before, so if it has im sorry. do you guys think Erwin Rommel would have been put to better use in the eastern front instead of in africa?
rommel---africa or russia?
Doppleganger
Active member
I voted no as Deutsch Afrikakorps needed a commander with his flair and boldness and he did very well for a time. Plus there were Panzer Commanders in Russia at least as good as him and in one case certainly better (Guderian). There were 4 Panzergruppes that went into the USSR in 1941 and to be fair I think that Rommel would have been better suited than Paul von Kleist to command Panzergruppe 1.
By the time Rommel had been defeated in 1943, the high watermark of the German invasion of the USSR had been reached and was now waning. Germany was now fighting a defensive war which did not really suit Rommel's particular talents.
To summarize. Rommel made a big impact in North Africa. In Russia he would have gone relatively unnoticed.
By the time Rommel had been defeated in 1943, the high watermark of the German invasion of the USSR had been reached and was now waning. Germany was now fighting a defensive war which did not really suit Rommel's particular talents.
To summarize. Rommel made a big impact in North Africa. In Russia he would have gone relatively unnoticed.
MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
I voted yes because his skill in large scale open terrain armoured warfare would have been a very welcome addition to the German offensive especially in the south.
I also think that had Rommel not been sent to Africa there probably would have been no DAK.
He had already been noticed through his command of the 7th division in France.
I also think that had Rommel not been sent to Africa there probably would have been no DAK.
He had already been noticed through his command of the 7th division in France.
Doppleganger
Active member
MontyB said:
Well, his proven skill was in small scale open terrain warfare but I agree that he would have been a better choice for Panzergruppe 1 than von Kleist, the commander of the Panzergruppe attached to von Rundstedt's Army Group South.
He had been noticed but note that I said relatively unnoticed if he had been assigned to the Eastern Front. In other words, he would not have hogged the limelight in any way, especially with Guderian and Hoth's armored spearheads racing for Moscow.
Doppleganger
Active member
SHERMAN said:
I would. Understand that small scale does not necessarily mean unimportant. When I talk about large scale I'm talking about size of forces involved. Compared to the massive encirclements at Kiev, Smolensk, the Battles of Moscow, Rostov, Kharkov, Stalingrad, Kursk, Bagration, Berlin ect, El Alamein is dwarved. In the context of this discussion I argued that Rommel had only been involved in small scale operations and when sizes of forces and scales of battles are weighed up this is true. El Alamein was small scale but nonetheless a very important morale boosting turning point for the British in particular.
MontyB
All-Blacks Supporter
Doppleganger said:
The fact that he never got a chance at "large scale" armoured warfare should not be a factor here as he proved himself a more than capable capable commander in France which lead to him being chosen for operations in North Africa and I think those talents would have carried through into Russia especially around the Ukraine.
Doppleganger
Active member
MontyB said:
Yes but the topic is should he stay in Africa or have been assigned to Russia. Africa needed a very capable mobile commander and Rommel was perfect for the job. I've stated twice in this thread that Rommel would have done fine in Russia, better than von Kleist IMO. The latter would not have done so well in Rommel's place. Thus I voted that Rommel should have stayed historically where he was.
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.
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.
Doppleganger
Active member
Mike Main said:
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.
behemoth79
Active member
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.
behemoth79
Active member
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.
Young Winston
Banned
Damien435 said:
I agree.
IF Rommel had been resourced better by Hitler in Africa then we probably would have been in serious trouble there.
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.
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.
Doppleganger
Active member
Farseer said:
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.