FALL BLAU 1942 - Examining the Disaster
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ก.ย. 2024
- The last gasp of victory for the Axis in WW2, Fall Blau is a disaster for German Blitzkrieg and a strategic turning point of the war. Today we find out what happened, and why it broke down.
Check out the pinned comment below for more information, notes, links, and sources.
Don't forget to subscribe if you like history or gaming! And hit the little bell icon to be notified when videos like this are uploaded.
Please consider supporting me on Patreon and help make more videos like this possible / tikhistory
![[Full] 4 ต่อ 4 Celebrity EP.910 | 22 ก.ย. 67 | one31](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4TR3MVpOiw8/mqdefault.jpg)
*NOTES, LINKS and SOURCES*
This video touches on many subjects which I couldn’t possibly go into fully today. However I will be coming back to many of these later for a more in-depth discussion. The thing to take away though is that the failure of the Blau Campaign results in a definite “turning point” in the war for several reasons. Hopefully by the end of the video, you will have a clearer picture as to why.
Another aspect which is touched on, but which perhaps needs further discussion (and its own video) is that of Hitler’s “madness”. Some claim Hitler was a madman, and that he should have listened to his generals. This actually stems from Halder and several other leading German generals who survived the war, who were trying to show that their dismissal from command positions within the army were not rational decisions because they were great generals. This view was made with the purpose of covering up their own mistakes or failures, and by saying Hitler was mad, gives them an excuse for being sacked which doesn’t say they were in-fact bad. What we have to remember is that, while the actions of the main players of this giant game (e.g. Hitler) may at first glance seem irrational, the reality was that these players were making rational decisions when placed within the context of the time. The problem with many accounts is that the actions made have not been placed in the wider context, and so they seem irrational to us in hindsight.
What I didn’t mention in this video was that the plans for Blau actually fell into the Soviet hands prior to the battle. But Stalin dismissed them as a deliberate ploy by the Germans to draw forces away from the Moscow area. Hitler though was not amused. This was the so-called “Reichel Affair”. And it further convinced Hitler that his generals were not obeying his orders, since Reichel shouldn’t have been in a plane with the full Blau plans anyway. Hitler dismissed the commander of the 23rd Panzer Division (where Reichel was from), plus his superior at 40th Motorized Corps, and his chief of staff. Halder wrote in his diary for the 24th of June 1942 -
“In OKW, which returned today, the campaign against the General Staff is in high gear again. The unfortunate Reichel affair (Ia, 23d Armoured Division) seems to have crystallized ill feelings of apparently long standing. We only have to brace ourselves now for the explosion.”
Again, a seemingly irrational decision. However, if we consider that Hitler had been at loggerheads with his generals for quite some time, it all makes sense. And if we consider that his generals were not considering the strategic picture (as mentioned in the video) then again, it adds weight to the idea that Hitler was actually making rational decisions. Hitler may have been evil, but he was not mad, nor stupid. He was on a whole making very good decisions - even better than his generals at times - and was frustrated when his generals failed to obey his commands because they were tunnel-visioned by training and philosophy into looking at the tactical or operational level. Again, given the context, it makes sense.
I absolutely recommend Citino’s “Death of the Wehrmacht” book, which goes into this campaign and the whole ‘traditional German way of war’ element. It’s a very well written book and good read for anyone interest in Blau or the German military in WW2.
Someone said last video that “Operation Blau” is actually “Fall Blau” or “Case Blue” and not an operation. However, while it’s name was Fall Blau, it was an operation, so for this reason, I use the term “Operation Blau” occasionally. But yes, technically it should be Fall Blau.
I also mistakenly say “1940” twice in the video rather than “1941”. This was purely a slip of the tongue.
*Video Links*
The MAIN Reason Why German Lost WW2 - OIL th-cam.com/video/kVo5I0xNRhg/w-d-xo.html
Why No German Reinforcements at Stalingrad? th-cam.com/video/VQ3-TqeZqeA/w-d-xo.html
Citino’s “Death of the Wehrmacht: The German Campaigns of 1942” th-cam.com/video/UNDhswF1GKk/w-d-xo.html
*SELECTED SOURCES*
Citino, R. “Death of the Wehrmacht: The German Campaigns of 1942.” University of Kansas, 2007.
Gerasimova, S. “The Rzhev Slaughterhouse: The Red Army’s Forgotten 15-Month Campaign against Army Group Center 1942-1943.” Helion & Company, Kindle, 2013.
Glantz, D. House, J. “The Stalingrad Trilogy, Volume 1. To the Gates of Stalingrad. Soviet-German Combat Operations, April-August 1942.” University Press of Kansas, 2009.
Halder, F. “The Halder War Diary 1939-1942.” Presidio Press, 1988.
Liedtke, G. “Enduring the Whirlwind: The German Army and the Russo-German War 1941-1943.” Helion & Company LTD, 2016.
Stahel, D. “Operation Barbarossa: Germany’s Defeat in the East.” Cambridge University Press, Kindle, 2010.
Toprani, A. “Oil and Grand Strategy: Great Britain and Germany, 1918-1941.” PhD Dissertation. Georgetown University, 2012.
Toprani, A. “The First War for Oil: The Caucasus, German Strategy, and the Turning Point of the War on the Eastern Front, 1942.” From The Journal of Military History 80 (July 2016): 815-854.
“Germany and the Second World War: Volume VI/II, The Global War.” Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (Research Institute for Military History) Potsdam, Germany. Oxford University Press, 2015.
“Führer Directive 41” From: World War II Database site. ww2db.com/doc.php?q=419
Thanks for watching!
Forgot to add this source : Glantz, D. "Colossus Reborn:The Red Army at War 1941-1943." University Press of Kansas, 2005.
You are not a big fan of Halder, are you? :-)
What would possibly give you that idea? ;)
I'm sorry, but speaking that russian forces could retreat all the way to Ural and still fight a war, is stupid in general. Just look how many resources, production, population and all other stuff are on the western borders. also taking 5 mil casaulties in first year of war trying to hold the front line and stop the german offence just doesnt looks like a good strat for me(also sorry for my bad english)
Excellent! Thank you for the detailed information!
One of my favorite German related oil stories is that of the Libyan oil fields. Oil was not discovered in Libya until after WWII, but when it was, it became necessary to bring German ex-soldiers who had served in the Afrika Korps back to Libya to locate and remove the German minefields that were in the oil fields.
imagine if the mines had gone off and they stuck Oil...
@@Sammyli99 A beautiful thought.
Mussolini would've been able to actually use the fleet he had been building up during the interwar years. The Italian navy actually had in a tactical design lense the most advanced European modern fleet of larger than average destroyers, the four fast new Zara class 8 inch gun heavy cruisers were the best in the Mediterranean, and the modern Littorio class battleships whose nine new 15 inch guns in three triple turrets should have been superior to the old British dreadnoughts like the Queen Elizabeth and Revenge classes with only eight and were mounted in the four double turrets. However it all proved to have been a massive waste as they were ineffective when operating because of Italian command incompetence and they were in port for most of the war and destroyed there because of severe lack of fuel. And it didnt matter anyway, just the British Mediterranean fleet was larger than the whole Italian navy and had aircraft carriers and it turns out the old Queen Elizabeth class were still quite effective such as the stubborn lady Warspite whose 'old' guns managed to score the longest range naval gunnery hit on an enemy ship in history, funnily enough on the Littorio class.
Iran wasn't tapped either. It course went completely unreported and continues to be unreported that the UK just invaded and stormed the country "to protect it" and proceeded to take 75% of oil profits for the next century. What business did the UK have there that Germany did not have in Danzig? Press S to spit.
yes , allies where never above slave labor for german pows
It's okay, Steiner's attack will bring everything under control.
Guardian Milsim steiner’s counter attack surely will bring victory
Downfall meme.
Okay, everyone get out except this guy and that guy
@@franciscodanconia45 Steiners atack was an order!!
Mien Fhurer! Steiner...Steiner...
Wow, this is something rare these days; a presentation not geared at 12 year olds. Great stuff, thanks.
Too much for you as your ten.
@@edmundcowan9131 *you're
Interesting how everyone talks about how Hitler didn't have the mind or intelligence or military training to understand what was happening, but it appears he was the one who did in fact understand.
This is the point. Halder was the lead war historian advisor to the U.S. Army Historical Division after the war, where he tailored the German general's opinions to his own. This is why he casts Hitler in a bad light - calling him mad. When the reality was that Halder had schemed behind his back and failed to do his job several times. But in the light of history, Halder is actually praised by some - Shirer constantly used Halder's diary and opinion to write his well-known "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich". Despite everything I've said and hinted about Halder, I will say that he was very good at manipulating people. Intrigue level 101.
After losing. they blame all their fault on Hitler since he can not defend himself and also western media like the idea of blaming Hitler.
Folks who say "History is written by the victor" probably aren't aware of how much the Allied perception of the war was tailored by German commanders and officials immediately after its conclusion. Everyone had a fucking memoir, and everyone wanted to read them.
Fuzzy Dunlop Exactly, I compare it to the American Civil War in that regard. Who can say that "history is written by the victors" when every loser has a memoir, an honorary fellowship, and best-selling pop history contributions? Seems more like an attempt to stifle discussion than give the "untold story," from where I'm standing.
EXACTLY! Though iirc 'lost-cause revisionism' wasn't concocted by Southern officers or Confederate figures, I think it also fits that same mold - if a little more after the fact. I always try to tell people, victors don't write the histories - survivors do, and if those survivors happen to also be the 'losers' then then probably say something like "The victors write the histories." School textbooks in some districts in the South attest to this, in keeping with your (incredibly apt) example.
Baybakov was told 2 things by Stalin: 1. If Germans take any working oil fields then you will be shot (as was mentioned in the video). 2. If Germans won’t take some area but you destroy oil fields in that area then you will be shot (it was not mentioned in the video). :)) thanks, TIK! I am seriously impressed.
sounds dumb. I don’t know how many others think the same, but my first response to that would be to destroy all the oilfields and give them all up to the Germans. It’s the only way to absolutely guarantee compliance with those two orders
@@kaijiesoo8588 and then get shot anyway xD
The order was quite clear actually
@@PanterDash82 This.
@kaijiesoo8588 the army wasn't subordinated to him so he couldn't give up anything on purpose
The US Army employed Halder as a historian in the 1950s. It appears that much of WWII history in the US (from the German point of view) comes from Halder's diary.
And from histories written by other German generals in Allied captivity whom Halder supervised. So you are only going to get a certain point of view. The failure to provide winter clothing to German soldiers in the fall of 1941 was due to Halder's decision to make a final attempt to take Moscow, fuel and ammo were favored for resupply-not winter gear which was left in the warehouses.
@@mp4373 Wow, I had no idea. Thanks for sharing the info
Regardless of how Halder is seen historically, the idea that Hitler had any idea of tactics never mind strategy is laughable. After 1943, any plans to assassinate Hitler were cancelled as the allies knew he was the Wehrmacht's greatest enemy. His only positive move was halting the German retreat during the first winter of the Russian campaign- though even then the blame lies mainly with Hitler by not supplying the army with winter clothing. Why anyone would believe that a WWI corporal had any knowledge of tactics or strategy is ludicrous. Minus Hitler the Germans would've still lost the war- but they may have lasted until 46-47.
So you’re saying that everything bad was Hitler’s fault and those German generals like Halder TOTALLY didn’t just blame it all on Hitler once the war was over? You must not be good at noticing patterns. A lot of the blunders were actually on the generals who very cleverly blamed everything on Hitler, except for the early successes, of course. That was all them, apparently. Halder is literally the guy who came up with Operation Barbarossa, and everyone knows how poorly that went. My point being, just because someone is a German who didn’t get hung at Nuremberg, doesn’t mean they’re speaking the absolute undeniable truth.
@@lowlandnobleman6746 yes it's not like the Kraut Generals to lie & use omissions to cover their mistakes with the benifit of hindsight when writing about the war years later.
I've been studying ww2 since 2007, I have a degree in European history and have worked at multiple ww2 museums. I have to say of all the historical narratives I have watched, your documentary videos don't fail to miss any minute detail. This gives the real view of the battle from every level that most previous ww2 documentary has missed or skipped over due to time or not understanding the scope of events. IMHO your doc series is the best since the world at war series from the 70s. You know your topics and can talk about them at length. I really look forward to your videos as they are very eye opening and I learn a ton every time i watch. Keep up the amazing work!!
Also if you ever need a new subject have you ever looked into the early conflicts between Germans and American troops in December 1942? A lot f cool history that no one has shed a lot of light on, it goes much deeper than a rout at Kasserine pass!
Spot on. I've been studying the war for better than 40 years. Some things he has said, i already knew. A LOT of what he has said is new to me. His documentaries are very, very good.
@Manny Menke: Even if what you ascribe to yourself is correct, what follows is simple opinion based upon an argument from authority, which is logically invalid. Even in its own terms, a comment like "[didn't] fail to miss any minute detail" is mere assertion and demonstrably false. In the context of this video about 'Stalingrad', *minute* details such as Paulus having dysentery and refusing to take sick leave in Germany (thus precluding a different command of Sixth Army at a crucial moment, or sapping his moral courage to act decisively even further), for example, were omitted. All this is not to suggest that the 'TIK' presentation is slipshod, far from it, but to put it on a par with 'World at War is clearly stretching credulity to breaking point: in the first instance, it's more tendentious.
Elr James the original “World at War” was a huge undertaking but it did deliver the standard narratives. The economic reasons/necessity for Germany going East was never explained.
@@davidelliott5843 To the small degree that it exists at all, there is a reason for the "standard narrative:" it does not attempt to hide the actual words and orders of the actors involved behind broad, nebulous notions like "economic necessity." This notion represents a confusion and conflation of causes and events: Germany had, in the years preceding its attack on the USSR, not only a non-agression treaty, but growing economic ties with the USSR, even in strategic minerals. The economic necessity of the war is the myth. Indeed the oil shortage was a consequence of war, not a cause. A nation that had not been constant aggressor, threatening its neighbours large and small alike, running rough shod over the weak, and publicly spewing racialisms such as to make even the notoriously racialist Imperial Britain shy away would have had the same access to oil and minerals as every other nation of Europe, that is to say, through trade.
@@schwerpunkt7687 Did so. Recommend you do the same.
This guy is inspirational and explains it so clearly.
I'm certainly trying my best :)
Even more impressive given the huge amount of details that are often covered.
Yes but he is mistaken, primarily in his hypothesis that Moscow held no real strategic importance. Rather, in fact, Moscow was the soviet capital, the most populous city in the Soviet Union and was the centre for soviet transportation of resources and was very important.
Has an empire ever managed to sustain a war effort after their capital has been sacked?!!
@@mattkierkegaard9403 America during the war of independence
@@mattkierkegaard9403 china during ww2 literally lmao
Criminally undersubscribed.
I prefer quality subscribers over quantity subscribers
TIK
Can you do an analysis on Soviet movements and strategy in the period of 1941-43?
All coverage of the war seems to focus on the German perspective, Icd really like to see Soviet thinking focused on.
I'm working up to it. I just want to clarify some things on the German side first.
Yes, cant wait until you start roasting Soviet generals and leadership xd
WolfschanzeArchiv welp as far as I’ve seen Germany had worse generals than the soviets did by late 1943
22:06 Hitler's image turning red as he's getting enraged - I do appreciate this detail.
yes red, very red, until it turns out a stalisnist....
Lol what the
*you hear Hitler's muffled shouting coming from the other room*
This is one of if not your best video. It's the best breakdown of Fall Blau, Barbarossa and even the German war in the east that I've ever had the pleasure of learning from.
Great work.
Have you ever considered talking about Operation Bragation, it doesn't get talked about much.
I have, but Stalingrad must come first, simply because I'm so far into it now
YOU ARE GOOD WHEN YOU FOUND TIME SPEAK ABOUT YOUGOSLAVIA,..IN 2WW....SERBIANS AND RUSSIANS ARE ONE NATION DIDNT YOU KNOW THAT....UNFORTUNATLLY OUR PRUSS BROTHERS ARE ALSAW OUR NATION DARK SIDE OF THE MOON SIDE IT WAS CIVILL WAR.... GREETS FROM SERBIAN BTW I SEE YOU R SCOT,...SO LISTEN THE PLANE TRUTH WE RUSS SORABS ARE GOING FOR NAZI NATO ISIS TALMUDIC ALLIENCE CRIMINAL SCOULLS
THIS TIME WE WILL NOT LIVE THE JOB HALFFINISHED GREETS
Igor Jajic , you feeling good mate?
SHOURE BUT I WILL FEEL GREAT WHEN NAZI NATO ISIS TALMUDIC ALLIENCE TRASH AROUND THE GLOBE IS HUNTED AND SHOT ON THE SPOT,......YOU ?
Igor Jajic Do you speak English? One would never know. And turn off the CAPS. No one wants to hear you yelling gibberish!
Millions of young men perished in a single year.. absolutely insane
Yes, but that meant less competition for women for the men that were left.
@@schmingusssWhat an incredible stupid thing to say. Congrats for being an imbecile.
@@claudiucojobv Facts Don't care about your feelings you dip shit.
@@schmingusss what
@@claudiucojobv its true tho not realu importan but true if youre compiting as a firm with 5 difrent firma if 3 of them disiper competition will be easier its fact not a importan t one but a fact dont get so trigerd
this guy is good. one of the best analysts I've heard. not the storyteller that Dan Carlin is, but a greater strategic mind and vision
TIK has presented the evidence and made a great argument for a complete narrative change regarding the German campaigns. Impressive that he does not regurgitate what he was taught, he dug deeper and has worked it out. I mostly agree based on what he has pointed out, but I admit it is hard to give up Hitler the madman. Cheers.
I swear this channel has taught me more about the eastern front in one day than what schools and documentaries can do in 5 years. It's a shame the eastern front isn't covered more in world history classes since it's at least in my opinion the most important part of the war. 1941 - 1943 is the True Rise and Fall of the Reich to me. Thanks for the videos and keep up the good work.
Every day is a good day if theres a new TIK vid
And to think, most people don't look forward to Mondays!
"What works on the European chess board, does not work on the Asiatic go board." Beautiful.
There are two things I will likely never be able to resolve within myself - First is the lack of commitment of men and materiel to Fall Blau; namely the withdrawal of 11th army, and then the lack of much-needed reinforcements during the Battle of Stalingrad, leaving bridgeheads over the Don, much like Oranienbaum Bridgehead.
Many people insist blithely that Fall Blau was and would under any circumstances, fail, but I strongly disagree.
There are enough scenario's to assume that Blau could have succeeded; including first dealing with the British in North Africa and the Mediterranean before committing to Russia, also if all the originally allocated armies had been concentrated at and upon one strategic objective at a time; and although unlikely, an immediate breakout of the sixth army with an operational reserve in the Don area could have at least held off the Soviets until suitable campaigning weather the following year. (With the Mediterranean secured, there would be no Sicily landings, and I imagine Hitler may have learnt a serious lesson about leaving his flanks weak, in addition to perhaps coming out of his fantastical haze about the true state of the Red Army.
A strike with 4th and 1st Pz, 6th, 11th,17th, 4th Luftflotte, plus satellite armies down the Don bend, across to Stalingrad - either leaving 11th to lay it to siege if well defended or take it if not, then shoot for Astrakhan could have all been achieved so much even before 'Edelweiss'.
Cutting the Volga at Astrakhan has obvious advantages as it was the Lend-Lease port, it would have temporarily isolated all the Red Army units in the Caucasus, enough at least to weaken them, and as long as the Axis keep the Don-Volga line intact, it is very likely that the overall strategic picture may have lead potential co-belligerents like Turkey and others to join in if they sense the kill.
By 1943, the II SS Pz Corps is online, along with the new medium and heavy tanks, and the final death blow can be delivered by capturing the Caucasus, which ultimately leads to Moscow, Leningrad, Murmansk, and Archangelsk.
Whether this is enough to allow GroSdeutschland to exist as a major world power is far more difficult to presage, but almost certainly the war would have looked very different
I agree that the Germans would have done much better if they'd cut off the Caucasus by reaching Astrakhan or some other point on the Caspian; and indeed it seems strange that this objective was not emphasized in the campaign or by the high command, despite the difficulties associated with bringing it about. This would have greatly weakened the Soviet forces to the south due to the loss of supply and command control. And like you said, if they could have completely cleared the banks of the Don-Volga line, then holding off Russian forces in the north seemingly would have been possible and the worst effects of any Russian counter-offensive avoided. This would have allowed for a complete conquest of the Caucasus in '43, as you suggest, especially if the 11th army had remained in the south to help out instead of being over-confidently and strangely sent north.
But I'm far less certain than you that this would have changed the overall picture much. A two-stage two-year plan to fully take the south would result in a Russia hobbled by oil shortages. But I can't imagine they'd be out of fighting spirit and willing to give up Moscow, Leningrad, Murmansk, etc. in the years after that. In particular, with the German emphasis even greater in the south, it seems conceivable that the siege of Leningrad would have been broken early, and the north of Russia even better prepared to resist eventual attack. And meanwhile, the British and Americans would have been growing immensely in strength, as in the original timeline, and the Germans still would have lost -- albeit a year or two behind schedule.
Still, makes you wonder what a few changes could have done. A little more effort, a little clearer focus... Like you, I feel that Case Blue was not inherently a doomed plan.
Because of this channel I enjoy Mondays again.
It's the best way to beat the Monday Blaus
TIK
Hey I see what you did there!😁
Big Guy you're a big guy
"Let's fight a short decisive war in Russia!" These are famous last words. But another quote I like was from Napoleon after he returned from Russia, "Next time I'll get it right." Perhaps this was topped by the best apology of the 20th century by Gavrio Princip, who shot Archduke Ferdinand, "Sorry, I didn't expect everyone would get this upset."
Tbf he did beat Russia before in a short decisive war and I’m sure he thought he could do it again
@@michaelgoldsmith9359 Could he sustain it? Is capturing Moscow "beating" Russia? It's much, much harder to win a peace than win a war.
@@francisebbecke2727 no capturing Moscow isn't "beating Russia" that's not what i'm referring to i mean when he beat Russia is earlier in the war of the third coalition when napoleon crushed Russia and Austria at Austerlitz and Friedland
@@francisebbecke2727 Germany could have won the peace but was too stupid to have the foresight before 1944 to just let Vlassov become the rally man and just create a second civil conflict in Russia behind the Lokot Autonomy. At the very least, Germany could use its weight and population size to hold sway and at least made its priority holding the oil fields to the south and the grain as well. They already had the Muslims in full-on rebel mode.
Japan beat Russia in a short decisive war. Napoleon had as well,, previous to his idiotic final campaign into Russia. Charles XII would have likely done so as well if a sniper hadn't taken him out. Honestly the idea that Russia is unbeatable was mid to late Soviet propaganda and has very little relation to reality. It also lets the "great conqueror" types off the hook for strategic blunders.
TIK! Best WW2 channel. Good work. Keep it up.
Thanks! Will do :)
The most enjoyable channel on youtube. Cant wait for your next video!
Wow, I admire the effort, clarity and use of details involved in explaining the events. Not only on the battlefild inself but in the background as well. Among other things, why Hitler started to mistrust his generals - and how Stalin correctly guessed the bottom line in the end: Germans are trying to reach oil fields. Great video!
You're going to trigger soooo many wehraboos...
Wehrabouts are they? Normally they're here by now, overwhelming us with their mechanized hordes
TIK lmfao
I dont get it why would someone get triggered by this video...
WolfschanzeArchiv they get triggered because they believe that the German army was the greatest military in the world with no flaws what's so ever. and that the only reason that they lost was because of snow and endless hordes of Russians.
also the legendary myth that hitler lost because he didn't listen to his generals n had he listened to them he would certainly have won the war....
I just finished Stahel’s book. Your Presentation fit nicely with that historical foundation. Great work.
"Racing forward leaving millions of enemies behind you...ehem gauderian" he was an agressive bastard wasn't he🤣
Hats off to you, my dear! You give me the impression that to find a more clarifying lecture and a more suggestive account on this episode of the East Front would be a vain attempt. Much obliged.
Thank you, glad you enjoyed the video :)
Pronounciation of German names is always excelent. Except for Hoth. There is no th in German. In fact, a H following a T is now obsolete in German spelling. It's Hot.
Well I didn't know that. But I do now! Thank you!
(and normally I suck at German names, so to only get Hoth wrong is a good thing!)
German th- is a fancy way of spelling t-. Cf. English 'Thames' and 'Thomas'.
Handy minor rule for English speakers on pronunciation of German:
German -ei- is pronounced as English -ie-. Always (also in 'Leibstandarte').
German -ie- is pronounced as English -ei- (in eg. 'receive'). Always.
Further: Vorónezh. Budjónny
Which I know from looking them up on Wikipedia.
Somehow my hyphens got screwed up. They were supposed to be on either side of the letter sequence.
Maybe in Standard German, but examples of hard T with TH spelling abound: Rothenburg ob der Tauber (city in Middle Franconia), several towns in the Upper Palatine of Bavaria and Upper Franconia (towns and cities ending in -reuth and -ath.)
Timothy Piggott-Smith had the same problem on the Battlefield series. He also mispronounced FDR's name as "Rue-sevelt", when you can listen to radio broadcasts from the 30s and 40s, and it's always "Rose-velt." (BTW, the Internet Archive site has a good collection of WW2 radio news broadcasts, like Shirer in Berlin, D-Day, etc.)
Astonishing Video. Week after week ....more and more solid work. You deserve more patrons. I´ll be one soon. Congratulation again Sir.
Thank you! And I'm very grateful to the Patreons I have already. The more support I get, the more I can put into these videos
Also your humor and proper irony are appreciated !!!!
I saw a historian of the Eastern front on a different TH-cam channel and he brought up something that I hadn't thought about before. One good way to tell that a campaign has not succeeded is the development of a follow-up campaign before the first one is even finished. I shouldn't say follow up as much as a brand new campaign that either continues on the work of the first one or is there to fix the first one. In some ways you could say that Fall blau was partially at least an add-on or repair of operation Barbarossa.. also I'm not sure how many people might know this but Barbarossa is a pretty bad Commander to name your campaign after. He famously drowned because he refused to accept the idea that a river wasn't fordable at the spot they were at and took it upon himself to show everyone that it was fordable which was fine until his horse was swept out from underneath him and he drowned. This is the guy that operation barbarosso was named after
So one important take away is Halder has no credibility due to his perfidy. And Halder's diaries are what historians use to analyse Hitler. Therefore, do we really understand Hitler as well as we thought?
The answer is probably no, we don't. Certainly not for the period 1941-1945. And most of the generals calling Hitler mad by the end are the one's who were sacked. Those still fighting in 1943-1945 weren't alive after the war to write their memoirs. And even if they were, they had to get past Halder.
I think you are red-pilling the hell out of us with history! These findings in my mind call into question everything I thought I knew about history. How much of it is a pack lies?
@@TheImperatorKnight Your account of the sackings made me rethink and question the motivation behind the plot to assassinate Hitler. Perhaps it wasn't as altruistic as 'history' claims - perhaps the plan to preserve dignity of generals and use Hitler as scapegoat was formed long before Nuremberg - perhaps because of the sackings. Granted, Halder was not implicated as a conspirator in 44, but they say he was part of an earlier plot - and undoubtedly he had influence over the 1944 conspirators.
@@dlr978 of course it wasn't altruistic. By the time the plot took place, cccp was at the polish border. If they managed to do it, they would save their own asses first and foremost. The red army would never enter berlin
People have been misinformed on the history of , like many events
Lee's retreat from Gettysburg and Kesslerings defense of Italy are two of the best Retrograde Movements that come to mind
Except the scale is rather different!
" We have only to kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will come crashing down"
Trust me guys
-Funny Mustache man
[Probably]
It wasn't that rotten I guess..
@@deg6788 Exactamundo... IMHO the best quote on that is: "In fighting Russia , the German Army is like an elephant attacking a horde of ants. The elephant may kill thousands or millions, but in the end , he will be eaten to the bone" - Gen. Blaskowitz, Army Group N.
It took some time but it did, so did britton, france, italy. not too bad.
"...on top of us."
I much appreciate the clarity, concision and orderly setting forth of content. This way of teaching makes it much more easy to assimilate a complex series of events. It is well contextualized too by emphasizing the context of the fight, the differing views of Hitler and Halder. Also, the pacing and enunciation of speech is excellent. Thanks for doing such a good job. Any teacher could learn from your skillful presentation - which also has perfectly timed and effective and clear, simple visuals.
Very interesting and unbiased, I like how you are not trying to paint Hitler as an absolute madman like most others try to do... Instead you focus on facts and leave emotions out of it. Thank you!
You're welcome, glad you enjoyed the video :)
The more I think about it, the more the German invasion of the Soviet Union looks like an ill-timed and ill-advised effort. Did the Germans think they could get a quick victory because the Soviets performed poorly in the Winter War, or did they have a low opinion of Russia in general because of their WWI experience? They engage a second foe, numerically strong and vast in territory, while another foe (Britain) remains undefeated, and the US is hovering just offstage. Hitler did not seem to have a sense of timing, of knowing when to strike. There was no need for them to attack the Soviet Union when they did-- Stalin, of all people, had been lulled into complacency by the German-Soviet non-aggression pact, so there was no immediate threat on the frontiers of the Reich.
Then, when they did not achieve a quick victory, they did not face reality and dig in, but kept pushing beyond the limits of their logistic and manpower. For a military with a reputation of efficiency and rationality, it's almost inexplicable. Did the political demands of the Nazi state so thoroughly override sound military thinking?
An important thing to keep in mind, and one reasons that Generals thought Hitler was 'mad.'
Hitler did not take a look at his options, and decide what was the most likely favorable outcome (in the conventional sense), and then move towards that, while avoiding undo risks.
Hitler pursued a strategic and ideological goal, and took the risks necessary to achieve that goal. You might say this was "political demands" overriding "sound military thinking", but you can't separate the two in WW2: You only get into the war in the first place, and the decision to invade the Soviet Union, in the first place, through the pursuit of Hitler's Stategic Vision and Gambles.
This is a larger scale of the 'ticking clocking' TIM mentions in his videos that the German Generals ignored or misunderstood, that Hitler had. Beyond the level of strategy, there was Grand Strategy. And on that level, Hitler had decided to gamble everything, not in 1941, but in 1933. And in Hitler's mind, there was victory or nothing. If he did not alter the map of Europe dramatically, including it's demographics, Germany would be eventually marginalized by a larger power, which for Hitler's nationalist pride, was worse than total destruction in an armed conflict.
I love this video I watched it like 3 times now I just like how you have everything all the units set up their movements the picture of the general that that's just freaking awesome
It's brilliant isn't it. Check out the Operation Market Garden video. That's one of my favourites.
Informative, well voiced, well paced. Really good. Subscribed.
Thanks! Glad you liked it!
Am i the only one revisiting this video, waiting for the next Stalingrad episode?
TIK, thank you for this.
I always knew on some level many of the things that you're saying, but you've validated my beliefs and taught me so much more besides.
Truly invaluable man.
So the WWI twice winner of the Iron Cross Corporal was more tactically brilliant than the OKW Chief Halder.
Did Halder for one minute believe that Stalin would surrender if Moscow was captured? The Czar fled Napoleon in 1812, knowing the winter was an ally. Stalin would have fled to Kamchatka if necessary and would have shoveled Russian lives against the Germans while he stayed cozy & safe.
fanof runbot he probably didn't think about it. Prussian doctrine was essentially a codified rehash of Napoleon's doctrine. It works when the enemy has no strategic depth and mobility outpaces defense, but not every war is like this. Predictably it failed in very similar conditions.
@fanof runbot
Who said soviet citizens were eager to have themselves thrown against the Germans?
And equating Russian Campaign of 1812 to Eastern Front of WWII is absurd. They way the wars were fought was fundamentally different, aside from "lots of people were killed and starved to death".
Was referring to the capture Moscow strategy. I don't think the soviet citizens had much choice in the Red Army. A scene from ENEMY AT THE GATES (2001) kinda puts it in context.
@fanof runbot
Capturing Moscow meant completely different things in those two wars, due to different natures of those wars. One cannot point at army of musket troops and sabre cavalry walking out of Moscow in early XIX century and claim it had consequences similar to what might have happened almost 129 years later.
And referencing Enemy at the Gates in historical context is not a good idea. Because it was not... a very historical movie.
This series is better than the old World at War television series.
The intro to that series is more dramatic though :)
m9078jk3 No it's not!!
m9078jk3 I don't remember was it world at war or battlefield t.v. series that did the siege of leningrad episode while dedicating 3/4 time to wehraboos. They also played sad violin music when siege was lifted and Jerries got rolled over.
Yes, because Tik implements the latest of historic data from various books and authors.
And it shows the differences with the common perception of the 1970's-1980's.
m9078jk3 bad comparison, waw focused on people not tactics, different works
Tactics dont necessarily win wars the same with strategies realistic logistics wins wars. But actually no one wins at war because it's all hell.
Your videos are amazing but hard to digest for majority off braindead TH-cam goers. You show a lot of compassion and go into great detail without being boring, that's quite an achievement.
Once Hitler's - primary objective - became Stalingrad, Manstein's army should have been imediately recalled from the south to prevent Stalingrad from being incirclled.
That would have been a disaster. It would have exposed a massive German flank to major Soviet armored forces, and one which the Germans would not have been able to defend as they redeployed northeast in support of the Stalingrad attack.
Stalingrad blocked shipping on the Volga. It restricts fuel availability to the Russians from the South. The German didn’t have the oil fields but the Russians didn’t have the oil either because of German control of Stalingrad.
@@allangibson8494 I guess all those t34s that trapped the 6th army must have been pushed there. i mean the germans were in sgrad for like what 4,5 mos so the entire soviet machine must have totally ground to halt for lack of oil during all that time, right?
4:00 the BIG difference is that Moscow wasn't the seat of government in 1812, while capturing Moscow in 1942 would also also neutralise Russia's major rail junction, which linked Murmansk, Astrakan and the Urals.
Good point indeed, but regardless of Moscow, the war could've went on for ages in the Urals.
There was no way to get the oil from Baku to refineries in Romania anyway. The transport up the volga doesn't go to romania, it goes to moscow.
Via the Black Sea ?
Yes and even worse, the oil from Baku was suitable only as low grade heating oil - it was no good for making gasoline or even diesel. Also the Russians had wrecked the wells so thoroughly it would have taken the Germans at least 6 months to repair the damage.
@@jessiepinkman7736 then where did the USSR get its petrol from, if not the Caucasus?
@@jaykilbourne1110 they got a lot of it from American lend lease.
@@jessiepinkman7736 yeah, and that was after 1941. what about before that?
Magnificent overview of the Blau Operation. Thanks so much TIK. Very grateful for your work.
One of the most informative ww2 videos on you tube. I keep coming back to it. It really opens up the subject. Brilliant Tik
For a succinct introduction the Stalingrad campaign and battle, “Victory at Stalingrad” (2002) by Geoffrey Roberts stands out. In little over 200 pages, Roberts wrote a brilliant introductory survey of the battle, its significance in History and culture and the historiography about it.
For the armchairs historians that see the battle as a key to victory its always good to point out that after mid-1945 the Americans could destroy cities or point targets such as the Reich Chancellery and Führer headquarters with nuclear weapons. Alan J. Nevine puts the argument that Stalingrad didn’t matter much anyway in, “Was World War II a near-run thing?” (The Journal of Strategic Studies. Number 1, vol. 8).
Yeah because capturing Moscow worked so well for Napoleon....
Those who don't learn from history...
Hadler
doesn't work cause that wasn't his objective, but for the Mongols it works, and for the Germans who want the conquest of "just the european part of the USSR" probably would have work, who in 1941 was the neurological central system of all the Soviet Union, and was close to Gorki (who was the true objective of the operation Barbarossa)
who was actually very different than in 1812, cause the revolutionary french, want to destroy the russian army, not conquer russia, they just take Moscow, cause the russians don't defend it, but their objective was always get a fight with the enemy, to anhilate their army, and claim victory, rather than "occupy" it
@@omarbradley6807 yes, in 1812 the Russians just pulled back to the east, Napoleon was in a city with no support and extended supply lines......then the Russians fought back with a vengeance. In WW2, they moved most production east, that's why the Germans were just fighting in ruins in Stalingrad, with a massive Russian fighting presence to the east (History doesn't repeat but it rhymes). In my opinion, the only neurological centre of Russia is "Holy Mother Russia" herself.
@@SuperNevile Actually, The difference is hughe, In 1941, you would had need, roads, railways, etc, and all the roads and railways past towards Moscow, and the Soviets, couldn't move the production, to "the east," first, cause if Moscow would had fell, the logistic, and resources needed to produce the material, would had been troublesome to carry, even the Oil in the Caucasian zone, would had been, cutted, so the Soviets, would had need to made miracles, and sacrifice a hughe quanty of men and machines, whitout even took the offensive, and finally, after Moscow, there no where to go, except Gorki, then, the Soviets, will had to hide behind the Urals, where there are few serious points of population, and industry, and the majority where on the Pacific, and also the german objective, Was Gorki, if Moscow had fell, it would had been a disorganised, and short supplied defense, and also the battle will be in the factories, and then, you just create the Panter-Wotan line between Astrakhan and Archangel, and negotiate peace with the Soviets, or you let them at the other side of the line, where they would had suffer heavily, and would had retreated back to the Urals, and the political effect, maybe would had been who Japan join the war, and the Germans get as far as Omsk
I've seen many of your clips, TIK, and, IMHO, YOU'RE A REAL HISTORIAN, DIGNIFUL OF THIS NAME! At the beginning I didn't like your deep pronunciation, it reminded me a very cocky guy who brays too much on a certain news channel, but I realised I should finally decide to grow up and look at the very high quality of the information you show. Now I find your accent perfectly fine, and your attitude calm, not arrogant, sure of yourself, YOU ARE A PROFESSIONAL and, while my words shouldn't mean much to you as I'm a mere nobody, as long as there's still a place under the sun for me, I've got the right to an opinion, and it's most favourable for your classy materials! Keep up the good work, thank you for bringing useful information on this site!
Just seen your comment, and thank you! I will admit that in some videos I do come across as arrogant, but that wasn't the intention. I do a lot of reading on the topics and then make a case against the alternative arguments. The way I argue or state my case may make me sound cocky, and I'm aware of this, but it's not arrogance, more taking a firm stand. History lies in the heart of the debate after all. Can't have a debate if one side appears weak! Cheers!
@@TheImperatorKnight Rest assured that from my point of view you're way better than many so-called historians, and you're NOT AT ALL arrogant, it was just at the beginning that some inflexions of your voice sounded - falsely - like that, sorry for having told this, actually, because it doesn't apply to you at all, really! Yes, I could see you read a lot and understand what you read, and that you even look for very rare sources and corroborate them very harmoniously with the main information, your series on the Courland pocket are the most authoritative and detailed information for me so far, the accuracy and plenty of the details there really impressed me, a sharp masterpiece of highest quality indeed, at least fully to my taste! Your materials are my favourite and I am sure I am just one of the very many accross the world who appreciate your work at maximum. And I am sure they all agree with me definitely! Don't be fooled by my kind words, though; I spare none to congratulate, but, against others who just speculate and splash rubbish around you will see all my wrath in smashing comments. Keep up your brilliant work, man, I wish I could express my view half as effectively as you do!
From all I have read, in both world wars, the British Army and its generals were full of admiration for the German Army - at a tactical level. Strategically however, they thought it was hopeless. Aside from Hitler, Admiral Raeder seems to have been the only real strategist on the German side in WW2.
The British would obviously admired the Nazis after all they had so much in common.
You are either a fascist or communist I cant tell the difference! Fantastist maybe a better adjective.@@Abhishek-sr2pu
Prepare to add my name to the list of patreons
That's awesome, thank you!
What a great historian you are. This is a fantastic presentation. Thank you.
I knew a German soldier who went to the Russian front. He told me that because of the great distances some drivers fell asleep at the wheel as they drove East. Causing accidents and delays in the German advance.
Mansteins picnic at Leningrad.
Pass the salt, Manny
Btw, If you havent noticed my username was before "toni112007" I am actually one of the older subscribers of this channel, when you did lets plays. While I dont agree with every single thing you say, in majority I do and I fully support what you are doing right now, and keep doing it! :D
Ah, I do remember you Toni! Good times back then, getting shot up in Close Combat and Panzer Corps haha :)
TIK I am really happy about how much your channel has evolved since that time. I hope your channel get even more popular as you deserve it ;)
Well, I'm just happy that you're still watching since I made the transition to history videos. I was fearful I'd lose many viewers from the gamer audience, which would be a shame because the topics are quite similar.
Thks so much for making this complex operation digestible. You get it just right, full of necessary details but yet simple enough for me to grasp it. I love the way to got from conceptually grand strategy to the operational details. I hope, and wish you can, in the future, explain Bagration to us. Thks again
You do not underestimate the importance of Moscow, it is a huge industrial area and the most important center of almost all communications in the European part of the USSR.
(In fact, I am delighted with the work that you have done, so please do not consider my remark as criticism, but rather as additions)
Kudos TIK, you pronounced David Stahel correctly. Drives me nuts when that American dude calls him Stay Hill.
Glad to hear I pronounced something right for a change! :D
TIK You've made great progress so I don't want to nit-pick... But Wagner is pronounced with a soft 'a' like the great composer. So v-aahhhg-ner. Not vag-ner to rhyme with haggler
It doesn't have to be perfect :) I like the way it is.
great material, my uncle was fighting in Stalingrad, lost an eye. Always thought German could won the battle, but now see how strategicly was far away
PLEASE NO MORE DETAILS!!! I would like broad generalizations mixed in with a slab of propaganda.
Keep up the great videos!!
You forgot to request that I show WW2 footage of fighting that's not related to the campaign in question ;)
TIK I'd like to see the invasion of D-Day while talking about the Battle of Kursk
painter203 buy textbooks approved by the Texas schools
Lol!! I went to highschool and college in Texas...know all about it. Our public education system is in a truly sad state.
Many places are nearly as bad but without the anti science slant
These days when I visit the library, my own shelves are better stocked than theirs in history and with newer books
@@painter203
I'm very impressed by how much detail you have mentally integrated, as evident by how you explain things.
Over 50 minutes? You're spoiling us!
Someone last time complained that my videos were too long (on the one that was 25 minutes). Well, sadly for him, they're as long as they need to be - and Battlestorm Stalingrad will be a lot longer!
Good Analysis of Operation Blue reminds me of an old saying, " He who wants everything ends up with nothing at the end." Question though...would Manstein 11th Army kept intact and sent to assist Army A or B made a difference?
Absolutely. The only issue would be the supply situation, which his army's presence may have made worse.
@Binh
11th Army was the controlling army for the Romanians.
Von Manstein needed to be jumped up to AGD commander in the summer of 42 -- and given 11th, 6th and 4th Panzer armies plus the Romanians.
The minor axis allies needed to be put to work on the RAIL NET -- not the front line.
The entire campaign turned on getting the rail net up and running, chasing after the front line troops, so that gasoline is freed up.
Halder paid no attention to this.
Hitler assumed that logistics was unimportant, too.
An oil field without a rail connection (Mykop) would be worthless.
German doctrine tends to disregard logistics maybe due to majority of the time they've been fighting smaller neighbours near them
A good question. But I think that if you realize your objectives are the key to winning or losing, and you do not yet have attained those objectives, weakening your offensive is a strategic AND tactical mistake. Leningrad could take care of its own for a while, if Germany had taken the oil and grain intact they would have taken Leningrad eventually. But diluting an already stretched front even further while you haven't yet achieved anything? That's just silly.
They might not have won in either case, but this certainly didn't help. Remember: they had an army of 600000 Soviet troops facing them, getting reorganized en resupplied. The 11th Army, during the battle of Sevastopol, consisted of nine German infantry divisions (including two taken on strength during the battle), in two corps, and two Romanian rifle corps, plus various supporting elements, including 150 tanks, several hundred aircraft and one of the heaviest concentrations of artillery fielded by the Wehrmacht. This would certainly have made a serious dent in the opposition.
@@TheImperatorKnight I don't understand why it would have made it worse.
Another tremendous video. Better than any I experienced at war College!
Thanks a lot, TIK. The amount of detail u put in the video saves a ton of time and effort from us.
Is this the Best World War 2 channel?
I think It probably is.
Well, I'm glad you think so :)
I really enjoyed this lecture, loads of detail but not much prior knowledge needed to follow the story through. Engaging narration, too. However, my son thought it was really boring compared to singing dinosaurs, so a mixed reception overall.
To be fair, it's hard to compete with singing dinosaurs
The A-A-Line was suposed to be based on the river Dwina in the north and then on the Wolga southward to Astrachan. So it was based on the closest thing to a geographical barier available.
What kind of Pateron donation would be required to get TIK to read out loud The Halder Diaries over a series of videos? :)
take my money!!
I don't know but I'd pay any amount to hear TIK tear the guy apart
One of your best videos! Consequential work! Thanks! 🎉
Is there anywhere available a full collection of your videos on WWII, the eastern front. I would like to have it as an index to check your videos. Thanks very much, they have been very interesting!
I like your videos a lot, usually it’s just a disembodied voice and arrows on a map, you make your videos very engaging. Thx.
Yes the Stalingrad series continues time to get some snacks
Hope you enjoy the video as much as the snacks!
Tremendous lecture. Lots of info here I did not know. I didn't see any edits here either. You just let that go off the top of your head. Amazing work. Good map graphics as well.
Thank you for this!!!! You need to be on the american heroes channel or military history channel
Wow, thank you! I no longer watch TV, so I'd rather these videos just get more popular on here :)
First time I ever heard anyone say Hitler may have had the correct strategic idea (south for the oil and food ) ; an idea that was stymied by his chief of staff. Something to consider...
The disaster occured much earlier...with operation Typhoon in Nov41 (attempt to capture Moscow).
The whole thing failed horribly and an entire army was left standing in summer clothing during russian winter - This alone should prove just how unprepared the axis actually was, they did one thing right, the blitzkrieg, everything else bad.
Excellent video. Barbarossa failed for the same reason Napoleons invasion did; logistics. Too much distance, not enough fuel, food and ammunition (or winter clothing). By European standards Russia lost both wars but simply traded bodies for space and time until their full might could be assembled from their vast territory. Scorched earth policies in both wars also robbed the invaders of immediate resupply. It was simply not thought through and Western Russia became the graveyard of the Wehrmacht.
Adding to the pile of "What if's", that operation Typhoon in late 1941 would have been then and there been directed towards the south instead of the center to have a better springboard position to launch Blau.
Meu amigo, parabéns pelo teu trabalho. Já vi alguns documentários, mas o teu é cheio de detalhes. Saudações do Brasil.
I love the detail, whether it's the chronology of events, sometimes to the day, or the actual deployment of forces on the various fronts. I've never seen it presented any more thoroughly online than on your channel.
Ultimately, we know that Blau failed in its one real objective, which was to obtain sizeable oil supplies while depriving the Soviets of same. That is an undisputed fact. The question is why it failed, and you gave three good reasons, ie, the logistics (distance), insufficient troops and Red Army resistance.
However, you spend a lot of time criticizing Halder or some other General for not following Hitler's orders, as if that was also a significant reason for the failure of this operation. That seems questionable to me. I'm not disputing that these disconnects between Hitler and his various Group Leaders and Generals didn't exist, but I do question whether Halder or the others disobeyed because they disagreed with the strategic plan or didn't understand it. They weren't idiots. I think a case can be made that they understood the strategic plan but Hitler didn't understand the tactical imperatives and obstacles facing such a plan.
Just for an example, let us agree or concede that occupying Stalingrad wasn't critical. The argument is made here that the Wehrmacht lost time and initiative getting bogged down north of or near Stalingrad when it was essential to head south. Had they done that, wouldn't that have freed up Red Army forces to also head south, possibly posing a threat of encircling from the north or simply reinforcing the line ahead of them? It's sort of a "zero-sum game", though if you are fast enough, you can concentrate forces, win engagements and capture large numbers of enemy troops. It's not clear to me that the tactical "mistakes" were a major contributor to the failure of Blau. I go back to those three reasons. They are the same three reasons that apply to the failure of Barbarossa.
In a sense, the success of Army Group Centre until October of 1941 suggests that great tactics didn't help very much. Army Group Centre did almost everything right. The Red Army did a lot of things wrong. Yet, when they got close to Moscow, it still wasn't enough. Had they decided instead to make Army Group South the focal point of Barbarossa, the Red Army would have concentrated their efforts accordingly, as they were preparing to do, and the ultimate outcome might well have been the same, just played out differently. Indeed, some historians have made a convincing argument that there wasn't a "turning point" on the eastern front but rather that it was always doomed to failure.
Agree with your assessment. Operational errors were a factor but by May 42 Germany could not win the war. At worst a German victory at Stalingrad May have led to stalemate at best d delayed the war one year.
Loved the video.
You are one of my favorite military/WWII channels
I like the guderian part :-D
:D
I'm sure TIK was just clearing his throat, not dissing the God of Panzer warfare
A very informative video, the author has studied the question, greetings from the capital of Ukraine, the city of Kiev.
it was not a disaster, it was a blessing
When you read the crimes the of Einsatzgruppe commmited against Jews and Russians, it was definitely a blessing Russia defeated these Nazi monsters.
@@danlivni2097 and you could immediately dispell the vaticans collaboration with the church burning nazis in the baltics as a fucking ideological warcrime. they cried "the commies kill god and burn churches" so many times that they never seemed to notice it was the nazi who burned villagers in their churches all over eastern europe....
Idit Smotrit
Operation Citadel documentary and analysis next please !!!
Very good indeed. Thank you for your excellent work.
15:00, Good Lord!? 4100km(!) To give everyone an idea of how insanely FAR that is, 4100km=2547.622 MILES.
The distance from New York City to Los Angles is 2,451 miles(!)
Then go 100 miles out to sea from NY & L.A.!!!
THAT'S the Front Line, the width of NORTH AMERICA. holy. crap.
Bro just found you. You just talk and IT IS STILL AMAZING. Excellent job. I just wish school teachers were as talented and interesting.
what a great historic analyse! thank you for not staying on the surface like many others but diving deeper in the details. i am german and know our countrys history pretty well, but this video from a british citizen is to outline.
Not going well for Germany here
It's not. And it's the German general's fault ;)
Great Jamie I hope they turn it around in the next episode ☺
The Soviets certainly turn it around
Herman Kranendonk spoiler warning lol
54:05 - time's up, over, Blau
1:20
Hold on hold on.
So it was the Germans lacking food while the soviets had plenty of it?
my life is a lie
My favorite WWII Germany exert! I love your research as far as books go and referencing them. Good work! Ever considered doing "first line" research in the archives? I suspect there is still a lot to be found.
An Army division is a small mobile city that needs constant resupply, replacements, etc. Cut the logistical tail and the units starve. Long distances consume supplies , manpower., and time. The US Army calculated it cost $1M/Soldier/year to keep a Soldier operating in Afghanistan. The long Russian distances, different rail gauges, poor roads, poor infrastructure, etc. consumed manpower, fuel, and time.
This is the real deal , Well Done Sir and I am very glad to join Your Site !