Quote:
Originally Posted by Diopos
Statements from Field Marshal Keitel:
Link: http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/Keitel/Keitel.zip, page 153
And also (from the Nuremberg Trial, Ithink): "The unbelievable strong resistance of the Greeks delayed by two or more vital months the German attack against Russia; if we did not have this long delay, the outcome of the war would have been different in the eastern front and in the war in general, and others would have been accused and would be occupying this seat as defendants today".
Anyway, even If the rivers were swolen they wouldn't just put one of the largst invading forces ever "on hold" just outside the Soviet borders. Call it "mobilization inertia" (  ) if you want, but they would have pressed on.
I still maintain, though that even if they succeeded in fullfilling Barbarossa's objectives it would not be enough in the end.
. |
Keitel has many reasons to blame the failure of Barbarossa on the Balkan campaign, he's hardly objective.
The original date for Barbarossa was May 15th, that's a month and one week, not 'two or more months'. Besides that; yes, the mud season would have put the German invasion on hold; the mud season in Russia was very serious for military operations. In October the Russian mud season impeded Operation Typhoon even more than the frozen winter did later on.