Quote:
|
Originally Posted by micky1up
the answer to the question is yes it was if rommels afriika corp where available for the babarossa campaign instead of fighting in the med the outcome of babarossa may have been different im also sure that rommels tatical influence would have made a massive difference
|
Rubbish the situation in Russia would still had been the same result, it comes down to logistics at the start of Barbarossa only one third of the German army was motorised unlike the SS Einsatzgruppen which was fully motorised and the fact they failed to take Moscow. Hitler took over running the war doing it his way and lost the gamble.
Field Marshal-General Erich Von Mainstein, wrote about his defeat at Stalingrad after the war: “In winter 1942 I realized that we would not win in the war against the Soviet Union. We failed to maintain the far-stretching front in Russia. I understood the Soviet troops would finally crush us, moving step by step”.
Logistics again Russia has a massive man power.
In 1943 when the German army was on the defensive and what dose Hitler do he launched that debacle operation at Kursk. As for Rommel he would have been sacked just like all the rest, Hitler wanted yes men not thinkers.
Salvadoreno interesting article but the U-Boat was lost before it started and Hitler made sure of that by declaring war on USA.