The 1941 invasion of Russia by the Nazis has many parallels to Napoleon's invasion, and marks a radical departure from previous Nazi tactics.
By 1941, Hitler was probably feeling pretty bold. He had smashed his main rival on the continent, made allies or subordinates to everyone else, and left England huddled on their island, playing a desperate game of hit and run. So assured was Hitler of his victory that he refused to commit forces to the critical Africa campaign. And the Soviets, utterly convinced that Hitler would finish the war with England before attacking Russia, only made a half-hearted attempt to fortify their country.
Hitler had good reason to suspect that the invasion of Russia would be a short affair. The Russian economy was in shambles, due to years of Soviet depredation. Their army's main strength was its numbers, though at times as many as 5 soldiers would be sharing a single rifle. Russia had gotten hammered in World War I, as Germany's slow crawl to the interior was only halted by Russia's pullout of the war. These problems were further expounded by Stalin's belief that the Nazis were his staunch allies, reportedly refusing to believe that the Nazis were invading after Operation Barbarossa commenced.
There was nothing subtle about the Nazi invasion of Russia. They smashed headfirst into the country, hoping to overawe the Russians into submission. But unlike France, there was no gesture of stability and unity; the Nazis brutally burned villages and terrorised the population into fighting for the equally brutal and oppressive Soviet Union. There was no delusion that this wasn't an ethnic cleansing. But despite Operation Barbarossa's reputation as a simple minded invasion, it was carefully crafted to attempt to avoid Napoleon's mistakes. Napoleon's invasion was a straight forward race to Moscow, but the grand army had been harrassed by the Russians coming from both Ukraine and the Upper balkans. The Nazis attempted to avoid this by pulling a three pronged strike into Russia, capturing Leningrad, Moscow, and Stalingrad at the same time, preventing the harrassing tactics of the Napoleon era Russians. However, in the long run, this served to stretch the nazi army thin, and slowed advancement to a halt, forcing the Nazis to endure the agonizingly cold Russian winter. Coupled with the rapid deterioration of the situation in Africa (the only reason it had survived so far was due to the brilliance of Erwin Rommel) and the fear of a rout, The Nazis were forced to continue to commit to their strategy, despite the frequent and numerous signs that failure would inevitably occur.
the Nazis were forced to call off the invasion of Moscow (though they had gotten close enough to see the spires of the Kremlin) in order to reinforce their sieges of Leningrad and Stalingrad, leaving the Soviet high command relatively unmolested. This is ironic, because Napoleon had captured Moscow, and his attempts to hold it was what did him in, but the Nazi's inability to take it is probably what lead to their decline. Because they were stymied at the two cities, the Soviets were able to convert much of their industrial capacity into manufacturing facilities for weapons of war, eventually grinding the Nazis down through attrition.
The two invasions, despite having dramatically different approach strategies, ended the same; with the European power sulking back in defeat.
2007-05-02 07:06:45
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
In the Spring of 1941, Britain was not in a position to establish a second front, so there was only one "front" at the time of Operation Barbarossa. Even Mein Kempf stated it would be a severe mistake to fight a two front war. Because of the uprising in the Balkans, Operation Barbarossa didn't take place earlier as planned, which could've avoided Napoleon's mistake by attacking Moscow in the dead of winter.
2007-05-02 08:34:49
·
answer #2
·
answered by Its not me Its u 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
He certainly did not avoid the most critical mistake of Napoleon, and he paid for it dearly.
2007-05-02 06:37:22
·
answer #3
·
answered by Fred 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
It wasn't that he was dumb. Far from it. It was his EGO that led to his downfall. He didn't like for his generals to tell him anything. He thought he had the military training to do the thinking for all branches of the military AND the SS. He didn't.
2007-05-02 06:53:16
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
ever heard the term "history repeats itself"?? theres your answer.
2007-05-02 06:14:22
·
answer #5
·
answered by pink_dancer912 3
·
0⤊
0⤋