...instead of 3 fronts' attack?
2007-05-03 14:19:19 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
NO... The Russian climate was too severe for the Germans to be successful. The reason it would not be successful this way also is because of the "Blitzkrieg" mind set, just the Germans going to fast weakened their organization. Just a bit of fun trivia: Blitzkrieg means Lightning war.
2007-05-11 10:37:50 · answer #1 · answered by Matt 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well of course its easy now to reflect on what might have been.
Hitler's worst mistake was having an alliance with Italy.Mussolini attacked Abyssinia.Now the brits could'nt get into the war.Here was a chance to deal with one of the axis forces.To save Mussolini's bacon,Hitler was compelled to send the Africa Corp and Rommel to his aid.Not content with that little fiasco Mussolini then attacked Greece.Once again he bit off more than he could chew.Hitler was forced to conquer the whole of the Balkans,to again rescue his ally.
Had neither of these two occurencies happened. Hitler would have went through the USSR like a knife going through butter.
So we should be happy for Mussolini.Hitler would have found other people for his mass extermination facilities.Perhaps even built more.
2007-05-04 00:19:29 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Probably not.
Hitler would never listen to his General Staff; even massing his military would not have helped.
The main failure of the operation was starting just before winter, believeing it would be finished. Thus, the troops were never issued winter clothing.
The second item - the area was so expansive that the German military continually outran their supply lines. This was an item the Russian military took advantage of, letting the German military run strong, thus outrunning the supply lines.
2007-05-03 21:31:17 · answer #3 · answered by Living In Korea 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
No. He still had to confront Patton. Even Eisenhower could not fault the man for the way he fought. He was the "Pure warrior".
2007-05-11 19:26:37 · answer #4 · answered by Ke Xu Long 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Define successful.
Successful as in winning a battle, it's possible...changing the outcome of the war, very doubtful.
2007-05-11 21:14:51 · answer #5 · answered by John Y 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably not. The front was too long, the weather too harsh.
2007-05-11 15:26:05 · answer #6 · answered by merrybodner 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No...
supply lines too long
troops in summer uniforms
Russian winter.
Just like Napoleon.
History does repeat itself.
2007-05-03 21:29:00 · answer #7 · answered by robbie 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
No way, Russians are unbeatable
2007-05-11 08:10:29 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Impossible to say
2007-05-04 00:39:07 · answer #9 · answered by brainstorm 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
no if he did that he would leave his flanks(sides) open for a counter attack.and thats one thing you NEVER want to do is leave your flanks (sides)open .
2007-05-09 10:54:50 · answer #10 · answered by atlantismeditation@sbcglobal.net 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋