Why didn't Hitler aim for Mosow - the capital of USSR singlemindedly?

Answer 1

He did aim for Moscow in the plan Barbarossa ( invasion of Russia ) the Heeresgrouppe Mitte ( army group center ) had as final objective Moscow
This army group witch was the strongest off the three groups had first to take Smolensk and then to take Moscow but with the very heavy fighting in Minsk and Smolensk they where delayed in there tracks by 2 months and then Hitler decided to change the direction of hid mean offensive to the Ukraine so that the Heeresgrouppe Mitte could retake there offensive only after that this battle was ended.
But from then on they where already to late in the year and the weather turned against the Germans and they where stopped in there tracks by the weather and the fresh troops that where gathered around Moscow

Answer 2

Grab a map. Look at the distance between Warsaw and Moscow. It's about 1,200 miles. From Kiev it is 750 miles.

An advance on a narrow front (which is what I think you are suggesting) would have meant that the Germans would have had a penetration about 1,000 miles long, and (at best) perhaps a hundred miles wide.

All the Russians would have had to do was break through, at any point, (I say again AT ANY POINT) along that perimeter and they would be across the penetration. They could link up with the Russian Armies on the other side, and BINGO... they have cut off the German line of supply, and the German troops would be surrounded and cut off. (This is exactly what they did to the German troops in Stalingrad later in the war.)

So in order to protect his flanks, Hitler had to move on a broad front.

Another reason is that it wouldn't have done a whole lot of good. Stalin would have just moved the captial somewhere else. In fact I think much of the Soviet Government WAS evacuated from Moscow. Stalin was the government, and the government was Stalin... all they had to do was put him on a train, and as long as he had some sort of communicatons he could govern from Valdivostok if he had to. Napoleon captured Moscow and it didn't do him a bit of good... why does everyone think it would have been any different for Hitler?

Lastly the Germans had specific objectives besides Moscow. They wanted the farmlands of the Ukraine. They wanted the Russian fleet base at Lenningrad. They wanted the Baku oil fields. They wanted the Liebensraum.

Answer 3

The short, simple, answer is because he believed that destroying the Soviet Army, not conquering territory, was the shortest road to victory.

Long and involved answers; including political - military strategy, logistics - production, Nazi ideology, and a host of other mind numbing topics; are presented in any of numerous Eastern Front books and their Bibliography compilation. Start on Amazon.com and search under "Eastern Front" next, "Barbarossa," and, if desired, the "list mania" recommendations.

David M. Glantz and John Erickson are, subjectively, two very good authors. Pay attention too, to books and chapters that attempt to explain Hitler's irrational thinking.

If memory serves correctly (most likely not), W. Victor Madej wrote a book (title unknown) on Hitler's ordering Panzer units south in late summer, 1941. His main point is stripping Armored formations from Army Group Center, to help Army Group South, near Kiev, was THE major reason for German defeat on the Eastern Front and in WWII.

If you have the patience for it, playing "War in Russia," "East Front II," "IL-2 Sturmovik," and other similar computer games will give you more insight also.

Answer 4

Hitler had aimed for Russia. As Russia fought back, they lost battles, yet also feigned some defeats. The Russians would retreat back into their own country. The farther the Russian army retreated, the colder the weather got, with the Nazis right on their tail. This method was effective for the Russians were well prepared for this, as the Nazis were not. From then on, the Nazis lost their battles due to the temperature. They never got close to Moscow.

Answer 5

Hitler did not aim for Moscow because he was driven by a Seige mentality rather than the Blitzgreig mentality. Though he made huge tactical errors and interfered too much with the management of the war, he did have a solid understanding of strategic principles; however, the irony is that his army had the capabilities of one type of warfare while he drew the plans out for another.

Over and over again in looking at strategic objectives, Hitler saw war aims on expanding Germany's seige lines in a long drawn out conflict. He did not actually believe war with France would end in six weeks nor that he would be deep into Russia within the same span. His goal for the French invasion was to attack through the Ardennes not to knock France out of the war but rather to capture Belgium. The invasion of Norway was not to simply take away a possible Ally staging area but rather to secure himself Swedish Iron Ore. Hitler's decision to vere south into the Ukraine when he could have pushed straight into the Moscow-Gorki pass was another, though this time monumental, indecisive moment where he chose to expande siege lines and possibly capture southern oil fields rather than believing in the knock out punch.

If it had been WW1, his seige mentality would make logical sense. In a long drawn out conflict the extra resources and captured land would prove valuable but Hitler did not understand the logistical nightmares Russia would create for his effective but small field armies. The war machine was made for speed and quick destruction, and to their discredit, Hitler underestimated their capabilities in knocking anyone out quickly. When he veered South he also gave away all the time advantage his armies had gained, allowing the Soviets to pur troops through the pass.

Understanding Hitler's mindset is key to seeing why he did not push further for Moscow. Other responses tend to forget that Napoleon had no intention on occupying Russia, while Hitler planned on making it is backyard, so while Napoleon had no need of Moscow, Hitler surely did. What has to be realized is that by taking Moscow and the Gorki pass, thought it may not have ended the war, it would have done what Hitler had wanted ( Lebensraum, oil, resources, ect). Left to do their job, the armies would have cut through the pass east of Moscow and effectively knocked the Soviets out of the war, or the very least, achieved in expanding Hitler's seige lines. Before winter set it, Hitler would have had everything east of Moscow, including the Leningrad basin, without the abillity to be taken back by Soviet reinforcements. He tried to go everywhere at once without ever finishing off anyone place.
Siege mentality and objectives but with a blitz army and it could have still worked, but he pulled the trigger South too soon.

Answer 6

Because that's foolish. You do not strike at an enemy's capital when their warmy is still strong enough to strike. You destory their army and infastructure first, and then worry about occupying it.

A few examples of such a decision going bad...
Napoleon in Russia
Romans in Persia
British in the War of 1812
Austrians in the 7 Years War
Swedes in Prussia (I forget the war's name)

Answer 7

Moscow itself had few strategic advantages, especially when one took into account all of the other targets and forces in the area. The main thrust was to capture Soviet resources (especially oil) and toppling the Soviet government was a secondary objective.

Answer 8

He was desperate for those Eurasian and SE European oil fields. He didn't want or need to march on Moscow; Napolean made that mistake.

Answer 9

It's along way to go and you always have to secure your lines of communication otherwise you get cut off and surrounded. Eventually happened at stalingrad

Answer 10

Kill your television has the right answer,the Germans needed oil to fuel their tanks,planes,keep their weapons from freezing up and so on.