>Attacking their allies, making the same mistakes Napoleon did a century ago.>Arrogant and mediocre high command.>Following the orders of an "enlightened" guy who basically ignored any criticism.>Poor assessment of the situation and potential pros/cons.>Extreme propaganda required to justify the invasion.>Underestimating the enemy, after a few previous easy victories.>Defeated by... surprise! the weather! Who could have imagined it.I mean, what the fuck? Sounds pretty subhuman to me. Never trust a German.
>>11929927Had to be done to protect EVROPA from judeo-bolshevism
>>11929946Yeah, let's allow these guys who are going to exterminate 90% of europeans to "protect" Europe.
>>11929927When you consider that the reason Germany invaded all of Europe was to have a united front against the USSR, it makes a bit more sense. While it makes more sense tactically for them to have focussed on Britain first, the reality is that they needed the oil fields of the Caucasus.
>>11929968>who are going to exterminate 90% of europeans Source?
>>11929970And, of course, conquering mainland Britain wouldn't have been the end of the Western front of the war. The Empire, likely led by fled politicians and the Royal Family, would have re-invaded sooner rather than later. Either way, Germany were fucked.
>>11929981Maybe I've exaggerated a bit, but I think you get the idea.
>Attacking their allies, They were never really allies, Hitler always planned to attack Stalin>Defeated by... surprise! the weather! They were defeated ultimately by soviet material, men and a willingness to die fighting, the Germans couldn't hope to recover their material losses after only a few months into Barbarossa, they hadn't even converted their economy into an efficient productive war time economy yet, they weren't even producing replacement tank parts.
>>11930016>They were never really allies, Hitler always planned to attack StalinThey were allies, perhaps distrustful of each other, but they signed a non-aggression pact and various commercial treaties.Daily reminder:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German%E2%80%93Soviet_military_parade_in_Brest-Litovsk>>11930016>They were defeated ultimately by sovietTouché. And if I recall correctly, Stalin talked about a "patriotic war" in order to mobilize the people, not about bolshevism.
most basic bitch eastern front thread on /his/. Quara tier.
>>11929927>>Attacking their allies, making the same mistakes Napoleon did a century ago.1.first they were not allies 2.what were they supposed to do both hitler and stalin knew war was inevitable anyway why not attack now while the soviets are still somewhat weakened instead of giving them an extra year to prep.>>Arrogant and mediocre high command.This one is true.>>Following the orders of an "enlightened" guy who basically ignored any criticism.This one is also true.>>Poor assessment of the situation and potential pros/cons.While german Intelligence reports were not the most accurate they did what they could>>Extreme propaganda required to justify the invasion.Not recent the german concepts of eastern european colonization is very old tracing its origins back to the teutonic order.>>Underestimating the enemy, after a few previous easy victories.Considering they clapped them for the first year i would say in between>>Defeated by... surprise! the weather! Who could have imagined it.Actually the weather and road conditions were the best they could be,at least when the campaign had began if they had stuck with original May plan most of the roads would have been filed with mud and i doubt they would have gone as far as they did.
>>11930167>1.first they were not alliesWell, if I recall correctly, they planned a joint invasion of Poland. Also, see >>11930047>what were they supposed to doI agree, but we are talking about facts. I also heard about the possibility of Stalin invading a weakened Europe (this is why the Soviet Union invested so much in military spending, and that's why they had the resources to repel the Germans).>While german Intelligence reports were not the most accurate they did what they couldI am mostly talking about Hitler ignoring the recommendations of his own generals and economists, who said that such an invasion would be a liability rather than a benefit, unless the infrastructure remained intact after the invasion.>Considering they clapped them for the first year i would say in betweenHere I am talking about their victory against France, which they considered a more worthy opponent after WWI.Glad to see a legit /his/ fellow. Forgive this uneducated noob.
>>11929927"Muh hindsight"Literally the entire world at the time including the Americans and British thought the Soviets would fold in a matter of months. Their recent humiliation in Finland coupled with the popular idea that the Soviet union was some uncivilized backwater made it look that way. It took years of fighting and millions of deaths for the Soviets to prove everyone wrong.
>>11931197Chill out, Attila.
>>11929927>>11930167>>Attacking their allies, making the same mistakes Napoleon did a century ago.The alliance with the russians was a pact with the devil. Everyone knew it would end soon and war would soon follow. Stalin just thought hitler would first peace out the western allies before turning on the soviets. He was surprised>>Arrogant and mediocre high command.the opening moves of barbarossa are some of the greatest strategical, operational and tactical moves. Kiev was deep battle to such a degree even isserman would be proud.>>Following the orders of an "enlightened" guy who basically ignored any criticism.that guy had just capitulated the (then assumed) strongest land army in the world in six weeks. Every gamble he had made was insanely succesful>>Poor assessment of the situation and potential pros/cons.they assessed that they needed more resources and that the USSR would not deliver them. Taking them was the only option. It was barbarossa and a chance of victory or a slow, strangling but certain defeat>>Extreme propaganda required to justify the invasion.not at all>>Underestimating the enemy, after a few previous easy victories.assumed a likewise defeat of russia like in ww1: destroy the russian army in frontier battles and then just ride trains into the hinterland to occupy. They did destroy the soviet army, but stalin just conscripted more and more men. >>Defeated by... surprise! the weather! Who could have imagined it.defeated by stalin being ready to literally destroy any future russia would have and american lend lease0/10 see me after class>>11931167this too
MP40 or Papasha?
>>11929927>>Defeated by... surprise! the weather! Who could have imagined it.Poltava happened during summer.Napoleon got trashed before winter begun.Adolf's zerg rush also run out of steam before winter (and battle of Stalingrad had begun in August).I'm pretty sure "real" Europeans just suck at logistics.
Hitler and Stalin were staunch allies, both being socialists. We should be thankful that Hitler invaded Stalin. If he didnt, Stalin would have invaded west and taken all of Europe.
>>11929927>USSR were allies and not people that were always gonna be attacked >Thinking that hitler ignored criticism early into the war and not later after everything was pretty much always fucked>defeated by weather and not overextended supply lines, later troop shortages and oil shortages that were a constant problem throughout almost the entire wardo people just make ww2 threads cause it has the most lies that are repeated en mass? cause fuck the Germans but at this point, you're just wrong to the point of lying
>>11929946Stalin wasn't even planning to invade Europe though. Even though Hitler gave him half of Poland lol.
>>11931680Stalin was building up his forces along the border. It was only a matter of time before the Russian socialist movement betrayed the German socialist movement
>>11931167This is it in a nutshell.
>>11931816Trotzki would’ve done this with his perpetual revolution. Stalin was too preoccupied brainwashing his subordinates
>>11931441>lend lease>in 1941I bet you teach in a public school.
>>11930013>Maybe I've exaggerated a bit, but I think you get the idea.
>>11929970>When you consider that the reason Germany invaded all of Europe was to have a united front against the USSRLol no. The USSR and Nazi Germany were de facto allies during the invasion of Poland, and Hitler himself saw war against the USSR as an abstract long term goal when WW2 broke out. It was just the catastrophic collapse of France and soviet dramatic ineptitude during the Winter War that lead to Barbarossa being regarded as feasible.
>>11929927>>Defeated by... surprise! the weather!Pic related.The Wehrmacht wasn't defeated by the weather but by stiff Soviet resistance, that wasn't merely because of "muh winter", "muh Siberians" or even "muh Battle of Moscow". The advance was already slowing down since Smolensk. Propaganda (i.e. "the Deutsche Wochenschau", the funny news reel where you get all the inaccurate footage of grey-helmeted Germans cruising around on fancy vehicles from) portrayed the city as already captured even though it took two more weeks to take it. Do you know the famous scene of that German machine-gunner lying on the ground, a wall to his left, providing covering fire for his mates, while they, who were also lying down, hop up and run across the street, carbines in hand? - yeah, that was from the news reel on the Battle of Smolensk, where the field greys had to fight block for block.It's not often talked about because it's a German victory and brainlets can only think in terms of "muh turning points", but it saw almost as many German casualties as Moscow and urban warfare similar to Stalingrad.What you list are armchair general talking points. As Dr. Jonathan House explains in his "The Three Alibis" logistics could only carry the Wehrmacht ca. 800km deep into the USSR. The fact that the USSR is a communist shithole with insufferable infrastructure does not render the Germans "subhuman", no less than it renders the Romans "subhuman" that they never conquer Germania Magna, which is just forest inhabited by semi-nomads who do not use coins until the third or fourth century AD.
>>11934336so you're saying that being a communist shithole without roads can actually be a good thing?