Stalingrad

Discussion in 'The Eastern Front' started by Zeppelin, Aug 23, 2007.

  1. 4th wilts

    4th wilts Discharged

    what about a better general;would this not have made any difference.
     
  2. Korps Steiner

    Korps Steiner Senior Member

    A very good question Lee ,Possibly is the answer , Paulus did have a couple of chances to encircle the majority of the withdrawing Russians in the Don Steppe prior to them withdrawing into the City but was too cautious to take them !!

    Particulary after the 48 Panzer Korps had unlocked the door into the South of the City Paulus delayed sending 6th Army units south to link up with them which could have trapped 40,000 Russians in the steppe.

    In the first few days of the fighting in the City those 40,000 were vital !!
     
  3. Sloniksp

    Sloniksp Junior Member

    I want to know if the russian officers really did shoot their men for retreating.

    Yes this is true but so did the Germans. Paulus executed over 300 soldiers in a weeks time for desertion. ;)

    The number that I read was 15,000. Also the germans were using the Russian children trapped in Stalingrad to fetch water from the river for them in return for scraps and crusts of bread. When the Russians learned of this they started shooting the children coming to the riverbank with canteens.
    GM

    This sounds more of something out of a Hollywood movie. It is a myth.
     
  4. JohnOTT

    JohnOTT Junior Member

    This sounds more of something out of a Hollywood movie. It is a myth.

    I read this too...I think it was in Antony Beever's book - STALINGRAD! I certainly read it in a book that stated it as being fact. Doesn't mean it was though!
     
  5. Steve Petersen

    Steve Petersen Junior Member

    Couldn't Hitler have cut supply lines up and down the river anywhere? If the objective had been to isolate Russian forces south of Stalingrad, why did he have to sever the lines at Stalingrad? Was it pure egoism? Defeating 'Stalin'grad?
     
  6. Smudger Jnr

    Smudger Jnr Our Man in Berlin

    Couldn't Hitler have cut supply lines up and down the river anywhere? If the objective had been to isolate Russian forces south of Stalingrad, why did he have to sever the lines at Stalingrad? Was it pure egoism? Defeating 'Stalin'grad?

    It was not by chance that Hitler ordered the re-naming of the Pocket battleship "Deutschland" because of possible sinking.

    So yes you could say that egoism played a part in Stalingrad.
    There are many permutations and "What If's", but they are banned on this forum.:)

    Regards
    Tom
     
  7. Steve Petersen

    Steve Petersen Junior Member

    There are many permutations and "What If's", but they are banned on this forum.:)

    Regards
    Tom


    :sorry: I guess I can understand that.
     
  8. tovarisch

    tovarisch Discharged

    There is also the movie "Enemy at Gates". While completely worthless in historical terms, it does provide you with a good visual impression. The initial river crossing sequence is makes you wish you were somewhere else.

    The correct term would be not "execution squad" but "blocking detachment". Nothing like a little incentive to put a spring in your step :wink:

    I agree with every single word. The film's worthless, but it carries across the right kind of picture in terms of visualisation. I actually tutor kids on the GPW on Mondays, and when we were studying Stalingrad I showed them the sequence with the river crossing, the 'Pereprava', and they were really taken aback, it made a very strong impression.

    And yes, "blocking detachment" would be my choice of words as well. Euphemisms are great :) I have to add that blocking detachments date back to as early as the Roman Empire, and their specific use in the battle of Stalingrad was pretty much inevitable, as much as I hate to say that, and knowing how contradictory that may seem. I mean, no normal person wants to charge a machine gun, and tactically that's not the smartest thing to do either. But the command was desperate, the weapons and ammo were running low, and Stalingrad had to be defended at all cost, literally. (I have an extreme urge to start a 'what if' here, but we don't do 'what ifs' :D)
    Closed quarter fighting at minimal range, suppressed by hellish artillery and mortar fire, 'ushered' on by a cheery Stalinist 'politruk', I don't think people had the choice to disobey orders. If they did, they would get shot by their own or sent to a penal batallion, where they would die in the space of a week, or get caught by the Germans and get shipped out to Auschwitz or Maidanek, or shot on the spot, or hanged, or tortured. Out of the two, they picked neither and followed orders. Most of the soldiers were villagers, and had no clue about military tactics or anything of that nature, they believed that by dying for the Motherland, they saved their loved ones from peril, and that they did their country good.

    Well, that's what I think anyways. I don't think they had a choice.

    Stalingrad still remains a phenomenon of warfare and stands apart from any other battle in history, and I don't think the world should ever witness a repeat. Ever again.
     
  9. FschJgBtl 261 Lebach

    FschJgBtl 261 Lebach Sch├╝tze

    where they would die in the space of a week, or get caught by the Germans and get shipped out to Auschwitz or Maidanek, or shot on the spot, or hanged, or tortured.


    thats what I call "what if".but i agree in the rest of your post
     
  10. Combover

    Combover Guest

    I want to know if the russian officers really did shoot their men for retreating.

    Yes, one female officer, for instance, shot 3 men with her revolver. In the Back. As they went to surrender. Grim
     

Share This Page