The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
The central question of WWII is how cum Hitler didn't try and retake Moscow
Poast new message in this thread
Date: August 5th, 2025 3:46 AM Author: beady-eyed nowag indian lodge Sure he got pushed back a hundred miles. The Siege of Leningrad was totally pointless as was Army Group South.
Did Hitler pivot to Stalingrad because he was a little bitchboi? He said in speeches it was about him being a military genius and making unpredictable moves.
Why did he go rogue and not listen to the generals? 50/50 in the Spring of '42 he throws everything all at once at Moscow and win or lose the war is over. Bit increased odds of winning.
Why was he being so retarded? |
 |
Date: August 5th, 2025 4:06 AM Author: Slimy Laughsome Volcanic Crater Boistinker I thought he got his shit tossed there. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5758486&forum_id=2Vannesa#49157735) |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 5:09 AM Author: beady-eyed nowag indian lodge He did. He got pushed back over a hundred miles when the winter set in. He was late to showing up because retard Mussolini fucked up in the Balkans and Hitler had to help him out.
So he shows up too late for his offensive and the winter pwns him. But in the Spring of 42 he pivots South. This was the worst military idea in world history. He should have gone all in on Moscow. By most accounts the Soviet Union could not functional at all without Stalin. |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 4:19 AM Author: zombie-like love of her life stage To be fair,
It's because "Adolf Hitler" was actually a Zionist construct who was completely under the control of his Jewish puppetmasters. They told him what to do, and he just mindlessly danced for them to serve Jewish interests.
In fact, no Western leader in at least 1,000+ years hasn't been completely in thrall to the unbeatable and all-powerful Jews who control the world and are always 6,000,000 steps ahead of everyone else.
Don't you understand this yet, you stupid goy? There's no use in fighting back... it's already over, in fact it's been over for centuries now! Just give up already and accept eternal Jewish rule forever, you dumb fucking cattle piece of shit. |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 4:19 AM Author: zombie-like love of her life stage To be fair,
EDIT: Shit, sorry, I forgot to switch over to my "cock of michael obama" monicker hehe. ;) |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 5:04 AM Author: beady-eyed nowag indian lodge I really don't understand what point you're trying to make here.
Hitler unironically in his attempt to fight back against the decadence of the Weimar era and what he perceived to be the imminent threat of Judeo-Bolshevism thrust his country deeper into actual Communism, a total lack of sovereignty over foreign affairs, and multicultural nonsense than he could have possibly imagined. If Hitler saw Berlin today he would kill himself in shame all over again.
I'm not sure where you interpreted anything I said as don't ever fight back against Jewish power. The point of the OP is that Hitler was at times a retarded military strategist. I don't think that's debated by any serious historian. By the end of the war he was bribing his generals with cash payments and promises of a massive pension after the war for fighting the battles he felt like fighting even though Mannstein knew his strategy was retarded. No Jew made Hitler bungle the war hth. |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 5:21 AM Author: deep box office police squad If any mid 20th century G7 leader saw their country today they'd kill themselves (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5758486&forum_id=2Vannesa#49157756) |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 5:26 AM Author: talented mint selfie reading party He’s trolling Consolea (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5758486&forum_id=2Vannesa#49157759) |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 8:29 AM Author: zombie-like love of her life stage (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5758486&forum_id=2Vannesa#49157870) |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 8:55 AM Author: Hideous legend Well it sucked (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5758486&forum_id=2Vannesa#49157904) |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 9:03 AM Author: Milky lodge dopamine (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5758486&forum_id=2Vannesa#49157916) |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 11:02 AM Author: lascivious dragon (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5758486&forum_id=2Vannesa#49158180) |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 10:57 AM Author: beady-eyed nowag indian lodge (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5758486&forum_id=2Vannesa#49158165) |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 11:02 AM Author: lascivious dragon A good troll job has to understand the arguments being made before mocking them - TBF doesn't understand them. The others were right, this sucked (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5758486&forum_id=2Vannesa#49158179) |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 11:26 AM Author: zombie-like love of her life stage To be fair,
(Just an objective bro, spitting cold hard facts) |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 3:30 PM Author: Wine People Who Are Hurt Regret NSDAP state capitalism wasn't a 1:1 with communism There weren't many communist influences at all in Hitler's economic ministry. The "socialism" part of National Socialism largely died with the night of the long knives and the purge of Rohm and the populist SA |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 8:25 AM Author: Concupiscible abode deer antler (Napoleon)
Im unaware of any strong evidence supporting your idea that had only moscow fallen the soviets would have capitulated.
I find the theory more convincing that the entire moscow gambit was misguided from the start and army group south should have been prioritized from day 1 of barb. If stalingrad had fallen the wehrmacht could have proceeded down the volga and cut off the caucasus and given access to caspian oil fields. This would actually confer a material benefit to the axis and a matetial hindrance to the soviets far in excess of losing some factories and landmarks in moscow (albeit tough to say how long it would take to get caucausian oil on-line) rather than holding on to a pilitical husk in northern russia, which of course was unattainable any way.
U also assume it was even possible to begin with which is extremely dubious.
Ignoring practicalities like possibility, what specifically makes you think think capturing moscow would lead to capitulation? |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 11:04 AM Author: beady-eyed nowag indian lodge There are a bunch of historians who believe that a key difference between 1812 and 1941 is that the Russians had centralized all power in Moscow. And especially under Stalin's leadership. It is thought that if you cut the head off the snake the rest of it collapses.
How sure was anyone that if you cut off the supply line to the Caucuses that it decimates Russian tank capability? Also the added risk of pushing so deep into Russia was too precarious.
You take Moscow and Saint Petersburg you have territory the Russians can never retake. Shattered command structure. You might not be able to chase the remnant army all the way back to Siberia but you hold onto the main population centers, capture all leadership, prepare for a counter-offensive from a shattered and disorganized force. |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 3:23 PM Author: hyperventilating nofapping puppy bawdyhouse Ran here via literally 1000 miles of tenuous German supply lines between Berlin and Moscow.
Taking Moscow in 1941 (or later in the war) (a) would have been extraordinairly costly and (b) would not have done much for Germany's odds of winning the war. Keep in mind that they got within a few miles of Moscow. It wouldn't have made a difference if they got a few miles further and took the city.
In 1812, someone (Russia? France? Both?) burned Moscow, and the Russian response amounted to "LJL, get wrecked, we'll deal and you won't," which turned out to be accurate.
|
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 3:46 PM Author: beady-eyed nowag indian lodge Russia burned all the farms around Moscow and evacuated the city. Napoleons army was stuck in the freezing winter with no food. It was a brilliant strategy by Russia at the time and Napoleon was totally fucked.
As bad as the supply lines were to Moscow they couldn't have been any better to Stalingrad. |
Date: August 5th, 2025 9:03 AM Author: Diverse Hell Boltzmann The war was decided by the middle of December, 1941. Germany was never going to be able to defeat a united UK/US/USSR. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5758486&forum_id=2Vannesa#49157915) |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 9:11 AM Author: French digit ratio Russia could have continued the war even if they had been pushed to the Urals, tying up hundreds of German divisions in fighting them and occupying Russia. And then as long as the US was in the war, the Allies would have eventually won. Stalin moved a lot of his factories behind the Urals right at the start of the invasion so this was clearly his plan to fight on.
The US and Russia were the two world superpowers after the world. A country with Germany's limited resources never had a chance of beating both of them. |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 11:05 AM Author: lascivious dragon Yes, the overall economic production of what would become the Allies dramatically outpaced what would become the Axis by anywhere from a 3:1 to a 10:1 ratio depending on category, from oil to air and naval forces to manpower to tank production to munitions. Actual and potential production figures were known to the central bank owners long before the war (via leaks from Hjalmar Schacht to Montagu Norman) which gave the central bank owners the comfort they desired of an assured victory before green-lighting the manipulation of the world toward war: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_production_during_World_War_II#Production_summaries,_1939%E2%80%931945
Germany never had a chance, they were set up as a blood sacrifice to Yahweh regardless of anything Hitler did or didn't do. |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 11:06 AM Author: beady-eyed nowag indian lodge This is all true except that if you take Moscow and capture Stalin you have an improved chance that der Feind collapses (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5758486&forum_id=2Vannesa#49158196) |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 12:25 PM Author: Concupiscible abode deer antler Just do capture stalin bro. Also they should have captured churchill was dumb not to do that imo. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5758486&forum_id=2Vannesa#49158486) |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 12:31 PM Author: beady-eyed nowag indian lodge OK so Stalin flees he's without a central command structure, the population centers have been taken. He's hiding in the Urals waiting to rebuild an army to take back his country. Ok, what happens next? No guarantee Russia ever recovers militarily. Much better position for the Reich. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5758486&forum_id=2Vannesa#49158506) |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 3:28 PM Author: Wine People Who Are Hurt Regret It was actually pretty plausible Historian accounts say that he would've refused to leave; his generals tried to evacuate him to the east a few times but he rejected these proposals for stubborn morale reasons |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 3:58 PM Author: Concupiscible abode deer antler Stubbornly being correct that his 5 reserve armies would manage to hold the line. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5758486&forum_id=2Vannesa#49159549) |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 12:00 PM Author: Odious submissive pisswyrm lay retake? did he take it at one point? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5758486&forum_id=2Vannesa#49158408) |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 3:26 PM Author: Wine People Who Are Hurt Regret I think his generals overestimated the defenses at Moscow (it was relatively lightly defended and this was part of Stalin's gambit wrt troop deployments) and considered shoring up Romanian oil deposits to be more important at the time The Wehrmacht was perpetually running low on petrol and machine parts during the push east and this caused some warp in German strategic planning. The coal to oil mfg process wasn't in full swing until iirc 44 and by that point it was too late to make up for logisitical shortcomings |
|
Date: August 5th, 2025 3:44 PM Author: beady-eyed nowag indian lodge I didn't realize this but historians say Hitler could have started mass production of the U-boot far sooner and he could have made so many of them that he could have disrupted the British navy to the point where a land invasion of Britain would be possible.
This dude was the polar opposite of Bismarck. Absolutely no feel for strategy. Totally unwilling to listen to his generals. He wouldn't do strategic retreats because he didn't want the public to be ashamed of Germany losing territory as if people could have cared less.
Very weird guy, war was totally winnable if played strategically and not ideologically. |
|
Date: August 7th, 2025 8:30 AM Author: Concupiscible abode deer antler These historians are glorified hoi 3 players. First and most important mistake was not massacring the brits at dunkirk and still expecting them to negotiate. Total misread of human character and totally doomed rest of war. It was all on rails after that. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5758486&forum_id=2Vannesa#49164064) |
|
Date: August 7th, 2025 10:49 AM Author: beady-eyed nowag indian lodge He couldn't comprehend why an Anglo Saxon tribe would want to fight another Germanic tribe. He was captured by his own ideology. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5758486&forum_id=2Vannesa#49164330) |
|
Date: August 7th, 2025 6:54 PM Author: talented mint selfie reading party Good poast imo. This is a huge deal.
Also he wasted way too much time and manpower in North Africa and should’ve been in Russia sooner |