Comments on: Battle of Kursk: Germany's Lost Victory in World War II http://www.historynet.com/battle-of-kursk-germanys-lost-victory-in-world-war-ii.htm?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=battle-of-kursk-germanys-lost-victory-in-world-war-ii From the World's Largest History Magazine Publisher Wed, 15 Feb 2012 02:15:35 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Harry http://www.historynet.com/battle-of-kursk-germanys-lost-victory-in-world-war-ii.htm#comment-786768 Harry Fri, 13 Jan 2012 16:24:18 +0000 #comment-786768 If one looks at Russian strategy at Kursk, it was not much different from the one they used at Stalingrad. The difference was ammount of equipment available to them in 1943 compared to 1942. Both were used as bait to draw German army to fight attrition war to deprive it's advantage in training and wear it out and then cut it off from it's supply line with much larger force. Hitler was always a fast learner, especially from his enemies. He realized the trap, after heavy loss to army group center. It is Hitler's instict to cancel the Operation Citedel that saved German army a major disaster and help Germany fight for nearly two more years. If one looks at Russian strategy at Kursk, it was not much different from the one they used at Stalingrad. The difference was ammount of equipment available to them in 1943 compared to 1942. Both were used as bait to draw German army to fight attrition war to deprive it's advantage in training and wear it out and then cut it off from it's supply line with much larger force.

Hitler was always a fast learner, especially from his enemies. He realized the trap, after heavy loss to army group center. It is Hitler's instict to cancel the Operation Citedel that saved German army a major disaster and help Germany fight for nearly two more years.

]]> By: Allan Stevens http://www.historynet.com/battle-of-kursk-germanys-lost-victory-in-world-war-ii.htm#comment-786681 Allan Stevens Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:46:38 +0000 #comment-786681 The Hawker Tempest and Typhoon were as good a ground-attack aircraft as any other. The Hawker Tempest and Typhoon were as good a ground-attack aircraft as any other.

]]> By: velkore http://www.historynet.com/battle-of-kursk-germanys-lost-victory-in-world-war-ii.htm#comment-786670 velkore Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:19:07 +0000 #comment-786670 no I think berlin Hamburg , and the Rhur going up in flames would have made them toss in the surrender , but who knows, ??? no I think berlin Hamburg , and the Rhur going up in flames would have made them toss in the surrender , but who knows, ???

]]> By: velkore http://www.historynet.com/battle-of-kursk-germanys-lost-victory-in-world-war-ii.htm#comment-786669 velkore Thu, 12 Jan 2012 09:55:10 +0000 #comment-786669 the Ju87 stuka and ju88 were as good or better , the one most agree on is the p47 thunderbolt and the corsair , the t-34 ?? was junk it had great ideas, sloped armor wide tracks but lacked good crew lay out , Radio, had transmission issues, they only won because of masses of t-34 s were up versus few jerrys , the jerrys never had oil the ussr had, hence they needed to field great tanks, no hope of matching ussr in numbers,, the germans never even got off the Horse, !! the oil shortage always stopped them ! as best tank ? the late war Panthers, & tigers 1& 2 on a 1 to 1 fight ill take over any other tank !!!! i look to kill ratios not how many were produced , hans Rudel in a ju87 wrecked many a t-34 s , oil and production won germany never had a hope !! the Ju87 stuka and ju88 were as good or better , the one most agree on is the p47 thunderbolt and the corsair , the t-34 ?? was junk it had great ideas, sloped armor wide tracks but lacked good crew lay out , Radio, had transmission issues, they only won because of masses of t-34 s were up versus few jerrys , the jerrys never had oil the ussr had, hence they needed to field great tanks, no hope of matching ussr in numbers,, the germans never even got off the Horse, !! the oil shortage always stopped them ! as best tank ? the late war Panthers, & tigers 1& 2 on a 1 to 1 fight ill take over any other tank !!!! i look to kill ratios not how many were produced , hans Rudel in a ju87 wrecked many a t-34 s , oil and production won germany never had a hope !!

]]> By: Sam http://www.historynet.com/battle-of-kursk-germanys-lost-victory-in-world-war-ii.htm#comment-786524 Sam Tue, 10 Jan 2012 20:25:21 +0000 #comment-786524 and USSR would simply overrun western forces and took full control of europe. U forget that at that moment Japan was still fighting and US was counting on USSR strike on Japanese continental forces in china (aka - what really won ww2 on Japanese front, not nuking civilians). and USSR would simply overrun western forces and took full control of europe. U forget that at that moment Japan was still fighting and US was counting on USSR strike on Japanese continental forces in china (aka – what really won ww2 on Japanese front, not nuking civilians).

]]> By: Allan Stevens http://www.historynet.com/battle-of-kursk-germanys-lost-victory-in-world-war-ii.htm#comment-786521 Allan Stevens Tue, 10 Jan 2012 19:45:17 +0000 #comment-786521 True, but they STILL received several thousand of our sucky tanks, tanks which the Germans still had to destroy. And again, the Soviet Union produced almost no trucks in comparison to the numbers that the U.S. sent them. True, but they STILL received several thousand of our sucky tanks, tanks which the Germans still had to destroy. And again, the Soviet Union produced almost no trucks in comparison to the numbers that the U.S. sent them.

]]> By: Allan Stevens http://www.historynet.com/battle-of-kursk-germanys-lost-victory-in-world-war-ii.htm#comment-786518 Allan Stevens Tue, 10 Jan 2012 19:41:01 +0000 #comment-786518 Yes, I have been to the IWM. Would love to see the one in Duxford also, maybe someday. There has always been talk of surrender at that time, but I have never read anything like an official document related to this topic. Were the articles you read transcripts of high level meetings, or something else? I think it would be fascinating to know exactly what was being considered at that time. Yes, I have been to the IWM. Would love to see the one in Duxford also, maybe someday. There has always been talk of surrender at that time, but I have never read anything like an official document related to this topic. Were the articles you read transcripts of high level meetings, or something else? I think it would be fascinating to know exactly what was being considered at that time.

]]> By: Sam http://www.historynet.com/battle-of-kursk-germanys-lost-victory-in-world-war-ii.htm#comment-786497 Sam Tue, 10 Jan 2012 18:16:46 +0000 #comment-786497 total amount of US help to Soviet Union accounted for only 4 % of USSR domestic military production. Actually - UK got 11 times more material help from US than USSR. Soviets directly asked US not to send them western tanks, but rather send trucks instead since western tanks sucked so much. total amount of US help to Soviet Union accounted for only 4 % of USSR domestic military production. Actually – UK got 11 times more material help from US than USSR. Soviets directly asked US not to send them western tanks, but rather send trucks instead since western tanks sucked so much.

]]> By: Allan Stevens http://www.historynet.com/battle-of-kursk-germanys-lost-victory-in-world-war-ii.htm#comment-786448 Allan Stevens Mon, 09 Jan 2012 14:38:14 +0000 #comment-786448 I agree with your comments except for parts of your first paragraph. You've left out that over 200,000 American trucks, half-tracks and jeeps; thousands of American aircraft and tanks and several hundred British tanks were sent to the Soviet Union and USED everywhere. I also disagree with your comment about studying mobile warfare on a tactical level is pointless. Tactics alone won't win a war but extremely POOR Soviet tactics at the beginning of the war almost led to the Soviet Union losing. Finally, there were 200 Panthers involved at Kursk, yes most of them DID break down. Also, there were approx. 160 Tigers involved at Kursk as well. These numbers are hardly what one would call a 'handful'. I agree with your comments except for parts of your first paragraph. You've left out that over 200,000 American trucks, half-tracks and jeeps; thousands of American aircraft and tanks and several hundred British tanks were sent to the Soviet Union and USED everywhere. I also disagree with your comment about studying mobile warfare on a tactical level is pointless. Tactics alone won't win a war but extremely POOR Soviet tactics at the beginning of the war almost led to the Soviet Union losing.
Finally, there were 200 Panthers involved at Kursk, yes most of them DID break down. Also, there were approx. 160 Tigers involved at Kursk as well. These numbers are hardly what one would call a 'handful'.

]]> By: Allan Stevens http://www.historynet.com/battle-of-kursk-germanys-lost-victory-in-world-war-ii.htm#comment-786446 Allan Stevens Mon, 09 Jan 2012 14:26:57 +0000 #comment-786446 Lee had all the advantages?? What on earth are you talking about? Oh, and the Third Reich lasted for 12 years not 2. Get your 'facts' straight before ranting Pavel. Lee had all the advantages?? What on earth are you talking about? Oh, and the Third Reich lasted for 12 years not 2. Get your 'facts' straight before ranting Pavel.

]]>