The Importance of the Eastern Front.

The Eastern Front is the single most important front during the second world war. Its size and scope dwarf other theaters of war; on the eve of operation Barbarossa the axis powers had amassed 173 divisions from the baltic to the black sea, in comparison the Western Allies amassed at its peak during the Italian campaign a mere 25 divisions. The Soviet Union in June 1941 had 240 field divisions, of which 213 faced off against the Axis on the U.S.S.R's Western frontier. Many major advancements in weapons technology had there birth in due course by events on the eastern front, The Soviet Union has progressed from the T28 medium tank in the begining of the war, to what is for all acounts the best medium tank of the war the T34; and the Germans advanced there guns from the 50mm l42 of The Panzer III g-h models to the 75l43 of the Panzer IVf2, to the truly awe inspiring 75mm l70 of the Panther. And while the Soviets never truely mastered warfare on the tactical level as well as there German adversary, they mastered it far above the germans in the area of grand strategy.

I totally agree, plus the Eastern Front is the coolest when it comes to game. Also to go into detail, The allies were 1,452,000 strong in Operation Neptune (Landing part of Overlord). At the beginning of Operation Barbarossa, the Axis had: 5.6 Million Infantry, 3,600 tanks and 4,389 Aircraft. The USSR had: 12 Million Infantry, 12-15,000 Tanks, and 8,000 Aircraft. I think also a lot of changes, like you sadi about the T-34 came out of the Eastern Front. The slanted armour design, is still used today, and probably got a lot of ideas from the USSR tanks of WW2. You can see the tanks designed in 1946-1950 and the rest of the Pre-War period, the Russian designs already start to look quiet like the more modern tanks.

Welcome to the team Facehardened.

A bit more on those division numbers; from the onset of Barbarossa to December of 41, I believe Germany destroyed somewhere near 260 Russian divisions, while their Intelligence placed the Russians at below 300.  During that same time period, Russia raised over 360 brand new divisions!  This is all from rough memory, I don't have access to a majority of my books right now, or I would give some more precise numbers.

Thank you. It does go along way to showing the scale of the conflict.

Without the Eastern Front the Western Allies couldn't have won the war it's all down to numbers the Soviets killed 3.5 million Germans and the Western Allies only .5 million.

Yeh, you could say, Hitler made us win the war. If he didn't decide to create Operation Barbarossa, he wouldn't have lost, 3.5 million fighting troops, and would have been able to have a real serious threat at the beaches, D-Day would have failed, and probably Italy wouldn't have been taken also. But then, possibly, things would have changed, and we could have still won, but would have taken longer.

The atomic bomb and more attacks like Dresden would have happened in Europe in all likelyhood.

Probably, but the war might have lasted longer and had more deaths. Whats Dresden? Thats in Germany, right?

Never mind, looked it up. Saw some stuff about people thinking that the Atomic Bombs and Dresden were war drimes. I think that the death toll at Hiroshima and Nagasaki together would have been less i think than, the death toll  if the US were forced to land on Japan or any of the inner islands. Even though Japan was close to defeat, after the way they fought through out the war, the main land, wouldn't have been given up easily.

Last edited August 29, 2007 at 7:28 PM by Dragon93

Well Japans whole way of doing things in there war was screwed up, big time, and it showed. They would even put people on an island to defend it, we would just ignore it, drive by, and they would leave them there....  All kinds of dumb things.

The longer the war lasted, and the less involved Germany was with a war against Russia... things start to look a bit scary.  All of Germany's nuclear material, scientists, and records were confiscated by western Allied forces.  These records are classified until 2045.  There is substantial evidence going around that Germany was much closer to a nuclear bomb than anyone thought, but no one will know fore sure for almost another 40 years.  Eye-witness accounts tell of what appeared to be a 1 kiloton or less test bomb going off in late 1944.  Loud explosion, earthquake, and a small white mushroom cloud.  In 1945, there was supposedly a test of a dirty bomb, used on slave laborers.  Supposedly several German scientists and SS officers got radiation poisoning from this as well, since no one knew at the time what the effects of such a bomb would be.  Some of the evidence for this includes a patent for a plutonium weapon, and an attempt at the Nuremburg trials to hold Albert Speer accountable for the dirty bomb test on slave laborers.  The KGB is said to have captured a film of the dirty bomb test, as well as soil samples, but so far they have denied having anything of the sort.  On top of all this, Germany spent barely 1% of what America spent on the manhattan project for their atomic programs.  It's scary what might have happened if they had really tried or been given more time.  Hitler with a bomb would not have been good for the world.  But with Russian Forces advancing on all fronts, and constant allied bombing raids, it's amazing that German scientists accomplished anything at all.

The what ifs. Its why so many people enjoy wargamming. What if Germany made the Tiger I its primary tank in 1942, or had pushed the developement of the Me 262 Jet fighter. I wish that a game would come out in which you could handle the stratigic situation, as in Hearts of Iron, and the Tactical as in COH. Ataris Axis & Allies RTS was a general attempt, but far to simplistic. I can only sit and hope a game company desides to do it right, so we can all explore the what if a bit more.

Last edited August 30, 2007 at 12:01 AM by Facehardened

What like a Total War game but with better research and economics?

Personally i like the north African campaign, it puts commanders to the test, nothing but open desert and sand so you have to implement tactics very well.

In 9 October 1942 Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of USSR has published the Edict about determination and abolitions of the institute of military commissar in Red Army . The Institute of  military commissar was abolished, but in lieu thereof was entered institute of the deputies of commander on political work (“Politruk”). Full responsibility for combat and political condition of a parts, join and institutions was entrusted on commander. In 10 October action of the Edict was wide-spread and on ВМФ.
In Red Army abolished institute of military commissar. The Navigator 8 air army and Hero of Soviet Union colonel Selivanov so has commented this event: "Finally! That sponger will not be in aviations. For example. What did the commissar of the staff airdivision? Nothing!".

P.S. I want to see in your addon company about taking Berlin (not 1941!!!).

Last edited September 20, 2007 at 4:33 PM by UeArtemis

Ya if it wasn't for the eastern front the Germans wouldn't have the heavy tanks such as the tiger and panthers. It also would mean the American and British would have a much harder time to invade France so the eastern front is for sure the most important front in the European theater of war. 

i heard on the history channel that hitler had a abomb prototype but rejected its funding....also the US took the AMERIKA BOMBER and finished it with a few modifications to make the stealth bomber...

but then u think deeper...what if germany had won WWII? one nation ruling the world...wouldnt that eliminate most of todays problems?...the look at the downside...would technology grind to a halt with the end of war?

to me WWII was the last time where one nation could rule the world...i mean now ...if u even tried ud get nuked until everyone was dead

Last edited November 12, 2007 at 3:52 AM by Bonte

Most exact information on the German atomic program is classified until 2045.  There are eye witness reports from sources trusted by the U.S. military that a 1 kiloton bomb was tested late in the war, and many documents of radiation poisoning from a dirty bomb test.

Several designs in the Amerika bomber program were flying wings, but we did not turn them into the stealth bomber.

There are several arguments of what would have happened if Germany had won.  If they had won WWI there would be no WWII.  If they had won either war we would probably have the current European Union with Germany dominating it, but many years earlier.  That is, if by winning WWII they had never attacked russia and forced Britian and her allies to sue for peace.  This would have been entirely possible if different actions were taken at Dunkirk, the Battle of Britain, and the early campaigns in Africa.  But these outcomes would only have happened if Hitler was removed from power, as he was a madman who would never back down and never agree to peace.  Most German generals believed that there would be peace after the fall of France, but the mistakes made afterwards and the invasion of Russia prevented it.  There is also the contended point that Russia would have attacked Germany no matter what.  There is ample evidence that the enormous German gains at the opening of Barbarossa were a direct result of attacking on the eve of a Russian invasion of Germany.  Russian troops were caught out of position while readying their own invasion and taken by surprise.  There is supposedly a large amount of evidence in the form of orders and communications records that support this.

If the Russians had lost, Germany would have gone through Asia, probably attacked there other ally, and then, good bye main land Euroasia, only America and Britain, and Africa left.
Today though, we might have peace, though it is likely there would still be people for fighting for independence from the 3rd Reich or whatever the world would be.

If USSR had lost, then the Third Reich spread from Spain to Ural. :) only America left, not Great Britain :)

Would you really be able to police and control such a large area? I think a regime like that would collapse from the sheer size and likely bureaucracy of it.

All Empires not matter how strong or big, always fall, whether its after months, years, or even longer. The Reich would not be an exception.

ConquestSavior wrote:
Most exact information on the German atomic program is classified until 2045.  There are eye witness reports from sources trusted by the U.S. military that a 1 kiloton bomb was tested late in the war, and many documents of radiation poisoning from a dirty bomb test.

Now, I have to ask why would those "files" be locked until 2045?
After all America's own Manhattan Project & others have been declassified for decades.

I'd also like to see some sources, particularly with those dealing specifically with "Radiation Poisoning from a Dirty Bomb test", coincidentally a "Dirty Bomb" or "Radiological Dispersal Device" can not be considered the same as an "Atomic Bomb", it's use is marginal & relies on mass hysteria for effect rather than Lethal Radiation Poisoning.

Quote
There is also the contended point that Russia would have attacked Germany no matter what.  There is ample evidence that the enormous German gains at the opening of Barbarossa were a direct result of attacking on the eve of a Russian invasion of Germany.  Russian troops were caught out of position while readying their own invasion and taken by surprise.  There is supposedly a large amount of evidence in the form of orders and communications records that support this.

Quite correct, you can see the advanced planning stages, including the "War Games" held by the inner most circle of the Soviet Government (in Russian)
http://militera.lib.ru/docs/index.html


Some stories are true that never happened.
Some events do take place but are not true; others are, although they never occurred.
~ Elie Wiesel ~ Author of "Night" A Holocaust Survivors tale

Quote
Nazi use of atomic weapons to kill Jews at Auschwitz

Trial of the Major War Criminals Before the International Military Tribunal. Nuremberg: IMT, 1947.

21 Jun. 46

"Mr. Justice Jackson:
    And certain experiments were also conducted and certain researches conducted in atomic energy, were they not?
"[Albert] Speer:
    We had not got as far as that, unfortunately, because the finest experts we had in atomic research had emigrated to America ...
"Mr. Justice Jackson:
    Now, I have certain information, which was placed in my hands, of an experiment which was carried out near Auschwitz. The purpose of the experiment was to find a quick and complete way of destroying people without the delay and trouble of shooting and gassing and burning, as it had been carried out, and this is the experiment, as I am advised. A village, a small village, was provisionally erected, with temporary structures, and in it approximately 20,000 Jews were put. By means of this newly invented weapon of destruction, these 20,000 people were eradicated almost instantaneously, and in such a way that there was no trace ..."

If you believe that, you'll believe anything!

Let's keep it real ay!

Haha guys. Germany would have been attacked by Stalin if they hadn't attacked. Doesn't that go whiteout saying? Two extremist superpowers so close to each other.

Maybe, but surely not in 1941 and not in 1942. Coz of re-arming and reforming of army and navy.
But, i think if USSR had attacked Germany, Germany would have no chance, coz, as u know, german tanks(for example) have been "upgraded" only after meeting with KV and t-34.

And whole world would tell USSR "Thanks" for it.

ya well... the death toll of nagasaki and hiroshima put together was still less the the death toll of the average US b17 carpet bombing raid, which was over the 100.000 mark
(this might seem irrelevant right now, i was talking about something mentioned earlier in the topic.)

well about the atomic bombs in the pasific they wasent the most destructive raids on japan i have sources (discovery channel :D) i herd from that the USA bombed Tokyo (<- capital of japan or whatever) with fire bombs and cuse of that evrything was made of wood the whole city burned to the ground, and the boddy-count was much higher then with the atomic bombs (meybe not when both are counted together but with just one of them) i hav eno exact source and it was a while ago i heard it but atleast i hope you get the picture.

[quote author=Soviet_Marine link=topic=97.msg1657#msg1657 date=1210099876]

And whole world would tell USSR "thanks" for it.

Well... Not really: Churchill was a very strong anti-bolshevik, and (if he was prime minister, he would probably have continued to isolate Russia, calling its attack on Germany as an example of the terrible takeover of a great nation by communism

Another idea: what if the allied had lost the D-Day landings? Would Russia have eventually swept through Fortress Europe?

Well Russia owns. Whatever happens, they win, simple. :)

That is true to a certain extent but they didn't win in the Crimea against Britain and France.

Dragon93 wrote:
Well Russia owns. Whatever happens, they win, simple. :)

That's ridiculous and quite worrying for the mod that you say so.

lol.  ;)
They didn't lose at the Crimea, they lost the war, but mentally they defeated you all. :)

The British last assault against the fortified Sebastopol was indeed a real shame. The Brits attacked and fleed befor reahing the Russian defence line. A big thanx goes to the French colonial troops, they just did all the job.

So no. The Russians did not win "mentally" against all (because all is iferent from British and Americans  :-X ).

Cheers :)

One figure sums it all :

80 % of the overall german casualties were sustained on the eastern front.

: 80% of all losses on eastern front? Er, ouch?
Where did you get this info?
: As for british/french colonial troops attacking/fleeing
from Soviet Sevastopol... er... ... Am I on drugs, here?
GERMANS/AXIS attacked Sevastopol... yes? :)

About losses is an all-known fact.
The Crimean war (British vs Rus) was in a XIX century.

Loupblanc wrote:

: 80% of all losses on eastern front? Er, ouch?
Where did you get this info?
: As for british/french colonial troops attacking/fleeing
from Soviet Sevastopol... er... ... Am I on drugs, here?
GERMANS/AXIS attacked Sevastopol... yes? :)

As Artemis said I'm not saying bullshits.
80% of military german losses tho. Not German people.

Concerning Sebastopol, it was during the Crimean War.

Facts are facts gentlemen !

JC_von_Preußen wrote:

Loupblanc wrote:

: 80% of all losses on eastern front? Er, ouch?
Where did you get this info?
: As for british/french colonial troops attacking/fleeing
from Soviet Sevastopol... er... ... Am I on drugs, here?
GERMANS/AXIS attacked Sevastopol... yes? :)

As Artemis said I'm not saying bullshits.
80% of military german losses tho. Not German people.

Concerning Sebastopol, it was during the Crimean War.

Facts are facts gentlemen !

wait he brought up the Crimean War??????????

Yea, I know. Got me confused :)
I generally know my wars quite well, but never heard of
the british attacking there?! lol. Well, it's XIXth century,
so, bleh :)

Napoleon attacking Russia, though, yess!
But British?!. Ahh, I got to go hit my history books now,
damn you!

ConquestSavior wrote:

There are several arguments of what would have happened if Germany had won.  If they had won WWI there would be no WWII.  If they had won either war we would probably have the current European Union with Germany dominating it, but many years earlier.  That is, if by winning WWII they had never attacked russia and forced Britian and her allies to sue for peace.  This would have been entirely possible if different actions were taken at Dunkirk, the Battle of Britain, and the early campaigns in Africa.  But these outcomes would only have happened if Hitler was removed from power, as he was a madman who would never back down and never agree to peace.  Most German generals believed that there would be peace after the fall of France, but the mistakes made afterwards and the invasion of Russia prevented it.  There is also the contended point that Russia would have attacked Germany no matter what.  There is ample evidence that the enormous German gains at the opening of Barbarossa were a direct result of attacking on the eve of a Russian invasion of Germany.  Russian troops were caught out of position while readying their own invasion and taken by surprise.  There is supposedly a large amount of evidence in the form of orders and communications records that support this.

The Wehrmacht high command had NEVER wanted a two front war. With so many WWI veterans they had seen the difficulty of doing that. Everyone with the slightest intelligence begged Hitler to not fight on two fronts. That being said in all fairness to Hitler, he hadn't PLANNED on fighting two fronts. England had no mainland ground presence, so they didn't need to worry about that. Obviously France had nothing going on after the invasion, the only real threat was Russia. And as stated previously, make no mistake, Russia WAS a threat to Germany. However Hitler had estimated that the invasion of Russia would take no more then 6 weeks. In all reality this was impossible, but you can certainly make an argument that, would Hitler have stuck to his own plans instead of changing them over and over, the Wehrmacht could have had Leningrad, Moscow and pushing the Crimea by late '41.

The same argument can be made however, that capturing those two major cities would NOT have ended Russian resistance. Many Historians believe that Stalin would have moved back towards the vast hinterlands and set up his regime there and continued resisting the Germans. This is mostly speculation, but even some German commanders didn't know how they could win IF Moscow and Leningrad were taken and the Russians fought on. Basically this strategy played on the Russian populations fear. They had hoped by crushing the Red Army and taking the two most significant cities in Russia, that Stalin would loose control of Russia, the population would rise up (hoping for peace with Germany) and Hitler would be able to make a humiliating treaty for the Russians who had no other way out but to sign it.

Guderian's Panzer Group sat idle for almost 4 weeks outside of the gates of Moscow in November of '41, by Hitler's orders. If he would have given Army Group Center the green light at THAT time, they very well may have been able to take the city by a coup de grâce. Alas, it never happened.

Impossible Luck :
- Crushing France\Britain so easily.
- Cancelling Sea Lion when he'd won (without knowing it)
(Although, then Russia would have attacked Germany and
won big time, with so many German troops in Britain).
- Attacking Russia when he did (Riiiight before they were
themselves invaded).
- Guderian :)

Major Blunders :
- Dunkirk.
- Switching to bombing London instead of airfields.
- Mussolini probably lost Hitler's war all by himself the
moment he went after Greece. While Germany crushed
Greece handily, that threw the EF assault out of whack
and Moscow was gotten nowhere as fast as it should
have.
- Being greedy and going all over the place in
Russia. Initial success made him reckless (though
with his luck so far, could you blame him??)
*Not giving winter gear to his troops for political reasons*
(Showing doubt would sap troop's morale)
* Treating Ukrainians like he did. They hated soviets.
Had he gone in there as a savior, his army size might
have doubled, or tripled. Partisans would never have
had so much fun as they did. (Yes, I know. Not same
area, but syndrome is the same).
- Putting italians covering Army Center's flank. Next
to Stalingrad.
- Crete's paratroopers. As GI dude said, that unsettled
Hitler, and never would they be used for what they were
meant to be used. Giving the Soviets chance to recoup.

- Japanese not poking hello to Siberian troops.
Pinning army there.

Afterwards, it was game over, really.

Small note : Yougoslavian partisans pinned an EXTRAORDINARY amount of troops who never managed to
exterminate them. Like, woah. Tito did a lot to help Soviet
Union right there.

That's just off the bat :)

Goering, Mussollini And appointing that Field Marshal
to Army Group Center (forgot his name) M something.
Bad.

ConquestSavior wrote:
Most German generals believed that there would be peace after the fall of France, but the mistakes made afterwards and the invasion of Russia prevented it.  There is also the contended point that Russia would have attacked Germany no matter what.  There is ample evidence that the enormous German gains at the opening of Barbarossa were a direct result of attacking on the eve of a Russian invasion of Germany.  Russian troops were caught out of position while readying their own invasion and taken by surprise.  There is supposedly a large amount of evidence in the form of orders and communications records that support this.

I was just wondering if you had any sources that I could read up on about this (in English). Everything I have read says that yes Stalin was interested in launching an attack, though much further down the track, and that he was extremely paranoid about his staff creating any such potential plans, in case they go leaked to the Germans, who would obviously see it as a case of agression, and attack before they were ready.

Well, I´m not saying I am 100% sure this was owed to a supposed, possible Russian attack. But do look at the results of Barbarossa in its first phases. They are incredibly impressive...

Loupblanc wrote:
* Treating Ukrainians like he did. They hated soviets.
Had he gone in there as a savior, his army size might
have doubled, or tripled.

an interesting item. why only Ukrainians? in any case, it seems like just the Western Ukraine would join the Axis ranks - as the rest of the territory cannot just "hate" their ... government like they cannot just "hate" the previous gov't and the gov't before the previous one... gov't is always considered bad - but have to live with that.
do you have Ukrainian roots? (just curious) ;)

About Ukranians, yes Ukranians very much so did not like Russian rule. Stalin starved 10-11 million people when he switched their agriculture output to industrialize their nation. Also, many White Civil war veterans came from Ukraine if I remember correctly. Many White War Vets who fought the Bolshevik party greeted the Germans as liberators.

And more about Ukrainians joining Germans, that was VERY suprisingly prevelant, especially in the Stalingrad region. Did you know that somewhere near 70,000 Hiwis (Nickname for Russians in German uniform) served in the 6th army? (meaning only 230,000 were even German) Isn't that just crazy? That's a fact from Antony Beevor's Stalingrad, good book. Alot of Ukranians were also used as POW camp guards and for the roundup of Jews as the Germans marched through Russia.

About the 2 front war, at the launch of Barbarossa, you couln't really consider the war for Germany at that point as two fronted. Only the African Theater and a small garrison in France to ward off English raids, as England was in no shape to establish itself in France again after loosing their equipment (can't load tanks, artillery, trucks ect. at beaches)at Dunqirk. Rommel was winning in Africa and Hitler had just brushed away yet another nation (Greece).

Russia was simply the ideological enemy. Had Hitler's plans gone his way, he would have went from  the annexation of Austria, Czechs, Poland, to Russia. He only wanted living space in the east. And after fighting for power in the Reichstag for years against the communist party in Germany and having his party based off of the denunciation of Jews and Communists, how could he and Stalin not have an eye on eachother?

Just one more thing I wanted to add, bear with me here, =)

I always found Stalin's paranoia and distrust quite interesting. In the weeks leading up to Barbarossa, Stalin had around 80 warnings from seperate occasions about an imminent attack from Germany, alot of which came from Great Britain. Stalin disregarded these warnings time and time again, as he thought that the U.K. was making these warnings up so as to draw the Soviets into the war against Germany. He also did not trust socialist countries in general, as they all denounced communism. Even after the Soviet Delegate in Germany sent a pamphlet back to Moscow containing phrases in russian for German soldiers to memorize, such as," Are you a communist", and," Where is the collective farm chairman?", and "I'll shoot!", Stalin still did not find them credible, figuring these were part of England's deception plan. Even 3 months into the Invasion, when  a German armored column was spotted heading towards Smolensk by a recon plan, Stalin did not beleive the Germans could have broken through that far so quickly, and sent another plan out. After the second pilot confirmed the sighting, Stalin sent yet ANOTHER plan out to confirm it again.

Thanks for reading if you read that far, if you didn't, there's some pretty interesting stuff in there.

Last edited March 19, 2010 at 10:53 PM by figgy

The Eastern Front was important to everyone, but for different reasons. For the British, this meant a second front in their favour; for Germany, this was both the apocalyptic dream of Hitler's ideological vision and a bane that, due to te date of Barbarossa, allowed Britain to remain in the war. For Russia, war with Germany was inevitable; the non-aggression pact with Germany was acknowledged to be nothing but lip service to an extended truce between ideological arch-rivals. The Japanese and Americans I think were affected the least, since Japan sought to secure South-East Asia for resources rather than fight a pointless conflict over two giant enemies initially uninterested in hostilities.

What made the Eastern Front important in hindsight was that it involved Hitler achieving his life mission- defeating Communist Russia and securing Lebensraum in the East. His insistence that it happen at an unreasonably early date prevented Germany from focusing on North Africa, the Balkans and Britain, as forces were prioritized to stockpiling for operation Barbarossa. The majority of the cream of German forces were earmarked for Barbarossa, leaving lower-quality forces to occupy places like France.