Does anyone know how many Russian and German troops died at Stalingrad?

@ABWorsham4

So the what if is “What if the Finns mobilised more troops that would free up German forces?”

And the question is where I would send them. Okay.

I think it might be easier by saying where I would not send them.

I am also assuming that the “Mountain Corps” are just infantry, not Gebrigsjager or Alpini, considering the corps were entirely made up of regular infantry divisions.

Italy (Germany’s doing really well here, no hope of pushing the Allies out with one corps, so just do what we did historically)

Norway (almost nothing there except the sabotaging of the heavy water plant, but any hope of redoing the bomb is long gone)

The Atlantic Wall (Allies aren’t landing there until 1944, other areas are much more dire)

Leningrad Front (Feels like the time for storming Leningrad is long gone and a corps wouldn’t make a difference, maybe if the Kursk attack was cancelled entirely and was redirected, but tanks don’t work well in cities)

So that leaves:

Army Group South

Balkans

Kursk

Mainly because I’m more knowledgable about this area I would probably give it to Kursk (to strengthen the attacks) or Army Group South (to hold the line against the Soviet counteroffensive, allowing Manstein’s guys to continue pushing on Kursk rather than racing southwards to defend). I also have an odd affinity for Kursk out of all the Eastern Front battles.

And I feel there’s no way to get Tito.

As we both know, this wouldn’t change much in the grand scheme of things. Hopefully Manstein does better though.

You are off topic again, Kurt, 4 engines remember ?

@jim010:

Good analysis. +1 to you.

Had the Germans had these, though, it would be hard to say what they would match up against.  Britain and France would have ships to counter these.  Instead of being an answer to the Deutschland class, they would have had to have built answers to the more powerful Mackensens.  The KGV very likely would have had 15 guns rather than 14s.Â

Very hard to figure out what France and Britain would have responded with.  And in turn, whatever the French did would influence the Italians.  My guess is you would have seen a much more aggressive battleship race between the major powers.  The super battleships planed by everyone probably would have materialized sooner.

Well said.

How would the German light cruisers have preformed as commerce raiders?

It’s widely thought that Germany’s conquest of Romania is all that kept the German Army and People from complete starvation. Germany brought by train between 300 and 400 million tons of grain occupied Romania.

Germany also had a few long range U-Boats that went to the U.S to get precious supplies. In the early years of the war, the U-Boats were welcomed as heros.

@balungaloaf:

i heard on a show lately that the german army lost 1/4 of all supplies and material that the germans ever produced in the ENTIRE SECOND WAR!

i was like whaaaaaaa?!

is this accurate?  it makes sense of a lot of things for me.  by number losses of troops alone i always thought that the germans should be able to recoup their losses by their volunteer campaigns in occupied territories, or by forcing human labor in the territories occupied to free up more german men to be put into the wehrmacht.

1/4 of all supplies produced lost is staggering.

makes you wonder why in the hell Hitler didnt allow a tactical retreat from the area after the soviets counterattacked en masse.

the question is this. is the 1/4 loss number accurate?

I think this may be be reference to a line in the “Stalingrad” episode of “The World at War”.  Towards the end of the episode, as the narrator describes the German losses in men and equipment at Stalingrad, he says that enough equipment was lost to equip one-quarter of the German army.  So it’s not a reference to one-quarter of the equipment produced, which would be a much larger number.

That means that Konig had his sight on Thorvald, but Thorvald fired first! :wink:

KurtGodel7, very good post, thank you.

I’m still not convinced however, I’ll reply to a few of your points below further:

Germany desperately needed the Russian oil by 1943 (as well as Russian grain which I will discuss further below).  That they failed to take the Caucasus during this time was their last realistic chance at victory, IMO.  However, had they taken the oil wells, but with the Russians destroying them in the process as was quite likely, would the Germans be able to restore the flow of oil in sufficient time? It might take months, even years to rebuild the necessary infrastructure in the best of circumstances, let alone during a brutal war.  The German industry was already hard pressed to supply the necessary armaments and did not have a great deal of experience with oil industry in the first place.  I think they would not have been able to do this.

The same idea goes for the chromium, vanadium, etc., though this would be less difficult for the Germans to accomplish (or mitigate as you also suggest) than the oil problem.

While Germany might have been able to supply an equivalent amount of money, material and engineers to work on their atomic program, there simply were much fewer top nuclear physicists in all Europe than existed in the US.  Consequently, it would have probably cost more and taken longer than the US program for this reason alone.  I have no doubt they could have eventually done it, but I don’t see how they develop nuclear weapons before the allies developed a delivery system that could get through their defenses.

The German V-2 was a technological marvel, but other than size, no more advanced than the rockets being built by Dr. Goddard.  After the war, when Dr. Goddard was able to examine a captured V-2, he was convinced the Germans had stolen his work.  And the Germans might have because most of his designs were on file in the US patent office, available for public viewing (which the Germans did prior to the war).  I think had the Americans wanted to (and Dr. Goddard certainly did) they could have built a superior rocket in a couple months and have it mass-produced in six.  As the A-bombs designs at that time were quite heavy, it might have taken longer than that to build a nuclear capable rocket…but how much longer?

Alternatively, the Allies could have either copied the German jets to enable a delivery system, or devise other means (boats/submarines? special ops?) to deliver these weapons.

In addition, I consider the German attack on Russia to be about food as well as oil  The Ukraine was the breadbasket of Europe, and helped the Germans tremendously in 1943.  But food was scarce in 1944 and onward.  Partly this was due to Russian recovery of territory.  But it was also because the Ukraine was normally not sufficient by itself to feed Germany (the year of the capture of Ukraine by the Germans was one of the best years for Ukrainian agriculture as the weather was nearly perfect).  Of course, the poor treatment of the Ukrainians by the Germans did not lend itself to helping this problem either. In order to assure itself of adequate food, I think the Caucasus (the next logical food source) was needed.