General World War 2 Discussion Thread

I believe that a lot of off-topic debates about WW2 from the COH forums can be safely relocated and deposited here.

Allies? Good!
Hitler? Bad!
Stalin? Its complicated!

Russians won the war 10 times the panzer divisions on the eastern front. Also this game is BS because the vehicle balance isn't the same as real life.

Allies? Good!
Hitler? Bad!
Stalin? Its complicated!

I find that funny, personally i go by fuck hitler, fuck stalin even more, and allies were dicks.

Allies? Good!
Hitler? Bad!
Stalin? Its complicated!

where do aliens and secret weapons go?

Well I knew that thos would turn into a troll-tgread -.-

Well I knew that thos would turn into a troll-tgread -.-

You can't make a general discussion thread ever, it just doesn't have a way to go, waht do we talk about the french and how the surrender was necessary, or how german tanks were awesome, or how ****************************************************** or any other thousand arguments

Hoping this thread can help me out.

Can anyone recommend me some good books on the Eastern Front? I'm generally more interested in the early stages of combat 1941 - 43 if that helps.

I highly recommend 'Stuka Pilot' by Hans-Ulrich Rudel, changed a lot of ideas I had about the eastern front and a fascinating insight into what it was like as a luftwaffe pilot.

"Panzer Leader" the memoirs of Heinz Guderian (the man largely responsible for the modernization of German armour pre-war) are quite a good read. It follows the early stages of german annexation through the war

This is going sound rude and abrupt: But Panzer Leader was one of the first German memoirs I read and I regret doing so at a young age. I learned a lot of 'wrong' things about the war that took a lot of time to unlearn. Guderian was a first rank prima donna.

I would stay away from German General memoirs and German military fan books first and go for more objective and academic material.

I can't recommend 'Panzer Leader' (sorry, Durendal)- it has a lot of historical revisionism and German general excuse making. Like Speer's 'Inside the Third Reich', it's a book that is better digested critically with full understanding of their agendas. Ditto for Manstein's "Lost Victories".

--------------------------------------------------------

These books are not general histories (like Ziemke) and jump right into organizational specifics:

Stumbling Colossus (pre war Red Army, and its predicament and its strategic planning)
Colossus Reborn (best overview of the Red Army in 1941-1943, outstanding)
The Bloody Triangle (about the destruction of Soviet mechanized corps in the Ukraine in 1941 and why it happened, and why the Soviet armored force collapsed so quickly)

Red Army Tank Commanders: The Armored guards- About the Tank generals of the elite of Red Army- the leaders of their Tank armies.

^

These go into the disasters experienced by the Red Army in the summer/fall of 1941 and explain why they occur a lot more than general histories IMO. Institutional understanding should come first in my view.

German side:

War without Garlands is a great read about the German soldier in Barbarossa.

Eastern Front Inferno: Diary of a Panzerjaeger: What makes this books valuable is it is the unedited diaries of a veteran soldier that was killed in 1943. Inside are things that are usually edited out by German memorists: vivid depictions of war crimes (Kiev and other places) , mass murder, and cruelty of the German soldiers of his division- the author even writes about himself and how he beat Soviet POWs. He saw lots of brutal combat. It's a real gem.

Fast forward into 1943 and you have 2 operational histories about two major campaigns from the SS point of view. While the author is a fan of the SS and biased, he does used soviet sources and overall his books are of a much higher level than all the rest of the SS panzer books (in english). Read with some caution. He focuses on the SS divisions. His book on Citadel is supposed to be good but I didn't read it yet.

Last Victory in Russia, Decision in the Ukraine



From the Don to the Dnepr From another author, this time soviet side- the most significant part of the book is the greater half that's about the Kharkov-B operation (the other 1/3rd covers the same situation as in 'Last victory')- Kursk is distorted in Western historiography- in reality only the first two weeks of a campaign that lasted the rest of the summer. The Soviets launched two massive offensives with new weapons (Soviet Artillery penetration corps) that broke the back of the Wehrmacht in the east and this book is about one of them. The other was the offensive for Orel. There was nothing but retreat after this. But this is a great book that shows the beginnings of a new soviet offensive style that was to become their hallmark in 44' and 45'.

There are lots more, but don't have time to write now.

Hoping this thread can help me out.

Can anyone recommend me some good books on the Eastern Front? I'm generally more interested in the early stages of combat 1941 - 43 if that helps.

Thanks for the help guys, I think there are enough books in the posts to keep me occupied for a while!

Thanks for the help guys, I think there are enough books in the posts to keep me occupied for a while!

Have you read "The Forgotten Soldier" by Guy Sajer? Outstanding combat memoir as a member of the elite Gross Deutschland Division, he fought in all the great battles from Kursk to Kharkov.

^^

That's a good one. We were assigned this when I studied WW2 in college.

Other good German infantry combat memoirs are 'In Deadly Combat' and 'Blood red snow'. The author of 'In deadly combat' wore the close combat clasp and rose from private to major in five years- he ended commanding an assault battalion.

'Blood Red Snow', about an HMG gunner of panzer division, has a lot of visceral depiction of the street fighting situation at Stalingrad.

'Tank Rider'- about the commander of Soviet SMG tank rider troops is very useful for getting a personal feel of infantry support of red army tank forces.

'Commanding the Red Army's Sherman Tanks' is unread but I have a copy. I have read articles from the author and was impressed enough to get his book.

When it comes to general histories, the superlative work both in terms of operational narrative and the quality of its structural analysis probably still is the MGFAs "Das deutsche Reich und der zweite Weltkrieg" series.

Allies? Good!
Hitler? Bad!
Stalin? Its complicated!

I don't get it.

Sie sind ja ein veritabler Pfiffikus...

I've heard of this but it's very expensive in English. I have never seen these volumnes, but I have had others mention them to me.

The translation is also incomplete. I also heard that it is strong on the German side only- a bit like the Soviet General Staff studies on the various campaigns that were strong on Soviet side only.


Are these volumnes focused on troop movements (micro) or general overviews (macro?) I've seen the titles for the series and many have nothing to do with combat details. (about social, economic, and political)

When it comes to general histories, the superlative work both in terms of operational narrative and the quality of its structural analysis probably still is the MGFAs "Das deutsche Reich und der zweite Weltkrieg" series.

In the english speaking world, the classic eastern front general histories are:

Moscow to Stalingrad and Stalingrad to Berlin (German historiography)


Road to Stalingrad and Road to Berlin (Russian historiography)

Note how the titles are kind of similar as the two historians were probably aware of each other's projects and they present different views of the war.

Eh, all of it really. It aims to be a comprehensive outlook on the conduct of the war, both operationally and in terms of grand strategy (with the focus of course on the ETO, the war in the Pacific is only treated peripherally), but it also tackles the underlying formation of German wartime society, economy and policy. Therefore, while the focus and perspective is indeed explicitly a German one, it of course does integrate most of the recent foreign scholarship, to include that of Soviet/Russian provenience. Unfortunately the English volumes are indeed filthy expensive and I can't vouch for the quality of the translation, I would suggest interlibrary loan from the next university library. And while there have been a host of contributions, not at all of course of homogenously high quality, I think it is no exaggeration to say that this represents the state of research in most fields, and you won't get around it if you are looking for an advanced understanding of the war.

The Soviet General Staff studies really do not make for an apt comparison in ambition, or scope, or historiographical quality - at all. Frankly they aren't really a work of serious scholarship, just look at the source apparatus or lack thereof. Still of course interesting, if only because they play so prominent a role in some of Glantzes' work.

As far as Ziemke and Erickson are concerned, I think it is safe to say they dated since quite some time.

It's right, that Germany is still occupied and not souvereign?

Btw: Everybody says the allies had an easy ride through France and Germany while the glory Red Army crushed one Panzerdivision each day to arrive in Berlin...

You know that the US/British Forces in Normandy forced the biggest "blob" of Elite-Panzerdivisions, "Flak-Feldverbänden (8,8s)" and mechanized Division the Reich could mobilise. While on the eastern Front mainly Infantry-Divisions with a pair of PaK's ....

Many historicans have the opinion that the eastern front 1944 was "balanced", Wehrmacht had better equipment/tactics while the Red Army meanwhile got great Generals too, better industry and fought on their own ground.

Of course through Partisan Attacks throughout europe, constant bombing of the german industry so so on the tide turned ...