Cartoon Demands the government take over of businesses to do war crimes
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (85)
sorted by:
Both explanations lack satisfaction. Germany was hellbent on decapitating the USSR and seizing every useable raw material, which they badly needed. Otherwise, invading Russia is pure folly, whether the Soviets planned to eventually invade or not. That's very different from destroying supplies at the border.
Without getting into the why and how of Barbarossa, this is a pretty bad take. If the USSR was going to invade, the ideal time to respond would have been when the USSR was "almost but not quite ready" to invade. That's the gist of Suvelov's idea. You don't just turn on an invasion, you have to prepare; if your opponent beats you to the punch, you've taken two steps backwards. Decapitating the USSR was required for the success of Barbarossa; that's how modern mechanized wars are fought. Germany failed.
I don't think you read the full meaning of my comment. Germany invaded in large part to capture Russia's resources to fuel their global war effort. The element of defense may or may not have existed, but the element of opportunism certainly existed.
Generally, yes. But 70 years of technological advancement later, we are witnessing the complete opposite of mechanized high tempo warfare in Ukraine.
Hence why Germany had the Russian invasion in mind before '41.
I'm going to have to take another look at Germany's resource objectives, but you realize, I'm rejecting the idea that there was a global war effort?
No. What we are witnessing is Russian failure.
I'm not sure what you mean by this, but Germany was at war on multiple fronts at that time.
If you mean that Hitler was less megalomaniacal than commonly portrayed, then OK.
The Russians are winning. I suppose you mean that they could do better?