Posted on 03/14/2023 6:43:53 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
Is the epic battle for Bakhmut turning into the Stalingrad of the Russia-Ukraine war? Would the city’s capture by Russian forces swing the war decisively in Putin’s favor?
On the other hand, would a successful Ukrainian defense of the city provide the springboard for a tide-turning counter offensive to push back Putin’s invasion?
Like Bakhmut, the Battle of Stalingrad of 1942-1943 was a prolonged war of attrition — 200 days of fire as the Soviets liked to say — albeit on a much larger scale. Casualty figures are hard to pin down but scholars have generally estimated 850,000 Axis soldiers (German and allies) dead or wounded, with over 1.1 million casualties, including civilians, on the Russian side.
Neither side intended to wage such a costly battle, but both were willing to do so in pursuit of key strategic goals. Attrition was a means to achieve those goals, not an end in itself.
(Excerpt) Read more at responsiblestatecraft.org ...
The population of Bakhmut was 73,212 before the battle began. Stalingrad’s was nearly 500,000.
I’m more concerned about about whether this will become another Sarajevo for the world.
The Nazis biggest mistake was bombing Stalingrad to rubble, it actually made it easier for the Russians to defend.
The United States.’
And the Nazis couldn't get resupplied in Stalingrad.
I don't see how that is even possible. There is basically nothing left standing in most of the city, as shown in the satellite pictures and there is no functioning economy. No food. No water. Two weeks, and everybody should be gone.
There are one or two rather fragile supply routes into the city, and they are dominated by Russian forces to the north and south. Somehow the Ukraine supplies have been getting to the troops in the city else the defenders would have long since been overrun.
Something does not match up.
A Ukraine counterattack to the north or south is necessary.
I wonder, with what?
It’s more like Verdun on a smaller scale.
That was once they reached Stalingrad. The actual loss can be argued as being due to Paulus dithering just outside Stalingrad when Hoth urgently radioed him to immediately turn south to link up with Hoth and thereby trap the two Soviet armies (I think they were the 62n and 63rd) which had not yet withdrawn into the city.
Paulus' dithering allowed the two Soviet armies to witdraw into Stalingrad and the rest is as they say history.
"
I don't see how that is even possible.
They're probably getting a good deal on their rent.
Wow, that’s more casualties than all of the American Civil War.
Even European generals were amazed at the destruction we caused to ourselves.
Thats a strange take. How many Americans have died in Bakhmut?
Actually, their biggest mistake was not crossing the Volga the moment they reached it in late summer. Even the Russians admitted Stalingrad would have fallen immediately. Germany gave them too much time to regroup and defend.
Thank god the original nazis blew it there.
Old tactics and modern weaponry. The civil war was a nightmare. Minieball bullets, repeating rifles, ironclad warships and gunboats, huge advancements in artillery, observation balloons, first sub sinking a ship. A whole new level of siege artillery. You name it, the civil war was industrial scale.... and men were walking into the teeth of that like it was 100 years before.
The Crimean was was similar in character.
Actually, Germany lost the war they minute they launched Operation Barbarossa (invasion of the Soviet Union). The Germans completely underestimated Russian manpower and industry. They were simply outmatched. Ironically, just a few months earlier (Feb 1941), Stalin offered Hitler an alliance with all the raw materials and oil Germany needed. But Hitler saw that as weakness and wanted it all.
And the Soviets were stupid. They were communists so the soldiers didn't want to fight for them at the beginning. All of their officers were eliminated in a purge by Stalin. That's why the Nazis got as far as they did in the Eastern Front.
Yes, but by 1941, the USSR was correcting those mistakes. The first months of the war were bad for Russia, but the fall mud and winter turned the tide. Also, Russian technology scared the Germans early on — especially the T-34 tank. By August, the Germans were still kicking a$$, but they were getting bogged down and knew it. By fall 1941, Hitler himself admitted that the invasion was a mistake in private meetings.
By fall 1941, Hitler himself admitted that the invasion was a mistake in private meetings.
Hitler meeting with Finnish Commander-In-Chief Carl Gustaf Emil Mannerheim, where he talks frankly about how the war was going. It’s the only example of Hitler speaking in a normal voice.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oET1WaG5sFk
Really all that lost cause thinking misses two points. The Germans were never going to get a surrender, even had they taken Moscow. Napoleon took Moscow with 100,000 men. Had they crossed the Volga and even taken Moscow... their highwater mark would have simply been another hundred miles east.
Nothing could save the Germans from defeat. Russia was too big and too much resources and manpower. And supplies and planes were pouring in from here in the USA.
Hitler’s fate was sealed the minute he declared rolled east, and when he declared war on us.
His only true war winning hope was to prevail in the Battle of Britain, and to somehow have come to an agreement with the Brit nobility class that they kept titles and property in exchange for peace. And with that nazi sympathizing Brit king abdicating, Hess’ mission failure, and the failure of the Luftwaffe... it was done.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.