Why Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union?

Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: The German-Soviet War 1941-1945 is a turn-based World War II strategy game stretching across the entire Eastern Front. Gamers can engage in an epic campaign, including division-sized battles with realistic and historical terrain, weather, orders of battle, logistics and combat results.

The critically and fan-acclaimed Eastern Front mega-game Gary Grigsby’s War in the East just got bigger and better with Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: Don to the Danube! This expansion to the award-winning War in the East comes with a wide array of later war scenarios ranging from short but intense 6 turn bouts like the Battle for Kharkov (1942) to immense 37-turn engagements taking place across multiple nations like Drama on the Danube (Summer 1944 – Spring 1945).

Moderators: Joel Billings, elmo3, Sabre21

User avatar
TulliusDetritus
Posts: 5581
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 1:49 am
Location: The Zone™

RE: Why Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union?

Post by TulliusDetritus »

ORIGINAL: Keke

ORIGINAL: Chris10
ORIGINAL: Mynok


Really? And what evidence does he provide for that, because the actual production numbers seem to fit Speer's claims (peak production in 1944).
You are right on this. Corruption and negligence was rampant in Germany at the time as the important positions in the responsible authoritys where occupied by egocentric selfrighteous ideological driven nazis who filled their own pockets rather than with real professionals and until mid 43 the german industry was only using relative little capacity for war equipment production. They started tighten things up a lot from summer 43 on and even under heaviest bombing raids in 44 production jumped up various times. Things could have been very different if Germanys Industry would have been geared up to full scale war production from 39 on.

Lol, that is just repeating the myth.

He is not repeating myths... He is saying what the SERIOUS history has been saying since many decades. Now you've just read a book that might prove this WAS a myth. Ok. That IS a great contribution. Believe me, I am going to BUY this book, therefore this thread bought Tooze a reader. YES [:)] But don't bash all of us who didn't know this Booze guy and honestly believe what the serious historians (as opposed to clowns: revisionists, etc.) have been saying for many decades. That Germany only fully mobilized her industry in 1943-44.
"Hitler is a horrible sexual degenerate, a dangerous fool" - Mussolini, circa 1934
User avatar
TulliusDetritus
Posts: 5581
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 1:49 am
Location: The Zone™

RE: Why Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union?

Post by TulliusDetritus »

Overall, Keke has made us an excellent service. The book seems really GOOD [;)]

http://www.complete-review.com/reviews/ ... toozea.htm
"Hitler is a horrible sexual degenerate, a dangerous fool" - Mussolini, circa 1934
JJKettunen
Posts: 2293
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2002 6:00 pm
Location: Finland

RE: Why Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union?

Post by JJKettunen »

Ok, I realize I was a bit of an asshole there. My apologies.

I warmly recommend the book for anyone interested in WWII economics. It's an eye-opener.
User avatar
Chris10
Posts: 114
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 6:58 pm
Location: Germany,living in Spain

RE: Why Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union?

Post by Chris10 »

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus
He is not repeating myths... He is saying what the SERIOUS history has been saying since many decades. Now you've just read a book that might prove this WAS a myth. Ok. That IS a great contribution. Believe me, I am going to BUY this book, therefore this thread bought Tooze a reader. YES [:)] But don't bash all of us who didn't know this Booze guy and honestly believe what the serious historians (as opposed to clowns: revisionists, etc.) have been saying for many decades. That Germany only fully mobilized her industry in 1943-44.
Toozes numbers are not better than those obtained in the 60s or 70s or 80s...Germany has not been the Soviet Union where archives where closed up.
He just arranges them differently and personally I think he measures things with how economy works nowadays but things have been different back then.
As well he insinuates that Germanys conquering of entire Europe was nothing more than a lucky break and that even England alone would have had to ability to overcome Germay which is a total nonsens as UK was practically beaten by summer 41 and posed no threat and without US convoys and lend-lease UK would have just faded away little by little. The man must be seriously plagued by national pride blindness. Another stunning thing is that Tooze states that trade between USSR and Germany has been small which is an epic fail cause Germany was totally depending on russian ressource deliverys since the France campaign.
I could provide hard info too but I dont have time to elaborate half a book just to convince somebody in a forum...Iam sort of busy with my own stuff and doin a bit of work on the german version of WiTE which is scheduled to be releaded shortly.
I study the entire WWI-WWII problematic for over 30 years now and when one thing has become very clear in all that time then its that Germany has gone thru different kind of economys during the course of the war and only the last stage (War-Industry introduced between summer 42 and taken effect little by little from summer 43 on) allowed it to fully focus its Industrial potential on war production but it was far to late anyway.
In that regard I mention
Alan S. Milward: "Die deutsche Kriegs Wirtschaft 1939 bis 1945"
which is out of printing since over 45 years...

For each Tooze or Overy statement that Germany inevitably had to loose the war I can qoute 5 saying the opposite (all reputable military historians too..)


As an interesting sidenote I may add that even Churchill regretted the outcome of WWII just 1 year after its end.
Churchill held an antisowjetic speech in the US american University City Fulton which he repeated on Sept. 9th 1946 in Zurich: "We have to be united to stop the Russians", Churchill asked the US and Western Europe to stand together against the red threat and regardig the beaten Germany he added: "Well, obviously we have butchered the wrong pig"
The full speech has been printed in the english newspapers.

ORIGINAL: Keke

Ok, I realize I was a bit of an asshole there. My apologies.

I warmly recommend the book for anyone interested in WWII economics. It's an eye-opener.
nevermind...accepted [:)]
however..iam not agreeing with Tooze cause I think he is biased a fair bit and manipulates the numbers for his purpose...on the other hand...he wants to sell a book and make money,perras,plata,bucks,weed,pulver,kohle,kniste...so he to come up with something new cause the stuff has been published a hundred times before. I dont wanna disregard the entire book but some of his key conclusions are coming out of the worng assumptions...and he hasnt been there...my family has.. and we know excactly when things started to become more straight...up to mid 42 the german population hardly noticed that it was wartime and life continued nearly normal (except a little bombing here and there but nothing big), then thing started to change and where focussed on mobilizing craftmanship, changing productions...consume goods and other stuff started dissapearing..fabrics started working in 3 shifts of 8 hours and have night production (never happend before end 42) etc etc...all those little things you notice around you and which tell you that something is going to change drastically...we had 4 men in the war...1 fell in Stalingrad..the second on the eastern front around Donetz-Bassin (never got recovered) and 2 survided in the west...my grandmas mother and 2 of her older sisters where working at night shifts in fabrics making shells ...


User avatar
Oleg Mastruko
Posts: 4534
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am

RE: Why Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union?

Post by Oleg Mastruko »

ORIGINAL: Keke
Ok, I realize I was a bit of an asshole there. My apologies.

Geez mate, this is not you, did aliens steal real Keke and replaced him with the apologize-o-bot? [:D]
JJKettunen
Posts: 2293
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2002 6:00 pm
Location: Finland

RE: Why Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union?

Post by JJKettunen »

Oh, I take it back.

Chris, what the hell are you talking about? From your totally misinformed arguments it is plain to see that you have not read the book! What is your problem?
User avatar
Chris10
Posts: 114
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 6:58 pm
Location: Germany,living in Spain

RE: Why Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union?

Post by Chris10 »

ORIGINAL: Keke

Oh, I take it back.

Chris, what the hell are you talking about? From your totally misinformed arguments it is plain to see that you have not read the book! What is your problem?
nevermind...my point is standing...you can like it or not..its not going to affect my life so I dont have any problems.
thnx for the chitchat...
User avatar
TulliusDetritus
Posts: 5581
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 1:49 am
Location: The Zone™

RE: Why Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union?

Post by TulliusDetritus »

ORIGINAL: Chris10
I could provide hard info too but I dont have time to elaborate half a book just to convince somebody in a forum...Iam sort of busy with my own stuff and doin a bit of work on the german version of WiTE which is scheduled to be releaded shortly.
I study the entire WWI-WWII problematic for over 30 years now and when one thing has become very clear in all that time then its that Germany has gone thru different kind of economys during the course of the war and only the last stage (War-Industry introduced between summer 42 and taken effect little by little from summer 43 on) allowed it to fully focus its Industrial potential on war production but it was far to late anyway.

Chris, it's true that the thesis is very striking. After all, to produce more things (industrial stuff) you need to make some moves that are BIG, really big... So either the old historians saw these huge moves or pink elephants...

I mean, if in x factory you produce 100 tanks per month, you might decide this is not enough. You can expand that factory (more machines and workers) or two other choices: you build a new factory or you transform a civilian factory (er, one which was producing let's say cars or tractors). Well, there is a third choice: increase productivity.

I mean, these are HUGE things that can't be hidden. It's MASSIVE: think about the astronomical quantities of military materiel made in the US in WW2. I mean, you can't miss it. When historians were saying Germany only mobilized her forces in 1943-44, I am assuming they were tracking German industrial output, map: number of factories, year of creation, number of workers, etc. etc. And therefore they discovered that yes, German regime built/transformed many factories (or increased productivity) in 1943-44.
"Hitler is a horrible sexual degenerate, a dangerous fool" - Mussolini, circa 1934
JJKettunen
Posts: 2293
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2002 6:00 pm
Location: Finland

RE: Why Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union?

Post by JJKettunen »

ORIGINAL: Chris10
nevermind...my point is standing...you can like it or not..its not going to affect my life so I dont have any problems.
thnx for the chitchat...

Why do pretend that you know the contents of the book? For example:
ORIGINAL: Chris10
As well he insinuates that Germanys conquering of entire Europe was nothing more than a lucky break and that even England alone would have had to ability to overcome Germay which is a total nonsens as UK was practically beaten by summer 41 and posed no threat and without US convoys and lend-lease UK would have just faded away little by little. The man must be seriously plagued by national pride blindness.

Tooze doesn't claim any of those things. No lucky breaks nor UK surviving alone. Who are you actually criticizing here?
ORIGINAL: Chris10
Another stunning thing is that Tooze states that trade between USSR and Germany has been small which is an epic fail cause Germany was totally depending on russian ressource deliverys since the France campaign.

If you even had read the paragraph I attached to the first post, you'd know that the "stunning thing" Tooze claims is only a figment of your own imagination. I ask again: Who do you think you are criticizing here?
User avatar
Chris10
Posts: 114
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 6:58 pm
Location: Germany,living in Spain

RE: Why Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union?

Post by Chris10 »

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus
Chris, it's true that the thesis is very striking. After all, to produce more things (industrial stuff) you need to make some moves that are BIG, really big... So either the old historians saw these huge moves or pink elephants...

I mean, if in x factory you produce 100 tanks per month, you might decide this is not enough. You can expand that factory (more machines and workers) or two other choices: you build a new factory or you transform a civilian factory (er, one which was producing let's say cars or tractors). Well, there is a third choice: increase productivity.

I mean, these are HUGE things that can't be hidden. It's MASSIVE: think about the astronomical quantities of military materiel made in the US in WW2. I mean, you can't miss it. When historians were saying Germany only mobilized her forces in 1943-44, I am assuming they were tracking German industrial output, map: number of factories, year of creation, number of workers, etc. etc. And therefore they discovered that yes, German regime built/transformed many factories (or increased productivity) in 1943-44.
It was not about making new fabrics but optimizing ressource usage and similar things
I partly answered to that in my previous post and if you allow I may quote myself
ORIGINAL: Chris10
I dont wanna disregard the entire book but some of his key conclusions are coming out of the worng assumptions...and he hasnt been there...my family has.. and we know excactly when things started to become more straight...up to mid 42 the german population hardly noticed that it was wartime and life continued nearly normal (except a little bombing here and there but nothing big), then things started to change and started focussing on mobilizing craftmanship and productions...consumer goods and other stuff started dissapearing from daily life and shops as fabrics swapped production...fabrics started working in 3 shifts of 8 hours and have night production (never happend any nightshift before end 42) etc etc...all those little things you notice around you and which tell you that something is going to change drastically...we had 4 men in the war...1 fell in Stalingrad..the second on the eastern front around Donetz-Bassin (never got recovered) and 2 survided in the west...my grandmas mother and 2 of her older sisters where working at night shifts in fabrics making shells ...

JJKettunen
Posts: 2293
Joined: Tue Mar 12, 2002 6:00 pm
Location: Finland

RE: Why Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union?

Post by JJKettunen »

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus

I mean, these are HUGE things that can't be hidden. It's MASSIVE: think about the astronomical quantities of military materiel made in the US in WW2. I mean, you can't miss it. When historians were saying Germany only mobilized her forces in 1943-44, I am assuming they were tracking German industrial output, map: number of factories, year of creation, number of workers, etc. etc. And therefore they discovered that yes, German regime built/transformed many factories (or increased productivity) in 1943-44.

Tooze provides answers to these things. Trust me. I don't want to retype everything here.
User avatar
TulliusDetritus
Posts: 5581
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 1:49 am
Location: The Zone™

RE: Why Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union?

Post by TulliusDetritus »

ORIGINAL: Chris10
focussing on mobilizing craftmanship and productions...consumer goods and other stuff started dissapearing from daily life and shops as fabrics swapped production...

If I well understood, these "fabrics" were producing x stuff and then they started producing y stuff. You are not being very concrete. Am I safe to assume "y" is military stuff? [;)] If yes, they were "transforming" factories ergo they were producing more stuff, which should be in theory easily tracked. Or not? [&:]
"Hitler is a horrible sexual degenerate, a dangerous fool" - Mussolini, circa 1934
User avatar
TulliusDetritus
Posts: 5581
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 1:49 am
Location: The Zone™

RE: Why Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union?

Post by TulliusDetritus »

Keke, the reviews of his book are very contundent (a great book apparently). I will buy and read it. Now I'd really like to know what went wrong aka what was missed by the other historians [:)]
"Hitler is a horrible sexual degenerate, a dangerous fool" - Mussolini, circa 1934
User avatar
Chris10
Posts: 114
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 6:58 pm
Location: Germany,living in Spain

RE: Why Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union?

Post by Chris10 »

ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus
If I well understood, these "fabrics" were producing x stuff and then they started producing y stuff. You are not being very concrete. Am I safe to assume "y" is military stuff?
yes...you are right...fabrics stopped producing hair-tonic,wallpapers,heating-pads,chairs,buckets..whatever you can think about in consumable goods and swapped to someting else needed by the military.
ORIGINAL: TulliusDetritus
[;)] If yes, they were "transforming" factories ergo they were producing more stuff, which should be in theory easily tracked. Or not? [&:]
Everybody in germany could just straight see the changes between 42 and 43

just a few numbers:

1939 the consumable goods industry got 732.000 tons of steel assigned
in 1940 it was 908.000 tons..so actually a lot more than one year before.
I let it to anybodys own judgement what that tells us.

For the 750.000 men in the 50 new Divisions Germany has raised before the France campaign there where only produced 370.000 rifles, 21.000 MG, und 394 light infantry guns, the rest had to be taken from the national weapons reserve which was pretty low by then anyway cause the Poland campaign had cost a lot more material than expected.

During 1941 the production of light infantry wepaons dropped 38%, the production of Artillery by 67%. The total drop of weapons production was 29% while in germany everybody lived just a normal life as if there would be no war at all. Shops and warehouses where full with stuff

User avatar
Panama
Posts: 1362
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 1:48 pm

RE: Why Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union?

Post by Panama »

The Soviets certainly expected a better showing by German industry. They had assumed twice the aircraft production and four times the armored combat vehicle production. RGAE, 4372/91/3002, 139 (Gosplan defence sector, 1937)

Also, when you plot the war production of the USSR, UK, USA and Germany on a curve the other nations have a very steep curve. Germany's is gradual and constant. Not what you would expect of a nation at total war.

And here's something for you pro/anti Speer people.

pre Speer number of:
artillery types 26
AT gun types 12
AA gun types 10
Armored vehicle types 18
Aircraft types 42

post Speer number of:
artillery types 8
AT gun types 2
AA gun types 2
Armored vehicle types 7
Aircraft types 5

The role of mass production in undeniable. Soviet superiority in this field prevailed. Germany was all about the latest novelty and the widest variety. Coupled with German industry's artisan tradition (non mass production) this all translated into a lack of wartime rationalisation and cost reduction. The Soviets mass production strategy might have limited variety and caused disruptions in production due to weapons upgrades but it more than made up in quantity and efficiency.

This isn't merely a sterotypical assertion but can be documented. Soviet war production was able to accelerate faster in 1942 and out produced Germany overall despite an inferior industrial base that was barely out of it's fledgling stages.

You cannot boil Germany's defeat down to one or two or even three things. It was a large variety of factors that, individually would not have lost the war but, in total, brought about defeat. It's almost as though they were doing war on the fly without long term strategies while the Soviet Union had been planning for a war against somebody since 1927.
User avatar
pompack
Posts: 2585
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2004 1:44 am
Location: University Park, Texas

RE: Why Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union?

Post by pompack »

While controversial, I have certainly put this book on my wishlist if only because of this review:

"This massive study of Hitler’s war economy runs to half the length of War and Peace, partly for the reason that the author shares with Tolstoy the annoying habit of repeating himself frequently and at length. Although I suspect the book will be cited more often than read and perhaps more often read than understood, it must all the same now be enrolled by any serious student of the second world war as belonging to the list of indispensable sources available." - Noble Frankland, The Spectator


While he has got to be over 90 by now, this is a very, very postive review by a major historian (and I don't count World at War as a credit but I do count the British official history of the bomber offensive).
Ridgeway
Posts: 139
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 11:36 pm

RE: Why Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union?

Post by Ridgeway »

Guys -- stop saying "fabrics." Fabrik heisst "factory" auf englisch.

Fabrics (auf englisch) are textile products like nylon, cotton, linen etc.
User avatar
pompack
Posts: 2585
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2004 1:44 am
Location: University Park, Texas

RE: Why Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union?

Post by pompack »

ORIGINAL: Ridgeway

Guys -- stop saying "fabrics." Fabrik heisst "factory" auf englisch.

Ah yes, but I think that most people on this forum know that, if only from searching for data on German production in WWII [:D]

Although I must admit that I had to look at the post twice before I caught it since he spelled it with the "c" instead of "k". [:)]
User avatar
Panama
Posts: 1362
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 1:48 pm

RE: Why Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union?

Post by Panama »

ORIGINAL: Ridgeway

Guys -- stop saying "fabrics." Fabrik heisst "factory" auf englisch.

Fabrics (auf englisch) are textile products like nylon, cotton, linen etc.

Maybe a fabrics fabrik?
User avatar
Mynok
Posts: 12108
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2002 12:12 am
Contact:

RE: Why Nazi Germany invaded Soviet Union?

Post by Mynok »


I am quite curious about the book now, having read Speer's volume about the situation.

Panama makes an excellent point about the German tendency to make lots of specialized vehicles in small numbers vs a few general ones in great quantity.

I have to wonder if maybe somewhere near the heart of the issue is what 'mobilized' means. German industry was certainly in decent shape early in the war, but it wasn't dedicated totally to war production. I can't see how this could be disputed. Is it? The general take from mainstream historians is that the big boost in war material production was the switch of industry from domestic production to military.

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series”