Why did Germany lose on the Eastern Front

[pariah]

Yeah, Google comes in handy sometimes (emphasis on "sometimes"...). Don't know much about that "Wikipedia" thing, though.

[Analpirat]

Well Puny is taking it to the extreme. I don't think one should undervalue all the supplies the Brits and the Soviets received. They didn't pay such a huge price in blood, but without them victory would've come a lot more costly to the soviets (If, Gasp!, at all. But you'll probably try to stone me for that  ).

I meant the fighting part, since we were talking about germany declaring war on the US, because it was strongly supporting the enemies of the riech. So the above notice of yours sinks into the cold void

I wasn't aware there was such a thing as a cold void for posts.
Plus, wars aren't only fought by fighting ;-)

[Chancellor]

I wonder what would happen if Japan chose to invade the USSR from the East at the height of the German invasion from the West...

Would the USSR still be able to hold off both fronts?  If these guys actually won, we might be living in an extremely racist world now.

I never understood why Hitler decided to join with Japan.  I thought he hated all non-whites?

[Tico_1990]

I never understood why Hitler decided to join with Japan.  I thought he hated all non-whites?

It's a bit more complicated than that. If you were an Aryan (German, Austrian, Dutchman, Scandinavian etc.) than you were ok, if you were a Russian, you definately weren't ok. Now Italians are by no means what Hitler calls "Aryans", but they were his allies. Hitler may not have been a very practical man in a lot of instances, but in this one I think he was practical, Japan was by far the most powerfull nation in the far east, and Italy had a good foothold in Africa.
Japans ideal (to rid Asia of unfair overrulers) was somewhat in line with that of Hitler, to get rid of the yoke of Versailles and return Germany to it's old former glory.

[pariah]

Yeah, no doubt Hitler would have turned on the Japanese and Italians eventually, just like the Russians.

[loatty]

The defeat of the USSR would've been more likely with Japan joining in, but Japan already attacked the USSR before, and lost all the time (fun fact: it was the fighting against Japan which helped so to speak 'shape' General Zhukov ) Germany was the country which had to deliver the biggest en then decisive blow, not any other nation.

[Mad hatters in jeans]

Basically Germany lost on the Eastern front for a number of reasons.
Most of them stem from the leadership at the time being poor.
(ie Hitler Goering)

The attack on Stalingrad was a step too far with an army stripped of it's panzers and fuel, but then telling the same army to stay in it's position once surrounded was catastrophic.

Lack of proper winter equipment for two years running!
Russia being so damn huuge mean the German supply routes were huge and innefficient.

The Russians made a titanic effort to relocate their populations and build a new industrial area behind lines. Russians were particularly good at masking huge armies from German observers.
With the Majority of the German airforce beaten in the battle of Britain it lost air superiority, allowing Russian airfighters to harass German forces from the skies later on.

German treatment of the local populations was ridiculously harsh and genocidal, which meant a large proportion of their occupied territories had lots of partisan activity.

The Kursk offensive was the turning point, the German forces did not use their favourite tactic well (blitzkrieg) and the Russians had plenty of time to prepare the battlefield with lots of mines and defenses.

Germany tried to eat more than it could chew, and declaring war on USA was incredibly stupid, in fact if the Germans had not done so the USA would have probably not intervened in Europe, or if it had it would have been too late.

[loatty]

That covers it, i suppose

[Analpirat]

No, sorry. Kursk was in no way the turning point on the Eastern Front. It was already over long before that. Had Kursk succeeded Germany would by no means have won the war, all that would have happened would be that maybe(And I'll stress that) the defeat would not have been as catastrophic. OTOH it could have been even more catastrophic with the US nuking German cities instead of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

[Seeme]

Hitler wouldn't have won the war no matter how you slice it, the only reason he got as far as he did was because the Soveits weren't ready.

[loatty]

Well, if i stick to basic options, Germany could've won the war if:

1: the German nuclear project finished before the US.
2: if Hitler actually listened to his officers!

[Seeme]

Number 1- Defiantly

Number 2- Would of helped a bunch, but 3 Million men vs 15+Million....

As I said before, the only reason he got that far was because he the Soviets weren't ready. On 1943, They had the Army better off in equipment then the Germans. They had no chance from the start.

The Reich Scared away a lot of scientist at the beginning of the war (Including Albert Einstein). If Hitler didn't blame everything on the Jews, maybe half of the scientist would of stayed there, and they would of got it done faster.

[loatty]

They may have scared a lot of scientist away, but Germany was still superior with certain technologies until the very end of the war, take rockets, for example......

damn I'm not in the mood to talk a lot right now

[loatty]

may i remind everyone that this is a discussion about why Germany lost on the eastern front? And the 'they lost because they were fu...ng idiots' story might be partly right, it isn't going to explain everything, so please try to talk about something a little more serious.

Now, can we all please get back to the topic?

[BurroDiablo]

Stay on topic guys. You want to argue politics, go somewhere else.