2022-11-20 翻译熊 9261

How come Nazi Germany didn’t learn from Napoleon’s blunder of trying to invade Russia?


Ivory Campbell
An infatuation with Moscow and St Petersburg. Also the respective German & French leadership had the same exaggerated importance and, contrary to their propaganda, had very little empathy for their own citizens and soldiers. This combonation resulted in millions of unnecessary deaths. Unfortunately war only amplifies these characteristics and many forces (before, during and after) have also succumbed to their leaders egomania. While there is evil in the world, hopefully, in the future, we can realize that large scale warfare was mans worst creation.


Lee Rich
The invasion of Russia was - what we call today -a preemptive strike. The Germans believed (and the information we have now makes it appear accurate) that the Soviets were prepared to invade Germany. So, by attacking the Soviets first, they destroyed most (if not all) of their primary offensive capabilities before the Soviets could use them.
In modern terms, this would be like destroying all of Russia's nuclear missiles while they were still in the silos.
Obviously, the problem is…once you launch an invasion like that, you can't force the enemy to agree the war is over by destroying their offensive capabilities. So, you're stuck trying to have to conquer enough territory to make them surrender. Which the Germans weren't able to do. Mainly, because Hitler demanded the German military waste resources to conquer Stalingrad for a “propaganda win" rather than striking south into Azerbaijan and/or north to Moscow.


Peter Clings
I believe that the Germans before WW2 (Generals and Hitler) were batting on a win as they have experience by themselves during WW1. They were probably no fools or ignorant of history just over confident, partially motivated from experience


Hitler believed he could defeat Russia with a quick short campaign. To him the whole Russian system was corrupt and all he had to do was kick in the door and the whole rotten mess would come tumbling down. He was wrong of course. Even when the Soviets pushed the German military all the way back to the borders of Germany itself he still believed he could win the war, By this time he was delusional


Jason Taylor
Associates from Mt. Hood Community College, Gresham, OR2y
There was no where else to conquer, and Nazi ideology was predicated on fighting Bolshevics, gaining living space, and purifying the Aryan Race. Those goals could not be realized without invading Russia.


Gordon Allen
The situation was not analogous Weapons technology had changed dramatically, and more importantly industrialization(and it’s requirements)now offered potentially decisive targets that didn’t exist in 1812. Germany had a good chance of achieving its aims in 1941/42.After all, it achieved them in Russia in 1918 (Treaty of Brest-Litovsk), and they were similar.


Robert Clouse
At the time of Napoleon, the idea of completely defeating Netherlands, Belgium, and France in only 7 weeks wouldn't be found in even a dream.
Combine that history of the Quick defeat to 3 nations so quickly, and the Ego of Hitler, I am sure they didn't see that they would have any of the problems the Napoleon did when he invaded Russia.
Operation Barbarossa was named after Frederick I, Holy Roman Emperor.
Frederick I, Holy Roman Emperor - Wikipedia
“Historians consider him among the Holy Roman Empire's greatest medi emperors. He combined qualities that made him appear almost superhuman to his contemporaries: his longevity, his ambition, his extraordinary skills at organization, his battlefield acumen and his political perspicacity. “
The Nazi German thought themselves and just as Superhuman as Frederick Barbarossa when they invaded Russia.


Andrew Anderson
I guess Hitler and his team were overconfident of the Wehrmacht’s ability to encircle and completely destroy all Soviet army units at the beginning of the war. If Germany had succeeded in doing this, then their Soviet War would literally be over, fairly quickly, with no remaining resistance aside from weak partisan movements. Had this happened, the Wehrmacht could then have easily occupied all of the USSR’s cities, industrial regions, and agricultural belts as far as the Urals. Such a success by the Germans might have enabled Hitler to win the war. Obviously, Hitler & Co miscalculated.


The supreme irony is that Napoleon, too, expected to encircle and completely destroy all the Russian army’s divisions early in the 1812 war. Once the Russian army had been mopped up and destroyed within two or three months, the tsar would have nothing left to fight with except partisans, poorly equipped militias, and ragtag Cossack units. Under these conditions, Napoleon could have occupied most European Russian cities without facing significant resistance, and he might very well have been able to dictate peace to the tsar. But, as we all know, Napoleon goofed up, and very badly at that.
So, my answer to your question is that I don’t know why Hitler and his advisors expected to avoid the same pitfalls that snared Napoleon in Russia. The parallels between each invasion are definitely uncanny.

原创翻译:龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

Ronald Emmanuel
They did. They determined Napolean’s error was in pursuing taking cities instead of engaging and destroying the Russian army and seizing resources. They formulated the Hunger Plan to seize food and starve tens of millions of russians and on destroying that army however they had no idea how big that army really was and so they did not have the resources to kill it or to stop it deploying new formations and that's why they lost.


James Lingren
A lot of folks don’t know or recall that in WW One, Germany and the Austro-Hungarians knocked Russia out of the War.
The Russians signed a treaty giving the Germans huge territories.
Even worse than the Treaty of Versailles.


Sebastien Dorat
I’m not convinced that the comparison with Russia’s performance 25 years earlier was a decision driver for Germany in WW2 as the contexts for Russia were significantly different and the defeats of the Russians in WW1 not exclusively caused by the lack of valor of their troops. In WW1 the russians issues against the Germans by 1917 were significantly aggravated by the messy political situation domestically, further to revolution and the dissensions existing between Soviet’s and conservatives. Basically almost 2 governments coexisted and Russia was already on the verge of the civil war between reds and whites. The Russian army on the east front was significantly impacted by massive desertions since Lénine and the Soviets were pushing hard to sign an immediate peace with Germany at any cost (they preferred to focus these forces on the conquest of domestic power). Ultimately the soviets managed to sign a peace agreement with Germany. They didn’t care about the lost territories as anyway all what mattered to Lénine and his fans was to focus on the conquest of absolute soviet power in Russia itself and everything that could help,to disorganize the conservative government was welcome. Bolcheviks were obviously against any alliance with legacy capitalist and democratic western countries such as France and Britain.


I’ll get lighten on here, Because i am going to defend someone who is indeffendable in light of the history we are teached. But it is the truth … if you doubt, look at the sequence of war declarations on wikipedia. And you will be surprised … and you will also realize that what you were thought does not fit the facts. you may experience a cognitive dissonance.
Declarations of war during World War II - Wikipedia
So here we go :Hitler attacked Russia, not because he wanted to add onto , his already complicated war against people he didn’t want to get in war with (all the Anglo Saxon comunity), but because Russia was about to attack Europe and to take it over … so he anticipated that. And acted with the hope of a successful blitz krieg.


When you will find the sequences of war declarations in WW2, you will be surprised how many declarations were made to Germany, and not inversed. What is not said, are the 10’s of letters Hitler wrote to countries not to make war, and later to make peace … including (this is also recorded as a fact) that he sent his right arm Rudolf Hess to Scotland, to have peace negotiations with Britain … who simply kept him as prisonner)
So … learning from Napoleon would have been good. (and probably they learned because they had the most advanced program to teach strategy and tactics to german officers) but when you have no choice … the story is different.


Divaker V Vittal
The Nazis commenced operation Barbarosa in the summer of June to capture Moscow, destroy Stalingrad, Leningrad and Occupy oil fields in Romania with their Blitzkrieg tactic on a weaker Soviet unx which was practically immobile for a mechanized warfare and weighed heavily on junk armaments and a very large infantry.
The Germans knew way too well that their blitzkrieg is unstoppable by the reds to enter Moscow and the oil fields, so that they were pretty sure to capture these places much before rain commences which would make the Soviets hard for regrouping and army movements. The strategy was well made to use terrain and the weather to favor the occupiers and fortify places, whereas the Stuka Bombers would take care of the Soviet unxs railway lines and hamper army movement completely.
We can see the Nazi failure in the Russian theater in two parts: The first being delay in securing the oil fields and Hitler’s personal interests to delay direct assault on Moscow by the Nazis who were waiting for orders in her gates.


Luftwaffe achieved air supremacy in the first week of attack and helped gaining grounds in the Baltic states in July, Ukraine and Moldavia and finally the Belorussian regions by July.
On 29th June Hitler instructed the commander Fedor Von Bock to halt the advancing panzers till regrouping of all other Nazi divisions forage. This decision took the tactical advantage of Nazis over the Soviets who were at a very weak spot in protecting the Kremlin as well as the city.
The waiting just grew longer as the Nazi skirmishes and political lobbying dragged Finland into the war delaying a whole week from any action, From 2nd July to 8th July a rainstrom slowed the Panzers progress and later the mechanized army broke down due to swamp roads.


Hitler continued with his mistakes series by diverting food and supply to those divisions fighting Belurisian regions to seize industrial areas and capture places which are glamorous like Kharkov, Donbass, Leningrad etc.
Fedor Von Bock's many requests were not heeded for a full direct assault on Moscow which was on a striking distance to them and his theory of reducing the Soviet unx's morale by capturing Moscow went unheeded with Hitler.
Hitler was too busy in circumventing Moscow in a pincer movement which would appear more glorious and glamorous on the map and of course he was too much interested on providing newer versions of the Panzers and to cause more harm cancelled assault rifles from the requisition.


Michael Robinson
To/ Reader
I’m not sure exactly how much they could have learnt from Napoleon’s Russian campaign.
Yes, the Russians were persistent in both campaigns and Germany largely had the same kind of logistics as Napoleon, transporting some of their supplies using horses and carts/wagons, but that seems to be the end of the similarities between the 2.
The Russians had wider railways than the rest of Europe. Without building a fleet of new trains, specifically made for the Russian railway gauge, there was little the Germans could have done about it. No study of Napoleon’s Invasion of Russia could have prepared them for that.


However, a major difference was the Russian strategy in countering both the French and Germans. Against the French, the Russian strategy of Kutuzov was to deny battle for as long as possible, making the French supply lines become overstretched and allowing diseases to take hold, whereas their strategy against the Germans was to engage them as soon as possible, using their population and equipment supplied by the UK and the US to form reserves.
The motivations of the 2 invasions were also different. The German aim was to capture the 3 main cities (Leningrad/St. Petersburg, Moscow, Stalingrad/Volgograd) and the oil in the Caucasus. However, Napoleon’s aim was to destroy the Russian field armies and force them to obey his will. Hitler both wanted and needed to occupy Russia whereas Napoleon just wanted to go in, smash the Russian army and force Tsar Alexander to rejoin the Continental System, after which he could return to Central Europe. He had no need to occupy anything.


If history has taught us one thing, occupying a country is more difficult than just invading one.
1808 - 1814: Napoleon found that out in the Iberian Peninsular as thousands of his soldiers died in Spain and Portugal.
Afghanistan became known as the graveyard of empires.
While the US could invade Vietnam, their ability to occupy it was limited by political opinion

1. 1808 - 1814年:拿破仑在伊比利亚半岛发现了这一点,成千上万的士兵死于西班牙和葡萄牙。
2. 阿富汗被称为帝国的墓地。
3. 虽然美国可以入侵越南,但他们占领越南的能力受到政治观点的限制。

很赞 1