Remember to subscribe to Times Radio History: www.youtube.com/@TimesRadioHistory?sub_confirmation=1
@DanH-u3f3 ай бұрын
This would have just prolonged the inevitable defeat of Germany.
@elrjames77992 ай бұрын
Easy to write as this scenario isn't realistic as a sensible historical variable: although remaining on the defensive?
@simonargall55082 ай бұрын
@@elrjames7799 WUT?
@simonargall55082 ай бұрын
@@elrjames7799did you find that easy to write....
@DavidFMayerPhD2 ай бұрын
No matter how the battle might have ended, the defeat of Germany was CERTAIN because USA had an ultimately successful nuclear bomb project in progress, and Germany did NOT. Strangely, many, perhaps MOST of the important scientists in the Manhattan Project were exiles from Germany, including John Van Neumann, Edward Teller, Martin Deutch, and many others. When Max Planck personally asked Hitler how Germany would fare after deporting the best physicists (who were mainly Jewish), Hitler answered, "Germany will just have to do without physicists." How did that work out, Adolph, baby?
@waffle_burger84992 ай бұрын
The lesser known battle of Brody in 1941 probably involved more tanks overall, but spread over a bigger area and over several days. The Red Army fielded at least 3,500 tanks for this operation.
@kevincarroll64903 ай бұрын
One of the main reason Germany lost at Kursk was that they had not got enough front-line infantry to hold open, the flanks for the armoured break through. As a result, the panzer divisions had to help them from the constant Russian counter attacks. Which diverted them from their main objective l. After 3 years of the German had 2 million of their best combat troops died.
@thomaswayneward2 ай бұрын
They lost because they gave up, they could have won.
@mateo80982 ай бұрын
@@thomaswaynewardthey couldnt soviets had their reserves not even in battle
@simonargall55082 ай бұрын
@@thomaswayneward Rubbish lol😅
@TheStudio-div2 ай бұрын
@@thomaswayneward if Japan attack east (i mean Soviet union not China) instead of west, the 2 millions Japanese might able to push it through and capture Siberia and further
@DrCruel2 ай бұрын
@@thomaswayneward To win Kursk, a breakthrough was insufficient. They needed to somehow decisively destroy the entire Red Army and prevent Stalin from creating another. The Americans are coming. German cities are being pulverized. Hitler's run out of time.
@sourkraut53693 ай бұрын
Been waiting for you guys to cover this one, well done as usual!
@goldean59742 ай бұрын
If D-Day had been delayed or, worse, deferred, the atomic bomb would have been dropped first on Germany, not Japan (which was the objective of the Manhattan Project all along).
@simonargall55082 ай бұрын
Could have, not would have, anyway, Russia did not need America to reach Berlin. America helped them do it faster.
@TheStudio-div2 ай бұрын
@@simonargall5508 Russia raw equipment's and even their oil and food supplies are from the US/British lend lease.
@MamunurSiamАй бұрын
@@simonargall5508 tell that to Stalin who said otherwise
@SirOrganic2 ай бұрын
When you draw a straight line from Berlin to Moscow or Kursk region, it’s insane that the Germans could cover that distance… and re-enforce it properly.
@simonargall55082 ай бұрын
Russia is huge.
@colinhunt4057Ай бұрын
@@simonargall5508 Both of you are right. The vast distances of Russia have always been its main defense. Napoleon, Charles XII of Sweden all discovered this to their cost. In Russia, it's all about logistics. Any army that you can feed and supply is too small to do the job. If the army is large enough to do the job, you can't feed it.
@Mr.KingenАй бұрын
germany had the best military on earth by that time
@highdesertutah3 ай бұрын
It’s like asking what would have happened if the Confederacy had won a certain battle in 1864. The tide had turned and it was just a matter of time for the Third Reich. I doubt Hitler would listened but I would have advised him to cancel the offensive making all the resources the Soviets put into their extensive fortifications a waste.
@gabrielgodinho39053 ай бұрын
In this particular case he might have. Hitler had many misgivings about Operation Citadel but deferred to the High Command, who were eager to launch that offensive. In other cases, like the 1944/45 Ardennes offensive, their roles were reversed.
@darbyohara2 ай бұрын
If the confederacy won the battle of Gettysburg there would be 2 Americans right now
@simonargall55082 ай бұрын
Sadly you were not there how to tell people how to do their job😅😅
@simonargall55082 ай бұрын
@darbyohara, that is one alternative history, hey bra. Time travel don't exist yet.
@robertdacquisto68713 ай бұрын
This is such a great series, some of the better WW2 videos I’ve seen.
@coco260062 ай бұрын
"there always neurotic about their flanks" yeah any tactician should be, because troops tend to look forward, if you get in the enemies flank you can do massive damage to the enemy before much of the section even knows what's happening. so the Wehrmacht being concerned of being outflanked by a million soviets isn't an unfair one
@jonahtwhale17792 ай бұрын
Most fighting formations only have enough supplies - fuel, food, ammunition, water etc for a few days fighting, at most. If your supply line is interupted you will have no choice but surrender. The only way to get to your supply line is via your flanks.
@coco260062 ай бұрын
@@jonahtwhale1779 And if Market Garden showed anything its that suppling formations from the air is practically worthless, actually given how much supplies were captured by the Germans it was worse than worthless. so yeah its was probably wise of the Wehrmacht to be concerned about there flanks
@simonargall55082 ай бұрын
@@coco26006 well yaaaa...
@marcelgroen62563 ай бұрын
The geopolitical views of (Rear) Admiral Chris Parry are always a pleasure to listen to.
@davebradshaw25373 ай бұрын
Good one guys, possibly your best yet.
@trickypg71843 ай бұрын
Thank you guys - great, informative content as always. You're should get a lot more subscribers if there's any justice in the world.
@stunitech3 ай бұрын
I've been throwing this show out to as many people as I think would like it. I hope it helps with subs
@stevesmith81553 ай бұрын
Yes! These shows are great! Well done all.
@jasonmussett21292 ай бұрын
I covered the Battle of Kursk in my MA Dissertation and I argued that Citadel was really a local attack against a single objective. Personally I always argue the Germans should not have launched an offensive at all but let the Soviets throw the first punch, Ah the what ifs of history, great job lads.
@stebo-pv2hq2 ай бұрын
correct,the Germans,however valiantly,charged into a trap
@stephenmacdonald44432 ай бұрын
I think may be good idea
@colder54652 ай бұрын
General Kurt Zeitzler who initially suggested the idea would agree with you. But certainly not Hitler who transformed the idea into the Mother of All Battles
@jasonmussett21292 ай бұрын
@colder5465 Absolutely yeah👍👍👍
@simonargall55082 ай бұрын
And the results would be the same anyway. America to change sides could have helped.
@Lindsay-t2e3 ай бұрын
POTW is a great platform Mike. Great guests as always. THANKS from 🏴
@masonmead273 ай бұрын
Love the show!
@jimmycakes71582 ай бұрын
Really good format, feels like something that used to be on tv
@All2Meme3 ай бұрын
What if Publius Varus and his legions had not been lured into and destroyed in the trap that was the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest?
@kevinmcinerney19593 ай бұрын
Kursk would have gone differently.
@outlet69892 ай бұрын
One "What If" is more than enough when commenting on a video.
@unclebuck94832 ай бұрын
@@kevinmcinerney1959😅🎉👏👏👏
@soupordave3 ай бұрын
Something the presenters didn't bring up was Operation Mincemeat. This was the British intelligence operation to convince Hitler that the Allies were invading Greece and Sardinia and not Sicily. If that is not successful, and the German troops sent to Greece instead are put in Italy and Sicily then maybe Hitler doesn't panic and halt Kursk prematurely. As for Japan and the Pacific, I don't think the timetable can be advanced any more than it was. The distances in the Pacific are just too vast and you need those island bases not just for airfields, but also as logistics centers to keep the offensive going. You might be able to squeeze a few more divisions into the Burmabut the terrain just does not allow large armies to operate.
@simonargall55082 ай бұрын
Thanks for the talk, it was great.
@stevenovetsky32742 ай бұрын
Brilliant video, many thanks to all three gentlemen.
@JPGoertz2 ай бұрын
Very interesting. Gave me some new perspectives. Thank you.
@aolcom-nl9qb3 ай бұрын
The Germans almost won at Kursk , but the cost would have been higher then what efforts would've been to hold on to Kursk and reposition the German army.
@mmartinu3272 ай бұрын
The soviets had better numbers, were better prepeared, and were ready for the attack. There was nothing that Germans could do for victory
@friendfacemcriffhard0003 ай бұрын
Another great video. Well done.
@colder54652 ай бұрын
Actually, the Soviets were prepared for the worst scenario. That was the purpose of the so called Steppe Front of Marshal Konev. Its primary task was to counter the negative consequences of an eventual defeat. The second task was supporting a counteroffensive if the things went well. That was the reason why the Soviets went on the offensive so fast on the southern side of the Kursk salient. Manstein's idea of destroying Soviet reserves was impossible to fulfil.
@tomcolvin81992 ай бұрын
Great show, expert guests.
@craiglarge59253 ай бұрын
CCCP would have still prevailed: however, A German victory at Kursk would have delayed the inevitable defeat in WW2 by perhaps 3 months. Germany was out produced, out manned, and surrounded by its enemies. D-Day still would have happened with maybe a delay in its implementation.
@TheLucanicLord3 ай бұрын
A delay of a year, because you can't do it in winter.
@MichaelDeutschman3 ай бұрын
Not necessarily, the Russians were also getting bled white.
@Vandelberger3 ай бұрын
Yeah, only difference in opinion is the Germans would of had to pull off another 1941 Kursk encirclement and that was not going to happen.
@martinwarner11783 ай бұрын
I'm hooked! Harold & lucky ba-tard William yesterday, now Kursk, brilliant. Keep up the great work. Peace and goodwill. Chris Parry gave William the lucky bit, and I love it.
@MC-ys3sq3 ай бұрын
I've always wondered how the Germans could have inflicted so many casualties on the Soviet thru an offensive that made so little headway and was eventually repulsed
@iamthatiam19463 ай бұрын
we gave the russians total intelligence so the russians knew exactly how many and where troops would be if not german probably would have won.
@MamunurSiamАй бұрын
cause they're far better fighters. That's why
@HerbertAshe2 ай бұрын
Excellent series and keep up the good work Times radio. Just to note but the image associated with the Ferdinand looks to me a lot like a Pak 37 rather than the Pak 43 mounted on the tank killer.
@DHEAS113 ай бұрын
Interesting! Many thanks!
@TheLucanicLord3 ай бұрын
Italy's closer than Kursk, but there's humongous mountains in the way. Another possibility is that senior soviets decided Stalin was a moron and arranged for him to fall out of a window.
@tancreddehauteville7643 ай бұрын
The Germans wasted time. Had they attacked in late May/early June they might have won, but they delayed and allowed the Soviets to build up defences.
@TheStudio-div2 ай бұрын
Mastein was right when he propose to launch immediately strike after Stalingrad, but Hitler was afraid of failure.
@noneofyourbusiness29973 ай бұрын
I was surprised that you couldn't find a photo of the Ferdinand / Elefant with the Panzerjägerkanone 43/2 (PaK 43) - What you showed was the AT gun itself, not the massively armored (Later called) Panzerjäger Tiger (P).
@simonargall55082 ай бұрын
They could 😅
@sulate12 ай бұрын
It was hardly a strategic offensive. At best they would have straightened their line but would still not have had the fuel and supplies to maintain any offensive posture.
@sharonwhiteley6510Күн бұрын
WHAT IF: Russia had aided the Polish and Jewish uprising in Warsaw instead of watching the total devastation and carnage?
@lesliefranklin18702 ай бұрын
Note that the atomic bombs were initially considered to be dropped on Germany. Germany surrendered before the atomic bombs were ready to be deployed. So, they were dropped on Japan instead. So, if the plan was Japan before Germany, things likely would have been different.
@suspiciousminds17502 ай бұрын
The number of troops involved in this battle, in a relatively small area was enormous. Two million Russians, 800k Germans. As a comparison, the entire US Army today is about 400K.
@stunitech3 ай бұрын
Lol! I literally said to myself earlier "Hmmm they haven't done Citadel yet" 😂😂
@simonargall55082 ай бұрын
Literally!!
@AngriestAmerican2 ай бұрын
I heard someone once say that Manstien recommended a shift in the attack axis and wanted to attack Kursk right up the middle.
@gustavderkits8433Ай бұрын
Roosevelt was still alive. He calls Stalin and says, “ If you sign an armistice, not one more tank or ton of aluminum or steel. “ Stalin knows this.
@morty8443 ай бұрын
If the Germans won Kursk, the soviets wouldn t have been able to pile up reserve for serious offensive actions until late winter 1943/early 44. But it would have freed up division to counter allies landing in Italy. Pottentially pushing back the allies to the sea. This would have seriously compromises upcoming allies strategies - the soviet stopping hostilities. Freeing up considerable forces and air personnal capable of challenging the allies bombing campaigns. On the long run, new tech projects leads by German would have keep the allies busy and under constant pressure. Most likely, a status quo would have freeze up the conflict
@TheYeti3083 ай бұрын
I Agree .
@albert23953 ай бұрын
I have heard that they coukdn't attack on the original date of ? May, because the ground was too wet, especially for heavy armour.😮
@MichaelDeutschman3 ай бұрын
Salerno gets cracked by hundreds of panzers and aircraft which causes pause and caution in the planning of future operations.
@phillipjoy48202 ай бұрын
The German goal at Kursk was indeed a separate peace in the East
@simonargall55082 ай бұрын
And your source is??
@ARBBFamily3 ай бұрын
Win or lose… Germany’s time was up. Russia could replace its losses Germany could not. Stalin could see that he was gaining more land as he went forward and was not going to stop now
@MichaelDeutschman3 ай бұрын
No, the Germans were inflicting much higher casualties on the Russians. As alluded to in this video the casualty ratio only started to change when the Russians took the initiative after this battle. - Otl the average age of the typical Red Army rifleman in Berlin was 45.
@ARBBFamily3 ай бұрын
@@MichaelDeutschman the battle of Kursk was one of desperation on the Germans part. It was guaranteed a defeat for the Germans because it was Hitler’s idea Not to mention the numerical superiority that Russia had. But even with a victory, It would’ve tasted just as bitter as the defeated did
@breckmcvay21043 ай бұрын
Pervitin was a methamphetamine (used by mainly the Germans and some other Axis forces) Americans and some Allied forces used amphetamines (Adderrall and similar)
@Francis-m2d2 ай бұрын
A decent enough overview, sort of a Battle of Kursk 101,,,but there are some things not touched on. Manstein was NOT advocating endless attacks; he favored the 'backhand' approach whereby you let the Soviets attack, Germans withdraw, Russians overextend their supply lines and their military forces become disorganized, and then the Germans attack in strength and recover the ground just given up...objective is to bleed the Russians and get them worn down enough a stalemate leads to a peace treaty. Once Hitler decided to delay the attack until the beginning of July, whatever he gained via Panthers and Tigers was more than negated by the time given to the Soviets to build defensive lines and bring up more of their own forces. And we might want to consider what exactly is meant as a German victory? If the Germans had won an easy victory than yes, good things for them might have followed. But what if the victory had simply cost too much?
@EL200782 ай бұрын
27:44 there was no way they could have driven to Kursk, the Soviets had brought in massive reserves and they heavily outnumbered the Germans. Hitler's decision to call off the offensive was wise.
@simonargall55082 ай бұрын
Ya, the generals always said Hitler was responsible for all their mistakes. No one is immune from mistakes etc.
@Wolf-hh4rv3 ай бұрын
Always come back to- how obvious was where the offensive was coming?-- and must have known the Soviets were building their defences around the salient, surely?
@leebiggs16853 ай бұрын
You're right. It's hard to attack into prepared positions when you are down manpower and armor 2 or more to 1.
@slickone91352 ай бұрын
21 Army divisions fought in pacific theater. It wasn't just the Marines and the Navy.
@colm-u8m2 ай бұрын
Excellent
@maxwellutter38852 ай бұрын
What music is this?
@HontasFarmer803 ай бұрын
I am so glad to see serious alternate history done that doesn't ignore the atom bomb. Any scenario that sees Germany or Japan holding out longer sees them getting hit with copious amounts of atom bombs. I guess the question is would countries like those be willing to lose a few cities every couple of weeks until America loses interest? For however long Truman remains president assuming things go the same way with Roosevelt I don't see America changing its policy towards those particular countries.
@JesterEric3 ай бұрын
Germany never used the huge quantities of nerve gas it had developed
@gabrielgodinho39053 ай бұрын
@@JesterEric but the Germans never had enough gas masks for their men and horses to survive their own gas, nor the poison gas the Allies had and would use in retaliation.
@JesterEric3 ай бұрын
@@gabrielgodinho3905 The Allies did not have nerve agents. They only had ww1 mustard gas in quantity. Every German soldier had a gas mask but for nerve agents you really need full body protection
@rickj8952 ай бұрын
Love it
@Madskidzz3 ай бұрын
Love this show
@stephenclarke22063 ай бұрын
If the Germans had won at Kursk would Operation Bagration have been realistic the following year?
@eric-wb7gj3 ай бұрын
It depends on the scale of any German victory.
@mat98130042 ай бұрын
Feels like I am watching a sports show review.
@theplayerofus3192 ай бұрын
14:36 that is not a Ferdinand 😂
@AdamMisnik22 күн бұрын
The Strategic consequence of a German victory at Kursk would have been the mauling the Red Army would have taken for the Germans to win. The Soviets did not have an infinite ability to replace losses and could not sustain the losses they were taking at Kursk.
@jayfelsberg19313 ай бұрын
You assume the Allies Med strategy would work. What if it failed?
@Idahoguy101573 ай бұрын
Wait on the atomic bomb? It wasn’t until one was exploded that the president knew it wasn’t a colossal failure. Almost no one knew of the Manhattan Project. Let alone expecting a super weapon in 1945
@coachhannah24033 ай бұрын
Well... Uranium bombs are easy to explode, but tough to make the Uranium. Plutonium is trivial to produce, but it was the one that was questionable as to getting it to go boom instead of poof.
@internetstrangerstrangerofweb2 ай бұрын
TLDR: they prolong the inevitable
@besteffortint2 ай бұрын
Well, time to educate the masses. Dubno & Brody in ‘41 was the largest tank battle in history.
@lovatocrvero742Ай бұрын
Yeah but it was more spread out and over several days so that doesn't count 😂😂
@midwestguy19832 ай бұрын
Nice what if, but there is no way at all that Germany would have won at Kursk. The Soviets had concealed several armies the Germans didn't even know about and the Soviet command pretty much knew where the Germans wanted to go.
@Douglas.Scott.McCarron2 ай бұрын
There is no way to know if DDAY wouldn't have happened. And the battle of Kursk did not last a month and a half.
@johnmacdonald187823 күн бұрын
Kursk, only came about because of the defeat at Stalingrad. If the Germans had not been defeated at Stalingrad. And lost the entire 6th army. Things might have been quite different in the east. What would have happened if the Germans had not attacked the salient at Kursk. might have been a more pertinent question. The Germans were never able to mount a major offensive again. More importantly the losses were so great they were unable to hold back the Russians. If the Germans had not attacked the Russians would have had to attack. Result greater losses and much longer to defeat the Germans.
@ihsanduzgun2 ай бұрын
End is ineviatale even they won at Kursk.
@adamdavidson40896 күн бұрын
14.38 through you are taking about a self propelled gun and showing a non self propelled gun. (You talk about an 88mm Panzaerjager Tiger Elefant made by Ferdinand Porsche and show, I think, a 75mm Pak 40.)
@GaryRoberts-i4w2 ай бұрын
Please have a show about what would happen if the Germans new technology coming in. If the wor went to 1946
@colinmurphy5252 ай бұрын
Wouldn’t have mattered, what interesting stuff they came up with. By then B-29’s would be roaming Germany. Leaving mushroom clouds in their wake.
@keesvanharen97912 ай бұрын
Month and a halve battle? Lol no way, it was finished within 1,5 week. Infact the Germans where breaking through and Manstein planned to push towards Kursk after Prokhorovka was won by the Germans. It was Hitler that canceled the operation because of Italy.
@axxellein2 ай бұрын
TRES Heavy!
@sourabhsrivastav7172 ай бұрын
That Germans did what the allies anticipated.That's Stupidity
@СветославТасев2 ай бұрын
Kursk illustrated the small mindedness of the German generals. They gambled all of their reserves on an operation which if successful would only manage to shorten the front line by a 200 kilometers. Brilliant!
@Baptiste.b.a.c.p29 күн бұрын
And encircle 800k-1m men, they needed these as man power to work for german industry, you shorten the front, you open a gap toward both Moscow, and Voronej, and finally moral would be great again for the germans which are desesperate
@sisuriffs2 ай бұрын
They didn't. They lost, but what if they HAD won?
@thomaswayneward2 ай бұрын
They should have won the battle of Kursk, they quit too quickly from panicking. They could have won by just continuing the battle, even though it was rough. I base my post on my readings of the battle in several different books.
@BC-ns6px2 ай бұрын
well, actually, they won. look at the casualties
@RR-uj2vx3 ай бұрын
What if history is science fiction. Has Times Radio run out of history to discuss?
@bidenator97603 ай бұрын
You don't sound too fun at parties. Alternative history is a great way to educate yourself on real history.
@jimrunsfar2 ай бұрын
@@bidenator9760🎯
@anilles20012 ай бұрын
Wouldn't have made a difference. Russia would not have settled for peace. D-Day was a full year later anyway.
@clanpsi3 ай бұрын
*What if Germany ~HAD~ Won
@paulmicheldenverco12 ай бұрын
The U.S.A. still would have prevailed. We would have found a way.
@davidcolley77145 күн бұрын
Pure supposition
@Tbone14923 ай бұрын
U.S should've given lendlease to Germany. Kept selling oil and steel to Japan!
@simonargall55082 ай бұрын
😭
@TheStudio-div2 ай бұрын
Japan killed their prime minister and replace with hideki tojo who launch attack on pearl harbour. The prime minister was pushing for soviet attack than attack their own ally (China and US are friendly to Japan during that time)
@thomasbaagaardАй бұрын
"the Russians"... at least he a few times remembers to say the soviets. The red army included millions of men who where not Russians.
@bfc30573 ай бұрын
Germany could never have won the battle of Kursk either after retaking Kharkov in April as there was inadequate equipment or in July as the Soviets had prepared for it. Germany had used all its strategic reserve and it ignores the inevitable German losses.
@060POTEHb8 күн бұрын
Erm...32:06 "use our aviation..."? To a fashist airforce? Am i missheard something?
@M_Rich112 ай бұрын
Even if the German's "won" at Kursk, their mobile units were worn out from the effort and required rest and refit. The Soviets launched Operation Kutuzov (against Orel) on July 12 and Operation Rumyantsev (Ukraine) shortly thereafter. The Germans were going to be under serious pressure in the East regardless of "win" or "lose" at Kursk. The Soviets were playing a strategic game of attrition that the Germans couldn't afford to. If they had not attacked at Kursk and awaited the Soviet offensives and countered them, then its possible the attrition game could have favored them. The attack at Kursh ensured their defeat, "win" or lose.
@tonyserebro85422 ай бұрын
it wouldn't matter because in summer 1943 all eastern front line was not properly manned and equipped allready especially army group north and north of army group centre
@NYG53 ай бұрын
They would have had to win a perfect victory, which just wouldnt have happened.
@Jim-Tuner3 ай бұрын
If Germany had won the battle of Kursk, they would have been able to temporarily straighten the front in the east and build up a degree of reserves from doing it. But those reserves would immediately have been taken away into the west to deal with Sicily and Italy the same way that forces were taken away when Germany did not win the battle. It would have meant less than nothing.
@josephmcbee12913 ай бұрын
I agree. The massive, crushing Soviet counterattacks immediately following the German defeat at Kursk - all along the eastern front, smashing the Germans back for months on end - was going to happen regardless of the outcome at Kursk. They had overwhelming reserves built up and waiting in anticipation of going on the offensive once the Germans showed their summer offensive hand, and even a Soviet loss at Kursk was not going to stop this. Even a German victory at Kursk would have most likely ended with the entire Kursk region in Soviet hands by that winter.
@johnhallett58462 ай бұрын
WOULD NOT HAVE CHANGED THE FINAL OUTCOME. from Stalingrad on, German defeat was inevitable. It certainly would not have affected the western allies. LET alone DDay
@rudolphguarnacci1972 ай бұрын
You mean like ukraine?
@Cohen.the.Worrier3 ай бұрын
If a Soviet defeat at Kursk leads to a ceasefire on the Eastern front, much of German troops there would be redeployed and I don't see the Allies punching through the mountainous terrain.
@stoobydootoo40983 ай бұрын
A very common, unthinking phrasing error @ 07:04 - " ... you can't underestimate ... "'. You mean, "can't OVERESTIMATE". Or, " ... you SHOULDN'T underestimate ... " No need to thank me. 😃
@calistudent63353 ай бұрын
Good vid but it's hard to listen to Johnathan Trigg repeating words three or four times in every sentence.
@jakejackson67302 ай бұрын
The German invasion of the U.SS.R was dividend into three areas. Army Group North that was to take Moscow, Army Group Center went into Ukraine and Army Group South, going through Crimea and Southern Russia. In the first year alone when driving toward Moscow casualties on the German Army was nearly 400,000. In Kursk German casualties were near 60'000. Soviet near 70.000. i think it would not make any difference if the Germans won at kursk because their forces would been spread too thin to retake all the lost ground since losing at Stalingrad. .
@JesterEric3 ай бұрын
Zelensky should have learned this lesson from the Third Reich
@stephenclarke22063 ай бұрын
Zelensky is defending his own country he hasn't invaded someone elses or exhausted his supply lines
@cricketerfrench75013 ай бұрын
Sorry Eric, you are not amusing anyone comrade
@bidenator97603 ай бұрын
How much did the Kremlin pay for this post?
@wartoga42483 ай бұрын
I disagree strongly with your opinion. The conclusion is the battle of Kursk could not have been won. The Germans did not have the fuel, air support and ammunition resources and lacked the human resources in numbers to make a much larger encirclement. Besides, they had a crappy strategic leader, the mustaccio man himself.