Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonzo'sCostar
Actually, I had always accepted that Stalingrad was just another example of Hitler's military buffoonery. I can't remember where I read it, but I was intrigued by another way of looking at it. Basically, my unremembered author asserted that a retreat from Stalingrad, at that stage of the war, would have led to a general collapse on the eastern front. Things were going so poorly generally that there would have been nothing to stem a panicky rout.
Turned out it only delayed the inevitable (if we accept the assertion), but it might have provided time and space for something different to happen.
|
That is an interesting point that might have some merit. Would be hard to prove since it is counter-factual, but still one could probably do some research on the matter.
However, it would not have made Hitler's decision "genius". It would have merely been the better of two horrible options. Still, in that the decision to take Stalingard was originally Hitler's idea (I believe, am not a WWII expert, so please feel free to correct me) it would definitely counteract any credit his later decision may have had.
Still, it is always a good idea to look at "establish truths" in different ways. Particularly WWII. I don't mean to praise Hitler in the least, but at the same time there was a tendency to present a too negative cast to all of his decisions and this prevents a truer understanding of the war.