The Battle of Kursk - IV: Control of the Eastern Front - Extra History
Added 2016-03-28 14:35:14 +0000 UTCThough it only lasted 12 days, the Battle of Kursk was the largest tank battle ever. And it turned the tide of World War II.
Comments
The political victory of this battle is almost as good as the strategic one. Hitler had been aiming to use a victory in the Eastern Front to prove to his allies that they shouldn't abandon the war effort, and the loss here meant that Germany had to bear the burden of the crumbling Eastern Front and the soon-to-be crumbling Italian theater, and the message of Axis strength Hitler had been hoping to display would never come. And just as important, this was the first time a major German offensive had been stopped before it reached strategic depth. Now, Stalin was the one with the powerful message: "The German army's strategy is no longer invulnerable." It was proof of concept that the until-now invincible blitzkrieg could be beaten. One important thing is that the Russians launched a two-pronged counter-offensive. The northern movement, Operation Kutznov, is the first part, while the second, in the south, was launched in August after the Soviets could repair after the devastating losses of Citadel. Stalin knew he had a manpower advantage and he was not afraid to use it, forcing the Germans into holding multiple fronts, forcing them back to protect their supply lines and overwhelming them by sheer mass. This was Verdun writ large. We also see the heavy toll that Stalin's attrition campaign left on the Soviet Union. Stalin lost almost 850,000 in irrevocable casualties throughout the Kursk campaign, from Citadel through Kharkov, lasting from 5 July to 23 August (for comparison, the 9-month Verdun campaign of WWI had similar losses from the French and Germans put together, depending on the estimates). The vehicle losses, even at their lowest estimates, are around 40% during Kursk itself and much, much higher during the two counter attacks, with Operation Kutznov suffering over 100% vehicle losses, meaning cannibalized and repaired vehicles were sometimes destroyed twice.
Jim McGeehin
2016-03-28 23:30:04 +0000 UTCI do believe so although my l knowledge of the specifics is embarrassingly weak.
Robbie the Gnome
2016-03-28 17:57:16 +0000 UTCI believe you're thinking of the Gaesatae, Gauls and Picts specifically, there?
Stephen
2016-03-28 16:58:50 +0000 UTCNo body wants to fight the man without pants. It's how the Celts pushed back the Romans.
Robbie the Gnome
2016-03-28 15:47:03 +0000 UTCOn the topic of tanks I rather liked the design choices made by the russians and germans to counter the T-34 the Germans spent massive recorces designing all new super advanced tanks (the Panther and tiger) but when it came time to counter the those new tanks the russians just put a bigger turret in the t-34 to fit a bigger gun and boom the t-34 is back in the game or rather the T-34-85
paul staber
2016-03-28 15:23:21 +0000 UTC
