Who is the legitimate ruler of France?

[Malthus]

Ok, Mister Killjoy.  Next you're going to insist that General Winter defeated Hitler. 

Hitler taking it for granted he would somehow defeat the Soviet Union in just a few months so he did not send his army any winter gear was more the problem.

I am still baffled by that.  How could anybody have thought that campaign would have gone better than it actually did for the Germans is beyond me.

Not me: the assumption was that the Soviets would collapse like a house of cards once they had been dealt a staggering blow, and that the staggering blow would be easy to deliver because the Soviet army was worthless, its general staff filled with incompetent bootlickers and toadies, and badly positioned along an indefensible front.

It wasn't an unreasonable assumption, given the lamentable performance of the Soviets vs. tiny Finland, and the general incompetence, rigid centralization and cruelty of the Soviet system.

What Hitler failed to realize was the incredible hatred and will to resist his own acts inspired.

[ulmont]

It wasn't an unreasonable assumption, given the lamentable performance of the Soviets vs. tiny Finland

Yeah.  Any projections of the Red Army based on the Winter War would assume it would be like Poland all over again.

[Valmy]

Yeah.  Any projections of the Red Army based on the Winter War would assume it would be like Poland all over again.

Except that the Soviet Union is huge and had a far bigger population than Germany?  Heck just walking his army to Moscow was going to take several months even without that pesky Red Army in the way.

[ulmont]

Yeah.  Any projections of the Red Army based on the Winter War would assume it would be like Poland all over again.

Except that the Soviet Union is huge and had a far bigger population than Germany?  Heck just walking his army to Moscow was going to take several months even without that pesky Red Army in the way.

Less than 700 miles from Brest-Litovsk to Moscow, isn't it?  That's like 1 month at 20 miles a day, which is a doable march.

[Habbaku]

I am still baffled by that.  How could anybody have thought that campaign would have gone better than it actually did for the Germans is beyond me.

Wargame designer Ted Raicer is of the opinion that the Germans actually underperformed in Barbarossa. 

[Caliga]

Wargame designer Ted Raicer also thinks that armies instantly vaporize when their supply lines are cut, so I wouldn't put much weight on his opinions.

[Habbaku]

Wargame designer Ted Raicer also thinks that armies instantly vaporize when their supply lines are cut, so I wouldn't put much weight on his opinions.

They only vaporize at the end of the turn.   

[Viking]

Wargame designer Ted Raicer also thinks that armies instantly vaporize when their supply lines are cut, so I wouldn't put much weight on his opinions.

While real armies get vaporized when they are out of supply, have spent their reserves and ammunition and get attacked by a Soviet Guards Banner Army.

[The Minsky Moment]

Less than 700 miles from Brest-Litovsk to Moscow, isn't it?  That's like 1 month at 20 miles a day, which is a doable march.

And then you are in an abandoned Moscow in the middle of winter.

We all know how well that worked for Napoleon.

[Neil]

Less than 700 miles from Brest-Litovsk to Moscow, isn't it?  That's like 1 month at 20 miles a day, which is a doable march.

And then you are in an abandoned Moscow in the middle of winter.

We all know how well that worked for Napoleon.

Thanks to James Watt and Nikolaus Otto, Hitler's ability to supply his troops in the field was much more robust, compared to Napoleon's.

[BuddhaRhubarb]

The Pear shaped Duke Of Scipio?

[jimmy olsen]

The Pear shaped Duke Of Scipio?

No, the Duke of Katmai!

[The Minsky Moment]

Less than 700 miles from Brest-Litovsk to Moscow, isn't it?  That's like 1 month at 20 miles a day, which is a doable march.

And then you are in an abandoned Moscow in the middle of winter.

We all know how well that worked for Napoleon.

Thanks to James Watt and Nikolaus Otto, Hitler's ability to supply his troops in the field was much more robust, compared to Napoleon's.

Quite the opposite - thanks to those men it was less robust because in addition to all the supply needs that Napoleon required, and the additional supply needs of heavy artillery, he also had to supply vast quantities of gasoline and aviation fuel to front line units to maintain effectiveness.

[BuddhaRhubarb]

@Timmay
ooh burn You'd better wear a cup next time you see Kat.

[Neil]

Quite the opposite - thanks to those men it was less robust because in addition to all the supply needs that Napoleon required, and the additional supply needs of heavy artillery, he also had to supply vast quantities of gasoline and aviation fuel to front line units to maintain effectiveness.

Be that as it may, they allowed supplies to be marshalled and transported much more efficiently.  While demand increased, transport capacity increased even more.