When did the third reich lost the war? German navy getting weakened

>>933791
Stalingrad

>>933799
Honestly the Germans still had the Russians on the back foot until Kursk, that's when they finally lost their momentum for good.

As for when German defeat was inevitable, that would be the failure of Barbarossa to make the Russians capitulate. After that, they had lost too much of their core to make an offensive as successful as that plausible ever again. They gamed on breaking the Russians through shock and realized too late that it would be a long, long war.

When Barbarossa failed in its main objectives.

Invading Poland.

>>933822
>>933826
Were the objectives of the battle of the bulge plausible at all?

>>933845
no

Hitler's aims for the U.S.S.R. weren't really feasible.

Ok, i understand the germans got btfo at the eastern front. But wasn't the lost at the battle of Britain, and the failure to set an invasion of the british isles and ending the western front were the germans lost the war? Without England, France or USA, Germany could throw every thing they had at the ruskies.

>>933845
Even if it had worked, Operation Bagration had already annihilated Army Group Center, and the Bulge was just diverting the perilously few troops the Germans had left against the masses the Soviets had on the Eastern Front.

Looking at it another way though, The Bulge was a push in the only real place the Germans could really plausibly push, and Hitler wasn't a fan of the slow grind to inevitable doom.

>>933791
>When did the third reich lost the war?
1933.

>>933791
Germany lost ww2 in 1918 tBh

>>933864
They could possibly win in the East if they had only a one front war. But of course Seelowe was a pipe dream and would never happen succesfully, Air superiority gainer or not.

>>933791

When it began.

>>933883
The bristish industry sufferend greatly with german bombardment like the germans suffered later. Maybe they could set up an invasion.
But yeah, the royal navy was much stronger.

we have this thread every day

twice

>>933894
better than all the religion vs atheism threads

File: nazigymbrats.jpg (70KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 800x600px

In 1945, the wholesale rape of German women and girls pretty much was the icing on the cake of the fall of the Reich.

Couldn't protect their Aryan mothers, daughters, wives, little sisters etc. from being defiled by pretty much any soldier that had a hankering to debauch and defile.

>>933864
The BoB was a setback for Germany but mostly because Goering gave Hitler false expectations, something he later did at Stalingrad as well. It was a significant drain on the Luftwaffe in planes&pilots, but not something that greatly damaged Germany's chances of winning. An invasion of the Isles was never plausible, the Royal Navy was simply too strong and Germany didn't have the means of launching a mass amphibious invasion to begin with.

The air war only began to seriously hinder the Reich once joint allied airpower began bombing the hell out of the Reichs infrastructure&industry.

File: 436332.jpg (46KB, 256x382px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 256x382px

When they lost Stalingrad.

>>933921
>Goering gave Hitler false expectations, something he later did at Stalingrad as well
To be fair, they didn't have many other options at Stalingrad, and a strategic airlift just like that had worked earlier that year at Demyansk and Kholm. Their options were
>launch an unprecedented winter offensive on short notice
>perform a strategic airlift, which had been proven to work before

Of course, there were still plenty of issues with that decision, ranging from not having enough aircraft to actually perform the airlift to expecting the Soviets to have learned nothing from Demyansk. But the Stalingrad airlift wasn't the pants-on-head retarded decision it's always made out to be.

>>933865
>Operation Bagration
That's a cool name.

>>933892
I don't really think so, the Brittish bombers were able to bring a far bigger load than the Germans ever could.
Remember that the Britts spent the interwar period developing their air doctrine so they in case of war could just destroy their enemies behind their lines in case of static warfare.

File: German_Woman_signs_her_persona_caputilation.jpg (367KB, 987x1024px) Image search: [Google]

367KB, 987x1024px

>>933902
Good times.

File: 2000px-Belorussia_Operation_Detailed.png (2MB, 2000x1365px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2000x1365px

>>934199
>That's a cool name.
Everything about that operation was cool.

>>934167
Immediate breakout should have been the order of the day when the aims of Operation Uranus became clear, the 6th Army still had functional armoured and mechanized units in Stalingrad and iirc Anthony Beevor writes in his book on Stalingrad that it may have been possible for the 6th Army to blunt the southern Red Army spearhead if they had acted quickly enough. A breakout wasn't even allowed during Operation Winter Storm.

The chances of success would've been low, but they only got worse the longer they waited until the 6th Army merely served as a distraction while Manstein prepared a new line further west.

>>933791
Hitler was the reason the Germans lost. An ex CPL posty. If he'd left the military roles to the experienced they'ed have gone a long way.

>>933791
With the onset of winter '41 when Barabarossa lost its momentum.

>>934213
Deep battle, fuck yeah.

>>934213
Gotta love Deep Battle doctrine.

File: BagrationMap2.jpg (527KB, 1256x956px) Image search: [Google]

527KB, 1256x956px

>>934776
>>934778
Fun thing is, Bagration wasn't even the main part of the 1944 Summer Offensive. Bagration was followed up by an offensive at Lvov (the place where the Soviets had their original diversion) that got a bridgehead on the Vistula, and then finally a push into Romania.

>>934869

Imagine if Stalin hadn't purged all those red army officers and generals like Tukhachevsky , war would have been over in 2 years.

>>934869
>western cucks still managed to fight a whole year in France/Germany against German reserves while this was raging in the East

>>934711
Not true. This is basically just parroting what Manstein and Guderian said after the war was over. The Allies wanted to paint Hitler out to be an idiot, so they went along with the, "If he had listened to his generals he would have won" nonsense. Hitler played the war out about as well as possible. He was smarter than his generals most of the time, not dumber. Guderian or Manstein would have lost the war much earlier if they were in his position.

>>935009
Just wanna point out that it was Hitler who chose the plan they used to invade France with.
His Generalls just wanted to repeat what they did in world war 1.

>>933791

Poland and the subsequent declaration of war by Britain and France.

Honestly, it was something of a minor miracle that they were able to beat France at all, let alone so cheaply and decisively. Taking on multiple states, each of whom has greater populations and industrial outputs though, almost never ends well.

>>934947
>western cucks still managed to fight a whole year in France/Germany against German reserves while this was raging in the East
The guys on the Western Front were shipping literally everything across the ocean while the Soviets were fighting on their own doorstep.

Still, it does really lessen the impact of all the hyping up of D-day.

>>933864

The problem is that even if you somehow maul the RAF in the battle of Britain, the idea of a sealion is still absurd; you have no sealift worth mentioning, a large hostile enemy navy, no practice with amphibious operations outside of Norway, and an enemy who can withdraw his own plane bases outside of your range.

>>933892

Not really. German raids were miniscule next to the British ones, and the Brits only got good at strategic bombing later, late 42ish or so.

>Roman

>>934928
>Imagine if Stalin hadn't purged all those red army officers and generals like Tukhachevsky , war would have been over in 2 years.
Not too sure about that. The biggest issues that hurt the Red Army at the outbreak of war were endemic things that probably wouldn't have been fixed by not having purged certain commanders. They had too heavy a reliance on rails and telegraphs for logistics and communication, so it was fairly easy for the Luftwaffe to paralyze armies while the Panzer groups swept through. The VVS was also caught in the middle of a transition period and was hampered by lagging tactics and technology. For reference, the biggest things Alexander Novikov (the one competent local VVS commander at the outbreak of war) introduced among his forces were
>fighter escort for bombers
>putting radios on all aircraft
For that, he ended up becoming the commander of the entire VVS by the next year.

>>934199

>Remember that the Britts spent the interwar period developing their air doctrine so they in case of war could just destroy their enemies behind their lines in case of static warfare.

Not him, but honestly, that was one of their problems. Trenchard's air war doctrine was beyond idiotic, and honestly got in the way for a lot of things

>We don't need fighters, bombers can protect themselves if they fly in formation!
>Who cares about navigation, things will be fine!
>Terror bombing is what broke the back of Germany in WW1, not the blockade or the battlefield defeats!
>Trying to use airpower to protect our convoy lines? Waste of time and effort, bomb Germany!
>What do you mean, use bombers as flying artillery? That's a stupid idea, if we just bomb hard enough, we don't need an army at all!


Plus, never being able to decide whether they were trying to terror bomb the Germans into submission or cripple their industry meant that they sporadically tried both and never concentrated on either.