Battle of Kursk - 2 of 2

[vagul2]

who the talking lies?

[ZLarryZB]

Read Von Manstein's memoir, Lost Victories. He was one of the greatest generals of the war. Hitler's greatest blunder was the mistreatment of the Russian civilians who welcomed the Germans as liberators. He drove them to being pro Soviet partisans.

[zielonysmokss]

super film !

[FUCKyouANDyourDOG]

The biggest battle on the biggest front of the biggest war.....

[DmitryDaren]

This is nazi-germany newsreel. it must be biased.

The only thing left to do is to shoot one where they won the war.

[Makreel44]

German propaganda movie, but still, this battle was massive

[notaire2]

Die Zerstoerungskraft der deutschen Panzerarmee war noch bemerkenswert.

[MrBobe9]

The recent documents show that germany won this battle of KURSK , but Hitler called off the offensive and sent SS PANZER DIVISIONS to Italy (that front was open to relief the russians(USSR), so instead of destroying some russians armies, Hitler helped the enemy and in weeks all the ground won was back in russian hands and army GROUP CENTER was doomed . Hitler deserves the name MADMAN when incompetence and absolute power converge.

[iguzik]

@MrBobe9

What documents are those? And who decided that? Don't make stuff up. Mainshteyn wanted to continue the offensive but Hitler was concerned that the causalties sustained were too great especially with the Panzers. And yes, he did need to preserve them for the second front that was opened at Sicily. It would not matter anyway- Soviets had 7 defensive lines around the Kurks sailent. In most places Germans penetrated no more than 2.

[MrBobe9]

@iguzik National archives in Washington DC, documents(microfilm) showing the numbers of tanks involved and lost at battle of KURSK, from WAFFEN SS PANZER DIVISIONS involved under command of Gen PAUL HAUSSER.

MANSTEIN had to obey HITLER'S orders don't matter how absurd, like stopping offensive giving tactical advantage to russians who suffered more than 2400 tanks in one week and had no reserves , the germans had 3 panzer divisions ready to finish the job,Sicily was just a bait to relief KURSK.

[iguzik]

@MrBobe9

National archives in Washington?! You have to be kidding. Even in Russia they are still trying to dig throgh the records to figure out how many soldiers/machines and where were lost, because battle stats in USSR were relatively poorly recorded.

[MrBobe9]

@iguzik I subscribed to WORLD WAR II magazine ,can't get more specialized than that, got to histrynet and search KURSK.

i am not REWRITING history my name is not JOSEPH STALIN, it took me LONG to learn about KURSK'/PROKHOROVKA to separate the garbage propaganda from real facts.

It is impossible to get (if any)credible information from reading just one side (soviet).

I have publication from ENGLAND about WWI both admirals discuss BATTLE OF JUTLAND, both claim victory(one moral (UK) .

[iguzik]

@MrBobe9

As for your statement that Soviets had no reserves left- it is simply absurd. Soviet counter offensive on the Northern sector of the Kursk salient started 2 days after cesation of German action and on the Southern sector- that's where heaviest Sovient losses occured, within days. It tooks Soviets 2 weeks after the counteroffensive was started, to regain all the territory taken by the Germans in the early stages of the battle. And the offensive did not stop there.

[iguzik]

@MrBobe9

Your statement that Sicily was a bait to releif Kurks is a very simple propaganda. Operations such as invasion of Sicily take weeks even months to prepare. And it's not like Hitler could shuffle his panzers all the way from Kursk to Sicily within days. Look at the map, you'll understand why. He simply realized necessity to preserve his forces for future engagements.

[MrBobe9]

@iguzik ZHUKOV never forgot the allies for the delay in opening 2nd front,by the time they did at D-DAY the soviets already had beaten the germans in USSR.

ZHUKOV the most brilliant general in USSR. knew allies either deliberately or not, delayed opening of 2nd front.

HITLER was a incompetent, arrogant egomaniac he attacked KURSK to revenge (with his PMS anger) STALINGRAD fall which was his fault. He screwed up a fine tuned german war machine, should had won in 1941 if he hadn't intervened .

[jackzero99]

@MrBobe9 IF I was the Western Allies, I would have let the Nazis and Communists kill each other off too. None of them could be trusted

[iguzik]

@MrBobe9

The reality is that the Germans had no chance at Kursk to develop a lethal blow the the USSR. Or at Stalingrad or anywhere else after they failed to take Moskow. Even with Stalin's incompetence, and relative lack of talented commanders, thanks to Stalin, the resources of the Soviet Union, vastness of the country, and willingness of the the people to fight could never be matched.

[MrBobe9]

@iguzik At KURSK Manstein had a chance to destroy several soviet armies, all of soviet tanks were engaged, ROTMISTROV's 5th guards tank army were the only reserve at the time they drove 2 days without sleep to PROKHOROVKA, from the 850 tanks 650 were destroyed by WAFFEN SS panzer div

MANSTEIN guessed that if he had used his reserves 3 experienced div XXIV Panzer Corps he would given a fatal blow to several armies, instead HITLER took control again and FUBAR.

ZHUKOV counteroffensive 4 # places.

[MrBobe9]

@iguzik STALIN and HITLER were both incompetents, Stalin prevailed because he let ZHUKOV take control of most from armament production to conduct of war, what he did with competent staff KONEV/ ROSSKOVSK etc.. on the other side HITLER because had ABSOLUTE POWER and could / fired(GUDERIAN) any general who disagree with his absurd ideas he fired competent generals kept yes people,

took control of everything and all decisions, it was a disaster for german army(had to plot to kill the MADMAN/CRAZY)

[MrBobe9]

@iguzik Zhukov panicked at KURSK he used ROTMISTROV 5th guard tank army with 850 tanks (reserves that was supposed to be used in the counteroffensive), of those 850 tanks 650 were destroyed , the less than 200 left were moved to defensive positions, ROTMISTROV after the disaster of PROKHOROVKA (which historians repeating STALIN PROPAGANDA believe was a victory for soviets) never regain command again, he was not killed or impaled because he was a STALIN'S friend only. LSSAH"s TIGERS survived.

[iguzik]

@MrBobe9

The battle of Kursk was a Soviet strategic victory. After the battle Germans ran out of any capabilities to launch another offensive campaign. Prokhorovka was not a disaster and it was never claimed, even in the Soviet Union that it was a Soviet victory. This was a heroic effort by relatively unprepared for the development that occured troops to stop enemy advance which they succeeded in doing. You are the one who is preaching German propaganda.

[gyrovague]

Soviet intelligence had the German plans way in advance, had very well-prepared positions and hard-wrought battle experience amongst both troops and tacticians paid off. Stalin and STAVKA knew it was to be a grinding machine as much as Montgomery expected Alamein to be. It was a decisive Soviet victory. A pyrric victory countermands a victory,hobbles its significance and usefulness. This battle does NOT fall into that category and most respected military historians would agree on that.

[vulpecula132]

this is propaganda, battle of kurks was win hardly by russian troops... haha, germains troops are smilling, they where shittings in they re pants when they saw thousandof T 34 coming on theyre side.

[Semmler1969]

If any of you fartheads would have lost a family member in this war I`m sure you wouldn`t be flapping at the gums so loosely and disrespectful. Many men of all sides lost their lives here, one of them my grandfather. And no I don't give a rats ass who's fault it was (Hitler, Mickey Mouse or Churchill okay), fact of matter is that POLITICIANS "rule" Soldiers into death, NOT THE PEOPLE OF A COUNTRY, yet the "people" loose, not the politician okay. So treat them with respect - ALL OF THEM!

[palm14287]

Neat propaganda but in fact they should have made a 3rd. clip that shows the Soviet counter-attack worked and they won the day!!

[dareta]

That was one bloody battle...

[kakvotoiskash]

Kursk was the end for Germany

[Lautapa]

El destino de las armas alemanas se selló en ésta, la mayor batalla librada por dos grandes ejércitos en la historia de la humanidad. En esta batalla se decidió la derrota definitiva de Alemania. Si esta batalla hubiese sido ganada por los alemanes, lo más probable que la Segunda Guerra Mundial hubiese terminado de otro modo.

[Excelentz]

@Lautapa to loose the capital doesn't mean to loose the war

[SuperTimebandit]

Gewonnen,verloren,wenn man rein von den zerstörten Panzern ausgeht,hat niemand diese Epische Schlacht gewonnen.

Da Hitler aber nach Kursk,keine eignen Offensiven mehr gestalten konnte,war es wohl nach Stalingrad der 2 Wendepunkt im Russlanfeldzug.Wochenschauen zeigen den Krieg immer wie so eine Art Betriebsausflug,Propaganda halt,aber die andre Seite machts genauso.

Wer möchte schon grausam enstellete eigne Soldaten zeigen.Meine Opas waren dabei,ich bin froh das ich das nicht erleben musste

[arkileivos]

cshooligan, read "the patton papers"! on 18 may, 1945 he noted:

"in my opinion, the american army as it now exists could beat the russians with the greatest ease, because, while the russians have good infantry, they are lacking in artillery, air, tanks, and in the knowledge ot the use of the combined arms, whereas we excel in all three of these. if it should be necessary to right the russians, the sooner we do it the better."

[Semmler1969]

@arkileivos - "if it should be necessary to right the russians". Why doesnt your army "right" your own politicians first before trying to right others, as one can "clearly see" that yours start sh** in every corner of the world trying to impose their way of life onto people in their own country. People like u simply promote a bad image for your country.

[arkileivos]

@Semmler1969 you mean patton :)

[IanHunedoara8]

DeutscheWochenschau was not bringing any fabrications into this particular account of WW2 but t much more telling was what they were NOT saying- the offensive was not gaining any serious breakthroughs and German strategic mobile reserves were being ground down to the point where by August they could not defend long sections of front against Soviet counterrattacks.

[AdognamedOp]

LOL @ 0:41

[the82spartans]

Kursk was indeed an interesting battle... so 'learn a history'.... as some Russians say.

Operation Citadel was domed from the start, because it didn't start soon enough for the Germans.

I saw the Soviet movie from the 60's and it's not so good.

Too bad. I would like to see a real good film of this interesting battle.

[Nicktint]

Kursk was more than an "interesting " battle. It was by and large the alrgest armed battle of tanks and men in the history of warfare. Nothing else comes close. Kursk was epic and mind boggling in size, scope and scale.

[BaranovV]

Russia win this battle.stupid propoganda

[roanhawk]

Kursk was an interesting battle in many ways, and certainly a pivotal one. Many books have examined the battle, from both Soviet and German perspectives. Manstein showed his brilliance in this batte but unfortunately even Manstein's brilliant leadership and strategy was not enough to force a comprehensive German victory in the summer of 1943.

[shiva369]

Good vid. The nebelwurfers were cool to see.

[pavel280488]

hahah later soviets rape nazi hahah

[infreg213]

untermensch hahaha

[arkileivos]

Soviets losses were 6 times more tanks than Germans and 4 times more men...

"Great victory" or should I say "Pyrrhic victory"?

[iroscoe]

Even if the losses you quote are correct it was still a great Soviet victory they defeated a concentrated Nazi thrust and still had the means to go on the offensive themselves,its no coincidence that it was last large scale Germans attack in the East . Also they retained possesion of the Battlefield so whatever German tanks were lost were total losses whilst the Soviets could retrieve and repair their own as well as any enemy armour from the battlefield .

[arkileivos]

I exaggerated a little bit, Soviet casulties were only three times more than German in the battle of Kursk, but Soviets didn't repair those destroyed tanks, because for example their production rate of T-34 was 1300 per month in 1943 and if we think about Russian mentality - they wouldn't have...

[iroscoe]

They certainly did repair and return knocked out tanks to service ive seen pictures of ceremonys where new crews are presented with 'hero' tanks(whose previous crew had presumably not made it)it was a process simplified by the soviet use of only 3 main chasis (the BT,T34 and KV)a lot of the Soviet combat engineering and recovery tanks were not manufactured as such rather they were damaged beyond economical repair and were field modified and converted at the front .

[triantafyllos3214]

The point is who won the war,

this is the real victory.

Remember what Makiaveli said:

''The purpose blesses the means''

[somethingboring]

You obviously don't know the meaning of a Pyrrhic victory.

The term originated with Pyrrhus of Epirus who wont several battles against the Romans with fewer casaulties, but they're still called pyrrhic victories, you know why? Because he couldn't replace those losses as easily as the Romans, a Pyrrhic victory is a victory at a crippling loss, not necessarily a higher one then the enemy, but one which endangers the fuctioning of said army.

[arkileivos]

soon after german surrendered patton with his army could have easily beaten weak red army. unluckily he had an accident and died... - so, can we call it "pyrrhic victory"? yes we can.

[TomaSkTemplar]

lol weak red army in 45 wake up at best.

What is traditional with these Wochensomething, is they always say soviet casualties were unusually heavy, while stating not a word about their own catastrophic, including of their ´uberpanzer´Panther, Tiger. Patton was one misguided fool favoring nazis, Accident wasnt accidental.

[somethingboring]

Nope, we can't, the losses never really endangered the fuctioning of the Red Army, it continued to be a formidable force throughout the war.

[bobshenix]

Well... semi-true. They did recover, but when the freezing Russian winter saved Stalin's ass toward the end of Operation Barbarossa, the Soviets only had 400 tanks left and 500,000 men left to defend Moscow (not counting the Siberian reserves at the time who came later)

The Germans wiped out entire armies and divisions to the tune of millions of men killed/captured, and found themselves as close as 15 minutes from Moscow, others 30-35 minutes.

The Soviets came VERY close to losing the war...

[83ls]

@bobshenix

Except that you don't get it. That was the Russian tactic all along. Let the Germans come, and expand their resources the deeper they go. When they entered Russia, (150 miles tops) they were pushed back. It was easy against Russian-hating populations of Eastern Europe. Much harder when Nazis came to Russia itself. There they encountered, for the first time, a superior Tank, T-34. Superior soldiers. Superior everything. Russia isn't France or Poland.

[wowa99]

@bobshenix behind of Stalin's as were asses of Cherchil, Russeveld and many other. Would Stalin be ass kicked, all others will be kicked as well 

[CSHOOLIGAN]

@arkilevios

If Patton had his way from the begining he could have reached Warsaw before the Soviets. I dont think he would win against the Soviets in 45. The US could have nuked them.

[kakvotoiskash]

@arkileivos Except that Russia could make good its losses and not Germany.

[iguzik]

@arkileivos

Your statement is not true. Soviet forces lost about 3 times more tanks during the battle of Kursk and 1.5 to 2 times more men. Stalin did not care about human causalties therefore preserving lives of Soviet soldiers was never part of any strategy. As for the tanks, T34's were cheap and easy to make and they were easily replaceable. Same could not be said about the Panzers.

[arkileivos]

@iguzik Please read first "Zetterling, Niklas and Anders Frankson. Kursk 1943: A Statistical Analysis", and then make your statement.

[MrBobe9]

@arkileivos I have THE BATTLE OF KURSK by GLANTZ who was allowed access to SOVIET ARCHIVES, maybe most of it are correct then i come across a ABYSMAL LIE. JULY 12(PROKHOROVKA) soviet 181st TANK REGIMENT engaged MICHAEL WITTMANN tigers of 13th company 1st SS panzer regiment, and according to soviets it was INTACT after, but according to the germans IT WAS COMPLETELY ANNIHILATED .

WOW who do i believe, not hard to figure out a BIG LIE , INTACT after meeting M WITTMANN tigers LOL great joke.

[iguzik]

@arkileivos

By the way, Pyrrhic victory is when an army wins a battle but because of severe causalties cannot continue further fighting. If you don't know who won the war- look it up.

[EinundzwanzigPanzer]

@arkileivos Correct, but you must take into account just how many more tanks, guns, planes and men were available to the soviets, so while they did loose much more than the germans (and always did) the losses were minimal compared to the reserves, manpower and industrial capacity on their side, that was the way the Red Army and all of the Soviet society worked,

[EinundzwanzigPanzer]

@EinundzwanzigPanzer so yeah, Kursk was in fact a great victory since it eleminated the offensive capability of the Wehrmacht to such a degree that it would never prove to be a major threat to the Soviet Union again, because Germany simply couldn't replace their losses. So after the battle of Kursk there were no doubt that the soviets would win, and that probably makes the battle of Kursk the most important battle of WWII, Stalingrad was the turningpoint but Kursk was the decisive battle.

[EinundzwanzigPanzer]

@EinundzwanzigPanzer and I am not trying to be russian fanboy or anything, I am for example aware of the importance of the leand lease program, the Soviet counter offensive after Kursk and it's offensives in 44 and 45 wouldn't have been possible without the thousands of american 6x6 trucks, food, gasoline and aviation fuel. Nor am I an american fanboy since I recognise that It was indded the Soviet Union who defeated Germany

[EinundzwanzigPanzer]

@EinundzwanzigPanzer the only major contribution the western allies did to the outcome of the war was to prevent the Soviets from taking the rest of Europe, which we of course should alle be thankful for :-) Anyway IF Hitler hadn't delayed his offensive, or even better if he had listened to Manstein and waited for the Soviets to attacks first then Kursk might very well have been a decisive GERMAN victory...

[2092809]

@arkileivos everybody loves a winner

[tcrlaf]

Pyrrhic or not, the last offensive reserves of the Wehrmacht were used up. Had the Invasion of Italy come just a few weeks later, the Germans may have won the strategic victory they were seeking at Kursk. Instead, the forces diverted to oppose the Americans could have made all the difference, and were sorely missed.

[Grej2]

"the winner writs the history", isn't that what they say? How can anyone of you be sure that your own historybook arn't lieing?

[ukrainesuperpower87]

Pure propaganda

They don't talk about great their own losses

[Gallagherfreak100]

The narrator fails to inform that the German objective in this battle; the pinch out of the Kursk salient, and a break through of the Soviet lines, to threaten Moscow from the south, failed. The Germans lost much equipment that could never be replaced. The great Soviet counter offensive, which took the Red Army all the way to Berlin actually began when this battle ended.

[Watchsomedirt]

Goebbels in totaller Aktion. Diese grosse deutsche Niederlage macht dem Zuschauer denken das die Nazis einen grossen Sieg erlangen hatten.

[Wittmann73]

actually it wasnt a defeat but a draw, but a draw that germany couldnt afford

[themgoodpancakes]

funny how it doesnt say anything about the gigantic defeat germany suffered

[Rockopeetzee]

Great stuff..I feel like I'm there.

[weresic]

Thanks bro, got more?