Guderian was undeniably a brilliant panzer general. Also undeniable is that he built up his own legend by heavily endorsing Liddel Hart's writings who in turn flattered, helped build up Guderian into the legend he sought to become. A case of mutual flattery. This nexus was exposed in Alan Clark's work Barbarossa. He still deserves his place in history as among the greatest panzer generals of the two wars.
Guderian was an interesting case of a German general as while his field command was not much impressive compared to his more famous colleagues like Rommel, his experience in staff position did put him as one of the closest general to Fuhrer. His position as Inspector General of Panzer, unlike inspector general of other arms, was unique in that he got direct access to the Fuhrer, even bypassing Reserve army commander. In 1944 he even rose to the Army Chief of Staff. As such Guderian held more power than his Generaloberst rank suggested, arguably comparable to Field Marshal. Still as with most German Panzer generals, he did have a fair share of conflicts with the Fuhrer as the war progressed and the German military and logistics being less able due to shortage to conduct the mobile warfare these generals once held in high regards.
@sthrich635 Rommel was a capable Divisionsl commander but nowhere in the league of a Guderian. Guderian's drive, vision and strategic insight was proven I battles and results, no matter what they say. Believing the Rommel myth does not mark you as anyone other than a believer of allied perceptions.
Good, but deserves more attention on 1941. Silly about the attempt to make him a criminal in the end. The Allies would've given their eye-teeth for a general like him.
Guderian was a visionary, his insistence on making Moscow the only objective was proven correct. His assessment of the capabilities of his own army, as well as the Soviets, was dead on. Guderian was a professional, his opinions were based on his experience. One thing usually missing from any analysis of German arms is the complete collapse of the Luftwaffe after 1943. Once air supremacy was lost, the German Army wasn’t effective.
The capture of Moscow wouldn't have led to the defeat of Russia, there were heavy industries beyond the Urals in places like Perm, Sverdlovsk, Magnitogorsk, Omsk, Novosibirsk, Tomsk, Krasnoyarsk, Bratsk, Irkutsk, Ashkabad, Samarkand, Tashkent and Alma Ata. The Soviet Union could still resist even if Moscow was captured.
DesmondG is partly right, also because capturing Moscow would have meant not attacking Ukraine east of the Dnjepr. However Moscow in 1941 was the political, administrative, military and infrastructural centre of the SU. Taking it would have crippled the Red Army enormously ánd resulted in the fall of Leningrad (it was supplied from Moscow). So combined with halting the attack after the autumn rains it would have given the Wehrmacht a way better start in 1942, strategically speaking. Fortunately we'll never know if the nazis would have won.
@marknieuweboer8099 Even though German generals blamed the late start of Barbarossa on the Balkans campaign, exceptionally heavy spring rains, allocation of motor transport to divisions and the inability of the Luftwaffe to prepare its foward airfields in time contributed to the delay in operation Barbarossa, the capture of Moscow would've left considerable and powerful forces intact in the Ukraine.
@ DesmondG: correct. Moreover It's not widely known that aready in August 1941 the Wehrmacht was incapable of attacking at all fronts (North, Centre and South). And nearly everyone forgets that in that month the operational plan had failed: the Red Army was not decisively defeated - the main goal.
Just the planning phase for Operation Otto (then renamed Barbarossa in Dec 1940), the generals developed their initial plans for the invasion, and then it was presented to Hitler. From there Hitler didn't like it and told them how he wanted the invasion to go, micromanaging things in the updated planning, and then during the campaign.
In my opinion its a bit strange to show so much footage of Panthers and Tigers when you talk about the 1939 invasion of Poland amd the conquest of France. Many viewers will know these tanks did not exist during these events but some people might get a wrong view of early ww2 german tank warfare due to the visuals shown.
Guderian was a victim of Hitler's micro-managing of military operations, his insistence on unconditional obedience, his intolerance of anyone who disagreed with him, tried to think for themselves....
Percy Hobart, a British officer who pioneered the nuts and bolts of armor combined warfare taught Gudarian from translations of Hobart’s works. Britain pioneered tank warfare before Germany ever did
A very above average general. Also very very good at self promotion. But being above average and innovative wasn't good enough for him. As very well articulated in this video
No doubt he was a great general
Guderian was undeniably a brilliant panzer general. Also undeniable is that he built up his own legend by heavily endorsing Liddel Hart's writings who in turn flattered, helped build up Guderian into the legend he sought to become. A case of mutual flattery.
This nexus was exposed in Alan Clark's work Barbarossa.
He still deserves his place in history as among the greatest panzer generals of the two wars.
Guderian was a very good teacher, the Allies learned well, they paid a steep price but the lessons helped guarantee the Germans defeat!
Guderian was an interesting case of a German general as while his field command was not much impressive compared to his more famous colleagues like Rommel, his experience in staff position did put him as one of the closest general to Fuhrer. His position as Inspector General of Panzer, unlike inspector general of other arms, was unique in that he got direct access to the Fuhrer, even bypassing Reserve army commander. In 1944 he even rose to the Army Chief of Staff. As such Guderian held more power than his Generaloberst rank suggested, arguably comparable to Field Marshal. Still as with most German Panzer generals, he did have a fair share of conflicts with the Fuhrer as the war progressed and the German military and logistics being less able due to shortage to conduct the mobile warfare these generals once held in high regards.
@sthrich635 Rommel was a capable Divisionsl commander but nowhere in the league of a Guderian. Guderian's drive, vision and strategic insight was proven I battles and results, no matter what they say. Believing the Rommel myth does not mark you as anyone other than a believer of allied perceptions.
Rommel could never be compared to Guderian, Guderian's, 90 degree advance to encircle Kiev couldn't have been executed by Rommel.
Everyone knows that the greatest military masterminds are in UA-cam comments sections.
Good, but deserves more attention on 1941. Silly about the attempt to make him a criminal in the end. The Allies would've given their eye-teeth for a general like him.
Guderian was a visionary, his insistence on making Moscow the only objective was proven correct. His assessment of the capabilities of his own army, as well as the Soviets, was dead on. Guderian was a professional, his opinions were based on his experience. One thing usually missing from any analysis of German arms is the complete collapse of the Luftwaffe after 1943. Once air supremacy was lost, the German Army wasn’t effective.
The capture of Moscow wouldn't have led to the defeat of Russia, there were heavy industries beyond the Urals in places like Perm, Sverdlovsk, Magnitogorsk, Omsk, Novosibirsk, Tomsk, Krasnoyarsk, Bratsk, Irkutsk, Ashkabad, Samarkand, Tashkent and Alma Ata. The Soviet Union could still resist even if Moscow was captured.
DesmondG is partly right, also because capturing Moscow would have meant not attacking Ukraine east of the Dnjepr. However Moscow in 1941 was the political, administrative, military and infrastructural centre of the SU. Taking it would have crippled the Red Army enormously ánd resulted in the fall of Leningrad (it was supplied from Moscow). So combined with halting the attack after the autumn rains it would have given the Wehrmacht a way better start in 1942, strategically speaking.
Fortunately we'll never know if the nazis would have won.
@marknieuweboer8099 Even though German generals blamed the late start of Barbarossa on the Balkans campaign, exceptionally heavy spring rains, allocation of motor transport to divisions and the inability of the Luftwaffe to prepare its foward airfields in time contributed to the delay in operation Barbarossa, the capture of Moscow would've left considerable and powerful forces intact in the Ukraine.
@ DesmondG: correct.
Moreover It's not widely known that aready in August 1941 the Wehrmacht was incapable of attacking at all fronts (North, Centre and South). And nearly everyone forgets that in that month the operational plan had failed: the Red Army was not decisively defeated - the main goal.
@@ronbdallas You're ignoring the half million dead, missing and permanantly crippled every 6 months in theWehrmacht.
Just the planning phase for Operation Otto (then renamed Barbarossa in Dec 1940), the generals developed their initial plans for the invasion, and then it was presented to Hitler. From there Hitler didn't like it and told them how he wanted the invasion to go, micromanaging things in the updated planning, and then during the campaign.
Why is it one or the other? Like most historical figures, its a bit of both.
In my opinion its a bit strange to show so much footage of Panthers and Tigers when you talk about the 1939 invasion of Poland amd the conquest of France. Many viewers will know these tanks did not exist during these events but some people might get a wrong view of early ww2 german tank warfare due to the visuals shown.
Guderian was a victim of Hitler's micro-managing of military operations, his insistence on unconditional obedience, his intolerance of anyone who disagreed with him, tried to think for themselves....
Awesome Generals uniform for sure
Percy Hobart, a British officer who pioneered the nuts and bolts of armor combined warfare taught Gudarian from translations of Hobart’s works. Britain pioneered tank warfare before Germany ever did
who play wc4 and feel his power 🗣️🔥🔥🙏
@@TrinhNguyenHung-lz6kt me
My favorite is Mannstein but Guderian was one of the best .
Manstein had shady dealings with Paulus
Curiously, the decision to concentrate armor was forced on the Germans due to the small number of tanks they had to work with.
Guderian was definitely not overrated. Yet Rummel Rimmel Remmel, the "dessert fucks" definitely was.
A very above average general. Also very very good at self promotion. But being above average and innovative wasn't good enough for him. As very well articulated in this video
Guderian pretty much created blitzkrieg without him France might have defeated Germany
A genius
German heroes
First!
😃😃
"Hurrying heinz"