5 ms·

Overlord overshadows other operations because it was unique in its nature, scale and difficulties. Eastern Front also had its iconic moments like Battle of Stal

Overlord overshadows other operations because it was unique in its nature, scale and difficulties. Eastern Front also had its iconic moments like Battle of Stalingrad or Siege of Leningrad...

the_af 2y ago
> Overlord overshadows other operations because it was unique in its nature, scale and difficulties Without diminishing Overlord (a landing of this magnitude was unparalleled), I think Bagration is just as impressive, devastatingly effective at annihilating the German army (most of Army Group Center gone, poof), and must have been a logistical and secrecy nightmare to employ maskirovka at such a large scale. It was larger scale than Overlord, too. Not many in pop culture know about the Siege of Leningrad. Stalingrad is better known in pop culture, but regrettably most of it at the level of terribly bad and misleading movies such as "Enemy at the Gates". > Eastern Front also had its iconic moments [...] That's a bit of an understatement... The Eastern Front is where most of the fighting in WWII happened. It's where the European theater of war was truly won or lost.
- JackFr 2y ago
  https://www.amazon.com/900-Days-Siege-Leningrad/dp/0306812983 https://www.amazon.com/900-Days-Siege-Leningrad/dp/030681298... The 900 Days is an eye-opening and compelling book about the siege of Leningrad. Highly recommended.
  - B1FF_PSUVM 2y ago
    One of the big churches in St. Petersburg features huge columns - in some the pockmarks from strafing have been preserved. And the pictures at the Hermitage are labelled "Great Patriotic War 1941-45"
- The_Colonel 2y ago
  > I think Bagration is just as impressive Well, I disagree. Landings are generally considered to be very difficult and risky operations to execute, and Overlord is by far the largest scale landing in history. It was a one-off, all-in operation. It had to be close to perfect or it would fail badly. You can't just call off the landing in the middle of it or reduce its objectives if it doesn't go well. Meanwhile, operation Bagration is just standard maneuver warfare, only particularly large and this time quite successful in achieving its objectives. Soviets had plenty of previous (some failed) attempts to improve their strategy and tactics. Maskirovka / deception campaign is standard for any such large operation. If things don't go as planned, you can scale down the objectives, or call it a diversion (Operation Mars). Operation Bagration might be more impactful on the course of the war, but in my mind it's not close to be as impressive as Overlord. > That's a bit of an understatement... The Eastern Front is where most of the fighting in WWII happened. It's where the European theater of war was truly won or lost. "Most iconic" is not the same thing as "most impactful". Maneuver warfare is just generally not as iconic as pitched, close quarters battles.
  - the_af 2y ago
    You don't need to convince me Overlord was very impressive, because I fully agree. It seems we possibly agree Bagration was more impactful, but our disagreement is whether it was as impressive. I'll argue that it was: the scale was humongous, and in war, this means more chance of fuckups or logistical nightmares. Scale in troops & territory is a huge source of trouble (just ask Hitler...). Military deception was practiced by all sides, but the Soviets took maskirovka to an art form. Not only were there feinted strategic offensives (with the potential to become real as plan B), but huge troop formations moved one way during daytime and retraced their steps during the night. Radio discipline exercised atypically for the Red Army. The Germans later claimed not to be fully taken in, but really... that's what they would claim. Reality shows otherwise and their army was shattered. As for whether it's as iconic... well, "iconic" is an ill-defined term anyway. "Most iconic" in the Western world is just because, like I argued, the Eastern Front is way less known and depicted in movies. It's almost the definition of "lesser known", of which there are many reasons (Cold War thinking being a big reason initially). Overlord is more iconic in the West because it has been brought to the forefront in multiple accounts, movies and games. Imagine if there were American movies about Bagration like there are for Normandy, "Saving Conscript Petrov". There are a million interesting and amazing stories you could tell set during this massive operation, just like Private Ryan or Band of Brothers. Stalingrad in contrast is indeed iconic -- possibly as iconic as Overlord, because everyone knows about Stalingrad too -- but regrettably not too many good movies have been made about it. I've mentioned "Enemy at the Gates" (sigh!) but there's also that terrible Russian movie called... "Stalingrad"? Yuck. About the only one that's decent is ironically the German "Stalingrad" movie, but that one mostly shows the German perspective.
    - The_Colonel 2y ago
      > It seems we possibly agree Bagration was more impactful, but our disagreement is whether it was as impressive. Well, what makes Bagration unique in the same sense as Overlord? The scale alone does not cut it, and it's not the largest land operation anyway. > Military deception was practiced by all sides, but the Soviets took maskirovka to an art form. Not only were there feinted strategic offensives (with the potential to become real as plan B), but huge troop formations moved one way during daytime and retraced their steps during the night. Radio discipline exercised atypically for the Red Army. So far I haven't seen what would set Soviet maskirovka apart from e.g. Allied effort. All methods you mention seem pretty standard. > "Most iconic" in the Western world is just because, like I argued, the Eastern Front is way less known and depicted in movies. Partially yes, but that's not what makes Bagration forgettable. "Iconic" is about human stories. Photos from the landing craft moving onto the beach, soldiers getting mowed by the machine guns while running over completely exposed positions, German soldiers sitting in fortified, but ultimately outnumbered and hopeless positions. Those are very memorable. You can make stories about close quarters combat for months in a completely destroyed Stalingrad, fighting for every building, pretty much living next to the enemy etc. You could make stories about Bagration, but it would not appear unique to the reader, you can't really transmit the scale of manouver warfare into the human story.
- ultimafan 2y ago
  >The Eastern Front is where most of the fighting in WWII happened. It's where the European theater of war was truly won or lost. I remember being very surprised when I heard for the first time that something like 80% of all casualties taken by the Germans happened on the Eastern front. Or the total sizes of the armies (collectively on both sides) fighting one another and the large margin by which the Western front was dwarfed by. It stood completely at ends with everything I learned about WW2 growing up in the US, through school, pop culture, friends, family of friends. I suppose it's not too surprising though that any country emphasizes their own involvement over that of others- for example I doubt that the Soviets touched much on the extent of lend lease in their education or war movies.

Overlord overshadows other operations because it was unique in its nature, scale and difficulties. Eastern Front also had its iconic moments like Battle of Stalingrad or Siege of Leningrad...

the_af 2y ago

> Overlord overshadows other operations because it was unique in its nature, scale and difficulties Without diminishing Overlord (a landing of this magnitude was unparalleled), I think Bagration is just as impressive, devastatingly effective at annihilating the German army (most of Army Group Center gone, poof), and must have been a logistical and secrecy nightmare to employ maskirovka at such a large scale. It was larger scale than Overlord, too. Not many in pop culture know about the Siege of Leningrad. Stalingrad is better known in pop culture, but regrettably most of it at the level of terribly bad and misleading movies such as "Enemy at the Gates". > Eastern Front also had its iconic moments [...] That's a bit of an understatement... The Eastern Front is where most of the fighting in WWII happened. It's where the European theater of war was truly won or lost.

JackFr 2y ago
https://www.amazon.com/900-Days-Siege-Leningrad/dp/0306812983 https://www.amazon.com/900-Days-Siege-Leningrad/dp/030681298... The 900 Days is an eye-opening and compelling book about the siege of Leningrad. Highly recommended.
- B1FF_PSUVM 2y ago
  One of the big churches in St. Petersburg features huge columns - in some the pockmarks from strafing have been preserved. And the pictures at the Hermitage are labelled "Great Patriotic War 1941-45"
The_Colonel 2y ago
> I think Bagration is just as impressive Well, I disagree. Landings are generally considered to be very difficult and risky operations to execute, and Overlord is by far the largest scale landing in history. It was a one-off, all-in operation. It had to be close to perfect or it would fail badly. You can't just call off the landing in the middle of it or reduce its objectives if it doesn't go well. Meanwhile, operation Bagration is just standard maneuver warfare, only particularly large and this time quite successful in achieving its objectives. Soviets had plenty of previous (some failed) attempts to improve their strategy and tactics. Maskirovka / deception campaign is standard for any such large operation. If things don't go as planned, you can scale down the objectives, or call it a diversion (Operation Mars). Operation Bagration might be more impactful on the course of the war, but in my mind it's not close to be as impressive as Overlord. > That's a bit of an understatement... The Eastern Front is where most of the fighting in WWII happened. It's where the European theater of war was truly won or lost. "Most iconic" is not the same thing as "most impactful". Maneuver warfare is just generally not as iconic as pitched, close quarters battles.
- the_af 2y ago
  You don't need to convince me Overlord was very impressive, because I fully agree. It seems we possibly agree Bagration was more impactful, but our disagreement is whether it was as impressive. I'll argue that it was: the scale was humongous, and in war, this means more chance of fuckups or logistical nightmares. Scale in troops & territory is a huge source of trouble (just ask Hitler...). Military deception was practiced by all sides, but the Soviets took maskirovka to an art form. Not only were there feinted strategic offensives (with the potential to become real as plan B), but huge troop formations moved one way during daytime and retraced their steps during the night. Radio discipline exercised atypically for the Red Army. The Germans later claimed not to be fully taken in, but really... that's what they would claim. Reality shows otherwise and their army was shattered. As for whether it's as iconic... well, "iconic" is an ill-defined term anyway. "Most iconic" in the Western world is just because, like I argued, the Eastern Front is way less known and depicted in movies. It's almost the definition of "lesser known", of which there are many reasons (Cold War thinking being a big reason initially). Overlord is more iconic in the West because it has been brought to the forefront in multiple accounts, movies and games. Imagine if there were American movies about Bagration like there are for Normandy, "Saving Conscript Petrov". There are a million interesting and amazing stories you could tell set during this massive operation, just like Private Ryan or Band of Brothers. Stalingrad in contrast is indeed iconic -- possibly as iconic as Overlord, because everyone knows about Stalingrad too -- but regrettably not too many good movies have been made about it. I've mentioned "Enemy at the Gates" (sigh!) but there's also that terrible Russian movie called... "Stalingrad"? Yuck. About the only one that's decent is ironically the German "Stalingrad" movie, but that one mostly shows the German perspective.
  - The_Colonel 2y ago
    > It seems we possibly agree Bagration was more impactful, but our disagreement is whether it was as impressive. Well, what makes Bagration unique in the same sense as Overlord? The scale alone does not cut it, and it's not the largest land operation anyway. > Military deception was practiced by all sides, but the Soviets took maskirovka to an art form. Not only were there feinted strategic offensives (with the potential to become real as plan B), but huge troop formations moved one way during daytime and retraced their steps during the night. Radio discipline exercised atypically for the Red Army. So far I haven't seen what would set Soviet maskirovka apart from e.g. Allied effort. All methods you mention seem pretty standard. > "Most iconic" in the Western world is just because, like I argued, the Eastern Front is way less known and depicted in movies. Partially yes, but that's not what makes Bagration forgettable. "Iconic" is about human stories. Photos from the landing craft moving onto the beach, soldiers getting mowed by the machine guns while running over completely exposed positions, German soldiers sitting in fortified, but ultimately outnumbered and hopeless positions. Those are very memorable. You can make stories about close quarters combat for months in a completely destroyed Stalingrad, fighting for every building, pretty much living next to the enemy etc. You could make stories about Bagration, but it would not appear unique to the reader, you can't really transmit the scale of manouver warfare into the human story.
ultimafan 2y ago
>The Eastern Front is where most of the fighting in WWII happened. It's where the European theater of war was truly won or lost. I remember being very surprised when I heard for the first time that something like 80% of all casualties taken by the Germans happened on the Eastern front. Or the total sizes of the armies (collectively on both sides) fighting one another and the large margin by which the Western front was dwarfed by. It stood completely at ends with everything I learned about WW2 growing up in the US, through school, pop culture, friends, family of friends. I suppose it's not too surprising though that any country emphasizes their own involvement over that of others- for example I doubt that the Soviets touched much on the extent of lend lease in their education or war movies.