Western historian: Germans defeated Russians near Moscow in 1941


A peculiar military historian, writer, senior professor of history at the University of New South Wales (Australia), a latent "expert" in the Third Reich David Stahel (born in New Zealand in 1975) has an unconventional (generally accepted) look at the history of the Second World War II. In his next book, Retreat From Moscow, he argues that the Red Army offensive at the end of 1941 near Moscow should be seen as a local victory for Germany.


Stahel is convinced that the Wehrmacht’s “hold on” order (Halt-Befehl), dated December 8, 1941, was Hitler’s reaction not to the Soviet counter-offensive, but to the beginning of winter, slightly stalling his own offensive and, possibly, the Japanese’s attack on Pearl Harbor ( USA). That is, the offensive of the Red Army did not really concern the Germans, however, as did the author of the book.

It should be noted that the "expert" frankly does not know the climatic features of the Moscow region. After all, there winter comes not according to the calendar, but in the middle of October. Therefore, he is confident that the supreme command of the Wehrmacht, and Hitler himself, initially did not pay attention at all to the actions of the Soviet troops. Moreover, the historian known in narrow circles clarifies that only after a week, i.e. already in mid-December 1941, the situation became clear to Hitler. After that, he issued a second, more “powerful” order to the Wehrmacht to “hold on” - to hold positions at all costs. Moreover, Stahel was embarrassed to point out that the Germans made a real miscalculation and wrote that the Germans only considered the Red Army counter-offensive a series of insignificant attacks that created little discomfort on the eastern front.

But Stachem writes that the Red Army offensive was wasteful and "disastrous", sadly stating that Berlin lost the war to Moscow in the summer of 1941, when it launched the campaign itself, but could not quickly win. At the same time, the fierce battles that unfolded in the winter of 1941 were considered by the "scientist" not as an attempt by the Wehrmacht to contain the counter-offensive of the Red Army, but as a victory for Germany.

It should be added that few people, except Stahel, can set forth such a story and give such assessments. By the way, this is his fifth book. Before that, he wrote: “Operation Barbarossa and the defeat of Germany in the East” (Operation Barbarossa and Germany's Defeat in the East), “Kiev, 1941” (Kiev 1941), “Operation Typhoon” and “Battle for Moscow ”(The Battle for Moscow). Naturally, the “historian” refers to official documents and memoirs of that time, but at the same time draws his own conclusions, which often contradict facts and common sense. So the attempts to distort the story will be continued, there is no doubt about it.
Photos used: https://www.istra1941.com/
Ctrl Enter

Noticed oshЫbku Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

15 comments
Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.
I have an account? Sign in

  1. Sapsan136 Offline
    Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 20 November 2019 10: 57
    +6
    • 6
    • 0
    Well, yes, and the Third Reich won the war, and then invited the vanquished Russians to Berlin on an excursion ... Hitler even shot himself with delight ... Expert .. Well ...
  2. Valentine Offline
    Valentine (Valentin) 20 November 2019 11: 05
    +2
    • 2
    • 0
    Yes Yes! And that's why our soldiers signed on the Reichstag building in defeated Berlin ... Or maybe we don’t know everything, and they don’t tell us anything, and the German soldiers signed on the walls of our ancient Kremlin? .... He wants to , and their propaganda can spoil and denigrate our past, but again we can’t squeak, as if our "partners" were not offended, and they have so many of their "skeletons in the closet" that our media had enough to duplicate for hundreds of years without a break.
  3. Pishenkov Offline
    Pishenkov (Alexey) 20 November 2019 12: 02
    0
    • 2
    • 2
    I didn’t read the article of this scientist in the original, now there are a lot of such specialists, you can’t follow all. laughing But if he considers this a "local victory" of the Germans, then how does he actually rewrite history? In the West, this is indeed a trend now, but in this particular case, in my opinion, this is not quite the option. Everyone had enough of these “local” victories - the Japanese won Pearl Harbor this way so that almost nothing remained of the American fleet in the Pacific Ocean. Also a victory, and also local. Both the Germans and the Red Army had many local victories and defeats, and the general mosaic of the entire war was formed from them. This same Stahel does not dispute the fact that the USSR won the war? And the names of other books are quite adequate for him -

    "Operation Barbarossa and the defeat of Germany in the East" (Operation Barbarossa and Germany's Defeat in the East)

    for example.
    So, frankly, I do not really understand what the author, in this particular case, has claims to this Australian? Wehrmacht reached Moscow? I got it. Caused by his actions the Red Army huge losses? Caused. During the autumn offensive, did the Germans manage to withdraw and stabilize the front? Happened. They did not achieve the strategic goal - the capture of Moscow, and the rest could be called a local victory. And from the side of the Red Army, too, their victory was also local - they did not win the war, but defended the capital.
    In my opinion, this is just not a census of history. The maximum, perhaps, is too one-sided look, but nothing more. The USSR and the Russian Federation have a rather one-sided view of the history of the Second World War, to put it mildly.
    1. topograf Offline
      topograf (topograf) 21 November 2019 07: 37
      0
      • 1
      • 1
      Such "local crossings" here have a chance, in the future, to become a "full-fledged history" of World War II (WWII), if now this whole shaft is not stopped. On the Kursk Bulge they (the Germans and others like them) did not lose the tank battle, but retreated because they “leveled” the front line. In Stalingrad, they landed in encirclement and surrendered only for humane reasons (they saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of soldiers). They didn’t keep the “impregnable Dnieper shaft” during the capture of Kiev by the Soviet army, justifying this retreat by the need to protect the borders of the Third Reich, etc., etc. Already now the "opinion and take doubts" is beginning to take shape - but how did the Soviet troops end up in Berlin ?!
      1. Pishenkov Offline
        Pishenkov (Alexey) 21 November 2019 10: 17
        +1
        • 2
        • 1
        Yes, they are really trying to rewrite now. True, the fact of the autographs on the Reichstag that shot Hitler, hundreds of thousands of German prisoners, who were forced to rebuild the destroyed USSR and the like, was unlikely to be challenged. And I repeat, I think this is not the case. The Germans also had victories, it is not in vain that their tactics and strategies are still being studied at our military academies, and, by the way, they were also studied during the Second World War. And thanks to this, too, among all the rest, and the SC later began to get brilliant victories. You just need to consider the history from the beginning adequately, with all the pros and cons. The opposite option just leads to the fact that people begin to believe in a lie - if you always say everywhere that only we were “white and fluffy”, we only won nobly and brilliantly, behaved decently everywhere and with everyone and didn’t offend anyone, then suspicions creep in, too, willy-nilly, that something is wrong with all of this, and here the “rewriters” are right there ... But if people really knew what was and how it was, then they would not be led to different noodles ...
        But, unfortunately, they rewrote history and rewrite everything in their favor, including the USSR, and the Russian Federation have been doing it and are doing it. And when others do it later, everyone starts to be sharply indignant ...
    2. Aleksey Glotov Offline
      Aleksey Glotov (alexey glotov) 21 November 2019 15: 19
      0
      • 1
      • 1
      The winner writes the story ... and who is the winner? ... USSR ... so the author of the article should carefully read the documents, as the Germans were draping hundreds of kilometers from Moscow.
      1. Pishenkov Offline
        Pishenkov (Alexey) 21 November 2019 15: 52
        0
        • 1
        • 1
        The winner writes the story

        - here, including, because in the USSR and the Russian Federation there were too many and too many people who think and behave in the same way as you, now they demolish monuments to Soviet soldiers who laid down their lives for this Europe throughout Europe . So do not be surprised then. You decided that you can write your story, and they destroyed the USSR and now rewrite everything in their own way. So then you are kind enough to haw it all and not be indignant ... Smart guy ... ... Such people, as a rule, have full pants of slogans and cheers-patriotism, and zero knowledge about the same war ...
  4. fevralsk.morev.75 (Sergey Morev) 20 November 2019 12: 59
    +1
    • 1
    • 0
    The Germans defeated the Russians near Moscow in 1941

    - Who would doubt it? Won, won the Russians ... we congratulate. Russians.
  5. Masqube Offline
    Masqube 20 November 2019 13: 38
    +2
    • 2
    • 0
    But did this author write anything about Napoleon’s victories in Russia?
  6. boriz Offline
    boriz (boriz) 20 November 2019 14: 21
    +1
    • 1
    • 0
    As for the "wasteful" offensive, Stahel better recall the idiotic attack of the light cavalry 25.10.1854/XNUMX/XNUMX. In England, the heroism of the cavalry is still glorified (by the way, the color of the nobility of Great Britain), but no one is trying to assess the motivation of the brigade commander, Count Cardigan (the color of the nobleman ditched). Either he was drunk like a pig, or the roof went. It would be interesting to know Stachel's rating.
  7. rusich Offline
    rusich (rusich) 20 November 2019 14: 57
    +1
    • 1
    • 0
    Lord And what are they smoking, since so rushing.
  8. Petrik66 Offline
    Petrik66 (Igor) 20 November 2019 19: 15
    -3
    • 0
    • 3
    But he is a historian, he practically guessed.
  9. bmp4444 bmp4444 Offline
    bmp4444 bmp4444 21 November 2019 11: 44
    +1
    • 2
    • 1
    That's it, now I know for sure who bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Germans, however. Weak, Stahel?
  10. Panting Offline
    Panting (Vyacheslav) 22 November 2019 08: 31
    0
    • 1
    • 1
    It turns out that America lost the war of Japan in the Pacific, and in Europe - Hitler’s Germany ??? And should pay reparations and indemnities to the axis countries? In gives! Ah yes well done.
  11. Alexander Kornilov (Alexander Kornilov) 20 December 2019 09: 08
    0
    • 0
    • 0
    Undoubtedly, the Soviet Union defeated Moscow. But only a terrible victory ...

    https://www.vpk-news.ru/articles/8441

    The total irretrievable losses of the Red Army in the Moscow battle, we estimate at 3 million 182 thousand killed and prisoners. We emphasize that the vast majority of prisoners near Vyazma and Bryansk did not survive the winter of 1941-1942. The total irrecoverable losses of the Wehrmacht near Moscow, we estimate at 118 thousand people. The total ratio of irretrievable losses is 27: 1 in favor of the Germans.