View Single Post
  #40  
Old 07-22-2019, 12:20 PM
Raellus's Avatar
Raellus Raellus is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Marana, AZ
Posts: 2,672
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Olefin View Post
Keep in mind that is why the last NATO offensive was launched in 2000 - to gain control of the Baltic coastline and much of the area that used to be part of Germany
Nowhere is it made clear in canon why the Summer 2000 offensive was launched. There are a few vague hints, nothing more. We've had quite spirited debates here in other threads regarding possible reasons- oil shale, Baltic fisheries, spoiling attack, etc. One can't assume it was simply for nationalistic, restore the pre-1945 borders reasons.

According to the map (based on Going Home), there are no cut-off U.S./Canadian/British units aside from the 5th ID (presumed destroyed) and the 8th ID. Why would the Germans fight to bring two broke-ass American units into the fold? The map shows that XI Corps has a clear shot back to Germany with no Polish or Soviet units standing in the way.

Yes, some Soviet units would retreat* or surrender if the Germans launched a major offensive, but a significant number of others would not, resisting either out of loyalty to the remains of the Soviet gov't or to protect their Polish cantonments.

Would it be worth fighting to seize even a 10-mile buffer zone into post-1945 Polish territory? You and RN7 seem to envision a bellicose, aggressive German gov't/military c.2001. That's cool, but I don't.

Now, if the Germans could snatch back some small chunks of pre-1945 territory at no cost, then sure. They might even go so far to sponsor a low-intensity/guerrilla war in W. Poland, kind of like what IRL Russia is doing in Eastern Ukraine. But a big, conventional offensive, relying on the bulk of the surviving Bundeswehr to take back a few hundred square miles of pre-1945 German territory? I don't think so. Keep in mind, the Soviets still have a few nukes left. Do you think they're going to allow the Germans to creep closer to the old Soviet border? Again? I don't. Why would the Germans risk another nuking for eastern territory? It's borderline madness.

The cost benefit analysis just doesn't support continuing the war.


*Begging the question, why didn't they do so earlier? If they couldn't retreat when not under attack (widely accepting as the most difficult operational maneuver in all of warfare), how could they when they are?
__________________
Dulce bellum inexpertis. - Erasmus

Last edited by Raellus; 07-22-2019 at 03:34 PM.
Reply With Quote