Was blitzkrieg really that revolutionary?

[MAGNA]

I think the point here is that the Mongols used Reconnaissance, mobility, and the shock tactic of being where they were not expected to fullest advantage.

The firepower capability of the early war German divisions was limited when looking at mobile units. Motorised artillery wasn't an option, the Luftwaffe had to supply that.

The firepower of the Panzer divisions was limited by the gun types. The main advantage for the German divisions was the ability to put an enemy on the back foot and keep them there. The Mongols were also masters of this.

So yes, Blitzkreig was a very old concept.

[PanzerBob]

Maybe it's word that is confusing the issue. Warfare by it's nature and aims is always an attempt to get to the objective the fastest with the mostest!
Blitzkrieg the mid 20th Century name for that very action.

Someone metioned the Mongols never really held ground. They solved that problem by leaving nothing behind worth holding.

[webmill]

Originally Posted by MAGNA

I think the point here is that the Mongols used Reconnaissance, mobility, and the shock tactic of being where they were not expected to fullest advantage.

The firepower capability of the early war German divisions was limited when looking at mobile units. Motorised artillery wasn't an option, the Luftwaffe had to supply that.

The firepower of the Panzer divisions was limited by the gun types. The main advantage for the German divisions was the ability to put an enemy on the back foot and keep them there. The Mongols were also masters of this.

So yes, Blitzkreig was a very old concept.

Hello Magna:

While it is probably true that the Mongols used "reconnaissance, mobility and the shock tactic of being where they were not expected to fullest advantage"the Mongol, I would estimate, would being doing this all the time.with nothing else up the Mongol sleeve, so to speak.

Again German Blitzkreig does not follow the Mongol way:The German Blitzkreig does use the Blitzkrieg strategy of attacking for a breakthrough in an unexpected place for surprise such as from the Ardennes in the Battle of France 1940.
The Germans do seek the achieve surprise in the breakthrough and it does cause shock to the opponent when successful; but the Mongol never faced an organised continuous line with guns on this scale;and therefore, the Mongol could not build firepower superiority under any circumstances when faced with a line with guns such as the Germans confronted
Therefore,
the differences of German Blitzkreig are far greater than the similarities in the comparison to Mongols of the technological backwards era of the Mongols and their basically Mongol horseman raids; although the Mongol horseman horde could be rather large in this raid.

[McCoy]

The only thing that's get renewed in the art of war is the means of killin' as the weaponry gets more sofisticated due to new technologies.

[Pirate-Drakk]

Originally Posted by MAGNA

I think the point here is that the Mongols used Reconnaissance, mobility, and the shock tactic of being where they were not expected to fullest advantage.

The firepower capability of the early war German divisions was limited when looking at mobile units. Motorised artillery wasn't an option, the Luftwaffe had to supply that.

The firepower of the Panzer divisions was limited by the gun types. The main advantage for the German divisions was the ability to put an enemy on the back foot and keep them there. The Mongols were also masters of this.

So yes, Blitzkreig was a very old concept.

Thanks for the concise summary.

[MAGNA]

Originally Posted by webmill

Hello Magna:

While it is probably true that the Mongols used "reconnaissance, mobility and the shock tactic of being where they were not expected to fullest advantage"the Mongol, I would estimate, would being doing this all the time.with nothing else up the Mongol sleeve, so to speak.

Again German Blitzkreig does not follow the Mongol way:The German Blitzkreig does use the Blitzkrieg strategy of attacking for a breakthrough in an unexpected place for surprise such as from the Ardennes in the Battle of France 1940.
The Germans do seek the achieve surprise in the breakthrough and it does cause shock to the opponent when successful; but the Mongol never faced an organised continuous line with guns on this scale;and therefore, the Mongol could not build firepower superiority under any circumstances when faced with a line with guns such as the Germans confronted
Therefore,
the differences of German Blitzkreig are far greater than the similarities in the comparison to Mongols of the technological backwards era of the Mongols and their basically Mongol horseman raids; although the Mongol horseman horde could be rather large in this raid.

That is precisely the point here. The German armies avoided the gun lines as much as possible. That is the whole thrust of Blitzkreig. Find the weak point and go for it.

Remember the Mongols didn't have Panzers or air support either. They faced everyone from Asia and then beat the armour of the time in Europe - the knights. Mongol tactics and equipment were not just ponies and composite bows either. They carried out sophisticated sieges as well as winning full on battles against what many would consider to be better equipped enemies.

The Wermacht and Luftwaffe did the same. The Blitzkreig in France was carried out against superior numbers with equipment which was better in many cases. It still comes back to the use of available resources coupled with communication and training - even a German section or squad knew what was going on and what to do if their officers were gone. This was far more important than who had the biggest gun.

[webmill]

Originally Posted by MAGNA

That is precisely the point here. The German armies avoided the gun lines as much as possible. That is the whole thrust of Blitzkreig. Find the weak point and go for it.

Reply to Magna:

While the thrust of a German Blitzkreig breakthrough is to find the weakest point in the enemy line, the Mongols were different in that, in my estimation, as they started their horseman raids, was that their recon had told them that the enemy was weak every where for hundreds of squares miles;
and this is not the situation of the German Generals planning and executing German Blitzkreig for invasion of a European country
If the opponents of the Mongols had holed up in defensive town, the Mongol knew they could bypss the opponents in the town ;as the surrounded townsmen could not control the countryside aorund them during the Mongol raid; the Mongols could not hold territory.

For example, the German Blitzkreig using its Panzer spearheads and all German effort to support it, ultimately would target and destroy the military industral capacity of the Allies and Russian opponent, for if this was not done, the Allied opponents would not remain weak

Cheers,
webmill

[TRDG]

Originally Posted by MAGNA

Spot on there MAGNA, there are other factors, but that is a great start, but I hope that list will clear that up as well for many here.

And also, HOW the big (or little) "gun" was used to against the enemy forces, another good thought sir, I just added on a bit......

Cheers

Tom

[webmill]

Originally Posted by Pirate-Drakk

Sometimes I forget that what is completely obvious to me after decades of intense study, is not always well established concept in the minds of others.





Therefore, the only conceptual difference between the Mongols and the German Blitzkrieg was the equipment.

Note that once again I am specifically addressing the question posed by FreightShaker: "Was blitzkrieg really that revolutionary?"

I don't think the Blitzkrieg is a new concept at all. Just a modern rehash of an old idea. .... Unless of course you are correct, in which case I will change my point of view.

Cheers!

Hello Pirate Drak:

Thank you for your response

You know, forum members such as yourself are not under pressure to respond;any forum member is free to leave the discussion if he wants to, without responding to a poster, such as myself who may ask on the thread if he is going to post again or not;

However, I think your contention about the Mongols is worth a debate;

While I disagree with your final conclusion about the Mongols and German Blitzkreig; I do have this question.

The context of the times 1939-1942 was far more complex for the German War Machine than the ancient times were for the Mongols;
For example, Hitler needed to make an alliance with Italy in the Pact of Steel in order to ensure that Italys possible nuetrality would not reverse the success of future German blitzkreig success. particulary in the Occupation of France in 1940.

To my knowledge, the Mongols did not make an alliance with anyone, except themselves.

to quote Pirate Drak above"the only conceptual difference between the Mongols and the German Blitzkreig was the equipment"end quote by Pirate Drak;
In my opinion,this can apply to any ancient Army, in this sense.

Cheers,

webmill

[Tom Houlihan]

Originally Posted by webmill

Therefore, the only conceptual difference between the Mongols and the German Blitzkrieg was the equipment.

So rapidity of movement, command and control (in context), weapons, all had no comparison?