The Battle of Kursk - Myths and Reality

 

 

 

Yes, when I said 'weakening' of the southern front in Russia I did not mean to suggest that troops were withdrawn from there (for one thing that wouldn't have made much sense logistically).  However, the Germans did ship in troops to Tunisia that otherwise could have been available as reinforcements (agreed, after the Allied Torch landings in N.A., it was fairly obvious that there was not going to be a 'second front' in France anytime soon) in the east.  Also, most importantly, and what I was referring to for the most part, were the air transport assets that were used to transport and supply many of the forces in Tunisia.  Those would have been critical to the front in the southern portion of the eastern front, in flying in reinforcements and supplies.  So my one-liner about Hitler being willing to 'weaken' the southern / Caucasus front in the east was suggesting the alternative to the move into Tunisia would have been to use all of those forces instead to supply and relieve the forces in Stalingrad.  That would have then resulted in the much earlier loss of N.A.  However, that goes back to my point, Hitler was more willing to lose the Caucasus and the 6th Army in Stalingrad than he was to give up N.A. without a further fight.  That all had to do with trying to keep Italy in the war.