Robert Citino is definitely my favourite when it comes to talks about WW2. He combines in depth knowledge with very skillful story telling, using specific examples to illustrated points and a way of conveying the feeling of the tactical and strategic situations he describes.
Citino has done something really brilliant, casting for himself a career built around an unusual and better point of view on a much worked-over field of study. The Germans were huge losers in the War of the European Plain, 1870~1945, yet Citino is almost alone in studying them comprehensively and then reporting on them _as losers_.
I had the extreme pleasure of "majoring" in Citino when at Eastern Michigan University, and miss the days of his lectures. He is not just incredibly knowledgeable, but also very entertaining.
I’m so jealous. I’ve watched tons of his lectures on RU-vid and read 4 of his books. He is always entertaining in his lectures (and his books are not just well researched but excellently written. It’s rare to find an academic page turner!)
Citino sure has the hability to make history interesting and compelling. I got hooked on his talks and then i read his books, and he is great. The guy really has this sort of spark within him. Kinda like a guy who you'd hang out with, having a beer and discussing the faults of the german general staff en ww2
Dr. Citino has given this talk in many other venues. He is one of the leading authorities in this topic. Excellent speaker. Vivifies this historical area with some backstory to boot.
31:40 The Italian government capitulated in 1943, but an Axis backed government was formed in northern Italy almost immediately. The Italian soldier fought until the end in 1945. Several divisions were re-equipped with British uniforms and weapons, and fought for the Allies. Several divisions were re-equipped with German uniforms and weapons, and fought for the Axis. And many soldiers just changes into civilian clothes and went home, but not the vast majority.
Love his lecture but wish he would have an audible format available for his books. I rarely get a chance to sit down to read and instead listen to books while driving and working.
"I say the german army is aggressive and half my class slaps high fives" hahahahahahahah. Damn you manstein for creating a romantic vision of the German Army for the west, i.e. the US
I also think that one major reason why Germany couldnt surrender in 1943 was due to the atrocities that they had done at the eastern front from the start of the war. The killing, pillaging and raping of the civilian population at the eastern front had been so terrible and the cost of human suffering so high that I dont think there was even a chance of anything else than unconditional surrender from the perspective of Stalin and the people of Soviet Union.
That's ridiculous, Kursk had over 7000 tanks engaged. Not all at once of course, but during the course of the battle. Just like we record how many troops were engaged at the Battle of Gettysburg which was over a 3 day period.
@@NathanMulder You might be right, but since the Germans won that battle, it doesn't get any notoriety at all. After all most of only heard of the German lost battles of Kursk & Stalingrad.
7:49 This is a minor nitpick, but Russia did not have a 5:2 population numbers vs France during Frederick the Great's time. Even during Napoleon's era, France had 20% bigger population than France, it was only after around 1820 that French population figures started getting surpassed by other European powers.
When one must turn up the sound to hear the speaker, then someone near the mic. claps about 5 times as loud, this stops me listening to this channel's videos because I live in flats close to others and often listen at night. I don't like earphones so these lecture videos wake my neighbours! The good content deserves some competent production decisions...
Iam not sure why we stopped starving out encircled forces,(popular in the middle ages). I suppose it's the time factor. Those seige troops waiting out the fortress garrison could be used better elsewhere.
I wish a super computer would go over the what if of if Germany was an oil hub would they have beaten the Russians or were the logistical distances just too great to maintain 3 aggressively fighting army groups
Italy under-performed in the war, no doubt about it, but the full magnitude of the stereotypical "lack of will to fight" has been very over-blown since the end of the war and it's actually hurt the historiography very much. Think about it, a major belligerent in the largest conflict known to mankind and its perspective, influence, and individual POVs have been almost completely ignored. You have things like break-out of the Italians after Little Saturn and the disastrous raid during Operation Agreement that have been almost completely ignored because they don't follow the prescribed slant of the immediate post-war narrative - one which was largely compiled by the Anglo-American faction from the hear-say and misrememberings of German officers and officials, ones who had impetus to scapegoat the Italians after the war - and use them and the Hungarians and Romanians as cannon fodder during the war. You have the early North Africa campaign where the Italians steal the British codebook in Rome and are essentially listening to Allied correspondence and radio traffic but it's near-universally been overlooked. This isn't about glorifying the Italians or anything - this is about a major part of the story that's been neglected.
The Italians stole the US Codes in Cairo. The British would not have any one in Rome when there at war. Try Googling Bonner Fellers. It was the USA that gave away all the British Commonwealth secrets.
I know he was hot but I don’t like his style in this book. Generalizations omissions and interpretation after the events that fall as trite condescending and one sided. The Germans were between by superior force applied correctly. The German way did not fail but was perfected by the Russians at the strategic and operational level of war his books would be better without using over used phrases.
1. There was no "failure to penetrate" on the southern flank. They rationally decided that the forces were needed to counter soviet and allied attacks. 2. German complete tank losses have turned out to be no where near what they were reported for decades. Infantry, always in short supply, losses were high. 3. In this "defeat", while on offense, against well prepared defenses, the Germans still inflicted several times more casualties on the Soviets. 4. The Germans could not have continued on, as they would have been vulnerable to a counter envelopment of their own had they continued to the NE. 5. Speaker takes lame cheap shots at Hitler, (5 tanks to Tunisia) These decisions were offhand and took minutes. They had a disproportionate effect to their numbers while there, by the way. Hitler's decision to delay that attack at Kursk was a big mistake. Stupid, in fact.
