Was the Soviet Union beatable?

Krivosheev gives 29.6 million casualties for '41-'45, of which 18.3 million were wounded.
there is a breakdown from his book at axishistory
http://www.axishistory.com/index.php?id=5956

for the german army there is a diagramm in Zetterling's "Kursk 1943" with the "evolution" as below:
from 22 june '41
until 31 dec. '41: 831.050
until 31 dec. '42: 1.912.000
until 31 dec. '43: 3.409.721
until 31 may '44: 4.060.300
for the eastern front. i said 4 million '43 from the top of my head earlier, but the 4 million were reached in '44.

even '43 there was a second front in italy which absorbed manpower, especially the replacements designed for the eastern front after the conclusion of citadel.

Correct, but not significant to make a difference IMO. After all the preparations and delay, operation Zitadelle was a dud, Husky or not.

You're right, Denes, thats why I put at the end of my comentary the reference about Suvorov's books (there is another topic about that).
If this "what if" plan would had a chance to succede, it would be started in 1940, after immediatelly after the colapse of France. That, Yogoslavia and Greece would not exist, all the resources avaible would thrown in Northern Africa, to conquer Egypt.
Anyhow, just a theory of "what if".

Correct, but not significant to make a difference IMO. After all the preparations and delay, operation Zitadelle was a dud, Husky or not.

according to Manstein, things were not going all that bad when adolf called the operation off. and he called it off because of Husky. things might have gone wrong later though, but he called it off because he knew that he couldn't man a second front and continue citadel.

nevertheless, even with citadel not succeeding, still everything wasn't lost, if the EF remaind the only theatre. the largest amount of soviet casualties did not happen during citadel, which was called off after 3 weeks, but in the subsequent fightings.

This post has been edited by dead-cat on February 10, 2010 10:15 pm

German lossings were in main part Hitler's fault, in spite to his orders to stand stil and not allowed any rectification of the front line.

Maybe you want to say ...until July 1943 after the Allied landings in Sicily when german forces prepared for Citadel operation have been relocated to Italy... because with all the huge losses in men and material in 1943, Soviet Union, in early 1944 virtually won the war in the East... please read the german generals memories available and look the map ... and you agree... and if you won't than how you explain the soviet reserves as 9th Guards Army - formed in January 1945 from "Separate Guards Airborne Army" with 37th, 38th and 39th Guards Rifle Corps (3 divisions each)? Lack of reserves?

from 1944 on the german manpower in the east shrank constantly in lieu of the other fronts.
therefore the defence in the east was becomming gradually weaker. this, however was not because of soviet military successes in the east, but because the new fronts in the south and west.

the SU could form new armies in '45 without increasing front strength as the front length shrank, but again because of the front in the west, the german front strength in the east did not increase.
the ussr did not have limitless resources at her disposal. with the casualty ratio of 41-43 they would run out of men and material, before the axis did. this applies to pretty much every category, except navy.

also, no forces "prepared" for citadel have been relocated to italy, except the "Totenkopf" SS division and only briefly. what went to italy were formations forming in france. they drew away reinforcements needed to sustain citatel, therefore adolf called it off.

The German may overcome the tactical part, but they forgot about the cold. That was a big mistake on the part of Germans.