How could the Soviets have handled the Siege of Leningrad better?

Question

How could the Soviets have handled the Siege of Leningrad better?

Answer 1

In September 1941 all land routes into the city were cut. For a month boats crossed lake Ladoga bring military supplies into the city. Soon the lake started to freeze and boats could not make the trip. Finlay the lake froze firm enough for trucks and a ice road was opened up on November 20, 1941.

The problem was one ice road, under bombardment, was not enough to feed a city of a million. Mass evacuation of civilians did not start for several months. This delay is one of the few things the soviets could have done better. But where do you send starving people in winter?

A major warehouse with most of the cities sugar did burn after it was bombed. They salvaged what they could. Later people went and mined the dirt. If the dirt had a little ash meaning it was close to the surface, it was worth more money.

Answer 2

In 1937 & 1938 Stalin had over 30,000 officers finished because of his fears of losing vigor, at the same time Hitler had an inclination to overrule his generals choices throughout WWII. Both, in hindsight, made bad selections however Stalin's decisions show up to be worse than Hitlers. Stalin's choices should not as reported as a result of the Soviet military victory which was a result of the navy's dimension and now not of it is command.

Answer 3

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Stalingrad

Answer 4

the soviets flat out didn't really care about their civilians. they had the best tanks of the war, and the most men. if they wanted to, they could have stopped the siege. However, Stalin's strategy wasn't to beat the Germans so to speak, but limit the penetration (as shown by his scorched earth policy) He kept them out of the oil fields, and out of Moscow (barely) and that was his goal. he waited until the brutal notorious Russian winter set in, and after the victory at Stalingrad, pushed the Germans back. Yes, the Germans pushed deep into Russia, primary because of the amazing blitzkrieg tactic.



Long story short, if Stalin would have chosen a more offensive strategy vs the defensive one, he would have saved countless civilian lives.

Answer 5

Used the sea, used the sea, used the sea.

Leningrad (now again St. Petersburg) sits on the sea coast (the Baltic Sea).

It's backed by the massive great lake 'Ladoga'.

In the War the Nazis (and the Finns) had blocked the city on 3 land sides leaving only the water (or ice) surface of Lake Ladoga open...by land.

But...the seaside remained open throughout and was never used.

The Soviet Union at the time 'did' have a navy almost as good as the German but Stalin never used it...plus...the British had a navy at least 5 times better/ bigger than the German.

It should have been possible to relieve and supply Leningrad by sea with a combined Russian-British fleet. Of course German air power would harry them from Denmark on...but the British could have included aircraft carriers, used neutral Sweden to advantage and counted on the Finns never to fire at the British...The naval run for the British (with Russian help) to Leningrad should have been no worse than the British naval run to Malta done at the same time without any help.

Why wasn't it done?......

1.) Stalin was a true Russian 'land guy' he thought only of land infantry and land tanks...the use of naval and air-power mostly never occurred to him.

2.) Stalin wanted (and said so) the Russian people of Leningrad to be trapped in there and fight like cornered rats to the bitter end.

3.) If they won...Stalin didn't want a British non communist land force in his 2nd most important city.

3.) The British preferred spending British lives and ships to save Britons in Malta than to save Russians in Leningrad.