What do you think?
Rate this book
Disaster at Stalingrad: An Alternate History
It is early September 1942 and the German commander of the Sixth Army, General Paulus, assisted by the Fourth Panzer Army, is poised to advance on the Russian city of Stalingrad. His primary mission was to take the city, crushing this crucial centre of communication and manufacturing, and to secure the valuable oil fields in the Caucasus. What happens next is well known to any student of modern history: a brutal war of attrition, characterised by fierce hand-to-hand combat, that lasted for nearly two years, and the eventual victory by a resolute Soviet Red Army. A ravaged German Army was pushed into full retreat. This was the first defeat of Hitler's territorial ambitions in Europe and a critical turning point of WWII. But the outcome could have been very different, as Peter Tsouras demonstrates in this fascinating alternate history of this fateful battle. By introducing minor - and realistic - adjustments, Tsouras presents a scenario in which the course of the battle runs quite differently, which in turn throws up disturbing possibilities regarding the outcome of the whole war.
256 pages, Hardcover
First published March 19, 2013
68 people are currently reading
231 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 34 reviews
August 7, 2013
I was HUGELY impressed with this alternative history, I had to keep reminding myself that this was actually fiction and not a real history. Very cleverly written.
I have read many alternative history novels and stories before and this really has to be one of the best ones. I have also read many of the authors previous books before and had mixed feelings about some of them but this is easily the BEST book he has written.
SPOILER ALERTS -
An interesting plot begins with the Heydrich surviving his Prague posting and working closely with German Intelligence, a new strategy with the German Navy completely destroying and stopping Allied Arctic Convoys supplying the USSR, Turkey coming in to the war on the German side, Manstein taking over strategy on the Stalingrad front with Paulus being transferred back to Germany all combine in to a plot where the Germans win the battle of Stalingrad and change the whole course of the war!
I wont say much more and leave you to discover the details of how the above happens and to discover the interesting conclusions but it really is a great read.
I have read many alternative history novels and stories before and this really has to be one of the best ones. I have also read many of the authors previous books before and had mixed feelings about some of them but this is easily the BEST book he has written.
SPOILER ALERTS -
An interesting plot begins with the Heydrich surviving his Prague posting and working closely with German Intelligence, a new strategy with the German Navy completely destroying and stopping Allied Arctic Convoys supplying the USSR, Turkey coming in to the war on the German side, Manstein taking over strategy on the Stalingrad front with Paulus being transferred back to Germany all combine in to a plot where the Germans win the battle of Stalingrad and change the whole course of the war!
I wont say much more and leave you to discover the details of how the above happens and to discover the interesting conclusions but it really is a great read.
March 19, 2014
An enjoyable alternative history in the same vein as the author's Disaster at D-Day: The Germans Defeat the Allies,June 1944 and similar to Moscow Option: An Alternative Second World War.
If I was going to point out a weakness I thought the naval battle over PQ17 a little far fetched.
If I was going to point out a weakness I thought the naval battle over PQ17 a little far fetched.
August 16, 2014
I really enjoyed the exploration of possible different outcomes for the Eastern Front on the whole. There are a few things in the book that I did take some issue with, particularly given how neutral parties just simply fall into the Germany's lap that wasn't well explained. Tsouras does throw the reader a bone in that, just as it was in "Disaster at D-Day," the July 20 plot manages to kill Hitler, though it's growing a bit tiresome. The key element that is lacking for me is a discussion of the repercussions of the USSR dropping out of the war. What does this mean for the Western Allies? Do they peace out? Do they invade? Do they drop the Atomic bomb on Berlin? It's something that isn't often discussed and I think Tsouras missed a prime opportunity to explore this further. Overall a good book though.
August 18, 2013
I like the quote by Field Marshal Moltke "Order, counterorder, disorder."
December 23, 2013
A solid historical piece about a all too possible alternative history where Germany wins Stalingrad and knocks Russia out of WW2.....highly recommended for people interested in World War 2, Soviet Union or alternative historh
August 10, 2014
I have mixed feelings about this style of alternate history. It is written like a history book, complete with footnotes that fit the context (of an alternate history). I have a reasonable knowledge of the Stalingrad front and battle, but I found myself wishing I had a much more in depth knowledge to be able to follow the subtle changes the author introduces throughout his narrative.
Given that, he does an excellent job, and there were certain lesser threads he adapted to his premise, I particularly liked the story of of the Russian sniper Zaitsev, and how the changes the author introduces to this history changed significantly what Zaitsev contributes to the war.
Also, Staffenberh is allowed to play out his plots in a totally different way, but makes a larger impact. As opposed to the Himmler's War alternate history I recently finished by Robert Conroy, where Staffenberg ends up dead in a ditch due to an allied bomb that kills Hitler...very ironic.
Overall, an interesting experience.
Given that, he does an excellent job, and there were certain lesser threads he adapted to his premise, I particularly liked the story of of the Russian sniper Zaitsev, and how the changes the author introduces to this history changed significantly what Zaitsev contributes to the war.
Also, Staffenberh is allowed to play out his plots in a totally different way, but makes a larger impact. As opposed to the Himmler's War alternate history I recently finished by Robert Conroy, where Staffenberg ends up dead in a ditch due to an allied bomb that kills Hitler...very ironic.
Overall, an interesting experience.
January 18, 2014
One of the best "What if" books in a bloody long time! Mr Tsouras amazes the reader with his in depth knowledge about the 2:nd world war and in particular the eastern front.
This is a gem! Go get it right away!
This is a gem! Go get it right away!
April 11, 2022
I have a lot of criticism of this book. If I was rating it on my personal enjoyment level I might have given it 2 stars, but it was extraordinarily well researched, so I gave it 3.
I am used to reading alternate history novels, a favorite genre of mine. I thought that’s what this book would be, but it’s not. This is fair enough, in hindsight the book does not market itself as a novel. However, at some points it tries to read as a novel. Randomly it will put you in the personal story of a couple specific individuals with dialogue etc., as if it were a novel. But it is basically a timeline textbook with these arbitrary style transitions mixed throughout.
I did not like that the book spent so much time leading up to Stalingrad before we got there at all. The book is marketed as an alternate history of the battle at Stalingrad and altogether there’s a couple of chapters spent there. We spend a ton of time on the lead up, with so much detail about specific army groups movements that can be pretty tedious. But again, I respect the research.
We also spent just as much, if not more time, on a naval battle as we do on Stalingrad. The naval battle was cool but it drags on and on, with lead up, 2 chapters for the naval battles, and then consequences of it.
Then, we only spend 3 pages - 3! - on an epilogue to the book. After all the lead up there is an extraordinarily short conclusion to how these alternate events shake out for the war as a whole etc. I would have much preferred a longer Coda with some of the earlier details and meandering scrapped.
Also, we spent time looking at the war through Roosevelt and Churchill perspective etc, but then don’t get any of the American or British perspective towards the final events of the battle! How did the Allies react to all this? Again, we don’t know because the Coda is 3 pages long. It’s like the author had a year to write the book, spent 10 months on the prelude, 2 months on Stalingrad, and then realized he didn’t have time to wrap it up with a satisfying ending.
I didn’t like the map illustrations, they were superfluous due to not being well explained enough. I couldn’t understand what they were depicting, they seemed childish.
Lastly, the book makes it clear that the alternate history was launched due to supplies that went to the Soviet Union not actually arriving there in this timeline. However it was unclear to me when the events diverged from our timeline exactly, and what caused that to occur per se.
I am used to reading alternate history novels, a favorite genre of mine. I thought that’s what this book would be, but it’s not. This is fair enough, in hindsight the book does not market itself as a novel. However, at some points it tries to read as a novel. Randomly it will put you in the personal story of a couple specific individuals with dialogue etc., as if it were a novel. But it is basically a timeline textbook with these arbitrary style transitions mixed throughout.
I did not like that the book spent so much time leading up to Stalingrad before we got there at all. The book is marketed as an alternate history of the battle at Stalingrad and altogether there’s a couple of chapters spent there. We spend a ton of time on the lead up, with so much detail about specific army groups movements that can be pretty tedious. But again, I respect the research.
We also spent just as much, if not more time, on a naval battle as we do on Stalingrad. The naval battle was cool but it drags on and on, with lead up, 2 chapters for the naval battles, and then consequences of it.
Then, we only spend 3 pages - 3! - on an epilogue to the book. After all the lead up there is an extraordinarily short conclusion to how these alternate events shake out for the war as a whole etc. I would have much preferred a longer Coda with some of the earlier details and meandering scrapped.
Also, we spent time looking at the war through Roosevelt and Churchill perspective etc, but then don’t get any of the American or British perspective towards the final events of the battle! How did the Allies react to all this? Again, we don’t know because the Coda is 3 pages long. It’s like the author had a year to write the book, spent 10 months on the prelude, 2 months on Stalingrad, and then realized he didn’t have time to wrap it up with a satisfying ending.
I didn’t like the map illustrations, they were superfluous due to not being well explained enough. I couldn’t understand what they were depicting, they seemed childish.
Lastly, the book makes it clear that the alternate history was launched due to supplies that went to the Soviet Union not actually arriving there in this timeline. However it was unclear to me when the events diverged from our timeline exactly, and what caused that to occur per se.
July 17, 2020
(3.5 stars) A solid counterfactual about what could have happened at Stalingrad. There is significant technical detail that would appeal to the military buff, and quality writing to make this an enthralling narrative. There are enough subtle changes to history in this account that would make it feasible that it could have happened this way. In no future is the battle of Stalingrad not hell on earth, with it being the worst example of urban fighting in history. That other players enter into the fray might be a bit of a stretch (would Turkey really have joined in the war, or would they have been a better conduit for Nazi forces to threaten the Middle East and North Africa?) Then there is the idea that even counterfactuals eventually revert to second orders (i.e. they get back along the path they were meant to anyway). The death of Heydrich (who is perhaps the most loathsome Nazi this side of Hitler) and the mass shooting of all of the key Nazis in Stalingrad does kind of get things back on pace, but then what of the 2nd Russian Civil War and the rest of the war against Japan, etc.
There is something to be gained from reading this, as you get insights into various characters, and it does highlight that battles are not fought in a vacuum. Actions that impact logistics can have long reaching impacts in wars and this is a key example. Worth at least one read for the military historian, but don't know if will be a return read.
There is something to be gained from reading this, as you get insights into various characters, and it does highlight that battles are not fought in a vacuum. Actions that impact logistics can have long reaching impacts in wars and this is a key example. Worth at least one read for the military historian, but don't know if will be a return read.
October 9, 2020
Massive Citations
While the text of this is written in novel story telling style the massive number of endnote citations break up the text with multiple references justifying the various statements. This despite its interesting plot reads much more like a long term paper, the sort of dissertation level document needed for masters or doctoral thesis authorship. Having read a few thesis documents I was able to get in the habit of skipping over the citation interruptions but casual readers might find this more difficult. Fully the last 45 pages of the novel are appendices and endnote citations which s more than 10% of the novel length. Many academics make this "mistake" when attempting to write fiction, justifying every statement and decision made by historical characters. Far better to pick your point of departure, in this case the early death of Admiral Raeder, then write a story about how that change cascades through history via the butterfly effect. Trying to justify every single change as a logical consequence of the departure is both impossible, because life does not follow logical pathways, and consumes a lot of energy that would better serve by more fully developing the characters used in the novel.
While the text of this is written in novel story telling style the massive number of endnote citations break up the text with multiple references justifying the various statements. This despite its interesting plot reads much more like a long term paper, the sort of dissertation level document needed for masters or doctoral thesis authorship. Having read a few thesis documents I was able to get in the habit of skipping over the citation interruptions but casual readers might find this more difficult. Fully the last 45 pages of the novel are appendices and endnote citations which s more than 10% of the novel length. Many academics make this "mistake" when attempting to write fiction, justifying every statement and decision made by historical characters. Far better to pick your point of departure, in this case the early death of Admiral Raeder, then write a story about how that change cascades through history via the butterfly effect. Trying to justify every single change as a logical consequence of the departure is both impossible, because life does not follow logical pathways, and consumes a lot of energy that would better serve by more fully developing the characters used in the novel.
October 17, 2021
Disaster at Stalingrad is an excellent example of when alternate history goes the way it should. Peter Tsouras illustrates in perfect detail every little change and how, when put together, they lead to a grand shift in reality.
While the book does read more like a formal study on the events it is nonetheless engaging for even a casual reader.
Battle maps help the reader understand exactly what the order of battle is and how the different units act, and while I personally found the Battle of 20° East to be drawn-out, it was still well-written and managed to highlight individual characters, whereas the typical purely-military alternate history usually sticks only to battle maps and decisions made in divisional headquarters.
Indeed Tsouras glosses quickly over the consequences of the USSR's defeat, Stalin's removal and the death of the Nazi elite, but it can be agreed that these are not within the scope of the book to present. The book does exactly what is plans to - it puts forward a magnificent change in reality, justified at all times (perhaps excessively at times) by footnotes, both real and fictional.
While the book does read more like a formal study on the events it is nonetheless engaging for even a casual reader.
Battle maps help the reader understand exactly what the order of battle is and how the different units act, and while I personally found the Battle of 20° East to be drawn-out, it was still well-written and managed to highlight individual characters, whereas the typical purely-military alternate history usually sticks only to battle maps and decisions made in divisional headquarters.
Indeed Tsouras glosses quickly over the consequences of the USSR's defeat, Stalin's removal and the death of the Nazi elite, but it can be agreed that these are not within the scope of the book to present. The book does exactly what is plans to - it puts forward a magnificent change in reality, justified at all times (perhaps excessively at times) by footnotes, both real and fictional.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 25, 2018
Es fantástico cuando un libro del que no esperas mucho te sorprende, como ha sido este caso. "Disaster at Stalingrad: an alternate history" es un libro que disfrutarán los aficionados a la historia militar y a la Segunda Guerra Mundial en particular.
Se nota que Peter Tsouras conoce bien el material y hace los ajustes mínimos (ej: fracasa el atentando contra el monstruo de Heyndrich en Checoslovaquia) para que cambie la historia que conocemos. A veces introduce elementos algo polémicos o "novelescos" (ej: no se ha demostrado que el asesor personal de Roosevelt, Harry Hopkins, fuera un espía soviético) pero para nada afectan o empeoran la trama, más bien lo contrario.
Otro aspecto a destacar es que Tsouras introduce en la nerración personajes de tercera fila pero aún así no menos interesantes: Raus, Chuikov, Galland, Stauffenberg..., lo que ayuda a mantener la atención y querer saber más. Creo que conozco bastante la SGM y algunos los desconocía por completo.
Si te gusta la Segunda Guerra Mundial, este libro es una compra más que recomendada.
Se nota que Peter Tsouras conoce bien el material y hace los ajustes mínimos (ej: fracasa el atentando contra el monstruo de Heyndrich en Checoslovaquia) para que cambie la historia que conocemos. A veces introduce elementos algo polémicos o "novelescos" (ej: no se ha demostrado que el asesor personal de Roosevelt, Harry Hopkins, fuera un espía soviético) pero para nada afectan o empeoran la trama, más bien lo contrario.
Otro aspecto a destacar es que Tsouras introduce en la nerración personajes de tercera fila pero aún así no menos interesantes: Raus, Chuikov, Galland, Stauffenberg..., lo que ayuda a mantener la atención y querer saber más. Creo que conozco bastante la SGM y algunos los desconocía por completo.
Si te gusta la Segunda Guerra Mundial, este libro es una compra más que recomendada.
August 19, 2019
What if sniper Zaitsev had had a better target?
What if the convoys to Murmansk not only didn’t get through but were captured by the Germans so boosting the Nazi assault on Stalingrad while diminishing Soviet resistance? The resolution of this alternative history comes like the surprise it was to the participants, with a bang: two in fact. But however crucial the loss of the convoys is to the plot the convoy section gets very tedious, so much so I almost gave up. An editor could have kept the pace up without damage to the essentials of the story. B- with considerable B+ potential.
What if the convoys to Murmansk not only didn’t get through but were captured by the Germans so boosting the Nazi assault on Stalingrad while diminishing Soviet resistance? The resolution of this alternative history comes like the surprise it was to the participants, with a bang: two in fact. But however crucial the loss of the convoys is to the plot the convoy section gets very tedious, so much so I almost gave up. An editor could have kept the pace up without damage to the essentials of the story. B- with considerable B+ potential.
August 3, 2023
This was an excellent book, and I don't want to provide spoilers. But there were to me, too many inflection points, placing this creative, extremely well-researched book at the very edge of plausibility. I was reminded of the old Saturday Night Live character, Church Lady, exclaiming, "How convenient." !
I will tip my hat, though to Tsouras for his extremely clever citations of *fictitous* history books in footnotes and endnotes. Just brilliant!
Unfortunately, the Kindle version of this book has some annoying copy editing flaws, for example, lacking periods at the end of sentences.
And the ending will blow you away
I will tip my hat, though to Tsouras for his extremely clever citations of *fictitous* history books in footnotes and endnotes. Just brilliant!
Unfortunately, the Kindle version of this book has some annoying copy editing flaws, for example, lacking periods at the end of sentences.
And the ending will blow you away
June 25, 2018
Well done.
Well written. Could see this outcome without Turkey joining the Axis. Got a little lost trying to keep German and Russian units separated, but that was me, not the fault of the author. Thank God there was no useless sappy love story in it like so many other what if books. Will have to try another of his works.
Well written. Could see this outcome without Turkey joining the Axis. Got a little lost trying to keep German and Russian units separated, but that was me, not the fault of the author. Thank God there was no useless sappy love story in it like so many other what if books. Will have to try another of his works.
March 24, 2018
The events of World War II are slightly alterered, leading to Stalingrade yet again, but with very different cercumstances. If you are interested in World War II history, especially the eastern front, you will enjoy this book. If military manouvers aren't your thing, take a pass.
October 1, 2018
Rollicking good read!
Recommended to all followers of
of the alternative history genre. Peter Tsouras is a master of his craft who knows his subject well but does not baffle the reader with extraneous detail.
Recommended to all followers of
of the alternative history genre. Peter Tsouras is a master of his craft who knows his subject well but does not baffle the reader with extraneous detail.
July 13, 2019
Well written alternative history
Great battle scenes from a completely fictional 1942. The author captures a history of what might have been if the Germans had defeated the Russians, but settles for a jolting ending instead of building his vision beyond the battle of Stalingrad.
Great battle scenes from a completely fictional 1942. The author captures a history of what might have been if the Germans had defeated the Russians, but settles for a jolting ending instead of building his vision beyond the battle of Stalingrad.
February 4, 2020
Interesting alternative history book on the Stalingrad campaign. Tsouras lays out a convincing scenario that makes for a compelling read. I had some issues with some military inaccuracies but they were fairly minor and would not be noticed by most readers.
August 16, 2017
A little too much on which division or corps was doing what but an excellent read overall, well researched and a great ending
August 16, 2019
Well I enjoy these alternate history and if this was real we would have a problem with the d day invasion
December 7, 2020
I could see this happening up til the last chapter. Overall a good book to read and spend time in another world. Thanks Mr. Tsouras.
August 25, 2022
I enjoy alternative histories that pivot on one change - this required many changes, and contradicted my knowledge of logistics of the period as well. Too much magic.
June 24, 2023
Excellent!
An intelligent, well researched story what could have happened, but did not. If you enjoy (excellent) historical fiction you will enjoy this book.
An intelligent, well researched story what could have happened, but did not. If you enjoy (excellent) historical fiction you will enjoy this book.
April 28, 2024
A well written yarn
This book is a good alternate history book, wth a very possible scenario based on reasonable possibilities. Worth the read
This book is a good alternate history book, wth a very possible scenario based on reasonable possibilities. Worth the read
April 6, 2025
I love reading books by Peter Tsouras. The book: Disaster at Stalingrad is another masterpiece. Much of what he wrote did indeed happen.
August 24, 2020
This is an entirely realistic alternative to what could have happened.
January 27, 2015
Hasta ahora había leído ucronías literarias y ucronías académicas o contrafactuales más o menos serias. Es la primera vez que leo una ucronía divulgativa, es decir, que trata de contar la historia de una manera amena y comprensible para el común de los mortales, bueno, en este caso la no historia. El libro de Tsouras se podría comparar a los de Stephen E. Ambrose o Cornelius Ryan sobre la Segunda Guerra Mundial en el sentido de que mezcla datos contados a pelo con dramatizaciones de situaciones de la contienda y testimonios que en este caso, por razones obvias, uno no sabe si se los ha inventado o ha cogido algunos de la historia real y los ha utilizado en momentos de la virtual que inventa.
Evidentemente el libro es ficción, porque una ucronía no puede ser otra cosa, pero el autor domina el tema de tal manera que hará las delicias de cualquier aficionado a la historia militar. Tiene mucho mérito contar una batalla que nunca existió a todos los niveles, desde el estratégico al táctico más pegado a la trinchera, y hacerlo de manera plausible una vez que te despegas un trecho de lo que pasó en realidad. Resulta muy entretenido además ver a personajes como Vasili Záitsev, reconocibles ya para un público bastante amplio, actuando a su aire en la no historia.
Finalmente los peros. Aparte de que puedo estar más o menos de acuerdo con algunos de los datos que da el autor (seguro que tiene más información que yo) no me ha gustado que no utilice solo un punto Jombar para su historia. Lo ideal (para mí)habría sido partir del descubrimiento que hacen los alemanes de que sus comunicaciones están siendo descifradas por Bletchley Park, y desarrollar el tema hasta el final. Sin embargo Tsouras mete otras premisas que no tienen nada que ver con la primera, como la entrada en guerra de Turquía, que le quitan simplicidad al cambio y por tanto belleza y/o plausibilidad. El segundo pero es precisamente la minuciosidad con que relata algunos temas que seguramente serán muy interesantes para frikis de la Segunda Guerra Mundial (como el que suscribe) pero que acaban lastrando un poco el libro.
Le he puesto tres estrellas por lo último y porque no estoy de acuerdo con el autor en la visión que tiene sobre algunos de los temas principales, pero es un libro muy recomendable.
Evidentemente el libro es ficción, porque una ucronía no puede ser otra cosa, pero el autor domina el tema de tal manera que hará las delicias de cualquier aficionado a la historia militar. Tiene mucho mérito contar una batalla que nunca existió a todos los niveles, desde el estratégico al táctico más pegado a la trinchera, y hacerlo de manera plausible una vez que te despegas un trecho de lo que pasó en realidad. Resulta muy entretenido además ver a personajes como Vasili Záitsev, reconocibles ya para un público bastante amplio, actuando a su aire en la no historia.
Finalmente los peros. Aparte de que puedo estar más o menos de acuerdo con algunos de los datos que da el autor (seguro que tiene más información que yo) no me ha gustado que no utilice solo un punto Jombar para su historia. Lo ideal (para mí)habría sido partir del descubrimiento que hacen los alemanes de que sus comunicaciones están siendo descifradas por Bletchley Park, y desarrollar el tema hasta el final. Sin embargo Tsouras mete otras premisas que no tienen nada que ver con la primera, como la entrada en guerra de Turquía, que le quitan simplicidad al cambio y por tanto belleza y/o plausibilidad. El segundo pero es precisamente la minuciosidad con que relata algunos temas que seguramente serán muy interesantes para frikis de la Segunda Guerra Mundial (como el que suscribe) pero que acaban lastrando un poco el libro.
Le he puesto tres estrellas por lo último y porque no estoy de acuerdo con el autor en la visión que tiene sobre algunos de los temas principales, pero es un libro muy recomendable.
February 25, 2014
Fans of alternate history are people who are more than familiar with the true history of whatever time period is being written about so the problem is to make it convincing without completely going off course. Peter Tsouras is one of the best authors in this field covering World War II alternative histories. "Disaster at Stalingrad" reads like a history book even with reference notations (some of which are real) to make it seem authentic.
This is a fast paced book that will keep you turning pages to wonder how he plays out this rearranged version of history. As you read the book you will find yourself thinking how this easily could have have the true history of events involving not just the battle at Stalingrad but the whole southern front. The book is action packed like Red Storm Rising or Team Yankee but reads like any other historical accounting of a particular World War II battle.
Historians all agree that but for a few key missteps by Hitler in the summer of 1942 the war should have had a very much different outcome. "Disaster at Stalingrad" is the presentation of how a left instead of right turn somewhere in time opens a whole new realm of possibilities.
This is a fast paced book that will keep you turning pages to wonder how he plays out this rearranged version of history. As you read the book you will find yourself thinking how this easily could have have the true history of events involving not just the battle at Stalingrad but the whole southern front. The book is action packed like Red Storm Rising or Team Yankee but reads like any other historical accounting of a particular World War II battle.
Historians all agree that but for a few key missteps by Hitler in the summer of 1942 the war should have had a very much different outcome. "Disaster at Stalingrad" is the presentation of how a left instead of right turn somewhere in time opens a whole new realm of possibilities.
August 27, 2018
It is early September 1942 and the German commander of the Sixth Army, General Paulus, assisted by the Fourth Panzer Army, is poised to advance on the Russian city of Stalingrad. His primary mission was to take the city, crushing this crucial center of communication and manufacturing, and to secure the valuable oil fields in the Caucasus.What happens next is well known to any student of modern history: a brutal war of attrition, characterized by fierce hand-to-hand combat, that lasted for nearly two years, and the eventual victory by a resolute Soviet Red Army. A ravaged German Army was pushed into full retreat. This was the first defeat of Hitler's territorial ambitions in Europe and a critical turning point of WWII.But the outcome could have been very different, as Peter Tsouras demonstrates in this fascinating alternate history of this fateful battle. By introducing minor - and realistic - adjustments, Tsouras presents a scenario in which the course of the battle runs quite differently, which in turn throws up disturbing possibilities regarding the outcome of the whole war.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 34 reviews