>>514665940
>survivors writing the story and blaming the dead guy who wasn't there to defend himself.
Nonsense. They all protested at the time, and quite forcibly. Some, as I said, even trying to tweak the Directive
> The drive on Moscow was suicidal idiocy
No it wasn't but in any case, it was part of Barbarossa's original plan
>Moscow had some strategic utility
As I've pointed out >>514649153, that's a huge understatement because the USSR was a highly centralized state, Moscow had been its capital from the start, its infrastructure was entirely centered around it, and it contained much of its command and control center
Regardless, Directive 33 was a massive and highly suspicious 'blunder' for many reasons, most prominently the fact that it split Heeresgruppe Mitte, and divorced it of its most mobile divisions, which were send all the way north to Leningrad where they would be of very limited use assisting a siege in swampy land
If one wanted to sabotage Barbarossa in 1941 and stall the German advance at a moment when it appeared to be reaching a primary objective and possibly deliver a fatal blow to the Soviet regime, Directive 33 was the way to go
>>514666030
Yes, he did, and not just Gehlen, see >>514654320