Bagration
![Image](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiB54I1X8DzKdjn0_Zq1NeQOcx1V3uHovhfStcpKoqSUXJu2wtW2N_TUeHXMQr4h_cW3sOKn7-rPinaNx0MBE7HvzaPUIAzIODVHPN9L-pGjeXmNf3GhAIGZwHeKqfrbYlyDDGXsOYnXIs/s640/19e596_03518ad1f04c4588ab287d2b7.jpg)
by Luka Bilić Controversies and analysis of intelligence, strategy and outcome Every interesting eastern front operations is full of controversies and Bagration is no exception. These mostly fall into categories of inadequate and/or ignored intelligence; faulty strategy of defense and responsibility for the above mentioned. Intelligence . It is often said that intelligence reports about comming offensive were ignored by the high command and that catastrophe was thus largely preventable. In reality Soviet maskirovka (concept of deception, operational security, counter intelligence, camouflage etc) was highly efficient and sophisticated. It was at work on virtually every level. Reinforcements to the Belorussian sector were huge, but yet remained obscured. Only in last six weeks prior to offensive Soviets moved in 56 rifle divisions, 4 cavalry corps, 10 tank corps, 2 mechanised corps, one tank brigade, 18 tank regiments, 31 assault gun regiments and huge numbers of other units...