Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I didn't mean for you to misinterpret what I was saying. Actually the Russian goverment recently released new documents from the archives claiming that Red Army losses were much higher then experts originally thought. 17 to 21 million combat deaths on the Eastern Front. Of course the truth will never be known because Stalin did not release accurate casualty reports during WW2.
The fact that Stalin "did not release accurate casualty reports" does not mean that any other figure of military casualties that is floating out there is true.
It became very fashionable during Gorbachev's time to speak about Stalin's crimes, revealing "the horror of those days." Why? Probably to distract the population from the wrongdoings of ( than) current government.
Even today I see plenty of attempts in Russia to re-write history of the WWII, to vilify Soviet Government, to present German actions as "misunderstood and misinterpreted" and to make heroes out of Vlasov's army.
Again why? To distract population from their current troubles in supposedly "free and democratic Russia," constantly pointing at the "horrors of the Soviet past." Yet at the same time the archives quitely released in the 90ies showed that the estimates of GULAG deaths in Russia were greatly exaggerated to say the least, however those discoveries were not trumpeted all over the place.
So what I am saying here is that although I do not necessarily believe Stalin's statistics ( if such thing even exists,) I don't trust "new estimates" made by those who came after him either.
The fact that Stalin "did not release accurate casualty reports" does not mean that any other number of military casualties that is floating out there is true.
It became very fashionable during Gorbachev's time to speak about Stalin's crimes, revealing "the horror of those days." Why? Probably to distract the population from the wrongdoings of ( than) current government.
Even today I see plenty of attempts in Russia to re-write history of the WWII, to vilify Soviet Government, to present German actions as "misunderstood and misinterpreted" and to make heroes out of Vlasov's army.
Again why? To distract population from their current troubles in supposedly "free and democratic Russia," constantly pointing at the "horrors of the Soviet past." Yet at the same time the archives quitely released in the 90ies showed that the estimates of GULAG deaths in Russia were greatly exaggerated to say the least, however those discoveries were not trumpeted all over the place.
So what I am saying here is that although I do not necessarily believe Stalin's statistics ( if such thing even exists,) I don't trust "new estimates" made by those who came after him either.
I agree with you and I was just stating the "facts" that are know. What is known is the fact that very few German POW's made it home alive from the Gulag. Also the same can be said for Russian POW's in German captivity. 90 thousand German troops were captured after Stalingrad and only 6 thousand came home. Hitler lost his war against Stalin because decisions that he himself made, not because he was overwhelmed and defeated on the field of battle by a superior enemy. Many of Hitlers decisions that have been criticized as mistakes were on the contrary shrewd stategic moves. Hitler kept pouring precious military resources into the Mediterranean to the point that he doomed the last great German offensive effort in Russia. One of the very few mistakes that he made.
Im just not impressed with the knowledge in this forum. Dont believe eveything you read!
As a stated earlier 90 thousand German troops were captured after Stalingrad and only 6 thousand survived the Gulag. That is a fact and your saying the number of POW deaths from the Eastern Front is blown out of porportion?
I agree with you and I was just stating the "facts" that are know. What is known is the fact that very few German POW's made it home alive from the Gulag. Also the same can be said for Russian POW's in German captivity. 90 thousand German troops were captured after Stalingrad and only 6 thousand came home.
The Stalingrad POWs are actually a special case. Most of them died long before the "Gulag" (an incorrect term in this case). Most of the prisoners were already sick and starving at the point of surrender. The Russians were not prepared to deal with so many sick and starving people especially when their own troops and population was had just bare necessities.
Quote:
Hitler lost his war against Stalin because decisions that he himself made, not because he was overwhelmed and defeated on the field of battle by a superior enemy.
Hitler definitely deserves the blame since after all it was he who made the decision to invade the USSR. Germany did not have the resources for a war of attrition on the Eastern Front, and to maintain its commitments in Africa, in the Atlantic, and occupied Europe. Nevertheless, the German forces still had to be militarily defeated, which they were.
Quote:
Many of Hitlers decisions that have been criticized as mistakes were on the contrary shrewd stategic moves. Hitler kept pouring precious military resources into the Mediterranean to the point that he doomed the last great German offensive effort in Russia. One of the very few mistakes that he made.
Actually German forces in Africa were consistently starved of reinforcements and supplies, in part because the British did a good job intercepting them but also because they were of lesser priority compared to the Eastern Front. The entire case that the war was winnable if not for Hitlers meddling is very dubious IMHO. The whole war was started on faulty premises and all of Germany's problems stemmed from that.
Faulty Pemises? As I stated earlier, Hitler had ample information that Stalin was planning to invade Germany which is one of the reasons he decided to strike first. I couldnt disagree with you more that Germany couldnt have won the war wish Russia because they almost did win. They made it to the gates of Moscow only 20 miles from the capital before they were repulsed. The idea that Stalin could have prevailed in his war against Hitler without the massive quantities of Allied aid is without merit. Stalin lacked the basic principle of military art which is to secure objectives with the least losses. In the summer of 1943 the Germans were on the verge of a genuine breakthrough. Operation Citadel did not fail, it was broken off, not because of the judgment of the field commanders who believed they were on the verge of a real victory, but on Hitlers direct orders. Hitlers decision in July 1943 was not the only reason the Germans lost in the east. Allied aid and Stalin's willingness to fight to the last Russian prolonged the struggle. But if Hitler stepped aside and let his generals direct the war then yes, Germany would have won the war in the east.
"We have only to kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will come crashing down."
-Adolf Hitler
"We have severely underestimated the Russians, the extent of the country and the treachery of the climate. This is the revenge of reality."
-Heinz Guderian
Quote:
Originally Posted by Torrachris
As I stated earlier, Hitler had ample information that Stalin was planning to invade Germany which is one of the reasons he decided to strike first.
While the war between Nazi Germany and the USSR was certainly a matter of time, Stalin did not believe it would start at least until 1942, if not later. In 1941, following the experience of the Winter War, the Red Army was undergoing massive reorganization and rebuilding. Hitler invaded the USSR to in the hopes that his victory would force Britain to discuss peace terms.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Torrachris
I couldnt disagree with you more that Germany couldnt have won the war wish Russia because they almost did win. They made it to the gates of Moscow only 20 miles from the capital before they were repulsed.
That was the closest Germany came to winning the war but still, being 20 miles away from Moscow and winning the war are not the same thing. By late fall 1941 the German Army was severely depleted and in dire need of reinforcements and supplies. It needed to deal with large surrounded but not destroyed pockets of Soviet troops. Nor was it prepared for the Russian winter. Finally, the Germans did not anticipate dozens of new divisions the Russians were forming in the rear and other troops being transferred from the east.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Torrachris
The idea that Stalin could have prevailed in his war against Hitler without the massive quantities of Allied aid is without merit.
Agreed. That's why I never said any such thing. But to be fair, the Soviets absorbed the brunt of Operation Barbarossa on their own. Lend-lease was not extended to the Soviet Union until fall 1941 and very few supplies reached before the Battle of Moscow. Western aid had more impact on the later stages of the war.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Torrachris
Stalin lacked the basic principle of military art which is to secure objectives with the least losses.
Irrelevant. The Soviet Union had to fight a war under adverse circumstances with low quality troops. As someone once said, "You go to war with the army you have, not the one you wish you had." It would be too simplistic to say that there was an easy, almost bloodless way of accomplishing something but evil Stalin chose the meat grinder instead. " Reality is more complicated than that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Torrachris
In the summer of 1943 the Germans were on the verge of a genuine breakthrough. Operation Citadel did not fail, it was broken off, not because of the judgment of the field commanders who believed they were on the verge of a real victory, but on Hitlers direct orders.
Actually Operation Citadel did fail. On the northern face, the Germans made barely any progress. In the South, their offensive also stalled after the Soviets committed their strategic reserves. But more importantly, the Soviets counterattacked on July 13 on the outer flanks, in the rear of the German spearhead. The Germans could not continue their offensive and safeguard their flanks at the same time. Even Manstein acknowledges that it was a failure.
But even a German victory in the summer of 1943 would still not bring them anywhere close to the Volga (the limit of their extent a year ago).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Torrachris
Hitlers decision in July 1943 was not the only reason the Germans lost in the east. Allied aid and Stalin's willingness to fight to the last Russian prolonged the struggle. But if Hitler stepped aside and let his generals direct the war then yes, Germany would have won the war in the east.
WWII was certainly a coalition victory. It is doubtful that the USSR could have prevailed without western aid. At the same time, it is also scary to imagine the position the Americans and the British would be in had the USSR been defeated. Any kind of D-Day style invasion would be out of the question. Most likely they would have to resort to nuclear weapons.
The idea that Hitler spoiled the war is overstated IMO. It was not really the case that there was a consensus among all the generals about something but idiot Hitler overruled them. More often, Hitler overruled some generals on advice of others in his inner circle. The worst decision Hitler made was a political one, which was to invade the USSR.
....and I suspect this forum is not impressed with the level of your knowledge and stuff you are reading...
Mutual sentiment one might say.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMarbles
"We have only to kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will come crashing down."
-Adolf Hitler
"We have severely underestimated the Russians, the extent of the country and the treachery of the climate. This is the revenge of reality."
-Heinz Guderian
While the war between Nazi Germany and the USSR was certainly a matter of time, Stalin did not believe it would start at least until 1942, if not later. In 1941, following the experience of the Winter War, the Red Army was undergoing massive reorganization and rebuilding. Hitler invaded the USSR to in the hopes that his victory would force Britain to discuss peace terms.
That was the closest Germany came to winning the war but still, being 20 miles away from Moscow and winning the war are not the same thing. By late fall 1941 the German Army was severely depleted and in dire need of reinforcements and supplies. It needed to deal with large surrounded but not destroyed pockets of Soviet troops. Nor was it prepared for the Russian winter. Finally, the Germans did not anticipate dozens of new divisions the Russians were forming in the rear and other troops being transferred from the east.
Agreed. That's why I never said any such thing. But to be fair, the Soviets absorbed the brunt of Operation Barbarossa on their own. Lend-lease was not extended to the Soviet Union until fall 1941 and very few supplies reached before the Battle of Moscow. Western aid had more impact on the later stages of the war.
Irrelevant. The Soviet Union had to fight a war under adverse circumstances with low quality troops. As someone once said, "You go to war with the army you have, not the one you wish you had." It would be too simplistic to say that there was an easy, almost bloodless way of accomplishing something but evil Stalin chose the meat grinder instead. " Reality is more complicated than that.
Actually Operation Citadel did fail. On the northern face, the Germans made barely any progress. In the South, their offensive also stalled after the Soviets committed their strategic reserves. But more importantly, the Soviets counterattacked on July 13 on the outer flanks, in the rear of the German spearhead. The Germans could not continue their offensive and safeguard their flanks at the same time. Even Manstein acknowledges that it was a failure.
But even a German victory in the summer of 1943 would still not bring them anywhere close to the Volga (the limit of their extent a year ago).
WWII was certainly a coalition victory. It is doubtful that the USSR could have prevailed without western aid. At the same time, it is also scary to imagine the position the Americans and the British would be in had the USSR been defeated. Any kind of D-Day style invasion would be out of the question. Most likely they would have to resort to nuclear weapons.
The idea that Hitler spoiled the war is overstated IMO. It was not really the case that there was a consensus among all the generals about something but idiot Hitler overruled them. More often, Hitler overruled some generals on advice of others in his inner circle. The worst decision Hitler made was a political one, which was to invade the USSR.
Im very impressed with your knowledge. You have the same passion and love for history as I do which is nice to see. Your points are all valid and I agree with most of them. Its just amazing to me the Germans kept winning the casualty exchange rate right up to the end of the war. There were 3 dead Russians for every dead German. The manuvers Gurderian made and the amout of land the panzers covered were truly spectacular in that first year of Barborossa. I will quote a German intelligence report in the next paragraph. "Indeed the enemy has learned much, but he has again shown himself unable to exploit critical favorable situations. The picture repeats itself when operations, which begin with great intent and local successes, degenerate into senseless, wild hammering at fixed front positions once they encounter initial heavy losses and unforeseen situations. This incomprehensible phenomenon appears again and again."
What some of the battle explained on the Militray channel and you will see a willingness to take casualties by soviet leaders. They often shot every other man when one deserted in a company.Many of the soviet troops used where very proolry trained and until inductry got goign and western help came they wre poorly eqauiped.Tremdous scarifices were made byt ehir tropps;often after seeing what the geramns did to realtives and other russians. There are books that US and british soldiers prisoners tell what they saw of treatment of soviet prsoners by germens.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
