Why were WWII Soviet casualties extremely high? (Ireland, Americans, government)

[SmilingWolf]

Just because my argument is similar doesn't mean I copied "verbatim" anything and you even admit to such in your next sentence.

The "most verbatim statement" ??? What do you mean the "most verbatim" ??? It's either verbatim or it isn't verbatim. It is not "most verbatim". That is like a woman saying she is "alittle bit pregnant" No, she is either pregnant or not pregnant.

So, my writing was not "most verbatim" PERIOD.

There were three factual points of reference I used from glancing at the axishistory site, a site which I came across just 3 (three) days ago. You got that? THREE DAYS AGO. I never heard of it till that point.

These three points of what I believed to be factual historical points of reference of others on that newly discovered site, I used in their similar arguments I was using against your proposition that the drive to Moscow by AG Center was a mistake.

The three points:

1) The supply situation for AG Center during and after the Smolensk operation. The actual ease with which Hoth and Guiderian and their forces fought a series of combat operations without being hamstrung in any way by any kind of coneivable or actual supply crisis.

2)The actual dispositon of the Soviet army in the region covering the southern flanks of AG Center and the reasons why this was not a real threat at that time as AG Center was preparing for an immediate resumption of its drive to Moscow.

3)The matter of the Siberian forces and the actual time requirements demanded for them to get to Moscow from the East and the time it would take to deploy. The reference I used on the axis was the estimation of 2 weeks to get to Moscow and 2 weeks to deploy. I put down in MY OWN WORDS 2 weeks for them to get there and 2 - 3 weeks for them to actually deploy in front of Moscow. Now, there is just so many ways you are going to write that brief bit of operational information without maybe, MAYBE sounding a little bit similar. I do remember using one word he used...I believe it was..."transit". But, I believe that hardly condemns me to Devils Island.

And, God knows whether even that word was his own original choice or he used it himself from an historian. I don't believe anybody on the axis site or the city-data site for this subject actually travelled to the Soviet Union, dropped by the Kremlin, got special access permission to look into their historical files, including those of the NKVD and made that info their own. You agree - Yes?


Now, I have written a relatively large number of posts on this subject in a short period of time since joining this discussion and most of those posts took place before 3 DAYS AGO


Again...that was 3 days ago.

With that one exception described above - those 3 references to those 3 aspects used to help counter your own argument, my posts involve my own approach to this historical account and I didn't plagiarize anybody or anything.

The questions I have posed regarding the reasons for the lack of preparations on the part of Hitler and the Wehrmacht and the equally puzzling lack of preparations and failures of Stalin and the Soviet Union....these questions came to me ON MY OWN.

Granted, similar questions and issues I'm sure have arisen over the years regarding this history, but I did not run to any site or reference specific historians when it came to writing these posts.

Does that register with you - Goat?

As mentioned above, there are just so many ways and limited points of written variation one is confronted with when facing : 2 weeks transit to Moscow and 2 weeks to deploy after that. I believe I used 2 weeks to arrive in Moscow and 2 -3 weeks to deploy in front of Moscow. So, it wasn't even 2 weeks to deploy, I used 2-3 weeks instead and I believe I used the word, "transit" as well. And, this same written rendering of these same facts applies to the other two points I mentioned above. I made every effort to put this info in my own words.

But, again, you had the extended nerve to add insult to injury by originally charging me with lifing entire statements verbatim from the axis site and putting them on city-data.

Now, because you were not able to prove this (because it was not true), you fall back on this weak charge that I paraphrased the information, instead

Goat, your thought processes are very sad and pathetic. You can not even mildly support the charge you made against me.

Really? You have the audacity to charge me with lifting a number of entire statements from others, but your statement "was not meant as "a condemnation of your knowledge or credibility"...? Huh?




, merely pointing out that we are arguing the same argument that many have argued before and I thought it pertinent to list the site we were both drawing from as well as the historians whose positions we seem to be in agreement with.

So, you jump to the spiteful and baseless conclusion that because my posts were spread out and somehow not "cohesive", I just had to be copying verbatim the words and thoughts of others? Do you have any real idea how stupid and hurtful you come across?



Goat...who asked you to make a critique of my writing style or abilities?
I had no idea I was in the presence of a new Hemingway. You grace us all here on this forum with your presence.

Seriously, spare us your ruthless jibes and unsolicited criticsims of the writing styles or abilities of others. And spare me your character assasination. Because such a nasty approach can be turned right back on you.

For example: After glancing over your own wiritng "style", or rather lack of one, I find your own approach clearly dull, pedantic and plodding. And, as for having anything truly original to say,at least in regards this historical subject; you've got nothing.

So, you are not one to judge the quality or content of my own writing.

You "mean't no offense, Goat, yet you intentionally and deliberately gave offense.

And, I do accept your apology, but I do not forgive you or your obvious talents for character assasination.

We're not at Harvard or Oxford and this is not some formal academic debate. Though it is obviously true what you mention about accumulating historical rendering and information and using that to reinforce and support a set of beliefs to defend a position, my specific and particular approach to this subject is my own.

For example: My series of posts regariding the actual preparations leading up to Operation Barbarossa..those operational questions, those questions of supply, of intelligence questions, and on and on...I didn't have to run to a history book or to a site to put that approach together. That was my own approach. I took the pains and the time and the effort to do that.

Now, whether you believe that or not, I could care less. It is truth nonetheless.

The only reason I would not continue this debate is if you insist on continuing with this nasty habit of attacking my character and my writing abilities.

Nobody died and made you the God and final aribiter of the writing abilites or the ultimate critc of the writing content of others.

You can quote all the supposed factual numbers and figures and statistics you want to support your argument. But, just like a court trail, the truth can be "massaged" to support just about any premise.

Now, I have invested some real time to put my "two cents" into this history of the Invasion of the Soviet Union and the only reason I will decide to stop this discussion of Operation Barbarosa after this point is if you decide to continue making these cheap shots against me.

And, if that is the case, let me know now.


Goat, you are going to need to refrain from using character assasination to make your points because it is way too easy for people to hide over the internet and do such things.

If you have a shred of a conscience or a moral ehtic at all, you will refrain from taking these shots against me. It really makes you look like a coward to hide behind the net and make such accusations.

The next time you want to insult a man or question his character, have the decency and the guts to do it to his face - to my face. I promise you my response will fit the attack.

Wolves eat goats.

[SmilingWolf]

One of my recent posts on page 21, I should add regarding my statement: "I have been a student of that site"...(the axishistory.com site of which the Goat has accused me of copying verbatim a number of statements wholesale from...

I should have worded this statement: "I have been a new stiudent of that site" since I came across it just 3 days ago.

Smiling Wolf

[NJGOAT]

Listen, you joined this site around a month or so ago. You have a whopping total of 30 posts, 5 or so of which have been jumping all over me for making a statement about where I thought you were getting some of your points from and making a little critique on your posting style. Which between the font size and color changes and spreading your thoughts over multiple posts is a little hard to read, especially when you consider that most of these posts are now basically mini-essays.

Most people around here would have simply ignored your first post as being good, but way too long to read. I took the time to read it, liked what you had to say and thought we could have a good conversation to build on what had been being discussed in this thread.

No one around here pretends to be a professional historian, just a bunch of people with an interest in history and a desire to learn more. HOWEVER, when threads do get this in depth and technical, it is necessary and considered standard for people to begin backing up their assertions with references, figures and sources.

For instance saying AG Center had enough supplies to get to Moscow in August should be supported with some level of source to verify it. This is what I asked you to do. I quoted supply figures from van Creveld who draws heavily from Halders personal diaries and other primary sources to prove the supply situation was tenuous. You responded with "their supply situation was fine", sorry, but that's not good enough.

As for me, I think most would consider me to be a rather gracious poster and regular contributor to this forum. I'm not afraid to admit when I am wrong, offer apologies and reverse my position. My approach may be "dull, pedantic and plodding", but when it comes to long posts on complex topics I personally think that is the better approach. I would venture that most passing through here readily understand the points I am making and are having a bit of difficulty sifting through yours, especially since you seem to think the way to make things "interesting, informal and lively" is to change colors, font sizes and ignore any attempt at forming cohesive paragraphs and statements.

I didn't intend to insult you with the "verbatim" statement, merely point out that I knew where you were drawing some of your points from and your posting/writing style made it appear you may have been copying a little too generously. My ultimate intention was to take the conversation in a different direction as it seemed we had reached a stalemate. You wouldn't accept my figures and you refused to provide your own in regards to the supply situation, so I graciously agreed to ignore that and focus on the game of capturing Moscow starting in August.

Character "assassination" and attacks is NOT my game, never has been. If you want to continue to discuss Barbarossa, then post something about Barbarossa and let's have at it.

As for that wolf eating this "goat"...well this "goat" weighs about 3,700 pounds and can hit 175 on a straight away...that would be some real messy roadkill.

[SmilingWolf]

Originally Posted by NJGOAT

Your points regarding the supply situation and disposition of Soviet forces on the SW Front are very similar to arguments made by a handful of posters on Axis History. The most verbatim statement was the one regarding the time table for the movement of the Siberian troops. While the statements are not verbatim they are paraphrased and I got the feeling I had read them before.

The statement was not meant as a condemnation of your knowledge or credibility, merely pointing out that we are arguing the same argument that many have argued before and I thought it pertinent to list the site we were both drawing from as well as the historians whose positions we seem to be in agreement with.

Your statements are a little difficult to discern at times, especially as they are often spread across multiple posts and they are not exactly cohesive as they jump from point to point, which drew me to the possibility you were drawing from another source to assemble your arguments.

As I said, I meant no offense and if offense was given then I apologize for it. For what it's worth, I doubt much of what we have posted regarding the positions we have taken are fully our own thoughts. Our thoughts are shaped by what we have read and have an inclination to believe is correct. Neither one of us is quoting from source material and making our own analyses, we are drawing from others who have done that.

I'm willing to continue the discussion and withdrawal my verbatim statement. I see three ways to continue:

1. We ignore everything about the supply situations and focus on our hypothetical August 18th launching of Typhoon, which I personally believe would have met the same fate the operation actually did, but with additional gains. This means I give up my position that it was impossible to launch the attack early. It also means we will be dealing in probability and what ifs, with no real concrete foundation to draw on for our arguments.

2. We can continue to discuss the supply situation for which I can continue to provide evidence, primiarly from van Creveld who as far as I know is the only person to take a critical look at the actual logistical situation. I might even have a response to why Guderian et al thought the way they did. The only thing I ask in return is that you attempt to provide constructive arguments as to why it was possible, not simply state it was.

3. We can consider this conversation closed and move on to other topics. Obviously the mainstream historian community is divided over the topic and we are each representing one of the camps. If they can't reach consensus chances are we won't either.

Originally Posted by NJGOAT

Listen, you joined this site around a month or so ago. You have a whopping total of 30 posts, 5 or so of which have been jumping all over me for making a statement about where I thought you were getting some of your points from and making a little critique on your posting style. Which between the font size and color changes and spreading your thoughts over multiple posts is a little hard to read, especially when you consider that most of these posts are now basically mini-essays.

Most people around here would have simply ignored your first post as being good, but way too long to read. I took the time to read it, liked what you had to say and thought we could have a good conversation to build on what had been being discussed in this thread.

No one around here pretends to be a professional historian, just a bunch of people with an interest in history and a desire to learn more. HOWEVER, when threads do get this in depth and technical, it is necessary and considered standard for people to begin backing up their assertions with references, figures and sources.

For instance saying AG Center had enough supplies to get to Moscow in August should be supported with some level of source to verify it. This is what I asked you to do. I quoted supply figures from van Creveld who draws heavily from Halders personal diaries and other primary sources to prove the supply situation was tenuous. You responded with "their supply situation was fine", sorry, but that's not good enough.

As for me, I think most would consider me to be a rather gracious poster and regular contributor to this forum. I'm not afraid to admit when I am wrong, offer apologies and reverse my position. My approach may be "dull, pedantic and plodding", but when it comes to long posts on complex topics I personally think that is the better approach. I would venture that most passing through here readily understand the points I am making and are having a bit of difficulty sifting through yours, especially since you seem to think the way to make things "interesting, informal and lively" is to change colors, font sizes and ignore any attempt at forming cohesive paragraphs and statements.

I didn't intend to insult you with the "verbatim" statement, merely point out that I knew where you were drawing some of your points from and your posting/writing style made it appear you may have been copying a little too generously. My ultimate intention was to take the conversation in a different direction as it seemed we had reached a stalemate. You wouldn't accept my figures and you refused to provide your own in regards to the supply situation, so I graciously agreed to ignore that and focus on the game of capturing Moscow starting in August.

Character "assassination" and attacks is NOT my game, never has been. If you want to continue to discuss Barbarossa, then post something about Barbarossa and let's have at it.

As for that wolf eating this "goat"...well this "goat" weighs about 3,700 pounds and can hit 175 on a straight away...that would be some real messy roadkill.

Poor creature. It's upset. It doesn't like color and font changes. Too radical?

It seems I managed to get your goat.

Goat . Character assasination is your game and you've demonstrated that through posts to me.

And, if you can't handle font changes and some color, just stick to your dull, plodding, and pedantic drivel. A mediocre mind like yours should accept so many limitations.

As I said, you really don't absolutely know if those supposed factual figures of supply tonnages are legitmate or not. You don't know. We don't know. Your numbers ultimately belong in the camp of speculation.

The bottomline to that argument is that in actuality, the forces of Army Group Center did not let or allow any supposed supply issues at that time keep them from effectively prosecuting the war against the Soviets as clearly evidenced from their very successful operations at that time.

Now, listen very carefully, goat. Read the above again slowly and then repeat about nine or ten times so it begins to creep into that slight, goat-sized brain.

That is not speculation. That is historical fact.

That alone shoots down your "theory" which is pointless.


A 3700 pound goat that can "hit 175 on a straight away" (?) can only mean you are a very, very fat egotist who just jumped off a very tall building, so you've just done us all a very big favor.

3700 pounds would make you a very nice series of meals. Although you are so clearly full of yourself, I would have to be pretty hungry.

(Poor thing. The reality is that you are most likely some wretch of a hillbilly in West Virginia with one tooth in your head and not a prayer of having a real life)

And, before I got to this little side-show of a forum, nothing was really going on with it. NOTHING.

So, don't worry. After I stop putting any further effort at trying to intelligently communicate with an obvious idiot like yourself, you can rest easy.

You can crawl back under that rock of mediocrity you are comfortable in.

Considering the shallow and unnecessary jibes and the CHARACTER ASSASINATION YOU INJECT INTO YOUR POSTS...

your flimsy pose of graciousnes was obviously disingenuous.

You also might consider going on a serious diet since all that fat (3700 lbs) killed off any possible brain activity.

And, you should thank your lucky stars. If you had lived during that time, a true negativist like yourself would not have been accepted into the German Wehrmacht and, if you were on the Soveit side, you would have been shot outright for cowardice.

[NJGOAT]

lol, OK. This ones going to get locked real soon. Shame, because it was a good conversation before getting siderailed. Maybe the mod can just delete this drivel and leave the actual conversation intact.

First things first, GOAT = GTO...as in Pontiac GTO.


...hence the 3,700 pounds going 175. I wonder how much buffing it would take to get wolf smears off the bumper?

Overall, I don't think this little "sideshow" of a forum is going to miss you. At this point I can only assume that my hunch about you "borrowing" your material from Axis History was pretty accurate, why else get your fur so ruffled?

As for the supply situation, the answer as to why the units were capable of operating in support of AG North and AG South is that there were enough supplies to move what amounted to a percentage of the total force of AG Center. Additionally, panzer divisions ironically enough require less tonnage to operate than infantry divisions. As the forces moved north and south they were able to be supplied from other rail heads. There was only so much capacity that could be moved into and processed through Smolensk at the same time. Hoth's group moving to AG North could be supplied from the railhead at Velikiye Luki and Guderian moving to AG South could be supplied from the railhead at Gomel. These actions lessened the bottleneck at Smolensk (particularly road traffic to and from the railhead) and again, operating the Panzergruppen was less supply intensive then operating all of AG Center on the advance.

Further, neither of those two railheads could support an attack on Moscow. Luki is on the opposite side of Lake Valdai from Moscow and Gomel is a considerable distance further away from Moscow then Smolensk, making supply for an advance to Moscow from Gomel inefficient. The next step in the supply chain would require removing the Soviet defenses from Bryansk and regauging the rail in order to allow more supplies to flow in the direction of Moscow. Until that was completed the entirety of AG Center had to be supplied through Smolensk and that capacity did not exist until into September, according to Halders own personal accounts.

Attacking the forces at Bryasnk could not be done through encirclement as long as the SW Front was still active, so a direct and costly assault would be necessary. Historically after the Germans had cleared the SW Front, the Soviet forces at Bryansk had their left flank hanging and the Germans exploited that to eliminate them.

Look at a map, think like a logistician, not a Guderian wannabe maneuverist and realize the reality of the situation.

[SmilingWolf]

Originally Posted by NJGOAT

Your points regarding the supply situation and disposition of Soviet forces on the SW Front are very similar to arguments made by a handful of posters on Axis History. The most verbatim statement was the one regarding the time table for the movement of the Siberian troops. While the statements are not verbatim they are paraphrased and I got the feeling I had read them before.

The statement was not meant as a condemnation of your knowledge or credibility, merely pointing out that we are arguing the same argument that many have argued before and I thought it pertinent to list the site we were both drawing from as well as the historians whose positions we seem to be in agreement with.

Your statements are a little difficult to discern at times, especially as they are often spread across multiple posts and they are not exactly cohesive as they jump from point to point, which drew me to the possibility you were drawing from another source to assemble your arguments.

As I said, I meant no offense and if offense was given then I apologize for it. For what it's worth, I doubt much of what we have posted regarding the positions we have taken are fully our own thoughts. Our thoughts are shaped by what we have read and have an inclination to believe is correct. Neither one of us is quoting from source material and making our own analyses, we are drawing from others who have done that.

I'm willing to continue the discussion and withdrawal my verbatim statement. I see three ways to continue:

1. We ignore everything about the supply situations and focus on our hypothetical August 18th launching of Typhoon, which I personally believe would have met the same fate the operation actually did, but with additional gains. This means I give up my position that it was impossible to launch the attack early. It also means we will be dealing in probability and what ifs, with no real concrete foundation to draw on for our arguments.

2. We can continue to discuss the supply situation for which I can continue to provide evidence, primiarly from van Creveld who as far as I know is the only person to take a critical look at the actual logistical situation. I might even have a response to why Guderian et al thought the way they did. The only thing I ask in return is that you attempt to provide constructive arguments as to why it was possible, not simply state it was.

3. We can consider this conversation closed and move on to other topics. Obviously the mainstream historian community is divided over the topic and we are each representing one of the camps. If they can't reach consensus chances are we won't either.

Originally Posted by NJGOAT

Listen, you joined this site around a month or so ago. You have a whopping total of 30 posts, 5 or so of which have been jumping all over me for making a statement about where I thought you were getting some of your points from and making a little critique on your posting style. Which between the font size and color changes and spreading your thoughts over multiple posts is a little hard to read, especially when you consider that most of these posts are now basically mini-essays.

Most people around here would have simply ignored your first post as being good, but way too long to read. I took the time to read it, liked what you had to say and thought we could have a good conversation to build on what had been being discussed in this thread.

No one around here pretends to be a professional historian, just a bunch of people with an interest in history and a desire to learn more. HOWEVER, when threads do get this in depth and technical, it is necessary and considered standard for people to begin backing up their assertions with references, figures and sources.

For instance saying AG Center had enough supplies to get to Moscow in August should be supported with some level of source to verify it. This is what I asked you to do. I quoted supply figures from van Creveld who draws heavily from Halders personal diaries and other primary sources to prove the supply situation was tenuous. You responded with "their supply situation was fine", sorry, but that's not good enough.

As for me, I think most would consider me to be a rather gracious poster and regular contributor to this forum. I'm not afraid to admit when I am wrong, offer apologies and reverse my position. My approach may be "dull, pedantic and plodding", but when it comes to long posts on complex topics I personally think that is the better approach. I would venture that most passing through here readily understand the points I am making and are having a bit of difficulty sifting through yours, especially since you seem to think the way to make things "interesting, informal and lively" is to change colors, font sizes and ignore any attempt at forming cohesive paragraphs and statements.

I didn't intend to insult you with the "verbatim" statement, merely point out that I knew where you were drawing some of your points from and your posting/writing style made it appear you may have been copying a little too generously. My ultimate intention was to take the conversation in a different direction as it seemed we had reached a stalemate. You wouldn't accept my figures and you refused to provide your own in regards to the supply situation, so I graciously agreed to ignore that and focus on the game of capturing Moscow starting in August.

Character "assassination" and attacks is NOT my game, never has been. If you want to continue to discuss Barbarossa, then post something about Barbarossa and let's have at it.

As for that wolf eating this "goat"...well this "goat" weighs about 3,700 pounds and can hit 175 on a straight away...that would be some real messy roadkill.

Originally Posted by NJGOAT

lol, OK. This ones going to get locked real soon. Shame, because it was a good conversation before getting siderailed. Maybe the mod can just delete this drivel and leave the actual conversation intact.

First things first, GOAT = GTO...as in Pontiac GTO.


...hence the 3,700 pounds going 175. I wonder how much buffing it would take to get wolf smears off the bumper?

Overall, I don't think this little "sideshow" of a forum is going to miss you. At this point I can only assume that my hunch about you "borrowing" your material from Axis History was pretty accurate, why else get your fur so ruffled?

As for the supply situation, the answer as to why the units were capable of operating in support of AG North and AG South is that there were enough supplies to move what amounted to a percentage of the total force of AG Center. Additionally, panzer divisions ironically enough require less tonnage to operate than infantry divisions. As the forces moved north and south they were able to be supplied from other rail heads. There was only so much capacity that could be moved into and processed through Smolensk at the same time. Hoth's group moving to AG North could be supplied from the railhead at Velikiye Luki and Guderian moving to AG South could be supplied from the railhead at Gomel. These actions lessened the bottleneck at Smolensk (particularly road traffic to and from the railhead) and again, operating the Panzergruppen was less supply intensive then operating all of AG Center on the advance.

Further, neither of those two railheads could support an attack on Moscow. Luki is on the opposite side of Lake Valdai from Moscow and Gomel is a considerable distance further away from Moscow then Smolensk, making supply for an advance to Moscow from Gomel inefficient. The next step in the supply chain would require removing the Soviet defenses from Bryansk and regauging the rail in order to allow more supplies to flow in the direction of Moscow. Until that was completed the entirety of AG Center had to be supplied through Smolensk and that capacity did not exist until into September, according to Halders own personal accounts.

Attacking the forces at Bryasnk could not be done through encirclement as long as the SW Front was still active, so a direct and costly assault would be necessary. Historically after the Germans had cleared the SW Front, the Soviet forces at Bryansk had their left flank hanging and the Germans exploited that to eliminate them.

Look at a map, think like a logistician, not a Guderian wannabe maneuverist and realize the reality of the situation.

Goat. If the mod decides to remove these posts, that would include yours which are even more pointless.

As for copying other's words, you just used the word, "drivel" which I just put in the post right before yours above. That alone speaks volumes.

In regards your "taste" in cars, you just proved my guess to be on the momey.

YOU ARE ACTUALLY A HILLYBILLY (those folks are fond of muscle cars) FROM WEST VIRGINIA WITH ONE TOOTH IN YOUR HEAD AND NOT A PRAYER OF HAVING A REAL LIFE.

As for me, I trade the global currency markets with a bank of large screens in front of me and I probably make more money in one morning than you make in ten or twenty years of trailer trash employment. I live in one of the exclusive parts of Northern California and I am staring at my brand new Porsche 911 in the driveway. So don't even bother, Goat with the, 'Who's got the biggest toys' routine.

Again, crawl back under that rock of mediocrity which I found you under when I came across this forum.

It is too easy destroying your pointless arguments. You are a defeatest and an obvious loser in life and you get your jollies propping that fragile ego of yours on sites like this.

[NJGOAT]

ROFLMAO, so nice that a wealthy and succesful global currency trader can take time away from making millions and driving his Porsche to insult poor, toothless, little old me. You're right, your guess was right on the "momey"...how sad that a currency trader can't spell "money", lol...and people wonder what's wrong with our economy.

I live in Southern New Jersey in a suburb of Philadelphia. I'm happily married, I have 3 awesome kids and a modest home. I attended Boston College where I received a BA in Political Science. I'm an operations analyst for a major transportation and leasing company and do some consulting on the side. I make a decent wage, enough that my wife can stay home with kids, but not enough that we don't occasionally find ourselves counting the pennies.

Before the kids came and my wife was working full time I dabbled in cars. First with a Mustang GT, then a Camaro SS, then an E46 BMW M3, then the GTO which is also when I started posting a lot on forums using the name NJGOAT. The GTO went away a couple years ago and I got into racing in the SCCA spec Miata class. I've also owned an Audi A4 and A6 as daily drivers. As we added kids I got rid of toys and settled down. I currently drive a Chevy Malibu and my wife has a minivan.

I'm 6'4" and a little on the heavy side and could stand to lose around 20 pounds. I wear glasses and my hair is a little thinner then it used to be. I like to work on my house, go bike riding with my kids, watch my son play sports. I enjoy the occasional video game and tend to watch the History Channel when nothing else is on. I also like to take my wife out dancing every couple months (she's good, I'm a clutz) and wish we could go more often. I also enjoy sports, mainly football and hockey, but have recently gotten more into baseball since my son has been playing.

I make no excuses about who I am, nor do I feel the need to prove myself to others. I'm happy with my life. How sad that with all your "momey" and intelligence, you feel the need to belittle me over something so trivial.

[SmilingWolf]

Originally Posted by NJGOAT

ROFLMAO, so nice that a wealthy and succesful global currency trader can take time away from making millions and driving his Porsche to insult poor, toothless, little old me. You're right, your guess was right on the "momey"...how sad that a currency trader can't spell "money", lol...and people wonder what's wrong with our economy.

I live in Southern New Jersey in a suburb of Philadelphia. I'm happily married, I have 3 awesome kids and a modest home. I attended Boston College where I received a BA in Political Science. I'm an operations analyst for a major transportation and leasing company and do some consulting on the side. I make a decent wage, enough that my wife can stay home with kids, but not enough that we don't occasionally find ourselves counting the pennies.

Before the kids came and my wife was working full time I dabbled in cars. First with a Mustang GT, then a Camaro SS, then an E46 BMW M3, then the GTO which is also when I started posting a lot on forums using the name NJGOAT. The GTO went away a couple years ago and I got into racing in the SCCA spec Miata class. I've also owned an Audi A4 and A6 as daily drivers. As we added kids I got rid of toys and settled down. I currently drive a Chevy Malibu and my wife has a minivan.

I'm 6'4" and a little on the heavy side and could stand to lose around 20 pounds. I wear glasses and my hair is a little thinner then it used to be. I like to work on my house, go bike riding with my kids, watch my son play sports. I enjoy the occasional video game and tend to watch the History Channel when nothing else is on. I also like to take my wife out dancing every couple months (she's good, I'm a clutz) and wish we could go more often. I also enjoy sports, mainly football and hockey, but have recently gotten more into baseball since my son has been playing.

I make no excuses about who I am, nor do I feel the need to prove myself to others. I'm happy with my life. How sad that with all your "momey" and intelligence, you feel the need to belittle me over something so trivial.

Actually, I trade the currency markets on a 24/5 cycle, taking catnaps along the way with lots of breaks. Most of the large scale, highly liquid trades take place in early morning to noon (Pacific Time) and then it slackens off a bit after that till the Japanese and Asian markets pick up around 5 pm PST.

I do concentrate heavily on market patterns and reversal points. But, I am capable of taking breaks and on some of those breaks, I will come across a site like your city-data, and all too often encounter a sad, pathetic little insect like yourself, and proceed to pull your wings off slowly.

I have a registered Mensa rating of over 168 and am quite capable of running circles around someone like you.

In an odd peculiar kind of way, it must be a simple, easy kind of life you lead, completely unemcumbered by any real degree of in-depth thought process.

You bore me, though. So, after this last message, I will put you and your irrelevent site in the spam folder. That translates to don't bother replying.

I have to move on to other more worthy insects for entertaiment during my breaks.

Have a pleasant little existence. Hillbilly.

[NJGOAT]

Originally Posted by SmilingWolf

Actually, I trade the currency markets on a 24/5 cycle, taking catnaps along the way with lots of breaks. Most of the large scale, highly liquid trades take place in early morning to noon (Pacific Time) and then it slackens off a bit after that till the Japanese and Asian markets pick up around 5 pm PST.

I do concentrate heavily on market patterns and reversal points. But, I am capable of taking breaks and on some of those breaks, I will come across a site like your city-data, and all too often encounter a sad, pathetic little insect like yourself, and proceed to pull your wings off slowly.

I have a registered Mensa rating of over 168 and am quite capable of running circles around someone like you.

In an odd peculiar kind of way, it must be a simple, easy kind of life you lead, completely unemcumbered by any real degree of in-depth thought process.

You bore me, though. So, after this last message, I will put you and your irrelevent site in the spam folder. That translates to don't bother replying.

I have to move on to other more worthy insects for entertaiment during my breaks.

Have a pleasant little existence. Hillbilly.

Ya'll come back now ya hear...we could use someone with one of them biggun brain thingy's now and then...

[erasure]

Oh my. I've been away only a couple of days and what do I see upon my return?
Anyway, since *pal* is back - here is the translation. I didn't have time to brush on it, so take it or leave it - I am not a professional translator you know...

The plight of German POWs in the USSR.

The subject of this article ( I gave it a title 'The Fate of the German POWs in the USSR) was regarded as "delicate" and obscure for long time in the USSR for the ideological reasons. It was not a common practice to discuss it other than for propaganda purpose both in the USSR and GDR. Up until now we don't have a written collection of the events, like, say the "Archipelago" that would reflect all the details and nuances of the life of the German POWs in the captivity. For some reason or the other it's left up to periodics instead of historians. At this point in time few Russian publishers ( Yauza- Press, Zentr-Poligraph) started publishing the translation of the war veterans memoirs, including the POWs of the Eastern front. Germany has so-called 'KGB-Reihe' (Reihe Kriegsgefangenenberichte) - the sequel of stories written by the POWS, that's published by the private publishers. There are some translated works as well ( from English and German) that reach the Russian readers in limited editions.

Short reference and statistics.

The first mass surrender ( about 100,000 soldiers and officers) took place at Stalingrad. The Soviet civil and police authorities were at loss; they didn't know what to do with a huge crowd of hungry, rundown and sick people; where to find food for them all, how to shelter them. The marches of 20-30 km in winter time, lodging под открытым небом, the useless fight with lice and practically no adequate warm food brought the death of German POWS on massive scale. No surprise, that out of 94000 "Stalingradians" only 6,000 survived. By the most optimistic calculations that if only 3,000,000,000 German POWs went in Russian captivity, only 1,000,000,000 of them returned home. That means two thirds of them died in captivity from cold, hunger and infectious diseases.
With the increase of numbers of POWs as the war was nearing to the end, the GULAG was accumulating more and more "German," "Romanian" and other camps from Volga region to Ural.
On one hand in the country still at war the famous poem-slogan of Ilya Ehrenburg "As many times you see the enemy, as many times kill him" was still in effect, on another hand - the ideas of humane treatment of the POWs and feeding them while there was not enough of food for the Russian population, were in place as well. These controversial ideas had hard time to coexist in the heads of the guards and the NKVD soldiers, so there were plenty of crimes committed against the POWs. Some crimes were committed as intentional, some - because of the negligence, starting from theft of the POWs food ( and reselling it on the black market,) and finishing with not providing the water to POWs during the week-long conveyance/railing.
In the first two years of war the status of POW was equal to death sentence. Their camps were built in the same manner as GULAG camps. According to that practice, everyone was forced to go to work, until people were dying.
As Klaus Fritzshe a former radio operator, who went through a dozen of camps from 1942 to 1948 recalls in his memoirs, the life of a German POWS in the former USSR depended on few factors, such as;

1.Political and ideological stand of the Soviet government towards the POWs.
2. The standards of living of the local population.
3. The food ration.
4. The discipline and honesty of the supervisors.
5. The type of work the POWs were performing.
6.The ability to obtain food on top of the ration.

In 1945-49 Soviet Authorities agreed to repatriate part of the POWs, first of all - the sick and unable to work. However at the end of the forties the situation changed drastically; the POWs were not allowed to leave any longer, and many of those remained in Russia were accused of war crimes. The Soviet military law sentenced many of them to 25 years in labor camps. The Soviet government explained to allies such severity of punishment by the necessity to rebuild the country with the help of the German soldiers, who destroyed it.
The spy-mania, the search of the covert criminals of the Reich and denunciation in German camps had reached its peak. For example the fate of the war criminal has befall Erich Hartman, the ace fighter, whose only crime was 352 destroyed Soviet aircrafts. He was accused as a war criminal only after he refused to cooperate with the "Free Germany" committee. Hartmann returned back to Germany only in 1955.
There was a small group of Hitler's soldiers with famous field-marshal Paulus in charge, that agreed to cooperate with the Soviet government under the umbrella of the anti-fascist committee "Free Germany.' By the way it's a not a well-known fact, but when Paulus has been asked during the Nuremberg process about the life in Soviet captivity, he didn't say anything in response. He didn't want to lie about the "POW's heaven," yet at the same time he couldn't tell the truth, without endangering himself and others. In exchange for the best food rations and the supervising positions in the camps, many of these POWs found themselves in a "golden cage." The Soviets were not in a hurry to let them go home, because they needed them for the propaganda reasons. Even Paulus, in spite of all his requests to be sent to work to a newly-organized GDR, has made it there not earlier than October 1953.
The overall picture might be better understood through the concise examples; the plight of people I've personally met was indicative of the life of German POWs in the USSR in general.

1. One of them was the former radio-operator of Heinkel He 111 bomber Klaus Fritzsche, who spent his life in captivity from 1942 to 1948, and who presently lives in Weimer. He was gunned down during his third mission over the Kaspian Sea and was captured by the fishermen. He went through a dozen of labor camps from Astraknan to Gorkiy, where he worked at a tank-building factory, he worked as a member of fishing crew as well as demolition worker, while accumulating a vast experience of the Gulag life. He was falsely accused by someone in SA (Sturmabteilungen) membership and therefore was kept in captivity for long time, while his captors were trying to extort a confession from him, and simultaneously, trying to turn him into anti-fascist. Klaus Fritzsche could have spent much longer time in captivity, but he managed to simulate heart problems and was repatriated to Germany according to decision of the camp administration.
( I've found on-line a book written by Fritzsche, but it's in German of course.)
Das Ziel - Überleben: Sechs Jahre hinter Stacheldraht: Amazon.de: Claus Fritzsche: Bücher


2. My second acquaintance who went through captivity in the USSR was Herbert Bamberg from Dusseldorf. He went practically through the whole war on the Eastern front as anti-aircraft gunner, assigned to the 12th Tank Army. He fought in Rzhev, in Caucasus and in the Crimea. He was captured in September 1944, after the defeat of the Army Group "South" near Kishinev. Ваmberg spent only a year in a camp by Ulyanovsk, but this year has almost become the last one in his life. Within the nine months that he spent in the camp, out of 2400 POWs only 400 survived. May be that was the reason why he was repatriated with the first wave - already in August of 1945 he was shipped to Germany.

3. Berliner Hans-Armin Schutz (emigrated to the US in 1951) who served as corporal in Wermacht communication support and was captured during the battle near Berlin in April of 1948. He spent three years in POWs camp near Saratov, where he went through typhus, dystrophy, famine and hard labor at Saratov and Engels factories. He lived through few major positive changes, when he was promoted as a foreman of POWs working crew, but he knew the pitfalls as well, when for unknown to him reasons he was the only one who was singled out in a group of sick, emaciated prisoners destined for repatriation and he was returned to camp. He got back on the repatriation list only in 1948.

The Jurisdictional ground for treatment of Soviet POWs and POWs of the Third Reich.

The official mutual agreement regarding the treatment of POWs between Russians and Germans was practically non-existent. The USSR refused to acknowledge the enactment of Geneva conference of 1864, although the Soviets did announce that they've intended to adhere to its basic provisions. So basically, Stalin didn't officially promise to protect the life of German prisoners and he didn't expect any protection for his soldiers either. What was even worse, the Supreme High Command General Headquarters issued an order on August 16 1941, declaring all captured Russian soldiers as traitors and cowards. On another hand, Stalin's order ( from 1942?) to spare the lives of German soldiers and officers was in place.

The nutrition guidance

According to nutrition guidance for German POWs, established by the order of NKVD USSR on the 13th of October, 1941, each POW was supposed to receive 700 grams of bread, 100 grams of fish and seafood, and 25 grams of meat and meat products.
At the beginning Claus got lucky when he was shipped to the camp near Astrakhan, where in the morning he was getting half-kilo of porridge and 200 grams of bread. For dinner the prisoners were served with a liter of soup with lamb meat or fish, half-kilo of porridge from different kind of grains with bread and compote. The supper again consisted of a liter of soup and bread.
Then he was transferred to a camp near Krasnoarmeysk, where he was given only bread, salted fish and boiled water. There he has lost 26 kilos and was transferred to a dystrophy ward.
The soldier of German air defense forces, Herbert Bamberg who spent about a year in a labor camp near Ulyanovsk, was writing as well about the dismal cases of starvation death in his book. In the camp where he stayed, the prisoners were given once a day only a liter of soup, half-ladle of porridge and small piece of bread. Out of 2400 Germans who arrived there in October 1944, only 400 people returned to Germany in August of 1945. They looked like walking skeletons.

In spite of the initially established nutrition guidelines that were fluctuating up and down according to the new NKVD orders, the living conditions of POWs differed from camp to camp, so the survival rate was different as the result of it.
Often, in absence of required products, they were substituted with bread.
This is how it looked;
Required product; Substitute
50 gr. meat 150 gr. bread.
20 gr. fat 80 grams of bread.
120 gr. grain 200 grams of bread
100 vegetables 100 grams of bread.

The German POWs opinion about the country of their captivity.

The moral principles of German soldiers who lived through the war were harshly tested as much as their bodies. Claus Fritzsche is witnessing, that those who survived the captivity were often not of the highest moral standards, but people who were able to walk over the dead bodies of the their fellow soldiers.
The extreme situation was testing everyone, and Herbert Bamberg told that his neighbors took away all his undergarments, when he was too weak to defend himself. He was the kind of person that would share the last piece of bread with his friend. It's necessary to note, that until now Mr. Bamberg still couldn't decide for himself whether the camp administration was hoping that all POWs would die from cold and thus planned it intentionally. However he agrees that most likely the population of Ulyanovsk was starving as well.

German soldiers express their appreciation to many people who were part of camps management and security, and who were guided by their sense of humanity, rather than rules and regulations. The Germans knew very well that the events were taking place during Stalin's regime and the unsanctioned relations between the POWs and civil or military Soviet personnel were persecuted as betrayal on their part. On another hand, Germans were sick and tired of the Soviet system, dealing with the social and economic side of it. They've condemned it for the ruthless exploitation of people in the name of ideology. As Claus Fritzsche recalled, his German crew was digging a trench half of a month, while the broken excavator was standing by. It would have taken only a couple of days to accomplish the task with the help of the working equipment.
Very soon the Germans stopped being surprised by the crop theft from the kolhoz fields that the peasants ( and POWs themselves) were involved in. As Hans-Armin Schutz writes in his memoirs, the complex and expensive machinery that Russians carted out of Germany was rusting under the rain, while the POWs had to unload and carry the heavy equipment with their bare hands. This was a harsh and time-consuming process, all while the factory had a lifting apparatus, that could have speedup up a process immensely, if it were tuned and set up properly. Germans learned as well to hate the ostentatious style of Soviet political slogans, such as "The 1948 is the year of repatriation to Germany." Practically none of the POWs from that particular camp went home that year.

Claus Fritzsche writes in his memoirs with sincere warmth about the "Russian soul," the women, and Soviet people in general, whose compassion and support helped him along the way.
The Soviet propaganda was methodically painting Germans as animals in a human disguise for a long time, creating an overly negative attitude among the Russian population towards them.
As Claus recalls, once during his work assignment in a village, an older Russian woman didn't believe him that he was a German. "How can you be German" she said, "when you don't have horns?"

Source;
Êóçèí Äìèòðèé Ìèõàéëîâè÷. Íåìåöêèå âîåííîïëåííûå â Ñîâåòñêîì Ñîþçå

Now hold it, I am about to share my thoughts...