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.
Do you really think that the heroism of the Soviet people can be justified by the threat of execution? You simply deny the heroism of the masses and the steadfastness of the Soviet people. this is a naive opinion. If you study the history of Russia, it always happened like this. We are the ancestors of the Scythians and Sarmatians, and have our city destroyed without looking back, under the threat of seizure. So they were built again. so it was with Moscow, under Napoleon. I advise you to read the reports from the front of 1941-45. as well as the Allied Command and Presidents. This war was not for Stalin or communism. She was for survival, her native land and her people. Therefore, the period from 1941-45 we called the fatherland. The Soviet people showed not only military feats, but also labor. Many planes were superior to the German ones, and there were a lot of them for the Germans. Tanks were built 20 times faster than Hitler thought. The Germans were stopped immediately, as soon as they entered the territory of the USSR. But, the defenders' command was young. since many experienced tsarist officers were shot during the civil war. Meanwhile, many fortifications lasted longer than the whole of Europe. For example, the Brest Fortress (it's only 8000 original numbers of Russian soldiers) could not take longer than France or Poland, while the Germans suffered more losses for the whole company in France. The fight to the last soldier is also because of death threats from the NKVD? Even in the environment, the Russians fought with great perseverance. In Europe, with the threat of encirclement, the soldiers immediately surrendered. In the USSR this did not work. It's easier to think so in the West than to acknowledge the obvious fact. And on the eastern front where Germany (soldiers of all Wehrmacht troops) suffered more than 75 percent of all losses, British pilots did not fight, like other allies.
The naval fleet of the USSR was at its height. As for the convoys of cargo from the United States. The first most of them were accompanied by the Soviet guards. The second-lend lyse First osered was for Britain. Britain, which hid on its islands. The third thing that got the ussr, most of it was old and necessary repairs. in the fourth consignment of leasing, less than 3 percent of the total production of the ussr. so that this could not change significantly the situation. but in a difficult moment. any help is needed. for all the so-called help. so do not say nonsense. the USSR would never speak German. And the largest production in the history of mankind was created in the USSR during the great national war. not in the United States.
So if the Soviet Union lost the war, it would all talk to German people including the United States of course.
The blockade of Leningrad lasted three years, but the city did not give up. Do you really think that without your stew, the Soviet people would surrender? I do not want to belittle the exploits of the British sailors, we remember that. But it was more for them. Britain and the United States saved hundreds of thousands of their soldiers and brought great profits for their countries. This was the land of liz.
This topic, about France 1939. back to it.
I don't doubt the heroism of the Soviet people, but some of your assertions are woefully inaccurate.
1. "The largest production in the history of mankind was created in the USSR during the great national war..." Well, that's patently untrue; the current GDP of the US far exceeds that of either the USSR or the USA during the war. In any case, while it is true that the USSR's production exceeded that of the US in some areas, such as total production of artillery and tanks, the US production far outstripped that of the USSR in areas such as aircraft and ships. The USSR built 2 battleships and 0 carriers, for instance. The US produced 8 battleships and 48 carriers. The focus of production obviously was different since the US was fighting a two-front war against both Germany and Japan and required more air and sea power, but it's certainly not fair to say that the USSR's production was greater than that of the US.
2. "The Germans were stopped immediately, as soon as they entered the territory of the USSR." Really? That's not how I remember the history of the war. The border of the USSR was the Volga River during the war? There were German troops attacking the "border town" of Stalingrad, don't forget. Obviously, the Germans advanced hundreds of miles into Soviet territory and were actually within sight of the Kremlin when they were stopped.
3. "In Europe, with the threat of encirclement, the soldiers immediately surrendered. In the USSR this did not work." The Battle of Smolensk - over 300,000 Soviet soldiers taken prisoner. Other locations in the initial Barbarossa attack led to similar results. Soviet soldiers certainly surrendered when their situation was hopeless, no less so than any other country's soldiers. Only the Japanese were well noted for refusing to surrender.
I don't mean to belittle the contribution of the USSR to the defeat of Nazi Germany. Obviously Hitler would not have been defeated without the USSR. You seem to want to belittle the contributions of the other allies, though. In reality the invasion of Russia was a near thing; it could have succeeded had Hitler been able to bring more force to bear. Without the funneling of resources to defend France and Western Europe and engage the Battle of Britain, it is entirely possible that the invasion could have succeeded. Further pressure in Africa and then of course with the Normandy invasion also helped turn the tide.
Of course, one might also wonder how things might have gone differently had the USSR not initially signed the nonaggression pact with the Nazis and instead at least maintained the threat of military action in the east. Perhaps the attack on France would have gone differently? Perhaps Hitler would not have attacked Poland? Who knows. The history of WWII is quite complicated, and we should be wary of trying to make it simplistic like you seem to be trying to do with your USSR won the war and the other allies didn't really do anything line of thought.
Maybe this effected not just the British and French armies in WW2, but I wonder if it was possibly responsible for the terrible showing of the Italians in WW2? After the ELEVEN failed Battles of Isonzo in WW1, where for 2 years the Italians launched attacks against the outnumbered Austrians, for the most part unsuccessfully and with heavy losses. Then, the 12th Battle of Isonzo resulted in a major Italian defeat with over 300,000 losses in dead, wounded and POW and the Italians were pushed back toward Venice. Not surprisingly this may have played a role with Italian army morale in WW2.
The poor showing of the Italians in WWII was nothing but because of that they weren't given the tools to do any better. Strip a WWII US division of 80% its artillery, 70% of its ammunition, 70% of its heavy weapons including machine guns and 90% of its motor transport, and you will have nothing but an unruly mob unable to perform anything else but sentry duty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LINative
I did not know that Rommel fought the Italians in WW1! Kind of ironic considering his role alongside the Italians in WW2.
Nothing more ironic than Mannerheim, a former general in the Russian Army being the commander-in-chief of the Finnish Army in WWII.
This war was not for Stalin or communism. She was for survival, her native land and her people. Therefore, the period from 1941-45 we called the fatherland. The Soviet people showed not only military feats, but also labor. Many planes were superior to the German ones, and there were a lot of them for the Germans. Tanks were built 20 times faster than Hitler thought.
I don't doubt the heroism of the Soviet people, but some of your assertions are woefully inaccurate.
1. "The largest production in the history of mankind was created in the USSR during the great national war..." Well, that's patently untrue; the current GDP of the US far exceeds that of either the USSR or the USA during the war. In any case, while it is true that the USSR's production exceeded that of the US in some areas, such as total production of artillery and tanks, the US production far outstripped that of the USSR in areas such as aircraft and ships. The USSR built 2 battleships and 0 carriers, for instance. The US produced 8 battleships and 48 carriers. The focus of production obviously was different since the US was fighting a two-front war against both Germany and Japan and required more air and sea power, but it's certainly not fair to say that the USSR's production was greater than that of the US.
2. "The Germans were stopped immediately, as soon as they entered the territory of the USSR." Really? That's not how I remember the history of the war. The border of the USSR was the Volga River during the war? There were German troops attacking the "border town" of Stalingrad, don't forget. Obviously, the Germans advanced hundreds of miles into Soviet territory and were actually within sight of the Kremlin when they were stopped.
3. "In Europe, with the threat of encirclement, the soldiers immediately surrendered. In the USSR this did not work." The Battle of Smolensk - over 300,000 Soviet soldiers taken prisoner. Other locations in the initial Barbarossa attack led to similar results. Soviet soldiers certainly surrendered when their situation was hopeless, no less so than any other country's soldiers. Only the Japanese were well noted for refusing to surrender.
I don't mean to belittle the contribution of the USSR to the defeat of Nazi Germany. Obviously Hitler would not have been defeated without the USSR. You seem to want to belittle the contributions of the other allies, though. In reality the invasion of Russia was a near thing; it could have succeeded had Hitler been able to bring more force to bear. Without the funneling of resources to defend France and Western Europe and engage the Battle of Britain, it is entirely possible that the invasion could have succeeded. Further pressure in Africa and then of course with the Normandy invasion also helped turn the tide.
Of course, one might also wonder how things might have gone differently had the USSR not initially signed the nonaggression pact with the Nazis and instead at least maintained the threat of military action in the east. Perhaps the attack on France would have gone differently? Perhaps Hitler would not have attacked Poland? Who knows. The history of WWII is quite complicated, and we should be wary of trying to make it simplistic like you seem to be trying to do with your USSR won the war and the other allies didn't really do anything line of thought.
Saying that the Germans were stopped at the borders of the USSR, this is my English fence.
it was said that he was stopped until all the units were destroyed.
P.S.The Germans were 30 kilometers from Moscow later.
In the summer of 1941 the Wehrmacht, having inflicted a number of heavy defeats of the Red Army, still could not achieve decisive successes. From the first day of the war, she began to destroy punctually painted German plans. 485 border guards underwent a sudden attack, and none of them surrendered to the enemy. Many fighters were surrounded, but fought to the last possible. The 41st division together with the border guards held Rava-Russian for five days. A serious blow to the German troops was inflicted in the region of Peremyshl. Captured by the enemy on the night of June 23, he was released by the 99th Infantry Division and held until June 28.
For a whole month the Soviet troops heroically defended Brest. yes, 500 people were captured. Do you understand the difference? captured or surrendered. they slept in their barracks at this time, so they were in their underpants. After that the Germans could not take the fortress for more than a month. The Germans suffered more losses than the whole company in France. There were 8,000 who were the defenders of Brest (now 7500). human.
Millions of Soviet people fought heroically with the enemy. "The troops of the 3rd Panzer Group," wrote General Gott in July 1941, "suffered heavy losses. The moral spirit of the personnel is suppressed ... The enemy appears everywhere and fiercely defends. " Guderian in his "The experience of war with Russia" wrote that Russian generals and soldiers "did not lose their presence of spirit even in the most difficult situation of 1941".
General Blumentritt was amazed at what the German army in Russia had encountered: "The behavior of the Russian troops even in the first battles was in striking contrast to the behavior of the Poles and the Western allies in defeat. Even in the environment, the Russians continued to fight stubbornly. " Halder in the first weeks of the war wrote in the "Military Diary": "It should be noted the persistence of Russian units in battle. There were cases when the garrisons of the pillboxes refused to surrender, they blew themselves up along with the pillboxes. " The officer of the 18th Panzer Army of the Wehrmacht noted with alarming surprise: "Despite the fact that we are moving for considerable distances, there is no feeling that we entered the defeated country that we experienced in France. Instead, it is resistance, resistance, no matter how hopeless it may seem. "
Is it possible to somehow reconcile these eloquent testimony of German generals and officers and many of the facts cited above with the vile inventions of the West that "millions of soldiers and commanders have passed over to the Germans with weapons in their hands"?
The Germans could not destroy the main forces of the Red Army west of the Dnieper, which was the main goal of the Barbarossa plan. They are surrounded by a number of Soviet divisions, but those in the environment continued to fight desperately. Our soldiers, the leading unequal battles with the enemy and even know that they are certain to perish, fought to the last possible. Without this holy faith, we would not have won. this is the main reason for victory. Have the Allies fought so and where and when? Would you like to give examples of allies' conspiracy? This applies to both wars in Africa and not only. After these arrangements, the military units of the Germans, who fought with the allies, unexpectedly cease fighting and moved to the eastern front, where the Red Army had to fight. Or you do not know about it? Of course, I respect all veterans of the Allies. They did not sit at home like most. But the allies were not led by a paramount goal. they were not going to win and give their lives for victory. Their goal was economic and political benefits. Therefore, in 1944 the United States entered the war and opened a second front. Not when the USSR needed assistance in 1941,1942,1943 there were many appeals to the Allies.
Result? Zero.
When, the USSR did not need help anymore, the Allies opened a second front. While the Red Army again suffered great losses, because it began the attack ahead of time. so that the Allies could land in Normandy. 170 Wehrmacht of the most prepared divisions at this moment the Red Army took over.
These were the words of the Germans. Now the words of the Allies:
No government could resist such terrible severe wounds that Hitler inflicted on Russia. But the Soviets not only survived and recovered from these wounds, but also inflicted on the German army a blow of such power that no other army in the world could inflict on it.
The monstrous machine of fascist power was broken by the superiority of the Russian maneuver, Russian valor, Soviet military science and the excellent leadership of Soviet generals.
In addition to the Soviet armies, there was no such force that could break the ridge of the Hitler war machine ...
It was the Russian army that released the guts from the German war machine ....
PRIME MINISTER OF THE GREAT BRITAIN Winston CHURCHILL.
Only the heroic resistance of the Soviet Union saved the allies from the shameful separate peace with Germany SECRETARY OF THE USA CORDELL HELL.
The American people should not forget that in 1942 he was not far from the disaster. If the Soviet Union could not retain its front, the Germans would have the opportunity to seize Britain. They could also capture Africa, and in this case they could create their own bridgehead in Latin America ....
US SECRETARY SECRETARY EDWARD STETTINIUS.
US PRESIDENT FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT:
From the point of view of the big strategy ... it is difficult to escape from the obvious fact that Russian armies destroy more soldiers and weapons of the enemy than all the other 25 united nations together ... (telegram to General D. MacArthur on May 6, 1942).
Under the leadership of Marshal Joseph Stalin, the Russian people showed an example of love for their homeland, firmness of spirit and self-sacrifice, which the world did not yet know. After the war, our country will always be happy to maintain good-neighborly relations and sincere friendship with Russia, whose people, saving themselves, help save the whole world from the Nazi threat (July 28, 1943). It's funny, but in 1946, the US place with Europe creates a plan to destroy the USSR.
There are many other almost all generals of the Allies who also noted and evaluated what the Soviet people did.
I think their words will be more believable and have more weight than discussing on this forum anyone.
And than any of today's Western propaganda, which grows young people in Western countries on false history textbooks. I'm not talking about the brazen falsifications that create such funds as Soras.
In addition, you must understand.
That the Fascists are not with the Red Army.
They fought against the Soviet people. The people won the war, not the army.
In Europe, this was not, so they surrendered so quickly.
If someone says about Lend Liz again. Then you forget one important feature. Lend Liz was needed, since no one knew how long the war could last, but it was not necessary.
For the reason that Stalin in 1937 began to create state. reserve. That's why in the years after the war. of these reserves was restored the USSR. from these stocks were restored such countries as Germany, Poland and others. This reserve exists today, unlike other countries, where it does not exist.
For example, when Hurricane Katrina arrived. Food and stuff were taken from the Reserve of Russia. not USA. you probably do not even know about it.
In the US, the reserve is simply money. In Russia, the reserve is delivered food and essentials. In the USA reserve is just money. In Russia, not only money.
in Russia it is raw materials for the production of all major plants, fuel, food, grain, water, machinery, cars, and everything that is necessary for the life and existence of the country and the population for 3 years. All this is in different parts of Russia. In cases of disaster or war. and this is so since 1937.
Last edited by GreyKarast; 11-15-2017 at 09:57 AM..
As for production. Do you judge based on United States data? Perhaps you are right, but this is a controversial issue.
For the period from 1924 to 1941, that is, over 17 years, 12,500 large industrial enterprises were built and put into operation in the USSR, including 9,000 during the fulfillment of the five-year plans for the development of the national economy of the USSR, and the Stalin five-year plans. Thanks to these factories, the USSR won the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945.
During the Great Patriotic War, the USSR produced weapons twice as much as Germany, along with all the Europe that worked for it.
Here you are right, in fact, fascist power forged in the US. It was the US that received the assets of many leading German enterprises, which was defeated in the First World War, weakened by the economic crisis of the 1920s and the payment of bonded reparations, could not resist them.
Having received assets, it was the US that invested colossal funds in industry and the financial system of Hitler's Germany, the Nazi party of the NSDAP and personally Adolf Hitler. Even after the US joined the Second World War on December 11, 1941, American corporations continued to actively fulfill orders and actively supported the activities of their branches in Germany. No doubt, these corporations enjoyed the full support of the US government, which sought to ensure that the Russians and Germans had the maximum possible losses. The US president only regulated which producers of Germany to direct the largest cash flows, and on December 13, 1941 issued a decree allowing the Americans to conduct business jointly with enemy companies.
American investments were directed primarily to the machine building, automotive, electrical, aviation, oil, chemical and other industries of military importance. American corporations supplied Germany with steel, engines, aviation fuel, rubber, components for radio engineering, etc. For example, the American monopoly Standard Oil, which owns the Rockefellers family, which produced, transported, refined and marketed petroleum products, even during the war regularly supplied Hitlerite Germany with fuel and synthetic rubber. While in the United States there were problems with the supply of synthetic rubber for American industry, the German industry did not know such problems. Aircraft Luftwaffe refueled with gasoline produced by an American corporation.
In this, the help for the USSR was not contested
Is not it?
If the United States did not support Germany, how long would the war last?
I think no more than 2(2WW) weeks. But you are talking about some incomprehensible maneuvers in Africa, which were only for seizing the resources of the African countries for themselves.
This is not so, since the war lasted 1941-1945 with the USSR. In the summer, too, did the General Winter help all four years? so this is the Delusion created in the West, to belittle the Red Army. And to justify the collapse of fascist Germany. As well as with Napoleon.
Let's return to the flow.
I do not want to pollute this stream any more. If you want to talk on this topic, you can create a thread.
Are we back to discussing the Russian Front with Ivan, what happened to this topic?
GreyKarast you have some interesting and amusing comments but it's hard to follow, you are covering too much material.
One question then from me as a milsurp gun collector since we are off the topic charts: Why did you Russians cover up your captured German K98's with such crappy shellac when my Russian Mosin Nagent from 1935 has this beautiful shellac finish still.
Well. The shellac is just a preservative like cosmoline. I guess it could be removed carefully with acetone. Some hardcore RC collectors prefer the shellac in any condition as it preserves the historical accuracy of a weapon that was seized on the battlefield sometimes from dead German soldiers.
So, right after I remind you all to remain on the topic of France, not Russia .. you go and keep talking about Russia.
This is seriously the last warning to get back on topic, if you continue you will force me to issue infractions.
I'd address some of the claims made here as they seem ... well, ridiculous really, but I'd be a part of the hijack then.
Yac.
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.
