Another Article for Students of the Eastern Front

Discussion in 'The Eastern Front' started by Gerard, Apr 19, 2006.

  1. Gerard

    Gerard Seelow/Prora

  2. Gnomey

    Gnomey World Travelling Doctor

    Interesting Gotthard. There is also this presentation that covers the whole of the war on the Eastern Front (not in that much detail): http://english.pobediteli.ru/
     
  3. Za Rodinu

    Za Rodinu Hot air manufacturer

  4. jimbotosome

    jimbotosome Discharged

    That David Glantz dude is wacked out. He is a pretty poor historian. He states that among the battlefields that Kasserine was the "revealing" of the American policy for WWII. Someone ought to tell him that at Kasserine Pass, the Americans were under British control. Some other crazy claims:

    -He also claims that the weather repeadedly frustrating the German aims was a Myth. Is he talking about the Soviet Army and the war on the Eastern Front in WWII or some other war?

    -He claims the Soviets didn't have numerical superiority. Again we are talking about WWII? They started virtually every battle with a signficant numerical advantage in men, tanks and artillery, though he might be right if he is referring to immediately after the battle. He didn't specify that.

    -He claims the Lend lease was critical for Soviet victory. Without it collapse might have ensured is a myth. Stalin was the one that said that, not the US. Does Glantz know more about the Soviets in WWII than Stalin did?

    -He claims that Soviet manpower resources were inexhaustible, hence the Soviets continually ignored human losses was a myth. Does he know how many of the Soviets were killed in battle or surrendered in at the first sign of attack of the enemy. Someone is off in the weeds. Either Glantz or the German soldiers that reported their memoirs in books on the eastern front. That's a toughie!

    Last time I heard of someone so infactuated with the Soviet Union was Lee Harvey Oswald and I believe he was the first US defector to the Soviet Union before he was rejected by the Soviets and shot John F Kennedy. Both of them were in the US military but this Glantz guy seems flat crazy by comparison. Interesting...
     
  5. Exxley

    Exxley Senior Member

    That David Glantz dude is wacked out. He is a pretty poor historian. He states that among the battlefields that Kasserine was the "revealing" of the American policy for WWII. Someone ought to tell him that at Kasserine Pass, the Americans were under British control. Some other crazy claims:

    -He also claims that the weather repeadedly frustrating the German aims was a Myth. Is he talking about the Soviet Army and the war on the Eastern Front in WWII or some other war?

    -He claims the Soviets didn't have numerical superiority. Again we are talking about WWII? They started virtually every battle with a signficant numerical advantage in men, tanks and artillery, though he might be right if he is referring to immediately after the battle. He didn't specify that.

    -He claims the Lend lease was critical for Soviet victory. Without it collapse might have ensured is a myth. Stalin was the one that said that, not the US. Does Glantz know more about the Soviets in WWII than Stalin did?

    -He claims that Soviet manpower resources were inexhaustible, hence the Soviets continually ignored human losses was a myth. Does he know how many of the Soviets were killed in battle or surrendered in at the first sign of attack of the enemy. Someone is off in the weeds. Either Glantz or the German soldiers that reported their memoirs in books on the eastern front. That's a toughie!

    Last time I heard of someone so infactuated with the Soviet Union was Lee Harvey Oswald and I believe he was the first US defector to the Soviet Union before he was rejected by the Soviets and shot John F Kennedy. Both of them were in the US military but this Glantz guy seems flat crazy by comparison. Interesting...

    Interesting thing, except that it only shows that some people out there really needs some reading courses.

    I will suggest interested readers to take a look at what Glantz really says and compare it with what our local reading expert wrote :

    The dominant role of German source materials in shaping American perceptions of the war on the Eastern Front and the negative perception of Soviet source materials have had an indelible impact on the American image of war on the Eastern Front. What has resulted in a series of gross judgments treated as truths regarding operations in the East and Soviet (Red) Army combat performance. The gross judgments appear repeatedly in textbooks and all types of historical works, and they are persistent in the extreme. Each lies someplace between the realm of myth and reality. In summary, a few of these judgments are as follows:
    - Weather repeatedly frustrated the fulfillment of German operational aims.
    - Soviet forces throughout the war in virtually every operation possessed significant or overwhelming numerical superiority.
    - Soviet manpower resources were inexhaustible, hence the Soviets continually ignored human losses.
    - Soviet strategic and high level operational leadership was superb. However, lower level leadership (corps and below) was uniformly dismal.
    - Soviet planning was rigid, and the execution of plans at every level was inflexible and unimaginative.
    - Wherever possible, the Soviets relied for success on mass rather than maneuver. Envelopment operations were avoided whenever possible.
    - The Soviets operated in two echelons, never cross attached units, and attacked along straight axes.
    - Lend lease was critical for Soviet victory. Without it collapse might have ensured.
    - Hitler was the cause of virtually all German defeats. Army expertise produced earlier victories (a variation of the post World War I stab in the back. legend).
    - The stereotypical Soviet soldier was capable of enduring great suffering and hardship, fatalistic, dogged in defense (in particular in bridgeheads), a master of infiltration and night fighting, but inflexible, unimaginative, emotional and prone to panic in the face of uncertainty.
     
  6. Gerard

    Gerard Seelow/Prora

    Yeah I love that one about Envelopment operations being avoided. Just what exactly was the surrounding of 6th Army at Stalingrad or indeed how did so many German Units end up as "roving pockets" following Soviet Attacks. They were well capable of envelopment operations. Jimbo, first of all he didnt say they were completely false. He said that "Each lies someplace between the realms of myht and reality".

    The weather did not completely impede the Germans in the East. Yes it was a factor but not to the extent that the German Memoirs would have us believe. As I have stated before two sides were fighting in the same weather and the Russians just happened to fight better and were smarter than the Germans in that they knew what was coming. I dont accept the premise that the weather was the only reason the Germans lost at Moscow and Stalingrad. The Germans were only 28km from Red Square at one point but in no way were strong enough to take the capital. It certainly impeded their advance and indeed hampered their ability to fight but doesnt that make the Russians smarter? Who is stupid enough to invade Russia and not bring Winter Clothes?
     
  7. Gerard

    Gerard Seelow/Prora

    "Military planners and the general public alike were transfixed by foreign locales such as Tobruk, El Alamein, Oran, Kasserine, Palermo, Salerno, and Anzio where America's military strategy unfolded. " This is the quote that Jimbo is referring to I believe. You know why he mentions these battles Jimbo?? Because up to June 1944 these were the only battles against the Germans that the Western Allies were involved in!!!! America's strategy unfolded in places like these because this is were the Allies Fought the Germans!! Are you denying Kasserine????? Kasserine was a valuable lesson for the US. After it they never lost a battle in the Med to the Germans. Kasserine showed the Americans how inflexible their command Structure was and also showed up Frendendall to be incompetant. A certain chap named Patton got the job I believe :) and the rest IS history. So please, no dissing Kasserine. Even in Defeat valuable lessons can be learned. By the way, Glantz's point about Kasserine and the rest is that Western Planners were obviously too preoccupied with Western Battles to notice what was happening in the East.
     
  8. Za Rodinu

    Za Rodinu Hot air manufacturer

    I can't understand your patience with these kind of people. Why do you waste time responding to him? This fellow is immature, crass, insulting, attention-seeking, pigeon-holed, destructive, utterly repetitive and above all, boring.

    The only result is that discussions get sidetracked and go down the drain, and the only person happy in the end is him. I think the definition below is appropriate.

    "In Internet terminology a troll is someone who comes into an established community such as an online discussion forum, and posts inflammatory, rude or offensive messages designed to annoy and antagonize the existing members or disrupt the flow of discussion." in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

    "Don't Feed the Troll" essentially means to not satisfy a troller by posting a response to his troll. If you do post a response, you have been trolled and this satisfies the troller's lust for conflict." in http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=705934


    [​IMG]
     
  9. Exxley

    Exxley Senior Member

    I can't understand your patience with these kind of people. Why do you waste time responding to him? This fellow is immature, crass, insulting, attention-seeking, pigeon-holed, destructive, utterly repetitive and above all, boring.

    The only result is that discussions get sidetracked and go down the drain, and the only person happy in the end is him. I think the definition below is appropriate.

    "In Internet terminology a troll is someone who comes into an established community such as an online discussion forum, and posts inflammatory, rude or offensive messages designed to annoy and antagonize the existing members or disrupt the flow of discussion." in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

    "Don't Feed the Troll" essentially means to not satisfy a troller by posting a response to his troll. If you do post a response, you have been trolled and this satisfies the troller's lust for conflict." in http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=705934


    [​IMG]

    Well, old habits never die unfortunately I might say. Harassing the trolls/neo-nazis/whiners was quite a successful tactic on the History Channel, but I have to confess that this one troll is even more trolly than what I have seen so far. Usually those dumbwits tend to stick to just one kind of topic where they had some kind of knowledge (see the posts made by AntiComm, D./onara/whateverhisnickwas, Confucius on the THC for instance). I guess that the behaviour of this one troll can be explained by the fact that he obviously doesnt know anything at all about the topic at hand.
     
  10. von Poop

    von Poop Adaministrator Admin

  11. jimbotosome

    jimbotosome Discharged

    Yeah I love that one about Envelopment operations being avoided. Just what exactly was the surrounding of 6th Army at Stalingrad or indeed how did so many German Units end up as "roving pockets" following Soviet Attacks. They were well capable of envelopment operations. Jimbo, first of all he didnt say they were completely false. He said that "Each lies someplace between the realms of myht and reality".

    The weather did not completely impede the Germans in the East. Yes it was a factor but not to the extent that the German Memoirs would have us believe. As I have stated before two sides were fighting in the same weather and the Russians just happened to fight better and were smarter than the Germans in that they knew what was coming. I dont accept the premise that the weather was the only reason the Germans lost at Moscow and Stalingrad. The Germans were only 28km from Red Square at one point but in no way were strong enough to take the capital. It certainly impeded their advance and indeed hampered their ability to fight but doesnt that make the Russians smarter? Who is stupid enough to invade Russia and not bring Winter Clothes?
    Well, the Russians were the home team. Of course they have home field advantage. But doesn't the fact that Hitler was too arrogant to believe it might take a few months longer and therefore not allocate winter clothing validate one of the claims that is traditional that Hitler impeded Germany's progress? Glantz said that was a myth and speaks as though his opinion was fact and those of others are refuted even if they have facts to back it up.

    Strange beasty that Glantz.

    Also you can't say that weather "hampers" your ability. That sounds to dismissive. If your cannon barrels are breaking, if your armor wont start, if the grease in your guns freeze and make them inoperable, and if the cold starts killing your soldiers, then it does far more than hampers. Some of these things are very hard to sugar coat.

    I am convinced that if the weather had been warm, Russia would have fallen. I am likewise convinced that had the Lend Lease not been extended to the Russians, their army would have starved to death. Can we at least agree that they would have starved to death without food? It is a limitation of humans, barbaric or otherwise. And then can we agree that a soldier that has starved to death does not fight very well?
     
  12. Exxley

    Exxley Senior Member

    But doesn't the fact that Hitler was too arrogant to believe it might take a few months longer and therefore not allocate winter clothing validate one of the claims that is traditional that Hitler impeded Germany's progress? Glantz said that was a myth and speaks as though his opinion was fact and those of others are refuted even if they have facts to back it up.
    Strange beasty that Glantz.


    Of course, Glantz was not talking only about decisions taken before and during Barbarossa, a "fact" that somehow our reading expert failed to see.

    Also you can't say that weather "hampers" your ability. That sounds to dismissive. If your cannon barrels are breaking, if your armor wont start, if the grease in your guns freeze and make them inoperable, and if the cold starts killing your soldiers, then it does far more than hampers. Some of these things are very hard to sugar coat.
    I am convinced that if the weather had been warm, Russia would have fallen.

    Shall I point out that it has been demonstrated over and over that by fall 1941, the Ostheer had already suffered too many losses ? Guess who is to be believed ? An uneducated redneck or Franz Halder ?

    I am likewise convinced that had the Lend Lease not been extended to the Russians, their army would have starved to death. Can we at least agree that they would have starved to death without food? It is a limitation of humans, barbaric or otherwise. And then can we agree that a soldier that has starved to death does not fight very well?
    Except that once again the effect of Lend lease did not kick in before late 1942. By that time, the tide had already turned.
     
  13. Za Rodinu

    Za Rodinu Hot air manufacturer

    If your cannon barrels are breaking, if your armor wont start, if the grease in your guns freeze and make them inoperable, and if the cold starts killing your soldiers, then it ...

    ... then it means somebody at a very high level was not doing his homework. It also means that "somebody at a very high level" ( a collective "somebody", not only Hitler) was utterly arrogant and incompetent to base a campaign in wishful thinking instead of a careful study. Summer coats and boots in under -40ÂșC? I can't imagine the suffering all thos people went through. Somebody was very incompetent indeed.

    I am convinced that if the weather had been warm, Russia would have fallen.

    I am convinced that every year between 1941-45 the weather in Russia was warm enough between roughly March to November, and nevertheless Russia did not fall even then.

    I am likewise convinced that had the Lend Lease not been extended to the Russians, their army would have starved to death.

    And I happen to be convinced that Lend-lease was in a very incipient phase in 1941, and that's not what kept the Russians from falling. Later it was a significant help, but in 1941?

    Anyway, these two articles were presented here yesterday. I have to commend you for being such a fast reader to have read and absorbed both in such a short time.
     
  14. Gerard

    Gerard Seelow/Prora

    Right this has gone far enough. You keep referring the Russians as "Barbaric". I can take your dismissive attitude towards the Red Army no problem, but to infer that they are Barbaric is rascist in itself and I dont care what atrocities they have committed, please be more respectful in your tone towards the Russian People. I dont see any other countries being referred to as "Barbaric" yet you constantly do it. I dont care what you believe or dont believe but please stop referring to an entire nation in that tone. Do we refer to the Germans as Barbaric even though they themselves took on a particular brand of Genocide? Or do you ignore that because they were good soldiers in your eyes. This is supposed to be a welcoming board to all peoples and when posts like that are put out there what sort of message does that send??? I'm not surprised that we have such a small representation from Russia when that sort of comment is allowed.
     
  15. Exxley

    Exxley Senior Member

    How dare you refer to all Germans as perpetrators of a genocide! I can take you saying that about the Nazis but not a whole nation! That's racist!


    It would be interesting if our uneducated loony can quote Gotthard saying that. Being the dishonest bloke he is, Im afraid he is going to do his best not to answer this.

    unlike Russia who embraces their history and killed far more of everyone than the Hitler ever imagined, including Jews, which Stalin killed because they were Jews.

    Funny that at the same time, many senior Soviet officials and General officers were Jews. Guess that poor Jimbo doesnt once again have any clue of what he's babbling about.
     
  16. Gerard

    Gerard Seelow/Prora

    I have called the Nazis barbaric many times on this site even. Racism? You are fishing dude.

    Interesting. Today, I read where the Soviet Union is going to sell anti-air missile systems to Iran. The whole of civilized nations is collecting to debate what to do about Iran who is treatening to wipe Israel off the map, is drumming up nukes, and Russia (in the circle of the wise?) up and says, don't count on me, I can make some money here even if I destablize the world". And you are afraid we are going to send a wrong message that Russia is a scumbag nation? Is that even possible?

    Why aren't you afraid that the Barbarians are insulted by being compared to the Russians? Don't get you at all Gotthard. I gotta admit. You lose me in the turn.

    How dare you refer to all Germans as perpetrators of a genocide! I can take you saying that about the Nazis but not a whole nation! That's racist!

    BTW: I work with Germans. The are very ashamed of their nation's dubious history in WWII to the point I am embarrased when the point comes up, unlike Russia who embraces their history and killed far more of everyone than the Hitler ever imagined, including Jews, which Stalin killed because they were Jews. You are barking up the wrong tree if you think you can one up Hitler with Stalin...that's out there...

    You refer to the Russians as Barbaric and "A Scumbag nation" because of Stalin and the fact that they deliberately killed millions of their population and enslaved millions more in lives of misery and penure. Now by your logic thats enough reason to refer to Russia and Russians in that light. And you are calling them a "scumbag Nation" in light of their current actions as well. I'm glad that you think that this is ok. What do you think the Germans/Nazis were doing in 1939-45??? Go ask the Simon Wiesenthal Center. They might be able to enlighten you as to what went on or does the Holocaust escape your mind. Have you ever called them Barbarians? I know I havent. I have never referred to Germans in a derogatory tone. I merely asked why you dont call them Barbarians given that they also killed millions. By the way I have German Friends too. Great! At least we have something in common. And the guys I know are perfectly happy to talk about the war and face up to what happened. Are you trying to make me feel guilty about it? Well because I have not mentioned anything derogatory about the German Nation I dont. If we go by your logic that they killed millions (as did the Nazis/Germans) and the fact that they enslaved millions (as did the Nazis/Germans) then you should be referring to both nations as Barbaric and not the other. If not all Germans were involved in what the Nazis did well please give me proof that all Russians did what the Communists did because not all Russians were members of the Party. But you have referred to All Russians as Scumbags and evil. So am I merely asking why you dont say the same about the Germans. I dont get your logic. Nor do I want to. Your constant referrings to Russia and the Russians as Scumbags is as ignorant as its embarrassing to this board. I dont care what your views are, but its not your board and other people have different opinions to you. What sort of a message is this board sending out when we are allowing comments like that to be put up on the board.

    And as for trying to state that one dictator was worse than the other well you keep ranting on about the Evilness of Stalin because BOTH were as bad as each other.

    Oh yeah, You really shouldnt be talking about Russia selling arms to Iran for 2 reasons. One: It is discussing politics and as Kiwiwriter has stated that is not to happen and Second: People in glass houses shouldnt throw stones. A US Citizen trying to adopt the moral high ground on Arms Sales to other Countries is really funny!!! :wow:
     
  17. Za Rodinu

    Za Rodinu Hot air manufacturer

    Again, please read this definition of an Internet Troll: "In Internet terminology, a troll is someone who comes into an established community such as an online discussion forum, and posts inflammatory, rude or offensive messages designed to annoy and antagonize the existing members or disrupt the flow of discussion".

    Please stop feeding the troll.
     
  18. Gerard

    Gerard Seelow/Prora

    You are right Za! I have also taken the liberty of reporting the post in question to the mods. :goodnight:
     
  19. Exxley

    Exxley Senior Member

    You are right Za! I have also taken the liberty of reporting the post in question to the mods. :goodnight:

    Let's see what good this will do
     
  20. Gerard

    Gerard Seelow/Prora

    I am resurrecting this thread for two reasons.

    The first is the articles referred to in the thread, which if you are interested in the Great Patriotic War/Ostfront I can recommend highly and also to see the types of arguments that can be so prevalent on threads of this nature. Its the 70th Anniversary of Operation Barbarossa on 22nd June and it would be nice to avoid this sort of argument.
     
    James S likes this.

Share This Page