Operation Barbarossa and Icebreaker

Discussions on WW2 in Eastern Europe.
Post Reply
User avatar
Starinov
Member
Posts: 1490
Joined: 18 Apr 2002, 17:29
Location: Québec, Canada.

#61

Post by Starinov » 07 Jan 2003, 16:23

Roberto wrote:
savantu wrote:Beseides the factories were running at full capacity.
Says savantu and who else?
According to Hélène Carrère d'Encausse, leading historian at the Sorbonne University, "the military industry was set on war footing since 1939"

User avatar
Roberto
Member
Posts: 4505
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 16:35
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

#62

Post by Roberto » 07 Jan 2003, 16:25

savantu wrote:-Stalin was assured of US and England's suport before the war begun.
Was he?
Richard Overy ([i]Russia’s War[/i], page 167) wrote:[…]When Stalin met them [Zhukov and Vasilevsky] on September 13 [1942] he was livid with rage at his British ally for arguing over military aid. ‘Tens, hundreds of thousands of Soviet people are giving their lives in the struggle against fascism, and Churchill is haggling over twenty Hurricanes. It was over a year [my emphasis] since Britain and the United States had pledged to send the Soviet Union the military and economic aid necessary to keep the Soviet front from collapsing. Though there was popular hostility in both Western states to co-operation with Communism, the alternative of a German victory in the East was regarded as even less palatable, since it would leave Britain at the mercy of a military giant and the United States with little prospect of fighting a major war 3,000 miles distant from its shores. Yet for all the importance attached to Soviet resistance, neither Western power contributed enough during 1942 to ensure Soviet survival[my emphasis]. Churchill candidly told the Soviet ambassador, Ivan Maisky, that all Britain could offer was ‘a drop in the ocean’[my emphasis]. The American Lend-Lease aid program, begun in March 1941 for the British Empire and extended to cover the Soviet Union in August that year [my emphasis], provided $ 5.8 billion of goods for Britain by the end of 1942 but only $ 1.4 billion for the Soviet Union[my emphasis].[…]


User avatar
Roberto
Member
Posts: 4505
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 16:35
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

#63

Post by Roberto » 07 Jan 2003, 16:28

Starinov wrote:
Roberto wrote:
savantu wrote:Beseides the factories were running at full capacity.
Says savantu and who else?
According to Hélène Carrère d'Encausse, leading historian at the Sorbonne University, "the military industry was set on war footing since 1939"
I wonder what she means by that.

If you look at Krivosheev's figures about the development of Soviet armament production between 1941 and 1945, it seems that Mme. d'Encausse doesn't know what she's talking about.

Where did you pick that up, by the way?

User avatar
savantu
Member
Posts: 213
Joined: 29 Dec 2002, 01:36
Location: Romania
Contact:

#64

Post by savantu » 07 Jan 2003, 18:58

Roberto wrote:
Starinov wrote:
Roberto wrote:
savantu wrote:Beseides the factories were running at full capacity.
Says savantu and who else?
According to Hélène Carrère d'Encausse, leading historian at the Sorbonne University, "the military industry was set on war footing since 1939"
I wonder what she means by that.

If you look at Krivosheev's figures about the development of Soviet armament production between 1941 and 1945, it seems that Mme. d'Encausse doesn't know what she's talking about.

Where did you pick that up, by the way?
IMO,you don't know about what you're talking.You keep present those silly figures that peek production was achieved in 1944 or so.Is that what determines if the industry was on a war footing or not??

Besides even those figures do tell a different story.
Look at ship production.

Many numbers(if not all) are for the 22 june-31 dec period when production was minimal(the factories were being moved to the east,in the urals and Siberia).

Show me for the entire 1941,or better for the first part january 1st-to june 22.That was the normal production.Double it and add an extra 10%(since production was on a steady growth) and then you have the real production for 1941.The german attack killed the weapon production in the Soviet Union,and if Suvorov is right,especially the ammo production.

Besides,imo,if Stalin would have attacked,the production would have went up considerably.Total war ,you know...
Roberto wrote:Regarding Stalin, on the other hand, we seem to be reduced to pointless discussions about how many tanks he had, how many of them were new ones, how many combat ready, etc.

What the hell does all that matter if you have no evidence as to what, if anything, he planned to do with all that hardware?
“It will be necessary to crush the enemy forces with a surprise attack, after which our liberation campaign will move forward at full speed.” – Stalin, October 21, 1939

"And when Marshal of the Revolution Comrade Stalin gives the signal, hundreds of thousands of pilots, navigators, and parachutists will rain down upon the heads of the enemy with the full force of our arms, the arms of socialist justice. The Soviet armies of the air will bring happiness to humanity! "(Pravda, August 18, 1940)

What Pravda wrote passed first through Stalin's hands.

Who could be the enemy in august 1940??

I think Stalin knew what to do with so much hardware.

You need evidence?What do you expect??The full set of plans??Stalin's main decisions/criminal orders were never put on paper.

And in 60 years the communists had enough time to wipe all the evidence.German records are held at Podolsk,near Moscow.If they say the oficial version of the war ,why weren't they published??

But any criminal leaves traces of the crime,finding those traces is important.

Could the Soviet Union say to the rest of the countries(many helped it finish the germans-US,England) ,no problems,thanks for your help,but i must admit i wanted to conquer you,destroy capitalism and make you slaves in the great Soviet Union???But nasty Hitler stopped me,and i only managed partially to do this.(eastern europe,china,etc)

Being in their place i would do everything to destroy the evidence related to that criminal plan of mine,what would you do???

User avatar
Roberto
Member
Posts: 4505
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 16:35
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

#65

Post by Roberto » 07 Jan 2003, 19:57

savantu wrote:
Roberto wrote:
Starinov wrote:
Roberto wrote:
savantu wrote:Beseides the factories were running at full capacity.
Says savantu and who else?
According to Hélène Carrère d'Encausse, leading historian at the Sorbonne University, "the military industry was set on war footing since 1939"
I wonder what she means by that.

If you look at Krivosheev's figures about the development of Soviet armament production between 1941 and 1945, it seems that Mme. d'Encausse doesn't know what she's talking about.

Where did you pick that up, by the way?
IMO,you don't know about what you're talking.You keep present those silly figures that peek production was achieved in 1944 or so.Is that what determines if the industry was on a war footing or not??
Cool it, Icebreaker.

The "silly figures", first of all, demonstrate that your source Michaels is a bloody liar.

Second, they demonstrate that Soviet industry geared to war production turned out a lot more than was produced in 1941.

Which makes the statement that it was already on "war footing" in 1939, 1940 or 1941, whatever that is supposed to mean, seem rather doubtful.

Add Salisbury's reference to Stalin's order to switch the country's industry over to war production until the end of 1942, and the doubt becomes even stronger.
savantu wrote:Besides even those figures do tell a different story.
Look at ship production.
Boy, now it's getting silly.

Looks like they didn't build all that many ships throughout a war that was mostly not fought at sea but instead dedicated their productive capacities to making hardware for land warfare.

So?
savantu wrote:Many numbers(if not all) are for the 22 june-31 dec period when production was minimal(the factories were being moved to the east,in the urals and Siberia).
The figures for "availability, supplies and losses" (table 95) cover only a partial period of the year, but the production figures (table 93) cover the whole year.
savantu wrote:Show me for the entire 1941,or better for the first part january 1st-to june 22.That was the normal production.Double it and add an extra 10%(since production was on a steady growth) and then you have the real production for 1941.
See above.

But even if the figures for tanks and planes in 1941 were to be doubled, they would still be below the figures of 1942, 1943 and 1944 in each case.
Your logic regarding the additional 10 % totally escapes me. But applying it wouldn't tip the balance either.
savantu wrote:The german attack killed the weapon production in the Soviet Union,and if Suvorov is right,especially the ammo production.
Wow, then a "killed" weapons industry managed to turn out far more tanks and planes in 1942 than in 1941, even if you double the 1941 figures from table 93 (which I see no reason to do).

This supports rather than counters the assumption that in 1941 the Soviet armament industry was not running at full steam, doesn't it?
savantu wrote:Besides,imo,if Stalin would have attacked,the production would have went up considerably.Total war ,you know...
As it went up after the Germans attacked, I suppose.

And where does that get us?
savantu wrote:
Roberto wrote:Regarding Stalin, on the other hand, we seem to be reduced to pointless discussions about how many tanks he had, how many of them were new ones, how many combat ready, etc.

What the hell does all that matter if you have no evidence as to what, if anything, he planned to do with all that hardware?
“It will be necessary to crush the enemy forces with a surprise attack, after which our liberation campaign will move forward at full speed.” – Stalin, October 21, 1939

"And when Marshal of the Revolution Comrade Stalin gives the signal, hundreds of thousands of pilots, navigators, and parachutists will rain down upon the heads of the enemy with the full force of our arms, the arms of socialist justice. The Soviet armies of the air will bring happiness to humanity! "(Pravda, August 18, 1940)
Great, and where are the military orders and protocols of military conferences, orders of battle, documents about occupation policies, the kind of stuff we know about Hitler's intentions, as opposed to the above quoted propaganda baloney?
savantu wrote:What Pravda wrote passed first through Stalin's hands.

Who could be the enemy in august 1940??
The Capitalist West. Who else?
savantu wrote:I think Stalin knew what to do with so much hardware.
What you think is irrelevant.

What you can demonstrate is all that matters.

So far, no show.
savantu wrote:You need evidence?What do you expect??The full set of plans??
The kind of documentary evidence we have in regard to Hitler's intentions, as I said.
savantu wrote:Stalin's main decisions/criminal orders were never put on paper.
And there are also no witnesses either, right?

Or then all the witnesses chose to keep quiet, bloody lying commies.

Tough luck for you Icebreakers, reduced to pointless speculations as you thus are.

As we're at it, it was not Soviet practice to destroy documents, for all I know.

They were more like filing them and keeping them "for all times".

Stalin's written order for the Katyn killings, for instance, has emerged from the Soviet archives.
savantu wrote:And in 60 years the communists had enough time to wipe all the evidence.
If so, tough luck for your breed of truth-seekers, see above.

But as I also said, that was not their way of doing things.
savantu wrote:German records are held at Podolsk,near Moscow.If they say the oficial version of the war,why weren't they published??
I don't know what you're talking about, and I don't care either.

Conspiracy theories don't interest me.

But as you mention Podolsk, you are not talking about the Central Archive of the Russian Defense Ministry where German historians Rolf Keller and Reinhard Otto found the files of the Wehrmacht Information Bureau (Wehrmachtauskunftsstelle - WASt) of the Wehrmacht High Command on Soviet prisoners of war in German captivity, are you?
savantu wrote:But any criminal leaves traces of the crime,finding those traces is important.
Well, I wouldn't even use the term "traces" for what Suvorov et al come up with.

As you're so fond of conspiracy stuff, by the way, I wonder why the abundant evidence speaking against Suvorov's contentions, some of which has been shown on this forum, hasn't made you wonder about the consistency of these contentions.

Neither do you seem to bother with the absence of evidence for Suvorov's most spectacular contentions, like the stuff about the one million paratroopers, or his demonstrated misrepresentations of statements by former Soviet generals.

Have you never wondered why he felt the need to resort to such tricks, if he was so sure about his thesis?
savantu wrote:Could the Soviet Union say to the rest of the countries(many helped it finish the germans-US,England) ,no problems,thanks for your help,but i must admit i wanted to conquer you,destroy capitalism and make you slaves in the great Soviet Union???But nasty Hitler stopped me,and i only managed partially to do this.(eastern europe,china,etc)

Being in their place i would do everything to destroy the evidence related to that criminal plan of mine,what would you do???
Irrelevant considerations, as long as you have no evidence to any such attempt to destroy or hide evidence let alone to the commission of a crime.

I suggest you give a thought to the meaninglessness of your above statements to keep yourself from repeating such utterances.

User avatar
savantu
Member
Posts: 213
Joined: 29 Dec 2002, 01:36
Location: Romania
Contact:

#66

Post by savantu » 07 Jan 2003, 21:54

Roberto ,have you read any book by Suvorov???

Be honest.

User avatar
Oleg Grigoryev
Member
Posts: 5051
Joined: 12 Mar 2002, 21:06
Location: Russia

#67

Post by Oleg Grigoryev » 07 Jan 2003, 23:06

Stalin had to go 180km to prove deadly for Germany.That was the distance to Ploiesti from Basarabia.
who says it was deadly? As far as I recall Germany did not crumbled right away after Ploeshti was destroyed by allied bombings. Accidentally you might want to look up the actual percentage of Romanian oil in the German reserves (hint Hungarian oil, synthetic fuel). Btw how come you are not replying to my post?

User avatar
Starinov
Member
Posts: 1490
Joined: 18 Apr 2002, 17:29
Location: Québec, Canada.

#68

Post by Starinov » 07 Jan 2003, 23:13

oleg wrote:
Stalin had to go 180km to prove deadly for Germany.That was the distance to Ploiesti from Basarabia.
who says it was deadly? As far as I recall Germany did not crumbled right away after Ploeshti was destroyed by allied bombings. Accidentally you might want to look up the actual percentage of Romanian oil in the German reserves (hint Hungarian oil, synthetic fuel). Btw how come you are not replying to my post?
When Ploiesti fell in 1944, Germans were alredy using synthetic oil. They did not have such a thing in 1941.

In 1941, Ploiesti was the main oil reservoir for Germany.

User avatar
Oleg Grigoryev
Member
Posts: 5051
Joined: 12 Mar 2002, 21:06
Location: Russia

#69

Post by Oleg Grigoryev » 07 Jan 2003, 23:30

Starinov wrote:
oleg wrote:
Stalin had to go 180km to prove deadly for Germany.That was the distance to Ploiesti from Basarabia.
who says it was deadly? As far as I recall Germany did not crumbled right away after Ploeshti was destroyed by allied bombings. Accidentally you might want to look up the actual percentage of Romanian oil in the German reserves (hint Hungarian oil, synthetic fuel). Btw how come you are not replying to my post?
When Ploiesti fell in 1944, Germans were alredy using synthetic oil. They did not have such a thing in 1941.

In 1941, Ploiesti was the main oil reservoir for Germany.
After difficulties in the process were worked out the plant at Leuna was producing 300,000 tons per year. Even as the government came to control the industry towards the mid 1930s, companies and combines were eager to get into the operation of synthetic fuel. The benefits offered by the government seemed to outweigh the costs of producing synthetic fuel and thus the program expanded. In January of 1935 the coalition Brabag also began its first hydrogenation plant at B?len. The plant was finished in the spring of 1936 and reached a maximum production of 150,000 tons of fuel products per year. Brabag also started on its second hydrogenation plant in Magdeburg in April of 1935, which saw completion in 1936 and reached a maximum production of 150,000 tons per year. At the outset of the four-year plan in 1936 there were four hydrogenation plants built or being built in Germany for the production of synthetic fuel.

User avatar
Oleg Grigoryev
Member
Posts: 5051
Joined: 12 Mar 2002, 21:06
Location: Russia

#70

Post by Oleg Grigoryev » 07 Jan 2003, 23:33

Image

User avatar
Starinov
Member
Posts: 1490
Joined: 18 Apr 2002, 17:29
Location: Québec, Canada.

#71

Post by Starinov » 07 Jan 2003, 23:38

Roberto wrote:Suvorov's most spectacular contentions, like the stuff about the one million paratroopers
I saw that in other books as well. Don't forget they started to be train in 1930-31....

User avatar
Oleg Grigoryev
Member
Posts: 5051
Joined: 12 Mar 2002, 21:06
Location: Russia

#72

Post by Oleg Grigoryev » 07 Jan 2003, 23:44

Starinov wrote:
Roberto wrote:Suvorov's most spectacular contentions, like the stuff about the one million paratroopers
I saw that in other books as well. Don't forget they started to be train in 1930-31....
The recruits were trained. The staff they were taught covered basic training, and there is a long was form recruits with basic training to a paratrooper (speaking from personal experience).

User avatar
Oleg Grigoryev
Member
Posts: 5051
Joined: 12 Mar 2002, 21:06
Location: Russia

#73

Post by Oleg Grigoryev » 08 Jan 2003, 00:22

One more of Suvorov pearls. Suvorov quoting Soviet Filed Regulations Pu-39: ?The RKKA will be the most attacking army in the history of the world?. Actual phrase: ?To every enemy aggression USSR will reply by crashing blow of its Armed Forces. If the enemy will force a war upon us then RKKA will turn into the most attacking army in the history of the world.? Does make a difference dose not it?

User avatar
Roberto
Member
Posts: 4505
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 16:35
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

#74

Post by Roberto » 08 Jan 2003, 14:41

savantu wrote:Roberto ,have you read any book by Suvorov???

Be honest.
No, and I don't intend to, and I don't think I missed or shall miss anything.

User avatar
savantu
Member
Posts: 213
Joined: 29 Dec 2002, 01:36
Location: Romania
Contact:

#75

Post by savantu » 08 Jan 2003, 14:43

oleg wrote:One more of Suvorov pearls. Suvorov quoting Soviet Filed Regulations Pu-39: ?The RKKA will be the most attacking army in the history of the world?. Actual phrase: ?To every enemy aggression USSR will reply by crashing blow of its Armed Forces. If the enemy will force a war upon us then RKKA will turn into the most attacking army in the history of the world.? Does make a difference dose not it?
:D

Sure,the soviets do understand in a very funny way enemy agression.

From their records the japs attacked them at Halkin Gol.

And the war in Finland was a response the finland's agression towards the SU.

In the same manner,the german attack on Poland was a reply to Poland's agression.

Post Reply

Return to “WW2 in Eastern Europe”