Was the Russian Army the largest in history?

Discussions on all aspects of the USSR, from the Russian Civil War till the end of the Great Patriotic War and the war against Japan. Hosted by Art.
User avatar
Roberto
Member
Posts: 4505
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 15:35
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

Post by Roberto » 03 Apr 2002 18:35

Hawok wrote:
Which Suvrov and his followers used in all their books, however when his book came out in Russia and people began to show (with documents and such) that it is in fact otherwise , he somehow decided not address the critics. Anyway research done on the sate of RKKA, as of 22.6.41 clearly shows it was not in position to begin the offensive – it was not really in position to do much of anything.


Suvrov and his fellowers ? Perhaps Suvrov - the bad guy- is more honest then most of his own historicans.


Wishful thinking, pal. Why can the honest Suvorov offer no proof for his theories, no backup other than troop movements on the Soviet border? Why does he avoid discussing his theses, according to Oleg?

Concerning June 1941 : correct, but Stalin would have attacked in late 1941 or spring 1942 without any doubt.


"Without any doubt" sounds like an article of faith in the absence of evidence. Does any of the wise guys (Suvorov, Maser et al) have an answer to the questions I addressed in my first post on this issue?

The only possible result : it was a (not wanted) preemptive strike. If Hitler had not attacked, we would have fell under the soviet rule for many years.[/quoted]

Why, do you really think the ramshackle force that the Red Army was in 1941 would have made headway in an offensive against the Wehrmacht, if they had undertaken one? They could barely handle tiny Finland the year before. And while they eventually became an effective defensive force in the course of the German attack, after spectacular initial catastrophes, they botched up every offensive operation until Stalingrad and were in no condition to conduct an offensive in summer until after the battle of Kursk in 1943. To assume that the Red Army was in conditions to overrun the Wehrmacht in 1941 and that Hitler saved Europe from this fate just blinks at the realities of the time. To assume that the Iron Curtain would never have come into being if Hitler had refrained from attacking the Soviet Union is far more realistic, in my opinion.

Hitler was a great criminal (Holocaust), but without him (and that is his historical importance only a few have understood yet), europe would have fallen under Stalins reign (except the isolated and corrupt Churchill).


I would say that without Hitler's attack on the USSR Soviet troops would never have entered Eastern Europe or Germany, simply because Stalin would never have dared to carry out such an attack against a force no other army had managed to stand up to so far. After Hitler had squandered his forces in the vast spaces of Russia, however, the conquest of Europe by a hardened Red Army became a real possibility, and it was only corrupt Churchill and his colleague Roosevelt who, through the invasion of Western Europe, eventually prevented that from happening.

User avatar
Oleg Grigoryev
Member
Posts: 5051
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 20:06
Location: Russia

Post by Oleg Grigoryev » 03 Apr 2002 20:11

Sorry the idea of German pre-emptive strike will not fly for very simple reason. Hitler initiated planning of Barbarossa in 1940 far prior any Soviet deployment took place. Consequently there was nothing to preempt . Moreover for document that I posted here http://thirdreichforum.com/phpBB2/viewt ... c&start=25 it fairly obvious that Soviet moves were done in reaction to German deployment (the document that Suvorov ignores totally). Speaking of Suvorov, when put under scrutiny - it seems that he lies if not on every page, then on every other page for sure.

Hawok
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: 02 Apr 2002 10:10

Post by Hawok » 04 Apr 2002 10:28

oleg wrote:Sorry the idea of German pre-emptive strike will not fly for very simple reason. Hitler initiated planning of Barbarossa in 1940 far prior any Soviet deployment took place. Consequently there was nothing to preempt . Moreover for document that I posted here http://thirdreichforum.com/phpBB2/viewt ... c&start=25 it fairly obvious that Soviet moves were done in reaction to German deployment (the document that Suvorov ignores totally). Speaking of Suvorov, when put under scrutiny - it seems that he lies if not on every page, then on every other page for sure.

_____________________________________________________________

@oleg : ok, lets leave the question of a preemptive strike for a moment, but would you agree upon a possible later offensive war (1942/43) ?

Hawok
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: 02 Apr 2002 10:10

Post by Hawok » 04 Apr 2002 10:34

I would say that without Hitler's attack on the USSR Soviet troops would never have entered Eastern Europe or Germany, simply because Stalin would never have dared to carry out such an attack against a force no other army had managed to stand up to so far. After Hitler had squandered his forces in the vast spaces of Russia, however, the conquest of Europe by a hardened Red Army became a real possibility, and it was only corrupt Churchill and his colleague Roosevelt who, through the invasion of Western Europe, eventually prevented that from happening.

_____________________________________________________________

Sorry but i'm not able to share your opinion. If Hitler had not been the german chancellor, we would have Papen etc. Do you really think that Stalin did not plan to attack europe at a later time ? Thats naive. He had the power, the economy and the warmachine. And please don't forget one important thing : the area would have been much smaller and better to control, then for Hitler and the hugh soviet lands. Combined with his natural resources Stalin had been a moron, if he would not have attacked earlier or later (see many of his own quotes).

Despite the fact that many people don't seem to percept it, i say, that Hitler saved western (!) europe from Stalins reign. And between, don't mix things together : the expel of german people and the iron court was not Hitlers action, but the decision of Stalin. He has simply overcome the hypocrite western politicans at Potsdam and Jalta.

Hawok
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: 02 Apr 2002 10:10

Post by Hawok » 04 Apr 2002 10:38

Does any of the wise guys (Suvorov, Maser et al) have an answer to the questions I addressed in my first post on this issue?


The question is, who is really the wise guy. Is it more acceptable for you, that their opinion and books are false, only because they are opposite to the common but perhaps wrong view ? We are not talking of Suvrov any more, we are talking about such well known historians like Prof.Dr.Maser, Hoffmann and Magenheimer.

CabinetMinister
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: 04 Apr 2002 11:03

Post by CabinetMinister » 04 Apr 2002 11:19

"Jeder führt sein eigenes System ein, soweit seine Armeen kommen. Es kann gar nicht anders sein."

Josif Vissarionovic Stalin
_____________________________________________________________

"Wir erretteten die menschliche Kultur, die aus alter Zeit stammenden Steine Europas, seine Wiege, sein arbeitendes Volk, seine Museen und seine Bücher. Wenn England dazu bestimmt ist, einen neuen Shakespeare hervorzubringen, wenn neue Enzyklopädisten in Frankreich erscheinen... Wenn der Traum eines goldenen Zeitalters jemals Wirklichkeit werden sollte, dann wird dies deshalb geschehen, weil die Soldaten der Freiheit Tausende von Werst marschierten, um das Banner der Freiheit, der Brüderlichkeit und des Lichtes aufzupflanzen... Das ist der Grund dafür, warum nicht nur in unserem Land, sondern überall in der Welt Stalins Name mit dem Ende der Nacht und dem ersten Morgen des Glückes verbunden ist."

Ehrenburg, 17.05.1945

User avatar
Roberto
Member
Posts: 4505
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 15:35
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

Post by Roberto » 04 Apr 2002 13:21

Sorry but i'm not able to share your opinion. If Hitler had not been the german chancellor, we would have Papen etc. Do you really think that Stalin did not plan to attack europe at a later time ? Thats naive. He had the power, the economy and the warmachine.


Not in 1941. His war machine was not worth much then, and he knew it. I’m not saying that Stalin did not want to control as much of Europe as possible. But I’m convinced that he was a cautious fellow rather than an adventurer who would have embarked on so risky an undertaking as an all-out attack on Europe, especially with the kind of army he had at the time. His policy was to let Germany and the Western Allies take each other apart and then step in as the laughing third party. But when Germany conquered France, Belgium and the Netherlands in a few weeks and threw the British army into the sea, his clever plan went down the drain.

And please don't forget one important thing : the area would have been much smaller and better to control, then for Hitler and the hugh soviet lands. Combined with his natural resources Stalin had been a moron, if he would not have attacked earlier or later (see many of his own quotes).


Dead wrong. He would have been a moron (even more so than he was anyway) if he had attacked the mighty Wehrmacht with an army that had no offensive capabilities at the time and would not have any for almost two years thereafter, an army that could barely defend its own country against the German onslaught.

Despite the fact that many people don't seem to percept it, i say, that Hitler saved western (!) europe from Stalins reign.


Wrong again. By squandering the Wehrmacht in a war of aggression against the Soviet Union, Hitler created the conditions that allowed Stalin to invade Eastern Europe and Germany with a hardened and victorious Red Army, one that would never have got as far as it did against the intact German army of 1941. If anyone saved Western Europe from Stalin’s reign, it was the Western Allies.

And between, don't mix things together : the expel of german people and the iron court was not Hitlers action, but the decision of Stalin.


Did I say it was Hitler? No. I said that if Hitler had not attacked the Soviet Union and lost his army there, Stalin would never have been in conditions to conquer Eastern Europe and Germany and to impose the conditions he imposed. You should read my posts more carefully.

He has simply overcome the hypocrite western politicans at Potsdam and Jalta.


No doubt about that.

The question is, who is really the wise guy. Is it more acceptable for you, that their opinion and books are false, only because they are opposite to the common but perhaps wrong view ?


No, buddy, because they can offer no solid evidence to back up their contentions and because the evidence in fact speaks against their speculations.

[question]We are not talking of Suvrov any more, we are talking about such well known historians like Prof.Dr.Maser, Hoffmann and Magenheimer.[/quote]

Maser we have discussed, he may be a well-known historian but in this respect he seems to have let ideology get the better of him. As to Magenheimer and Hoffmann, do they also adhere to the pre-emptive attack nonsense? In the case of the latter, I would no longer be very surprised.

CabinetMinister
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: 04 Apr 2002 11:03

Post by CabinetMinister » 04 Apr 2002 15:14

Maser we have discussed, he may be a well-known historian but in this respect he seems to have let ideology get the better of him. As to Magenheimer and Hoffmann, do they also adhere to the pre-emptive attack nonsense? In the case of the latter, I would no longer be very surprised.

_____________________________________________________________

Ich kann hier nicht ganz folgen. Wo wurde Maser besprochen ? Hoffmann und Magenheimer haben beeindruckende Arbeiten vorgelegt, die logisch und fundiert geschrieben sind. Warum machst Du Dir nicht einfach mal die Mühe und liest diese Bücher vom Anfang bis zum Ende. Auch hier wieder dasselbe Problem : es wird nur das als wissenschaftlich fundiert betrachtet was i.) der offiziellen Lehrmeinung entspricht und ii.) in das eigene Bild passt. Fähigkeit zu kritischen und selbstreflektierendem Denken ? Fehlanzeige, leider. Im übrigen hat sich gerade Maser nun in der Vergangenheit wirklich nicht als ein Freund des 3.Reiches gezeigt. Schon deshalb würde ich an Deiner Stelle auch hier mal einen genaueren Blick wagen.

Hoffmann war Mitglied des renommierten Militärgeschichtl. Instituts mit Sitz in Freiburg. Zusammen mit Ueberschär (der immer ganz gerne von bestimmten Kreisen zitiert wird) schrieb er u.a. eines der Standardwerke über den deutsch-sowjetischen Krieg. Auch hier haben wir es mit einem renommierten Autoren zu tun, dessen Buch "Stalins Vernichtungskrieg" manchem linken Vertreter ganz und gar nicht geschmeckt hat.

CabinetMinister
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: 04 Apr 2002 11:03

Post by CabinetMinister » 04 Apr 2002 15:17

Zu Stalin nur folgendes : die gescheiterten Offensiven u.a. gegen den Staat Finnland sind als ein erster Test zu werten, der Stalin und seinen Generälen Auskunft über die Offensivfähigkeit der Roten Armee geben sollte. Dieser reichte in der Tat für einen Angriff im Sommer 1941 wohl noch nicht völlig aus, vermutlich aber im Herbst 1941 oder Frühjahr 1942. Es ist erstaunlich naiv anzunehmen, daß Stalin diese einmalige Chance nicht genutzt hätte, sein Imperium auszudehnen. Im übrigen standen dem sowjetischen Diktator schon im Sommer 1941 knapp 1900 modernste T34 Panzer zur Verfügung. Selbst seine Vorgängermodelle waren den damaligen deutschen Panzern weitestgehend überlegen. Die deutsche Seite zeigte sich bezüglich der wahren Kampfkraft der Roten Armee im Frühjahr 1941 erstaunlich naiv und desinformiert.

User avatar
Roberto
Member
Posts: 4505
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 15:35
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

Post by Roberto » 04 Apr 2002 21:50

Cabinet Minister,

This is an English language forum, and it is a lack of courtesy towards our fellow posters to use a language that not all of them understand. Some of your readers may be interested in what you have to say and accordingly frustrated because they don't pick up a word of it. So please put your responses into English, and I will reply to them tomorrow.

Cheers,

Roberto

User avatar
Oleg Grigoryev
Member
Posts: 5051
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 20:06
Location: Russia

Post by Oleg Grigoryev » 04 Apr 2002 22:49

Hawok wrote:
oleg wrote:Sorry the idea of German pre-emptive strike will not fly for very simple reason. Hitler initiated planning of Barbarossa in 1940 far prior any Soviet deployment took place. Consequently there was nothing to preempt . Moreover for document that I posted here http://thirdreichforum.com/phpBB2/viewt ... c&start=25 it fairly obvious that Soviet moves were done in reaction to German deployment (the document that Suvorov ignores totally). Speaking of Suvorov, when put under scrutiny - it seems that he lies if not on every page, then on every other page for sure.

_____________________________________________________________

@oleg : ok, lets leave the question of a preemptive strike for a moment, but would you agree upon a possible later offensive war (1942/43) ?
1942/1943 – that is really what if kind of question. Interest of USSR and Germany would eventually clash because of the Balkans. Would to lead the war and who would initiate is another question. Soviet Mechanized formations of 1940 type proved to be to unwieldy anyway –even if completed –so that would probably call for another reform and so on. RKKA was in good position to overrun Europe as early as 1936 and yet it did not do it. Contrary to what Suvorov (or seemingly Hoffman) want us to believe Soviet external policies prior to 1939 were not directed towards provoking European war. In 1938 Soviet Union the only major European power who opposed Munich – it even mobilized its army and ask Poland for corridors to Czechoslovakia (Czechs were very much for it) Poland however refused – and with a good reason since it got the peace of Czech pie too. In a sense 1939 pact with Germany was Soviet way of returning favor to the West that turned Hitler in 1938 towards the East.

CabinetMinister
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: 04 Apr 2002 11:03

Post by CabinetMinister » 05 Apr 2002 10:36

medorjurgen wrote:Cabinet Minister,

This is an English language forum, and it is a lack of courtesy towards our fellow posters to use a language that not all of them understand. Some of your readers may be interested in what you have to say and accordingly frustrated because they don't pick up a word of it. So please put your responses into English, and I will reply to them tomorrow.

Cheers,

Roberto



Roberto, das ist mir in der Tat auch schon aufgefallen, stell Dir vor. Da meine Antwort aber an Dich persönlich ging (vielleicht sollte ich Deinen Namen das nächstemal vorstellen), wirst Du mir das für diesen Einzelfall sicher nachsehen. Eine pädagogische Ermahnung ist hier fehl am Platz, oder hast Du etwa schon vergessen, daß auch Du mal eine Konversation in portugiesischer Sprache geführt hast ?

User avatar
Roberto
Member
Posts: 4505
Joined: 11 Mar 2002 15:35
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

Post by Roberto » 05 Apr 2002 11:12

CabinetMinister wrote:
medorjurgen wrote:Cabinet Minister,

This is an English language forum, and it is a lack of courtesy towards our fellow posters to use a language that not all of them understand. Some of your readers may be interested in what you have to say and accordingly frustrated because they don't pick up a word of it. So please put your responses into English, and I will reply to them tomorrow.

Cheers,

Roberto



Roberto, das ist mir in der Tat auch schon aufgefallen, stell Dir vor. Da meine Antwort aber an Dich persönlich ging (vielleicht sollte ich Deinen Namen das nächstemal vorstellen), wirst Du mir das für diesen Einzelfall sicher nachsehen. Eine pädagogische Ermahnung ist hier fehl am Platz, oder hast Du etwa schon vergessen, daß auch Du mal eine Konversation in portugiesischer Sprache geführt hast ?


As you wish, my friend. The difference between my conversations in Portuguese and your German language contentions being that the former were of a private nature and not related to the topic in question, and that I stopped them as soon as the moderator asked me to do so.

Once again:

Arguments on the topic should be made in a language that everyone can understand.

If you want to have private conversations, send me a private message.

CabinetMinister
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: 04 Apr 2002 11:03

Post by CabinetMinister » 05 Apr 2002 13:54

and that I stopped them as soon as the moderator asked me to do so.



Exakt, und bisher habe ich noch keine Beschwerde vom Moderator oder einem anderen Leser hier vernommen, sondern ausschliesslich von Dir. Ob privater Inhalt oder nicht ist Makulatur, denn private Inhalte gehören erst recht nicht in einen Thread gepostet, da sie i.) nicht in den Kontext passen ii.) die inhaltliche Stringenz des Threads konterkarieren. Im übrigen wünsche ich Dir ein schönes Wochenende. Das Wetter hier ist herrlich. Besten Gruß.

User avatar
Fred
Member
Posts: 335
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 13:13
Location: Sweden

Post by Fred » 05 Apr 2002 14:48

CabinetMinister! can you post your comments in English, my German sucks.

Return to “The Soviet Union at War 1917-1945”