History buffs?

Omahan said:
...just how shitty the USSR's army was in the face of the Blitzkrieg...
Click to expand...
You are wrong here. The army was not shitty whatsoever. The stupidity and shortsightedness of commanding officers (no shit, all talented commanders and military leaders were imprisoned and executed by bolscheviks who saw a threat in these people), plus atmosphere of panic fear and chaos in upper commanding layers - that's what has caused the Red Army to suffer such a humiliation in 1941. Moreover, fuckheads in Kremlin who didn't learn from their 1941's mistakes repeated the same shit in 1942 and allowed Wehrmacht to Stalingrad.
 
The USSR's army also consisted of a lot of South Asian mercenaries in the Winter War against Finland. They got de_molished by the snow and cold weather.
 
It starts at Ancient history but by the end of the western Roman Empire my knowledge breaks apart, it picks up again in the medieval period and that just goes up until post ww2 and then I don't really know that much of the cold war so yeah
 
Jwso said:
The USSR's army also consisted of a lot of South Asian mercenaries in the Winter War against Finland. They got de_molished by the snow and cold weather.
Click to expand...

finland-afraid.jpg


they drank euroshopper to give them that combat edge over the russians
 
PsychoRealm said:
You are wrong here. The army was not shitty whatsoever. The stupidity and shortsightedness of commanding officers (no shit, all talented commanders and military leaders were imprisoned and executed by bolscheviks who saw a threat in these people), plus atmosphere of panic fear and chaos in upper commanding layers - that's what has caused the Red Army to suffer such a humiliation in 1941. Moreover, fuckheads in Kremlin who didn't learn from their 1941's mistakes repeated the same shit in 1942 and allowed Wehrmacht to Stalingrad.
Click to expand...

But it is the actions of the commanding officers that goes down in the history books, is it not? And it is the combination of these actions that gives the army its reputation as a whole. Do I doubt the skill of the army itself? No. But I'd hardly call a casualty number of many millions 'good,' either.

Frankly, we could argue all day about the Eastern front, but it all trickles down in a society that values production statistics over production results.
 
Omahan said:
Do I doubt the skill of the army itself?
Click to expand...

Omahan said:
...just how shitty the USSR's army was...
Click to expand...
Looked like you did doubt to me.
Omahan said:
But it is the actions of the commanding officers that goes down in the history books, is it not?
Click to expand...
No. And if you read the books that accent on commanding officers' actions only - burn them. These books are not trustworthy. Let me bring you a small example. Can you name on the fly, without googling it up, who was the Commander-in-Chief of a set of Russian armies that won the battle over Stalingrad (I can because I'm Russian and I have read tons of literature about WWII)? I bet you can't. However, you know for a fact that Russians won, that it was the first time they've surrounded Whermacht armies, and that this victory was a turnover of WWII history.
 
PsychoRealm said:
No. And if you read the books that accent on commanding officers' actions only - burn them. These books are not trustworthy. Let me bring you a small example. Can you name on the fly, without googling it up, who was the Commander-in-Chief of a set of Russian armies that won the battle over Stalingrad (I can because I'm Russian and I have read tons of literature about WWII)? I bet you can't. However, you know for a fact that Russians won, that it was the first time they've surrounded Whermacht armies, and that this victory was a turnover of WWII history.
Click to expand...

Is Zhukov?
 
JayDee said:
Is Zhukov?
Click to expand...

Nope. Plan for operation "Uranus" was developed by Rokossovsky and Vasilevsky. Those too were actually commanding the armies during the operation. Zhukov was just a Deputy Commander-in-Chief who was representing Stalin. If Zhukov was commanding armies during operation "Uranus" Red Army would've lost millions of soldiers again, since Zhukov did not care about causalities and losses.

On the other hand, one of the most skillful and experienced generals Rokossovsky is not well known as Zhukov, even though in army every single soldier loved and respected this talented general.
 
PsychoRealm said:
Nope. Plan for operation "Uranus" was developed by Rokossovsky and Vasilevsky. Those too were actually commanding the armies during the operation. Zhukov was just a Deputy Commander-in-Chief who was representing Stalin. If Zhukov was commanding armies during operation "Uranus" Red Army would've lost millions of soldiers again, since Zhukov did not care about causalities and losses.

On the other hand, one of the most skillful and experienced generals Rokossovsky is not well known as Zhukov, even though in army every single soldier loved and respected this talented general.
Click to expand...

Ah, I don't really know that much of the Eastern front, I'm afraid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back