"They raped everyone from eight to 80"

[--am--]

Originally posted by RRAM



WEll, they ran into an army wit 28000 tanks, and 8 million soldiers, with just 4 million soldiers and barely 3500 tanks...

28000 it is all Russian tanks from Brests up to Moscow serviceable and broken, new and old

3500 it is all serviceable German tanks in the first line of an attack on border. If to consider tanks in Germany, France, Czechoslovakia and other countries, total (switching and trophy) leaves for 16000

[straffo]

Originally posted by RRAM



thats what I meant with "less prepared armies, yes", straffo ...

The french army was thought to be the best in the world in 1939, it sure had lots of numbers on it...

but it was an army not ready to deal with the german army  because its defensive mind...I'm not talking about the "maginot line" collective strategic mind, but of more operational and tactical paralysis in the french army command...

there are several instances of this command paralisys, the most important of them involving one of the french heavy armored divisions' Chars used as static defensive pillboxes instead of conducting a counterattack which could've threatened to cut the german drive towards the Channel...

Old theory at work

What is really dramatic is the fact that one of the theorician of modern warfare was de Gaulle ...


With this guy in command + a better organised army Hitler's bellybutton would have been kicked early and the world would  have been different (I hope)

[Boroda]

Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
--am-- and Boroda let me ask you a few things..

During USSR, were you happy? It didn't bother you not to be able to express your opinnions without getting interrogated by KGB or Stasi etc..? It didn't bother not to have free press?

It didn't bother you weren't allowed ever to leave the country? It didn't bother you to have significantly lower standard of living compared to all capitalist countries? It never bothered you to have an industry which spews out pollution reducing the average life expectancy to 50 years? That's still the reality in petrozavodsk. There is an industrial area which has 10 square kilometers of barren area - all trees and vegetation has died from the toxics.

What's your stand on those details?

OK, let's start

I was happy during USSR. JFYI - I was born in 1972.
Allmighty KGB is another cold-war myth. 99% of the so-called "dissidents" who were "suppressed" were fed by the enemy. Some of them still get their cash, now - from Islamic terrorists they adore.

Free press is a myth. There isn't anything "free", and I don't care if I'll read papers from communist party or financial groups.

I happened to "leave the country" and studied in an American high school as an exchange student.

Living standarts that include free professional health care, education, dwelling etc are low!? Hehe.

Industry that spews pollution!? Say what?! Moscow is one of the most "green" cities in the world. Yes, we have cities like Magnitogorsk, but heavy industry produses smoke everywhere, it doesn't matter - Urals or Appalaches. BTW, living standards in Magnitogorsk have always been much higher then even in Moscow or Leningrad, just to compensate the pollution to keep people living there.

50 years!? We didn't reach this mark even after "democratisation" that cut off good 15-20 years. Before the revolution life expectancy was 35 years for males

My friend, I have been to Petrozavodsk 2 years ago, and didn't notice anything unusual. I did drink water directly from Onego. You can find wastelands everywhere, even in Finland. JFYI, Karelia reached the lowest life expectancy in 1943.

[AKSWulfe]

You focus on the ground war- Blitzkrieg relied heavily on the air to supress the armor and infantry.

Size does not necessarily equate to strength.

The French had better tanks, but they were getting decimated in the air. Air power= ground supremacy.

RRAM, by the following, I am beginning to believe you are the Spaniard LuftWannabe who has quit here so many times because of undermodelled German planes...

Seawulfe, you must read some story of the battles in Russia before talking with so much security here. Germans became less and less phenomenal as the war progressed because their soldier pool was drying, and because they were heavily outnumbered anywhere.

And why were their experienced dying? Because they were prepared  for a quick, easy war employing tactics for that kind of war. However, the loss of experienced soldiers was less of a problem... the loss of experienced pilots would of been the bigger problem. Which again leads me to believe you are simply RAM.

There are multiple instances and examples on how the wehrmacht kicked some serious butt up to early 1944. However, since BAgration onwards, that was forever over.

And there are far more instances of Allied groups straight up whooping their ass. Your point here? Germany got lucky they rolled over most of the European continent so early... this gave them a foot hold which had to be breached, which wouldn't be easy. This was not necessarily because of the phenomenal war machine... but more due to the land they held. Any military man will tell you, the person with a continent will have more advantage over someone who has a body of water.

German commanders were awesome on the offensive but were also superb on the defensive. See Manstein's actions during winter'42-spring'43 to get a grasp on what I am talking about...or see Balck's delaying actions on the eastern front in 1944.

Every military has their awesome leaders... but if the whole thing isn't awesome then it doesn't matter one bit.

Uhm... WWII was revolutionary in it's concept of fighting. WWI was trench warfare- sheer power- overwhelm and make them run outta bullets and men first.

WWII was the first war where air power was used in conjunction with ground units. Germany used these new tactics of hitting front line installations, depots and other military targets and then moving in the armor and infantry to great success initially.

So basically this: "Germans were so tough to crack not because the revolutionary concept of offensive warfare"
is this: "because they were -SIMPLY- brilliant tactically, operationally and (in the rare instance when Hitler didnt mess into it), Strategically.". Revolutionary concepts tend to be brilliant tactically, operationally and strategically because the enemy hasn't seen this before.
-SW

[RRAM]

Yep straffo, I agree...De Gaulle was a very capable commander, but when he was given a chance to fight the germans, France already didnt' stand a chance to survive

But he sure created some havoc in his counter attack

Originally posted by --am--



28000 it is all Russian tanks from Brests up to Moscow serviceable and broken, new and old

3500 it is all serviceable German tanks in the first line of an attack on border. If to consider tanks in Germany, France, Czechoslovakia and other countries, total (switching and trophy) leaves for 16000

excuse me, --am--...the Soviet army was deployed on an offensive fashion all around their western line. The major part of the soviet tank force was deployed near the front in June 22.

General Kirponos on the south (he was defending the Kiev front) had around 4500 tanks, just his army...

so one single soviet front had more tanks than the whole wehrmacht....

you get the idea.

[Boroda]

Originally posted by RRAM
excuse me, --am--...the Soviet army was deployed on an offensive fashion all around their western line. The major part of the soviet tank force was deployed near the front in June 22.

General Kirponos on the south (he was defending the Kiev front) had around 4500 tanks, just his army...

so one single soviet front had more tanks than the whole wehrmacht....

you get the idea.

And where do you expext Soviet tanks do be deployed for defence? Siberia!? Bering strait?!

BTW, Kirponos was the smart guy who sent the tanks across the ice of the Finnish Gulf in March, 1940... Sic transit gloria mundi