Reply to topic  [ 69 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Did Russia win WWII? 
Author Message
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2014 5:22 pm
Posts: 326
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
Germany's nuclear program was also trying to use heavy water as a moderator. While it's possible to build a heavy water nuke (it was done in the 50s), it could not be done at the time.

As for Operation Sea Lion? The Germans thought crossing the Channel would be like a normal river crossing. That alone is a recipe for disaster. Besides which, Germany would have needed air and sea superiority. And good weather. Admiral Raeder didn't think it would be possible to ptotect the landing vessels against the Royal Navy, and the Luftwaffe knew that good weather was not guaranteed in the North Sea.

_________________
If every cloud had a silver lining, there would be a lot more plane crashes.


Fri Aug 21, 2015 5:08 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2011 7:11 pm
Posts: 550
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
Quote:
Not really, just made the invasion of Poland go faster.


Oh Arioch no no no, I am sorry but that is entirely untrue. The Soviet Union was very serious about forming a long lasting relationship with Hitler and the economic, military and political support they gave to Nazi Germany ranged from considerable (trainloads of grain, sizeable funds) to critical (oil, manganese, and rubber). Also there was the territorial support of allowing Hitler to virtually ignore a large swathe of Eastern Europe until a time of his choosing, and thus focus his attention and resources elsewhere, a critical factor in Nazi Germany's success. Many people do not realize how chummy the Soviet Union was with Nazi Germany before Hitler's inevitable and sudden betrayal of Stalin.

A small excerpt:
Quote:
Germany and the Soviet Union continued economic, military and political negotiations throughout the last half of 1939, which resulted in a much larger German–Soviet Commercial Agreement was signed on February 11, 1940.[68][69] Under that agreement, the Soviet Union became a major supplier of vital materials to Germany, including petroleum, manganese, copper, nickel, chrome, platinum, lumber and grain.[70] They also received considerable amounts of other vital raw materials, including manganese ore,[69][71] along with the transit of one million tons of soybeans from Manchuria.[52] On January 10, 1941, the countries signed an additional agreement modifying their 1940 commercial agreement, adjusting borders, and resolving other minor disputes.[72]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German%E2%80%93Soviet_Credit_Agreement_(1939)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi%E2%80%93Soviet_economic_relations_(1934%E2%80%9341)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German%E2%80%93Soviet_Border_and_Commercial_Agreement
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany%E2%80%93Soviet_Union_relations_before_1941

Wow, even I didn't know that the aid and trade between the two powers was so considerable, I'm going to have to spend some time studying this.


Fri Aug 21, 2015 5:52 am
Profile

Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:00 pm
Posts: 1065
Location: Athens, Greece
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
RedDwarfIV wrote:
Germany's nuclear program was also trying to use heavy water as a moderator. While it's possible to build a heavy water nuke (it was done in the 50s), it could not be done at the time.

As for Operation Sea Lion? The Germans thought crossing the Channel would be like a normal river crossing. That alone is a recipe for disaster. Besides which, Germany would have needed air and sea superiority. And good weather. Admiral Raeder didn't think it would be possible to ptotect the landing vessels against the Royal Navy, and the Luftwaffe knew that good weather was not guaranteed in the North Sea.


Air Superiority was the sole factor that was really needed, as long as there would be a small Kriegsmarine task force at hand then the RN wouldn't be able to do anything against several hundreds Stukas and other bombers. There was a reason why the war on the Pacific was not decided by battleships but by carriers.

In the Battle of Crete the RN lost 8 ships (two anti-air light cruisers and 6 destroyers) and had 7 others severely damaged (2 battleships, 1 cruisers and 3 destroyers). In those engagements the Luftwaffe suffered minimal casualties (most of their air loses in Crete were air transports). Pound for pound, the RN suffered an overwhelmingly one sided defeat in those anti-air engagements, that was later matched with the slaughter the Japs gave at Force Z at Malaya where the RN lost a battleship and a battlecruiser for only 3 destroyed and 28 damaged japanese planes.

_________________
My fan fics

Looking forward to the Mirror (Final Editing)
The pale horse (irregular updates)


Fri Aug 21, 2015 12:45 pm
Profile

Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2015 7:10 pm
Posts: 3
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
If Fighter Command had withdrawn out of range of the German airfield attacks. Which they were in three days of doing so, the Germans would have the
air control to land early Sept. That meant the British would have had at least two weeks to rest their exhausted pilots and bring in new pilots at an acc. rate.
So on the day of the invasion fighter command would bring their fighters back into position stronger then before.


Fri Aug 21, 2015 5:58 pm
Profile

Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 3:30 pm
Posts: 43
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
Grayhome wrote:
Quote:
Not really, just made the invasion of Poland go faster.


Oh Arioch no no no, I am sorry but that is entirely untrue. The Soviet Union was very serious about forming a long lasting relationship with Hitler and the economic, military and political support they gave to Nazi Germany ranged from considerable (trainloads of grain, sizeable funds) to critical (oil, manganese, and rubber). Also there was the territorial support of allowing Hitler to virtually ignore a large swathe of Eastern Europe until a time of his choosing, and thus focus his attention and resources elsewhere, a critical factor in Nazi Germany's success. Many people do not realize how chummy the Soviet Union was with Nazi Germany before Hitler's inevitable and sudden betrayal of Stalin.

A small excerpt:
Quote:
Germany and the Soviet Union continued economic, military and political negotiations throughout the last half of 1939, which resulted in a much larger German–Soviet Commercial Agreement was signed on February 11, 1940.[68][69] Under that agreement, the Soviet Union became a major supplier of vital materials to Germany, including petroleum, manganese, copper, nickel, chrome, platinum, lumber and grain.[70] They also received considerable amounts of other vital raw materials, including manganese ore,[69][71] along with the transit of one million tons of soybeans from Manchuria.[52] On January 10, 1941, the countries signed an additional agreement modifying their 1940 commercial agreement, adjusting borders, and resolving other minor disputes.[72]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German%E2%80%93Soviet_Credit_Agreement_(1939)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi%E2%80%93Soviet_economic_relations_(1934%E2%80%9341)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German%E2%80%93Soviet_Border_and_Commercial_Agreement
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany%E2%80%93Soviet_Union_relations_before_1941

Wow, even I didn't know that the aid and trade between the two powers was so considerable, I'm going to have to spend some time studying this.


In turn the soviets got much needed machine tools and other pieces of advanced equipment. both sides gained from the agreement, but both sides had to know it was going to come down to who was fastest on the backstab.


Fri Aug 21, 2015 6:53 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2011 7:11 pm
Posts: 550
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
Quote:
but both sides had to know it was going to come down to who was fastest on the backstab.


From what I remember from a BBC documentary detailing the friendship and betrayal of Hitler and Stalin I watched years ago; Stalin spent a few days (was it a week or more?) in denial during the initial Nazi invasion of Russia. Stalin flat out refused to believe his generals when they told him that German troops were invading Russia, refusing to order any sort of preparation or defense. I will try to find more information sometime tomorrow, it's late here.

I think I remember the documentary claiming that Stalin was seen crying by his aides at the thought of his best friend Hitler's betrayal. They were planning to enslave the world together after all, Stalin took it pretty hard.


Fri Aug 21, 2015 8:49 pm
Profile
Online

Joined: Wed May 20, 2015 2:14 am
Posts: 446
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
And while the Germans got stuff they needed right now, and had the industrial machinery to use, the Russians got machines, they had to install first, get to know, calibrate, and start using.
On top of that, the Germans delayed their deliveries, while the Russians remained timely (in fear of giving the Germans a reason to start fighting).
The few weapons the red army received from Nazi-Germany were useful, but by far from enough to modernize more than the absolute minimum of the red army.

_________________
Vote for Outsider on TWC: Image


Sat Aug 22, 2015 3:47 am
Profile

Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2015 5:00 pm
Posts: 327
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
Krulle wrote:
And while the Germans got stuff they needed right now, and had the industrial machinery to use, the Russians got machines, they had to install first, get to know, calibrate, and start using.
On top of that, the Germans delayed their deliveries, while the Russians remained timely (in fear of giving the Germans a reason to start fighting).
The few weapons the red army received from Nazi-Germany were useful, but by far from enough to modernize more than the absolute minimum of the red army.


The Soviet equipment also had the advantage of not being overengineered like the German stuff tend to be. Uncool stuff that works win over cool stuff that doesn't. The Soviets, and largely the allies at large went for "boring but practical", they had some amazing stuff as well thou, especially when they could afford to take the time to finish a design before fielding it. The American mustang fighter both look cool was effective and had an awesome range.


Sat Aug 22, 2015 7:13 am
Profile
Online

Joined: Wed May 20, 2015 2:14 am
Posts: 446
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
What Germany needed from Russia were grain/food and raw-materials (oil and rubber).
No engineering needed at al....
But Germany needed the supplies, otherwise the war would have ended after a few months due to lack of rubber.
Most of what Stalin delivered was in theend what enabled Nazi Germany to atack Russia at all.

_________________
Vote for Outsider on TWC: Image


Sat Aug 22, 2015 1:47 pm
Profile

Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 6:41 pm
Posts: 38
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
My understanding is that World War II ended on August 15, 1945 with the surrender of Japan via Emperor Hirohito on board the USS Missouri, meaning that regardless of who defeated Germany, a very valid statement could be made that the US, despite having the least overall investment of WWII of the three main Allied powers (USSR, UK, USA) won WWII at that moment.

It would be more accurate to say that the allies together won WWII. But does anyone truly win a war?

Germany, Italy, and Japan -lost- WWII is the truer statement.


Tue Aug 25, 2015 3:48 pm
Profile YIM

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 12:44 am
Posts: 600
Location: Umeå, Sweden
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
15 March 1991 is when ww2 ended.
And yes, the Russians did the heavy lifting in the war.


Wed Aug 26, 2015 1:27 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2011 7:11 pm
Posts: 550
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
Quote:
And yes, the Russians did the heavy lifting in the war.


We seem to be in complete agreement, see my previous post for how much heavy lifting they actually did, by the trainload. The wiki links are quite revealing.


Wed Aug 26, 2015 6:18 am
Profile

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 10:42 am
Posts: 155
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
No disagreement here either about them doing the heavy lifting.

But, to expand the metaphor, I don't think they could have lifted enough* without the steroids the west sent them, without Germany being 'lighter' from a poor diet due to the western blockade/bombing campaign, and without the (less that the Russians, but still significant) lifting done by the west.

*In any high intensity, conventional war sense... a 30 or 50 year guerrilla campaign, possibly against a changed German leadership, who knows?


Wed Aug 26, 2015 8:44 am
Profile

Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2015 4:51 am
Posts: 51
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
To jump into this a bit late, I'd like to add that there has been recent historical speculation that it was also the threat of a soviet invasion that helped pushed the Japanese into capitulation.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/05/30/the ... talin-did/
(Non-subscribers can only read 1 article a month I think, so don't open any other article or you won't be granted access)

One of the reasons why the Soviet forces could be called the heavy lifters of the war is that they could achieve with pure brute force what the rest of the Allies needed code-breakers to do. Most of the British & American victories, such as the successful invasion of normandy and the battle of midway, could be heavily attributed to knowing where the axis were, and what they were planning to do (also what they believed the allies were planning on doing). Successful codebreaking also helped make many defeats much more phyrric for the axis, such as the Italian invasion of Greece.

http://www.history.co.uk/study-topics/h ... e-breaking

I don't know much about Soviet code-breaking during ww2, but as the the codebreaking expertise of the British & Americans were based of the earlier code-breaking formula from the Polish, I doubt the Soviets had as much success, as the polish had no reason to share their findings with Russia, for obvious reasons.

In my opinion, by the Mid war years, Soviet Russia could have functioned autonomously even without Allied help, and could have won the war eventually even on its own.

What was lacking in the early years though, was expertise, momentum, and popular public support. The Army and Navy had been gutted by the purges, the Industry and infrastructure was nowhere close to being able to support total war footing needed to match the Germans. A simple perusal of Frozen Hell : The Russo-Finish Winter War of 1939-1940 by William Trotter is enough to underline just how inept the russian army and airforce had become due to the purges and the commissariat (If I remember correctly, it was defeats in this war that convinced Stalin to tone down the commissariat authority, but there was nowhere near enough reform by the time of Operation Barbarossa).

Furthermore, many minorities and population groups were disgruntled by Stalin's many heavy handed (and not very successful) projects. Many of these people were indifferent to nazi occupation (or worse, welcoming), as they took the view "no one could be worse then Stalin!". True, it didn't take too long for them to change their minds and flock to the partisan camps, but without allied support to bolster the frontline and jumpstart their industry, Russia itself could have fractured under pressure. After all, Stalin was a dictator, if his reputation and power was weakened enough, many military and political leaders could have simply decided to abandon him.

Also, finally, it does seem that Stalin, funnily enough, had tried to be chummy with powerful world leaders a few times (who he considered equals), but his own reputation and character defects always made him misunderstood and/or inevitably back-stabbed. Another example of a World leader he tried to be chums with is president Truman.

https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/di ... occupation

Alright, I know I didn't give you any straight answers, but since this is a speculative question the best I could supply is food for thought. Hope it helps.


Wed Aug 26, 2015 9:18 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:19 pm
Posts: 2308
Location: San Jose, CA
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
Logannion wrote:
To jump into this a bit late, I'd like to add that there has been recent historical speculation that it was also the threat of a soviet invasion that helped pushed the Japanese into capitulation.

I think that's true, but neither of these elements "won" the war; they just helped to get the Japanese leadership to admit that it was already over. Even without the threat of Soviet invasion the Japanese would eventually have surrendered; it's just a matter of how many cities had to be incinerated.

Logannion wrote:
Furthermore, many minorities and population groups were disgruntled by Stalin's many heavy handed (and not very successful) projects. Many of these people were indifferent to nazi occupation (or worse, welcoming), as they took the view "no one could be worse then Stalin!". True, it didn't take too long for them to change their minds and flock to the partisan camps, but without allied support to bolster the frontline and jumpstart their industry, Russia itself could have fractured under pressure. After all, Stalin was a dictator, if his reputation and power was weakened enough, many military and political leaders could have simply decided to abandon him.

To say that Stalin's subjects were "disgruntled" is underselling it a bit; tens of millions died of starvation under his regime. If the Germans had invaded as liberators rather than homicidal maniacs, no doubt many of the people of Ukraine and Belarus and the various Baltic States, and even some Russians would gladly have fought on the German side instead of being forced to rally around Stalin. But as has been said, if the Nazis hadn't been homicidal maniacs, they probably wouldn't have invaded Russia in the first place.

_________________
Outsider


Wed Aug 26, 2015 9:45 pm
Profile WWW

Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2015 4:51 am
Posts: 51
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
Arioch wrote:
Logannion wrote:
To jump into this a bit late, I'd like to add that there has been recent historical speculation that it was also the threat of a soviet invasion that helped pushed the Japanese into capitulation.

I think that's true, but neither of these elements "won" the war; they just helped to get the Japanese leadership to admit that it was already over. Even without the threat of Soviet invasion the Japanese would eventually have surrendered; it's just a matter of how many cities had to be incinerated.


Yeah, I'm somewhat dubious about supporting that claim myself, but the article did specifically state that it was the threat of having to fight 2 superpowers on two fronts was a recipe for disaster that was readily apparent to the Japanese. Because even after the bomb I do believe reading that there were some generals that still tried to stop Hirohito from broadcasting the surrender.

Arioch wrote:
To say that Stalin's subjects were "disgruntled" is underselling it a bit; tens of millions died of starvation under his regime. If the Germans had invaded as liberators rather than homicidal maniacs, no doubt many of the people of Ukraine and Belarus and the various Baltic States, and even some Russians would gladly have fought on the German side instead of being forced to rally around Stalin. But as has been said, if the Nazis hadn't been homicidal maniacs, they probably wouldn't have invaded Russia in the first place.


It's been a long time since I've read WW2 history, so I'd rather understate rather than exaggerate. I think its safe to say that one of Hitler's worst decisions was to have those territories that were inhabited by 'subhumans' be garrisoned by hardline SS troops. Instead of the less facist regular army units.


Wed Aug 26, 2015 10:14 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:19 pm
Posts: 2308
Location: San Jose, CA
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
Logannion wrote:
Yeah, I'm somewhat dubious about supporting that claim myself, but the article did specifically state that it was the threat of having to fight 2 superpowers on two fronts was a recipe for disaster that was readily apparent to the Japanese. Because even after the bomb I do believe reading that there were some generals that still tried to stop Hirohito from broadcasting the surrender.

My understanding is that the Japanese were truly terrified of the prospect of occupation by the Russians. They may have viewed the Americans as barbarians, but that's nothing compared to how they viewed the Russians (whom they had fought against before).

Logannion wrote:
I think its safe to say that one of Hitler's worst decisions was to have those territories that were inhabited by 'subhumans' be garrisoned by hardline SS troops. Instead of the less facist regular army units.

I agree, but again -- Hitler's purpose behind the invasion was to exterminate those subhumans so that their arable land could be taken over by proper Aryan farmers. Treating them humanely was never part of his plan.

_________________
Outsider


Wed Aug 26, 2015 10:55 pm
Profile WWW

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 10:42 am
Posts: 155
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
My opinion is that, by August 1945, most of the Japanese leadership was looking for a way to end the war without having an invasion of the home islands, and without losing an unbearable amount of face. The two atomic bombs mostly provided this. Fighting and losing to other (non-Japanese) men is shameful. Trying to fight against atomic bombs, though, is like trying to fight a force of nature, or even the supernatural. There is less or no shame in the merely mortal giving way is such a case.

The Soviet declaration may have sped up the process, but it wasn't necessary to it. And yeah, the Japanese leadership most definitely didn't want Japan partitioned into occupation zones where -any- of those zones were occupied by the Soviets. From the Japanese perspective, the USSR both the history and proximity to try to keep parts of Japan if they ever got their mitts on them.


Thu Aug 27, 2015 3:01 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 11:31 am
Posts: 581
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
I wonder, had the Allies already partioned off occupation zones in Japan prior to its defeat like was agreed over Germany between the Western Allies and the Soviet Union?

_________________
Image


Thu Aug 27, 2015 10:25 am
Profile

Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 2:00 pm
Posts: 1065
Location: Athens, Greece
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
iirc Japan was deemed under the US sphere of influence in the Yalta conference, with several key issues regarding China, Mongolia, the Sahkalin and the Kuril islands to be concluded with the terms that the USSR would dictate. The USSR had given guarantees in regards to an independent Korea (i.e. not annexed by anyone else) but nothing concrete about under whose sphere of influence the Koreans would end up.

In the end both parties distrusted each other and went into a massive land grab in order to solidify what they signed, to no ones surprise Korean independence didn't mean a single unified Korea once troops from the US and USSR met around the 38th parallel in what is best described as an unspoken and unsigned agreement between superpowers.

_________________
My fan fics

Looking forward to the Mirror (Final Editing)
The pale horse (irregular updates)


Thu Aug 27, 2015 11:18 am
Profile

Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 9:33 pm
Posts: 669
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
As far as the Japanese go, I understand that most of their leadership was aiming for a conditional surrender... which is not what we gave them. There were probably one or two who thought that they could still "win" (there always is), there were certainly some who felt so shamed that they committed suicide, etc. Japanese society just wasn't flexible enough at the time.

JQBogus wrote:
The Soviet declaration may have sped up the process, but it wasn't necessary to it. And yeah, the Japanese leadership most definitely didn't want Japan partitioned into occupation zones where -any- of those zones were occupied by the Soviets. From the Japanese perspective, the USSR both the history and proximity to try to keep parts of Japan if they ever got their mitts on them.
Actually, Russia still does have a few islands that they seized during WW2. There's been a minor three-way (US, Japan, Russia/USSR) diplomatic conflict around them since the war.

As for the Soviets in WW2, let's be frank: the Germans weren't realistically going to defeat the Russians at any point, though they might have been able to acquire a negotiated truce. One of the big problems that they had is that the Soviets were actually able to move a lot of their factories beyond the reach of the Germans (I think beyond the Ural mountains), so unless the Germans managed to get bombers that could do the job they were never actually going to eliminate the USSR's industrial capacity. Also, while the Soviets never had most of their vehicles working (they were always aware that we would accidentally steam-roll them if the Cold War turned hot, for example), the vehicles that did work would work during the Russian Winter, which was generally not the case for German designs: one way or another, the Nazis were going to have major losses each winter for a few years, which the Soviets could replace easier than them. If the Soviets had been able to keep their factories running (and, obviously, expanding) for a decade or two, only intervention by the Allies would likely have been enough to keep Germany unconquered. Also during that time, they would have had time to come closer to everyone else in terms of artillery: the Soviets had bombers and incompetents, while everyone else was more balanced (except for the USA, which went the other direction with artillery: the artillery crews could guide the infantry over the radio in how to give spotting directions, and things were organized such that other artillery crews both could and did take "bombardments of opportunity").

But, really, in general this shouldn't be too surprising. During the most recent recession, the total GDP that America lost was comparable to Germany's total GDP, both lost and retained. If either the USSR or the USA had fought the Nazis for a decade or two then the Nazis would have lost, because they just weren't in the same weight bracket in the first place. But at least they were in a better position than Japan or Italy, both of which were considered incapable of standing without German support.

As for Hitler and Stalin, it's time for another piece of frankness (mostly directed at Greyhome): Stalin always intended to attack Hitler. Stalin's big problem during the initial attack is pretty simple: he was so worried about a coup that he didn't have any attention to spare. When he first heard the news he was relieved, because his first thought was that the coup might be starting right then. He had, after all, not merely instigated genocides and purges against his own countrymen, but had accidentally destroyed the only strain of wheat that could survive in some parts of the USSR's breadbasket: when last I heard, they still couldn't grow wheat there, despite the passage of decades, and the Soviet leadership was coming to understand it then. The Germans were a military threat, but strategically were actually inferior to the Russian system (the competent generals were mostly dead, but the strategic system was quite good for a hierarchical system, while the Germans basically had the tactical Blitzkrieg: once again, the Germans were fighting beyond their weight class).


Thu Aug 27, 2015 5:22 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2011 7:11 pm
Posts: 550
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
Absalom a few of your points caught my attention.

Quote:
As for the Soviets in WW2, let's be frank: the Germans weren't realistically going to defeat the Russians at any point, though they might have been able to acquire a negotiated truce.


The early German push smashed through Russia and annihilated everything it encountered without any significant Russian resistance that I am aware of. That is with sizable portions of the Nazi war machine scattered and engaged across the globe. I... simply do not see how the Russian Army, which had such poor performance in Poland and Finland, could possibly stand up to the full force of the veteran Nazi war machine. The topic of this thread is not that Russia could have gotten to a point of negotiated truce, but that Russia won WWII single handedly, and that any and all help provided by the Allies was incidental. It is a very strange claim I am seeing online these days, and directly conflicts with what I know of WWII.

Quote:
One of the big problems that they had is that the Soviets were actually able to move a lot of their factories beyond the reach of the Germans (I think beyond the Ural mountains), so unless the Germans managed to get bombers that could do the job they were never actually going to eliminate the USSR's industrial capacity.


From what I understand of Russia's economy and resources before Lend Lease, Russia lacked the ability to produce enough belt buckles and boots for the soldiers needed to fight Germany, let alone the resources necessary to forge the munitions and armored divisions. Without the resources provided by the Allies I cannot see where the Russians would have gotten the materials needed to produce anything. I have heard statements from Russian military commanders and Stalin himself saying as much.

Quote:
As for Hitler and Stalin, it's time for another piece of frankness (mostly directed at Greyhome): Stalin always intended to attack Hitler.


With respect Absalom I do not see how that is relevant.

It doesn't change the fact that Stalin aided Nazi Germany immensely during the war. It doesn't change the fact that Stalin initiated the Great Purge, wiping out tens of thousands of his best and most experienced officers, dramatically weakening Russia’s military. It doesn't change the fact that Russia was decimated by the early Nazi push through a combination of factors including terrible Russian leadership, inadequate supplies and no real preparation on Russia’s part. It doesn't change the fact that Stalin committed terrible errors in judgment by supplying massive amounts of vital resources (which he would desperately need later) to Nazi Germany, or that he ignored his spy network when they told him that a Nazi invasion force was massing on his border.

With respect Absalom I am seeing a lot of opinions in your post, and not much in the way of anything substantive to back up your claims.


Last edited by Grayhome on Fri Aug 28, 2015 5:29 am, edited 1 time in total.



Thu Aug 27, 2015 8:10 pm
Profile

Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2011 6:04 pm
Posts: 262
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
One thing I havent seen mentioned here is how close the Germans got to Moscow and the few remaining factories the Russians did have in their first push. That push was delayed by a month by allied action and bad weather, was undermanned as the Germans split their forces, and rushed to completion so the eastern front forces could be demobilized or sent back to the west. Had the Germans been free to focus their full weight, and planned and supplied for a fight and occupation lasting through the winter rather than a mere three months, the outcome would likely have been quite different.

Quote:
I agree, but again -- Hitler's purpose behind the invasion was to exterminate those subhumans so that their arable land could be taken over by proper Aryan farmers. Treating them humanely was never part of his plan.


Which is the same thing the Russians had already been doing in Ukraine Georgia and elsewhere, just replacing Aryans with Russian proletariat party members. Great folks all around.


Thu Aug 27, 2015 11:33 pm
Profile

Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:20 pm
Posts: 80
Location: Moscow
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
Quote:
Which is the same thing the Russians had already been doing in Ukraine Georgia and elsewhere, just replacing Aryans with Russian proletariat party members. Great folks all around.


Are you crazy?

I really did not want to write this topic.So, if you want to learn more about Russian participation in the war, go to the Russian forums, read Russian books(keep out of Rezun books, this is historical fantasy, nothing more). I read both American and British, they are not talking about very many events and things. The most obvious (to me) example - in one of the books said that all Soviet radars supplied under Lend-Lease. It lies - on the ships radars (RUS-1, 2(RUS - "Radio Ulovitel Samoletov" - "Radio Finder of Airplanes"); "Redoubt") stood from 1938, at the Soviet-made aircrafts our radars were set from 1942 ("Gneiss")
Fighter Pe-2/3 with Gneiss, and of battle of Moscow, 1942.
http://www.airwar.ru/image/idop/fww2/pe ... neys-3.jpg

We got a lot of technology by Lend-Lease, yes, but its quality was far from desirable. And if planes AirCobra, Spitfire, Boston, and cars Studebaker and Willis, machines guns Browning enjoyed well-deserved popularity and were really good, for the aircrafts P-40 and Hurricane used one word - "shit", and tanks M4 soldiers called "Mogila-4-mestnaya" (" Four-grave "). Compare with this nicknames "Katyusha" - a BM-13, "Swallow" - SU-76, "Deerslayer" - SU-152.
Many British artillery guns was did not shoot any one time and used as anti-hedgehogs because British don't send a shells or guns was faulty.

And most importantly - we divide the Second World War into two - with Germany and Japan. And we talks what we a destroyed Hitler's Germany. And Americans - Japan, we only helped them a little bit.


Fri Aug 28, 2015 2:57 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2011 7:11 pm
Posts: 550
Post Re: Did Russia win WWII?
Many scholars have examined Russian history books. They're (and there is no polite way of saying this) of very poor quality. Stalin and the leaders of Russia post WWII were not known for their honesty or truthfulness, and the historical fact that Russia regularly and casually committed genocide against... pretty much everyone they enslaved is common knowledge. The genocidal politics employed by the Russians were why their neighbors despise them so much and one of the reasons why the Soviet Union collapsed during the cold war.

Poland, Ukraine, Finland, etc are to this day very vocal on the subject.


Fri Aug 28, 2015 5:26 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 69 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Suederwind and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.