Jump to content


The Soviet-German War, 1941-1945: Myths and Realities


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
19 replies to this topic

theta0123 #1 Posted 01 March 2012 - 06:52 PM

    Brigadier

  • Beta Tester
  • 5614 battles
  • 4,477
  • [FHA] FHA
  • Member since:
    07-08-2010



Watch this you biased bushwackas! Only is 1 hour and 19 minutes long....

but worth it

TheSmallCompanionCube #2 Posted 01 March 2012 - 07:03 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 6683 battles
  • 337
  • [D4L] D4L
  • Member since:
    12-23-2011
Just finished it....
I should go get a little break.  :mellow:

Aqarius #3 Posted 01 March 2012 - 09:16 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 11182 battles
  • 2,507
  • Member since:
    03-11-2011
Some very interesting points here. Nice watch, just too low quality to actually see anything he's showing.

theta0123 #4 Posted 01 March 2012 - 09:30 PM

    Brigadier

  • Beta Tester
  • 5614 battles
  • 4,477
  • [FHA] FHA
  • Member since:
    07-08-2010
yeah a big shame

Sotahullu #5 Posted 01 March 2012 - 09:42 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 15540 battles
  • 684
  • Member since:
    10-15-2010
I know only couple of facts but the most unbeliable fact was that during '42, Soviets build; 10 000 light tanks, 12 000 medium tanks, 2 000 heavy tanks and got 4 500 tanks by lend-lease.

And at same year they lost frigging 16 000 tanks during that year -_-.


Edit: And 16 000 is more than most armies even possseded...

R_O_N_I_N #6 Posted 01 March 2012 - 10:14 PM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 10740 battles
  • 137
  • Member since:
    11-07-2010
@above: The soviets indeed had amassed the biggest invasion army ever financed by starving millions of ucrainians and selling their crops. If it wasnt for the german pre-emptive strike, you´d be speaking russian now.

Could someone give some basic points of this man at least? I skipped through the video and saw him talk bout technicalities and dont find the mood to spend a full-hour on this without knowing where it leads to.

Whats his main thesis?
What are the myths?
What are the realities?

Would be cool if someone who watched it made a short summary so we have something to debate on.

@Theta: Simply putting up a 1hour+ video and expecting the readership to watch it in a whole and then start a lively debate on it is quite optimistic.A short summary/introduction would have helped.
Whats the main points that made you share this video here?

theta0123 #7 Posted 01 March 2012 - 10:57 PM

    Brigadier

  • Beta Tester
  • 5614 battles
  • 4,477
  • [FHA] FHA
  • Member since:
    07-08-2010

View PostR_O_N_I_N, on 01 March 2012 - 10:14 PM, said:

@above: The soviets indeed had amassed the biggest invasion army ever financed by starving millions of ucrainians and selling their crops. If it wasnt for the german pre-emptive strike, you´d be speaking russian now.

Could someone give some basic points of this man at least? I skipped through the video and saw him talk bout technicalities and dont find the mood to spend a full-hour on this without knowing where it leads to.

Whats his main thesis?
What are the myths?
What are the realities?

Would be cool if someone who watched it made a short summary so we have something to debate on.

@Theta: Simply putting up a 1hour+ video and expecting the readership to watch it in a whole and then start a lively debate on it is quite optimistic.A short summary/introduction would have helped.
Whats the main points that made you share this video here?
Because this man is unbiased, unlike you with your political talk again bout how russia would have taken over the world...Please dont ruin this thread by PRO german vs PRO SOVIET discussions...
Read his books and you will find out.

R_O_N_I_N #8 Posted 01 March 2012 - 11:04 PM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 10740 battles
  • 137
  • Member since:
    11-07-2010
"Read his book". Thx Theta, but thats not enuff. What points of his you agree with and what makes this video watchworthy?

Popovic123 #9 Posted 01 March 2012 - 11:06 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 15022 battles
  • 843
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

View PostR_O_N_I_N, on 01 March 2012 - 10:14 PM, said:

If it wasnt for the german pre-emptive strike, you´d be speaking russian now.

Pre-emptive strike. Riiight.
And I guess that Holocaust is a myth?

Popovic123 #10 Posted 01 March 2012 - 11:09 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 15022 battles
  • 843
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

View PostR_O_N_I_N, on 01 March 2012 - 11:04 PM, said:

"Read his book". Thx Theta, but thats not enuff. What points of his you agree with and what makes this video watchworthy?

The video shows a man who is obviously a good historian giving out some info from some of his researches that differs primarily from what RUSSIAN historians wrote.
Also, it sheds some light on just how dynamic the conflict on the Eastern Front was.
Well worth watching.
Doubt that you`ll care though, as he is not anti-Russian biased, but seems to be rather objective (despite the fact that what he is saying disagrees with a lot of the stuff Russian historians wrote).

R_O_N_I_N #11 Posted 01 March 2012 - 11:11 PM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 10740 battles
  • 137
  • Member since:
    11-07-2010
Thx popo. Now I might actually give it a look.

theta0123 #12 Posted 01 March 2012 - 11:30 PM

    Brigadier

  • Beta Tester
  • 5614 battles
  • 4,477
  • [FHA] FHA
  • Member since:
    07-08-2010
he disagrees with alot of historians. Even american and some british ones.This presentation of german-soviet war was pretty much his lifework

And RONIN i am deeply dissapointed in what you wrote..Pre emptive strike? jesus christ.....

Aqarius #13 Posted 01 March 2012 - 11:40 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 11182 battles
  • 2,507
  • Member since:
    03-11-2011
Our friend Ronin prefers a, shall we say, slightly different breed of historians http://forum.worldof..._teethhappy.gif

R_O_N_I_N #14 Posted 01 March 2012 - 11:51 PM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 10740 battles
  • 137
  • Member since:
    11-07-2010

Quote

The US has a secretive hidden government organisation. A sort of NKVD with billions to spend and thousands of agents. Some people call it "NSA". Can you believe that? Those conspiracy folk I tell ya...
- Casual sheeple retard during the 1980s

@Aquarius: Mike Rivero is no historian.
@Theta: Of course it was a pre-emptive strike. I seen various clips of german landsers talking bout how the USSR made paratrooping a national sport. Paratroopers cannot be utilized for defense, they are offensive troops. And the USSR had more of them than the rest of the world combined. Same for tanks. Russia had more of them than the rest of the world combined and already attacked/swallowed up some of her surrounding nations ready to finally sweep across europe and "revolutionize her from the outside". Especially the KV which was designed for the european road network but not for rural russia.
The initial successes of the german Barbarossa strike into that invasion army can only be explained, that the red collossus was in attack mode. There were no anti-tank obstacles, there was no barbed wire, there was no mine fields.
Also when I watch the interview with Hitlers personal servant- a man that was around him 24/7, he too testifies that Hitler expected a russian attack soon and forestalled it by attacking first.

Oh, and please let Jesus out of it. He was banned in the USSR. Same for the crucifix.

Aqarius #15 Posted 01 March 2012 - 11:56 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 11182 battles
  • 2,507
  • Member since:
    03-11-2011

View PostR_O_N_I_N, on 01 March 2012 - 11:51 PM, said:

@Aquarius: Mike Rivero is no historian.

For once we agree http://forum.worldof...e_veryhappy.gif

deamy #16 Posted 02 March 2012 - 01:54 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 10731 battles
  • 1,913
  • Member since:
    12-22-2010
Haven't watched it yet but I will later. For now I'll just dump two things here:


1. Here you find the numbers on Soviet tanks losses (+ impact of Lend-Lease), amongst other things. Numbers, not opinions:  

http://operationbarb...thBusters1.html


2. About this pre-emptive strike thing:

If one went by the strength of the forces assembled in the western parts of the Soviet Union and the powerful concentrations of armour in the Bialystok area and around Lwow, it was possible to contend - as Hitler did did in support of his decision to attack - that sooner or later the Soviet Union would take the offensive. On the other hand, the layout of the Soviet forces on 22nd June 1941 did not indicate any immediate intention for aggression on the part of the Soviet Union.

- Field Marshal Erich von Manstein in Lost Victories (1982:181).

Yamaxanadu #17 Posted 02 March 2012 - 02:03 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1215 battles
  • 5,031
  • Member since:
    10-07-2011
If we remember how many times Russian Empire failed to achieve victory in offensive wars... I think that defensive war was the only way for USSR to gain some territories.

Popovic123 #18 Posted 03 March 2012 - 12:18 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 15022 battles
  • 843
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

View Postdeamy, on 02 March 2012 - 01:54 PM, said:

Haven't watched it yet but I will later. For now I'll just dump two things here:


1. Here you find the numbers on Soviet tanks losses (+ impact of Lend-Lease), amongst other things. Numbers, not opinions:  

http://operationbarb...thBusters1.html


2. About this pre-emptive strike thing:

If one went by the strength of the forces assembled in the western parts of the Soviet Union and the powerful concentrations of armour in the Bialystok area and around Lwow, it was possible to contend - as Hitler did did in support of his decision to attack - that sooner or later the Soviet Union would take the offensive. On the other hand, the layout of the Soviet forces on 22nd June 1941 did not indicate any immediate intention for aggression on the part of the Soviet Union.

- Field Marshal Erich von Manstein in Lost Victories (1982:181).

Watch it, then comment. What you wrote has pretty much nothing to do with the video, and the lecture in question.

OldIronsides #19 Posted 07 March 2012 - 10:09 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 4297 battles
  • 1,482
  • Member since:
    10-04-2010

View PostR_O_N_I_N, on 01 March 2012 - 11:51 PM, said:

@Theta: Of course it was a pre-emptive strike. I seen various clips of german landsers talking bout how the USSR made paratrooping a national sport.

Of course, this explains everything, how could we have been so blind? =P

View PostR_O_N_I_N, on 01 March 2012 - 11:51 PM, said:

Paratroopers cannot be utilized for defense, they are offensive troops. And the USSR had more of them than the rest of the world combined.

Ever thought of the possibility that in the country with the biggest expanse there have to be ways to quickly relocate troops? Just my first thought. Also it is a rather weak conclusion that the SU planned an attack because of the huge number of paratroopers.

View PostR_O_N_I_N, on 01 March 2012 - 11:51 PM, said:

and already attacked/swallowed up some of her surrounding nations ready to finally sweep across europe and "revolutionize her from the outside".

Doesn't match Stalin's very own ideological beliefs, sorry. Stalin advocated the "socialism in one country" thesis, unlike Leo Trotzki, an advocator of the "permanent revolution", whose assassination Stalin ordered partly (!) due to these differences.

View PostR_O_N_I_N, on 01 March 2012 - 11:51 PM, said:

Especially the KV which was designed for the european road network but not for rural russia.

Sources? Or just more assumptions, twisted in a way that they might benefit your point of view and political aims?

View PostR_O_N_I_N, on 01 March 2012 - 11:51 PM, said:

The initial successes of the german Barbarossa strike into that invasion army can only be explained, that the red collossus was in attack mode. There were no anti-tank obstacles, there was no barbed wire, there was no mine fields.

No, it can be explained by several other circumstances as well. For example that there was a peace treaty, or that the SU had nearly all of their mid to high-ranking officers eliminated two years before (something most people would not consider benificial for waging war against the rest of the world). Hell, Stalin refused to accept reality, even though he know from several spies and other sources of the German attack plans months before the actual attack. Even when Operation Barbarossa had started, Stalin still did not want to believe the messages he received from the frontlines. Even the trains delivering iron ore (or something) to Germany were still on their way. This all really does not sound like a nation that is ready to start WW2 on their own.


View PostR_O_N_I_N, on 01 March 2012 - 11:51 PM, said:

Also when I watch the interview with Hitlers personal servant- a man that was around him 24/7, he too testifies that Hitler expected a russian attack soon and forestalled it by attacking first.

Ah, you mean the guy that still has this brilliance in his eye when talking about his Führer? Anyway, Hitler already writes about his plans against the SU in that abyssmal book of his, written 1923. And was it 1935 or 1936 when he told the high command of the Wehrmacht about his plans for war?

R_O_N_I_N #20 Posted 08 March 2012 - 12:41 AM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 10740 battles
  • 137
  • Member since:
    11-07-2010
edit.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users