Huh? So, you're saying that when the Germans took control of the country and the Russians pushed the Germans out, that that was bad thing? Bet the Polish Jews would disagree with you.
Since when is saying Russia defeated Germany in WWII controversial?,...
- Thread starter preshlock
- Start date
I have absolutely no idea what you are going on about. In September 1939 Poland was divided in half between the Germans and Soviets. In June 1941 the Germans took the part of Poland that had been occupied by the Soviets. Between August 1944 & February 1945 the Soviets took all of Poland.
Germany losing the war was a very good thing.
What's interesting is that just 8ish years ago and beyond the board conservatives would have - and did - argue the opposite side. That America saved the war effort by entering when they did, they'd talk about North Africa, Italy, the Pacific, the aid, that Russia was cannon fodder, etc.
You know the typical nationalistic pride, back to back world war champs, undefeated, the best. The kind of white washing we still sometimes see when we want to pretend that slavery wasn't such a big deal and that it's best to focus on the great and patriotic things about the greatest country ever.
But now it's just, Russia beat the Germans, and that's a good enough description.
You know the typical nationalistic pride, back to back world war champs, undefeated, the best. The kind of white washing we still sometimes see when we want to pretend that slavery wasn't such a big deal and that it's best to focus on the great and patriotic things about the greatest country ever.
But now it's just, Russia beat the Germans, and that's a good enough description.
so you believe that in November 1943 Stalin thought the Soviets were going to lose the war?
You moved the goalposts. The Main Board?? Once it became 90% Trump loving I left. Too depressing.
Why don't you just ignore him? I get that admitting an error is uncomfortable, but reasonable people will read this very easy to follow interaction and realize that the quote provided is something of the sort.
what specifically do you think Stalin was talking about in late 1943? I have explained repeatedly ITT the Germans were not going to conquer the European part of the Soviet Union.
So unless you specifically say otherwise I'm to take that you truly believe Stalin thought Soviets could lose in late 1943.
Why do you believe the Soviets were going to lose the war in late 1943?
I'm well aware of the quote. Zhukov made similar remarks. Neither was speaking about the Germans conquering the Soviet Union. Both were equating victory/defeat with the total defeat of Germany.
I'll ask you the same question. Do you believe Stalin thought the Soviet Union could be defeated in late 1943. If so what did that defeat entail.
in late 1943 Eisenhower said that if the Germans and the Soviets made peace the Germans could not be defeated on the Western Front. What do you think he meant by that?
Dude…I’m not arguing any of this. You got proven wrong in post 7 and changed your argument. Just own it and move on.
I agree with much of what you’re saying. Jeessh.
Have a book in my library “How Hitler could have won WW2”, laying out some hypothetical scenarios where Germany could have won the war.
Most of which required quick victories before the Allies could fully mobilize and/or allowing his generals to fight the war.
In regards to Russia, he needed to either put the focus of the invasion solely on Moscow instead of the 3-pronged invasion they initiated. Taking Moscow would have allowed them to effectively cut industrialized Russia in 2; and made logistics for Russia nearly impossible for months if not years as Moscow was the biggest transportation hub they had.
The other option would have been to move south and threaten Russian access to the oil fields in the Caucasus which would also have greatly damaged their ability to fight on.
Both remained long shots of course, but represented far better options that Barbarossa provided them.
Most of which required quick victories before the Allies could fully mobilize and/or allowing his generals to fight the war.
In regards to Russia, he needed to either put the focus of the invasion solely on Moscow instead of the 3-pronged invasion they initiated. Taking Moscow would have allowed them to effectively cut industrialized Russia in 2; and made logistics for Russia nearly impossible for months if not years as Moscow was the biggest transportation hub they had.
The other option would have been to move south and threaten Russian access to the oil fields in the Caucasus which would also have greatly damaged their ability to fight on.
Both remained long shots of course, but represented far better options that Barbarossa provided them.
No, why would you ask me this question?
What I will say is that I think the Stalin quote is much closer to "something of the sort" as opposed to "nothing of the sort". But I also realize that for some people - especially those who have expertise in a subject which is clear that you do - have great difficulty in admitting any sort of fault or possible error. Often times those people look like overly sensitive douchebags, they'll try to twist the discussion, perhaps by asking a different question such as you have done repeatedly.
so you think Stalin believed the Soviets could have been defeated in November 1943. No reason for further discussion with you.
Soviets weren't marching them to death camps. I'm not sure you understand what divided was meant in these terms. They were still fighting a war and the frontlines split Poland.
effectively until mid-1943 that is what he did. After the middle part of 1943 the Allies had a major role in assisting Soviet victories.
I don't know. What do you think about people who make a very mild misstatement on a anonymous message board but are too sensitive to just acknowledge it or even just ignore it? Instead they dig in for no seemingly apparently reason that is just the way that they are?
I'm well aware of the Stalin quote.
I've made my position very clear in the thread. Stalin equated defeat with being unable to completely defeat Nazi Germany not the Soviet Union being conquered by the Germans.
Waiting to invade Russia until after Britain was defeated would have been a good way to go....or not invading Russia at all.
Not declaring war on the U.S after Dec 7 could have made things interesting.
I meant in 1939--the start--not **** around all over Europe and North Africa.
That was my point.
when Germany invaded the Soviet Union the Germans had 153 divisions of 3,300,000 troops on the Eastern Front. The only other active front was North Africa where the Germans had 3 divisions of 45,000 troops. Even after German defeat there the Germans did not have significantly reinforce Italy until late 1943. When the Allies landed in Sicily the Germans had 6 divisions in Italy with one on Sicily. During that time the Germans had 175 divisions on the Eastern Front.
During the late summer and fall of 1943 the Germans began to substantially reinforce both France and Italy.
The Stalin quote meant not conquering Germany not the Soviet Union being conquered by the Germans.
the General Staff presented a Middle Eastern alternative to Hitler for 1941 instead of invading the Soviet Union. The plan was to bring Turkey into the Axis and stage an entire Army Group there which would march south to the Persian Gulf.
Hitler was uninterested as for fundamental reasons he believed the future of German required conquests in the East. Further more reaching the Ural Mountains would, in Hitler's view, have brought Turkey and Persia into the Axis. So he decided to go forward with Barbarossa.
By the time of the Tehran Conference in 1943 the Soviet Union had,,..
pushed the Germans almost entirely out of Russia. Smolensk had been retaken at the beginning of October and the Germans only held Crimea, the Taman Peninsula, and the approaches around Smolensk & Leningrad. The eastern half of Ukraine had been retaken and notably Kiev was regained in early November. By the time Stalin arrived in Tehran German casualties on the Eastern Front had amounted to about 3,700,000 {KIA, WIA, MIA, & POW}. In no way did Stalin believe the Soviet Union would be conquered by Germany.
pushed the Germans almost entirely out of Russia. Smolensk had been retaken at the beginning of October and the Germans only held Crimea, the Taman Peninsula, and the approaches around Smolensk & Leningrad. The eastern half of Ukraine had been retaken and notably Kiev was regained in early November. By the time Stalin arrived in Tehran German casualties on the Eastern Front had amounted to about 3,700,000 {KIA, WIA, MIA, & POW}. In no way did Stalin believe the Soviet Union would be conquered by Germany.
It's not a attribute I wish to have or that I would wish upon any friend or family member, but I will say that stubbornness can be a very amusing trait, especially when the afflicted is merely an anonymous poster on a internet message board. Your inability to cede any ground on this is about as entertaining as the actual discussion of the history. Are you like this on other topics (all?) are you a bit different socially?
I completely understand if you do no feel comfortable answering, but frequently on this board, the posters themselves are more interesting than the topics that they post about.
Saying the Russian war machine defeated Napoleon is ridiculous. Even the movie Minions gets that piece of history correct.
I honestly care more about Ohio State winning the NC this season than Donald Trump winning the election. But saying that Russia defeated Germany is true.
By the time of Tehran,..
the Red Army pushed the Germans almost entirely out of Russia. Smolensk had been retaken at the beginning of October and the Germans only held Crimea, the Taman Peninsula, and the approaches around Smolensk & Leningrad. The eastern half of Ukraine had been retaken and notably Kiev was regained in early November. By the time Stalin arrived in Tehran German casualties on the Eastern Front had amounted to about 3,700,000 {KIA, WIA, MIA, & POW}. In no way did Stalin believe the Soviet Union would be conquered by Germany.
Stalin wasn't talking about the Germans conquering the Soviet Union. I bet you were a staunch Brian Ferentz supporter.
Soviets did not do the Holocaust and did liberate concentration camps but they also killed plenty of Polish during the war and they purged Poland of anyone they deemed threats to Soviet rule after the war.
Yeah that was another one - in particular the shift in targets away from the airfields. The British were close to having to decide if they’d have to abandon the southernmost airbases due to the heavy casualties they were taking and saving the rest for the invasion itself.
Here’s the book if you’re interested
How Hitler Could Have Won World War II: The Fatal Errors That Led to Nazi Defeat https://www.amazon.com/dp/0609808443?ref_=cm_sw_r_apin_dp_WFQAQ3R09HT4SZ38XNXJ&language=en-US
???? quoted wrong post or your own way of answering if you are a socially different type of person?
Definitely not a Brian Ferentz supporter.
will be interesting to see what happens with the Hawkeyes now that they don't have the West Division to hide in.
Stalin didn't think the Soviet Union was going to be "defeated" in November 1943.
Lot's of interesting "what if's" in WW2
