Russia’s Four Immortal Generals

[Zhukov]

Legendary General Gregory Zhukov?

 

[notorious_eagle]

Red Army received lot of hype after WW-II but its performance was actually terrible. They won because they were never short on men and material and Germans were not prepared for Russian winter and they were also fighting on many fronts.

That's incompetence on the German side than. If the Red Army's performance was terrible, we would have the Nazi flag flying over Moscow, not the other way around.

Fallacies don't equate to reality. Human wave attacks can only get you so far against machine guns and artillery. By 1942 the Red Army was well on its way to re-master the operational arts of battlefield and Operation Uranus is a good measure of that where they masterfully encircled the Axis Forces. The depth of defences prepared in Kursk to grind German resources, and than the counterattacks that were planned that largely ended the Third Reich could not have been achieved with men alone.

Just look at the kill ratio of both forces during the course of war.

And what was the end result? Who won?

Yes, Zhukov won the largest and most famous victory in the history of mankind. He must be in the list.

Zhukov can be credited with destroying the offensive capabilities of Wehrmacht. His defences at Kursk, and than vicious counterattacks after largely destroyed Wehrmacht's offensive capabilities and the complete destruction of Army Group by Summer 1944. It was nothing short of a masterstroke. We also cannot discount the defence of Moscow, and the pincer attack so beautifully planned by Zhukov.

I feel strangely when I say about the obvious things that it is the USSR that owns the lion's share in the victory over Nazism.

Why do you feel strange when its the truth? Wehrmacht's best fighting divisions met their end in Russia. Majority of Wehrmacht's resources and best fighting men were deployed on the East, not the West. USSR and Nazi Germany were fighting battles of annihilation. We didn't see this ferocity of fighting on the Western front. The Eastern front was a whole different ball game; and with persistence, bravery and superior planning/execution, USSR emerged victorious.

 

[vostok]

Why do you feel strange when its the truth?

I mean I feel strange when I have to explain such obvious things.

 

[LeGenD]

That's incompetence on the German side than. If the Red Army's performance was terrible, we would have the Nazi flag flying over Moscow, not the other way around.

Before I embark on my critic, I shall make this clear that Soviet war-effort in WW2 is nothing short of amazing; in resolve; in scale; in capability; and in bravery. A lesser society would have fallen apart in its place. Credit where due. @vostok

My critic is in regards to combat effectiveness of the Red Army and the tendency of some observers to overlook other factors that contributed to fall of Wehrmacht! Nothing personal.

----

Adolph Hitler was at fault; he had an unfortunate habit of overruling his generals.

Shortcomings of Wehrmacht notwithstanding, Red Army's performance was (holistically) terrible as well. Have a look at Soviet losses in WW2: http://www.self.gutenberg.org/articles/eng/World_War_II_casualties_of_the_Soviet_Union?View=embedded'

- 8,668,000 KIA
- 22,326,905 WIA

Absolutely horrible. Thanks in part to questionable Soviet tactics. Another problem was that Soviets were lacking in Air and Naval fronts to offset pressure from troops on the ground.

Now keep in mind that Russian Winter took its toll on German war-fighting capability* and Allied Lend Lease program ensured that Soviets were never short on crucial equipment in dire times**.

*Comprehensive information in this source: https://history.army.mil/html/books/104/104-6/cmhPub_104-6.pdf

**Acknowledgement from Russians:

https://www.rbth.com/business/2015/05/08/allies_gave_soviets_130_billion_under_lend-lease_45879.html
http://www.historynet.com/did-russi...ase-helped-the-soviets-defeat-the-germans.htm
https://www.rbth.com/defence/2016/0...ies-aided-the-ussr-in-its-darkest-hour_575559

Fallacies don't equate to reality. Human wave attacks can only get you so far against machine guns and artillery. By 1942 the Red Army was well on its way to re-master the operational arts of battlefield and Operation Uranus is a good measure of that where they masterfully encircled the Axis Forces. The depth of defences prepared in Kursk to grind German resources, and than the counterattacks that were planned that largely ended the Third Reich could not have been achieved with men alone.

I am not asserting that Soviets were simply throwing troops over German positions with little planning but it is true that Soviets were seldom short on men and material after 1942; Soviets held advantage in resources and adaptability to conditions of the battlefield. They were also smart enough to capitalize on tactical blunders of the opposing force. However, Soviets had a tendency for mass attacks without regard to losses.

And what was the end result? Who won?

You make it sound like as if Wehrmacht was pitted against Soviets only.

Let me tell you something; US-led armies made armored thrusts towards Germany via Italy (1943) and France (1944) and Allied combat aircraft were bombarding German cities and industries in force. Before these developments, US-led armies routed Erwin Rommel from Africa and Hitler forced him to commit suicide after implicating him in an assassination plot in 1944. Wehrmacht was literally f**ked under these circumstances and was unable to replenish its forces in the Eastern Front in order to counter advances of the Red Army. In-fact, Wehrmacht was forced to recall some of its mechanized divisions from the Eastern Front and pit them against US-led armies in 1944.

Hitler's remarks: "the whole outcome of the war depends on each man fighting in the West, and that means the fate of the Reich as well!"

Implications of US-led war-effort notwithstanding, additional factors contributed to loss of Wehrmacht in the Eastern Front: http://histclo.com/essay/war/ww2/cou/sov/log/gpw-log.html

Zhukov can be credited with destroying the offensive capabilities of Wehrmacht. His defences at Kursk, and than vicious counterattacks after largely destroyed Wehrmacht's offensive capabilities and the complete destruction of Army Group by Summer 1944. It was nothing short of a masterstroke. We also cannot discount the defence of Moscow, and the pincer attack so beautifully planned by Zhukov.

I am sorry but you are exaggerating Geogori Zhukov's role in this matter. FYI: http://www.vho.org/tr/2004/3/Michaels334-340.html

At a closer look, several factors contributed to degradation of offensive capabilities of Wehrmacht over the course of WW2. Among them, Allied Strategic Bombing missions took a toll on German industries and labor. Objective was to disrupt supply of crucial equipment to Wehrmacht on a timely basis which in turn would force troops to give ground to opponents.

Why do you feel strange when its the truth? Wehrmacht's best fighting divisions met their end in Russia. Majority of Wehrmacht's resources and best fighting men were deployed on the East, not the West. USSR and Nazi Germany were fighting battles of annihilation. We didn't see this ferocity of fighting on the Western front. The Eastern front was a whole different ball game; and with persistence, bravery and superior planning/execution, USSR emerged victorious.

Such narrative-building is questionable.

Situation changed in 1944; Wehrmacht committed some of its best Panzer divisions to stop US-led armies in the West and combat was as intense as it could be. Learn more from this source: http://www.iwm.org.uk/history/the-german-response-to-d-day

Learn about virtually every engagement between US-led armies and Wehrmacht since 1943 from following links:

https://ww2-weapons.com/military-performance/
https://ww2-weapons.com/performance-on-the-western-front/

Due to the aforementioned factor, bulk of Wehrmacht forces in the EAST comprised of infantry divisions.

More: http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v20/v20n6p59_Michaels.html

Another thing you do not understand is the difference between combat doctrines and tactics of US-led armies vis-a-vis Red Army during WW2. People mistakenly assume that these two forces fought in a similar way and had similar capabilities.

FYI: https://ww2-weapons.com/performance-on-the-russian-front/

 

[DejanSRB]

Russia's single most successful general is Mr. R. W. He single handledly routed many armies including the Napolean Bonapartes and Germans in WWII.

Bull$hit, no offense.

Russian winter is A MYTH, made by westerners to justify their defeats against "subhuman" Russians. In reality there is no winter, just Russian Empire and USSR at its peak, after Napoleon defeat, Russian Empire became most powerful continental power on European soil, and after WW2, Soviet Russia became one of two of world superpowers.

Both Napoleon and Hitler was defeated by Russian armies, and other factors ( weather was one of them).
Battle of Leningrad was fought for years, and we all know that one year consists of winter, spring, summer and autumn.
So, no, winter IS A MYTH.

So it would be nice if we take a look at Russian military record (not againts third world countries like Angola or Burma, but againts great powers)

Russo - Ottoman wars - 12 WARS TOTAL ( 9 RUSSIAN VICTORIES - 3 OTTOMANS)
Russo - Polish wars - 14 WARS TOTAL ( 10 RUSSIAN VICTORIES - 4 POLISH )
Russo - Swedish wars - 11 WARS TOTAL ( 8 RUSSIAN VICTORIES - 3 SWEDISH )
Russo - Persian wars - 5 WAR TOTAL ( 3 RUSSIAN VICTORIES - 1 STALEMATE - 1 PERSIAN)
Russo - Germanic wars 4 WARS TOTAL ( 2 RUSSIAN VICTORIES - 2 GERMANIC)
Russo - French - ONE WAR - RUSSIAN VICTORY
Russo - Japanese- TWO WARS ( 1 RUSSIAN - 1 JAPANESE )
Russo- Sino wars - THREE WARS ( 2 RUSSIAN - 1 CHINESE)


After France and Great Britain , Russia have best military record in the Europe and world. And first by far on Asian continent. That's why Voltaire or John Locke called Russia " MASTER OF HALF ASIA". That's why Doestoyevsky made a statement " Better to be Master in Asia then boogeyman in Europe".

Just pure historical facts.

 

[Lavrentiy]

Bull$hit, no offense.

Russian winter is A MYTH, made by westerners to justify their defeats against "subhuman" Russians. In reality there is no winter, just Russian Empire and USSR at its peak, after Napoleon defeat, Russian Empire became most powerful continental power on European soil, and after WW2, Soviet Russia became one of two of world superpowers.

Both Napoleon and Hitler was defeated by Russian armies, and other factors ( weather was one of them).
Battle of Leningrad was fought for years, and we all know that one year consists of winter, spring, summer and autumn.
So, no, winter IS A MYTH.

So it would be nice if we take a look at Russian military record (not againts third world countries like Angola or Burma, but againts great powers)

Russo - Ottoman wars - 12 WARS TOTAL ( 9 RUSSIAN VICTORIES - 3 OTTOMANS)
Russo - Polish wars - 14 WARS TOTAL ( 10 RUSSIAN VICTORIES - 4 POLISH )
Russo - Swedish wars - 11 WARS TOTAL ( 8 RUSSIAN VICTORIES - 3 SWEDISH )
Russo - Persian wars - 5 WAR TOTAL ( 3 RUSSIAN VICTORIES - 1 STALEMATE - 1 PERSIAN)
Russo - Germanic wars 4 WARS TOTAL ( 2 RUSSIAN VICTORIES - 2 GERMANIC)
Russo - French - ONE WAR - RUSSIAN VICTORY
Russo - Japanese- TWO WARS ( 1 RUSSIAN - 1 JAPANESE )
Russo- Sino wars - THREE WARS ( 2 RUSSIAN - 1 CHINESE)


After France and Great Britain , Russia have best military record in the Europe and world. And first by far on Asian continent. That's why Voltaire or John Locke called Russia " MASTER OF HALF ASIA". That's why Doestoyevsky made a statement " Better to be Master in Asia then boogeyman in Europe".

Just pure historical facts.

American military historian David Glantz has also dismissed the WINTER MYTH. Even though Germans were near Moscow, all of their divisions were either at 50% strength or even lower at 30%. On paper, a whole division may be attacking a sector but in reality it was a only single brigade. In addition, 35 Soviet armies launch a massive counteroffensive in the Winter of 1941. There is little reference to this Winter Offensive in western military literature.

If Soviet machines and vehicles could work in that harsh winter, so should German. This WINTER myth is illogical since it would equally hamper operations for either side.

 

[Clutch]

The greatest Russian military stratagist

Not a russian general but... an ex-KGB military stategist is Vladamir Putin!!!

The greatest the world has know... he recorded an american goofball millionaire with russian prostitutes urinating and deficating on the american goofball in a russian hotel to fulfil the americans fetish... then he got one of those prostitutes to marry the goofball... he then ran the guy for an election and defeated the american decocracy by trolling and hacking social media and email servers.

Now Putin has a puppet in the White House with all the evidence to blackmail the goofball and has checkmated the low IQ yankees at their own game and taken revenge for the West's rape of Russia post Soviet fall.

The End.

 

[vostok]

Trying to justify your defeat by bad weather is, of course, very stupid and pathetic. The Mongols have been fought in the Middle Ages in the winter.
I also doubt that Europeans are inferior to primitive peoples of the North who live in a much more severe climate than Central Russia, which approximately equal to Scandinavia.

None of the Western losers-invaders, have not even come close to those regions of Russia, where winters are really severe - with normal temperatures -40...- 50 Celsius.