"Stuart Wilkes' mom" wrote in message
t...
I always said Stuey would never amount to anything.


"Drazen Kramaric" wrote in
message
...
On 23 Oct 2003 03:20:56 -0700, (Stuart Wilkes)
wrote:


What were the numbers of soldiers involved in the two campaigns that
you are comparing. i.e:

Suprisingly equal, Rostyk. I'm suprised you didn't know that.

Post the numbers, then.

Rawest numbers for jan 1939
Germany 1,500,000 troops
Holland 60,000
Belgium 80,000
France 700,000
Britain 154,000
total 994,000

in divisions the Germans had 136 against 136
To keep some navy in this well the German navy at the time might be able to
beat Hollands but it was totaly out classed by both major powers
In aircaft it was about 4500 against about 5900, though the Germans did have
a lower proportion of obsaleat types.

Size of armies in the west and the casualties?

Well, the French Army alone suffered 1.9 million KIA and prisoners in
the campaign in the West, while the combined
Franco-Anglo-Belgian-Dutch armies inflicted ~27,000 KIA on the
Germans.

Your numbers are correct, but do not tell the whole story. France
surrendered because it had no more manpower nor space to continue the
war so all their remaining soldiers went to POW camps. Had you
included only POWs captured prior to cease fire the numbers would be

The Vichy government maintained a large army untill the end of 42, at which
point alot of it went over to the allies. Also alot of units, especully
reserve units, disbanded themselves late in the campain and went home where
they were left as civies.

more correct, but would represent argument against your thesis, that
Red Army represented the most efficient enemy realistically possible.


In this case, the Germans faced unprepared unalerted,
peacetime-strength
Rifle Divisions (~6000 men) far from their assigned battle positions,
which is one of the
advantages you get when you do a sneak attack.

Except the only person the attack was a surprise to was the boss, due to
willful self deseption and a willingness to shoot anyone who dared to tell
him the truth, it dose speck volumes for the courage of many in the Red army
that they went on trying however. The trouble was that a large chunk of the
Red army was in its battle possitions, the possitions were just insainly
chosin. being in the middle of a major re equipment cycle and doctran change
didn't help much ether.

You are representing this as 3,000,000 German soldiers appeared out of
nowehere next to the Soviet border. The primary person responsible for
Red Army been caught napping is the man you feel was justified in
invading Poland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Finland under the
pretext of "security in case of German attack".

Why don't you address that fact for a change?

Moving the boarder west probably saved Russia in 41, if preperations had
been made with any degree of compatence they should have done far better.
The failiers rest 110% with the guy at the top and his cronies, though
atleast he had the ability once the war started to learn from his errors if
not as fast as might be desired. Atleast he was smart enough to recognise
talent and from the middle of 42 mostly listen to people who knew what they
were talking about.

Drax