russia vs. japan in 1941 [WAS: 50% of NAZI oil..]

"David E. Powell" wrote in message
s.com...
"Ivan Grozny" wrote in message
...

"ZZBunker" wrote in message
om...
"Nicholas Smid" wrote in message
...
"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.

The Germans didn't need much of a Navy in WWII,
since they were attacking North Africa, the
Middle East, France, and Russia, not the US.

Where is pathetic loser Stuart Wilkes when you need him?
So they weren't attacking the US? German submarines routinely sank US
ships
in US coastal waters, especially early on. They also routinely sank US
merchant marine vessels in international waters. Doenitz pleaded with
Hitler
for more ships and subs. If Germany didn't need a navy, why was Doenitz
asking for them?

Yes... Operation Drumbeat, off the US Atlantic coast and in the Gulf of
Mexico, caught the US quite hard early on in 1942. Also, it took time for
the US to get the convoy doctrine and patrol aircraft up and running. And
to
get the lights turned off in the coastal towns at night....

And especially since they were fighting
with tanks, rockets, and missles,
and the rest of Europe was fighting with horses and cannons.

Wrong. Germany used horses throughout the war like all the other
continental
European countries. The US used motorized vehicles almost exclusively.
The
V-1 and V-2 had no strategic impact.

Right again. People tend to forget that while the Whermacht used motorized
forces for blitzkrieg style attacks and front line action, the supply
chain
of the German Armed forces relied very heavily on horse drawn wagons and
such, in terms of supply chain. Especially in the Eastern Front, where
trucks bogged down in mud bad, (though carts were also troubled.) Besides,
when one is short on diesel fuel and gasoline, finding food for a horse
can
be easier. Up to the end of the war, the Germans used horses. As for the
V-1
and V-2, yes, they were terror weapons. But by the time they came out,
German cities were taking far more damage from Allied air raids than their
V-weapons could inflict on the Allies. Also, disinformation, antiaircraft
guns and bulked up fighter defenses helped protect London against V-1
attacks after a while. One of the Western Allies' greatest contributions
to
the war was the bombing campaign.

And since it was the invasions of
Sicily, Normany, and Norway that saved
Russia's ass from certain anniolation, you're
missing several other armies in
the analysis.

The battles of Stalingrad and Kursk occured before June of 1944, I
believe.
Also, the Germans had forces tied down by the Allied invasion of Italy. It
was the D-Day attack that opened the way in the west, however. Kesselring
and the Apennine mountains were quite nasty delaying forces in Italy.

Though the allies did tie down German and Axis forces there. Hitler's war
on
many fronts was a grand mistake. Not to mention the garrison requirements
of
the countries he had already taken. From France and the Low Countries in
the
west to Yugoslavia and Greece in the east.

This by no means takes anything from the bravery of the Russian people and
soldiers that fought, however. From the gates of Moscow to Leningrad to
the
Reichschanchellery in Berlin, they did a ton of damage, and took a lot,
too.
Not to mention the footage I have seen of people setting up factories and
working hot steel in buildings with no roofs on yet and snow coming down.
There aren't words for that kind of bravery.


You need to be a little more specific about bravery when you talk about the
Russians. Much of their bravery came at the muzzle of an NKVD rifle. The
Moscow panic was brutally surpressed by the NKVD. If you didn't work long
hard hours in those factories, you could be shot. NKVD units were generally
interspersed with regular units. Anyone not showing sufficient enthusiasm
for marching into a Nazi machine gun nest would be shot in the back. The end
of the war did not bring relief but did bring into being the gulag system of
slave labor.

Then there is the issue of the Russians that welcomed the Nazis hoping to
get rid of the Communists. Ukranians, although not Russians, were often
quite happy to see the Germans, especially remembering that Stalin's famine
caused about 4 million of them to die.

While Chechans were storming the Reichstag, their families back home were
being deported to Siberia.

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