Exhausted by Stalin's regime Russians were ready simply to surrender to the Nazis

There are two views about World War II. The first: Stalin's regime was tyrannical, but the war was fought for freedom. The second: WWII was in fact two wars: the one on the Western Front a battle for freedom; the other on the Eastern Front between dictators enslaving nations. People in the Soviet Union had little idea of democracy or Nazism, and were just fighting for the Motherland. And even then they thought long and hard before fighting: Stalin's regime had "exhausted" them, and many were ready to give up. This explains why millions and millions of Red Army soldiers surrendered in the early stages of the war.

Russia reflects on sixty-five years since the Soviet Union's World War Two victory - Telegraph

 

The human factor is largely ignored by Soviet Historians. I believe we can split the Eastern Front war into 2 parts. 1941-42 and 1943-45. It seems that Germans faced 2 different versions of the Red Army.

Historians will tell us that Russians although numerically superior to Germans were equipped with old Tanks and Airplanes covered in fabric. However Soviet historians will never admit that country, people and the Army were all “exhausted” by the Revolution, Civil War, and the whole Proletarian movement.

Regions where early battles took place also had very strong anti Soviet feelings.
There were armed uprising in many towns hours after German attack. Shots were fired in Baltic States, Byelorussia and Ukraine. I guess people in Lvov did not forget how Soviets took away all of bread and Piroshkis stuffed with human flesh were sold in the city markets.

People simply ran or walked away from the fight in the early months. Not only the Army commanders but in many cases the civilian leaders were first to flee. A simple mentioning of German Tanks and a rumor of being surrounded could put a whole unit into a state of panic. I read a number of accounts where after giving a fiery speech to the troops about Stalin and Mother Russia Commissar would just drive away after taking a security detail armed with machine guns. On other hand I also heard of officers ordering their troops to shoot them if faced with being captured.

Russian Army was reborn in 1942. When faced with fighting and dying for Russia and Stalin and realizing that Germans were not there to improve their lives, almost all of the Russian people got behind the drive that ended in Berlin.

 

It's as if the activities of the lone 62nd Army at Stalingrad 'miraculously' transformed the rest of the Red Army from what was essentially unformed rabble to professional soldiers overnight....

AS IF......What a lot of *******.

The greater part of the Red Army REMAINED a unformed rabble right up to Berlin. Their casualty figures got higher and higher, and their conduct as a whole was frankly on a par with their Nazi enemies.

We have Stalinism to both thank and damn. Any other military of any other country would have thrown up their arms a la' France 1940....But the sheer GRIP that Stalinism and the security services had on the long suffering Russians meant that the regime held firm...shooting or imprisoning anyone who dared to say different.

Where it not for Nazism's comparitive barbarism in their policy of occupation, many of these exhausted people would have been glad to give up, a la' 1917.

Germany missed it's chance. Pity it was the Nazi's, rather than the Imperial German Army that launched 'Barbarossa'. We could have gotten rid of Soviet Socialism for good. These days, we still have to put up with Russian Imperialism in the guise of hydralic despotism and tawdry 'historians' still glorifying a regime that deserved to be pulled apart at the seams.

The ordinary people in the region of Eastern Europe have my undying sympathy and respect.

I would not urinate on their politicians and power players.

 

Whoever made that assertion?

I don't want to beat dead horses. I would like to know how you figured out statement 2, though. I don't think any other year of the war in the East exceeded 1941 in sheer carnage.

Who are these historians, would you like to nominate names?

Why do you think those who praise the Red Army's military effectiveness neccessarily glorified the Sovet State? To me the morality of a regime and skill at war are two totally unrelated qualities.

 

To stick to the topic, the Baltic states were ready to turn; Ukraine and Beloruss might have went to the German side if the occupation was less brutal. But I doubt Russia proper was going to quit. No ethnic-national antagonism was to be found there, no opposition to Russian rule (as they were Russians). If USSR east of the Dnepr held, then it had a very good chance at defeating an invading army, even if they lost the support of the people west of the river.

Sounds pretty reasonable to me?

 

I think that of my own rabble in the UK and they aint Stalinist....Well apart from ....And we can still go to war when the people dont want to...Im seeing not much difference in ideologies end games here.

 

World War II was waged on land, sea, and in the air over several different theaters of operation around the world for approximately six years.
It's been widely believed as vigorously argued that WWII was in fact a Two War Front. WWII started as a III War front The China Japan, As I've
read part of WWII, Eastern Block and Europe with the Nazis in the middle. Jerry invaded these countries, and in many cases it was just a walk in the
park. As Someone in the post stated It was Carnage, "Sheer butchery." As the many civilian casualties that incurred after the battles. All these
Countries tried to rappel the invader, knowing the hardships, oppression,+++ would be inflected upon them, as for their freedom they would surely
loose. Some countries also formed alliances with Hitler, since they heard what he did to those that would not comply.

Now WWII Was fought on 4 fronts China; Japan or AKA The Pacific War. The Chinese Theater of Operations more resembled the Soviet-German war
on the Eastern Front than the war in the Pacific or the war in Western Europe. China had been at war with Japan since 1937 and continued the fight
until the Japanese surrender in 1945. The United States advised and supported China's ground war.

As years went by the Russians Army had depleted. Can't fight without food or weapons and supplies, therefore many surrendered, many villages
and small cities laid in Chaos and shambles. Didn't the US and Allied Countries greatly contribute to Stalin's War Effort by supplying him. The Will to
fight to the end was Strong in the Russian population they were defending their home land.

I'm A little disoriented concerning this comment?

Yes maybe this can be true, but the Russians did fight back with vengeance. And the Germans in the end were ready to give up. The Germans Supplies, oil,
Gas, munitions, Invaded land lost and pushed back to Germany with devastating looses then Berlin, by Allied and Russian forces. As many also claim the
Russian Winters did it's part in diminishing the Jerries War Machine.

Stalin's War Machine did it's Part in "Exhausting" it's Population and so did the German invasion. War with time will Exhaust any population
especially if your loosing.

 

That is a great article from the Soviet perspective. In Sajer's book: The Forgotten Soldier he touched on the issue briefly as a compare and contrast, from when the German Army headed east in 1939 and when they began their withdrawl west in '43-'44. During the eastern move they were welcomed as "liberators"; but, as the war progressed they seemed to have worn out their welcome and by the time of their retreat found themselves fighting on all sides.

 

The French, Czechs, Belgians and Dutch were not throwing their own citizens into exile or work camps (gulags) for decades at a time, nor were they persecutuing returning prisoners, nor were their security services arresting people for the flimsiest of reasons on a quota system.

If people don't like living in a democratic country, they are free to leave at their leisure, provided that is, that their record is clean enough to aquire the necessary paperwork to emmigrate. Keep your nsse clean and you can travel anywhere, commit grave acts and you won't be able to leave the country, as no other will accept you.

Back to the issue, I've stated more than once that Germany and Russia were both totalitarian, both deserving to be defeated....and both eventually were, with the Nazi's the greater of the two evils leaving the building first, and deservedly so. Only a little less evil were the Soviets, and that by a micron, and their sordid regime got what it deserved from all the countries of their sordid 'empire'. Listing the many states that were swallowed up by Stalinism is unnecessary.


As for Russian 'historians', take your pick from a plethora of people who have had their 'works' translated into English. They don't seem to understand that criticism of the Soviet Union as a governed body and criticism of the Russian people are a two seperate issues. Even online posters don't seem to see the difference

 

That seems accurate or at least agree with what I've read. Ukraine and Belarus was chafed by the German requisitions which allegedly was more demanding than Soviets if not more, the holocaust, and their indiscriminating use of firepower in dealing with partisans.

Gotcha. Was a bit unclear on who you were talking about.

 

Are you sure about that Volga Boatman, the figures I have from Khrivosheev says
Soviet irrevocable casualties were.............


'41- 3,137,673 - 27.8%
'42- 3,258,216- 28.9%
'43- 2,312,429- 20.5%
'44 - 1,763,891- 15.6%
'45- 800,700- 7.1%

What figures do you go by?


And Red Army certainly learnt some painful lessons on the way to becoming a pretty deadly outfit by Bagration & put it all on show in August Storm.


An article by David Glantz, comes to these conclusions in this small section of his article, about some of the myths of the Eastern Front.................


Conclusions: The Reconciliation of Myths and Realities.


The dominant role of German source materials in shaping American perceptions of the war on the Eastern Front and the negative perception of Soviet source materials have had an indelible impact on the American image of war on the Eastern Front. What has resulted in a series of gross judgments treated as truths regarding operations in the East and Soviet (Red) Army combat performance. The gross judgments appear repeatedly in textbooks and all types of historical works, and they are persistent in the extreme. Each lies someplace between the realm of myth and reality. In summary, a few of these judgments are as follows:


- Weather repeatedly frustrated the fulfillment of German operational aims.


- Soviet forces throughout the war in virtually every operation possessed significant or overwhelming numerical superiority.


- Soviet manpower resources were inexhaustible, hence the Soviets continually ignored human losses.


- Soviet strategic and high level operational leadership was superb. However, lower level leadership (corps and below) was uniformly dismal.


- Soviet planning was rigid, and the execution of plans at every level was inflexible and unimaginative.


- Wherever possible, the Soviets relied for success on mass rather than maneuver. Envelopment operations were avoided whenever possible.


- The Soviets operated in two echelons, never cross attached units, and attacked along straight axes.


- Lend lease was critical for Soviet victory. Without it collapse might have ensured.


- Hitler was the cause of virtually all German defeats. Army expertise produced earlier victories (a variation of the post World War I stab in the back legend).


- The stereotypical Soviet soldier was capable of enduring great suffering and hardship, fatalistic, dogged in defense (in particular in bridgeheads), a master of infiltration and night fighting, but inflexible, unimaginative, emotional and prone to panic in the face of uncertainty.


A majority of Americans probably accept these judgments as realities. In doing so they display a warped impression of the war which belittles the role played by the Red Army. As a consequence, they have a lower than justified appreciation for the Red Army as a fighting force, a tendency which extends, as well, to the postwar Soviet Army. Until the American public (and historians) perception of Soviet source material changes, this overall perception of the war in the East and the Soviet (Red) Army is likely to persist.


Close examination of Soviet sources as well as German archival materials cast many of these judgments into the realm of myth. Recent work done on Eastern Front operations has begun to surface the required evidence to challenge those judgments. Continued work on the part of American historians, additional work by Soviet historians, joint work by both parties, and more extensive efforts to make public Soviet archival materials is necessary for that challenging process to bear fruit.

Through the work of Glantz himself & others since then have changed the perception of the then Red Army.

 

I think their was a large transformation of the Russian army after Stalingrad, supplies and arms were readliy available and the leadership was now tested by fire. The stategy however, remained the same , sacrifice, sacrifice, sacriefice.
The German army had also changed. it was tired, exhausted, and supplies now stretched. Their strategy also remained the same . Superior confidence of the German soldier, except he no longer existed, gone in the dust and mud of the Russian steppe.
Two armies now transformed, intellectual tact against the Tartar hordes. No contest.

 

Soviet historians lie for a living. I also think Gantz is a idiot who never had an original thought. He just regutgitates what Soviet historical propaganda has been saying forever.

Sorry I just have to get that off my chest.

 

Don't hold back...how do you really feel?

 

To denigrate David Glantz, who is generally noted as one of the foremost western writers on the Eastern front is a big call, but it's your prerogative I guess, have you read any of his books?

Many of Glantz's best works came after the break up of the Soviet Union when the Russians opened up thousands of classified documents that implicated themselves in cover ups such as the Katyn massacre, & enabled him to write 'Zhukov's Greatest Defeat: The Red Army's Epic Disaster in Operation Mars, 1942 etc.

 

This statement illustrates almost no understanding of what the Red Army evolved into. If you think it was a crude force that smashed into Berlin and defeated the German Army in the field then think again... or maybe read something other than cold war propaganda.
Check the German losses too perhaps, for a less ideological and more appreciative standpoint.

Tactically, strategically, technologically, the Army that hoisted that famous flag had come an incredibly long way from when the Nazi hammer fell in 1941.

~A

 

Well Volga you are the one who criticised them and you havent answered the question mate, exactly which Russian Historians are you talking about when you criticise??

 

Ok, as Von Poop has already initimated this statement is wrong, totally wrong. Words like "Human Waves", "Rabble", "Horde" all seem to be bandied about by Westerners who try and study the Eastern Front from a Western Perspective and never come to terms with the fact that the Soviet Army became an extremely organised, and very skillful Army, one which was more than able to take on whatever was thrown at it. It never ceases to amaze me how many write off the Red Army in 1941 as terrible, yet they managed to defeat the Japanese at Khalkin Gol...... Now that was before the Winter War but it shows that with the right commmander, Soviet troops were as capable as any other army.

Battle of Khalkhin Gol - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Read the accounts of the German Soldiers taking part in Barbarossa, for example as stated in Ian Kershaw's "War Without Garlands". They all testify to the fighting ability of the Soviet Soldier - and contrast this with all the German General's memoirs such as Panzer Leader or Von Mellenthins memoirs, in which the Soviet Army is never one of the reasons for the defeat of the Wehrmacht!

I'm not defending Stalin's regime - it was as bad as the Nazis and he was a monster, but when studying the Great Patriotic War its not about "Good versus Bad", its about a war of annihalation between two civilizations and ideologies and when that happens atrocities are sure to follow. But the Red Army was not a Rabble throughout the war Volga, no way can I agree with that.

 

On 6th October 1941 the Soviets blocked the advance on Tula, with an ambush on 4th Pz Div, Guderian said, 'They're learning'.