The Red Army

owned liked Nazis at Stalingrad

Ощнед лике Назис ат Реичстаг

Move on we're off that topic.

I guess you mean "oвнед" instead of "oщнед".

Trotsky sucks, but the red army was cool!

I do however prefer the Red Guards

Trotsky sucks

I shall purge you!

I shall purge you!

What are the red guards?

Well, maybe scarletghoul means these red guards but they are rather unknown, so I think he refered to Mao's guards of radical youths during the Culture Revolution.

Nope I was talking about the soviet red guards!

Of course, the chinese ones where awesome and much more famous, but this is discussion on soviet union so I mean the soviet red guards

Are those the guys that got the golden plated AKs and patrolled the kremlin?

I posted this last week on the 9 May on a bourgeois "social-activist" site - needless to say, I wasn't very popular!

Today is the day on which, 64 years ago, the war in Europe ended for the people of the Soviet Union.
Why does this matter?
In an article published on Thursday, 30 April, 2009 by TomDispatch.com, bourgeois historian Andrew Bacevich of Boston University writes:
For example, to the extent that the demolition of totalitarianism deserves to be seen as a prominent theme of contemporary history (and it does), the primary credit for that achievement surely belongs to the Soviet Union. When it came to defeating the Third Reich, the Soviets bore by far the preponderant burden, sustaining 65% of all Allied deaths in World War II.
By comparison, the United States suffered 2% [Australia suffered 0.57%] of those losses, for which any American whose father or grandfather served in and survived that war should be saying: Thank you, Comrade Stalin.
For the United States to claim credit for destroying the Wehrmacht is the equivalent of Toyota claiming credit for inventing the automobile. We entered the game late and then shrewdly scooped up more than our fair share of the winnings. The true "Greatest Generation" is the one that willingly expended millions of their fellow Russians while killing millions of German soldiers.
At least TWENTY MILLION Soviet citizens – soldiers and civilians, women, children and men — lost their lives in that epic struggle, five million of those in concentration camps. The German aim was to destroy the USSR and kill, deport or enslave its inhabitants — their fantasy was to turn the Soviet Union into a gigantic “theme park” with Teutonic Knights and their families hunting Russian “peasants.”
Civilians and hostages were routinely massacred (the largest number of civilian deaths in a single city was 1.2 million citizens during the 900 day Siege of Leningrad). In three years of occupation, between one and two million Soviet Jews were killed. Other ethnic groups were also targeted for extermination, and even those nationalist groups who collaborated with the Germans (Ukrainians and Cossacks, for example) met short shrift from their new “liberators.” Millions died from starvation as the Germans requisitioned food for their armies and fodder for their draft horses. As they retreated from Ukraine and Belarus in 1943–44, the German occupiers systematically applied a scorched earth policy, burning towns and cities, destroying infrastructure, and leaving civilians to starve or die of exposure
Prisoners of War were treated abominably — sixty percent died, starved, beaten, summarily executed, left to freeze to death or die of untreated wounds, or forced marched to be slave labour in the Reich. And lest anyone try to excuse the Wehrmacht (the regular German Army) on the grounds that “it was all the work of the SS,” let me set you straight. Hitler’s “Commissar Order” — communicated to all ranks prior to the invasion —absolved in advance ANY soldier of the Reich who committed what would now be called “crimes against humanity.” Jewish PoWs were sent away for “special treatment,” soldiers from the Central Asian Republics were executed out of hand and on 29 June 1941, Field Marshal Günther von Kluge ordered, ‘Women in uniform are to be shot.’
Later, as their excesses ignited a protracted partisan war, the Germans reacted by issuing harsh orders calling for the execution of any Red Army personnel found in civilian clothing. An order to the 56th Infantry Division stated, ‘Soldiers in plain clothes, mostly recognizable by their short hair, are to be shot following their identification as Red Army soldiers.’ Villages were razed for sheltering Red Army soldiers, and prisoners were shot in retaliation for partisan attacks or for simply being soldiers. A field court-martial had sentenced a major to demotion for shooting PoWs for no particular reason. Hitler intervened and excused the major, stating, ‘We cannot blame lively spirits when they, convinced as they are that the German people are engaged in a unique battle of life and death, reject the Bolshevik world-enemy beyond all commandments of humanity.’
Wikipedia notes,"According to a summary, presented by Lieutenant General Roman Rudenko at the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg, the property damage in the Soviet Union inflicted by the Axis invasion was estimated to a value of 679 billion rubles. The combined damage consisted of complete or partial destruction of 1,710 cities and towns, 70,000 villages/hamlets, 2,508 church buildings, 31,850 industrial establishments, 65,000 kilometres of railroad, 4100 railroad stations, 40,000 hospitals, 84,000 schools, and 43,000 public libraries. Seven million horses, and 17 million sheep and goats were also slaughtered or driven off." (Yes, wikipedia lies about communism, as it lies about women, but there figures are the same as appear in my copy of the IMT's Transcripts)
As a Trotskyist, I have many bones to pick with Comrade Stalin. Yet none of them would have stopped me from picking up a gun and marching with the Red Army all the way to Berlin!
GLORY TO THE RED ARMY!

Im sorry but the Red Army was not nearly as good as everybody makes it out to be.

For one without the logistical support from the US thanks to lend-lease the Soviet Union would never have been able to become nearly as powerful as it was. The US supplied 18 million tons of material to the USSR at a cost of $10 Billion (and thats not adjusted for inflation)

In the first year of the war the majority of Soviet AVs and transport vehicles were either detroyed or captured. It had lost much of its agriculture and a large amount of industrial capability.

From 1942-1945 the USSR used 170 US ships with US crews to transport these materials to them from the US. This was essential as Russia's Navy was a joke durring WWII. The use of US sailors also allowed the USSR more manpower for the ground war.

In terms of air support for the USSR the US gave over 21,000 p39 fighters, as well as 57% of all their aviation fuel. Without this support the USSR would never have been able to gain air superiority over the Luftwaffe, especially in the begining of the war.


For transportation at the front the US gave over 351,700 trucks, and over 75,000 Jeeps. Without these Russian towed arty couldnt move, troops couldnt be easily transported where rails didnt go, and logistics to the front would be all but impossible. Not to mention the over 90% of rail locomotives, cars, and rail, which would have made any transport of equiptment from factories to the front impossible.

Here are some rough statistics
80% of all canned meat.
92% of all railroad locomotives, rolling stock and rails.
57% of all aviation fuel.
53% of all explosives.
74% of all truck transport.
88% of all radio equipment.
53% of all copper.
56% of all aluminum.
60+% of all automotive fuel.
74% of all vehicle tires.
12% of all armored vehicles.
14% of all combat aircraft.
The list includes a high percentage of the high grade steel, communications
cable, canned foods of all types, medical supplies, and virtually every modern
machine tool used by Soviet industry. Not to mention the "know-how required to
use and maintain this equipment.

All the spam sent by the allies is not to be ignored either. As Napoleon said "an army marches on its stomach" and without food the Red Army would simply starve, and being so huge would starve damn fast.


Enjoy this quote from Zukov

"Speaking about our readiness for war from the point of view of the economyandeconomics, one cannot be silent about such a factor as the subsequent help from the Allies. First of all, certainly, from the American side, because in that respect the English helped us minimally. In an analysis of all facets of the war, one must not leave this out of one's reckoning. We would have been in a serious condition without American gunpowder, and could not have turned out the quantity of ammunition which we needed. Without American `Studebekkers' [sic], we could have dragged our artillery nowhere. Yes, in general, to a considerable degree they provided ourfront transport. The output of special steel, necessary for the most diverse necessities of war, were also connected to a series of American deliveries."

"It is now said that the Allies never helped us . . . However, one cannot deny that the Americans gave us so much material, without which we could not have formed our reserves and could not have continued the war . . . we had no explosives and powder. There was none to equip rifle bullets. The Americans actually came to our assistance with powder and explosives. And how much sheet steel did they give us. We really could not have quickly put right our production of tanks if the Americans had not helped with steel. And today it seems as though we had all this ourselves in abundance."


I chose to focus on lend lease this time to simply demostrate why the Red Army and USSR wasnt the super winner and only reason the Germans lost. It is apparent to those who have read up on the little known fact of US lend lease to the USSR that without the aid by 1943 the Red Army would have been on its knees, rather than on the Germans heels.

I can also point out the Red Army murdered thousands and raped million across "liberated" eastern Europe, so to argue they are any better than the Germans is hard. It wasnt even until 1946 when STD concerns came to light than "fraternization" with the populace was cranked down upon. Even still from 1945 to 1948 there were an estimated 2 million illegal abortions in occupied Germany a year, thanks to the mass rape. Did I mention half the women raped by Soviet soldiers were gang raped? And often it was done in front of their husbands and children as a way to humiliate them?
Soviet soldiers also raped women liberated from concentration camps and other villages they recaptured from the Germans, so it was not simply a matter of "revenge". It was a lack of military discepline and a brutality encouraged by officers and Stalin himself.

Yay it's a trot!

Whatever a trot is Im a trot with actual data to back up what I say.

Im sorry, I just get tired of the "Red Army Ruled ALL Teh Nazis!" crap. Simple fact is they coudnt have done it without the Western Allies, and the Western Allies might not have been able to do it without the USSR.

The Soviet people were most grateful for US monetary assistance, Comrade, even though it amounted to no more than ten per cent of their own industrial output – but, unlike their cousins in capitalist countries, they didn’t consider themselves bought and paid for by their American “godfathers.”

What they were not grateful for is that, while they almost always faced 90 percent of the German troops (and at no point in the war less than two-thirds), the US did not get involved “on the ground” in Europe until 1944, and only because, by then, the Red Army looked likely to march all the way to the Atlantic.

And what they were even less grateful for is the fact that the US army sat on its arse on the wrong side of the Elbe, because Patton thought that it was better for “godless Commies” to die than Americans — and besides, the more Reds who died fighting the Nazis, the fewer he would have to face on his proposed march on Moscow.

But you’re right — no woman should ever condone the rape of another, so I guess Soldat (Private) Salabra would have been shot for trying to stop it.

But maybe, if she had witnessed foulnesses committed on her mother, sister, daughter or “best friend,” she’d want to take a few souvenirs from the male perpetrators!

The 10% of industrial output or 15% of output is a statistic I have seen thrown around alot, but even it if it is that low the industry they provided was essential.

Many of the things provided, while small in number in the grand scheme were essential due to their function. Things like tires, fuel, high grade steel, and communications equiptment were items the soviets were unable to produce on their own in the quantity they needed throughout the war just because their industry was unable to.

The soviets could probably have tooled their industry over eventually to produce more fuel, or better steel, but what needs to be realized is that providing all the trucks, trains, rails, gas, tires, etc it allowed the soviets to focus on producing tanks, so they could have that huge numerical advantage over superior german tanks, or produce enough weapons to arm their army, and make new aircraft to gain dominance over the Luftwaffe. If they had to produce all their own rails, their own trucks, their own fuel, their ability to produce other things would have been greatly reduced.

What also is important to take into account when seeing the 10 or 15% atatistic is to realize that when lend lease saved the USSR was when the war began. While Russia by 1944 and 1945 was an industrial giant and by then lend lease was not very important in 1942 and 1943 it is what allowed them to fight. Without the rails and trucks they would have had no quick way to rush troops to the front and tanks from the factories. Instead their troops would be moved on foot, causing attrition, their arty immobile, food moved by animals, and their industry would have been rushing to produced a large number of rail and trucks rather than thousands of panzer killeing T34s.

You are right the USSR faced the vast majority of the German military, if fact the Werhmachts elite unit "Grossdeutschland" was not once deployed on the western front. That is no small feat, and greatly weakened the German army for the wester allies, because after all, if they werent fighting in Russia they would have been on the west landing in Great Britian in 1942 or 43 and in North Africa kicking the fresh US troops all over the desert. But that works both ways, if the Germans were not awaiting the Western then that would have been millions more troops and thousands more aircraft and AVs on the Eastern Front.

However, the notion the US and allies were not involded in ground fighting in Europe until D-Day in 44 is wrong. Since July of 43 the US and allies were very active in Italy, and the Italian campaign, which did not end until March 1945. Even before that the US involvement in North Africa was as early as 1942.

Both sides, ther Western Allies and the USSR both made very important contributions to the war effort and without either the other would have had a far harder fight, and probably couldnt have won.

Double Post, please delete

Whats your point? If you are trying to argue the Red Army was the best in the war I would sat the fact they lost 34 times more troops killed than the US shows the opposite. It shows a total lack of troop survivability, the opposite of what an Army wants.

The body count was different for many reasons
1: Superior medical care fo Western troops
2: Superior equiptment for western troops so less troops were killed by the weather.
3: Western troops were not always expected to fight to the last man, machine gunned by their own forces for retreating.
4: Western troops did not wave attack like they were still fighting WWI like Soviet troops did.
5: Western commanders never sent units out to clear mines by stepping on them
6: In the begining of the war Soviets lacked any good commanders thanks to purging

The USSR simply did not value its soldiers lives as much as the western allies did. One only needs to look at the tactics many Soviet generals and many quotes from Stalin to make that clear.

Just accept the facts

To hell with my damn computer, another second post. Sorry Comrades.

Whats your point? If you are trying to argue the Red Army was the best in the war I would sat the fact they lost 34 times more troops killed than the US shows the opposite. It shows a total lack of troop survivability, the opposite of what an Army wants.

The body count was different for many reasons
1: Superior medical care fo Western troops
2: Superior equiptment for western troops so less troops were killed by the weather.
3: Western troops were not always expected to fight to the last man, machine gunned by their own forces for retreating.
4: Western troops did not wave attack like they were still fighting WWI like Soviet troops did.
5: Western commanders never sent units out to clear mines by stepping on them
6: In the begining of the war Soviets lacked any good commanders thanks to purging

The USSR simply did not value its soldiers lives as much as the western allies did. One only needs to look at the tactics many Soviet generals and many quotes from Stalin to make that clear.

Just accept the facts

The machine gun unit place behind unreliable units may be true but the clearing land mines is nazi propaganda. No country values a soldiers life what they value is the strength of their army. Every time a country plans a major attack they calculate losses if those losses are acceptable and won't damage the strength of the army beyond repair they will go forward with the attack. Look at Israel they don't care for the lives of Palestinian civilians and as you should know civilians are supposed to be protected in wars at all costs. While you are trying to make a point if you would have read this whole thread you would have noticed I already made the point of the machine gun units and tramplers for land mines to be told it that info came from Josef Goebbels the Nazi Minister of Propaganda.

The shooting of those who retreated was common practice under order No. 227 after it was passed in 1942. Units would sometimes be deployed behind attacking units as "blocking units", whos job was to block their retreat. While not common it did happen and is documented. They were only officially removed in 44.

The same order also created the penal battalions, who were made up of soldiers who had retreated, been captured, or disgraced themselves in another way. Two well respected Russian military historians place the number who were forced to serve in this battalions betweem about 425,000 and 1,600,000. (it should be noted the low figure was given by a high ranking Russian military official.)

But while these units were primarily infantry units, where were only used for offensive manuvers and suffered terrible casualties, serving as meat shields, there also is documented evidence of mine-clearing battalions. There untis were given the worst fucntions, such as rear guards, advanced recon, and mine clearing. Often when clearing mines they had no choice but to charge because of blocking units. Like it or not tramplers are documented in both USSR and German sources, its not some propaganda fantasy. Read '"Night Combat" by Alfred Toppe. The book is a study of night fighting tactics used by Germans and Russians in WWII by the US Army in the 50s.

I also disagree that civilians lives should be protected at all costs. Thats some BS people like to imagine happens now, but it isnt how war is conducted, especially in the 1940s. Germans, British, USSR, and US all showed how much they cared for civilians when they bombed and shelled cities full of people. The only thing an army does at all costs is protect itself from being destroyed and to kill the enemy.

Links please and come on.
And are you saying that you want civilians to be specifically targeted in war?

I again site "Night Combat" by Alfred Toppe.

Other online sources also mention tramplers,
http://pigeonproject.wordpress.com/2...-world-war-ii/
http://www.feldgrau.net/forum/viewto...&sd=a&start=15

I also remember a mention to them in either the book "Blood Red Snow" or "The Forgotten Soldier", both accounts from Werhmacht veterans. I know, Im sure they are both just masters of propaganda 60 years after the war but it is a first hand account.

What I cant find are any sources that tell me the existance of tramplers was made up and totally fictional.

And I never said civilians should be targeted in war, I meerly refuted you claim that "civilians are supposed to be protected in wars at all costs". Armies have bigger and more imporant things to worry about that the welfare of the civilian population of their enemy, such as the destruction of the enemy combatant, the defence and prservation of their fighting force, and, believe it or not, victory. Civilians shouldnt be targeted but when it comes down to it war is ugly, and people die, and in any environment where the enemy chooses to mix valid military targets, be them combatants of factories, in population zones, civilians will be killed. Its just how it is.

You want me to read books by Wehrmacht and US soldiers on the tactics of the Soviets?
I didn't bother to look at the links but if you can find me a link that shows the names of the "penal battalions" or just the number of trampers used I will assume that I must just have been blinded by evil communist propaganda and will immediately convert to Fascism.

Why would the German generals who faced the Soviets in combat be a poor source for Soviet tactics? In the 1950s the Soviets sure as hell werent going to offer any input on the book. The Army had the book made so they could better see how to fight the Russians if the cold war went hot. You would imagine they would have striven to get the real tactics down, so the book would actually mean something if it came down to it.

Also, "Penal Battalions" were just refered to as shtrafbats. They were not given any names other than a simple number designation. So the idea I, or anyone, can produce a list of names of the Penal Battalions is nonsese. The Soviet and Russian government also has never releases the number of troops sent to Penal Battalions so the idea a number of those used as tramplers or otherwise could be had it also an impossible task.

Also, are you saying gulags cant be likened to concentration camps? How many millions died in Soviet camps?