2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on Mar 22, 2015 16:32:09 GMT -5
This Retired US Army Colonel has dedicated his life to the WW2 Eastern Front Studies. With the recent release of long squealched records by the Soviets, many myths and misunderstandings about this entire front are addressed in his 30 minute lecture. Much of the data was hidden to spare embarrasment or protect reputations of Russian commanders. it also bring home to incredible scale of this front and the horrific casulaties and sacrafices Russia endured to defeat Naxiism. Here is the link for anyone interested: youtu.be/7Clz27nghIgAn example of new information is that KURSK was NOT the largest tank battle in history (in fact it wasn't even close). Also why Hitlers numerous "blunders" in the Eastern Front weren't in fact blunders at all.
|
|
|
Post by volkssturm on Mar 22, 2015 23:00:06 GMT -5
OK, now I have to ask. What actually was the largest tank battle in history?
|
|
2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on Mar 23, 2015 11:42:32 GMT -5
In the early stages of Barbarossa, Zuchov himself organized and directed a massive armored counter attack in the South Central area of the German advance. The combined German and Russian after action reports reveal that more than 12,000 armored vehicles were involved. 5,000 Russian tanks were lost to Germanys 350. The battle was a movement to contact, swirling, intertwined event in fairly open terrain and the available Soviet tanks (the excellent T34 wasn't present in significant numbers) Soviet tactics and poorly trained tank crews were what primarily account for the lopsided outcome. Because it was such a resounding defeat it was buried and remained unreported and ignored in Russia. German comments about it were ignored as unsubstantiated propaganda or boastful exaggerations.
There were many significant battles in the Eastern front which were massive affairs compared to the events in the West that are only now being fully appreciated. Any failure by a Soviet Commander with connections, in essence "didn't happen" although the lecturer pointed out that the Soviet penchant for record keeping and documentation exceeded even that of Germany who we we often associate with precise recording of daily status and anal record keeping.
There is much material in his brief about Both Hitler and Stalins meddling and the surprising suggestion that many of the historical critisism of Hitlers blunders at this stage of the war were actually quite sound. Some of the "what ifs" built around the belief that critical moves that should have been taken and weren't, in fact weren't possible or would have lead to more significant disasters.
It is clear in this lecture that the losses by Soviet Russia and Germany in the Eastern Front were humongous and unimaginable.
|
|
|
Post by volkssturm on Mar 23, 2015 12:17:41 GMT -5
I listened to the video last night. Boy, does he sound like a retired Colonel. Didn't catch the name of the tank battle, but it makes sense. The Russians had an enormous number of tanks at the start of the war, but like their huge number of aircraft they were mostly obsolete compared to the best of the German tanks. e does a really good job of presenting the scale of the Eastern Front. It's mind boggling how many troops were involved and the casualty figures.
|
|
2nd Bat
Master sergeant
Posts: 11,813
|
Post by 2nd Bat on Mar 23, 2015 12:41:26 GMT -5
"he does sound like a retired Colonel" that's funny as I thought exactly the same thing! This fellow has absolutely made the eastern front his lifes work. You can hear the passion as the recently available information debunked much that he had been lead to believe from earlier and filled in a number of questions he had. To know the significance of what he was looking at he had to be able to recognize that which was previously unknown and that which constituted conflicts with previous dogma. It sounds like he was exactly the right guy to be exposed to all this stuff.
As a professional presenter it was funny seeing overhead slides being used. Talk about a throw back, YIKES!
It was also interesting to hear stated what I have often said. Many historical "facts" became common myth simply because they are stated with confidence by someone who was believed. Such statements get repeated so often that they become recognized as unshakable facts even though there was never any true basis for the belief. This happens in medicine, science, sales, management, history and probably every discipline known to man. New discoveries are reluctantly shared if they question these beliefs as the discoverers are often ridiculed or ostracised.
|
|