Movie Theater "The Soviet Role in World War II - Antony Beevor"

[sirhrmechanic]

NKVD blocking detachments were used to push soviet units into attacks "like wolves herding sheep." throughout the war, the average soviet soldier was more afraid of Stalin and the gulag than he was of the nazis.
here's an article:

Military History Matters: Soviet Blocking Detachments

militaryhistorymatters.blogspot.com

And almost every Soviet POW that was liberated back to the USSR at the end of the war ended up in the Gulag. Very few survive German harsh treatment. And then Stalin jailed them for a variety of crimes which included dereliction of duty. By not dying.

It is argued that a large part of the reason stalin did this was because these people had been exposed to Western ideas. And represented a threat to him. I think it’s more likely that he was just a murderous sociopath .

Regardless, liberation from a POW camp generally meant a Gulag for a unfortunate Russian soldier.

Sirhr

 

[Guthwine]

Enemy at the Gates is one of the worst examples. Soviet officers that retreated were often shot but the regular soldiers were just put under new command or into penal battalions. They were not so dumb to kill their own men "en masse" in a war of attrition.

The victory was an allied effort, but still destroying 75% of the german forces is a massive contribution.

 

[sirhrmechanic]

The victory was an allied effort, but still destroying 75% of the german forces is a massive contribution.

And one can't really measure the psychological damage done to the German military and home front as the endless casualties, body bags, letters, POW notices came back. The entire Wehrmacht lived in fear of being sent to the East. Those who came back had horror stories that were not helpful to their new units... except maybe to motivate some to fight to the end.

It also contributed, late in the war, to a much faster collapse of defenses at the West as the Germans realized they wanted American and British occupation (no so much French... they were not nice.) But they certainly did not want Soviet occupation! They regarded the Soviet occupation as a fate worth than death and fought for every foot of territory in the East. While, in the West there were a lot of German Troops who could not wait to get behind the wire and get hot dogs and three squares.

Again, the Soviet sacrifice saved a ton of Western allied lives. A fact often not recognized by historians.

Sirhr

 

[Guthwine]

And one can't really measure the psychological damage done to the German military and home front as the endless casualties, body bags, letters, POW notices came back. The entire Wehrmacht lived in fear of being sent to the East. Those who came back had horror stories that were not helpful to their new units... except maybe to motivate some to fight to the end.

Definitely, my great grandfather was on leave from Russia when broke down and told my great grandmother "I am not going back there". But in the end he went back anyway because he did not want his family being branded as the "traitor's family" which would have serious repercussions for them. A few weeks later he died in a soviet mine field.

 

[georgeIfisher]

With greatest respect I will disagree that the battle of the bulge was hardly holding on. It was a brilliantly engineered surprise attack. By fresh German troops marshaled specifically for the purpose. And it was launched against the quiet sector, against green and recuperating units who expected to be in winter quarters.

Fact is the allies did hold on and Pattons Wheel and turn north movement, which he had pre-planned, Absolutely cut the Germans to pieces. If you think about what the Germans threw at the bulge and what the allies had defending it, was a remarkable defense. Hitler threw the dice. But in the end the skies cleared in a few days and allied AirPower was overwhelming. And Pattons tanks showed up faster than anyone, including Eisenhower, could’ve imagined. So it’s not a really fair comparison to say that the Americans were outmatched at the bulge.

You are 100% right about the Russian contributions pulling huge troop concentrations away from the Western front to the eastern. And the Soviets definitely cut the Germans to pieces. Without the Soviet sacrifices and ultimate brilliant
generaling toward the end of the war, Germany probably would have still fallen. But it would’ve been a really really bloody affair.

But I would also argue that the Russian victory didn’t start at Kursk, It started with the defense of Moscow the Seige Of Leningrad and the victory at Stalingrad. Kursk was The Soviet army landing their first body blow. But they defeated the Germans at the gates of Moscow in December of 41.

After that it was just a matter of time for Germany. The Soviets recovered. The allied effort started to coalesce after Pearl Harbor. Stalin started trusting his generals…

Kursk was the beginning of the end for Germany. To paraphrase Churchill, the battle of Moscow, which never happened, was the end of the beginning.

Cheers

Sirhr

PS. One thing no one has mentioned as a Soviet contribution was the absolute mastery of artillery. The Soviets put a lot into long range guns and rocket systems. Their ability to put steel on target was unlike any force in World War II. In that respect Soviet doctrine and equipment and tactics were utterly at the leadIng edge of military science.

Imagine if the mass of Panther and Tiger tanks were available for the thrust into the Ardennes. Also as we know the Luftwaffe was spent and had no air support for the ground forces. A little deeper dig would be helpful in understanding the role of the Soviets.

 

[georgeIfisher]

And one can't really measure the psychological damage done to the German military and home front as the endless casualties, body bags, letters, POW notices came back. The entire Wehrmacht lived in fear of being sent to the East. Those who came back had horror stories that were not helpful to their new units... except maybe to motivate some to fight to the end.

It also contributed, late in the war, to a much faster collapse of defenses at the West as the Germans realized they wanted American and British occupation (no so much French... they were not nice.) But they certainly did not want Soviet occupation! They regarded the Soviet occupation as a fate worth than death and fought for every foot of territory in the East. While, in the West there were a lot of German Troops who could not wait to get behind the wire and get hot dogs and three squares.

Again, the Soviet sacrifice saved a ton of Western allied lives. A fact often not recognized by historians.

Sirhr

Absolutely!

 

[georgeIfisher]

Not sure how accurate, but this film depicts Russians shooting thier own if they retreated.

Enemy at the Gates (2001) ⭐ 7.5 | Action, Drama, War

2h 11m | R

m.imdb.com

That was a very fine movie. I enjoyed and first learned of Vasily Zeitsev and his Mosin Nagant sniper rifle.

 

[georgeIfisher]

Tanks were incidental. P-39's, hurricanes and tomahawks were important. However, the West gave Stalin and his pack of Bolsheviks over 420,000 4x4 trucks. Without them, the Soviet doctrine of deep penetration never could have been achieved. The Soviets defeated the Germans on the operational level, not the tactical level. They were able to confound the Germans by moving men quickly to critical points of attack, and then steamrolling the Germans with an unstoppable flood at the breakthrough points, which then outpaced the Germans who could not move their limited reserves as quickly as the soviets could execute their attack. We made that possible. Without that motorization, the soviet army would have been footslogging into one repeat of the Rzhev Meat Grinder after another, year after year, and they might have reached Poland by the time the Western allies reached Berlin.

(and the fact that we provided them with communication networks so they could actually speak to each other and organize their attacks as they developed was pretty important too, although secondary to the motorization)

"Tanks were incidental..." Whoa, where did you come up with that?

 

[RUTGERS95]

Grandpa was with Patton the whole war. He loved and hated the man but to a man, said everyone respected him and understood that what he wanted was the best approach. Patton loved his men, loved beating the Germans more.

 

[RUTGERS95]

Not sure how accurate, but this film depicts Russians shooting thier own if they retreated.

Enemy at the Gates (2001) ⭐ 7.5 | Action, Drama, War

2h 11m | R

m.imdb.com

not sure? it's well documented how the commie scum treated their own

 

[georgeIfisher]

You can agree to disagree, but it is an undeniable fact of history that the nuclear weapons developed by the Manhattan Peoject were destined for Germany. And, the only thing that saved Germany from the eventual fate of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is the unconditional surrender that preceded the completion of the weapons. I cannot believe this is even a point of discussion. There are some that are carrying this discussion from a place of ignorance.

It was AE's letter to FDR that got the Manhattan train going because of the scientists fear of German heavy water experiments. Fortunately, Hitler viewed and dismissed nuclear physics as "Jewish physics." His scientists and military kept it going unbeknownst to him. The fire bombings of Dresden, Hamburg and a number of Japanese metropolises were far more deadly than the two nukes.

 

[sirhrmechanic]

It was AE's letter to FDR that got the Manhattan train going because of the scientists fear of German heavy water experiments. Fortunately, Hitler viewed and dismissed nuclear physics as "Jewish physics." His scientists and military kept it going unbeknownst to him. The fire bombings of Dresden, Hamburg and a number of Japanese metropolises were far more deadly than the two nukes.

^^^ This

And technically it was Louis Szilard, a Hungarian Physicist working in Chicago, I think, who wanted to warn Roosevelt. But he didn’t have the name or clout. So he went to Einstein along with a couple of other scientists to get him to lend his name to the concern.

Together at Princeton they drafted the famous letter and Roosevelt put Vannevar Bush his science advisor on it.

Einstein didn’t really come up with it. But when presented with the math by Szilard and possibly Fermi he was concerned enough to act.

and to your point about the battle of the bulge, without a doubt the strains of the Eastern front prevented Hitler from assembling anywhere near the resources or punching power he needed to get back Antwerp. It was a powerful force, but a roll of the dice that was doomed from the beginning.

There is a good book from about two years ago called Hitler as Military Commander if I remember the title correctly. It shows what an absolute disaster he was as a military commander. Goes through campaign by campaign decision by decision and it’s very well documented.

His incompetence is one of the reasons that some of the discussions about targeting or assassinating Hitler were dismissed. The longer he was pulling the strings the worst things were for the German military.

If they had gotten rid of Hitler, they might have had competent commanders in charge. This is just opinion, but my bet is that Goering wouldn’t have lasted long. If at all. Whether a bullet in the head or retired to play with his art and liquor.

And that Speer would have ended up as titular head or deputy Fuhrer and he would’ve continued to work production miracles while staying out of military decisions. In the meantime you would’ve had a new Fuhrer or military cabal that would have made competent military decisions. And that would’ve been bad in many many ways. But that is purely conjecture and opinion on my part.

Cheers,

Sirhr

 

[sirhrmechanic]

"Tanks were incidental..." Whoa, where did you come up with that?

I think his intent was to say that the tanks provided by lend lease were incidental. Because the T 34 and the later KV?/Stalin tanks were probably the finest of the war.

And I include in that the German tanks which were 10 times too complex far too expensive and left supply chain disasters for the Germans. Once again German economic decisions were just stupid.

Lend lease was not incidental. But I don’t think the few hundred grants, Lee’s and Shermans that the Russian got made much of a difference compared to their own tank production and designs.

Sirhr

 

[sirhrmechanic]

In hindsight I don't see how japan ever hoped to win.

Technically they didn’t. What they intended to do was seize enough resources to be self-sufficient in their “greater East-Asian co-prosperity sphere”. Which was a euphemism for we will be a colonial power. But they felt that by doing this they could push themselves onto world power stage, which is what they felt they deserved. Especially following World War I. And institutionalized Japan-centric racism in Japan Made Hitler’s legions look like Portland wokie’s..

What they utterly underestimated was the American response to a surprise attack. The insular War counsel in Japan really thought the Pearl Harbor would shock the Americans and make them come to the negotiating table so that Japan could keep gains in the Pacific.

They absolutely had no concept of the American psyche. Except for a few people like Yamamoto who had lived in America. And he said very clearly before Pearl Harbor that “ I will run roughshod over the Americans for six months to a year. After that there’s a little chance.” I paraphrase.

They violated the first rule of war. Which is to know your enemy.

Cheers Sirhr

 

[GreenGO Juan]

I think his intent was to say that the tanks provided by lend lease were incidental. Because the T 34 and the later KV?/Stalin tanks were probably the finest of the war.

And I include in that the German tanks which were 10 times too complex far too expensive and left supply chain disasters for the Germans. Once again German economic decisions were just stupid.

Lend lease was not incidental. But I don’t think the few hundred grants, Lee’s and Shermans that the Russian got made much of a difference compared to their own tank production and designs.

Sirhr

They received 1386 lees and 4102 Shermans and others totaling around 7,000. I believe the British and Canada gave them some as well.

They moved the factory that built T-34’s by rail as the Germans advanced on Stalingrad. This is were the 2,000 locomotives from the lend lease was useful.

I believe the Russias built around 100,00 tanks, 50,000 or so being a version of the T-34. T/34 was a superior design for sure. Big gun, metal tracks, diesel engine. There is an interesting story of on of its chief designers Mikhail Koshkin driving from Stalingrad to Moscow in one, having no heating and being in the dead of winter he died of pneumonia soon after his arrival.

What the Soviets lacked was air and naval power. They didn’t even posses a decent long range bomber. In fact the Tu-4 which was their first long range bomber was basically a copy of a B-29 that made emergency landings after bombing Japan in 1944 and was built after the war.

Btw, I have heard as many as 27 million Soviets were killed in all over Ww2. With around 19 million being civilians, 8 million military.

5.3 million German soliders including 900,000 conscripted fighters.

Eastern front was a blood bath.

Not forgetting about those stuck in the middle killed as well. My mom dates an Israeli whose mother survived the holocaust, she watched her whole family killed in front of her by the ss, remembered the name of the officer and after the war testified against him. Speaking with my mom‘s friend they took a trip to Israel and we were talking about flights and routes and he still refuses to go to Eastern Europe. He’s not very fond of Nazis or Russians.

 

[Darayavaus]

"Tanks were incidental..." Whoa, where did you come up with that?

seems like you only read the first 3 words. no wonder you were confused.

 

[Darayavaus]

We also sent them 57.8 per cent of their aviation fuel requirements, 53 per cent of all explosives, and almost half the wartime supply of copper, aluminum and rubber tires. We sent them 56.6 per cent of all the rails used during the war and 1,900 locomotives - they only built 92. We sent them 11,075 railway cars compared to 1,087 they produced in their own factories. Almost half the supplies, by weight, was food- enough to provide a half-pound of concentrated nourishment for every Soviet soldier, every day of the war.

Because of all this they had the unbelievable luxury of concentrating their entire output on things like T-34s. Nobody even knows how many were actually produced because the communists lied about most everything.

after 1945, the communists tried to play off Lend-Lease as a minor factor, and it's importance was hidden under the flood of self-serving propaganda by the soviet state. In the 1990s when the archives opened, one of Khrushchev's taped memoirs was released: "Several times I heard Stalin acknowledge [Lend-Lease] within the small circle of people around him. He said that… if we had had to deal with Germany one-to-one we would not have been able to cope because we lost so much of our industry." And another secret tape of Marshal Zhukov was found at the same time: without aid the Soviet Union ‘could not have continued the war’.

 

[hlee]

I think we have found the only verified Russian instigator on the whole damned internet...

 

[mgrs]

Imagine if the mass of Panther and Tiger tanks were available for the thrust into the Ardennes. Also as we know the Luftwaffe was spent and had no air support for the ground forces. A little deeper dig would be helpful in understanding the role of the Soviets.

By no air support, you mean the most concentrated single-day ground attack operation the luftwaffe put up?

Operation Bodenplatte

... after which, they were then spent. I guess, it was technically an air superiority bid (in support of the ground forces).

 

[mgrs]

With greatest respect I will disagree that the battle of the bulge was hardly holding on. It was a brilliantly engineered surprise attack. By fresh German troops marshaled specifically for the purpose. And it was launched against the quiet sector, against green and recuperating units who expected to be in winter quarters.

<snip>

PS. One thing no one has mentioned as a Soviet contribution was the absolute mastery of artillery. The Soviets put a lot into long range guns and rocket systems. Their ability to put steel on target was unlike any force in World War II. In that respect Soviet doctrine and equipment and tactics were utterly at the leadIng edge of military science.

While I normally agree with your (excellent) posts, I've always understood that while the soviets had a lot of artillery, their employment was kind of "First World War-ish." I'd argue that of all the powers, the United States Army had the best artillery arm, from how forward observers were integrated, comparatively low echelon engagement authority, and more advanced and reliable munitions (posit fuses, better fragmentation).

I'd agree that Soviet doctrine was completely on the cutting edge... especially before the war. From Svechin in the early interwar years to Tukhachevsky, Khalepskii, Varfolomeev and their combined arms integration in Deep Battle doctrine they were arguably more modern than anyone. It was Khalepskii and pushing fast shock/exploitation tank design (starting with BT series) that brought about the T-34. Of course, they were purged...

Also (not directed at you).... while we love to lament US tank design, we tend to forget that everything had to be designed around hoisting onto a ship and traveling thousands of miles, being unloaded at the minimum port facility, and going into the fight. The US had a number of heavy tank designs and certainly had the industrial capacity to build in large numbers some of the most powerful vehicles on the planet, but that doesn't do much for you in an age before roll on/roll off shipping...

 

[sharac]

Same shit as Panther or King tiger or <insert any failure of decent or good design>. In the end it boils down to compromise that works in any given situation and what works wins and its clear who had won and at what cost.

As to the human sacrifice its easy to dismiss either "barbarian hordes" or "german knights" or "nazi fanatics" or whom ever you mention in relation to WWI or II. Given the state of human beings in 2000+ i find it insulting and abhorrent to use word evolution or to mention in judging/measuring way anyone from history that has made ultimate sacrifice. Some keep banging the drum of 1775 or any other bright moment in human history and yet month after month the water is hotter and frog quite content in the pot. The same frog would then judge people who had actually made the jump and many had paid for that jump with their life.
We (that do nothing) are not much better than the various scum po(ll)pulating this planet today. Imagine WWIII in the field now or in few years? Bunch of LGB....QZY123 zombies duking it out with dildos and fleshlights and crying because comrade has broken a nail when hitting sauerkrautz strapon sideways....

 

[Guthwine]

By no air support, you mean the most concentrated single-day ground attack operation the luftwaffe put up?

Operation Bodenplatte

... after which, they were then spent. I guess, it was technically an air superiority bid (in support of the ground forces).

One german operation (which basically was the Luftwaffe's suicide) is nothing compared to the constant air raiding that the allies were conducting. Having some strength in the air does not equal air superiority.

 

[sirhrmechanic]

I think we have found the only verified Russian instigator on the whole damned internet...

Seeing as how this thread was virtually created to discuss Russian perspective on Russian history as represented by western historians over the last 75 years having a Russian voice here can hardly be seen as instigation. It should be seen as a welcome addition to the discussion.

Cheers Sirhr

 

[GreenGO Juan]

 

[MK20]

If you do some reading of primary source materials you see that without Lend Lease supplies the Soviets wouldn't have made it. Especially around 1941/42. It wasn't so much tanks and such, but the support items, wheeled vehicles, etc. At one point a massive portion of Red Army wheeled vehicles were American.

Oh, and while the Russian people are great, the Soviet leaders weren't. We should have took the Germans up on their offer made by Kanaris of a conditional surrender and joined forces to liberate Russia from Bolshevism.

Then we would have gotten Hitler and Stalin in one war. There would have been no Mao, no Pol Pot, no Kim Il Sung, no Ho Chi Minh, Rhodesia would have been the breadbasket of Africa and the gestating fifth column in our own country would have struggled to survive without the ideological nourishment from the motherland.

 

[Guthwine]

For those of you interested in the Topic and with time on your hands.

 

[Mr.BR]

'‘NATIONAL NARCISSISM’ INFLATES BELIEFS ABOUT WORLD WAR II VICTORY''

National narcissism rears its head in study of WWII

In a survey of adults from the countries that comprised the World War II alliances known as the Allies and the Axis, respondents overestimate the importance of their country to the war effort. A new Arts & Sciences study shows how.

source.wustl.edu

“The Russian story is told in practically none of our movies, none of our novels,” Roediger says. “It’s all about us

Lend-lease was a big deal to keep the Brits and Soviets in the fight ,but still has to be taken in context, Lend lease has a US jobs program after a massive recession that helped the foreign fighting man win the war ,and lets just say working a paid job 7:00-15:00 is a bit different than dodging bullets and shrapnel every day. While much of the LL debt was written of it was never a freebie. Considerable resources and raw materials including gold and diamonds were used to pay for parts of it last of it in 2006
Folks also always think Lend Lease as planes, tanks, trucks , the part that kept folks in the fight was food and fuel.

When it comes to assessing the strategic bombing of Germany, you have to consider that Germans ultimately ran out of men not planes or tanks. 80% of German KIA were eastern front , also NonGerman Axis Allies alone lost more men on Russian front than all of western allies combined. Soviets swallowed the Wehrmacht whole in the Ukrainian and Belorussian steppes, and wore it down till it run out of military age men ,Germans literally had draft old men and kids for the final year of the war .While aid from the Western Allies mattered greatly in this victory, the Russian people fought and won the war against Germans and when turn came to take on the Japanese went through them like a steam roller. Japanese shat their pants in fear of the Red Army rolling into Japan .

11.3Billon $USD(1945) supplied to USSR is cca 160 Billion$ in today's $ , just for perspective vs 2 Trillions spend on Afghan war..

Lend-Lease was not charity. In June 1941 Harry Truman - New York Times “If we see that Germany is winning the war, we ought to help Russia; and if that Russia is winning, we ought to help Germany, and in that way let them kill as many as possible …”

Poling in France 1945 when things are still ''fresh'' and after Hollywood had its propaganda run, Poll run in 1945 in any of the allied countries had soviet contribution to WW magnitudes higher than it was decades later when sanitized history lessons and propaganda make their mark.

 

[steve podleski]

...

They moved the factory that built T-34’s by rail as the Germans advanced on Stalingrad. This is were the 2,000 locomotives from the lend lease was useful.
....

The USA and USSR had the same rail gauge?

 

[GreenGO Juan]

The USA and USSR had the same rail gauge?

Don’t know, but they were provided with around 2,000 locomotives, I would assume they would have to fit Russian tracks if not they’d be kind of useless .

Apparently they were so smitten with Alco locomotives it became a design that they used for a long time
What I do know is when the soviets moved the T-34 production, they moved it to an factory that used to produce locomotives.

I am not a Very knowledgeable on trains

 

[GreenGO Juan]

Japanese shat their pants in fear of the Red Army rolling into Japan .

Russo-Japanese War - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Japan kicked Russia’s ass a few years prior

Maybe a defeated Japan, which the US and Brits fought with no support from Russia . Besides allowing a few stricken US bombers to crash land there

 

[GreenGO Juan]

Id like to add, Japan is an Island. And Russia had shit for long range aviation or navy/marines at the time.

 

[sirhrmechanic]

The USA and USSR had the same rail gauge?

Rail gauges were all over the map everywhere. I assume in a lot of cases Americans simply laid the tracks right to the Russian border and then the Russians figured it out.

A lot of that stuff came in through Iran. And one of the guys making big huge lead lease shipments of trucks and trains through Iran was a guy named Schwarzkopf. His son would later become somewhat famous.

Even into the 1980s when Russia, then the USSR, sent trains into the eastern European part of the eastern bloc. They would change the bogeys (aka wheel sets) Under the carriages before crossing the so-called borders. They didn’t even unload the trains they simply pulled into a special spot jack them up take one set of bogeys out and put the other set of bogeys in and off they went.

I don’t think rail gauge was much of an issue when it came down to it. Sirhr

 

[steve podleski]

Rail gauges were all over the map everywhere. I assume in a lot of cases Americans simply laid the tracks right to the Russian border and then the Russians figured it out.

A lot of that stuff came in through Iran. And one of the guys making big huge lead lease shipments of trucks and trains through Iran was a guy named Schwarzkopf. His son would later become somewhat famous.

Even into the 1980s when Russia, then the USSR, sent trains into the eastern European part of the eastern bloc. They would change the bogeys (aka wheel sets) Under the carriages before crossing the so-called borders. They didn’t even unload the trains they simply pulled into a special spot jack them up take one set of bogeys out and put the other set of bogeys in and off they went.

I don’t think rail gauge was much of an issue when it came down to it. Sirhr

The germans had to relay the tracks with their (wider or narrower) gage to allow their engines and stock to supply the invasion. I don't think that you can strap on a set of appropriate bogeys to the locomotives and away you go.

 

[sirhrmechanic]

The germans had to relay the tracks with their (wider or narrower) gage to allow their engines and stock to supply the invasion.

In yet another well-thought-out plan…



Sirhr

 

[MK20]

The Russians did have to swap gauges coming up from Iran to Russia. Churchill mentions it in his 6 volume work.

 

[sirhrmechanic]

The germans had to relay the tracks with their (wider or narrower) gage to allow their engines and stock to supply the invasion. I don't think that you can strap on a set of appropriate bogeys to the locomotives and away you go.

Yes… only the carriages! They changed locomotives entirely. Good catch and thanks!

 

[sirhrmechanic]

Id like to add, Japan is an Island. And Russia had shit for long range aviation or navy/marines at the time.

Can’t say WRT marines, but they had a damn good Navy. But not so much of a Blue Water navy. But the Soviet Navy shore battery support was legendary. And at Sevastopol. And Leningrad they were dropping accurate fire 20 miles inland!

They were not crossing the T and engaging in naval battles… and we’re at the mercy of German long range bombers.

But dont count them out!

Sirhr

 

[Mr.BR]

Russo-Japanese War - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Japan kicked Russia’s ass a few years prior

Maybe a defeated Japan, which the US and Brits fought with no support from Russia . Besides allowing a few stricken US bombers to crash land there

Russo Japanese war predates first WW1 , Japan and SSSR fought in the 1930s at the time Japan took ower much of China and possibility of war with Japan keept lot of Soviet troops in the east. But Japan had no apetite for a grund war with the soviets even after they allied with the Germans.

Yes Japan was certainly weakened by Allied powers but at same time no one fought a large land war with Japanese forces since the 30's.

Considering state of Japans AF and Navy at the time Soviets could and would land on Japanese soil if need be. Russia to Japan closest distance is kind like Britain to France at Dover - Calais. But with Cold War already brewing there was realy no desire by Allies to see Soviet forces land in Japan which would end up like in Germany with a country partition.

The Soviet Invasion of Manchuria led to Japan's Greatest Defeat

By Nathan N. Prefer To the Soviet military, it is known as the Manchurian Strategic Offensive Operation. Although it had no official name to the Japanese, it has become known in the West as Operation August Storm. It was the greatest defeat in Japanese military history, yet few outside the...

warfarehistorynetwork.com

 

[RGStory]

And Russia had shit for long range aviation or navy/marines at the time.

If I was not certain that you are simply unaware of the actions of the Russian Marines in WWII, that statement would be insultingly inaccurate.

Please review the actions of Grain Elevator September 17th - 20th, 1942 for a dramatic example of their fighting capabilities and for their operational capabilities and contributions, please review the Moonsund operation of September 29th - 24 November 1944.

I suspect that the problem of the Russian Marines is that the direct translation of the name Morskaya pekhota Rossii (MPR) from Russian to English is literally "Russian Naval Infantry". So when people go looking for the word "Russian Marines" in battle reports they miss them entirely.

@sirhrmechanic the Army University Press, publishes some of their course work on youtube and their series on Russian Campaigns of WWII may be of interest to you. The material is detailed and is supplemented with unit designations and map recreations as they discuss the campaigns. It is designed to be watched in conjunction with classroom material but they provide the references in the video so its fairly easy to follow along.

For example, please see below the part they did on the MPR's defense of the Grain Elevator.

 

[GreenGO Juan]

Can’t say WRT marines, but they had a damn good Navy. But not so much of a Blue Water navy. But the Soviet Navy shore battery support was legendary. And at Sevastopol. And Leningrad they were dropping accurate fire 20 miles inland!

They were not crossing the T and engaging in naval battles… and we’re at the mercy of German long range bombers.

But dont count them out!

Sirhr

August 1945 Japan I wouldn’t count them out and yes they likely would have seeked revenge for the previous disgraceful defeat and swept them off the Asian mainland, but I still don’t think they could’ve taken the island. By 1945 Japan were all but defeated logistically and most of there experienced people we sleeping in Davey Jones locker, courtesy of 3 1/2 years of war with US Army Air core, Navy and Marines with help from the British Empire. ( one can draw similar parallels to Russia v Nazi allowing the Us and British to liberate france)

1942 Japan, when they were at their peak. Russia doesn’t have any Pacific warm water ports, which is what the 1905 war was over, which ended in Russias defeat. I don’t believe Russia could have been successful alone

Air power came too heavily into play in Ww2. To bring ships with heavy guns in would require control of the air space, Russia had 0 aircraft carriers throught all of ww2, and zero “effective” long range bombers. The battle ships, cruisers and destroyers would be decimated by the Japanese naval aviators which at that time were arguably the best in the world.

Without effective year round pacific fleet with a warm water port, there would be months where Vladivostok would be frozen over. The same winter that hindered Napoleon and Nazi advances on Moscow, would be their demise in the far east.

It would be necessary for potential threats against Russia in Europe to have been decimated before they could focus their attention on Japan.

But Russia didn’t become the biggest country in the world by being a bunch of pussies

 

[RGStory]

But at a strategic and production level the Americans totally outstripped both the British and the Soviets. And it was in the end a technological war.

Are you familiar with Bernard Baruch and the legacy of ICAF?

 

[sirhrmechanic]

Are you familiar with Bernard Baruch and the legacy of ICAF?

Yup. I think that became NDU. A buddies wife was president of that recently.

 

[RGStory]

August 1945 Japan I wouldn’t count them out and yes they likely would have seeked revenge for the previous disgraceful defeat and swept them off the Asian mainland, but I still don’t think they could’ve taken the island. By 1945 Japan were all but defeated logistically and most of there experienced people we sleeping in Davey Jones locker, courtesy of 3 1/2 years of war with US Army Air core, Navy and Marines with help from the British Empire. ( one can draw similar parallels to Russia v Nazi allowing the Us and British to liberate france)

1942 Japan, when they were at their peak. Russia doesn’t have any Pacific warm water ports, which is what the 1905 war was over, which ended in Russias defeat. I don’t believe Russia could have been successful alone

Air power came too heavily into play in Ww2. To bring ships with heavy guns in would require control of the air space, Russia had 0 aircraft carriers throught all of ww2, and zero “effective” long range bombers. The battle ships, cruisers and destroyers would be decimated by the Japanese naval aviators which at that time were arguably the best in the world.

Without effective year round pacific fleet with a warm water port, there would be months where Vladivostok would be frozen over. The same winter that hindered Napoleon and Nazi advances on Moscow, would be their demise in the far east.

It would be necessary for potential threats against Russia in Europe to have been decimated before they could focus their attention on Japan.

But Russia didn’t become the biggest country in the world by being a bunch of pussies

This is a static view of history and assumes that Russia would have been unable to adapt to a new theater of war. Truth is, we don't know how well Russia would have been able to perform in the Eastern Theater. We can look at the Manchurian campaign for a clues, but you are correct that they did not have a blue navy of strength in the Pacific Theater and without American war efforts we cannot know what would have occurred.

The Russo-Japanese War of 1904-05 while insightful was an entirely different war, fought with entirely different weapons using WWI tactics. I think its fair to say by 1945, the Soviet Army was far different than the Czarist Army of the early 1900's.

Interesting anecdotal note, the 1905 campaign in Port Arthur was the last charge of a traditional Samurai unit on the battlefield. Swords and armor they charged a fortified Russian Trench line against barbwire, naval artillery support and machine guns. They vastly exceeded everyone expectations took the trench line and held off numerous counter attacks. Unfortunately, the Japanese commander did not expect them to actually succeed and was unprepared to send reinforcements to hold the position.

 

[RGStory]

Yup. I think that became NDU. A buddies wife was president of that recently.

That is awesome. I was there when Ambassador Nancy McEldowney handed over the presidency to Major General Martin.

I like to joke that I put more general grade officers "in their place" on that day than I ever saw in my entire life..... As I escorted them to their seats.

ICAF is one of several colleges within the National Defense University.

 

[GreenGO Juan]

This is a static view of history and assumes that Russia would have been unable to adapt to a new theater of war. Truth is, we don't know how well Russia would have been able to perform in the Eastern Theater. We can look at the Manchurian campaign for a clues, but you are correct that they did not have a blue navy of strength in the Pacific Theater and without American war efforts we cannot know what would have occurred.

The Russo-Japanese War of 1904-05 while insightful was an entirely different war, fought with entirely different weapons using WWI tactics. I think its fair to say by 1945, the Soviet Army was far different than the Czarist Army of the early 1900's.

Interesting anecdotal note, the 1905 campaign in Port Arthur was the last charge of a traditional Samurai unit on the battlefield. Swords and armor they charged a fortified Russian Trench line against barbwire, naval artillery support and machine guns. They vastly exceeded everyone expectations took the trench line and held off numerous counter attacks. Unfortunately, the Japanese commander did not expect them to actually succeed and was unprepared to send reinforcements to hold the position.

Yes they would have had to develop new equipment tactics and strategy. But I feel this focus, would have left them vulnerable in other higher risk area’s, like Eastern Europe.

Btw enjoyed the Video on the Grain Elevator.

 

[Mr.BR]

This is a static view of history and assumes that Russia would have been unable to adapt to a new theater of war. Truth is, we don't know how well Russia would have been able to perform in the Eastern Theater. We can look at the Manchurian campaign for a clues, but you are correct that they did not have a blue navy of strength in the Pacific Theater and without American war efforts we cannot know what would have occurred.

The Russo-Japanese War of 1904-05 while insightful was an entirely different war, fought with entirely different weapons using WWI tactics. I think its fair to say by 1945, the Soviet Army was far different than the Czarist Army of the early 1900's.

Interesting anecdotal note, the 1905 campaign in Port Arthur was the last charge of a traditional Samurai unit on the battlefield. Swords and armor they charged a fortified Russian Trench line against barbwire, naval artillery support and machine guns. They vastly exceeded everyone expectations took the trench line and held off numerous counter attacks. Unfortunately, the Japanese commander did not expect them to actually succeed and was unprepared to send reinforcements to hold the position.

You can imagine they would not emulate US or Brit pacific fighting model in any way if it came to it they would adapt to what suited them , and it would not be happening isolated from rest of the war effort US and Britain would still do their thing against Japan , if Allies decided to invade Japan , Soviets would likely get a beachhead going on Hokaido . Japan being an Island is a defense but they were realistically looking at a considerable number of potential invasion points spanning much of Japan so would be hard pressed to defend against both soviets and western allies

But considering somewhat costly Kuril islands fighting, (Battle of Shumshu) they were in no real hurry to invade Japan . Stalin made a deal with allies regarding Japan in Yalta and deals were always held.

 

[RGStory]

Yes they would have had to develop new equipment tactics and strategy. But I feel this focus, would have left them vulnerable in other higher risk area’s, like Eastern Europe.

The lessons of Milton Bradley board games aside, I would argue that in the real world it is truly impossible to discern the effects of an earlier breaking of the Soviet-Japanese Neutrality treaty. It was only honored by both sides as long as their attentions were diverted elsewhere, so I think it is safe to discount the continued effectiveness of the treaty to deter conflict without the Japanese and Russians fighting on other fronts. The Japanese considered breaking the pact when Germany was advancing towards Stalingrad, and the Russians broke the treaty when they finished up in Europe.

However, the Japanese would still be bogged down securing their newly acquired holdings and fucking around in Burma and Australia even without the Americans to contend with, so I don't know how far they could have actually made it into Russia anyways, or if they would have seen merit in diverting so much of their resources towards the Russians.

That said, it is a documented fact that the Japanese saw the Russians as a real threat by the Summer of 1945. Also, I am not aware of any historic material that would lead me to conclude that had the Japanese not not surrendered to the United States, that the Russians would not have invaded Japan on their own.

 

[RGStory]

Btw enjoyed the Video on the Grain Elevator.

Having watched the video and looked up some of their amphibious landing operations, would you agree to amend your adjective of "shit" regarding the Russian Marines?

 

[GreenGO Juan]

Having watched the video and looked up some of their amphibious landing operations, would you agree to amend your adjective of "shit" regarding the Russian Marines?

Projecting power across the Open Ocean and is something completely different. In that theater, against Japanese navy is what I was getting at. This is not comparable to the defense of land locked Stalingrad.

This is the context I was referring to.

Shit was not the best word to describe it, I can admit that!

 

[RGStory]

Shit was not the best word to describe it, I can admit that!

LOL.
Thanks. I admit I am overly defensive against people speaking ill of Marines.

Projecting power across the Open Ocean and is something completely different. In that theater, against Japanese navy is what I was getting at. This is not comparable to the defense of land locked Stalingrad.

In that context, I would agree with you, with the caveat that blue water amphibious operations were not required for their operations. I also do not doubt that Russian industrial capacity could have been converted to producing landing craft of various types. As far as doctrine, training and capability, they did execute localized amphibious landing operations in Northern Europe. Something they should have utilized earlier in the Winter War.