History (and related interesting facts)

Patton was a war crime waiting to happen and sort of a goof when it came to organizing anything to do with infantry(hence why he had his subordinates tend to do that) not to mention not nearly as creative and inventive as he is commonly believed to be these days but he wasn't a horrible military leader, just a fairly average one.

My favorite strategist?

Otto Model

Field Marshal of the Third Reich.

Hitler's Fireman.

I'm not sure how that is childish or arrogant, we are proud of it and never say ''you lot better be grateful for it'' but its nice for people to remember the sacrifices our soldiers made, And i'm sure you would love having soviet or ottoman Europe..

Actually thinking about  it i never in my life have heard anyone saying about any part of history ''we-saved-everyone-and-you-should-be-grateful-for-that''

Fair enough mate, some of these statements have grain of truth but anyways i don't think Magvs meant that  in this way

Yeah, maybe but Putin has Robert Krafts super bowl ring so nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah!

I think every war you participate and your neighbour doesn't, can be considered as "saving" your neighbour. I mean Poland was between Russia and Germany for centuries. So when the Polish were at war with Germany, they kinda saved Russia, and vice versa. On the other hand, German principalities were between France and Poland, so when the Germans fought against France, they kinda saved Poland, and vice versa.

Say, when England, Holland, Austria, Brandenburg, Savoy, and Portugal defeated Louis XIV, they kinda "saved" the rest of Europe from France. Looking at Louis' ambitions, it's safe to say he could attack Poland if he would conquer Germany. So Germans and Austrians could say, "we saved Poland and Sweden and Russia from the French."

Or, when France battled Spain over Europe dominance in XVI-XVII centuries, they kinda "saved" Dutch Republic and German Protestant states from the Spaniards.

Or Nomads attacking China for centuries can be considered saviors of the rest of the world from Chinese expansion.

So there's no point to talk who saved who.

I read about this theory. It looks solid considering the Red Army was suspiciously close to the German-Soviet border just before the German invasion. If you wanna defend your territory, you shouldn't place the bulk of your forces that close to the border. Because they will be decimated if the enemy charges and gains the advantage of sudden attack.

But if you wanna attack the enemy first, you do move your troops to the border.

But I don't remember seeing any actual proof (i.e. documents such as Stalin's order to attack Germany or secret plans to attack Europe) to this theory.

Hitler killed Jews and other people - meaning people he perceived as enemies. Stalin killed over 20 million if his own IN PEACE TIME. Stalin is way worse than Hitler, but way smarter and more calculating. 

If Stalin was afraid of Hitler - why would he seek he a common BORDER in Poland? If he was afraid and weak, why did he have 5 million pairs of new boots on the border? Why did he have hospitals and airports ON the damn border? Why did he have thousands of maps of EUROPE on the border? Why did he ordered to destroy his own defenses? 

You can't feed and support an army for years. And he had a 5 million army. He had to attack in 1941 or the nation would've went bankrupt. 

He had the best tanks BY FAR in 1941, nothing can compare to T-34 or KV-1 He had great planes. He would've killed Europe. 

Merkel.

Definitely Merkel.

*sigh* This sounds disturbingly like Suvorov's bullshit again. I thought people had gotten over that one....

Have you actually looked at the Nazi's long term plans? Even had they completed the extermination of European Jewry, it would've been minor compared to the full implementation of Generalplan Ost We're talking about exterminating around 80% of the population of the region between the pre-war German border and the Ural mountains with the remainder kept in slavery that would have made the ante-bellum South look like paradise. Stalin was the one who killed people he percieved as enemies. Hitler and the Nazis killed people they considered sub-human and prioritised doing so over and above fighting the war. Seriously. Even when Germany itself was being invaded, trains moving Jews, Slavs and other "undesirables" to the death camps received priority over those carrying troops and military supplies. Hitler ordered Barbarossa to implement his ideological goals.

Stalin took half of Poland to a) restore historical Russian territory and to act as a buffer zone against attacks. (Don't get me wrong I'm not in any way saying he was justified in invading Poland, just that he didn't do it in preparation of invading the rest of Europe, at least in the short term)

The Red Army had a relatively small number of good, modern tanks in '41 (around 1500 IIRC) [and even they were hardly wonder weapons given how they were actually used - not to mention the Germans were perfectly capable of dealing with such vehicles when they could actually bring heavier guns to bear, which they would be more able to on the defense]. They also had vast amounts of obsolete crap (mainly BT series) which were barely more than armoured cars by the time of Barbarossa at would've have been of almost no use in an offensive campaign against Germany - in fact, they were actually being withdrawn from service for that exact reason in 1941 (Indeed, this goes back to what I was saying, the Red Army was reorganising and rearming in 1941).

The Soviet economy was in a bad state, but it was recovering. They could definitely support the Red Army as it was in '41. The longer Stalin waited, the stronger he would be. He had no need to launch a war in 1941. Wait a couple more years and he's in a much better position, with both a stronger economic base and a much stronger military (while the Nazi, on the other hand, did need to launch a war pretty soon for economical reasons).

The abandonment of many defenses in the SU (particularly the Stalin Line) was primarily as part of a general shift to the Molotov Line of defenses closer to the border - of course the German attack came before the latter could be completed, and in general, the process was done somewhat haphazardly and with a distinct lack of competence (something that was far from uncommon in Soviet military circles at this time - in part due to the massive purges that the Red Army was still recovering from in '41, another tick against the idea they were going to attack).

Stalin put forces and support for them along the border to discourage German aggression. Again, no matter how many were there, their deployments were simply unsuitable for a large scale offensive.

Did the Soviets have some plans covering an invasion of Europe? Of course. Militaries prepare for that kind of thing all the time (the US for example, has plans for invading Canada), and the general doctrine of the Red Army was an aggressive one. Had they considered such an attack in '41? In all likelihood, yes. But the simple facts on the ground were that they were in no position to launch such an attack at that time. And if they were going to launch an attack, why '41? They weren't that much stronger than they had been a year earlier when the Nazi's were occupied in the West. Stalin was an arch-opportunist. If he was going to attack in the early 40s, he would've done so then. Or even earlier, maybe in '39 when he had a large force mobilised in Poland directly opposing the Nazis. Hell, why not during the 1930s when the Soviets were unquestionably the most powerful nation in the world militarily? But he didn't.

And German tanks were not obsolete compared to BT7? You kidding me? If you want a buffer zone, then you tell Hitler - FUCK you. No deal. No pact. I'm going to support Polish rebels and arm them. And they will be my buffer zone. I'm going to build massive forts and defensive lines, lay minefields, barbed wire everywhere. Defense is easy.

By 1941, most of the obsolete German tanks had been phased out. The remainder were far more capable machines supported by excellent training and doctrine. Against the Wehrmacht, the BT7 was a tin can deathtrap (just, you know, look at the results of Barbarossa).

If you give Hitler all of Poland, then you give him a border closer to your heartland, and simply funding Polish partizans ain't gonna stop that. And, as I said, it wasn't purely a buffer zone - Stalin was known as the Red Tsar for a reason. Taking back "Russian" lands (such as the Baltic states and Eastern Poland) was definitely a matter of pride.

Do have any idea just how large eastern Europe is? You can't just fortify the whole thing. And the Soviets did build a lot of defenses, but, as I pointed out, were in the process of construction new ones along the border and shifting much of the weapons and supplies from the older Stalin line forward at the time of Barbarossa.