I have heard so many of those "rebuttals" in my years of reading that I find a lot of them of dubious credit. In fairness no more worthy than the articles they are meant to rebut.
Quote:
The group of Military Academy
listeners (the officers' reserve) have arrived from Moscow with him. Zhukov
fired those whom he considered not relevant to their positions and shot
them. On their positions he placed people from reserve and if the last made
the smallest fault, they, like their predecessors, got bullet in the back of
the head".
|
I don't believe for a second that Zhukov had those officers he considered unnecessary or who made a mistake shot in the back of the head. What in the hell is the point? It's all exaggeration to me and I find it contemptable. It distorts the most valuable resource humanity has. History.
I'm sure Zhukov made his mistakes, all generals do. I'm sure that the Russians exaggerate the crimes of the Germans but I have seen too much evidence in european Russia to write it all off as lies. The same goes for the atrocities of the Red Army in Prussia/Germany.
War is not a nice affair. I hope we can discuss this without a flamewar. If anyone wants too.