Hitler or Stalin?

Again, I reiterate that I did not say their contribution was irrevelent, but when the Western allies made attempts to coordinate military operations, the Russians were not 'cooperative'. For example, during the Warsaw uprising, the Allies requested permission to use Russian airstrips for landings after supplying the ghetto fighters but the Soviets refused and they also did nothing to help. Yes, I have heard that they out ran their supplies but that is a bunch of bull. Either way, I am not convinced that Stalin put 100% into the allied effort. As for the 25 million losses, well, alot of that was Stalin's own fault.

 

So many issues mixed in one single short post

All right, I agree that cooperation was not the strongest card the Soviets had to play. Naturally they were working to a different agenda, so that caused these differences. In any case as an example of planning coordination may I point out that Operation Bagration (aka Destruction of Army Group Centre) was brought forward to weeks in order to assist Overlord?

No bunchy bully. The Soviets were at the end of one offensive and when they reached the end of one, believe me, they were completely unable to take a single step forward!

Well, Stalin used to say a lot more when he spoke about the time the Allies took to provide the Second Front, so the feeling was mutual

Read my post above in response to Skipper67.

 

LOL. You can't accuse me of being (in Peppy's words) a post whore.

 

The body count was closer to 30 million... Please correct me if im mistaken, but are you saying that the 25-30 milllion Soviets casualties list includes Stalin purges and deportations???

 

No, only the 1941-1945 period, the purges and post war deportations are to be added (that means millions extra)

 

Agreed.

 

Quite the opposite, you squeezed the poor post as much as you could. Still you might have said something about your favourite Fred Astaire movie and what underwear you use when you go reenacting

Oh, Slava, one of these days I'm going to say something you won't agrre with, and you will be damned sorry that day:clown:

 

I dont agree!!!

 

Doo doot, dooo doot, Doo doont doo doont doo doot doo doo dooo, doo doo doo. (My VERY poor imitation of the Jaws attack theme.)

 

Agreed. The 2nd Tank Army was depleted and out of support when trying to seize Warsaw. When the citizens of Warsaw rose up, the 2nd Tank Army was being counter-attacked and hammered by the 4th and 19th Panzer Divisions, as well as the Hermann Göring and SS Wiking! Basically they were hanging on tooth and nail, and suffering horrible casualties in the process. Just days after the German counter-attack began the 3rd Tank Corps had suffered 90% casualties. The 47th Army was thrown into the fight a week later and managed to reclaim some ground, but was too stretched out by far, to take Warsaw.

Of course, (initially) denying supply flights was not very nice of Stalin, but on the ground the Soviets were pretty much exhausted in the area for quite some time to come. The fact that Stalin found it convenient to have the Home Army beaten does not change this fact.

 

Another difference between Stalin and Hitler: One of them doesn’t know what exhausted and overstretched mean.

 

And Stalin wins by a moustache!

 

Getting slightly schizophrenic here, quoting myself, but apparently I forgot to mention that 3rd SS Totenkopf joined in hammering the 2nd GTA as well.

Oh, and the Germans had clear air superiority over Warsaw and neighboring areas, at least for a couple of weeks, since the Red Army had outrun most of its fighter cover...

 

Stalin kills 25 million and Hitler 12 million making Stalin the bigger monster, not true in my book. What a lot of people over look is the fact Stalin was in power much longer than Hitler and you good folk here are wise and you all knew that unlike some other forums.

The fear factor. When you look at both men I believe that Stalin wins this hands down as people feared him unlike Hitler where the fear was of the SS and Gestapo.

Hitler also had poor health and as the war went on his health hit rock bottom, it's true to say at the time of June 1941 Nazi Germany was on a high note which suffered only minor set backs and Barbarossa would make Hitler or break him. He gambled on the biggest operation ever and lost.

Stalin on the other hand suffered a major blow to his power base in 41/42 and after the dreadful fall out of Operation Mars 1942 Stalin knew he could not run the war on his own. He used his fear factor to get the job done at the cost to his own country and the Soviet people.

Hitler on the other hand was hiring and firing generals all over the place and for some strange reason believed he could win the war if victory was gained at the battle of Kursk. As we all know that cost him in men and material, so in Hitler's mind did he know the game was up? And decided to pull as many of his enemy's down with him. Well he gave it a damn good try that's for sure.

Hitler was his own worst enemy who paid the price while Stalin came up smelling of roses and all of Eastern Europe was under his wing.

 

Would you care to expand on this? The failure of Operation Mars was quietly swept under the carpet by the victory at Stalingraf and subsequent effects. It's completely immaterial. Most people inside or outseide Russia never even heard of the name Op. Mars at all.

 

Here is a good article arguing Glants points of the Mars offensive.

http://rkkaww2.armchairgeneral.com/battles/mars42_Orlov.htm

 

Za, I was referring to the Second Battle of Kharkov in 1942.

Oops, bloody medication screwing me up.

 

IMHO Hitler recieves the Pin Head Award.

The German army used more horses than any other major beligerant. The Russian army was more mechanied than the German. While he may have had a great personality the man was more feared than loved. The Motherland was loved.

The US effort in the Pacific was second, and no resources that went there were needed in Europe. Remeber that in may 45 the US had more men in arms than any other nation, including Russia. North Africa and Italy would not have changed too much, had Russia not been invaded. And a more concerted effort could have been made in Europe in 45 vs 44, while it would have taken longer and cost the Western Allies more lives they could have done it.

Not in all cases, there were some bombers that operated for brief periods from Russian bases.

 

I see the new "quote" solution is working out well for you!

 

Its a beautiful thing isn't it!