Manifesto of the Communist Party (K. Marx/F. Engels) with english subtitles. Video

[Jredbaron96]

As the saying goes, the Soviets won Stalingrad by "drowning the enemy in the blood of Soviet soldiers", thus effectively dealing a blow from which "the Reich" never recovered.

Eh, Case Blue was doomed more or less the moment it started, at least how it was envisioned, the same way Barbarossa and Citadel were; vast offensive operations that were logistically beyond the capability of the Ostheer to accomplish. They ended up compounding one another in a disastrous downward spiral for the Germans; losses in Barbarossa meant Case Blue had to be supported by hundreds of thousands of Italian, Romanian, and Hungarian troops to guard the German flanks, none of which had the ability to match the increasing tank heavy forces of the Red Army.

Even worse the Romanians had identified almost immediately that they were without the anti-tank weapons necessary to stall the Soviet advance; but their requests for more support fell on deaf ears and when the Red Army launched Operation Uranus the Romanian armies were swept aside and would never again constitute an offensive force on the Eastern Front.

At Kursk they made the same mistake, but that time they didn't even make any initial progress. When they set realistic goals the Germans could do wonders; ala the Third Battle of Kharkov, but that kind of reasonable decision making was at a premium on the Eastern Front.

 

[Chagos]

Eh, Case Blue was doomed more or less the moment it started, at least how it was envisioned, the same way Barbarossa and Citadel were; vast offensive operations that were logistically beyond the capability of the Ostheer to accomplish. They ended up compounding one another in a disastrous downward spiral for the Germans; losses in Barbarossa meant Case Blue had to be supported by hundreds of thousands of Italian, Romanian, and Hungarian troops to guard the German flanks, none of which had the ability to match the increasing tank heavy forces of the Red Army.

Even worse the Romanians had identified almost immediately that they were without the anti-tank weapons necessary to stall the Soviet advance; but their requests for more support fell on deaf ears and when the Red Army launched Operation Uranus the Romanian armies were swept aside and would never again constitute an offensive force on the Eastern Front.

At Kursk they made the same mistake, but that time they didn't even make any initial progress. When they set realistic goals the Germans could do wonders; ala the Third Battle of Kharkov, but that kind of reasonable decision making was at a premium on the Eastern Front.

.......and Kursk was exemplary in (just that one issue) about 7 destroyed Soviet tanks matching one German destroyed tank. IOW Soviets lost up to 2,000 tanks, a number that would have designated the defeat of any other army.

But not here.

With Soviet losses in men approaching 180,000 (Germans 55,000 max.), one can see that the Soviets were not only drowning the German advances "in the blood of Soviet soldiers", but also in a flood of greater material resource.

Even at massive cost, they could afford to keep coming which the Germans could not.

 

[Jredbaron96]

.......and Kursk was exemplary in (just that one issue) about 7 destroyed Soviet tanks matching one German destroyed tank. IOW Soviets lost up to 2,000 tanks, a number that would have designated the defeat of any other army.

Eh, Soviet material losses shouldn't be taken at face value. The Soviets suffered a chronic shortage of mechanics and technicians throughout the war, rendering relatively simple fixes for their equipment harder to perform than their Western Allied or German counterparts, hence they tended to count a vehicle that was not mission capable (even if it was as simple as a blown transmission) as a loss. By comparison, if the Germans deemed a vehicle recoverable (even if it was devastated) they would not count it as a loss.

At some points this would lead to an unusual situation where the Germans would report a sudden spike in tank losses; not due to battle but rear areas being overrun by the RKKA.

With Soviet losses in men approaching 180,000 (Germans 55,000 max.), one can see that the Soviets were not only drowning the German advances "in the blood of Soviet soldiers", but also in a flood of greater material resource.

The manpower disparity at the critical junctures of the Eastern Front (Moscow, Stalingrad, Kursk) was not wildly disproportionate in favor of the Soviets; at the most vital moments of Typhoon for example, the Soviets were out numbered, and at Uranus the balance of manpower was largely equivalent. It wasn't until Kursk that the Soviets began enjoying noticeable advantages in manpower, but even then it wasn't gigantic; a 2:1 or even 3:1 advantage can be overcome by fighting smart.

And that's where the Germans failed; they didn't fight smart. Despite a wealth of evidence showcasing that their obsession with the war of movement was not working out in the Eurasian steppe they failed to make any changes to it, and even proceeded to double down on it in 1943. Max Hastings once described the Germans as good at fighting battles and bad at waging wars. I find that an apt statement.

 

[Monica33]

Let the ruling classes tremble at a communist revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Workingmen of all countries, unite!

Don't the Communists still head America for most deaths --- 100 million and rising ?

If Kamela linked- up closely with the Angel of Death himself ( Bill Gates ) I feel confident that this figure can be multiplied many times .

 

[Fledermaus]

Don't the Communists still head America for most deaths --- 100 million and rising ?

If Kamela linked- up closely with the Angel of Death himself ( Bill Gates ) I feel confident that this figure can be multiplied many times .

Nope.

Please fail again.