Search results

There's a fundamental difference between short-term, opportunistic uses of Bolshevists in support of broader agendas (German victory over Russia, hurting the Czar, getting a particular business deal) and long-term propping up of the Communist regime by Wall Street in general (ATP's claim). The...

Changing from pretty sure to you're definitely deranged. The old wall street-commie alliance... wonder what role you think "rootless cosmopolitans" play in this.

Not sure I entirely understand this garble but I'm pretty sure you're deranged.

Sources and summary below, comparing July-Nov "Tot" for Feldheer+WSS in the East only. 1941: July: 36.858 August: 41.039 Sept: 29.419 Oct: 24.056 Nov: 17.806 Total: 149.178 1943: July: 34.874 August: 33.962 Sept: 20.264 Oct: 25.815 Nov:18.609 Total: 133.524 In 1941, RKKA fronts averaged...

This is incorrect; I went back and checked. Reading the 10-day reports again from the archived ww2stats.com, I have to say that I can't support my earlier assertions about June 1941 Ostheer casualties. I can't remember why, at some point, I decided that the German Yearbook stats were more...

My reply indicates the difference by addressing them separately.

I don't trust those numbers (the AHF cite is to the wrong page, btw - p1020 of GSWW v.5/1, not p885). GSWW's source is the "10-day troop sickness certificates," which is a very odd source to use. Why would the administrative body tallying sickness certificates have any insight into how many were...

We're discussing entirely quantitative matters: That RKKA killed more Germans per day in 1941 than did similar-sized Western armies in France. That RKKA killed about as many Germans per day in 1941 as in 1943. The stats are clear - I assume you know that (1) and (2) are true. Specifically...

I know, I'm just trying to shift the discussion into more analytical/quantitative bent. If partisans inflicted just 1% of German casualties in the first year that'd ~12k casualties and you'd see extensive mention of them because 12,000 people is a lot of people. Nonetheless, "a lot" objectively...

Partisan warfare wasn't a big factor until well into 1942 and even then only ~10% of Ostheer was engaged in security operations (and the worst 10% of Ostheer at that). Stragglers were an issue but what proportion of casualties inflicted? To argue that this is the main factor in 1941 German...

Gotcha. This is probably true - more Soviets would have died in battle had so many not surrendered in large cauldrons. Those Soviets would have killed more Germans, though, if instead of being surrounded and cut off from supply they were fighting under normal conditions. Something around the...

Which is why when the Germans say 22,000 Heer soldiers were killed in June 1941, you should believe them. Unless you think horseflies killed all those Germans, it can't be denied that RKKA was putting up a fight. I don't know about multiple times higher. That would imply bloody casualty...

Who killed 22,000 Germans in the nine days of June fighting then? Zeus?

They put up a fight. RKKA killed more Germans per month in 1941 as did the ~same-size French/British armies in May-June 1940. The average soldier actually fought pretty well that summer at the tactical level, especially when you consider their lack things like supplies, radios, and spare parts...

I'm continually amazed by the persistence/vehemence of online and (to a much lesser extent) academic belief that Germany could not have defeated the Soviet Union. 99% of commentary on the topic focuses on the wrong issue. It bickers about Moscow vs. Ukraine in 1941, for example, rather than...