Why Did Russia Sign The Nonaggression Pact?

[Friedrich H]

Thanks for the reply, Gotthard. Very good one.

[Michal_Dembinski]

Originally posted by Friedrich H@Mar 31 2005, 12:31 AM
As stated by David M. Glantz:

'On 15th May 1941, General G. K. Zhúkov, then Chief of the Red Army General Staff, sent Stalin a proposal for a preventative offensive against German forces concentrating in Eastern Poland. Although Defense Commissar S. K. Timoshienko initialed the proposal, there is no evidence either that Stalin saw it or acted upon it. The proposal and other fragmentary evidence provides the basis for recent claims that Stalin indeed intended to conduct a preventative war against Germany beginning in July 1941 and that Hitler’s Operation Barbarossa preempted Stalin’s intended actions. Current evidence refutes that assertion. As subsequent events and archival evidence proves, the Red Army was in no condition to wage war in the summer of 1941 either offensively or, as the actual course of combat indicated, defensively.'

Quoted post

I think that Glantz had dug himself into a rather inflexible position and once the Red Army archives had been (all too briefly) opened to external scrutiny in the early 1990s, he could either chuck in all his hitherto-held beliefs or else obstinately hold his previously held line. He did the latter.

How can he come up with the sweeping generalization that the Red Army was 'in no condition to go to war in the summer of 1941... offensively?'

How many more tanks did Stalin need? 1,000 T-34s not enough? Hang on a few months, the munitions factories are working round the clock, we'll have another 1,000. Of course, Stalin wanted there to be NO doubt about the outcome. He was not a gambler. He'd rather have gone in with the outcome assured. Hitler had no winter equipment, no clear strategy, not enough oil... The gambler's luck would have to run out. Stalin simply did - could not - believe that Hitler would jump first.

Michal

[Gotthard Heinrici]

Originally posted by Michal_Dembinski+Apr 4 2005, 07:22 PM-->

I think that Glantz had dug himself into a rather inflexible position and once the Red Army archives had been (all too briefly) opened to external scrutiny in the early 1990s, he could either chuck in all his hitherto-held beliefs or else obstinately hold his previously held line. He did the latter.

How can he come up with the sweeping generalization that the Red Army was 'in no condition to go to war in the summer of 1941... offensively?'

How many more tanks did Stalin need? 1,000 T-34s not enough? Hang on a few months, the munitions factories are working round the clock, we'll have another 1,000. Of course, Stalin wanted there to be NO doubt about the outcome. He was not a gambler. He'd rather have gone in with the outcome assured. Hitler had no winter equipment, no clear strategy, not enough oil... The gambler's luck would have to run out. Stalin simply did - could not - believe that Hitler would jump first.

Michal

Quoted post

[/b]

The war in Finland proved conclusively that the Soviet Union was ill-prepared for a war. Soviet formations were ill-trained, and the tank forces were ill-equipped to fight in such inhopsitable terrain. As in Summer 1941 the Tank Forces were inflexible and prone to grave errors - Soviet commanders had not learned the lessons of combined arms tactics. German Commanders complained about having little freedom to Command on the Battlefield due to tinkering from Hitler - this also affecte the Red army in 1941.

Anorther point worth making is that no army prepares itself for only one type of combat - you dont build an army jjust ot attack. Any army worth its salt is well able to attack and defend. Suvorov makes plenty of references to the fact that the Soviets were only prepared for an attack and therefore this explains the events of 1941. They the Army had been built only to attack not defend - bit of a sweeping generalization too dont you think - indeed this is a wonderful excuse for Russian commanders to explain why in 1941 they were almost annihalated nad why they lost over 1 million men.

[sappernz]

Spbasimo nyet grigski kramsvxpt Stalin.

stalin was afraid of nazi germany might and just wanted to stay away from upcoming war.
conquering europe was not of his plans, that's why he had saved the world from bolshevik revolution by sending all bolsheviks to gulag/asassinating trotzki/death penaltying zinoviev, kamenev & bukharin [all those who made russian revolution 1917].

[spidge]

Originally Posted by stalin

stalin was afraid of nazi germany might and just wanted to stay away from upcoming war.
conquering europe was not of his plans, that's why he had saved the world from bolshevik revolution by sending all bolsheviks to gulag/asassinating trotzki/death penaltying zinoviev, kamenev & bukharin [all those who made russian revolution 1917].

Do videnja!

[plant-pilot]

Originally Posted by stalin

....that's why he had saved the world from bolshevik revolution by sending all bolsheviks to gulag/asassinating trotzki/death penaltying zinoviev, kamenev & bukharin [all those who made russian revolution 1917].

Well that's all right then. Suppress the Bolsheviks with another regime, led by a dictator who thought nothing of killing off any potential opponents. I don't suppose the Soviets/Communists had any form of expansionist policy did they?

I'm so glad we were all 'saved' by Stalin.

Stalin (the user name, not the Soviet dictator) you're full of it

bolsheviks - opponents? if so, then nazis are opponents too.
ungrateful slobs, all of you.

Originally Posted by spidge

Do videnja!

VSEGDA PRIVIET, CAMARAD!
like, hello forever.

[plant-pilot]

Originally Posted by stalin

bolsheviks - opponents? if so, then nazis are opponents too.
ungrateful slobs, all of you.

Ungrateful? Slobs? Firstly I'm no slob and have served (am serving) my country. You don't know me so your opinion on who or what I am is irrational and founded on nothing but your prdjudice.

As for ungrateful, why should we be overly grateful to a nation that started out in a pact with Hitler, fought Hitler and his regime with the help of 'Lend Lease' and then held eastern europe in an equally vile dictatorship after the war, and the whole of europe under the threat of war for the next 50 years. Communisum doesn't work even if the prioncipal may seem sound. It's against human nature for some to work harder than others and all the profit to be shared. It just means that everyone decides to do the minimum work as there is no incentive to do better.

The only way it could work is by keeping the citizen suppressed and subdued. That may have been possible in the old days, but today with better communications and the internet to show people what they are missing there's no way that they are willingly going to go for second best. Even China is becoming more open and although still oppressive, their system of business is becomming more western and capitalist all the time.

Don't believe me? Look at the state of your once mighty Soviet Union. As soon as individual countries got the chance to leave and work on their own they did. All the western Warsaw Pact countries, the Baltic States and others trying not only to join NATO but the EU as well. People's revolutions in Latvia, Estonia etc showing what the people really want.

Time for you to wake up, smell the coffee and grasp reality, because hankering for the 'good old days' is just going to leave Russia backward and broken.