Stereotypes About The Red Army And Russia

[Gotthard Heinrici]

David Glantz, in his paper American Perspectives on Eastern Front Operations in World War II puts forth the theory that the following sterotypes prevailed about the Red Army and the Eastern Front. Do you agree and also do you think some of these still exist?

Here is the link to the whole article: http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/documents/e-front.htm

Here is a part of the paper dealing with the stereotypes. I'd be interested to read what people think:



The dominant role of German source materials in shaping American perceptions of the war on the Eastern Front and the negative perception of Soviet source materials have had an indelible impact on the American image of war on the Eastern Front. What has resulted in a series of gross judgments treated as truths regarding operations in the East and Soviet (Red) Army combat performance. The gross judgments appear repeatedly in textbooks and all types of historical works, and they are persistent in the extreme. Each lies someplace between the realm of myth and reality. In summary, a few of these judgments are as follows:

- Weather repeatedly frustrated the fulfillment of German operational aims.

- Soviet forces throughout the war in virtually every operation possessed significant or overwhelming numerical superiority.

- Soviet manpower resources were inexhaustible, hence the Soviets continually ignored human losses.

- Soviet strategic and high level operational leadership was superb. However, lower level leadership (corps and below) was uniformly dismal.

- Soviet planning was rigid, and the execution of plans at every level was inflexible and unimaginative.

- Wherever possible, the Soviets relied for success on mass rather than maneuver. Envelopment operations were avoided whenever possible.

- The Soviets operated in two echelons, never cross attached units, and attacked along straight axes.

- Lend lease was critical for Soviet victory. Without it collapse might have ensured.

- Hitler was the cause of virtually all German defeats. Army expertise produced earlier victories (a variation of the post World War I stab in the back. legend).

- The stereotypical Soviet soldier was capable of enduring great suffering and hardship, fatalistic, dogged in defense (in particular in bridgeheads), a master of infiltration and night fighting, but inflexible, unimaginative, emotional and prone to panic in the face of uncertainty.

[Gnomey]

I agree with the sterotypes you have mentioned Gotthard and I would still say that a few of the still exist, notably the ones about numerical superiority and manpower resources.

[Dac]

Some of the stereotypes have merit others not so much.

-Weather did play a role in the halt of the German advance in 1941, and there's no question that the Soviets were much better prepared to deal with the sometimes harsh Russian climate.

-Soviet manpower was not unlimited they were facing shortages in maintaining the 300+ divisions on the eastern front at the end of the war.

-The Soviets lacked an experinced Officer Corps at the start of WW II due to Stalins' purges. By the end of the war the Soviets had some very experienced and capable officers.

-I think the Soviets often did take a brute force approach to battle and this is reflected in their high causualties. They were also fighting against the most effective army in the world at that time.

-Some aspects of lend-lease were a great help to the Soviets in WW II, notably the modern communcations equipment and large number of transport trucks sent from the West.

-I've read accounts of German soldiers who were impressed at the stoicism show by Russian soldiers at Stalingrad. When hit they often made no sound, and either waited for medical aid or died quietly.

[smc66]

Originally posted by Dac@Sep 15 2005, 07:37 PM
Some of the stereotypes have merit others not so much.

-Weather did play a role in the halt of the German advance in 1941, and there's no question that the Soviets were much better prepared to deal with the sometimes harsh Russian climate.

Quoted post

That was because they learnt their lesson the hard way during the Winter War when the Finns taught them how to use the climate to their advantage.

[Dac]

Originally posted by smc66+Sep 15 2005, 02:43 PM-->

That was because they learnt their lesson the hard way during the Winter War when the Finns taught them how to use the climate to their advantage.

Quoted post

[/b]

One of the more impressive military feats in history.

[spidge]

[quote=Dac,Sep 16 2005, 05:37 AM]

[

]-Some aspects of lend-lease were a great help to the Soviets in WW II, notably the modern communcations equipment and large number of transport trucks sent from the West.

I came across this very professional site the other day. I was astounded at the numbers and the variety of mobile transport sent to the USSR.

http://www.o5m6.de/main.html

P.S. I wonder if Zhukov is presently doing his "National Training"?

[GUMALANGI]

Am wondering should Friedriech is around <_<

[Dac]

Very nice find spidge.

[Gnomey]

Yes, good find spidge, amazing the variety of vehicles that was set to the USSR durings Lead-Lease.

[GUMALANGI]

Nice sites spidge,...

But i can't found any sherman thereI thought Shermans were part of the package as well.,...

am not too sure where is this sherman roaming,.. but i was thought this was part of russian crewed sherman.