Performance of the British army in WW2 - how good?

[red_elk]

The thread's turn is funny actually, gave me a few good laughs.
Dachs, thanks for an effort to put a comprehensive post.

Edit:
Dach is obviously not a British national. I suspect he may be Russian - he made generally a good point, but his praise for Vasilevsky and Rokossovsky looks a bit biased.

 

[Lexicus]

I think it's very difficult to claim that the Soviets only had to fight against the rabble of the Axis war machine.

This probably wins the Understatement of the Year award considering that the assertion in question is almost exactly the opposite of the truth.

*If I wanted to hire people, why would I be yelling "I work"?

For the record, "trabajo" can also be used as a noun that means, simply, 'work.' As this is perhaps the only thing in this thread that Jackson is not ludicrously, comically, completely wrong about, I figured I would point it out in the interests of fairness.

The deployment of that formation determined German military priority: it was the sole large unengaged formation throughout the fall of 1944. In December, the Germans deployed it in the Ardennes, the single moment, post-1940, that we can reliably say that they put the bulk of their mobile forces in the West.

Also want to point out that this turned out to be a colossal mistake that almost certainly hastened the end of the war by months.

 

[Dachs]

Never thought I'd miss the old boy.

The only positive to wading through the inane and obdurate turn this thread has taken is that it has coaxed dachs, that notorious Anglophile (or is he a Slavophile now?), out of retirement.

Welcome back.

Aw, thanks. Maybe for a bit.

The thread's turn is funny actually, gave me a few good laughs.
Dachs, thanks for an effort to put a comprehensive post.

Edit:
Dach is obviously not a British national. I suspect he may be Russian - he made generally a good point, but his praise for Vasilevsky and Rokossovsky looks a bit biased.

Thank you.

Yeah, I'm just overflowing with pro-Soviet bias. Completely unreliable source. Everyone knows those Soviet marshals were actually incompetent butchers who couldn't match up to the intellectual agility of German and Western officers.

This probably wins the Understatement of the Year award considering that the assertion in question is almost exactly the opposite of the truth.

[...]

Also want to point out that this turned out to be a colossal mistake that almost certainly hastened the end of the war by months.

Yeah, it's...I mean, relegating the whole Great Patriotic War to a footnote is...I can't even.

Joe Collins thought that the Nazi offensive in December made the war shorter, and he was certainly in a position to know: they took an awful lot of casualties, didn't inflict as many on the Americans and Brits, and burned off entirely too much of their remaining fuel. Still, though, it took the Western forces another three months of hard fighting to reach and cross the Rhine. That's added to the three months of tough, bloody positional warfare between September and December in Lorraine, the Hürtgenwald, the Geilenkirchen corridor, and the southern Netherlands. Six months of heavy casualties after Brad, Patton, and Monty claimed they would cross the Rhine, they finally did it. Even if the Ardennes offensive shortened the war, the fact that it took that long is an indictment of the leadership at Twenty-first and Twelfth Army Groups.

 

[Kyriakos]

Careful now, Ned; one does not simply walk into Holodomor.

 

[MilesGregarius]

Aw, thanks. Maybe for a bit.

Well, you did sort of propose some years back.

 

[red_elk]

Feel free to argue with the Nazis themselves on what they considered the most important area of the war to them.



Notice how France, Italy, Spain, and the entire Mediterranean are not considered in their dream of Greater Germany...

What's surprising for me in this map, is that Sweden included into Reich territory. Other neutral or Axis members aren't, which is understandable.

 

[innonimatu]

Not a very good guess. Extremely difficult to support from the text of the post. Might make some older CFC users laugh because of how wrong it is.

Good to see you back! And I admire your patience. Even here if it is wasted on some people, many others will appreciate your thorough post above. And whatever else you write - missed you on the forum.

 

[Jackson2626]

I'm not the one who keeps saying the Nazis had no interest in Eastern Europe. Hating on the Judeo-Bolshevik conspiracy and acquiring lebensraum were pretty core to Nazi ideology.
Though what I have been harping on is the crippling logistic and resource situation facing Nazi Germany that saw them become just about bankrupt to the Soviet Union and invaded them in a desperate attempt to pillage what they could. Mind, you haven't been particularly eager to engage on that front. (Or indeed engage with anyone as noted by your blithe response to Dachs' excellent post. PC+1 I guess.)


The needs of actual war didn't stop the Nazis from murdering six million humans on industrial lines because of their race.


Not sure what is worse, your Spanish* or that you defaulted to Hispanic day laborers as an example of people who kill civilians.
*If I wanted to hire people, why would I be yelling "I work"?


Trying to separate the civilian-murdering and wanton pillaging aspect from the "professional" aspect of Nazi Germany is like trying to separate the Frenchiness and arrogance from Charles de Gaulle. Not really possible.

I believe it is common knowledge that what we refer to today as the "Holocaust" was a multinational effort. Look at what was going on in the Balkans, and I think you would be surprised at the nationalities of those working in the camps. There was really an entire culture of people who used the war as a way to unleash their sadism, kind of like what they try to mimic in the Purge movie. I believe that to be a big reason why the Allies wanted to win the war as quickly as possible, because there was so much instability going on.

I think the point that I made was sound. It doesn't require shock divisions to deal with civilians, and realistically brass is always trying to stack up as best they can with their opponent. In football, your defensive line is very important and if they are being overpowered by your opponent's offensive line then your team has no chance of winning. regardless of what any one else is doing. It would be sprint all the way to Germany.

Have you looked on a map recently and seen where Stalingrad actually is? I am not going to say anything but woah, just woah. I couldn't imagine being dispatched there and wondering what the hell I was doing there in the first place. So why have all these idiots tried to lead us to believe that so much rode on this for Germany? I am an intellectual in many ways and I am dumbfounded by this.

 

[schlaufuchs]

TFor the record, "trabajo" can also be used as a noun that means, simply, 'work.' As this is perhaps the only thing in this thread that Jackson is not ludicrously, comically, completely wrong about, I figured I would point it out in the interests of fairness.

Fun fact to digress from the brain-meltingly dumb arguments:

trabajo probably comes from:

VLat *tripalium (verb form tripalio, tripaliare), derived from tres+palus (three+stake), referring to a torture device using three stakes. The verb form would have meant "I torture" or "I inflict agony"

 

[red_elk]

Have you looked on a map recently and seen where Stalingrad actually is? I am not going to say anything but woah, just woah.

Try to find Midway. And describe your emotions

 

[Gen.Mannerheim]

What's surprising for me in this map, is that Sweden included into Reich territory. Other neutral or Axis members aren't, which is understandable.

Because they believed that all the "Germanic peoples" minus the British & North Americans would be a part of their future superstate. Plus, Sweden had a significant Fascist or pro-German sector, who would have received a big boost from an Axis victory. If they had achieved this fantasy, I totally imagine that Finland's independence would have a rapidly approaching expiration date.

 

[Zkribbler]

Except that the war arguably started in order for the Russians and the British to have an opportunity to target the Ottoman Empire - ...

"arguably started" indeed. The British, Russian, and Ottoman Empires were not among the original belligerents. I cannot justify pointing the finger at any of them.

 

[Jackson2626]

Try to find Midway. And describe your emotions

Of course yeah, who could forget Midway of all places. The important info about Midway is that the Jap fleet was heavily damaged. You can see how America prevails on the high seas also, which illustrates some more versatility. The Pacific War is pretty interesting to think about because I always viewed it as an unconventional War. Though we put the bulk of our Army in Europe, because we had adopted a Europe first policy, we still managed to be effective in the South Pacific. You can be that efficient if you take care of your people and have officers in command who know what they are doing. I think it was a really tough fight, and the Japs did the best they could to make up for what they lacked, when compared to US capabilities. It was just a different fight all together from Europe. Germany had better equipment and understanding of modern war, the Japanese on the other hand were tenaciously mean, for that was their biggest strength. I have heard people say that the Japanese fought to the death, where the Germans did not, but that isn't necessarily true. Depending on the unit, Germany had divisions that fought to almost destruction, or to the point where they were rendered combat ineffective.

The environment in that part of the world is horrible though, particularly in places like New Guinea and Southern Philippines. All of the smaller islands to the East that were hot as hell with Japs dug into just about every piece of high ground. So you have the brutal mentality of your opponent, god awful heat coupled with ecosystems that preyed upon human health. Yeah, not very fun at all.

I believe that it was a very important campaign, the South Pacific. This region of the world is so screwed up, with the exception of Australia. How many countries down there have even adopted Freedom yet? Look at Indonesia and how Islamic it is, unless of course you're in to that sort of thing. I really look at the Pacific War as chapter 1, in a book that has at least 3 chapters. Each War fought in the Orient was based on one all encompassing goal.

 

[schlaufuchs]

"arguably started" indeed. The British, Russian, and Ottoman Empires were not among the original belligerents. I cannot justify pointing the finger at any of them.

?? The war started when Russia declared war on Serbia's behalf, Russia was the first of the nations to give mobilization orders.* Scholarship on the war has largely settled on "every nation was an independent actor with agency, and every nation had its own personal geo-political reasons that necessitated committing to mobilization", but if you have to point to one fait accomplit that blew the conflict up, then Russia is that reason.

*Before Dachs jumps in - yes Russia had the lengthiest mobilization time of the major nations, meaning they had to pull the trigger before everybody else, and by the time Russia called for general mobilization the larger war was already a foregone conclusion, but it nevertheless emphasizes the point that Russia and Russia's choices were at the heart of the start of the conflict.

ETA: rather fitting that my 14,000th post is a shot-from-the-hip WWI jump-in that will almost certainly be met with a Dachs wall of text. Eh, c'est la prix PC+1

 

[Gen.Mannerheim]

Scholarship on the war has largely settled on "every nation was an independent actor with agency, and every nation had its own personal geo-political reasons that necessitated committing to mobilization", but if you have to point to one fait accomplit that blew the conflict up, then Russia is that reason.

The Russians are the ones guilty of turning the Third Balkan War into the Great War.

But does this mean we can blame the Japanese now for the start of the Great War? I mean, if they didn't have the audacity to beat the Russians in 1905, then the Russians might not have had such a need to assert themselves on the World stage. But then couldn't we blame the Qing for being too weak to prevent the Japanese from taking Korea in the first place.? But then....

yes Russia had the lengthiest mobilization time of the major nations, meaning they had to pull the trigger before everybody else, and by the time Russia called for general mobilization the larger war was already a foregone conclusion, but it nevertheless emphasizes the point that Russia and Russia's choices were at the heart of the start of the conflict.

The Russians mobilization happened far quicker than anybody expected though. The "period preparatory to war" baloney was a face-saving term to allow the Russians to get a head start on a war they already wanted to conduct. I always find it hilarious that German intelligence kept sending back reports of troop trains rolling into Poland during this "prep" period, completely throwing off the foreign office. Somebody literally had to tear a train schedule off of a station wall and send it back before Berlin would believe them.

 

[schlaufuchs]

The Russians are the ones guilty of turning the Third Balkan War into the Great War.

But does this mean we can blame the Japanese now for the start of the Great War? I mean, if they didn't have the audacity to beat the Russians in 1905, then the Russians might not have had such a need to assert themselves on the World stage. But then couldn't we blame the Qing for being too weak to prevent the Japanese from taking Korea in the first place.? But then....

I mean, I'm not a big proponent of "it was [this one specific thing or actor]'s fault" for pretty much anything historical. I probably should have emphasized the significant amount of arm twisting (or in this case, the allure of PC+1'ing) that would have to occur for that to be the answer for me. Really the only point I'm trying to make is that Zkribbler's declaration that Russia was a periphery or bit participant in the start of the conflict (as opposed to, presumably based on context, Germany) is patently absurd.

 

[Gen.Mannerheim]

I mean, I'm not a big proponent of "it was [this one specific thing or actor]'s fault" for pretty much anything historical. I probably should have emphasized the significant amount of arm twisting (or in this case, the allure of PC+1'ing) that would have to occur for that to be the answer. Really the only point I'm trying to make is that Zkribbler's declaration that Russia was a periphery or bit participant in the start of the conflict (as opposed to, presumably based on context, Germany) is patently absurd.

Don't get me wrong, I am a big proponent that the Russians bear the lion's share of the general guilt around the outbreak of the Great War. Just about everybody but Britain was interested in picking some kind of fight, the Russians for instance wouldn't have made the actions they did if they didn't already have assurances from the French in early July. Only Russian interference in what were legitimate Austrian grievances could have turned what should have been a regional dispute into an international crisis. Whether Austria's actions were legitimate is a different argument, but that Austria had the moral high-ground in early 1914 is beyond dispute.

I was only making a joke about the chain of war guilt. My major point being that there eventually has to be some kind of cutoff point into what prior events are germane to the subject. I once heard a colleague seriously claim that the World Wars were Germany's fault for having the audacity to begin their nation state on a victory over another power in 1871. While not trying to sound like a German fan-boy, the double standard that Germany/A-H get treated with in Western classrooms and writings, particularly in the late 19th century, is very blatant.

 

[Jackson2626]

Who is writing this history? It's not us I can tell you.

Anyone can see that the Red terror accompanied by the purges that the Bolsheviks inflicted upon civilians served as an inspiration for the mass murder that occurred during WW2. In fact, Japan was also committing mass murder, well before it was ever made policy in Nazi Germany. Then if we go back to WWl and see the Armenians who were being killed by the Ottomans. You wonder with all these preceding events that served as a precursor to the Holocaust, why Germany is specifically singled out when it comes to being shamed. The first part of the 20th Century was a pretty horrible time when you consider what was happening on a global scale. It wasn't something that cured itself either, because we had to mobilize to an incredible degree and make it stop, so we could live normal lives. Violence is a scary thing and War is one hell of a business, but what do you do when people won't stop?

There will always be some War going on somewhere, but now it won't grow into a massive global conflict where countries lose a substantial part of their younger generation. This has happened throughout history repeatedly though. Anyone have an idea of how many Germans died in the 30 Years War when compared to the actual size of the population? Or the destructiveness of the Napoleonic Wars, or the Great Northern War and what it did to Scandinavia. This process has repeated itself all the way into the World Wars. So you can see where the anger comes from, and how frustrating it is to see what's going on in Europe and the world today.

 

[red_elk]

Anyone can see that the Red terror accompanied by the purges that the Bolsheviks inflicted upon civilians served as an inspiration for the mass murder that occurred during WW2.

Why not the genocide of Native Americans by your beloved westerners? At least they also were cleaning out their Lebensraum from "inferior" race. Looks like better analogy.

 

[Jackson2626]

Why not the genocide of Native Americans by your beloved westerners? At least they also were cleaning out their Lebensraum from "inferior" race. Looks like better analogy.

So now you are comparing the world of Native Americans with that of Europe. That's real good. You do realize that Natives still have a substantial amount of territory that was allocated to them by the government, right? And by the way, don't pretend like you actually care anyway, especially if you are Russian.

I am sorry if I think that most of what happened to the USSR in WW2 was brought on by themselves. I think that the Communists were really upset that we didn't let them have anymore of Europe, because its obvious that they always wanted to keep expanding. They knew however, that at full mobilization the US military would have taken them to school and embarrassed them. We took not even a half million personnel into Korea and told the Chinese to come out and play with all the people they had. Imagine what Europe was like at the end of 1945, with millions of Allied soldiers in uniform.

Yeah, the Soviets weren't gonna do anything.