Why did Hitler choose to attack Russia first?

[Sharwood]

If you insist, but there is the numbers:

During 1937-38 9056 officers and generals were arrested and 18822 were dismissed from army because of political reasons. In 1938-39 1431 of arrested officers and 9121 of dissmissed officers were restored in their ranks.

So during the Purges military lost 8075 officers arrested and 9701 dissmissed.

In 1937 army had 206 thousands of officers total. In 1941 this number was 439 thousands.

So I cannot see a "whole officer corps killed or thrown in GULAG".

And as some flashy example: one "purged" in 1937 colonel, who served in Far Eastern Special Military District was convicted for raping and killing of two 14 years old girls. But in middle of 50s this colonel was rehabilitaed as "victim of repressions", just because he was convicted not only in raping and murder, but also in "conduit improparable for soviet officer" and this article was considered a "political" one.
Sometimes even a "evil" state doing a right things.

There's also a decent chance that Stalin had those rape charges falsified. But that's neither here nor there.

I didn't say the whole officer corps was removed. I said most, and by most I mean the talented ones, career military. Not the political appointees that the Finns loved to shoot.

 

[CruelDwarf]

Who were that "talented" ones? May be Blucher who transform his Special Military District in some sort of private feudal domen and miserably failed with japaneese provactation on Khasan?

In one point you right - Purges removed many of high ranking soviet officers and generals. But I don't think that any of them were more talaented than others. Just because most of them were leaders who moved into position during Revolution and Civil War and not many of them had military education or real war (not several hundred man skirmishes) expirience.

There's also a decent chance that Stalin had those rape charges falsified. But that's neither here nor there.

I imagine - Stalin personally falsificated crime cases of merely Air Force colonel. This dictator defenetly had a loads of free time.
And why falsificate such matters if far more easily convict him for work for japanese intelligence or such?

 

[Sharwood]

Who were that "talented" ones? May be Blucher who transform his Special Military District in some sort of private feudal domen and miserably failed with japaneese provactation on Khasan?

In one point you right - Purges removed many of high ranking soviet officers and generals. But I don't think that any of them were more talaented than others. Just because most of them were leaders who moved into position during Revolution and Civil War and not many of them had military education or real war (not several hundred man skirmishes) expirience.


I imagine - Stalin personally falsificated crime cases of merely Air Force colonel. This dictator defenetly had a loads of free time.
And why falsificate such matters if far more easily convict him for work for japanese intelligence or such?

Stalin wouldn't do it personally, that would be left up to whatever they were calling the secret police at the time. And the Winter War helps prove the stupidity of the average, politically appointed Russian officer.

 

[CruelDwarf]

Well, and what tells Singapore catastrophe about stupidity of english average, not politically apointed officer? Or may be collapse of French army during may of 1940 was because they too "politically appointed" their officers?

And why you think that "purged" soviet officers were better then those who weren't "purged"?

 

[Verbose]

Well, and what tells Singapore catastrophe about stupidity of english average, not politically apointed officer? Or may be collapse of French army during may of 1940 was because they too "politically appointed" their officers?

And why you think that "purged" soviet officers were better then those who weren't "purged"?

Senior French officers of the 1930's were intensely political.

Gamélin located his HQ in the best spot to keep tabs on the French government, not the German army, which made sense to him as he expected worse from the politicians than the Germans.

Gamélin might have been a fool in this respect, but the truth of the matter is that the French republic by the time of WWII had waged a half-century long campaign against the army of the French republic, as it happened to be a haven for all and sundry devout Catholics, monarchists and people with ideas contrary to the ideals of the French Republic.

So yeah, the French senior command in WWII was political as hell, obessing about their own political leadership to the point of ignoring the Germans. It certainly wasn't the only thing the French army had against it, but it did contribute.

As for why the purged Soviet offices were better than the survivors, it's a matter of training and experience.

The purges resulted in lots and lots of officers in lower positions of command being bumped up into positions they weren't yet sufficiently trained and experienced to fill; regimental commanders suddenly were in charge of a brigades, brigade commanders a division, divisional commanders a whole army corps etc.

A "good officer" is not just a "good officer" regardless of rank and position. You do have to groom people for leadership at the proper level. It's not an uncommon ocurrence where brilliant officers on some lower level get promoted to a higher position where they instead become downright lacklustre.

The English language even has a concept for what happens when junior officers suddenly are thrust into position of command and authority beyond their present experience and capabilities; that situation very often results in messy, unnecessarily bloody and badly fought battles referred to as "subaltern battles".

Or as the French CiC in WWI Ferdinand Foch put it:
"It takes 15 000 casualties to train a Major General."

From that perspective the performance of the Red Army in the Winter War was one huge "subaltern campaign". They did learn from it though.

 

[Yeekim]

Well, and what tells Singapore catastrophe about stupidity of english average, not politically apointed officer? Or may be collapse of French army during may of 1940 was because they too "politically appointed" their officers?

Don't you have any ancestors of Armenian descent, by any chance?
Question: "What is the average salary of Soviet worker?"
Answer by radio Yerevan: "But in America, they are lynching Negroes!!"


Jokes aside, Singapore catastrophe might very well be accounted for stupidity of English command. But how would that be related to the topic under discussion? How should this disprove that the purges seriously weakened Red Army?

In one point you right - Purges removed many of high ranking soviet officers and generals. But I don't think that any of them were more talaented than others. Just because most of them were leaders who moved into position during Revolution and Civil War and not many of them had military education or real war (not several hundred man skirmishes) expirience.

Agreed, but then, the fresh appointees did not have the real war experience neither.

NB! Verbose had a great post - as always.

 

[Yeekim]

I didn't say the whole officer corps was removed. I said most, and by most I mean the talented ones, career military. Not the political appointees that the Finns loved to shoot.

Reminded me:
"Afghanistan, during the the 1980's Soviet invasion.

An Afghan mudjahideen sniper sits on a rocky hilltop, watching Soviet soldiers running about from cover to cover on the hillside below him through the scope of his sniper rifle. He is eager, for bountys have been offered to mudjahideen snipers for killing Russians officers.
He sees a smartly uniformed and athletic Russian with two small stars on the uniform epaulettes. He quickly whips out his mudjahideen handbook to the soviet armed forces, which informs him that this would be a senior lieutenant - reward for shooting - $500. He quickly resights the rifle and prepares to fire, but the Russian has already ducked behind cover. Disappointed, he continues to watch for targets.
He next spots a older and senior looking Soviet officer with two large stars on the uniform epaulettes. He consults his handbook, which informs him that this would be a lieutenant-colonel - reward for shooting - $800. He quickly resights the rifle and prepares to fire, but again, the Russian has already ducked behind cover. Deeply disappointed, he continues to watch for targets, saying to himself "Next time I will be smarter: shoot the Russian first, and consult the book later".
He then sees a badly dressed, unshaven and apparently drunken Russian with two medium stars on the uniform epaulettes. He takes the immediate shot and drills the Russian through the head. Excitedly, he whips out his handbook, which informs him that that was a Soviet army praporshchik - most virulent enemy of the Soviet people - PENALTY for shooting - $1000..."

 

[CruelDwarf]

The purges resulted in lots and lots of officers in lower positions of command being bumped up into positions they weren't yet sufficiently trained and experienced to fill; regimental commanders suddenly were in charge of a brigades, brigade commanders a division, divisional commanders a whole army corps etc.

A lot of fresh officers was not result of Purges but result of major expansion of the military. In 1941 RKKA was four times larger then in 1937. With Purges or without them USSR couldn't train needed amout of good quality officers for newly expanded army.

In such dire situation every man who had completed 10 years of school was considered ready for officer training. So Winter War and first years of Great Patriotic War was indeed some sort of "subaltern battle". This is reasons behind for using such generals as Zhukov as some sort of emergency crew.

A "good officer" is not just a "good officer" regardless of rank and position. You do have to groom people for leadership at the proper level. It's not an uncommon ocurrence where brilliant officers on some lower level get promoted to a higher position where they instead become downright lacklustre.

I agree, but this is very lenghty process to create a truly professional officer corps. Germans had their cadre from First World War. Soviets had nothing comparable. Russian professional officers were massacred during first years of the War, when unpreparedness of the country to war was covered by sheer courage and patriotism of officers and simple soldiers. Then was two revolutions and Civil War when leftower officer corps was split and divided. So USSR had very small base to start with.

How should this disprove that the purges seriously weakened Red Army?

This example not for disprove anything. This example was for show that any army with Purges or without them have their own faults. So no direct link from Purges to Winter War exists.

Agreed, but then, the fresh appointees did not have the real war experience neither.

Indeed. But some high ranking officers who lived through the Purges are failed miserably during war, but others was rather good. So no such direct connection as "skilled = purged" and "dumbass = left in the army" exists.

In my own opinion the most interisting thing about the Purges is dosiers and cases of Thuhachevsky and others generals and marshals. But this documents never was published and no researchers were allowed to see it. Not in USSR time, not when Gorbachev came to power, even Yeltsin never tries to show this documents to public. And I wonder - what secrets are hidden in this files, so they never used in interfractional warfare in USSR or as blame to soviet regime in postsoviet Russia.

Some kind of ours JFK conspiracy.

 

[Verbose]

A lot of fresh officers was not result of Purges but result of major expansion of the military. In 1941 RKKA was four times larger then in 1937. With Purges or without them USSR couldn't train needed amout of good quality officers for newly expanded army.

That may well be, and certainly didn't help the Red Army early performance after such an expansion.

Still, all the more reason to assume that keeping the previous senior command in place would have helped to prop up the newly expanded army.

Instead in 1937-38 the Red Army apparently lost 13 out of 15 army commanders, 50 out of 57 army corps commanders and 154 out of 186 division commanders. That's pre-army expansion.

We're not talking about something as dramatic as a bullet to the back of the head in the basement of Lubyanka necessarily, most were around later to be rehabilitated I guess, but the senior command of the Red Army had been pretty comprehensively removed from the equation by the 1939 Winter War.

And the source for the numbers above would be "Le Livre noir du communisme: Crimes, terreur, répression" (Robert Laffont, Paris, 1997).

 

[CruelDwarf]

That may well be, and certainly didn't help the Red Army early performance after such an expansion.

I agree. This is just not a sole or even main reason, but it not help indeed. But I tend to think that the Purges hurt mostly not to the competence of Red Army officers, but to their confidence. This was indeed bad effect.

Still, all the more reason to assume that keeping the previous senior command in place would have helped to prop up the newly expanded army.

Instead in 1937-38 the Red Army apparently lost 13 out of 15 army commanders, 50 out of 57 army corps commanders and 154 out of 186 division commanders. That's pre-army expansion.

But the real perfomance of this officers in practice was rather poor. Great Maneuvers in 1936 showed almost total lack of training of troops of Belorussian and Kiev Military Districts. Khasan incident with japanese was another fault for Far Eastern Special Military District commander. And this is three most importand regions for defense of the country. So I tend think that commanding structure of Red Army was in dire need of major overhaul.

 

[Sharwood]

I think you'll find that even Zhukov was purged by Stalin at two point, as talented military officers were seen as threats to him. It was usually the most experienced and talented of the officers who were purged, in the same way that Stalin removed the most talented politicians from the party.

Of course there were complete idiots in the Red Army before the purge, almost as many as there were after. The difference, was that before the purge, they commanded a few small units, whereas after the purge, they ran whole armies.

 

[CruelDwarf]

"Complete idiots" if using your words running three most powerful and most important Military Districts before Purges.

I think you'll find that even Zhukov was purged by Stalin at two point, as talented military officers were seen as threats to him.

As many others soviet officers Zhukov was never "purged". Just because no direct link between talent and threat to Stalin exist.

in the same way that Stalin removed the most talented politicians from the party.

Who this most talented politician? Trotsky? May be Bukharin or Zinoviev?

 

[Agent327]

The Show Trials of the 1930s* should be sufficient proof for Stalin's paranoia as concerned "internal enemies", who apparently ran into the millions. When it came down to it the party line was simply Stalin's line and not even close associates were safe from being "purged". But even in the final stages of WW II he liked to play off one talented general against the other. It was basically his game: powerplay to the extreme. (Nothing "communist" about that.)

*Just prior to the Axis invasion there were rumours of a "Jewish Doctors" trial, but WW II intervened. (On a psychological sidenote, his paranoid fear of talent threatening his position - which even made himself assume supreme command until he learned a lesson Hitler never did - may ultimately stem from the fact that beyond pure politics he had no talent whatsoever.)

 

[Sharwood]

"Complete idiots" if using your words running three most powerful and most important Military Districts before Purges.


As many others soviet officers Zhukov was never "purged". Just because no direct link between talent and threat to Stalin exist.


Who this most talented politician? Trotsky? May be Bukharin or Zinoviev?

I should have kept my own advice and completely ignored you on the subject of Russia. You're an idiot. Zhukov was purged twice, but brought back due to the war the first time, and after Stalin was gone the second.

And yes, Trotsky and others that were threats to his powerbase. If you can't contribute anything other than: "Nuh-uh, Russia never did no evil sir, no no it di'nt." Then you are clearly not worth the trouble of speaking to.

 

[CruelDwarf]

Zhukov was purged twice, but brought back due to the war the first time, and after Stalin was gone the second.

May I ask about dates when Zhukov get "purged"?

From 1933 he was a commander of 4th Cavalry Division
From july 1938 - assistant officer for commander of Western Military District.
From 5 june 1939 - commander of army group in Mongolian People Republic.
From june of 1940 - commander of Kiev Special Military District in rank of general of the army.
From feburary of 1941 - assistant officer for Chief of General Staff.

So when Zhukov was "purged"?

And yes, Trotsky and others that were threats to his powerbase.

I ask you - were Trotsky, Zinoviev and Bukharin talented politicians?
They was indeed Stalin's competitors in internal soviet politics, but were they more humane or better in state governing?

 

[Agent327]

May I ask about dates when Zhukov get "purged"?

From 1933 he was a commander of 4th Cavalry Division
From july 1938 - assistant officer for commander of Western Military District.
From 5 june 1939 - commander of army group in Mongolian People Republic.
From june of 1940 - commander of Kiev Special Military District in rank of general of the army.
From feburary of 1941 - assistant officer for Chief of General Staff.

So when Zhukov was "purged"?

I don't know about "purged", but he was "relieved of command" at least once, because he was becoming to succesful to Stalin's taste.

I ask you - were Trotsky, Zinoviev and Bukharin talented politicians?
They was indeed Stalin's competitors in internal soviet politics, but were they more humane or better in state governing?

If they weren't talented politicians, we would never have heard of them. Since they were very effectively removed as competitors, there's no way to tell if they'd be better at ruling the Soviet Union or not. (Although I'm inclined to say anyone would have been better than Stalin - except perhaps Lenin, who, together with Trotzky, instigated the original Red Terror. The question can be simply summarized as: who would have been the best dictator?)

 

[CruelDwarf]

I don't know about "purged", but he was "relieved of command" at least once, because he was becoming to succesful to Stalin's taste.

When Zhukov was relieved from command? I never heard about this Zhukov's disgrace.

If they weren't talented politicians, we would never have heard of them. Since they were very effectively removed as competitors, there's no way to tell if they'd be better at ruling the Soviet Union or not.

Well - if they were talented and lost this is means that Stalin was more talented.

(Although I'm inclined to say anyone would have been better than Stalin - except perhaps Lenin, who, together with Trotzky, instigated the original Red Terror. The question can be simply summarized as: who would have been the best dictator?)

May I ask you - what a better and more effective way of development of USSR in 30s? What errors Stalin done?

 

[Verbose]

Try this:
"The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression" (Harvard University Press, 1999).
http://www.amazon.com/Black-Book-Communism-Crimes-Repression/dp/0674076087

 

[Sharwood]

When Zhukov was relieved from command? I never heard about this Zhukov's disgrace.


Well - if they were talented and lost this is means that Stalin was more talented.



May I ask you - what a better and more effective way of development of USSR in 30s? What errors Stalin done?

I'm working from memory here, but Zhukov was relieved of command in 1941, only to be hastily returned to power after Stalin lost an entire army. He was then relegated to a meaningless post after the war, as he was too popular to arrest for treason or have killed, but Stalin considered him a threat.

And yes, Stalin was a more talented politician than those men. That's why he won the struggle for power. Molotov was quite possibly in Stalin's league, but never opposed him, as Stalin was already top dog by that point. Only an idiot would set himself up as Stalin's rival.

And if you don't know about Stalin's crimes, then the Russian education system needs serious revamping.

 

[CruelDwarf]

Sharwood, if you don't want argue with what I say, but want to discuss what I'am there far better places exist then public forums.

I'm working from memory here, but Zhukov was relieved of command in 1941,

Your memory was wrong. Zhukov in 1941 was assistant officer for Chief of the General Staff of RKKA. So it was promotion, not a demotion or "relieving of command".
So I tent to think that you remebered some part of Rokossovsky biography, not Zhukov's.