Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Stalingrad

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Stalingrad

    I have just finish reading Anthory Beevor book Stalingrad, it's a great read for any looking for a insight into this battle of titans.

    I just wondering what would of happen if Stalingrad had be bypass German forces? The Fourth Panzer Army could have crossed the Voga River to the North of Stalingrad and the Sixth Army to the south, thus encircling Soviet forces in and around Stalingrad. Or was Stalingrad to important strategically to be bypass? Or was it only important to Hilter?

  • #2
    Thats an outstanding book and one of the most important ones when it comes to the battle of Stalingrad.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Stalingrad

      Originally posted by neon
      I have just finish reading Anthory Beevor book Stalingrad, it's a great read for any looking for a insight into this battle of titans.

      I just wondering what would of happen if Stalingrad had be bypass German forces? The Fourth Panzer Army could have crossed the Voga River to the North of Stalingrad and the Sixth Army to the south, thus encircling Soviet forces in and around Stalingrad. Or was Stalingrad to important strategically to be bypass? Or was it only important to Hilter?
      I think it became an ideology clash between the two dictators. Since it was called Stalingrad, Hitler wanted it at all cost.
      http://canadiangenealogyandresearch.ca

      Soviet and Canadian medal collector!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Stalingrad

        Originally posted by neon
        I have just finish reading Anthory Beevor book Stalingrad, it's a great read for any looking for a insight into this battle of titans.

        I just wondering what would of happen if Stalingrad had be bypass German forces? The Fourth Panzer Army could have crossed the Voga River to the North of Stalingrad and the Sixth Army to the south, thus encircling Soviet forces in and around Stalingrad. Or was Stalingrad to important strategically to be bypass? Or was it only important to Hilter?
        Firstly, book of Beevor is very bad according my opinion as Russian, it is parody on Red Army as I know it.

        Why didn't Germans stop actions directly in Stalingrad?

        I suppose that they firstly had strong impression always that they need only one more push, one more attack, one more battalion for victory...

        Later they captured practically all and only thin stripe of Volga bank was in Soviet hands and they couldn't believe that they are not able to capture this small territory after all what they captured before.

        More later it was question of propaganda. To stop attacks or to retreat meant to get large defeat in minds of peoples.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Stalingrad

          Originally posted by neon
          I have just finish reading Anthory Beevor book Stalingrad, it's a great read for any looking for a insight into this battle of titans.

          I just wondering what would of happen if Stalingrad had be bypass German forces? The Fourth Panzer Army could have crossed the Voga River to the North of Stalingrad and the Sixth Army to the south, thus encircling Soviet forces in and around Stalingrad. Or was Stalingrad to important strategically to be bypass? Or was it only important to Hilter?
          It truly became a conflict between two dictators. Hitler wanted to take STALINgrad. It's as simple as that. Hitler felt his army to be unstopable, especially against a subhuman army of Russians.

          The Germans would have been able to crush Moscow by simply bypassing Stalingrad. No Moscow, no Soviet involvement in WWII.
          "Aaah, the Luftwaffe, the Washington Senators of the History Channel."
          -- Homer J. Simpson

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Re: Stalingrad

            Originally posted by Andrey
            Firstly, book of Beevor is very bad according my opinion as Russian, it is parody on Red Army as I know it.
            Andrey why do you say this? I have read Beevor's Stalingrad and Berlin and found the books well written and well researched as he cites numerous primary sources.
            http://canadiangenealogyandresearch.ca

            Soviet and Canadian medal collector!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Re: Re: Stalingrad

              Originally posted by dannybou
              Andrey why do you say this? I have read Beevor's Stalingrad and Berlin and found the books well written and well researched as he cites numerous primary sources.
              I STRONGLY do not recommend for anyone to read books of Antony Beevor.

              His books are mixture from facts, hearsays, opinions of other authors and strange conclusions of personally Antony Beevor.

              All my experience about Red Army give me right to speak that he gives wrong image of Red Army in the spirit of Cold War time myths. May be it is OK for Westerners to imagine Red Army how Beevor describes it. But I am Russian (and I read not only Soviet propaganda) and it is clearly for me (ask also AMVAS if you do not believe for me) that Beevors image of Red Army is wrong.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Re: Re: Re: Stalingrad

                Originally posted by Andrey
                I STRONGLY do not recommend for anyone to read books of Antony Beevor.

                His books are mixture from facts, hearsays, opinions of other authors and strange conclusions of personally Antony Beevor.

                All my experience about Red Army give me right to speak that he gives wrong image of Red Army in the spirit of Cold War time myths. May be it is OK for Westerners to imagine Red Army how Beevor describes it. But I am Russian (and I read not only Soviet propaganda) and it is clearly for me (ask also AMVAS if you do not believe for me) that Beevors image of Red Army is wrong.
                OK, can you cite an example? In his book Stalingrad, I actually thought that Beevor described the intense savage fighting from both sides and even had me think how courageous and awesome the Soviet Army was when it was holding on for dear life on the shores of the Volga. As for Berlin, what is the problem with the book? How he describes the Red Army's behaviour in Prussia and Germany?
                http://canadiangenealogyandresearch.ca

                Soviet and Canadian medal collector!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stalingrad

                  Originally posted by dannybou
                  OK, can you cite an example? In his book Stalingrad, I actually thought that Beevor described the intense savage fighting from both sides and even had me think how courageous and awesome the Soviet Army was when it was holding on for dear life on the shores of the Volga. As for Berlin, what is the problem with the book? How he describes the Red Army's behaviour in Prussia and Germany?
                  Firstly, look this:

                  http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forum...=&threadid=542

                  It is about "Downfall of Berlin" more.

                  If you want to hear Russian opinion, read messages of me, Amvas and Oleg.

                  I shallright more about "Stalingrad" later.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Stalingrad

                    Originally posted by Andrey


                    His books are mixture from facts...

                    Yes

                    ...hearsays...
                    Mostly first hand accounts or personal recollections actually.

                    ...opinions of other authors...
                    In most cases, the opinions of other authors or historians are taken into account.

                    ...and strange conclusions of personally Antony Beevor.
                    Every author makes conclusions based on the material they've researched. Simply because you disagree, the conclusions are "strange"?

                    All my experience about Red Army give me right to speak that he gives wrong image of Red Army in the spirit of Cold War time myths.
                    Beevor gives more than a fair share of examples of the bravery and hardiness of the Red Army soldier. In "The Fall of Berlin", he also shows the good that many Red Army soldiers did in Germany and describes how many of them refused to condone the actions of some of their countrymen.
                    I think the image he portrays of the Red Army soldier all in all is a relatively postive one.
                    Scientists have announced they've discovered a cure for apathy. However no one has shown the slightest bit of interest !!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Stalingrad

                      Originally posted by Andrey
                      I STRONGLY do not recommend for anyone to read books of Antony Beevor.

                      His books are mixture from facts, hearsays, opinions of other authors and strange conclusions of personally Antony Beevor.

                      All my experience about Red Army give me right to speak that he gives wrong image of Red Army in the spirit of Cold War time myths. May be it is OK for Westerners to imagine Red Army how Beevor describes it. But I am Russian (and I read not only Soviet propaganda) and it is clearly for me (ask also AMVAS if you do not believe for me) that Beevors image of Red Army is wrong.
                      Facts please, not just your thoughts and opinions. I believe we would all like to read your sources, but you have to let us see them. You say in your thread "it is clearly for me". Does this mean we are to take your word and your word alone on this subject, or any subject that involves the Red Army during WW2?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        In reading Beevor's works I have always found him to present an unbiased opinion of the Soviet side. I'm always curious to see Andrey's "numerous, but uncited sources" of contradictory information................
                        Lance W.

                        Peace through superior firepower.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Lance Williams
                          In reading Beevor's works I have always found him to present an unbiased opinion of the Soviet side.
                          Ha-ha-ha. Who did say you about it? Did Beevor himself do it?

                          If you speak about your image of Red Army... I do not know what do you think about Red Army. But I doubt that you have the same image like I have, you lived in time of Cold War and read too many nonsense about Red Army in that time and didn't read Soviet/Russian sources enough.

                          If common image of Red Army in West is "drunken horde of Asians which fight because there are commissars with pistols behuind them" so books of Beevor shows better image.

                          But I am Russian (not Soviet, Russian, and I know about bad things which were in Red Army in time of WWII), I have my image of Red Army in WWII and I speak you that it is wrong that "Beevor give an unbiased opinion of the Soviet side". And I suppose that Amvas has the same position about Beevor's books.

                          If to speak about "showing of Soviet point of view"... From those books which I read Alexander Werth is best in showing of Russian point of view. Also Alan Clark, Len Deiton. But not Beevor or Carrell.

                          When Beevor's "Downfall of Berlin" was publuched in Great Britain some years ago Russian ambassador in Britain make a official protest against image of Red Army which was shown in this book.

                          Imagine, how is it possible to suppose that historical writer gives Soviet/Russian point of view if Russia even officially protested against his book, it is unexampled case when Russian Foreign Office protested against Historical book.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stalingrad

                            Originally posted by Tiger1
                            Facts please, not just your thoughts and opinions. I believe we would all like to read your sources, but you have to let us see them. You say in your thread "it is clearly for me". Does this mean we are to take your word and your word alone on this subject, or any subject that involves the Red Army during WW2?
                            I do not speak that I forbid you to read books of Beevor. I made my recomendation about these books. It is your right to agree or to disagree with this recomendation. But I suppose that if there are only two Russians here - I and AMVAS, and both Russians speak that book of Beevor is bad according Russian opinion so it is reason to think about it.

                            As I know when movie is selling in West so there are inscriptions in box of cassette: "according opinion of "The New York Times" it is best movie of year", "Stiven Spielberg suppose that it is very interesting movie" and so on. And everyone supposes that it is enough they do not demand from them concrete ddescription which episodes are best and to prove their opinion.

                            I only said my common opinion about books of Beevor.

                            If you want to speak about concrete facts so it is very long discussion so you have to MAKE NEW THREAD IN FORUM OF AMVAS, this forum is about "Alternative history".

                            But if you want to here pair of concrete things...

                            I personally read only "Stalingrad".

                            1. In description of battle for Moscow Beevor speaks that mud stopped Germans in October of 1941 when they encircled in Bryansk and Vyasma main Soviet forces.

                            Beevor "forgot" to say about 4th Tank Brigade of Katukov (49 tanks T-34, KV, BT-7) which was practically alone unit (later some other units arrived) on way of German 2nd Panzer Group of Guderian in direction Orel-Tula.

                            This tank brigade in region of Mtsensk realized tactic of tank ambushes, in many combats of 4th-12th of October practically destroy German 4th Panzer Division, slowed down all German 2nd Panzer Group and let for defenders of Tula to prepare to defence.

                            If to speak only about tanks so according Soviet data brigade of Katukov shot 132 German tanks (3 German panzers on every Soviet tank!!!), according German sources in staff of 2nd Panzer Group German 2nd Panzer Group lost 242 tanks in region of Mtsensk. 4th Tank Brigade of Katukov was rewarded and renamed, it got rank "Guard" and became 1st Guard Tank Brigade. This tank brigade finished war in Berlin as part of 1st Guard Tank Army of Katukov.

                            2. I disagree how Beevor describres Soviet aircraft.

                            3. I disagree how Beevor describes relation of Soviet soldiers to German woundeds and POWs, I disagree with his description of fate of German Stalingrad POws in Soviet camps.

                            Soviets treated to Germans much and much more softer that Beevor describes.

                            If you want to hear about non-Soviet sources so I read book of Alexander Werth, I read memoirs of German officer who was Stalingrad POW, they give other images.

                            4. Red Army is TOO cruel and brutal in books of Antony Beevor.

                            5. He writes too many about betrayers and NKVD. I also can to write book about US Army on base of US Military Police archives and to describe US army as muxture of good soldiers with large amount cowards, criminals and betrayers.

                            Did you read "Catch-22"? Do you like image of US Army in this book?

                            I suppose that it is enough right now.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Stalingrad

                              Originally posted by Andrey
                              I do not speak that I forbid you to read books of Beevor. I made my recomendation about these books. It is your right to agree or to disagree with this recomendation. But I suppose that if there are only two Russians here - I and AMVAS, and both Russians speak that book of Beevor is bad according Russian opinion so it is reason to think about it.

                              As I know when movie is selling in West so there are inscriptions in box of cassette: "according opinion of "The New York Times" it is best movie of year", "Stiven Spielberg suppose that it is very interesting movie" and so on. And everyone supposes that it is enough they do not demand from them concrete ddescription which episodes are best and to prove their opinion.

                              I only said my common opinion about books of Beevor.

                              If you want to speak about concrete facts so it is very long discussion so you have to MAKE NEW THREAD IN FORUM OF AMVAS, this forum is about "Alternative history".

                              But if you want to here pair of concrete things...

                              I personally read only "Stalingrad".

                              1. In description of battle for Moscow Beevor speaks that mud stopped Germans in October of 1941 when they encircled in Bryansk and Vyasma main Soviet forces.

                              Beevor "forgot" to say about 4th Tank Brigade of Katukov (49 tanks T-34, KV, BT-7) which was practically alone unit (later some other units arrived) on way of German 2nd Panzer Group of Guderian in direction Orel-Tula.

                              This tank brigade in region of Mtsensk realized tactic of tank ambushes, in many combats of 4th-12th of October practically destroy German 4th Panzer Division, slowed down all German 2nd Panzer Group and let for defenders of Tula to prepare to defence.

                              If to speak only about tanks so according Soviet data brigade of Katukov shot 132 German tanks (3 German panzers on every Soviet tank!!!), according German sources in staff of 2nd Panzer Group German 2nd Panzer Group lost 242 tanks in region of Mtsensk. 4th Tank Brigade of Katukov was rewarded and renamed, it got rank "Guard" and became 1st Guard Tank Brigade. This tank brigade finished war in Berlin as part of 1st Guard Tank Army of Katukov.

                              2. I disagree how Beevor describres Soviet aircraft.

                              3. I disagree how Beevor describes relation of Soviet soldiers to German woundeds and POWs, I disagree with his description of fate of German Stalingrad POws in Soviet camps.

                              Soviets treated to Germans much and much more softer that Beevor describes.

                              If you want to hear about non-Soviet sources so I read book of Alexander Werth, I read memoirs of German officer who was Stalingrad POW, they give other images.

                              4. Red Army is TOO cruel and brutal in books of Alexander Werth.

                              5. He writes too many about betrayers and NKVD. I also can to write book about US Army on base of US Military Police archives and to describe US army as muxture of good soldiers with large amount cowards, criminals and betrayers.

                              Did you read "Catch-22"? Do you like image of US Army in this book?

                              I suppose that it is enough right now.
                              Thanks for the history lesson on the 4th tank brigade. That I found interesting.

                              As for the kindness shown to German POW's by the Red Army, all's I can say to that is both sides were pretty barbaric in their treatment of POW's.

                              In your response to Lance Williams you say " From those books that I read Alexander Werth is best in showing of Russian point of view." Yet in your response to me you state "Red Army is TOO cruel and brutal in books of Alexander Werth. So should we believe Alexander Werth or not?

                              As for writing an accurate history of an Army or a people by police reports that would definitly show the worst, but it would totally ignore the good.

                              As for Catch-22, I liked it. I never really gave it any thought one way or the other on how it made the US Army look.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X