Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

1945 Manchuria Operation

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

  • #61
    Originally posted by Andrey

    Overy and Glantz are an exclusion from the large amount of other authors and journalists which continue to write in the style of Cold War.
    Looking at recent works by Max Hastings and Norman Davies I don't see the kind of 'Cold War' style that the older works like Alan Clark's 'Barbarossa' have. It's no longer 'the Red Army only defeated the Axis in the East because they outnumbered them', there's much more appreciation of the quality of the commanders and the individual soldiers.

    And the Westerners can read not only modern books but also the books written in Cold War time.
    And we can watch old Rambo movies as well Doesn't mean that they inform our opinions. In any case, it's the modern books that get the marketing and they sell well.


    It is the same to doubt that D-day events are not explored completely.
    They haven't been.

    It was a pair months ago when I spoke with an American girl-journalist who had arrived in Omsk as a Mormone-missioner a year ago and lived in Russia for one year in usual flat in usual house. She said that firstly she was afraid to go in Russia but now she supposed that "Russia is normal country".
    But this isn't unique to Russia. I know people who are afraid to go the USA because of what they read or see, even to go to other cities in the UK and go out at night. Yet if they actually conquer their fear then they usually find that wherever they go, they just encounter people. There's nothing I've encountered that would suggest that Russia is any worse a country to go to than any other in the civilised world

    Yes, there are a few changes from 80th's but those changes were not significant enough as now Western propaganda shows not Soviets but the Russians as bad guys.
    I don't know exactly what you're referring to here. I've seen opinions across the whole spectrum as to Russians being 'good' or 'bad' but again I've come across similar when referring to Americans, Italians, French, British etc. Again it's not unique to Russians.
    Signing out.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Full Monty
      Looking at recent works by Max Hastings and Norman Davies I don't see the kind of 'Cold War' style that the older works like Alan Clark's 'Barbarossa' have. It's no longer 'the Red Army only defeated the Axis in the East because they outnumbered them', there's much more appreciation of the quality of the commanders and the individual soldiers.
      Look on Beevor's books.

      You speak about a few outstanding authors only but I am speaking about common style of ALL publications.

      And we can watch old Rambo movies as well Doesn't mean that they inform our opinions. In any case, it's the modern books that get the marketing and they sell well.
      To be sold and to be read is not the same. Youth can read old books that were bought by their fathers in Cold War time or to take such books in a library.

      And may be you will be surprised but the movies are one of the most significant weapons of propaganda war. One "Rambo" can be equal to 10 Glantz's books in the question of propaganda.

      But this isn't unique to Russia. I know people who are afraid to go the USA because of what they read or see, even to go to other cities in the UK and go out at night. Yet if they actually conquer their fear then they usually find that wherever they go, they just encounter people. There's nothing I've encountered that would suggest that Russia is any worse a country to go to than any other in the civilised world
      If a person is afraid to go at night so it means that someone said to the person that it is dangerous.

      If a person is afraid to go in Russia it means that somebody said to the person some bad things about Russia.

      The meaning of the words of the girl-journalist was that she had a wrong bad image of Russia before she entered in Russia and lived there. She thought worse about Russia before she had knew from iside what Russia is. And her image of Russia was built by Western mass media.

      I don't know exactly what you're referring to here. I've seen opinions across the whole spectrum as to Russians being 'good' or 'bad' but again I've come across similar when referring to Americans, Italians, French, British etc. Again it's not unique to Russians.
      I saw a lot of modern US movies. The main bad guys there are Arabians, Serbs, Russians, Germans.

      I read a lot of Western historical books, the image of the Russians usually is not good there.

      I read a lot of modern Western newspaper articles about Russia (there are a few sites which translate in Russian the most important articles from the most famous US and European newspapers) and I can not call them "mainly friendly" articles.

      Comment


      • #63
        Andrey, my wife and I were in Moscow in January 2003 for a few days while en route to Kazakhstan to adopt 2 children. We found the Russian people to be wonderful and friendly for the most part. I would go back in a minute to visit again. But while there I became addicted to The Moscow Times, an English language paper, and I even read it on-line back here in the US. I must say usually there is not too many US friendly articles in it. I still enjoy reading the Russian point of view though, even if I don't usually agree with it.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by granite
          Andrey, my wife and I were in Moscow in January 2003 for a few days while en route to Kazakhstan to adopt 2 children. We found the Russian people to be wonderful and friendly for the most part. I would go back in a minute to visit again. But while there I became addicted to The Moscow Times, an English language paper, and I even read it on-line back here in the US. I must say usually there is not too many US friendly articles in it. I still enjoy reading the Russian point of view though, even if I don't usually agree with it.
          If you ask my opinion about US foreign policy and about President Bush you also hear a lot of bad words...

          The Russian public and mass media don't trust to America after the Iraq events and the attempts of US to interfere in Russian internal processes and in internal processes in other countries.

          When I speak "propaganda" I mean to give selective information for own purposes. For an example, it means to speak only bad or only good things about a country. If to speak only bad things too often so it makes the distorted image of the country in the minds of the people who are under the pressure of the propaganda.

          Also it means to make comments or to use such phrases which give negative shade to an event. For an example, it is possible to write "President Putin said..." or "President Putin, a former officer of KGB, said.."

          As I can see the Western propaganda uses both the methods.

          And very often a propaganda not only speak TRUE bad things but also speak FALSE. Hoebbels was a largest master of a propaganda who used false very widely.

          Sometimes it is not direct false but only some distortion of info (to increase or to decrease casualties, for example) that distorts ther real picture of events.

          The Western propaganda also used it widely during Cold War. So when I see that somebody speaks the info that looks as incorrect for me I speak: "Attention! It can be the false (distortion) made by Western propaganda, I didn't hear about it, Russian sources don't confirm it."

          In any case it is necessary to differ TRUE unpleasant things and false. If a Russian newspaper writes unpleasant things about US it doesn't mean that it is Russian propaganda. It can be unpleasant truth.

          I do not call any unpleasant info as a Western propaganda false. I do it when I have reasions to speak that the info is incorrect according my knowledge about it.
          Last edited by Andrey; 29 Sep 05, 20:22.

          Comment


          • #65
            Andrey, your continued belief that movies or tv shows and the like is such a major influence on how people think in the west never ceases to amaze me.

            You don't suppose the critical image of Russia that emerges from reporting about Russia has anything to do with actual policies and events in Russia?

            Of course mass media always emphasizes bad news no matter what it reports, so there is some justification in asking why the good news doesn't get publicised. However, this is the same for everybody. Still there is a reason why the media has to ask Putin if he intends to stay for a third unconstitutional term as president and doesn't have to ask this same question from Bush.

            Your ideas of Western propaganda stem directly from the propaganda machine of Soviet Union which unfortunately still exists in Russia albeit in slightly downgraded form. Due to freedom of the press and lack of government institutions that could coordinate such campaigns there simply is no monolithic Western propaganda comparable to Russian/Soviet existing or Goebbels' Nazi propaganda machine. Sure western governments occasionally resort to coverups, spins and outright lies, but these are usually very limited in scope.

            Evidence for this is easy to find. Just compare mainstream TV news shows in Russia and the US (or any other western country) and especially the amount of critique presented at own government.
            Last edited by pp(est); 29 Sep 05, 06:43.

            Comment


            • #66
              Andrey and pp(est), plz, try to avoid political off-topics here
              If you fire a rifle at the past, the future will fire a cannon at you.....

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by amvas
                Andrey and pp(est), plz, try to avoid political off-topics here
                No politics. I only explained why I often warn about Western propaganda.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Andrey
                  Ask danjon why he quoted only info about the eevents before the April of 1945.
                  a number of reasons- 1. was runnin g out of time (was at work at time) 2. rest article referenced 3. main point i was making is that the armies in manchuria had changed drastically from the earlier period when you could say it was a better than average force, to one that had much reduced equipment, its best formations removed etc thus whilst not saying the soviets had it easy, it was not quite the elite army andrey seems to be saying it was

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by danjon
                    3. main point i was making is that the armies in manchuria had changed drastically from the earlier period when you could say it was a better than average force, to one that had much reduced equipment, its best formations removed etc
                    Even if all the digits in your quote are correct so what does it prove? It can show only the situation in the March of 1945. But there are April, May, June, July and 8 days of the August between the time that your quote describes and the beginning of the Soviet operation in Manchuria. The situation could change (and had changed) completely for those months.

                    If the Japanese removed the best units from Manchuria to the March they had enough time to return them back etc.

                    Your quote doesn't prove anything if to speak about the situation to the August, 9th.

                    And I didn't say that Kwantun Army was the best in 1941, I said that it was the best without the speaking about time date.

                    thus whilst not saying the soviets had it easy, it was not quite the elite army andrey seems to be saying it was
                    ...

                    In the March the Soviets also had no in Far East the 6th Guards Tank Army, the 5th and 39th Armies which still were fighting with the Germans in Europe in that time and which were the main blowing force in the August of 1945.
                    Last edited by Andrey; 30 Sep 05, 03:22.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Andrey
                      No politics. I only explained why I often warn about Western propaganda.
                      Lets use political correct terms: not propaganda, but points of view, which are not always supplied with proper documental verification


                      Never mind though, try to stay in subject.
                      Admin is always right

                      Alex
                      If you fire a rifle at the past, the future will fire a cannon at you.....

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        ok heres the situation at the time of invasion then..

                        In order to prevent the Russians from discovering their
                        alarming weakness in Manchuria, the Kwangtung Army mobilized
                        reservists and new recruits to form new divisions and
                        brigades to maintain the appearance of a formidable fighting
                        force. In early July 1945, the Kwangtung Army was expanded
                        from 11 infantry divisions to more than 24 divisions.
                        Unfortunately for the Kwangtung Army, more than one-fourth
                        of its entire combat force was mobilized only ten days prior
                        to the Soviet offensive (8 of 24 divisions and 7 of 9
                        brigades). [4-63] One of two very weak tank brigades was
                        not formed until July 1945, and both brigades were far
                        removed in south central Manchuria. [9-63]
                        The Japanese IGHQ and Kwangtung Army had not heeded the
                        lessons learned at Nomonhan. In the Summer of 1945, their
                        army had no artillery larger than 75 mm, few tanks, no
                        rockets, nor any modern anti-tank weapons. The newly formed
                        149th Infantry Division did not have a single piece of
                        artillery in its possession when war commenced! [9-63]
                        Ammunition and weapons were in such short supply the
                        Japanese resorted to arming soldiers with bamboo spears.
                        [18-154] Of the 24 divisions in the Kwangtung Army, the
                        Japanese themselves rated only seven or eight to be combat
                        effective. [9-63] In fact, eight of their infantry
                        divisions were rated at being only 15% combat effective
                        while all nine independent mixed brigades were rated at 15%
                        combat effectiveness or less. [18-161]
                        By August 1945, the Kwantury Army had pieced together a
                        combat force of 1,155 tanks, 5,360 guns and 1,800 aircraft,
                        most obsolete. Discounting Japanese forces in South
                        Sakhalin, Korea and the Kuriles, the Soviets faced an
                        inexperienced army totalling little more than 710,000 men.
                        [10-29]
                        In May 1945, the Japanese commenced their unit
                        redeployments and construction of fortifications and
                        barriers to conform with the new defense plan. [18-134] The
                        Japanese problem and "Achilles heel" was simply that their
                        troop redeployments and military construction projects were
                        underway and incomplete when the Russians attacked on 9
                        August 1945.

                        ok hardly an inspiring force to stop soviet armoured divisions

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          For those interested, you can get on-line Dave Glantz's Leavenworth Papers #7 (August Storm: The Soviet 1945 Strategic Offensive in Manchuria) and #8 (August Storm: Tactical and Operational Combat in Manchuria, 1945) at: http://www-cgsc.army.mil/carl/resour...csi.asp#papers.

                          At that site are a number of other great pieces of military history.

                          Enjoy.
                          Leadership is the ability to rise above conventional wisdom.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            I'll answer. I an translating my source...

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              OK, I am beginning.

                              Originally posted by danjon
                              ok heres the situation at the time of invasion then..

                              In order to prevent the Russians from discovering their
                              alarming weakness in Manchuria, the Kwangtung Army mobilized
                              reservists and new recruits to form new divisions and
                              brigades to maintain the appearance of a formidable fighting
                              force. In early July 1945, the Kwangtung Army was expanded
                              from 11 infantry divisions to more than 24 divisions.
                              Unfortunately for the Kwangtung Army, more than one-fourth
                              of its entire combat force was mobilized only ten days prior
                              to the Soviet offensive (8 of 24 divisions and 7 of 9
                              brigades). [4-63] One of two very weak tank brigades was
                              not formed until July 1945, and both brigades were far
                              removed in south central Manchuria. [9-63] The Japanese IGHQ and Kwangtung Army had not heeded the lessons learned at Nomonhan.In the Summer of 1945, their army had no artillery larger than 75 mm, few tanks, no
                              rockets, nor any modern anti-tank weapons. The newly formed
                              149th Infantry Division did not have a single piece of
                              artillery in its possession when war commenced! [9-63]
                              Ammunition and weapons were in such short supply the
                              Japanese resorted to arming soldiers with bamboo spears.
                              [18-154]
                              So what? You described the situation in few newly formed units. But also there were units which were in Manchuria for a few years before 1945, they had excellent training and weapon. The weak Japanese units mainly were in the Japanese rears as reserve, the Soviets had to fight against regular units which and which were in the frontline positions.

                              The weak Japanese units coukd be used for the guard of the rears against partisans and saboteurs so the regular units could be sent in frontline.

                              Don't show the Japanese forces as an analogue of German Volkssturm.

                              USSR in WWII also used militia units. They often had no any training, they had only rifles, pistols, grenades and few artillery. But it doesn't mean that other units of the Red Army also were weak. It doesn't prove anything. The Soviets used such weak units and won the war. The German generals spoke after WWII that it were "General Frost" and "General Mood" who had won them nearly Moscow in 1941 and a lot of Western historians repeat "Yes, it was"

                              But when it is about the Soviets in Manchuria where the landscape and weather were profitable for a defender so the Westerners speak: "It was a easy walk for Red Army..."

                              And it is a very interesting method - to describe the weakest units. It is possible to prove everything by such a method.

                              If to compare the Japanese and American forces in the battles in the islands of the Pacific so it is clearly that the Japanese always were weaker. Guadalcanal, Ivodjima, Okinava - it was everywhere where the Japanese had the shortage of food, weapon (especially - heavy), ammo, supply, artillery, naval and air support.

                              From Guadalcanal the Americans NEVER fought against the superior forces.

                              I also can quote a lot of phrase about the conditions of the Japanese troops opposing to the Americans. I also can quote phrases about hungry Japanese soldiers which made a bayonet attack as they had no ammo for rifles.

                              But it doesn't prove anything...

                              Of the 24 divisions in the Kwangtung Army, the
                              Japanese themselves rated only seven or eight to be combat
                              effective. [9-63] In fact, eight of their infantry
                              divisions were rated at being only 15% combat effective
                              while all nine independent mixed brigades were rated at 15%
                              combat effectiveness or less. [18-161]
                              Where did you get it?

                              In my book there are a few opinions of Japanese generals that were said in the talkings in 1945 between them and to Japanese ministers. They were sure that Kwantung Army was able to stop the Soviets. I'll give the quotes later.

                              The Japanese generals were sure that Kwantung Army is strong enough. And they spoke that the landscape is the main ally of the Japanese in Manchuria.

                              By August 1945, the Kwantury Army had pieced together a
                              combat force of 1,155 tanks, 5,360 guns and 1,800 aircraft,
                              most obsolete. Discounting Japanese forces in South
                              Sakhalin, Korea and the Kuriles, the Soviets faced an
                              inexperienced army totalling little more than 710,000 men.
                              [10-29]
                              The forces in South Sakhalin, Kuril Islands and Korea were not a part of Kwantung Army.

                              Also you forgot to mention the pro-Japanese Chinese forces.

                              Those troops HAD A LOT OF TIME to prepare to Soviet invasion...

                              As I remember when the Western Allies hade approached to Zigfrid Line in the Autuimn of 1944 that line was occupied only by weak German units like Volkssturm. Those units contained mainly too young or too old men with few training. But the best units of Western Allies were stopped by those troops in the spite of the fact that those troops were very weak.

                              Also I remember about battle for Hurtgen Forest. It was a massacre when Allied Infantry VERY slowly moved ahead with a lot of casualties. It was in the result of very difficult terrain.

                              In May 1945, the Japanese commenced their unit
                              redeployments and construction of fortifications and
                              barriers to conform with the new defense plan. [18-134] The
                              Japanese problem and "Achilles heel" was simply that their
                              troop redeployments and military construction projects were
                              underway and incomplete when the Russians attacked on 9
                              August 1945.
                              It is possible to build new and new fortifications always.

                              If the Japanese made mistake about the time and directions of the Soviet blows it doesn't mean that it was easy to crush the Japanese in Manchuria.

                              The Germans in Normandy in 1945 also didn't know the exact time and the directions of the Allied invasion. The best German forces were in Pa-De-Cale and the landing zone was defended even by so weak units like Ost Troops contained the citizens of former USSR. It was the triumph of Allied intelligence, it was a triumph of Allied huge misinformation. And it doesn't mean that D-day and the following breakthrough in France were an "easy walk".

                              The situation in Manchuria also was a triumph of Soviet intelligence and strategy.

                              The main mistake of the Japanese was that they made mistake about the time of the Soviet advance and about the direction of that advance.

                              The Japanese waited the Soviet advance from the direction of Vladivostok and built the main fortifications and concentrated the main forces there.

                              The Japanese General Staff had decided that the Soviets would be ready to advance only not earlier than to the seconf half of September.

                              In the August, 8th a typhoon began in the region of Vladivostok and along the rivers of Sungari and Amur. The Japanese supposed that the Soviets would not be able to advance in the conditions of heavy rains.

                              The Japanese hadn't observed the concentration of Soviet forces including the 6th Guards Tank Army in Mongolia.

                              The Japanese supposed that the desert of Gobi and the Grand Khingan Mountains are impassable for tank troops. If the Japanese occupied the passes of the Grand Khingan so the breakthrough the 6th Guards Tank Army fron the east was impossible. The Japanese needed very weak forces to occupy the passes and the Soviet Command understood it so the main task for the 6th Guards Tank Army was to arrive to the Grand Khingan's passes quicklier than the Japanese would occupy it. So the 6th Guards Tank Army made a rush to the Grand Khingan and crossed it sucessfukky very quickly.

                              So the Japanese were weak TO ATTACK but they have enough forces TO DEFEND IF the Japanese knew exactly the directions and the time opf Soviet advance. The Japanese had no chances TO WIN but they had a lot of chances "to turn the battle for Manchuria in one more long Eastern attrition Campaign which could continue for two years" (from the words of Japanese General Umedzu, the Chief of Japanese General Staff in the August of 1945, to Togo, the Foreign Affairs Minister, in the August of 1945).

                              So the Japanese in Manchuria were approximately in the same situation like the Germans in Normandy in 1944.

                              To speak the Soviets made an "easy walk" is the same to speak the same about the Allies in Normandy.

                              And it is wrong to speak about the REALITY. It is better to speak about the TASK. REALITY was better for Western Allies in Normandy and for the Soviets in Manchuria as their command had got the "element of surprise" and had cheated the enemy about the time and the direction of the blow.

                              ok hardly an inspiring force to stop soviet armoured divisions
                              The Soviets had no armoured divisions there in the August of 1945. They had tank brigades combined in Tank Corpses. Also they had the 6th Guards Tank Army. But the main force in Manchuria Operation was non-machanized troops with the support of a few tanks. Only the 6th Guards Tank Army made a rush from Mongolia. The most part of other troops were infantry units supporting by artillery, self-propelled guns and tanks.

                              For example, a most serious Japanese fortified region was captured for two days by an infantry with the support of regimental artillery and self-propelled guns.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                No one is saying it was easy or not well planned im pretty sure i said as much earlier, and we cant get into the usual west front east front arguements, wereas its not even that simple to compare the island battles to this campaign as its very different in nature.
                                As for the last point, no divisions but still over 5000 afv's against which the japanese had little answer to!
                                Last edited by danjon; 15 Oct 05, 07:06.

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X