Re: More history (on meaning of Pearl Harbor) [OT]
At 03:09 AM 9/15/2001, Vadim Antonov wrote:
If whoever bothered to invent that pseudo-quotation bothered to learn hitory of WWII, he'd know that most military action had seen no American involvement at all. The widely regarded as the turning point of WWII was Stalingrad battle, after which Red Army began the advancement on all fronts.
Most Eastern Front action (although the 15th Air Force was helpful to the Russians with air support and Lend-Lease provided a great deal of Russian logistic vehicles), true. However, the North African campaign (Operation Torch, et al) and the Italian campaigns were conducted primarily by Americans. Of course, while the Normandy invasion and advance eastward were multi-national operations, the USA provided the vast majority of materiel, manpower, etc. Stalingrad is widely regarded as the turning point for Germany's *Russian* campaign.
US become involved in the continental WWII to prevent Soviets from occupation of the entire Europe, not to win the war with Germany. It was already going to be defeated (and it was the Red Army which took Berlin).
One wonders why Iosef Stalin was then so adamant that the other Allies MUST open a second front in France to sap German resources away from the Eastern Front? I must point out, too, that GEN Patton was poised to take Berlin well before the Russians arrived - but the political decision was made to allow the Red Army to take the city.
From the point of view of saving Europe from communism it was a brilliant move - wait for both sides to become exhausted before getting in. By that time the Red Army had no resources to fight both desperate Nazi and Allied Forces (Japanese were no threat at all to USSR because it was protected by huge very sparsely inhabited landmass, so they could be safely ignored for a while), and this is how the modern political map of Europe came to be.
I might point out that the Americans (and allies) had been fighting Germans in North Africa and Italy for quite some time - not "waiting to get in". Furthermore, to say that Russia was not concerned with Japan is a gross mis-statement. From 1938-1940 Russia and Japan fought a series of skirmishes and minor battles along the Mongolian border with Manchuria (then the Japanese province of Manchuko, captured from the Chinese). The Japanese incursions into Russian territory were troubling enough to Iosef Stalin that he sent Zhukov (THE Zhukov) to stop them. On Aug 20,1939 he did just that - wiping out the entire Japanese 23d Div of the Kwantung Army at the Battle of Khalkin-Gol in the world's first example of blitzkrieg (learned from the Germans who used it in Poland 33 days later). After destroying the Japanese forces all the way to the interior Manchurian border, Zhokov then loaded his tanks onto trains for a quick trip east. Waiting for Zhukov and his armor is why the Russians were two weeks behind the Germans in taking their chunk of Poland. Several divisions of men were left on the Mongolian border to ensure the sanctity of the Non-Aggression Pact signed on 16 Sep 1939. After the Japanese took Port Arthur in the Russo-Japanese war of 1904, and wiped out the Russian Pacific Fleet, Russia *NEVER* took Japan lightly. In fact, modern Red China exists because of heavy Russian support to the People's Army in their fight against the Japanese; support intended to keep the Japanese from being a major threat to Russia. Russia didn't even declare war on the Japanese until 8 Aug 1945 - 2 days AFTER Hiroshima and the day before Nagasaki were A-bombed.
Of course, American school textbooks forget those small details and make it look like that US nearly single-handedly defeated fascism. It didn't.
My history books included all kinds of small details - like the 15th Air Force flying ground support missions from North Africa and Sicily to assist the Red Army. Like Lend-Lease which provided Russia with most of it's logistic vehicles and a significant number of tanks - not to mention war materiel.
To get a sense of what was going on and who was fighting whom see
?? This does nothing to support your contentions...
And if you ever wondered why America dropped A-bomb on Japan - it was to prevent imminent occupation of Japan by the Red Army. After Germany capitulated the Soviet armies were quickly shipped eastward, and were quickly advancing (this you can also see on the world political map, especially if you compare pre-war and post-war boundaries). The only way to prevent People's Republic of Japan was to scare s*t out of Japanese to force them to capitulate to Americans.
Again, note that Russia didn't declare war on Japan until 8 Aug 1945 - 6 days before Japan surrendered. Although Russia *DID* invade Manchuria after declaring war, the Japanese had already abandoned it. Furthermore, the Russians had NO naval capacity and no landing craft - were they going to swim to Tokyo from Mongolia? With the US on the Japanese doorstep?
The myth that American involvement in WWII made a significant difference from the point of view of defeating fascism is just a myth. What US involvement did is to check advancement of communists, not Nazis.
I think that the NDSP, Vichy French and Italian Fascisti would find fault with that statement.
No wonder, US immediately took place of the main enemy of the Soviet Union. It still was worth it, Stalin was no better than Hitler.
Stalin was always suspicious of the other allies. The enemity of the US/USSR is a far larger issue than this.
Sorry, fellow Americans, you _are_ brainwashed if you believe the drivel they teach you as "history". "Fascist powers were doomed" because of Pearl Harbor, sure. Until you check the figures and actually think for a second or two.
Sorry, "fellow American" - your viewpoint of history shows a strong disregard for the facts and figures - as well as a lack of thought.
PS If you want to know how _that_ is related to Sep 11, you may be interested to know that Chechens were collaborating with Nazi; which prompted Stalin to retaliate after the war with mass deportations. They were allowed to return decade or so later, having no love for Russians and the Allies in WWII. That's how their militant leaders became natural allies with Middle-Eastern terrorists, including (surprise) bin Laden.
Somehow, the connection between Chechens not liking the US and the argument that the US was a minor player in WWII escapes me... Further discourse can be off-list - but I could not let this public gross mis-representation of history stand. Dean Robb www.PC-Easy-va.com On-site computer services Member, ICANN At Large
On Sun, 16 Sep 2001, Dean Robb wrote:
At 03:09 AM 9/15/2001, Vadim Antonov wrote: Most Eastern Front action (although the 15th Air Force was helpful to the Russians with air support and Lend-Lease provided a great deal of Russian logistic vehicles), true. However, the North African campaign (Operation Torch, et al) and the Italian campaigns were conducted primarily by Americans. Of course, while the Normandy invasion and advance eastward were multi-national operations, the USA provided the vast majority of materiel, manpower, etc.
Of course, but the scale of any US operation in WWII was at least an order of magnitude smaller than Eastern front battles. See casualty figures.
Stalingrad is widely regarded as the turning point for Germany's *Russian* campaign.
Of course. But it was that campaign which broke Nazi's back.
US become involved in the continental WWII to prevent Soviets from occupation of the entire Europe, not to win the war with Germany. It was already going to be defeated (and it was the Red Army which took Berlin).
One wonders why Iosef Stalin was then so adamant that the other Allies MUST open a second front in France to sap German resources away from the Eastern Front? I must point out, too, that GEN Patton was poised to take Berlin well before the Russians arrived - but the political decision was made to allow the Red Army to take the city.
Because he wasn't stupid and preferred to have Allies weakened by protracted fighting with Nazis while saving Red Army's manpower for subsequent occupation of the _entire_ Europe. A lot is made of Staling "begging" for help; this contradicts all his track record of being ruthlessly merciless, paranoid and always scheming. Most likely, he simply wanted Allies to be dragged into land war prematurely to get into much better position later. WWII wasn't two-sided (Communists and Allies vs Nazi) but rather three-sided; and Western leaders (I particularly admire Churchill's ingenuity) played the stalling game quite well.
I might point out that the Americans (and allies) had been fighting Germans in North Africa and Italy for quite some time - not "waiting to get in".
So did Soviet Union in Spain. For "waiting to get in" i were saying get in to the land war in Europe. I think delaying was a very smart move, strategically.
Furthermore, to say that Russia was not concerned with Japan is a gross mis-statement. From 1938-1940 Russia and Japan fought a series of skirmishes and minor battles along the Mongolian border with Manchuria (then the Japanese province of Manchuko, captured from the Chinese).
Yep, but these were exactly what you said - skirmishes. They had no geopolitical significance whatsoever - until the time to divide the world between Communists and the West came.
The Japanese incursions into Russian territory were troubling enough to Iosef Stalin that he sent Zhukov (THE Zhukov) to stop them. On Aug 20,1939 he did just that - wiping out the entire Japanese 23d Div of the Kwantung Army at the Battle of Khalkin-Gol in the world's first example of blitzkrieg (learned from the Germans who used it in Poland 33 days later). After destroying the Japanese forces all the way to the interior Manchurian border, Zhokov then loaded his tanks onto trains for a quick trip east. Waiting for Zhukov and his armor is why the Russians were two weeks behind the Germans in taking their chunk of Poland. Several divisions of men were left on the Mongolian border to ensure the sanctity of the Non-Aggression Pact signed on 16 Sep 1939.
Some military hitoricans (particularly, Suvorov) now insist that Stalin, until the last moment, didn't believe that Nazis will attack USSR - to the point of dismissing quite explicit intelligence reports. In any case, there was no hurry in getting piece under Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. BTW, Zhukov became THE Zhukov during WWII, not before. Nearly all prominent military commanders were killed by Stalin in purges of 37-39, leaving Red Army with inexpirienced carde of relatively junior commanders. Zhukov himself was moved into what amounted to honourable retirement after WWII because he became too popular and could present a threat to Stalin's rule.
After the Japanese took Port Arthur in the Russo-Japanese war of 1904, and wiped out the Russian Pacific Fleet, Russia *NEVER* took Japan lightly. In fact, modern Red China exists because of heavy Russian support to the People's Army in their fight against the Japanese; support intended to keep the Japanese from being a major threat to Russia. Russia didn't even declare war on the Japanese until 8 Aug 1945 - 2 days AFTER Hiroshima and the day before Nagasaki were A-bombed.
Russia still doesn't have a peace treaty with Japan - because of the Kuril Islands issue. The formal declararion of war was made pretty much when USSR was prepared to overtake Japan -- otherwise it wouldn't make any sense. The Red Army was shipped from west to east nearly immediately after capitulation of Germany - leaving no question about Stalin's intentions. This i know not from history textbooks, but from my grandfathers, both of whom were servicemen there.
Of course, American school textbooks forget those small details and make it look like that US nearly single-handedly defeated fascism. It didn't.
My history books included all kinds of small details - like the 15th Air Force flying ground support missions from North Africa and Sicily to assist the Red Army. Like Lend-Lease which provided Russia with most of it's logistic vehicles and a significant number of tanks - not to mention war materiel.
You know, the only visible American war materiel on Eastern front during WWII was canned beef (sarcastically called "The Second Front"). Shipping a _significant_ amount of heavy machinery under lend-lease was rather impossible, i'm afraid. The convoys of boats carrying lend-lease goods were under intensive attacks by Germans; and USSR didn't have sufficient naval forces to provide adequate protection. Of course, any help was deeply appreciated. But it just couldn't make a significant difference, being only in a single percent range of the Soviet industry output at the time.
To get a sense of what was going on and who was fighting whom see
?? This does nothing to support your contentions...
This gives a sense of scale of battles. Back then, US military technology wasn't in any sense special, so the casualties can be taken as a crude estimate of actual military powers deployed.
Again, note that Russia didn't declare war on Japan until 8 Aug 1945 - 6 days before Japan surrendered. Although Russia *DID* invade Manchuria after declaring war, the Japanese had already abandoned it. Furthermore, the Russians had NO naval capacity and no landing craft - were they going to swim to Tokyo from Mongolia? With the US on the Japanese doorstep?
The Pacific fleet was there, and (unlike US fleets) its supply lines were short. They could make many turns in a relatively short time. Besides, given the state of Japanese forces by that time the occupation wouldn't take much. Kuril islands are still occupied (or belong to, depending on which side you're listening to) by Russia. How they could be captured "with no landing craft" in the first place is left as an excercise in elementary logic. Note that i _never_ referred to opinions of any historicans, just made conclusions from undeniable facts, assuming rational strategies from commanders. (Assuming an irrational strategy is a way to explain anything and is not really productive - but is found in historical books all too often). --vadim
You know, the only visible American war materiel on Eastern front during WWII was canned beef (sarcastically called "The Second Front").
Yes, it was only: ' canned beef' 'trucks (Studebekkers, I can misuse their name)' 'a little of planes Aircobra' and that's all. It saved a lot of lifes, but Stalin did not bothered about 'lifes' so it really did not influenced the history.
participants (3)
-
Alexei Roudnev -
Dean Robb -
Vadim Antonov