73 years ago today, WWII was brought to an end

[Rich2018]

Do you seriously not comprehend the contradiction in your own claims?

C'mon then, enlighten me.

Show me the contradictions.

...the Red Army needed to be rebuilt because not only had its officers been purged, but it had suffered immense losses....

Suffered great losses...In 1941

...in Barbarossa alone the casualties they took were horrific...

Operation Barbarossa was the invasion of the USSR from June-December 1941


Since you're incapable of reading a post, I'll repeat my last post (bold bits added to make it clearer for you):

"...what "serious" defeats did the Red Army suffer after the battle of Moscow ? (which was lost by the Germans in 1941)

The outcome of WWII in the East was decided with the defeat of Nazi Germany's military at the battle of Moscow. (In 1941)

...Germany's defeat before Moscow in the Winter of 1941/42 was ultimately decisive...."


You can now go ahead with your perceived "contradictions".
Start by listing the Red Army's immense losses after the battle of Moscow.

 

[Rich2018]

No it wasn't. The USSR survived. The USA won the war in terms of after benefits. The USSR was a far 2nd place.

So the USSR got no gains at all in the PTO ?

None.

Not one square inch of territory.


Good to know....but wrong.

 

[Rich2018]

Well, before the purges the Red Army was at the forefront of many new tactics such as airborne warfare(paratroopers) and after the purges they were ineffectual at best.

Clearly something changed.....

Have you seen pre-war pictures of Red Army paratroopers hanging on the the wings of bombers ... in flight ?

SMH

 

[Rich2018]

No, not really. Korea was split in half, with a northern communist regime whose aggression soon got it bombed to hell and back.

China was mostly unified, more due to the local Chicoms than the Soviets, and the Russians couldn’t control them like they could the Eastern European puppets.

Are you really ignorant of the gains in the Pacific that the USSR made in the wake of WWII ?


https://amti.csis.org/the-legacy-of-the-soviet-offensives-of-august-1945/

 

[Tigerace117]

Are you really ignorant of the gains in the Pacific that the USSR made in the wake of WWII ?


https://amti.csis.org/the-legacy-of-the-soviet-offensives-of-august-1945/

I literally just addressed the "gains" of the Soviets---a Chinese communist victory that wound up being a double edged sword at best.....cough cough.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_split

And the bombed out wreckage of North Korea.

 

[Tigerace117]

Have you seen pre-war pictures of Red Army paratroopers hanging on the the wings of bombers ... in flight ?

SMH

Did you know that the Soviet paratroopers were among the first in the entire damn world?

"The first airborne forces parachute jump is dated to 2 August 1930, taking place in the Moscow Military District. Airborne landing detachments were established after the initial 1930 experimental jump, but creation of larger units had to wait until 1932–33. On 11 December 1932, a Revolutionary Military Council order established an airborne brigade from the existing detachment in the Leningrad Military District.[6]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Airborne_Troops

Yes, your ignorance is getting rather tiresome.

 

[Tigerace117]

Stalin has been dead for how long ?





Could not Zhukov have said anything at the time Khrushchev was denouncing Stalin ? (I mean he didn't die until 1974)

Are you actually that ignorant ?

Do you have ANY sources that prove or even claim that Stalin's purges actually cost the USSR any significant losses in WWII or cost the USSR victory ?

Or are you just making ignorant claims ?




Desperately needed yes,
Essential for victory ? No.
The USSR was capable of manufacturing trucks.



Awesome...since you're into Wiki.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_production_during_World_War_II




You don't sound very sorry and your facts are not actually "facts"

Yes the USA and UK send much needed aid to the USSR but it didn't mean the difference between victory and defeat.

The USSR was quite capable of manufacturing what it needed to beat Nazi Germany....and it did.




You probably find lots of things hilarious...the Cartoon Network would, I suspect, be a major source.

No-one said Stalin ever came out - or would even have the slightest motivation in doing so - and admitted he was in error when he purged the ranks of the Red Army in the 1930's

The questions was who has EVER said Stalin's purges caused a significant adverse performance to the Red Army in WWII.


Sadly I find no humor in yet another sad example, of America's failed education system, to accurately read and interpret printed text.

I hate to break it to you, but there was still a USSR well after Stalin died. And just like in any other despotic regime, speaking ill of the big guy, even after he dies, is perceived as disloyalty.....at least if you are a common civilian, which is why the criticism came from the top.

:lamo

You want to claim I'm ignorant yet you know exactly jack**** about really basic historical facts. The desperate flailing you have done to ignore the basic realities---that yes, Stalin's purges damn near cost the USSR the war and certainly cost millions of Russians their lives even after they ended due to his gutting of the officer staff---is downright hilarious.

Let's see if you can grasp the concept once one simplifies it for you. During the Winter War Stalin attacked the Finns, a country the USSR vastly outweighed. The Soviets had anywhere from 2,000 to 6,000 tanks deployed to the invasion force. The Finns had thirty two total. The Russians sent over 3,000 aircraft. The Finns had a hundred and fourteen. The Finns had about 300,000 soldiers; the Soviet invasion force consisted of at least 400,000 and as many as 760,000 soldiers.

The Finns held off the Soviets for several months and ultimately retained their independence and most of their territory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War

Gee buddy, now how exactly do you think that happens?

I give you a hint----it's the exact same reason why the Soviets lost so many troops in the Second World War---Stalin had gutted the ranks of anyone who seemed like he could pose a threat.

But I get it. It hurts you deeply to admit your precious supermen needed any help at all, much less as much as they did. It sticks in your craw to have to face the incompetence and brutality of Stalin and his cronies and the fact that those actions are the reason why the Soviets lost so many.

Yes, I think everyone gets that it hurts your pride to admit that the Soviets were reliant on lend lease to stay in the war. But hey, since apparently you think you know better than Zhukov.......:roll:

You have been repeatedly exposed as deeply ignorant on the topic and yet you think you can pontificate on the American education system. :lamo

 

[Tigerace117]

C'mon then, enlighten me.

Show me the contradictions.



Suffered great losses...In 1941




Operation Barbarossa was the invasion of the USSR from June-December 1941


Since you're incapable of reading a post, I'll repeat my last post (bold bits added to make it clearer for you):

"...what "serious" defeats did the Red Army suffer after the battle of Moscow ? (which was lost by the Germans in 1941)

The outcome of WWII in the East was decided with the defeat of Nazi Germany's military at the battle of Moscow. (In 1941)

...Germany's defeat before Moscow in the Winter of 1941/42 was ultimately decisive...."


You can now go ahead with your perceived "contradictions".
Start by listing the Red Army's immense losses after the battle of Moscow.

Here's one for you bud:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Battle_of_Kharkov

"The battle was an overwhelming German victory, with 280,000 Soviet casualties compared to just 20,000 for the Germans and their allies. The German Army Group South pressed its advantage, encircling the Soviet 28th Army on 13 June in Operation Wilhelm and pushing back the 38th and 9th Armies on 22 June in Operation Fridericus II as preliminary operations to Case Blue, which was launched on 28 June as the main German offensive on the Eastern Front in 1942."

Or are 280,000 casualties not "immense" enough for you? :roll:

 

[Oozlefinch]

Re: In the ETO? Not likely - but in the PTO?

The Nazi nuclear effort was hamstrung from the start - they overestimated the amount of U needed for an explosion. & the Nazi effort wasn't well coordinated, nor under a central command. The Nazi military apparently didn't think a nuclear weapon would be ready in time to use in WWII. For Germany, they were right.

Actually, it was doomed much more than that. It never would have worked.

Hitler did not believe in nuclear fission (calling it "Jewish Physics"), and refused to allow any research into it. All of the Nazi designs involved attempting direct nuclear fusion.

Even to this day, that is impossible. We still use a fission explosion to trigger the fusion one.

 

[Rich2018]

I literally just addressed the "gains" of the Soviets---a Chinese communist victory that wound up being a double edged sword at best.....cough cough.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_split

And the bombed out wreckage of North Korea.

You literally didn't.

So the answer is no, you're not aware of SOVIET gains in the aftermath of WWII in the Pacific.

 

[Rich2018]

Did you know that the Soviet paratroopers were among the first in the entire damn world?

"The first airborne forces parachute jump is dated to 2 August 1930, taking place in the Moscow Military District. Airborne landing detachments were established after the initial 1930 experimental jump, but creation of larger units had to wait until 1932–33. On 11 December 1932, a Revolutionary Military Council order established an airborne brigade from the existing detachment in the Leningrad Military District.[6]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Airborne_Troops

Yes, your ignorance is getting rather tiresome.

Awesome !


You're ignorance is boundless.

Take a look at the picture of Soviet paratroopers in YOUR OWN LINK.

They're jumping from the wings of a bomber !

...and then goes on to explain that most Red Army airborne units were used as infantry.




Now contrast that the Germany, the UK and the USA who actually developed divisions that were actually airborne.

:lamo.

 

[Rich2018]

I hate to break it to you, but there was still a USSR well after Stalin died....

Would that be the USSR that Nikita Khrushchev was First Secretary of the Communist Party of from 1953 to 1964 ?

Yeah, you're a little late in breaking that news.

Have you heard that the Earth is not flat ?

...just like in any other despotic regime, speaking ill of the big guy, even after he dies, is perceived as disloyalty.....at least if you are a common civilian, which is why the criticism came from the top....

You mean like Khrushchev did ?

And neither he nor Zhukov were "common civilians"

...you want to claim I'm ignorant yet you know exactly jack****....

No claims needed...you're demonstrating it perfectly well on your own.

...basic historical facts. The desperate flailing you have done to ignore the basic realities....

Says someone with zero education in history.

Your posts are based on myth and cliche

...yes, Stalin's purges damn near cost the USSR the war....

Says who ?

No-one is interested in YOUR personal opinion.

...and certainly cost millions of Russians their lives....

Certainly eh ?

You must have pretty solid evidence to back this up...start by listing your sources that corroborate this.

...let's see if you can grasp the concept once one simplifies it for you. During the Winter War Stalin attacked the Finns, a country the USSR vastly outweighed. The Soviets had anywhere from 2,000 to 6,000 tanks deployed to the invasion force. The Finns had thirty two total. The Russians sent over 3,000 aircraft. The Finns had a hundred and fourteen. The Finns had about 300,000 soldiers; the Soviet invasion force consisted of at least 400,000 and as many as 760,000 soldiers...

I think you mean "outnumbered" and your point is ?

Is it that without the purges, the Red Army was "certain" (to use your own word) to have done better ?

Which Red Army commanders, lost in the purges, would have made the difference in the Winter War...?


Again all you're doing it parroting myths and cliches without actually knowing ANYTHING about the Winter War.


The Russian army in WWI also suffered major losses and defeats to Germany - remind me again, when did Nicholas II conduct his purges ?



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War


Great, you can copy and paste a Wiki page URL...always a great substitute for actual knowledge.

...gee buddy, now how exactly do you think that happens?

I would hazard a guess that you're a victim of America's education system...that puts America's children amongst the lowest literacy levels in the developed world.

...it's the exact same reason why the Soviets lost so many troops in the Second World War---Stalin had gutted the ranks of anyone who seemed like he could pose a threat....

Thank you for your hints and opinion...

Now would you be so kind as to back them up with any credible historical sources ?

....but I get it....

Would that you did

....it hurts you deeply to admit your precious supermen needed any help at all, much less as much as they did. It sticks in your craw to have to face the incompetence and brutality of Stalin and his cronies and the fact that those actions are the reason why the Soviets lost so many.

Yes, I think everyone gets that it hurts your pride to admit that the Soviets were reliant on lend lease to stay in the war. But hey, since apparently you think you know better than Zhukov...

You might want to debate on Historical web sites...your ideas would be laughed off its pages as little more than childish prejudice.

...you have been repeatedly exposed as deeply ignorant on the topic...

Coming from you, we are now truly in the realms of hilarity.

 

[Rich2018]

Here's one for you bud:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Battle_of_Kharkov

"The battle was an overwhelming German victory, with 280,000 Soviet casualties compared to just 20,000 for the Germans and their allies. The German Army Group South pressed its advantage, encircling the Soviet 28th Army on 13 June in Operation Wilhelm and pushing back the 38th and 9th Armies on 22 June in Operation Fridericus II as preliminary operations to Case Blue, which was launched on 28 June as the main German offensive on the Eastern Front in 1942."

Or are 280,000 casualties not "immense" enough for you? :roll:

Great...how many hours did you spend looking for that battle ?

The 1942 campaign ended with the battle of Stalingrad...in which the Germans lost an entire army....with Axis losses up to 868,000

NOW THAT'S IMMENSE.

 

[Tigerace117]

Awesome !


You're ignorance is boundless.

Take a look at the picture of Soviet paratroopers in YOUR OWN LINK.

They're jumping from the wings of a bomber !

...and then goes on to explain that most Red Army airborne units were used as infantry.




Now contrast that the Germany, the UK and the USA who actually developed divisions that were actually airborne.

:lamo.

Yes, your particular brand of ignorance is rather amusing.

What part of “among the first” are you incapable of grasping? Did you think the “proper” way to paradrop soldiers sprang out of thin air? It was a process, requiring a lot of experimentation, and prior to the purges the Soviets were doing it on a scale very few others were.

But by all means, continue exposing your utter ignorance.

 

[Tigerace117]

Great...how many hours did you spend looking for that battle ?

The 1942 campaign ended with the battle of Stalingrad...in which the Germans lost an entire army....with Axis losses up to 868,000

NOW THAT'S IMMENSE.

That’s cool buddy. The Soviets lost more than three times that in encirclements in the first year of fighting alone.

But I get it. You bet based on ignorance and were exposed—- yet again—- so you’ve been reduced to caps lock filled shrieking.

Like I said before..... you just keep exposing yourself.

 

[Tigerace117]

Would that be the USSR that Nikita Khrushchev was First Secretary of the Communist Party of from 1953 to 1964 ?

Yeah, you're a little late in breaking that news.

Have you heard that the Earth is not flat ?




You mean like Khrushchev did ?

And neither he nor Zhukov were "common civilians"





No claims needed...you're demonstrating it perfectly well on your own.




Says someone with zero education in history.

Your posts are based on myth and cliche




Says who ?

No-one is interested in YOUR personal opinion.




Certainly eh ?

You must have pretty solid evidence to back this up...start by listing your sources that corroborate this.





I think you mean "outnumbered" and your point is ?

Is it that without the purges, the Red Army was "certain" (to use your own word) to have done better ?

Which Red Army commanders, lost in the purges, would have made the difference in the Winter War...?


Again all you're doing it parroting myths and cliches without actually knowing ANYTHING about the Winter War.


The Russian army in WWI also suffered major losses and defeats to Germany - remind me again, when did Nicholas II conduct his purges ?



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War


Great, you can copy and paste a Wiki page URL...always a great substitute for actual knowledge.




I would hazard a guess that you're a victim of America's education system...that puts America's children amongst the lowest literacy levels in the developed world.




Thank you for your hints and opinion...

Now would you be so kind as to back them up with any credible historical sources ?




Would that you did




You might want to debate on Historical web sites...your ideas would be laughed off its pages as little more than childish prejudice.





Coming from you, we are now truly in the realms of hilarity.

It seems you aren’t capable of reading comprehension, which would explain why you are so ignorant.

You trying a “gotcha” about Zhukov and Khrushchev is downright moronic since I explicitly pointed out that was why criticism came from the top.

Now you are doing nothing more than throwing a hissy fit screaming and rolling around on the floor going “no, no, no, I don’t wanna believe it I don’t wanna!”

The rest of your post is nothing more than you whining about the American education system(ironic given your complete and total ignorance about really basic history) you desperately trying to invoke the Imperial Russian Army(ignoring the numerous other flaws of that system such as poor equipment and poor logistics—- and still kicked the Austro-Hungarians and Ottomans up and down the block—- in a desperate attempt to ignore the fact that slaughtering anyone with any degree of competence cripples one’s military, as it did the Red Army) and generally exposing yourself yet again

Maybe on whatever tankie site you debate on, but on any regular historical board the effects of Stalin’s paranoia, brutality, and bloodthirstyness on the Red Army—- and the corresponding drop in it’s ability to fight—-is well known.

 

[Rich2018]

Yes, your particular brand of ignorance is rather amusing.

What part of “among the first” are you incapable of grasping? Did you think the “proper” way to paradrop soldiers sprang out of thin air? It was a process, requiring a lot of experimentation, and prior to the purges the Soviets were doing it on a scale very few others were.

But by all means, continue exposing your utter ignorance.

Amongst the first to think of soldiers parachuting into combat?

Pretty much every major military thought of that...so the great Red Army had guys hanging on to the wings of bombers. Most other militaries would dismiss this as suicidally unsafe.

Sorry Red Army fan boy but this is not exactly advanced military innovation.
The Germans first developed (and used) true airborne divisions. The British and then the USA then developed their own.

The Red Army never developed an airborne division before the end of WWII - and their paratroopers were used as elite infantry.


Now remind us all again what point you're actually trying to make ?

(amongst all your "utter ignorance" that is).

 

[Rich2018]

That’s cool buddy. The Soviets lost more than three times that in encirclements in the first year of fighting alone....

The Germans were really good at mechanized warfare.

Are you trying to say that had Stalin not conducted his purges, then the Red Army would have suffered less encirclement ?

If so, where is your source or is this just YOUR unsubstantiated opinion ?

...you bet based on ignorance and were exposed—- yet again—- so you’ve been reduced to caps lock filled shrieking.

Like I said before..... you just keep exposing yourself.

I feel like I've been attacked by a guinea pig.

Coming from a child who knows nothing about WWII.


Learn some history and stop masquerading your ignorant opinion as "fact".

 

[Rich2018]

It seems you aren’t capable of reading comprehension, which would explain why you are so ignorant.

You trying a “gotcha” about Zhukov and Khrushchev is downright moronic since I explicitly pointed out that was why criticism came from the top.

Now you are doing nothing more than throwing a hissy fit screaming and rolling around on the floor going “no, no, no, I don’t wanna believe it I don’t wanna!” ....

Ask mommy for a box of tissues...sounds like you need a few.

...the rest of your post is nothing more than you whining about the American education system(ironic given your complete and total ignorance about really basic history)....

So you don't know what "irony" means either.

It's not like goldie and steely but made of iron.

...you desperately trying to invoke the Imperial Russian Army(ignoring the numerous other flaws of that system such as poor equipment and poor logistics—- and still kicked the Austro-Hungarians and Ottomans up and down the block—- in a desperate attempt to ignore the fact that slaughtering anyone with any degree of competence cripples one’s military, as it did the Red Army) and generally exposing yourself yet again...

More tissues required.

1. The Red Army in 1941 also suffered from poor equipment, training and logistics. Russian/Soviet industry was backward for various reasons

2. If there were two armies in the world worse than the Russian army in 1914, it was the Austo-Hungarian and Turkish armies
When the Russian army fought the Japanese or German armies, it was soundly beaten. With no Tsarist purges to blame it on.

3. Again, where is your source that Stalin's purges cost the Red Army anything in WWII ?
No-one is interested in your personal and uninformed opinion as a source.

So stop commenting on things you are ignorant about.

...on any regular historical board the effects of Stalin’s paranoia, brutality, and bloodthirstyness on the Red Army—- and the corresponding drop in it’s ability to fight—-is well known.

1. Please give the URL of one of these "regular historical boards"...particularly one that gives sources of how Stalin's purges adversely affected the performance of the Red Army.
Since you claim that a drop in the Red Army's ability to fight is "well known" - it shouldn't be hard to produce a source for your claim (I suspect your expended a few hours of fruitless surfing trying to find one).


2. What is your source on the Red Army being "blood thirsty"? ... any more than say the Wehrmacht was.
Again more evidence that your posts are simply parroting ignorant myth and cliche.

 

[Tigerace117]

Amongst the first to think of soldiers parachuting into combat?

Pretty much every major military thought of that...so the great Red Army had guys hanging on to the wings of bombers. Most other militaries would dismiss this as suicidally unsafe.

Sorry Red Army fan boy but this is not exactly advanced military innovation.
The Germans first developed (and used) true airborne divisions. The British and then the USA then developed their own.

The Red Army never developed an airborne division before the end of WWII - and their paratroopers were used as elite infantry.


Now remind us all again what point you're actually trying to make ?

(amongst all your "utter ignorance" that is).

Oh look, the guy who can't comprehend that the "Great Stalin"'s purges crippled the USSR is calling me a "Red Army fanboy" :lamo

Sorry bud, but there was one hell of a lot of "suicidally unsafe" stuff going around in the first days of any new technology or technique. That's what experimentation is for---to weed said stuff out. How safe do you think the first tanks were? The first fighters? How about the first submarines?

I'll give a hint----not ****ing very.

OMG, you mean paratroopers were used as elite infantry? Just like every other major power?

Your ignorance is downright laughable.

 

[Tigerace117]

Ask mommy for a box of tissues...sounds like you need a few.





So you don't know what "irony" means either.

It's not like goldie and steely but made of iron.





More tissues required.

1. The Red Army in 1941 also suffered from poor equipment, training and logistics. Russian/Soviet industry was backward for various reasons

2. If there were two armies in the world worse than the Russian army in 1914, it was the Austo-Hungarian and Turkish armies
When the Russian army fought the Japanese or German armies, it was soundly beaten. With no Tsarist purges to blame it on.

3. Again, where is your source that Stalin's purges cost the Red Army anything in WWII ?
No-one is interested in your personal and uninformed opinion as a source.

So stop commenting on things you are ignorant about.



1. Please give the URL of one of these "regular historical boards"...particularly one that gives sources of how Stalin's purges adversely affected the performance of the Red Army.
Since you claim that a drop in the Red Army's ability to fight is "well known" - it shouldn't be hard to produce a source for your claim (I suspect your expended a few hours of fruitless surfing trying to find one).


2. What is your source on the Red Army being "blood thirsty"? ... any more than say the Wehrmacht was.
Again more evidence that your posts are simply parroting ignorant myth and cliche.

Yep, your stupidity is so hilarious I practically laughed myself to tears. Good self awareness buddy.

More importantly, they suffered from a complete and crippling lack of leadership, since showing any initiative was a good way to wind up dead. It doesn't matter how good your equipment is when your officers aren't able to competently command.

Oh look, even more pathetically shallow reasoning from you. You really don't know crap about history.

The Russo-Japanese War was really decided at sea and on the Homefront more than it was on land. The defeat at Tsushima, coupled with ever growing domestic instability, is what caused Russia to throw in the towel.

Aw, is the poor tankie upset that his hero Stalin is being criticized for nearly costing the USSR the war? I've provided sources before. You've either ignored them, hand waved them away, or dump,y pretended they weren't there. You have yet to provide any evidence of your own for your delusional claim.

Like I said before, you've been utter incapable of handling any links I previously provided, so why should I waste any more time providing you with facts that you'll just ignore?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_crimes

Here's a little list for your education.....not, of course, that I expect a tankie like yourself to bother learning anything.

 

[Tigerace117]

The Germans were really good at mechanized warfare.

Are you trying to say that had Stalin not conducted his purges, then the Red Army would have suffered less encirclement ?

If so, where is your source or is this just YOUR unsubstantiated opinion ?




I feel like I've been attacked by a guinea pig.

Coming from a child who knows nothing about WWII.


Learn some history and stop masquerading your ignorant opinion as "fact".

Yes, they absolutely would have suffered fewer casualties---certainly far fewer men would have been encircled.

The Germans were still "very good at mechanized warfare" yet we never see any similar utter catastrophes happening to the Western Allies. Gee, I wonder why:roll:

A tankie trying to lecture me about World War 2 is still just as funny as it was before :lamo

 

[Rich2018]

Oh look, the guy who can't comprehend that the "Great Stalin"'s purges crippled the USSR is calling me a "Red Army fanboy"

Because had Stalin not purged the Red Army, it would have been so much better.

Sorry comrade, you'll have to provide more evidence than your PERSONAL opinion.

...there was one hell of a lot of "suicidally unsafe" stuff going around in the first days of any new technology or technique. That's what experimentation is for---to weed said stuff out. How safe do you think the first tanks were? The first fighters? How about the first submarines?...

Go on then, bud, tell us exactly what your figures show for the casualty rates of the first tank crews.

What would you rather be, the driver or gunner of one of the first tanks...or a Red Army parachutist hanging on to the wing of a bomber !

And if you did any reading on the Red Army, you'll see it never conducted a major airborne operation. It didn't have the transport aircraft, nor the air transportable equipment, like tanks and gliders and all that good stuff an airborne unit needs to fight a battle with.

You may be in love with your Red Army supermen but read up on some facts.
Only the Germans, British and US actually formed true airborne divisions.

Not that this has anything to do with the performance of the Red Army in WWII

Sorry that Stalin purged your beloved Red Army but it really didn't make any difference to the outcome of the war.

...I'll give a hint----not ****ing very....

Awaiting your figures...but suspect that it's just more personal opinion mixed based upon ignorance.

You really haven't shown you know anything about WWII other than what you've learned from watching movies and reading comics.

...you mean paratroopers were used as elite infantry? Just like every other major power?

So now you don't know what "infantry" means

Hint: What's the difference between an INFANTRY division and an AIRBORNE division?

Yes paratroopers make excellent infantry but the Red Army used its airborne troops almost exclusively as infantry.
ie: It didn't conduct major airborne operations.

 

[Rich2018]

Yep, your stupidity is so hilarious I practically laughed myself to tears. Good self awareness buddy....

How old are you ?

I suspect falling itnto fits of laughter is not an uncommon event with you.

...they suffered from a complete and crippling lack of leadership...

Never heard of Marshall Zhukov, the Red Army commander at the Battle of Moscow?
He seemed to do OK...more than OK actually, he organized a successful defense of the city and then successful counter-attacks. The Red army actually encircled and destroyed an entire German corps...with "incompetent" officers according to people like you.

SMH.

You're just parroting nonsense.

...since showing any initiative was a good way to wind up dead....

You keep making these ignorant claims...


What's your source on this claim ?

...it doesn't matter how good your equipment is when your officers aren't able to competently command....

And who says the Red Army officers weren't able to "competently command" ?
I mean other than you

Data and sources please.

...you really don't know crap about history....

Your command of English mirrors your grasp of history.

You don't make me laugh at all...more like cringe at how shocking US education levels are.

Your "knowledge" so far consists of schoolboy ignorance, cliche and myth.

....the Russo-Japanese War was really decided at sea and on the Homefront more than it was on land. The defeat at Tsushima, coupled with ever growing domestic instability, is what caused Russia to throw in the towel....

So the Russian army didn't suffer and defeats to the Japanese army at all ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Yalu_River_(1904)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Mukden

...is the poor tankie upset that his hero Stalin is being criticized for nearly costing the USSR the war?

No, because he didn't

The USSR never came close to losing the war.

...I've provided sources before...

In what post ?

All you've done is spout personal and ignorant opinion.

...you've been utter incapable of handling any links I previously provided, so why should I waste any more time providing you with facts that you'll just ignore?

You have provided not one single source to your claim that Stalin's purges caused any significant drop in Red Army performance.

Not one.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_crimes


And you're saying this was worse or better than the record of the German forces in WWII ?

 

[Rich2018]

Yes, they absolutely would have suffered fewer casualties---certainly far fewer men would have been encircled....

Personal opinion, based on ignorance not sources.

...the Germans were still "very good at mechanized warfare" yet we never see any similar utter catastrophes happening to the Western Allies. Gee, I wonder why...

The May 1940 Blitzkreig ?

The fall of France in 6 weeks ?

Dunkirk ?

You obviously know nothing about WWII.

...a tankie trying to lecture me about World War 2 is still just as funny as it was before...

I suppose you're claiming to be a retired colonel of special forces now...all before the age of 17.