Matrix Games Forums

Players compare Ageods Civil War to Civil War IIDeal of the week - An updated War in the East goes half Price!Sign up for the Qvadriga beta for iPad and Android!Come and say hi at Pax and SaluteLegends of War goes on sale!Piercing Fortress Europa Gets UpdatedBattle Academy Mega Pack is now availableClose Combat: Gateway to Caen Teaser TrailerDeal of the Week Alea Jacta EstDeal of the Week Alea Jacta Est
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units in USSR?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units in USSR? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units in ... - 8/29/2011 10:31:28 PM   
rkr1958


Posts: 338
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline
I would like to hear from the the WW-II "historians" among us on the following question(s).

Is there any historical evidence that would support the premise that Stalin would have allowed corps size combat troops from the UK or USA to operate within the Soviet Union?

If yes or no, what is that evidence?

And if yes, under what conditions do you believe Stalin would have allowed this?
Post #: 1
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 8/29/2011 10:32:28 PM   
rkr1958


Posts: 338
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

I would like to hear from the the WW-II "historians" among us on the following question(s).

Is there any historical evidence that would support the premise that Stalin would have allowed corps size combat troops from the UK or USA to operate within the Soviet Union?

If yes or no, what is that evidence?

And if yes, under what conditions do you believe Stalin would have allowed this?
I'll also go first ... so fire away if you disagree.

My opinion is based on Stalin's paranoia over holding power as supported by the following two historical points.

1. The purge of the Red Army in the 1930's in which 90% of its general officers and 60% of its colonels were done away with.

2. The fact that Stalin ordered the Red Army to stand down and allowed the Nazi's time to crush the pro-western partisans during the Warsaw uprising in August of 1944.

Edited -- to post my opinion and not restate my question as I accidentally did.

< Message edited by rkr1958 -- 8/31/2011 9:30:21 AM >

(in reply to rkr1958)
Post #: 2
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 8/29/2011 11:43:22 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 17922
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rkr1958


quote:

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

I would like to hear from the the WW-II "historians" among us on the following question(s).

Is there any historical evidence that would support the premise that Stalin would have allowed corps size combat troops from the UK or USA to operate within the Soviet Union?

If yes or no, what is that evidence?

And if yes, under what conditions do you believe Stalin would have allowed this?
I'll also go first ... so fire away if you disagree.

I would like to hear from the the WW-II "historians" among us on the following question(s).

Is there any historical evidence that would support the premise that Stalin would have allowed corps size combat troops from the UK or USA to operate within the Soviet Union?

If yes or no, what is that evidence?

And if yes, under what conditions do you believe Stalin would have allowed this?

I seriously doubt that Stalin would have. Both the Commonwealth and the USA had a lot of troops in the USSR after WW I and they fought (more or less) on the side of the White Russians. That is, the fought against Stalin and the Red Russians.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to rkr1958)
Post #: 3
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 8/29/2011 11:45:25 PM   
Tylom

 

Posts: 6
Joined: 7/21/2011
Status: offline


We at least know that sailors in the North Sea convoy routes were allowed off-ship. Military personnel were accepted as such and given "liberty" of the city. We also know that the Brits had agents in St. Pete(Leningrad)...One has got to guess that Uncle Joe was informed to some extent.
I would guess that Stalin would happily use allied troops, especially should the north ports be threatened. However, I don't know of any time the US/UK saw action on Soviet soil. My bet is that it's possible, but probably never happened.

(in reply to rkr1958)
Post #: 4
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 8/30/2011 6:34:12 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 16006
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
I think that if the situation was desperate enough then Uncle Joe would have accepted troops on Soviet soil; but the situation would have needed to be really desperate, because of Stalin's paranoia. The treatment of Allied sailors on the Arctic convoys is proof of that.

The only exception I know of is the RAF which did have a unit based in Murmansk for a couple of months. IIRC this unit was sent over to train Soviet pilots on the Hawker Hurricane, but also flew combat missions themselves - and had an impressive kill record.

However, this is the only foreign unit (Polish excepted - which was a different kettle of fish) I know of on Soviet soil in WWII, and is a long way from being a corps sized army unit.

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty - Horatio Nelson 1805.




(in reply to Tylom)
Post #: 5
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 8/30/2011 6:50:35 AM   
elxaime

 

Posts: 95
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
I would not be so sure. There is some anecdotal evidence that the Soviet Union suggested it would be open to Allied ground assistance during the most dire period of Summer/Fall 1941-2. However the fact of the matter is that, aside from perhaps that brief period, it was not a real possibility. The British Empire was in no position to send troops anywhere in Russia and the USA likewise had its hands full after December 1941.

We need to remember that politics makes strange bedfellows. Prior to it actually happening, few would have predicted the Soviet-Nazi Pact of 1939. Likewise, the idea of massive US supplies being sent to the Soviets would have appeared ludicrous until the circumstances arose and it actually happened.

With our historical hindsight, we tend to discount various actions as being beyond the realm of possibility . But the better approach is to try and put yourselves in the shoes of the decision makers at the time. If the circumstances provided for the possibility, and the political cost-benefit analysis played out, it could have happened.

I see three elements to consider. First, remember that Hitler's Regime was waging what was essentially a genocidal war against the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was to be vaporized and replaced by the Third Reich's vision of a new "Ostland" with local populations replaced by German settlers and surviving Slavs either enslaved or relegated to east of the Urals. There was precious little room to negotiate - it was a war to the death. If the choice was between going under the Nazi boot and accepting whatever help was available in whatever form, can we truly say Stalin would have balked? Second, there is historical precedent for the Soviets doing whatever it took to "save the Revolution", namely Lenin's Treaty of Brest-Litovsk that took Russia out of WW1. That treaty, temporarily as it turned out due to Germany's subsequent defeat, gave the Kaiser a huge chunk of land, indemnities, etc. Third, we need to avoid having our lenses, as it were, colored by later Cold War views. At the time in 1941-1945, feelings toward the Soviet Union as an ally, and especially feelings toward the Soviet people, were much, much warmer in the US and Britain. The Red Army was viewed heroically for its victory at Stalingrad. There was real Soviet relief and gratitude at the establishment of the Second Front in Normandy in June 1944.

World diplomatic history is full of some amazing volte-faces and strange alliances of convenience. Our own US history started with one such, the assistance, including troops and ships, of the absolute French Monarchy fighting alongside the new revolution against the British during 1778-1783. It would be a mistake to view Soviet-Western relations during WW2 as so predetermined by ideological views as to preclude such possibilities.

(in reply to Tylom)
Post #: 6
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 8/30/2011 9:12:06 AM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 17922
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: elxaime

I would not be so sure. There is some anecdotal evidence that the Soviet Union suggested it would be open to Allied ground assistance during the most dire period of Summer/Fall 1941-2. However the fact of the matter is that, aside from perhaps that brief period, it was not a real possibility. The British Empire was in no position to send troops anywhere in Russia and the USA likewise had its hands full after December 1941.

We need to remember that politics makes strange bedfellows. Prior to it actually happening, few would have predicted the Soviet-Nazi Pact of 1939. Likewise, the idea of massive US supplies being sent to the Soviets would have appeared ludicrous until the circumstances arose and it actually happened.

With our historical hindsight, we tend to discount various actions as being beyond the realm of possibility . But the better approach is to try and put yourselves in the shoes of the decision makers at the time. If the circumstances provided for the possibility, and the political cost-benefit analysis played out, it could have happened.

I see three elements to consider. First, remember that Hitler's Regime was waging what was essentially a genocidal war against the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was to be vaporized and replaced by the Third Reich's vision of a new "Ostland" with local populations replaced by German settlers and surviving Slavs either enslaved or relegated to east of the Urals. There was precious little room to negotiate - it was a war to the death. If the choice was between going under the Nazi boot and accepting whatever help was available in whatever form, can we truly say Stalin would have balked? Second, there is historical precedent for the Soviets doing whatever it took to "save the Revolution", namely Lenin's Treaty of Brest-Litovsk that took Russia out of WW1. That treaty, temporarily as it turned out due to Germany's subsequent defeat, gave the Kaiser a huge chunk of land, indemnities, etc. Third, we need to avoid having our lenses, as it were, colored by later Cold War views. At the time in 1941-1945, feelings toward the Soviet Union as an ally, and especially feelings toward the Soviet people, were much, much warmer in the US and Britain. The Red Army was viewed heroically for its victory at Stalingrad. There was real Soviet relief and gratitude at the establishment of the Second Front in Normandy in June 1944.

World diplomatic history is full of some amazing volte-faces and strange alliances of convenience. Our own US history started with one such, the assistance, including troops and ships, of the absolute French Monarchy fighting alongside the new revolution against the British during 1778-1783. It would be a mistake to view Soviet-Western relations during WW2 as so predetermined by ideological views as to preclude such possibilities.

Very true.

But there were US troops up by Archangel that got driven out by the Soviets in the 1920's. And there were Commonwealth units down in the Crimea if my memory serves me correctly. The Red Army fought a desperate battle against the White Army and a host of other countries (US, Commonwealth, Japan) while simultaneously keeping down nationalist uprisings in Belo-Rus, Ukraine, and the Baltic States. There were even Hungarians conducting a fighting retreat eastwards across Siberia (they eventually exited through the Pacific and circumnavigated the globe to get back to Hungary). That all took place in the 1920's when Stalin and the members of his Politobureau (sp?) were out in the front lines fighting. Those experiences were undoubtedly be hard for Stallin and his comrades to forget easily.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to elxaime)
Post #: 7
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 8/30/2011 9:53:54 AM   
HansHafen

 

Posts: 250
Joined: 2/3/2008
Status: offline
Actually the second and third fronts were the air war over western Europe and the Med Front, both English out of Egypt and USA out of Algeria etc. So, June 44 was really like the fourth front. And fronts two and three pulled away a significant amount of units from the eastern front.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 8
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 8/30/2011 12:46:29 PM   
composer99


Posts: 2071
Joined: 6/6/2005
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline
I understand a Free French air squadron, the Group de Chasse GC3, also served in the Soviet Union during the war.

_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to HansHafen)
Post #: 9
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 8/30/2011 8:33:27 PM   
Centuur


Posts: 2505
Joined: 6/3/2011
From: Hoorn (NED).
Status: offline
I remember reading a book sometime where a visit by Molotov to London was mentioned during which Churchill did offer an Expeditionary force of about 10 divisions to be send to Russia in 1941. Molotov declined the offer by stating that those divisions could be better used to create a second front in Europe.
However, the Russians still don't give a lot of information on how they managed things during the war...



_____________________________

Peter

(in reply to composer99)
Post #: 10
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 8/30/2011 11:20:35 PM   
SirWhiskers

 

Posts: 30
Joined: 12/27/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

I would like to hear from the the WW-II "historians" among us on the following question(s).

Is there any historical evidence that would support the premise that Stalin would have allowed corps size combat troops from the UK or USA to operate within the Soviet Union?

If yes or no, what is that evidence?

And if yes, under what conditions do you believe Stalin would have allowed this?


A World at Arms by Gerhard Weinberg, page 290: "This concern was exacerbated in the fall of 1941 by the great difficulties in allocating already scarce supplies to Russia and the inability to respond to Stalin's appeal for either a massive invasion of Western Europe or the sending of 25-30 divisions to fight alongside the Red Army on the Eastern Front. [emphasis mine] Since the Soviet leader presumably knew that these divisions did not exist - and could not get there if they did - his demand must be understood as a measure both of his desperation in the face of the German onslaught and his desire to pressure the British into doing something." [emphasis in original]

End Notes for this passage, note 90, page 1011: Beaumont, Comrades in Arms, pp. 50-52; Woodward, British Foreign Policy, 2: chap 20, Gilbert, Churchill, 6: chap. 62.

If one accepts Weinberg's scholarship, it appears that there was a request from Stalin for British troops, but that the request was not intended to be met.

Also, based on evidence in other books, it seems highly unlikely that Stalin would have allowed foreign troops on his soil. In Absolute War, Chris Bellamy cites numerous examples of the NKVD following all foreign nationals and any Soviet citizens with whom they interacted. The assumption was that they were all spies, or at best, subversives.

(in reply to rkr1958)
Post #: 11
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 8/30/2011 11:59:47 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 16006
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

I understand a Free French air squadron, the Group de Chasse GC3, also served in the Soviet Union during the war.
Warspite1

Tell us more please: where, when?

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty - Horatio Nelson 1805.




(in reply to composer99)
Post #: 12
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 8/31/2011 12:57:32 AM   
composer99


Posts: 2071
Joined: 6/6/2005
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline
My online source is Wikipedia.

Wikipedia refers to three books and one article as references:
- Normandie Niemen, Yves Courrière, Omnibus, 2004 ISBN 2-258-06171-7
- Un du Normandie-Niemen, Roger Sauvage, Poche, 1971 ISBN B0000DOP3V
- French Eagles Soviet Heroes, John D. Clark, Sutton, 2005 ISBN 0-7509-4074-3
- Bernole & Barnett, "French Aces on the Eastern Front", WWII Quarterly, Fall 2011, pp. 16-25, 94

Wikipedia also links to the following more-or-less official online sources:
- What appears to be http://normandieniemen.free.fr/ for the official musuem/exhibit dedicated to the group.


_____________________________

~ Composer99

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 13
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 8/31/2011 6:46:19 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 16006
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: composer99

My online source is Wikipedia.

Wikipedia refers to three books and one article as references:
- Normandie Niemen, Yves Courrière, Omnibus, 2004 ISBN 2-258-06171-7
- Un du Normandie-Niemen, Roger Sauvage, Poche, 1971 ISBN B0000DOP3V
- French Eagles Soviet Heroes, John D. Clark, Sutton, 2005 ISBN 0-7509-4074-3
- Bernole & Barnett, "French Aces on the Eastern Front", WWII Quarterly, Fall 2011, pp. 16-25, 94

Wikipedia also links to the following more-or-less official online sources:
- What appears to be http://normandieniemen.free.fr/ for the official musuem/exhibit dedicated to the group.

Warspite1

Interesting stuff, thank-you.

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty - Horatio Nelson 1805.




(in reply to composer99)
Post #: 14
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 8/31/2011 9:35:52 AM   
rkr1958


Posts: 338
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline
Below is an interesting reference (given to me by someone else) on why Stalin might be sour on US combat intervention in Russia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_Bear_Expedition

quote:

The Polar Bear Expedition (also known as the Northern Russian Expedition, the American North Russia Expeditionary Force - ANREF or the American Expeditionary Force North Russia - AEFNR) was a contingent of about 5,000 U.S. troops[1] that landed in Arkhangelsk, Russia as part of the Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War and fought the Red Army in the surrounding region during the period of September 1918 through July 1919.

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 15
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 8/31/2011 6:43:55 PM   
rkr1958


Posts: 338
Joined: 5/21/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

Below is an interesting reference (given to me by someone else) on why Stalin might be sour on US combat intervention in Russia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_Bear_Expedition

quote:

The Polar Bear Expedition (also known as the Northern Russian Expedition, the American North Russia Expeditionary Force - ANREF or the American Expeditionary Force North Russia - AEFNR) was a contingent of about 5,000 U.S. troops[1] that landed in Arkhangelsk, Russia as part of the Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War and fought the Red Army in the surrounding region during the period of September 1918 through July 1919.


Another interesting reference on the Polar Bear Expedition -

http://polarbears.si.umich.edu/index.pl?node=polar%20bear%20history

quote:

The American military intervention at Archangel, Russia, at the end of World War I, nicknamed the "Polar Bear Expedition," is a strange episode in American history. Ostensibly sent to Russia to prevent a German advance and to help reopen the Eastern Front, American soldiers found themselves fighting Bolshevik revolutionaries for months after the Armistice ended fighting in France.


< Message edited by rkr1958 -- 8/31/2011 6:44:21 PM >

(in reply to rkr1958)
Post #: 16
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 8/31/2011 6:48:49 PM   
Shannon V. OKeets

 

Posts: 17922
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

Below is an interesting reference (given to me by someone else) on why Stalin might be sour on US combat intervention in Russia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_Bear_Expedition

quote:

The Polar Bear Expedition (also known as the Northern Russian Expedition, the American North Russia Expeditionary Force - ANREF or the American Expeditionary Force North Russia - AEFNR) was a contingent of about 5,000 U.S. troops[1] that landed in Arkhangelsk, Russia as part of the Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War and fought the Red Army in the surrounding region during the period of September 1918 through July 1919.


Thanks.

I had it wrong, it wasn't the Hungarians - it was the Czechs - that held the Trans-Siberian railroad and eventually departed the USSR via the Pacific to take the long way home after WW I was over.

EDIT: There was an old SPI game on the Russian Civil War that covers all of this. A very good board game I might add.

< Message edited by Shannon V. OKeets -- 8/31/2011 6:50:02 PM >


_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to rkr1958)
Post #: 17
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 8/31/2011 11:56:02 PM   
elxaime

 

Posts: 95
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
But there were US troops up by Archangel that got driven out by the Soviets in the 1920's. And there were Commonwealth units down in the Crimea if my memory serves me correctly. The Red Army fought a desperate battle against the White Army and a host of other countries (US, Commonwealth, Japan) while simultaneously keeping down nationalist uprisings in Belo-Rus, Ukraine, and the Baltic States. There were even Hungarians conducting a fighting retreat eastwards across Siberia (they eventually exited through the Pacific and circumnavigated the globe to get back to Hungary). That all took place in the 1920's when Stalin and the members of his Politobureau (sp?) were out in the front lines fighting. Those experiences were undoubtedly be hard for Stallin and his comrades to forget easily.


Yes, there certainly were tensions between the Soviets and other countries. But I return to my original point. Germany waged war on the infant Revolution in 1918 and helped Finland and the Baltic States get their independence. But that didn't prevent close collaboration with the Soviet Communists post-Versailles Treaty, to the extent where German weapons and techniques were tested on Soviet soil in the 1920's and 1930's. To use another example, we tend to think of the Anglo-French alliances in WW1 and WW2 as natural and inevitable. However, historical accounts among the officers who landed in France with the BEF in 1914 admitted to attitudes where "we would just as soon fight the French as the Germans." France was the historic enemy turned ally.

If push came to shove, I don't think we can discount Allied cooperation on an even deeper level than occurred. One does not make alliances based on whether one likes the ally or not - they are based on cold-eyed political interests and no interest is more dire than a life and death struggle.

The old Avalon Hill Third Reich, and many similar strategic scale European Theater WW2 games, usually have a rule not allowing Western-Soviet cooperation past a certain point. I think these rules reflect hindsight and also play a game balancing purpose. But I don't consider them predictive of what might have happened if historical circumstances had been different.


< Message edited by elxaime -- 9/1/2011 12:00:54 AM >

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)
Post #: 18
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 9/1/2011 11:13:34 PM   
Minority Report

 

Posts: 9
Joined: 8/7/2005
Status: offline
There was also a Canadian contingent in 1918-1919 in Vladivostock.

See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Siberian_Expeditionary_Force

I am sure for the Soviets who had memory of this event, British or Canadian it is the same thing: not welcomed.

(in reply to rkr1958)
Post #: 19
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 9/2/2011 2:08:53 PM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1521
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline
After the “Doolittle Raid April 18, 1942” Capt. Edward J. York had his plane and crew interned at Primorsky Krai, Siberia.

So I don’t believe Stalin would have allowed Corps size units to operate in the U.S.S.R.


_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to Minority Report)
Post #: 20
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 9/3/2011 2:33:04 AM   
SewerStarFish


Posts: 299
Joined: 5/7/2007
From: Reading, Pa. USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous
After the “Doolittle Raid April 18, 1942” Capt. Edward J. York had his plane and crew interned at Primorsky Krai, Siberia.

So I don’t believe Stalin would have allowed Corps size units to operate in the U.S.S.R.


Well, he was interned to maintain neutrality with Japan -- I don't think that that one event really answers the question. I can't imagine how much more desperate things could have gotten for the Soviets then in late 1942. Since the Soviets didn't make serious requests for such direct support then it is doubtful any such later request would have come or by the time it was made would even have been feasible.

(in reply to Extraneous)
Post #: 21
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 9/3/2011 5:18:40 AM   
michaelbaldur


Posts: 3564
Joined: 4/6/2007
From: denmark
Status: offline
Stalin used alot of nationalities that he hated as cannon fodder ... like troops from the east and the Caucasus. he really hated the Georgians .

he also used troops from countries he had been at war with. Poland, Runamia, Bulgaria.

so I think that he would have used any kind of troops to save him self.

and another point. we really don´t know. if he have send a request for CW troops. but it was off course declined as CW was on the brink of defeat in 1941      


< Message edited by michaelbaldur -- 9/3/2011 5:19:34 AM >


_____________________________

Peyton manning is a God and the wif rulebook is my bible

I work hard, not smart.

beta tester and Mwif expert

(in reply to SewerStarFish)
Post #: 22
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 9/3/2011 8:35:01 AM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 1590
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
I don't think it would have ever happened.

The British had to threaten to stop sending aid convoys to Murmansk because their few personnel stationed in Murmansk were so mistreated by the Russians initially. This rose to the level of Churchill's attention even, though of course he was well-known for looking into seemingly minor details everywhere in the UK war effort, this really got him worked up for a time.

After the war, any Russian that had been 'contaminated' by contact with the West via being a prisoner or otherwise displaced by the Nazis (forced labor of non-military people), faced death or a grim future in Siberia if the NKVD discovered a person had such experiences.

Allowing Western troops to contact Soviet civilians would be too much of a risk for Stalin and the CCCP; they were desperate to conceal how much the population hated them before and early in the German attack.

(in reply to michaelbaldur)
Post #: 23
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 9/3/2011 1:28:01 PM   
Extraneous

 

Posts: 1521
Joined: 6/14/2008
Status: offline
Operation Barbarossa was launched on June 22, 1941.

Total Axis forces available for Barbarossa were therefore in the order of 3.9 million. On 22 June, the German Wehrmacht achieved a local superiority in its initial assault (98 German divisions), including 29 armoured and motorized divisions, some 90% of its mobile forces.

According to Mikhail Meltyukhov, by the start of war, the Red Army numbered altogether 5,774,211 troops: 4,605,321 in ground forces, 475,656 in air forces, 353,752 in the navy, 167,582 as border guards and 171,900 in internal troops of the NKVD (316.5 Divisions with 25,700 tanks and 18,700 aircraft).

The Red Army possessed 23,106 tanks, of which about 12,782 were in the five Western Military Districts (three of which directly faced the German invasion front). However, maintenance and readiness standards were very poor; ammunition and radios were in short supply, and many units lacked the trucks needed for resupply beyond their basic fuel and ammunition loads. The Red Army had also partly dispersed their tanks to infantry divisions for infantry support.

The German Wehrmacht had about 5,200 tanks overall, of which 3,350 were committed to the invasion. This yields a balance of immediately available tanks of about 4:1 in the Red Army's favor. The best Soviet tank, the T-34, was the most modern in the world, and the KV series the best armored. The most advanced Soviet tank models, however, the T-34 and KV-1, were not available in large numbers early in the war, and only accounted for 7.2% of the total Soviet tank force. But while these 1,861 modern tanks were technically superior to the 1,404 German medium Panzer III and IV tanks, the Soviets in 1941 still lacked the communications, training and experience to employ such weapons effectively.

The Red Army was dispersed and unprepared, and units were often separated and without transportation to concentrate prior to combat. Although the Red Army had numerous, well-designed artillery pieces, some of the guns had no ammunition. Artillery units often lacked transportation to move their guns. Tank units were rarely well-equipped, and also lacked training and logistical support. Maintenance standards were very poor. Units were sent into combat with no arrangements for refueling, ammunition resupply, or personnel replacement. Often, after a single engagement, units were destroyed or rendered ineffective. The army was in the midst of reorganizing the armor units into large tank corps, adding to the disorganization.

The number of aircraft was also heavily in the Soviets' favor. However, Soviet aircraft were largely obsolete, and Soviet artillery lacked modern fire control techniques. Most Soviet units were on a peacetime footing, explaining why aviation units had their aircraft parked in closely-bunched neat rows, rather than dispersed, making easy targets for the Luftwaffe in the first days of the conflict. Prior to the invasion the VVS (Voenno-Vozdushnye Sily, Soviet Air Force) was forbidden to shoot down Luftwaffe reconnaissance aircraft, despite hundreds of prewar incursions into Soviet airspace.

As a result, although on paper the Red Army in 1941 seemed at least the equal of the German army, the reality in the field was far different; incompetent officers, as well as partial lack of equipment, insufficient motorized logistical support, and poor training placed the Red Army at a severe disadvantage.

Opposing forces for Operation Barbarossa
Axis forces: 166 Divisions, 4,306,800 Personnel, 42,601 Guns and mortars, 4,171 Tanks (including assault guns), 4,389 Aircraft.
Soviet forces: 190 Divisions, 3,289,851 Personnel, 59,787 Guns and mortars, 15,687 Tanks (including assault guns), 11, 537 Aircraft.

Divisions 1.1 to 1 Soviet advantage
Personnel 1.3 to 1 Axis advantage
Guns and mortars 1.4 to 1 Soviet advantage
Tanks (including assault guns) 1.38 to 1 Soviet advantage
Aircraft Soviet 2.6 to 1 Soviet advantage

Operation Barbarossa was postponemed from its original date of May 15, 1941 due to the intervention against an anti-German coup in Yugoslavia and Greek advances against Italy's occupation of Albania. Couplle that with the late Russia spring of 1941, compounded by particularly rainy weather in June 1941 made a number of roads in western parts of the Soviet Union impassable to heavy vehicles. During the campaign, Hitler ordered the main thrust toward Moscow to be diverted southward to help the southern army group capture Ukraine. This move delayed the assault on the Soviet capital, though it also helped secure Army Group Center's southern flank. By the time they turned to Moscow, the Red Army's fierce resistance, the mud following the autumn rains and, eventually, snow, brought the advance to a halt.

The USA is not in the war and Britain is fighting in North Africa jusr whom would you ask for the troops?

Now couple that with the successful winter offensive using the Siberian units and Stalin’s distrust of USA and Britain due to the “Polar Bear War”.

No, Stalin would not have allowed USA or British units in USSR.




_____________________________

University of Science Music and Culture (USMC) class of 71 and 72 ~ Extraneous (AKA Mziln)

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 24
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 9/3/2011 2:24:39 PM   
Dr Deo

 

Posts: 23
Joined: 7/8/2011
From: Landet Brunsås
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur

Stalin used alot of nationalities that he hated as cannon fodder ... like troops from the east and the Caucasus. he really hated the Georgians .



Why would he hate the Georgians, given that he was Georgian himself? Russian wasn't even his mother tongue, Georgian was. Sure, he had plenty of enemies there after the Georgian Affair, but he had plenty of enemies everywhere...

(in reply to michaelbaldur)
Post #: 25
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 9/3/2011 2:51:57 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 16006
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dr Deo


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur

Stalin used alot of nationalities that he hated as cannon fodder ... like troops from the east and the Caucasus. he really hated the Georgians .



Why would he hate the Georgians, given that he was Georgian himself? Russian wasn't even his mother tongue, Georgian was. Sure, he had plenty of enemies there after the Georgian Affair, but he had plenty of enemies everywhere...

Warspite1

Why would he hate Georgians?

The fact that he was Georgian himself meant absolutely nothing; it was almost like he had to over-compensate for his lack of "Russianess" by exhibiting utter ruthlessness in dealing with enemies of Russia; and that included his own people.

Remember this was the man that had some of his family, some of his closest friends and acquantances murdered for his own purposes (how many of those were Georgians?). He oversaw the mass starvation of Ukrainians, and the forceable deportation of Tartar's, Chechyns et al. He had ex-prisoners of war, many who had fought bravely for the Soviet Union, executed upon their return to the Soviet Union. Trying to understand this man or rationalising his actions is a far from a straightforward process......

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty - Horatio Nelson 1805.




(in reply to Dr Deo)
Post #: 26
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 9/3/2011 4:28:52 PM   
Dr Deo

 

Posts: 23
Joined: 7/8/2011
From: Landet Brunsås
Status: offline
Of course he hated Georgians, but I'm not sure he hated THE Georgians, implying all Georgians. I'm sure he feared anyone against his power position and in his paranoia that turned into hatred of Georgians and many other people, but I'm not so sure he hated any particular ethnicity (other than Jews, the victims of everyone's hatred)...

Anyway, why am I rambling about this, I'm gonna look at my Japanese build strategy instead...

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 27
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 9/3/2011 4:52:49 PM   
brian brian

 

Posts: 1590
Joined: 11/16/2005
Status: offline
I think Georgia was the last part of the Caucasus conquered by the Tsarist empire, and had to be re-conquered all over again by the Red Army in 1920. I just finished a large history of Russia from Novgorod/Kiev days to the rise of Breznhev; it mentions the struggle in Georgia by the Red Army as being 'particularly bitter'. Stalin's personal motivations on anything are sometimes mystifying; I now seek to find a good biography of the man.


Also, the British deployed 3 Hurricane squadrons in Murmansk to protect war supplies which were constantly over-stockpiled by the inefficient Soviet dock & transportation systems there. When convoys would resume after a summer break, there would still be material sitting in Murmansk from 4~6 months prior deliveries; Archangel had much better through-put. The RAF was only in Murmansk for 3 months.


A prime result of lend-lease was increasing the Red Army's off-road mobility with American vehicles such as Jeeps and Trucks, allowing the Russians to keep AT assets so close to the advancing front that finally by 1944 the Germans couldn't simply counter-attack any successful Russian infantry advance with their own tanks. I also read an interesting comment on that mobility as it allowed Russian artillery to become increasingly dominant: "as infantry forces became less available..."

(in reply to Dr Deo)
Post #: 28
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 9/3/2011 4:56:42 PM   
Orm


Posts: 5465
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dr Deo

Of course he hated Georgians, but I'm not sure he hated THE Georgians, implying all Georgians. I'm sure he feared anyone against his power position and in his paranoia that turned into hatred of Georgians and many other people, but I'm not so sure he hated any particular ethnicity (other than Jews, the victims of everyone's hatred)...

Anyway, why am I rambling about this, I'm gonna look at my Japanese build strategy instead...

Feel free to post that strategy in the Japanese AI thread. I am sure that it will be appreciated.

_____________________________

"You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment."

(in reply to Dr Deo)
Post #: 29
RE: Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units... - 9/3/2011 4:59:50 PM   
Orm


Posts: 5465
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

I think Georgia was the last part of the Caucasus conquered by the Tsarist empire, and had to be re-conquered all over again by the Red Army in 1920. I just finished a large history of Russia from Novgorod/Kiev days to the rise of Breznhev; it mentions the struggle in Georgia by the Red Army as being 'particularly bitter'. Stalin's personal motivations on anything are sometimes mystifying; I now seek to find a good biography of the man.


That history of Russia sounds interesting. Can you recommend it and if so what is the titel and author?

_____________________________

"You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment."

(in reply to brian brian)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> Any evidence Stalin would have allowed UK/USA units in USSR? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.115