USA's New Afghan Strategy

hitlers best chance to invade britain was lost when he did not destroy the british at dunkirk.after this the germans did not have the potential to invade britain.

hitler saw major rival as USSR so the question of what you say is purely hypothetical.

tsushima was a brilliant naval battle won with superior admiral ship plus an over exhausted russian fleet
Agha Amin

Amin sahib,

Did the Jap navy cross the Russian navy's T in Tsushima or was it more like an ambush across the opening of the Strait?

Btw, you havent answered #173

Regards

PS: Thanks for your recent i-log on Tannenberg

bot only was it a naval war , the major battle was mukden in manchuria , a ground battle in which russians lost , but this was a time when russia was deeply internally divided.after all later zhukov defeated the japanese at khakin gol.

the russo japanese war was naval plus land .in navy tsushima and in land mukden and port arthur.
Agha Amin

Re: # 174

riaz haq

you are not suited to comment on everything.i suggest that you read more ,brush up your knowledge.u may be a specialist in some fields but military history is new to you.

read some liddell hart , glantz , fuller.

its far more complicated than winter.the russians fought and they had the stamina to fight . they cannot be compared wit any race in the world other than germans and japanese.


Agha Amin

Riaz,

The Russo-Japanese War was largely a naval war.

Regards

Re: # 170

Pavo: "Europe was saved thrice by Russia/USSR."

You're right. The key Russian weapon in each war was the Siberian winter. Russians kept retreating until the winter arrived, then struck back at the weary European enemies.

However, the picture was different in Asia. The embarrassing string of Russian defeats at the hands of much smaller Japanese forces increased Russian popular dissatisfaction with the inefficient and corrupt Tsarist government and proved a major cause of the Russian Revolution of 1905.


Riaz Haq, PakAlumni Worldwide

Amin sahib,

Thanks for 171. But tell me honestly:

1. Had Napoleon struck to the Tilsit Treaty and not bullied Russia into the Continental Decree would they have truned against France.

2. Had the Germans not invaded Russia in 1941, would USSR have intervened to save Britain

Regards

Amin sahib,

Europe was saved thrice by Russia/USSR.

That is correct, but it was involuntary. Russia did not intervene on her own but reacted after the leading imperialist power turned on her.

In 1812 when Napoleons major army was destroyed by Russians

Tsar Alex came to peace with Napoleon at Tilsit and they had agreed to mutually divide Europe and Asia among themselves. It was only 'cos France violated the terms and later invaded Russia that they came to the "rescue of Wetsern Europe"

In WW 1 vast bulk of fighting against Germany was done by Russia.

That is not true. The French too bled heavily in the war against Germany. Secondly, it wasn't as if Russia attacked Germany to save France. They joined the war to save their fellow Orthodox Slav ally, Serbia from annihilation at the hand of the Mitteleuropa.

In WW 2 again some 90 % of the fighting against Germans was done by USSR.Some 90 % of allied killed were Soviet citizens.

Sure. But it wasnt as if USSR joined the war to liberate the Western World. Surely, you have heard of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and the division of Eastern Europe with the Nazis. Plus, USSR continued to supply Germany with provisions on very lenient credit terms right upto June 1941. Had the Nazis not turned on USSR the Soviets would never have entered the war.

Regards

PS: It reminds me of Sardarji joke. A Sardarji was travelling on a ship. Another passenger fell off the ship and as everyone gathered at the side of the ship to see what was happening, the Sardarji jumped into the sea and rescued the drowning man. The crowd gave him a standing ovation. After acknowledging the ovation the Sardarji said "Now, which of you buggers pushed me off the ship"

Regards

The USSR had destroyed about 80% of the Wehrmant on the Eastern front and inflicted about 12.5 million Axis casualties and suffered horribly because of it (Glantz estimates a grim figure of 35 million Soviet dead including civillians)

http://www.strom.clemson.edu/publications/sg-war41-45.pdf
(Written by David Glantz, arguably the most educated Historian on the Eastern Front)

-Some of the most tytanic battles in the war occurred during the Eastern front. These are icluded, but not limited to Stalingrad, Dnieper Offensive, Leningrad, Kursk, Moscow, Belorussian offensive.

-Bagration was an amazing offensive that inflicted over 1 million casualties on the Wehrmant. It was Germany's biggest defeat of the war.



Battle of Moscow:

In June 1941 the German army had 3.8 million men, of which 3.3 million (!) were deployed against Russia. Of 21 panzer divisions, 19 were targeted for Russia and 2 were in North Africa. The Germans massed three field and three panzer armies [17 panzer, 14 motorized, 6 luftwaffe, and 42 infantry divisions] for the offensive on Moscow. They enjoyed an 1,5 : 1 superiority in manpower, 1,75 : 1 in tanks, and 2 : 1 in aircrafts.

Both German and Russian losses have been a subject of debate. David Glantz in his book "When Titans Clashed", gives Russian casualties at 658,279 for the defense phase alone, plus 370,955 for the winter counteroffensive until Jan 7 1942.

At Moscow the Russian army inflicted an unprecedented defeat on the German army and prevented Hitler from achieving the objectives of campaign in the east. Germany could no longer defeat Russia on the terms originally set by Hitler. Stalingrad deprived the Germans of strategic initiative and proved that Germany could not win the war on any terms. Kursk confirmed that Germany would indeed lose the war. After Kursk Germany could not even pretend to hold the strategic initiative and the Russian army remained on the offensive throughout the rest of the war. At Kursk the Russians proved capable of contending successfully with World's most accomplished army.

Alot of people dismiss this amazing victory because they say that the weather won the battle. This is completely untrue, as Robert Forczy points out:

"The entire issue of the impact of poor weather conditions upon the conduct of Operation Typhoon has been distorted by decades of disinformation from both sides and gross oversimplification. Operation Typhoon was fought over a large area - 500 km - from north to south - and weather conditions often varied considerably along the front. It is clear from both German and Soviet weather data that while the offensive was hindered by passing periods of poor weather, that the worst winter weather did not arrive until after Typhoon had culminated." ( Robert Forczyk - "Moscow 1941" p 90)

Stalingrad:

The battle of Stalingrad raged from August 1942 until the German surrender on 2 February 1943. Significantly, it was the first catastrophic defeat to befall the Wermacht Army who not only lost the battle but were severely humiliated. Indeed, the German Army never fully recovered from this blow to its morale. Over the course of the battle it involved approximately two million men, 2000 tanks, some 2600 guns and mortars and more than 2000 planes. Conversely, morale in the Red Army soared as a consequence of Stalingrad giving the Russians increased strength and confidence. This battle represented a turning point in the Second World War.

By successfully defending the city of Stalingrad the Soviet Union were able to deny Hitler his summer 1942 objective of paralysing the Soviet war effort by interrupting Russian oil supplies and seizing the Caucasus oil fields. This achievement was made possible through the stubborn and ferocious resistance of the Red Army within the confines of Stalingrad and the meticulously planned counteroffensive which led to the encirclement of the entire 6th army outside the city. In addition, compared with their German counterparts, the Red Army were mostly highly organized, they had superior lines of communication and were better equipped.

Soviet victory at Stalingrad significantly raised the morale of the war weary Russian people and increased patriotic feeling. Stalin, hailed a hero, regained his credibility and was appointed Marshal of the Soviet Union. Red Army Generals were rewarded with military decorations and their statues were erected in their native cities. Propaganda also received a boost as newsreels showed the long columns of German POWs. Stalin personally took credit for the victory and military defeats prior to Stalingrad were depicted as part of his pre-arranged plan.

Kursk:

The greatest tank battle in history occurred at Kursk. It began on July 5th, 1943 and it ended ignominiously eight days later. This was the last major offensive launched by the Germans on the Eastern Front. During the battle the last hope of a Nazi victory over the Soviet Union faded into oblivion and it has since been considered to be a turning point in the war. At Kursk the Red Army proved that it could defeat a German summer offensive -- something that even the victory at Stalingrad had failed to show. However, the context in which Kursk took place should also be kept in mind.

Before the German command felt ready (almost four months later), 200 of the new Panther tanks, 90 Elefant tank destroyers and a mass of the new Henschel Hs129 ground attack aircraft were made available for the battle as well as a host of Tiger Is, late model PzKpfw IVs and venerable Stukas. In total, the Germans assembled a force of some 2700 tanks and assault guns and 1800 aircraft; about 900,000 men were earmarked for the battle. It was the greatest concentration of German fighting power ever put together. Even so, Hitler expressed doubts about its adequacy.

The battlefield in Kursk was filled with many hundreds of burnt tanks and crashed aircraft, and so many dead soldiers. The difference was that while the Russians suffered heavy losses but could continue as planned and shift from defense to a large counter attack in a wide front, the German army in the East just lost the core of its remaining force.

After the battle of Kursk, the war in the eastern front was a long Russian advance, in which the Russian army returned to all the territory it lost to the Germans, conquered all of Eastern Europe, and reached all the way to Germany and to Berlin and won the war. The Germans could no longer attack or stop the Russian advance, and were just pushed back in a long retreat.


A WORD ON LEND LEASE

-Lend-Lease is TERRIBLY overexaggerated in significance. As Glantz wisely notes below, its effect was not the "life saviour of the USSR" but the thing that made them win faster:


Agha Amin

Re: # 168

mr majumdar

you dont seem to have complete knowledge of Russian/Soviet role in WW 2 or previous wars.

1-Europe was saved thrice by Russia/USSR.

2-In 1812 when Napoleons major army was destroyed by Russians.It is after this that the West Europeans were able to recoup.

2-In WW 1 when removal of two corps from German right wing in France and their despatch to Poland because of Russian threat saved France.

3-In WW 1 vast bulk of fighting against Germany was done by Russia.

4-In WW 2 again some 90 % of the fighting against Germans was done by USSR.Some 90 % of allied killed were Soviet citizens.

You need to brish up your knowledged of military history.

The contributions by Red Army ( and that included Muslims also) in WW 2 were enormous and overshadow any mickey mouse allie casualties.

PS-some 50 heroes of socviet unions were chechems etc in WW 2.
Agha Amin

Re: # 166

Oye roos ki qabar k mujawar:

Pak-Afghan warriors fought russi aggression together for 1 year and half before your amerikan yaars saw potential that this war could be won. Amrika or not we would have won this war any way. If your amrika is so high and mighty then why and how it has been reduced to a baboon jumping up and down now.

Masadi sahib,

There was nothing glorious about USSR's involvement in WW-II. They were actually allied with the Nazis and divided East Europe, espeically Poland with the Nazis. It was only after Germany invaded USSR, that they joined the Allies. USSR would have had no compunction in allowing Germany to conquer UK if the Germans cud have managed it.

Regards

Re: # 163

Masadi:

You are a complete joker.

1965:
China could not have entered Indo-Pak, the U.S. would have destroyed it at that time. Domino theory was almost at its peak. Bay of pigs was a bruise from the commies, the U.S. would have simply looked to get even. The battle would have fought in India-Pak theater, and not it Vietnam. Reading your history, and get over it.

1971:
The U.S. and China were reapproaching each other. Bangladesh was not big enough to mess that up. Nixon, not China played the bluff. Indira Gandhi called the bluff. Read Chou-En-Li and Kissinger papers on this.

Are you sure you do not have GI problems to call for others fa...?

Your fitur does not become a history or reality.

Moron truly, Zia's intentions were clear and they were unholy, in part they included whoring Islam and Muslims for the American cause, a cause that you a becoming part of. Do not try to claim ownership of a 'freedom struggle'which has nothing to do with the formula baazi that you term "islam'. You pervert your kind have perverted Islam according to its caricature drawn by the Orientalists, you are their illegitimate (the B word) child.

TNITC masadi

It doesn't matter what Zia's intentions were, but it was absolutely necessary to encounter Russians in Afghanistan and defeat them. If zia hadn't initiated it, the war would have been fought anyway by Pakistan and Muslims. Now Afganistan has become a first milestone in Muslim history where the Muslim quest for global sovereignity took its first steps. The colonial powers of past and present are spending billions and killing millions to suppress thsi freedom struggle.

Re: # 158
beduin32...
Democracy etc..., is meant for human society, not for muslas....you need some sense of discipline ( not exclusively for human...ants are very disciplined), responsibilty....a bunch of street dogs ( like pakis, afghans, somalis etc...) can not make a democracy....How much money US and USSR had spent in Pakistan and Afghanistan to humanise the bipeds residing in this region. Is it of any use? I don't think so....