75th anniversary of Dresden bombing....

The Soviets made indisputably the biggest national contribution to winning the war.

We were fortunate to be on the same side (up to that point)

.



You may choose to differ.
I do indeed Differ


If you mean death toll, Even China is close with over 20 million dead. And many of those soviet dead were due to shitty generalship from Stalin on down. Hell even during the battle of Berlin soviet generals killed other units men to make bigger gains

UK fought the Nazis for 68 months, USSR for 48 so UK beats the USSR who as we all know were a Nazi ally until June 41 while the UK fought Hitler.

Then there are the Western factory managers (UK & US) sent to the Urals to streamline soviet production

Then Lend lease (US and UK) which armed, clothed, and fed both Military and Civpop
UK
USSR
Free France (15 Divisions worth, 11 from Casablanca agreement on)
Free Poles
Nationalist China
Brazil
Australia
Canada
Italy (as Co-Belligerent from 43 on )
Netherlands
Bolivia
Chile
Colombia
Cuba
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
El Salvador
Guatemala
Haiti
Honduras
Mexico
Nicaragua
Paraguay
Peru
Uruguay
Venezuela

I dont recall the sov's sending a single shipment of tanks to the western allies

EDIT poor craven50 still upset for QRK2
 
Last edited:

giatttt

Swinger
500 lost in a single raid? 50 in a single week would have stopped our recent adventures. We view things through a very different lens.
 

Wordsmith

LE
Book Reviewer
...the value of RDF/radar wasn't fully grasped by the wider Air Staff at the time, hence their belief in a Trenchardian approach - you couldn't stop German bombers getting through, so hit the Germans hard in Germany....

What Inskip realised (and Dowding knew) was that RDF was a game changer, along with the IADS in which it sat and the Spitfire and Hurricane. And you could build more of these than you could the sorts of bombers which were clearly required in a future war - the Blenheim, Hampden, Wellington and Whitely were, in effect, interim types, a stepping stone to the Stirling, Manchester and Halifax for the war which was likely to break out in 1940/41. Unfortunately...
Interesting discussion - thanks.

The first thing was that the RAF didn't do operational research pre-WW2. Or it would have found that the casualty figures from the German WW1 bombing of the UK were greatly exaggerated. They looked at the bombs that did hit London and ignored the ones (most) that hit open countryside. They also failed to account for the lack or air raid shelters and warnings, which also increased the casualty rate. Which gave an over exaggerated view of the effects of bombing.

They didn't take into account the rapidly changing technology either. A Gloster Gladiator (the last biplane fighter) would have struggled against any monoplane bomber - lack of armament and speed. But a simple comparison of (say) a flight of Hurricanes attacking a flight of Hampdens from astern and below, would have shown the problems the bombers would have faced. The Hurricanes had about a 75 mph speed advantage and 24 machine guns v 3.

Add in the lack of realistic testing of planes and equipment pre-war and you have another factor. The lack of testing of bombs I've previously mentioned. But Bomber Command didn't do the obvious - such as instruct a single flight of aircraft to fly aircraft to their limits and see what happened. So Bomber command found out a lot of it's kit needed urgent modification only after the shooting started.

We can obviously view the situation with 20/20 hindsight - and it's easy to be an armchair general. And I fully acknowledge the immense difficulties the RAF was struggling under in the last year of peace as it frantically struggled to expand as fast as possible. But I can't help but think there was a lack of critical thinking in the highest levels of the RAF in the run up to war.

Wordsmith
 
500 lost in a single raid? 50 in a single week would have stopped our recent adventures. We view things through a very different lens.
were it only true that we still understood the number of available airframes and trained crew that represented decisive air power...
 
The Soviets made indisputably the biggest national contribution to winning the war.

We were fortunate to be on the same side
(up to that point)

Our own most significant contribution was not inconsiderable: but it cannot be measured in terms of forces committed, or casualties sustained, much less by decisive victories over German forces attained by British forces fighting without the support of allies.

It was simply that we did not give in in 1940.

The civilised world should thank us for that alone.

We, on the other hand, should not kid ourselves about our position in the alliance that destroyed Hitler, nor seek to gloss over the manifest ineptitude that prevailed in our interwar military, much less cling to absurd myths about the natural martial superiority of this island race.

You may choose to differ.
Exactly the other way round, because of your point about Britain's continuation of the fight in 1940.

Without that, the USSR was doomed. No doubt about it.
 
I do indeed Differ


If you mean death toll, Even China is close with over 20 million dead. And many of those soviet dead were due to shitty generalship from Stalin on down. Hell even during the battle of Berlin soviet generals killed other units men to make bigger gains

UK fought the Nazis for 68 months, USSR for 48 so UK beats the USSR who as we all know were a Nazi ally until June 41 while the UK fought Hitler.

Then there are the Western factory managers (UK & US) sent to the Urals to streamline soviet production

Then Lend lease (US and UK) which armed, clothed, and fed both Military and Civpop
UK
USSR
Free France (15 Divisions worth, 11 from Casablanca agreement on)
Free Poles
Nationalist China
Brazil
Australia
Canada
Italy (as Co-Belligerent from 43 on )
Netherlands
Bolivia
Chile
Colombia
Cuba
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
El Salvador
Guatemala
Haiti
Honduras
Mexico
Nicaragua
Paraguay
Peru
Uruguay
Venezuela

I dont recall the sov's sending a single shipment of tanks to the western allies

Alanbrooke states that the Western allies never received a Soviet ORBAT, nor technical drawings for decisive weapons such as katyusha, IL-2 or T34.
 
Alanbrooke states that the Western allies never received a Soviet ORBAT, nor technical drawings for decisive weapons such as katyusha, IL-2 or T34.
I believe that the Sturmovik was not a decisive weapon, but its production numbers of over 30,000 gave it the "quantity has a quality all of its own", as comrade Jughashvili said.
 
I believe that the Sturmovik was not a decisive weapon, but its production numbers of over 30,000 gave it the "quantity has a quality all of its own", as comrade Jughashvili said.

"It is as necessary to the Red Army as air and bread..." said Stalin, echoing my personal views on Webster's Bitter in the NAAFIs of Cold War British Army barracks.
 

craven50

Old-Salt
Snowflakes out in force then? Can't wait till August. Wars bloody war for christ sake.
I prefer more dead enemies than allies. The yanks thought so too, thankfully.
 
Alanbrooke states that the Western allies never received a Soviet ORBAT, nor technical drawings for decisive weapons such as katyusha, IL-2 or T34.
With a great deal of prodding, the Russians eventually gave a T-34 and a KV-1 to the Allies for analysis and true to form, rubbished the results of the investigation. It can be found on the net. Worth a read.
 
I had a tour of the best surviving air raid shelter in Berlin in 2017 and the guide pointed out that only German citizens were allowed inside, when the siren went off, so if you were, in his words, "a foreign forced labourer or a concentration camp worker on a work detail" in the city (any city), you were left outside and had to fend for yourself. Any foreign worker or camp slave who dared to enter a shelter would be immediately thrown out. I'd wonder how many of Dresden's 25,000 dead were foreign workers or camp slaves.
Bugger. I served in Berlin 1979 - 80 and was completely unaware of this shelter's existence.
 
..........Beacause it was packed with refugees from the east, fleeing from the Russians who were advancing at a rapid rate. If there were no refugees, the city would have not been any different from Koln or Hamburg, all were legitimate targets, the difference was the fleeing non combatants......allegedly.
[/QUOTE

Those 'refugees from the east' would have been German, I assume?
 
500 lost in a single raid? 50 in a single week would have stopped our recent adventures. We view things through a very different lens.
I watched an old film called millions like us recently which was a propaganda film made during the war and apparently you can get over the death of a loved one by having a good old sing along.
 
I do indeed Differ


If you mean death toll, Even China is close with over 20 million dead. And many of those soviet dead were due to shitty generalship from Stalin on down. Hell even during the battle of Berlin soviet generals killed other units men to make bigger gains

UK fought the Nazis for 68 months, USSR for 48 so UK beats the USSR who as we all know were a Nazi ally until June 41 while the UK fought Hitler.

Then there are the Western factory managers (UK & US) sent to the Urals to streamline soviet production

Then Lend lease (US and UK) which armed, clothed, and fed both Military and Civpop
UK
USSR
Free France (15 Divisions worth, 11 from Casablanca agreement on)
Free Poles
Nationalist China
Brazil
Australia
Canada
Italy (as Co-Belligerent from 43 on )
Netherlands
Bolivia
Chile
Colombia
Cuba
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
El Salvador
Guatemala
Haiti
Honduras
Mexico
Nicaragua
Paraguay
Peru
Uruguay
Venezuela

I dont recall the sov's sending a single shipment of tanks to the western allies
Differ away, mate. Differ away.
 
And vice-versa.

Symbiosis.

No, not really. The Hun didn't beat the UK because 1. Channel
2. Navy
3. RAF


None of those were between Berlin and Moscow.

We saved them, by limiting the land forces available to Hitler. It was very close in 1941.

Having said that, in the event of Axix control from the French West Coast to the East Coast of Japan, which a negotiated peace in 1940 can be reasonably held to guarantee, the British experiment (and the American) with democracy would likely have come to an end by, what, mid 50s?
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top