This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Red_Stinger
1
« on: August 30, 2011, 11:13:44 AM »
@neosdark
I didnt read the entire book, but I'm well aware of each point the author assert as a fact. The fact that he did take into account what was interesting for his theory and left behind other information is quite informative of his objectives.
The fact that, I repeat, EVERY specialist of the eastern front do not believe his theory is sufficiant by itself for me.
There is a lot a evidence that the Ice-Breaker is probably in fact just a provocating book written for money rather than for historical truth.
1) I repeat, at that time paradrop maneuvre were impossible to the red air force considering his state, and most paratroopers werent real soldiers, just civilians volunteers whom performed training in paradrop.
2) I'm not Stalin. Before going into an argument, please, please, be at least informed of the subject. Just study the eastern front sometime, and then you will understand a lot of things considering the Ice-Breaker theory.
3) I would be pleased if you could effectively provide some fact from real archive, supposing you have access to them, instead of providing some numbers from wikipédia and link it to the global strategical situation of the Red Army. Su-2 were shit, that's why the production stopped, nothing else. And considering the production capabilities of the USSR in 1942, 910 is a very, very small number, which prohibit one to assert statement based on it.
And if you really think that the Area 51 hides aliens, it's not surprising that you believe to Vladimir Rezun's theory, sorry.
2
« on: August 29, 2011, 10:45:45 AM »
1) It was also suspicious to Suvorov, apparently. But suspicion is rarely something you can rely on. 2) You seem pretty uninformed on that point. Stalin didnt wanted, at all cost, Hitler to attack, because he knew that the Red Army wasnt ready. Thats why german could fly over soviet territory, taking photos and preparing Barbarossa in every details without being annoyed. Stalin was just blind in that regard, despite every warning he didnt wanted to mobilise the army. By "reluctantly", I mean that he authorized the general staff to mobilise some unit, secretly, but that's it. 3) I repeat, 20000 tanks is a false number considering the capabilities of these tanks at the time. And again, I stated earlier that Stalin would have maybe attacked in 1944 (or 1943), so this deployment can be explained. But more than 15000 were unable to move, and some tanks were also stationned to the Far East. Finally, you get fewer operationnaly ready tanks than the germans at the time. 4) The Red Air Force couldnt perform even small scale paradropping in 1941. Stalin did wanted to have a paradrop operation during the annexation of Bessarabia, but the Romanians didnt resisted. You arent ignoring that paratroopers formation did fight mostly on the ground as regular formation, because of a lack of planes? And btw, gliders cant fly by themselves. 5) How Guards unit are related to what I said earlier, or to the topic?  6) You can bring to the table every "fun facts" you want, but it dont prove anything if not taken carefully, with verified information about the context/ the period. Dont take it personnaly.
3
« on: August 28, 2011, 08:42:25 PM »
@neosdark The communist doctrine heavily emphazised on the need to go to the offensive whenever you can; soviet forces were placed on the western border since the early 1930's to counter-attack an attack from the "capitalist devil". Even during the Cold War, there were a lot of soviet division in East Germany ready to attack the West within 3 hours of the declaration of war. The deployment you mentionned is due to the doctrine in use at that time in the Red Army. 1) I wasnt even aware of that fact  But again, that could be linked to the offensive doctrine at that time. 2) During April and May 1941, Stalin reluctantly authorized a partial mobilisation of some unit on the border. Your great-grandfather may have been in one of these particular unit. 3) Ahhh, the numbers! Always helpful! - Of the 20000 tanks you mentionned, 3/4 of them were simply unable to move/fire, due to a lack of mechanics and supply. Most of them were just destroyed at their garrison point. The Mechanised Corps were simply not able to fight a war. - 1 000 000 paratroopers; this one is pretty vicious: there was 1000000 men able to perform paradrop, not 1000000 able to fight like paratroopers. These were for the most part volunteers whom had a training related to paradrop, nothing more. And ANYWAY, Stalin didnt have enough planes to perform great scale paradroping. The few planes able to fly were used, well, for training. 4) I dont understand how its related to the topic.
4
« on: August 28, 2011, 11:33:02 AM »
I wont extend on details, but Vladimir Suvorov (V. Rezun is his real name) dont have any serious fact to assert that the Soviet Union was going to attack Germany at this point.
Every specialist of the German-Soviet war (Glantz, Erickson, Gorodetsky and even Muller) contradict the Ice-breaker theory.
Goebbels was the first to invent it, to justify the invasion of the Soviet Union.
Stalin didnt wanted any provocation, and everyone apart Stalin in the Stavka knew that the Heer could attack at any time.
Stalin would have attacked maybe in 1944. The theory of a 2nd invasion of Finland is false also, for the same reason than the Ice-Breaker. Plus, the public opinion wasnt favourable to an other attack on this small country, and the Party knew it.
5
« on: July 11, 2011, 06:48:40 PM »
Leopard 2 is too cumbersome, besides the lack of an auto-loading system and modern active protection. Abrams and Challenger are pretty fine considering passive/active armor protection. Best armored are the Merkava series and T-90 (the latter being difficult to detect moreover). Leclerc tanks are quite nice too considering firepower and protection. P.S: didnt participated to the discussion about Unthinkable, no time 
6
« on: July 01, 2011, 12:06:57 AM »
Well, german stickies are funny to use in N44; from a competitive point of view it would be kinda pointless, but I wouldn't be horrified to see this idea in Ostheer.
7
« on: July 01, 2011, 12:04:22 AM »
You're still a National Socialist, man. You still support that ideology by going to war and fighting for it.
Or you just dont have the choice, because you and your family are threatened. You aren't obliged to commit war crime though. Finland for instance. They were IIIR allies, but they weren't nazis at all. Enemy of my enemy is my ally.
Finland's non-belligerance is a myth. Finns executed a lot of people, and let much of their remaining prisonner (civil or soldier) starve to death. Moreover, their was a high number of finnish volunteers in the SS (more than its commonly accepted today, even in a liberal country like Finland). And even Finnish "ultimate" goals weren't too far from nazi ideology: razing St-Petersburg, and starve/deport all slavian population from the Greater Finland area. Still, it doesn't mean that every finn is a convinced nazi, but people who present Finland like an angel fighting against the evil commie (not you Cephalos! you are at least rather objective) make me laugh About topic , I think we should listen to LordRommel ^^ My opinion is that PE could represent SS, but also element of the Heer. But as Relic never really answered this question, we are going to debate this for a long time I suppose !
8
« on: June 30, 2011, 05:46:55 PM »
Pariah, not every member of the WM, and it's subdivisions are members of the Nazi part
Hmm, i'm no expert on that time period, but didn't everybody in the German military have to swear allegiance to Hitler? 
Probably, but that doesn't mean that they were real nazi!
9
« on: June 27, 2011, 06:56:41 PM »
Nice map, moreover a COD2 based map! Great work from what I see! 
10
« on: June 27, 2011, 06:55:05 PM »
haha ami tanks didnt survive, they just made more shermans than the germans made AT shells
the sad thing in my view is that the american intelligence knew there men wouldnt survive armor engagemants unless lucky and threw them at them anyway and tank crews were never told exactly how one sided the engagements were, they just said get close in and preferrable behind them 
the soviet tankers without radios and t34 had a better chance, much better
Well, I'm not flaming here, but you are clearly a soviet fanboy if you are stating that kind of things! Americans did improve their tanks when it was clear that Tigers and Panthers were invulnerable everything they had. Shermans were relatively quickly fitted with much better gun/armor before late 1944. 76mm version, M36, or the british firefly were more than able to knock out a Tiger (which was basically a 10cm armored box, no angled plate!), and to engage a panther. Amies and british tankers were fully aware of the threat that heavy german armor posed - but they managed to adapt. It's not like they were supposed to die right away. Allies never really applied consciously the "human/tank wave" tactic. The fact that soviet tankers were safer in their tank is discutable. Poor leadership (at least until 1944), poor radio communications... Not mentionning that by 1943, T-34 armor was paper under a distance of 500m for every german AT gun. P.S: just a few nitpicks I think that, if basic american tanks arent balanced, the entire game isnt balanced aswell! No, Americans will not be changed.
2 M10s DO beat a Panther. I am talking from FAR more experience than you.
+1
11
« on: June 25, 2011, 11:50:43 AM »
whos the tiger hunter, IS-3?
No, would be too easy Sound a fun game though! 
12
« on: June 22, 2011, 08:44:59 PM »
13
« on: June 19, 2011, 04:56:12 PM »
Was a good replay though.
Except dirty comment from players ! I never had to support that, but well it was long ago, players change I suppose - and behaviour too.
14
« on: June 18, 2011, 10:39:26 AM »
OMG! That's awesome! I wish I could contribute to your work, but well, I'm too late Great work, I detect talent there WartyX !!
|
Show Posts