Foxbat

Me=Moron, end of discussion. [ December 09, 2002, 11:50 AM: Message edited by: Foxbat ]

"Had the Erickson/Glantz way been the only one pursued during the last 15 years, I think we would have had a more distorted perception today than we had 15 years ago." I guess this is the quote that dimwitted old me had a problem with and that led me to uh.. unbelievable idiotic conclusions. [ December 09, 2002, 11:56 AM: Message edited by: Foxbat ]

Ok, I see that further on the TDI forum Zetterling essentially urges us to NOT read Glantz and that the idea that anything written from the soviet pov/material could be worthwhile should be tossed on the ashheap of history. He then tops that off by saying that: "Furthermore, the causes behind the eventual Soviet victory in WWII belittled by Dick [adverse climatic conditions, the sheer size of the USSR, overwhelming Soviet numbers, Hitler’s mistakes -foxbat] seem far more plausible than his own statements. Also, as far as I can see, what has come out of Soviet archives since 1990 supports the notion that the Red Army overwhelmed the Germans by numbers and not by skill" So the soviets sucked ass, gen winter won the war for the germans and Glantz and Erickson are a pro-soviet nasties who are damaging history writing! We've indeed come full-circle

I said it before, but we are again discussing Zetterling vs Glantz so I'll say it again. Having these massive tomes that can justifiably be regarded as more-or-less final accounts on the minutea of the fighting as seen from the opposite sides is great. No will someone please stand and make oone combined (and preferably readable) book on the basis of these accounts? Maybe Zaloga could be persuaded to do the Osprey booklet

While Glantz certainly isn't infallible a lot of the heat I've seen so far is nitpicking though eg: It's an "odd statement" mostly in the sense that the wording is a bit quaint, but there is no denying that it wasn't until 1939 that the "Blitzkrieg" found a practical application (yeah I know they didn't call it Blitzkrieg themselves which makes the passage a bit odd too). A big issue is then made about the fact that forward repair capability did exist even though the two statements are not mutually exclusive*. Conclusion so far is: If you want a 100% accurate rendition of Kursk from the german side steer clear of Glantz. * The post by Rich points out that "[..] the German system utilized long-term repair vehicles in the field as both a method of parts warehousing (similar to the "hanger queens" common in air forces) and to reduce the strain on the transportation system. [..] In essence that meant that in US practice all of the vehicles held for repair in a unit were usually repairable in under 48-hours, while in German practice "short-term" repair meant that it was repairable in under two weeks. As a result, American operational readiness for tanks was typically often over 90 percent, and sometimes as high as 95 percent, while German operational readiness typically appears to hover at around 60 percent." [ December 07, 2002, 06:19 AM: Message edited by: Foxbat ]

Every book should ccome with a "Reader Beware" about the author: For Glantz it should probably be 'author uses primarily soviet sources, german sources mainly used for illustration you are advised to by a book about the other side too. [Grog alert! author doesn't know a 8-8 from a 75L48 if it hit him in the face]" For Carrell "Author was head of a nazi propaganda department and published his books under an assumed identity... make of that what you will" etc

That's what it's for innit. To represent that while a certain vehicle might be rare in general terms, but that your unit happens to have half a dozen of them just waiting to be shot to pieces in the upcoming battle. Variety is the spice of life and such.. [ December 06, 2002, 08:26 PM: Message edited by: Foxbat ]

"My just war - The memoir of a Jewish Red Army Soldier in World War II" by Gabriel Temkin. From Polish refugee, through labour battalions, a german internment camp, a soviet internment camp into infantry and ultimatly the reconiassance detachment. A completely differnt view of the war. "Commanding the Red Army's Shermans" The memoirs of Hero of the Soviet Union Dmitriy Loza. Tank stuff obviously, a collection of short stories placed in chronological order to form a more-or-less continues story as Loza and his tankers fought from russia, through eastern europe and finally into Manchuria. Great stuff, and one of the few first-hand accounts of soviet use of lend-lease equipment.

Do you have any idea how many historians who have accidentely written something "prohibited" have been thrown in jail? A thousand? Six million? And more importantly, how many came out alive?

Sure I'm getting all worked up only because a historian wrote some book that tries to minimize the Holocaust, deflect critisism away from the germans towards the evil russkies. That said historian also picks an actively revisionistic publisher to publish his book and helps the publisher out by writing an article for a book that 1) "debunks" the Holocaust 2) tells us that at least the concentrion camp voctims didn't have to suffer to the same extent as the german population did and 3) has "KRAFT DURCH GAS" on it's front cover is even less to get "bent out of shape". If I should get angry it should be with the evil german governement that censors offensive neo-nazistic holocaust denial literature!

Yep this is fairly typical for germans (or Jerries as they call themselves), they shift from service to service always have the newest euipment (often even newer than that) and talk like they are 20 years old because the horrors of war have taught them to live life to the fullest and "live like a young man until ya drop dead".

"Herr Hoffmann, beyond the grave" The manuscript of a lecture Hoffmann was supposed to give on in NY, it discusses not only Stalin's intended reign of terror but it "also gives the mostly unaware american historians an introduction in the measures the german federal governement takes against historians who do not bend to the leftist mind-control that is currently ruling germany."* Enjoy! *"sondern ist zudem für die zumeist ahnungslosen amerikanischen Historiker eine Einführung in die bundesdeutschen Repressalien gegen Historiker, die sich dem in Deutschland herrschenden linken Gesinnungsterror nicht zu beugen bereit sind."

He then went from self-propelled artillery to King Tigers with "night-vision gizmos" uh-huh "less then three minutes my tank and the other knocked out 28 Soviet T-34s only because we had those blessed night sight gizmos" uh-huh. And "At Kamenz, before I had been sent to pick up the new tanks, I had scrounged up a set of Infantry uniforms. This I did in the hope that I would have time to change into grays. This saved my life, because the Russians hated German tankers with a purple passion. I, personally, know of no Panzer man who was taken prisoner by the Russians and returned home. Not a single one." Sounds like you're avergage 80 year old german vet to me.

The article also shows why he got into trouble with the geramn law, he claims that the figure of 6 million jewish dead was a figment of Ehrenburg's imagination.

Doesn't it worry you that his book is crammed between "Holocaust, the lie" and "Holocaust, it never happened"? Here is an article Hoffmann wrote for Castle Hill/VHO.org (the publishers of his book in england): Grundlagen zur Zeitgeschichte, Appendix 2 this article was published as part of a book that debunks the Holocaust -the cover of which is pictured above. From the book: "One tends to forget that the fate of the normal Germans, soldiers and civilians, was sometimes even worse than that of the hundreds of thousands of inmates in POW and concentration camps." [ December 06, 2002, 10:31 AM: Message edited by: Foxbat ]

Dr Hoffmann also worked on this book which was hit by german 'censorship', I like the Kraft durch Gas logo subtle yet revolting.. [ December 06, 2002, 10:00 AM: Message edited by: Foxbat ]

Because there are no censors in germany, nad there is no real censorship. It is merely illegal to deny the Holocaust. The censorship you talk about is nothing more than the self-righteous BS spread by neo-nazi's and revisionists to cover their odious works with the mantle of free speech.

That's pretty much Volkogonov's view -- at least for 1941. Of course, Volkogonov's book was written in the late '80s during the glasnost period but before many of the archives were open. Perhaps there are new documents available which shed light on the issue. </font>

It get's worse: That puts a rather interesting twist on the idea that Carrell is not alone in his praeventiv-claim :eek: Read the review @ Theses And Dissertations Press To clarify: Theses and Dissertatioons Press is a small publisher that publishes books debunking the Holocaust, Hoffmann's book was published by them :eek: :eek: and this is their official review :eek: :eek: :eek: [ December 06, 2002, 09:28 AM: Message edited by: Foxbat ]

Apparently they do, from a review of dr Hoffmann's book (emphasis mine): Sounds like a scary place to work for those interested in the past. No wonder Carell had to disguise his real identity and seek refuge abroad

Are you sure this relates to his work on the "pre-emptive" war? And not on his corroboration on a book that puts to question the manner and number of jews killed during the Holocaust (Herr Doktor Hoffmann isn't afraid to touch some rather controversial subjects apparently, he also wrote "Stalin's War of Extermination 1941-1945 : Planning, Realization and Documentation"). Disputing known (or assumed) facts about the Holocaust is touchy business as they are considered evident facts in a court session, and disputing them might get you into trouble with anti-Holocaust denial law. It would take another topic to discuss it properly, but it's fairly obvious that the praeventivkrieg is a bogus claim as no major soviet mechanized unit was capable of sufficent operational or strategic movement in 1941. [ December 06, 2002, 09:12 AM: Message edited by: Foxbat ]

They actually have a book on Bagration, who would've thunk it: East Front Drama 1944 (Rolf Hinze). Hard cover, 9"x6", 360 pages, 100 photographs, 50 maps. In June 1944, the Russian Army launched "Operation Bagration", the largest offensive in military history—eclipsing even D-Day in its enormity. In a matter of days, a hole hundreds of miles wide was torn in the German front and Army Group Center was destroyed, with more than 300,000 casualties— the most costly German defeat of WW2. East Front Drama is a meticulous examination of how the German forces on the Eastern Front, under the direction of Hitler’s favorite Field Marshall—Walter Model—recovered from this shattering defeat. Rolf Hinze is one of Germany’s leading military historians and has covered this little known topic in meticulous fashion with detailed unit movements, analysis of command decisions and superb maps.

I guess slapping three heavy regiments together and adding some (imho) minimal support was probably the most expedient way to create a number of superheavy units for the final push. Zaloga actually does mention earlier heavy brigades, that is he mentions that the formation of Tank Corps with one Brigade organized on a special 'heavy' TOE*. But he doesn't mention what happened to them in the summer reforms. * I presume replacing only the medium tanks with heavies, rather than all KV all the time.

FDR had his faults (and that's putting it mildly), but at least he did not set up death camps etc [i'd put a smiley here, but I don't think it's really appropriate] Agreed, except the Ambrose bit of course.. but at least everything about Ambrose just screams pro-american bias

Yes, that is EXACTLY the book I would like. One that has presents a view of history that is warped in such a way that it's content is acceptable to me while I unknowingly also take in the author's ideological viewpoints. I guess the issues of Signal itself are also great books for wargamers since they "focus strictly on the military aspects", just because the political issues are not at the surface doesn't mean they're not there.. Rezun has the same annoying habit, what's worse people tend to quote these anecdotes as factual occurences. I also don't think it is a good thing that bad books are readable and thus remain the main sources for people's incorrect ideas on the war So? As long as it ingrains itself as a credible option in it's readers it doesn't have to be the majority of the book. I guess Dr Hoffman researched the time-warp device the soviets would have used to get their forces battle-ready, equipped and in place before 1942-3. Yeah that's exactly what I'm saying.. apart from the disqualifying and participant in the war bit. Carell/Schmidt was the head of a nazi propaganda department. That's information I'd like to know when reading a book. In fact I like to know something about any author I read. Background tells me what biases the author is likely to have, so I can be aware of them in advance. But in this case it's a little worse than that. Carell was a ranking nazi and he has done his utmost to hide his real identity from us so as to get us to approach his works less critically.. that's propaganda 101 again. Of course there is no reason for these lies, the secrecy and the deception that's just a coincdence that happened while he was writing otherwise perfectly unbiased history books. btw: your selection is quite interesting Guderian, Manstein and Mellenthin all published memoirs that offer a very distorted picture of the war in the east. That sweep the real defeats under the table, focus on the local victories while intentionally ignoring the big picture and point away the blame for any failure away from themselves. I'm not sure about v Mellenthin but the others at least also use their memoirs to wash their hands of the blood of the innocents. [ December 05, 2002, 10:56 PM: Message edited by: Foxbat ]