looks like they deleted the tweet
1 Like
Beaver. Dam fixer.
Edit. I should have scrolled before posting. Apologies @Toast
1 Like
https://twitter.com/igorsushko/status/1666202247464902656?s=46&t=36_hOhW1ZvaQ9lM-D8Rbuw
https://twitter.com/igorsushko/status/1666281190482132992?s=46&t=36_hOhW1ZvaQ9lM-D8Rbuw
2 Likes
Indeed. Could also add that although by then there was no conceivable German victory in Europe, the Hollywood account of America saving Europe is refuted by Churchillâs correspondence with Stalin at the time - conveying Eisenhowerâs gratitude for Russia helping Americans avoid a second Dunkirk when they lost the initiative in Ardennes:
In 1948 the Russian Foreign Ministry published the letters exchanged between Churchill and Stalin before and during this January offensive.
After the Germans had launched their Ardennes Offensive, which had placed the Anglo-American troops in a âdifficult positionâ (the Russian publication said), and Britain was threatened with âa second Dunkirkâ, Churchill sent the following message to Stalin on January 6,1945:
The battle in the west is very heavy and, at any time, large decisions may be called for from the Supreme Command. You know yourself⌠how very anxious the position is when a very broad front has to be defended after temporary loss of the initiative. It is General Eisenhowerâs great desire and need to know in outline what you plan to do⌠[Can we] count on a major Russian offensive on the Vistula front, or elsewhere, during January?⌠I regard the matter as urgent.
On the next day Stalin replied that it was âvery important to make use of our superiority in artillery and aircraftâ, for which clear weather was essentialâand the weather prospects were badâbut âin view of the position of our allies on the Western Front, Headquarters of the [Soviet] Supreme Command has decided to complete the preparations at a forced pace and, disregarding the weather, to launch wide-scale offensive operations against the Germans all along the Central Front not later than the second half of January.â
On January 9, Churchill replied with overwhelming gratitude:
âI am most grateful to you for your thrilling message. I have sent it over to General Eisenhower for his eyes only. May all good fortune rest upon your noble venture. The news you give me will be a great encouragement to General Eisenhower because⌠German reinforcements will have to be splitâ
The Russian offensive was duly launched on the 12thâeven earlier than Stalin had promised: five days later, Churchill cabled to Stalin thanking him âfrom the bottom of his heartâ and congratulating him on âthe immense assault you have launched upon the Eastern Front.â
Later, in February, in an Order of the Day, Stalin claimed that the Russian offensive had undoubtedly saved the situation in the West: âThe first consequence of our winter offensive was to thwart the German winter offensive in the West, which aimed at the seizure of Belgium and Alsace, and enable the armies of our allies, in their turn, to launch an offensive against the Germans.â
Churchill, while quoting some of this correspondence, gives it rather less dramatic significance. He describes it, nevertheless, as âa good example of the speed at which business could be done at the summit of the alliance.â Also, âit was a fine deed of the Russians and their chief to hasten this vast offensive, no doubt at heavy cost in life. Eisenhower was very pleased indeed.â*
Above extract from BBC Moscow correspondentâs history Russia at War - 1941-45 - Part 8 Chapter 1 âInto Germanyâ.
The book at that link is well worth studying for a more balanced view than Hollywoodâs.
5 Likes
I have no insight into Russia and its regime at all, but accept that the above makes sense.
But what struck me about this apparent truth is the similarity with democratically elected governments that often (always?) rely on fear to govern. I could restate the above as -
identify an enemy to fuel perpetual wars which enable a level of fear governments use (need?) to be (re)elected.
We have longstanding conflicts with communists, Muslims, terrorists, a perpetual war on drugs. elections are won and lost on the fear of being overrun by refugees and asians, or being starved of energy by Arab states, and we go to war to protect that latter fear.
Whilst we can differentiate the Russian level of brutality with our own versions, maybe a lesson is that governments that derive power from fear are inherently corrupt whether elected or not.
2 Likes
Yougopnik is a leftist YouTuber from Eastern Europe, he makes some good content if a little amateurish.
There was nothing pertinent about the tweet, not sure why it was deleted. I posted it due to the ridiculous decorations on the weapon
1 Like
Thanks. Thatâs why I thought he looked interesting 
1 Like
Cheer up. It was much worse in earlier centuries. The rulers have much to be gloomy about and their gloomy ideas are the ruling ideas.
But what makes them so gloomy is the fact that people are less ruled by the ruling ideas than they used to be.
In fact a lot of the gloom you are expressing actually results from more and more people noticing that the world needs to change and is not changing fast enough. That is itself grounds for optimism but it gets expressed as though not changing fast enough means it is going backwards or at least stagnant and there is nothing one can do.
Spread the message that people are noticing how backward things are and how intolerable it is for them to remain that way. It is the OPPOSITE message to things have always been like this and can only get worse.
Ukraine is winning. Fascism is losing. Cheer up!
4 Likes
His original theory of victory was day 4 of the SMO. It was all going to be over by then.
Thanks ArthurD! Very interesting. I did not know that and suppose most others did not either
1 Like
Hence the famous quote from Eric Blair:
âWe have always been at war with EastAsiaâ
And my own less famous quote: âThe Tories only have two policies: fear and greed.â The second policy is to attract those with avarice who would not respond to cowardice.
1 Like
As expected, the Stalin take is completely overblown and overhyped. The key German weakness leading into, and during, the Ardenne battle was sheer lack of fuel. They were in no position to transfer any meaningful forces from the East even without the Vistula offensive in mid January. German threats to the allied line were effectively contained by the new year, in large part because the Panzers were literally out of gas. It did take most of January to drive them back to the original starting line though.
But the Soviets certainly reacted quickly to the request , - of course Stalin was very mindful of getting to Berlin first - and theyâd already done more than their share from 1942 onwards. Overlord probably fails without the gigantic - and futile - investment of 3 million German troops in the East. Similarly, Stalin had been desperate for the invasion of France to commence to split off further German units from Army Group North and elsewhere. But once it did happen, he was immediately paranoid that German resistance in the West would collapse and deny him access to Berlin. He drove his commanders remorselessly to attack and take ground, even when ill advised , due to this paranoid panic.
But the die had probably been cast as early as 1942, and if not certainly following the outcome at Kursk in 1943. The tactical stalemate there was effectively a loss for the Germans strategically as their last genuinely strong Army Group of the war was blunted and negated. Interestingly, not a large distance from the current conflict in Ukraine. But weâve well and truly digressedâŚ
4 Likes
The detail that is often overlooked when historians pump up the Russian role in WW2 is the impact that American Lend Lease played.
But thatâs just a pesky detail to those who downplay the American impact.
4 Likes
The blokes (and blokettes?) that crewed those merchant navy convoys to Murmansk are some of craziest bravery of the war, imo.
But the sheer cost in lives suffered by the Soviet Union also cannot be underplayed. Often self inflicted, but real nonetheless.
2 Likes
Years ago, I read a book about the Murmansk Convoys called PQ-17, Convoy to Hell.
Truly awful conditions in peace time, let alone wartime with U-Boats lurking everywhere.
1 Like
Thatâs what the journos who originally repeated the prevailing âintelligenceâ analysis that Kyiv would fall within a few days keep on pretending was Russiaâs view rather than theirs.
Actually the captured Russian documents indicated that they hoped to be engaged in âstabilizing operationsâ after only 10 days - based on hope that they would have decapitated Ukrainian leadership in Kyiv and established a puppet administration.
I donât have a reference for the Russian doctrine on âstabilizing operationsâ but Afghanistan would be a good example of one that lasted many years and ended in defeat.
The The U.S. Army Stability Operations Field Manual: No. 3-07 lists Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq as examples. They were not short either.
They were expecting to capture the entire Donbas and south coast and be able to handle a guerilla war west of the Dnieper.
They did not even manage to remain within range to shell Kyiv but they certainly were NOT expecting it to be âall overâ in 3 days.
It was Western intelligence that expected a speedy Russian victory and now briefs journalists to ensure that gets attributed elsewhere.
What Russia was not expecting was the miserable performance they have in fact achieved - thanks to Ukraine defying Western predictions.
2 Likes
If Ukraine entirely rolled over tomorrow (good luck with that) he gets a smouldering wreck, a half-trillion dollar repair bill (to date, and the actual cost of running the war, and being screwed on trade with much of the world), and his new subjects hating his imperialist yoke.
Itâs no Crimea 2014.
Theories are hard!
5 Likes
Those first two parts of Prigozhin are REALLY important. Total 18â well worth it and looking forward to more!
He is seriously analysing, like Strelkov, not just ranting. Explains details of how they lost so far and the defeats that can be expected in near future (especially Bakhmut - which he just handed over to MoD to avoid blame)
But in a calm and serious manner he is insisting that the current military leadership must be shot and suggesting that Wagner should be put in charge of mobilizing and that there could be firing squads formed by angry soldiers within weeks unless that happens.
Either he gets disposed of or he gets put in charge.
Unlike Strelkov he does have a substantial armed force.
But I donât know âwhat FSB doingâ - they also have substantial forces.
2 Likes
âThe difference between theory and practice is that what is possible in theory is impractical in practiceâ
2 Likes