Revisionist tendencies and Ambrose Sindrome

Non-naval discussions about the Second World War. Military leaders, campaigns, weapons, etc.
mkenny
Senior Member
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 2:58 am

Re: Revisionist tendencies and Ambrose Sindrome

Postby mkenny » Thu Feb 18, 2010 1:50 pm

boredatwork wrote:
2. I was lost after page 25 and the name calling started but as I understand it 5 pages have been spent arguing 2 points - Germany was outnumbered in the west & substantial numbers of German troops surrendered in a not wounded or dead condition.


I do not see anyone disputing Germany was outnumbered. It keeps being brought up and sources quoted to prove it but it is never been denied.
There may be posters who believe it is being denied but that is because they get too excited.
The number of POW's is another matter. The calculations were done and a total arrived at. There is some leeway in respect that the numbers for 1945 are not precisely known but an upper limit can be established.
The problem is that hugely inflated claim is being advanced as to the number of German casualties in the East.
The official German totals (i.e. their own wartime calculations)for 1939-44 have been posted and they are being denied.
It is claimed they numbered 10.8 million and that the wounded soldiers were all permanent losses.
That really is it.

User avatar
minoru genda
Member
Posts: 131
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 1:09 am

Re: Revisionist tendencies and Ambrose Sindrome

Postby minoru genda » Thu Feb 18, 2010 2:43 pm

mkenny wrote:I do not see anyone disputing Germany was outnumbered. It keeps being brought up and sources quoted to prove it but it is never been denied.

It has never been denied but it has been very difficult for you to admit it. Now that you agree that Germany was outnumbered, may I ask:
Do you think being outnumbered had anything to do with Germany losing the war?
Tora! Tora! Tora!

mkenny
Senior Member
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 2:58 am

Re: Revisionist tendencies and Ambrose Sindrome

Postby mkenny » Thu Feb 18, 2010 8:50 pm

minoru genda wrote:It has never been denied but it has been very difficult for you to admit it.


I never confirmed that grass is green either. I presumed there was no need to state the obvious.


minoru genda wrote:Now that you agree that Germany was outnumbered,


Words are important. The pre-amble now that you agree presumes a period (i.e.before now) when I did not 'agree' with the statement Germany was outnumbered. Do you have you quote where I articulated this absurd proposition?

minoru genda wrote:may I ask:
Do you think being outnumbered had anything to do with Germany losing the war?

It was a factor but there were many others. The appalling German equpment situation that allowed even Panzer Divisions needing some horse drawn transport indicates a much deeper problem with the planning for the war.
I most certainly do not subscribe to the juvenile ' if it was one-on-one Germany would have won mantra of the besotted fan boy.

User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica
Contact:

Re: Revisionist tendencies and Ambrose Sindrome

Postby Karl Heidenreich » Thu Feb 18, 2010 9:52 pm

mkenny:

I most certainly do not subscribe to the juvenile ' if it was one-on-one Germany would have won mantra of the besotted fan boy.


Mkenny, with all due respect to you and to all the members of this forum, when Byron Angel called for a halt in the insults and harsh treatment I promised to do so and, you can confirm that from the posts, I stopped using any adjectives or names on you. I know you don`t promised the same, but I think it is time for you to stop, also, that inconvinient behaivor. I think is fair?

On the other hand there are a couple of things that must be regarded:

1. Have you found the quote, the one that according to you was provocative, in which I state that "the Germans fought to the death"?

2. As every body in the forum knows my real name coincides exactly with my user name: Karl Heidenreich. I´m not hiding behind a fantasy name. My real and personnal e mail is karlfred@hotmail.com and my phone number in Trinidad is 001-868-310-4076. That`s to point out how honest I try to be. Can, at least, we know who you are? Your personnal e-mail? Don´t worry, there is no the slightest desire to communicate to you. Just to see who is who.

Warmest regards,
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill

User avatar
minoru genda
Member
Posts: 131
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 1:09 am

Re: Revisionist tendencies and Ambrose Sindrome

Postby minoru genda » Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:02 pm

mkenny, you have showed us that you have very good knowledge of WWII and I of course realize you know Germany was outnumbered, everybody knows that. But when others have pointed out this German numerical inferiority you have always dissmissed that claim as "excuses by German fan boys" and that irony of yours. It is that attitude that made me believe you had a hidden agenda or something. That's all.
BTW, I don't think I have ever said anything about Germany winning one-on-one, whatever that means.
Tora! Tora! Tora!

User avatar
minoru genda
Member
Posts: 131
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2008 1:09 am

Re: Revisionist tendencies and Ambrose Sindrome

Postby minoru genda » Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:10 pm

Karl Heidenreich wrote:1. Have you found the quote, the one that according to you was provocative, in which I state that "the Germans fought to the death"?

I think it was "VeenenbergR" the one who said that in another thread.
Tora! Tora! Tora!

Bgile
Senior Member
Posts: 3658
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Re: Revisionist tendencies and Ambrose Sindrome

Postby Bgile » Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:39 pm

I believe Karl said Germans soldiers were better than Allied soldiers man for man. Not his exact words, but I think he will confirm that.

mkenny
Senior Member
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 2:58 am

Re: Revisionist tendencies and Ambrose Sindrome

Postby mkenny » Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:42 pm

I am exactly what it says on the label. M. Kenny. I post on a number of Forums and never hide behind a screen name.
I believe anyone who posts their phone number on a forum should know better. Delete it for your own good.

VeenenbergR
Senior Member
Posts: 273
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 5:52 pm
Location: Vinkeveen

Re: Revisionist tendencies and Ambrose Sindrome

Postby VeenenbergR » Thu Feb 18, 2010 11:50 pm

mkenny: Ostheer losses (KIA, MIA, WIA) until 26 april 1945: 6,366,649. Seems quite logical to me if these contain the wounded at that date 26-4-1945 alone.

This does NOT strictly contradict to Glantz his number of 10,8 million IF:

- these are the WIA at 26 april 1945 (not counting the millions of wounded before that date which were wounded multiple times and ended then for a part as KIA);
- the heavy losses after 26 april 1945..........hundreds of thousands of extra KIA, WIA
- the 1 to 1,5 million which had to surrender to the Soviets in May 1945......Army Group Center in Tjecho Slovakia, Army group Kurland; Units still fighting in East Prussia and troops along the eastbank of the Elbe;
- the 1,2 million POW's out of 6+ million POW's of the Western Allies handed over to the Soviets after May 1945 (33% of those would be perished in starvation over the next years).

Note that out of 18 million men served in the German Army 3,3 million died on all the battlefields (about 2,5 million against the Soviets which lost about 9 million but a small part of them also against the German Allies: the Finns, Rumanians, Italians and Hungarians) and 12 to 13 million were taken prisoner. So only 2 million (the severely wounded?) escaped imprisonment or death.
Total number of KIA after captivity was 5,3 million. About 1/2 million of these died of stress and disseases during the war. About 1,5 died as POW.

Byron Angel

Re: Revisionist tendencies and Ambrose Sindrome

Postby Byron Angel » Fri Feb 19, 2010 12:20 am

Bgile wrote:I believe Karl said Germans soldiers were better than Allied soldiers man for man. Not his exact words, but I think he will confirm that.



..... That was T N Dupuy's tactical opinion: fractionally better than soldiers of the Western allies on average; about 4-5x better than typical Soviet soldiers of 1941, with the Soviets making rapid improvements to materially reduce the difference in tactical efficiency as the war progressed.

Byron

User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica
Contact:

Re: Revisionist tendencies and Ambrose Sindrome

Postby Karl Heidenreich » Fri Feb 19, 2010 12:45 am

Bgile:

I believe Karl said Germans soldiers were better than Allied soldiers man for man. Not his exact words, but I think he will confirm that.


Have you find the quote in which you said I made the affirmation that I regarded the British victory at the Falklands as a total victory on the other thread?
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill

User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica
Contact:

Re: Revisionist tendencies and Ambrose Sindrome

Postby Karl Heidenreich » Fri Feb 19, 2010 2:07 am

I found this pretty important in what regards last days´ discussions. I´m posting it for everybody´s information and not in order to re ignite any discussion:

From David Glantz´essay on the Soviet-German War 1941-1945: Myths and Realities: A Survey Essay

THE PARAMETERS OF THE SOVIET-GERMAN WAR

SCALE:
The scale of combat during the Soviet-German War was unprecedented in modern
warfare both in terms of the width of the operational front and the depth of military
operations (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. Scale of Operations*

The Combat Front:

§ Initial Barbarossa Front (total) – 1,720 miles (2,768 kilometers)
§ Initial Barbarossa front (main) – 820 miles (1,320 kilometers)
§ Maximum extent in 1942(total) – 1,900 miles (3,058 kilometers)
§ Maximum extent in 1942 (main) – 1,275 miles (2,052 kilometers)

The Depth of German Advance:

§ Barbarossa objectives (1941) – 1,050 miles (1,690 kilometers)
§ Maximum extent (1941) – 760 miles (1,223 kilometers)
§ Maximum extent (1942) – 1,075 miles (1,730 kilometers)

* These figures indicate length as the “crow flies.” Actual length was about half again as long
Hitler’s Barbarossa objectives were of gigantic proportion. Plan Barbarossa
required Wehrmacht forces advance roughly 1,050 miles (1,690 kilometers) to secure
objectives just short of the Ural Mountains, a depth equivalent in U.S. terms to the
distance from the east coast to Kansas City, Missouri. To do so, in June 1941 the
Wehrmacht deployed its forces for the attack against the Soviet Union along a 1,720-mile
(2,768-kilometer) front extending from the Barents Sea in the north to the Black Sea in the
south. In U.S. terms this was equivalent to the distance along its eastern coast from the
northern border of Maine to the southern tip of Florida. Initially, the Wehrmacht
concentrated its main thrusts in an 820-mile (1,320-kilometer) sector extending from the
Baltic Sea to the Black Sea, which was equivalent to the distance from New York City to
Jacksonville, Florida.

Even though the Wehrmacht’s 1939 and 1940 campaigns in Poland and Western
Europe in no way prepared it to cope with combat in the vast Eastern theater, German
forces still performed prodigious feats during the first two years of the war. During its
initial Barbarossa advance, for example, by early December 1941, Wehrmacht forces had
advanced to the gates of Leningrad, Moscow, and Rostov, a distance of 760 miles (1,223
kilometers), which was equivalent to the distance from New York City to Springfield,
Illinois. During Operation Blau [Blue], Hitler’s offensive in the summer and fall of 1942,

German forces reached the Stalingrad and Caucasus region by October, a total depth of
1,075 miles (1,730 kilometers) into the Soviet Union. This was equivalent to the distance
from the U.S. east coast to Topeka, Kansas. By this time, Germany’s entire eastern front
extended from the Barents Sea to the Caucasus Mountains, a distance of 1,900 miles
(3,058 kilometers), which was equivalent to the distance from the mouth of the St.
Lawrence River to the southern tip of Florida. At this time, the Germans and their Axis
allies occupied contiguous positions along a front extending 1,275 miles (2,052
kilometers) from the Gulf of Finland west of Leningrad to the Caucasus Mountains,
equivalent to the distance from Austin, Texas to the Canadian border.
At its greatest extent, the German advance in the Soviet Union (1,075 miles) was
over 3 times greater than its 1939 advance in Poland (300 miles) and over twice as deep as
its advance in the Low Countries and France during the 1940 campaign (500 miles). At
the same time, the Wehrmacht’s operational front in the East (1,900 miles) was over 6
times as large as its 1939 front in Poland (300 miles) and over 5 times larger than its 1940
front in the West (390 miles).


It follows:

SCOPE:
Throughout the entire period from 22 June 1941 through 6 June 1944, Germany
devoted its greatest strategic attention and the bulk of its military resources to action on
its Eastern Front. During this period, Hitler maintained a force of almost 4 million
German and other Axis troops in the East fighting against a Red Army force that rose in
strength from under 3 million men in June 1941 to over 6 million in the summer of 1944.
While over 80 percent of the Wehrmacht fought in the East during 1941 and 1942, over 60
percent continued to do so in 1943 and 1944 (see Figure 2).
Figure 2. Scope of Operations

--------------AXIS FORCES--------------------- RED ARMY FORCES

June 1941: ---------3,767,000------------------------ 2,680,000 (in theater)
------------------------3,117,000 (German)------------ 5,500,000 (overall)
-------------------------900,000 (in the west)

June 1942: ---------3,720,000 ------------------------5,313,000
------------------------2,690,000 (German)
--------------------------80 % in the East
July 1943: ----------3,933,000------------------------ 6,724,000
------------------------3,483,000 (German)
-------------------------63 % in the East
June 1944---------- 3,370,000------------------------ 6,425,000
------------------------2,520,000 (German)
-------------------------62 % in the East
Jan. 1945 -----------2,330,000------------------------ 6,532,000
------------------------2,230,000 (German)
-------------------------60 % in the East
April 1945 ----------1,960,000------------------------- 6,410,000

Total Mobilized --------------------------------------34,476,700

In January 1945 the Axis fielded over 2.3 million men, including 60 percent of the
Wehrmacht’s forces and the forces of virtually all of its remaining allies, against the Red
Army, which had a field-strength of 6.5 million soldiers. In the course of the ensuing
winter campaign, the Wehrmacht suffered 500,000 losses in the East against 325,000 in
the West. By April 1945, 1,960,000 German troops faced the 6.4 million Red Army
troops at the gates of Berlin, in Czechoslovakia, and in numerous isolated pockets to the
east, while 4 million Allied forces in western Germany faced under 1 million Wehrmacht
soldiers
. In May 1945 the Soviets accepted the surrender of almost 1.5 million German
soldiers, while almost 1 million more fortunate Germans soldiers surrendered to the
British and Americans, including many who fled west to escape the dreaded Red Army.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill

mkenny
Senior Member
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 2:58 am

Re: Revisionist tendencies and Ambrose Sindrome

Postby mkenny » Fri Feb 19, 2010 2:23 am

German Pow numbers in 1945 by nation holding them.

France 940,000
Great Britain 3,640,000
USA 3,100,000
USSR 3,060,000

Total 11,740,000

User avatar
Karl Heidenreich
Senior Member
Posts: 4808
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:19 pm
Location: San José, Costa Rica
Contact:

Re: Revisionist tendencies and Ambrose Sindrome

Postby Karl Heidenreich » Fri Feb 19, 2010 2:48 am

mkenny:

Thank you for remind us those numbers. By the way have you found, yet, the quote that everybody has been asking from you?

This aditional information is outside the scope of what we have been discussing but I think is worth mentioning, due to the relevant comparison of efforts, doctrines and sacrificies that the west and east allies had during the joint conflict against nazi Germany.

COST:
Although exact numbers can never be established, its Great Patriotic War with
Nazi Germany and the Japanese Empire cost the Soviet Union about 14.7 million military
dead, half again as many men as the United States fielded in the entire war effort and more
than 30 times the 375,000 dead the United States suffered in the war. Overall, the Red
Army, Navy, and NKVD suffered at least 29 million and perhaps as many as 35 million
military casualties
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
Sir Winston Churchill

Byron Angel

Re: Revisionist tendencies and Ambrose Sindrome

Postby Byron Angel » Fri Feb 19, 2010 3:44 am

mkenny wrote:German Pow numbers in 1945 by nation holding them.

France 940,000
Great Britain 3,640,000
USA 3,100,000
USSR 3,060,000

Total 11,740,000



..... Forgive me for asking, but what is the point of citing these figures, which almost certainly represent the prisoner of war situation after the official German surrender in May 1945? If you are offering it as proof somehow that few Germans fought to the death, I'd have to point out that over seven million Japanese military personnel technically became prisoners of war as a consequence of Japan's surrender in September 1945, yet the Japanese soldier had a well earned reputation for preferring death to surrender.


Return to “World War II”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest