Game News Company of Heroes 2 gets Metacritic bombed by upset Russians

[Trash]

We have more than one of those? Plus I enjoy how you equate history with cinema.

 

[markec]

One other thing is also the hoary old '10-100 Soviets killed for every Aryan' crap and that the Soviets has limitless supplies of men.

You know whats even more sillier how Russians think that they could have beaten Germans without help of the Allies.

 

[Burning Bridges]

One other thing is also the hoary old '10-100 Soviets killed for every Aryan' crap and that the Soviets has limitless supplies of men. Of course the Soviets took massive losses in 1941-42 but German casualties even during the 'happy time' were hardly tiny. 200,000 dead just by the end of 1941 which is about 3/5ths of the total casualties the Germans suffered against the Western Allies throughout the entire war. By then the Germans had occupied much of the populated areas of the Soviet Union and so from a pure manpower perspective, the Germans and their allies had not many fewer recruits to choose from than the Soviets.

Yes of course the Soviets employed human wave attacks, but that was partly due to the doctrine of the Soviet Army which emphasised a concentrated crushing of a sector of enemy and the pouring through en masse. It was also partly due to Stalin's often irrational timelines which forced commanders to dispense with finesse and just plow through. What is rarely mentioned is that although the initial attack may result in a lopsided casualty count against the Soviets, when they actually did breakthrough and force the Germans to rout, they often slaughtered them redressing the casualty ratio somewhat. Operation Bagration and the advance into Romania really show what the Soviets could do when their tactics work well, annihilating the Germans with few casualties.

We had a very interesting discussion of this some pages back. The Red Army must have undergone a long way from chaotic headless mass in '41 to very efficent fighting force some time in '43-'44.

The root of the problem in Stalin's system lies in his jealous and manipulative nature. During the war he was clever enough to use his best commanders, but reverted to a policy of mistrust. He perceived and preempted every potential threat to his power, every hint of foreign influence on his people. He did not like competitors in his own ranks. Which is sad, because there may have been some better people available (Kirov). But he was in a way very successful because he would always act before something could take place, by a policy of "shooting 99 innocents to catch one bad guy". Unlike Hitler, no one ever attempted a coup or assassination attempt on him.

Another example is of course Shukov: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgy_Zhukov

Zhukov established good relationships with the other commanders-in-chief, General of the Army Dwight David Eisenhower (US), Field Marshal Bernard Law Montgomery (UK) and Marshal Jean de Lattre de Tassigny (France). These four generals exchanged views about matters such as judging war criminals, rebuilding Germany, relationships between the Allies and defeating the Japanese Empire. Eisenhower seemed to be especially satisfied with, and respectful of, his relationship with Zhukov.

The Soviet-America relationship should have developed well if Eisenhower and Zhukov had continued to work together.

Shukov was denounced after the war, but later played a key role in the execution of Beria and may have done much good to the Soviet Union, during the war and after.

But even if his greatest talents were scheming, purging an manipulating, Stalin was not just a blundering fool politically. He succeeded in keeping the power until his death, win the war, turning the USSR into a superpower, and controlling more territory than any Russian or Soviet leader. Hitler should be pretty good authority on Stalin's qualities.

In July 1942, Hitler praised the efficiency of the Soviet military industry and Stalin:

Stalin, too, must command our unconditional respect. In his own way he is a hell of a fellow! (German: ein genialer Kerl) He knows his models, Genghiz Khan and the others, very well, and the scope of his industrial planning is exceeded only by our own Four Year Plan.

 

[Drakron]

I wonder if the Japs have to endure same shit as we do?

They just pretend it never happened.

Also you dont want to compare both, the US strategy at one point to the end of the war was "isolation, starvation" of Japanese strongholds in the Pacific by taking over a nearby island that was lesser defensed, build a airbase and cut it off, also Japanese battlefield medicine was not exactly comparable with US one so a lot of KIA would because they didnt survived the injuries as in the US they would.

And lets not go about pilot recovery, the US Navy gone to lengths to recover aircrews using their submarines for example as the IJN was apparently near totally inept at it to the point any down craft was automatic a loss unless on the rare chance it was rescued by the US or IJ navy.

 

[Burning Bridges]

I don't know what Hamster was trying to say. Comparisons between the USSR and Imperial Japan are really not very helpful. It's very hard for an outsider to understand what made Japanese tick. I thought "Letters from Iwo Jima" was a very good movie in showing a paradox, how a nation was torn between humanity, Bushido and fanatic sense of duty. Japan as a nation had simply not fully entered the 20th century and engaged in a irrational war, starting it even though they knew they would probably lose.

Germany and Japan were the main perpetrators in human deaths, followed by the USSR. Germany had extermination camps, mass executions, working POWs to death, human experiments. Japan killed tens of millions Chinese and Indonesians, treated prisoners wihout mercy, conducted human experiments (Unit 731).

I would rate Stalin's crimes somewhat differentiated. He "only" had millions shot and worked to death, torture, paranoia and suppression of his people, .. But no outright extermination camps, no outright extermination policy, no outright racism. Soviet ideology was perverted by Stalin, but in principle humanistic. He believed in the socialist international, tried to re-educate prisoners and enemy civilians. I even have information that in a certain sense German POWs got "preferred" treatment, were allowed to wear uniforms, enter ideologic re-education and write letters home.

 

[Burning Bridges]

I came across something else which I find interesting, contrary to common belief there were Russian formations fighting on the German side, especially after 1944. This means that the Germans had by then become flexible in the racial question. The units were however of little combat value, and politically unreliable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Liberation_Army

Irrespective of the political wrangling over Vlasov and the status of the ROA, the reality by mid-43 was several hundred thousand ex-Soviet volunteers were serving in the German forces, either as Hiwis or in Eastern volunteer units (referred to as Osteinheiten or landeseigene Verbände).

The ROA did not officially exist until autumn of 1944, after Heinrich Himmler persuaded a very reluctant Hitler to permit the formation of 10 Russian Liberation Army divisions.

 

[baturinsky]

Actually, Stalin was way less brutal than Lenin. Lenin's plan was world revolution, which means total war against all capitalist countries at once, with supposed help of that countries' proletariat. Which led to civil war + intervention + economical blockade and ~6 million killed and a lot of Russia's land lost. Stalin dialed it down to something really possible, restored somewhat relations with other countries, raised Russia's pop by few millions, returned some of lost territory and made Russia world's strongest economical power. And even if we attribute all capital punishment cases to Stalin, it was "just" 1 million. May be another million or half dead in all wars initiated by Russia combined.

But you are right about the fact that while USSR, Germany and Japan ware totalitarian, i.e. had governing ideology and were perfectly ok with kill anybody that oppose this ideology; the ideology itself were very different and that made a lot of difference.

 

[Hamster]

I don't know what Hamster was trying to say.

I was wondering if japanese have to deal with constant accusation of their army being a disorganised stupid horde as we do. Just seems unfair that they can have their "noble samurai" theme even with such losses, while we have to constantly defend performace of our army.

 

[Hamster]

I came across something else which I find interesting, contrary to common belief there were Russian formations fighting on the German side, especially after 1944.

For a total of 3 days:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Liberation_Army

The only active combat the Russian Liberation Army undertook against the Red Army was by the Oder on 11 April 1945, done largely at the insistence of Himmler as a test of the army's reliability. After three days, the outnumbered first division had to retreat.

 

[baturinsky]

I don't know what Hamster was trying to say.

I was wondering if japanese have to deal with constant accusation of their army being a disorganised stupid horde as we do.

They were accused of being so good soldiers, that only way for US to win was to go for civilians and infrastucture. Nearly all Japan cities was bombed into the ground so thoroughly, that atomic bombing was barely noticed.

 

[Hamster]

I don't know what Hamster was trying to say.

I was wondering if japanese have to deal with constant accusation of their army being a disorganised stupid horde as we do.

They were accused of being so good soldiers, that only way for US to win was to go for civilians and infrastucture.

Thats's the double standart that i am talking about.

 

[Stereotypical Villain]

KIND COMRADE STALIN NEVER DID WRONG ANYTHING IS TRUTH TOVARISH BECAUSE I LEARN FROM PEOPLE'S COLLAGE OF PEOPLE'S EDUCATION

HEIL STALIN

 

[Burning Bridges]

As I said I would leave Japan aside, it was very different, not totalitarian, but based on tradition, and a completely different way of thinking.

USSR was totalitarian

Totalitarianism (or totalitarian rule) is a term employed by some political scientists to describe a political system in which the state holds total authority over the society and seeks to control all aspects of public and private life whenever necessary.

Marxism is however very different from National Socialism in that it wanted to give prosperity to all nations. It was a 19th century idea that was superseded when Western capitalist societies provided much better to their workers than Real Socialism.

I was wondering if japanese have to deal with constant accusation of their army being a disorganised stupid horde as we do.

Not that I know. There is some form of myth surrounding Kamikaze and Banzai attacks later in the war, which were in itself not "stupid" but part of a national philosophy. I remember an interview in World at War in which a veteran says something like "The Japanese? Animals! But also the most unbelievable soldier you can imagine."

What do you mean with "constant accusations"? I see no scheme or propaganda, though many myths have survived and recounted. But it's hardly a lie to say that the Red Army was for a long time "very disorganised", and "often comitting very stupid tactis", more so than any other army at the time.

 

[baturinsky]

AAH! MY WORLDVIEW IS CHALLENGED! I MUST SCREAM SO I DON'T HEAR THE HERESY!

 

[Burning Bridges]

A lot of military myths come from the 50s and 60s. During that time Germany and Japan were already allies and depticion in films is somewhat too lenient.

Though I cannot remember films from that time which gave the Soviets a particular bad image during WW2. A lot of thit shit came up after Perestroika, and it is mostly true, just easy to misinterpret.

 

[communard]

Marxism is however very different from National Socialism in that it wanted to give prosperity to all nations. It was a 19th century idea that was superseded when Western capitalist societies provided much better to their workers than Real Socialism.

I'd argue that with the implementation of the NEP the USSR stopped being even nominally Marxist. But what do I know, I'm just a bitter old ultra-leftist.

 

[Burning Bridges]

Eh I dunno. Marxism was always a sort of sacred cow, until the very end. It was considered the supreme subject to study Das Kapital, and Marx was some sort of uber god-father, the man who had know everything in advance. The pantheon was Marx-Engels-Lenin (Stalin was quickly erased). But even the socialist must have been able to admit that Marx could not know everything that would be needed in the 20th century.

bitter old ultra-leftist.

Interesting.

 

[baturinsky]

Thats's the double standart that i am talking about.

Standard is actually same. "USA! USA! USA is the best! Nobody richer! Nobody stronger! Nobody happier! Savior of the World!" Every fact in world history is then bended to fit this Procrustean bed.
To make USA army looking better in WW2 it was necessary to "make" enemies "stronger" and allies "weaker". Bonus points for dissing ideological enemy (which USSR was and Japan was not)

 

[baturinsky]

The pantheon was Marx-Engels-Lenin (Stalin was quickly erased).

Which is especially funny because Engels barely did anything besides sponsoring (and probably fucking) Marx.

 

[Burning Bridges]

That's a bit gotesque, Russian friends. The Americans have always liked to glorify themselves (and others). But their films about the Vietnam are hardly "glorifying".

Imo americans films are 99% commerce, and 1% politics.

 

[communard]

Eh I dunno. Marxism was always a sort of sacred cow, until the very end. It was considered the supreme subject to study Das Kapital, and Marx was some sort of uber god-father, the man who had know everything in advance. The pantheon was Marx-Engels-Lenin (Stalin was quickly erased). But even the socialist must have been able to admit that Marx could not know everything that would be needed in the 20th century.

Oh I agree that orthodox interpretations of Marx became very silly very quickly as the 20th century progressed. Which is why the more interesting currents of modern communist thought tend to use the term Marxian instead of Marxist.

The pantheon was Marx-Engels-Lenin (Stalin was quickly erased).

Which is especially funny because Engels barely did anything besides sponsoring (and probably fucking) Marx.

Patently untrue. Except for the sponsoring part, not sure about the fucking.

 

[Burning Bridges]

The pantheon was Marx-Engels-Lenin (Stalin was quickly erased).

Which is especially funny because Engels barely did anything besides sponsoring (and probably fucking) Marx.

Yes Engels role is a bit funny. An industrialist giving money to an unemployed friend writing political fiction in London, because that friend is a do-nothing who cannot feed his family.

 

[Burning Bridges]

I think Engels collaborated on the Communist Manifesto. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto

 

[communard]

I think Engels collaborated on the Communist Manifesto. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto

He did much more than that. He co-wrote The Holy Family, acted as Marx hitman with Anti-Dühring and wrote The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State which is very interesting.

 

[Burning Bridges]

The name Dühring is completely new to me, thanks.