Newsgroup: it.cultura.storia.militare
Titolo: Great Patriotic War - the main front of World War II

Interessante articolo sul quale fosse il "main front" nella WWII, articolo
scritto dal commentatore militare della Novosti il quale mette a confronto
i numeri delle forze che si sono scontrate a ovest con quelle presenti a
est.
Sergio
Great Patriotic War - the main front of World War II 
13:31 | 08/ 05/ 2008 
 
 
MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti military commentator Ilya Kramnik) - The approaching
Victory Day always evokes disputes about the bloodiest war in human
history. One of the main issues is the sides' relative contribution to
victory, primarily, in the European theatre, which all parties have
acknowledged as the main battle ground of WWII. 
These disputes are fierce because they are politicized - relations between
the Allies deteriorated soon after the war, which explains their different
views on its events. As a result, almost four years of fighting on the
Soviet-German front, or the Great Patriotic War - from June 22, 1941 to
May 9, 1945 - have been assessed very differently. Soviet experts
certainly viewed this front as the most important of all, but their
Western colleagues regarded it as simply an important one. 
These disputes are even more emotional because of the unprecedented
cruelty, with which the Nazi troops treated POWs and civilians on the
occupied territories. The Nazis were consistently exterminating both
categories, and as a result the Soviet Union sustained unprecedented
losses. The war became a real struggle for survival, and the emotional
tensions still remain in the nation's mentality. 
But let's leave emotions aside, and analyze the importance of the
Soviet-German front without bias, using figures and the opinions of the
Allies' leaders. 
First of all, we should emphasize the enormous scale of fighting on this
front. For quite some time, it was not comparable to other battlefields.
In the Second Battle of El Alamein (October 23 - November 4, 1942), which
Western experts consider as important as the Battle of Stalingrad, a
220,000-strong Allied force was confronted by 116,000 Axis troops. The
losses of the former and the latter were 13,600 and 38,000 respectively. 
When the Soviet forces launched a counteroffensive on Stalingrad on
November 19, 1942, it had three fronts with more than 1.1 million troops.
The Axis troops were of almost a similar strength - the German Army Group
B, comprising two German, two Romanian, one Italian and one Hungarian
armies, had 1,011,000 officers and men. Soviet losses in the
counteroffensive were almost 486,000, including more than 150,000 dead.
All in all, during the Battle of Stalingrad from the summer of 1942 to
February 2, 1943, about 750,000 of Soviet troops were killed, wounded, or
missing. The Axis powers, which sustained an unprecedented defeat, lost
more than 850,000. More than 110,000 of them were taken prisoner. 
Another enormous battle unfolded on the Soviet-German front the following
summer - the Battle of the Kursk Bulge. Hoping to break Soviet defenses
and return the strategic initiative, the German army started Operation
Citadel, involving more than 800,000 people. The number of Soviet troops
reached 1.3 million. The aggregate Soviet losses during the battle's
defensive and offensive stages reached 600,000, including 180,000 killed
in action. Germans lost about half a million officers and men. 
The Allied landing on Sicily, conducted at the same time, involved about
160,000 people, while the confronting Axis troops had 300,000 Italian and
about 40,000 German officers and men. All in all, more than 24,000 Allied
men were killed, wounded, or missing while 29,000 Axis troops were killed
or wounded, and more than 140,000 were taken prisoner - the Italian army
began to surrender en masse. 
The ratio of the scale of battles was the same after the Allied landing in
Normandy in the summer of 1944. The Allies had about 200,000 officers and
men in Operation Cobra in July; the strength of the confronting German
troops was about the same. 
In the meantime, the Soviet Union launched Operation Bagration, a
strategic offensive in Belarus with more than 2.3 million officers and men
against a 800,000-strong German force. Total Soviet losses in this
operation were 765,000 officers and men, including 178,000 dead. Total
German losses were more than 400,000, including about 300,000 dead. 
The importance of a theatre of military operations is determined not only
by the strength of the troops involved and sustained losses, but also by
its impact on the course of the entire war. There is no doubt that the
Soviet-German front was the main theatre of WWII - it involved from 60% to
80% of Germany's ground forces, half of its air force, and at least a
third of its navy. Allied leaders repeatedly confirmed this fact
themselves. These two excerpts from the correspondence between the Soviet
and Allied leaders need no comment. 
"Received on February 23, 1943 
F. ROOSEVELT TO J.V. STALIN 
On behalf of the people of the United States I want to express to the Red
Army on its twenty fifth anniversary our profound admiration for its
magnificent achievements unsurpassed in all history. For many months in
spite of many tremendous losses in supplies, transportation and territory,
the Red Army denied victory to a most powerful enemy. It checked him at
Stalingrad, at Moscow, at Voronezh, in the Caucasus, and finally at the
immortal battle of Stalingrad the Red Army not only defeated the enemy but
launched the great offensive, which is still moving forward along the
whole front from the Baltic to the Black Sea... Such achievements can only
be accomplished by an army that has skilful leadership, sound
organization, adequate training and above all determination to defeat the
enemy no matter what the cost in self-sacrifice. At the same time I also
wish to pay tribute to the Russian people from whom the Red Army springs
and upon whom it is dependent for its men, women and supplies. They, too,
are giving their full efforts to the war and are making the supreme
sacrifice. The Red Army and the Russian people have surely started the
Hitler forces on the road to ultimate defeat and have earned the lasting
admiration of the people of the United States." 
"Received on February 23, 1945 
PERSONAL MESSAGE FOR MARSHAL STALIN FROM MR. CHURCHILL 
The Red Army celebrates its twenty-seventh anniversary amid triumphs which
have won the unstinted applause of their allies and have sealed the doom
of German militarism. Future generations will acknowledge their debt to
the Red Army as unreservedly as do we who have lived to witness these
proud achievements. I ask you, the great leader of a great army, to salute
them from me today, on the threshold of the final victory." 
Excerpts are quoted from the correspondence between the Chairman of the
Council of Ministers of the USSR and the Presidents of the U.S.A. and
Prime Ministers of Great Britain during the Great Patriotic War of
1941-1945, Moscow, Foreign Language Publishing House, 1957,volume one pgs.
305-306, volume two pgs. 57-58. 
-- 
questo articolo e` stato inviato via web dal servizio gratuito 
http://www.newsland.it/news
 segnala gli abusi ad 
ab...@newsland.it

 in action. Germans lost about half a million officers and men.
Possiamo quindi prendere questo dato di 600.000 perdite sovietiche, di cui
180.000 morti, come dato accettato per la "Campagna di Kursk"
(impropriamente qui definita "Battaglia") ?
Oppure in questo capoverso hai quotato un'inesattezza ?
Ciao
Marco

 180.000 morti, 
che č un pochino diverso dai 800mila morti di cui parlavi tu, vero?
Sergio


 whether the western Allies finally opened a second front or not.
CUT
Ma infatti certe affermazioni sul fatto che il fronte russo-tedesco
non fosse quello principale sono dettate in genere da malafede (e in
parte da ignoranza degli avvenimenti e delle forze in campo).
ciao e grazie del contributo.
Sergio

 che č un pochino diverso dai 800mila morti di cui parlavi tu, vero?
E' anche molto diverso dagli 80.000 morti che tu hai riferito da Overy per
la battaglia o le 250.000 perdite che hai riportato da Glantz per l'intera
campagna di Kursk.
Premesso, beninteso,  che io ho contestato i tuoi dati relativi alla
campagna di Kursk, portando siti che calcolavano l'uno 863.000 PERDITE,
l'altro 600.000 PERDITE (e sono stato massacrato per questo), ti chiedo
almeno di non travisarmi come al solito parlando di "morti", anziche di
"perdite".
Comunque la mia, per la cronaca, era una domanda innocente.
Ribadisco quindi la domanda (innocente): per la prossima discussione (Dio ce
ne scampi, ma non sempre lo fa) possiamo prendere per buono questo numero di
600.000 perdite, che tu stesso quoti sopra,  oppure stiamo sui 250.000 di
Glantz ?
E se e' buono il numero di 250.000 di Glantz, come puoi quotare un sito che
allegramente ne spara 350.000 in piu' ?
E come se io quotassi un sito in cui si scrive che gli USA nel Mar dei
Coralli hanno perso due portaerei  !
Uhmmm........non starai mica passando a Berlusconi ?
Ciao
Marco

 della Germania? A me sembra quasi un'ovvietà...
Lurki male, ma hai le tue buone ragioni,  perche' questa frecciata si
riferisce ad una nostra discussione nell'ambito del thread su
"it.cultura.militare" dal titolo "USA, molestie sessuali ad una soldatessa
su tre" (ovviamente il subject e' andato a parare su altri lidi e qualcuno
giustamente ci ha rimproverato di non averlo modificato).
La mia tesi NON era che il fronte orientale NON era stato decisivo per la
vittoria degli alleati.
La mia tesi era che questa vittoria dell'URSS non ci sarebbe stata senza gli
aiuti americani (o meglio "alleati") nell'ambito del programma "Lend &
Lease".
Tutto qui.
Ciao
Marco

 Lease".
una affermazione su cui un tizio qualunque (per te) come Glantz non si
trova molto d'accordo.
Ma tu, come e' noto, ne sai ovviamente piu' di Glantz . <g>

 allegramente ne spara 350.000 in piu' ?
e' evidente che continui a confondere la parola "losses" con killed .
Sergio

 della Germania? A me sembra quasi un'ovvietà...
non per tutti che sono cresciuti a base di libri come quello di Carrel








vero.








-- 


Charkov"
Totale 250.470 PERDITE mi pare, riferite a tutta la "Campagna di Kursk"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Ciao
Marco


Pag. 297 del libro di Glantz (che sto leggendo con gran gusto):
                                                                 PERSONNEL 
LOSSES
 
Killed or missing          Wounded                  Total
Kursk defensive (May-23 Jul 43)  :                             70,330 
107,517                    177,847
Orel offensive (12 Jul - 18 Aug 43) :                        112,529 
317,361                    429,890
Belgorod-Kharkov offensive (March- 23 Aug 43) :   71,611 
183,955                    255,566
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totali 
254,470                 608,833                     863,303
Quindi Glantz dà per queste tre operazioni un totale di perdite (Losses si
intende morti+feriti+dispersi) di 863.303.
254.470 "morti o dispersi", 863.303 "perdite". Questo dovrebbe dissipare i
malintesi.
Carlo "Jurassic Park"

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Continui a dimostrare di non comprendere eh?
Nella tabella del libro di Glantz per ogni singola campagna dell'Armata
Rossa i dati sono dati separatamente per i feriti e i morti. 
E io nel pezzo che tu hai riportato dandomi del magliaro ti ho riportato i
dati indicati nella colonna dei morti proprio per farti capire che tu
scrivendo di 800mila morti hai scritto una cosa senza senso.
ciao ciao
