Originally Posted by godofthunder9010

I can offer an excellent example -- Operation Mars. It was going on during the same time as the Battle of Stalingrad. It was the main Soviet opperation that year and it was a complete catastrophe, so they wrote it out of history. Nevermind 500,000 Soviet casualties (or the 40,000 German). It offically never happened, etc. I'll go dig up the link if you need one.

I can do that for you God (I was bored!).

http://www.battlefield.ru/library/ba...ttle12_04.html

This was written by David Glantz so I'm sure it's quite accurate.

Thanks.

ive read somewehre that zhukov, though stated as the marshal of soviet union: the best commander) he was really stupid in real life, all hes good at is pincer attacks that even a child could draw out:

his main advantage over germans is his desire to fight: he once told montegomerty that before an offensive he send a first wave of troops into the open with their own artillery pounding, thereby eliminating any mines around, then the offensive begins>

in berlin, he sent armor units into the city, which was owned by flak towers

Originally Posted by godofthunder9010

I can offer an excellent example -- Operation Mars. It was going on during the same time as the Battle of Stalingrad. It was the main Soviet opperation that year and it was a complete catastrophe, so they wrote it out of history. Nevermind 500,000 Soviet casualties (or the 40,000 German). It offically never happened, etc. I'll go dig up the link if you need one.

I appreciate your reply, however this was not the question asked. Question was about a Soviet source that misrepresent information. To talk about Soviet misrepresentation, a Soviet source in question should be analyzed. I will be happy to look at something and talk about it with you.

Since you touched up on operation "Mars" let me share my observations. I looked carefully at Mr. Glantz's essay. He says there was a Rzhev-Vyasma area strategic offensive in november-december 1942 - operations "Mars" as well as plans for big offensives afterwards.

Overall, it raised a lot of interesting questions which I hope to answer through primary sources.

Mr. Glantz also has interesting approach to what he calls operation "Jupiter". The way he used it, in my opinion, is not a strong case for trusting the reader with the information.

On the casuality figures:
For German casualties he quotes two sources:
1) Anton Detlev von Plato, Die Geschichte der 5. Panzerdivision 1938 bis 1945, (Regensburg: Walhalla u. Praetoria Verlg KG Geog Zwickenpflug, 197, 256.
2) Rolf O. G. Stoves, 1. Panzer-Division 1935-1945, (Bad Nauheim: Verlag Hans-Henning Podzun, 1961), 408

For soviet losses which you quote, he gives some examples from the archive, but overall 500,000 losses are uncredited. For me this is important as I try to study, not judge history. Assuming that he's in the ballpark, does not have a good historical precedent.

In Soviet losses he adds up kia,mia, wounded. In German losses - no data is given by Mr. Glantz.

Overall, a place to investigate and study, not a case closed or a display of unquestionable facts and figures.

After I finished writing I picked up another interesting detail:
This is an excerpt of an exserpt of David Glantz's translation of a Soviet document.

"Eliminate squads and platoons made up of "nationals" [ethnic non-Russians] by dividing them up among sub-units. For camouflage purposes, whitewash all guns and transporters.... "

Interesting choice of words. "Eliminate" when the meaning is breakup. " "nationals" [ethnic non-russians]" when [non-russian] nationalities would be representative.

I found that document very interesting. Too bad he did not print it whole.

Originally Posted by 2ndShockarmy

ive read somewehre that zhukov, though stated as the marshal of soviet union: the best commander) he was really stupid in real life, all hes good at is pincer attacks that even a child could draw out:

his main advantage over germans is his desire to fight: he once told montegomerty that before an offensive he send a first wave of troops into the open with their own artillery pounding, thereby eliminating any mines around, then the offensive begins>

in berlin, he sent armor units into the city, which was owned by flak towers

I see that more went into the pincer arrows than drawing them. I read many directives and transcripts (minutes) of telephone conversations he had with other commanders.

I have a similar question about the tanks in Berlin, as AT weapons appear to have been advanced enough to disable them.

Mystery quotes are not a good source of information. I saw variations of this particular one in a number of publications. It did not correspond to wartime data on pentalty battalions, penalty regiments, or imprisoned men sent to the army.