Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > War and Military History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

War and Military History War and Military History Forum - Warfare, Tactics, and Military Technology over the centuries


View Poll Results: How vital was manpower to the Soviet war effort against Germany from '41-45?
10: Manpower was the absolute most vital factor that aided the USSR against Nazi Germany 10 34.48%
9 2 6.90%
8 6 20.69%
7 4 13.79%
6 4 13.79%
5 0 0%
4 1 3.45%
3 0 0%
2 0 0%
1: Manpower was the least vital factor that aided the USSR during their war against Germany 2 6.90%
Voters: 29. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old August 12th, 2015, 03:43 PM   #11
Scholar
 
Joined: Oct 2013
From: Jyväskylä, Finland
Posts: 563

Russians had interior lines of commumication and the "home field advantage"

It helps logistics atleast.

How well did Germany utilize Russian-built railroad instead of relying on trucks etc...
Late347 is offline  
Remove Ads
Old August 12th, 2015, 04:11 PM   #12

Yaroslav the Wise's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Apr 2015
From: Canada
Posts: 319

Considering that most Red Army soldiers were volunteers with absolutely no training, officers were generally incompetent in comparison to the German officers, and Stalin did not prepare for war, manpower was a very important factor.

Although the weather and the Germans' stretched supply lines were also important factors, in the end it comes down to the sheer size of the Red Army, and the fact that after the war started the Soviet Union moved the tank, artillery, and airplane factories East, away from German occupation.
Yaroslav the Wise is offline  
Old August 13th, 2015, 05:18 AM   #13

schmitt trigger's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Apr 2015
From: Texas
Posts: 327

Yes it was manpower, but also the ruthless employ of that manpower.

Manpower alone, as during WW1 with demoralized Tzarist troops and population, would not have turned the tide.

However under Stalinist rule, through fear, intimidation, propaganda and other techniques available to totalitarian states, both the civilian population endured the un-endurable (Leningrad the best example) and the army resisted surrender under the most appalling circumstances.
schmitt trigger is offline  
Old August 13th, 2015, 05:55 AM   #14

xander.XVII's Avatar
Alalai!
 
Joined: Nov 2009
From: Outer world
Posts: 3,825

Quote:
Originally Posted by Late347 View Post
Russians had interior lines of commumication and the "home field advantage"

It helps logistics atleast.

How well did Germany utilize Russian-built railroad instead of relying on trucks etc...
The gauge was different, hence Germans had to literally rebuild most lines and the same problems applied to Russian once they invaded Poland in 1944.
xander.XVII is offline  
Old August 13th, 2015, 10:10 AM   #15

Magnate's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jul 2011
From: Sweden
Posts: 1,426
Blog Entries: 8

The Germans were fighting on 3 fronts if not more, while the soviets just had to fight on one front.

The soviets would surely get crushed if Germany would have been able to only focus on Russia. But that was not the case.
Magnate is offline  
Old August 13th, 2015, 10:19 AM   #16

Yaroslav the Wise's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Apr 2015
From: Canada
Posts: 319

Quote:
Originally Posted by schmitt trigger View Post
Yes it was manpower, but also the ruthless employ of that manpower.

Manpower alone, as during WW1 with demoralized Tzarist troops and population, would not have turned the tide.

However under Stalinist rule, through fear, intimidation, propaganda and other techniques available to totalitarian states, both the civilian population endured the un-endurable (Leningrad the best example) and the army resisted surrender under the most appalling circumstances.
I wouldn't say that the Soviet Union won through fear and intimidation. That was mostly a myth, the only fact being that if a soldier runs from the battle field he will be shot, but almost every army did that, and it rarely had to be done.

If anything, it was the Imperial army from the First World War that was ruled by fear. Many of the soldiers in the Russian Imperial army were peasants without basic education. There are many stories of the peasants foolishly firing their rifles at German airplanes.

Another problem in the First World War was that the Russian Empire only picked generals from the aristocracy, who were not always competent generals. This poor leadership is what caused the destruction of the Imperial army at the Battle of Tannenburg 1914, which left the Russian Empire with half an army left, to fight Germany for the rest of the war.
Yaroslav the Wise is offline  
Old August 13th, 2015, 10:40 AM   #17

Tercios Espanoles's Avatar
Gonfaloniere
 
Joined: Mar 2014
From: Beneath a cold sun, a grey sun, a Heretic sun...
Posts: 6,469
Blog Entries: 1

Has any analysis been done to calculate just how long the USSR could have sustained its rate of casualties? Big the USSR may have been, but its population was not infinite.
Tercios Espanoles is offline  
Old August 13th, 2015, 11:31 AM   #18

Maribat's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 4,706

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnate View Post
The Germans were fighting on 3 fronts if not more, while the soviets just had to fight on one front.

The soviets would surely get crushed if Germany would have been able to only focus on Russia. But that was not the case.
If the Germans were to focus only on Russia they would be defeated much sooner I guess.

The German losses of manpower on the the Eastern Front (with Russia) were 90% of all losses in 1942 and 86% in 1943. So stop bragging about two more German fronts.
Maribat is online now  
Old August 13th, 2015, 11:58 AM   #19

Graveyard's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Mar 2015
From: Southern Brazil
Posts: 682

Any wars involving Russia automatically involves lot's of manpower. (Comparing to Europe until the 1990's) So 7

But since the USSR, instead of throwing man to be slaughtered, they actually build good equipment for themselves, sturdy equipment.

Ain't the best of the world, ain't the most accurate, but USSR wasn't the richest nation in the world and they didn't really had time to prepare, only managing to survive because Stalin subverted Leninism and reversed all the State functions.
Graveyard is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > War and Military History

Tags
effort or soviet, germany, manpower, soviet, victory, vital, vitsl, war



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Soviet Victory at Warsaw WeisSaul Speculative History 12 March 18th, 2015 02:54 AM
Soviet manpower from '44 to '45 Cmyers1980 War and Military History 25 December 16th, 2014 06:51 PM
Soviet supplies for Nazi Germany and the last Soviet attempt to join the Axis Domen European History 65 April 3rd, 2014 10:11 PM
Contribution to the WWII effort by nationalities of Soviet Union Edward European History 208 December 10th, 2011 01:52 AM
Stalin - Cause of a Soviet Victory? HelloMarcoPolo History Help 5 October 17th, 2009 05:54 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.