Who were the best soldier of ww2?

[trance]

Not really, a finnish historian would probably not work with biased materials, seeing as it would most likely put the Red Army in far better light. As for Kilin, he has worked a lot with finnish historians, even going so far as to co-write several books with a couple of them, I do get the feelling that Kilin is putting national pride aside and actually tries to find out the truth. That said, it seems like these sources contradict Domens', and seeing as his "quotes" are partially written with the Cryllic alphabet, does arouse some suspicion does it not? Not only that, but I fail to see how 58 x 17 500 can possibly become 425,640. Sounds a bit fishy to me, actually, it sounds like somebody simply took the two lowest estimations at wikipedia.

I will however admit that saying that all soviet sources are biased might have been a little rash, but I'd never ever trust the official soviet numbers.

[Lysimachus]

Not really, a finnish historian would probably not work with biased materials, seeing as it would most likely put the Red Army in far better light.

We're dealing with hard facts, not probabilities/possibilities

[OTZ]

Not really, a finnish historian would probably not work with biased materials, seeing as it would most likely put the Red Army in far better light.

I have to agree with Lysimachus. I suspect you haven't read anything by Manninen, and are really just making an assumption that a Finnish author writing about the Winter War doesn't have an agenda.

As for Kilin, he has worked a lot with finnish historians, even going so far as to co-write several books with a couple of them,

Have you read any of these books? It's hard to judge the man's integrity just because he worked with "finnish historians".

In any event, your double standard hasn't been justified yet.

That said, it seems like these sources contradict Domens',

I don't quite see where this has been demonstrated.

and seeing as his "quotes" are partially written with the Cryllic alphabet, does arouse some suspicion does it not?

It arouses my suspicion that perhaps you are a little more naive than I previously thought. Think about it for a moment - why would a Russian source (perhaps a primary document) be written in Cyrillic?

Not only that, but I fail to see how 58 x 17 500 can possibly become 425,640. Sounds a bit fishy to me, actually, it sounds like somebody simply took the two lowest estimations at wikipedia.

The low-ball on wiki is reported by Krivosheev. If you don't know who he is, look him up. Either Domen has his book - which wouldn't surprise me - or Domen is using wiki knowing that the figure there is one that can be considered reliable.

There are a handful of people on this board that I trust in terms of the information they post - Domen is one of them.

I will however admit that saying that all soviet sources are biased might have been a little rash, but I'd never ever trust the official soviet numbers.

Your mistrust is misplaced. You need to open your mind a bit. You'll find that the official numbers - the ones in primary documents - can be quite accurate.

[Perkele]

Your mistrust is misplaced. You need to open your mind a bit. You'll find that the official numbers - the ones in primary documents - can be quite accurate.

You misundrestand, the official numbers are the ones that are told to the people. Not the ones that are told to the leaders, which are the numbers that have only recently come available.

[OTZ]

You misundrestand, the official numbers are the ones that are told to the people. Not the ones that are told to the leaders, which are the numbers that have only recently come available.

No, I don't misunderstand. There are two veins to discuss here. One is the historiography of Russia's war effort, and the other are the primary sources that began to influence that historiography since 1960.

The official sources have (typically) always been accurate - the official story hasn't. I have no misconceptions about this, and I believe that I am very much aware of the issues related to the topic of source material and the war in Russia.

Jeebus Perkele, I'd like to think you've seen my posts enough in the VV to see that I wouldn't be confused about this...

[Perkele]

Jeebus Perkele, I'd like to think you've seen my posts enough in the VV to see that I wouldn't be confused about this...

That might be true, however while I have a vague image(now that you mention it..lend lease discussion, right?) I really haven't hanged around a lot in here lately(like a year or two or three) to the point that I can maybe name 2 or 3 members of the forums...so excuse me for forgetting.

[OTZ]

That might be true, however while I have a vague image(now that you mention it..lend lease discussion, right?) I really haven't hanged around a lot in here lately(like a year or two or three) to the point that I can maybe name 2 or 3 members of the forums...so excuse me for forgetting.

My bad. Look where assuming has got me...

[Perkele]

But it was the lend lease discussion?

[OTZ]

But it was the lend lease discussion?

Yes - there were quite a few of those "discussions", along with similarly themed threads.

[Gorbaczow]

I guess 99% of people who voted for Americans love Saving Ryan. If you want a good war movie check A Bridge To Far. The best soldiers from 2WW were the Brits and Polish. Brits for their great training and equipment, while Polish for their determination to beat the Germans.

[Rapax]

And now I'm wondering what you wrote instead of "Private".

[motiv-8]

I guess 99% of people who voted for Americans love Saving Ryan. If you want a good war movie check A Bridge To Far. The best soldiers from 2WW were the Brits and Polish. Brits for their great training and equipment, while Polish for their determination to beat the Germans.

You're so right, Americans don't bother reading books or even really thinking much at all. We just watch movies. America is just one gelatinous blob in front of a giant movie screen, and I'm so happy you've pieced it together.

[Farnan]

You're so right, Americans don't bother reading books or even really thinking much at all. We just watch movies. America is just one gelatinous blob in front of a giant movie screen, and I'm so happy you've pieced it together.

I love how he says we only think that way because of a movie, and then uses another movie as his source for his argument making statements the author of the book wouldn't agree with (Just so you know gorb, A Bridge Too Far is also a book).

[motiv-8]

Rather I think it "proves" exactly nothing other than making glossy statements about whose a better soldier in a conflict 60 years ago is utterly inane, especially when you use movie references to try to argue against a non-existent other side.

[Gorbaczow]

Sure sure everything is insane when USA is not the best lol

[motiv-8]

Another caricature in response to clarion call for reason? Interesting picture we are developing.

[Gorbaczow]

No we are not developing anything is Europe. We are all in 19th century, USA is leading the world in science and economy!!

[Spartacus the Irish]

Future Redleg Officer, you lack the ability to read and understand. What I have said is that 99% of people who voted for the Americans love Private Ryan.

How exactly did you conjure up that ridiculous information?

This just proofs that Americans cant even READ or UNDERSTAND what they are reading.

My generalisation alarm is blaring again.

[Domen123]

That is at the VERY least 580 000 soldiers, but it's far more likely that the real number is up somewhere near 900 000 (a soviet division consisted of 17 500 soldiers).

You can't see any difference between division "on paper" and real division? Most of Russian divisions were understrength.

[Koelkastmagneet]

Sure sure everything is insane when USA is not the best lol

No, things are insane when they are without logic, defy reasoning and promote prejudice and racism, I know how fun it is to take a stab at the US and there are various reasons to do so and various areas to criticize it on, but at least make a valid argument, not a vague accusation of nationalism.