East Front book talk

[british exil]

Mantill. Thx for the clarification. Was wondering because he surrendered in 1945 to the British Army. I only met him because he brought his watch to get repaired by me and when I noticed that it was a wehrmacht's watch we got talking where he got it from. He then came by to visit me at work for small talks.

I should think he will be one of the few remaining vets from his unit for the VE celebrations. At 94 he is quite ill.

Mat

[colberki]

Your passionate rebuttal of my point of view suggests to me that you are not a detached observer on this topic. But kudos to Berkut for his more reasoned rejection of my view but nevertheless has room for differing views. For me, the accounts dont need to be balanced in themselves; there is no shortage of authors with a different slant. I like to hear it from the SS or German point of view. Paul Carrell is great reading. Feels like a great adventure admidst all the killings and dying on both sides. I wish Genghis Khan had written his memoirs - what was he thinking when he annnilihated 30 percent of the Chinese in a few years to the levelling of Baghdad.

All big powers in their time have been brutal. There is no such thing as a righteous power. Such thinking leads to crusades and jihads and more killings. The Nazis were especially so in Eastern Europe to the Jews, Poles, Russians etc. The British and their European descendants slaughtered the North American Indians and did their share of pillaging and robbery in India, China and elsewhere. Yes, the Nazis are a more recent event. Modern Russia and ocassionally China resort to brutal tactics hold down restive regions. And throughout European history, Europeans have butchered their neighbours. Not every country is lucky like the USA, Canada, Australia and NZ. should know it as a naturalised Australian. My country expects all immigrants to leave behind the old world quarrels and prejudicies. Dont bring the troubles of Ireland, Europe, Middle East and Asia. We deport people who dont abide by our laws where possible.

This is a great forum because of all of us. We are one in our love for Gary Grisgby's eastern front wargames. Lets enjoy our shared interest and intellect and respect each other.

[Banzan]

ORIGINAL: colberki
Feels like a great adventure admidst all the killings and dying on both sides.

This acutally is a part of the problem.

ORIGINAL: colberki
All big powers in their time have been brutal.

While i agree with you about most historial empires were being brutal, there is quite a difference between "brutal" and "industrial genocide".


Well, and forums are always about discussion, and not always you will find a consensus.

[Theng]

Almost all larger historical empires engaged in "industrial genocide" in relation to their economic development. The Germans did it later in the industrial development, hence on a larger scale. By all means, the Germans don't have a monopoly on the drive to kill as many of the people they don't like as possible in as short of a time as possible. It had been done before and done afterwards. Here is an early example of "alleged" bio-warfare in the 18th century.

http://academic.udayton.edu/health/syll ... ntro02.htm

NB: Other historians think it was all by accident that the Indians were infected. In any case, it was a fortunate coincidence for the victors that they were infected right at that time and most convenient, at least for the victors.

[bush]

I read the Fugat book several years ago and thought it was a good one also.

[Muzrub]

Hitler and His Generals: Military Conferences 1942-1945
The military conferences that Hitler had twice daily with his staff, where he directed the war, were transcribed by stenographers from 1942 to 1945 in the bunker. These authentic documents are the only record kept by the Germans of their highest military decisions at the critical moment when the war turned against them.


Well worth a purchase.

[bush]

Just curious - why is Glantz being given so much love? Not trying to stir up the sh&& pot, just wondering about his bona fides.

Thanks,

Mike

[Montbrun]

ORIGINAL: bushpsu

Just curious - why is Glantz being given so much love? Not trying to stir up the sh&& pot, just wondering about his bona fides.

Thanks,

Mike

He's the only westerner to tap the Soviet military archives on any kind of scale. He's a prolific writer, and, obviously, concentrates on the eastern front. His books are excellent reads, and he's ex-military. He extrapolates information that we normally wouldn't see in the English language.

[von Shagmeister]

Col. Glantz is the founder and former director of the US Army's Foreign Military Studies Office. He really knows his stuff, his books give an insight not normally available, especially from the Soviet side.
 
Best Regards
 
von Shagmeister

[Ron]

Glantz is a prolific writer and an important source of information on the eastern front, no question. However, I think you are fooling yourself to think he has a 'lock' on what actually happened. It is hardly surprising, too many researchers and historians set out to prove a point and distort perspective to do so - even at the original source material, and the Soviet Union was not exactly the paradigm of espousing the 'truth' during its existence. It's a bitter pill to swallow when sources turn out to be questionable, but one is wiser after the 'discovery'.

[malfid]

even at the original source material, and the Soviet Union was not exactly the paradigm of espousing the 'truth' during its existence. It's a bitter pill to swallow when sources turn out to be questionable, but one is wiser after the 'discovery'.

Do you have any examples of, say, archival material meant for internal consumption being falsified? If so, I would request that you post them, so that we will all be 'wiser after the discovery'.

even at the original source material, and the Soviet Union was not exactly the paradigm of espousing the 'truth' during its existence.

To whom, exactly?

[von Shagmeister]

ORIGINAL: Ron

...even at the original source material, and the Soviet Union was not exactly the paradigm of espousing the 'truth' during its existence. ...

From what I have heard and read from a number of researchers (though I have no personal experience) the archive material from the likes of the TsAMO is extremely accurate, albeit as the Soviets collected and perceived it and as Malfid alludes to the material is for internal (state) consumption and not the propaganda fiary tales propogated during and after the war that have been accepted as fact by many writers.

[cantona2]

Started reading the first voulme of Glantz's Stalingrad trilogy last night. Having read most his other books I know I'll be in for a long ahrd slog but excellent read as well

[cantona2]

ORIGINAL: bushpsu

Just curious - why is Glantz being given so much love? Not trying to stir up the sh&& pot, just wondering about his bona fides.

Thanks,

Mike

Uses Soviet archives as much as German/Western ones and rights one hell of a military history book. His book on Kursk is an example of how much detail and research he does. it makes for heavy reading sometimes but any student of the Ost Front will need Glantz in his library

[FM WarB]

I respect Glanz' research, and like his volumes that have good oobs (Before Stalingrad, Kursk). But his bland writing style, basically listing units and places, which you cannot find on his poor maps make reading them and getting into the flow of the campaigns quite tedious.

[MarcA]

For history to be interesting you need to concentrate on personalities and how they interact with events around them. That is not what Glantz is writing, he writes pure operational histories for those who want to understand which units were where and what they did. There is no denying it is dry stuff. If you want something more interesting you want to aim for something like Anthony Beevors Stalingrad, which is presented in more story like fashion.

[Zemke]

A new book to come out which is very good, but expensive, Operation Barbarossa and Germany's Defeat in the East, by David Stahel published as part of Cambridge Military Histories, copyright 2009

[TargAK]

I am reading Last victory in Russia about the battle of Kharkov 1943 by Nipe. Only 30 pages into it so no opinion yet.

http://www.amazon.com/Last-Victory-Russ ... 0764311867

I also recommend Germany and the Second world war V4 book. Although pricey it is very detailed account of Germany's build up and fight on the Eastern front up until the end of 1941.

The map book that comes with it is simply amazing!

http://www.amazon.com/Germany-Second-Wo ... 678&sr=1-1

[zbig]

What fustrates me about most military history books is inadaquate maps. It is hard to follow at times when a book mentions units and places but they are not on a map.

[kfmiller41]

I agree zbig, most books don't have decent maps that allow people who don't know the geography to follow along. As for Glantz I am in the middle of the second volume of his Stalingrad trilogy and although very detailed it is quite dry, it takes effort to read it, unlike some others that flow better. It is worth it for anyone who really want's the details bu just know what your in for[:D].