Soviet Barbarossa

Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: The German-Soviet War 1941-1945 is a turn-based World War II strategy game stretching across the entire Eastern Front. Gamers can engage in an epic campaign, including division-sized battles with realistic and historical terrain, weather, orders of battle, logistics and combat results.

The critically and fan-acclaimed Eastern Front mega-game Gary Grigsby’s War in the East just got bigger and better with Gary Grigsby’s War in the East: Don to the Danube! This expansion to the award-winning War in the East comes with a wide array of later war scenarios ranging from short but intense 6 turn bouts like the Battle for Kharkov (1942) to immense 37-turn engagements taking place across multiple nations like Drama on the Danube (Summer 1944 – Spring 1945).

Moderators: Joel Billings, elmo3, Sabre21

User avatar
Kull
Posts: 2744
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 3:43 am
Location: El Paso, TX

RE: Soviet Barbarossa

Post by Kull »

ORIGINAL: whalus

I think most have indicated they agree that offensive plans were being made by both sides here. As far as actually being serious about conducting an offensive campaign in 1941 the evidence seems to point more to Hitler than it does Stalin. And I do find it hard to believe that the possibility of Stalin launching an attack first played much, if any, role in Hitler's decision to invade Russia when he did.

I completely agree that the "Stalin provoked Hitler" argument is baseless. There's more than enough evidence that Hitler was planning this from the beginning - after all, it's a core element in Mein Kampf. However, I haven't heard ANYBODY in this thread try to make that case. The question is, was Stalin planning an offensive against Germany, and was that plan independent of a preliminary German attack (i.e. the "counterattack plan theory"), and was there likewise no plan whatsoever for a "defensive alignment"? And according to the evidence from Soviet archives, as gathered and published by reputable historians (such as Pleshakov and Mikhail Ivanovich Meltyukhov, author of "Stalin's Missed Chance"), the answer is a categorical "yes".

I think many here are relying on old scholarship, and simply aren't aware of how much new information came out once the Soviet Union collapsed and researchers gained access to a treasure trove of Stalin-era documents (Suvorov's book came out in 1989 and uses none of this). The May 15th Zhukov plan is not imaginary. It's a real document that lays out the specifics of the assault plan, and it makes no reference whatsoever to a preliminary attack by the Germans.

Edit: As to the timing of the Stalin plan, Meltyukhov makes the case that it definitely was set to go in 1941. I haven't read his book, and so feel less confident in promulgating his ideas than those of Pleshakov. But he does have some interesting points (at least as summarized on various web sites).
whalus
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2015 11:38 am

RE: Soviet Barbarossa

Post by whalus »

Capitaine,

Are there any histories of WW2 that deny Hitler intended from the beginning to attack Russia?

What lies are you referring to?
whalus
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2015 11:38 am

RE: Soviet Barbarossa

Post by whalus »

Kull,

David Glantz is well familiar with the latest documents that have become available. He doesn't think the view you are advocating here is very credible.
User avatar
Kull
Posts: 2744
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 3:43 am
Location: El Paso, TX

RE: Soviet Barbarossa

Post by Kull »

ORIGINAL: whalus

Kull,

David Glantz is well familiar with the latest documents that have become available. He doesn't think the view you are advocating here is very credible.

I'll rely on the guys who are investigating the actual archives. There's always been plenty of third hand information to suggest that Soviet deployments were extremely odd from a defensive perspective, but the fact we now have actual documentary evidence seals the deal in my mind.

In addition to some very good scholarship in it's own right, Glantz has also focused on rebutting Suvorov's claims, but I have not seen anything in writing from him which counters the documents unearthed by Pleshakov or Meltyukhov.

Feel free to post something in that vein, but please spare us the anti-Suvorov stuff.
postfux
Posts: 183
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2015 12:53 am

RE: Soviet Barbarossa

Post by postfux »

It is a fact that in 41 Germany started acting agressivly against (interests of) the SU.

It would be very surprising if there wasnt some aggressive planning in the SU starting at least 41. I would go so far that agressive planning that startet in 41 is if not proof than a least evidence pointing towards a lack of strategic thinking to conquer Western or Central Europa (aka attacking Germany). That the SU wanted to expand her area of influence in Southwestern Europe towards the Med is well established. Attacking Germany doesnt play in the same league, it isnt even the same sport.

Everyone who is advocating that the SU intended to attack Germany has to offer evidence towards the existence of a greater strategy why they would think this is a good idea.

Germany invaded the SU with the aim to destroy the Red Army and conquer or destroy their industrial resources so that they couldnt put up organized military resistance anymore and Germany could divert resources towards the West. They expected to achieve their goals before the West could use their industrial and military resources to full extend. Success would most likely win the war for Germany and grant them control over Europe for "1000 years".

I do not understand why the SU should attack Germany while it was in a stalemated war against the British Empire without waiting for the next developments or seeking some informal alliance. The whole world would have seen this as a war of conquest for Europe with incalculable reactions most likely not favorable to the SU. What for? Why now?

Offensive military planning alone cannot prove an intend to attack Germany. I admit I dont have enough knowledge to claim to have a halfway comprehensive picture about the persons involved in German or Soviet decision making and do not want to dismiss anyone who offered an informed opinion but nobody did point out what the SU wanted to achieve by attacking Germany and offer some evidence that Soviet decision makers had such lines of thinking.
Aufklaerungs
Posts: 238
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 7:37 pm
Location: Chicago
Contact:

RE: Soviet Barbarossa

Post by Aufklaerungs »

Whalus

It would be helpful if you would cite a Glantz reference from the last five years, or since he was able to access/exploit troves of NKVD archived material circa 2009. His complaints against dubious "revelations" made back in the 1990s are a little dated.

Thanks
Are there any histories of WW2 that deny Hitler intended from the beginning to attack Russia?

Consensus of credible historians is that Hitler first formed/stated intention to invade Russia during the period between the end of Stalin's Winter War ágainst the Finns (March 1940) and the capitulation of France (June 1940). In Mein Kampf (1924) Hitler proposed his nationalist vision (in Landsberg prison) of the need for German expansion to the east in order to become a great world power. He predicated his vision on the ideas of Manifest Destiny settlement of the American west.
Aufklärungs
User avatar
Kull
Posts: 2744
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 3:43 am
Location: El Paso, TX

RE: Soviet Barbarossa

Post by Kull »

ORIGINAL: postfux

Everyone who is advocating that the SU intended to attack Germany has to offer evidence towards the existence of a greater strategy why they would think this is a good idea.

The fact is that the Soviet Union HAD a plan, fully fleshed out, to attack Germany, and to do so in the 1941-42 time frame. I've provided the names of historians and their books, both of whom developed their theses AFTER reviewing Stalin-era documents that only became available following the collapse of the Soviet Union.

You can either read what they present (and draw your conclusions accordingly) or continue to rely on "pre-archive" historical works. I will say that both historians do address the "why", which is your largest concern, but just be aware that Stalin's "why" may not pass your particular logical muster. But then that's probably in keeping with many of his other actions.
Capitaine
Posts: 1028
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2002 10:00 am

RE: Soviet Barbarossa

Post by Capitaine »

ORIGINAL: whalus

Capitaine,

Are there any histories of WW2 that deny Hitler intended from the beginning to attack Russia?

What lies are you referring to?
I believe there are very few conformist histories that accurately and/or truthfully describe what Hitler intended in WWII. It's all approved propaganda of the Allies.
tomeck48
Posts: 210
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 2:52 pm

RE: Soviet Barbarossa

Post by tomeck48 »

Springtime for Hitler?
User avatar
Telemecus
Posts: 4689
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 8:32 pm
Contact:

RE: Soviet Barbarossa

Post by Telemecus »

Autumn for Poland and France? [:D]
Wargamers Discord https://discord.gg/U6DcDxT
Capitaine
Posts: 1028
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2002 10:00 am

RE: Soviet Barbarossa

Post by Capitaine »

If your history is enforced by law, only one thing is certain: It is a lie.
Ridgeway
Posts: 139
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 11:36 pm

RE: Soviet Barbarossa

Post by Ridgeway »

ORIGINAL: Capitaine

ORIGINAL: whalus

Capitaine,

Are there any histories of WW2 that deny Hitler intended from the beginning to attack Russia?

What lies are you referring to?
I believe there are very few conformist histories that accurately and/or truthfully describe what Hitler intended in WWII. It's all approved propaganda of the Allies.

And there it is.

Always nice to spot a real-life neo-Nazi in the wild.
Capitaine
Posts: 1028
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2002 10:00 am

RE: Soviet Barbarossa

Post by Capitaine »

ORIGINAL: Ridgeway

ORIGINAL: Capitaine

ORIGINAL: whalus

Capitaine,

Are there any histories of WW2 that deny Hitler intended from the beginning to attack Russia?

What lies are you referring to?
I believe there are very few conformist histories that accurately and/or truthfully describe what Hitler intended in WWII. It's all approved propaganda of the Allies.

And there it is.

Always nice to spot a real-life neo-Nazi in the wild.
And once again, you have no argument. You can only try to smear, as is your wont.
Stelteck
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 5:07 pm

RE: Soviet Barbarossa

Post by Stelteck »

Hitler was not so bad, after all he is the one who killed hitler !!!
ORIGINAL: Capitaine

If your history is enforced by law, only one thing is certain: It is a lie.

The history enforced by law in Europe is genocide denial [X(]

It is funny how some people assume that because we enjoy wargame and history, we probably enjoy the ideologies behind the counter and will be friendly to them.
Brakes are for cowards !!
tomeck48
Posts: 210
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 2:52 pm

RE: Soviet Barbarossa

Post by tomeck48 »

What I've enjoyed about this forum over the last year or so is the lack of trolls. People here want to increase their knowledge and enjoyment of the game. I also enjoy sharing the game experience and discussion with a group that is probably quite diverse but the only agenda here is the game.

Is there some way we can vote that clown off the island?
Stelteck
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 5:07 pm

RE: Soviet Barbarossa

Post by Stelteck »

It is what the report button is for.
Brakes are for cowards !!
Capitaine
Posts: 1028
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2002 10:00 am

RE: Soviet Barbarossa

Post by Capitaine »

Never fails.. whenever someone disturbs any aspect of WWII dogma the slack-jawed heads start exploding. Why not just face it that your "most sacred" beliefs are built upon the quicksand of the times.

Challenging Allied propaganda (the winners write the history) doesn't "make one a Nazi", even if my facts would tend to shine a better light on them. Everything and everyone deserves accurate history, even the devil. Unless, of course, you yourselves have an agenda, in which case it would seem to be you who are the "devils".
Stelteck
Posts: 1420
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 5:07 pm

RE: Soviet Barbarossa

Post by Stelteck »

"the winners write the history" is such a stereotype, and is a very lazy and ultimately harmful way to introduce the concept of bias.

There are tons of example in history where it is not true at all. No serious historian would say that.

It is really funny to speak about it here because it do not apply to the eastern front of WW2 at all as for a very long time after the war, the sources about world war two in the east were mostly coming from retired and bitter german generals.
Brakes are for cowards !!
Ktonos
Posts: 335
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2018 2:25 pm

RE: Soviet Barbarossa

Post by Ktonos »

Soviet Union has been accused for the entirety of her post war life for collaborating with Hitler. Soviet Union's name has been dragged to the mud because the Luftwaffe flew over London to drop bombs using Soviet oil.

Yet there was a 1941 "Soviet Barbarossa" and it hasn't been brought out for 5 decades by Soviet propaganda to defend their name? To say "here dummies, we were going to attack all along, here are the 1941 plans".

On another note, it has been a month. Has this historian announced the "evidence" of a 1941 Soviet invasion?
Capitaine
Posts: 1028
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2002 10:00 am

RE: Soviet Barbarossa

Post by Capitaine »

No, he never spoke to the imminence of the reveal. I'm not even sure now, actually, that "new" information is anticipated. He did suggest the July 15th date which inferred to me that it would be new, but rereading his message over again made me wonder about this. His actual phrasing was more that "Germans are beginning to realize that their invasion of Russia was to preempt a Russian attack," and then he proceeded to list the facts I cited in the OP. So... this could be some of the existing facts we've broached here as well that are already known. (N.B. I hadn't been familiar with this idea prior to my sources message, so I'm new to all this.) But it could be new information too; I just never followed up on that and it's too late now to ask.
Post Reply

Return to “Gary Grigsby's War in the East Series”