English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I am reading Stalin's speeches given at various times and places during the German invasion of the Soviet Union and he persistently emphasizes on the fact that Germans also have Italian, Rumanian, Finns and Austrian divisions at the Russian front. But were these divisions as decisive as Stalin wants us to think? Or is he just giving an excuse for the initial advances of the Nazis in Russia? I'm not talking only in terms of the number of divisions but also their combat skills and the quality of their military material etc

2007-09-27 00:34:50 · 5 answers · asked by :] 4 in Arts & Humanities History

5 answers

Well, the Austrians weren't in their own divisions, they were ethnic and linguistic Germans and so were integrated into the regular army. But when captured by the Soviets, the Austrians always pointed out that they were Austrians. There was a joke in the Red Army that the quickest way to turn a German into an Austrian was to capure him. The Finns were excellent soldiers, but once they took back what Stalin had taken from them in 1940 they went on the defensive. Of the others, the Hungarians were probably the best, followed by the Romanians and the Italians. In January of 1943 an entire Italian brigade surrendered without firing a single shot, explaining to their captors that they hoped to be treated better since they hadn't killed any Russians.
With regard to the Romanian and Hungarian soldiers, their ineffectiveness was often due to poor equipment rather than anything else. For example, in 1941, the standard anti-tank weapon of German infantry divisions was the 37 mm gun, which was completely ineffective against the T-34 and KV tanks of the Red Army, who called them "door knockers". So in 1942, when the German forces recieved upgraded anti-tank guns, the obsolete 37 mm guns were given to the Romanians, Hungarians and Italians.
Except for the Finns, the satellite armies were not capable of any type of offensive action against the Red Army, their only role was to defend certain areas to free more Germans to attack.
Depending on the timing of the speeches, for any from 1942 or the first half of 1943, Stalin's point might have been that the Soviet Union was taking on not just Germany, but also these other countries, while the US and UK were refusing to take the pressure off of them by opening a second front. Up until Kursk that was something Stalin always tried emphasize.

2007-09-27 05:52:03 · answer #1 · answered by Captain Hammer 6 · 0 0

Yes ,during 1941 and 1942 these divisions were significant in enabling the German advance but as the war progressed their effectiveness diminished and the Italians and Rumanians became unreliable.
After September 1943 the Italians were withdrawn as their government had capitulated to the Allies.

2007-09-27 05:32:29 · answer #2 · answered by brainstorm 7 · 0 0

Those divisions were not very effective for the Germans. Their combat skills and moral didn't equal the German's and their equipment was inferior.
The Germans usually used those divisions to defend their flanks and put the strong German divisions in the middle of the line, when the Russians started their counterattack against the Germans at Stalingrad they specifically targeted those divisions to attack, the Russians easily broke thru the Romanian and Italian divisions and encircled the Germans.
There were a couple good Italian divisions in WW2 , but they fought with Rommel. They were : Armored Division "Ariete" and Infantry Division " Trieste ".

2007-09-27 00:51:36 · answer #3 · answered by Louie O 7 · 1 0

The Russian Winter is just one way the Russian terrain makes war hard. Once it warms up the ground thaws out and the mud they have sticks to everything. At the begginning of the operation they were able to easily defeat the Russians in battle but they were only gaining about 10 miles. The average amount would be around 30 miles but thats how badly the mud affected the German tanks and vehicles. The only way it could have worked is if they had defeated Britian. If they beat Britian then the US wouldn't have done anything in Europe because without Britian there is no reason for the US to get involved. The US didn't like Germany or Russia so they wouldn't waste their time trying to influcence it. So if they beat Britian they could take all the soldiers from the western front and move them to the east which would double the power of their military there.

2016-04-06 03:27:11 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

http://findarticles.com/

Easy to use links that will help with all your research needs, try typing a keyword or two into the search engine and see what happens.

http://vos.ucsb.edu/index.asp

http://www.aresearchguide.com/

http://www.geocities.com/athens/troy/886...

http://www.studentresearcher.com/search/...

http://www.chacha.com/

2007-10-05 00:42:14 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers