In Reply to: That would seem to answer the question... unless one challenges Wikipedia... nt posted by clarkjohnsen on June 26, 2007 at 08:19:12:
May I suggest you and Mr. Garvin go to your nearest Borders or B&N and purchase a copy of Max Hastings' Armageddon which is an excellent account of the fighting in Europe from mid-44 through to the end the war.
Hastings, a leading military historian and former editor of the UK's Daily Telegraph and an unlikely closet Stalinist, examines all the main combatants and their armies and pretty much offers the same judgement as Mr. Brennan does - that the Red Army was probably the best of the ground armies by the end. The Wehrmacht was possibly superior at it's peak (pre-Stalingrad) and he gives the edge in overall generalship to the Germans. He doesn't have very much good to say about the Western Armies (US, British, French), troops or generals with the exception of Patton.
I've also recently read Anthony Bevor's book about the fall of Berlin & he does seem to concur re the quality and power of the Soviet armies late in the war.
PS BTW re Soviet air power, I think the air ace with highest numbers of kills in aerial combat on all sides, in all theatres of WW2, is a Soviet fighter pilot. Need to check on this.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- so Wikipedia is the unchallenged source of all historical knowledge? - groovenoter 22:49:57 06/26/07 (5)
- You are discussing a different issue.. - jamesgarvin 10:22:40 06/27/07 (4)
- Have you analyzed the available combat air power available to the Soviet Union vs. - oscar 15:50:09 06/27/07 (3)
- RE: Have you analyzed the available combat air power available to the Soviet Union vs. - jamesgarvin 08:58:05 06/28/07 (2)
- Beautiful post. Fact. Firmly establishes the original assertion. Reasoning. nt - clarkjohnsen 11:02:57 06/28/07 (0)
- There's that 1941 state of affairs compared to 1944 State of affairs. - oscar 09:55:22 06/28/07 (0)