Support our channel by checking our NordVPN exclusive deal at nordvpn.com/historyvpn You can try it risk-free thanks to their 30-day money-back guarantee! Sign up for Armchair History TV today! armchairhistory.tv/ Promo code: ARMCHAIRHISTORY for 50% OFF Merchandise available at store.armchairhistory.tv/ Check out the new Armchair History TV Mobile App too! apps.apple.com/us/app/armchair-history-tv/id1514643375 play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=tv.uscreen.armchairhistorytv Discord: discord.gg/zY5jzKp Twitter: twitter.com/ArmchairHist
@@jeb791 oh absolutely once you get down to the fine details. But to give you an example of what I mean just look at Soviet tank design. Realizing that your tanks statistically have a short lifespan and consequently shifting your entire production doctrine around that fact in order to get as many tanks to the line as possible? That falls under both genius and insanity, but it worked. So it's generally seen as a big brain play. We see the opposite with German tank production. Heavily armed and armored behemoths designed to be produced in small numbers but possess absurd killing power. Again this falls under genius and insanity. However it didn't work and as a result we see German tank design principles frequently criticized....and rightly so *glances at the Ferdinand*
what the soviet's and Russia today have/had is man power, not strategic genius. those "big cats" cause a lot of damage to the soviet army in the nazi's retreat to Germany.
Early war: Hitler allows his general to act as they find it suitable Stalin holds a total control over anything End war: Stalin allows his general to act as they find it suitable Hitler holds a total control over anything Something like that was mentioned in a video I've watched somewhere on YT, and actually it's pretty accurate, since near the end of war Hitler was convinced that his generals betray him, don't act as he demands because they follow their own ambitions, and the other things like that.
To be fair to both leaders it's not entirely sensible to let generals operate completely autonomously since they could not be aware of certain strategic concerns.
@@Pasta_Pirate right and sometimes rulers can make good decisions overruling their generals. like imagine if rommel fucked up in france and ruined everything because he didn't follow Hitler's orders... in our timeline, the germans lucked out, but im sure it had a chance of going totally south if the allies exploited that area
@@Pasta_Pirate still Hitler at the end of the war acted just like Stalin right before Operation Barbarossa, and during its early stages. And only the generals' "disobedience" made it kinda work
The 20 July Plot certainly didn't help, but even if that hadn't occurred, Hitler would have felt betrayed regardless, as his *massive* ego made him believe that all of his ideas were flawless and that they only failed because of the stupidity, cowardice, and/or disloyalty of those beneath him. He truly believed that will alone would lead him to victory, and when it didn't, he narcissistically refused to accept his own failings and blamed everybody else.
@@AltaiAustro-Hungarian sending women into battle is a classic desperate move, paraguay did it, germany did it, it is something reserved for when you are running out of men
@@pedrocesarsakihara1853 well my great grandfather was wehrmacht and he hated the fact he had to fight women. I forgot say he surrendered to the west rather than the red army. Allies did not send women to the front
Stalin and Hitler never saw each other as “kindred spirits”. He read Mein Kampf and knew Hitler wanted to invade the USSR. He simply wanted to protect a mutual defense pact to avoid war until the USSR was more prepared.
@Henry Hudson for self-defense. The Nazis did it as a project settler colonialism. The Soviets took land to act as a buffer zone in case of a German invasion. And good thing they did as, had the Soviet Union not gained this territory, Germany would have likely defeated the Soviet Union, making their conquest of the world nearly inevitable.
@Henry Hudson Lol nope. Part of polish territory is Belarussian, because Stalin returned 1 region back to Poland without permission from the Belarussians. Also "Transnistria" was always Russian-Ukrainian region. Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia were fascist states and favored Hitler, as well as Finland. We should not forget the crimes against humanity that were commited by these nations.
I think a lot of people misunderstand the 3 to 1 ratio in military theory. 3 to 1 is the preferred ratio to conduct an attack with some level of assurance of victory and reduces the likelihood of high casualties. If you don't have a 3 to 1 advantage you can compensate with supporting arms (like artillery, air power, or armored support) or with basic principles of warfare like surprise, but if you can't compensate any attack is likely to result in high casualties without a guarantee of success.
@@shubhampreetsingh8630 true and that is part of why it's so hard to achieve a 3 to 1 ratio because in military theory supporting arms are what are called combat power multipliers meaning that artillery or air power increases the relative combat power of supported units. All of which means that if your opponent has supporting arms you have to increase the amount of troops or support to compensate or use other principles of warfare like mass, surprise, or tempo to try to gain temporary advantages.
Yes, 3:1 doesn’t refer to numbers of available Soldiers but combat power. For example, a 6 man rifle squad vs a 2 man .50 Cal Crew would have the numerical advantage, but the 3:1 combat power would be with the MG crew.
Actually, Stalin did have some military experience (from his time as a Red commander during the Russian Civil War). But even that was not much: his biggest involvement at the time was during the Tsaritsyn Offensive (later renamed Stalingrad, and eventually Volgograd), in the early days of the war.
And even that was mostly handled by another guy whom Stalin purged to ensure he could take all the credit. Stalin's real strength was his keen understanding of logistics, which worked very well once he started listening to his generals.
@@anjetto1 I read the book "Seize and Hold" Great coverage of the Russian battles against Poland in 1920. Stalin disobeyed orders and the advance went unsupported by his elements.
If I remember correctly from a Russian documentary or other youtube history channel, Order 227 is designed to punish not only retreating commanders without authorisation but also commanders who refuse to retreat even when they're being ordered to.
Why the hell would i trade a lieutenant for a field marshall?! -Stalin when his son got captured and the germans offered to trade him for a captured field marshall
@@pyromania1018 Source: Wikipedia, but then again he couldn’t exchange a Field-Marshal for a Lieutenant, and furthermore, he couldn’t really exchange any prisoner at all as it would've been unfair for the other millions of soviets who were imprisoned, And he said as much in his formal response to the German offer: "You have in your hands not only my son Yakov, but millions of my sons. Either you free them all or my son will share their fate."
@@Yo-ps2pf Stalin didn't because it would hurt his image and therefore his position as the "top guy".. if for some reason he could achieve it silently, he probably would
It's almost hilarious to see the Japanese manchurian army just folded like wet noodle once the veteran, grizzled red army just fresh from Berlin come knocking at their doors...
I think the “not one step back” order gets a lot of unfair flack, look at the numbers it was not like enemy at the gates where they had machine guns lined up gunning down scared soldiers. It was more to punish officers for unsanctioned retreats and placing soldiers into penal battalions for desertion. For how gargantuan an army the Red Army was there were relatively few soldiers outright shot for desertion. Sure this was brutal but this was the fucking Nazis at the door slaughtering millions of civilians. There’s a reason many Soviet veterans uphold this ruling.
@@Rynewulf nah. Had Jamaica formal right to get away out of under the brits? Were there factories that worked for the interests of the locals,like in Kazakhstan? Or atleast was local culture embraced by the metropoly? I don't think so. Plus Kazakhstan was called republic,not the colony. So in Soviet times Kazakhstan was anything but a colony. Unlike ukranian territories in Poland or Hawai in US. Or Jamaica. Apologies if my english seems to broken as hell.
Actually Stalin had military experience. He went through the entire revolution as chairman of the military council where he made important military decisions. And about the unwillingness to believe that the Nazis attacked the USSR, Stalin repeatedly received information about various invasions, and in such a stream it is rather difficult to assess which of these is true. But in any case, the country was not ready for war. But I can respect him for his loyalty. The fact that all his sons served at the front and that he refused to exchange his son for a German general. And also that he did not leave Moscow when the Nazis were already a few kilometers away.
actually his 2nd son Vasily Stalin was very corrupted and rare did combat, his colleagues hated him and nepotism often promoted him to positions he was not fit for. Also at the beginning of the war he hid away in a bunker and did not take command
Stalin had military experience in the revolution the same way George W. Bush had military experience in the Iraq war: While he was technically in a leadership position, other people did all the work.
His loyalty to what? Himself? Stalin wasn't loyal to anyone, people were loyal to Stalin. He refused to exchange his son for a German general because it was objectively a bad trade. His son wasn't worth a general. The Germans were hoping Stalin would ignore that fact because, you know, it was his son; but the Man of Steel also had a heart of steel.
@RAMY2472 I think he would've left, for one simple reason: Unlike Hitler in Berlin, there was actually somewhere for him to go and continue the war even if Moscow fell. Hitler was going down with his ship.
Russian in the video 1:00 - Molotov-Ribbentrov pact (the secret protocol) 5:04 (Миша) - Cute word for a bear (e.g. cat - kitty) 10:24 - Same as 1:00 13:50 (Атака) - Attack A comment to support this content.
This has become one of my personal favorites i just love the animation and the detailed explanition is amazing! The channel keeps getting better and better!
Life as the leader of the Soviet Union was quite difficult if I’m being honest, ever since I retired to work as a housewife things have been much easier
An overlooked part which the video didn't cover, was the removal of Corps-level military organization unit, making Divisions directly subordinate to Armies. On one hand, it saved up on Officers which were few and allowed fast-track promotion for exceptionally talented leaders and tacticians when they were needed most; on the other, it meant that every army commander now had to manage up to 32 different detachments if not more, with bad radio communication and constant german air raids on HQs. This overwhelming encumbrance was a leading reason for errors and mistakes in the field. A great example of the Stress was Chuikov's state in the Battle of Stalingrad, although it was present in other fronts.
Very good point. It also probably wasn’t helped by the fact Soviet divisions were also smaller than German divisions; so it requires even more effort when moving sizeable amounts of men around.
@@chrisstucker1813 they were smaller, but there was a whole lot more of them. It's not strictly about the number of men, but rather the frames within which they are organized.
Stalin knew an invasion was coming. Keep in mind Mein Kampf was a published book, and in it Hitler expressed his dreams of conquering the Bolsheviks to the East. Stalin knew this and wanted to play the diplomatic game and keep Germany at bay by keeping on time with the resources trade (part of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact which saw Soviet resources like oil and grain transported to the Nazis) so his army could build up. Now you could say him 'shooting his own officers was his fault' but men like Tukhachevsky had been discovered dealing with the Wehrmacht, and personally I wouldn't let that slide.
@@secretname4190 But he did not lead the German nation. He lead the Russian nation. Stalin had seen a war with western powers coming and acknowledged this somewhere right after becoming leader of the Soviet nation, which is why he implemented the "Five Year Plan" which turned the USSR into an industrial nation rather than an agricultural nation. The myth that Stalin had a breakdown at the beginning of the war is a myth. Stalin's leadership is unquestionable, and this. isbacked with logs showing he had meetings with his generals at the outbreak of the war - from morning to night, only stopping to rest after long blocks of work.
@@secretname4190 He wasn't caught off guard he purposfully didnt't position his army in the border as to not allow the germans an easy act of political propaganda to justify the war claiming that te soviets were going to attack them, thanks to this operation barbarossa was unqestionably a war of german agression. He did underestimate how long it would take for his armies in reserve to deploy and be functional on the field after the war started leading to many units being surrounded and destroyed by the blitzkrieg, but giving up land to the germans so they would overstretch and then counterattack was always part of the strategy, just not that much land.
@@secretname4190 Ha! Operation icebreaker so you believe in historical fantasy, no point arguing with you then. I will just say that the only actual evidence is that the only soviet military personel un the border were the border guards, icebreaker as much as it may pain you just repeats nazi propaganda about a preemptive atack even though the soviets kept very little garrison near Germany for that exact reason. Unless you have actual prove that there were soviet military preparations for an atack (which you don't because there weren't) or you have an explanation to why would the soviets atacked before the end of the second 5 year plan which would have ended in early 1943 then you should admit that your theory is fiction. Stalling favored Stalin since the soviet economy was growing much faster than the german one hence why the germans were in such a rush and were forced to get themselves into a two front war. Stalin mostly thought that Hitler wouldn't atack until he and Churchil had reached a peace agreement.
The thing I like about these videos is how they combine rigorous academic precision with occasional surgical, but devastating burns, delivered with just the barest hint of emotion. Griff's understated burn of "Enemy at the Gates" and "Call of Duty: World at War" in this video is a great example. His final words in the Isonzo video are another.
19:39 - He did have *some* military experience, although not good experience, his bungling in the Polish Soviet war by disobeying orders to support Tukhachevsky in attacking warsaw is pretty infamous
@@wilno7579 no? Most of their equipment was home made. And guns are only so much compared to the fighting spirit of the people. 75% of the casualties were caused by them.
@@california816 China: keeping 80% of the Japanese army occupied throughout war together with their supplies and equipment. Rest of the world: I pretend I did not see that
After learning about the Russian casualties from WW2, that quote, as an American, still gives me some chills and goosebumps. CoD managed to give so much respect to the Russians all in one quote.
@@DatcleanMochaJo There is no respect to be had for russians,look at their actions in ww2 like invading Finalnd,Baltics,Poland with Germany,bullying and terorizing smaller countries and its own people,communist fanaticism and russian chauvinism lead to the massives losses in ww2 to Germany,this is no different than Mussolini's quote that he needs some dead bodies to stand proud at the peace conference. If anyone is to blame for the deaths of soviets its the soviet union,the most evil regime the earth had ever seen,not the germans who saw the writings on the wall and soviet concentration and offensive postering on the border with them. Had you lived under communism you wouldnt think as you do. Modern russian actions should also be a wakeup call.
Wow, incredible analysis! My great grandfather fought in Manchjuria. People often overlook this conflict, while in reality it was important to show just how powerful USSR was at the time to the US and the world, as the soviets steamrolled Japan's elite army in 2 weeks.
Manchukuo’s army by that point wouldn’t be something you could call “elite” - that said, I can’t say the Soviet soldiers in that part of the conflict performed in any manner other than excellently. They’d had the entire war to perfect their art - and that was against the Nazis - their morale was absolutely the very best then also.
@@jimtalbott9535 japan marale was just as high.....but there inferiere tech army and lack of equipment numpers and good genrules.....but at that piont it was trully the best and the bigest mianland army of japan becouse the others were consomed with China and England
By 1945 the Japanese army in Manchuria was weak, consisting of many raw recruits and conscripts. Most of it's heavy equipment and best soldiers had been redeployed to fight the Americans and Chinese.
Was always under the impression that the Soviet Red Army had a reputation for fighting like the Japanese. Extreme brutality, fight to the death, fight for every meter of space, point blank artillery strikes, and shoot your way through their cities. Not to forget the Palov's house episode.
Considering that the enemy who has come burns your home, kills your relatives or takes them to Germany .. Soviet soldiers clearly had reason to fight to the death
They didn’t banzai charge and they weren’t particularly fanatical. But they definitely had every reason to do so. But unlike Japan for which you would find barely any prisoners by the end, there were millions of Soviet POWs.
Also nice words about blocking detachments. It's so nice to hear something apart from: "that was a pure NKVD units, who was firing at soldiers, showing fear"
Yes the blocking detachment were not “commissars” or “political officers”but NKVD soldiers instead of officers most of low ranking commissars are the one who also forced to charge like all others when blocking forces presents
@@塔兰克里格 most common function of blocking detachment was to stop and rally running and lost troops. They were too small to actually make someone to go into fight.
The Soviet invasion of Manchuria is the absolute height of Russian military accomplishments for all time. Imagine if the current russian army had commanders, logistics and soldiers as well trained and experienced as were available for that invasion.
@@wederMaxim How? The US suffered far less casualties and actually occupied the entire country and established a government that control and governed the entire country. The Soviets only controlled the major cities and roads. Which was about 50% of the Afghanistan. And the Soviets lost a lot more men and equipment Go learn some history
@@tylerclayton6081 1. In addition to American soldiers, there were others. 2. After the Soviets left, the Afghan government existed for another 3 years. How long did the Afghan Government last after the United States left?
@@wederMaxim dude that's only because the USSR committed a Cambodia or Holocaust-level atrocity through the occupation and struck fear into the hearts of the populace
@@wederMaxim both were disastrous failures. The only thing the US really has going for it is that it didn't take nearly as many casualties and the country doesn't seem like it's going to collapse after leaving the war.
Thank you for this, I'm tired of how our media always portray a nation's army through 1 trait only, ignoring the fact that armies, generals, and soldiers adapt and change over time throughout history
The Soviets actually suffered 5 million Killed in Action, the other 3 million were POWs killed under German captivity. And the germans suffered 85% of their total KIA in the Eastern front against the Red Army.
Mr Johnson , you and your team just earned my full respect , the Red Army has gained a reputation which it didnt deserve and people need to know the truth, the Red Army wasnt a wave of overwhelming numbers , but the product of nation at war , their soldiers were heroes and their equipment among the best of its era , also extra respects for the time of choosing to upload such a video , TRUE BIG BALLS shown by you and your team , truely magnificent
@@escomape5390 you simply fail to realise the scope of death and destruction the germans brought to the Soviet Union , what happened afterwards was not the conduct the Red Army but its leadership , and in case you didnt know the western allies were uneasy allies of the Soviets, they only needed them to take on the bulk of the german army , and Stalin knew that so he took his measures for the future , im not trying to sound like Stalin was a good guy, far from it, but blaming the decisions of the leadership to ordinary soviet soldiers is just wrong, and history should note that which it so often doesnt
@Prosiałke Poland suffered greatly during the war that i acknowledge , but 3 quorters of the fascist tide perished by their hand , and even though Poland did suffer under the Soviets too,thanks to them it also emerged greater than ever its British "allies" would have allowed it to.
2:27 it should be mentioned that the sheer number of deaths the Soviet Union suffered still impacts Russia (and I presume other former USSR countries) today. There is a noticeable dip in population growth every 18-20 years in Russia, of people who would be there.
No. The war was more than 70 years ago. The main problem is the realization that it will not be better. Factories are still being privatized and closed. Education is getting worse and worse.
Perhaps I'm being pedantic, but the only flaw I saw with the information in this video is a bit towards the end, in which Griffin says Stalin had "nearly zero war experience" before WWII. Stalin pretty famously (famously enough that the city was renamed in his honor, aka Stalingrad) commanded sizeable troops both during the Russian Civil War, and again during the Polish-Soviet War, although this campaign of Stalin's was less successful by several degrees. I think that Stalin was actually among the more militarily informed world leaders at the time, and felt like pointing out what I thought was a rather small error in an otherwise nice video. Loved the refutations of common myths drummed up by Cold War propaganda, though!
Trotsky was hardly a boy scout: he got his men to stay loyal by holding their families hostage. Admittedly, Stalin wasn't above such measures, either, but Trotsky could be very cold-blooded.
Prior to the Molatov-Ribentrop pact Stalin pushed for an alliance with France and the UK after the munich agreement when the UK and France sold Czechislovakia to Germany, Poland and Hungary, Stalin had an non-agression pact with Germany to try and delay war with the axis for as long as possible.
WOW! Greetings from Russia! I have to say it's an amazing job. The author took a very difficult topic, but was as objective as possible. I heard a lot of interesting facts, saw the debunking of myths about Red Army and the REAL history. My huge thanks to the author. I subscribe and like it. P.S.: Animation is just FANTASTIC. I immediately recognized Vasilevsky, Zhukov and Molotov. Such precision and approach to details is a real delight. Thanks!
Great to see a popular historian talking about the blunders and triumphs of the Soviet army in an honest manner. I'm so sick of Wheraboos chalking German success against the soviets up to "strong arian soldier fight good, weak slavic soldier fight bad" and then chalking the Soviet victories up to "German soldier cold, Soviet soldier outnumber".
3:29 About how much “comprehensive” and “sole” power possessed Joseph Vissarinovich Stalin well says such a fact. At the January Plenum of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) on January 27, 1944, Stalin, Malenkov, Zhdanov and Khrushchev sent a note to the Politburo of the Central Committee, where they proposed a serious redistribution of power between the Party committees and the Soviet authorities in favor of the Soviet authorities, including the executive committees of local Soviets. What is the point? The point is that this initiative came from three full members of the Politburo and one Candidate to the Politburo (representatives of the highest party and power leadership of the USSR). And what was the fate of this note? It was not accepted. Why? And because there was a real democracy and no full power of Stalin was not, as he could not just stomp his foot so that all around bent under this decision. Stalin would be forced to return to this issue only 2 years later, in May 1946. And that's the real power Stalin had during the war (!), who was Chairman of the State Defense Committee, Supreme Commander-in-Chief, Secretary of the Central Committee, Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars and People's Commissar of Defense - a total of 5 key government posts. And despite all these powers, he could not hold his initiative at a Politburo meeting. That's the kind of “totalitarian” power Stalin had, yes. О том, насколько "всеобъемлющей" и "единоличной" властью обладал Иосиф Виссаринович Сталин хорошо говорит такой факт. На январском Пленуме ЦК ВКП(б) [Центрального Комитета Всесоюзной Коммунистической Партии (большевиков)] 27 января 1944 года Сталин, Маленков, Жданов и Хрущев направляют записку в Политбюро ЦК, где предлагают серьезно перераспределить властные полномочия между партийными комитетами и органами Советской власти в пользу органов Советской власти, в том числе исполнительных комитетов местных Советов. А в чем суть? Дело в том, что эта инициатива исходила от трех полноправных членов Политбюро и одного Кандидата в члены Политбюро (представителей высшего партийного и властного руководства СССР). И какова была судьба этой записки? Ее не приняли. Почему? А потому что была реальная демократия и никакого полновластия Сталина не было, так как он не смог просто так топнуть ногой, чтобы все вокруг прогнулись под это решение. Сталин будет вынужден вернуться к этому вопросу только спустя 2 года, в мае 1946 года. И это реальные властные полномочия у Сталина во время войны (!), который был Председателем Государственного комитета обороны, Верховным Главнокомандующим, Секретарём Центрального Комитета, Председателем Совета Народных Комиссаров и народным комиссаром обороны - всего 5 ключевых государственных постов. И несмотря на все эти полномочия, он не мог провести свою инициативу на заседании Политбюро. Вот такая "тоталитарная" власть была у Сталина, да.
It was hilarious when at a small window of time the video was literally called "TITLE | Animated History". I thought we're gonna learn the history of titles.
I love this channel, it is so interesting and makes subjects that perhaps wouldn't be entirely enticing very catching and enjoyable. I hope one day my channel (also a history channel) will be as gripping as yours! Best the Knight of History.
This video has some minor inaccuracies. 1- the soviets proposed finland to give them a strip of land north of leningrad to Better being able to fortify the city. The finnish government accepted but the diplomat sent to accept the final soviet offer disobeyed and refused, starting the war. 2- Stalin had military experience, he was a general during the russian civil war and commanded troops during the soviet-polish war of 19-20, where he actually proved to be a very cautious strategist. He actually proved to be better than tukachevsky, which made the rookie mistake of charging with cavalry deep into poland, resulting in a major encirclement and ultimately in the polish counteroffensive, that brought the conflict to an end.
1*- there was no intention to put Finland in the "soviet Bloc", also because no soviet Bloc Existed till the end of ww2, the soviet Union was concerned with solidifying the Revolution in their own country at the time
I'm happy about this video, all I hear about was the Soviets mindlessly pushing the people to go on war against the Axis. Soviets not only have quantity but also quality on their tactics of their own.
It's pretty insane to ponder about the meaning of what was said at 5:46. In 1933 Mein Kampf was translated into russian and passed around the upper echelons of the soviet union. While we don't now exactly that Stalin read it, it seems extremely likely given his role. Also around this time all political actors in germany that were even remotely fond of the soviet union (mainly the communists and trade unionists) were killed, driven into exile or suppressed into the underground. To even suggest that Stalin could have seen Hitler as positive is utterly insane. Both frequently talked about how their respective ideologies are the bitterest enemies. To even suggest that this is a valid position to take is remarkably stupid.
At 6:36: "After finland refused to cede it's boder territories". Why again with half truths? Yes of course the soviet invasion of finland was insane, but they didn't just ask to be handed the territories near Leningrad. They wanted to exchange them for huge swaths of land in eastern karelia.
War preparations, not war efforts. I don't care that you think that Soviets won because of manpower. That is true for many parts of the war, but morale & skill played a big role. Take Zaicev (the sniper) as an example
Hi Griffin great video I hope you do a video of ".....Leadership WW2: Genius or Insanity?" of the Japanese Empire during WW2. If you think about it theirs was the definition of insanity especially given 🇯🇵 Japan's rigorous and strict culture.
Japanese high command was rather rational, but Japanese battle plans were often carried out with insane fanaticism by officers and soldiers alike. We're lucky that the US postwar occupation erased the Shinto Theocracy and broke Japan's military legacy by building a thoroughly Westernized JSDF
19:05 could it be slightly unfair to attribute the rapid invasion of Manchuria solely, as presented here, to the improved logistics of the Soviets? I would object that Fat Man had disrupted communications with home command and ability to mobilize with the growing possibility of surrender increasing rapidly atleast with the ruling elite. Asked in reverse I think this objection has more teeth, that is: had neither Nagasaki nor Kokura been bombed, would the advance have been so successful? Eventually, I think so. But not quite as it occurred. And while I actually don’t subscribe to the prototypical theory that the atomic bombs were the driving force behind the surrender, I do think they were the tailwinds propelling the pace at which Manchukuo was penetrated. And this directly, IMO, led to Emperor Hirohito’s Gyokuon-hōsō. Because we must also remember that while this is seen as a successful campaign, it’s amidst a confused surrender order and severe deficit in soldier and materiel for Japan.
Hmmm Stalin did have reasonable military experience in fact I'd say. He had commanded large sections of the Red Army in the 1920's and before that a life of banditry and evasion of the authorities and a stay in a Russian prison which all probably wised him up to a few things somewhat as well. I certainly wouldn't say he had hardly any military experience.
10:48 this is actually a very known myth spread by Khrushchev after the XX communist party's congress where he criticized Stalin. He even said Stalin thought they came to arrest him.
@TheArmchairHistorian I've said it before and I'll say it again. Your sponsor plugs are the best on TH-cam. I'm usually a pro ad dodger but I find myself very focused and interested when you start your segue.
Thank you for the detailed look at the Soviet military command structure's evolution during the war. It's very impressive that they were able to actually pull off the military overhaul they did. God be with you out there, everybody. ✝️ :)
There is some inaccuracy here: Stalin may have been a 'paranoid autocrat', as asserted in 19:37, (and in 1937 during the purges!) but Stalin certainly didn't have 'practically no military experience'. Stalin took in leading the Battle of Tsaritsyn in 1918, and was also a commander in the Polish-Soviet War in 1920. Stalin had far more military experience than Hitler, whose role in WW1 was entirely on the battlefield, rather than commanding anyone. Now, was Stalin very good at military experience in 1918-1920? Arguably not - but prowess is a separate matter.
Not so sure of "easily dealt with Wehrmacht", but if Stalin hadn't been head of the USSR beforehand I think the Soviet casualties wouldn't have been so large.
@@NefariousKoel I have fears that without Stalin, the USSR might not have won the war as a whole. His five-year plans greatly raised the economy and the country turned from an agricultural into an industrial one. You can blame him for a lot, but he understood the logistics very well.
@@tryasken - Perhaps, but I think any replacement leader would well know how far behind the USSR's industrial situation was compared to Europe at that point. It was bound to happen in that period. We just don't know whether it would've been addressed better or worse. One thing's for sure, Stalin's paranoid purges caused serious setbacks all around, not only for the military leadership.
Support our channel by checking our NordVPN exclusive deal at nordvpn.com/historyvpn
You can try it risk-free thanks to their 30-day money-back guarantee!
Sign up for Armchair History TV today! armchairhistory.tv/
Promo code: ARMCHAIRHISTORY for 50% OFF
Merchandise available at store.armchairhistory.tv/
Check out the new Armchair History TV Mobile App too!
apps.apple.com/us/app/armchair-history-tv/id1514643375
play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=tv.uscreen.armchairhistorytv
Discord: discord.gg/zY5jzKp
Twitter: twitter.com/ArmchairHist
bread expensive
Cant afford rents
Ok
Nord VPN does not work
Btw can you do more vid about the medieval age
Refusing a food shipment because you don't want to look undersupplied, 1000IQ plays
pokebmon
Mentally dominating
Pure alpha energy.
@@lentlemenproductions770 ah yes starving your citizens is an alpha move
It's the problem with strongman dictatorships. Can't ever look weak. Can't ask for help. Can't be wrong. And people die
Always remember; it's genius when it works, insanity when it doesn't.
The body count is so sad, think of the lost talent. But yeah insanity is war, war is insanity.
that's debatable
@@derrekvanee4567 Without a doubt.
@@jeb791 oh absolutely once you get down to the fine details. But to give you an example of what I mean just look at Soviet tank design. Realizing that your tanks statistically have a short lifespan and consequently shifting your entire production doctrine around that fact in order to get as many tanks to the line as possible? That falls under both genius and insanity, but it worked. So it's generally seen as a big brain play.
We see the opposite with German tank production. Heavily armed and armored behemoths designed to be produced in small numbers but possess absurd killing power. Again this falls under genius and insanity. However it didn't work and as a result we see German tank design principles frequently criticized....and rightly so *glances at the Ferdinand*
@@derrekvanee4567 the communist nations lost a lot of men in the world war.
it would be cool to have this "genius or insanity" as a series, specially since we already have the german one
Churchill would be the most interesting om that list. Maybe Mussolini too
France
I’d say Roosevelt,Napoleon etc
China and Japan
Japanese during WW2 would be an interesting episode in this format...
The perfect example of “you learn far more from failure than success.”
A shame it costed like 10 million lives
@@Dourkan nah, there wouldn't have any Russian left, or any European left, not just 10 millions dead if Stalin not hard
:hoetzendorf: moment
@@theluiginoidperson1097 truly
@@tmq0311....silly idealistes still don't understand the fate of untermenshen. 11 millioms of war casualties and or 100+ after defeat.
Moustache guy really thought big cats could stop the soviet counter-attack
Hello
what the soviet's and Russia today have/had is man power, not strategic genius. those "big cats" cause a lot of damage to the soviet army in the nazi's retreat to Germany.
@@sydryi3086You sound pathetic 🤡.
@@sydryi3086 Okay and? Naz-bot keep crying 1 million lost in the Battle of Berlin for no reason good job
@@sydryi3086We see only man power without strategy and industry in China.
They didn't end war in Tokyo(or Harbin), like Soviet's in Berlin
Early war:
Hitler allows his general to act as they find it suitable
Stalin holds a total control over anything
End war:
Stalin allows his general to act as they find it suitable
Hitler holds a total control over anything
Something like that was mentioned in a video I've watched somewhere on YT, and actually it's pretty accurate, since near the end of war Hitler was convinced that his generals betray him, don't act as he demands because they follow their own ambitions, and the other things like that.
To be fair to both leaders it's not entirely sensible to let generals operate completely autonomously since they could not be aware of certain strategic concerns.
@@Pasta_Pirate right and sometimes rulers can make good decisions overruling their generals. like imagine if rommel fucked up in france and ruined everything because he didn't follow Hitler's orders... in our timeline, the germans lucked out, but im sure it had a chance of going totally south if the allies exploited that area
@@Pasta_Pirate still Hitler at the end of the war acted just like Stalin right before Operation Barbarossa, and during its early stages. And only the generals' "disobedience" made it kinda work
The 20 July Plot certainly didn't help, but even if that hadn't occurred, Hitler would have felt betrayed regardless, as his *massive* ego made him believe that all of his ideas were flawless and that they only failed because of the stupidity, cowardice, and/or disloyalty of those beneath him. He truly believed that will alone would lead him to victory, and when it didn't, he narcissistically refused to accept his own failings and blamed everybody else.
It really does have more nuance than that. But we don't have to get into it.
Joseph Stalin was an odd example of not crazy but definetly not sane at the same time.
He was just unique...
He was crazy, he sent women into battle. Not even the Mongols would do that. And mongols helped USSR
I had to remove or I am going get banned
@@AltaiAustro-Hungarian sending women into battle is a classic desperate move, paraguay did it, germany did it, it is something reserved for when you are running out of men
@@pedrocesarsakihara1853 well my great grandfather was wehrmacht and he hated the fact he had to fight women. I forgot say he surrendered to the west rather than the red army. Allies did not send women to the front
And really evil.
@@pedrocesarsakihara1853 Deutschland never sent women to war
I hope we see even more of these "Insanity or Genius" videos soon.
Lots of good choices Mao, Hitler, Napoleon, and many more!
@@pauljimerson8218 They already did Hitler. Mao and Napoleon could be interesting choices for such videos, though.
Saddam Hussein/Ayatollah during the Iraq-Iran war maybe?
Putin
@This Apple Judges Well, it originally had a name with "Insanity or Genius" in it.
Stalin and Hitler never saw each other as “kindred spirits”. He read Mein Kampf and knew Hitler wanted to invade the USSR. He simply wanted to protect a mutual defense pact to avoid war until the USSR was more prepared.
@Henry Hudson for self-defense. The Nazis did it as a project settler colonialism. The Soviets took land to act as a buffer zone in case of a German invasion. And good thing they did as, had the Soviet Union not gained this territory, Germany would have likely defeated the Soviet Union, making their conquest of the world nearly inevitable.
Eastern Europe: you mean territory east of the Curzon Line ceded to Poland after the Polish-Soviet War?
Two words: katyn massacre
@Henry Hudson Stalin returned back the territories that were occupied by the Poles. What's wrong with that?
@Henry Hudson Lol nope. Part of polish territory is Belarussian, because Stalin returned 1 region back to Poland without permission from the Belarussians. Also "Transnistria" was always Russian-Ukrainian region. Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia were fascist states and favored Hitler, as well as Finland. We should not forget the crimes against humanity that were commited by these nations.
I think a lot of people misunderstand the 3 to 1 ratio in military theory. 3 to 1 is the preferred ratio to conduct an attack with some level of assurance of victory and reduces the likelihood of high casualties.
If you don't have a 3 to 1 advantage you can compensate with supporting arms (like artillery, air power, or armored support) or with basic principles of warfare like surprise, but if you can't compensate any attack is likely to result in high casualties without a guarantee of success.
@@secretname4190 Western front had.
Yeah but remember your enemy also has supporting arms, you`re not the only who has artillery or air support
@@shubhampreetsingh8630 true and that is part of why it's so hard to achieve a 3 to 1 ratio because in military theory supporting arms are what are called combat power multipliers meaning that artillery or air power increases the relative combat power of supported units. All of which means that if your opponent has supporting arms you have to increase the amount of troops or support to compensate or use other principles of warfare like mass, surprise, or tempo to try to gain temporary advantages.
Yes, 3:1 doesn’t refer to numbers of available Soldiers but combat power. For example, a 6 man rifle squad vs a 2 man .50 Cal Crew would have the numerical advantage, but the 3:1 combat power would be with the MG crew.
So why did Germany win so much at the beginning in 1941 when most of their operations didn’t have a 3 to 1 advantage?
“TITLE” is a criminally ignored part of history. I’m so glad Armchair Historian is giving this era the attention it deserves!
Cringe comment
@@space4166 ok
@@space4166 bruh
@@space4166 🤓
what is "TITLE"
I love watching TITLE, best episode ever.
ikr
Bro same
Man i really love this TITLE episode
Indeed.
agreed
Actually, Stalin did have some military experience (from his time as a Red commander during the Russian Civil War). But even that was not much: his biggest involvement at the time was during the Tsaritsyn Offensive (later renamed Stalingrad, and eventually Volgograd), in the early days of the war.
And even that was mostly handled by another guy whom Stalin purged to ensure he could take all the credit. Stalin's real strength was his keen understanding of logistics, which worked very well once he started listening to his generals.
He also fought the poles in the early 1920s with communist militia. And lost
@@anjetto1 I read the book "Seize and Hold"
Great coverage of the Russian battles against Poland in 1920. Stalin disobeyed orders and the advance went unsupported by his elements.
He was also responsible for the loss against Poland by not aiding the other commander and going on to capture another town
Wasn't Stalin also involved with the ill advised invasion of Poland in 1920?
If I remember correctly from a Russian documentary or other youtube history channel, Order 227 is designed to punish not only retreating commanders without authorisation but also commanders who refuse to retreat even when they're being ordered to.
Does it make it less fubar
Tick History ?
No. I'm reading the text right now. It's about discipline and order. It's about "we have no territory to trade for time". No retreat without order.
I believe"Tik said it was a directed at middle management"
@@Therealbkbk2019 sorry? I've read the order, it's published, no need to invent text and intentions.
"The Boy can't even shoot straight"
-Stalin finding out his oldest son Yakov had shot himself
Why the hell would i trade a lieutenant for a field marshall?! -Stalin when his son got captured and the germans offered to trade him for a captured field marshall
And yet he grieved when Yakov died anyway, and vented it by abusing his younger son, Vasily. This drove the young man to alcoholism.
@@pyromania1018 he still loved him after all it was his son but that much killing had made him emotionless.
@@pyromania1018 Source: Wikipedia, but then again he couldn’t exchange a Field-Marshal for a Lieutenant, and furthermore, he couldn’t really exchange any prisoner at all as it would've been unfair for the other millions of soviets who were imprisoned,
And he said as much in his formal response to the German offer:
"You have in your hands not only my son Yakov, but millions of my sons. Either you free them all or my son will share their fate."
@@Yo-ps2pf Stalin didn't because it would hurt his image and therefore his position as the "top guy".. if for some reason he could achieve it silently, he probably would
The quality of animation in this episode is honestly staggering. Extremely impressive work.
It's almost hilarious to see the Japanese manchurian army just folded like wet noodle once the veteran, grizzled red army just fresh from Berlin come knocking at their doors...
I think the “not one step back” order gets a lot of unfair flack, look at the numbers it was not like enemy at the gates where they had machine guns lined up gunning down scared soldiers. It was more to punish officers for unsanctioned retreats and placing soldiers into penal battalions for desertion.
For how gargantuan an army the Red Army was there were relatively few soldiers outright shot for desertion.
Sure this was brutal but this was the fucking Nazis at the door slaughtering millions of civilians. There’s a reason many Soviet veterans uphold this ruling.
Agreed. I am from Kazakhstan and it's so offensive when westerners believe that our ancestors were forced to fight for their own country
Damn right you are. To say more NKVD divisions did actual figting netherless than normal army.
@@user-rl6nk9sh7i Kazakhstan the Russian colony? You were as much an equal part of the Soviets as Jamaica was British
@@Rynewulf nah. Had Jamaica formal right to get away out of under the brits? Were there factories that worked for the interests of the locals,like in Kazakhstan? Or atleast was local culture embraced by the metropoly? I don't think so. Plus Kazakhstan was called republic,not the colony. So in Soviet times Kazakhstan was anything but a colony. Unlike ukranian territories in Poland or Hawai in US. Or Jamaica.
Apologies if my english seems to broken as hell.
@@user-rl6nk9sh7i база
Actually Stalin had military experience. He went through the entire revolution as chairman of the military council where he made important military decisions. And about the unwillingness to believe that the Nazis attacked the USSR, Stalin repeatedly received information about various invasions, and in such a stream it is rather difficult to assess which of these is true. But in any case, the country was not ready for war. But I can respect him for his loyalty. The fact that all his sons served at the front and that he refused to exchange his son for a German general. And also that he did not leave Moscow when the Nazis were already a few kilometers away.
actually his 2nd son Vasily Stalin was very corrupted and rare did combat, his colleagues hated him and nepotism often promoted him to positions he was not fit for.
Also at the beginning of the war he hid away in a bunker and did not take command
And Stalin also sucked as a general and his combat experience was truly bad.
Stalin had military experience in the revolution the same way George W. Bush had military experience in the Iraq war: While he was technically in a leadership position, other people did all the work.
His loyalty to what? Himself? Stalin wasn't loyal to anyone, people were loyal to Stalin. He refused to exchange his son for a German general because it was objectively a bad trade. His son wasn't worth a general. The Germans were hoping Stalin would ignore that fact because, you know, it was his son; but the Man of Steel also had a heart of steel.
@RAMY2472 I think he would've left, for one simple reason: Unlike Hitler in Berlin, there was actually somewhere for him to go and continue the war even if Moscow fell. Hitler was going down with his ship.
Russian in the video
1:00 - Molotov-Ribbentrov pact (the secret protocol)
5:04 (Миша) - Cute word for a bear (e.g. cat - kitty)
10:24 - Same as 1:00
13:50 (Атака) - Attack
A comment to support this content.
@@secretname4190 "little sh*t"
Cool
This has become one of my personal favorites i just love the animation and the detailed explanition is amazing! The channel keeps getting better and better!
K.
Xxx,💦
Life as the leader of the Soviet Union was quite difficult if I’m being honest, ever since I retired to work as a housewife things have been much easier
I always wondered, did Stalin have big pp?
Mom, can i join NATO?
If you’re a mistress…. Then where’s your hidden friend?
Здравствуйте товарищ !
War criminal
The greatest contribution by far was moving industry behind Ural mountains and quickly ramping it up.
An overlooked part which the video didn't cover, was the removal of Corps-level military organization unit, making Divisions directly subordinate to Armies.
On one hand, it saved up on Officers which were few and allowed fast-track promotion for exceptionally talented leaders and tacticians when they were needed most; on the other, it meant that every army commander now had to manage up to 32 different detachments if not more, with bad radio communication and constant german air raids on HQs.
This overwhelming encumbrance was a leading reason for errors and mistakes in the field. A great example of the Stress was Chuikov's state in the Battle of Stalingrad, although it was present in other fronts.
Very good point. It also probably wasn’t helped by the fact Soviet divisions were also smaller than German divisions; so it requires even more effort when moving sizeable amounts of men around.
@@chrisstucker1813 they were smaller, but there was a whole lot more of them. It's not strictly about the number of men, but rather the frames within which they are organized.
The visual animations added to the in depth assessments are just fantastic! Great work as always! :)
FDR: “He’s gonna invade.”
Churchill: “He’s gonna invade.”
Soviet spies: “He’s gonna invade.”
Stalin: “ME WHEN YOUR MOM-“
Stalin knew an invasion was coming. Keep in mind Mein Kampf was a published book, and in it Hitler expressed his dreams of conquering the Bolsheviks to the East. Stalin knew this and wanted to play the diplomatic game and keep Germany at bay by keeping on time with the resources trade (part of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact which saw Soviet resources like oil and grain transported to the Nazis) so his army could build up.
Now you could say him 'shooting his own officers was his fault' but men like Tukhachevsky had been discovered dealing with the Wehrmacht, and personally I wouldn't let that slide.
@@REDHOUR1943 Very true.
@@secretname4190 But he did not lead the German nation. He lead the Russian nation. Stalin had seen a war with western powers coming and acknowledged this somewhere right after becoming leader of the Soviet nation, which is why he implemented the "Five Year Plan" which turned the USSR into an industrial nation rather than an agricultural nation.
The myth that Stalin had a breakdown at the beginning of the war is a myth. Stalin's leadership is unquestionable, and this. isbacked with logs showing he had meetings with his generals at the outbreak of the war - from morning to night, only stopping to rest after long blocks of work.
@@secretname4190 He wasn't caught off guard he purposfully didnt't position his army in the border as to not allow the germans an easy act of political propaganda to justify the war claiming that te soviets were going to attack them, thanks to this operation barbarossa was unqestionably a war of german agression. He did underestimate how long it would take for his armies in reserve to deploy and be functional on the field after the war started leading to many units being surrounded and destroyed by the blitzkrieg, but giving up land to the germans so they would overstretch and then counterattack was always part of the strategy, just not that much land.
@@secretname4190 Ha! Operation icebreaker so you believe in historical fantasy, no point arguing with you then. I will just say that the only actual evidence is that the only soviet military personel un the border were the border guards, icebreaker as much as it may pain you just repeats nazi propaganda about a preemptive atack even though the soviets kept very little garrison near Germany for that exact reason. Unless you have actual prove that there were soviet military preparations for an atack (which you don't because there weren't) or you have an explanation to why would the soviets atacked before the end of the second 5 year plan which would have ended in early 1943 then you should admit that your theory is fiction. Stalling favored Stalin since the soviet economy was growing much faster than the german one hence why the germans were in such a rush and were forced to get themselves into a two front war. Stalin mostly thought that Hitler wouldn't atack until he and Churchil had reached a peace agreement.
The thing I like about these videos is how they combine rigorous academic precision with occasional surgical, but devastating burns, delivered with just the barest hint of emotion.
Griff's understated burn of "Enemy at the Gates" and "Call of Duty: World at War" in this video is a great example. His final words in the Isonzo video are another.
i don't remember blocking units being in WaW. I'm saw them only in CoD 1, which perfectly recreated scene from Enemy at the Gates
Enemy of Bill Gates is just a bad fantasy
Dont forget the single player campaign of Company of Heroes 2
19:39 - He did have *some* military experience, although not good experience, his bungling in the Polish Soviet war by disobeying orders to support Tukhachevsky in attacking warsaw is pretty infamous
The problem is not Soviet leadership. The problem is why Steiner's attack failed.
Failed? No Steiner's attack is coming just you wait
"Mein Fuhrer.... Steiner... "
@@sooryan_1018"Steiner.......didn't have the enough troops. The attack never happened....."
Hitler: DAS WAR EIN BEFEHL!!
People often criticize the Soviet Union but we owe the freedom of the world to the suffering and hardships of the soviets in WW2
The only way USSR won was bcuz of American lendlease lmao
@@wilno7579 no? Most of their equipment was home made. And guns are only so much compared to the fighting spirit of the people. 75% of the casualties were caused by them.
@@wilno7579by 1944 only 5-7% of equipment was lendlease in Soviet production
Your country was like a sideshow in WW2. The soviets destroyed any part of Germany
@@Itsjusthim22 why are you responding to comments if you can’t actually understand them? Try rereading my comment
"Victory cannot be achieved without sacrifice Mason. We Russians know this better than anyone" - Victor Reznov, COD Black Ops
China: *ahem*
@@california816 China: keeping 80% of the Japanese army occupied throughout war together with their supplies and equipment.
Rest of the world: I pretend I did not see that
I still quote that game to myself years later now that I'm grown and feeling down sometimes.
After learning about the Russian casualties from WW2, that quote, as an American, still gives me some chills and goosebumps. CoD managed to give so much respect to the Russians all in one quote.
@@DatcleanMochaJo There is no respect to be had for russians,look at their actions in ww2 like invading Finalnd,Baltics,Poland with Germany,bullying and terorizing smaller countries and its own people,communist fanaticism and russian chauvinism lead to the massives losses in ww2 to Germany,this is no different than Mussolini's quote that he needs some dead bodies to stand proud at the peace conference.
If anyone is to blame for the deaths of soviets its the soviet union,the most evil regime the earth had ever seen,not the germans who saw the writings on the wall and soviet concentration and offensive postering on the border with them. Had you lived under communism you wouldnt think as you do.
Modern russian actions should also be a wakeup call.
Wow, incredible analysis!
My great grandfather fought in Manchjuria. People often overlook this conflict, while in reality it was important to show just how powerful USSR was at the time to the US and the world, as the soviets steamrolled Japan's elite army in 2 weeks.
Manchukuo’s army by that point wouldn’t be something you could call “elite” - that said, I can’t say the Soviet soldiers in that part of the conflict performed in any manner other than excellently. They’d had the entire war to perfect their art - and that was against the Nazis - their morale was absolutely the very best then also.
@@jimtalbott9535 japan marale was just as high.....but there inferiere tech army and lack of equipment numpers and good genrules.....but at that piont it was trully the best and the bigest mianland army of japan becouse the others were consomed with China and England
By 1945 the Japanese army in Manchuria was weak, consisting of many raw recruits and conscripts. Most of it's heavy equipment and best soldiers had been redeployed to fight the Americans and Chinese.
@@richardstephens5570 They didn't have any luck against Soviets in 1938 or 1939 either
@Prosiałke Relatively to all the forces Japan had at that point lol)
Another masterpiece made by the armchair historian, keep up the great work!
Was always under the impression that the Soviet Red Army had a reputation for fighting like the Japanese. Extreme brutality, fight to the death, fight for every meter of space, point blank artillery strikes, and shoot your way through their cities. Not to forget the Palov's house episode.
So was germany. Only allies had both numerical and firepower superiority. And even then it was never easy ride.
Considering that the enemy who has come burns your home, kills your relatives or takes them to Germany .. Soviet soldiers clearly had reason to fight to the death
They didn’t banzai charge and they weren’t particularly fanatical. But they definitely had every reason to do so. But unlike Japan for which you would find barely any prisoners by the end, there were millions of Soviet POWs.
Jack Sparrow once said it is amazing how often insanity and being a genius coincide.
Also nice words about blocking detachments. It's so nice to hear something apart from: "that was a pure NKVD units, who was firing at soldiers, showing fear"
Yes the blocking detachment were not “commissars” or “political officers”but NKVD soldiers instead of officers
most of low ranking commissars are the one who also forced to charge like all others when blocking forces presents
@@塔兰克里格 most common function of blocking detachment was to stop and rally running and lost troops. They were too small to actually make someone to go into fight.
Agent: here’s good information
Stalin: no and multiple insults
What were the said insults for curiosity sake?
go and do your mom and uh little c word or bitch
Average middle schooler
You arab?
Some agents had "good information", but there were hundreds agents with "good information"
8:15 Didn't expect Stalin to be so hilariously uncouth.
4:42 Mistake here is that Budyonny was never purged. He was Stalin’s trusted marshal.
Also, it’s “Sor-gey” not Sorge as in “Surge”.
No, it's 'Lig-ma'
The Soviet invasion of Manchuria is the absolute height of Russian military accomplishments for all time.
Imagine if the current russian army had commanders, logistics and soldiers as well trained and experienced as were available for that invasion.
Tecnicaly, they have all the cards to do that and past experience
They just refuse it
I would love a vid on the Soviet-Afghan War. It's such an influential conflict that is so rarely discussed and analyzed.
No. Then we will have to admit that the USSR has achieved more in Afghanistan in 10 years than the United States has in 20.
@@wederMaxim How? The US suffered far less casualties and actually occupied the entire country and established a government that control and governed the entire country.
The Soviets only controlled the major cities and roads. Which was about 50% of the Afghanistan. And the Soviets lost a lot more men and equipment
Go learn some history
@@tylerclayton6081 1. In addition to American soldiers, there were others.
2. After the Soviets left, the Afghan government existed for another 3 years. How long did the Afghan Government last after the United States left?
@@wederMaxim dude that's only because the USSR committed a Cambodia or Holocaust-level atrocity through the occupation and struck fear into the hearts of the populace
@@wederMaxim both were disastrous failures. The only thing the US really has going for it is that it didn't take nearly as many casualties and the country doesn't seem like it's going to collapse after leaving the war.
Finally a Soviet version
Now we need an Italian one
One for Great Britain would be great too.
And America
I don’t think anyone would accuse the Italians in WW2 of being geniuses
@@jackparker8602 💀
@@jackparker8602 True
You forgot to mention the Soviet attempts to make an anti german alliance in the early 30s with the uk and france which they both refused
The policy of collective security
Thank you for this, I'm tired of how our media always portray a nation's army through 1 trait only, ignoring the fact that armies, generals, and soldiers adapt and change over time throughout history
The Soviets actually suffered 5 million Killed in Action, the other 3 million were POWs killed under German captivity. And the germans suffered 85% of their total KIA in the Eastern front against the Red Army.
Amazing documentary. As a history student in university, i appreciate the unbiased and informative approach you have in your videos. Keep it up!
Well, his GDR video wasn't unbiased
Unbiased. This is just another shitty video full of western propaganda on Stalin and Soviets in general.
Soviet commander: "We've lost 10 million more"
Stalin: "No prob, here's 10 million more"
100 000 000 000 000 millions. Be brave, lie more.
"We have more men than they have bullets"
-Joseph Stalin, absolute legend.
Keep up the good work man
You have no idea how long I’ve been looking forward to this video
5:15 The way hitler just awkwardly walked up and stared at stalin legit made me laught lol
Mr Johnson , you and your team just earned my full respect , the Red Army has gained a reputation which it didnt deserve and people need to know the truth, the Red Army wasnt a wave of overwhelming numbers , but the product of nation at war , their soldiers were heroes and their equipment among the best of its era , also extra respects for the time of choosing to upload such a video , TRUE BIG BALLS shown by you and your team , truely magnificent
Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact says otherwise. Occupations, murders and deportations before going head to head with Germany.
It deserves that reputation
@@escomape5390 you simply fail to realise the scope of death and destruction the germans brought to the Soviet Union , what happened afterwards was not the conduct the Red Army but its leadership , and in case you didnt know the western allies were uneasy allies of the Soviets, they only needed them to take on the bulk of the german army , and Stalin knew that so he took his measures for the future , im not trying to sound like Stalin was a good guy, far from it, but blaming the decisions of the leadership to ordinary soviet soldiers is just wrong, and history should note that which it so often doesnt
@@lazaroskordas4397 you’re right with the statement that soviet soldiers were very tough fighters
@Prosiałke Poland suffered greatly during the war that i acknowledge , but 3 quorters of the fascist tide perished by their hand , and even though Poland did suffer under the Soviets too,thanks to them it also emerged greater than ever its British "allies" would have allowed it to.
0:00 >> Intro
0:48 >> Sponser
2:04 >> Content
Amazing work! Well researched and explained in a very informative and entertaining way, thank you!
2:27 it should be mentioned that the sheer number of deaths the Soviet Union suffered still impacts Russia (and I presume other former USSR countries) today. There is a noticeable dip in population growth every 18-20 years in Russia, of people who would be there.
No. The war was more than 70 years ago. The main problem is the realization that it will not be better. Factories are still being privatized and closed. Education is getting worse and worse.
And Putin is making it even worse now.
@@wederMaximYes, but he is right also.
Perhaps I'm being pedantic, but the only flaw I saw with the information in this video is a bit towards the end, in which Griffin says Stalin had "nearly zero war experience" before WWII. Stalin pretty famously (famously enough that the city was renamed in his honor, aka Stalingrad) commanded sizeable troops both during the Russian Civil War, and again during the Polish-Soviet War, although this campaign of Stalin's was less successful by several degrees. I think that Stalin was actually among the more militarily informed world leaders at the time, and felt like pointing out what I thought was a rather small error in an otherwise nice video. Loved the refutations of common myths drummed up by Cold War propaganda, though!
Although pretty infamously he pulled troops to support Tukhachevsky at Warsaw in the Polish-Soviet war
OMG the art is breath taking and informative
Everyone: Stalin was odd, but not crazy
Leon Trotsky: Boys, do I have a story to tell you
And ever so slightly obsessed with being a bully , as Leon would find out
Trotsky: so yeah thats basically why- *gets mined like an ore*
Trotsky was hardly a boy scout: he got his men to stay loyal by holding their families hostage. Admittedly, Stalin wasn't above such measures, either, but Trotsky could be very cold-blooded.
Prior to the Molatov-Ribentrop pact Stalin pushed for an alliance with France and the UK after the munich agreement when the UK and France sold Czechislovakia to Germany, Poland and Hungary, Stalin had an non-agression pact with Germany to try and delay war with the axis for as long as possible.
WOW!
Greetings from Russia! I have to say it's an amazing job. The author took a very difficult topic, but was as objective as possible. I heard a lot of interesting facts, saw the debunking of myths about Red Army and the REAL history. My huge thanks to the author. I subscribe and like it.
P.S.: Animation is just FANTASTIC. I immediately recognized Vasilevsky, Zhukov and Molotov. Such precision and approach to details is a real delight. Thanks!
Common Griffin W
Griffin W
Griffin W
W
Griffin W
W
Great to see a popular historian talking about the blunders and triumphs of the Soviet army in an honest manner.
I'm so sick of Wheraboos chalking German success against the soviets up to "strong arian soldier fight good, weak slavic soldier fight bad" and then chalking the Soviet victories up to "German soldier cold, Soviet soldier outnumber".
3:29 About how much “comprehensive” and “sole” power possessed Joseph Vissarinovich Stalin well says such a fact.
At the January Plenum of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) on January 27, 1944, Stalin, Malenkov, Zhdanov and Khrushchev sent a note to the Politburo of the Central Committee, where they proposed a serious redistribution of power between the Party committees and the Soviet authorities in favor of the Soviet authorities, including the executive committees of local Soviets.
What is the point? The point is that this initiative came from three full members of the Politburo and one Candidate to the Politburo (representatives of the highest party and power leadership of the USSR). And what was the fate of this note? It was not accepted. Why? And because there was a real democracy and no full power of Stalin was not, as he could not just stomp his foot so that all around bent under this decision. Stalin would be forced to return to this issue only 2 years later, in May 1946. And that's the real power Stalin had during the war (!), who was Chairman of the State Defense Committee, Supreme Commander-in-Chief, Secretary of the Central Committee, Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars and People's Commissar of Defense - a total of 5 key government posts. And despite all these powers, he could not hold his initiative at a Politburo meeting.
That's the kind of “totalitarian” power Stalin had, yes.
О том, насколько "всеобъемлющей" и "единоличной" властью обладал Иосиф Виссаринович Сталин хорошо говорит такой факт.
На январском Пленуме ЦК ВКП(б) [Центрального Комитета Всесоюзной Коммунистической Партии (большевиков)] 27 января 1944 года Сталин, Маленков, Жданов и Хрущев направляют записку в Политбюро ЦК, где предлагают серьезно перераспределить властные полномочия между партийными комитетами и органами Советской власти в пользу органов Советской власти, в том числе исполнительных комитетов местных Советов.
А в чем суть? Дело в том, что эта инициатива исходила от трех полноправных членов Политбюро и одного Кандидата в члены Политбюро (представителей высшего партийного и властного руководства СССР). И какова была судьба этой записки? Ее не приняли. Почему? А потому что была реальная демократия и никакого полновластия Сталина не было, так как он не смог просто так топнуть ногой, чтобы все вокруг прогнулись под это решение. Сталин будет вынужден вернуться к этому вопросу только спустя 2 года, в мае 1946 года. И это реальные властные полномочия у Сталина во время войны (!), который был Председателем Государственного комитета обороны, Верховным Главнокомандующим, Секретарём Центрального Комитета, Председателем Совета Народных Комиссаров и народным комиссаром обороны - всего 5 ключевых государственных постов. И несмотря на все эти полномочия, он не мог провести свою инициативу на заседании Политбюро.
Вот такая "тоталитарная" власть была у Сталина, да.
Great video as always. Always watch these as soon as they drop. Keep up the good work.
It was hilarious when at a small window of time the video was literally called "TITLE | Animated History". I thought we're gonna learn the history of titles.
I think this is best episode so far, thanks for such great content!
I love this channel, it is so interesting and makes subjects that perhaps wouldn't be entirely enticing very catching and enjoyable. I hope one day my channel (also a history channel) will be as gripping as yours! Best the Knight of History.
Context: they put "title" on the video title instead of "Soviet Leadership WW2: Genius or Insanity?"
Best channel for understanding WW2 with soothing voice 👍
This video has some minor inaccuracies. 1- the soviets proposed finland to give them a strip of land north of leningrad to Better being able to fortify the city. The finnish government accepted but the diplomat sent to accept the final soviet offer disobeyed and refused, starting the war.
2- Stalin had military experience, he was a general during the russian civil war and commanded troops during the soviet-polish war of 19-20, where he actually proved to be a very cautious strategist. He actually proved to be better than tukachevsky, which made the rookie mistake of charging with cavalry deep into poland, resulting in a major encirclement and ultimately in the polish counteroffensive, that brought the conflict to an end.
1*- there was no intention to put Finland in the "soviet Bloc", also because no soviet Bloc Existed till the end of ww2, the soviet Union was concerned with solidifying the Revolution in their own country at the time
Best 'TITLE' I've read recently🤙. Also, GREAT VIDEO!!
I keep seeing title is it referring to the title or something else
what is "TITLE"
@@Schoolboyfrm5th so when it was uploaded, the title for this video was "TITLE|Animated History"
I'm happy about this video, all I hear about was the Soviets mindlessly pushing the people to go on war against the Axis. Soviets not only have quantity but also quality on their tactics of their own.
I really enjoy Armchair historian videos. The history class we all wish we had in High School. Top notch stuff.
Thank you for mentioning Marshal Vasilevsky, one of my favourite figures in Russian Military History.
The presentation is simply phenomenal
It's pretty insane to ponder about the meaning of what was said at 5:46.
In 1933 Mein Kampf was translated into russian and passed around the upper echelons of the soviet union. While we don't now exactly that Stalin read it, it seems extremely likely given his role. Also around this time all political actors in germany that were even remotely fond of the soviet union (mainly the communists and trade unionists) were killed, driven into exile or suppressed into the underground.
To even suggest that Stalin could have seen Hitler as positive is utterly insane. Both frequently talked about how their respective ideologies are the bitterest enemies. To even suggest that this is a valid position to take is remarkably stupid.
At 6:36: "After finland refused to cede it's boder territories".
Why again with half truths? Yes of course the soviet invasion of finland was insane, but they didn't just ask to be handed the territories near Leningrad. They wanted to exchange them for huge swaths of land in eastern karelia.
4:41 - Budyonny was not shot
in my opinion you should consider doing a video like this with the japanese leadership and command
They were just stupid.
5:04 this part symbolizes the soviet war effort very perfectly
War preparations, not war efforts. I don't care that you think that Soviets won because of manpower. That is true for many parts of the war, but morale & skill played a big role. Take Zaicev (the sniper) as an example
The production quality of this channel is great.
Hi Griffin great video I hope you do a video of ".....Leadership WW2: Genius or Insanity?" of the Japanese Empire during WW2. If you think about it theirs was the definition of insanity especially given 🇯🇵 Japan's rigorous and strict culture.
It was just insanity, like if you were a soldier and your commander was a rival of someone in the navy, you were screw
Saying just "japan" won't work, we need someone
@@takebacktheholyland9306 why someone? I didn't just say Japan but referring to the Empire of Japan or Imperial Japan.
@@itsblitz4437 No I meant, did you mean hirohito or tojo? because as well known hirohito may be, tojo was actually the one pulling the strings
Japanese high command was rather rational, but Japanese battle plans were often carried out with insane fanaticism by officers and soldiers alike. We're lucky that the US postwar occupation erased the Shinto Theocracy and broke Japan's military legacy by building a thoroughly Westernized JSDF
Hey, Mr. Armchair & Armchair team. I just wanted to tell you that i appreciate the work you guys do!
0:55 they didn't need encrypt it, they just had to write in Russian cursive
Actually no, the needed to ask russian medics to just write (even they can't understand their cursive)
19:05 could it be slightly unfair to attribute the rapid invasion of Manchuria solely, as presented here, to the improved logistics of the Soviets? I would object that Fat Man had disrupted communications with home command and ability to mobilize with the growing possibility of surrender increasing rapidly atleast with the ruling elite. Asked in reverse I think this objection has more teeth, that is: had neither Nagasaki nor Kokura been bombed, would the advance have been so successful?
Eventually, I think so. But not quite as it occurred. And while I actually don’t subscribe to the prototypical theory that the atomic bombs were the driving force behind the surrender, I do think they were the tailwinds propelling the pace at which Manchukuo was penetrated. And this directly, IMO, led to Emperor Hirohito’s Gyokuon-hōsō. Because we must also remember that while this is seen as a successful campaign, it’s amidst a confused surrender order and severe deficit in soldier and materiel for Japan.
Bro what lol, how did bombing of surrendering Japan helped the Soviets to advance in Eastern Front
This video saved me from a question on my history exam. Thanks
Hmmm Stalin did have reasonable military experience in fact I'd say. He had commanded large sections of the Red Army in the 1920's and before that a life of banditry and evasion of the authorities and a stay in a Russian prison which all probably wised him up to a few things somewhat as well.
I certainly wouldn't say he had hardly any military experience.
But that goes against op's chosen narrative.
You should make a video on the boxer rebellion, its fairly unknown and would be interesting
An underrated comment
Title sure is my favorite animated history video
10:48 this is actually a very known myth spread by Khrushchev after the XX communist party's congress where he criticized Stalin. He even said Stalin thought they came to arrest him.
@TheArmchairHistorian I've said it before and I'll say it again. Your sponsor plugs are the best on TH-cam. I'm usually a pro ad dodger but I find myself very focused and interested when you start your segue.
13:51 stalin doing the 💀
Plz do a vid on Korean War from the Korean perspective. Also, a comparison of Korean military uniforms would be very interesting.
Thank you for the detailed look at the Soviet military command structure's evolution during the war. It's very impressive that they were able to actually pull off the military overhaul they did.
God be with you out there, everybody. ✝️ :)
Thank you for dispelling the myths
Great Video! Keep up the good work
You should do Japan next, this series is great!
There's a fine line between genius and insanity.
Look at the results and that will tell you whether something is insane or genius.
If I was a History teacher, I wouldn't hesitate to show your videos they are so well made
There is some inaccuracy here: Stalin may have been a 'paranoid autocrat', as asserted in 19:37, (and in 1937 during the purges!) but Stalin certainly didn't have 'practically no military experience'. Stalin took in leading the Battle of Tsaritsyn in 1918, and was also a commander in the Polish-Soviet War in 1920. Stalin had far more military experience than Hitler, whose role in WW1 was entirely on the battlefield, rather than commanding anyone.
Now, was Stalin very good at military experience in 1918-1920? Arguably not - but prowess is a separate matter.
If Stalin didn’t purge his officers and waste troops in Finland the rest army probably could have more easily dealt with the Wehrmacht.
idk about Finland. weren't those losses kinda small compared to what the soviets drummed up fighting the wehrmacht
Not so sure of "easily dealt with Wehrmacht", but if Stalin hadn't been head of the USSR beforehand I think the Soviet casualties wouldn't have been so large.
@@NefariousKoel I have fears that without Stalin, the USSR might not have won the war as a whole. His five-year plans greatly raised the economy and the country turned from an agricultural into an industrial one. You can blame him for a lot, but he understood the logistics very well.
@@tryasken - Perhaps, but I think any replacement leader would well know how far behind the USSR's industrial situation was compared to Europe at that point. It was bound to happen in that period. We just don't know whether it would've been addressed better or worse. One thing's for sure, Stalin's paranoid purges caused serious setbacks all around, not only for the military leadership.