Re: Further costs of war (fwd)

[dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)]

The following has zero crypto relevance.

Jim Choate <ravage@ssz.com> writes:

> > In 1904/5 (what's a couple of years between punks) the japs beat the shit o
> > of the tzar, not Stalin, because of the tzarist army's supreme incompetence
> > and also because of severe internal unrest in Russia (general strikes and
> > uprisings everywhere).
>
> It was still Russia. The claims of incompetence and internal unrest apply to
> both regimes. Is there some point you wish to review regarding this point?

My point was that Russia might have negotiated a better peace at Portmouth, NH,
if it wasn't forced to stop fighting by the general strike.

> > Prior to that, the japs effectively beat Russia in 1875(?).
>
> Actualy, the Russians never beat the Japanese prior to Khalkal Gol.
>
> [deleted material, relevance unclear]

Actually, the Russians forced the japs out of port arthur in 1895 and took
it for themselves. But most times their strategy was to avoid conflict and
to let the japs take whatever japs wanted, such as Hokkaido.

> > At lake Khasan (near the short Soviet-Korean border) the Japs demanded
> > (July/August, 1938) that the Soviets turn over some strategic hills, which
> > would have made a future attack on Vladivostok easier.  Then the japs
> > just sent some troops to occupy the hills; it took the Soviets almost 2
> > weeks to re-take them, which can be explained both by their incompetence
> > and by Blyukher working for the japs. Jap casualties were 650 dead and
> > 2500 woulnded.
>
> This was the battle of Chankufeng Hill (1938). My sources indicate the
> casualties were approx. 10,000 on each side.

Sigh. My (Russian) sources refer to the incident as lake Khasan, and to the
hills by their Russian names: (vysoty) Zaozernaya and Bezymyannaya.  Your
attempts to refer to Russian hills by their Korean names are a sure sign
russophobia and racism.

(I have excellent maps of both battles, but no scanner.)

> > Jap casualties were much higher at Khalkhin Gol. Strategically, the Japs we
> > trying to occupy a chunk of Mongolia that would allow them to cut off the
> > only railroad linking the Soviet far east with the rest of Siberia (which
> > passes right next to the Chinese border). The japs were bombarding the
> > disputed area of Mongolia in January-April 1939; invaded in May, and were
> > kicked out by the Soviet troops, led by Zhukov (note the correct spelling)
> > in late August. Their casualties were 55K, 25K of which were killed.
>
> But(!), the relevant point of this conflict is one simple point. The
> Russians didn't re-inforce *or* launch their counter-attack until *after*
> Sorge had assured the Russians that the Japanese would *not* re-inforce
> themselves (which they didn't). Further, it is important to note that Zhukov
> employed a massively superior force, including weapons, the likes of which
> had never been employeed by the Russians before. In addition, Zhukov is
> notable not for his strategic sense but his tenacity, he didn't care about
> casualties and did not withdraw once forces were committed. Even though it
> was clear that the Japanese would have withdrawn because of lack of
> reinforcements. It was a show battle from the military perspective.

Russians had an overwhelming superiority in tanks (498, plus 346 armored
vehicles, to 120 jap tanks and no armored vehicles). Other than that,
Russian superiority wasn't that overwhelming: 581 Russian airplanes to
450 jap airplanes etc is not exactly "overwhelming air superiority"
on Aug 20.

As for timing: according to my sources, the japs made several raids between
May 11 and 26, but didn't try to stay on Mongol territory. On may 28, 2500
japs (much of it cavalry) invaded and were driven out within 2 days by the
Soviet troops already there, before Zhukov's arrival (thanks for spelling his
name right). After accummulating reinforcements for a month, the japs attacked
again on July 2 to 11, but were stopped. Finally on July 23-25 they managed to
penetrate Soviet defences and occupied a wedge of strategic Mongol territory
on the eastern bank of Khalkhin Gol river. (They were stopped to the south.
Anyone who saw the front line would think of cutting them off.) The Soviets
then brought in more forces for a month, in particular a large quantity of
tanks. On August 20, they attacked from the north and the south, and by August
23 they had the 6th jap army surrounded and separated into several groups.
Japs attempted to relieve the 6th army by sending more troops from Khailar,
which were immediately engaged and destroyed as they arrived Aug 24-26. The
remains of the surrounded 6th army were liquidated by aug 31. The japs
undertook several more attacks in the first half of september, and signed an
armistice on Sept 16.

I see no indication that the delay of 1 month between the Japanese incursion
on July 23 and the Soviet offensive on August 20th needs any more "explaining"
then the jap delay between the failed invasion on May 28 and the attacks in
July.

As for casualties, I have 55K japs (25K dead) vs. 9824 Soviets, which seems
plausible given that the japs were surrounded and unwilling to surrender.

As for the innovative use of tanks by Zhukov, remember that tanks were already
in wide use in 1939, and remember also who trained the nazi panzer troops
while they couldn't do it in germany under the versailles treaty. This was
happening while Germans and Soviets were invading Poland, while France and GB
declared war on Germany, and while Soviets were about to attack Finland.

> > They recognized that they could have occupied Vladivostok in 1938 if
> > they had really tried; but eventually Russian reinforcements would
> > come and there would be hell to pay. Stalin demonstrated that unlike the
> > tzars he was willing to put up a fight over this relatively worthless
> > real estate.
>
> Only after he was shure that the Japanese wouldn't contest it.

It was a centuries-old poker game, in which the tzars always folded (going
back to the Nerchinsk treaty of 1699, when they turned over to the Manchurians
huge tracts of land to avoid a possible conflict with China), and Stalin
decided to call the japs' bluff for once, and the japs folded.

> > Technically speaking, Moscow did fall. :-)
>
> Militarily speaking Moscow didn't fall. :-) There was no battle. The course
> taken by the Tzars in dealing with Moscow was a political move that would
> actualy provide them with more return than an actual battle. Remember,
> Moscow was the fort (ala Kremli), the capital was St. Petersburg. This
> strategy was discussed and discarded by Stalin as being politicaly
> unworkable.

Ahem. I was talking about Hitler in 1941, not Napoleon in 1812. (Both fucked
up the psyops and alienated the popuilation which could have viewed them as
their liberators, but that's a different thread altogether.)

Militarily speaking, by oct 16 Moscow was evacuated and useless to the
Soviets.

> > By Oct 16, 1941, everyone and
> > everything were evacuated from Moscow, down to Lenin's mummy, and the Germa
> > could have walked in if they wanted to.
>
> Actualy they did walk in. Napolean spent six weeks at the Kremli before
> realizing the folly of his misunderstanding. He was waiting on the Tzarist
> forces fro St. Petersburg. By that time 3/4 of Moscow had been burned to the
> ground.

Learn to read. I was talking about Hitler's troops in October 1941. The road
to Moscow was clear, but the Germans didn't walk in.

> > The Germans chose not to march in
> > because they feared mines and booby traps they encountered earlier in Kiev
> > (probably correct, too). While they waffled, Russian reinforcements arrived
> > from Siberia and drove them off.
>
> The Cossacks didn't arrive until shortly *after* the French began moving
> their van out of Moscow.

I'm talking about 1941! Stalin decided to assume that the japs wreen't going
to attack, so he brought in fresh troops from Siberia. By the way I feel that
from the game theortic point of view, if he knew nothing about jap intentions
(i.e., no Richard Sorge), they the right strategy would have been to assume
that the japs were not going to attack; for if they did, he would have been
fucked anyway. With the assumptions that the japs wouldn't attack, he was able
to beat off the germans.

> > Mussolini's bloody invasion of Ethiopia was mostly a revenge for the
> > previous invasion by Italy which ended in a humiliating defeat.
>
> But it's irrelevant to this discussion.

Possibly.  I was responding to your (outright silly) claim that Mussolini
invaded Ethiopia to "impress" Hitler.

> > I'd venture to say that other Hitler allies (Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria)
> > viewed him as a lesser eveil and didn't like him at all.
>
> Irrelevant to this discussion as well.

Possibly.  I was responding to your (outright silly) claims.

---

<a href="mailto:dlv@bwalk.dm.com">Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM</a>
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps