- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
73 Years Ago Today: Soviets Open the Vistula-Oder Offensive
Posted on 1/12/18 at 8:56 am
Posted on 1/12/18 at 8:56 am
This was the Battle that brought the Red Army to the Gates of Berlin at the Seelow Heights. The Red Army amassed two fronts consisting of over 2 million men, 4,500 tanks, 2,500 assault guns, and 13,000 pieces of artillery. They faced a little under 500,000 Germans, 1,150 Panzers, and 4,100 artillery pieces organized in shell of a formation named Army Group A, which had replaced the all but destroyed Army Group Center following the previous Soviet Offensive Code named Operation Bagration.
The offensive cleared western Poland, including finally liberating Warsaw. It also took a good deal of eastern Germany, liberated many concentration camps, Auschwitz being one, and isolated substantial German forces in Silesia, Pomerania, and East Prussia.
LINK
The offensive cleared western Poland, including finally liberating Warsaw. It also took a good deal of eastern Germany, liberated many concentration camps, Auschwitz being one, and isolated substantial German forces in Silesia, Pomerania, and East Prussia.
LINK
9
Posted on 1/12/18 at 8:58 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
liberating Warsaw
lol
Posted on 1/12/18 at 9:01 am to HempHead
quote:
quote:
liberating Warsaw
lol
Well, reletevely speaking at any rate. Guss it would be better to simply describe it as “taking Warsaw”.
Posted on 1/12/18 at 9:01 am to HempHead
Jesus, fine, liberated Warsaw from the Germans.
Posted on 1/12/18 at 9:02 am to Darth_Vader
Ahh yes the soviets
The ones we should've fought
The ones we should've fought
Posted on 1/12/18 at 9:03 am to el Gaucho
quote:
Ahh yes the soviets
The ones we should've fought
Could you imagine? Holy hell.
Posted on 1/12/18 at 9:04 am to el Gaucho
The Soviets were scary. The numbers they could muster and the willingness to let everyone die is a formula one would not want to face
Posted on 1/12/18 at 9:04 am to jmarto1
that's why you nuke 'em
Posted on 1/12/18 at 9:06 am to HempHead
quote:
that's why you nuke 'em
Only problem is we didn’t have very many of them in 1945.
Posted on 1/12/18 at 9:07 am to jmarto1
And by that time they were cranking out effective war material. Even if we stopped aid. They'd have enough of it to bleed the allies and Germans a good bit. Plus now they were numerous, veteran, and had just won the great patriotic war so big morale. frick sending our grandpas into that meat grinder.
Posted on 1/12/18 at 9:07 am to Darth_Vader
The other problem is they were close to one themselves and would have used the shite out of the on us after, regardless of the outcome.
Russia is a big place. Not like Japan where we can easily keep tabs on shite.
Russia is a big place. Not like Japan where we can easily keep tabs on shite.
This post was edited on 1/12/18 at 9:08 am
Posted on 1/12/18 at 9:08 am to el Gaucho
quote:
The ones we should've fought
After we humbled the real Nazis. Yes.
This post was edited on 1/12/18 at 9:08 am
Posted on 1/12/18 at 9:12 am to jmarto1
quote:
The Soviets were scary. The numbers they could muster and the willingness to let everyone die is a formula one would not want to face
Hard to believe the USSR (and the Warsaw Pact) collapsed in 1991 (26 years ago).
Posted on 1/12/18 at 9:15 am to Darth_Vader
After we bowed down to the communists they discovered they could take us over through brainwashing our children instead of fighting
Posted on 1/12/18 at 9:23 am to HempHead
quote:
that's why you nuke 'em
Geopolitical disaster if you do that. A first world country would be a fool to nuke first.
Posted on 1/12/18 at 9:25 am to jmarto1
quote:
Geopolitical disaster if you do that. A first world country would be a fool to nuke first.
Yeah, military leadership in the 40s and early 50s seemed to be way less cautious about the idea of using nuclear weapons.
MacArthur went crazy during the Korean War and talked about dropping atomic bombs on North Korea.
Posted on 1/12/18 at 9:28 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
Vistula
gross
Posted on 1/12/18 at 9:28 am to ZappBrannigan
quote:
And by that time they were cranking out effective war material. Even if we stopped aid. They'd have enough of it to bleed the allies and Germans a good bit. Plus now they were numerous, veteran, and had just won the great patriotic war so big morale. frick sending our grandpas into that meat grinder.
Not to mention that our supply lines were 2000 miles long, and theirs were only around 500 miles or shorter. IIRC, it was 11 men behind the lines for the US for every 1 man shooting a gun, just to get the gun and man to the front. The soviets had a considerably more favorable ratio.
We would have needed Chinese support. Hell, probably Japanese and German support as well.
Posted on 1/12/18 at 9:59 am to Darth_Vader
One nuke over Moscow would be enough.
Posted on 1/12/18 at 10:06 am to Darth_Vader
The more I study that era the more I am convinced that Patton was right. We should have taken it to the Reds. We eliminated one murdering tyrant only to leave his competition to reek havoc in Europe. We even surrendered Europe to their fate at war’s end, especially the poor Poles, who brought the west into the war in the first place. To say we and Europe got the raw end of that deal is a mild understatement at best.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News