Soviet use of Hurricane and Spitfire

MacArther said:

I'm not entirely possitive on this, but didn't Soviet P-39's have a lighter overall weight due to stripping off what was seen as non-essential? Also, didn't Soviet P-39s also usually have the Soviet 23mm gun in lieu of the 37mm?

Click to expand...

The Soviets used the 20mm gun on early models of the P-39 and the 37mm gun on the later models.

michaelmaltby said:

Nightwitch - I don't even understand what: "If it wasn't for the Soviets there could not have been a Luftwaffe, thus no aggression from Germany at all.", actually means - much less whether it's apologetics. Maybe I'm dense but, like HoHuns graphs, I'd like clarity and understanding.

Please, what is Waynos trying to convey in his butchered logic...?

And is your mutual relationship with him permanently damaged, or do you still have mutual interests?

Michael

Click to expand...

I can only presume he's referring to the secret Luftwaffe training schools in the USSR in the 20s and 30s, most notably the combat school at Lipetsk started in 1925 and running until 1933, when it was shut down by the new Nazi government. However, it's not really clear how much the Luftwaffe actually benefited from this training school. And certainly the supposition that the Luftwaffe couldn't have existed without it is fallacious in the extreme. Once the Nazi party was in power, the plug was pulled on the Lipetsk training operation and the Luftwaffe began training in Germany proper, in flagrant violation of the treaty of Versailles. Moreover, the German involvement in the Spanish Civil War was more of a crucible for German planes, training, and tactics than Lipetsk ever was, and that was several years later still. The indisputable fact is that the Nazi party, the very party directly responsible for Germany's aggression in WWII was the very same party that killed the joint training operation at Lipetsk. So to draw a link between Nazi aggression and the training that went on there is, in my opinion, spurious.

Nightwitch - I wouldn't have read that degree of nuance into Wayno's comments. I can't speak for Wayno nor does he need anyone to, but, if what you are referring to previously - the co-operation between the German state and the Soviet leadership - is what Wayno is getting at: a. The schools that the Germans financed in Russia for training are simply matters of historical fact, the armoured schools were far more important in the scheme of things than the air schools and both Russians and Germans had similar instincts about using armour [Zhukov - summer 1939 - Kolkin Gol [sp]' and b. The Stalin officer purges pretty much eliminated the benefits that the Soviet leadership might have derived from joint training with the German high command.

I'd like to hear from Wayno on what he intended, but from your various posts and your "handle" Nightwitch, I think you have lots of insight and knowledge about the Soviet side - amongst other topics.

So - riddle me this Nightwitch (and this is way off topic) - how come Zhukov did so well in the June September timeframe with serious supply lines, and yet the Soviets got chewed up by the Finns 3 months later?

Personally - the don't see too much difference between the Nazis and the Communist leadership - both are dillusional, both are fanatical, both are racist and both are prime examples of personality cults.

Roosevelt was unrealistic about Stalin. Churchill was realistic about Stalin.
I expect you will want to take issue with these views and that's fine -- but don't ever suggest that the Communists were LESS EVIL than the Nazis -- because if your saying that your either drinking Liberal coolaide, or your a sentimental neo-soviet.

I don't see conducting tribal purges on the Estos and Balts any different than doing it to the Children of Israel or Gypies. Being worked to death in Siberia or in a V-2 plant is really just a difference in hue - not morality...............

Still - like your posts, Nightwitch

michaelmaltby said:

...but don't ever suggest that the Communists were LESS EVIL than the Nazis -- because if your saying that your either drinking Liberal coolaide, or your a sentimental neo-soviet.

I don't see conducting tribal purges on the Estos and Balts any different than doing it to the Children of Israel or Gypies. Being worked to death in Siberia or in a V-2 plant is really just a difference in hue - not morality...............

Click to expand...

I guess I'm drinking Liberal Koolaide and/or I'm a sentimental neo-Soviet because I definitely do believe the Communists were much less evil than the Nazis. For one thing, Communism was not founded on racism, indeed in theory it was anti-racist and pro-feminist (even if it failed this in practice). Nazism was founded on race hatred, pure and simple - read Mein Kampf. Stalinism was a horrible system, brutal, corrupt and repressive. It still doesn't hold a candle to the horror that was Nazism. Stalin killed a lot of people, millions, but it wasn't for racial reasons - he killed those who opposed him (or he thought they opposed him). This is very different from the naked genocide of the Nazis. They wanted to kill all the Jews and all the Roma (Gypsies) regardless of whether or not they really posed a threat to him. In addition, the Nazis planned an artifical famine in the European part of the Soviet Union that would have made the Ukrainian famine pale in comparison. The Communist labor camps were terrible places where millions may have died but they were not the deliberate murder factories that places like Birkenau were. And please don't accuse people of being Soviet sympathizers unless you wish to be called a neo-Nazi.

Venganza

Folks, this thread started off real good, please get it back on track before I close it.

Make a choice Vengaza - will it be Liberal Kool aide or sentimental neo-Stalinist?
I condemmed BOTH Nazis and Communist systems in my previous post - that doesn't make me a Neo-Anything. If you see a moral difference between the two systems you're welcome to it.

"Communism was not founded on racism, indeed in theory it was anti-racist and pro-feminist (even if it failed this in practice)" you say.

Actually - the credo of communism at the leadership level was and still is "do as we say, not as we do".

Internationalism, feminism ... just words. In practise, the Soviets waged war (class, political, economic war, who cares) against ANY group, race or tribe that dared to resist their centrally planned soviet enforced destiny -- unless of course you buy the images in Frank Kapra's "Soviet Ally - Why We Fight" film -- dancing Kulaks and tribemen.

Most liberals I know that sympathize with Soviet communism over Nazism do so because the sheer incompetence associated with Communism endeavors humanizes Communism for them - as opposed to steely-eyed robotic storm troopers. Incompetence however doesn't lessen the moral accountability of actions. There's only a difference between murder and manslaughter in court.

I repeat, both camps are tarred with the same sickness: dillusional, immoral and worshipping the cult of the Kool aid. You want lime or cherry, Vengaza?

Michael

Closed - the next time I'll just start banning.