this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2025
167 points (98.8% liked)

memes

23340 readers
181 users here now

dank memes

Rules:

  1. All posts must be memes and follow a general meme setup.

  2. No unedited webcomics.

  3. Someone saying something funny or cringe on twitter/tumblr/reddit/etc. is not a meme. Post that stuff in /c/slop

  4. Va*sh posting is haram and will be removed.

  5. Follow the code of conduct.

  6. Tag OC at the end of your title and we'll probably pin it for a while if we see it.

  7. Recent reposts might be removed.

  8. Tagging OC with the hexbear watermark is praxis.

  9. No anti-natalism memes. See: Eco-fascism Primer

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DornerStan@lemmygrad.ml 45 points 3 weeks ago (13 children)

...that I cannot find an ounce of evidence to support

I'm doing yet another deep dive on Soviet history during the Stalin years (I'm an ML in a trot org and want receipts) and this statement perfectly encapsulates how fucking frustrating it all is. Even revisionist school historians, who tend to be more reasonable, cite Hoover Institution ghouls for like half of their sources.

Like I'll read a chapter describing how bad something was. I make notes of anything sourced from the Soviet Archives or other firsthand accounts, cross out anything citing Robert Conquest and the like (or often just unsourced claims or "we don't have evidence but it was probably blah"). And what I'm left with is a skeleton of facts that don't really point one way or another. The narrative "skin and muscle" constructed around this skeleton more often than not just seems to corroborate the author's pre-existing beliefs. I could just as easily invent a believable counter-narrative (which is what less-scrupulous authors have done), but it ultimately doesn't prove anything.

[–] FloridaBoi@hexbear.net 34 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

There was a really good post on r/history from like 10 years ago about the Nazi efficiency myth and how much more effective the Soviet army over time. The emphasis was that the Soviets applied “scientific socialism” to their strategy and tactics and would pore over results of battles and incursions making constant adjustments to avoid prior mistakes.

Edit: I don’t remember if logistics were specifically mentioned but one assumes that planning would improve as the war went on.

[–] Belly_Beanis@hexbear.net 22 points 3 weeks ago

The Soviets during WWII used planned obsolescence based on existing combat data. If a T-34's average lifespan was 6 months (dropping to less than 24 hours when in actual combat), there was no need to make an engine that would last decades. It was all going to be stripped down later anyways or salvaged from wrecks.

This allowed them to build more quicker with lower tolerances and maintain a strong wartime economy. Remember, they were having to rip up railroad lines to get more steel. Operation Barbarossa was much sooner than they anticipated.

The Germans, in contrast, were overspending on their tanks in both labor and money. They thought quality was better than quantity, except it resulted in tanks that were still one-shot by Soviet tanks while German shells bounced off. Because of obsolescence, the Soviets were quicker to update and adapt. Meanwhile, German tanks would fall behind as production got clogged up with wunderwaffe ideas.

Logistics was a whole other problem for a variety of reasons. For one, the Germans kept running out of oil. They famously abandoned fully functional vehicles in North Africa simply because they ran out of gas during their retreat (which were promptly captured and studied by the Allies). Tiger tank transmissions would give out after 100 miles, meaning they had to be railroaded to the front...also a problem because of Allied bombing and resources diverted to the Holocaust.

One way ideology would impact German logistics was their refusal to believe they were being beaten by untermensch. Soviet partisans would raid a convoy, wiping out a platoon of Germans. The Germans thought only a barbarian horde could wipe out the mighty German, so obviously that's where the Red Army is positioned! They'd send a force of matching size to go look for this horde out in the woods. Except it was just a dozen locals with old bolt actions. Then the real Red Army was able to overrun German positions which were now understaffed.

[–] D61@hexbear.net 6 points 3 weeks ago

Edit: I don’t remember if logistics were specifically mentioned but one assumes that planning would improve as the war went on.

By necessity, it would have to.

load more comments (10 replies)