Comments by "Cary Black" (@caryblack5985) on "D-Day at Stalingrad | BATTLESTORM STALINGRAD E20" video.

  1.  @Cloudman572  It is unfortunate. Many people who watch this film will never open a real history book. Probably the most widely read book on Stalingrad is Beevors and although he dug up some interesting facts it is just fair as to accuracy and quite outdated. For those who do not want to invest in a 5 part, very expensive and lengthy books by Glantz I recommend Isaev Stalingrad City On Fire which is excellent from the Soviet view but offers a good amount of information on the German side.
    14
  2. Not in Stalingrad
    6
  3. The movie is useless for history. It is entertainment not to be considered accurate.
    4
  4. Not revisionist only accurate.
    4
  5. In fact many German soldiers used and preferred the Soviet submachine guns to their own.
    4
  6. Not true the NKVD division was on the front line. Blocking detachment were at the rear but if you read Island of Fire the blocking detachment of the NKVD was fighting on the front line.
    3
  7.  @alanle1471  I am just saying that the NKVD division fought on the front line in Stalingrad and took casualties as did all the other units. How it was for them in other battles I could not say but I know about this battle.
    3
  8. It makes them look silly and we know that German logistics were much worse and their production capacity was much inferior to the Soviets. Enemy At The Gates is entertainment not history.
    3
  9. There are conflicting ideas of when the planning for Uranus started. Zhukov says middle of September but Isaev has some evidence that it was not until 3 weeks later. But I think your point is correct. They would want to hold Stalingrad but use as many troops for the counter offensive and the least they could to hold the city. The question becomes what amount of troops will be sufficient to hold Stalingrad?
    2
  10. There was a rail line I believe by the East bank of the Volga. It is possible that it could be used to transship oil.
    2
  11.  @greatsouthernplumbinggaswa2255  To give you a little more information the Germans lost 45,033 dead in September 1942 and you can assume 3 times the number of wounded. Obviously fighting is going on in other places along the front. Isaev gives totals of Soviet strengths of divisions. On Sept 25 the 13th guard is down to 6,906. Another figure is the 42nd rifle brigade losses on Sept 17-18 is 153 men killed 308 wounded and 72 missing. You really have to read Glantz , Isaev and others to get the picture since even with all the detail Tik doesn't have time to discuss all the losses mentioned in the various books.
    2
  12.  @alanle1471  As I said not in Stalingrad they were on the front line.
    2
  13. The problem is people think it is accurate history. If they watch it and go on to read real history books thats great. If they think they have an accurate picture of the battle for Stalingrad not good.
    2
  14. So are the Nazis
    2
  15. By the end of September 1942 that is when the Germans entered Stalingrad the Germans had 674,361 deaths on the Eastern front. The Soviets had well over 5.700,000 deaths.
    2
  16. Not true just a myth
    2
  17. IThink it applies to the battles outside the city in Stalingrad itself, the Northern flank attacks, reinforcements to both armies including Romanians Hungarians and Italians and Operation Uranus .
    2
  18. The NkVD regiment fought on the frontline. Do not confuse them with blocking detachments who also in some instances fought on the front lines.
    2
  19. Advertisements are controlled by youtube. TIK has no control over them.
    1
  20.  @МихаилЧерников-п2т  Yes Isaev lays it out .
    1
  21. If you read Isaev Stalingrad City On Fire you will get a good idea of the number of troops on both sides and the losses they took. It is a good single volume history if you don't want the 5 vol. history that Glantz did.
    1
  22.  @nottoday3817  I have no doubt that changing to a part rail and part river or all rail transport of oil would effect both quantity and efficiency of oil transport. The question would be would it be sufficient? This is a question I am sure the Soviets were glad they did not have to answer.
    1
  23. There is also divisions where the losses are mentioned. He often says the battalion has 36 men as an example. This gives you the idea of some of the losses.
    1
  24.  @gordy3714  Men were landed at various points throughout the battle. Troops would come in after the South and most of the center of Stalingrad was taken by the Germans.
    1
  25.  @jussim.konttinen4981  True but they beat the Germans.
    1
  26. Check out the World War Two channel. They cover the war week by week. They have been covering Barbarossa from June 1941 to December 1941 when it was stopped at Moscow. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uzns-YF1I60
    1
  27.  @Punisher9419  Have to remember it is a history of WWII not just the Eastern front. They gave plenty of coverage between June and December 41 and will cover it for 3 more years. Of course if you are only interested in the Eastern front it is not for you.
    1
  28. Pleas give citation to this statement. I know they used them in security divisions against partisans and late in the war in the West. I have not heard they used them on the frontline in the East.
    1
  29. The Austrians were considered German after the anschluss and their army was incorporated into the Wehrmacht. Czechs, Poles French that were in the Wehrmacht were volksdeutsche, Germans living outside the Reich. The Germans recruited Hiiwis , helper who did labor in the rear areas and various work. They had armed exSoviets to assist in security divisions against partisans. Later in the war some Eastern soldiers were in Normandy fighting on the Western front. I have not heard of large number of exSoviets used on the frontline in the East of course when crises occurred security divisions might be sent to the front. The SS was a different story.
    1
  30.  @Scrap_Lootaz  Agreed and we might mention some from Romania. Unfortunately for them because of manpower needs they were subject to conscription.
    1
  31.  @Scrap_Lootaz  Thats not what I meant it was the volksdeutsche which were living in Romania and brought back to the Reich.
    1
  32. Take a look at the map . There was no secure location that they could land to reinforce the city. They were needed where it was most vital, the city center, and could not spend a couple days more trying to get there.
    1
  33. There were only 3 German divisions in Africa so that is a drop in the bucket on the Eastern front. I doubt if Rommel could have made any difference if Guderian and von Manstein could not.
    1
  34. Most of the Soviets that were recruited by the Germans were Hiwis which were basically laborers and rear area helpers. The ones they armed seemed mostly to serve in security divisions to fight the partisans. Later in the war they sent armed Soviets to the West and some units were in Normandy in1944.
    1
  35. I assume he was a Soviet. Many men after the retaking of the Ukraine and Belorussia were armed but given little training and conscripted in the army.
    1