And the Soviets, did they make many blunders?
In short, plenty. If there was a worse strategist than Hitler, it was Stalin.
Hello mate:)
Why you don’t like a comride Stalin?
How do you think , could the Word worst strategist Stalin spread the communism over half of the world until end of his life?
Sure they did a many.
Have you heard the proverb- the one who don’t make the mistakes , do nothing?
I personaly think that the most importaint and tragical mistake of hight command was - too many of personal ambitions of some of soviets generals with the extremally low lewel of combat experiense at the same time.
Shortly saying , in the hight command of Red Army there were too much peoples , who come to do a career instead to defend their motheland.
In comparition with the Hight and awerage Germans officer staff who specially prepeared for the war- the soviets Generals like raritet Budenny , Timoshenko, Pavlov and ets was just a Phony Generals who sited at the warm places.
Just during the war the New Generation of the Soviet generals has come to the scene:- Konev, Rokossovsky, Chernijakov( tragically perished in the winter 1945), Rubalko( tank commander who crushed the Berlin defence) , Chyikov ( saver of Stalingrad).
To the contrast of Germany where such high professionals like Guderian and Mainstain managed by the troops from the most beginning.
But did he make any blunders?
If so, what do you think was the biggest?
Well the biggest i suppose was that Stalin saved TOO much old idiots in their warm places during the so called Great Purge…
So you think murdering and imprisoning 30,000 officers wasn’t a through enough job?
Really 30 000 were arrested?
http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/showpost.php?p=101858&postcount=78
So only about 10 000 have been arrested duing ALL pre-war period and ONLY tiny part of them have been executed.
Now do you see WHY the Great Purge wasn’t though enough job:)
So that is a lesson to all future dictators: don’t purge massivly, purge smartly. 
Very true…
Sir Winston Churchill purged nobody during his career … That’s why he lost the whole British Impire finally;)
UK lost most his dominion not because of Churchill, it was infact a global movement,… initiated by the end of the war,. as powerful countries gave promises,… british gave promise to India on their independence provided the Indian would fight for Allied,… and so others the same to the colonized countries,…
Churchill was infact tried to keep them in thigh rope,. not only to UK colonized countries,. but also to other allied colonized countries (east - indies to Dutch)
Certainly the failure to order the frontier armys and airforces to a better position of readiness in June 1941 was a mistake. Too many were in the barracks with the artillery and tanks parked and ammunition stored in the depots rather than with the combat battalions. The aircraft were caught on the ground and large number lost there.
It is clear a stratigic mobilization was underway. Larger numbers of men were being conscripted, new weapons had been delivered and more were on order. A portion of the reserves had been called up and ordered to positions to backup the frontier armys.
These actions did not prevent tactical suprise, which lost so many men and wepaons to the German attack. Even if alert orders had come just a few days before the German attack the armys could have been so much more prepared. Moved their assembly areas for battle, ammunition distributed, battle communications established, aircraft dispersed and combat patrols sent aloft. Had these actions been taken many more Germans would have been killed in the opening weeks of the campaign.
Perhaps the wrong men were shot? Beria was suffering from too much vodka the night before and picked up the wrong list?
General Marshall purged the US Army from 1940 through 1942. Perhaps because he did not have anyone shot his widespread ‘retirement’ of General officers was regarded as a good thing?
Beria drink only wine , an excellent caucasian wine.( like the comride Staline as well).
So he survived the purge ( at least till the 1953).
Therefore the list was right, but …not a full:)
The Soviet casualty figures reported by Krivosheev seem higher than one might expect given the reported strength of the forces they were facing. The Germans appear to have employed even larger forces on the western front in 1914-18 than they did on the eastern front in 1941-45 yet I don’t believe the allies ever suffered casualties on the level that the Soviets did for an extended period.
Do Russians feel that his figures are incorrect?
The Army loosing 3 of its 5 marshals, [think only Voroshilov and Budenny, two old cronies of Stalin survived] 13 of its 15 army generals, 8 of its 9 admirals, 50 of its 57 army corps generals, 154 of its 186 division generals, all 16 of its army commissars, and 25 of its 28 army corps commissars, must have had some effect on Red Army performance in Barbarossa.
You obviously think that not enough of your countrymen were ‘‘purged’’ during the great terror, although presumedly, many, like Tukhacheveski, would have put their lives on the line for the Soviet in the past, and men like Rokosovski narrowly survived, it seems a little callous to me, but I guess you have a reason.
Staggering numbers arn’t they?
Irrecoverable losses of over 800,000, and sick and wounded of over 3 million for '45 alone.
This is a whole problem.
What has to do with combat effectivenes the admirals, generals and…damn… army commisars:) who have made the fascinating briskly party carier during the 10-15 years.Without real experience of management troops?
If for instance even the Budenny , the hero of Civil war, have been uncapabe to manage the troops in 1941.
Just look for others.
The Tuhachevsky - who ordered for Red Army the great figures of obsolete and primitive wearpon like the bombers TB-3, tanks BT, T-26 and fighter I-16 that was not able to reach the Bf109G in 1941.
You obviously think that not enough of your countrymen were ‘‘purged’’ during the great terror, although presumedly, many, like Tukhacheveski, would have put their lives on the line for the Soviet in the past, and men like Rokosovski narrowly survived, it seems a little callous to me, but I guess you have a reason.
Don’t make me laught.
The Tukhachevsky who sended the Red Amry to die to the Poland in the 1920 .
to “support the European proletary revolution”. Due to his stoopid orders about 150 000 of Red Army soldier have been cuptured many of them perished in polish concentration camps.
This IDIOT should be already executed in the 1921 but he suvived and made a lot of harm for army.
Don’t please think that my “countryman” Tukhachevsky would have put his lives on the line for the Soviet in the past. He actually would , as about 50 000 of HIS soldier killed and perished during the 1920-21.
But this ba…rd did not even wish to die for anything.
They allowed the NKVD to have a good deal of input on strategy early on. The NKVD also controlled its own paramilitaries in an adjacent chain of command to the Red Army’s --causing much duplicity and hindering the Red Army’s ability to cull the idiot sycophanting incompetents in favor of the truly effective commanders like Zhukov, who along with other Soviet Army commanders (Chuikov, Rossovsky ), were able to wrestle complete control from them. The NKVD’s battalions also hindered consolidation and coordination at the fronts up until the battle of Stalingrad…
The role NKVD never reduced during the war Nick
moreover after the Liberation of Europe the NKVD was responsible for the order in the cuptured territories.
So hardly the NKVD influence would “scared” the Red Army commanders MORE that in last period of war.
The NKVD’s battalions also hindered consolidation and coordination at the fronts up until the battle of Stalingrad…
The NKVD battalions never hindered to anything, except the cases of uncontrolled retreat of Red Army units ( especially in flanks). This situation lead to the surround of the Central troops.
Besides in the Stalingrad the NKVD covering units made a hell lot of job , defending crossing the Volga lines. Most of NKVD soldiers died here themself.