ADS NOT DISPLAYED TO REGISTERED USERS.
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 11 of 11
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By davebender

Winston Churchill and the Russian Civil War

World War I Discuss Winston Churchill and the Russian Civil War in the Other Eras forums; https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstream/...pdf?sequence=1 An excellent paper on the Russian Civil War. IMO this deserves to be published in book form. It appears ...

  1. #1
    Senior Member davebender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    5,236
    Country
    United States

    Winston Churchill and the Russian Civil War

    https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstream/...pdf?sequence=1
    An excellent paper on the Russian Civil War. IMO this deserves to be published in book form.

    It appears to me Churchill did a good job providing Russian anti-Bolshevik forces with war material. He was let down by the incompetence of British Army officers who were responsible for organizing and training the White Russian forces. You would think the British Army would know how to organize and train proper infantry divisions, after 4 years of practise during 1914 to 1918.


  2. #2
    Senior Member Readie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Plymouth, England
    Posts
    2,602
    Country
    England
    Quote Originally Posted by davebender View Post
    https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstream/...pdf?sequence=1
    An excellent paper on the Russian Civil War. IMO this deserves to be published in book form.

    It appears to me Churchill did a good job providing Russian anti-Bolshevik forces with war material. He was let down by the incompetence of British Army officers who were responsible for organizing and training the White Russian forces. You would think the British Army would know how to organize and train proper infantry divisions, after 4 years of practise during 1914 to 1918.

    I like your ironic sense of humour Dave. What was the battle plan in WW1 for the British Army? Was there a battle plan..?
    Cheers
    John

  3. #3
    Senior Member TheMustangRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    340
    Country
    United States
    If I'm not mistaken, the US and France were also engaged in providing assistance to the White Russian forces.
    I have wondered myself many times if a Bolshevik defeat during the Russian Civil War could have managed to alter WWII in a meaningful way and perhaps eliminated the Cold War that followed it.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,896
    Country
    United Kingdom
    Quote Originally Posted by Readie View Post
    What was the battle plan in WW1 for the British Army? Was there a battle plan..?
    Cheers
    John
    I think a serious look at tactics and the way they evolved throughout the conflict rather than the propagation of myths which belong in an episode of "Blackadder" would be more helpful. This thread and this forum probably aren't the place for that.
    Cheers
    Steve

  5. #5
    Senior Member davebender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    5,236
    Country
    United States

    Some Perspective

    1919 British Military Mission to Southern Russia.
    -Two regular army divisions to secure the rear area.
    -About 2,000 British regular army personnel to train and organize White Russian military units.
    -Modern weapons and equipment for 250,000 infantry.
    -A generous amount of artillery and plenty of ammunition.
    -A mountain of uniforms, field gear and other supplies.
    -74 tanks complete with British tank commanders.
    -6 armored cars
    -629 trucks and motorcars
    -200 aircraft complete with British aircrew and ground support personnel.
    -Naval supremacy including battleships. These provided gunfire support on several occasions in addition to securing the sea supply route.
    Even with these resources the White Russian forces were defeated in less then two years.

    1914 German forces in Ost Afrika.
    -No German regular army units.
    -No tanks, aircraft or modern artillery.
    -Ammunition was in short supply.
    -No naval support. In fact the two main seaports (Tanga and Dar es Salaam) didn’t even have coast defenses. Enemy naval forces could and did sail into both harbors to bombard targets.
    -128 German officers and NCOs to serve as cadre for the Schultztruppen.
    -132 German non-combatants. Includes medical personnel and colonial officials.
    -Modern weapons and equipment for about 1,000 soldiers. Plus about 1,500 obsolete black powder rifles.
    With these limited resources plus what they captured from the enemy and two small blockade runner shipments the Ost Afrika Schultztruppen were still fighting hard a couple weeks after the November 1918 Armistice.

    If LTC Lettow-Vorbeck had resources in quantities similiar to those which Churchill provided to South Russia would the Deutsches Reich flag still be flying over Dar es Salaam?

  6. #6
    Senior Member michaelmaltby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,194
    Country
    Canada
    ".... If LTC Lettow-Vorbeck had resources in quantities similar to those which Churchill provided to South Russia would the Deutsches Reich flag still be flying over Dar es Salaam?"

    I don't think so, although it is a very valid point. Without naval supremacy from 1914 onwards, off-shore German colonies would be in for tough times IMHO.

    MM

  7. #7
    Senior Member davebender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    5,236
    Country
    United States

    naval supremacy

    Since the British Military Mission had naval supremacy I think the primary logistical and training base should have been on the Crimea Peninsula. The two British infantry divisions could hold the peninsula neck, allowing a dozen or so White Russian infantry divisions to be trained in a safe rear area. Meanwhile you provide existing Kuban and Don cossack forces enough munitions to defend their tribal areas but not enough to go on the offensive. The main offensive would be conducted by an entire field army after the dozen infantry divisions have completed training.

  8. #8
    Senior Member ivanotter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Johannesburg, South Africa
    Posts
    183
    Country
    South Africa
    Interesting subject as usual.

    I have just finished reading (and reviewing) the book "Spies and commissars". Focused on Russia, its interactions with the outside world, etc, etc. Fascinating reading.

    It basically claims that the western powers were totally exhausted after WWI and the military leaders were doubtful if anybody wanted to get into another war, esecially in faraway Russia.

    The more interesting part is actually the japanese occupation of eastern siberia around vladivostok.

    On East Africa. There is another interesting book: They fought for King and Kaizer" by Ambrose Brown.

    It shows something interesting: Smuts really tried his very best to maneuvre Vorbeck out of east africa, which to a certain extent was successful. It was Smut's philosophy to avoid casualties as South Africa's (white) man-power was rather small at that time.

    This caused trekking across tropical africa, rain forest, malaria, fever, sicknes, everything that could possible go wrong. It probably caused more casualties than attacking Vorbeck head-on (if he only would stand a fight).

    Vorbeck saw his mission to tie up forces in africa, which he was rather successful in doing. His "little war army" was the only one not defeated.

    I can recommend both books

    Ivan

  9. #9
    Senior Member davebender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    5,236
    Country
    United States

    western powers were totally exhausted after WWI

    There is another way to look at the situation. After November 1918 the British Army had mountains of surplus military equipment. You can ship that equipment to Russia and fight a war by proxy. British equipment plus Russian manpower.

    That's essentially what happened historically but it appears to me the British Army botched the job both in Siberia and in Southern Russia.

  10. #10
    Senior Member michaelmaltby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,194
    Country
    Canada
    "... That's essentially what happened historically but it appears to me the British Army botched the job both in Siberia and in Southern Russia."

    If indeed "the job" could be done in the first place. Not sure it could. The RED revolution spread through the Czarist army.

    MM

  11. #11
    Senior Member davebender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    5,236
    Country
    United States

    RED revolution spread through the Czarist army

    Protests against Bolshevik rule spread just as quickly once the population got a taste of it. Even the Bolshevik naval and industrial heartland experienced major unrest. That's why the newly created Red Army had armed Bolshevik commissars at every level of command. Red Army soldiers couldn't easily join protesters as Russian soldiers had done during 1916 and 1917.

    If British controlled White Russian forces had offered democracy and self-determination most of the people living outside Sovdepia would have welcomed them with open arms. Just as they welcomed German Army forces during the summer and fall of 1918.

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Obituaries
    By syscom3 in forum WW2 General
    Replies: 1103
    Last Post: Yesterday, 04:48 PM
  2. This day in the war in Europe 65 years ago
    By syscom3 in forum WW2 General
    Replies: 1458
    Last Post: 01-21-2011, 07:17 PM
  3. RAF Bomber Command Diary... Jan 1945......
    By lesofprimus in forum Aviation
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 01-28-2007, 01:29 PM
  4. Lev Shestakov versus Hans-Ulrich Rudel
    By aussie jim in forum Stories
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-03-2005, 08:32 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86