Why is it referred to as "The Great Patriotic War"?

[steviej]

Being an avid history buff, and having read quite a bit of WWII history, it is my opinion that the Germans were already defeated before the US set foot on the beaches of Normandy. With the US attack in the West, the war ended within a year. But the Russians had already beaten the Germans, and it would have been over within 2 years, anyway. So, the US helpled it end sooner, that's all.

There are many Russians that contend that the allies delayed their landings in the West until: first - they knew the Germans were already beaten, and second: to be able to arrive in time to contest the Soviet army overrunning all of Eastern and Central Europe. Over the past ten years, my opinion has moved toward this view as well. Western allies goal: Let the Russians beat the Germans, squeeze as much as you can out of the Russians, and then get there in time to hold Central and Eastern Europe for Allied political control and manipulation.

About the original question, why the "Great Patriotic War", I may be repeating someone here, but  believe it was a propaganda campaign to motivate the Russian people to fight for the "motherland" as many party leaders believed they would not fight "for the party" . Stalin also re-invorgated the Orthodox church as a partner in morale for the war effort. Of course, as soon as the war was over, it was back to business as usual, and worshipping the Party, and not "mother Russian".

People in the West just cannot comprehend the devastation that the Germans wreaked upon Russia, and the amount of blood required to save their land. The Battle of Stalingrad ranks as the most heroic defense in all history, IMHO. The only other one that ranks with it in my opinion is the defense of Constantinople against the Ottomans in 1453, where 7000 men fought for 2 months against an army of 200,000, fought to the death of the last man, including the Emperor himself. But, the glory of Stalingrad is that the Russians were victorious.

[deccie]

Being an avid history buff, and having read quite a bit of WWII history, it is my opinion that the Germans were already defeated before the US set foot on the beaches of Normandy. With the US attack in the West, the war ended within a year. But the Russians had already beaten the Germans, and it would have been over within 2 years, anyway. So, the US helpled it end sooner, that's all.

I would not be so  certain about that. For one thing it ignores the role of air power. I'm not talking about the allied firestorm bombing missions but rather those that denied the Germans the use of raw materials and production facilities. Can you imagine, had that not happened, the impact of aircraft like the ME262 in mass production? The Russians would not have had ANYTHING to combat it. Throw in loads more V2's and V1's plus the first guided missles... Things _COULD_ have been different.

Remember too that Albert Speer had manged to increase production of armaments significantly DESPITE the bombing. Take away the bombing and what happens? More equipment on the German side. Of course the Russians, like the Americans, would out produce the Germans. but German tactics and Tanks and Tank destoyers like the Panther and Jagdpather were always better than even the Russian KV-1 and T-34/85.

People in the West just cannot comprehend the devastation that the Germans wreaked upon Russia, and the amount of blood required to save their land. The Battle of Stalingrad ranks as the most heroic defense in all history, IMHO. The only other one that ranks with it in my opinion is the defense of Constantinople against the Ottomans in 1453, where 7000 men fought for 2 months against an army of 200,000, fought to the death of the last man, including the Emperor himself. But, the glory of Stalingrad is that the Russians were victorious.

What you say may well be true but for me the Victory is also a tragedy because a lot of the Russian losses just didn't need to happen. The Leadership just showed complete disdain for the  troops and also the civillians. Stalin had his purge before the war commenced and the Russian people paid for that with their lives  literally. It was literally "Victory at ANY price". The Russian population at large paid that price. For an indication just how bad things were just look at the losses Russia sufferred in the Russo-Finnish war. Finalnd ain't exactly a big country but they inflicted very heavy losses on the Russians.

[Shadow]

Check the history of any Russian war and you will see that they have always used the numbers to their advantage, rather than superior technical equipment.

[deccie]

Check the history of any Russian war and you will see that they have always used the numbers to their advantage, rather than superior technical equipment.

I think you mean "try to". The losses in WW1, The Russo-Finnish war and the war with the Japanese with the naval battle of Tsushima playing a significant feature I think all show that superior numbers don't always give the decisive outcome that is assumed.

[Shadow]

I think you mean "try to". The losses in WW1, The Russo-Finnish war and the war with the Japanese with the naval battle of Tsushima playing a significant feature I think all show that superior numbers don't always give the decisive outcome that is assumed.

Russo-Finnish war was won by Russia.

Battle of Tsushima:
Japan:
4 battleships
27 cruisers
destroyers and auxiliary vessels    
 =31 vessels

Russia:
8 battleships
3 coastal battleships
8 cruisers
9 destroyers
 = 28 vessels.

Numbers won...(apart from the state of material and other factors).

[deccie]

Russo-Finnish war was won by Russia.

Battle of Tsushima:
Japan:
4 battleships
27 cruisers
destroyers and auxiliary vessels    
 =31 vessels

Russia:
8 battleships
3 coastal battleships
8 cruisers
9 destroyers
 = 28 vessels.

Numbers won...(apart from the state of material and other factors).

That is a really biased way of stating numbers. Compare the numbers of heavy units.
A destroyer / gun boat or even a heavy cruiser does not count on a one for one basis with a battleship!

[deccie]

Russo-Finnish war was won by Russia.

Seems more like  a stalemate to me.
From the Wikipedia entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War

"Finland held out until March 1940, when the Moscow Peace Treaty was signed, ceding about 9% of Finland's territory and 20% of its industrial capacity to the Soviet Union. Soviet losses on the front were tremendously large, and the country's international standing suffered.

 Finally, the Soviet forces did not accomplish their primary objective of conquest of Finland but gained only a slice of territory along Lake Ladoga. The Finns retained their sovereignty and gained considerable international goodwill."

So the Finns ceded some of their territory but a country the size of the USSR could not crush a country the size of Finland? Funny definition of "won".

[Shadow]

That is a really biased way of stating numbers. Compare the numbers of heavy units.
A destroyer / gun boat or even a heavy cruiser does not count on a one for one basis with a battleship!

Similar farmers with pikes do not count one on one for knights with armor and swords.... by such standards Russians were outnumbered.

[Shadow]

Seems more like  a stalemate to me.
From the Wikipedia entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War

"Finland held out until March 1940, when the Moscow Peace Treaty was signed, ceding about 9% of Finland's territory and 20% of its industrial capacity to the Soviet Union. Soviet losses on the front were tremendously large, and the country's international standing suffered.

 Finally, the Soviet forces did not accomplish their primary objective of conquest of Finland but gained only a slice of territory along Lake Ladoga. The Finns retained their sovereignty and gained considerable international goodwill."

So the Finns ceded some of their territory but a country the size of the USSR could not crush a country the size of Finland? Funny definition of "won".

From encarta:
Russo-Finnish War, also known as the Winter War, war fought between Finland and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) in 1939 and 1940, during the beginning of World War II, following the inability of the two countries to reach an agreement on Soviet demands for territorial concessions. The USSR, worried that German forces might attack through Finnish territory, wanted Finland to cede their land near Leningrad (now Saint Petersburg), Russia. The Finns refused, and the war began on November 30, 1939, lasting until March 13, 1940.

Russia never wanted all of Finland, they wanted some territories and got them.

[deccie]

Russia never wanted all of Finland, they wanted some territories and got them.

In 1939???? That's a stretch and a half! I also find it hard to beleive they never wanted all of Finland.
I have a Finnish friend here, I'll ask her what popular culture in Finalnd says about this war.

[deccie]

Similar farmers with pikes do not count one on one for knights with armor and swords.... by such standards Russians were outnumbered.

I would say that is true. But in what battle are you referring to?

[OlgaH]

About the original question, why the "Great Patriotic War", I may be repeating someone here, but  believe it was a propaganda campaign to motivate the Russian people to fight for the "motherland" as many party leaders believed they would not fight "for the party" .

It was not a motivation. It was sad and terrible reality when people had to sacrifice their lives to defend their Отечество against attack by the enemy.

As I have written in one of my previous posts the first Patriotic war was in 1812. 

[anjutka]

........

what are your posts about?exactly,concrete and short?or you by this way trying to  answer for original question "Re: Why is it referred to as "The Great Patriotic War"?

[SANDRO43]

There are many Russians that contend that the allies delayed their landings in the West until: first - they knew the Germans were already beaten, and second: to be able to arrive in time to contest the Soviet army overrunning all of Eastern and Central Europe. Over the past ten years, my opinion has moved toward this view as well. Western allies goal: Let the Russians beat the Germans, squeeze as much as you can out of the Russians, and then get there in time to hold Central and Eastern Europe for Allied political control and manipulation.

This was discussed earlier here: http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?topic=7461.msg133274#msg133274.

[OlgaH]

From encarta:
Russo-Finnish War, also known as the Winter War, war fought between Finland and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) in 1939 and 1940, during the beginning of World War II, following the inability of the two countries to reach an agreement on Soviet demands for territorial concessions. The USSR, worried that German forces might attack through Finnish territory, wanted Finland to cede their land near Leningrad (now Saint Petersburg), Russia. The Finns refused, and the war began on November 30, 1939, lasting until March 13, 1940.

Russia never wanted all of Finland, they wanted some territories and got them.

There were four armed conflicts (wars) between Soviet Russia and Finland.

The first war was started in January 1918 when Finnish troops invaded the territory of Eastern Karelia and was finished in October of 1920 with the signed Treaty of Tartu  between Finland and Soviet Russia.

The second war was started in November of 1921 when Finnish troops again invaded the territory of Karelia and was finished in March of 1922 with the signed agreement between Soviet Russia and Finland about the taking action on security of inviolability of Soviet R - Finnish border.

The third war was started in November 1939 when Soviet army invaded the territory of Finland and was finished in March 1940 with the signed Moscow Peace Treaty.

The fourth war was started in June of 1941 three days after beginning of Great Patriotic War. Finland declared war against USSR. The fourth war was finished in September of 1944 with the signed Moscow Armistice and formally with the Paris Peace Conference in 1947 when Finland acknowledged the territorial acquisition of USSR according to the Moscow Peace Treaty (sizeable part of South Karelia with Vyborg and Sortavala). Also Finland gave Russia back the region Petsamo, also handed over for the use for 50 years the territory and water space in Porkkala and committed itself to pay $300 million reparation to Russia.   

[OlgaH]

In Soviet and Russian historiography the Soviet - Finnish war (1939—1940) is considered to be as a separate two-sided local armed conflict that is not a part of World War II.

The Soviet - Finnish war (1941—1944) was a part of the Great Patriotic War.

[deccie]

It was not a motivation. It was sad and terrible reality when people had to sacrifice their lives to defend their Отечество against attack by the enemy.

Given the feelings about sacrifice definding one's country from an invading army is there any opinion on the Soviet invasion of Poland in 1939?

[OlgaH]

Given the feelings about sacrifice definding one's country from an invading army is there any opinion on the Soviet invasion of Poland in 1939?

deccie, please don't confuse the Soviet invasion of Poland in 1939 with the Great Patriotic War (1941-1945) 

[OlgaH]

BTW Germany invasion of Poland in 1939 (when Hitler demanded to hand over Gdansk (Danzig) to Germany and was refused)  was a beginning of the World War II 

[deccie]

deccie, please don't confuse the Soviet invasion of Poland in 1939 with the Great Patriotic War (1941-1945) 

Sorry for the confusion, but some of the world was already at war with Germany by then.

[deccie]

BTW Germany invasion of Poland in 1939 (when Hitler demanded to hand over Gdansk (Danzig) to Germany and was refused)  was a beginning of the World War II 

Actually, this was kind of my point. The Molotov - Ribbentrop pact could at best be seen as "dealing with the devil" and at worst an overt act by Stalin to divide the spoils of Estern Europe between two dictators.

Either way the Soviet Union doesn't come out of it well.

[SANDRO43]

I have a Finnish friend here, I'll ask her what popular culture in Finalnd says about this war.

A Finnish opinion on their conflict/war with the USSR: http://www.kolumbus.fi/rastas/nyky/reasons_ww2.html.

After WWII, Finnish politics were under close scrutiny and 'advice' from the USSR. I remember touring Finnish Karelia in the mid 1980s: miles before reaching a small lake  with a Finnish Western shore and a Russian Eastern shore (Simpele ?), huge (5m x 10m) placards every half-mile or so warned motorists in several languages that upon reaching the lake it was prohibited to stop on its shore, use binoculars, take photos, etc. etc. .

[OlgaH]

Sorry for the confusion, but some of the world was already at war with Germany by then.

The entering of USSR into the the World War II in September of 1939 (after German army) was co-ordinated with Germany in advance according to the secret Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact

[deccie]

In Soviet and Russian historiography the Soviet - Finnish war (1939—1940) is considered to be as a separate two-sided local armed conflict that is not a part of World War II.
 

I dispute this view as  Finland was included in the territories discussed in the Molotov/Ribbentrop pact it could well be argued to have a place in the Great Patriotic war especially as the pact preceeded the final war between Finland and the Soviet Union.

It may have preceeded the actual declaration of hostilities between Germany and the USSR but it sure was part of the build up to it.

[deccie]

The entering of USSR into the the World War II in September of 1939 (after German army) was co-ordinated with Germany in advance according to the secret Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact

Exactly. And the Finnish "situation" was discussed as part of this pact.