Jump to content

Talk:Georgy Zhukov: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
SuperDeng (talk | contribs)
1,937 edits
Fixed typo
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
 
(357 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
'''''hi'''''
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|vital=yes|living=n|listas=Zhukov, Georgy|1=
{{WikiProject Biography|military-work-group=y|military-priority=Top|politician-work-group=y|politician-priority=Low}}
{{WikiProject Military history|Biography=y|WWI=y|WWII=y|Russian=y|Cold-War=y|class=C|b1=no|b2=yes|b3=yes|b4=yes|b5=yes}}
{{WikiProject Soviet Union|importance=Top|mil=y}}
{{WikiProject Socialism|importance=}}
}}
{{Contentious topics/talk notice|e-e}}


==Terrible general==
Hello. Do you have an interest or comment on the Georgi Zhukov article? - [[User:Texture|Texture]] 18:32, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)
In reality Zhukov was a terrible general who lied about his role in World War II, and only won because of Lend Lease from the West. In any democracy he would have been fired for deliberately sacrificing so many of his own troops. ([[Special:Contributions/2A00:23C4:6384:600:3C90:B6A8:3E9A:4A23|2A00:23C4:6384:600:3C90:B6A8:3E9A:4A23]] ([[User talk:2A00:23C4:6384:600:3C90:B6A8:3E9A:4A23|talk]]) 11:36, 15 August 2017 (UTC))
:Really? Where on earth did you heard that? I myself come from that Soviet Union thing, and heard nothing of this kind. Maybe I am not as westernized as you are? As for the second sentence of yours, maybe. But, keep in mind if he would have come to power in the US under Truman (and some people after him wanted to come (but non did)) he would have been no better then [[Augusto Pinochet]].--[[User:Biografer|Biografer]] ([[User talk:Biografer|talk]]) 03:10, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
::There has been a widespread reassessment of Zhukov's supposedly great leadership since the end of the Cold War. He was undeniably a war criminal who caused the deaths of millions of Red Army soldiers. ([[User:Defence1|Defence1]] ([[User talk:Defence1|talk]]) 13:02, 17 March 2019 (UTC))
Maybe you should continu your sourceless bickering on Twitter. --[[User:Nickdenuijl|Nickdenuijl]] ([[User talk:Nickdenuijl|talk]]) 11:48, 12 September 2022 (UTC)


==Standard English usage==
I propose the adoption of UK English as the prefered usage in this article. Can we get a consensus? Any comments? [[User:Roger 8 Roger|Roger 8 Roger]] ([[User talk:Roger 8 Roger|talk]]) 18:36, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
:I would say ''no'' to it. Rewording every sentence in the article is rather time consuming and obscure.--[[User:Biografer|Biografer]] ([[User talk:Biografer|talk]]) 04:37, 13 November 2018 (UTC)


== Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion ==
Yes, I do. Before assuming command of the defence of Moscow in late 1941, Zhukov organised the defence of Leningrad, stopping the German advance in the southern outskirts of the city. Maybe you want to insert a more elaborate reference to that?
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
* [[commons:File:Командир корпуса Георгий Жуков.jpg|Командир корпуса Георгий Жуков.jpg]]<!-- COMMONSBOT: discussion | 2020-02-17T22:55:06.058799 | Командир корпуса Георгий Жуков.jpg -->
* [[commons:File:Командующий 1-й армейской группой комкор Жуков в войсках перед наступлением.jpg|Командующий 1-й армейской группой комкор Жуков в войсках перед наступлением.jpg]]<!-- COMMONSBOT: discussion | 2020-02-17T22:55:06.058799 | Командующий 1-й армейской группой комкор Жуков в войсках перед наступлением.jpg -->
Participate in the deletion discussion at the [[commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Photographs by Pavel Troshkin|nomination page]]. —[[User:Community Tech bot|Community Tech bot]] ([[User talk:Community Tech bot|talk]]) 22:55, 17 February 2020 (UTC)


== The greatest Russian military mind? ==
Oh and by the way, Russia adopted the Zhukov Order and the Zhukov Medal in 1995, commemorating his 100th birthday.


I have reverted adding the following sentence to the lead:
--[[User:Kolt|Kolt]] 12:30, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)
: He is considered one of Russia's all-time greatest military minds. <ref>{{cite web |title=10 great russian military minds |url=https://www.rbth.com/history/332559-10-great-russian-military-leaders}}</ref>
<references/>


Firstly I do not think the site [https://www.rbth.com Russia Beyond] that between "seven tastiest Russian soups" and "ten Russian rivers flowing in tunnels" have the list "!0 great Russian military leaders" is authoritative enough to make such statements. The second there are a lot of criticism of Zhukov's performance as a military leader: as the chief of the general staff in 1940-1941 he is responsible for the military catastrophe of 1941, almost all his operations during the World War 2 were excessive in military losses, etc. Still many people hold him in high regard. Any thoughts? [[User:Alex Bakharev|Alex Bakharev]] ([[User talk:Alex Bakharev|talk]]) 05:44, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
Zhukov didn't subdue 'a peasant revolt" but the Tambov rebellion:
:I agree. I do not think this website should be used for such statements. [[User:Mellk|Mellk]] ([[User talk:Mellk|talk]]) 04:26, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tambov_rebellion


== Soviet russia 🇷🇺 ==
==Russian topography and administration==


You and me are the best thing ever [[Special:Contributions/2601:CB:80:810:254C:C057:28BB:4AA8|2601:CB:80:810:254C:C057:28BB:4AA8]] ([[User talk:2601:CB:80:810:254C:C057:28BB:4AA8|talk]]) 00:32, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello,


== Typo among quotation marks ==
there was no ''Ugodski-Zavod'' raion in tsarist era, I was wrong, sorry. The tsarist-era raion was
of larger scale than later soviet-era raion.
- therefore is right: "born in ...''Maloyaroslavets'' raion".


“On 10 June 1941, Zhukov sent a message to the Military Council of the Kiev Special Military District, after someone, most likely the commander of the Kiev district, Mikhail Kirponos, had ordered troops on the border to occupy forward positions. Zhukov ordered: "Such action could provoke the Germans into armed confrontation fraught with all sorts of consequences. Revoke this order immediately and report who, specifically, gave such an unauthorised order." On 11 June, he sent a telegram saying that his immediate superior, Timoshenko, had ordered that they were to report back by 16 June confirming that the troops had been withdrawn from their forward positions." According to the historian David E. Murphy, "the action by Timoshenko and Zhukov must have been initiated at the request of Stalin."”
Does anyone know when the place (PGT) UGODSKI ZAVOD was renamed "ZHUKOVO" in Georgi K. Zhukov's honor ?


This passage contains an odd number of quotation marks; the one following "positions" is either an accident or, just possibly, requires a counterpart earlier in the sentence. [[User:Harfarhs|Harfarhs]] ([[User talk:Harfarhs|talk]]) 17:46, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks,
WernerE (germanwiki), 25.2.05
----------------


== "Pre-war military exercises" is hard to understand ==
== Kursk ==


The section titled "Pre-war military exercises" is hard to understand. There may be some Eastern confused with Western or some Red with Blue, but as it is written at this moment it is not clear. [[User:Nickdenuijl|Nickdenuijl]] ([[User talk:Nickdenuijl|talk]]) 11:52, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
How does it happen that [[Battle of Kursk]] is not linked, nor the city even mentioned? [[Robert Service]] (NPR interview 2005 May) attributes his role at Kursk as the biggest reason for his veneration to this day in Russia, unless i got confused.<br>
--[[User:Jerzy|Jerzy]][[User talk:Jerzy| (t)]] 05:49, 2005 May 8 (UTC)

:Zhukov was representative of [[Stavka]] (actually, Stalin's deputy), to coordinate the [[Front (Soviet Army)|Front]]s during the battle. The immediate major commanders are listed at the [[Battle of Kursk]] article. If one wants to attribute this piece of glory to Zhukov, he must not forget that all Soviet battles have been won by the Greatest Military Genius of All Times Generalissimo Stalin. [[User:Mikkalai|Mikkalai]] 00:43, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

== Mistake in the article ==

The painting of Marshal Zhukov is tagged as "propaganda poster"
In fact, this is a painting by the artist Konstantin Vassiliev
(Константин Васильев), 1942 - 1976. You can see some of his
paintings at http://rus-sky.com/vasilyev/


== Stalin submit to criticism? ==

:''Stalin's willingness to submit to criticism and listen to his generals eventually contributed to his success as a commander - whereas Hitler sacked any general who disagreed with him.''

From what I remember of history class (which isn't much) Stalin executed most of his military commanders before the war, for some reason Zhukov survived Stalin's extermination. This meant Russia had precious few capable generals at the beginning of WWII, leading to massive Soviet losses.

But basically, did Stalin really take criticism at all from anyone? He executed more Russians than died in WWII! Perhaps someone who knows more about history than me could clear that up! --[[User:Fxer|Fxer]] 01:01, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

* That's actually true. After the major failures of 1941 Stalin became quite receptive to the suggestions of his commanders. Unlike Hitler he did listen to their advice, allowed them to ovverrule him on occasions, and let them act independently. Instead of being judged on their opinions before the battle they were judged by the outcome. Of course the pressure to succeed was enormous, and the punishment for failure severe; however Stalin was at least smart enough not to think himself a military genius. He'd take the credit for the successes later anyway. [[User:24.168.5.223|24.168.5.223]]

After the Nazis almost took Moscow and won WWII Stalin had no other option but to listen to his generals. Hitler on the other hand had taken France within a month, and held most of Europe by 1941. To him the Russian Victory at Battle of Moscow was simply luck and general winter. The battles of Stalingrad and Kursk would prove him dead wrong. But Stalin had no successes as a commander. His 'success' was realizing that others who grew up with the army and fought in actual battles should command instead of him. His contribution to victory was beating the Nazis at the 'propaganda war'.

== Numbers ==

The following piece of text

::''for example at the Battle of Moscow in the winter of 1941 Zhukov lost 139,586 men, or 13.6% of his total strength - while a comparable operation under General Kozlov lost 39.4% of his men near Kerch. As the war went on, Zhukov's casualties were becoming even lower; while often incredibly high by any other country's standards, for the Soviet Union they were below average. At the Battle of Berlin Zhukov lost only 4.1% of his men, while Konev's forces, that faced weaker German opposition, lost 5%, and at the same time Rodion Malinovsky lost almost 8% at the Battle of Budapest''

does not credit a source. I have never come across such numbers and they seem very suspicious to me. could the author of these staements provide her/his sources?--[[User:Compay|Compay]] 21:11, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

: I believe they are coming from the book "Russia and USSR in the Wars of XXth Century. Military Losses. Statistical Research" by candidate of sciences (military) full general G. F. Krivosheev. It was published in Russia in 2001 and so far remains the most thorough and reliable source for information on Soviet losses in WWII. It is available online in Russian here: http://www.soldat.ru/doc/casualties/book/.

: The numbers are based on loss reports, which in the Red Army were submitted bi-weekly IIRC. Note that the balance method of losses estimation gives a total number of military losses that is approximately 16% higher than Krivosheev's data (10,107,500 total losses during WWII as opposed to 8,668,400 as calculated by Krivosheev). These two numbers are the "safe" lower and upper limits for Soviet military losses during WWII. The actual number of losses is somewhere between these two figures, but it's hard to tell where exactly.

: As for operational losses, only Krivosheev's numbers are available. Purely theoretically, I would expect them to be more accurate towards the end of the war. Thus, the numbers of losses in Berlin operation are probably quite close to reality, while the losses for operations of 1941 are probably underreported. But this is just speculation, of course. [[User:Eleyvie|Eleyvie]] 09:43, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

== Contradictory Text ==

According to the text on this page, Lavrentiy Beria is "one of the main organizers of Stalin's purges". This information directly contradicts the data on Lavrentiy Beria's page and does not relate to this article anyway. This statement should probably be removed I reckon?

P.S. Sorry, forgot to sign: it's me. :-) [[User:Eleyvie|Eleyvie]] 09:49, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

== Grand Cross of the Bath ==

This article begins with the words "Georgy Konstantinovich Zhukov, GCB", with the acronym GCB linking to the "Grand Cross of the Bath" page. As Zhukov was Russian, not British, and as he held many other honours in addition to this, I don't really think that it is appropriate to single out the fact that he had had this British honour conferred upon him. Comments? --[[User:Thievinggypsy|The Thieving Gypsy]] 14:34, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

== Leningrad 1941 ==

Article says: "Zhukov stopped the German advance in Leningrad's southern outskirts in the autumn of 1941."

This is not true as Zhukov arrived to Leningrad only on 13 September, 1941 and Germans did not have any plans to attack Leningrad. Already 5 september Hitler announced that objective at Leningrad was achieved and 6th September signed directive No. 35, ordering blockade of Leningrad (not a sturm!) to release airforce and mobile units for central direction.

Hitlers directive no.35 says: "On the Northeastern front, in conjunction with the Finnish Corps attacking on the Karelian peninsula, we must (after the capture of Schlusselburg) so surround the enemy forces fighting in the Leningrad area that by September 15th at the latest substantial units of the motorized forces and of 1st Air Fleet, especially VIII Air Corps. will be available for service on the Central front. Before this, efforts will be made to encircle Leningrad more closely, in particular in the east, and, should weather permit, a large-scale air attack on Leningrad will be carried out. It is particularly important in this connection to destroy the water supply."

http://www.adolfhitler.ws/lib/proc/direct35.html

Conclusion: Zhukov did not stop advance in Leningrad outskirts as Germans did not even plan to take Leningrad in Autumn 1941. Article is full of similar errors and needs serious cleanup.[[User:Legionas|Sigitas]] 17:03, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

:Your conclusions are wrong, the germans wanted to capture leningrad but were unable to make progress because of the resistance zhukov and others put into place so hitler decided to starve out the city ([[User:SuperDeng|Deng]] 19:24, 5 May 2006 (UTC))

:: Content of articles must be verifiable! Don't invent facts. When Zhukov arrived to Leningrad German had no plans / made no attempts to take the city. Zhukov did not stop advance of Germans at Leningrad because Germans stopped before arrival of Zhukov. Decision to blockade city was made before arrival of Zhukov. Check the dates: 7th September Hitler orders to encircle Leningrad and release units to other directions, 13th September Zhukov arrives to leningrad and assumes command. [[User:Legionas|Sigitas]] 01:38, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


:::This is what happens when you only read limited information, you must read more it is the only way that you will learn here are 4 books and you should atleast read one of them if you want to know something.
# The Siege of Leningrad, 1941-1944: 900 Days of Terror (2001) ISBN 0760309418 by David Glantz
# Stumbling Colossus: The Red Army on the Eve of World War (1998) ISBN 0700608796 by David glantz
# Russia's War: A History of the Soviet Effort: 1941-1945 ISBN 0140271694 by Richard Overy
# The Court of the Red Tsar by Simon Sebag Montefiore

::: Without getting a bigger picture and with only scraps of information from the internet you can never understand the whole big picture and if you wish to know more then the only way to do so is to study more.

== Term "neo-Stalinists" ==

This term is misapplied here when we talk about events of 1957. People who took power in 1957 - [[Nikita Khrushchev]], [[Georgy Zhukov]] and [[Ivan Serov]]- were no lesser stalinists and they all were ruthless executors of Stalin's will each responsible for countless deaths of Stalin regime. Let's simply call oponents of Zhukov "opposition" or "Anti-Party Group" as they traditionally are called. [[User:Legionas|Sigitas]] 17:34, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

== Not a "brilliant strategist" ==

Article says: "Zhukov was certainly a brilliant strategist".

Zhukov wasn't brilliant strategist. Catastrophe of Red Army in 1941 (when Zhukov was chief of the Red Army General Staff) is one of the most spectacular defeats in history. 34.000 tanks destroyed or captured, over 6000 aicraft destroyed, and +- 2 million casualties (killed, wounded and captured).
These were the losses in 1941 of the Soviet Army. Let's remove this incorrect sentense. [[User:Legionas|Sigitas]] 17:40, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

::You asume that everything that went wrong in 1941 is his fault? You totally ignore that the doctrine and traning of the red army was obsolete in 1941. And in 1941 most of the soliders didnt have any small arms or ammunition. You ignore so much and blame everything on Zhukov. And then you ignore the rest of the war, it ended in 1945. Most historians say that he was brilliant. For example [[David Glantz]], [[John Erickson]] and [[Richard Overy]] all say the same thing. They are all military historians and they know what they are talking about. Read the books they have written and you will find out for your self ([[User:SuperDeng|Deng]] 10:04, 3 May 2006 (UTC))

:: "In 1941 most of the soliders didnt have any small arms or ammunition"? Prove it. And if it was the case why chief of the Red Army General Staff Zhukov did not supply them with ammo? Why chief of the Red Army General Staff did not train his army properly? It is strange position to attribute victories to Zhukov, but defeats to someone else. Yes, war did not end in 1941, just like Zhukov's defeats did not end in 1941. Did you hear about Rzhev meatgrinder? Opinion of few historians doesn't make him more brilliant. I don't mind formulation "David Glantz, John Erickson and Richard Overy consider Zhukov brilliant strategist despite many strategical setbacks experienced of Red Army under his command." [[User:Legionas|Sigitas]] 12:19, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

::: I am not sure Glantz would make an overall assessment of "brilliant", but since I have most of his books I will check. He is, after all, mostly responsible for uncovering Operation Mars (Rzhev) in the west. Frankly Zhukov's record is uneven, like many Generals. The article should reflect that.
::: Glantz's '''Stumbling Colossus''' demonstrates that the Red Army's readiness in June 1941 was appalling. It's not true that "most of the soldiers didn't have any small arms or ammunition" but it is correct that many units lacked any provision for resupply of even basic loads, and had a very low level of maintenance and training. The spring 1941 set of new recruits had just been taken into their units and had very little training by June.
::: The Red Army didn't have 34,000 tanks to lose in 1941. Their doctrine ("Deep Battle") was quite advanced, but thier training and readiness were horrible, so they couldn't execute it.
::: Finally it might be useful to take Rokossovski's views into consideration. He served both above Zhukov and under his command over the years. [[User:DMorpheus|DMorpheus]] 14:53, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

::::Sorry, my numbers were incorrect. According to the official data from the General staff of Russian Federation loses during 5 first months of war were: 4,000,000 POVs, 20 500 tanks, 17 900 military planes, 20 000 guns and 85% of military factories. We cannot call this tactical setback. We cannot call chief of the Red Army General Staff of annihilated army "brilliant strategist". What Zhukov did to avoid this catastrophe? [[User:Legionas|Sigitas]] 16:27, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

::::Legionas|Sigitas I think your problem is that you lack alot of information. First why the red army lost so much early in the war wasent Zhukov fault but Stalins. Basically everywhere you want to put Zhukov put Stalin and you will have a correct version. Stalin was the one who didnt supply the troops, stalin was the one that demanded counter attacks everywhere. And Zhukov could only work and use his brilliance to a certain levle because Stalin demanded to much and understod to little. And it is not the oppionon of Some historians but almost ALL historians. If you want to find out more then read more or study history at an university. And Rokossovski's could have an axe to grind with Zhukov, just as DMorpheus has an axe to grind with me. ([[User:SuperDeng|Deng]] 15:37, 3 May 2006 (UTC))

::::: As SuperDeng is in minority this time and he did not provide quotes of his favorite hiostorians saying that Zhukov was "brilliant startegist", I'm removing this sentence. As no one protests I also make two more corrections, see posts on this page above on Leningrad and "stalinists". [[User:Legionas|Sigitas]] 17:34, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

:::::: You are blameing the wrong person. Zhukov didnt give the orders Stalin did. Zhukov could only advice Stalin. During the early part of the war Stalin wouldnt listen to anyone and EVERYONE was afraid of Stalin. It was Stalin who refused to believe that the germans would attack and also gave orders which forbade people from strikeing back when the germns launched their invasion. Stalin gave all the orders during the first part of the war and everyone had to follow them. Zhukov was the only one brave enough to argue with Stalin and tell him how wrong he was. In Russia's War by Richard Overy you can see that Zhukov was the only one who argued with Stalin the rest of the Stavka were just quiet. You must understand that Stalin ruled the Soviet Union with an iron hand and he was the undisputed ruler, his words were the law. And the majority of the faliures that befell the red army early in the war was almost completly Stalins fault. Stalin would demand counter attacks everywhere, no matter if the troops had ammo, weapons or any form of equipment. Only when Stalin stoped giving his idiotic orders and released his grip on the military was the red army able to fight an equall battle. Everything you believe is Zhukovs fault is in fact Stalins fault becuase he was the one that gave all the idotic orders during the first part of the war. He was the one who pushed the troops into battle without equipment. Stalin is to blame not Zhukov. The fact that Stalin would listen to Zhukov and did not kill him for argueing with him shows without a shadow of a doubt that Zhukov was brilliant. Because if even Stalin can understand that someone is smart then he must really be smart. And when Zhukov was allowed to give his orders and fight without any interferance from Stalin there you can see victory. But when Stalin interfered there you can see defeat. ([[User:SuperDeng|Deng]] 18:07, 5 May 2006 (UTC))

::: You wrote: ''Stalin gave all the orders during the first part of the war and everyone had to follow them.'' If this is true then on what basis can you rate Zhukov as "brilliant"? The guy giving the orders gets the credit and the blame. For example, you credit Zhukov's three-week command of the Leningrad sector with saving the city. But according to you Stalin was giving all the orders, so isn't it Stalin who saved Leningrad? Zhukov's role is meaningless if Stalin was giving all the orders....he might as well have been a clerk. How is it "brilliant" to follow the orders of an untrained dictator? You can't have it both ways - either Zhukov and other generals had some autonomy and could command (at least within their sphere of authority) or it was Stalin giving all the orders. You also wrote ''"....when Zhukov was allowed to give his orders and fight without any interferance from Stalin there you can see victory. But when Stalin interfered there you can see defeat."'' That is a very convenient, but false formulation.
::: The truth is rather obvious: commanders of the Red Army indeed had *some* autonomy and the better ones were able to achieve successes, often in spite of Stalin. The worst ones failed whether Stalin was breathing down their necks or not. People like Kulik, Voroshilov, etc. didn't need Stalin to help them fail.
::: You also wrote ''"The fact that Stalin would listen to Zhukov and did not kill him for argueing with him shows without a shadow of a doubt that Zhukov was brilliant."'' This is laughable. A more likely explanation is that Stalin needed Zhukov, and both men knew it. There were plenty of brilliant people who did not survive an argument with Stalin, so "not being killed" by Stalin is hardly evidence of brilliance. Trotsky was an intellectual giant compared with either of them, and it cost him his life.
::: Anyway, all of these 'brilliant' statements are mere POV or original research until a historian is quoted giving this assessment. Sigitas was right; until there is a reputable historian providing the assessment, it is original research and does not belong here.
::: Regarding Rokossovski, of course he may have had an axe to grind. So does everyone else. The point is to understand who has what axe and how it affects their writing. Zhukov's memoirs were published in the Krushchev era, when Stalin's role in WW2 was being minimized. Of course they will say that Zhukov stood up to Stalin. If he had written that in 1947 he would have never been published. [[User:DMorpheus|DMorpheus]] 18:50, 5 May 2006 (UTC)


::::An historian has been quoted Richard Overy In Russia's War
:::: Yes the generals had some command within their sphere of authority but that dosent matter when the man in charge gives idiotic orders and impossible tasks. And that Stalin didnt kill Zhukov was proof of Zhukovs brilliance, after the war many heads would roll but Stalin didnt kill Zhukov he only demoted him. Trotsky was a rival and Stalin wanted all the power and didnt want to share anything with anyone. Anyone being a threat to Stalin real or imaginative was killed. Only Zhukov was left to live. Kulik and Voroshilov were not Zhukov. Zhukov did need help to fail but he didnt need help to win. When you are talking about Zhukov then this line is 100% correct that when Zhukov was allowed to give his orders and fight without any interferance from Stalin there you can see victory But when Stalin interfered there you can see defeat. We are not talking about Kulik, Voroshilov or any person but only Zhukov when it comes to Zhukov it is clear that the less Stalin interfered the better the red army did.
::::And not only I but Richard Overy credits Zhukov with saveing Leningrad and so does Simon Sebag Montefiore and many other historians as well([[User:SuperDeng|Deng]] 19:15, 5 May 2006 (UTC))

::: That is one of the most absurd things I have ever read; completely uncontaminated by any logic at all. [[User:DMorpheus|DMorpheus]] 21:35, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 21:03, 12 April 2024

Terrible general

[edit]

In reality Zhukov was a terrible general who lied about his role in World War II, and only won because of Lend Lease from the West. In any democracy he would have been fired for deliberately sacrificing so many of his own troops. (2A00:23C4:6384:600:3C90:B6A8:3E9A:4A23 (talk) 11:36, 15 August 2017 (UTC))[reply]

Really? Where on earth did you heard that? I myself come from that Soviet Union thing, and heard nothing of this kind. Maybe I am not as westernized as you are? As for the second sentence of yours, maybe. But, keep in mind if he would have come to power in the US under Truman (and some people after him wanted to come (but non did)) he would have been no better then Augusto Pinochet.--Biografer (talk) 03:10, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There has been a widespread reassessment of Zhukov's supposedly great leadership since the end of the Cold War. He was undeniably a war criminal who caused the deaths of millions of Red Army soldiers. (Defence1 (talk) 13:02, 17 March 2019 (UTC))[reply]

Maybe you should continu your sourceless bickering on Twitter. --Nickdenuijl (talk) 11:48, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Standard English usage

[edit]

I propose the adoption of UK English as the prefered usage in this article. Can we get a consensus? Any comments? Roger 8 Roger (talk) 18:36, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would say no to it. Rewording every sentence in the article is rather time consuming and obscure.--Biografer (talk) 04:37, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:55, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The greatest Russian military mind?

[edit]

I have reverted adding the following sentence to the lead:

He is considered one of Russia's all-time greatest military minds. [1]
  1. ^ "10 great russian military minds".

Firstly I do not think the site Russia Beyond that between "seven tastiest Russian soups" and "ten Russian rivers flowing in tunnels" have the list "!0 great Russian military leaders" is authoritative enough to make such statements. The second there are a lot of criticism of Zhukov's performance as a military leader: as the chief of the general staff in 1940-1941 he is responsible for the military catastrophe of 1941, almost all his operations during the World War 2 were excessive in military losses, etc. Still many people hold him in high regard. Any thoughts? Alex Bakharev (talk) 05:44, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I do not think this website should be used for such statements. Mellk (talk) 04:26, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Soviet russia 🇷🇺

[edit]

You and me are the best thing ever 2601:CB:80:810:254C:C057:28BB:4AA8 (talk) 00:32, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Typo among quotation marks

[edit]

“On 10 June 1941, Zhukov sent a message to the Military Council of the Kiev Special Military District, after someone, most likely the commander of the Kiev district, Mikhail Kirponos, had ordered troops on the border to occupy forward positions. Zhukov ordered: "Such action could provoke the Germans into armed confrontation fraught with all sorts of consequences. Revoke this order immediately and report who, specifically, gave such an unauthorised order." On 11 June, he sent a telegram saying that his immediate superior, Timoshenko, had ordered that they were to report back by 16 June confirming that the troops had been withdrawn from their forward positions." According to the historian David E. Murphy, "the action by Timoshenko and Zhukov must have been initiated at the request of Stalin."”

This passage contains an odd number of quotation marks; the one following "positions" is either an accident or, just possibly, requires a counterpart earlier in the sentence. Harfarhs (talk) 17:46, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Pre-war military exercises" is hard to understand

[edit]

The section titled "Pre-war military exercises" is hard to understand. There may be some Eastern confused with Western or some Red with Blue, but as it is written at this moment it is not clear. Nickdenuijl (talk) 11:52, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Georgy_Zhukov&oldid=1218629903"