TheArtOfBattle masthead

Battle of Warsaw, 1920

 | Modern Era  | 2 comments  | Print This Post Print This Post  | Email This Post Email This Post

Mikhail Tukhachevsky versus Jozef Pilsudski: A Soviet army under Tukhachevsky tries to break the defensive lines of a Polish army under Pilsudski. Can Pilsudski’s risky master plan save the capital? Also known as the Miracle at the Vistula. Click on the images below to view.
 
 
Desperate, fearful men fought on both sides in this forgotten struggle for Eastern Europe. The prospect of what would happen if either side suffered defeat was well-known in all ranks.
 
Tactically, the battle seems simple: Tukhacevsky and Yegorov did not cooperate and therefore a wide – literal – rift developed between their two army groups which Pilsudski exploited to roll up the Soviet line from the south. Logistically, the battle is very complicated; Pilsudski was able to organize his logistics satisfactorily enough to actually launch his decisive offensive while Tukhachevsky was not. Western historians cringe at the thought of what would have happened had the Soviet horde been a more organized horde and launched its decisive offensive before Pilsudski.
 
 
The battle was relatively easy to animate compared with other massive, modern battles such as Mukden. As is typically the case, I spent more time determining the strength and casualties of each side. One issue was the fact that my animation featured only the northern half of a wider strategic campaign and so I was forced to do my own arithmetic. Fuller’s Decisive Battles of the Western World was specific as to the size of formations so I only had to subtract the formations not shown in the animation. I was therefore confronted with a casualty figure that exceeded the total number of Soviet soldiers involved. Szymczak put forward the most reasonable casualty figures in “Polish Soviet War: Battle of Warsaw” but these include the wider Warsaw campaign which I was not animating. Nonetheless, I converted these numbers to a percentage and arrived at the figures you see in the animation. Are they exact? Absolutely not. However, they serve their purpose.
 
- Jonathan Webb
 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

  1. 2 Comments to “Battle of Warsaw, 1920”

  2. Russians have this inane ability of REPEATEDLY sabotaging each other at the expense of Russian Troops in the field.

    GEN Samsonov PUBLICALLY ATTACKED GEN Rennenkampf for not coming to his rescue at MUKDEN 1905. Their ‘hate fest’ for each other was gleefully noted by GEN Hindenberg who bet the farm that GEN Rennenkampf would not do anything to help his arch enemy which was a major factor as to why 2D army was surrounded and destroyed at the battle of Tannenberg (Allenstein).

    Fast forward six years later to the Battle of Warsaw 1920. Your article did not do justice to the ‘lost cause’ the Poles were in. Gen Pilsudski had no reserves, had no ammo left and morale was at an all time low. GEN Pilsudski’s decision to throw a ‘hail mary’ pass and assult up the middle was mocked at my Marshall Tukhachevsky, GEN Weygran (FR Attachee), the Polish GEN Staff and field Commanders. Prior to sending up the order, GEN Pilsudski submitted his letter of resignation and remarked “What I do is madness–sheer madness”.

    So who lost the battle of (communist) Tours? Budyunne and Stalin who decided to pillage an obscure village than provide reserve support. The gambit worked and Western Europe was saved (until 1945-1989). Marshall Tukhachevsky never forgave Stalin for the screw up and Stalin never forgave Tukhachevsky for the his screw-up. Payback came in 1938 when Stalin had Tukhavchesky arrested and shot and appointed his drinking buddy Budyunne as Southern Front Commander. What was Budyunne’s comment during the Great Purge. I have nothing to worry about—Comrad Stalin only kills smart people!!!

    By Debauchee69 on Jun 5, 2010 at 7:46 pm

  3. The victory of reactionary Rightist, imperialist forces here over the Soviet workers’ state, long before developments like this major defeat weakened it (this counter-attack *was* taken in response to imperialist aggression, after all — and it was carried thru with the express aim of linking up with the revolutionists in Germany and in the West) — and which led directly to the degeneration known as stalinism — is not something to crow over and be proud of. i.e.: the article should be a little more objective. Fair and balanced, even. If this is possible here.

    By Vlad Lenin on Jun 5, 2010 at 11:03 pm

Post a Comment

Please note that The Art of Battle Staff cannot respond to requests for research of any type. Please visit our research forum to post research questions.

Related Articles



acglogo SUBSCRIBE TODAY!

Magazine Help
+Give as a gift
+Renew
+Address Change
+Questions

Most Titles
$21.95/6 issues!

SPONSORED SITES






Historynet Spacer

OPINION POLL

Which upcoming animation are you most looking forward to? Select up to three.

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Supported Sites

Supported Readings

Weider History Group

Weider History Network:  HistoryNet | Armchair General | Once A Marine | Achtung Panzer!

Terms of Use | Copyright © 2009 Weider History Group. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
Contact Us|Advertise With Us|Subscription Help