Drea, Coox and the Institute of Oriental Studies have been cited; how much literature are you asking for?I could go through one by one again and compare "people on the Internet" with published author (in 2012 btw, includes the 2002 article you've referenced. If you really want a break down of why taking a tiny sample and assuming that rings true for the whole front then you'll have to wait as I don't have a pc.
Please, has anyone here actually read any of the literature on nomonhan? I am glad to have this information about the invasion of manchuria.
The author is definitely wrong, given basic research into the TOE of 1st Army would reveal it was only superior in tanks. Furthermore, attempting to utilize a single sentence, which does not include a single citation for its claim, is the definition of "taking a tiny sample".Note the bold. But I guess this historian and the Kwangtung army itself is wrong and actually the Soviets were weaker in every regard (apart from apparently useless tanks)
I'm saying there would be no gains; the Soviets had to pull from STAVKA reserve in the European USSR just to make a Corps-level action against a single Japanese division possible at a time when a relief force, at the Corps level, was already being assembled by the Kwantung Army.Now the quotes about fuel is interesting, so you're saying soviet gains would be limited based on their logistical capacity?
Best case, probably overrun everything South of the Amur River. Worst case? Stalemate. Either is extremely bad for the Soviets come 1941.So what happens then? The Japanese storm to the urals? Easily brushing aside the incredibly weak Soviets?