External forces against the Russian Empire

184
Not only internal forces (the “fifth column”: the ruling elite, freemasons, bourgeoisie, liberal intelligentsia, revolutionaries and nationalists of all stripes) came out against the Romanov empire, the autocracy, but also external forces. So, Germany, Austria-Hungary and Turkey were vitally interested in the internal explosion in Russia to win the war.

However, not only official enemies, but also formal "allies" on the Entente, came out against the Russian Empire. The United States, Britain and France actively supported the “fifth column” in Russia. During the war, England and France concluded a secret agreement not to give up the Black Sea straits of Russia under any circumstances. Moreover, after the victory over Germany, the "noble allies" of Russia planned to dismember their "partner" - Russia, separating from it the Privislensky krai (Kingdom of Poland), the Baltic states, and if successful, then Little Russia, the Caucasus.



Western powers supported as the so-called. “Fevralistov”, that is, political and social, aristocratic, military, financial and economic elite, who wanted to overthrow the autocracy to get the “freedom”, the full power, and dissimilar revolutionaries and nationalists.

US Ambassador to Russia David Rowland Francis was probably the most unconditional supporter of the February revolution. He spoke of revolution as the “most amazing revolution in stories”, And US President Wilson stated that he unequivocally condemned“ autocracy, which crowned the top of the Russian political structure for so long and which resorted to such terrible methods that it was not Russian either by origin, nor by its nature, nor by its goals. Now it is from the market, and the great noble Russian people have joined with their natural greatness and power to the forces that fight for freedom, justice and peace. "

The United States solved its tasks in the First World War. At the same time, they wanted to crush the “autocracies” of Germany and Russia, weaken Britain, making it their junior partner in the new world order, and weaken France. The Americans planned with their goods to penetrate the British and French colonial empires. The American economy during the war became the main one in the world, and the United States turned from a debtor into a creditor to England and France, taking leading positions in the western project. Post-February Russia in these plans was to become a dependent ally of the United States, a raw materials appendage of the American empire and a sales market for American industry. The United States wanted to get into its sphere of influence the regions of Russia where its main raw material resources — Siberia and the Far East — were concentrated. Therefore, the Americans actively supported the revolution in Russia and prepared plans for dividing Russia into spheres of influence. In the area of ​​responsibility of England departed Russian North (Murmansk, Arkhangelsk), the Caucasus, Turkestan, France - the Northern Black Sea region. Japan was to receive half of Sakhalin, the Amur region, the remaining possessions of Russia in China.

At the same time, the Americans had their own "agents of influence", both among the red and white. In particular, L. Trotsky with a detachment of internationalist militants was abandoned from the United States; the “supreme ruler” of Russia also acted in the interests of America and Britain, Admiral Alexander Kolchak. In the interests of the States, Czechoslovak arrows also acted, which, in fact, unleashed a civil war in Russia, in the interests of the masters of the West.

External forces against the Russian Empire

British warships enter Sevastopol. Autumn 1918

Central powers

Germany, Austria-Hungary and Turkey needed a revolution in Russia to save themselves. The ideology of Pan-Turkism prevailed in Turkey, and the Ottomans dreamed of taking under their hands all the Turkic peoples of the Russian Empire. One of the main ideologists of Pan-Turkism, Zia Gekalp, stated: "The political boundaries of the Turks' homeland cover the whole territory, where the Turkic speech is heard and where there is Turkic culture." And he pathetically asked: “Where is Turan now? Where is the Crimea? What happened to the Caucasus? From Kazan to Tibet, only Russians are everywhere. ” The Turks were declared a "purebred higher race", called to dominate other peoples.

At the congress of the Ittihad party, the Turkic ideologue Dr. Nazim spoke about the creation of the “Great Turan”: “In the East in Asia there are boundless spaces and opportunities for our development and expansion. Do not forget that our ancestors came from Turan, and today in Transcaucasia, as well as to the east of the Caspian Sea, on spacious lands, Turkic-speaking tribes make up an almost complete population, alas, under the yoke of our age-old enemy - Russia. Our political horizons are open only in this direction, and it remains for us to fulfill our sacred duty: to unite the Turkic tribes from the Caspian to the Yellow Sea ... ”.

Therefore, the Russian Caucasus and Central Asia in 1908-1914. Turkish emissaries and agents flooded them, acting under the guise of merchants, pilgrims, travelers who carried out subversive propaganda, looked for contacts with anti-Russian forces, organized revolutionary centers. They continued the same activity during the First World War. In particular, Turkish agents were noted during the organization of the uprising in Turkestan in 1916. Turks also actively worked in the Caucasus, especially among Muslims.

Austria-Hungary and Germany staked on national separatists and revolutionaries in Russia. In particular, supported the Polish and Ukrainian separatism. In the prewar period, the Austro-Hungarian authorities, in response to the growth of the Russian revival in the regions of Galician and Carpathian Rus, which were under their control, began repressions. The scale of the Russian national revival in Galicia is eloquently evidenced by the petition to the Vienna parliament that gathered more than 100 thousand signatures of Russian Galicians: “High Chamber! According to its historical past, culture and language, the Galician-Russian people are closely connected with the Little Russian tribe in Russia who populate the adjacent Galician land, which together with the Great Russian and Belarusian constitutes an integral ethnographic group, that is, the Russian people. The language of this nation, developed by thousands of years of labor of all three Russian tribes and currently occupying one of the first places among the world languages, Galician Russia considered and considers its own and only recognizes the right to be the language of its literature, science and culture in general ... ”. Further, the petition cited the demands for the freedom to study and teach the Russian language, history and law in the Russian lands that were part of Austria-Hungary. At the same time, the process of returning Uniates to Orthodoxy was going on.

The Austrian authorities, which stopped the process of the Russian national revival in Galicia, began demonstrative trials of priests and laity who converted to Orthodoxy and spoke Russian. Whole villages of Transcarpathian Russian peasants who converted to Orthodoxy were subjected to repression. Tens of peasants were condemned, thousands of peasants lived in a state of siege for several years.

When World War I began, the repression escalated into anti-Russian genocide. A network of concentration camps was created. The most famous of them is Talerhof, near the city of Graz in Austria-Hungary. At first, more than 60 thousand people were destroyed, more than 100 thousand fled to Russia, another about 80 thousand people were destroyed after the first retreat of the Russian army, including hundreds of Uniate priests killed, suspected of being sympathized with Orthodoxy and Russia. This information was given by the Polish deputy of the Vienna parliament A. Dashinsky. All Russian deputies of this parliament were shot.

Galician-Russian historian V. Vavrik in his work “Terezin and Talerhof” wrote: “The Austro-Magyar terror immediately spread across Carpathian Russia at all sites ... Our brothers, who had cut themselves from Russia, became not only servants of the Hapsburg monarchy, but also the most ingenious informers and even the executioners of the native people ... they performed the most despicable, shameful orders of the German riders. It is enough to pick up the Ukrainian newspaper “Dilo”, published for the intelligentsia, to be convinced of this completely. Sokal district was a log in the eyes of "Ukrainian patriots", so denunciations from their side fell on the Russian people, like a hail of black clouds ... Teacher Steniatinsky gave prominent, active peasants in the outskirts ... In the village of Makoviski, the priest denounced his parishioners uniate kraychik. In the village of Sosnitsa, “men of confidence”, Ukrainians Mikhail Slyusar, Voyt Mikhail Kushnir and others reported their fellow villagers on the basis of their denunciation. Zadubrovy and back, then hung on willows. In the Stanislav Prison on Dubrov, executions took place from morning to evening ... Talerhof ... In the diaries and notes of the Talerhof slaves we have an accurate description of this Austrian hell. The first batch of Russian Galicians drove in Talerhof 4 September 1914 year. Before the winter of 1916, there were no barracks in Thalerhof. A bunch of people lay on the damp earth in the open, exposed to cold, darkness, rain and frost ... Priest John Mashchak under the date of December 11 1914 of the year noted that 11 people were bitten by lice. Throughout the Talerhof Square, poles were hammered, on which the already fiercely battered martyrs often hung, the “Anbinden”, a glorious German procedure of hanging by one leg, took place. There were no withdrawals even for women and priests ... But still, the dirty tricks of the Germans cannot be compared with the bullying of their own. The German could not so deeply climb his iron boots into the soul of a Slav-Ruthenian, as the same Rusyn, who called himself a Ukrainian, like the official of the police in Peremyshl Timchyk, a scammer and executioner, who spoke of his native people as cattle. He was the right hand of the executioner Piller, who gave information about prisoners. Timchuk, however, outdid another Ukrainian - Uniate Popovich Chirovsky, lieutenant-chief of the Austrian reserve ... All the slaves of Talelhof characterize him as a professional torturer and executioner. ”

Prisoner Talerhof MA Marco in “Galician Calvary” testified: “It’s terribly and painful to remember that difficult period of the close history of our people, when a brother who emerged from some living and ethnographic conditions, without a shudder of the soul, became not only on the side of the physical tormentors of a part of his people, but even more - he demanded these torments, insisted on them ... Carpathian "Ukrainians" were one of the main culprits of our folk martyrology during the war. "

Thus, the Austro-Hungarian authorities struck a terrible blow to the Russian movement in Galicia, effectively destroying the Russian party in this region, and at the same time actively supported the creation of an ethnic chimera, “Ukrainians.” "Ukrainians" acted as executioners of their own people, a weapon in the hands of the enemies of Russian civilization and the Russian super-ethnos.

At the same time, the Austro-Hungarian and German authorities supported the Polish nationalists, directing their energy against the Russian Empire. Anti-Russian-minded supporters of the Polish Socialist Party (PPS) believed that the road to Poland’s independence was through the defeat of Russia in the war. A few years before the start of the First World War, the PPS leader Jozef Pilsudski began military training for Polish youth in Austro-Hungarian Galicia. After the start of the war, he formed the Polish legions as part of the Austro-Hungarian army. Legions participated in battles both in Galicia and in the Carpathians. In June 1916, there were about 25 thousand people in the legions.

With the beginning of the war, the Austrian authorities proposed to create a state formation within the Austro-Hungarian Empire - the “Kingdom of Poland” or the Duchy of Krakow. The capital of this public education was to be Krakow. In its composition planned to include the Polish lands that belonged to Austria-Hungary and Russia. 6 August 1914, the German Chancellor Theobald von Betman-Golveg formulated the slogan: "The liberation of the oppressed peoples of Russia, pushing Russian despotism towards Moscow." The press organs were instructed to direct propaganda activities "in favor of the Polish and Ukrainian buffer states."

2 November 1916 of the year Austria-Hungary granted the broad self-government of Galicia. At the same time, the authorities of the Austro-Hungarian Empire rejected a proposal to divide the region along ethnic lines. This step was a concession to the Polish aristocracy, which received the full power in Galicia. The question of the re-establishment of Polish statehood became an important topic in the internal politics of the Central Powers after they occupied Polish territory, which had previously been part of the Russian Empire. Against the background of the depletion of resources, including human reserves, the German and Austro-Hungarian authorities agreed to make concessions to the Polish national movement in exchange for the creation of the Polish army, which would side with the Central Powers against Russia.

On November 5, the German Governor-General in Warsaw, G. Beseler, and the Austro-Hungarian Governor-General K. Cook in Lublin, issued an Act on the intention of the monarchs of the Central Powers to create the Kingdom of Poland, which would become a buffer between the Russian Empire and the Central Powers. The text of the memorandum read: “To the population of the Warsaw governorate. - His Majesty the Emperor of Germany and His Majesty the Emperor of Austria and the King of Hungary, being firmly convinced of the ultimate victory of their troops, and, wishing a happy future for the Polish regions, which their brave armies, having suffered heavy sacrifices, pulled out from under Russian rule, agreed to create on the basis of these districts an independent state with a hereditary Monarchy and Constitution. The issue of clear boundaries of the Kingdom of Poland will be considered later. In alliance with the Central Powers, the new kingdom will find the guarantees necessary for the free development of its power. Her new army, which will inherit the glorious traditions of the Polish army of the past centuries, and will keep the memory of the Polish brothers, fighting alongside us in this great war of the present, will be recreated. The question of her organization, training and command will be decided on the basis of a bilateral agreement ... ". In the absence of the king, his authority was exercised by the Regency Council. The Polish throne was claimed by Karl Stefan, Archduke of Austria.

After the turning point was indicated in favor of the Entente, Pilsudski realized that it was necessary to change the patrons. He resigned from the Provisional State Council, established in 1917 by the German administration in the occupied part of Poland. After this, Pilsudski ordered that Polish soldiers not take the oath of allegiance to Germany and Austria-Hungary. In 1918, Pilsudski headed the Polish Republic, which began to focus on the United States, Britain and France and became the enemy of Soviet Russia. The Polish elite put forward an ambitious program to seize the western Russian lands, which in the past were part of the Commonwealth.


Odessa. French invaders

To be continued ...
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

184 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +2
    28 November 2016 07: 37
    Again, everything mixed up in the Oblonsky house ...
    1. 0
      29 November 2016 20: 11
      Yeah, "... the present century and the past century"
  2. +6
    28 November 2016 07: 44
    The external pressure on our country was under any authority, and it is useful to recall the experience of the reign of Nicholas I, who used the gendarmerie very effectively to counter external threats, and the king drew the highest ranks of the gendarmerie (Benckendorf) to government activities, appointed him censor, a member of the State Council, introduced into secret committees, and the chief of the gendarmes actively stated his understanding of both domestic and foreign policy, proposed the candidacy of officials for their appointment, or dismissal. This was an effective counteraction to external threats.
    1. +17
      28 November 2016 09: 11
      bober1982 Today, 07:44 AM New
      This was an effective counteraction to external threats.
      Well, yes, so "effective" that in just thirteen years it has led Russia to two lost wars and three revolutions! fool Efficiency is off the charts. If you already remembered the kings, the most effective in the fight against the fifth column were, in my opinion, Ivan the Terrible and Peter the Great! Here there was efficiency, as soon as they noticed in relations against the king or the fatherland that at that time it was the same thing, then immediately to torture and to the chopping block, without long foreplay. One Skuratov has another Romadanovsky, this is what I understand effective managers! Iosif Vissarionovich acted no less effectively together with Lavrenty Pavlovich, here there really efficiency approached one hundred percent. And in what you saw the effectiveness of Benckendorf and Nicholas No. 2, is this a big question ?!
      1. +9
        28 November 2016 09: 27
        Dear Diana, what is the connection between Nicholas II and Benckendorff? You mixed up the era. Unfortunately, Nikolai Alexandrovich did not have such an intelligent chef of the gendarmes as his great-grandfather.
        I agree about Stalin, he knew how to counteract threats from external forces, he understood this well, in contrast to the good tsar (Nicholas II). Another question is how Stalin counteracted - in a knacker way, and he had the same "gendarmes".
        1. +14
          28 November 2016 09: 54
          bober1982 Today, 09:27 ↑
          Dear Diana, what is the connection between Nicholas II and Benckendorff? You mixed up the era.
          Forgive me, I overlooked, it seemed to me that you and Bekendorf were connected with Nikolai No. 2 in some strange way. Excuse God for the carelessness!
          Another question is how Stalin resisted - in a knacker way, and he had the same "gendarmes".
          Excuse me "zhivoderskih" is what ?! And if you are already citing Beckendorf as an example, then what methods did he have ?! Probably exclusively "humane" from your point of view ?!
          1. +3
            28 November 2016 10: 19
            Diana Ilyina: Probably exclusively "humane" from your point of view ?!
            Humane means - philanthropic and responsive, so defines Ozhegov’s explanatory dictionary, so can there be a responsive gendarme? Therefore, such hatred was towards Benckendorff on the part of the liberal public.
      2. +6
        28 November 2016 10: 00
        Joseph Vissarionovich acted no less effectively together with Lavrenty Pavlovich

        20 thousand only Polish spies caught! These pesky pests were found even in remote Siberian villages! That's really - EFFICIENCY! 146%!
        1. +14
          28 November 2016 10: 19
          Zmicerz Today, 10: 00 ↑
          20 thousand only Polish spies caught! These pesky pests were found even in remote Siberian villages! That's really - EFFICIENCY! 146%!
          What are you ?! And what percentage of those 20 thousand "innocently" suffered? Isn't that all 20 thousand were innocent lambs ?!
          1. +5
            28 November 2016 10: 49
            That is, you do not mind the execution of people on fake espionage charges? Of course, I knew that the cannibal tribes had a slightly different moral from the moral of a civilized person, but I didn’t think so.
            1. +19
              28 November 2016 11: 06
              Zmicerz Today, 10: 49 ↑
              That is, you do not mind the execution of people on fake espionage charges?
              No, do not bother! Where is the evidence that the charges are fake ?! As I understand it, there are none ?! But no, and no trial! Here, give me the specific name of the convict, give the interrogation protocols, then give the interrogation protocols of those who interrogated and their convictions for exceeding their official powers, as well as acts on the rehabilitation of "innocent" convicts, then we will talk. And so this is just empty chatter, not supported by anything, except for your inflamed consciousness. And with such diagnoses, this is for you in the ward number 6, and not in the VO!
              1. +3
                28 November 2016 11: 19
                Where is the evidence that the charges are fake ?!

                Common sense is enough, but it is not so obvious to those who do not have it.
                1. +17
                  28 November 2016 11: 30
                  Zmicerz Today, 11: 19 ↑
                  Common sense is enough, but it is not so obvious to those who do not have it.
                  How ?! And who will determine whose meaning is "healthier" ?! Don't take on a lot ?! Don't overstrain!

                  In general, this is certainly a super "argument", I just fell out after such a "killer argument"! fool
                  1. The comment was deleted.
                2. +4
                  28 November 2016 14: 49
                  Instead of documents, "common sense"? Commercials can "prove" anything. No dear, only documents.
                  Otherwise, it will turn out, as Rezun has plans, but they are classified in the archives.
              2. +3
                28 November 2016 12: 31
                No, do not bother! Where is the evidence that the charges are fake ?! I understand that there are none ?! But no, and no trial!

                Yes, they beat them with sticks, stools, did not give drink, eat, sleep, planted wives and children. So they signed all nonsense. What are Japanese spies. Who survived wrote memories. These memories are there, they can be read. The crimes of the shoulder cases of the masters are known and condemned by society.
                1. 0
                  31 March 2017 22: 36
                  Can you tell me what happened to the Japanese who have been living on the US Terra since the start of the war?
              3. +3
                28 November 2016 13: 31
                Quote: Diana Ilyina
                Zmicerz Today, 10: 49 ↑
                That is, you do not mind the execution of people on fake espionage charges?
                No, do not bother! Where is the evidence that the charges are fake ?! I understand that there are none ?!

                Well, how not ?! If you take an interest, then rehabilitation and case reviews were carried out in the 39-40 years, at the beginning of the war and at the beginning of the 53-th still L.P. Beria.
                Massive legal rehabilitation in 54-62 years and later from about 85 to the present. And these are hundreds of thousands of rehabilitated.
                Those. the fact that the cases and accusations were "fake" were well known even in the USSR, moreover, under Stalin.
                So your righteous anger and pathetics are inappropriate, you need to better learn the history of your country.
                1. +13
                  28 November 2016 14: 02
                  merlin Today, 13:31 ↑
                  Well, how not ?! If you take an interest, then rehabilitation and case reviews were carried out in the 39-40 years, at the beginning of the war and at the beginning of the 53-th still L.P. Beria.
                  Massive legal rehabilitation in 54-62 years and later from about 85 to the present. And these are hundreds of thousands of rehabilitated.
                  Yes, only those rehabilitated mainly under political articles, and not for espionage in favor of another state! Do not confuse warm with blue!
                  In principle, I admit distortions and excesses in the investigation, but I do not think that they were massive, especially under Beria. When Yezhov agreed, there were many fabricated cases, but it was Beria who rehabilitated them, and again, not all of them!
                  So your righteous anger and pathetics are inappropriate, you need to better learn the history of your country.
                  Are you talking to me?! Nude ...
                  1. +2
                    28 November 2016 14: 29
                    Quote: Diana Ilyina
                    Yes, only those rehabilitated mainly under political articles, and not for espionage in favor of another state! Do not confuse warm with blue!

                    Offhand Rokossovsky K.V. - Marshal of the Soviet Union, was accused of espionage in favor of Polish and Japanese, and look, he was rehabilitated in 40.
                    Quote: Diana Ilyina
                    In principle, I admit distortions and excesses in the investigation, but I don’t think that they were massive,

                    41 thousand people were rehabilitated at 600.
                    Of course, I understand your Russophobic position - the more Russians were shot / imprisoned, the better, but to say that 600 thousand cases reviewed only from June to August, 41 are separate excesses and distortions ...
                2. +10
                  28 November 2016 14: 39
                  Very appropriate. A certain Humphrey claims that all cases were fake. So let's not cross the hedgehog and the snake to get the barbed wire.
                  Were there "fake" cases? There were, one might think, that in the punitive bodies, there were no those who wanted to curry favor with invented cases or settle their personal scores with someone.
                  For example, remove a neighbor in a communal apartment to take the whole apartment for yourself.
                  The question is different, what was the percentage of such cases in total?
                  That all the thieves, rapists, murderers, robbers, bandits, at one time got transferred after the revolution or re-educated? There were no spies and saboteurs and those who worked against the government?
                  So it’s no secret that especially under Khrushchev, Gorbachev-Yakovlev and Yeltsin, rehabilitation was carried out in droves, even without considering cases. Innocent and all.
                  So in my opinion, it is necessary to investigate each case separately and only then make a judgment on it.
                  By the way, many cases under Khrushchev were destroyed.
                  The vast majority of convicts were convicted legally and for specific crimes.
                  1. +1
                    28 November 2016 15: 38
                    Quote: Tula gingerbread
                    So it’s no secret that especially under Khrushchev, Gorbachev-Yakovlev and Yeltsin, rehabilitation was carried out in droves, even without considering cases. Innocent and all.

                    So this is no secretthat back in Soviet times, “facts of illegal repressions, falsification of investigative cases, torture and torture of prisoners” were found during Stalin’s time, and not what you wrote.
                    The number of cases is also doubtful: it turns out that most of the officials and generals were spies. Excuse me, who then ruled the USSR? Spies
                    And in general, are you going to rewrite history now? Will you go galloping to the square, shouting "Glory to the USSR" and "Stalin will come - he will put things in order!" I warn you: in / in neighboring Ukraine, all this led to sad consequences.
                    1. 0
                      31 March 2017 22: 41
                      So In or On?
            2. +6
              28 November 2016 12: 56
              Do you personally know for sure that they are all fake? Can you state unequivocally and without doubt?
              Can you personally have studied all these "fake" accusations?
              And Bulak-Bulakhovich, who acted from Polish territory, was also convicted on a "phony charge"? And that there were no Polish spies on the territory of Ukraine and Belarus?
              That all Polish spies, like Ostap Bender, were immediately re-qualified as managerial houses?
              1. 0
                28 November 2016 13: 35
                Bender tried to cross the Romanian border, did not agree with the Romanian border guards, where does the Polish spy?
                1. +1
                  28 November 2016 18: 34
                  Did you take it so literally? The meaning is in the word "retrained".
                  1. +1
                    28 November 2016 18: 46
                    O. Bender answered that Count Monte Cristo didn’t work out of him - he would have to retrain into management houses ..... That’s the whole point.
                    1. +1
                      28 November 2016 19: 43
                      In another sense, it’s not Bender, but spies who were not going to retrain into management houses at all. like bender. Is it clear now?
                      1. +1
                        29 November 2016 04: 35
                        Yes, now I understand.
              2. +3
                28 November 2016 14: 02
                There were Polish spies. But they could not be the amount that was convicted of espionage, physically could not. Reconnaissance RP2 simply did not have that much resources. From this it follows that the majority were convicted of fake charges.
                "Operational order of the NKVD of the USSR No. 00485" On the elimination of Polish sabotage and espionage groups and organizations of the POV [Polish Military Organization] "
                To date, it has been established: according to the "Polish operation" during 1937-1938. 139 people were convicted, of which (!) 815 (!) were sentenced to death. It was the bloodiest national operation of all.
                That is, not even 20 thousand, excuse me, memory led. Only 139 people. Think about it: one HUNDRED AND FIFTY FIVE THOUSAND EIGHT FIFTEEN POLISH SPIES has been revealed !!! This is real only in the sick mind of the Stalinist. For any sane person, this means linden. 815 people were killed on charges of Polish espionage. To argue how many% of them were real spies, and what fake essence is cannibalism.
                (Petrov N.V., Roginsky A.B. "Polish operation" of the NKVD 1937 - 1938 // Repressions against Poles and Polish citizens. P. 37. 25 Lubyanka.) "
                More details here: http://corporatelie.livejournal.com/15053.html
                1. +3
                  28 November 2016 23: 38
                  Indeed, many spies penetrated the Soviet country across the border. Karatsup border guard alone detained 338 border violators and destroyed 129 spies and saboteurs who had not laid down their arms. And how many of them successfully passed the border, and organized underground groups of those dissatisfied with the Soviet regime.
                  One way or another, they all worked for foreign intelligence, which financed their subversive activities against the country of the Soviets. In the USSR there was a class struggle, and the anti-Soviet were at all levels of government.
                  The father of my commander in the early 30s was the head of the regional department of the OGPU, and so he said that at that time he didn’t spend a normal night at home, because daily sabotage, arson, explosions, killings of activists, etc.
          2. 0
            27 March 2017 09: 48
            and how could there be so many Polish spies if Poland was part of the Russian empire? Those. There were many Poles in Russia - this is understandable, but how they could become spies of a part of the state in relation to the state is not clear.
            Finally, it is not clear how Poland was able to create such a spy network? After all, I strongly doubt that even 10% of them were ardent patriots.
        2. +2
          29 November 2016 10: 49
          Zmicerz like you and fables about "repression" and various books come up with! Immortal Gulag - a lie for the sake of PR
          pikabu.ru ›... bessmertnyiy_gulag__lozh_radi_piara ...
          came with a photo of the "repressed" On the Internet, part of the requests for the name of the "repressed" brought us to the Memorial website. Whether it is worth believing the data of this resource, in the light of its controversial financial and legal history, is up to you. I would not recommend it. For a couple of names in open sources, nothing was found. The request to the archives also gave nothing. Perhaps the "immortal Gulag" simply invented them for the volume of the repressed. But for three names, Wikipedia gave an extremely curious answer.

          Ivanchenko Nikolay Nikolaevich According to activists, he is a scientist engineer and professor, who was shot on October 2, 1937.

          According to Wikipedia, it is also a scientist, engineer and professor, but there is no data on his death. True, in 1939 he graduated from the LII GVF. During the siege of Leningrad, he was engaged in the design and installation of diesel-electric installations at enterprises. He became a professor in 1966. And until 1986, he worked at the Central Research Diesel Institute.
          How Comrade Ivanchenko came out after repressions and execution to make such a dizzying career is worth asking the activists of the Immortal Gulag. Although here they will probably answer that the name "Nikolay Nikolayevich Ivanchenko" was quite common in Soviet Russia and their repressed "scientist, engineer and professor Ivanchenko", "scientist, engineer and professor Ivanchenko" from the free encyclopedia are simply namesake. And indeed, professors by the name of Ivanchenko in the country of councils was "a dime a dozen." laughing
          1. +2
            29 November 2016 10: 51
            the next "reprised" According to the activists - a diplomat who was shot on April 19, 1950.

            According to Wikipedia, a military traitor who has crossed over to the side of the Nazis. In 1950, the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the USSR sentenced the former Major General Budykho to capital punishment. On April 19, 1950, the sentence was carried out.

            Here, not only the initials coincide. Yes, and Budykho surname, you see, is quite rare.
            1. +2
              29 November 2016 10: 54
              Well, in conclusion: Labutin Alexander Alekseevich According to activists, he is a weapons designer who was shot on April 30, 1935.

              And Wikipedia is silent here.
              The truth is that in the register of the “Immortal Regiment” there is an absolute namesake for the “repressed”. Only he heroically died in battle with the Nazi occupiers in 1944, and was awarded the Order of the Red Star posthumously. Although this slightly falls outside the concept of the “Immortal Gulag”, in which the Soviet government did not reward people but destroy them. Alexander Alekseevich Labut, shot in 1935, is more suitable for picketers. Apparently the letter “K” was not printed on the poster, since Alexander Alekseevich Labutkin really had to do with weapons production - he was a gunner. They only “repressed” him not according to the notorious 58th “political”. Shot Citizen Labutkin was for a completely different reason. Labutkin Alexander Alekseevich, nicknamed "one-armed bandit", a serial killer who killed 15 people.

              In light of the aforementioned, I would like to refer again to the statement of the participants of the “spring”

              “On October 30 at 19-00 we will go out in different cities. On the posters we will name the names of these people. So we remind our fellow citizens that the repression did not include mythical “pests” and “English spies”, but ordinary people. People like those who now live throughout Russia. ”

              Yes, not only spies and saboteurs fell under criminal prosecution.
              Traitors of the homeland fell. Aide to the Nazis. Serial killers. “Are they the same people who live in Russia now?” We dare to disagree.
      3. +3
        28 November 2016 10: 07
        Your * performance criteria * very much ..... Compare * the efficiency * of governing the state of England in the twentieth century under the leadership of Churchill and the SOVIET UNION under the leadership of both STALIN and L BERIA.
        ABOUT THE SOVIET UNION, the numbers are known, but you will never find numbers on the World Bank, there even numbers are classified there, so sometimes the data slip through the colonies, but always with * complaints * for inaccuracy or * they are to blame *.
        The British from the French, according to your * criterion of effectiveness * no one will ever surpass. They were out of competition in * efficiency * for several centuries, not only in the colonies, but also in the metropolis. Even in the twentieth century, Hitler could not surpass their * effectiveness *.
        1. +4
          28 November 2016 12: 01
          The British from the French, according to your * criterion of effectiveness * no one will ever surpass. They were out of competition in * efficiency * for several centuries, not only in the colonies, but also in the metropolis.

          You have a strange idea of ​​a democratic constitutional system, with developed shipbuilding and a free press. Judging by the materials of the Soviet press?
          1. +5
            28 November 2016 12: 57
            Is there anything to argue besides general phrases?
            1. +6
              28 November 2016 14: 29
              He doesn't know anything. Knows only one thing - Russia is an empire of evil, and the West is "democratic", "tolerant" and finally white and fluffy. The young man did not hear anything about how many "democratic" British exterminated the Indians, about concentration camps during the Anglo-Boer War, about chemical warfare agents invented in the "humane" west, about gas chambers invented there, about Guernica, Coventry, Leipzig , Hamburg, Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Vietnam with napalm, orange, Songmi, and indeed two world massacres were unleashed by this "democratic" and "humane" west.
              I don't even remember about the Middle East - "we came, we saw, he died." Very "democratic".
              The biggest crime of the liberals is that during the time that the tons have been bossing in the country, they have corrupted the souls and brains of many young people, like this Humphrey.
      4. +4
        28 November 2016 11: 21

        for:  Diana Ilyina
        "that at that time it was the same thing, then immediately to the torture chamber and to the chopping block, without long preludes. One Skuratov has another Romadanovsky, that's what I understand effective managers!" ////

        In Khabarovsk, they are now judging those who wanted "then immediately to the torture chamber and to the chopping block" ...
        They trained intensively on puppies and homeless people.
        1. +13
          28 November 2016 11: 33
          In Khabarovsk, they are now judging those who wanted "then immediately to the torture chamber and to the chopping block" ...
          I would give these to the public at large! Without any trial, to be beaten to death! There’s nothing to live for!
        2. +5
          28 November 2016 14: 17
          It is indecent to "fool around," as the Belarusians say. And this is exactly what you are doing, comparing people with animals.
      5. +5
        28 November 2016 11: 37
        Joseph Vissarionovich paired with Lavrenty Pavlovich, that’s where efficiency really approached one hundred percent

        Things were even better with the Hedgehog. Thousands of 500 a year were shot there, the landing plan descended from above, Khrushchev was ahead of schedule and demanded to raise the standard.
        As a result, Stalin went crazy, the Hedgehog shot and put the "moderate" Lawrence, he shot a hundred thousand less, but became skilled with sharashki. Perfect control system
        1. +6
          28 November 2016 12: 59
          If 500 thousand a year, then how many were shot and voice your source of information.
          1. +14
            28 November 2016 13: 21
            Ulan Today, 12:59 ↑
            If 500 thousand a year, then how many were shot and voice your source of information.
            Boris, his "sources of information" is a rezun with a Solzhenitsyn! According to their calculations, the population of the Russian Empire (excluding Poland and Finland) should have been about a billion. Otherwise, taking into account the losses in WWI and the civil war, it is simply impossible to shoot half a million a year!
            1. +4
              28 November 2016 18: 36
              I think not only these characters. Here, for many, the main "authorities" are some B. Sokolov, Svanidze, Albats, Gozman and other corned beef.
            2. 0
              30 November 2016 12: 25
              Quote: Diana Ilyina
              his "sources of information" is a rezun with a lie!

              I'm afraid it’s even worse.
              This loach diligently repeats Latynina’s ravings, but pretends to not know who Latynina is, and is not able to find her in the Googleland.

              In the same way, he assiduously repeats the ravings of Rezun, Solonin, Solzhenitsyn, and the like - and also pretends to not know at all who they are.

              He refuses to name the sources of his "information", trying to get rid of excuses like "everyone knows this", "Google yourself", etc.

              When he is given figures, facts, quotes that refute his fabrications, he "does not notice" and after a short time repeats all the same lies.

              In general, he is not a sane honest interlocutor. This is a completely conscious liar. Already on a paid basis it works, or ideologically - I can’t judge, but the radish is not thicker.
        2. +6
          28 November 2016 13: 32
          Well, you dreamer Hapfrey, you can immediately write billions of those shot, it's time for you to surpass Solzhenitsyn! "As is clear from the document, from 1921 to early 1954, 642 people were sentenced to death on political charges, 980 to imprisonment, and 2 to exile."

          However, there are more detailed data on the number of people sentenced to death for counterrevolutionary and other especially dangerous state crimes [8]! The scale of the Stalinist repressions - exact figures
          red-sovet.su ›Exact numbers
          1. +7
            28 November 2016 13: 41
            For example, in the prisons of America there are more than 2 million 200 thousand people. It is now in peacetime. It's a lot? A lot. But it does not follow from this that most of them are innocent. The US population is 260 million people, the number of prisoners - 2 million 200 thousand.
            The population of the USSR in 1940 was over 190 million, the number of prisoners - 1 million 850 thousand, that is, there is nothing extraordinary in this amount. But this is really surprising when you consider that the conditions in which the country was in the mid-30s should be called the words "martial law."
            Let us turn to the facts again. The prominent Japanese historian I. Hata found that 1933 military clashes between Japanese and Soviet forces took place on the Soviet-Chinese border in 1934–152 alone, 1935 in 136 and 1936 in 2031. The Japanese were always the attacking side. . If this is not war, then what? The Far Eastern border was actually a front line. Twice (Hassan and Khalkhin-Gol), Japan organized serious local wars with the Soviet Union, in which hundreds of thousands of soldiers took part. And the Far Eastern military district until the end of World War II was called - the front.
            Any war begins with preliminary intelligence. The Japanese special services were extremely active, and this is understandable - war is war, it would truly be surprising if there were no Japanese agents.
            In those years, like the Caucasus in our years, there was an unhealed wound on the body of the country, only many times larger - the Basmachi of Central Asia, which were fought until the mid-thirties. It was only in 1933 that the Turkestan Military District was formed, and before that it was called the “front”, because it was conducting active hostilities against the Basmachi — militants who were perfectly armed and strongly supported by England, based, for the most part, in Afghanistan.
            1. +3
              28 November 2016 14: 18
              "The US population is 260 million" ////

              In fact, 324 million. And 2,2 million prisoners. Of these for crimes
              with violence of 1 million, the rest - fraud, theft.
              1. The comment was deleted.
              2. +3
                28 November 2016 14: 34
                voyaka uh do you think the article is written today? belay
          2. +6
            28 November 2016 14: 15
            Moreover, "sentenced" and "sentence carried out" are two different things. For many, the sentence was commuted to imprisonment, and after Beria came to the NKVD, there was generally a massive rehabilitation, incl. clergymen.
    2. +2
      28 November 2016 09: 21
      I completely agree that there is always pressure on any country. It is enough to see what is happening in the world now to be convinced of this. And only the state, which has weakened due to internal contradictions, divisions and unsolvable problems, will fall apart from external blows.
      And as history shows, there were always those who wanted to sniff at the weakened neighbor of the zemlya. And Russia is no exception, it is enough to recall the Russian conquests in China at the turn of the XIX-XX centuries.
      1. 0
        28 November 2016 17: 42
        Until I read to the paragraph "" Austria-Hungary and Germany ...... "" the same plans about Russia ---- now and then. Absolutely the same aggressive aspirations about Russia of the same "friendly" "countries. like.
  3. +2
    28 November 2016 08: 27
    Why not poke Svidomo's nose into the story of Talerhof and Terezin in opposition to Poroshenko? The facts are, I hope, documented. The genocide of the Russian population is evident. Only I doubt that anything will be done at the state level, the "R'guss" people are not Armenians, after all, they pushed through the resolution on the genocide of the Armenian people 100 years later.
    1. +4
      28 November 2016 09: 41
      It is interesting, if the topic of accelerated melting of glaciers in Greenland was discussed, could Ukraine be dispensed with without mentioning Ukraine?
      1. +1
        28 November 2016 09: 46
        Quote: Dekabrist
        if the topic of accelerated melting of glaciers in Greenland was discussed, could Ukraine be dispensed with without mentioning Ukraine?

        Well, if you justify the dependence of the current melting of the Greenland glaciers on the "Holodomor" of the great ukrov ... Did you have any relatives who were Uniates? Or a guard in a concentration camp in the first or second MV?
        1. +4
          28 November 2016 10: 02
          Usually I don’t answer hamsters and warriors. We will make an exception.
          My grandfather went Finnish from bell to bell. Then Patriotic from call to call. Sevastopol defended and liberated. The war ended in Koenigsberg. Three wounds, shell shock. Uncle went missing in July 41, an artilleryman, a unit in Slonim stood. My father wore German fragments all his life, the factory evacuated under bombs. The second grandfather, however, did not fight, in 38 he died of tuberculosis, he was a caster, the work was harmful.
      2. avt
        +4
        28 November 2016 10: 01
        Quote: Dekabrist
        It is interesting, if the topic of accelerated melting of glaciers in Greenland was discussed, could Ukraine be dispensed with without mentioning Ukraine?

        True eyes prick?
        Quote: V.ic
        Have any of your relatives been a Uniate? Or a guard in a concentration camp in the first or second MB?

        It’s just a victim’s campaign, like the father of the Yushchenko brothers, whom the Nazis tortured in Auschwitz, forcing them to drink good coffee. What actually his son and told during the reign. They supposed that the executioners taught us to torture good coffee in a concentration camp by torture, so until his death he couldn’t break the habit of such torture. He drank and suffered, suffered and cried.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. +3
            28 November 2016 14: 10
            Svidomye hamsters? Well, you, they are rather monkeys, they jump well.
    2. +1
      28 November 2016 13: 13
      Quote: V.ic
      Why not poke Svidomo's nose into the story of Talerhof and Terezin in opposition to Poroshenko? The facts are, I hope, documented. The genocide of the Russian population is evident. Only I doubt that anything will be done at the state level, the "R'guss" people are not Armenians, after all, they pushed through the resolution on the genocide of the Armenian people 100 years later.

      Do you want to talk about this?
      The article is so interestingly written, a direct appeal that "the Ukrainians are to blame for the concentration camps." The Russian-language wiki also adds "Ukrainophiles". In general, it does not matter who is the main thing Ukrainians. Voila - Ukrainians rotted away "Russians"
      Ukrainian wiki testifies that "Ukrainophiles" also got under the knife.
      My opinion was the genocide of the peoples of my country (Ukraine in this case)
      How to spell
      A complete list of contests for such people was observed in Ukraine, reputed by the Austrian representatives: Talerhof, Terezin, Schwaz, Kufstein, Gmünd i Gnav, overseas number of ponads 60 thousand., And Moscow only one.
      Through those who before Talerhof were consumed by the top officials of Moscow, they remembered the stench about the new one, but about the others they were "forgotten", why blame for the repressions on the Ukrainian philosophers, who suffered more. Ale through Talerhof passed 20 yew. cholovik maximum. Kudi was still 40 thousand? And they just wrote it down in the Moscow branch.
      Sleight of hand and no fraud ©.
      I remember a little that war (WW1) and I remember that the Galicians were almost all loyal to the army of Ingushetia, the Austrians generally understood that the population would happily meet the Russian military (in Galicia). Their task was not to destroy specifically "Russian" but sympathizers! All Galicians fell into this category - Ukrainians, Rusyns, Mosvophiles and others.
      Rusyns are the direct and purest descendants of ancient Rus. In fact, “Rusyns” and “Russian” are one and the same. Rusyns are mentioned in Russian Truth.
      In general, the genocide was almost all the indigenous people who lived in Galicia in order to destroy sympathy for RI.
      Are you trying to skzat that the Ukrainians are the organizers of the genocide of the "Russians" in Galicia? Yes, Ukrainians and "Ukrainophiles" were generally rotted in those camps for the same thing - sympathy for RI!
      I have the impression that the "Ukrainians of that time" according to the articles did not sympathize with RI ... and in general "enemies of the people" ... but all Orthodox.
      Now the second part
      Quote: V.ic
      Only I doubt that anything will be done at the state level, the "R'guss" people are not Armenians, after all, they pushed through the resolution on the genocide of the Armenian people 100 years later.

      Hesitate
      On October 8, 2004, under N2084-IV, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine adopted a Resolution "On the 90th anniversary of the tragedy in the Talerhof concentration camp." It provides a list of specific measures aimed at perpetuating the memory of the victims of genocide in Western Ukraine. The draft Resolution was submitted by the deputies of the Communist faction I. Migovich , Y. Solomatin, A. Golub, S. Pkhidenko.

      In the Preamble of the Resolution it was said: "This fall marks 90 years of the tragedy in the Talerhof concentration camp near the Austrian city of Graz. Then the Austro-Hungarian authorities carried out repressions against those indigenous citizens of the empire who considered themselves Rusyns as part of the Russian people. Victims of pogroms, arrests, tens of thousands of residents of Bukovina, Galicia and Subcarpathian Rus (now Transcarpathia) were executed for such national identification, "dissent" and insubordination. "
      In Russia, unfortunately, the memory of the first European concentration camp intended for the re-education of torture and the killing of people who firmly adhere to the Russian identity and the Orthodox faith is also relevant today only for a very small part of the informed society. The efforts of a few activists to educate the Russians in the history of this tragedy and to honor its anniversaries have not yet achieved results.
      https://topwar.ru/58254-talergofskiy-konclager-k-
      100-letiyu-russkoy-tragedii.html
      Surprisingly, the genocide of the "Russians" and no memory ... at the state level ... but in Ukraine, because it happened on my land - thousands of my compatriots were genocidal just because of potential sympathy for Russia ...
      1. +4
        28 November 2016 14: 05
        Quote: Retvizan
        I remember that war a little (1MB) and I remember that

        Methuselah and more! feel My mother (God forbid she still has a long life) in the past year turned 94 years old, she was born in 1922 Born 3 years and 8 months after the end of 1 MB. By the logic of things and, according to your statement, you are already well over a hundred ... Have you already exceeded the number of great-grandchildren over a hundred? Live another hundred years and please us with your visits. fellow
      2. +3
        28 November 2016 15: 15
        Quote: Retvizan
        Ukrainian wiki testifies that "Ukrainophiles" also got under the knife.

        Ukrainian Wikipedia is edited by the descendants of Baron Munchausen (who was clearly a Ukrainian), and ordinary people are aware of the exploits of the Ukrainian Siche Sagittarius (UK. Ukrainian Volunteer Legion), who fought against Russia in 1914-18. Http: //uateka.com/ru/article / society / herita
        ge / 930. Evgen Konovalets, the founder of the OUN was just a Ukrainian archer. The Rusins ​​of Galicia were for Russia and against the Austrian Ukrainians.Carpathian Volunteer Squad http://www.dk1868.ru/history/vavrik.htm
    3. +2
      28 November 2016 14: 12
      I do not agree with you here, Ukraine has nothing to do with it.
  4. +6
    28 November 2016 09: 57
    Czechoslovak riflemen acted in the interests of the States, which, in fact, unleashed a civil war in Russia, in the interests of the masters of the West.

    And the German spy V.I. Ulyanov "Lenin" and his gang of terrorists (consisting mainly of people with beautiful faces and correct genes), therefore, did not start a civil war with an armed seizure of power and the illegal dissolution of the consensual Constituent Assembly. "Lenin is innocent!"
    1. +9
      28 November 2016 10: 21
      What do you mean! According to the local fans of the "red" idea, the Civil War began with the overthrow of Emperor Nikolai Alexandrovich. What is noteworthy, one such "connoisseur of history", to my direct question, whether he can name, in this case, significant battles of the Civil War in the period from March to September 1917, chose to proudly keep silent.
      1. +4
        28 November 2016 13: 48
        Quote: Lieutenant Teterin
        significant battles of the Guards in the period from March to September 1917

        The shooting of the July demonstration in Petrograd? Kornilov rebellion?
        1. +3
          28 November 2016 15: 00
          If mass peasant unrest, including armed unrest, is not considered a civil war, then what is a civil war?
          And the landed estates in this period burned like candles and plundered them, and the landlords and the church divided the lands by force.
          1. +3
            28 November 2016 17: 05
            And the landed estates in this period burned like candles and plundered them, and the landlords and the church divided the lands by force.

            So banal robbery or war? Decide, be nice =)
      2. +5
        28 November 2016 14: 07
        Well, you consider the beginning of the Civil War, who is the October Revolution, who is the dispersal of the founding, so why others can’t be fantasized like you.
      3. +5
        28 November 2016 15: 01
        Lieutenant Teterin
        The Civil War began with the overthrow of Emperor Nikolai Alexandrovich.
        ..That is the massacre of officers on the Baltic Fleet ..? .. The shooting of the July demonstration is that your way? ... The rebellion of General Kornilov? You do not forget that after the overthrow of the monarchy, dual power formed: the Soviets and the Provisional Government, and this continued until October 1917 ... Moreover, in some cities, in Ivanovo and Shuya (weavers were mostly men), the power of the Soviets was established immediately after February and The interim government was not executed .. And sometimes it came to armed clashes, especially in rural areas, where peasants seized landowners' lands and burned estates .. These are all elements of the civil war that have not yet grown into major armed clashes .. You apparently are a connoisseur of history ..have you teach and sometimes ask questions for which I would put a deuce for you at school as if I didn’t know the subject. By the way. September 1 (14), 1917 according to the Decree of the Provisional Government, Russia was proclaimed a republic. It said: "General Kornilov's mutiny has been suppressed. But the great turmoil introduced by him in the ranks of the army and country. And again, there is a great danger threatening the fate of the Motherland and its freedom. Considering it necessary to put an end to the external uncertainty of the political system, bearing in mind the unanimous and enthusiastic recognition of the republican idea, which affected the Moscow State Conference, the Provisional Government announces that the state order that the Russian state is governed by is the republican order and proclaims the Russian Republic. The urgent need to take immediate and decisive measures to restore the shaken state order prompted the Provisional Government to transfer the fullness of its power to manage five of its members, headed by the Prime Minister. The interim government considers the restoration of state order and the combat effectiveness of the army as its main task. Convinced that only the concentration of all the living forces of the country can lead the Motherland out of the difficult situation in which it is located. The interim government will seek to expand its membership by attracting representatives of all those elements who put the eternal and common interests of the motherland above the temporary and private interests of individual parties or classes. The interim government has no doubts that it will fulfill this task within the next few days. " The decision was signed by Minister-Chairman A. F. Kerensky and Minister of Justice A.S. Zarudny. On this day, the Russian Empire ceased to exist, the empire collapsed .. Based on this decision, a more active separation of the outskirts from Russia began .. There is no empire, there is no oath, not everyone was ready to swear allegiance To the interim government ... And immediately the question: where are the numerous speeches of the monarchists, from your words, everyone in Russia loved and respected the tsar, were ready for him in fire and water .. Where is the Black Hundred?
      4. 0
        28 November 2016 22: 44
        Quote: Lieutenant Teterin
        The civil war began with the overthrow of Emperor Nikolai Alexandrovich

        In a way it is. There were no active military operations yet, but discord and anarchy gradually began to heat up the situation.
    2. +2
      28 November 2016 14: 57
      I answer briefly. They didn’t start.
  5. +3
    28 November 2016 13: 36
    On photo
    Checkpoint at the border of the French military zone on Nikolaevsky Boulevard, 1919
    Source: http://viknaodessa.od.ua/old-photo/?primorskij-bu
    lvar-1917-1941

    German soldiers on Mykolayiv (Primorsky) boulevard, June, 1918
    The source is the same.
    Trampled all with their interests.
    Without one idea, such a large territory to Russia cannot exist! And the interests of external forces were always and everywhere.
  6. The comment was deleted.
    1. +7
      28 November 2016 14: 05
      Stop talking nonsense. It’s time to grow up.
      1. +3
        28 November 2016 14: 25
        That you should wake up from the Soviet dream and return to the world of reality.
        1. +6
          28 November 2016 17: 13
          You said stupidity and that is a fact.
          If you do not understand that this is - "The USSR is not Russia, and the Soviets are not Russians, since internationalists by definition, that is, people without clan and without tribe" .... this is bullshit, then you are a young man for me, sorry.
          Vinaigrette devoid of any sense - "forty barrels of prisoners".
          A normal cultural and literate person should be ashamed to write such nonsense.
          And then, answers in the style of Father Fyodor - "himself d ..." are not interesting to me.
          And finally, let me remind you, in your opinion, the fighters of the international brigades in Spain in the war with Franco were also "without a family without a tribe"?
          No need to demonstrate your ignorance in such an authoritative forum as VO, find something simpler.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. +2
              28 November 2016 18: 09
              my dear Zmicerz so you take away the day of victory, the day of astronautics! can you follow the path of Ukrainian banderlogs destroy everything Soviet, only Ukraine has gone far? belay But what is Ilyin last resort? lol
              1. The comment was deleted.
              2. +2
                28 November 2016 18: 54
                "Tula Gingerbread" is right, so much nonsense has been written that mum do not cry. What can you say if a person is not aware that the Bolsheviks had nothing to do with order No. 1 and that it was approved by the military committee of the Provisional Government, which then issued a decree on soldiers' freedoms, which finished off the army.
                He knows that the Petrograd Soviet adopted it, but that the Bolsheviks in it did not have a decisive vote and the majority at that time in the Petrograd Soviet, is not in the know
                I do not know that much earlier than the Bolsheviks, back in 1905, the Russian intelligentsia expressed their defeatist position in the war with Japan and wished for the defeat of Russia and sent congratulatory telegrams to the Japanese emperor.
                Incidentally, that same intelligentsia, to which Ilyin also belonged, whose opinion they are trying to impart to us here as the ultimate truth.
                For some, Goebbels is credible.
                So it turns out, since the Russian intelligentsia took a defeatist position in the war with Japan, then the Russian Empire also emerges. not at all Russia.
                This is called - agreed, to the point.
                But Ilyin acted as Zinoviev said; he made his mark on the Communists, and landed in Russia.
                The person read something somewhere, but has a very vague idea of ​​reality. "The communists never uttered the word Russia" ... one must think of such a stupidity, apparently the person has never heard the song - "I love you Russia, my dear Rus." Or does not know about the existence of the hotel "Russia", and much more. Obsessed gentleman on anti-communism.
                1. +2
                  28 November 2016 22: 46
                  Quote: Ulan
                  Russian intelligentsia expressed a defeatist position in the war with Japan

                  The worst enemy of the Russian people is a Russian intellectual. In the USSR it was the same.
                  1. 0
                    29 November 2016 21: 17
                    What the hell is a Russian intellectual? In no other national-linguistic mentality the concept of "intellectual" exists, it is a purely Russian invention!
                    1. +1
                      29 November 2016 22: 14
                      Quote: 3x3zsave
                      In no other national-linguistic mentality the concept of "intellectual" exists, it is a purely Russian invention!

                      So I write about this - the enemy of the Russian people
                2. 0
                  29 November 2016 21: 11
                  Sorry, Goebbels is really an authority, as one of the founding members of the basic tenets of modern media space
                  1. +1
                    29 November 2016 23: 44
                    I'm sorry. But I spoke of Goebbels as one of the founders of false propaganda.
        2. +1
          29 November 2016 06: 38
          The statistics of the archives perfectly illustrates that the liberal-western bugbear of Stalinist repressions is just a myth created to justify the collapse of the USSR, the creation of fraudulent-thieves capitalism with the subsequent robbery of the people.
          If we take the data from the archives, then from 1921 to 1954, 3 million 779 thousand 380 people were convicted by all types of law enforcement agencies in the USSR. Of this number, 642 thousand 980 people were sentenced to death. To the maintenance in camps and prisons of 2 million 369 thousand 320 people. And to the expulsion of 765 thousand 180 people. In 1934, approximately 500 thousand people were imprisoned. In 1937, approximately 800 thousand people were imprisoned. In 1945, approximately 700 thousand people were imprisoned. In 1947, more than 800 thousand people were in prison (the maximum number of prisoners for the entire period from 1921 to 1954, since it was a post-war year). In 1937, political prisoners made up 12,8% of the total number of prisoners.
          That is, these statistics fit into the statistics of prisoners of any other country in the world and are even much lower than in developed capitalist countries like the United States. Which is quite logical, because socialism provides much more opportunities for the development and self-realization of each person than capitalism, therefore in socialism there is no particular sense in committing crimes, since any person looks confidently into the future and is fully protected and provided socially.
          Westernized liberals often talk about some secret archives of special services there, which are still not open. And some leaders of the secret archives mysteriously portray mysterious faces on various television programs, alluding to great secret knowledge about the monstrous crimes of Stalinism that they allegedly own. In fact, personally, I am sure that there is nothing in these archives. And the leaders of these archives give themselves this way, because they were given such a task. These archives therefore do not declassify, although all the deadlines have long passed so as not to destroy that fragile liberal-western bogeyman of the Stalinist repressions, GULAGs and slaves, who scare our people every time as soon as they begin to nostalgize for communists and socialism. After all, falsification of documents is simply not possible with the modern development of science and technology, with all this radiocarbon, chemical and other controls. And even more so, to falsify such a huge number of documents in such a way as to depict tens of millions of repressed, it is simply impossible to do in any way. Therefore, all these attempts of the Western liberals to spit upon IV Stalin, the Communists, socialism, the USSR and Soviet power are absolutely ridiculous.
          1. +2
            29 November 2016 09: 48
            Quote: Uncle Murzik
            If we take the data of archives, then from the 1921 to the 1954 years, all types of law enforcement agencies in the USSR condemned 3 million 779 thousand 380 people.

            Dear Uncle Murzik (do you like cat names?), I'll start with the fact that here one of the members of the forum claimed that Khrushchev could not be trusted - you probably trust him, since you brought the data from a note prepared for him. Why didn't you go further? Indeed, in the archives there is also "Certificate of the 1st special department of the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs on the number of arrested and convicted in the period 1921-1953" according to which 4 were arrested, 835 people were convicted, of which 937 people were sentenced to death, to detention in in camps and prisons - 4 people, for exile and deportation - 060 people, for "other measures" - 306 people. Those. in Khrushchev's reference, the figure was stupidly reduced by 799%. Why don't you write that these statistics do not include mass executions? That the family members of the convicts were also subjected to repression?
            If you are such a fighter for the truth, be truthful to the end.
            1. +1
              29 November 2016 10: 25
              Quote: merlin
              to link and expulsion - 413 512 people

              In fact, the Communists exiled millions of Russian peasants, Cossacks. Crimeans, Chechens, Koreans, etc. ... So the numbers are dubious.
              1. +1
                29 November 2016 11: 14
                Quote: ALEXEY VLADIMIROVICH
                Quote: merlin
                to link and expulsion - 413 512 people

                In fact, the Communists exiled millions of Russian peasants, Cossacks. Crimeans, Chechens, Koreans, etc. ... So the numbers are dubious.

                Dear Alexey Vladimirovich, there is a difference between the terms "exiled" and "deported", albeit a small one. The numbers that are given in the note, as you correctly noted, do not include the number of deportees.
                In addition, if you carefully read my post to the end, then I, in the form of questions addressed to Uncle Murzik, indicated that the numbers were not complete.
                1. 0
                  29 November 2016 11: 44
                  Quote: merlin
                  there is a difference between the terms "exiled" and "deported"

                  It is advisable to find out which one. I am a descendant of exiled peasants, communicated with deported Germans ... They all died the same way.According to the data of the historian and researcher of the repressions V.N. Zemskov, about 4 million people were dispossessed (it is difficult to establish the exact number), of which 1930 million were exiled in 1940-2,5, and 600 thousand died in this period the overwhelming majority died in 1930-1933. Mortality rates among special settlers exceeded the birth rate from 7,8 times (among “old-timers”) to 40 times (among “new settlers”)
                  1. +2
                    29 November 2016 12: 26
                    Quote: ALEXEY VLADIMIROVICH
                    Quote: merlin
                    there is a difference between the terms "exiled" and "deported"

                    It is advisable to find out which one.

                    They send someone to a specific person by a court decision, and whole nations can be deported - on a national or social basis.
                    I am a descendant of exiled peasants, communicated with deported Germans

                    I sympathize with your family, my relatives were a little more fortunate: they fell from their native lands to foreign lands the day before dispossession.
                    1. 0
                      29 November 2016 18: 21
                      Quote: merlin
                      They send someone to a specific person by a court decision, and whole nations can be deported - on a national or social basis.

                      I saw no fundamental difference. Unless the Russians were exiled to Siberia, and the Chechens-Turks to Kazakhstan and Central Asia. Accordingly, when the Caucasians basked in the sun, the exiles in Siberia died out from the cold.
  7. +4
    28 November 2016 14: 03
    The fact that the February revolution was prepared with the participation of "allies" and approved by the "allies" of Nicholas II is no secret for a long time.
    1. 0
      28 November 2016 14: 43
      Yes, they had a hand. But all the same, our "liberals" were the main characters. They blew into the ears of the allied representatives in Russia that Nicholas, because of the pressure of his "pro-German wife", was about to conclude a separate peace with Germany.
      The British and French were primarily interested in the defeat of Germany, and Germany in 1916 was still far from defeated. After all, one must not forget that Germany was conducting hostilities on foreign territory.
      The way many now extol the role of Russia's allies in its collapse is done from the fact that we know what happened next. At the end of 1916, no one knew who would win the war, and Germany was no further from victory than France and England. And no one could predict in advance that such chaos would happen in Russia after the abdication of Nicholas II.
      1. +2
        28 November 2016 17: 02
        I have no objections.
  8. +2
    28 November 2016 14: 44
    Zmicerz,
    So what? The base decreased, but did not disappear completely and disappeared only in certain areas, I think the lieutenant was responsible for a very limited sector. Probably asked to increase staff and funding.
    But however, it is significant that the Soviet people increasingly supported the government.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. +2
        28 November 2016 20: 29
        This, of course, is very interesting about Polish intelligence. But who is the author of this LJ? what is his name? Is he a professional historian? Or a former security officer? Well, so that you can more or less trust. Or should we now study the history of Russia on the nameless LJ?
        1. 0
          28 November 2016 21: 29
          This blog: just an attempt to present a subjective (private) position on some issues of the history of a graduate student of the St. Petersburg Institute of History of the Russian Academy of Sciences (2012-2016) and a doctoral student at Oxford University (2016-), and now, for the time being, rather chaotic and chaotic structured drafts of the proposed candidate dissertation "Mortality of prisoners in the penitentiary system of the Russian Empire and the USSR: comparison in a historical context." After graduating from the Faculty of History, perhaps the only thing that connects me with the profile specialty in the diploma, in addition to graduate school. The rough nature of the materials is expressed primarily in the fact that in many posts there is no design in accordance with GOST. All materials and articles presented in the blog are strictly educational, completely apolitical, academic.

          http://corporatelie.livejournal.com/
          1. +2
            29 November 2016 06: 40
            Zmicerz that's exactly the subjective lol and here is what Zmicerz statistics say. Archive statistics perfectly illustrate that the liberal-western bugbear of Stalinist repression is just a myth created to justify the collapse of the USSR, the creation of fraudulent thieves capitalism with the subsequent robbery of the people.
            If we take the data from the archives, then from 1921 to 1954, 3 million 779 thousand 380 people were convicted by all types of law enforcement agencies in the USSR. Of this number, 642 thousand 980 people were sentenced to death. To the maintenance in camps and prisons of 2 million 369 thousand 320 people. And to the expulsion of 765 thousand 180 people. In 1934, approximately 500 thousand people were imprisoned. In 1937, approximately 800 thousand people were imprisoned. In 1945, approximately 700 thousand people were imprisoned. In 1947, more than 800 thousand people were in prison (the maximum number of prisoners for the entire period from 1921 to 1954, since it was a post-war year). In 1937, political prisoners made up 12,8% of the total number of prisoners.
            That is, these statistics fit into the statistics of prisoners of any other country in the world and are even much lower than in developed capitalist countries like the United States. Which is quite logical, because socialism provides much more opportunities for the development and self-realization of each person than capitalism, therefore in socialism there is no particular sense in committing crimes, since any person looks confidently into the future and is fully protected and provided socially.
            1. 0
              29 November 2016 09: 53
              Quote: Uncle Murzik
              ... but what Zmicerz statistics says Archive statistics perfectly illustrate ...

              Uncle Murzik, according to the rules of the VO site - copying the same message is a flood !!!
              Respect other members of the forum and they will answer you the same.
        2. 0
          29 November 2016 23: 45
          That's it.
  9. +3
    28 November 2016 14: 46
    Lieutenant Teterin,
    error
    And from hunger and from excessive hard labor. And you do not know?
  10. +3
    28 November 2016 14: 51
    Lieutenant Teterin,
    Or maybe he didn’t want to curry favor, but to get additional financing, so he cried.
  11. +4
    28 November 2016 17: 01
    Quote: merlin
    Quote: Tula gingerbread
    So it’s no secret that especially under Khrushchev, Gorbachev-Yakovlev and Yeltsin, rehabilitation was carried out in droves, even without considering cases. Innocent and all.

    So this is no secretthat back in Soviet times, “facts of illegal repressions, falsification of investigative cases, torture and torture of prisoners” were found during Stalin’s time, and not what you wrote.
    The number of cases is also doubtful: it turns out that most of the officials and generals were spies. Excuse me, who then ruled the USSR? Spies
    And in general, are you going to rewrite history now? Will you go galloping to the square, shouting "Glory to the USSR" and "Stalin will come - he will put things in order!" I warn you: in / in neighboring Ukraine, all this led to sad consequences.

    Those. You compared Stalin with Bandera? And then what to talk about.
    There is no need to shout the glory of the USSR, its glory has not gone anywhere, it will remain so for centuries. Regarding the "established" repressions, this is only clear to you, but under ... Khrushchev's I don't believe a single word.
    1. +2
      28 November 2016 19: 20
      Quote: Tula gingerbread
      Those. You compared Stalin with Bandera? And then what to talk about.

      I compared you with the activist of the Maidan. If you do not understand this, then there really is nothing to talk about with you - you, apparently, have difficulties with abstract thinking, and I am no longer interested in talking with representatives of the square-nested way.
      Quote: Tula gingerbread
      There is no need to shout the glory of the USSR, its glory has not disappeared, it will remain so for centuries.

      Indeed - this is the past. As well as the glory of RI - but for you it does not seem to exist. But many are proud of the Cossacks in Paris.
      Quote: Tula gingerbread
      Regarding the "established" repressions, this is only clear to you, but under ... Khrushchev's I don't believe a single word.

      Did we consider Vera’s questions? Believe what you want, I try not to argue once again with religious sextants.
      1. +1
        29 November 2016 23: 51
        It's funny That is, when you say that for example, do not believe Kiselev. Are you a sectarian too? There are grounds and, moreover, documentary ones not to believe Khrushchev.
        Wapm personally Tula gingerbread said. that the glory of the Don Cossacks does not exist for him, or in the best traditions of trolls and demagogues ascribed to the opponent their thoughts and began to smash and condemn them?
        The forum can not be abstract thinking, only concrete, no one is obliged to guess. what did you mean and what kind of abstract thoughts are in your head.
        1. 0
          30 November 2016 08: 46
          Quote: Ulan
          It's funny That is, when you say that for example, do not believe Kiselev. Are you a sectarian too? There are grounds and, moreover, documentary ones not to believe Khrushchev.

          Dear Ulan, that is how it was necessary to write "the grounds and documentary" according to which "it is impossible" to believe Khrushchev in this particular case. The same should be done with regard to Kiselev. "I believe - I do not believe" is not an argument. Give the facts, or is this the only way you can?
          Quote: Ulan
          Wapm personally Tula gingerbread said. that the glory of the Don Cossacks does not exist for him, or in the best traditions of trolls and demagogues ascribed to the opponent their thoughts and began to smash and condemn them?

          Not only to me, but to all forum users, he repeatedly wrote that in RI - everything was bad. And you, I'm sorry, harnessed for him, because he has nothing to answer? Or is it just out of a desire to accuse me of demagogy? What is your direct accuser, a knight without fear and reproach))))
          Quote: Ulan
          The forum can not be abstract thinking, only concrete, no one is obliged to guess. what did you mean and what kind of abstract thoughts are in your head.

          Are you also a representative of the square-nested way of thinking? And you do not have abstract thinking as a class? Sympathize with you.
  12. +2
    28 November 2016 19: 36
    Something the author has mixed everything in a heap. England and France, of course, were those allies, but to bring down the empire in the midst of a war, with an incomprehensible result for oneself, is madness. Rather, they could have agreed to a summit palace coup. Liberals are also in vain mixed, they did not oppose the monarchy. The same Miliukov repeated more than once - "we are not opposition to His Majesty, we are the support of His Majesty." The Russian bourgeoisie, unlike the European one, which emerged from the revolutionary upheavals of the 18-19th century, was closely united with the supreme power. Capitalism in Russia was imposed from above, in contrast to Europe, where it initially opposed feudalism. For liberals, masons, the bourgeoisie, the events of February 17th came as a surprise. Or were there liberals in the Soviets of Workers 'and Soldiers' Deputies, who began to take power in the early days?
    1. 0
      28 November 2016 22: 52
      Quote: Rastas
      but to bring down an empire in the midst of war, with an incomprehensible outcome for itself - is crazy

      The fact of the matter is that the outcome of the war was a foregone conclusion. Germany has exhausted all resources and the impending entry into the US war meant a guaranteed victory.
      Quote: Rastas
      The same Miliukov repeated more than once - "we are not opposition to His Majesty, we are the support of His Majesty."

      He wrote after and in personal correspondence:
      In response to the question you have raised, how I now look at the coup we have committed, what I expect from the future and how I assess the role and influence of existing parties and organizations, I am writing this letter to you, I admit, with a heavy heart. What happened, we did not want. You know that our goal was limited to achieving a republic or a monarchy with an emperor having only nominal power; the dominant influence of the intelligentsia in the country and the equal rights of Jews
      ...
      You know that a firm decision to use the war to effect a coup was made by us shortly after the outbreak of this war. Note also that we could no longer wait, for we knew that in late April or early May our army was to go on the offensive, the results of which would immediately radically stop all hints of discontent and cause an explosion of patriotism and glee in the country.
      You understand now why at the last minute I hesitated to agree to a coup, you also understand what my inner state should be like at the moment. History will curse our leaders, the so-called proletarians, but curse us, who caused the storm.
      What to do now, you ask ...
      I do not know. That is, inside we both know that the salvation of Russia in returning to the monarchy, we know that all the events of the last two months have clearly proved that the people were not able to perceive freedom, that the mass of the population, not participating in rallies and congresses, was monarchically configured, that many many campaigning for the republic do this out of fear.
      1. +1
        29 November 2016 00: 09
        This is the so-called penitential letter of Milyukov. True, there are disputes over its credibility, such as the 2nd volume of Brusilov’s memoirs. The course of actions of the Provisional Government from March to October 17th showed that they had no plan, what they did not know, making one mistake after another, dodging from side to side. To think that the offensive in April could solve something is also very strange, we can recall what the June offensive led to. And the Brusilovsky breakthrough stopped when it was necessary to deal not with the motley Austrian army, but with the German one, the resources ran out. And the conclusion is that if people do not take part in congresses, then they are monarchistically inclined, generally in the clouds. Throughout the civil war, there has not been a single pro-monarchist uprising. The same peasant uprisings took place under Soviet slogans.
        1. +1
          29 November 2016 06: 15
          Quote: Rastas
          To think that the offensive in April could solve something is also very strange, we can recall what the June offensive led to

          And what could it lead to after order No. 1?
          Quote: Rastas
          The course of action of the Provisional Government from March to October 17th showed that they had no plan, what they did not know, making one mistake after another

          To seize power and dispose of it is not the same thing. In addition, there is speculation that Kerensky was a traitor like Gorbachev.
          Quote: Rastas
          Yes, and the Brusilovsky breakthrough stopped when it was necessary to deal not with the motley Austrian army, but the German one, the resources ran out

          The point is not in the army, but precisely in the resources - they attacked as much as they could. But the troops of the two fronts (North and West) did nothing at all. As Brusilov himself wrote:
          This operation did not give any strategic results, nor could it, because the decision of the military council of April 1 was not implemented in any way. The Western Front did not strike a major blow, and the Northern Front had as its motto the “patience, patience and patience” familiar to us from the Japanese War. The headquarters, in my opinion, did not in any way fulfill its purpose of controlling the entire Russian armed force. The grandiose victorious operation, which could be carried out with the appropriate course of action of our high command in the 1916 year, was unforgivably missed.

          Stupidity or treason? In the light of subsequent events, it is more likely treason.
          Quote: Rastas
          Throughout the civil war, there has not been a single pro-monarchist uprising.

          And was there a candidate for whom it was possible to rebel? The White Guards did not put forward monarchist slogans, but killed Nicholas II with his family.
          1. +1
            29 November 2016 06: 37
            One amendment, in 1918 there was no longer Nicholas II, was a citizen Nikolai Romanov.
            He abdicated the throne on his own
            1. 0
              29 November 2016 10: 30
              Quote: sibiryak10
              there was no longer Nicholas II, there was a citizen Nikolai Romanov.
              He abdicated the throne on his own

              with a revolver at the temple, but completely independently .... Even the abdication in two or three versions.
            2. 0
              29 November 2016 20: 08
              Even if we discard the oddities of renunciation, it could still become a center of attraction for monarchists.
  13. 0
    28 November 2016 20: 30
    The main thing for Russia is to free the Russians in southern and western Russia from the occupation power of the Austro-Hungarian "Ukrainians" (Judeo-Bandera).
    1. 0
      29 November 2016 20: 44
      Will you release yourself, or will you send my sons?
  14. 0
    29 November 2016 20: 15
    Article - agitation! Pulling by the ears of the facts of a century ago and their imposition on modern geopolitical realities through the "living, Great Russian language"
  15. 0
    30 November 2016 13: 23
    Regarding the straits and Constantinople - a few additions.
    1. Both the current bakers and the then tsarist propagandists unanimously reiterated that this is an age-old dream of the Russian people, along with the support of Orthodoxy around the world and the support of fraternal Slavic peoples.

    However, the facts show a completely different thing: all these slogans were used as a rattle for a herd of gullible citizens of the Republic of Ingushetia, when it was required to cut off more money from them or to throw them into the war.

    In reality, for example, during the Balkan wars, the union of Slavic Balkan states and Orthodox Greece inflicted serious defeats on Turkey and was close to realizing an allegedly centuries-old Russian dream.

    However, the Russian state not only did not render the Orthodox and Slavic opponents of Turkey any significant, but also tried not to notice these events in every way.
    What was done: privately sold Bulgaria and Serbia aircraft with a total of 14 copies (more precisely, the aircraft sold by Russia itself purchased in France), which amounted to half the aviation union of the Balkan countries. The rest was bought in the same way in other states, indifferent to the Balkan disassembly, but at the same time helping the Balkan countries in much the same way as Great Russia supposedly vitally interested in them. lol

    There was still a small number of volunteers from Russia, as well as other countries, in a strictly private manner.

    The reason is simple: Russian diplomacy tried to incite the union of the Balkan states not against Turkey, but against Austria.
    And the "disobedient" instead tried to fulfill the "age-old Russian dream", according to the official hypocritical slogans of Tsarist Russia.

    As a result, despite its very weak forces and lack of support from the great powers, the Balkan alliance in a very short time, about six months, achieved impressive successes - the "great" tsarist Russia, which had many times greater forces on the Caucasian front and the Black Sea in WWI, achieved 3+ years of WWI of incomparably less success.

    Then Austria managed to quarrel the alliance of the winners, and the Second Balkan War to a considerable extent annulled the successes of the previous one. And official Russia, as before, continued to pretend that it did not concern it.

    2. Crystal bakers, who like to say that following the results of the WWII, Russia should undoubtedly gain control of the Straits and Constantinople, only the pants prevented the dancer, they rely on the so-called Sykes-Picot agreement. Yes, it was! lol
    And now - the details, for crystal bakers forever classified:
    2.1. This agreement was concluded between two diplomats who do not have high official posts. In fact, filkin is a letter.
    2.2. The parties to this, as it were, agreement were English and French. No other state as a party to the agreement did not appear, although it was a matter of respecting the interests of the allies.
    2.3. Even if you believe in the legal force of this filkin of a letter, it provided for Russia's control over = part = = European = coast of the straits - i.e. even this carrot in front of the donkey face did not promise FULL control over the straits, and Constantinople did not enter there.
    2.4. During WWI, the British repeatedly stated the insufficient effectiveness of Russian participation in the war.
    That was, generally speaking, quite obvious truth - but in this context it is more important that with such statements the British justified in advance their refusal to fulfill their promises to Russia after the war.

    2.0. Similar agreements on parole also promised the Arabs the creation of their national state in exchange for the armed struggle of the Arabs against Turkey. The Arabs fulfilled their part of the promises completely, but the Europeans threw the Arabs - and I see no reason why we should assume their greater honesty with respect to Russia.

    3. There were similar agreements on parole in 1915 over Constantinople in exchange for a Russian landing operation in the Bosphorus. Simply put, "let you take Istanbul yourself from the Turks, and then we may allow you to keep it for yourself."
    But there was no landing operation then - there was only an inconclusive shelling from a safe (for both sides lol ) the distance that Eberhard immediately turned into a reason for a victorious report and the distribution of golden rain of awards laughing

    4. There was no Bosphorus landing operation in 1916, and later - fortunatelybecause the plan drawn up for her was the height of idiocy and incompetence, the operation was doomed in advance, already at the planning stage, to failure with huge losses on the Russian side.

    That's all about the conquest of Constantinople by Russia according to the results of the WWII laughing
    1. 0
      30 November 2016 19: 58
      Quote: murriou
      However, the Russian state not only did not render the Orthodox and Slavic opponents of Turkey any significant, but also tried not to notice these events in every way.

      And if RI got into this fight, then the countries of Europe would most likely have acted on the side of Turkey.
      Quote: murriou
      There was no Bosphorus landing operation in 1916, and later - fortunately, because the plan drawn up for her was the height of idiocy and incompetence, the operation was doomed in advance, already at the planning stage

      This is when Turkey had virtually no army?
      Quote: murriou
      During WWI, the British repeatedly stated the insufficient effectiveness of Russian participation in the war.

      And they themselves began mobilization only after the threat of France to make peace.
  16. 0
    30 November 2016 21: 07
    Quote: Dart2027
    if RI got into this fight, then the countries of Europe would most likely have acted on the side of Turkey.

    Some may, yes. Some would most likely oppose, if not Russia, then their opponents. Europe at that time was not united, as before / during the REV.

    But! Is it a great Russian dream, or is it a petty bargain?

    In Russia and in WWII, Russia did not get involved in canine horseradish, and get involved in the war for the great Russian dream in the interval between these wars - no more? laughing

    This is how the real value of the "great Russian dream" for the authorities of tsarist Russia becomes clear. laughing

    Quote: Dart2027
    This is when Turkey had virtually no army?

    In order to roll the landing to the nines even when it landed, or even earlier, Turkey had more than enough forces in the Bosphorus. Learn the materiel.

    Quote: Dart2027
    Quote: murriou
    During WWI, the British repeatedly stated the insufficient effectiveness of Russian participation in the war.
    And they themselves began mobilization only after the threat of France to make peace.

    England was the leading force of the Entente at sea, and it fulfilled this part of its tasks admirably.

    It’s not like the Baltic Fleet hiding behind minefields, for the whole war in terms of effectiveness, is comparable to a small handful of English submarines in the same Baltic.

    And the Black Sea Fleet, which initially had a huge superiority of forces, and after the commissioning of "battleships" of the "Empress Maria" type - incomparable and overwhelming, could not boast of results worthy of such forces. The Greeks in 1912 acted much more successfully, yielding to the Turks just as much as the Turko-Germans were inferior to the Russians.
    1. 0
      1 December 2016 19: 38
      Quote: murriou
      But! Is it a great Russian dream, or is it a petty bargain?

      You already decide, huh? The tsar is to blame for the fact that he did not dare to get involved in the war without any allies, or that he was guilty of engaging in the war as part of a coalition.
      Quote: murriou
      Turkey had more than enough forces in the Bosphorus. Learn the materiel.

      And which ones.
      Quote: murriou
      England was the leading force of the Entente at sea, and it fulfilled this part of its tasks admirably.

      Leaving the rest to bear the brunt of the loss. Yes, this is a great feat.
      Quote: murriou
      Not like the Baltic Fleet hiding behind minefields

      Which there was no sense to send anywhere - there was a task to cover the coast from a possible landing and it was carried out.
      Quote: murriou
      And the Black Sea Fleet, which initially had a huge superiority of forces, and after the commissioning of "battleships" of the "Empress Maria" type - incomparable and overwhelming

      Empress Maria and Empress Catherine the Great.
      The Trebizond operation of January 23 (February 5), 1916-5 (18) April 1916. A number of successful operations of the Russian troops and the Black Sea Fleet against the Turkish troops during the First World War. It ended with the victory of the Russian troops and the capture of the Turkish Black Sea port of Trebizond. After the Russian troops occupied Erzurum, the Russian command decided to conduct an offensive operation in the direction of Trebizond. On April 15, after the successful actions of the Russian troops and the landing of naval assault forces in Riesa, the Turkish army was forced to leave Trebizond.
      Empress Maria - sank in 1916.
      Emperor Alexander III - joined the fleet in 1917.
      Not tired of lying, huh?
  17. 0
    1 December 2016 20: 21
    Quote: Dart2027
    And which ones.

    I sympathize with your illiteracy and willingly help! laughing

    1. Minefields.
    Which "Russian geniuses" planned to shoot completely overnight, having neither comparable experience of operations of this scale even during the day, nor sufficient experience in night clearance.

    In reality, if someone is not smarter than "Russian geniuses" and needs an explanation of such simple things: already at this stage, significant losses are very likely, and above all - a complete unmasking of the entire operation by the very first blast.

    2. Coastal defense.
    Which the Russian "geniuses" considered insignificant on the grounds that during the unsuccessful shelling from a distance of 120 cables, when the Russian shells barely reached the lighthouse advanced far ahead, the fortifications did not respond.

    In reality, having a guaranteed effective distance of about 12-15 cables, these batteries were guaranteed to cover the "landing" ships and the landing itself even before the landing.

    3. "Goeben", who was declared by the "brilliant naval commander" Kolchak to have completely lost its combat capability, from the explosion of brilliantly placed mines on allegedly Kolchak.
    In reality, "Goeben" in 1916 did not receive any explosions or other damage, it was fully operational.
    Being in a closed position, he could absolutely safely grind the entire landing force even on the approach to the shore, and if the Black Sea Fleet ships were approaching the reach of his GK (up to 100-120 cabin.), And cut into them.
    And unrequitedly, being hidden from view.

    4. Battleship "Torgut Reis" of the "Brandenburg" class, which during the Dardanelles operation forced even much more serious Entente forces than the Black Sea Fleet to stay out of the reach of its guns (15-16 km).
    Being just near the Bosphorus, the battleship also had time to connect to his defense - and he alone was enough to cover the entire landing, of course.
    Shipped too close to ships, if such * adventurers * there, too, could crash.

    5. Even the smallest warships located near the Bosphorus, also had the opportunity to join the extermination of the landing troughs and landing, if any has time to land on the coast.

    That is, I listed several reasons for you at once, each of which is enough for the previously guaranteed failure of this adventure. Few? laughing
    1. 0
      1 December 2016 21: 37
      I rushed in a hurry. The effective fire distance of the Bosphorus coastal batteries is 12-15 km, and not cables, of course.
    2. 0
      2 December 2016 18: 08
      Quote: murriou
      I sympathize with your illiteracy and willingly help!

      I sympathize with your illiteracy and willingly help!
      You already decide whether the RI fleet is stronger than the Turkish or not? If you do not know, then landing ships always cover warships, the same two battleships from which Gabin could only escape, but not win.
      1. 0
        2 December 2016 21: 44
        Quote: Dart2027
        I sympathize with your illiteracy and willingly help!

        Oh, I liked you repeating my words - but a little not the ones that on your part would be like the truth, unlike mine laughing

        Quote: Dart2027
        You already decide whether the RI fleet is stronger than the Turkish or not?

        feel You, alas, are a complete zero in matters of tactics and strategy, in which you constantly climb to disgrace. crying
        Spell for the most * talented *.

        1. The strength of the army and navy depends not only on the number of people, guns and guns - according to which the advantage was undoubted and significant among the Russian army throughout the WWII, and the Russian fleet at the World Cup.

        2. The result also depends on the ability and determination to use these forces - with which Russia had a complete failure in the REE and WWI.

        3. The result also depends on the conditions under which the battle is taking place, and with which it happened in different ways.

        4. For example, in the Gulf of Riga, most of the time, the battleship Slava and small ships, which arrived late to Tsushima, held the defense. the forces of the Russian fleet there were many times weaker than the German in every attempt of a German offensive.

        However, the ability to conduct corrected fire from a closed position protected by the coastline allowed Slava and small ships to successfully hold the defense for about 3 years.

        5. During the Dardanelles operation, Turkish forces at sea were even more significantly inferior to the forces of the Entente.

        However, even there, the ability to conduct corrected fire from a closed position allowed the battleship "Torgut Reis" (about which the "Russian geniuses", when drawing up the "brilliant" plan for the Bosphorus landing operation, managed to forget altogether! laughing ) to keep the entire Entente fleet available at a distance no closer than the reach of its main guns.

        6. In the case of an attack by the Russian forces on the Bosphorus, the Turks have an advantage, although according to the bare calculation of forces (the only available for your abstract theorizing, even then not to the full extent) they are even there to a considerable loss.

        However, in the Bosphorus "Torgut Reis" and "Goeben" could fire from closed positions, with effective adjustment of fire, and the Russian Black Sea Fleet did not have such an opportunity.
        Therefore, the Russian forces in the Bosphorus did not have the slightest chance of success.

        Even so, in the explanation spelled out for the most talented, is it clear? wink
        1. 0
          5 December 2016 10: 11
          the opponent has evaporated. Fighting in other topics, not a foot here laughing
  18. 0
    1 December 2016 21: 12
    Quote: Dart2027
    Leaving the rest to bear the brunt of the loss.

    Nevertheless: at sea England was the main force of the Entente, and, unlike Russia, had worthy accomplishments there. On land, she also quite actively acted on several TVDs at once.

    And even in the Baltic, English sailors on 3-4 English submarines achieved success comparable to the successes of the entire Baltic Fleet for the entire war.
    With negligible losses, but a big effect - while their Russian colleagues only distinguished themselves by self-flooding.

    What claims to England, to be more specific? What did she not cope with? Even in the unsuccessful, in general, Dardanelles-Gallipoli operation, the Anglo-French forces were able to inflict losses on Turkey noticeably more than their own.

    The British did not have to retreat numerically by significantly smaller enemy forces, like Russia, in WWI, in any case.

    Quote: Dart2027
    The tsar is to blame for the fact that he did not dare to get involved in the war without any allies, or that he was guilty of engaging in the war as part of a coalition.

    The tsar risked bringing the matter to the REV, and in it the weak Russia was beaten great Russia as a small one. Say it’s not my fault?

    And in the WWII, as part of a powerful coalition, Russia was unsuccessful. Also no one is to blame?

    And in relation to the Balkan war, Russia, even without direct intervention, could have done a lot to make the victory of the Balkan Union over Turkey crushing.

    But - it was most important for Russia to achieve complete obedience from the allies supposedly so patronized by it, and did not want to allow them to make independent successes.
    As a result, Turkey lost much less than it could lose, and Russia did not gain anything that it could gain.
    The pride of bureaucratic turkeys turned out to be more important than the straits and Constantinople. That's all about the "great Russian dream".

    Quote: Dart2027
    And which ones.

    I listed it in a separate message - although you, according to your habit, you may not "notice" laughing

    Quote: Dart2027
    Which there was no sense to send anywhere - there was a task to cover the coast from a possible landing and it was carried out.

    The meaning could be, if Russia at sea diverted a significant part of the Hochsee fleet. But the main forces of the Baltic Fleet were practically inactive throughout the war. The huge funds spent by Russia on the construction of "battleships" of the "Sevastopol" type, as well as the smaller - but still considerable - funds for the construction of the "Andreev Pervozvanih" were wasted.

    Well, except for the significant result, the enrichment of the contractors who carried out this order and the officials who issued the order were enormous. lol

    Quote: Dart2027
    The Trebizond operation ... Ended in the victory of the Russian troops and the capture of the Turkish Black Sea port of Trebizond.

    The Russian army here showed itself well, who would argue.
    But the participation of the fleet was, in comparison with its composition and capabilities, insignificant. And even the landing was partially landed already in the rear of the advancing army. And here we are about the fleet, actually.

    Quote: Dart2027
    Empress Maria - sank in 1916.

    He spent a year and two months in the ranks. A long time. What did you manage to accomplish during this time? A worthy battleship title? "Covered the actions" of the old battleships in a couple of exits? Did you do about the same thing during the Trebizond operation?

    Quote: Dart2027
    Emperor Alexander III - joined the fleet in 1917.

    And also practically did not participate in the war. I am glad that you at least now admitted it - usually bakers with foam at the mouth are eager to prove exactly the opposite laughing

    And "Ekaterina", although it seemed that she entered the ranks already in 1915 and remained in the ranks until the end of the war, she also did not show herself worthy of anything. What I wrote earlier, actually. There were enormous forces; there was no worthy use for them.

    Quote: Dart2027
    Not tired of lying, huh?

    You know better lol
    It’s you who are still trying to lie about 70% of the peasants in the officer corps of the Russian army at the end of the WWII, although this ratio was only in a few graduates of the ensign school at the very end of the war, and the real number of peasant officers in the entire Russian army was about half that You named numbers.

    Or are you trying to argue, contrary to the facts, that I lied here, and not you? What exactly? wink
    1. 0
      2 December 2016 18: 24
      Quote: murriou
      What claims to England, to be more specific?

      With the fact that the main burden of hostilities shifted to others.
      Quote: murriou
      But the participation of the fleet was, in comparison with its composition and capabilities, insignificant.

      His participation was to complete the task - to ensure the landing.
      Quote: murriou
      He stayed in service for a year and two months. A considerable period. What did you manage to accomplish during this time?

      Given the fact that during his service there were simply no major operations worthy of a battleship, he did what was required at that time - he covered the weaker ships. But when landing their artillery and armor would be just very useful.
      Quote: murriou
      and the actual number of peasant officers in the entire Russian army turned out to be about half the figure you mentioned
      And where is it written? In some, it’s not clear where the calculations come from?
      Quote: murriou
      The tsar risked bringing the matter to the REV, and in it the weak Russia was beaten great Russia as small.

      Having exhausted all resources and remaining the winner only thanks to the riots in the Republic of Ingushetia.
      Quote: murriou
      But - it was most important for Russia to achieve complete obedience from the allies supposedly so patronized by it, and did not want to allow them to make independent successes.

      And it was necessary in the best traditions of the Soviet dope (namely Soviet) to put their stomach for them and not have anything to fuck? The tsar was well aware that too strong allies could become a problem and did not seek to save them at his own expense. This is called politics.
      1. 0
        2 December 2016 22: 19
        Quote: Dart2027
        With the fact that the main burden of hostilities shifted to others.

        Well, well. laughing
        The main front of the WWII was the West, the British there invested no less than Russian forces, and no less successfully - in any case, they did not have to retreat before the forces significantly smaller in number.

        In the Messopotamian and Syrian theater of war, the British also advanced more than the Russians in the Caucasus. Yes, less power, and so what?

        In the Baltic, the British, using several submarines, achieved results comparable to the entire Baltic Fleet, which spent almost the entire war hiding behind minefields. Strength - yes, less, but the effect?
        Many times more Russian submarines at the same time, in these same places, could not distinguish themselves except for self-flooding.

        And the fighting on the North Sea from the English side attracted such forces, with which tsarist Russia is not something to equal, it is ridiculous to even try to compare.
        = * =
        1. 0
          5 December 2016 10: 12
          and here the opponent preferred to "overlook" the facts I have cited. Everything is as usual lol
      2. 0
        2 December 2016 22: 44
        Quote: Dart2027
        His participation was to complete the task - to ensure the landing.

        Once again spelling: in comparison with its composition and capabilities - the mountain gave birth to a mouse. The whole Black Sea Fleet solved the problem for a couple of gunboats. laughing

        Quote: Dart2027
        Quote: murriou
        He stayed in service for a year and two months. A considerable period. What did you manage to accomplish during this time?
        ... during his service, there were simply no major operations worthy of a battleship

        Translated into Russian: the capabilities of the "battleship" in the tasks corresponding to its supposedly class were not in demand, because the great and mighty Russian fleet sat out in safety, confining itself to ridiculous "operations" to destroy feluccas and transports, well, sometimes even daring to shoot at dry in the absence of opposition. lol

        Quote: Dart2027
        Quote: murriou
        the actual number of peasant officers in the entire Russian army turned out to be about half the figure you mentioned
        And where is it written? In some, it’s not clear where the calculations come from?

        You, as always, "did not notice" that in these calculations you used the given figures, and besides them - perhaps the rules of arithmetic and the basics of tactics laughing

        Quote: Dart2027
        Exhausting all resources

        I have repeatedly denied these your tales.
        "Depleted" Japan after RYA very quickly overtook Russia by several years in military shipbuilding, for example laughing

        Quote: Dart2027
        remaining a winner only thanks to the riots in RI.

        You traditionally lie: these rebellions began already after most of the battles of the REV were the tsarist army and navy ALREADY lost, shattered and shameful, and ALL other battles - Mukden, Tsushima and the Japanese capture of Sakhalin - could not depend on these rebellions.

        Quote: Dart2027
        Quote: murriou
        But - it was most important for Russia to achieve complete obedience from the allies supposedly so patronized by it, and did not want to allow them to make independent successes.
        And it was necessary in the best traditions of the Soviet dope (namely Soviet) to put their stomach for them and not have anything to fuck?

        1. The USSR had a lot of things. And the fact that the post-Soviet bullshit all these conquests surrendered for a damn dog is not the fault of the USSR.

        2. As a result of the Balkan wars, Russia could have captured the straits and Constantinople, and had a shame and loss of influence in the Balkans.

        3. Bulgaria, for example, as a result came to WWI on the side of the Germans, and Greece, which showed itself brilliantly in 1912, coordinated its actions with the Entente, but NOT with Russia.

        For you, the bakers, all this is deeply classified, of course lol

        Quote: Dart2027
        The tsar was well aware that too strong allies could become a problem and did not seek to save them at his own expense. This is called politics.

        Yes, the tsar chose, at his own expense, or rather, due to the death, wounds and captivity of millions of Russian people, to save the British and French. laughing
        1. 0
          4 December 2016 11: 29
          Quote: murriou
          The whole Black Sea Fleet solved the problem for a couple of gunboats.
          Once again spelling: by the time the Black Sea Fleet was supposed to begin providing for the landing, internal unrest began.
          Quote: murriou
          Translated into Russian: the capabilities of the "battleship" in the tasks corresponding to its alleged class were not in demand, because the great and mighty Russian fleet
          Translated into Russian: the capabilities of the "battleship" in tasks corresponding to its alleged class were not in demand, because the great and mighty Russian fleet was destroyed during the revolution.
          Quote: murriou
          You traditionally lie: these rebellions began already after most of the battles of the REV were the tsarist army and navy ALREADY lost, shattered and shameful, and ALL other battles - Mukden, Tsushima and the Japanese capture of Sakhalin - could not depend on these rebellions.
          You traditionally lie: these riots began only after it became clear that one could not win Japan’s depletion war and that the blitzkrieg had failed.
          And by the way, who paid for them?
          Quote: murriou
          The USSR had a lot of things.
          And therefore, in the USSR, a trip from the socialist country was abroad, where do people live?
          Quote: murriou
          As a result of the Balkan wars, Russia could have captured the straits and Constantinople
          And it was not you who just defended the idea that RI "could not have been terribly backward, etc."? Make up your mind, eh? I give a hint then Turkey was actually a protectorate of England. For you crystal bakers, this is all deeply classified, of course.
          Quote: murriou
          Yes, the tsar chose, at his own expense, or rather, due to the death, wounds and captivity of millions of Russian people, to save the British and French.
          Only no one has yet answered how participation in the world war could have been avoided.
  19. +1
    4 December 2016 13: 30
    Quote: Dart2027
    the capabilities of the "battleship" in the tasks corresponding to its supposedly class were not in demand, because the great and mighty Russian fleet was destroyed during the revolution.

    Lying.
    Before the revolution, 3 years of war passed.
    For all this time, no one has prevented the great and mighty Russian army and the great and mighty fleet from showing themselves - but the fleet was, to put it mildly, passive, the army screwed up.

    And only then, the great dancer was prevented, ahem, pants laughing

    Quote: Dart2027
    Quote: murriou
    The whole Black Sea Fleet solved the problem for a couple of gunboats.
    Once again spelling: by the time the Black Sea Fleet was supposed to begin providing for the landing, internal unrest began.

    LIE and here. The riots began almost a year later than the Trebizond operation.
    And most importantly, in any case, the participation of the fleet was required to a minimum, incomparable with the forces of the Black Sea Fleet.

    Quote: Dart2027
    Quote: murriou
    Translated into Russian: the capabilities of the "battleship" in the tasks corresponding to its alleged class were not in demand, because the great and mighty Russian fleet
    Translated into Russian: the capabilities of the "battleship" in tasks corresponding to its alleged class were not in demand, because the great and mighty Russian fleet was destroyed during the revolution.

    Lying again.
    The fleet was destroyed in 1918, before that the Russian "battleships" had been inactive in the Baltic for more than 3 years, at the World Cup - a little less than 3 years.
    And only then, as always, the trousers prevented the great dancer. lol

    Quote: Dart2027
    Quote: murriou
    You traditionally lie: these rebellions began already after most of the battles of the REV were the tsarist army and navy ALREADY lost, shattered and shameful, and ALL other battles - Mukden, Tsushima and the Japanese capture of Sakhalin - could not depend on these rebellions.

    You traditionally lie: these riots began only after it became clear that one could not win Japan’s depletion war and that the blitzkrieg had failed.

    Lying.
    The calendar for you, as always, is deeply classified. lol
    I remind you again.

    1. Japan turned out to be a blitzkrieg: the Russo-Japanese war was lost to pieces by Russia BEFORE the riots began.

    2. The war of attrition of Japan was not needed, the Japanese did not intend to go further than Manchuria, and Manchuria was completely in their hands after Mukden.
    3. Port Arthur was commissioned in December 1904. together with residues 1 TOE.
    4. Most land and sea battles were completely lost by Russia before the fall of Port Arthur, in an incomplete year of the war.
    5. The battles won by the Russian side were not a single in the whole war. Well, except for the heroic exploits of the Cossack patrols, invented by Russian newspapers.
    6. The first revolutionary events - January 1905.
    7. The battle of Mukden was lost in February, and no events in Russia could influence its course.
    8. The Tsushima battle was disastrously lost in May 1905, but the 2nd TOE went on a campaign in October 1904, and again, it did not depend on events in central Russia after that.

    9. After Tsushima, the Russian fleet in the Far East was almost completely destroyed, the remnants of the Vladivostok detachment of cruisers could no longer influence anything and stayed at the base.
    10. Under these conditions, a turn of events in favor of Russia has become absolutely impossible; Russia's recognition of the loss is a matter of time.
    11. Sakhalin, under the monopoly domination of the Japanese at sea, was doomed, it was taken shortly after Tsushima without straining.

    And what can you object to this? laughing

    Quote: Dart2027
    And by the way, who paid for them?

    First of all, His Imperial Insignificance Nicholas II, who brought popular indignation to revolutionary fermentation with his mediocre domestic and foreign policies.

    Quote: Dart2027
    Quote: murriou
    The USSR had a lot of things.
    And therefore, in the USSR, a trip from the socialist country was abroad, where do people live?

    Are you trying to say something? lol That the USSR, a great superpower, the second in the world in economic and military power, who won the WWII, the first in the world to go into space, control all of Eastern Europe and a significant part of Asia, defeat Japan even repeatedly, etc. - inferior in its achievements to the Russian Empire, omitted under the baseboard during the REV? laughing

    Quote: Dart2027
    Quote: murriou
    As a result of the Balkan wars, Russia could have captured the straits and Constantinople
    And it was not you who just defended the idea that RI "could not have been terribly backward, etc."?

    RI did not even do the little that she could.
    In the Balkan War, Turkey was smashed to smithereens by Greece, Bulgaria and Serbia, which even together were many times weaker than Russia.

    But Russia was sitting on the sidelines, and the Balkan countries appreciated this: only Serbia kept the pro-Russian course, which was substituted and crushed for this in the WWII.
    Greece was on the side of the Entente, but did not look back at Russia; it kept all ties only with England and France.
    Bulgaria generally sided with the Germans.
    These are the glorious conquests of the tsarist foreign policy before the WWII.

    Quote: Dart2027
    I give a hint then Turkey was actually a protectorate of England.

    Yes Yes Yes! You, as always, make great historical discoveries at every turn! laughing
    Nothing so that Turkey fought in WWI on the side of Germany and against England?
    Nothing so that during the Balkan wars, England supplied arms to Greece, and not Turkey?
    Thanks, have fun even more than usual laughing

    Quote: Dart2027
    For you, the bakers, all this is deeply classified, of course.

    Schizophrenia is a dangerous thing, you do not run it lol

    Quote: Dart2027
    Quote: murriou
    Yes, the tsar chose, at his own expense, or rather, due to the death, wounds and captivity of millions of Russian people, to save the British and French.
    Only no one has yet answered how participation in the world war could have been avoided.

    Italy, Japan and the United States managed to delay this participation longer and turn to their advantage.
    And if Russia's dependence on English and French loans was too strong not to obey the orders of its creditors, then admit it in plain text. winked
    1. +1
      4 December 2016 13: 40
      murriou
      A powerful, reasoned and crushing answer to the baker! Thank! hi +100500
    2. 0
      4 December 2016 16: 54
      Quote: murriou
      For all this time, no one has prevented the great and mighty Russian army and the great and mighty fleet from showing themselves - but the fleet was, to put it mildly, passive, the army screwed up.

      You're lying. Examples of how the Turkish army famously beat the Russian lead?
      Quote: murriou
      The fleet was destroyed in 1918, before that the Russian "battleships" had been inactive in the Baltic for more than 3 years, at the World Cup - a little less than 3 years.

      Lying again. At the Baltic Fleet and the Black Sea Fleet, the fleet carried out its current tasks of covering its shore. And fulfilled.
      Quote: murriou

      1... 10.
      And what can you object to this? laughing

      The fact that RI could completely recover all the losses incurred on land, unlike Japan.
      Quote: murriou
      First of all, His Imperial Insignificance Nicholas II, who brought popular indignation to revolutionary fermentation with his mediocre domestic and foreign policies.

      So who paid for the revolution? What shisha were weapons bought, propaganda produced, revolutionaries lived, etc.?
      Will you continue to evade the answer, or will you admit that they were kept by foreign intelligence services? As well as the current "fighters".
      Quote: murriou
      But Russia was sitting on the sidelines, and the Balkan countries appreciated this: only Serbia kept the pro-Russian course, which was substituted and crushed for this in the WWII.

      Quote: murriou
      Nothing so that Turkey fought in WWI on the side of Germany and against England? Nothing so that during the Balkan wars, England supplied arms to Greece, and not Turkey? Thanks, have fun even more than usual laughing

      After the Balkan Wars, Turkey was offended by the British who threw them and began to look for a patron in the person of Germany.
      Quote: murriou
      Schizophrenia is a dangerous thing, you do not run it lol

      You have a problem with this for a long time.
      Quote: murriou
      Italy, Japan and the United States managed to delay this participation longer and turn to their advantage.
      The participation of Japan was to capture a couple of cities in Asia, I don’t remember the details. The USA how to say it - they are overseas. Italy was of little interest.
      Quote: murriou
      Are you trying to say something? lol That the USSR, a great superpower, the second in the world in economic and military power, who won the WWII, the first in the world to go into space, control all of Eastern Europe and a significant part of Asia, defeat Japan even repeatedly, etc. - inferior in its achievements to the Russian Empire, omitted under the baseboard during the REV? laughing

      Once again, you move away from answering a simple question - why did the USSR live worse than its social block partners?
      And by the way, show me the country that built communism? Or
      And only then, as always, the trousers prevented the great dancer.
      1. 0
        4 December 2016 21: 29
        = * =
        Quote: Dart2027
        Quote: murriou
        But Russia was sitting on the sidelines, and the Balkan countries appreciated this: only Serbia kept the pro-Russian course, which was substituted and crushed for this in the WWII.

        I don’t quite understand why you quoted me here, without commenting on it.
        But, in any case, it will be more difficult for you than usual to lie, as if you "did not notice" this either. laughing

        Quote: Dart2027
        Quote: murriou
        Are you trying to say something? lol That the USSR, a great superpower, the second in the world in economic and military power, who won the WWII, the first in the world to go into space, control all of Eastern Europe and a significant part of Asia, defeat Japan even repeatedly, etc. - inferior in its achievements to the Russian Empire, omitted under the baseboard during the REV? laughing

        Once again, you move away from answering a simple question - why did the USSR live worse than its social block partners?

        1. You shirk again. They began to compare the USSR with the Republic of Ingushetia, which I wrote about, but they realized how much this comparison was trivial for tsarism, and quickly moved the arrows to compare the USSR with the CMEA countries.
        2. And here there are no secrets and discoveries. The USSR had large expenses for a forced arms race, and the CMEA countries were largely spared from such expenses.

        Quote: Dart2027
        And by the way, show me the country that built communism?

        The country that built socialism, you could see. But too diligently squint laughing
  20. 0
    4 December 2016 21: 22
    Quote: Dart2027
    Quote: murriou
    For all this time, no one has prevented the great and mighty Russian army and the great and mighty fleet from showing themselves - but the fleet was, to put it mildly, passive, the army screwed up.

    You're lying.

    Prove it. I prove your lies every time.

    Quote: Dart2027
    Examples of how the Turkish army famously beat the Russian lead?

    "Well, these are the Turks." They were even beaten by Italians in 1911-1912.
    To be better than the Turks and along with the Italians is not a great honor laughing

    And here are examples of how the Japanese and Germans famously beat the Russian army, even being in the minority, I have already cited a lot, and I can cite as many again. Is it necessary? wink

    Quote: Dart2027
    Quote: murriou
    The fleet was destroyed in 1918, before that the Russian "battleships" had been inactive in the Baltic for more than 3 years, at the World Cup - a little less than 3 years.

    Lying again. At the Baltic Fleet and the Black Sea Fleet, the fleet carried out its current tasks of covering its shore. And fulfilled.

    You are lying.

    Throughout the WWII, the Turkish-German fleet made unpunished shelling of the Russian coast and the sinking of Russian ships, making commercial shipping at the World Cup impossible for Russia.

    Even in 1917, when the superiority of the Russian fleet at the World Cup was not just great. and the overwhelming, light (!) cruiser "Breslau" in the most insolent manner BROUGHT the Russian post with a radio station on the Snake Island, aka Fidonisi, under the very nose of the Black Sea Fleet and safely left the pursuit in the Bosphorus.
    Moreover, during this "chase" Russian destroyers, those "magnificent" and "best in the world" newcomers, managed to lag behind (!!!) from the "battleship" Empress Catherine the Great, maintaining an economical move because of their * shyness * in a battle against a light cruiser, inferior to the four “noviks” in the number of barrels, salvo weight and other combat performance characteristics, and especially in speed.
    But for some reason the "newcomers" lol they preferred not to use it, and the "battleship" did not have enough speed.

    This is how the Russian Black Sea Fleet "defended" its shores and "performed" its tasks. laughing

    Quote: Dart2027
    RI could completely recover all the losses incurred on land, unlike Japan.

    That is, women give birth to new women, right? laughing
    However, the Russian heroes after Mukden chose not to test your theories in practice and, having an overwhelming numerical superiority over the Japanese, did not attempt to take active actions until the conclusion of the peace. laughing

    Quote: Dart2027
    Quote: murriou
    First of all, His Imperial Insignificance Nicholas II, who brought popular indignation to revolutionary fermentation with his mediocre domestic and foreign policies.
    So who paid for the revolution?

    You are so stubbornly trying to impose on me the answer you want and "ignore" the undesirable ones. laughing
    And I once again inform you that, first of all, the revolution was prepared and ensured by the incompetent actions of the tsarist government.
    The vast majority of participants in the revolutionary events of 1905-1907. acted without any payment, and even themselves made feasible contributions to the needs of the revolution. But for you, such information is forever classified. laughing

    As for the money for the direct purchase of weapons and other technical means, there were many sources for this.
    The main sources are party contributions and voluntary donations, which were collected a lot.
    The credit for this, again, belongs to the tsarist government, the Russian people “loved” it so much that many were ready to take off their last shirt, just to have hope that the sleeve of this shirt would strangle Nikolashka.

    Quote: Dart2027
    Will you continue to dodge the answer or admit that they sat on the contents of foreign intelligence?

    Neither one nor the other laughing
    I do not shy away from the answer, and it’s already how many times I have answered the same question in the same way.

    But you do not like my answers, so you constantly try to "ignore" them - and I am not going to lie for your pleasure stop lol laughing
    = * =
    1. 0
      4 December 2016 22: 29
      Quote: murriou
      You, as always, "did not notice" that in these calculations you used the given figures, and besides them - perhaps the rules of arithmetic and the basics of tactics

      The basics of tactics in whose opinion? Who is the source of the calculation methodology?
      Quote: murriou
      2. And here there are no secrets and discoveries. The USSR had large expenses for a forced arms race, and the CMEA countries were largely spared from such expenses.

      Simply put, did he contain them? And at whose expense? Religion did not allow them to defend themselves?
      Quote: murriou
      The country that built socialism, you could see. But too diligently squint laughing

      I asked a simple question - where is the constructed communism?
      And show on the map the country that built socialism.
      Quote: murriou
      Prove it. I prove your lies every time.

      You're lying. I prove your lies every time.
      Quote: murriou
      "Well, these are the Turks." They were even beaten by Italians in 1911-1912. It is not a great honor to be better than the Turks and on a par with Italians laughing

      That is, you did not write that about the Black Sea Fleet
      Quote: murriou
      For all this time, no one has prevented the great and mighty Russian army and the great and mighty fleet from showing themselves - but the fleet was, to put it mildly, passive, the army screwed up.

      Already confused themselves in their lies? However, the fact of victories is no longer denied well
      Quote: murriou
      Throughout the WWII, the Turkish-German fleet made unpunished shelling of the Russian coast and the sinking of Russian ships, making commercial shipping at the World Cup impossible for Russia.

      When I managed to escape, because it’s impossible to put a battleship to each post.
      Quote: murriou
      But for some reason the "newcomers" lol they preferred not to use it, and the "battleship" did not have enough speed.

      You do not know, but without a battleship, it’s fraught for the destroyers to fight with a cruiser, to put it mildly, therefore no one has set such a task for them. The tasks of the destroyers in the WWII were more modest and consisted in the fight against ships of their class, sudden torpedo attacks, defense against submarines and more.
      Quote: murriou
      However, the Russian heroes after Mukden chose not to test your theories in practice and, having an overwhelming numerical superiority over the Japanese, did not attempt to take active actions until the conclusion of the peace. laughing

      Since the beginning of the troubles had to clean up the rear.
      Quote: murriou
      First of all, His Imperial Insignificance Nicholas II, who brought popular indignation to revolutionary fermentation with his mediocre domestic and foreign policies.
      And I once again inform you that, first of all, the revolution was prepared and ensured by the incompetent actions of the tsarist government. The vast majority of participants in the revolutionary events of 1905-1907. acted without any payment, and even themselves made feasible contributions to the needs of the revolution. But for you, such information is forever classified. laughing

      You are trying so hard to impose on me the answer you want and "not notice" the undesirable ones. Poor, unhappy workers who had no money to live on, but had enough to buy weapons from abroad? Well, like the Maidan in Kiev, for which they collected $ 2000000 a day ... Voluntarily ...
      So who paid for the revolution?
      And by the way, who created Ukraine there?
      Quote: murriou
      I do not shy away from the answer, and it’s already how many times I have answered the same question in the same way.

      Beautiful tales that are constantly repeated when some special service overthrows an undesirable government.
      1. 0
        5 December 2016 03: 21
        = * =
        Quote: Dart2027
        Quote: murriou
        However, the Russian heroes after Mukden chose not to test your theories in practice and, having an overwhelming numerical superiority over the Japanese, did not attempt to take active actions until the conclusion of the peace. laughing

        Since the beginning of the troubles had to clean up the rear.

        Pants prevented the great dancer. feel
        When was the loss near Mukden, and when - the trouble?
        Which troops, specifically, were withdrawn from the theater of operations of the Russian Republic of Nuclear Forces to suppress unrest in the rear? laughing

        Quote: Dart2027
        Quote: murriou
        First of all, His Imperial Insignificance Nicholas II, who brought popular indignation to revolutionary fermentation with his mediocre domestic and foreign policies.
        And I once again inform you that, first of all, the revolution was prepared and ensured by the incompetent actions of the tsarist government. The vast majority of participants in the revolutionary events of 1905-1907. acted without any payment, and even themselves made feasible contributions to the needs of the revolution. But for you, such information is forever classified. laughing

        Poor, unfortunate workers who did not have money to live on, but enough for weapons purchased abroad? .

        Have you read the story "Mexican" by J. London? If yes - remember, if not - read. There is just about the purchase of rifles by carriages abroad laughing

        Quote: Dart2027
        Quote: murriou
        I do not shy away from the answer, and it’s already how many times I have answered the same question in the same way.

        Beautiful tales that are constantly repeated when some special service overthrows an undesirable government.

        I look forward to hearing from you a fascinating story about the personal recruitment by foreign special services of many thousands of participants in peasant uprisings and labor strikes throughout Russia in 1905-1907.
        And, knowing your habits, I remind you in advance that I appreciate your imagination, of course, lol - but as for the evidence, still for a change, remember sometimes, is it possible? laughing
    2. 0
      5 December 2016 10: 16
      Quote: murriou
      examples of how the Japanese army and the Germans famously beat the Russian army, even being in the minority, I have already cited a lot, and I can cite as many again. Is it necessary?

      Quote: murriou
      This is how the Russian Black Sea Fleet "defended" its shores and "performed" its tasks.

      And then the opponent showed * marvelous selectivity * his vision laughing
  21. 0
    5 December 2016 03: 20
    Quote: Dart2027
    And show on the map the country that built socialism.

    She is already gone. But you know about her. Well, at least you might know laughing
    The Russian empire has not been on the map much longer - but it does not dream of you writing up delusional praises about it. lol

    Quote: Dart2027
    Quote: murriou
    Prove it. I prove your lies every time.

    You're lying. I prove your lies every time.

    Yes? Well, prove again that the Russian army in the Russo-Japanese war won, not lost, and in the WWII against Germany it was quite effective, not helpless laughing
    For the most obstinate clowns, this is the crown clown number - such are the "proofs" of obvious delirium. lol

    Quote: Dart2027
    Quote: murriou
    "Well, these are the Turks." They were even beaten by Italians in 1911-1912. It is not a great honor to be better than the Turks and on a par with Italians laughing

    That is, you did not write that about the Black Sea Fleet
    Quote: murriou
    For all this time, no one has prevented the great and mighty Russian army and the great and mighty fleet from showing themselves - but the fleet was, to put it mildly, passive, the army screwed up.

    And what is wrong? Victory over the Turks is not a great merit, they were beaten by everyone who feels like it, even Italians, even the unsuccessful as a whole Dardanelles-Gallipoli operation brought the Turks more losses than the advancing Entente.
    And against the Germans in WWI and the Japanese in the REV, the Russian army was very unsuccessful.

    As for the Russian fleet - it was certainly a disaster in the REV and unconditionally passive in the WWII, it used its capabilities to a very small extent in the Baltic Sea (where the BF generally stayed the whole war behind minefields), and in the World Cup, where for its overwhelming advantage it was limited to tasks small groups of gunboats or cruisers.

    Quote: Dart2027
    the fact of victories is no longer denied well

    I never denied victory over the Turks; I denied being proud of them. It is like a professional boxer to be proud of a victory over an underdeveloped schoolboy.

    Quote: Dart2027
    Quote: murriou
    Throughout the WWII, the Turkish-German fleet made unpunished shelling of the Russian coast and the sinking of Russian ships, making commercial shipping at the World Cup impossible for Russia.

    When I managed to escape, because it’s impossible to put a battleship to each post.

    That is, your words about the reliable protection by the Russian fleet of the Russian coast and water area you recognized as lies. Already good laughing

    Quote: Dart2027
    Quote: murriou
    But for some reason the "newcomers" lol they preferred not to use it, and the "battleship" did not have enough speed.

    You do not know, but without a battleship, for destroyers to fight with a cruiser, to put it mildly, is fraught

    1. No, you are not in the know. Even after my prompts, you did not bother to get acquainted with the details of the fights I mentioned.
    2. It was not about a single destroyer, but about a group of destroyers, much stronger than a single light cruiser.
    3. For some reason, sailors of other countries were not afraid to attack even large single destroyers and destroyers. And in many cases they were successful.

    4. The Japanese in the REV sank destroyers even several Russian battleships. At the same time, for all of Tsushima their losses are 3 (in brackets, in words: THREE) destroyers against a whole rather big squadron.

    5. The Germans sank an English battleship and a Japanese cruiser one-on-one, and these destroyers were much weaker than the Novik.

    6. The British sank the battleship Pommern with their destroyers, and repeatedly threatened the large German ships with attacks from the destroyers.

    7. Bulgarians and Greeks in the Balkan War attacked, sometimes drowned or disabled the large warships of the Turks with such vessels that it is even ridiculous to compare them with the "noviks": an old building, less than 100 tons of displacement, 37mm "artillery", torpedoes are also old .e. small, slow, short-range.
    But they were not afraid to attack, and therefore defeated Turkey in the First Balkan War, despite the overwhelming superiority of the Turks.

    8. With the more modern destroyer "Aetos", the Greeks attacked the armored cruiser in the battle at Ellie and put it to flight, even without having torpedoes. not having the slightest chance of success. But the Turks did not know this.

    9. In all these cases, foreign sailors had at their disposal weaker ships than the Novik - but they were not afraid to carry out such a destroyer mission as an attack on large warships, with all this associated risk. Therefore, they have such victories.
    And the Russian "noviks" in WWI have nothing to be proud of.

    10. In the described battle, the destroyers had only to take advantage of their vaunted speed, cut off the cruiser's path to retreat, and delay it for a few minutes until the approach of the "battleship" capable of drowning the light cruiser with a few volleys. Even the risk was small.

    But "shyness in battle * prevented: the Black Sea destroyers of the "novik" type in at least a couple of battles, in 1916 and 1917, for several hours (!) from a safe distance watched the retreat of rather weak prey without trying to impose an open battle on it, and both times this prey missed.

    Quote: Dart2027
    The tasks of the destroyers in the WWII were more modest and consisted in the fight against ships of their class, sudden torpedo attacks, defense against submarines

    That's just about the sudden torpedo attacks and speech. Where are examples of such bold actions on the Russian side? lol
    By the way, I know something similar. But there, too, is not a reason for pride, but for shame.

    And why, in other countries, an attack on large warships was included in the tasks of destroyers and destroyers, and in Russia, according to your knowledge lol - didn’t enter? laughing
    = * =
    1. 0
      5 December 2016 20: 34
      Quote: murriou
      When was the loss near Mukden, and when - the trouble?
      Which troops, specifically, were withdrawn from the theater of operations of the Russian Republic of Nuclear Forces to suppress unrest in the rear? laughing

      What will happen when the only railroad can be cut by groups of trained militants?
      Quote: murriou
      Have you read the story "Mexican" by J. London? If yes - remember, if not - read. There is just about the purchase of rifles by carriages abroad laughing

      "Will five thousand dollars help the cause?"
      Let's start with the fact that this is a work of art, that is, fiction, and end up with a thousand dollars - it will not be enough.
      You are trying so hard to impose on me the answer you want and "not notice" the undesirable ones. Poor, unhappy workers who had no money to live on, but had enough to buy weapons from abroad? Well, like the Maidan in Kiev, for which they collected $ 2000000 a day ... Voluntarily ...
      So who paid for the revolution? What shisha were weapons bought, propaganda produced, revolutionaries lived, etc.?
      Will you continue to evade the answer, or will you admit that they were kept by foreign intelligence services? As well as the current "fighters".
      And by the way, who created Ukraine there?
      Quote: murriou
      I look forward to hearing from you a fascinating story about the personal recruitment by foreign special services of many thousands of participants in peasant uprisings and labor strikes throughout Russia in 1905-1907.

      Sealed wagon of Lenin, a steamboat with a blessing from the American President Trotsky, etc.
      Quote: murriou
      and here the opponent preferred to "overlook" the facts I have cited. Everything is as usual lol

      Yes, given your habit of spreading your messages to make them difficult to read.
      Quote: murriou
      The main front of WWI was the West, the British there invested no less than Russian forces
      In what year was mobilization announced in England?
      Quote: murriou
      In the Baltic, the British with several submarines achieved results comparable to the entire Baltic Fleet, which spent almost the entire war hiding behind minefields
      Moreover, you still have not been able to clearly explain why he had to go somewhere if he was originally planned only for the defense of his coast.
      Quote: murriou
      Yes? Well, prove again that the Russian army in the Russo-Japanese war won, not lost, and in the WWII against Germany it was quite effective, not helpless laughing For the most obstinate clowns, this is the crown clown number - such are the "proofs" of obvious delirium. lol

      There was already a reference to Japanese historians - yes they won, but like King Pierre. The war lasted and that’s it.
      How long did the Germans reach?
      Quote: murriou
      And what is wrong? Victory over the Turks is not a great merit, they were beaten by everyone who feels like it, even Italians, even the unsuccessful as a whole Dardanelles-Gallipoli operation brought the Turks more losses than the advancing Entente.

      That is, you finally recognized, and it began with this that the landing, preparing to capture the straits and Constantinople-Istanbul, would be successful.
      Quote: murriou
      I never denied victory over the Turks; I denied being proud of them. It is like a professional boxer to be proud of a victory over an underdeveloped schoolboy.

      So, RI was still a professional boxer.
      Quote: murriou
      That is, your words about the reliable protection by the Russian fleet of the Russian coast and water area you recognized as lies. Already good laughing

      It’s far from simple that you cannot cover every lighthouse with a battleship, but important objects were protected
      Quote: murriou
      No, you are not in the know. Even after my prompts, you did not bother to get acquainted with the details of the fights I mentioned

      4. The Japanese in the REV sank destroyers even several Russian battleships, but during the Tsushima battle, where Japanese battleships fought with them.
      6. During the battle, Hanover served as the flagship of a detachment of four battleships of the second Fleet Division. On the first day of the battle, before the Pomerania retreat, the other battleships encountered several British battlecruisers commanded by David Beatty. Pomerania was hit by the HMS Indomitable linear cruiser shell. During the night battle on June 1, he was hit by one or two torpedoes from the British destroyer HMS Onslaught, which detonated the detonation of cordite in one of the powder cellars of Pomerania. The explosion broke the ship in half and killed the whole team. Pomerania was the only battleship in the opposing fleets sunk during the battle ..
      Again lying - destroyers fought not alone.
      7. You yourself were crucified about which Turks are bad warriors. By the way, according to the recollections of one of the sailors from Gabin, when they became part of the Turkish Navy, and began to teach the allies, they found that all the torpedoes of the Turkish fleet were faulty.
      5. Too lazy to look, but judging by the previous examples, there will be linden.
      10. Even the risk was low. In addition, the cruiser was much more tenacious than any of them, so most likely it would just drown them.
      Quote: murriou
      That's just about the sudden torpedo attacks and speech. Where are examples of such bold actions on the Russian side? lol

      Suddenly catching someone who sees you perfectly? Original
      Quote: murriou
      She is already gone. But you know about her. Well, at least you might know laughing
      The Russian empire has not been on the map much longer - but it does not dream of you writing up delusional praises about it. lol

      That's just RI lasted longer. In addition, you have not answered the question why the USSR with all its achievements lost? Bureaucracy reborn?
      Quote: murriou
      Pants prevented the great dancer.

      Your favorite expression.
      1. 0
        6 December 2016 20: 27
        Quote: Dart2027
        What will happen when the only railroad can be cut by groups of trained militants?

        Your excuses in trying to justify the shameful loss of RI in the REV are becoming more fun laughing
        1. Before the start of the revolutionary events, the Russian army managed to lose all the battles in a row, except for Mukden, who was also BEFORE the revolutionary events went into hostilities, and could not depend on the events in central Russia in any way.
        In many of the battles, the Japanese advanced and won, even in the minority.
        In almost all battles, except for Liaoyang and a couple of small ones, the Russian losses were even greater than the Japanese, despite the fact that the Russian army usually defended on prepared positions.
        When the fighting was symmetrical, i.e. counter battle and alternate offensive - Russian losses were MANY TIMES: Sandepu - 1,5 times, Shahe - 2 times, Wafangou - 3 times.

        That is, the combat readiness of the Japanese army in the REV was stably and significantly higher than that of the Russian, as well as morale and decisiveness.
        But the Bolsheviks are to blame for this and the revolution that began a year after the start of the REV and after the loss of most of the main battles of the REV. laughing

        2. Now about the railway, fighters and the offensive.
        During the Second World War, the German rear was not like militant groups, there were partisan detachments and armies, and a real rail war - but the Germans did not know your great theories, lol they simply patrolled the railway, and did not postpone any of their attacks because of this.

        There were also subversive groups in our rear, and this also did not affect the course of the war in a significant way. All damage to the railway from saboteurs, bombing, shelling and any other reasons were promptly repaired by special repair crews.
        What prevented tsarist Russia from acting in the event of a real threat?

        3. And the last question - otkeda firewood about the militants?
        About revolutionary groups on the railway - but after the signing of the world - I know, I read in the memoirs of Ignatiev and Denikin.
        But there has never been a single attempt to damage the railway and interfere with transport communications, and there is not a word about groups of militants acting with a similar purpose.
        And you are trying to talk about these groups as if they really existed.
        Where did the information come from? Or is it again your sterile vacuum-spherical theories? laughing
        = * =
      2. 0
        6 December 2016 20: 39
        Quote: Dart2027
        Will you continue to dodge the answer or admit that they sat on the contents of foreign intelligence?

        Once again I repeat the answer "unnoticed" by you, from which I have never eluded: neither one nor the other, but the third, fourth, fifth laughing

        "were on the maintenance" means FULL support from foreign intelligence services, and a LARGE amount of money allocated for this.
        As we remember, the Ukrainian Maidan, which for some reason you are constantly trying to refer to, cost the United States millions of dollars only in OFFICIALLY STATED expenditures "on democracy."
        You could never justify, no matter how hard lol nor the significance of foreign support for the revolution of 1905-1907, nor the significance of the amounts allocated to this.

        And I repeatedly reminded that there were a large number of Russian people. participating in revolutionary events disinterestedly and even giving money. Let it be small. but if you multiply them by tens or hundreds of thousands, a very considerable amount comes out. There were also large receipts from voluntary donations.
        Of course, the text of J. London is a work of art, but it is based on real events, and most importantly - it shows quite clearly how this could be.
        = * =
        1. 0
          6 December 2016 21: 12
          Quote: murriou
          Your excuses in trying to justify the shameful loss of RI in the REV are becoming more fun laughing

          1. It has already been said how many times that in a war of attrition one with more resources will win.
          2. During the Second World War, the Germans had more developed communications than one railway, and how many German plans fell through due to the actions of the partisans?
          3. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A3%D1%85%D1%82%
          D0%BE%D0%BC%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9,_%D0%90%D0%BB
          %D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%B9_%D0%92%D0%BB%D0%B0
          %D0%B4%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%
          D1% 87
          Did not hear? Or do you think that if the authorities didn’t start tidying up the situation, then the actions of the militants would not become more destructive? For the good of the revolution, of course.
          Quote: murriou
          "were on the maintenance" means FULL support from foreign intelligence services, and a LARGE amount of money allocated for this.
          As we remember, the Ukrainian Maidan, which for some reason you are constantly trying to refer to, cost the United States millions of dollars only in OFFICIALLY STATED expenditures "on democracy."
          You could never justify, no matter how hard lol nor the significance of foreign support for the revolution of 1905-1907, nor the significance of the amounts allocated to this.

          Well read for example this
          http://coollib.com/b/289485/read
          And the lack of official expenses does not mean that they were not. Hitler was also funded more than generously. Much more than the Germans themselves could afford.
          Quote: murriou
          And I repeatedly reminded that there were a large number of Russian people. participating in revolutionary events disinterestedly and even giving money. Let it be small. but if you multiply them by tens or hundreds of thousands, a very considerable amount comes out. There were also large receipts from voluntary donations.

          Quote: murriou
          Of course, the text of J. London is a work of art, but it is based on real events, and most importantly - it shows quite clearly how this could be.

          Yeah. Did the poor, unhappy, destitute find money to buy weapons abroad? This is how they earned? I do not deny that there were private donations, only revolutions always require money of a different order.
          By the way, what about Lenin’s sealed train car and a steamboat from the American president for Trotsky? You think they would be given to anyone? Or a ship with weapons from England on the eve of 1905? And given the fact that the weapon still was, it means that he was far from alone. Do you seriously believe that the British counterintelligence would have missed this without an order from above? Or why could a congress of the RSDLP be quietly convened in London and the British government does not express any concern, although before that they had been expelled from several countries?
          Will you continue to dodge the answer or admit that they sat on the contents of foreign intelligence?

          In addition, you have not answered the question why the USSR with all its achievements lost? Bureaucracy reborn? Why was it reborn?
          1. 0
            6 December 2016 21: 44
            Quote: Dart2027
            Well read for example this
            http://coollib.com/b/289485/read

            Discover America laughing
            In the same place, I read by you "not noticed":
            At the same time, a closer analysis of the content of the report shows that quite often Akashi drove the desire to obscure some of his own mistakes and exaggerate achievements. The report also contains errors (especially in assessing the state of the Russian revolutionary movement and in the characteristics of its individual representatives) caused by the lack of awareness of Akashi, who in this part relied heavily on rumors, speculation and other dubious sources of information. For all these reasons, the modern researcher needs to scrupulously double-check the information of the final report of the Japanese colonel, relying on sources independent from him - both official government (materials from the intelligence agencies of different countries, reports from diplomatic, border, customs, etc. services), and coming from opposition and revolutionary camps.


            Quote: Dart2027
            the absence of official expenses does not mean that they were not.

            This means that you have no evidence, only fantasies.
          2. 0
            6 December 2016 21: 49
            Quote: Dart2027
            3. https: //ru.wikipedia.org/wiki / ...

            Your next discovery of America. There are events near Moscow, and after the signing of the Portsmouth Peace, and you are trying to lie about sabotage in the Far East, which led to its signing. laughing
          3. 0
            6 December 2016 21: 51
            Quote: Dart2027
            1. It has already been said how many times that in a war of attrition one with more resources will win.

            RI in 1905 did not have such a MOST important resource as mass support of the population.
            She was in the Second World War in the USSR, she was in Japan in the REV — they won.
      3. 0
        6 December 2016 20: 41
        Quote: Dart2027
        Sealed wagon of Lenin, a steamboat with a blessing from the American President Trotsky, etc.

        In the years 1905-1907 ?! belay lol laughing
        Thanks, have fun again laughing
      4. 0
        6 December 2016 20: 49
        = * =
        Quote: Dart2027
        given your habit of spreading your messages to make them difficult to read.

        Poor thing !!! crying It’s more difficult for you to read my messages than for me to write them ?! laughing

        The forced verbosity of my messages to you, about the most bakery of the bakery, is associated with:
        1. Extremely detailed chewing spell for you lol what normal people would understand perfectly;
        2. Repeated forced repetition for you lol what you are trying hard to "ignore";
        3. I do not hope that you will show honesty instead of pretended stupidity and stop fooling around. You simply have no other way to argue with the real story.
        However, making it difficult for anyone to read my posts is not in my interest.
        I’m just trying to make it difficult for you. Your usual attempts are too arrogant to lie. laughing

        4. Today I tried, especially out of compassion for your clip thinking, to break the entire answer into several short messages, each of which is devoted to one narrow question from the whole pile of nonsense that you, as usual, dumped on me again.

        But I suspect that in them you will not "understand", "will not notice" and "will not master" everything. laughing
        1. 0
          6 December 2016 21: 16
          Quote: murriou
          In the years 1905-1907 ?!

          But what about the fact that it was during another rebellion, the essence is changing?
          Quote: murriou
          The forced verbosity of my messages to you, about the most bakery of the bakery, is associated with:

          Inability to fit everything in one post?
          Quote: murriou
          But I suspect that in them you will not "understand", "will not notice" and "will not master" everything.

          Understand, notice and master the answer to the question why the USSR with all its achievements lost? Bureaucracy reborn? Why was it reborn?
          1. 0
            6 December 2016 21: 27
            Quote: Dart2027
            Quote: murriou
            In the years 1905-1907 ?!

            But what about the fact that it was during another rebellion, the essence is changing?

            1. Your myths and in 1917 had no basis. But discuss it here? You constantly complain that I write too much, and your brains cannot digest so much. Poor thing crying
            2. You do not translate the arrows. What is your evidence about the significance of the participation of foreign intelligence in the events of 1905-1907?

            Quote: Dart2027
            Quote: murriou
            The forced verbosity of my messages to you, about the most bakery of the bakery, is associated with:
            Inability to fit everything in one post?

            You have not mastered a short list of real reasons given by me? I'm sorry again crying
            Quote: Dart2027
            why did the USSR lose with all its achievements? Bureaucracy reborn? Why was it reborn?

            I have already answered many times, I can repeat again: because there was a betrayal.
            And when will your answers be to my questions? wink
      5. 0
        6 December 2016 21: 18
        Quote: Dart2027
        There was already a reference to Japanese historians - yes they won, but like King Pierre.

        1. And what kind of "Japanese historians" did you cite? wink
        All the bakers operate only with a couple or three quotes from ONE book of ONE historian, Prof. Okamoto. laughing

        2. I read this book TOTALLY, unlike you, and repeatedly poked you with my nose at the fact that besides the quotes you pulled out of context, there are a lot of Troubles you.
        I can remind you again, do you want?

        3. Actually, the Japanese losses were MUCH smaller than the Russians in most battles, and in general.

        4. Yes, with the population of Japan three times less than Russia, the significance of these losses for Japan was even more, one and a half times, but:
        - ordinary Japanese were massively inclined to war to a victorious end (the aforementioned Okamoto also confirms this, wipe it off)
        - the victories achieved in the war inspired the Japanese even more, and if the Japanese oligarchs thought about the benefits of the war for them, then the Japanese people DEMANDED the war to a victorious end (and here see, including Okamoto, read it in full - and wipe yourself on every page )

        5. The Russian people, unlike the Japanese, WAS NOT sufficiently motivated to start the war, constant defeats and losses quickly made the mood completely decadent, the continuation of the war was considered undesirable among the vast majority of Russian society.
        Tsushima drove the last nail into the coffin lid for Russian hopes of winning back the shamefully lost war.

        6. The Russian fleet was destroyed even twice in the RPN theater of operations, and the reserves of the Russian fleet of the metropolis were completely exhausted, which meant that under any state of affairs on land, a full-fledged revenge of Russia was impossible, and Japan could not be threatened even in the worst case. than the return of the PIECES of the vast territories seized by them.

        7. The Japanese believed that not protruding the nose from * shyness * lol the Russian grouping of troops in Sinpagai fortified positions numbers about a million people, and that these are elite troops.
        These assumptions forced them to exercise some caution.
        However, with their 300 thousand, they were ready to defend themselves against this elite million!
        In reality, the number of the Russian group reached only half a million, and a significant part of it was the so-called. "spare", i.e. reservists, whose level of training and fighting spirit was below the plinth, as shown by their real participation in the battles of the RYA.

        8. The combat readiness of the Russian army was many times less than the Japanese.

        When the Japanese attacked the prepared Russian positions, which the Japanese did even in a small minority, the losses were usually approximately equal to or in favor of the Japanese.
        Near Mukden, irretrievable Russian losses were 2,06 times greater than irretrievable Japanese losses, according to official (!) Russian (!) Data.

        With symmetrical database maintenance, Russian losses were more than Japanese at times.

        That is, in the event of a Russian attack on the prepared defense of the Japanese — which in the real history of the REV was NEVER, but could be in the event of a revenge — the Russian losses should have been more than Japanese from 3-4 times to an order of magnitude difference.
        In this situation, the Russian offensive would quickly drown in blood.

        And now we expect that the crisp baker will once again “not notice”, “understand”, “fail” and again complain about the “mnogabukaff” - well, do not expect from this public an honest admission of their absurdity laughing
      6. 0
        6 December 2016 21: 40
        Quote: Dart2027
        How long did the Germans reach?

        I answer for dunno: Germans,
        1. having a main front in the west,
        2. retaining its main and best forces there,
        3. significantly inferior to the Russian army in numbers,
        - they threw it back even under these conditions for a considerable distance: they reached Riga and Molodechno, approached Minsk and Brest-Litovsk, Grodno and Bialystok, drove the Russian army out of the Carpathians, Galicia and Poland, etc. - for more details in any primer, see "The Great Retreat", which was so called by the Russians themselves, and not without reason.

        And this is in the auxiliary direction, which was the Eastern Front in the WWI for Germans.
      7. 0
        6 December 2016 21: 56
        Again I remind you of one of the stubbornly "unnoticed" questions you:
        Which troops, specifically, were withdrawn from the theater of operations of the Russian Republic of Nuclear Forces to suppress unrest in the rear?
        I will add: what troops were at least scheduled for sending to the theater of operations of the Russian Academy of Sciences, but were detained in Russia in connection with the revolution? WHEN was this decision made?
      8. 0
        6 December 2016 22: 33
        Quote: Dart2027
        Quote: murriou
        In the Baltic, the British with several submarines achieved results comparable to the entire Baltic Fleet, which spent almost the entire war hiding behind minefields

        Moreover, you still have not been able to clearly explain why he had to go somewhere if he was originally planned only for the defense of his coast.

        1. I poke yours once again * face * in comparing the effectiveness of the British and Russian actions in the Baltic, persistently by you "unnoticed" laughing
        2. Are you completely illiterate in the issues you are discussing, or are you pretending to be so convincing? lol laughing
        Battleships are NOT needed for coastal defense. Their task is to fight for the capture and retention of dominance at sea. In this capacity, Russian "battleships" were NEVER used, because by the time of their commissioning they were hopelessly behind their counterparts in developed countries.
        But why did they plan to apply them?
        So, once again you are lying.
        3. For the defense of the coast, the Russian "battleships" were also not used, and also because of their worthlessness, at a terribly expensive cost.
        4. For coastal defense, there were much cheaper classes of ships: gunboats, coastal defense battleships and what was actually used in WWII.

        Quote: Dart2027
        That is, you finally recognized, and it began with this that the landing, preparing to capture the straits and Constantinople-Istanbul, would be successful.

        That is, you are Lying again, trying to distort my words.
        The landing on the Bosphorus was stupidly planned, and doomed to failure for a number of reasons, which I have listed in detail with explanations that are available even for very, very dumbasses.
        But not for you laughing - You, as usual, "did not notice" and "did not master" them laughing

        Quote: Dart2027
        So, RI was still a professional boxer.

        NO.
        If we describe the situation in the WWI in such analogies, then RI was a yard bully who constantly snatches off adult athletes in the face, but is proud of the ability to take breakfast from teenage schoolchildren.

        Quote: Dart2027
        Quote: murriou
        That is, your words about the reliable protection by the Russian fleet of the Russian coast and water area you recognized as lies. Already good laughing
        It’s far from simple that you cannot cover every lighthouse with a battleship, but important objects were protected

        Yes, you can’t hide every lighthouse, and every ship, and every major radio node lol sort of defeated by the Germans on Fidonisi Island, and so on.
        Translated into Russian, again:
        That is, your words about the reliable protection by the Russian fleet of the Russian coast and water area you recognized as lies. Already good laughing
      9. 0
        7 December 2016 11: 52
        Quote: murriou
        No, you are not in the know. Even after my prompts, you did not bother to get acquainted with the details of the fights I mentioned

        Well now - finally! - bothered ... It seems as though lol
        But if the facts are against your myths, then the worse for the facts laughing

        Quote: Dart2027
        4. The Japanese in the REV sank destroyers even several Russian battleships, but during the Tsushima battle, where Japanese battleships fought with them.

        ..and further everywhere arguments in the spirit that destroyers did not usually fight alone.

        However, what are you reading? In both cases of cowardly behavior of "noviks" I cited, on the Russian side there was a whole battleship and FOUR powerful destroyers, on the German side there was one light (!) Cruiser with an unfavorable state of ship vehicles.

        The task of the Russian destroyers was incomparably simpler and safer than in all the cases I have cited, the task of sailors on destroyers of other countries: to show their vaunted speed, to cut off the cruiser's path to retreat and tie it in battle for a short time until a battleship capable of sinking light cruiser in several volleys.

        However, decisive actions in the REV and WWII were completely uncharacteristic of the Russian fleet. Almost all the battles in which the Russian sailors showed heroism, or even courage, were imposed on them by the enemy, and not committed on their own initiative.
        The only exception I know of is the battle of the cruisers of the Vladivostok detachment in the Korea Strait, during the attempt to break through the 1TOE in the Yellow Sea. But even there the path to the retreat of the cruisers was first cut off by the Japanese, and the battle itself was lost dry, "Rurik" died heroically, but uselessly.

        All WWI battles with the participation of "noviks" were either an attack on the obviously weakest enemy, in the victory over which there was not the slightest honor, or flight from a stronger one, no more honorable, or, as in the above cases, "noviks" * shy * hid behind a more powerful, but not fast enough ship, as a result shamefully missed prey, which was rather easy for them, even without the support of the "battleship".

        Quote: Dart2027
        Again lying - destroyers fought not alone.

        You are lying. I gave examples of both joint and solo actions of destroyers / destroyers, but you "did not notice" them.
        I can bring it again, it’s easy for me bully

        Quote: Dart2027
        7. You yourself were crucified about which Turks are bad warriors.

        Yes. But when, from the Turkish side, there is a quite solid battle armored ship, and from the Greek or Bulgarian side - a flimsy boat, the performance characteristics of which I brought (and you, as usual, "did not notice" them laughing ) - such an attack is certainly a feat.

        The Russian sailors did not make anything comparable. On the contrary, they often shied away from battle in a situation incomparably more advantageous for themselves.

        Quote: Dart2027
        By the way, according to the recollections of one of the sailors from Gabin, when they became part of the Turkish Navy, and began to teach the allies, they found that all the torpedoes of the Turkish fleet were faulty.

        Yes, it happened. And the Greeks on the "Aetos" alone, in broad daylight, attacked a Turkish powerful armored cruiser, generally having no torpedoes with them, and if the Turks were even a little braver, they would have sunk the brave destroyer with several volleys, and the Greeks without torpedoes could have at least all their artillery ammunition to release, for "Messudie" it was like a pellet to an elephant.

        Feat? Feat.
        Was there something similar with the Russian seamen in the REV and PMV? It was not even close comparable.

        Quote: Dart2027
        5. Too lazy to look, but judging by the previous examples, there will be linden.

        "I have not read, but I condemn" laughing
        I remind you that you were too lazy to read:
        5. The Germans sank an English battleship and a Japanese cruiser one-on-one, and these destroyers were much weaker than the Novik.

        This is the sinking by the destroyer S-90 of the cruiser "Takachiho", about the sinking of which Rudnev lied,
        and the sinking of the battleship Goliath by the destroyer Muavinet.
        In your favor, the attack was carried out at night in both of these cases. If you unearthed this yourself, I would applaud. But you didn’t use your chance because of laziness and illiteracy.

        However, even at night, neither the "noviks" in WWI, nor any other Russian destroyers at the beginning of the 20th century even tried to perform such operations, while in other countries this was quite common. All the same * shyness in battle * constantly defeated Russian sailors in the REV and WWI.

        Quote: Dart2027
        In addition, the cruiser was much more tenacious than any of them, so most likely it would just drown them.

        I repeat once again what you so diligently and persistently "do not notice" for the umpteenth time: laughing
        1. There were four "noviks", they surpassed the enemy in all respects: total displacement, number of barrels, weight of a single and minute salvo ...
        The maximum that the Germans could count on was to sink at least one of the destroyers, and most likely they would not have time: the 105-mm guns were weak for this, the 150-mm gun required a lot of time to reload. Exchanging a destroyer for a cruiser would certainly be beneficial for the Russian fleet, but ... again * shyness in battle * lol

        2. This is even in the case of four "noviks" WITHOUT support against one "Breslau" - with decisive actions of the Russian destroyers, the cruiser would be doomed in any case.
        But in the battles described, each time a quasi-battleship appeared nearby, and not even just close - but at a distance from which it could fire at the cruiser!

        That is, if the teams of the "noviks" behaved like combat sailors, and not like cowards, and would force the cruiser to delay, cut off his escape route, then in a matter of minutes the "empress" would come within effective fire range, and single hits by 12 "shells would have been enough for Breslau. During this time, the Germans would not have had time to sink even one destroyer.

        Quote: Dart2027
        Quote: murriou
        Pants prevented the great dancer.
        Your favorite expression.

        What to do - it very well describes your attempts to justify the constant disgrace of tsarist Russia.
        1. 0
          7 December 2016 21: 57
          Quote: murriou
          and repeatedly poked you with his nose into the fact that besides the quotes you pulled out of the context there are a lot of Nasty things to you.
          What, from the point of view of the Japanese, did the RI provoke a war? I know. By the way, from their point of view, the Kuril Islands are the same of them.
          Quote: murriou
          ordinary Japanese were massively set to war to a victorious end (the aforementioned Okamoto also confirms this, wipe it off)
          The aforementioned Okamoto also claims that the government was panicky afraid that the real state of affairs at the front would become well known.
          Quote: murriou
          and a significant part of it was the so-called. "spare", i.e. reservists
          But only at the same time the number of machine guns and artillery increased significantly. Yes, and the Japanese had reservists.
          Quote: murriou
          Discover America
          But the fact that the revolutionaries, in principle, maintained contact with the enemies waging war with their country, do not bother you?
          Quote: murriou
          You do not translate arrows. What is your evidence about the significance of the participation of foreign intelligence in the events of 1905-1907
          Okay, one more time. What about Lenin’s sealed train car and a steamboat from the American president for Trotsky? Yes, I remember that it was 1917, but the fact itself - you think they would have been given to anyone? Or a ship with weapons from England on the eve of 1905? And given the fact that the weapon still was, it means that he was far from alone. Do you seriously believe that the British counterintelligence would have missed this without an order from above? Or why could a congress of the RSDLP be quietly convened in London and the British government does not express any concern, although before that they had been expelled from several countries? Will you continue to dodge the answer or admit that they sat on the contents of foreign intelligence?
          Quote: murriou
          Which troops, specifically, were withdrawn from the theater of operations of the Russian Republic of Nuclear Forces to suppress unrest in the rear?
          Quote: Dart2027
          What will happen when a single railway MAY BE CUT TO by groups of trained militants?
          By the way, there were riots on the CER, it is strange that such a fan of the revolution did not hear about this. From November 1905 to January 1906, Siberia and the Far East were practically cut off from the rest of Russia. If military operations were to take place then this would be very fraught.
          That is, I am right and you have nothing corny to say in essence?
          Quote: Dart2027
          I answer for the dummies: the Germans ... And this is in the auxiliary direction, which was the Eastern Front in the WWI for the Germans.
          The fact that Germany fought alone on the Western Front, but in addition to the Germans there were AB and German Turks, and again we don’t take Turks into account? And how many times did the Kaiser ask the king for peace?
          Quote: murriou
          Battleships are NOT needed for coastal defense. Their task is the struggle to seize and maintain dominance at sea.
          When their number is approximately equal to the number of battleships of the enemy. If not, then their task is to defend themselves so as not to be exposed to the blow of the strongest enemy. So, you are lying again.
          Quote: murriou
          The landing on the Bosphorus was stupidly planned, and doomed to failure for a number of reasons, which I have listed in detail with explanations that are available even for very, very dumbasses.
          That is, when the Russians beat the Turks, then this is nonsense, because they are Turks, but when it comes to a decisive victory, is this impossible? They completely lied. The landing would be successful because the only reason you could come up with is that, they say, the Turks would shoot at the landing ships and couldn’t say anything intelligible that these ships would hide behind the Black Sea Fleet, which, according to your own words, was an order of magnitude stronger than Turkish.
          Quote: murriou
          Translated into Russian, once again: that is, your words about the reliable protection by the Russian fleet of the Russian coast and water area you recognized as a lie.
          Translated into Russian, once again: By no means, you just can’t cover every lighthouse with a battleship, but important objects were protected. And the landing would also be under guard.
          Quote: murriou
          However, what are you reading? In both cases of cowardly behavior of "noviks" cited by me, on the Russian side there was a whole battleship and FOUR powerful destroyers
          It is one thing when destroyers attack an enemy already beaten by more powerful ships, and it’s quite another when they must stop a fresh enemy much larger and stronger than themselves.
          Quote: murriou
          You are lying. I gave examples of both joint and solo actions of destroyers / destroyers, but you "did not notice" them.
          You are lying. I have looked at a few of your examples.
          Quote: murriou
          Yes. But when, from the Turkish side, there is a quite solid battle armored ship, and from the Greek or Bulgarian side - a flimsy boat, the performance characteristics of which I brought (and you, as usual, "did not notice" them laughing ) - such an attack is certainly a feat.
          Feat. Only in most cases to blame on the obviously strongest enemy is suicide, and absolutely senseless.
          Quote: murriou
          All WWI battles with the participation of "noviks" were either an attack on the obviously weakest enemy, in the victory over which there was not the slightest honor, or a flight from a stronger
          The destroyers were created in order to attack the weakest and flee from the strongest.
          Quote: murriou
          In your favor, the attack was carried out at night in both of these cases. If you unearthed this yourself, I would applaud. But you didn’t use your chance because of laziness and illiteracy.
          So what's the problem? These were nightly attacks on an enemy unprepared for battle - the pursuit of a cruiser is slightly different.
          Quote: murriou
          1. There were four "noviks", they surpassed the enemy in all respects: total displacement, number of barrels, weight of a single and minute salvo ...
          What the Germans could count on was to calmly drive at full speed from the battleship by firing off from the destroyers. And since the then ships of rank 1-2 were much more tenacious than the current ones, then the matter would have ended with the drowning of a couple of destroyers and a wrecked cruiser. If everything were solved by the mentioned TTX articles, then all the fleets of the world would not strive to build expensive and huge battleships, but in a huge amount every detail was riveted.
          Quote: murriou
          I have already answered many times, I can repeat again: because there was a betrayal.
          Why did it happen? Not only Gorbachev betrayed, but the whole system.
          Yes, because the idea of ​​communism is a utopia. You can believe in creation, you can in evolution, you can in aliens - but this does not change the fact that a person by nature is not the embodiment of all virtues and there is nothing to be done about it. And the fact that you are constantly trying to pour mud on the Republic of Ingushetia does not make the achievements that were achieved in the USSR neither more serious, nor less serious problems that also accompanied its existence.
          1. 0
            9 December 2016 07: 56
            Quote: Dart2027
            at the same time, the number of machine guns and artillery increased significantly.

            Yes, it has increased - but in the Japanese army there was also an increase, and much more significant.

            At the same time, the Japanese had not only machine guns bought in France, but also machine guns captured from the Russians.

            And the Japanese machine guns were used much more rationally: not like the Russians, with large batteries, in which the machine guns were assembled in one narrow section, exposing the rest of the front, but rationally distributed among the infantry units / subunits.

            With guns, by the way, the same picture.
            Not only did a significant part of the Russian guns be captured by the Japanese, and then used in battle against the former owners - the reverse cases are unknown to me.
            It is much more important that only in 2 battles of the RJV did Russian field artillery operate from closed positions, and only the second time - successfully, the first was only in May 1904. and was of the nature of the first (!) experiment (!!).
            In the remaining battles, Russian guns were exposed to open positions, and the Japanese, who had mastered firing from closed positions already in the 1894-95 war, easily or quickly suppressed or destroyed Russian artillery.
            In addition, the Japanese used OF grenades with high efficiency against light field fortifications, and the Russians, in the light of the then French theories, used only shrapnel, against the fortifications it was absolutely ineffective.
            Ignatiev: "the frozen adobe walls, not to mention the stone buildings and shrines, reliably protected the Japanese not only from our rifle fire, but also from shrapnel fire. It was only possible to smash them with grenades, and our artillery sages, assigning field weapons for fighting in the open field, supplied them with shrapnel alone. "

            Kuropatkin: "The Japanese had a significant advantage over us in their shell with a strong explosive effect, in numerous mountain artillery, in machine guns, in an abundance of explosives, means of protection and destruction (wire, mines, hand grenades)."

            Now look at the numbers and facts.
            In the battle on the river. Yalu, which is also called Tyurenchenskoye, the Japanese did not have machine guns at all, the Russians had 8 machine guns, and all of them, like almost half of the artillery equipment, were captured by the Japanese when the Russian army fled in panic, bearing 5 times from the enemy’s frontal attack (!) More losses than the enemy suffered.
            Contrary to all the basics of tactics, which assumed a strictly inverse ratio of losses with adequate action by the defenders.

            There were 62 machine guns in Port Arthur, almost all of them went to the Japanese (some were damaged, but most likely repaired).

            Near Mukden, the Japanese already had more than 200 machine guns, of which they lost 10 damaged (possibly with subsequent repairs) - but they did not give a single one to the Russians.
            The Russians had 56 machine guns - 3 times less than the Japanese, and a significant part of these machine guns was, if not destroyed, then lost during the stampede of the Russian army, that is, the Japanese got it again.

            Now try lol to think what the role of these machine guns would be in a Russian attack on the prepared defensive positions of the Japanese IF THERE were such.

            Perhaps the final seizure of Russian troops in fortified positions for several months, in complete passivity, was explained including in that the picture of a possible attack against the Japanese was much more realistic there — huge losses with practically zero results — than you are now.
          2. 0
            9 December 2016 08: 12
            Quote: Dart2027
            riots on the CER were strange that such a fan of the revolution did not hear about it. From November 1905 to January 1906, Siberia and the Far East were practically cut off from the rest of Russia. If military operations were to take place then this would be very fraught.

            Sure sure. From November 1905 to January 1906
            Did you yourself read what I’m broadcasting here? lol

            Now take a look at the calendar.
            The last major land battle of the RJW was near Mukden in February (!) 1905. The supply of Russian troops then and later went unhindered - but until the signing of the peace, these troops sat quietly behind fortified positions, like mice under a broom, and were afraid to stick their nose out while the Japanese masterfully mastered Manchuria and captured Sakhalin.

            The world was signed on August 23 (September 5).
            2-3 months before the unrest on the CER and six months after the battle of Mukden.
            So here, as usual, you got into a puddle: about 9 months passed from Mukden to riots on the railway, during which no problems with the railway prevented the advance of the Russian army.

            For comparison. The Japanese went through the entire land war in the REV, from Yalu to Mukden, in 10 months laughing
          3. 0
            9 December 2016 08: 13
            Quote: Dart2027
            You are constantly trying to muddy RI

            I constantly bring FACTS.
            If these facts are not to the credit of RI and damn disgusting to the bakers - then this is not my fault. laughing
          4. 0
            9 December 2016 08: 22
            Quote: Dart2027
            But the fact that the revolutionaries, in principle, maintained contact with the enemies waging war with their country, do not bother you?

            Are you confused by the White Guards who collaborated with Hitler?
            Does it bother you that ALL the White Guard armies were supplied by the interventionists? Including the same Japanese and Germans, including?
            Does it bother you that Kolchak officially swore allegiance to the British crown?
            Does it bother you that Wrangel arrived in Crimea in an English warship and was leaving in French again with a military ship?
            Something I don’t remember for you such embarrassment laughing

            Of course, you can tell me that Japan and England were allies of the Entente RI in WWI laughing
            Are you not embarrassed that a significant part of the failures of the Republic of Ingushetia's foreign policy, at the same time, without a shadow of embarrassment you explain by "constant English Russophobia"? lol
          5. 0
            9 December 2016 08: 35
            Quote: Dart2027
            In addition to the Germans, were there AVs on the WF and do not take the Turks into account again?

            No. You do not take into account that Austria-Hungary, in addition to the front, fought with Russia on the Balkan and Italian fronts.
            You "forget" that the Turks suffered more losses in the Gallipoli operation than in the overwhelming majority of battles on the Caucasian front.
            You forget about the existence of the Syrian and Messopotamian fronts, on which the territorial advance of the British was more significant than at the same time among the Russians.

            Or are you trying to inflate to heavenly heights the importance of the Turkish "corps" (numbering about half of the staff) in the battles in Galicia? laughing
            Then do not forget about the participation in the battles in the Baltic of British submarines and English submariners, who, despite their very small numbers, have achieved exactly the same results in large warships as the entire Baltic Fleet (with mine operations exclusively wink ), and for transport - many times more laughing
          6. 0
            9 December 2016 08: 51
            Quote: Dart2027
            That is, when the Russians beat the Turks, then this is nonsense, because they are Turks, but when it comes to a decisive victory, is this impossible? They completely lied. The landing would be successful because the only reason you could come up with is that, they say, the Turks would shoot at the landing ships and couldn’t say anything intelligible that these ships would hide behind the Black Sea Fleet, which, according to your own words, was an order of magnitude stronger than Turkish.

            Now, if you call you stupid, then you will be indignant and write complaints lol laughing

            And if you write one and the same thing every so often, and you constantly “don't notice”, then “don't understand”, then “don't remember” - what else can you call it? laughing

            For the most talented - I repeat what was written on December 1, already a week ago:
            Quote: murriou
            I sympathize with your illiteracy and willingly help!
            1. Minefields.
            Which "Russian geniuses" planned to shoot completely overnight, having neither comparable experience of operations of this scale even during the day, nor sufficient experience in night clearance.

            In reality, if someone is not smarter than "Russian geniuses" and needs an explanation of such simple things: already at this stage, significant losses are very likely, and above all - a complete unmasking of the entire operation by the very first blast.

            2. Coastal defense.
            Which the Russian "geniuses" considered insignificant on the grounds that during the unsuccessful shelling from a distance of 120 cables, when the Russian shells barely reached the lighthouse advanced far ahead, the fortifications did not respond.

            In reality, having a guaranteed effective distance of about 12-15 km, these batteries were guaranteed to cover the "landing" ships and the landing party itself even before landing.

            3. "Goeben", who was declared by the "brilliant naval commander" Kolchak to have completely lost its combat capability, from the explosion of brilliantly placed mines on allegedly Kolchak.
            In reality, "Goeben" in 1916 did not receive any explosions or other damage, it was fully operational.
            Being in a closed position, he could absolutely safely grind the entire landing force even on the approach to the shore, and if the Black Sea Fleet ships were approaching the reach of his GK (up to 100-120 cabin.), And cut into them.
            And unrequitedly, being hidden from view.

            4. Battleship "Torgut Reis" of the "Brandenburg" class, which during the Dardanelles operation forced even much more serious Entente forces than the Black Sea Fleet to stay out of the reach of its guns (15-16 km).
            Being just near the Bosphorus, the battleship also had time to connect to his defense - and he alone was enough to cover the entire landing, of course.
            Shipped too close to the ships, if such * adventurers * are found, he could also crash.

            5. Even the smallest warships located near the Bosphorus, also had the opportunity to join the extermination of the landing troughs and landing, if any has time to land on the coast.

            That is, I listed several reasons for you at once, each of which is enough for the previously guaranteed failure of this adventure. Few?

            I repeat what was written right there a week ago, on December 2, after which you evaporated from that thread of the discussion without answering: lol
            Quote: murriou
            Quote: Dart2027
            You already decide whether the RI fleet is stronger than the Turkish or not?

            You, alas, are a complete zero in matters of tactics and strategy, in which you constantly climb to disgrace. crying
            Spell for the most * talented *.

            1. The strength of the army and navy depends not only on the number of people, guns and guns - according to which the advantage was undoubted and significant among the Russian army throughout the WWII, and the Russian fleet at the World Cup.

            2. The result also depends on the ability and determination to use these forces - with which Russia had a complete failure in the REE and WWI.

            3. The result also depends on the conditions under which the battle is taking place, and with which it happened in different ways.

            4. For example, in the Gulf of Riga, most of the time, the battleship Slava and small ships, which arrived late to Tsushima, held the defense. the forces of the Russian fleet there were many times weaker than the German in every attempt of a German offensive.

            However, the ability to conduct corrected fire from a closed position protected by the coastline allowed Slava and small ships to successfully hold the defense for about 3 years.

            5. During the Dardanelles operation, Turkish forces at sea were even more significantly inferior to the forces of the Entente.

            However, even there the ability to conduct corrected fire from a closed position allowed the battleship Torgut Reis (about which the "Russian geniuses", when drawing up the "brilliant" plan for the Bosphorus landing operation, managed to forget altogether! Laughing) to keep the entire available fleet of the Entente at a distance no closer than its reach main guns.

            6. In the case of an attack by the Russian forces on the Bosphorus, the Turks have an advantage, although according to the bare calculation of forces (the only available for your abstract theorizing, even then not to the full extent) they are even there to a considerable loss.

            However, in the Bosphorus "Torgut Reis" and "Goeben" could fire from closed positions, with effective adjustment of fire, and the Russian Black Sea Fleet did not have such an opportunity.
            Therefore, the Russian forces in the Bosphorus did not have the slightest chance of success.

            Even so, in the explanation spelled out for the most talented, is it clear?

            How do you understand the reception? laughing
          7. 0
            9 December 2016 08: 56
            Quote: Dart2027
            but important objects were protected.

            Sure sure. lol
            Russian cities on the Black Sea coast are not considered important objects.
            Oil fields are not considered an important object.
            A large radio center on Zmein Island, aka Fidonisi, defeated with impunity by the Germans under the very nose of the Black Sea Fleet, is not considered an important target.

            So then what is considered an important object worthy of protection by the Black Sea Fleet? Base of the Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol? laughing
          8. 0
            9 December 2016 09: 05
            Quote: Dart2027
            how many times did the kaiser ask the king for peace?

            Not once, as far as I know.

            Or are you trying, as is customary with the baker, to consider the correspondence between the king and the Kaiser as requests for peace before the start of the WWII? Then you either read it inattentively or interpreted it in a strange way laughing

            And the Germans' requests for peace were indeed, at the end of the WWII. Only they were addressed not to the tsar, who was then no longer there, and not to Russia, weak and still deciding nothing, but to the owners of the Entente - the British and French.
          9. 0
            9 December 2016 09: 46
            Quote: Dart2027
            Will you continue to dodge the answer or admit that they sat on the contents of foreign intelligence?

            "Will you continue to evade the answer, or admit that you are mentally inadequate and mentally disabled?" laughing

            Something I don’t believe in your confessions, even after repeatedly exposing your historical illiteracy and problems with basic logic. And why should I recognize you imposing nonsense on me? lol

            In this case, I do not shirk the answer, as you are lying.
            You received the answer immediately, and more than once, as soon as you started repeating rotten myths 100 years ago - but since these were answers that were unpleasant to you, you "did not notice" them and continue to LIE, as if there were no answers.

            Quote: Dart2027
            How is it with the sealed wagon of Lenin

            Exactly the same as almost 100 years ago laughing
            1. There were several dozen citizens of Russia who arrived in it through Germany during the WWII. For the sake of Lenin alone, no one ordered a car.
            2. In particular, there were representatives of various parties, not only of a revolutionary nature, but among the revolutionaries - not only the Bolsheviks.
            3. Including, in a similar car, Comrade Milyukov arrived, whom Milyukov himself met on the platform.
            If anyone believes that Milyukov was a Bolshevik and revolutionary, admit it right away laughing
            4. If anyone claims that in 1917 Lenin was liable for military service, and on this basis was subject to arrest / captivity / deportation, as many crystal bakers like to repeat, also admit right away that you don’t know how to read the primer and count even at the initial level school laughing
            More questions? laughing
          10. 0
            9 December 2016 13: 07
            Quote: Dart2027
            It is one thing when destroyers attack an enemy already beaten by more powerful ships, and it’s quite another when they must stop a fresh enemy much larger and stronger than themselves.

            Well, give me examples when Russian destroyers in the REV and WWI attacked even the battered large warships of the enemy. Huh?
            When did the Russian destroyers decide on night attacks of large warships and formations?
            When did the Russian destroyers attack the enemy at his base?
            When were they generally capable of any risky operations of their own free will / initiative, rather than being trapped in a corner by an adversary?

            Or try to explain why in such situations during the period from REV to WWII, destroyers / destroyers of many other countries - Japanese, German, English, Greek, Bulgarian, even Italian and Turkish, and whose not-so-yet - only Russian, decided to take a risky attack sailors ALWAYS interfered with doing this * shyness in battle * lol
            1. +1
              9 December 2016 19: 38
              Quote: murriou
              Perhaps the final seizure of Russian troops in fortified positions for several months, in complete passivity, was explained including in that the picture of a possible attack against the Japanese was much more realistic there — huge losses with practically zero results — than you are now.

              “Few people now believe that Japan was devoid of the fruits of impending victories. The opposite opinion prevails. Many believe that Japan was already exhausted by the end of May, and that only the conclusion of peace saved her from collapse or total defeat in a clash with Russia. ”
              (Tyler Dennett, "Roosevelt and the Russo-Japanese War")
              Have you complained that when they talk about the exhaustion of Japan, you refer to one work? Here is another link for you. A clear explanation of why, with such super-duper superiority, Japan quickly restrained its appetites, when it realized that RI could continue the war, do you still haven't?
              Quote: murriou
              Sure sure. From November 1905 to January 1906
              The world was signed on August 23 (September 5).

              I know that only the beginning of global unrest was HF, but it was a little earlier. And their mass and organized character spoke well to whom the incident was beneficial.
              Quote: murriou
              Are you confused by the White Guards who collaborated with Hitler? Does it bother you that ALL the White Guards ...

              And I never denied this or justified them. But this does not change the fact that when the Bolsheviks came to power, they also entered into a conspiracy with the enemies, so in this sense there is no difference between them.
              Quote: murriou
              allowed the battleship Torgut Flight

              You yourself gave examples of the fact that the Turkish fleet was, to put it mildly, not the most combat-ready, and that the victory of the Republic of Ingushetia over Turkey was simply the beating of babies. Not tired of contradicting yourself? How do you understand the reception?
              Quote: murriou
              So then what is considered an important object worthy of protection by the Black Sea Fleet? Base of the Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol?

              Sevastopol was bombed in 1914, before RI and Turkey declared war on each other, and on the second attempt to attack the Crimea, Gabin escaped from the Russian battleship. In addition to this unfortunate island of Snake, there was nothing special to boast of.
              Quote: murriou
              3. Including, in a similar car, Comrade Milyukov arrived, whom Milyukov himself met on the platform. If anyone believes that Milyukov was a Bolshevik and revolutionary, admit it right away

              The very Milyukov, who later wrote that history will curse them as destroyers of RI? Or are you not aware that this audience overthrew the tsar by starting the process of the collapse of the country, in which Milyukov himself was very famously noted? More questions?
              Quote: murriou
              Well, give me examples when Russian destroyers in the REV and WWI attacked even the battered large warships of the enemy. Huh?

              Did they often have such an opportunity?
              Quote: murriou
              Or try to explain why in such situations during the period from the REV to the WWII the destroyers / destroyers of many other countries decided on a risky attack - Japanese, German, English, Greek, Bulgarian, even Italian and Turkish, and whose only

              Decided on their own free will / initiative, or being pressed into a corner by the enemy? Do not want to clarify?
              Quote: murriou
              No. You do not take into account that Austria-Hungary, in addition to the front, fought with Russia on the Balkan and Italian fronts.

              And where was she, how many troops, and what losses did she suffer?
              Quote: murriou
              You "forget" that the Turks suffered more losses in the Gallipoli operation than in the overwhelming majority of battles on the Caucasian front.

              After which the British and their allies escaped, having been defeated. On the sea, things were not very good for them, but on land the Turks could still do something. But how many times did the Turks beat the Russians? Answer finally? Or do you admit that RI fought better on land than England?
              Quote: murriou

              You forget about the existence of the Syrian and Messopotamian fronts, on which the territorial advance of the British was more significant than at the same time among the Russians.

              And what forces opposed them?
              Quote: murriou
              At the same time, I do not at all shirk the answer, as you are lying. You received the answer immediately, and more than once, as soon as you started repeating rotten myths 100 years ago - but since these were answers that were unpleasant to you, you "did not notice" them and continue to LIE, as if there were no answers.

              Okay, one more time. A ship with arms from England on the eve of 1905? And given the fact that the weapon still was, it means that he was far from alone. Do you seriously believe that the British counterintelligence would have missed this without an order from above? Or why could a congress of the RSDLP be quietly convened in London and the British government does not express any concern, although before that they had been expelled from several countries? Will you continue to dodge the answer or admit that they sat on the contents of foreign intelligence?
              Will you not argue that the idea of ​​communism is a utopia?
              1. 0
                9 December 2016 21: 18
                = * =
                Quote: Dart2027
                You yourself gave examples of the fact that the Turkish fleet was, to put it mildly, not the most combat-ready, and that the victory of the Republic of Ingushetia over Turkey was simply the beating of babies. Not tired of contradicting yourself?

                Still, you are very, very, very similar to ... You understand, right? Straight to indistinguishability lol laughing
                How many times have I given you an explanation, chewed before your lol understanding the topic, and as many times as you are trying to ignore it. or in fact it is not available to you.

                In any case, don’t get into better matters of tactics and strategy, you don’t understand nichrome in them and constantly make yourself a laughing stock.

                You are also VERY similar to an underdeveloped boy who is trying to play chess, and is trying to get the grandmaster to set forth an absolute scale for the value of pieces.

                The grandmaster patiently, over and over again, tries to convince the boy that a conveniently located knight is stronger than a queen, and a cornered rook, although a heavy piece, is inferior in real strength to a well-developed "light" bishop.

                In response, the boy, completely in your style, stupidly repeats: "But isn't the rook stronger than the bishop? Isn't the knight weaker than the queen?", Meaning chess only at the level of single pieces in a vacuum laughing

                So here. The Russian fleet at its base is many times stronger than the Turkish fleet if this fleet were close to this base.

                But at the same time, in the Bosphorus Strait, the entire Black Sea Fleet is not able to prevent the Turkish fleet and coastal fortifications from destroying the entire Russian landing force in a matter of minutes.

                That is, if the Russian landing ships SUDDENLY break through the powerful minefields, which the Russian staff "geniuses" were going to clear overnight, having nothing close to the experience of such operations.

                And there is no contradiction in this, except in your dogmatic and abstract-minded brains.
                How do you understand the reception? laughing

                Quote: Dart2027
                In addition to this unfortunate island of Snake, there was nothing special to boast of.

                So, you recognized Island Zmeinyy with its radio station as an important object worthy of protection and not received from the Black Sea Fleet. Not even six months have passed laughing
                It’s better to tell right away how much time and poking you need about your * face *, so that you also recognize coastal Russian cities and oil fields as such an object? lol
                So that you acknowledge that the German-Turkish fleet was able to paralyze Russian commercial and postal shipping on the Black Sea, and that this also had sufficient significance?
                = * =
              2. 0
                9 December 2016 21: 21
                = * =
                Quote: Dart2027
                Quote: murriou
                3. Including, in a similar car, Comrade Milyukov arrived, whom Milyukov himself met on the platform. If anyone believes that Milyukov was a Bolshevik and revolutionary, admit it right away

                The very Milyukov, who later wrote that history will curse them as destroyers of RI?

                Yes, that one. Who at that time, if you are not aware, was not anyone, but a recognized parliamentarian, leader and founder of the Constitutional Democratic Party ("Cadets"), a member of the Provisional Government, and Minister of Foreign Affairs.

                Quote: Dart2027
                Quote: murriou
                Well, give me examples when Russian destroyers in the REV and WWI attacked even the battered large warships of the enemy. Huh?

                Did they often have such an opportunity?

                In other countries, destroyers sought and found these opportunities, and sometimes created them.
                I gave examples.
                In the Russian Empire, destroyers fled from such opportunities.
                I gave examples.

                You never gave me examples of the initiative of the Russian fleet, and its courage on its own initiative, and not on the initiative of the enemy, who drove the Russian ships into a hopeless situation, no matter how hard you tried.

                You could not give good reasons for such a fundamental difference between the Russian destroyers and the destroyers of other countries, mentioned by me, too.

                Well, you yourself understood, yes? lol

                Quote: Dart2027
                Quote: murriou
                Or try to explain why in such situations during the period from the REV to the WWII the destroyers / destroyers of many other countries decided on a risky attack - Japanese, German, English, Greek, Bulgarian, even Italian and Turkish, and whose only
                Decided on their own free will / initiative, or being pressed into a corner by the enemy? Do not want to clarify?

                If you yourself were not able to, at my prompts, find important for you, and not mentioned by me. details - sympathize, by the way, - crying - yes, I’ll clarify: in ALL the cases I cited, the brave attacking behavior of foreign crews of destroyers / destroyers was their own conscious choice.
                I ignored forced behavior.
                The Russian crews did not notice such behavior in the REV and WWI.
                = * =
              3. 0
                9 December 2016 21: 36
                = * =
                Quote: Dart2027
                And what forces opposed them?

                How many times have I reminded you that the British submariners in the Baltic have achieved very great results with very small forces?
                Comparable to the performance of the entire Baltic Fleet, due to its constant passivity?
                You "don't notice" this fact all the time laughing - it is unpleasant for you, but it does not become a fact less.

                At the same time, the forces of Russian submariners in the same Baltic were many times greater than those of the British, but what's the point?
                In addition to outstanding self-flooding, Russian submariners in the Baltic could not distinguish themselves for the entire WWI crying and at the World Cup only "Crab" was useful, and only as an underwater mine-loader

                So the forces are forces, and the result is of paramount importance.

                Quote: Dart2027
                Will you continue to dodge the answer or admit that they sat on the contents of foreign intelligence?

                You will continue to dodge the answer or admit that you constantly demonstrate a lack of your mental abilities, a poor and purely selective knowledge of history, dishonesty in behavior, including juggling my remarks and ignoring inconvenient facts that you constantly cite?

                Quote: Dart2027
                Will you not argue that the idea of ​​communism is a utopia?

                Any idea is utopian if approached with such absolute criteria.
                This is generally a property of IDEAS, if someone does not know laughing

                For example, capitalism is an extremely predominant economic system on our planet at the present time, and has existed for at least almost 3 centuries.

                However, during all this time, they have never been observed in reality, in their pure form, without distortion: a free market, fair competition, instant market reaction to changes in supply and demand, and all other ideas that are fundamental to capitalism.
                Further explain? laughing
  22. 0
    9 December 2016 21: 13
    Quote: Dart2027
    (Tyler Dennett, "Roosevelt and the Russo-Japanese War")

    Another lol link is good laughing
    However, even it says that there is another opinion, and that this opinion was at first general and unconditional, namely that Japan could receive the greater fruits of its victories, and was entitled to count on it.
    Quotes that reinforce this unpleasant opinion for you are not difficult to find. tongue
    If you still dig, it turns out that such a change in grades for some reason lol coincided in time with the cooling of relations between the Anglo-Saxons and Japan laughing

    Quote: Dart2027
    A clear explanation of why, with such super-duper superiority, Japan quickly restrained its appetites, when it realized that RI could continue the war, do you still not have it?

    I = still = HAVE an explanation that you stubbornly "overlooked": the forces and capabilities of the Russian Empire were VERY strongly overestimated by the Japanese both before the RYAV and until the very end of the peace negotiations.
    Moreover: it is repeatedly confirmed by your beloved for a couple of convenient quotes by Okamoto, the rest (and the main) content of the book of which is deeply classified for you laughing
    And much more than that. For instance:
    “I will not hide,” answered the colonel, “that we did not expect such a protracted nature of the war.” Even less could we have foreseen that, having retained the army, you would be able to bring its number to the end of the war to a million people with six hundred thousand bayonets!
    These last words revealed to me the secret of the relatively soft terms of the Portsmouth Treaty.

    I hope it’s not a secret for you that the number of the Russian army “bravely” hiding in the fortified positions of Sypingai was exaggerated by the Japanese by about two times, and its combat effectiveness - by cr. to the same extent?

    Quote: Dart2027
    their mass and organized character spoke well to whom the incident was beneficial.

    Yes, the mass character of the events of the revolution of 1905-1907 was not connected at all with acute social conflicts ripening in Russia, but with the fact that these events were at the moment of their beginning, and 2 years before their end, beneficial to Japan for signing a peace with Russia lol
    You know how to amuse yourself with your crystal bakery myth-making. Thank! love laughing

    Quote: Dart2027
    this does not change the fact that when the Bolsheviks came to power, they just as well entered into a conspiracy with enemies

    "It's not a fact yet!" (C) Prof. Challenger. laughing

    So far, your "reasoning" is exclusively schizophrenic: you state some very dubious statement, declare it to be the truth, unconditional and in the last instance, then try your best to stretch the alleged confirmation of the original statement, and in the end, happily declare that your "confirmation" is absolutely true since they confirm the unconditional truth lol laughing

    And you could not bring facts as such during the whole process, and you cannot.
    “The myth of the sealed carriage” we have recently analyzed once again, it remains a well-known example of lies for 100 years already, and your other “facts” are of the same level, at best.
    = * =
    1. +1
      10 December 2016 16: 15
      Quote: murriou
      That is, if the Russian landing ships SUDDENLY break through the powerful minefields, which the Russian staff "geniuses" were going to clear overnight, having nothing close to the experience of such operations.
      And why would they break through when the warships, which are designed for this, do it themselves? How do you understand the reception?
      Quote: murriou
      So, you recognized Island Zmeinyy with its radio station as an important object worthy of protection and not received from the Black Sea Fleet.
      Actually, I recognized it as the only success that the "Turkish / German" Navy could achieve. But this does not change the fact that you cannot put a battleship near every lighthouse. As well as the fact that nothing has changed for the Turks from this success. Better just tell me how much time you need and how much you need to poke around in unpleasant facts for you to admit that the German-Turkish fleet couldn’t do it. Well, or tell us in more detail how often and successfully he attacked Russian cities.
      Quote: murriou
      Yes, that one. Who at that time, if you are not aware, was not anyone, but a recognized parliamentarian, leader and founder of the Constitutional Democratic Party ("Cadets"), a member of the Provisional Government, and Minister of Foreign Affairs.
      That is, one of the main traitors and conspirators who overthrew the king. Or are you not aware of the February coup?
      Quote: murriou
      In other countries, destroyers sought and found these opportunities, and sometimes created them. I gave examples.
      This is when ships of rank 1-2 beat the enemy to an almost unfit state and the destroyers finished them easily and safely? Yes they did.
      Quote: murriou
      You never gave me examples of the initiative of the Russian fleet, and its courage on its own initiative, and not on the initiative of the enemy, who drove the Russian ships into a hopeless situation, no matter how hard you tried.
      Well, they were going to carry out an amphibious operation, the very one at the mention of which your bile is spilling sharply, and February made a mistake.
      Quote: murriou
      in ALL the cases I have cited, the brave attacking behavior of foreign destroyer / destroyer crews was their own conscious choice. I ignored forced behavior.
      Finishing an already beaten up enemy and a torpedo in an enemy who turned up in the night darkness when he tried to escape? It was.
      Quote: murriou
      How many times have I reminded you that the British submariners in the Baltic have achieved very great results with very small forces?
      And you prefer not to notice that it was about the Syrian and Messopotamian fronts. Judging by the attempt to skip the topic, were the forces not very significant?
      Quote: murriou
      However, during all this time, they have never been observed in reality, in their pure form, without distortion: a free market, fair competition, instant market reaction to changes in supply and demand, and all other ideas that are fundamental to capitalism.
      The basic idea of ​​capitalism is the struggle for power without rules. In this sense, it is no different from feudalism, nor from slavery. Technology has changed, conditions have changed - but the essence remains the same.
      But communism is not just economic, technical or something else, but the real spiritual degeneration of man. Further explain?
      Quote: murriou
      and that this opinion was at first general and unconditional, namely that Japan could receive the greater fruits of its victories, and was entitled to count on it.
      If you still dig, it turns out that such a change in grades for some reason lol coincided in time with the cooling of relations between the Anglo-Saxons and Japan
      Keyword at first. And the cooling in 1925? And if you consider that the book was written before publication, then in the early 20's? I must disappoint you - the cooling was later.
      Quote: murriou
      I = still = HAVE an explanation that you stubbornly "overlooked": the forces and capabilities of the Russian Empire were VERY strongly overestimated by the Japanese both before the RYAV and until the very end of the peace negotiations.
      Do you think that if necessary it was impossible to bring to your beloved million? I hope it’s not a secret for you that the mobilization resources of RI were not even nearly exhausted?
      Quote: murriou
      It was not connected at all with acute social conflicts that were brewing in Russia, but with the fact that these events were at the moment of their beginning, and 2 years before their end, beneficial to Japan for signing a peace with Russia lol You know how to amuse yourself with your crystal bakery myth-making. Thank!
      That is, essentially nothing to say? No social conflicts can replace a good organization, take out weapons from the air and train militants.
      Quote: murriou
      So far, your "reasoning" is exclusively schizophrenic: you state some very dubious statement, declare it to be the truth, unconditional and in the last instance, then try your best to stretch the alleged confirmation of the original statement, and in the end, happily declare that your "confirmation" is absolutely true since they confirm the unconditional truth lol laughing

      Okay, one more time. What about Lenin’s sealed train car and a steamboat from the American president for Trotsky? Yes, I remember that it was 1917, but the fact itself - you think they would have been given to anyone? Or a ship with weapons from England on the eve of 1905? And given the fact that the weapon still was, it means that he was far from alone. Do you seriously believe that the British counterintelligence would have missed this without an order from above? Or why could a congress of the RSDLP be quietly convened in London and the British government does not express any concern, although before that they had been expelled from several countries?
      Read this: http://coollib.com/b/289485/read
      Will you continue to dodge the answer or admit that they sat on the contents of foreign intelligence? You will continue to dodge the answer or admit that you constantly demonstrate a lack of your mental abilities, a poor and purely selective knowledge of history, dishonesty in behavior, including juggling my remarks and ignoring inconvenient facts that you constantly cite?
      1. 0
        10 December 2016 18: 42
        Quote: Dart2027
        And why would they break through when the warships, which are designed for this, do it themselves? How do you understand the reception?

        You are even more hopeless than I thought before laughing Thank you for the next batch of fun from your opus! lol fellow

        For a very, very inadequate baker, I’ll tell you a secret: in order to land, landing ships must come as close to the shore as possible.

        In reality, the ships intended for landing were supposed to be assembled across the Azov and Black Seas from a pine forest, while the Russian staff "geniuses" are hardly more "smart" and competent "than you, lol laughing - for some reason, it was believed that such a large-scale event would go unnoticed by the enemy, who probably had abundant agents on the Russian coast. laughing

        In reality, there were very few low-sitting vessels, for the transport of 40 thousand people many times more were required, most of the supposedly "landing" steamers and schooners had a draft of 2,5 - 3,6 meters, i.e. the landing from them was supposed to get to the shore a noticeable distance by swimming and / or on boats. With a corresponding waste of time.

        The "geniuses" you esteemed also did not take this into account, in the favorite style of the Tsarist high command, "it was smooth on paper."

        I am forced to give explanations for the very, very mentally retarded, taking into account the "level" you have already shown. lol To approach the shore, landing ships had to go through minefields, which are set, if someone does not know, at an even greater depth.
        For "especially talented" - an encore, in large letters:
        PASS THROUGH MIN FIELDS.
        РЎРѕ всеми отсюдР° РІС ‹С‚екР° СЋС ‰ РёРјРё РїРѕСЃР» едствиями.

        This was not necessary for warships, although they could also try, of course - but why? In order to fall under heavy fire of coastal batteries and heavy enemy ships hidden in closed positions together with landing ships?

        To pass through the minefields, I explain for idiots, it’s not warships — well, unless you intentionally want to sink them in mines — but minesweepers.
        Russian minesweepers were.
        But there was neither their sufficient number and productivity, nor sufficient experience to remove ALL mines in a whole strip in a few hours, in complete darkness, allowing more than a hundred "landing" troughs to pass in a short time.

        Even the Germans, who have an incomparably more plentiful experience and much higher qualifications from the beginning, sometimes made mistakes when waging warships through worn passages, leading to undermining.
        Well, at least without loss.

        And here we are talking about escorting about a hundred civil slobs, passing through the worn passage not trained at all.

        With such a scope and such complete unpreparedness, losses and problems are guaranteed, including loss of secrecy after the first bombing, followed by massive shelling of the operation site.
        Russian minesweepers near the Bosphorus have already perished in this way.

        How do you understand the reception? laughing laughing laughing

        Your other nonsense has already been answered entz times. For deaf and dumb people do not serve 100 times a day. Re-read everything again, if you still do not understand it, see a doctor immediately. laughing
        1. +1
          11 December 2016 15: 00
          Quote: murriou
          For the passage through minefields, I explain for absolutely idiots, it is not warships that serve - well, unless you want to deliberately sink them on mines - but minesweepers. The Russians had minesweepers. But there was neither their sufficient number and productivity, nor sufficient experience to remove ALL mines in a whole strip in a few hours, in complete darkness, allowing more than a hundred "landing" troughs to pass in a short time.

          Minesweepers are the same part of the Navy, and by warships I mean all ships that implement cover, including minesweepers and battleships. Minesweepers were, but could not? Who said that the fleet could not cope with mines?
          Quote: murriou
          Even the Germans, who have an incomparably more plentiful experience and much higher qualifications from the beginning, sometimes made mistakes when waging warships through worn passages, leading to undermining. And here we are talking about escorting about a hundred civil slobs, passing through the worn passage not trained at all.

          Yes, the Germans are superhuman ... Somewhere I already heard it. The fact that there are losses in war is unknown to you? First you whine that the Black Sea Fleet did nothing and demand that he ... You yourself do not know what, and at the same time accuse of cowardice. Then, when it comes to a specific military operation, you raise a cry that it was impossible to think and start, because the Black Sea Fleet cannot and cannot do anything. They managed in the Trebizond operation and could have done it here.
          Quote: murriou
          Your other nonsense has already been answered entz times. For deaf and dumb people do not serve 100 times a day. Re-read everything again, if you still do not understand it, see a doctor immediately.

          This is when you answer uncomfortable questions with fairy tales? It happens.
          1. 0
            11 December 2016 15: 53
            Quote: Dart2027
            Who said that the fleet could not cope with mines?

            You, as a teenager lagging behind in development, do not distinguish between details and midtones.

            To remove a couple of mines in the afternoon, on their own territory, at one point, without a time limit, - and to remove several hundred mines, in a matter of hours, in the dark, on a vast area, under the nose of the enemy and in the range of his guns, - for You are one and the same task. lol

            The Black Sea Fleet could solve the first task, and even then not always - for example, after the German raid on Zmeiny Island I mentioned with impunity (!), There also the Russian destroyer immediately sank on mines, "Lieutenant Zatsarenny", I remember nas.

            The second task for the Black Sea Fleet was absolutely overwhelming: it was too large-scale and difficult, it never had to work out or even remotely comparable ones.

            The Russian staff "geniuses" also, apparently, did not understand the difference between what the Black Sea Fleet knew how to do and actually did at least sometimes (not always well), and what they were going to direct it to.

            It’s like a school group of tourists who once descended on a local slide, send without additional training and additional equipment immediately to Everest. So understandable? laughing

            Quote: Dart2027
            Germans are superhuman ... Somewhere I already heard it.

            Cheap fraud, but what else remains for you? laughing
            There is no talk of German superhuman men - but exactly what the Germans could REALLY do and REALLY do at the time of WWII, and did well - unlike the Russians.

            Quote: Dart2027
            The fact that there are losses in war is unknown to you?

            Losses are also different, and this is incomprehensible only to mentally retarded teens.
            In Tsushima and the Russians had losses, and the Japanese had losses. No difference, huh? laughing

            Here are just the losses of the Japanese - 3 destroyers, 117 people, including dead from wounds after the battle, a little more than five hundred wounded.
            And the Russian losses - more than 30 warships, almost the full squadron, of 16+ thousand personnel, about a thousand broke through, less than 2 thousand interned, more than 6 thousand prisoners, all the rest were killed. More than 100-fold loss ratio, a rare result even on a global scale.
            Now the difference is noticeable, or not yet? lol

            And in the case of the execution of the Bosphorus operation according to the plan of the Russian headquarters "geniuses", Russian losses are expected of the order of those same 2 divisions, i.e. tens of thousands of Russian people.

            Quote: Dart2027
            raise a cry that it was impossible and think to start, because the Black Sea Fleet cannot and cannot do anything.

            A school Turk circle can climb the hill - maybe it can.
            Everest to storm - can not and can not.
            Although the same circle, and also just a climb up the mountain lol laughing

            By the way, Mr. Crystal Glassmaker!
            The Russian headquarters during the REV planned and carried out several dozen military operations on land and at sea.
            Of these, NONE have been successfully completed.

            During the WWII, a successful large-scale operation was perhaps the Brusilovsky breakthrough, and it was not executed according to the plan drawn up by the Russian General Staff laughing
            The vast majority of Russian operations in WWII, both on land and at sea, were Failed and / or NOT PLAN.

            Does it not seem to you that certain conclusions can be drawn from this about the level of planning, preparation and implementation of operations in the tsarist army and the tsarist fleet? winked feel laughing
            1. +1
              12 December 2016 19: 57
              Quote: murriou
              The Black Sea Fleet could solve the first task, and even then not always - for example, after the German raid on Zmeiny Island I mentioned with impunity (!), There also the Russian destroyer immediately sank on mines, "Lieutenant Zatsarenny", I remember nas.

              That is, before it became known about the mines and trawling was carried out?
              Quote: murriou
              A school Turk circle can climb the hill - maybe it can.
              Everest to storm - can not and can not.
              Although the same circle, and also just a climb up the mountain

              That is, when it comes to a decisive blow capable of completely ending the war with Turkey, it suddenly turns out that this is impossible, but when it comes to victories won over Turkey itself, it immediately becomes clear that:
              I never denied victory over the Turks; I denied being proud of them. It is like a professional boxer to be proud of a victory over an underdeveloped schoolboy.
              To be better than the Turks and along with the Italians is not a great honor
              Decide finally?
              Quote: murriou
              By the way, Mr. Crystal Glassmaker!
              The Russian headquarters during the REV planned and carried out several dozen military operations on land and at sea. Of these, NONE have been successfully completed.

              Battle of Galicia, Lodz operation (in the latter, most of the enemy were precisely the Germans, from Germany).
              Against the Turks - the Battle of Erzurum, the Trebizond operation.
              And they did nothing. Does it not seem to you that certain conclusions can be drawn from this about the level of planning, preparation and implementation of operations in the tsarist army and the tsarist fleet?
              1. 0
                12 December 2016 20: 31
                Another example on the fingers.

                There is a school Turk circle in the district center Verkhnezadrishchensk.
                This school Turk was engaged in mountaineering.
                Of the ten surrounding slides, each a couple of hundred meters high, he climbed two, with the rest he failed, including with injuries.

                The same Turk circle was engaged in water tourism.
                I didn’t find normal kayaks, but what I found was stuck on every shallow, and in the end I got a hole in the bottom.
                The same Turk circle was engaged in hiking.
                A couple of times I was able to reach the clearing where I made victorious barbecue, in five cases I got lost and barely returned to my native school, I searched for each other three more times all day throughout the forest, twice managed to burn my own tent and sink all the pots in the stream.

                Now this Turk circle is about to go to storm Everest.

                An outsider with experience believes that:
                1. One should not be proud of all the listed "achievements";
                2. It is worth thinking about preparing a circle;
                3. It is not worth this mug, in its current composition and condition, to climb Mount Everest, nothing good will come of it.

                Do you see a contradiction between these opinions of an outsider? Show plz. I still think that he is right in everything. laughing
                1. +1
                  13 December 2016 19: 23
                  Quote: murriou
                  Another example on the fingers.

                  Another example on the fingers.
                  Quote: murriou
                  I never denied victory over the Turks; I denied being proud of them. It is like a professional boxer to be proud of a victory over an underdeveloped schoolboy.
                  To be better than the Turks and along with the Italians is not a great honor.

                  First, shout for yourself that, they say, the Turks should play a trivial matter, but when it comes to a decisive blow capable of completely ending the war with Turkey, it suddenly turns out that this is impossible.
                  Decide finally?
                  1. 0
                    13 December 2016 21: 12
                    Once again for such talented personalities that even to the level of a school Turkish circle they have not grown up, but they climb into tactics and strategy with a smart look.

                    Climbing on those slides on which the Turk circle has already climbed is a merit small. Climbing onto something much, incomparably more serious is an overwhelming task for a Turkcruise.

                    To beat the comparable forces of the Turks in the open sea, with an equal position - is not a question.
                    Beating Turks with incomparable positional superiority is an insoluble task for the Black Sea Fleet.
                    If this is not clear to you, then you will not go to me, but to the doctor. URGENTLY.
                    1. +1
                      14 December 2016 19: 29
                      Quote: murriou
                      Once again for such talented personalities that even to the level of a school Turkish circle they have not grown up, but they climb into tactics and strategy with a smart look.

                      Once again for such talented personalities that even to the level of a school Turkish circle they have not grown up, but they climb into tactics and strategy with a smart look.
                      Either RI was stronger than Turkey, or not, or its troops had a huge superiority in combat efficiency, either not, or the Black Sea Fleet was immeasurably stronger than Turkish, or not.
                      Not tired of evading the answer, so as not to admit that they are completely confused in their ideological tales?
                      1. 0
                        14 December 2016 19: 48
                        Try again to re-read what was personally spelled out for you at the level for special idiots.
                        If it doesn’t help, as usual, I sympathize, but this is not my problem. You see a doctor before it's too late.
                      2. +2
                        14 December 2016 21: 00
                        Quote: Dart2027
                        Either RI was stronger than Turkey, or not, or its troops had a huge superiority in combat efficiency, either not, or the Black Sea Fleet was immeasurably stronger than Turkish, or not.

                        Do you remember how Willie answered the question: "What is the combat readiness of the Turks?"
  23. 0
    14 December 2016 20: 54
    Quote: murriou
    Try again to re-read what was personally spelled out for you at the level for special idiots.

    That is, after all, there is nothing to say? Expected.
  24. 0
    14 February 2017 08: 19
    Quote: Zmicerz
    20 thousand only Polish spies caught! These pesky pests were found even in remote Siberian villages!

    I wonder where this figure comes from?
  25. 0
    29 October 2017 15: 39
    If this one, who was reckoned to ..., had a head, and not a stand for the crown, then he might have realized that contact with the Anglo-Saxons is impossible under any circumstances. As in the saying: God save me from such friends, and I will get rid of enemies myself.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned), Kirill Budanov (included to the Rosfinmonitoring list of terrorists and extremists)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"