Military Review

The revival of the Romanian army: the battle of Marashti and Maraseshti

80
The revival of the Romanian army: the battle of Marashti and Maraseshti

The Romanian military-political elite perceived the February-March coup in Russia as a catastrophe. The Romanian king Ferdinand, having learned about the revolution in Russia, burst into tears. General A. Averescu wrote in his diary: "A genuine catastrophe for us: the revolution in Russia." Romanian censorship imposed a ban on the publication of news from Russia.


The Russian envoy in Iasi, General Mosolov, the old royal dignitary who was in charge of the office of the Ministry of the Court, was shocked. He even suggested that the head of the Stavka Alekseev swear to Grand Duke Mikhail, and if the garrison of Petrograd refused, then "detach the appropriate part of the troops from the front to the capital." Alekseev, who belonged to the February lists, refused and announced the need to recognize the Provisional Government in order to avoid civil war.

The Provisional Government dismissed the commander-in-chief of the Romanian front, General V.V. Sakharov, he was replaced by General D. G. Shcherbachov, the talented commander of the 7 Army. The Romanian front experienced all the "joys" of revolutionary turmoil: rallies, a sharp drop in discipline and the reluctance of soldiers to fight more, mass desertion, etc. The Russian front was falling apart. However, the remoteness of the Romanian front from the main centers of the revolution still somewhat smoothed the situation, the troops partially retained their combat capability. In addition, there was the Romanian army, restored with the help of Russia.

It is worth noting that the Romanian elite, fearing the expansion of their army and revolutionary actions “against the boyars”, took a number of measures that allowed the king and the government to maintain control over the situation. On the one hand, the Romanian secret police (Siguranz) was active, revolutionary activists were subjected to repression, the army was tidy and the anti-revolutionary propaganda was actively pursued. On the other hand, the authorities made concessions. King Ferdinand traveled troops. He promised the soldiers to give them land after the war and give them voting rights. Parliament hastily revised the 1866 constitution of the year, which recognized private property "sacred and inviolable." Innovations provided for universal suffrage, the elimination of land holdings of the crown and the state, the alienation of the ransom to 2 million hectares of landowner land. The promise to give the peasants what many generations of their ancestors dreamed of — the land — had a serious impact. The overwhelming majority of peasant soldiers lay behind the front line, were occupied by the enemy, who brutally robbed Romania. That is, the land had to be repulsed. This, to a certain extent, prevented the decomposition of the Romanian army.

Battle of Merashti (Mareshty)

According to the Bet plan, drawn up before the revolution, the Romanian front was to play an important role in the 1917 campaign of the year. The Romanians wanted to win the Wallachians, therefore, originally planned to organize a broad offensive operation in the Lower Seriet. However, the revolutionary collapse led to a reduction in the scope of the operation to private operations of a local nature. With the appointment of a decisive Shcherbachev and the end of the restoration of the Romanian army, they again raised the question of a decisive offensive by the forces of the entire front. The Romanian elite especially insisted on it. Having 15 infantry and 2 cavalry divisions of the reorganized army (400 thousand fighters), who wanted revenge on the defeat in the 1916 campaign of the year, the Romanians demanded a general battle.

As a result, General Shcherbachev developed a plan for a decisive offensive. King Ferdinand, the formal commander-in-chief of the Romanian front, approved him. The 1-I Romanian army of General Kristesko struck from Lower Seriet deep into Wallachia. The Russian 6 Army of General Tsurikov was supposed to support this offensive in the Danube zone and advance in the general direction of Buseo. At the same time, the 2-I Romanian army of Averesco (4 infantry divisions and cavalry brigade), with the support of the Russian 4-th army of General Ragoza, was to advance on the Carpathian direction. The main role in this offensive was to be played by the restored Romanian army and Russian artillery. If successful, the 9-I German army was covered from two flanks.

The Romanian Front launched Operation 9 (22) on July 1917. Artillery preparation lasted two days. 11 (24) In July, the troops of the 2 of the Romanian and 4 of the Russian armies went on the attack. Their blow fell on the right flank of the 1 of the Austro-Hungarian Army - the 24 of the German reserve corps of General Gerok. Our troops broke through the front of the enemy. By July 19 (August 1) on the 30-kilometer-long mountainous sector of the front advanced to the depth of 20 km. At the same time, an artillery preparation took place on the Lower Seriet before the onset of the 1 of the Romanian army. The operation promised undoubted success. However, even 12 (25) in July, owing to the general unfavorable situation on the fronts, caused by the intensified disintegration of the Russian army, Kerensky gave the order to stop further progress. The Chairman of the Provisional Government could not give orders to the acting army, bypassing the Stavka, ignoring the Supreme Commander. But Kerensky did this and instantly paralyzed the troops. His telegram through the soldiers' committees became known to the troops and the soldiers declared to their commanders that the offensive was canceled "by order of Kerensky himself." All the long preliminary training, the first victories and losses were all in vain. As the military historian A. A. Kersnovsky wrote: “.. the high spirits that promised to go on to the victorious breakthrough the next day were replaced by immediately embittered tired indifference. The hand, already carrying the sword over the head of the enemy, suddenly trembled, sank and dropped weapon».

The Romanian troops, supported by the artillery of the 4 Army, attacked for some time and successfully completed the battle, but without decisive results. Thus, the battle of Merashti ended with a tactical victory for the Romanian-Russian troops. Our troops took 3 thousand people prisoners and 43 guns.

German counteroffensive. Battle of Maraseshti (Maraseshty)

The 11 (24) of July in the Austro-Hungarian General Staff in Baden near Vienna, the Austrian emperor Karl, the chief of staff of the Austro-Hungarian army, General von Arts and the German commander-in-chief Hindenburg held a meeting. At the council it was decided to develop the victory at Tarnopol and go on a decisive offensive in Galicia and Romania. Army Group Böhm-Yermoli was supposed to attack in Galicia. A group of Archduke Joseph inflicted a 7 army from Bucovina to Moldova in the flank and rear of the Romanian front. And the Mackensen group was instructed to inflict a decisive defeat on the Russian-Romanian troops, breaking the front on the Lower Seryet, to conquer Moldova and permanently incapacitate Romania. In the event of the complete success of a strategic offensive, a serious threat arose to the regions of southern Russia, and the Austro-German command hoped to dictate a profitable world to Russia. A group of troops Böhm-Yermoli partially fulfilled the task - occupied Galicia, following the collapsing Russian armies. But Kornilov was able to partially arrange our armies and they fought back at Zbruche.

The Archduke Joseph group failed to develop a broad offensive operation. The 7 Army of General Kevesh was stopped by the stubborn resistance of the Russian 1 Army of General Vannovsky in the Bukovina Carpathians, and the 1 of the Austro-Hungarian Army of General Rohr . Then the 1-I Russian army retreated to the Bessarabian-Bukovinian line, leveling its position with the retreating South-Western front, and was included in the Romanian front, covering Moldavia from the north. Kevesh was tasked with breaking through the front of the Russian 1 army, Rohr with the 1 Austrian army forging the 9 army with frontal attacks and breaking through its front at the junction with the 2 Romanian army. This operation was associated with the offensive of Mackensen's troops in Lower Seriet. July 27 (August 9) The 7-I and 1-I armies of Kevesh and Rohr attacked our troops. However, in a two-day stubborn battle, Russian troops repelled an enemy strike. The plans of the Austro-German command for the passage of troops to Northern Moldova — on the flank and rear of the Romanian front — were not realized.

Field Marshal Mackensen decided to hit the center of the 9 of the German army in Lower Seriet. To strike in the north direction - on Marasesht and further on Adjud, discarding the defeated 4 th Russian army and entering the rear of the 2 st Romanian army. At the same time, the 1 th Austro-Hungarian army was to break through to Moldova at the junction of the Russian 9 and 2 Romanian armies and go towards the 9 German Army, which had broken through to Adzhud. Thus, the Germans traditionally sought to create "Cannes" - for the 2 of the Romanian and 4 of the Russian armies. At the same time, Mackensen was also thinking about a broader operation, he wanted to destroy the 1 th Romanian army, and with luck, the 6 Russian too. That is, the German command was going to almost completely destroy the Romanian front. Mackensen bet on the revolutionary decay of the Russian army, hoping for quick and decisive success.

The right wing of the shock group - the 9-I German army, was to take part of the troops to the southeast - at Tecuci, to the rear of the 1-th Romanian army, after the capture of Miresheshti. The 10 Army of General Eben made up two groups of the same force: 13,5) of General Morgen’s right-flank group (9 of the reserve corps) had to break into Tekuch; 1) General Veninger's left-flank group (1-th Reserve Corps) - to advance on Adjud. The enemy in the Putna Valley was opposed by the 2 of the Russian army: against the Weninger group - the 18 of the army corps, against the group of Morgen - the 4 of the corps. Ten German divisions opposed the weakened 8 Russian divisions.

24 July (6 August) 1917, the 9-I German army launched an offensive. A group of Morgan (5 divisions) attacked the Russian 7 Army Corps. The blow of four German divisions fell on our left-flank 34 division, which retreated to Seret and destroyed the crossings. Our troops suffered heavy losses that day - the Germans captured more than 3 thousand prisoners and 17 guns. The powerful fire of the Russian-Romanian artillery (the Russian 7-th and 3-th Romanian corps) bound the enemy further advance on Tecuci. Mackensen had to abandon the idea of ​​an attack on Tekuch and coverage of the 1 of the Romanian army. He instructed the Morgan group to go north and northwest, to attack Maresheshti. But the main blow should have been delivered by the Veninger group to Adjud. July 25-26 (August 7-8) the troops of our 8-th and 7-th corps held back the onslaught of the enemy. Hard fights boiled. With great difficulty, German troops captured the line of Putna. General Ragoza took the right-flank 8 corps to Sushitsa, and the left-flank took the Seret line. The attack of the Morgan group on Maraseshty was repelled by the troops of the 6 corps.

July 27 (August 9) General Ragoza ordered the troops to launch a counter-offensive. Our 8 Corps crushed Veninger's group, throwing the enemy partially to the starting position on Putna. The 7 Corps, reinforced by the Romanian troops, pressed the Morgen group. July 28 (August 10) Russian-Romanian troops continued to attack. Having regrouped the 9 Army and hoping for the success of the 1 Austrian-Hungarian Army (left wing of the attack force), Mackensen in the morning of July 29 (August 11) continued the offensive. In the fierce battle of Maraseshti, the 71 Infantry Division was completely destroyed. General Ragoza threw in equestrian Zamaurts and avant-gardes of the 5-th Romanian corps to the counterattack. With the desperate effort of our troops, Merasheshti was defended. At night, the remnants of the Russian 7 corps were replaced by fresh troops of the Romanian 5. The 1-I Romanian army, led by Grigorescu, was temporarily subordinate to Ragoza. The commander-in-chief Shcherbachev ordered the 6 Army to conduct demonstrative attacks in order to alleviate the position of the bleeding troops of Ragoza and Grigorescu. The groups of Morgan and Veninger, having met stubborn resistance of the Russian-Romanian troops, exhausted, attacked sluggishly.

By 31 July (12 August), both sides suffered serious losses. General Ragoza ordered mereshesti to leave. However, the Romanians refused to retreat. The Commander-in-Chief Shcherbachev agreed with the arguments of the Romanian command and handed over command of the Russian-Romanian troops in Susice and Sireth to Grigorescu. General Ragozu was called back to Northern Romania to take over the 4 Army. Romanian reserves gradually changed bloodless Russian troops. 1 (14) of August the German troops attacked again and defeated the Kozmesht Romanian 3 Corps. The 5-I Romanian Infantry Division was completely destroyed, the Germans took only prisoners 3 thousand people. However, the Romanians continued to stubbornly fight back and the further advance of the Germans was choked. Mackensen suspended the operation.

In the meantime, while Mackensen's troops tried to break through the Russian-Romanian front and surround our troops, the Archduke Joseph again went on the offensive. Austro-German troops attempted to hold our 9 army in battle and reach the 2 Rumanian army together with Mackensen's troops. 25 July (7 August) The 1 Army of Rohr launched an offensive with the forces of the 1 Austrian-Hungarian Corps, July 26 (August 8) attacked the enemy with its right flank. July 27 (August 9) the battle was already general. The Russian 9 Army (26, 2, 34 and 24 Corps) repelled the onslaught of the 1, 11, 21 and 6 Austro-Hungarian corps. However, the group of Geroca (8 th Austro-Hungarian and 24 th German reserve corps), which was given the task of forcing the Oituz pass to cover the Romanian army, pressed the 4 th Romanian corps. July 28 (August 10) Rohr suspended the frontal attack on the 9 Russian army and focused all his attention on the group of Gerok. As a result, the 2-I Romanian army stopped the enemy. The breakthrough to Moldova by the Oituz valley by the Austro-German forces failed.

However, Mackensen and the Archduke Joseph did not yet consider that the offensive failed. 6 (19) August Austro-German troops again tried to attack. 9-th German army was waiting for a complete failure. Having repelled an enemy strike, the 1-I Romanian army counterattacked. In the Marasesht district, the Morgan group was broken up, and the Veninger group was repelled near Ireshtami. The 1 th Austro-Hungarian army also did not succeed, its initial successes were nullified by the counterattacks of the 2 th Romanian army. 9 (22) August, the German General Staff ordered to stop the offensive, leading to such heavy losses.


German mortar in Romania

Results

The battle was very bloody. In the battle at Maraseshty in 4 of the Russian army from 70 thousand personnel personnel killed and injured 40 thousand people, 5 thousand more captured (two thirds of the army). The 1-I Romanian army lost more than 21 thousand people and 5 thousand people prisoners; 2-I Romanian army - 14 thousand people. The Germans hid their high losses - more than 40 thousand people. Only 9-I German army lost 40% of its composition.

Thus, the German offensive did not lead to the defeat of the Romanian front. The Russians, who still retained part of their combat capability, repelled enemy attacks. The Romanian army, restored by Russia after the defeat of 1916, showed itself in these battles from the good side. The battle of Marasesti marked the rebirth of the Romanian army, and to some extent strengthened the prestige of the Romanian government. By the beginning of September, the 1917 of the year had finally stabilized, and these were the last active hostilities during the 1917 campaign of the year.

It is worth noting that the offensive was accompanied by the further disintegration of the Russian army. The front command introduced the death penalty, but it did not help much. The old military mechanism of Russia collapsed and this process could not be stopped only by repression. The replenishments that came did not strengthen, but further undermined the combat capability of the army, as they brought news from the revolutionary, devastated, mortally tired of the war, from the beginning of the peasant war of the rear. Cases of unauthorized withdrawal of entire units from the front, reprisals against officers, have increased. The punitive detachments from cavalry and artillery, which maintained order for the longest time, did not save either. So, in early August, they disarmed three battalions of the 30 regiment and an assault battalion in the 1 division. The Kornilov revolt finally undermined the position of the officers. “Soldiers are eagerly and persistently waiting for peace,” the headquarters of the Romanian Front reported in September.
Author:
Articles from this series:
1917 Campaign

The transition of the Central Powers to a strategic defense
Entente plans for 1917 year: bet on a decisive victory in the war
Russian army to the beginning of the 1917 campaign of the year: the approach of the general collapse
Attack without shot: Mitav operation
How Germany began the unlimited submarine war
German submarine vs UK
How the German submarine fleet tried to crush the "mistress of the seas"
The United States used the myth of "inhuman" submarine warfare to oppose Germany
Caucasian front in 1917 year. Baratov corps offensive in southwestern Persia
Mosul operation. How the British, until recently, tried to use the Russian "cannon fodder"
The war of the USA and England against Europe and Russia for absolute power on the planet
USA and World War I
How did the USA profit from World War I
"War will end wars." USA in the First World War
World War I turned the United States into a leading world power
"Nivel Meat Grinder"
Tenth Battle of the Isonzo
The failure of the "offensive of Kerensky"
"It was no longer the former Russian"
As Greece at gunpoint forced to go to war
80 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. nizhegorodec
    nizhegorodec 6 July 2017 06: 36 New
    +6
    On the other hand, the authorities made concessions. King Ferdinand traveled around the troops. He promised the soldiers to give them land after the war and grant them suffrage. Parliament hastily revised the constitution of 1866, which recognized private property as "sacred and inviolable." The innovations provided for universal suffrage, liquidation of the land holdings of the crown and the state, alienation for the purchase of up to 2 million hectares of landlord lands. The promise to give the peasants something that many generations of their ancestors dreamed of - the land, had a serious impact.
    Romanians guessed, if such a discovery dawned on ours, how many troubles would Russia have avoided then
    1. Uncle Murzik
      Uncle Murzik 6 July 2017 06: 55 New
      +7
      nizhegorodec yours is not possible to overshadow! wassat
      1. nizhegorodec
        nizhegorodec 6 July 2017 07: 46 New
        +5
        Quote: Uncle Murzik
        yours is not possible to overshadow!

        so where are we to yours - God's chosen
        1. Uncle Murzik
          Uncle Murzik 6 July 2017 09: 27 New
          +2
          nizhegorodec will not reach the Germans! wassat
    2. Olgovich
      Olgovich 6 July 2017 09: 14 New
      +9
      Quote: nizhegorodec
      Romanians guessed, if such a discovery dawned on ours, how many troubles would Russia have avoided then


      1. In Russia, 1917, the most advanced electoral law in the world.
      "Russia is the freest country in the world"(Ulyanov, “April Theses of 1917”)
      2. Constituent. The meeting of Russia in January 1918 adopted "Land Law".
      .
      The article is about the revived Romanian army, but, mainly, the heroic actions of the Russian army are mentioned. That is, the brunt of the fighting was still carried by Russia. Romania without her was nothing.

      For which he "thanked" her occupation of Bessarabia .....
      1. Uncle Murzik
        Uncle Murzik 6 July 2017 09: 29 New
        +2
        Well, yes, in every village in 1917 there were polling stations and ballot boxes! laughing funnier and funnier! wassat
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 6 July 2017 10: 18 New
          12
          Quote: Uncle Murzik
          all funnier and funnier!

          ".......- and the second worker wore a helmet. Therefore, when a brick fell on his head, he laughed and went. Since then he has been walking and laughs" lol
          1. Uncle Murzik
            Uncle Murzik 6 July 2017 12: 33 New
            +3
            how reasoned! laughing
      2. soldier
        soldier 6 July 2017 09: 34 New
        20
        You are absolutely right.
        It was the Russian army that recreated the Romanian Front, which delayed fifty divisions of all 4 countries of the German bloc. Revived the Romanian army.
        And Ludendorff could only complain (after the brilliant victories of the Austro-Germans in August-November 1916) that "Romania has not yet been defeated."
        The fact that the Romanian front did not rest on the “revived” Romanian army, but on the Russian one, is also evidenced by the fact that immediately after the withdrawal of Russia from the WWII (Brest Treaty on March 3, 1918) Romania almost immediately left the war (April 27, 1918 .) by signing a separate Bucharest Peace Treaty.
      3. soldier
        soldier 6 July 2017 09: 47 New
        20
        Olgovich
        The article is about the revived Romanian army, but, mainly, the heroic actions of the Russian army are mentioned. That is, the brunt of the fighting was still carried by Russia. Romania without her was nothing.

        Better not say.
        The Russian army is the backbone of the Russian-Romanian front.
        1. Pancir026
          Pancir026 6 July 2017 13: 09 New
          +2
          Quote: soldier
          The Russian army is the backbone of the Russian-Romanian front.

          And the Romanian army, the absolute burden and misunderstanding for Russia as a dubious quality, is an ally, moreover, absolutely not combat-ready.
          In the fall of 1916, the Russian command immediately had to urgently send to the Romanians their 50th group of troops under the command of General Andrei Zayonchkovsky (who in the future would write the famous historical work on the First World War and go to serve in the Red Army). Subsequently, in his memoirs, he will characterize the Romanian army as “a strikingly weak fighter.”
      4. Pancir026
        Pancir026 6 July 2017 12: 41 New
        +3
        Quote: Olgovich
        1. In Russia, 1917, the most advanced electoral law in the world.
        "Russia is the freest country in the world" (Ulyanov, April Theses of 1917)
        2. Constituent. The Russian Assembly in January 1918 adopted the Land Law.
        .

        Oh .. well, do you just come up with?
        And then what?
        Pavel Milyukov: “From the assault signal” to the assault
        The tactics of the "Progressive Bloc" aimed at seizing power, Milyukov laid three factors:

        1. The collapse of the authority of the king and his entourage.

        2. Support for the “democratic” revolution by the Entente allies who fought a double game in Russia: on the one hand, they were interested in preserving the Eastern Front, which distracted part of the German troops; on the other, in the destruction of not only the German, but also the Russian Empire, with the aim of expanding its colonial possessions and naval power;

        3. Support for spontaneous popular rebellion, decomposition of the army.
        So Kerensky answered questions about the role of Lenin in the preparation of the revolution: • When Lenin returned to Russia in 1917 [April], was he widely known there, as claimed by Soviet historiographers? - In the masses - no. But Lenin was well known in political circles.

        • Lenin was not then dangerous to me. No one in all of Russia believed in the time that the head of an extreme left party could be a danger to the foundations of the country. When I learned about Lenin’s speech [April 1917], my first emotional impulse was to meet with him, to talk about our childhood in Simbirsk, about our parents.

        The positions of the Bolshevik leadership regarding war and the army are devoted in documents 1925 to documents No. 44, 45, 46, 53, 184, 186. The Bolshevik leadership, joining the political struggle, found the army completely destroyed by Rodzianko, Guchkov and Kerensky. The emperor was changed and supported by the Duma in 1916 and the tsarist generals.
        Quote:
        “Adjutant General Ruzsky and Alekseev ... instead of crushing the revolutionary actions in the army with an iron hand, which could be done very easily, these two commanders, under the influence of the Duma, not only did nothing of the sort, but, having forgotten their duty, left the Emperor right in front of the end in this difficult situation. It is significant that after the victory of the revolution it was said that the Tsar declared that he was ready to forgive all his enemies, but at the bottom of his heart did not feel forgiveness towards General Ruzsky. ... The revolution, which began largely through their fault, took a completely catastrophic form ... "
        Zavarzin P.P.
        Who is P.P. Zavarzin, do you know? Well, he understands who was destroying the country .. and some kind of olgovich .... in other matters, what to take from olgovich ..
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 6 July 2017 12: 58 New
          +8
          Quote: Pancir026
          Who tacosth P.P. Zavarzin?

          "Who is Studebaker? Is it your relative Studebaker? Dad is your Studebaker? Why are you stuck to a person? ... Experts! Such experts must be killed!" (C) lol
          PS Yes, and take a look at the topic.
          1. Pancir026
            Pancir026 6 July 2017 13: 03 New
            +2
            Quote: Olgovich
            Yes, and take a look at the topic.

            Well, let’s start .. You don’t know who Zavarzin is.
            The theme of your Romanian army. Beaten is always and by everyone, uninteresting.
            Not me, but instead of telling stories about the “great Romanian 2 warriors, you started an endless song about the State Duma, some“ great accomplishments ”there, some Constituent assembly. So about the topic, you should be silent.
            Quote: Olgovich
            Connoisseurs! It is necessary to kill such experts! "

            Are you talking about yourself?
      5. nizhegorodec
        nizhegorodec 6 July 2017 13: 42 New
        +4
        I completely agree with you, but it would also be worth declaring the laws on land, democracy to the Russian peasantry was not so important. And the thesis about the Russian army and the Romanians to what?
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 6 July 2017 15: 13 New
          +2
          Quote: nizhegorodec
          I completely agree with you, but it would also be worth declaring land laws, democracy was not so important for the Russian peasantry

          There were declarations. But the VP was not entitled to adopt such laws: it was the prerogative of the CSS, as well as the state system of Russia.
          Quote: nizhegorodec
          And the thesis about the Russian army and the Romanians to what?

          I already said this directly about the article. Probably, it was necessary to write in a separate comment hi
          1. nizhegorodec
            nizhegorodec 6 July 2017 18: 12 New
            0
            Quote: Olgovich
            But VP was not entitled to adopt such laws:

            At least declare, at the level of intentions.
            Quote: Olgovich
            Probably, it was necessary to write in a separate comment

            Probably
  2. soldier
    soldier 6 July 2017 08: 41 New
    20
    At the battle of Marasesti in the 4th Russian army, out of 70 thousand personnel, 40 thousand were killed and wounded, another 5 thousand were captured (two-thirds of the army). The 1st Romanian army lost more than 21 thousand people and 5 thousand people prisoners; The 2nd Romanian army - 14 thousand people. The Germans concealed their high losses - more than 40 thousand people.

    Particularly impressive -
    75 thousand Russian losses, and moreover 2/3 of the army

    THIS IS NOT TRUE.
    Soviet specialist - researcher of Romania’s participation in WWI
    V.N. Vinogradov in the academic publication (Romania during the First World War. M. Nauka, 1969.) indicates the following figures of the total losses of the parties for JULY AND AUGUST 1917:
    The Germans - 47 thousand people (and the Russians captured 40 German guns).
    Romanian troops 27,5 thousand people.
    Russian troops - 25 thousand people (PAG. 217.).
    So the losses of the Russian-Romanians and Germans are practically EQUAL.
    But if the Austrians and Bulgarians were added to the Germans, then the losses of the German bloc were GREATER than that of the Russian-Romanians.
    Those are the FACTS
    1. Uncle Murzik
      Uncle Murzik 6 July 2017 09: 32 New
      +2
      but there is no link to the "historian" oleinikov! lol
      1. Uncle Murzik
        Uncle Murzik 6 July 2017 09: 37 New
        +2
        How many do not say halva will not be sweeter! "The most difficult thing is to determine the losses of the Russian army during the First World War. They cannot be determined for any reason, because due to the revolution and the Civil War, the final official figures have not been established, and the current The German generals, like their Russian colleagues who were in exile, agreed that the losses of the Russian army were greater than the losses of the German, Austro-Hungarian, and Turkish divisions opposing it. The total number of people who died in battles and died from wounds Russian soldiers and officers are most often estimated at about 2 million people, and German General E. Ludendorff was inclined to such an assessment.
        To determine the Russian losses, we must first try to establish the losses of the opponents of Russia in the fight against its army. Germany lost 317 thousand people on the Eastern Front, 450 thousand were killed by Austria-Hungary, and 150 thousand were Turkey. It is known that on the Western Front, the losses of the British and French killed almost 1 times higher than the German. In terms of armament and combat training, the Russian army, which did not even have enough shells and rifles in the first year and a half of the war, was inferior to both the German and the English and French. In addition, it had a more significant, one and a half to two times, numerical superiority over the enemy than the Western allies. Therefore, it can be assumed that in the fight against German divisions, Russian losses were relatively greater than on the Western Front, and doubled German losses. In the struggle with the Austro-Hungarian and Turkish armies, they could be approximately equal to the losses of the enemy. Then the total number of those killed in the Russian army should be estimated at 234 thousand. 306 thousand people died from wounds and diseases, 15 thousand died from accidents. 3 750 thousand soldiers and officers of the Russian army were captured, of which up to 500 thousand died. In turn, 177 thousand troops of the German army were in Russian captivity, 1 thousand were Austro-Hungarian and 737 thousand were Turks and Bulgarians.
        In total, more than 2 million of our compatriots died in the First World War. The total irretrievable losses of the central powers amounted to 4 thousand people, and the Entente states - 020 thousand people. The ratio is in favor of Germany and its allies - 5: 610. This is explained by the better preparedness of Germany for war and the higher combat readiness of the German army. The Entente's numerical superiority also played its role, prompting its commanders to spend their soldiers' lives more wastefully. THE FIRST WORLD WAR (1,4-1). Entente...
        bibliotekar.ru ›Table of Contents› 80.htm
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 6 July 2017 12: 29 New
          +9
          Quote: Uncle Murzik
          How many do not say halva will not be sweeter! "The most difficult thing is to determine the losses of the Russian army during the First World War. In total, more than died in the First World War 2 million our compatriots. To determine the Russian losses, we must first try to establish the losses of the opponents of Russia in the fight against its army. Germany lost on the Eastern Front killed 317 thousands people, Austria-Hungary - 450 thousand, and Turkey - 150 thousand


          It's five! good
          You are always referring to the "historian" fool -white slug Sokolov, but you’re embarrassed to call his last name, and here they are ashamed lol . What’s so? One should be proud of one's pale-ribbon companions! fool lol

          THIS is the same bookkeeper, a regular of MK and NG, who named the figures of the losses of the USSR in the Second World War in 41 million people (of them 27 million only military!). At the same time, the Germans on the eastern front lost everything 2,6 млн. (i.e. loss ratio 10:1).

          General losses in the Second World War, he generally 60 млн (with demographic)

          You have good authority and ally! "Good" counts! good fool lol

          PS Yes, just look at it insane face in the photo ...

          :
          1. Uncle Murzik
            Uncle Murzik 6 July 2017 12: 48 New
            +2
            for me, that Oleynikov, that Sokolov is one field of berry, godless dreamers! Well, let's see what Golovin writes "Let us now summarize the total result of the combat losses of the Russian army that we supposed in the past great war.
            Killed - 1300000
            4 wounded
            (350 000 of them died)
            Prisoners - 2 417 000
            In total - 7 917 000
            The total result of combat losses, according to the table of the Military Statistics Department of the CSO, is 7. We will not repeat here everything we said that most of the results printed in the table of "military losses" of the Military Statistics Department of the CSO are much less than the actual ones.
            In another Soviet statistical work, which we also repeatedly quoted {88}, the overall result of the losses is outlined much larger. L.I. Sazonov in his article "Russia's Losses in the War of 1914-1918. {89} writes in the form of the final conclusion of his research:
            “With high probability, we can therefore assume that the army’s losses are actually approaching the figure of 8428 717 people, and behind rounding - the figure is 8 500 000. To think this is the basis for the approximation of digital data for certain categories of losses given in the doctor’s tables Avramov, to the data that are obtained on the basis of the Headquarters. So, the total losses of the Russian army during the imperialist war of 1914-1918, according to official data received during the war, not yet verified, requiring further development, are determined in 7 326 000, and rounding off - at 7 500 000. Based on the research of Dr. VG Avramov, supplemented by official, sufficiently verified data on prisoners, are determined (rounding off) at 8 500 000 people, and this number should be considered more appropriate reality.
            Thus, the total result of combat losses set by us of 7 is in the middle between the two values ​​determined by the Soviet statistical agencies.
            1. Olgovich
              Olgovich 6 July 2017 13: 14 New
              10
              Quote: Uncle Murzik
              for me that Oleynikov that Sokolov one field berry

              Oops! belay request
              ONLY that you referred to SOKOLOV as an authority, brought HIS article, and after 20 minutes, when you were caught and pointed to this crazy man, he is no longer an authority! belay lol Fast you betray of their own! wink
              Quote: Uncle Murzik
              Well, let's see what Golovin writes

              Let's see: Golovin wrote the work, while being in exile, abroad. Those. Not having the slightest access either to archives in Russia or to other sources in Russia.

              HOW can calculations be done without initial archive data for the calculation? No way.
              Therefore, Golovin, thanks for the point of view, and no more.
              1. Uncle Murzik
                Uncle Murzik 6 July 2017 14: 13 New
                +2
                and where did I write that Sokolov is my authority? lol you are no different from the falcon, my Svidomo friend! wassat
                1. Gopnik
                  Gopnik 6 July 2017 15: 13 New
                  +2
                  so if not authority, why are you referring to it ???
              2. Uncle Murzik
                Uncle Murzik 6 July 2017 14: 20 New
                +2
                Olgovich if you would not read a lot, but in other matters it is superfluous to you! lol One of the main Soviet researchers on the issue of losses in the war of 1914–1917, Mr. L.I. Sazonov, who had at his disposal all the material that remained in Russia on the issue of interest to us, came to the following sad conclusion {55}: "Establishing the exact figures for losses in general, as well as finding out from various categories of them, that is, killed, wounded, shell-shocked, captured and missing, it presents enormous difficulties due to the lack of appropriate, albeit raw, but sufficiently complete and reliable material. "
                1. Olgovich
                  Olgovich 6 July 2017 15: 31 New
                  +2
                  Quote: Uncle Murzik
                  Olgovich if you would not be much read but in other it is superfluous to you!
                  you no differentь

                  What?! Please translate into Russian!
                  Do not forget, you are on the Russian resource yes
                  1. Pancir026
                    Pancir026 6 July 2017 15: 41 New
                    +1
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    What?! Please translate into Russian!

                    Points to give?
                    Quote: Uncle Murzik
                    One of the main Soviet researchers on the issue of losses in the war of 1914–1917, Mr. L.I. Sazonov, who had at his disposal all the material that remained in Russia on the issue of interest to us, came to the following sad conclusion {55}: "Establishing the exact figures for losses in general, as well as finding out from various categories of them, that is, killed, wounded, shell-shocked, captured and missing, it presents enormous difficulties due to the lack of appropriate, albeit raw, but sufficiently complete and reliable material. "
                    1. Gopnik
                      Gopnik 6 July 2017 16: 00 New
                      +1
                      This is normal for the researcher of the 20s, which Sazonov was. The Germans considered their losses until the 1930s. At the same time, losses in WWII are much easier to calculate than losses in WWII. Because personal registers were compiled in the shelves, which are stored in one of the RGIA funds and which promise to be digitized (for several years now). In addition, the names of the dead inhabitants of the provinces were published in the local press. At the same time, in WWI there were no such hundred thousandth boilers as in the Second World War, where whole armies died, i.e. Of course, there are gaps, but there are few of them. That is, as they say, there would be a desire.
                      1. Pancir026
                        Pancir026 7 July 2017 08: 58 New
                        +2
                        Quote: Gopnik
                        Moreover, in WWI there were no t

                        This is you tell Samsonov’s army.
          2. nizhegorodec
            nizhegorodec 6 July 2017 13: 44 New
            +9
            Bravo! Well you did it! good
            1. Uncle Murzik
              Uncle Murzik 6 July 2017 14: 18 New
              +3
              nizhegorodec Well, you have direct choral singing with Ukrainian Svidomo!
              1. nizhegorodec
                nizhegorodec 6 July 2017 18: 17 New
                +1
                Quote: Uncle Murzik
                you have direct choral singing with

                Are you offended that no one is singing along with you? So set your mind and gain allies
            2. Pancir026
              Pancir026 6 July 2017 15: 42 New
              +2
              Quote: nizhegorodec
              have done!

              Sorry, but you screwed up here, along with your subject of enthusiasm.
              1. nizhegorodec
                nizhegorodec 6 July 2017 18: 19 New
                +1
                Quote: Pancir026
                you screwed up here, along with your subject of enthusiasm.

                Yes i noticed laughing
                1. Pancir026
                  Pancir026 6 July 2017 18: 21 New
                  +2
                  Quote: nizhegorodec
                  noticed

                  Sniff like it?
      2. soldier
        soldier 6 July 2017 09: 39 New
        19
        the historian Oleinikov knows these figures - he figures in him. But it is a pity that Samsonov (Shirokorad) did not know Vinogradov with difficulty, since he undertook to write about the Romanian Front
        1. Uncle Murzik
          Uncle Murzik 6 July 2017 09: 42 New
          +1
          besides oleinikov, other historians are not familiar with these works, “thank you” to oleinikov! lol
          1. soldier
            soldier 6 July 2017 09: 45 New
            20
            Historians are familiar with this work, Uncle Murzik. After all, this is a publication of the RAS. And you raise your educational level, this is useful
            1. Uncle Murzik
              Uncle Murzik 6 July 2017 09: 49 New
              +2
              only the majority of historians about the losses of the Russian army basically have different numbers! apparently they do not reach the educational level to oleinikov! wassat
        2. Pancir026
          Pancir026 6 July 2017 13: 16 New
          +1
          Quote: soldier
          historian Oleinikov knows

          In addition to Oleinikov, there are others.
          Anton Kersnovsky "History of the Russian Army" Chapter XV. World War. The defeat of Romania
          http://www.vedomosti.md/news/Razgrom_Rumynii_V_Pe
          rvoi_Mirovoi_Voine
          1. soldier
            soldier 6 July 2017 14: 04 New
            17
            Pancir026
            In addition to Oleinikov, there are others.
            Anton Kersnovsky "History of the Russian Army" Chapter XV. World War. The defeat of Romania
            http://www.vedomosti.md/news/Razgrom_Rumynii_V_Pe
            rvoi_Mirovoi_Voine

            And Anton Kersnovsky has nothing to do with it.
            The loss figures that I cited above are named by Vinogradov in labor, published under the stamp of the USSR Academy of Sciences and built on archives.
            However, if the works of Soviet historical science are not your authority, then we will exclusively refer to Uncle Murzik (Armor) lol
            1. Pancir026
              Pancir026 6 July 2017 14: 17 New
              +1
              Quote: soldier
              However, if the works of Soviet historical science are not your authority

              Where did I write that the works of conscientious historians are not authoritative for me?
              Something you have reported in the heat of controversy.
              On October 22, Bulgarian and German troops captured Constanta. On November 23, forces under the command of Mackensen, a German general who broke through the Russian front near Gorlice in 1915, launched an offensive from Bulgaria on Bucharest. The attempt of the Romanian army on November 29 - December 3 to stop the Germans and Bulgarians on the Arges river turned into a brutal defeat. On December 6, 1916, the Germans entered Bucharest and developed the offensive further to the northeast.

              During the first four months of the war, 250000 Romanian soldiers were killed or captured, the Romanian command left at its disposal 70000 combat units. True, Romania had another 400000 recruits who were mobilized but did not have time to arm. The forecast of General Alekseev came true. In order to prevent the enemy from seizing the entire Romanian territory and attacking the southwestern regions of Russia, in December 1916 - January 1917, more than half a million Russian soldiers had to be urgently transferred to Romania and deployed at the front from Bukovina to the mouth of the Danube. As a result, the Germans and Austrians stopped in early January on the Focsana-Braila line, the old Wallachian-Moldavian border. The Russians occupied a 400-kilometer section of the front, the Romanians at first could only keep 70 km. Http://www.world-history.ru/countries_about/23
              51.html
              1. Koshnitsa
                Koshnitsa 6 July 2017 16: 43 New
                +3
                Oh, these tales of Uncle Murzik laughing
                According to the German People’s Union, ONLY in the territory of modern Poland, and this is the battles of the 14th and mid-15s, OVER 400 thousand German soldiers who died in WWII were buried.
                That’s all you need to know about the heat of that war.
                Every fifth German soldier who died in that war was killed on the territory of modern Poland !!!
                I brought you a document, Uncle Murzik, didn’t you translate it?
                1. Koshnitsa
                  Koshnitsa 6 July 2017 16: 45 New
                  +3
                  Deutsche krigsgraber in Ost- und Sudosteuropa Volksbund Edition Deutsche Kriegsgräberfürsorge eV 2003 edition. In paper, e-no.
                  By the way, in Poland, according to their data, 400 WWI and 000 WWII soldiers.
                  Are you specifically interested in Poland?
                  These are those killed in the battles of 1914-15 and the sanitary burial places of Silesia, Pomerania, Danzig, and parts of East Prussia.
                  Can you make a scan in Poland?
                  Naturally, 400 thousand is not counting unburied. Swamps, the bottom of the Vistula, Bzura, Ravka and a number of other reservoirs, impassable forests.
                  Like that of Gumilyov, when they flunked a couple of scouts, they just barely got out.
            2. Uncle Murzik
              Uncle Murzik 6 July 2017 14: 17 New
              +2
              an army soldier you are not Golovin not Kersonovsky not authorities, only oleyniks laughing ! One of the main Soviet researchers on the issue of losses in the war of 1914–1917, Mr. L.I. Sazonov, who had at his disposal all the material that remained in Russia on the issue of interest to us, came to the following sad conclusion {55}: "Establishing the exact figures for losses in general, as well as finding out from various categories of them, that is, killed, wounded, shell-shocked, captured and missing, it presents enormous difficulties due to the lack of appropriate, albeit raw, but sufficiently complete and reliable material. "
              1. soldier
                soldier 6 July 2017 14: 28 New
                18
                Dear Uncle!
                The article is devoted to a specific operation of July-August 1917 on the Romanian front: as it is called
                battle of Maraesti and Măraşesti

                And we are not talking about losses in general (there really is nothing to wander through the tree with thought) - but only in this operation. And they are named in the work of the Soviet academician Vinogradov (p. 217). In your work under the stamp of the USSR Academy of Sciences, and since you do not agree with them, it means that you do not agree with the official opinion of Soviet historical science. What else can be concluded?
                On the one hand - academic work - and on the other - verbosity and dubious Internet links.
                We are talking about specifics. Refute Vinogradov - only after a long work in the archives is desirable.
                1. The comment was deleted.
                  1. Pancir026
                    Pancir026 6 July 2017 15: 44 New
                    +1
                    Quote: Gopnik
                    don't take it seriously.

                    Here you are with the company, ... for serious ones, it’s just impossible to perceive. You would go to the ALTISTORY website, there you are at the time, fantasize at your full potential. But ignorance of reality .. talks about your insanity.
  3. Trapperxnumx
    Trapperxnumx 6 July 2017 11: 19 New
    +8
    I am becoming more and more convinced that in the 1917 year Russia could well end the war with victory and avoid all the subsequent horrors of the Civil War, famine, devastation, and other nasty things associated with civil wars. Obviously, this readiness for victory was also seen by many generals and rear rats, who longed for power themselves and who arranged the February riot for this.
    1. Pancir026
      Pancir026 6 July 2017 13: 13 New
      +2
      Quote: Trapper7
      More and more convinced that in 1917 Russia could well end the war with a victory

      Yeah ... and right there-
      Quote: Trapper7
      Obviously, this readiness for victory was also seen by many generals and rear rats, who longed for power themselves and who arranged the February riot for this.

      So what are you convinced of and what is your "conviction" based on if you are the second to your conclusion. Do you deny the first?
      1. Trapperxnumx
        Trapperxnumx 6 July 2017 13: 28 New
        +7
        I understood the question. I answer. In my opinion, in the absence of the February riot, followed by the abdication of the sovereign, the RIA could well have inflicted a decisive defeat on the enemy, at least AB, Bulgaria and Turkey, without which Germany would simply cease resistance.
        And seeing this readiness, irresponsible persons organized just this riot in order to take advantage of the fruits of victory.
        1. Pancir026
          Pancir026 6 July 2017 13: 41 New
          +2
          Quote: Trapper7
          The RIA could well inflict a decisive defeat on the enemy, at least AB, Bulgaria and Turkey, without which Germany would simply cease resistance.

          Absolute fantasy. Do you really think that England, France and America would give Russia. What did she want? You don’t know the material. Come not from their beautiful, but impossible wishes, but from the historical REALITIES.
          Under no circumstances would the WEST give Russia the Bosphorus, the Dardanelles, and especially Istanbul-Constantinople
          .
          Quote: Trapper7
          And seeing this readiness, irresponsible persons organized just this riot in order to take advantage of the fruits of victory.
          -This is your speculation. Unreasonable.
          1. Trapperxnumx
            Trapperxnumx 6 July 2017 13: 50 New
            +8
            1. I am writing about the fact that Russia could defeat the enemy, and not about the fact that then it could or could not get. Learn to read what is written, not what it seems.
            2.
            Quote: Pancir026
            -This is your speculation. Unreasonable.
            no more than your speculation about the consequences of Russia's victory in that war.
          2. Gopnik
            Gopnik 6 July 2017 13: 50 New
            +7
            Quote: Pancir026
            Under no circumstances would the WEST give Russia the Bosphorus, the Dardanelles, and especially Istanbul-Constantinople


            Where did Trapper7 write about the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles? Although, if we are talking about them, the West "gave" them to Turkey, or rather, Turkey itself took them, and the West wiped it off.

            Quote: Pancir026
            -This is your speculation. Unreasonable.


            This is a fairly common opinion, in fact. That the plot was made on the eve of the general spring offensive, which had high hopes
            1. Pancir026
              Pancir026 6 July 2017 14: 03 New
              +2
              Quote: Gopnik
              This is a fairly common opinion, in fact. That the plot was made on the eve of the general spring offensive, which had high hopes

              Explore at your leisure ...
              http://agitpolk.ru/2017/01/24/844/
              1. Gopnik
                Gopnik 6 July 2017 15: 12 New
                +2
                What for? One site name discourages even opening a link
                1. Pancir026
                  Pancir026 6 July 2017 15: 46 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Gopnik
                  What for?

                  Hmmm ... already one such phrase confirms the idea that you absolutely don’t know and don’t want to know the story, being in a state of nirvana after your fantasies, as if it’s bland. If ... well, then about the grandmother with grandfather. carp and so on ..
                  1. Gopnik
                    Gopnik 6 July 2017 16: 02 New
                    +2
                    I know a story better than you. Therefore, I do not need to push some left-wing articles from agitator sites. Maybe for you this is a revelation, but for me a long-passed and uninteresting stage.
                    1. Pancir026
                      Pancir026 6 July 2017 18: 23 New
                      +1
                      Quote: Gopnik
                      I know a story better than you.

                      Yes?
                      But what you write here has nothing to do with real history.
                      1. Trapperxnumx
                        Trapperxnumx 7 July 2017 08: 20 New
                        0
                        Quote: Pancir026
                        Quote: Gopnik
                        I know a story better than you.

                        Yes?
                        But what you write here has nothing to do with real history.

                        The real story is the victory of the Entente, the union in which Russia was a member. The revolution in Russia allowed Germany to last a year longer and for this it was necessary to enter the war already the United States. Without a revolution, Russia automatically entered the number of winners and all losses would not be in vain.
              2. Trapperxnumx
                Trapperxnumx 7 July 2017 08: 56 New
                0
                Quote: Pancir026
                Explore at your leisure ...
                http://agitpolk.ru/2017/01/24/844/


                You know, but I learned. Thanks, very interesting by the way. But you refer to this article as a confirmation of your arguments that Russia could not win, and yet it says the opposite - it could and should!
                The first myth is that the 1917 revolution of the year supposedly spontaneously arose, and no one prepared it; that they say it was the result of a political and socio-economic crisis caused by the war.
                The second common myth says that Russia could not take part in the First World War.
                The third myth says that Russia was a militarily underdeveloped country, and as a result, it was doomed to defeat in the First World War.

                and further
                Historical sources say otherwise.

                and here is a quote directly confirming what I wrote in the first comment
                “A firm decision to use the war to effect a coup was made ... 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 [1915] 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 in the country and Rejoicing

                yes, 1915 is indicated there, but it did not work out, the liberals did not give the second attempt to the tsar.

                I won’t give the whole article, but it just says that Russia could and should have won that war!
                At the same time, I beg you to carefully pay attention to my words - I never and never accuse the Bolsheviks of overthrowing the tsar and the collapse of the country. But it is so. Remark just in case.
  4. nizhegorodec
    nizhegorodec 6 July 2017 13: 47 New
    +9
    Quote: Trapper7
    and to avoid all the subsequent horrors of the Civil War, famine, devastation and other disastrous concomitant civil wars.

    And, I would add, perhaps, the second world
  5. Pancir026
    Pancir026 6 July 2017 14: 04 New
    +2
    Quote: nizhegorodec
    And, I would add, perhaps, the second world

    What are you ?? Is it right like this? Is there evidence?
    1. Uncle Murzik
      Uncle Murzik 6 July 2017 14: 27 New
      +2
      dear Pancir026 what evidence they can have! only ravings of monarchists! laughing
      1. Pancir026
        Pancir026 6 July 2017 14: 31 New
        +1
        Quote: Uncle Murzik
        what evidence they can have! only ravings of monarchists!

        I understand .. but I don’t understand the other, how much you need to be blinkered and frankly not knowing anything to insist on talking about something that will never happen again, because the story took place the way it happened.
        And this whole audience is persistently showing exactly this ... complete isolation from REALITY.
    2. Gopnik
      Gopnik 6 July 2017 15: 11 New
      +4
      Of course. Didn’t you read Soviet historians how the West created, fed, set Hitler against the world's first state of workers and peasants? Communism was a bugbear for Europe between the world wars, precisely for the struggle against communists and how the reaction to communism was created, developed and came to power by the NSDP, which ultimately led to 2MB. There would be no communist USSR, there would be no Hitler at the head of Germany.
      1. Pancir026
        Pancir026 6 July 2017 16: 01 New
        +1
        Quote: Gopnik
        There would be no communist USSR, there would be no Hitler at the head of Germany.

        Right?
        And you will be able to confirm this FALSE?
        Well, at least something more significant than repeating the Western point of view with rehashing local, Russian servants of the West. Like the Brewer, for example, and the Yeltsin Center in general. From where this drab construction is thrown into society.
        For example, you can draw your myth here about the fact that the Molotov Pact _Ribbentrop, supposedly the beginning of the war .. can you create a myth that hand over the USSR to Leningrad, there would be no victims, how many myths do you have in your arsenal?
        Stalin, who knew more than politics, wrote in his work “On the Ways to October” in 1925: “Already at the beginning of the XNUMXth century, Germany and Japan jumped so far that the first managed to overtake France and began to push England into the world market, and the second - Russia. From these contradictions the recent imperialist war arose, as you know. ”World War II, only the continuation of unresolved issues between your masters, and even directed against the country, which brought them a threat already by the fact that its ideology is not an ideology of wolf to man.
        1. Gopnik
          Gopnik 6 July 2017 16: 07 New
          +2
          "Ostap carried" (c) Some Yeltsin center with a brewer and "servants of the West" was blamed, Molotov and Ribbentrop formed, the Leningrad blockade. What are you talking about ???
          1. Pancir026
            Pancir026 6 July 2017 18: 23 New
            +1
            Quote: Gopnik
            "Ostap carried"

            Well, you are self-critical. Your whole company is here ... bears ..
        2. nizhegorodec
          nizhegorodec 7 July 2017 06: 35 New
          +1
          Quote: Pancir026
          .World War II, only a continuation of unresolved issues between your masters, and even directed against a country that it threatened them already with the fact that its ideology was not ideology human to human wolf.

          You don’t even understand your idol Stalin, the key point is just at the end of the statement and it coincides with the opinion Gopnik
          1. Pancir026
            Pancir026 7 July 2017 07: 58 New
            +1
            Quote: nizhegorodec
            You even your idol Stalin

            Judging by your writings, an idol in the fight against which you are breaking your forehead here will inevitably plunge you to dust. And you, dear one, in your lies already simply cross all borders, gopniks from the hysteria of history ..
            Stalin, who knew more than politics, wrote in his work “On the Ways to October” in 1925: “Already at the beginning of the XNUMXth century, Germany and Japan jumped so far that the first managed to overtake France and began to push England into the world market, and the second - Russia. From these contradictions, as we know, the recent imperialist war arose ”
            Where are you to Stalin ... ignoramus.
            1. nizhegorodec
              nizhegorodec 7 July 2017 08: 05 New
              0
              Quote: Pancir026
              an idol in the fight against which you are breaking your forehead here

              I do not fight corpses
              1. Pancir026
                Pancir026 7 July 2017 08: 08 New
                +1
                Quote: nizhegorodec
                I do not fight corpses

                You remind me of the character of one proverb, about a dead lion and a herd .. well, you understand who, so you should not continue to broadcast obvious bullshit.
                1. nizhegorodec
                  nizhegorodec 8 July 2017 07: 03 New
                  0
                  Quote: Pancir026
                  You remind me of a character in one proverb

                  you have very strange associations ... recourse maybe to a psychologist?
                  1. Pancir026
                    Pancir026 9 July 2017 08: 22 New
                    0
                    Quote: nizhegorodec
                    maybe to a psychologist?

                    You?
      2. zoolu350
        zoolu350 1 November 2017 11: 37 New
        0
        That's right, only the owners of the Fed began to feed Herr Hitler only after they themselves could not, together with their bulky-slave servants, eliminate the Soviet power. And the owners of the Fed determined Russia to be an expense in February 1917, because they did not take any steps against the authorities of the Provisional Government and the mess that began in Russia, because at that time everything was going according to their plan, but the Bolsheviks came and the plan of the owners of the Fed was covered with a copper basin.
  6. Pancir026
    Pancir026 7 July 2017 08: 59 New
    +1
    Quote: Trapper7
    no more than your speculation about the consequences of Russia's victory in that war.

    My speculation ?? You do not attribute a gag to me.
    The story has already taken place as it happened, and you ... all have some kind of fantasies on the topic if the grandmother were a grandfather ..
  7. Gopnik
    Gopnik 7 July 2017 11: 54 New
    0
    Pancir026,
    Uuuu, a very difficult case ... From Samsonov’s army, 2,5 corps, numbering less than 100 thousand people, were surrounded. Those. the definition of "hundred thousandth boilers in which entire armies were killed" does not fall.
    1. zoolu350
      zoolu350 1 November 2017 11: 45 New
      0
      But the Novogeorgievskaya fortress also does not fall?
  8. Pancir026
    Pancir026 9 July 2017 08: 23 New
    0
    Quote: Gopnik
    Oooo, a very bad case.

    For you? Play less in compstrategy, read more, maybe then you will understand something.