Soviet strike on fascist Germany ... in 1938

The main cause of damage is called economic problems. By the beginning of the war, the industry did not have time to turn the Wehrmacht into a well-equipped modern army.

Of the thousands of single Messerschmitts concentrated on the 21 evening on June 1941 near the Soviet borders, only half were the newest modification “F” (579 units). Despite the rush deployment of production lines, serial deliveries of Bf.109F could only be adjusted in early spring, just a few months before the attack on the USSR.

Even more depressing was the state of “Panzervaffe,” where the number of modern tanks (Pz.III and Pz.IV) was a quarter of the fleet of armored vehicles. For the attack on the USSR, 965 “triples” and 439 “fours” were allocated.

Of course, in 1941, the state of the armed forces was much better than at the very beginning of the war. In September, the 1939 of the year when there was an attack on Poland, there were only 211 “fours” and 98 “triples” of the first, still imperfect modifications (and also 20-25 command vehicles based on Pz.III).

In the prewar years, the German leadership gave the impression of madmen. For all the grandeur of designs with an eye on world domination, as of January 1938, the “Panzervaffe” armed forces had a “steel fist” consisting of 12 Pz.III tanks and three more menacing Pz.IV.

Could Guderian’s “steel wedges” at that time interfere with the advancing Red Army?

As of the beginning of the 1938, the Red Army was armed with over-BTN-2000 7 tanks with powerful (for that era) cannon armament and high mobility. The value of the combat mass (14 tons) and the security of these combat vehicles approximately corresponded to the Pz.III and Pz.IV of the first modifications. At the same time, the BT-7 has been massively exploited in the army for three years and was well known to the personnel.

The numbers do not give reason for doubt. In total for 18 months before the beginning of World War II, the main enemy was a militarily insignificant state. Based on the 100-multiple ratio of forces, our invincible and legendary could break the Wehrmacht, like a crystal vase. There was no reason to be afraid of Hitler, to pursue a “policy of appeasement” and conclude any covenants with him.

The official historiography describes the heroic successes of diplomacy, which managed to “push the frontier” to the West and provide time to begin re-equipping the army. Just forgot to add - the German army.

Our Red Army received all the necessary equipment by the middle of the 1930's.

Now experts will certainly enter the discussion, explaining that the above estimates are incorrect. A comprehensive analysis of the armed forces is needed. During this period, the Red Army had a 100 -fold superiority only in medium tanks. For other types of military equipment, 10-ti was observed, or even scary to imagine, 5-multiple superiority.

Experts will remind you that there were many other types of armored vehicles in service with the Panzervaffe. The German “two” (Pz.II) with an automatic 20-mm gun was formidable weapons, a real infantry fighter. However, in the conditions of complete absence of “real” tanks, combining firepower, mobility and security at the level of the Soviet BT-7 or T-28, the presence of these tankettes could no longer be meaningful.

Why is the armored trash that looks like children's toys in the parade in honor of the Fuhrer's 50 anniversary of the streets of Berlin? Because the Germans have nothing better

If you continue in the same vein, along with the primitive “units” and “deuces” it is worth considering in the calculations and 6000 light tanks T-26 and military equipment on their chassis, transferred to the Red Army in 1932-1937.

All the facts and figures say the obvious: in the prewar period, the Red Army could overturn the Wehrmacht in one blow, as planned: “with a little blood, on foreign territory”.

T-28 on the streets of Moscow, 1938 year. Powerful "breakthrough tanks". Anyone who doubts the combat capabilities of the T-28 should urgently become familiar with the feat of Sergeant Dmitry Malko.

The absolute catastrophic weakness of the German armed forces was noticeable in all.

As of the beginning of 1938, the main Luftwaffe fighters remained He.51 and Ar.64 — primitive biplanes armed with a pair of rifle caliber machine guns even by the standards of that time. The combat value of these flying coffins was demonstrated by the actions of the Condor Legion. In exchange for outdated aircraft, Messerschmitts were urgently sent to Spain, which could offer at least some resistance to Soviet fighters.

As of 1 in August, 1938 had a 643 fighter in the first line of the Luftwaffe, of which about half were Bf.109. The Germans did not waste time using the “grace” provided to them every day to prepare for war. Rearmament went at full speed. The production of the “Messerschmitt” was connected to the plant “Arado” in Warnemünde, the enterprises “Earl”, “Fizeler” and “Focke-Wulf”. As a result, on 19 September 1938, the Air Force already included 583 fighter Bf.109 of all types.

However, it was not too late. All built "Messerschmitts" belonged to the primitive modifications of A, B, C and D. Equipped with low-power engines, the vast majority - with machine-gun armament. Corresponding to the aggregate TTX Soviet I-16 "type 5", which at that time was built over 2000 units.

The first “mature” Bf.109E modification with Daimler-Benz “six hundredth series” engine insensitive to overloads with direct fuel injection, which developed more power with 40%, was still at the flight test stage with gun armament.

Another fantastic example. When attacking Poland, the Luftwaffe had only 12 Ju.88 high-speed bombers. For comparison: by the fall of 1939, front-line bomber aviation The Red Army Air Force managed to get over 4000 SB bombers from industry.

By June 1941, the ratio changed markedly. And not in our favor.

2 / 3 German squadrons already had a new type of bombers in service. 88 th Junkers - a unique in its class aircraft, best fit into the structure of the armed forces. In 1941, he had no analogues in the number of bombs used and the variety of combinations of bomb weapons.

In total, 523 “Junkers” was allocated for an attack on the USSR, while most of the aircraft belonged to the Ju.88A-4 and Ju.88A-5 modifications, much more sophisticated than those used in the 1939-40 military operations.

* * *

There is nothing more interesting than to refute established myths. Such simple and obvious mistakes made by smart people. When will they once again talk about “unfinished plans” and about the lack of time to prepare for war, ask historians a simple question: gentlemen, do you have a smaller field of view than an ant?

In your calculations, you give a "head start" to one side, but do not notice that the pace of development of the German military industry exceeded the domestic ones. In such conditions time worked on the enemy.

By the beginning of the war, the industry did not have time to turn the Wehrmacht into a well-equipped modern army. By the 1941 year, the Germans managed to catch up (and in some cases beat) the Soviet military industry only in terms of the quality of the equipment produced. If the truce continued for another couple of years, it would have surpassed the number.

The most advantageous power ratio was observed in 1937-1938. The Red Army had absolute quantitative and qualitative superiority in all categories. And then this superiority was gradually lost.

The development of the USSR military industry, as well as the appearance of “new types” of tanks and aircraft, did not change anything in this scenario. The German MIC evolved faster. Just like us, the Germans regularly created new models of military equipment.

Let me quote a small excerpt:

"... a few years before the advent of the T-34 to the factories of the company Henschel and Son, AG, the development of heavier vehicles began, and in 1937, this company received an order to build an 30-ton breakthrough tank that would have more powerful weapons and 50 mm armor. By 1941, the chassis of the new model was created and tested ... Next came VK 3001 (30 tons), VK3601 (36 tons) and VK 4501 (45 tons) models. The latest model especially liked Hitler, so as early as April 1942, to his birthday, the Führer received a modified and improved version of the new tank as a gift. ”

This is “Tiger”, gentlemen.

Suppose the war began a year later. And what would be the result of a successful “rearmament of the army”? If by the spring of 1942, the Germans had created a tank that did not promise anything good for Soviet military equipment of the “new types”, all that remained was to add the T-34 and KV to the list of “obsolete equipment” and begin an urgent re-equipment of the army to other, more advanced tanks.

* * *

The above reasoning is very vulnerable to criticism. There will always be those who find the complex simple and the simple difficult. After all, one can enumerate the details for a long time, making amendments on the “human factor”, comparing the combat experience and the strategic art of the generals.

But it could be easier. We are talking about the pre-war period, and we know the input parameters that leave little doubt.

What significance could the commander's abilities of Goth and Guderian have when they had three modern tanks for two?

Fascist reptile should be pressed into the bud. The question remains: why, instead of crushing blows with tank wedges, did you flirt with the Germans on the pretext of not being ready (who? Or us?) For war?

Used materials from sites:
http://ww2history.ru
http://www.airwar.ru
http://arsenal-info.ru
and the article of D. Khazanov “Eighty-eighth” against the USSR ”.

Comments

[Razvedka_Boem]

Arguing while sitting in a comfortable chair with the Internet about why you didn’t do this or that, it’s sometimes interesting, but you’d better write AI than such articles.

[Santa Fe]

And immediately the first comment is about a comfortable chair and an alternative history.

Dear, you are wrong. For history, as a humanities, a virtual experiment, the formulation and consideration of alternative development options as important as a full-scale experiment in physics. The “alternative reconstruction” of events helps in understanding the causes and mechanisms of the development of real events. And helps to draw lessons from the past.

[Cxnumx]

Quote: Santa Fe

Dear, you are wrong. For history, like the humanities, a virtual experiment, the formulation and consideration of alternative development options are as important as the full-scale experiment in physics. "Alternative reconstruction" of events helps in understanding the causes and mechanisms of development of real events. And helps to learn from the past

only here and does not smell "alt. history." it’s enough to see how the Finnish war went, how many innovations were after it (and there were just sea), what efforts were required to defeat the Finnish army (even if there were difficult terrain conditions). and it will become clear what the war would have turned to be unshielded, without combat experience, with poor support, outdated equipment, and other and other army. for example, you know that during the Finnish pilots were invited for combat sorties civil Aviation because combat pilots refused to fly in difficult weather conditions? this is an example of training personnel. and throw such an army against the German? it would be a disaster.

[Santa Fe]

Quote: K0

just look at how the Finnish war went,

Just look at the fighting against Japan (Hasan, Khalkhin Gol)
Or do you think the Red Army is completely inefficient?

Quote: K0

how many innovations after it (and there were just a sea of ​​them)

Did it somehow prevent the 1941 disaster? The answer is no
Then what's the point in your argument ?? The experience was gained directly in battles with the Germans, all the pre-war experience was useless.

But in 1938, the Germans would have had a harder time: they still didn’t have any Blitzkrieg experience, nor any experience in the battle for Britain.

[Cxnumx]

Quote: Santa Fe

Just look at the fighting against Japan (Hasan, Khalkhin Gol)
Or do you think the Red Army is completely inefficient?

to confront the German of that period? yes, I think. Experience is gained not only in battles, but also in the analysis of these same battles. the application of the Syrian experience in our troops now, for example.

Quote: Santa Fe

Did it somehow prevent the 1941 disaster? The answer is no

the answer is yes. because training, re-equipment, changing the structure of command and much more prevented a complete rout. for example, are you aware that before the Finnish we didn’t have that winter uniform that helped us so much in the 41st?

Quote: Santa Fe

But in 1938, the Germans would have had a harder time: they still didn’t have any Blitzkrieg experience, nor any experience in the battle for Britain.

Yes, only their experience of war with France is simply magnificent, and ours and Finland are simply depressing.
Here is a video on the shortcomings that the Finnish revealed, the list is impressive to the impossible.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egkKAZm5_x0

[Olgovich]

Quote: Santa Fe

But in 1938, the Germans would have had a harder time: they still didn’t have any Blitzkrieg experience, nor any experience in the battle for Britain.

Hit the Germans, I think it was necessary in 1940 year, during their attack on France: France and England could no longer get out and sit out, as during the "strange war" there was a war already in France itself. And the Germans would have been hit legally, like an invader and occupier.
Germany still weak on two fronts, having suffered any losses in Poland, could not withstand it.
But this is the details.
The author is right in the main: during our rearmament, Hitler rearm at times bigger and better..
And another moment, not reflected by the author: during our rearmament, Germany captured tremendous resources almost all of Europe, which allowed her simultaneously to increase at times its economy and, accordingly, its army.. This could not be allowed in anticipation of an imminent war.
An alternative course of history to the 1914 year, undertaken by the Soviet leadership in the hope that the damned capitalists would overstep each other was a gross mistake and led to the gravest consequences of the 1941 year ...
The 1939 pact of the year could be concluded, but only until May 1940 ... IMHO.

[albert]

Quote: Olgovich

The 1939 pact of the year could be concluded, but only until May 1940 ... IMHO.

You do not take into account the fact that if the USSR attacked Germany in 1938, England and France would immediately come to the aid of the Germans. declaring war on the Union. A strange war and the flight of Hess prove this. The author of the article generally excluded the political aspects of that time and considers the tanks.

[Olgovich]

Quote: albert

You do not take into account the fact that in the event of an USSR attack on Germany in 1938, England and France would immediately come to the aid of the Germans. declaring war on the Union.

This is what I take into account and say that it was necessary to beat 1940 the year when the war was blazing in France and neither Nie nor warring England could get out of their participation against the Hitler anymore!

[Vladimir 5]

Stalin strategically defeated everyone. The world has fought since 1939, and it has strengthened the Red Army and the state’s defense for a year and a half. Only within the state was politics dictatorial and unacceptable for a socialist nation-wide state. Therefore, there are 3 million prisoners in the first half of the war, and hidden sabotage and refusal to fight. (Most of the many accidents and malfunctions of military equipment are deliberate damage, if a large number of ordinary collective farmers and different nationalities do not want to fight) ... Remember the Finnish in 1939, the Finnish peasants called up from the villages with one mosin and bottles of gasoline were smashed Red Army divisions with tanks and aircraft. (loss of both sides). The Red Army was weak, and in 1941, especially in 1938, according to Suvorov, the Wehrmacht defeated “not by number but by skill” ..., Stalin wanted to avoid a war with Germany, for 1941 everything suited him. V. Molotov, accepting a note on declaring war from Ambassador Schulenburg, said - what we did wrong, we did everything and did everything ... Hitler thought to act more cunningly, but in 1942 he expressed it - if he knew about such resources The Red Army, there was no offensive against the USSR ... Vyvold, the USSR of that time was not ready for war, the enthusiasm of part of the people was breaking on the steel of discipline and training of the Wehrmacht ...

[Dimachrus]

What are the "millionaires" on the Mannerheim Line know? The division of volunteers from Europe on the Finnish side is a fiction? This is for your Finnish peasants with mosquitoes and bottles ;-) Sabotage of the opponents of the revolution has always been part of Stalin’s repressive measures, by the way there are wonderful notes from the then US ambassador to the USSR, I’m ready to share the link)))
Well, about the number and skill - the numerical superiority in the 41st was among Germany and the allies, the USSR at that time - the mass sabotage of orders from above in the border districts - the first aircraft ram was completed almost in the first minutes of the war because, contrary to the order, fighters in the border areas were without ammunition It’s also very interesting in what condition Vlasov (the same one) left the Lions to the Germans, how many military units acted according to the instructions of the General Staff in cases of attack on the USSR ...

[your1970]

Quote: Dimachrus

What are the "millionaires" on the Mannerheim Line you know

- And what is it? For troops, we’ll not "throw our hats!", But for trained, well-coordinated and well-armed? We broke through the entire line in a week, as soon as we could organize everything correctly, including with the use of the "Stalinist sledgehammers" ...

[Alexey RA]

Quote: your1970

- And what is it? For troops, we’ll not "throw our hats!", But for trained, well-coordinated and well-armed? We broke through the entire line in a week, as soon as we could organize everything correctly, including with the use of the "Stalinist sledgehammers" ...

The problem is that in the event of a war with Germany in 1939, no one will give us a month and a half of a respite after the first week of the war — to train troops and draw together forces from all over the USSR. So it’s necessary to fight as at the beginning of the Special Forces.

[Dimachrus]

Bunker "millionaire" - a long-term firing point worth from one million marks! - artillery and aviation, even with 100% hits, could not destroy them, they were destroyed by sappers, by laying at least a ton of explosives under enemy fire. I don’t argue - orders of the command to bomb, shoot for weeks can’t be called smart, but then there were no sensible commanders in the Red Army, as there were no means of fighting artillery or aviation

[Olgovich]

Quote: Vladimir 5

Stalin strategically defeated everyone. The world has fought since 1939, and it has strengthened the Red Army and the state’s defense for a year and a half.

Yeah, only the Red Army has gained interest, and Hitler for the same time, at times!

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Olgovich

Yeah, only the Red Army has gained interest, and Hitler for the same time, at times!

Percentage - is it 100 or 200? As of 1939, the Red Army struggled to deal with Finland, using the forces of all the western border districts and mobilizing enterprises of the second industrial center of the country.
Actually, the main advantage for the Red Army from the shift of the war in 1941 was precisely the Special Forces of the Soviet Union, which gave the top military-political leadership a real picture of the Red Army’s combat readiness, and not bravura reports about allegiance to the cause of Lenin-Stalin и the steady growth of military and political training.

[Olgovich]

Quote: Alexey RA

Percentage - is it 100 or 200?

And this

Quote: Alexey RA

Actually, the main advantage for the Red Army from the shift of the war in 1941 was precisely the Special Forces of the Soviet Union, which gave the top military-political leadership a real picture of the combat effectiveness of the Red Army,

how many percent?

[Julio Jurenito]

It seems to me, gentlemen, that you are all looking in the wrong direction.

Let's start with the fact that people are not fighting hardware. The Red Army in real 1941 had a decisive superiority over the Wehrmacht both in the amount of iron, and in its quality, and in personnel, but we all know the result. So, there is no need for illusions that in the event of a preemptive strike in 1938 the Red Army would have torn apart the almost defenseless Third Reich along with the Wehrmacht.
In exactly the same way, the 50 million Arabs who inhabited the countries surrounding Israel and were armed to the teeth with completely modern Soviet weapons could not cope with 5 million Israel for half a century.
The tragedy of the summer of 1941 to this day remains a mystery behind seven seals. How could what happened? How could the USSR, right from the moment of its foundation prepare for war against the whole of Europe, build an army for the last penny, at the cost of poverty, hunger and peasant farmers ’screaming about the impending war and vigilance from every matugalnik and iron, then still in the overwhelming mass of coal, obsessed spy mania, suddenly look at the preparations for war ?!
If I put aside the Rezunov ravings, I have two versions:
1. Stalin received through direct channel Hitler’s personal non-aggression guarantees. The circumstantial evidence of this is the sudden and mysterious visit to Moscow on May 15, 1941 by Junkers-52. Let me remind you that exactly 5 days before this flight, on May 10, 1941, Rudolf Hess, the second man of the Reich, made his more than strange flight to Britain. If you want to know the details, google it.

That is, there were clearly stormy geopolitical graters at the highest level.

And from this we stretch the thread to version number two.
2. Stalin, of course, knew about the impending attack, and about its timing, and about the forces by which this attack was prepared, but DELiberately allowed the opponent to deliver the first blow.
In this case, the main gain was on the side of the one who would be the victim of unprovoked aggression and, therefore, who would be supported in the war and who would be punished by the Anglo-Saxons - Great Britain and the USA. That is precisely and only why Stalin allowed Hitler to start a war on his terms. And the threat to get the WB and the USA not in allies, but in real enemies was real: after all, hardly a year has passed since the USSR was expelled from the League of Nations for the Finnish War, and the command of the Anglo-French Air Force was preparing a retaliation strike at the Baku oil fields.
That's just, hoping to quickly and quickly repel this first strike, and then powerfully counterattack and burst into Europe on the shoulders of the retreating enemy (namely, this was the scenario of all strategic team games of 1940-41, re-read Zhukov and others), Stalin did not expect that The Red Army will be so disastrously incompetent ....


Well, and if the Soviet Union attacked the Reich in 1938, and even, for example, before the Anschluss of Austria, the entire Western world would instantly take up arms, and the very existence of our country would be in great doubt.

[aybolyt678]

Quote: Julio Jurenito

The tragedy of the summer of 1941 to this day remains a mystery behind seven seals. How could what happened? How could the USSR

There is no secret, firepower and weapons are compared ... dibilism. In 1941, every German tank was equipped with a VHF radio station .. The battle near Dubna - with our threefold superiority in firepower and 10-fold in armor, the tanks were targets .. the tanks communicated using flags .. from the commander's tank he had to get out a news and semaphore. The Germans knew this communication system and simply shot them. Through the radio communications of the Germans, all kinds of troops interacted well. Unlike us. Fight not by number but by skill. we were like Indians

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Olgovich

how many percent?

Judging by the growth in training of the headquarters of the ZOV in 1940, it is at least 100%.
The main result of the Special Military Forces is the beginning of real combat training in the troops. Moreover, year-round and without conventions. And then before the SFV the Red Army practically did not have the same winter training - because of the prohibition of training at low temperatures. There were also no infantry exercises with live firing artillery.

VOTE. Do not scare me with this. We were often scared. We were afraid that if a little frost would let the fighter go, we also did not shoot live shells through the infantry. We do not need to scare, we will somehow tell. I believe that we are not doing anything criminal, we ask comrade vague questions. Indeed, by orders in peacetime it is forbidden to shoot live ammunition.
KURDYUMOV. But nevertheless, in the Leningrad Military District, at one time we trained troops in cooperation and shot artillery from the head of our troops at the training grounds. The infantry attack was accompanied by artillery fire. Shot Dimitriev and other comrades present at our meeting.
VOTE. And I shot, but it's forbidden. We are talking about this.
KURDYUMOV. What do you want the order to say that shoot, and if you kill someone, no one will answer.
VOTE. We had a fire shaft prohibited, it was regarded as a wrong action, as harmful.

In the memoirs, Tymoshenko’s arrival is associated with the beginning of horror-horror-horror: full-length marches and live firing.

[Olgovich]

Quote: Alexey RA

Judging by the growth in training of the headquarters of the ZOV in 1940, it is at least 100%.

And only same percent increased Nazi training after real victorious operations carried out in France, etc. for the same time? 400% at least.

[NordUral]

And not only defense, but also the foundation for the transfer of industry beyond the Urals.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Santa Fe

Just look at the fighting against Japan (Hasan, Khalkhin Gol)

That's for sure...

Comrade Stalin ... As expected, there were no divisions in the encirclement, the enemy either managed to withdraw the main forces, or rather, there were no large forces in this area for a long time, and a specially trained garrison was sitting, which is now completely destroyed. ..

© NPO comrade Voroshilov.

In the August offensive, the 6th, 11th tank, 7th, 8th, 9th motorized armored brigades were involved. A total of 8 tank battalions of two tank brigades plus one single tank battalion for three motorized armored brigades. So, the 11th tank brigade at the beginning of the offensive was torn in half - two battalions support the advance of the troops of the northern group, two battalions - the southern group. The 6th tank brigade, firstly, was torn apart - one of its tank battalions leaves the command of the army group as a reserve - the other three battalions are delayed at the crossing and have no time to start the offensive. In total, five tank battalions may be involved at the beginning of the offensive - two in the northern and three in the southern group.
Further, the course of the operation: with a depth of operation of 20-25 km in the first day, the southern group advanced about 8-10 km, the northern group - 4 km, found the Japanese stronghold on the way (the very same height of Fuy - “Finger”, Remizov’s height is a different height) and instead of flinging it around with mobile troops, blocking with infantry and moving on, he began fiercely, furiously, frantically banging his head on his strong point. The second day: reserves were introduced at the front of the northern group (the same battalion of the 6th tank brigade and 9th motorized armored brigade), the furious penetration of the wall with the forehead continues with unrelenting power. The southern group goes to the "meeting point" and takes a seat to smoke and recover. Accordingly, at night, the Japanese begin to withdraw troops and roll out equipment from the semicircle with battalions - with success. Finally, only on August 23 — on the fourth day of the encirclement operation with an operation depth of 25 km — did the Japanese stronghold at the Finger height be finished, and the Japanese troops in the central sector of the front fell into a more or less complete encirclement.

© D. Shein AKA litl_bro

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Santa Fe

Or do you think the Red Army is completely inefficient?

This is not what we consider. This believes Comrade Tymoshenko:

2. The army has up to 1080 titles of existing charters, manuals and manuals. The main charters - the Field Service, the Internal Service, the Disciplinary and some combat manuals of the combat arms are outdated and require radical processing. None: instruction for driving large military formations (armies), instruction for attacking and defending fortified areas, and instruction for actions of troops in the mountains.
3. Most military units exist in temporary states not approved by the People's Commissar. Staffing and time services are running. About 1400 states and timesheets, according to which the troops live and are supplied, are not approved by anyone and published for the leadership as temporary.
(...)
1. By the time of the acceptance and surrender of the People’s Commissariat of Defense, there was no operational plan of war, operational plans, both general and private, were not developed and lacked.
The General Staff has no data on the state of covering the borders. The decisions of the military councils of the districts, armies and the front on this issue are unknown to the General Staff.
(...)
1. The People’s Commissariat does not have an accurately established actual strength of the Red Army at the time of admission. Accounting personnel due to the fault of the Main Directorate of the Red Army is in an extremely neglected state.
(...)
The main shortcomings in the training of troops are:
1) The low training of the middle command staff in the company link is a platoon and the especially weak training of the junior command staff.
2) Weak tactical training in all types of combat and reconnaissance, especially small units.
3) Unsatisfactory practical field training of troops and their inability to carry out what is required in a combat environment.
4) The extremely weak training of the combat arms on the battlefield: the infantry cannot cling to and break away from the fire shaft, the artillery can not support the tanks, the aviation can not interact with the ground troops.
5) The troops are not trained in skiing.
6) The use of camouflage worked out poorly.
7) The troops have not worked out fire control.
8) The troops are not trained in attacking fortified areas, building and overcoming barriers and forcing rivers.

Etc.
It is enough to say that when checking the Red Army in 1940, a shortcoming was discovered:

BT-7 96 cars
BT-2 34 cars
BT-5 46 cars
T-26 103 cars
T-38 193 cars
T-37 211 cars
T-27 780 cars
BA-10 94 cars
BA-6 54 cars
FAI 234 cars

[your1970]

Quote: Alexey RA

It is enough to say that when checking the Red Army in 1940, a shortcoming was discovered:
BT-7 96 cars
BT-2 34 cars
BT-5 46 cars
T-26 103 cars
T-38 193 cars
T-37 211 cars
T-27 780 cars
BA-10 94 cars
BA-6 54 cars
FAI 234 cars

"And where could such a breakthrough of armored vehicles be done? Have you drunk them in the national economy?" Well, tanks, you can plow them, but BA of all stripes?
Whatever collective farm chairman would dare to come to BA for a meeting in the area ?

[Alexey RA]

Quote: your1970

"And where could such a breakthrough of armored vehicles be done? Have you drunk them in the national economy?" Well, tanks, you can plow them, but BA of all stripes?

Break, burn, drown, disassemble for parts - in short, lose and do not reflect the write-off in the documents.

Raised archival material since 1929 for accounting, special. sending and writing off combat vehicles did not give a significant change in reducing shortages, because decommissioning of military vehicles until 1936 was not conducted.
The number of decommissioned vehicles, for example T-27 - 26 units - is clearly not true, because the production of these machines began in 1931 and over 10 years this figure should undoubtedly be much larger ...

© Shein / Ulanov.
But all these tanks and BA were in the staff of the units, and, in which case, the tasks of these units would be cut on the basis of the availability of "paper" equipment.

[Малый]

Stupidly dismantled for parts .... and it was .....

[stalkerwalker]

Quote: Santa Fe

It is enough to look at the hostilities against Japan (Hassan, Khalkhin Gol). Or do you think the Red Army is completely incapable?

If Marshal Blucher headed the Western direction, then yes .... The Red Army would not have reached Brest ... With all the consequences ....

Quote: Santa Fe

But in 1938, the Germans would have had a harder time: they still didn’t have any Blitzkrieg experience, nor any experience in the battle for Britain.

Excuse me, darling ... Blitzkrieg experience - the experience of coordinating units and formations in combat conditions. This is only a military component. And there are others, such as mobilization, production, the problem of competence of the highest staff of the Red Army. And to focus on weapons models, this is not comme il faut. Or again, we will remember the "miracle tanks"?
In order to make such a decision as “The USSR’s strike on fascist Germany ... in the 1938 year”, it was necessary not only to have political will, but also the background in the form of knowledge of the state of the Army and Navy at that time, including the mobilization capabilities of the USSR both in terms of human resources and on technology and ammunition. And in this regard, the situation in the USSR was far from rosy.

[NIKNN]

Quote: stalkerwalker

To make such a decision as “The USSR strike on fascist Germany ... in 1938”, it was necessary to possess not only political will, but also the background in the form of knowledge of the state of the Army and Navy at that time, including the mobilization capabilities of the USSR

Here is the first one I don’t want to argue with ... Pseudo sofa strategists, politicians and experimenters ... What do you have to do with the army? I'm not talking about general education (except for Harvard brochures) in this area ... Do you consider the number of tanks, and when would you have heard about rear support and the impact on the nature of hostilities of rocky, and especially railway tracks? None of you pseudo-strategies can even plan the advancement of a company to a depth of a kilometer. You what you think in the military academies the rear teach how to sell property and remove prostitutes? ... You are greatly mistaken in your knowledge and do not crap to go where you should not be. I am sure you would be standing near the Urals and there would be 3 more strands of deaths. Amateurs do not annoy ... well, please ...

[stalkerwalker]

Quote: NIKNN

You are greatly mistaken in your knowledge

The fact of a sufficiently successful evacuation of enterprises of important military importance suggests that the military-political leadership of the USSR, headed by I.V. Stalin, understood that the upcoming war had a chance to go completely different from what was planned in the plans to cover the borders of the USSR. Those. evacuation plans were developed in advance, communicated to the heads of enterprises and superiors of the NKPS.
Separately about the railway workers.
Having completed the practice of assistant commander at the station of Oryol, I heard from the lips of the oldest worker then that during the war years Oryol passed up to 70 pairs of trains per day. And this is with that completely bombed and destroyed infrastructure. At the end of the 70's 50-55, pairs of trains per day consisted of wear and tear on the workers of the locomotive depot, train compilers (or couplers in that terminology). And why was it worth restoring broken and shot locomotives?
The work of the rear has always remained in the shadow of great battles and battles ....

[NIKNN]

Here is um about tm .. It is impossible to evaluate the combat readiness and combat readiness of armies by the number of military equipment that pseudo-historians use ... there is staff work and planning and supply and planning of a database taking into account the possibility of producing military equipment and the possibility of supplying troops with prepared crews, (I draw attention), and this means not only the organization of military schools, but also the transfer of relevant DB experience ... and enough funds for effective training .. (of which we certainly could not be proud of the situation at the front) Yes, in general, I already wrote the above pseudo-strategies that they don’t see beyond the amount of military equipment and argue with them do not respect yourself ... This is called military science , and not all amateurs should analyze it with the appearance of experts .. Shame on you, put yourself in front of professionals like that ...

[saigon]

You are talking about such trifles, the carrying capacity of the fleet of the same tank division, and the presence of the same cars in the divisions is boring.
These are all the little things, the main thing is a lot of tanks! And how tanks without fuel will go even more than a second question, about a communications instrument at that time, a separate song .1938 is a wonderful year, but what to get to the German you need to go to the Baltic States and Poland with battles, and there the German areas are strengthened. And BT they certainly during the assault will help to strengthen the areas and how to pull up artillery and shells to deliver it just do silence.
The whole article is tanks, blitzkrieg planes, and about artillery they forgot, after all, is not a task.

[NIKNN]

Quote: saigon

that’s not the task.

It is not a task that amateurs are trying to cut the story. I just touched the rear, and they are experts in politics, they lived there and know by hearsay ... I’m saying .. Harvard with brochures steers ... I’ll add so for strategists that would pull mobilization reserves to the borders of Germany we five-year plow plowing nabo was shocking work ...., it’s at a cost ... these are your 2000 tanks and 12000 aircraft ... Well, roughly of course, I'm nervous, but not cheap ...

[naidas]

Quote: Santa Fe

But in 1938 the Germans would have been more difficult

And better look at the map for September 1939:
Hit across Poland (and get a response from the Entente and Germany), in 1938. it was possible if the Czechs were asked to strike with impunity on the basis of a treaty.
And since September 1939, due to the partition of Poland-Zarana with the support of Germany, the Entente surrendered Poland to the Germans, for an attack on the USSR and supported it in a collision.
By 1941, the Entente itself had fallen under the blows of the Germans, which is why it was possible to negotiate with the west.

[YELLOWSTONE]

it smells worse here, as if the Brest parades went lower
The Soviet Union didn’t cultivate, it cultivated against it by fencing off Poland, which, under British guarantees, didn’t want to collectively defend itself against the USSR, and before that, the Soviet troops had not allowed to defend Czechoslovakia,
It is hard to believe that the author did not see the photos of the real German-Polish parades before, and does not know that nobody shared Poland, because the occupied Poles of Western Belarus and Western Ukraine were not part of it.
and as regards trade, so other countries refused to sell all the necessary USSR to him, and the Germans set the condition to take not with gold but with copper and other goods that they already needed.

Quote: Santa Fe

You do not know the fact that the USSR fought on the side of Germany from 1939 to the summer of 1941?

already fought it turns out together with Finland and against Mongolia

[YELLOWSTONE]

and China ........

[svd-xnumx]

what efforts were required to defeat the Finnish army (even if there were difficult terrain conditions).

And there was also the experience of the Spanish Civil War, where I had to face "backward" German weapons.

[Bogatyrev]

Amendment - the pilots of the Civil Air Fleet at that time were a reserve of bomber aircraft. Many of them, working in the North, were the only ones who could perform tasks in any weather.
Subsequently, most of them flew to the DBA throughout the war - to Berlin and Koenigsberg.
So what about the Civil Air Fleet - this is in vain.
As for the Finnish - a difficult question.

[avt]

Quote: Santa Fe

"Alternative reconstruction" of events

Fantasy is called, or simply fantasy, again, no relation to history and actually not having facts. So Oleg! Learn, study and study again, then delusional questions

Fascist reptile should be pressed into the bud. The question remains: why, instead of crushing blows with tank wedges, did you flirt with the Germans on the pretext of not being ready (who? Or us?) For war?

will not excite, until complete inflammation of the brain. Then you will know exactly who and when did not let the Soviet troops into Czechoslovakia in order to fulfill the obligations in accordance with the signed mutual assistance agreement, then knowledge will come about who and how, and most importantly, was negotiating in Moscow BEFORE signing the pact ,, Ribbentrop-Molotov "and why, in fact, instead of entering the war as part of the coalition, I had to sign it. So go ahead, well, on a campaign for knowledge. In general, the level of moderation on the site To post such frank nonsense is something! More and more opuses worthy of placement in the old magazine ,, Murzilka "from the USSR

[anykin]

If the Germans had three tanks, did other European states have one tractor each?

[Fitter65]

Quote: avt

More and more opuses worthy of placement in the old magazine ,, Murzilka "from the USSR

Here, in vain you are so, about the magazine "Murzilka". Very informative was for children of a certain age. I remember even studying in grades 5-6, I read this magazine, it was written out to my younger brother, it told us in an interesting and accessible language about our history, country, army, nature of different regions, animals, about a lot of things and how to make different toys from paper, and what pictures of different tank-airplanes-ships with their description ... In general, a development-recognizing magazine was very beautiful. Which incidentally carried out the most important, initial education of a citizen and patriot of his great country ...

[avt]

Quote: Fitter65

. Very informative was for children of a certain age.

KEY

Quote: Fitter65

for children of a certain age.

But

Quote: Fitter65

even in grades 5-6

As if, if not, “Young Technician”, then “Youth Technique” should have been studied.

[Fitter65]

UT and the Skillful Hands application were written to him for me, as well as the Pioneer and TM magazines, I started reading at the age of 14-15, this is already 6-7 grade. And there was also a wonderful supplement to the magazine "Around the World", called "The Seeker" ... There, in the late 70s and early 80s, such beautiful things printed, what FANTASY was there ... And the "secrets of forgotten civilizations" in the same "Youth Techniques." By reading “Behind the Wheel”, by the age of 14 I knew the device and the rules for driving a motorcycle ... Therefore, at that time print media carried a very large educational burden. And considering at that time the lack of the Internet, in which there is so much different “trash”, the “Murzilka” in comparison with the Internet looks like a fount of knowledge. By the way, about the creation of the cartoon "Uncle Au" was told in Murzilka, and it was said that this cartoon was created based on (!) The stories of the Finnish writer Hannu Mäkel, I turn it on for my granddaughters periodically, well, think about it - foreign writers print to Soviet children, I'm still silent about Carlson ...

[forester]

There is nothing to argue about - history has no subjunctive mood.

[Mikhail3]

For history, as a humanities science, a virtual experiment, the formulation and consideration of alternative development options are as important as the full-scale experiment in physics

Humanities is not a science. No experiments can be carried out in it, in principle, since there are no criteria to rely on. An experiment is an action that is reproduced under exactly the same conditions.
The idle chatter about "what would happen if" was chatter. No more. Do not call it science, it’s funny and embarrassing. Chatting is our pleasure. But only ...
So, in the order of idle chatter. In 38, Hitler did not attack us. So the only way to start a war is to attack yourself. In this case, Germany (Britain (over which the sun did not set then) and America would start pumping Germany and equipment. In a matter of weeks, the German army would surpass the Soviet in all technical indicators. Total?
Considering that the Soviet army did not have combat experience, the readiness was from low to none, just as there were no technicals for tanks ... And by the way, England and America would have provided Germany and their troops with that, all the same, for "repelling unprovoked Soviet aggression." The whole world would be covered with propaganda materials in which bestial Cossacks burst into the homes of peaceful Europeans and eat children ...
Stupidity is all this.

[Akuzenka]

Oh yes, this is the magic word "Alternative" !!!!! if the USSR in 1938 attacked (delirium) Nazi Germany, then the alternative would be such that immediately ALL Western "civilization" would join the "reflection". Just to grab a piece from the USSR. At that time, the most powerful army in Europe - the French, then the Polish. And England would not stand aside, but the United States, likewise. These countries had non-aggression treaties with Germany and military assistance. That is, the author did not even bother to study the political conditions of that time. Oh, about the planning of offensive operations of the Red Army against Poland, France, etc. didn't say anything at all ?! How much? Yes, because even the British spy Rezun failed to invent them. The Red Army did not have for this technical base for this. It’s very poor in the country with this began to improve, and then attack?

[GAF]

Quote: Santa Fe

For history, as a humanities science, a virtual experiment, the formulation and consideration of alternative development options are as important as the full-scale experiment in physics

Virtual experiments with history are not important, but possible as fantasy and nothing more. What was, it was. With whom is the “hangover” of the USSR would have piled on Germany, with which there was not even a common border. The loyal attitude of Europe towards Germany was demonstrated by the Munich agreement of 1938. Flaring up (with whom it doesn’t happen), the author of the opus decided that they were capable of "cutting the nut" all over Europe on high-speed BTs. All Europe would have opposed the aggressor, including "our sworn friends" - the British. It was necessary to fight Europe later, but with a completely different alignment of forces and motivation both on their part and on ours.

[Vladimir 5]

The main political moment is missed. Hitler in 1938 had not yet unleashed a world war, so most countries would have taken the side of Germany, for Bolshevism, with its actions "towards the world dictatorship of the proletariat," was the main danger to European countries. Only Hitler’s ill-conceived behavior, - began to fight with all of Europe, and then the whole world (declaring the USA a war - Hitler’s most ill-conceived and deadly move), created the conditions for converging in one allied camp with Stalin ... V. Churchill said that with the devil in union, if only to defeat this barbarian Hitler ...

[redf]

Soviet strike on fascist Germany ... in 1938

The author does not know history and georgafia well.
In 1938, the USSR and Germany did not have a common border.
An amphibious strike was completely ruled out.
Therefore, it is not clear how the USSR could have attacked Germany in 1938.
As for the variant allied for the USSR, Poland, if there was a choice, I would put it on the sea landing. This is more believable.
And in the event of a preliminary attack, first on Poland, the USSR would be completely protected from it and its allies. And then he would no longer be in Germany.

[210ox]

And what did you want. This is Kaptsov ... Although there is a rational link in this. Was that just the command of the Red Army in the same 38-39 years? Marshals Kulik, Voroshilov or Budyonny were not able to fight the Wehrmacht at any time. .

Quote: Razvedka_Boem

Arguing while sitting in a comfortable chair with the Internet about why you didn’t do this or that, it’s sometimes interesting, but you’d better write AI than such articles.

[Akuzenka]

If you are talking about the range and amount of throwing hats, then yes, the scope for imagination is wide.

[andrewkor]

Joining your opinion, fellow countryman, the author clearly messed up the sites, he would have to have an alternative.

[Monster_Fat]

I have often visited the beautiful "tank museum" in Parola in Finland. Finland had an army, two-thirds armed with captured Soviet equipment and, in particular, tanks. The museum has many rare examples of Soviet armored vehicles (there is also a captured T-50), as well as the mechanisms, equipment, weapons of Soviet tanks of different eras. What struck me (especially after reading Beshanov’s books), that, in complete contrast to what is read in literature, about the unreliability and obsolescence of Soviet armored vehicles of the 30s, the Finns, on the contrary, speak of it in superlative terms, as of completely combat-ready, reliable, convenient and unpretentious in service. And by the way, what I saw with my own eyes confirms this - inside the armored vehicles of the 30s it was like a "toy" - everything was carefully crafted, neatly trimmed, everywhere there is a marking on every detail. Engines, mechanisms are distinguished by careful finishing, high-quality performance, you can say they are just "licked". Standing next to German technology, surprisingly, was distinguished by a more "rude" performance, maybe from what was already produced during the war.

[Mikhail3]

We have a museum in Smolensk, where something is presented. Processing say gun bed just struck me ... and struck unpleasantly. Why the devil was cutting the finest thread of huge diameter? How many guns did the front not receive while these records were set? In my opinion, a lot should be simplified by adding in quantity. Here the Germans were more right ...

[Akuzenka]

Yes, on some sort of site for children of younger kindergarten age. But I think it will not work there either. The alternative people, for the most part, are friends with logic and roughly represent both the political and technical side of the situation. This is not close here.

[foxic]

Actual article at the moment ..... We are sitting and doing nothing with the new fascists in Kiev. They strengthen, knit the population with blood. A new generation is growing up, who has already "pissed" in their ears that Muscovites are an eternal enemy ......
Recognize the republic and crush the Nazis in spite of any reputation losses ..... It will not be easy anyway. Not for that, the arrogant Saxons once again degenerated, so that they just sat on the sidelines ..... the war will be

[Uncle lee]

If the USSR attacked Germany in the year 38, then it would be an aggressor and would fight against the whole world.

[Santa Fe]

Why no one, neither the USSR nor the European powers, did anything to stop Hitler in the 1930-s, the answer is as obvious as the question itself. Growing up a monster, in the hope that he will bite his neighbor. Stalin won a tactical victory, beat Britain and France, came under attack Wehrmacht. But after two years, he himself fell under the blow of a multiply intensified enemy; strategic defeat, which almost cost the loss of the country

[Dart2027]

Quote: Santa Fe

Why no one, neither the USSR nor the European powers, did anything to stop Hitler in the 1930s,

You do not know the fact that the USSR was the only one who tried to fight with fascism as well? Help from Spain, an attempt to offer freedom help to Czechoslovakia, etc.?

Quote: Santa Fe

Stalin won a tactical victory, defeated Britain and France, who were hit by the Wehrmacht

Not tactical, but strategic, because it frustrated all the enemy’s plans in London and Washington.

[avt]

Quote: Santa Fe

You do not know the fact that the USSR fought on the side of Germany from 1939 to the summer of 1941?

Here it is not necessary to lie to begin with. Or stupidly do not know the facts, yes-ayno voiced publicly? The USSR went to the border outlined by ANTANTA and then called the Curzon Line, taking away the territories obtained by Poland after the attack on the RSFSR and the signing of the Riga Treaty. Further, the USSR did not declare war on Poland and Poland, in the person of the emigrant government in London either. Moreover - having fled from Poland, she ordered that the Red Army not be armed. and the troops of the Red Army included in it. Wringing his hands in an intellectual hysteria a la Svanidzelechin, Stalin did everything competently de jure and de facto.

[Razvedka_Boem]

About this photo there was already an article on VO.
And in return for the supplied raw materials, the USSR received machines and other finished products, the production of which at that time was fraught with difficulties.
These couple of years of postponement of the war played a big role in a positive sense for the USSR.
And the fact that war is inevitable, Stalin perfectly understood and, being in a very difficult situation, did everything to delay the start of the war.

[parusnik]

And you do not know the fact that Poland fought on the side of Germany in 1938 ..? During the partition of Czechoslovakia, received Teshinsky region ..

[Avenich]

Quote: Santa Fe

You do not know the fact that the USSR fought on the side of Germany from 1939 to the summer of 1941?

Brest September 22, 1939. On the podium - German General Heinz Guderian and Soviet brigade commander Semyon Krivoshein.

The counter question is how the photo of the German troops leaving Brest proves that the USSR fought on the side of Germany. Only the fact that the German and Soviet commanders were on the same platform.

[Vladimir 5]

Avenich - The lack of truthful information makes our citizens stupid. The Molotov-Ribentrop Pact, in its secret part, had a detailed division of Poland after its occupation. The USSR was supposed to strike from the east. to Poland, but Stalin was pulling the time, to which the Germans complained and asked to start an offensive under the treaty, and only on September 17 parts of the Red Army invaded Poland, but Poland still resisted and the capital Warsaw defended itself. The Red Army launched an invasion in large tank columns, the Polish troops could not fight on two fronts, because the commander of the Polish Armed Forces Ridz-Smiglo issued an order to retreat to Romania and not engage in battles with the Red Army, and only to engage in battles if necessary. Fights by the Polish armed forces took place not infrequently, and the number of casualties was hundreds on both sides. For example, during the transfer of Brest by the Germans of the Red Army, separate Polish units still fought with the Germans in some areas of Brest, so these Polish units in Brest were finished off by the Red Army by combat operations and so on. The sagging of our citizens in history continues to remain at a deplorable level, different and cannot be with such sources ......

[Dimachrus]

At the 1928 plenary session, Stalin said that the country has 10 years to recreate industry and the army, or "they will crush us." The basis is the high-profile start of the construction of the "engineering miracle - Maginot line" separating Germany from France. Do you imagine the state of the Wehrmacht at that time? After the WWII, reparations, the ban on the creation and production of weapons, Germany was in a deplorable state and Europe decided to spend 10 years creating a powerful defensive system, while the demoniac corporal in Germany was known only to beer pubs!
About the war of 39-40 years with Finland, it was said above that the Red Army had neither the experience of military operations, nor the experience in providing everything necessary during the military operations. Plus, the author did not mention the fact that England and France had plans to seize the Baku oil fields in the summer of the 40th year if the Finns were successful - to crush the Germans in 38 under such conditions?
Strange opus .....

[Andrey Yuryevich]

Quote: Uncle Lee

If the USSR attacked Germany in the year 38, then it would be an aggressor and would fight against the whole world.

I agree, especially since the German industry was actively helped to build by the Anglo-Americans. we would automatically receive these countries as a military adversary, not an anti-Hitler coalition, but an anti-Stalinist one, and Japan would undoubtedly join the war then, I’m already silent about the Finns, so the author walks past the box office with his fantasies.

[igordok]

Quote from Uncle Lee

If the USSR attacked Germany in the year 38, then it would be an aggressor and would fight against the whole world.

About Poland forgot. Without the capture of Poland, only East Prussia is available. When attacking Prussia, Psheks, like ordinary "European hyenas," will "help" Germany. But all the "democracies" of the world will respond to the conflict with Poland.
PS capitalized capital is a country. Poland, with the capital, is the territory.

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote from Uncle Lee

If the USSR attacked Germany in the year 38, then it would be an aggressor and would fight against everything

Would fight against the whole world? What nonsense!? There was a mutual assistance agreement between the USSR and Czechoslovakia from 1935. There was a similar agreement between France and Czechoslovakia, but France did not fulfill its obligations, thereby betraying the Czechs and Slovaks. Despite this, it was absent the common border with Czechoslovakia, the USSR was ready to provide military assistance to this country (there were also small chances to get permission for the passage of Soviet troops through the territory of Romania after the ultimatum was presented to Bucharest ....). The main reason for the USSR not entering the war against the Nazi Germ nii-capitulation of the Czechoslovak government to Hitler. It should be noted that at that time Czechoslovakia had a huge arsenal of weapons, a developed military industry and a well-trained, well-armed army. And if the “Czechoslovakians” had the will to resist, and the country called on the USSR to help, then declaring the Soviet Union an aggressor would be “more difficult” for some! Of course, the betrayal of France was of great importance. Otherwise, France could influence the governments of both Czechoslovakia and Romania ..... even Poland (to a lesser extent ... but maybe ...)

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Nikolaevich I

Would fight against the whole world? What nonsense !?

See for yourself: to attack Germany you need to go through Poland. Poland will never give permission to pass, for two reasons: it has already set its sights on the Teszinskie Voivodeship + the memory of the Soviet-Polish War of 1920 (this is a ploy - in fact the reds are going to enslave us).
Passing through Poland by force means getting a German-Polish bloc — before the Danzig friction began, Poland and the Reich actively cooperated.

On August 11, Poland notified Germany that it would not let the Red Army through its territory, and also had an impact on Romania, but insisted on creating a common Polish-Hungarian border. On August 24, the opinion of the Polish leadership was brought to the attention of Berlin, according to which Transcarpathia and Slovakia should be transferred to Hungary, Tesin to Poland, and everything else to Germany.

© Meltyuhov
Do not forget that until the end of the 30s the Polish army was considered a serious enemy in the Red Army.
And after Poland, France and Britain can get into a mess. subjected to red aggression Poland.

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: Alexey RA

And after Poland, France and Britain can get into a mess, and on the side of Poland, which has undergone red aggression.

France? But why didn’t this “formidable” France “fit” on the side of the “aggressed” Czechoslovakia? And later, the same Poland in 1939? And if you also remember how “great” the “notorious Britain” of France helped in 1940 ...
"I repeat!" ...

Quote: Alexey RA

. Despite this and the fact that there was no common border with Czechoslovakia,USSR was ready to provide military assistance this country (there were small chances to get permission for Soviet troops to pass through Romanian territory after presenting an ultimatum to Bucharest...).The main reason for the USSR not entering the war against Nazi Germany was the surrender of the Czechoslovak government to Hitler.It should be noted that at that time Czechoslovakia had a huge arsenal of weapons, a developed military industry and a well-trained, well-armed army. And if the “Czechoslovakians” had the will to resist, and the country called on the USSR to help, then declaring the Soviet Union an aggressor would be “more difficult” for some! Of course, of great importance betrayal of France. Otherwise, France could influence the governments of both Czechoslovakia and Romania..... even to Poland (to a lesser extent ... but maybe ...)

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Nikolaevich I

But why didn’t this “formidable” France “fit” on the side of the “aggressed” Czechoslovakia?

And because it’s one thing - the usual European brawl, when three European countries share the fourth, and another - Red Horde Invasion. The French and last time significantly helped Poland against the spacecraft.

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: Alexey RA

ordinary european brawl

This ... "brawl" was given to you! Of course, it’s convenient to brand such a stereotype “left and right” ... but it does not reliably explain the whole background of the political events and causes taking place in the 30 years. (Like any stereotype ...) Is the threat of a war between the USSR and the “whole world”? Entente's “revival” against the Soviet Union? Eh-u-n-d-a (!) All this! These "threats" did not prevent the USSR from "returning" Western Ukraine and Belarus!. To declare war on Finland! Occupy the Baltic States! Join Bessarabia and Sev. Bukovina!
PS Something became boring for me to answer all this "trend"!

[Mikhail3]

Are you serious? What about the contracts? How nice ... straight uncomplicated look of the purest theorist. The main thing with this outlook on life is not to go anywhere from the apartment. And it’s better not to open the door to anyone, otherwise, look, practical life will burst, tear all theories, make it dirty ...

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: Mikhail3

Are you serious? What about the contracts?

And to whom is this “foggy” appeal?

[Mikhail3]

To you, of course. Which of the Anglo-Saxons and when did the written agreements keep them from achieving their goals? I don’t understand whether you’re joking, or the truth is so naive ...

[Nikolaevich I]

M-d-ah ... That's what an individual, exhausted by tap water, can do without an Aquaphor filter! You do not take care of yourself! The fact that you "squeezed out" of yourself is not even rubbish .... this pokpday The picture is clear to me: the individual, neither x..fig does not understand the "topic", but decided to "start the stone" ... ,, to eat something "...

[Azim77]

Fascist reptile should be pressed into the bud. The question remains: why, instead of crushing blows with tank wedges, did you flirt with the Germans on the pretext of not being ready (who? Or us?) For war?

If the USSR hit Germany first in 1938, then Great Britain, the USA and other countries would oppose the USSR. And these are other numbers ..

[Santa Fe]

Quote: Azim77

then the United Kingdom, the United States and other countries would stand against the USSR.

Someone at the top said it, and you repeat nonsense

The USSR quietly survived the expulsion from the League of Nations at 1939 (for the invasion of Finland). and spat on the opinion of the whole world.
Based on the facts: the United States did not intervene until they were hit.
"and other countries" - then who? Belgium?

In 1938, hostilities were fought throughout Europe, the invasion of Poland into Czechoslovakia (the occupation of Těšín Silesia, Operation Zaluzhye), the Austrian Anschluss, the Nazi occupation of Czechoslovakia ... most people believe that before 01.09.1939 there was heavenly silence. Everyone would have shouted at once: the aggressor and pointed at the USSR))), no one would have noticed if Hitler had been given a horn

[Uncle lee]

I was very sorry in childhood that Soviet tanks did not reach the English Channel and Gibraltar .... But then in childhood ....

[Azim77]

Quote: Santa Fe

In 1938, fighting was fought across Europe

The fighting in Europe was just a given, like rainfall in the fall? No, it was the height of the global capitalist crisis that was raging in the United States and Europe. The global crisis demanded sacrifices and at that time everyone was looking for a way out, at the expense of whom to get out and whom to devour. This is exaggerating. That is why Stalin and Soviet diplomats tried not to become a victim of the combined flock, signed acts, and bargained. They understood that the USSR was the most dainty victim against a capitalist society. And the above figures about the number of weapons of the USSR were a grin, a restraining force sufficient for defense, but not as an attack and against the entire capitalist world. Japan, by the way, also belonged to this group and hit it from the other flank, the result could be disastrous. And only the skillful work of diplomats, intelligence and the growing power of industry of the USSR allowed us to take the role of the victim from ourselves.

[flicker]

no one would have noticed if Hitler had been given horns

Why Hitler, and not Churchill (what was the difference between them at that moment - all the more so because the agreement was concluded between them known as the “Munich conspiracy”? Or why not in Poland, which was no less aggressive, seized part of Czechoslovakia, showed a desire to start a war with the USSR?

[Per se.]

The Soviet Union could inflict a blow on Nazi Germany in the event of Hitler’s aggression against Poland, moreover, without violating any international rights, moreover, joining Britain and France. But, for this, it was not necessary to fraternize with Hitler, trying to find in the German national socialists a related system, a certain antagonist of the European bourgeoisie. Probably, it was not correctly assessed why and why Hitler was allowed to come to power, fed him Austria and Czechoslovakia, and, by and large, Poland, Europe in general, creating a powerful Germanic anti-Soviet fist. The West correctly hoped that Hitler, a hater of Bolshevism, would work out an order for a big war, in which the Germans and the Russians, if not self-destruct, then it would not be difficult to finish off the rest. Well, and super-profits in the war, were also one of the goals. If, for an attack on Poland, Germany concentrated, in addition to landwehr troops, border units and the Slovak corps, 57 divisions and 2 brigades (including 6 tank and 8 motorized divisions) with more than 1,5 million people, more than 2500 tanks and up to 2000 combat aircraft, then the USSR had by 1 September about 2 a million personnel, 55,8 thousands of guns and mortars, more than 18 thousands of tanks (!) and 17,5 thousands of combat aircraft (!). In addition, even if France and England were inactive, they had already declared war on Germany at the time of the German attack, plus the forces of Poland itself. To all, Germany had no opportunity at that time to wage an active protracted war, unlike the USSR, due to the limited strategic reserves. What history teaches us ... All our assumptions of a jigger are not worth it, if the conclusions are not carried over to the present, the historical "rustle of nuts" will be touched only by history buffs. And conclusions need to be made, why the West has allowed "red" China to rise, like Hitler's Germany, why it stifles "fraternal" bourgeois Russia, but does not touch the Chinese "national-communists"? Finally, who is our friend and partner, and who is the "Tambov wolf", who can sell the latest weapons, and who does not ... Ultimately, in the theater of the Lord God, something that "the doctor prescribed" or the great "cosmic programmer, "our task is to correctly accomplish what we can change, to adequately transfer what is not possible to change, and, most importantly, never to confuse the first with the second. The Soviet Union will be revived, the time of capitalism on the planet will expire, at what price the universal performance will again be paid, the question is, but Russia seems to be a prima for God, without which history cannot be ruled.

[Rurikovich]

Quote: Per se.

The Soviet Union will be reborn, the time of capitalism on the planet will expire, at what price the universal performance will again be paid, a question, but Russia, it seems, is a prima for God, without which history cannot be made.

[Andrey Yuryevich]

Quote: Per se.

The Soviet Union will revive, the time of capitalism on the planet is running out

eh, Sergey ... Putin, not Lenin and not Stalin, there will be no nationalization, no “industrialization” is expected either, feudally oligarchic Russia, what should be done to revive the USSR? —show again from the “Aurora”? then I think the country will not survive another, last revolution ...

[Per se.]

Quote: Andrey Yurievich

Putin, not Lenin and not Stalin

Andrei Yurevich, Putin and not God, in Russia everything was always solved in the capitals, and often by the army ... The humiliation of Russia is the humiliation of the army, and the weakening of Russia is the destruction of the army. The West itself pushes Russia out of its world capitalist system, Russia for the West, like the Indian who is good only for the dead, without a difference, he is a communist, democrat or monarchist. We are surrounded from all sides, we need a full mobilization of forces, but it is not possible with the existing system, honed under the Anglo-Saxons, with corrupt and dependent bad guys. Therefore, Putin will either himself be forced to lead the "red coup", or will become a traitor, an insolvent "leader", and revive the new pole of power, reanimate the might of the Soviet Union without him.

[Andrey Yuryevich]

Quote: Per se.

Putin will either be forced to lead the “red coup”, or he will become a traitor, an insolvent “leader”,

and here, it’s hard not to agree with you, if only HE understands it. but you can’t argue with the foregoing, it is.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Per se.

The Soviet Union could inflict a blow on Nazi Germany in the event of Hitler's aggression against Poland, moreover, without violating any international rights, moreover, by joining England and France.

The problem is that neither Poland, nor England, nor France wanted it and did everything to exclude such a scenario.

Warsaw notified London on June 9 that it “could not agree to mention Poland in the Anglo-Franco-Soviet mutual assistance treaty. The principle of the Soviet Union providing assistance to the state that was attacked, even without the consent of the latter, we consider unacceptable in relation to Poland, and in relation to other states, a dangerous violation of stability and security in Eastern Europe. Establishing the amount of assistance to the Soviets, in our opinion, is possible only through negotiations between the attacked state and the USSR ”
(...)
... at the end of July, England brought Germany to notice that negotiations with other countries "are only a reserve means for genuine reconciliation with Germany and that these ties will disappear as soon as the only important and worthy goal is reached — an agreement with Germany"
(...)
Still hoping to reach an agreement with Germany, the British government did not want as a result of negotiations with the USSR “to be drawn into any definite obligation that could tie our hands under any circumstances. Therefore, with regard to a military agreement, one should strive to limit oneself to the more general formulations as possible. ” It is no coincidence that the French delegation had the authority only to negotiate, and the British delegation had no written authority at all.
(...)
Although England and France were well aware of Poland’s negative attitude to the problem of allowing Soviet troops to enter their territory, it was decided to once again request Warsaw and try to find a compromise formula that would allow further negotiations with the USSR. On August 18, at the request of Bonnet, the Polish ambassador in Paris, Yu. Lukasevich, replied that “Bek will never allow the Russian troops to occupy the territories that we took from them in 1921. Would you, the French, Germans, let Alsace-Lorraine?” To Bonnet’s remark that the threat of a clash with Germany makes “the help of the Soviets necessary for us”, Lukasevich said that “not the Germans, but the Poles will burrow deep into Germany in the very first days of the war!”

© Meltyuhov
The bottom line: there will never be permission to enter the Red Army into Poland. And the entry of the Red Army into Poland without permission in the event of German aggression will be regarded as an unfriendly act or even aggression.

[Per se.]

Quote: Alexey RA

The problem is that neither Poland, nor England, nor France wanted it and did everything to exclude such a scenario.

It's great, but the Germans did everything to cover their rear, to connect new potentials in Europe to the Reich. Who needed this non-aggression pact more, to Stalin or Hitler, that he received the USSR from potentially hostile and technically impoverished territories, and what did the Germans end up with, having transferred forces to the west? Finally, September 17 1939, our army entered Poland, having this muddy pact-alliance with Hitler, and what prevented not to sign an agreement with the Germans, and to enter Poland as liberators, starting a war against Nazi Germany? No matter how much the stench was now, from the same West, from the same psheks ... The pact about not attacking did not give us anything, and without it Hitler would not have been ready to fight 1941-1942 of the year before him against the USSR. Otherwise, even with the most unfavorable situation in the war with Germany, the losses for the USSR, with our first strike, and not with their Barbarossa, would be much less, start the Soviet Union with the war in 1939, and not becoming a victim of aggression, 1941, having lost everything, for which this “delay” was justified, and having received into the opponents the already mobilized German power, with the technical potential of almost all of Europe, its military trophies, new human resources, and military experience. All the rest is slyness, you can as much as cry the blues, it’s better to admit a mistake when the "delay" and muddy friendship with the antipode of communism made it only worse, both morally, for the political image of the country and the government, and purely practically, according to a common geopolitical miscalculation.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Per se.

Who needed this non-aggression pact more, Stalin or Hitler,

To Stalin. Because, as shown by the same Polish campaign - the Red Army arr. 39 turned out to be completely unprepared for a great war. But Soviet-Finnish confirmed this conclusion.

Quote: Per se.

what the USSR received from potentially hostile and technically impoverished territories

USSR got time. Time to bring his army into a minimally combat-ready state. On the transition from the territorial-militia system and triad divisions to the mass conscript army and cropped units. To build the rudiment of normal armored forces - and not tank infantry support brigades without artillery, motorized rifles and rear, and SD tank battalions, which in fact were a cemetery of armored vehicles.

Quote: Per se.

Finally, on September 17, 1939, our army entered Poland, having this muddy pact alliance with Hitler, and what prevented us from signing an agreement with the Germans and entering Poland like liberators, starting the war against Nazi Germany?

I understood correctly - do you propose the USSR to start a war alone against Germany in the potentially hostile territory of Poland? To “liberate” the main potential adversary of the USSR during the 20s and 30s - a country that until recently, together with the Germans, divided Czechoslovakia connected with the agreement with the USSR and almost occupied Lithuania? And to do this in a situation where the official allies of this Poland, the victors of Germany in the last war, suspiciously calmly stand on the border with the Reich, taking nothing to save her?
Oh yes, all this will need to be done in the absence of a mobilization component of the Red Army - new framing units are not formed, and there are only enough rifles, machine guns, 82-mm mortars and 76-mm guns for them in armaments (and with the condition of opening NZ). The rest of the industry has yet to deliver.
And most importantly, the leadership of the USSR in 1939 does not have a time machine. And it does not know that the army-winner of WWI will be defeated in 1940 in 2 weeks.
By the way, why is Poland in 1939 with its territorial claims to all neighbors, pacification and Kresy Wschodnie better than the Reich?

Quote: Per se.

Otherwise, even with the most unfavorable development of the situation in the war with Germany, the losses for the USSR, at our first strike, and not at their "Barbarossa", would be much less if the Soviet Union started the war in 1939, rather than becoming a victim of aggression, in 1941

The first strike of the Red Army in 1939 was the defeat of the cadre army in Poland. The Mechkorpus of 1939 is dangerous primarily for its own rear - in the Polish campaign, in greenhouse conditions. it took Marshal Budenny’s personal involvement to clear traffic jams and deliver fuel to tanks. And in his rear. With the replenishment of BTT’s losses, there’s a complete ambush: even in a local conflict, such as the SPF, for this it was necessary to attract 3 Leningrad tank plants and plunder the KOVO — so much so that in the summer of 1940 15-20 tanks remained in its brigades, the rest did not come from repair. Infantry ... infantry does not follow tanks, and its commanders have mastered only one trick well - an attack on chains on an unsuppressed defense (first month of Special Forces). Aviation fornication and rubs - even for a target the size of a railway station.

[Per se.]

Quote: Alexey RA

I correctly understood - you offer the USSR to start a war alone against Germany in the potentially hostile territory of Poland?

By oneself? Well, let's say, the Britons and the French are sitting and leading a "strange war", Poland has fallen, having had time to "bite" the Germans. What we have, Hitler in the West is not conquered by Belgium, France and England, in the east of the USSR, whose army all 30-years was considered one of the most powerful. Immediately just define, do not mow under the orphaned and the needy. There was already experience of fighting in Spain, on Lake Hassan, there were brave red commanders from Civil and First World War. With us, Heinz Guderian borrowed the theory of the art of tank war, here Kurt Tank saw I-16, on impressions of which he later created FW-190. Already when the Nazis came to power, it was necessary to prepare for war, since we hit the alternative for analysis. Humility with realism somehow does not suit, the 1941 pogrom of the year does not fit into any logic, about preparation, about the postponement, to present even stronger losses in the 1939 year is simply not physically possible. So what's the "cunning plan" of such masochism, dear Alexey? Well, not men with axes and disabled people were in the Red Army, one of the strongest in Europe ... About some experience for the German army on the Anschluss with Austria and the annexation of Czechoslovakia, it’s generally strange to hear what the experience was for war, the only thing the Germans got their industry and general resources, in particular human. Of course, this can be a long discussion. However, as it turns out, Hitler outplayed Stalin, and the 1941 pogrom of the year was the result of previous blunders on rapprochement with the Germans, on a deal with the Nazis. The German cruiser’s purchase didn’t give us anything good, the Germans heated us up, got gold for it, and the German equipment could be easily received from the front as trophies, and not buy from Hitler in the gesture of his “trust” and “goodwill”. Most modern weapons have already been developed by the 1938 year, or have begun to be tested in the 1939, like the T-34. The rest would have matured in the conditions of transition to a war footing, during the experience of fighting. It is unlikely that in the 1939 year the Germans would have reached the Volga, and Leningrad would have been in blockade. It is possible that all the fools from the army would probably have been removed during the war. In any case, the pact with the Germans was a mistake, and without it we could have done what we did in the Baltic States and with Finland, that before Poland, we would have returned ours after, before 1941, Hitler was not ready to fight with the Soviet Union, and to prepare for war, he needed the potential of Europe; he did not have this potential in 1939. This is my opinion, dear Alex.

[stalkerwalker]

Quote: Per se.

In any case, the pact with the Germans is a mistake

"Oh, how many wonderful discoveries we have ..."

Quote: Per se.

The rest would have ripened

Quote: Per se.

Germans warmed us up, getting gold for it ahead, and German equipment for acquaintance could well receive from the front, like trophies

Quote: Per se.

Most modern weapons have already been developed by 1938, or have begun to be tested in 1939

I modestly: "No comments" ...

[Per se.]

Quote: stalkerwalker

I modestly: "No comments" ...

Yes, nothing, ok. The excuses for our "dances" in 1941 have been written enough, well, not all the same to whistle in one tune. What happened is known, to sit here and be ironic over “free-thinkers” and it would be easier for me. We want to make excuses again, like some “brothers” chop off half of Russia, where our tanks and airplanes were gone ... Personally, I don’t want this, therefore it is hardly reasonable to justify what led the Germans to the Volga and terrible losses and suffering . So I think that if the Germans were not ready to start the war on the USSR in 1939, our people would not have suffered such losses.

[stalkerwalker]

Quote: Per se.

So it seems that if the USSR started the war in 1939, when the Germans were not ready, our people would not have suffered such losses.

As far as I understand, the maximum possible chance of success for the USSR in the war with Germany was no earlier than 1942. And even a preventive strike by the Red Army in the Wehrmacht a day or two before 22.06.41 would not give positive militarily. And in the political USSR it would be declared an aggressor in the same USA. And then the Volga would have seemed to us a "slight fear".

[Per se.]

Quote: stalkerwalker

And in the political USSR would be declared an aggressor in the same US.

It's like, I'm sorry, when Germany has already begun the aggression, and the same England and France have declared war on her? "Pardonte", here the USSR automatically became an ally of the "bright side", declaring about the protection of its borders, about the protection of the Russian-speaking on the same Western Ukraine, about helping the people of Poland. We like to say when the USSR was ready for war, but why did Hitler come to power in 1933 year, without aviation and tanks, a substantial army in general, and was able to attack Poland with practically only light tanks, and the USSR with thousands of tanks and airplanes, huge mobilization potential, everything was not ready. That way, something would have hindered 1942, because we have a winter every year comes suddenly, just as spring treacherously unexpectedly happens. No need for these excuses here, the army must always be ready for war, if there is one, and if it is an army. We had an army and it was not even very sickly, and foolishly you can lose the most modern equipment and put millions of soldiers in it. Maybe it's not the army, and the fools in it? Then, it is necessary to deprive such "dancers" of stripes, so that tomatoes do not press them between their legs, and not justify their lameness.

[stalkerwalker]

Quote: Per se.

Quote: stalkerwalker
And in the political USSR would be declared an aggressor in the same US.
Is it like, excuse me, when Germany had already begun aggression, and the same England and France had declared war on it? "Pardonte", here the USSR automatically became an ally of the "bright side", declaring the protection of its borders, the protection of Russian speakers in the same Western Ukraine, and assistance to the people of Poland

Sergey, no offense ... Well, you do not have enough knowledge of that period of time.
I hope you saw the zigzag aglitsky football players in Germany in 1938 that recently our Foreign Ministry stuck under the nose Johnson and May?

[Per se.]

Quote: stalkerwalker

I hope you saw the aglitsky players playing in Germany in 1938

And, what, these "aglitsky" football players would register in Waffen SS, England would pass to Hitler's side? How did the communists start collaborating with the nazis? How, if "everything is correct", was lost practically all new equipment, all personnel army, everything for the sake of what the deal with Hitler was justified? Explain if you have enough knowledge here. I have already said that it is easy to join the majority, it is easier to rely on the official one, and it’s not a matter of my flawed ideas, frail historical knowledge, how it happened, what happened, what would have happened, follow the story in a different way. The war with Germany was inevitable, it became inevitable from the very beginning of the Nazis to power, as the antipode of Bolshevism, as the force that the West needed to destroy the USSR, a country with a model of economy not controlled by the world capitalist system, with a communist morality clans such as the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers, Morgans ... Seeing the German brothers in the National Socialists, hoping for an alliance with them against their Western masters, was the main reason that led to miscalculations and mistakes.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Per se.

Is it like, excuse me, when Germany had already begun aggression, and the same England and France had declared war on it? "Pardonte", here the USSR automatically became an ally of the "bright side", declaring the protection of its borders, the protection of Russian speakers in the same Western Ukraine, and help the people of Poland.

In this case, the bright side is separate, and the red hordes are separate. 1939 is far from 1941, when limes clutched at a straw and were ready, if Hitler invades hell, make an alliance even with Satan.
So in the worst case for us, Mr. Hess will fly to Britain two years earlier - to agree on an alliance against the threat from the East.
And at best - the Allies will strike when the Germans finally expose the Western Front - and Germany surrenders to the Allies. And the USSR will receive a muzzle with oil and a demand to immediately withdraw troops from the occupied Polish lands, reinforced by the full-blooded divisions of France and Britain. And then a new war.

[Per se.]

Quote: Alexey RA

And in the best - the Allies will strike when the Germans finally expose the Western Front - and Germany capitulates to the Allies.

And, what, the new Crimean war, or the new invasion of the French without Napoleon? The allies would have sat behind the Maginot line, everything would be similar to the events of the opening of the second front, while the Russians and the Germans would kill each other. Further, all the same, the division of Europe, two camps, two poles, but our losses would be less. You do not allow such a version, is it really so fatal, everything is so alternative to the fatal program? Your opinion, your right, and among historians there is no unity in judgments, we sinners, all the more, we can have our own ideas, by virtue of "our own depravity."

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Per se.

There was already experience in fighting in Spain, on Lake Hassan, there were brave red commanders from the Civil and World War I.

Spain is tankers and pilots. The experience of the tankers is only one: "infantry does not follow tanks, tanks without infantry burn at once."
Hassan - 2 divisions. Stand on the Far East. guard the Japanese.
Khalkhin-Gol - experience "how to allow the enemy infantry division to leave the cauldron with mechanized units." All participating formations except the Airborne Forces remained in the Far East.
The brave colors of the Civil with a bang and blood about ... loved the first stage of SPF.

... it was the cult of the tradition and experience of the civil war that must be put to an end that he prevented our command personnel from immediately reorganizing themselves in a new way, on the rails of modern warfare.

To prompt the author of this epitaph to the "GV experiment" - or google it yourself?

Quote: Per se.

Heinz Guderian borrowed theories of the art of tank war

Yeah ... and the X-ray borrowed from us the idea of ​​an apparatus that allows see through. Russia is the birthplace of elephants. ©
Heinz was brewed in a European boiler - Pirner, Heigl, von Eimansberger, von Fallard-Bockelberger, von Sect, Fuller and others. And he began to develop the theory in the 20s, when the horse didn’t lie with us either.

Quote: Per se.

Already when the Nazis came to power, it was necessary to prepare for war, since we hit an alternative for analysis.

It is necessary. But there is no money. 20 personnel divisions for 1935 from Kamchatka to Leningrad - this is all that the USSR can pull.

Quote: Per se.

Well, not men with axes and people with disabilities were in the Red Army, one of the most powerful in Europe ...

On paper, yes, the army was strong. But in reality, it took her 3 months to remember at least how to fight according to the charter. And before that ... a heavy tank brigade when trying to break through the line of machine-gun dos, covered by a battery of anti-tank vehicles, was reduced to zero in 3 battles. The same result would have been with an German field defense attack - even faster, because the Germans have more "mallet".
You look at the documents in Finnish - this is the best section of the level of training of the Red Army. In greenhouse conditions, with absolute superiority - and such losses. There is no intelligence, there is no interaction, tanks of rifle divisions (which is 7 units throughout the Red Army) were only combat-ready on paper, commanders demand artillery fire on squares and harassing fire from a 000-mm mortar, etc., etc. .

[Per se.]

Quote: Alexey RA

On paper, yes, the army was strong. In fact, it took 3 a month to remember at least how to fight under the charter.

That is, the Aryans here grasped everything instantly, the experience was instantly obtained, even on the Anschluss with Austria, and here “the horse didn’t roll” everywhere ... Well, then it was fate, karma, what happened, what happened, all the will of God , did everything right, and June 1941, the same fate. I recall a conversation with you in Japan, whether samurai could not disperse forces, spreading garrisons on countless Pacific islands, but initially set the goal of withdrawing the US from the war, where, apart from the pogrom in Pearl Harbor, a landing operation would be carried out to capture the Hawaiian islands, landing in Alaska ... Alas, as we all know, the Japanese lost, but a different scenario, again, no luck, it makes no sense, they did it right, but they finished wrong ... Similar with the possibility of war with Germany in 1939 year. Yes, they lost everything for which the deferment was justified, they again studied with blood, on the millions of lives of our men, where blood relatives, in particular, my father’s elder brother, died in my family, having been called up by a young guy, died in March 1945 of the year. Otherwise it was impossible, it was impossible to end the war, albeit in the same 1945 year, but without suffering such terrible losses? What did we then win in this postponement, losing all the tanks and airplanes, what we did in factories in three shifts, suffering terrible losses in people ... Everyone’s business, what to believe, at least I tried to voice something different here, I’m official version I know about suddenness and old technology, although the new T-34 and KV were comparable to what the Germans had with the T-III and T-IV, not to mention the thousands of BT and T-26 latest versions. This can be said about the number of MiG-3, Yak-1, LaGG-3 against Bf-109, not counting the I-16 and I-15. Oleg Kaptsov also tried to set the topic, even if the year has already been about 1938 and I am not so radical in alternatives. Thanks for attention.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Per se.

That is, the Aryans here grabbed everything on the fly, they instantly gained experience, even on the anschluss with Austria, and everywhere we had "a horse did not lie" ...

That is, the Aryans were preparing their officer corps, starting in the early 20s, von Sect's “Army of Commanders”. And regularly conducted tactical exercises, on which they worked out the interaction of real units on conditional equipment, choosing the optimal staffs and methods of warfare. And our command staff was more or less trained only in personnel units (those same 20 divisions of 1935). And then the elite ttbr at the demonstration exercises of 1936 managed to get stuck:

T-28s from the 1st BWO tank brigade “suddenly” (!) Found themselves in front of a strip of tank traps and gouges and were forced to turn sharply to the side - to an unexplored area where they got stuck ..

And at the territories ... the regiment’s chief of staff, at the final exercises, couldn’t set the battalion a combat mission.
The main problem is the basic level. Where the Germans had secondary education, in our country the primary is even lower.

... in 1929, 81,6 percent (and in infantry schools - 90,8 percent) of the army enrollment in military schools had only primary education, or had none at all! In January 1932, 79,1 percent of cadets of military schools had primary education, in January 1936, 68,5 percent (but 85 percent in armored ones).

At the exit, we had future officers who noted:

lack of commander skills and methodological techniques for graduated cadets

The result of such a low level is appropriate: the commanders were even unable to organize combat training - the training day was dedicated to:

2 1/2 - 3 hours of study, the rest is leaving, walking, waiting and our other disorganization

Many fighters and commanders do not attend classes, but skip time criminally

© Uborevich, 1937
The crews of 45 MK were trained to drive on the parade ground of a tank race ground on level ground, even taking small obstacles with difficulty.
The result of the preparation of the Red Army of the mid 30s summed up Budyonny:

We sometimes hover on a very large operational and strategic scale, and what will we operate with if the company is not suitable, the platoon is not suitable, and the detachment is not suitable?

Quote: Per se.

I know from school about surprise and old equipment, although the new T-34 and KV were comparable to what the Germans had with the T-III and T-IV

Yeah ... and 300 trained crews on all T-34 and KV. Plus - the OSH, which has not been tested even in exercises. Well, our war did not wait in 1941 - otherwise the experimental MK exercises would not have been assigned for September 1941.

Quote: Per se.

not to mention the thousands of BT and T-26 latest versions

Which were declared obsolete back in 1937 - following the results of battles in Spain and acquaintance with French tanks. It was not in vain that our people tried to buy a tank from the Czechs, and then they hit upon work on a new infantry escort tank, the result of which was the T-50.

Quote: Per se.

The same can be said about the number of MiG-3, Yak-1, LaGG-3 against Bf-109

Again - count the crews. The most frequent picture of June 1941 is the IAP of 60 aircraft and 0 crews, even prepared for flights to PMU.
The second is again the structure. Where the Germans have fleets and groups brought together under a single aviation command, we have air divisions of army subordination, air divisions of front subordination and air divisions of central subordination. And each level strives to keep its parts in his beloved.

[Per se.]

Quote: Alexey RA

Yeah ... and 300 trained crews on all T-34 and HF.

Well, "Where not to throw, everywhere a wedge" ... In 1939 there was a lack of competent commanders, in 1941, as it turns out, this became even worse. From what side do not go, everywhere fatum, doom because of our "lack of will" against the Nazis. As if Germany had not previously been torn off, as if sticky, with reparations after the First World War, there were no consequences of the imperialist war itself, with the complete exhaustion of German forces, there were no restrictions of Versailles, according to which the Germans could not have and even develop tanks and warplanes .. Cool, we have, as it turns out, a bunch of degenerates, and the gloomy German genius in the person of Adolf Hitler, could turn our army on the bayonet from 1939 onwards! On the other hand, we conducted a brilliant evacuation of the factories to the east, admitting the ruins of most of our developed territory. I do not understand your logic, dear Alexey, the impression that there is some kind of "obscurity" of a view of history, the pressure of archival dust, with a bunch of tsifir, foreign reports and protocols, which, quite often, simply covered someone's ass, were formal replies or far from uncontested conclusions. I have already said, I will emphasize here, I respect your opinion, your knowledge in history is obvious and professionally extensive, but in this topic I am not your like-minded person.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Per se.

It’s as if Germany hadn’t been previously torn off like sticky reparations after the First World War,

Losses of Russia in the civilian industry will cover the whole of Versailles. Even in 1927, for the USSR, access to the level of military production of the Empire was possible only in several positions - and that was subject to a multiple increase in money. invested in the military-industrial complex. Plus, the Germans had initially a higher level - otherwise they would not have been able to hold out so much in the WWII. With the same aircraft engines and even machine guns, Russia was all sad.

Quote: Per se.

there were no restrictions on Versailles, according to which the Germans could not have and in general even develop tanks and combat aircraft ..

Yeah ... and which the Germans so abided by, that already in 1928 various "tractors" with armor and guns were running at the Kama Center. And who just made them?
In addition, for tactical training, a real technique is not really needed. Campfan groups of the Panzerwaffe honed combat work and interaction on plywood mock-ups on the chassis of cars and with “pilots” on motorcycles.

Quote: Per se.

Cool, we have, as it turns out, a bunch of degenerates, and the gloomy German genius in the person of Adolf Hitler could spin our army on a bayonet already from 1939!

The Germans had an officer corps with the experience of a normal big war. And a dozen free years for training the backbone of the future army. They could afford an “army of officers” of 100 people throughout the country, which was engaged exclusively in combat training. They did not need to maintain at least 000 personnel divisions (plus territories and collective farm divisions) thousands of kilometers from the center, on the border with a country covered by civil war, which was also hosted by interventionists.
And most importantly - they had a competent cadet and even ordinary draft contingent. I would look at the Panzerwaffe, in which 2/3 of the privates would have 3 classes or less, and among the non-commissioned ones there would be a third.

Quote: Per se.

But, we carried out a brilliant evacuation of factories to the east, allowing the ruins of most of our developed territory.

Just as planned. © 20 years of evacuation planning were precisely connected with the fact that the leadership knew about the weakness of the army. The plan of the third five-year plan generally included the transfer or duplication of the main industries in the eastern part of the country.

[Per se.]

Quote: Alexey RA

The Germans had an officer corps with the experience of a normal big war. And a dozen free years for training the backbone of a future army.

And we did not have? There are excuses, there are no options where fatal errors would be excluded. Let the option of the Soviet Union entering the war against Germany in 1939 a fantasy, but not to conclude a pact with the Germans, not to enter Poland with Hitler, is a perfectly acceptable action. It would not have been flirting with Hitler, about this "friendship forged with blood", there would have been no "falsity of rumors" about the attack, and categorical "not to succumb to provocations." What are the conclusions, if everything was "right", why is it all so shitty turned out. So, not right. Finally, how is the current situation better or worse for Russia, when we are surrounded from all sides, what can history teach us here? Really, all over again, as in 1941 ...

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Per se.

About some experience for the German army on the Anschluss with Austria and the annexation of Czechoslovakia, it’s somehow strange to hear

But in vain. For the experience of properly organizing the same march of a tank division at 300-400 km would be invaluable to the Red Army.

I had to transport fuel for 5 microns in the air in Belarus (Comrade Kovalev knows). It’s good that there was no one to fight with. On the roads from Novogrudok to Volkovysk, 75 percent of the tanks were due to fuel. The commander said that he can send fuel only on airplanes, and who will organize?

© Budyonny

Quote: Per se.

and German technology for acquaintance could well be received from the front, like trophies, and not bought from Hitler in a gesture of his "trust" and "goodwill"

Sumptuously. That is, do you suggest that we only after entering the war know that the only "Red Forty" in the Red Army PTP - penetrates German 30-mm armor with only 200 m?

Quote: Per se.

Most modern weapons were already developed by 1938, or began to be tested in 1939, like the T-34.

Between the drawing or even the prototype and the series lies a huge chasm. The name of which is staging. And in military conditions, this abyss is often insurmountable - the T-50 and T-43 are an example of this.
In addition, what is the use of having tank drawings, if one third of the machines need to be bought abroad to launch it in a series (and not mass ones, but piece ones - such as gear-grinding or internal grinding). In real life, this niche was closed ... Germany, which supplied us with machines for organizing mass production of the same T-34.
So that the Germans would have to fight on I-16, T-26 and BT. The very T-26s and BTs that burned in Spain like matches cannot even be detected from where they are being hit.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Per se.

If, for an attack on Poland, Germany concentrated, apart from the landwehr troops, border units and the Slovak corps, 57 divisions and 2 brigades (including 6 tank and 8 motorized divisions), numbering more than 1,5 million people, more than 2500 tanks and up to 2000 fighting By September 1, the USSR had about 2 million personnel, 55,8 thousand guns and mortars, more than 18 thousand tanks (!) and 17,5 thousand combat aircraft (!).

By September 1, 1939, the USSR did not have the main thing - the army for the Great War. For the old system of mobilization deployment of the Red Army was recognized absolutely not in line with the new realities and from August 15, 1939 a complete restructuring of the system was begun.

... the Commission for Organizational Activities under the NGO established under the decision of the Main Military Council under the chairmanship of the deputy commissar of defense commander of the 1st rank G.I. On July 27, 1939, Kulika decided to deploy ordinary rifle divisions with 4 personnel on the basis of the triple deployment infantry divisions. The commission concluded that all military districts can accommodate new divisions, there were also enough material reserves, therefore, by November 100, 1, it was necessary to switch to a new organization of rifle troops and by May 1939, 1, prepare new mobilization plans.
In accordance with the decision adopted, on August 15, 1939, People's Commissar of Defense Marshal K.E. Voroshilov gave directives No. 4/2 / 48601-4 / 2/48611 to the Military Councils of the Leningrad (MVO), Moscow (MVO), Kalininsky (KalVO), Belorussian (BVO) and Kiev Special (KVO), Kharkov (KhVO), Orlovsky (OrVO), Volga Volga Federal District), North Caucasian (North Caucasian Military District), Ural (UrVO) and Siberian (Siberian Military District) military districts, according to which they should form 25 departments of rifle corps from August 1 to December 1939, 18, transfer personnel divisions to the new staff of 8 people and deploy 900 divisions of triple deployment in 36 divisions of b 92 people.
Given the availability of weapons in the untouchable reserve, the measures taken were generally provided for rifles, machine guns, 82-mm mortars and 76-mm guns. For self-loading rifles, 45-mm anti-tank guns, 122-mm howitzers and 76-mm anti-aircraft guns, incomplete coverage was expected during 1939 on the basis of their receipt from the industry, and the need for anti-tank rifles, 12,7 mm machine guns, 50 mm, 107 mm and 120 mm mortars, 152 mm howitzers, 37 mm and 45 mm anti-aircraft guns and automobiles were satisfied with the receipt from industry in 1939-1940.

© Meltyuhov

[Per se.]

Quote: Alexey RA

USSR to September 1 1939 did not have the main thing - the army for the Great War.

And, Germany, then, had an army for a big war, gathering everything against Poland alone? I have already said above, one can arbitrarily cry the blues, but worse than what happened in June 1941 could no longer be, and, most likely, had our first blow to the Germans in 1939, and not German in 1941, we would have lost less . Now you can discuss here as much as you like, but what is in fact. The first, shameful contract with the Nazis, however justified, as others have concluded. Second, the transfer of the border to impoverished and hostile territories from Poland did not strengthen, but weakened the defenses. Third, the Third Reich received much more in terms of preparation for war, having received the potential of Europe than the USSR. The most important thing is not admitting your mistakes, you can not draw the right conclusions, and the conclusions we need for the past, which is no longer correct, but for the present and the future, so as not to be substituted, and not look for a friend in the antipode and potential aggressor to use concessions of others for their geopolitical interests, and not to sacrifice their interests for the sake of dubious appeasement of enemies, and receiving deferments in favor of the enemy.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Per se.

But Germany, therefore, had an army for a big war, having gathered everything against Poland alone?

2/3 against Poland and 1/3 against France.
The Reich has been preparing revenge since the creation of the Reichswehr. And already managed to practice on cats in the form of Austria and Czechoslovakia, catching the same jambs of the organization of the march of armored units and the interaction of military branches. And in Poland, one tank battalion was advancing without shells, and in another sector, the division managed to advance “back to front”.

Quote: Per se.

First, a shameful agreement with the Nazis, no matter how you justify it, that others concluded.

Shameful it is only for those who put any bast on the line in Russia. In fact, this is a common contract of the time, like Munich.

Quote: Per se.

Second, the transfer of the border to the poor and hostile territories from Poland did not strengthen, but weakened the defense.

A Wehrmacht strike from the line of the old border would be even worse. Stalin’s line would not have time to get even the minimum infantry filling - and the Germans would have passed it without problems (and not like in real life - with 2-3 day battles and opening the direction of strikes). And then the situation would be the same as in real life - it would only be more difficult to exchange territories for a while.

Quote: Per se.

Third, the Third Reich received much more in terms of preparing for war, gaining the potential of Europe than the USSR.

During this time, the USSR managed:
- Chasing the theoretically possible German release of aircraft, in fact mobilize your aircraft industry ("... having examined 219 aviation points in Germany - most of the German aircraft factories, especially new ones - I came to the conclusion that Germany is capable of producing up to 70-80 combat aircraft per day."© General Petrov).
- To re-equip factories for the release of next-generation equipment (with German, by the way, help) and partially launch it in a series.
Partially clear up the rubble in NGOs inherited from Voroshilov ("Act of acceptance ..." you read).
- Complete the creation of independent armored forces (and not an appendage of infantry).
- Complete army reform and the construction of a new mobilization system.
- Pull up the training of personnel at least to a satisfactory level.

"As a result of all these activities, the operational training of senior officers has grown significantly and is assessed mediocre."

© REPORT TO THE COMMISSAR OF DEFENSE OF THE USSR MARSHAL OF THE SOVIET UNION Comrade. TIMOSHENKO S.K. ABOUT THE RESULTS OF BATTLE TRAINING THE TROOPS OF THE WESTERN SPECIAL MILITARY DISTRICT FOR THE WINTER PERIOD 40/41 ACADEMIC YEAR

What was the army arr. 1939 showed good Soviet-Finnish. Well, damn it, there aren’t enough words - a couple of Finnish battalions cut the Soviet division into “motties”, and its regiments didn’t even itch to help each other; of the most egregious is the unhindered construction by the Finns of a barricade on a forest road in the radius of fire of a division artillery regiment.
However, Khalkhin-Gol is also good: instead of a quick jerk of the combined mobile groups to the crossings and cutting off the only way of the departure of the main Japanese forces, our fire-brigade battles were consistently hollowed at every strongpoint he encountered along the way. As a result, ticks around the Japanese closed for a week - and closed around the void.

[Cartalon]

In 1938, the USSR did not border Germany, teleportation had not yet been mastered, and landing in Pomerania was a bit of a risky operation.

[Rurikovich]

Oleg , here we are waiting for an alternative about the Tsushima variant with the "emperors" in the title role, but we see "if" with fuss in Europe.
Here history teaches us that we do not touch anyone until they touch us. Whether the people, Panimash, will not approve aggression towards whether they are "reptiles" or what else We are kind in essence We barbaric aggression is not to the core
Because plus for the "crushing tank wedges"

[kos2cool4u]

Well, the answer is obvious - in order to avoid a war on two fronts, Stalin deliberately dragged Hitler into an attack on the USSR, because the West doubted to the last who he was more profitable - the Communists or the Nazis, and Churchill generally considered the USSR to be his enemy No. 1 ... Stalin acted though cynically having sacrificed Soviet people in the west of the country, but very far-sighted, essentially saving millions !!! ...

[Dr. Barmaley]

There is a good book on this subject:
D. Shein and A. Ulanov "Order in the tank forces?"

[Strashila]

The author simply did not get acquainted with the reports of army inspections in 1937. Of this series, they would still love to write to us in 1941 ... PE-8 ... 1000 pieces of this kind ... we would have driven the Germans to their very nostrils. there was a legitimate chance to do something in 1938 ... when Czechoslovakia was taken ... Poland, in violation of international laws, did not miss the troops of the USSR and itself became an invader.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Strashila

The author simply did not get acquainted with the reports of army inspections in 1937.

Still good to study the "Act on the admission of the People's Commissar of Defense of the USSR SS Timoshenko K. K. from Voroshilov K. E." - heartbreaking reading.

[inkass_98]

Oh, Kaptsov logged in. Did you get acquainted with the work of Shpanov "First Impact"? So here Rezun was in the forefront, years earlier at 25-30.
By the way, here in the comments about Khalkhin-Gol there were references, so everything was not very rosy there, if anyone is not in the know. And the reasons were all the same: poor trained l / s, lack of walkie-talkies in tanks and aircraft, disgusting command. And the Red Army there had a two-fold, or even three-fold advantage over the Japanese, and, by the way, there was not an offensive, but practically active defense, as according to the charters of those times.

[Andrey VOV]

Delirium, delusional, if grandmother were grandfather, if only ....

[Alsur]

"The fascist reptile should be crushed in the bud"
And to get all that we have now, sanctions, maybe armed intervention of a coalition of countries against the evil empire that has captured the innocent Poland, Germany, the Czech Republic, etc. I remind you that Hitler was a legally elected politician in Germany, who was given a hand and concluded an agreement.

[smaug78]

Kaptsov set to the old))))

[andrewkor]

“Slightly something Oblique, Oblique,” ​​I mean that the USSR should have this or that, and there would be no other participants in the process! Suppose that Czechoslovakia did not bend, but began to fight, accepted help from the USSR! And even without this help, it would not be nice to compare the military potential of Germany and Czechoslovakia in 1938, it’s not difficult! But how could the USSR strike Germany bypassing its ally Poland, bound by the Pilsudski-Hitler Pact of 1934? Another nonsense from Kaptsov!

[Vard]

The mistake of people arguing about past events is that they judge them from the standpoint of modern reality ... on the basis of knowledge that became available later and morality, which at that time was completely different ...

[parusnik]

The fascist reptile should be crushed in the bud.

... Through the territory of Poland, the Baltic states, Romania, Czechoslovakia? ... They were not part of the Soviet Union ...

[Beholder]

[quote = Santa Fe] [quote = 0]
But in 1938 the Germans would have been more difficult: they still had neither the experience of the Blitzkrieg, nor the experience of the battle for Britain. [/ Quote]

And as a result of the Soviet attack on Germany through Poland, we get a crusade against Bolshevism around the world? Do you take this into account?

[gorenina91]

-Author really hovering in the clouds ... -Before attacking the USSR, Germany literally utterly destroyed Poland ... -And the USSR could not do anything like this with a low-power, poorly armed army of sparsely populated Finland ... -Ah, if you compare the army of Poland and Finland of those years .. it’s just “laughing at the chickens” ... -Poland then had a real regular army, and Finland ...- some hastily assembled paramilitary units ... - Yes, and the Wehrmacht’s army was then quite comparable in power with the army of Poland ... -And could it be sopost build a huge army of the Red Army with small, poorly armed Finnish ski battalions, hastily recruited from the Finnish farms from lumberjacks, smolokurov and farmers ... -Yes ..., just no comparison ... -And, nevertheless, the Red Army did not succeed destroy Finnish military units, and after monstrous losses of their own, somehow persuade Finland to peace talks ... -This is the “Pyrrhic victory” of the Red Army and its own victory over Poland and inspired Germany to a victorious war with France, and then with the USSR.

[andrej-shironov]

Why the Russian government does not destroy the fascist Ukrainian reptile in the bud? Let the author ask himself this question and find a justification for such a situation !!!
The analysis of the author is impressive!

[groks]

Yeah. In 38 USSR, half of Europe separated from Germany. With their armies and allies. At 41, it was likely that the “partners” would hit the Caucasus.
If Germany had not started the war with us at 41, then most likely it would not have lasted long. She would have started to fuck in the west, where she would have to expand. And they would have caved in 146%. Moreover, they would buy a USA and England a couple of politicians and five generals and tear it from the inside. Why do they need Germany, which is not at war with us, but with them?
The pact, which has already struck the whole head, ensured the government crisis in Japan and ensured for us the absence of a second front in the East.

[vvvjak]

Oh, these storytellers. Yes, in general, it was necessary to “ignite” the fire of the world revolution in the 1920s (as Trotsky wanted). Then there would be neither Hitler, nor Stalin, nor Churchill with de Gaulle. There would be a Union of Soviet Socialist Countries of the World and the common good and prosperity. Although you can reconsider the concept of human development from even earlier times (for example, prehistoric).

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Oleg, you’re such a pardon me, I wrote nonsense that simply ears are curled up in a tube.
In 1938, we can say that we didn’t have an army, and this is well known to everyone who took the trouble to get acquainted with the topic

[andj61]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Oleg, you’re such a pardon me, I wrote nonsense that simply ears are curled up in a tube.
In 1938, we can say that we didn’t have an army, and this is well known to everyone who took the trouble to get acquainted with the topic

We had no border with Germany in 1938!

[Altona]

Quote: Monster_Fat

What struck me

----------------------------------
During the war, technology quickly passes field tests and the fighting itself rejects unnecessary concepts. And sometimes a technique is created as a response to the enemy’s technique, the same Tiger or Panther, for example. And the best and justified is taken - it is an 88-mm gun or inclined sides, or something else. But something cannot be done, tank diesel, for example. Therefore, it is easy to reason in abstractions. Do not forget that Germany was very well helped by the occupation of Austria and Czechoslovakia, countries with developed industry, and the Czechs had good tanks that also invaded the USSR. And other things that you will not mention.

[Monster_Fat]

On some exhibits or under historical and photographic material depicting wrecked Soviet armored vehicles in the museum, there is a constantly occurring (in different variations) phrase: "improper construction ..... illiterate use .... lack of intelligence ..... lack of support ..... leaving without a reason at the first shots .... illiterate ..... lack of leadership ..... left without fuel ...... having shot ammunition ...... ", etc. and so forth

[gregor6549]

Well done Oleg. He dared to encroach on the seemingly unshakable truth, and somewhere he even got ahead of Rezun. Three years old that way. "Icebreaker" Kaptsov, in kind.
By the way, all the main critics of the “traitor” Rezun could not adequately explain the reasons for the terrifying defeat of the personnel of the Red Army, concentrated on the western border of the USSR. They tried to catch Rezun on technical trifles all the time, and the main issue of the Icebreaker and the books following the Icebreaker bypassed a dashing cavalry maneuver. But the "traitor" built a very logical picture of what happened in the world in the prewar years, and built on the basis of extensive factual material. And based on this logic, Stalin’s task was not to defeat Hitler Germany in the 1938 year, but to push Germany’s forehead against France, Great Britain and other different Swedes, and when all the participants in the brawl run out of steam, hit Germany and everyone else . Not for that, Stalin allowed Hitler to take power into his own hands in Germany in the 33 year, and helped him transform the Wehrmacht from a full-time army into a real force. and then he did his best to make the planned brawl take place, to arrange a PREMATURE war between the USSR and Germany. And by the 41 year, the Army had accumulated more than enough strength and combat experience to defeat the Wehrmacht in all possible war scenarios. Unfortunately, the war scenario was not just considered by the defensive Stalin and his close circle, but was considered harmful. The consequences are known.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: gregor6549

By the way, all the main critics of the “traitor” Rezun could not adequately explain the reasons for the terrifying defeat of the personnel of the Red Army, concentrated on the western border of the USSR.

They were explained at 100500 times, and it is not our fault that you do not accept explanations other than Rezunov's. You even memoirs of German generals (completely disproving the rezun) - not proof

[andj61]

Fascist reptile should be pressed into the bud. The question remains: why, instead of crushing blows with tank wedges, did you flirt with the Germans on the pretext of not being ready (who? Or us?) For war?

And who was ready to fight? The USSR in 1938 had no border with Germany. In order to start a war, it was necessary either to ensure the passage of our troops through the territory of Czechoslovakia, Poland and the Baltic states, or to fight also with these countries. It was precisely in 1938 that Germany had extremely tense relations with Czechoslovakia on the Sudeten question. In September, with the mediation of England and France, an agreement was concluded in Munich and the Sudetenland withdrew by Germany. Shortly before this, the leadership of Czechoslovakia requested the USSR’s position on this issue. The USSR expressed its readiness to fight on the side of Czechoslovakia. But France said that in the event of an alliance with the Bolsheviks, it would not fulfill the agreement with Czechoslovakia on mutual assistance. England's position was similar - it also forced Czechoslovakia to conclude a treaty on German conditions. Lithuania and Latvia refused to let the USSR troops through its territory. Poland’s position was even tougher - it was ready to fight the USSR and Czechoslovakia with Germany. As a result, Czechoslovakia abandoned the alliance with the USSR and concluded the Munich Agreement with Germany. So the USSR did not have the opportunity to win only over Germany, but had the opportunity to get involved in a world war without allies, where the USSR would be opposed by ALL European countries, and, as usual, our country would be declared an aggressor. And do not forget about Japan, which would also take advantage of this situation.

[Rakti-kali]

As of the beginning of 1938, the Red Army was armed with over 2000 BT-7 tanks ...
The figures do not give rise to doubt. Just 18 months before the outbreak of World War II, the main enemy was a militarily insignificant state ... our invincible and legendary one could smash the Wehrmacht like a crystal vase.
The official historiography describes the heroic successes of diplomacy, which managed to “push the frontier” to the West and provide time to begin re-equipping the army. Just forgot to add - the German army.

did the author learn to count tanks? Maladie, author! But the main theses of the Panzerwaffe until mid-1943 were - "tanks do not fight tanks", "infantry breaks the enemy’s defenses, tanks go on a clean breakthrough." Therefore, Soviet tanks in 1938 would have met not a couple of dozens of grooves three and four, but almost 17.000 of these little ones, piercing BT-5/7 and T-26 at all distances from forehead to jo ... to stern.

Well and more. If the Red Army tried to hit Germany in 1938, then the USSR would have gotten a war with ALL Europe, because then Poland, and probalts with the Scandinavians, and other Romania with Hungary, not to mention France and Britain, would have immediately declared war on the USSR .

[Imobile]

It's simple - Koba was dumb.

[iouris]

Koba left you a superpower. And where is she?

[Monster_Fat]

Koba left you a superpower.

"Stupidly left" .....

[iouris]

And how do you like the theme "British strike on the USSR in 193 .."? History allows us to understand the logic of today's events and the consequences of the inability to conduct timely proactive actions in 2013 ... 14. Received? Sign up.

[flicker]

Fascist reptile should be pressed into the bud. The question remains: why, instead of crushing blows with tank wedges, did you flirt with the Germans on the pretext of not being ready (who? Or us?) For war?

On the topic, to start sooner or later: in our military development we are moving ahead of the United States (that is, in a year our advantage will grow), so why should we rush things if time plays on us? But this is not the main thing.
Is this a hint to the current leadership through a historical parallel with the period of the beginning of World War II? Like, even then it was necessary not to wait until they attack us, but to attack ourselves. And now even more so, they say, who are we waiting for, we must bang Ukraine, we must bang the USA in Syria. Today we are very strongly encouraged and provoked to active hostilities, they want us to get involved in some kind of military campaign, moreover, under a very specious (painted in patriotic tones) pretext. Like, Israel would have answered a long time ago (which is strange: Jews are actively pushing us too), it’s time to ignore the UN, they’re “wiping” their feet on Russia, Russia is suffering everything: a doping scandal, a ban on state symbols on OI, poisoning of violins, arrest ships, shelling of Donbass, etc. etc. - But for some reason the West is so persistently provoking us, as if waiting for our sharp reaction? If there is no reaction or it is sluggish, then they begin to drag out, they say, "wipe their feet" and so on. - the formation of a negative attitude towards Russian politics within Russia itself. If we respond, then screams begin: Russia occupied the Crimea, waging war in the Donbass, killing Ukrainians, helping the bloody Assad, etc. - i.e. form a negative attitude towards Russia among the world community. What should Russia do in such a situation: to respond or not? Russia must and must respond, but respond first of all Proportionately those. very accurately - only such a reaction allows us to win at the same time both in assessments of what is happening within our own people and in assessments of what is happening on the part of other peoples.
If it comes to the struggle for a new world order, then it will be won by those who win overwhelming majority of world states - and only order can attract them (overwhelming majority) based on the equal rights of each - we are for such an order, and thanks to this position, we have every chance to win. But in order for us to be believed, we must observe “these equal rights” - otherwise they will say that we will be even worse than the United States. That is why we react proportionally, which is why we continue to uphold our position at the UN, which is why we not only declare our position of "equal rights", but also comply with this in our actions.

[Imobile]

Quote: iouris

Koba left you a superpower. And where is she?

C'mon, he, along with his homies, ruined the superpower. Even when he died, Russia did not reach the level of 1916!

[iouris]

Quote: Imobile

C'mon, he, along with his homies, ruined the superpower.

I cry!

[Imobile]

No one doubts that Lenin was an agent of Germany. I think Stalin could not help but participate in the betrayal of the 17 of the year and he is also an agent of Germany. He conducted anti-Soviet subversive activities, destroying the literate population, military commanders, etc. There was an agreement on the division of Europe where Stalin should become the governor of a large territory. But they threw him.

[iouris]

Quote: Imobile

No one doubts that Lenin was an agent of Germany.

He who does not read has no doubt. He “knows” everything. British scientists have proven that 5% of the population think what they think, and 92% of the population shoot themselves better than they force themselves to think.

[Sotskiy]

Quote: Imobile

No one doubts that Lenin was an agent of Germany. I think Stalin could not help but participate in the betrayal of the 17 of the year and he is also an agent of Germany. He conducted anti-Soviet subversive activities, destroying the literate population, military commanders, etc. There was an agreement on the division of Europe where Stalin should become the governor of a large territory. But they threw him.

Did you happen to be stuffed with such “knowledge” by accident not in Ukraine with the Baltic states? Or did the "absence" of ideology in the Russian Federation itself lead to such "conclusions"?

[67STRELOK]

Rezun cries, from the unrealized fantasies of the author! )))

[Sotskiy]

Fascist reptile should be pressed into the bud. The question remains: why, instead of crushing blows with tank wedges, did you flirt with the Germans on the pretext of not being ready (who? Or us?) For war?

Can the author recall the lessons of the Finnish war when the superior forces of the Red Army were bogged down on the Mannerheim Line, suffering heavy losses from the Finnish "partisan" ambushes and raids?
The German army, despite the seeming unpreparedness for war with the USSR, before that captured the whole of Europe with the same "small" forces and had more positive military experience in conquering territories than the Red Army.
Now the question. The Red Army could attack fascist Germany first, while knowing who "sponsored" the German military industry since the 30-s. Let me tell them, these "sponsors" then, by some miracle, the policies of Stalin, became our temporary allies.

[yehat]

unlike the Red Army in the German Wehrmacht, there were many veterans from the First World War, there were revolutionary developments in the use of assault groups, there was considerable experience in the trench warfare, there was the best staff work in the world, the best system for training soldiers in the world - all this affected. Especially, near Rzhev - this is where the difference in experience resulted in a real loss ratio.

[invisibility]

Quote: Olgovich

2
Olgovich (Andrey) Today, 09: 43 ↑ New
Quote: Santa Fe
But in 1938, the Germans would have had a harder time: they still didn’t have any Blitzkrieg experience, nor any experience in the battle for Britain.

I think it was necessary to hit the Germans in the 1940 year, during their attack on France: France and England could no longer get out and sit out, as during the “strange war”, there was a war in France itself. And the Germans would have been hit legally, like an invader and occupier.
Germany still weak on two fronts, having suffered any losses in Poland, could not withstand it.
But this is the details.
The author is right in the main: during our rearmament, Hitler re-equipped many times more and better ..
And another point that was not reflected by the author: during our rearmament, Germany seized the enormous resources of almost all of Europe, which allowed it to simultaneously increase its economy and, accordingly, its army .. This could not be allowed in anticipation of an imminent war.
An alternative course of history to the 1914 year, undertaken by the Soviet leadership in the hope that the damned capitalists would overstep each other was a gross mistake and led to the gravest consequences of the 1941 year ...
The 1939 pact of the year could be concluded, but only until May 1940 ... IMHO.

Your knowledge of history is amazing!
But did you know that our leadership delayed a meeting with the German ambassador after the outbreak of war? So that the whole "civilized" world would not be tempted to call the USSR an aggressor. Or do you think that the capture of Austria and Czechoslovakia for Stalin and the government went unnoticed? Or the refusal of Poland to miss the Red Army to help Czechoslovakia? Or negotiators from Britain in Moscow who are not empowered? Will the capitalists overpower each other? You know, dear man, either you are stupid, or you are trying to prove again that Stalin’s “regime” was not only “bloody”, but also dumb ...

[Alexey RA]

Quote: kan123

In 1938, the Germans did not have an army at all.

In 1938, the Germans already had a Wehrmacht with officers and non-commissioned officers trained in the Reichswehr. And there was the experience of the Reichswehr’s exercises, on which tactical innovations were tested and the optimal staffs of the same campaign groups were determined (the Germans tested the first campaign group in the exercises of 1928). It remains only to fill these states with appropriate equipment (so as not to leave a third of the tanks on the sidelines on the sidelines, as in 1937).
But the Red Army was the other way around - there was technology, but there were no trained personnel, optimal staffs and charters. There were commanders who grew up from the cadets of the 30s, 95% of whom, upon admission, had primary education or did not have it at all. There were theoretical staffing units that did not pass the “battle test” even at demonstration exercises. And there were a whole bunch of temporary or amended charters, often left over from the Civil era.

The army has up to 1080 titles of existing charters, manuals and manuals. The main charters - the Field Service, the Internal Service, the Disciplinary and some combat manuals of the combat arms are outdated and require radical processing. None: instruction for driving large military formations (armies), instruction for attacking and defending fortified areas, and instruction for troop actions in the mountains.

Quote: kan123

In 1941, they had an army capable of removing security from borders.

In 1941, the Germans had an army that defeated the victors in WWI in 2 weeks.

Quote: kan123

What does the division in Brest fought for several months.

Organized resistance in the Brest Fortress lasted about a week. And the division was not there - there were consolidated groups of those who did not have time to leave the fortress and survived after the fire raid.

Quote: kan123

In the first, historians ask why this innocent, knowing about the concentration of war near the borders, dug up airfields - for their concreting (!) - silt born killers, landed on any field.

Because the headquarters of the Air Force in 1940 with its actions frustrated the reconstruction of the airfield network. And I had to carry it out in 1941. By the way, only part of the airfields was concreted:

According to the recollections of the chief of staff of the 4th Army, Colonel L. M. Sandalov, 2-4 thousand people worked at each of the facilities. As a result, it was possible to create a network of 231 airdromes, including 48 with concrete runways; they were operated by 10 air districts.

© Khazanov
The bulk of the work was done on the repair of unpaved strips and the expansion of airfields to values ​​suitable for the operation of new aircraft.
Oh yes, there were 2 IL-22.06s in the ZOV on 8. And 0 (zero) trained crews for them.

Quote: kan123

He also ordered that all armaments be removed from aviation, having solid information about a real attack on the entrusted units.

EMNIP, the order belonged to the “five-point” MiGs - they removed wing-mounted UBs for arming new aircraft due to the shortage of machine guns delivered by industry.

[chenia]

Quote: Alexey RA

tactical innovations were run in and the optimal staffs of the same campaign groups were determined (the Germans tested the first campaign group in the exercises of 1928)

Tactical formations that were the source of the victories of the Wehrmacht, and then defeats.
The paradox is that German rationalism gave rise to inertia of thought, and they still could not (although they tried) get out of worked out methods (although they worked against the Allies).
And ours quickly learned (relatively, of course, and after heavy losses) to use techniques (which they would later call the unified system of enemy fire destruction) and a more substantial massing of forces and weapons.
And even military thought (about plans to create (before the war) shock armies, and mechanized corps of the optimal ratio (at the level of formations and units) is a delight (here it’s possible to understand the regiments with the state and the rear support units).
There is no command and control of the troops, the training of the troops (the BP was completely failed as a result of constant organizational measures), the poor reliability of equipment (if it were due to the BP, at the level of the exercises they would have revealed flaws, and so during the war they had to be corrected).

And the Germans (after success in Europe) made motorized TDs altogether (it worked up to a certain point), and then they wondered why from a certain moment everything stopped spinning (and only the lower tactical level helped) ..

And about the fact that in 1942 the Germans would be stronger than ours by head, most likely not.
Before the summer company of 1942, they had a much more powerful advantage (we lost a huge territory, part of industry, a lot of weapons), but we know the result.

The fact is that ours believed (and rightly) - in 1941 there will be no war. A big provocation (strategic reconnaissance in battle) -yes (well, as in Khalkhin Gol). But by 1942 everything can be expected.

And from the fall of 1941, the troop sweep would go at full speed, and this is not only a BP, but the identification of shortcomings and OShs, methods of command and control, equipment, etc., etc.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: chenia

And even military thought (about plans to create (before the war) shock armies, and mechanized corps of the optimal ratio (at the level of formations and units) is a delight (here it’s possible to understand the regiments with the state and the rear support units).

The main problem of our military thought of the late 30s is its isolation from the real state of affairs in the army. On paper, the mechanized corps really looks menacing. But, even without taking into account the capabilities of industry to fill its staffs, this whole harmonious structure collapses with one question - and where to find commanders for its combat use? Where in the Red Army to find a sufficient number of commanders and staffers who are able to assign a combat mission to the mechanized corps as a whole, determine the optimal composition of the combat groups required for its implementation, form these groups from the mechanized corps units, plan their actions and manage these groups in battle? And which headquarters will manage this battle group? After all, the pre-war OSV of the BTV was copied from the Germans (more precisely, from the data on the Panzerwaff that the intelligence brought to us), and they had it imprisoned precisely for actions by combat groups.
After 15 years of theory and 3 years of practice, the Germans had such officers. Our problems began already at the front level, when their motorized divisions regularly pulled out of the MK, which immediately cut defense lines - and then the MK had to fight without infantry. There were no less problems at the lower levels.
According to the mind, pre-war MKs had to be formed from separate brigades, so that future combat groups would have a well-coordinated "skeleton" on which they could hang the "meat" of the dowry and support. But to understand this, a year of war was needed.

[chenia]

Quote: Alexey RA

The main problem of our military thought of the late 30s is its isolation from the real state of affairs in the army.

And she must be ahead of the real state. Take the best armies as an example, and even then we shared the functions of the breakthrough formation and the mobile forces introduced into the breakthrough (for Germans, TD was the essence of the breakthrough division initially (and from the moment when they left 1 TP, it was finally and only).

Quote: Alexey RA

and where to find commanders for its combat use?

After all, they found it in the war. And in peacetime, enhanced BP, BP, BP

.

Quote: Alexey RA

to form these groups from the units of the mechanized corps, plan their actions and manage these groups in battle? And which headquarters will manage this battle group?

All this requires a streamlined and complex mechanism (where each link should function very clearly), which we did not have until the end of the war. And so we came up with a simpler and much more correct, single system (where it was required from the regiment to carry out an insignificant task in depth, and then to contribute, and this with disparate (with the capabilities of the BG) fire support) ..
The battle groups, on the other hand, had a greater degree of independence, united by a common plan, and were imprisoned in obtaining the maximum result (private) with a minimum of costs.

But with careful implementation it took time. Everything was fine while our defense was not resistant (and with holes). And then (due to persistence) we began to keep pace with the introduction of reserves, the pace they fell even more - in short, the Kursk Bulge. Where the Germans gnawed the defense at the end of the tactical zone with the density of the first position.

The Germans were jewelers (to open the castle), and we acted as a sledgehammer, which later (our time) turned out to be the most correct approach ..

[Alexey RA]

Quote: chenia

And she must be ahead of the real state. Take the best armies as an example

That's only to bring this theory to life will have a domestic comrade commander, who has 3 classes in the base.

Quote: chenia

After all, they found it in the war.

Yeah .. found - by natural selection. In the war, those incapable of control simply perished. Often - along with his team. But the quality of training for survivors in the battles was really good - the teachers were very talented.

Quote: chenia

And in peacetime, enhanced BP, BP, BP

And here the second factor comes into effect - the lack of command personnel (up to 60%) and the lack of equipment for the maintenance of military personnel. As a result, the typical commander of the late 30s, instead of the BP, is engaged in resolving economic issues and performing other people's duties.
In addition, a normal PSU needs normal charters and instructions written by competent commanders, who are highly desirable to have combat experience. And not the theorists' calculations - for example, about the opening of anti-tank fire on enemy tanks starting from the direct-fire range of the anti-tank fire.

[chenia]

Quote: Alexey RA

which has 3 classes in the database.

Here I am about it. The need for inventions is cunning (but it so happens that she will come up with the most true and correct way). We had worse artillerymen then (in the past, to go there without an average), and during periods we will do so that almost the entire infantry and the majority of the dowry (of course there were separate detachments), will be parrots, repeating the commands of the main artillery chief ( and the installation on the shield of the gun), accompaniment, so one NS (then the adjutant) at ADN capable of calculating the settings for the batteries will be found.
And for the infantry (regiment), the task is not set for 3-5 days of fighting, as for the battlefield, but the immediate task at such a depth where it is not difficult to control the execution (or intervene) of the divisional commander (even to an older chief), and then contribute to the completion of the nearest higher link. Well, the reinforcement by tanks and tanks (senior level), and we had before the next one was completed.

In principle, the idea of ​​assault groups and BG is correct and implemented - our MCO is a machine gun. grenade launcher, ATGM, (sniper options), and our SMEs - TB, ISR, ADN, PT batr (then generally ADN).

But at the same time, tasks are under formation, and not formation under tasks. The Americans played for a long time, and finally they have brigades of constant composition.



.

Quote: Alexey RA

And not the theorists' calculations - for example, about the opening of anti-tank fire on enemy tanks starting from the direct-fire range of the anti-tank fire.

And what if for PT res. shelf and above should it be so? Well, the infantry reinforcement of these units is not supposed. And they should not let the enemy to the zone of machine-gun fire. And 45 mm, even in the M-42 version, is not a weapon for the PT res. (The right thought overtook reality - claims to Kulik)

[intuzazist]

How be it Suvorov-Rezun read! Colossal problems were revealed in Spain and the Finnish War, both in existing equipment and in command and control! Our “donkeys” were far behind the German Messers! I just don’t understand one thing, why destroy the old line of defense without completely building a new one ????! Shaw, there weren’t enough guns? Enough! When you read how many weapons Hans got right in warehouses, your hair stands on end ..................................... ..
...

[yehat]

the pre-training failed by the lack of readiness for 2/3 of the work in the 40th and the first half of 41 years, and the main reason was litigation. Stupidly traded MONTHS to make with less effort or somehow otherwise gain. The discipline was a complete out - there are a bunch of reports in the archives. Even in elite units where there were only officers (for example, air defense squadrons), there were difficulties with discipline. One infantry division was completely reorganized due to rampant drunkenness.

[dDYHA]

Stalin wanted to be an ally of Hitler. It then began to redo the story after June 22. And count to the 90s and almost no one knew about the division of Poland and the Finnish War. I think they will open the archive in which Stalin and Hitler shared the WORLD. I think they did not agree in the division of property.

[invisibility]

Quote: dDYHA

Stalin wanted to be an ally of Hitler.

Do not trifle! Stalin wanted to be God ... Goebbels, you homegrown.

[yehat]

Stalin simply did not want a war with anyone, and for this he was ready to be friends with Hitler and the equally dangerous Chamberlain, and Daladier, and even with the Poles, who had already managed to attack the USSR once.
You should read how great danger the USSR was at that time.
This is expressed by a simple phrase of Stalin - if we do not have time to prepare, they will simply crush us.

[yehat]

why instead of crushing blows

1. 2000 tanks is a big force, but in the conditions of the most severe shortage of means of support (tanks should not only be registered, but also effectively maintained and maintained) they were not very combat-ready.
2. The Germans had a large effective 37mm anti-tank gun in service with the 38-37 year, and it was they who swept out hundreds of BTs in the summer of the 41st.
3. The USSR had a peacetime army, a little over a million, the Germans had almost no army numbers.
Attacking in such conditions is simply pointless.
4. In addition to Germany, the USSR had other enemies — Japan with a half-million Kwantung group, England (together with France and Finland), Turkey, Romania, which could easily lead to the creation of a punitive coalition of more than 10 states and fronts 3-4 times long thousand km The economy of the country simply would not have pulled such a war.
5. The Finnish winter war showed how weak the Red Army was even after a partial reorganization based on the experience of Holkin-Gol and Spain.
6. Why attack Germany, which seriously helps in the formation of industry, including military
half of the aircraft during the war released on German equipment.

and lastly, the article is completely irresponsible. A person does not understand what he is talking about, does not understand the economy, does not understand the balance of power, and does not even understand the readiness of the Red Army for real battles and elementary mobilization resources.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: yehat

4. In addition to Germany, the USSR had other enemies — Japan with a half-million Kwantung group, England (together with France and Finland), Turkey, Romania, which could easily lead to the creation of a punitive coalition of more than 10 states and fronts 3-4 times long thousand km The economy of the country simply would not have pulled such a war.

EMNIP, in the USSR back in 1937 the situation of the war with the coalition of Finland, Poland, Romania and Japan, even without the participation of European powers, was considered extremely difficult for the army and the country.

[Arkady Kharitonov]

in 1937-38, the USSR was not against stopping Germany by force. It simply was not possible due to the lack of common borders. In 1939 the situation was already different. Yes, Germany at that time was not so strong, but the USSR had the danger of war at the same time as Germany and Japan, and there was a number of independent Baltic states through which Germany could strike. So I think that in 1939 the pact was signed correctly

[Tektor]

Fursov so answers this question. The impudent state made it clear in advance that in the event of an USSR attack on Germany, they would take the side of the latter. And then you just need to add up the potentials of the economies, and then it will become obvious that those 4 or so% of the world GDP of the USSR would not be able to withstand the remaining 70% for a long time, because in the war of attrition the last word is for the strength of the economy.

[vvp2412]

I didn’t read it ....
And for some reason I realized that I wrote the article Olezhka ...
Oleg, topics for ships exhausted? Tanks are not yours! And geopolitics is not yours at all!

[av58]

Sounds like the truth. This is a lesson for us in relation to the enemy, which we, unfortunately, have not learned, and once again failed: in 2014, the Russian authorities stopped the advance of the LPR and DNR armies at a time when Mariupol was already empty, and there was an opportunity to overturn a weak one, poorly armed, and demoralized army of Ukraine and Nazi battalions. The armies of New Russia could occupy the entire territory of the right bank up to Kiev. Instead, the enemy was given a respite, and now, no matter how ranted, the DPR and LPR are facing a completely different army, behind which NATO stands.

[pilot8878]

Mr. Kaptsov is better off writing about ships. Better yet, do not write at all.

[yehat]

no, let him write about armored fishing seiners
will be very informative reading)))

[Alexey RA]

Quote: yehat

no, let him write about armored fishing seiners

Better about the armored Zamvolt.

[yehat]

relatively recently there was a project of an armed icebreaker
it would be good for him to understand this topic and lay out analytics, if such an enthusiast.

[Siberian54]

In the thirty-eighth Czechoslovakia refused the help of the Red Army .. During the Polish company, the entry into the war when all of Europe had peace treaties with Hitler (we were extreme signatories in this line) meant a war with all of Europe (yes, the Franco-English then declared war not a single gun shot and no bomb fell on Germany_strange war)

[brn521]

In fact, the USSR was a potential enemy not only for Germany, but also for the Allies. Moreover, if Germany merely declared future aggression in an ideological spirit, then the Allies tightly imposed us, crushing both economically and politically. The communists were hated much more then than the fascists, and they feared the possible spread of the communist infection like fire.
Thus, any of our invasion of Europe meant a war with all of Europe, regardless of our goals and intentions. In order to do anything, it was necessary to negotiate with the parties. The allies, on the one hand, did not refuse to agree, on the other hand, they dragged on time, repeatedly returning any of our proposals for examination. Poland tried especially hard, which negatively perceived any military actions or movements of the USSR near its borders in the event of a future conflict between the Allies and the USSR against Germany. Rubber lasted more than six months. Again, the reputation of the allies, who merged their own, despite the agreement, was greatly tarnished. If they deceive their own, then God himself commanded the communists. Meanwhile, the Germans gained enough strength and decided to come to an agreement with the USSR themselves, which as a result received a concrete agreement on the territories, and, what is very important, on trade. In return, the Germans received a guarantee of non-aggression. As a result, the USSR was able to expand the territory, significantly pushing the borders in dangerous directions, and the trade embargo was broken. The allies, in exchange for guarantees from the USSR, actually offered us to just sit and wait, not representing anything in return. Given how the Allies carried out their agreements, Germany would continue to tear them in parts. As a result, we would get the same war, but within the old borders and with a worse economy.
I must also say thank you that all these negotiations took place before the Finnish War. The very course of the Finnish war and its results very seriously reduced our authority - according to the public, as a result of the USSR, it inflicted more damage on itself, by the same executions of the command staff than the Finns. Actually, some researchers considered this war one of the reasons for German aggression against the USSR. she caused the Germans to underestimate the enemy.

[stalkerwalker]

Per se.,

Quote: Per se.

The war with Germany was inevitable, it became inevitable from the very advent of the Nazis to power, as the antithesis of Bolshevism,

I give a hint - study the materials about the "Law on Lend-Lease" adopted in the USA in March 1941 — the purpose and meaning of the law. And to whom and how military assistance could be addressed.
By the way. There are a lot of analogies today with the law passed by the US Senate on sanctions against Russia. And the decision - how and when to take, and in which area - rests with the US President.

[antioh]

It’s good to consider yourself smarter than Great Stalin. Yes, indeed in the 37-38s the USSR could deal with Hitler even without the help of the “allies,” about which long but unsuccessful negotiations were conducted with the West. Hitting Germany alone, the USSR would have received against itself a united front of the capitalist countries, i.e. NATO would have formed in 1938! The latest attempt to “turn the arrows” was the non-aggression pact with Germany. Under the circumstances, the USSR could count on the support of the "allies" only undeniably becoming a victim of aggression. Even if Germany successfully repelled the blow, the USSR would be declared an aggressor - see above ...

[S_Baykala]

Oleg!
Thank you for the article. Everyone has their own opinion. Let me express my own.

why instead of crushing blows with tank wedges there was a flirtation with the Germans under the pretext of unpreparedness (who? their or us?) to the war?

You assume that the USSR was supposed to crush Germany in the bud. Through the territory of Poland (a sovereign state at that time?).
It seems to me that one could not mention the authority of the USSR after the act of aggression. At that time, the very fact of the existence of the USSR was like a red rag for a bull - from Europe to the SGA. In the case of aggression, the chance of creating not an anti-Hitler, but an anti-Stalin coalition would approach 100%. How would you (put yourself in the place of Churchill, for example) reacted to the fact that the world's first socialist state occupied Poland, Germany (Czechoslovakia, Austria, Hungary had to be bent to heaps), thereby setting up your system there.
Fear of strengthening the USSR would put Europe and America in one line.
Knowing what happened in 1941, I would very much like that everything you describe would happen. No ridicule. But it turns out a fork: then there would be no 1941 of the year and I would hardly be proud of my ancestors who attacked Germany (Poland, Czechoslovakia). Hitler was there in 1938 - yes, we now know that. At that time, he was just the leader of one of the countries.
As far as I remember the story, the Russians always only defended themselves. There were cases of attack (campaigns "for zipuns," for example), I do not argue. But these are raids. The Middle Ages, then the moral was different.
Best regards

[Varna]

Hooray, VO found a way out!
Behind the gasp of the Ukrainian theme and the souring of the Syrian, the old, trouble-free theme was removed from the shelf - the treacherous attack of Stalin on Hitler!
You give a record - 500 kament!

[strannik1985]

No, just May 9th is close.

[ALEA IACTA EST]

The USSR, with all the desire, could not have hit Germany due to the lack of common borders. In 1938, only Czechoslovakia had a chance to stop Hitler, but in the Czech political and military leadership, people like Karel Pavlik and Sergei Wojciechowski were in the absolute minority.

[Andrey Sukharev]

If only there were mushrooms growing in my mouth...

[Operator]

Everything is much simpler - Stalin only waited until 1941 for the formation by Hitler of an anti-Hitler coalition in the West (Britain and the USA) and the reorientation of Japan in the East.

In 1938, the USSR would have had to fight on two fronts - with the anti-Comintern coalition (Germany, Britain, France, Italy, Poland and Finland) in the West and Japan in the East. The Soviet Union would definitely lose such a war.

Actually, German military-technical potential has nothing to do with it.

[Mihail28]

But that's not all.
Then, after the “draining of Czechoslovakia,” England and France “drained” their ally Poland to Germany.
On the one hand, in accordance with obligations to Poland, they declared war on Germany, and on the other hand, in accordance with agreements with Germany, they did not attack Germany.

[Radical]

Fascist reptile should be pressed into the bud. The question remains: why, instead of crushing blows with tank wedges, did you flirt with the Germans on the pretext of not being ready (who? Or us?) For war?

The author is ready to ask the same question to the current leadership of the Russian Federation, why, instead of taking effective, drastic measures to strangle the fascist reptile in Ukraine in 2014, they actually recognized the coup that had taken place, and also flirted with Poroshenko?

[Ragoz]

The article is a mixture of fantasy, nonsense and speculation, as evidence of the aggressive policy of the USSR, which is very typical of modern liberals.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Per se.

And what, a new Crimean War, or a new French invasion without Napoleon? The Allies would still be sitting behind the Maginot Line, everything would be similar to the events of the opening of the second front, while the Russians and Germans would kill each other. Further, everything is the same, the division of Europe, two camps, two poles, but our losses would be less.

In the 1939 scenario there would be no division of Europe. The Allies, who will not need to prepare a strategic landing operation, will strike at the moment of the greatest weakening of Germany - and their fresh and fully staffed divisions will meet us somewhere on the Vistula. We defeated Germany - and you get out of Polish lands back to your Siberia.

[Imobile]

We had an army in 39, but it did not live to see 41, as a result of the influence of Stalin

In 1938, the Germans had no army at all. In 1941 they had an army capable

I understand that Hitler, but the experience of the formation of industry would be worth studying, especially since Hitler was good for industry (we must separate leadership qualities and correct decisions from the fact that he was a scumbag)

[Bakht]

What an idiotic article. I can repeat it again. There is not an ounce of wisdom here.
Who was supposed to put pressure on Germany in 1938? Has the author gone completely off the rails?

[Antropos]

It was necessary to attack in 33-34. I'll explain now. The entire wild west was struck by depression and had no time for active action. Our industrialization has just begun and has not yet affected the power of the army. Nevertheless, the troops in the states of the 18th year were enough for aggressive behavior. In the "Stalin Plan" I usually group all the troops on the Finnish border and with the whole crowd in the fall of 33, successively capture Finka, Sveev, Denmark, cut Germany in half and enslave it by the end of 34. The main thing is not to attack the Norgs right away. Nagly and Franks immediately fit in with them. The USSR economy is not ready yet. But if you don’t touch the Norgs, then in three or four years you can catch up with PP to 1000 and with German design bureaus, war with the whole world becomes easy and pleasant. You can make the entire planet red by the 50th year. If you are not lazy, you can do it earlier. And all this without cheats. It's a pity that Stalin didn't play "Stalin's Plan".))))))

[meandr51]

You can argue about the balance of power, but for some reason no one wants to pay attention to the political aspects. How would the Red Army come into contact with the Wehrmacht? Would you invade Poland? Czechoslovakia? The answer would be war with a coalition of ALL Western powers. In 1938, Germany was weaker not only than the USSR, but also England and France. But these countries “did not pay attention” to the capture by the Wehrmacht back in 1936 of the demilitarized Rhineland, from which French troops were prudently withdrawn.
France alone could then occupy all of Germany. Why didn't she do this? “Highly Likely” there is only one answer: it was a coordinated policy of the West, acting at the behest of the global financial international. Send Germany east to the USSR! Which they succeeded very well, although they had to sacrifice almost all of Europe. And the bankers don't care. They increased their profits sharply.
If the USSR had started WW2 with an attack on Poland in 1937, it would have been no better for it. Germany and Poland would be declared victims, demanding the protection of the civilized world from the “Asian barbarians.” The combined power of all Western Europe + the United States would act against the USSR. These are not the Japanese at Khalkhin Gol.
Now regarding the fact that “time worked for Germany.” It's an illusion. This is what the further course of events showed. The superiority of the Wehrmacht in the first period of the war was due to better organization and logistics, as well as experience in applying the new strategy in a real war. And also by the accumulation of human and material resources of almost all of Europe with a population of 400 million people. At the second stage of the war, these factors ceased to operate.
They would have ceased to operate even without the war in 41-42. The planned mobilized industry of the USSR surpassed the European one and was second only to the American one.

[RPG_]

Hmmm, this is complete nonsense. Better write about the need for battleships, there is at least some sound grain there.

[Reklastik]

What kind of Viktor Suvorovism is this?))))

[bk316]

What would have happened if the USSR, on Kaptsov’s advice, struck the Reich in 38?
Answer: Stalin had every chance of ending up like Hitler (his corpse would have burned in the Kremlin courtyard while the Allies stormed the General Staff building).
Only Stalin was not a d.u.rak and understood the difference between a war of liberation against world fascism, which is trying to devour the entire planet, and a treacherous attack on a country with which you do not even border.
This difference cannot be compensated for by a thousand tanks. In general, we won largely thanks to the unity of the Russian people in understanding the essence of this war (and not at all thanks to qualitative and quantitative superiority in military equipment) and we should not consider them a fool.

I don’t even want to write about the reaction to this adventure in the world, here everything is clear to a child

[bashkir]

Fascist reptile should be pressed into the bud. The question remains: why, instead of crushing blows with tank wedges, did you flirt with the Germans on the pretext of not being ready (who? Or us?) For war?

Why was our country scared in 38 to put pressure on Germany? Did we fight with them de jure?

[pafegosoff]

Did time work for the Nazis? It was England, France and the USA who worked for the Nazis. And everyone would have stood up en masse against the USSR. So Stalin had to dodge as best he could. And Japan is behind us... And it would not quarrel with the United States, but would fight together.

[VS]

The author - read a lot of rezunov and spewed nonsense)))

[Kostadinov]

A very good example of a fatal strategic mistake, but it is also surprising that after 80 years, who has not yet realized that this was the best way for the USSR to commit suicide. Moreover, there is no doubt that at that time many Soviet military leaders thought so about “repression.”
1. In 1938, getting to Germany was possible only through Poland or through Romania and Czechoslovakia. In other words, until October 1938, it was necessary to fight with these states and their allies (the British and French empires). After the Munich Treaty the situation did not change for the better for the USSR. The USSR's attack on Germany in 1938-39 could only lead to the creation of a united front of the West against the USSR.
2. The same Red Army of 1939 suffered heavy losses and with great difficulty coped with tiny Finland and its 300-strong army. And here, in a fantastic way, the Wehrmacht with its 3 million soldiers, with its best infantry in the world and with the most numerous and effective anti-tank and automatic anti-aircraft artillery - the main weapon of the Wehrmacht in 1941 - was defeated. Look at the results of counterattacks by Soviet tank corps in the summer of 1941 against German infantry divisions or at the retreat of the Southern Front in the summer of 1941 in front of German and Romanian troops who had no tanks.
3. In 1938, the Soviet artillery did not hit 37 mm and 85 mm anti-aircraft guns, modern divisional artillery did not hit (76 mm guns and 122 mm howitzers), 120 mm mortars did not hit yet, and then the main weapon of victory did not hit.
4. The qualitative superiority of Soviet aviation in 1938 was an illusion. Compare the hundred Finnish fighters in 1939 with 10 times more German fighters and anti-aircraft guns and you can get an idea of ​​what fate awaited Soviet aviation over Germany in 1938.

[Mihail28]

Quote: igordok

Without capturing Poland, only East Prussia is available.

At least draw a route in Yandex using a 1938 map, so that from the USSR to East Prussia it turned out to bypass Poland.

Quote: igordok

capitalized capital is a country. Poland, with the capital, is the territory.

From Wikipedia. "An uppercase, or capital, letter is a letter that is increased in size compared to lowercase letters. Sometimes such a letter has a different grapheme."
That is, an uppercase and a capital letter are the same letter.

[NordUral]

We sit high, look far away, and intelligently reason about how. One trifle was not taken into account, the West was just waiting for this to attack the aggressor with the whole pack, and then Japan would catch up.

[ccsr]

Author: Oleg Kaptsov

Fascist reptile should be pressed into the bud. The question remains: why, instead of crushing blows with tank wedges, did you flirt with the Germans on the pretext of not being ready (who? Or us?) For war?

The author, with his capricious slogans, would do well to familiarize himself with the fighting during the Finnish War and at least study the transcript of the meeting in the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks on April 14-17, 1940.
Perhaps then he will understand something why his fantasies were unrealistic in 1838.