Military Review

You give the borders of 1772! Why did the leadership of the USSR consider Poland a likely adversary

133
You give the borders of 1772! Why did the leadership of the USSR consider Poland a likely adversary

Jozef Pilsudski in Minsk. 1919 year


"Crusade" of the West against Russia. No one in Poland removed the slogan on the return of the borders of 1772. The Polish lords wanted to plunge Europe into a big war again. The First World War returned to Poland statehood, part of the former lands of the Commonwealth. Therefore, Warsaw believed that a new big war in Europe would give Poland the territories it claimed.

Peaceful Poland


After three sections of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (1772, 1793 and 1795), which were caused by the complete decomposition of the pansko-gentry elite, Polish statehood was liquidated. The Poles lived on the territory of three empires: the Austrian. German and Russian. In World War I, all these powers were defeated and were divided by Western democracies - England, the USA and France. The Entente in November 1918 separated the Polish regions from the fallen Austro-Hungarian and German, and united them with the Kingdom of Poland, a region that before the war belonged to Russia, but was then occupied by German troops.

In December 1919, the Entente Supreme Council determined the eastern border of the Polish Republic (Second Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth) according to the so-called. "Curzon line" (named after the Minister for Foreign Affairs of England, Lord Curzon). This line passed where the eastern border of Poland is now located approximately. This line as a whole corresponded to the ethnographic principle: to the west of it there were lands with a predominance of the Polish population, to the east - territories with a predominance of non-Polish (Lithuanian, West-Russian) population. But historical the border of the Kingdom of Poland and Russia passed on average 100 km west of the Curzon line, so some ancient Russian cities remained in Poland (Przemysl, Kholm, Yaroslavl, etc.).

The New Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was surrounded by the lands of the newly defeated empires and their debris, which headed for "independence". Therefore, Warsaw turned a blind eye to the proposal of the Entente and tried to capture as much as possible, to recreate its empire "from sea to sea" (about the Baltic to the Black Sea). The Poles got access to the Baltic Sea: the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 transferred to Poland most of the German province of Posen (Poznan), part of West Prussia, part of Pomerania, which gave the country access to the Baltic. Danzig (Gdansk) received the status of a “free city”, but the Poles claimed it until the defeat of Germany in 1939. In addition, the Poles seized from the Germans part of Silesia (Eastern Upper Silesia).

The Poles seized part of the Cieszyn region from Czechoslovakia. In October 1920, Polish troops chopped off part of Lithuania with the capital, the city of Vilnius (Vilnius). But most of all, the Polish elite hoped to profit in the east, where Russia was torn by the Time of Troubles. In 1919, the Polish army defeated the Western Ukrainian People's Republic (ZUNR) and occupied Galicia. In 1923, the League of Nations recognized the entry of Galician lands into Poland.

Poland "from sea to sea" at the expense of Russian lands


In early 1919, Poland launched a war with Soviet Russia (Creating the Second Polish Commonwealth) The goal was the borders of the Commonwealth of 1772. Polish troops without any problems occupied a significant part of Lithuania, Belarus and Little Russia (Ukraine). The Poles used the opportunity - the best forces of the Red Army were connected by the struggle with the White Guards. Then Warsaw temporarily stopped the offensive. The Polish government did not want the White Army to win with its slogan "united and indivisible Russia." The months-long negotiations in Taganrog between Denikin and Pilsudski’s representative General Karnitsky ended to no avail. This was a major mistake of the Polish elite, which showed its limitations. The simultaneous blow of the powerful Polish army, which was supported by the Entente, and the army of Denikin, could lead to the fall of the Soviet Republic or to a sharp reduction in its territory. In addition, the Polish leader Pilsudski underestimated the Red Army, believed that the Polish army itself could enter Moscow without the White Guards.

The Soviet-Polish negotiations also did not lead to success. Both sides used the truce to prepare a new round of confrontation. In 1920, the Polish army resumed the offensive. In spring, the Poles achieved new successes in Belarus and Lesser Russia, and took Kiev. However, the Red Army regrouped forces, tightened reserves and launched a powerful counterattack. In June, the 1st Budenny Cavalry Army recaptured Kiev. Polish troops tried to counterattack, but were defeated. In July 1920, the red Western Front under the leadership of Tukhachevsky again went on the offensive. The Poles quickly retreated, losing previously captured lands and cities. In a short period of time, the Red Army advanced more than 600 km: July 10, Polish troops left Bobruisk, July 11 - Minsk, July 14 - Vilno. On July 26, in the region of Bialystok, Soviet troops crossed directly into Polish territory. On August 1, Brest was given almost without resistance to the Reds.

A quick victory turned his head. In their revolutionary romanticism, the Bolsheviks lost a sense of proportion. The Temporary Revolutionary Committee of Poland (Polrevkom) was established in Smolensk, which was to assume full power after the capture of Warsaw and the overthrow of Pilsudski. This was officially announced on August 1, 1920 in Bialystok. The committee was headed by Julian Markhlevsky. Lenin and Trotsky were sure that when the Red Army entered Poland a proletarian rebellion would break out and Poland would become socialist. Then the revolution will be completed in Germany, which will lead to the victory of the Soviets throughout Europe. Only Stalin tried to sober up the Soviet government with calls to stop on the Curzon line and make peace with Warsaw.

However, Moscow decided to continue the offensive. It ended in defeat. The Red Army lost the August battle for Warsaw. Hopes for the support of the Polish proletariat did not materialize. The troops were tired of the previous battles, the communications of the Red Army were stretched, the rear was not fixed. The enemy was underestimated. The Polish army, on the contrary, had a strong rear, the front line was reduced, which allowed the Poles to concentrate on the defense of the capital. It may be that the Red Army had a chance of success, but the factor played by Tukhachevsky. The Soviet Western Front was commanded by Tukhachevsky, an extremely ambitious commander, an adventurer who dreamed of the glory of Napoleon. The Com Front has sprayed the armies of the Western Front, sending them in diverging directions.

As a result, Pilsudski, who called this war a “comedy of mistakes”, inflicted a crushing defeat on Tukhachevsky’s troops (“Miracle on the Vistula”). The troops of the Western Front suffered heavy losses. This led to the fact that the Polish army was able to recapture part of the previously lost territories in the fall. Both sides were exhausted by the struggle and went to peace. On March 18, 1921 in Riga between Poland and the RSFSR (the delegation of which also represented the Byelorussian SSR) and the Ukrainian SSR, the Riga Peace Treaty was signed. Vast territories left for Poland - Western Ukraine and Western Belarus.


Polish troops enter Kiev. 1920 year

Colonization policy


Having swallowed such a large production, Warsaw spent all the time before the Second World War to “digest” it. The Polish gentry, having appropriated the rights of a higher race, tried to colonize the West Russian and Lithuanian lands by the most brutal methods. Polish authorities tried to make up almost a third of the population. All Catholics and Uniates were considered Poles. “Dissidents” were subjected to persecution - this is what non-Catholics were called in Poland. Uniate churches were destroyed or turned into churches. Entire villages in Volyn became Polish.

Warsaw pursued a policy of "siege". Polish settlers, retired soldiers, members of their families, as well as civilian immigrants who, after the end of the war with Soviet Russia and later land allotments in the territories of Western Ukraine and Western Belarus with the aim of actively polonizing (polishing) the territories, were called besiegers. Despite the fact that Little Russian lands were already densely populated, Polish colonists here received allotments of the best lands and generous cash subsidies. The Polish authorities at one time gave the siege from 15 to 40 hectares of land. So in the period 1921 - 1939. About 300 thousand settlers moved from ethnic Polish lands to Belarus, and about 200 thousand people moved to Eastern Galicia and Volyn.

This led to the resistance of the West Russian population. In 1930, attacks on the homes of Polish landowners and besiegers in Ukraine became more frequent. In the summer of 1930 alone, 2200 Pole houses were burned in eastern Galicia. The authorities brought in troops, burned and looted about 800 villages. Over 2 thousand people were arrested, about a third received large prison sentences.

Polish threat


Since the beginning of the 1920s, Polish diplomats have created in the West the image of Poland as a barrier to Bolshevism, the defender of "enlightened Europe." In 1921, an alliance agreement was signed with France. True, the Poles once again completely forgot their own history and did not remember that although France was Poland’s traditional ally, it usually abandoned its “partner” at a dangerous moment. In addition to the period 1807 - 1812, when Napoleon fought with Russia.

The Polish elite could not give the country neither economic nor social reforms that led the people to prosperity in the 1920s and 1930s. As a result, only the old slogan remained: “From mozh to mozh” (“from sea to sea”). Nobody in Warsaw was going to forget about the return of the borders of 1772. The Polish lords wanted to plunge Europe into a big war again. The First World War returned to Poland statehood, part of the former lands of the Commonwealth. Therefore, Warsaw believed that a new big war in Europe would give Poland the territories it claimed.

The main conductor of this course to the war was the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Poland in 1932-1939. Jozef Beck. After the death of Pilsudski in 1935, power in Poland fell into the hands of the ruling group of three people - Marshal Rydz-Smigly, President Mosczycki and Beck, while Beck actually determined Warsaw's foreign policy. Therefore, the Western press until September 1939, the Polish government called the Beck government.

Poland was not the main aggressor in Europe, but Pilsudski and the heirs of his political course were no worse and no better than Mussolini or Mannerheim. In Rome, they dreamed of restoring the greatness of the new Roman Empire, turning the Mediterranean into Italian, subjugating countries and peoples in the Balkans and in Africa. In Helsinki, they planned to create a “Great Finland” with Karelia, the Kola Peninsula, the Leningrad, Arkhangelsk and Arkhangelsk provinces (The myth of the aggression of the "criminal Stalinist regime" against the "peaceful" Finland; What prompted the USSR to start a war with Finland) In Warsaw, they dreamed of Ukraine.

Thus, in Warsaw, they still licked onto Russian lands. The Polish lords did not abandon their plans for the capture and colonization of Russian lands and access to the Black Sea. The Poles sought to capture most of the Ukrainian SSR. This until the Second World War predetermined the steadily bad relations between the USSR and Poland. And the hostility was Poland. Warsaw stubbornly rejected all Moscow’s attempts to establish good neighborly relations. Already in the early 1930s, the USSR had trade agreements with all countries of the world, only Poland refused to sign such an agreement, and only met the Russians in 1939, a few months before their death.

The Polish border was a dangerous destination. Here, in the 20s, skirmishes and skirmishes constantly took place. Various White Guard and Petliura detachments were based on the territory of the Polish Republic, which, with the complicity of the Polish authorities and the military, periodically attacked the territory of the RSFSR and the Ukrainian SSR. This forced the Soviet government to hold large forces in the Polish direction. At the same time, Soviet Russia, in view of its weakness, was extremely cautious in the 20s and 30s. Soviet border guards had very strict guidelines for restricting their use weapons on the border. The Poles behaved arrogantly like conquerors. It is not surprising that Moscow during this period considered Poland the most probable adversary in Europe (together with Germany) and was preparing for a defensive war.


Official visit of Polish Foreign Minister Jozef Beck to Berlin. 1935 year.

To be continued ...
Author:
Photos used:
https://ru.wikipedia.org/
Articles from this series:
The “Crusade” of the West against Russia

The “Crusade” of the West against Russia
Why the USSR defeated Hitler's "European Union"
133 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Edward Vashchenko
    Edward Vashchenko 31 December 2019 06: 23 New
    +7
    As a result, Pilsudski, who called this war a “comedy of mistakes”, inflicted a crushing defeat on Tukhachevsky’s troops (“Miracle on the Vistula”).

    There is no connection in this phrase, at first the Poles made a "strong" mistake, but with the help of "friendly countries", taking advantage of Tukhachevsky's tactical mistakes, they went on the offensive, what a "comedy"?
    1. Slavutich
      Slavutich 31 December 2019 06: 45 New
      -1
      Yes, some kind of inconsistency, where does the "comedy of mistakes"
      1. svp67
        svp67 31 December 2019 07: 06 New
        13
        Quote: Slavutich
        Yes, some kind of inconsistency, where does the "comedy of mistakes"

        But apparently Pilsudsky saw so many mistakes and unused chances that he made Tukhachevsky ... His vision
        1. Krasnoyarsk
          Krasnoyarsk 31 December 2019 10: 40 New
          +7
          Quote: svp67

          But apparently Pilsudsky saw so many mistakes and unused chances that he made Tukhachevsky ... His vision

          We are talking about the mistakes of Tukhachevsky. It was a series of mistakes by Tukhachevsky that gave Pilsudsky the opportunity to stabilize the front first, then concentrate his forces and strike.
          1. svp67
            svp67 31 December 2019 17: 42 New
            +2
            Quote: Krasnoyarsk
            We are talking about the mistakes of Tukhachevsky.

            Pilsudsky also made a lot of mistakes and I am sure that he objectively understood this.
            1. Krasnoyarsk
              Krasnoyarsk 31 December 2019 18: 33 New
              0
              Quote: svp67

              Pilsudsky also made a lot of mistakes and I am sure that he objectively understood this.

              Yes very many. And one of them is the defeat of Tukhachevsky. No? But this does not happen. Wrong, mistaken and eventually won. Did something like this happen in history?
          2. Den717
            Den717 1 January 2020 18: 13 New
            +2
            Many researchers say that there was a complete mess in the spacecraft, which did not allow sending the Budyonny-Stalin army from near Lviv to Warsaw to help Tukhachevsky. Then, according to the recognition of the French advisers in the Polish army, Pilsudski would not have a chance to keep Warsaw behind him. So those defeats have many authors.
            1. Krasnoyarsk
              Krasnoyarsk 1 January 2020 19: 24 New
              +1
              Quote: Den717
              Many researchers say that there was a complete mess in the spacecraft,

              Don't you think that "many researchers" have confused something? The fact is that by this time (the campaign against Warsaw) the Red Army had already defeated Yudenich, Kolchak, Denikin and many smaller "atamans". How is this possible with "complete disorder" in the spacecraft?
              I do not presume to assert, but I believe that Budyonny and Stalin would have taken Warsaw. But this: 1. It would not mean the end of the war, which Russia so badly needed, and 2. Lenin and RVS understood that no Polish proletariat dreaming of overthrowing Pilsudski did not exist in reality. That is why Budyonny stayed in Lviv and peace negotiations began. As a result of which Russia lost some of its territories, which were returned in 39.
    2. Olgovich
      Olgovich 31 December 2019 09: 47 New
      -16
      Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
      There is no connection in this phrase

      But this phrase is only part of the text and is preceded by another:
      Comfront sprayed the army Western front, directing them in diverging directions.


      It was a "mistake" and:
      As a result, Pilsudski, who called this war “comedy” wrongto ”, inflicted a crushing defeat on the troops of Tukhachevsky (“ Miracle on the Vistula ”).


      So there are no problems with the presentation logic.

      The problem is in the presentation of the facts: describing, in some detail, the history of those events, the author "forgot" one of the most important documents of that time, which gave impetus to the events. SNK Decree on NOT RECOGNIZING ALL POLAND SECTIONS

      Thus, the Bolsheviks RECOGNIZED the Polish border prior to the partition, i.e. borders of 1772 g along the Dnieper. Poles and went to them.

      In addition, having overthrown the legal authority of Russia, the Bolsheviks turned out WITHOUT the borders of Russia recognized by anyone.

      The author talks about the aggression of Poland, but on what basis? Where was this border and who agreed and recognized it? NONE.

      The SNK considered the lands to be its own, and Poland, with the same reason as its own (especially, the SNK recognized the borders of 1772).

      The stupid policy of inexperienced, knowing nothing, never usurping usurpers led, thus, to endless wars on the borders with the whole environment: Poland, Estonia, Finland, Latvia, etc. and huge human losses, territorial and material.

      Their consequences are still being dismantled by Russia.

      Poland would never attack the ALL recognized Russian Republic of the Constituent Assembly.

      Lenin and Trotsky were sure that upon entry a proletarian rebellion broke out there in Poland of the Red Army, and Poland became socialist. Then the revolution will be completed in Germany

      These people screamed for 4 years that war is the greatest crime and they went ...war to Europe. by force request imposing their orders.
      no words ....
      1. alebor
        alebor 31 December 2019 11: 01 New
        +9
        From the text of article 3 of Decree No. 698 "On the refusal of treaties between the government of the former Russian Empire and the governments of the German and Austro-Hungarian empires, the kingdoms of Prussia and Bavaria, the duchies of Hesse, Oldenburg and Saxe-Meiningen and the city of Lubeck" the Polish people of the nation's right to self-determination, but the recognition of the borders of 1772 does not follow in any way, since the Ukrainian and Belarusian nations also recognized the same right. Therefore, Soviet Russia had full grounds for protecting the rights to national self-determination of the Ukrainian and Belarusian peoples.
        In general, the events and confusion of that time strongly resemble the events that took place after the French Revolution, when a series of wars of France with its neighbors also began, first defensive and then aggressive.
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 31 December 2019 11: 13 New
          -10
          Quote: alebor
          From the text of article 3 of Decree No. 698 "On the refusal of treaties between the government of the former Russian Empire and the governments of the German and Austro-Hungarian empires, the kingdoms of Prussia and Bavaria, the duchies of Hesse, Oldenburg and Saxe-Meiningen and the city of Lubeck" the Polish people of the nation's right to self-determination, but the recognition of the borders of 1772 does not follow,

          just read:
          Art. 3. All contracts and actsconcluded by the government of the former Russian Empire with the governments of the kingdom of the Prussian and Austro-Hungarian empires, concerning sections of Poland, in view of their contradictions to the principle of self-determination of nations and the revolutionary legal consciousness of the Russian people, which recognized the inalienable right of the Polish people to independence and unity, - canceled hereby irrevocably.

          Art. 5. About adopted in Article.Article 1-4 of this decree decrees the People's Commissariat for Foreign Affairs to notify the German and Austro-Hungarian governments for refusal to fulfill the said contracts in the order of Article additional to the peace treaty concluded in Brest on March 3, 1918, treaties of Russia with Germany and Austria-Hungary.
          sections were canceled (and it was the EARTH that shared), BEFORE the sections was 1772 border treaty on the Dnieper.
          everything is logical.
          Quote: alebor
          . Therefore, Soviet Russia had every reason to protect the rights to national self-determination of the Ukrainian and Belarusian peoples.

          with what fright RSFSR signs for ... independent usr and bsr? Poland, by the way, did not attack the RSFSR at all.
          Quote: alebor
          since the Ukrainian and Belarusian nations also recognized the same right.

          within what boundaries and who installed them?
      2. Vadim T.
        Vadim T. 31 December 2019 11: 01 New
        +8
        [/ i] Quote: The author talks about the aggression of Poland, but on what basis? Where was this border and who agreed and recognized it? NOBODY. [I]
        Dear Olgovich! Your comment would be logical and fair if ALL states at ALL times respected territorial boundaries and respected international law. But this, unfortunately, is far from the case. There is always one or more ruling regimes who want to chop off a fatter piece from a neighbor. There are many examples - both from the twentieth century and from the present century. Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya - the list of victims can be continued for a long time. This is the first. Secondly, you hate the Soviet past and see it only in a negative light. Such a position will never allow you to objectively evaluate historical facts and understand the essence of historical processes. I’m not trying to blame you for anything at all - I’m just explaining why your point of view is wrong in principle.
        And now, in essence. The author of the article when assessing the Polish-Soviet relations in the 20s -30s. Of the twentieth century relied on well-known facts. In addition, he tried to explain the reason for the aggressiveness of Pilsudski's foreign policy. You may be surprised, but even today the motto "from moz to mozha" is relevant for Poland. Dreams of expanding Polish borders at the expense of neighboring states have not disappeared. Currently, the Poles are actively preparing for the so-called restitution of the Eastern Kres (as they call the lands of Western Ukraine, which were part of Poland from 1921 to 1939). If it is not possible to take away these lands by legal means, they already have a military option ready. With such a defender as the United States, Poland is not afraid to send troops. And this is not about the distant future, but about the near future. And rest assured - if this happens, the "world community" will not notice the violation of democracy. Alas, what times, such are the customs.
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 31 December 2019 11: 19 New
          -15
          Quote: Vadim T.
          ! Your comment would be logical and fair.

          Dear Vadim, you have not refuted ANYTHING.

          Quote: Vadim T.
          if ALL states at ALL times respected territorial boundaries There is always one or more ruling regimes who want to chop off at the neighbor the fatter piece

          and who said that this piece is .... yours? belay A neighbor considers him their. Moreover, you recognized the sections yourself illegal
          Borders of country destroyed by thief and decree - see. higher
          1. Vadim T.
            Vadim T. 31 December 2019 11: 44 New
            +8
            Dear Olgovich, apparently, you have inattentively read my comment. I did not refute you, but pointed out the fallacy of your point of view. The examples I cited (including with regard to Poland’s foreign policy) proved just that. I repeat once more: if any ruling regime has a desire to take a piece of territory from its neighbor, NO treaties, even the most ideal ones, will save the victim country from aggression. So it was before, it remains so now. And if there had been an agreement on borders at the beginning of the Soviet-Polish war, this would hardly have stopped the Poles from aggression, since the foreign policy of the state was already clearly defined and rigorously implemented. The same can be said of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. It was respected until it was beneficial to Nazi Germany. As soon as it became disadvantageous to the Nazis, they immediately violated it. Do you agree? Or will you argue further? smile
            1. Olgovich
              Olgovich 31 December 2019 12: 08 New
              -16
              Quote: Vadim T.
              I repeat again: if any ruling regime there is a desire take a piece of territory at the neighbor, NO agreement,


              It NOT territory neighbor, and the territory of the ruling regime.
              Now you understand?
              Quote: Vadim T.
              And if at the beginning of the Soviet-Polish war there would be border agreement
              this hardly stopped the Poles from aggression, as the foreign policy of the state was already clearly defined and rigorously implemented.
              Nonsense: The contract fixes the already achieved COMPROMISE of the parties and after a month or two, as a rule, is not violated. Otherwise, it makes no sense.
              Quote: Vadim T.
              Same it can be said with respect to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. It was respected until it was beneficial to Nazi Germany. As soon as it became disadvantageous to the Nazis, they immediately violated it. Do you agree? Or will you argue further?

              Nonsense: there was an agreement with Gkrmanii, NOT with the Poland.
              Can’t you tell the difference?
              1. Vadim T.
                Vadim T. 31 December 2019 20: 26 New
                +4
                It looks like we speak different languages. wink You can’t understand in any way that if one state pursues an aggressive foreign policy in relation to another state, then no agreements will help here. This is just a temporary measure to gain time and prepare better:
                a) one - to attack;
                b) to others - to defense.
                But you persistently defend the point of view that having a treaty is a guarantee of peace and prosperity. Then I remind you that the existence of a treaty with Germany did not save the USSR from Nazi aggression, just as its absence did not save the West Ukrainian People’s Republic from Polish aggression.
                And in order to put an end to this discussion, finally I will give you one quote:
                "The treaty with Russia is not worth the paper on which it is written" Otto von Bismarck
                Now, I hope you catch the difference?

                PS I congratulate you, Andrei, and all respected members of the forum on the upcoming New Year. I wish you good health, family happiness, prosperity and prosperity, vitality and inspiration. See you on the site next year!
                1. Olgovich
                  Olgovich 1 January 2020 11: 10 New
                  -6
                  Quote: Vadim T.
                  It looks like we speak different languages.

                  This is yes.
                  Quote: Vadim T.
                  You can’t understand in any way that if one state holds aggressive foreign policy towards another state

                  You don't want to understand what "aggression" is. And this is an INVASION into ANOTHER state.

                  And who said that, for example. , Lviv is .... ussr? Poland considered him hiss, his ussr. And who is the aggressor?
                  Now, okay?
                  Quote: Vadim T.
                  But you persistently defend the point of view that having a treaty is a guarantee of peace and prosperity.

                  I have both words
                  Quote: Vadim T.
                  "The treaty with Russia is not worth the paper on which it is written" Otto von Bismarck
                  Now, I hope you catch the difference?

                  the phrase is meaningless without its continuation
                  Quote: Vadim T.
                  PS I congratulate you, Andrei, and all respected members of the forum on the upcoming New Year.

                  And you, Vadim, Happy New Year and all the best to you! hi
            2. Krasnoyarsk
              Krasnoyarsk 7 January 2020 10: 56 New
              +2
              Quote: Vadim T.
              Do you agree? Or will you argue further?

              Dear, Olgovich argues with you not because he believes that he is right, but because he wants him to be the way he thinks. Therefore, a dispute with him makes no sense.
              Sorry to interfere with your dialogue with him.
      3. tihonmarine
        tihonmarine 31 December 2019 12: 11 New
        +3
        Quote: Olgovich
        SNK Decree on NOT RECOGNIZING ALL POLAND SECTIONS

        Well, you would also recall in this decree 698 also with Article II With Prussia - the Convention on the Expulsion of Beggars, Vagabonds and Passport-Free from August 19, 1872
        All that was signed was crossed out by the start of the war by Poland against the RSFSR. After that, the decree 698 has sunk into oblivion.
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 31 December 2019 12: 17 New
          -15
          Quote: tihonmarine
          Well, you would also recall in this decree 698 also with Article II With Prussia - the Convention on the Expulsion of Beggars, Vagabonds and Passport-Free from August 19, 1872
          Everything that was signed was crossed out by the start of the war.

          So why did it start? the Bolsheviks CANCELED the Russian granites with this decree and this recognized the previous borders of 1772 on the Dnieper. Poles and went to them. This is one of the reasons.
          Quote: tihonmarine
          the outbreak of war by Poland against the RSFSR.

          Poland did NOT attack the RSFSR at all: it attacked the independent usr and the bsr.
          Quote: tihonmarine
          After that, the decree 698 has sunk into oblivion.

          Did the Kingdom of Poland enter Russia?
      4. avia12005
        avia12005 1 January 2020 10: 01 New
        +1
        This Provisional Government - "legal power" ??? Oh well. And what document provided for the abdication of Emperor Nicholas II from Power? And in general, the abdication of Russian emperors? The Provisional Government is no more legal than the Bolshevik one. Or Russian after 1991.
        1. D-ug
          D-ug 1 January 2020 13: 20 New
          -3
          Quote: avia12005
          This Provisional Government - "legal power" ???

          Absolutely legal. And recognized throughout the world.
          Quote: avia12005
          And what document provided for the abdication of Emperor Nicholas II of power?

          The emperor had the right to abdicate. He denied him in favor of Michael.
          And Michael had the right to abdicate. He renounced it, unfortunately in favor of the Constituent Assembly, with the transfer of provisional power to the Provisional Government.
          Michael hastened to 50 years. And unfortunately he did not make anyone laugh. The victims of the consequences of his decision are tens of millions of compatriots.
          Quote: avia12005
          The interim government is no more legal than the Bolshevik government. Or Russian after 1991.

          The Russian and Provisional governments were legal. Bolshevik, no. But it was legalized later, having won the Civil War.
          1. avia12005
            avia12005 2 January 2020 17: 06 New
            +2
            A document by which the Russian emperor had the right to abdicate? Dear, if you do not know, do not approve, please. In this is not accepted)))
            1. D-ug
              D-ug 2 January 2020 19: 58 New
              0
              Quote: avia12005
              A document by which the Russian emperor had the right to abdicate?

              Search. On the Internet there.
              1. avia12005
                avia12005 3 January 2020 09: 23 New
                +1
                Strange you, however. You have a question, and you go to the Internet. There is no such legislative act of the Russian Empire in nature.
                1. D-ug
                  D-ug 3 January 2020 12: 22 New
                  0
                  Quote: avia12005
                  There is no such legislative act of the Russian Empire in nature.

                  Those. was the emperor obliged to be an importer even against his will?
                  1. avia12005
                    avia12005 4 January 2020 07: 38 New
                    0
                    I repeat. The procedure for abdication is prescribed in the relevant acts. Like in the UK or the Netherlands. In the Russian Empire, according to the laws, abdication was not provided at all. And the emperor’s desire to be or not to be such is no longer his personal whim.
      5. gsev
        gsev 2 January 2020 00: 48 New
        +1
        Quote: Olgovich
        Poland would never attack the ALL recognized Russian Republic of the Constituent Assembly.

        I recommend reading the memoirs of Chernov, the leader of the Socialist Revolutionary Party. Back in 1914, he discussed with the emissary of Pilsudski which territories of Russia would move to independent Poland. The requirements of the Pole were approximately the following: a new democratic Russia should support any claims of Poland to Russia. Moreover, Chernov was told that representatives of France and Great Britain promised the Poles assistance in their claims after the end of a future war. Chernov agreed that Russia would lose land, but only asked the Poles not to take too much and not to anger very Russian patriots.
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich 2 January 2020 07: 44 New
          -6
          Quote: gsev
          I recommend reading the memoirs of Chernov, the leader of the Socialist Revolutionary Party. Back in 1914, he discussed with the emissary of Pilsudski which territories of Russia would move to independent Poland. The requirements of the Pole were approximately the following: a new democratic Russia should support any claims of Poland to Russia. Moreover, Chernov was told that representatives of France and Great Britain promised the Poles assistance in their claims after the end of a future war. Chernov agreed that Russia would lose land, but only asked for

          And? belay
          1. gsev
            gsev 3 January 2020 15: 54 New
            -1
            Quote: Olgovich
            And?

            And the opponents of Lenin and Trotsky in the Constituent Assembly, long before the Bolsheviks came to power, were going to indulge any exorbitant claims of Poland to the lands of the Russian Empire inhabited by Russians. If you read Chernov’s memoirs, it will become evident to you as a revelation, disappointment, and the bitter truth that the right Social Revolutionaries were already ready in 1914 to make big concessions to the combined forces of Poland, Great Britain, and France, who had planned the division of Russia after the end of World War I. The present story is a bitter remedy for repeating mistakes, unlike narcotic inventions about the Hyperboreans-Rus.
            1. Olgovich
              Olgovich 4 January 2020 09: 41 New
              -3
              Quote: gsev
              And the opponents of Lenin and Trotsky in the Constituent Assembly, long before the Bolsheviks came to power, were going to indulge any exorbitant claims of Poland to the lands of the Russian Empire inhabited Russians.

              Russian? Lying. And there wasn’t such a thing.
              Quote: gsev
              It will become evident to you as a discovery, disappointment, and the bitter truth that the Right Socialist-Revolutionaries were already ready in 1914 to make big concessions to the combined forces of Poland, Great Britain, and France, who planned the division of Russia after the end of World War I.

              Give evidence of the section in 1914.
              Excuse me. but you carry outright BAD
              Quote: gsev
              The real story is bitter medicine from the repetition of mistakes, in contrast to narcotic inventions about the Hyperboreans-Russians.

              And you obviously will not use it
              1. gsev
                gsev 4 January 2020 21: 37 New
                0
                Quote: Olgovich
                Excuse me. but you carry outright BAD

                I just informed you that there are Chernov’s memoirs, which can be considered one of Lenin’s main competitors in 1917. You can consider this as nonsense as you like. But after reading Chernov’s memoirs, I’ll assume that in Polish sources about Pilsudski and the party of Polish right-wing socialists there is a lot of material about the skill of Pilsudski and his associates, who used Britain, France and opponents of Lenin and Trotsky in the interests of Polish statehood. If you read Chernov’s memoirs, then you should have found details of Chernov’s negotiations with the Pilsudski representative. On what grounds should I not believe Chernov, where he presents himself and his party of Social Revolutionaries in a rather unsightly light for a Russian person?
                1. Olgovich
                  Olgovich 5 January 2020 07: 01 New
                  -4
                  Quote: gsev
                  I just informed you that there are Chernov’s memoirs, which can be considered one of Lenin’s main competitors in 1917. You can consider this as nonsense as you like. But after reading Chernov’s memoirs, I’ll assume that in Polish sources about Pilsudski and the party of Polish right-wing socialists there is a lot of material about the skill of Pilsudski and his associates, who used Britain, France and opponents of Lenin and Trotsky in the interests of Polish statehood. If you read Chernov’s memoirs, then you should have found details of Chernov’s negotiations with the Pilsudski representative. On what grounds should I not believe Chernov, where he presents himself and his party of Social Revolutionaries in a rather unsightly light for a Russian person?

                  chatter is empty.
                  And they did not prove their FALSE, about the transferred RUSSIAN lands and the SECTION of Russia in 1914
                  1. gsev
                    gsev 5 January 2020 13: 02 New
                    0
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    chatter is empty.

                    Have you found and read Chernov’s memoirs to say so?
                    1. Olgovich
                      Olgovich 5 January 2020 13: 31 New
                      -3
                      Quote: gsev
                      Have you found and read Chernov’s memoirs to say so?


                      CHAPTER EIGHTEEN


                      Our relationship with the Polish Socialist Party (PPP). - Pilsudski's report in Paris on the eve of the First World War. - Gap PPP with PSR. - The war. - A split in the socialist ranks. - Social patriots, internationalists and defeatists. - Zimmerwald conference.


                      And?
                      1. gsev
                        gsev 5 January 2020 13: 40 New
                        -2
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        Our relationship with the Polish Socialist Party (PPP). - Pilsudski's report in Paris on the eve of the First World War. - Gap PPP with PSR. - The war. - A split in the socialist ranks. - Social patriots, internationalists and defeatists. - Zimmerwald conference.

                        And?

                        And not a fool, a person will understand that if Chernov and his party had come to power in 1918 (and they would have come to power if the sailor Zheleznyak had not dispersed the Constituent Assembly), Russia would have completely collapsed. Apparently, the military leadership of Russia considered this as supporting the Bolsheviks in 1917. I have not heard of such negotiations between Lenin and Trotsky, which were conducted by Chernov. In my opinion, they are more of a betrayal than a sealed carriage (where the main passenger was a representative of the Social Revolutionaries and not Lenin, as Chernov thought in his memoirs) or Parvus’s money.
                      2. Olgovich
                        Olgovich 6 January 2020 08: 06 New
                        -2
                        Quote: gsev
                        And not a fool, a person will understand that if Chernov and his party had come to power in 1918 (and they would have come to power if the sailor Zheleznyak had not dispersed the Constituent Assembly), Russia would have completely collapsed.

                        1. They came to power: CSS took place. Dispersed by bandits who lost the election.
                        2. Bolsheviks , (not Socialist-Revolutionaries) ruined Russia, see. a window on the borders of Russia of the 17th century: it was installed in 1917-1940
                        Quote: gsev
                        Apparently, the military leadership of Russia thought so. supporting the Bolsheviks in 1917.

                        What?!! belay fool lol
                      3. gsev
                        gsev 7 January 2020 02: 39 New
                        0
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        The Bolsheviks, (not the Socialist-Revolutionaries) destroyed Russia, see. a window on the borders of Russia of the 17th century: it was installed in 1917-1940

                        Natives of the parties that formed the Provisional Government stood at the head of the separatist formations on the territory of the Russian Empire. Example SR Tsereteli. Name the large representative of the Bolsheviks who organized the separatist government. Pilsudski is a Polish socialist faction. The Bolsheviks fought throughout the civil war with the invaders and their White Guard puppets. Read the recordings of Kolchak’s interrogation as he began his activities in Siberia on the instructions of the British. It is very unfair to blame those who, with their blood and mind for 30 years, returned all the territories lost after 1917 and acquired the Kuril Islands, South Sakhalin.
                      4. Olgovich
                        Olgovich 7 January 2020 08: 31 New
                        -5
                        Quote: gsev
                        Natives of the parties that formed the Provisional Government stood at the head of the separatist formations on the territory of the Russian Empire.

                        AFTER THE THIEF. Forgot?
                        Quote: gsev
                        Name a major representative of the Bolsheviks, who organized the separatist government.

                        Such things could be known: the so-called. "Lenin" (nickname)
                        Quote: gsev
                        Pilsudski is a Polish socialist faction.

                        Socialists in France were. And in Germany. AND?
                        Quote: gsev
                        The Bolsheviks fought throughout the civil war with the invaders and their White Guard puppets.

                        The Bolsheviks for 4 years during the Second World War called for defeat their country, and then FOREVER gave the German invaders a third of Europe's Russia, 40% of workers, 95% of coal, etc. Wow, "defenders" belay
                        Quote: gsev
                        Read the recordings of Kolchak’s interrogation as he began his activities in Siberia on the instructions of the British.

                        leave these mossy agitation: A.V. Kolchak, the head of the Russian State, whose motto was United and Indivisible Russia
                        Quote: gsev
                        It is very unfair to blame those who, with their blood and mind for 30 years, returned all the territories lost after 1917 and acquired the Kuril Islands, South Sakhalin.

                        Are you blind
                        AFTER EDUCATION OF THE USSR, RUSSIA DISASTERLY CUT TO 4 min km2-on the Thirteen Germany over 18 years old!

                        These borders of the 17th century, NERUS Odessa, NERUS Nikolaev, etc., THEIR work!
                      5. gsev
                        gsev 7 January 2020 14: 49 New
                        -1
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        AFTER EDUCATION OF THE USSR, RUSSIA HAS DISAPPOINTED FOR 4 MINS km2-ON THIRTEEN Germany - for 18 years old!

                        Since 1990, in all republics of the former USSR, republican KGB fought against forces that sought to save the USSR or had the opportunity to join the struggle to save the USSR. Talk to your colleagues who served in the national republics in 1991. Special departments in full force often controlled the oath in the newly emerging states. The collapse of the USSR became possible after the KGB got out of control of the party. One of the first calls was Andropov’s decision to create a special sparing regime for work among anti-advisers.
                      6. Olgovich
                        Olgovich 7 January 2020 15: 27 New
                        -3
                        Quote: gsev
                        Since 1990, in all republics of the former USSR, republican KGB fought against forces that sought to save the USSR or had the opportunity to join the struggle to save the USSR. Talk to your colleagues who served in the national republics in 1991. Special departments in full force often controlled the oath in the newly emerging states. The collapse of the USSR became possible after the KGB got out of control of the party. One of the first calls was Andropov’s decision to create a special sparing regime for work among anti-advisers.

                        Yours have created an alliance of INDEPENDENT STATES.
                        and not a single e occurred to what might happen, that they would want to go out.

                        But all you had to do was open a TEXTBOOK of history for grade 3 ..
  • Sergey M. Karasev
    Sergey M. Karasev 31 December 2019 06: 33 New
    +4
    The Polish state now has only two states. Either its complete absence, or - "Give Rzeczpospolita from Mozha to Mozha!" And no intermediate state! request
    1. antivirus
      antivirus 31 December 2019 09: 30 New
      +6
      antivirus August 8, 2016 20:24 8
      +1
      Red Army after 1938. Some results
      In the times described, that before the revolution, and even more so during the industrialization of the USSR, where were working hands and engineering heads needed? That's right, in factories.
      Speaking of birds.
      My grandfather (1909-1997) served as a driver in 1932-36 in Rybnitsy and my father was born in Balta in 34.
      And in 2000, recalling the 70s that the grandfather spoke of the 30s; the conclusion is very sad: the enemy for the tankers was in the south there (according to my grandfather in the 70s, I heard a child and remembered fragments) -POLAND
      And not Romania.
      FROM CAN TO CAN, and not any Romanians.
      The influence of ANTANTA (Great Brit and France) through Poland threatened the USSR, and the lords in third place and roles.
      RESULTS 38g-SPRING 41g WE !!! RESOLVED THE QUESTION OF THE ATTIBOLSHEVITSKY SANITARY CORDON (which was bequeathed to both Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Bukharin and everyone else) Poland was defeated and the Romanians gently pushed. The cycle is completed.
      1. tihonmarine
        tihonmarine 31 December 2019 12: 20 New
        +3
        Quote: antivirus
        The influence of ANTANTA (Great Brit and France) through Poland threatened the USSR, and the lords in third place and roles.

        Well, ANTANTA created Poland so that it was always a gasket between Russia and Germany, and what if they become friends and France falls first. And in order to prevent this, they created the "Limitrophe" project Poland. And so, since 1918, this creature muddies the waters in a dirty river.
    2. gsev
      gsev 4 January 2020 21: 44 New
      0
      Quote: Sergey Mikhailovich Karasev
      The Polish state now has only two states.

      Already 75 the Polish state lives within the boundaries defined by Comrade Stalin. I suppose this condition is more durable than the time of the loss of Polish statehood. In addition, the Poles were able to restore their state faster than the Russians got rid of the Tatar yoke. In Russia, Zhirinovsky sometimes speaks of the Indian Ocean, but these words should not be taken to heart.
  • Basil50
    Basil50 31 December 2019 06: 52 New
    +2
    The author managed to get around this smoothly about how HOW they created Poland in the twentieth century.
    Today's Poland is trying to become * an honorary great martyr * including through the criminal prosecution of those who dare to learn about the real historical processes and the role of Poland and the Poles.
    It’s a pity that rarely anyone dares to tell about the genocide of RUSSIAN people with which * present Poland actually began *.
  • svp67
    svp67 31 December 2019 06: 55 New
    +3
    Soviet-Soviet negotiations also did not lead to success.
    The trouble, of course, the Soviets couldn’t even agree with themselves, where is it with Poland
  • peta locksmith
    peta locksmith 31 December 2019 07: 41 New
    +4
    cit "... Nobody in Poland removed the slogan about the return of the borders of 1772"

    and now nobody in Poland removes this slogan

    they even have a hymn with words from the year 1797 of the time of the Rzecz Pospolita third bottling

    Anthem of Poland "A Polish patriotic song written by Jozef Wybicki in Italy in 1797 as a song of the Polish Legions. The original text was" Jeszcze Polska nie umaria "(Poland is not dead yet).

    Since 1831, this work is considered a national anthem, and in 1926 it was proclaimed
    the national anthem. "
    the data is taken from this resource http://www.polska.ru/polska/polityka/uc/hymn.html

    "... The original title of the anthem is" Song of the Polish Legions in Italy "
    Polish legions are volunteer (mercenary) Polish military formations that were created in the XNUMXth-XNUMXth centuries in the armies of different countries of the world. "Https://ru.wikipedia.org

    And in all wars against Russia, the Poles participated
  • Soviet Union
    Soviet Union 31 December 2019 07: 48 New
    +2
    Poland must be divided!
    1. Catfish
      Catfish 31 December 2019 08: 24 New
      +7
      "Carthage must be destroyed." (FROM). good
      Happy New Year! drinks
  • Karen
    Karen 31 December 2019 08: 16 New
    +4
    In Rome, they dreamed of restoring the greatness of the new Roman Empire, turning the Mediterranean into Italian,

    A small amendment ... In Italian lake.
    1. Maki Avellevich
      Maki Avellevich 2 January 2020 21: 57 New
      +1
      Quote: Karen

      In Rome, they dreamed of restoring the greatness of the new Roman Empire, turning the Mediterranean into Italian,

      A small amendment ... To the Italian lake ...

      and what did not fit the good old - Mare Nostrum?
      our seaas the Romans called him.
      1. Karen
        Karen 3 January 2020 15: 02 New
        0
        Probably, I wanted to clean up sushi for myself for the waters ...
  • Semurg
    Semurg 31 December 2019 09: 09 New
    +1
    Now that we are starting to actively dislike Poland, we have ate Ukraine before burping. laughing
    1. Swordserg
      Swordserg 31 December 2019 09: 19 New
      +2
      So she begs herself. Ukraine has nothing to do with it
  • knn54
    knn54 31 December 2019 09: 11 New
    +4
    Romanians, Hungarians, too, were not opposed to making money. But a hyena is a hyena. With SPECIAL, CONSISTENT persistence.
    It was in Poland that the so-called "Promethean Movement" was created, which "carried the fire of freedom" to ALL "enslaved" peoples of the USSR. Hence the logical conclusion is the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. was directed against the enemy of the USSR.
  • BAI
    BAI 31 December 2019 09: 37 New
    +4
    This led to the resistance of the West Russian population.

    The author once again spoke up. There is one step before accusing Russia of the Volyn massacre.
    Yesterday, under the name "A. Samsonov", a more intelligent author wrote.
  • Parsec
    Parsec 31 December 2019 11: 19 New
    +7
    Ponte, Ponte - in the face.
    Ponte, Ponte - in the face.
    Ponte, Ponte - in the face.

    A brief summary of the history of Poland.
  • Igor Pa
    Igor Pa 31 December 2019 11: 24 New
    +1
    All with the coming! And yes, the Poles too!)
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 31 December 2019 11: 35 New
    +2
    Rushed: Poland.
    A new enemy was appointed, the command was given: "face!".
    Georgia is no longer relevant.
    The Baltic states are uninteresting.
    Ukraine - tired of it, stopped turning on.
    The USA is an "eternal enemy" like Voldemort.
    But, as luck would have it, the sprightly fighter Trump is cute to the Russians.
    England - "the Englishwoman crap" (Victor Pelevin). England does not excite the people ...
    ---
    And now - a new goal has been set ... sad
  • tihonmarine
    tihonmarine 31 December 2019 11: 50 New
    +5
    On March 18, 1921 in Riga between Poland and the RSFSR (the delegation of which also represented the Byelorussian SSR) and the Ukrainian SSR, the Riga Peace Treaty was signed. Vast territories left for Poland - Western Ukraine and Western Belarus.
    The Poles "rolled the lip", but Stalin's grandfather had a good lip-rolling machine. After its application, arrogance flew from the ambitious Poles.
  • Square
    Square 31 December 2019 14: 01 New
    +2
    Samsonov is even a great honor to criticize))
    About other. I just want to say hello)
    Greetings to the Military Review, purposefully instilling ignorance and personal greetings to its puppeteer - in combination with the troll of the entire Runet. But for the troll (even if it has its own website), the best punishment is ignore. I wish you good health and longevity, the old troll V. Shpakovsky, uncle Murzik with experience.
    Goodbye!
    1. Charlie
      Charlie 31 December 2019 21: 00 New
      +2
      Comrade Stalin considered the entire capitalist world a probable adversary. Why does the author highlight only Poland?
  • Falx
    Falx 31 December 2019 18: 33 New
    +4
    I know several Poles personally, regularly communicate with them. normal people. But you can only talk with politics about them very carefully.
    One can’t talk about history (relations between Russia and Poland) at once, they turn to hysteria, almost insults ... that's the kind of language they have!

    I personally believe that interwar Poland fully deserved the characterization that Churchill gave her. Hyena.


    All with the Coming !!
  • st2st
    st2st 1 January 2020 03: 53 New
    0
    Pole, saving a Jew, more absurdity, I have not met
  • Grim Reaper
    Grim Reaper 1 January 2020 12: 34 New
    +1
    And the Poles are very beautiful., But the character ..
    This is me. All the CIS!
    1. Zliy_mod
      Zliy_mod 1 January 2020 23: 50 New
      +2
      For more than a month he lived in Poznan, the Shoto did not meet beautiful Poles, they were nice, maybe I just spoiled Kiev winked
  • D-ug
    D-ug 1 January 2020 13: 12 New
    -4
    Why did the leadership of the USSR consider Poland a likely adversary

    The leadership of the USSR considered all neighbors (and not neighbors too) to be a likely adversary. And the USSR attacked all its neighbors (and even some non-neighbors). Except 1941, when the only time they attacked the USSR in Europe.
    1. Barmaleyka
      Barmaleyka 1 January 2020 16: 01 New
      +1
      that is, Poland did not attack us at the American end of the camps near Arkhangelsk?
      1. D-ug
        D-ug 1 January 2020 16: 07 New
        -5
        Quote: Barmaleyka
        that is, Poland did not attack us

        Of course not.
        Quote: Barmaleyka
        There were no American camps near Arkhangelsk?

        Of course not.
        1. Barmaleyka
          Barmaleyka 1 January 2020 16: 56 New
          0
          Quote: D-ug
          Of course not.

          make a drink and then by 9 say that we attacked the USA in pearl harbor
          Quote: D-ug
          Of course not.

          wrong under Arkhangelsk was aglitsky mattress was under Murmansk
          1. D-ug
            D-ug 1 January 2020 17: 10 New
            -4
            The Anglo-Saxons did not create any concentration camps in Russia. Their troops were introduced into the territory of Russia quite legitimately, according to the agreements of the Entente. They simply HAD to send troops into Russia and cleanse it of the Bolsheviks (and at the same time of the Germans and the Austrians). But they did not do this, did not fulfill their obligations under those agreements. It's a pity.
            1. Barmaleyka
              Barmaleyka 1 January 2020 19: 25 New
              +1
              Quote: D-ug
              The Anglo-Saxons did not create any concentration camps in Russia.

              read develop
              https://pikabu.ru/story/ostrov_smerti__mudyug_kontslager_interventovpod_arkhangelskom_interventsiya_v_rossii_1918_g_6099201
              sorry in the face to give you no opportunity
              1. D-ug
                D-ug 1 January 2020 19: 53 New
                -3
                Why are you so upset? Are you angry with the Anglo-Saxons for helping the Russians in their struggle with the Bolsheviks? Of which you will be?
                Quote: Barmaleyka
                sorry in the face to give you no opportunity

                Davalka will break. You will become a disabled person.
                1. Barmaleyka
                  Barmaleyka 1 January 2020 20: 57 New
                  +1
                  Quote: D-ug
                  Are you angry with the Anglo-Saxons for helping the Russians in their struggle with the Bolsheviks?

                  I'm not angry, but I hate that they killed Russians
                  Quote: D-ug
                  Davalka will break. You will become a disabled person.

                  will not break and believe you blather among normal people what you wrote here you will be strangled on the spot
                  1. D-ug
                    D-ug 1 January 2020 21: 02 New
                    -3
                    Quote: Barmaleyka
                    but I hate that they killed Russians

                    They did not kill the Russians. They were allies of Russian against your ideological ancestors.
                    Quote: Barmaleyka
                    among normal people

                    Among people like you? And who told you that you are a normal person?
                    Quote: Barmaleyka
                    you will be strangled on the spot

                    Dust swallowed.
                    1. Barmaleyka
                      Barmaleyka 1 January 2020 21: 15 New
                      +1
                      Quote: D-ug
                      They did not kill the Russians. They were on the side of the Russians.

                      purely sporting interest is it natural or acquired ?!
                      out of 1200 prisoners of the "island of death" only 20 were members of the communist party, and the rest were non-partisan. Almost all the concentration camp prisoners were either shot or died of hunger and disease, and only about 100 people remained healthy and were released.

                      recollecting Colonel of the US Army Morrow, lamenting that his poor soldiers ... "could not sleep without killing someone that day. When our soldiers took the Russians prisoner, they took them to Andriyanovka station, where the carriages were unloaded, prisoners led to huge pits, from which they were shot from machine guns. "

                      Concentration camps began to be established everywhere, in which about 52 people turned up. There were frequent cases of mass executions, where in one of the surviving sources, the invaders shot about 000 people by decision of the military field courts.

                      According to the historian A.V. Berezkin, "the Americans exported 353 poods of flax, tows and tow, and everything that was in the warehouses in Arkhangelsk and that could be of interest to foreigners was exported by them in a year, worth approximately 409 pounds sterling."

                      In the Far East, American interventionists exported timber, furs, and gold. Siberia was torn to pieces by Kolchak, where the Americans sponsored this event for the gold of Tsarist Russia. In addition to outright robbery, American firms received permission from the Kolchak government to carry out trading operations in exchange for loans from City Bank and Guaranty Trust.

                      Only one of them, Airington’s company, which received permission to export furs, sent 15 pounds of wool, 730 sheepskins, and 20 large dry skins from Vladivostok to the USA. From the Far East and Siberia they exported everything that represented at least some kind of material value.

                      Senator Poindexter wrote in the New York Times on June 8, 1918: "Russia is just a geographic concept and will never be anything else. Its power of cohesion, organization and reconstruction is gone forever. The nation does not exist." On June 20, 1918, Senator Sherman, speaking in the US Congress, suggested using the opportunity to conquer Siberia. The senator declared: "Siberia is a wheat field and pastures for livestock, which have the same value as its mineral wealth."

                      enough to clean your brains ?!
                      1. D-ug
                        D-ug 1 January 2020 22: 00 New
                        -3
                        Quote: Barmaleyka
                        out of 1200 prisoners of the "island of death" only 20 were members of the Communist Party, and the rest were non-partisan.

                        Who cares? There were almost certainly no Russians among them.
                        Quote: Barmaleyka
                        enough to clean your brains ?!

                        Than? Your drisney? She is not interesting to me.
                        The Russians were friends with the Americans at that moment?
                        Were friends.
                        And the point.
                        You know, I’m Russian myself, and therefore I’m for the Russians. And not for the Reds. And even more so, not for the Bolsheviks.
                      2. gsev
                        gsev 5 January 2020 13: 11 New
                        0
                        Quote: D-ug
                        Who cares? There were almost certainly no Russians among them.

                        But were they not residents of Russia? In addition, 20 is a big figure for the sparsely populated Russian North. I will assume that then there were no more than 000 people not belonging to the Russian ethnic group. An interesting assessment of the wife of Ilya Starinov about the intervention in the Russian North. She believed that the invaders robbed Russia while they were guarded by their White Guard puppets. When the White Guards were defeated, the interventionists considered that the robbery of Russia was not worth the military expenses and retired to their homeland.
                  2. Barmaleyka
                    Barmaleyka 1 January 2020 21: 15 New
                    +2
                    Quote: D-ug
                    Dust swallowed.

                    Well, yes, such as you immediately dump
  • Barmaleyka
    Barmaleyka 1 January 2020 16: 02 New
    +1
    Quote: D-ug
    And on all my neighbors

    on whom?
    to Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania, Poland? !!!
    "read out the ENTIRE list" of "victims"
    1. D-ug
      D-ug 1 January 2020 16: 09 New
      -5
      Quote: Barmaleyka
      on whom?
      to Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania, Poland? !!!
      "read out the ENTIRE list" of "victims"

      China, Manchuria, Japan, Iran, Bulgaria, the Baltic countries, Poland, Afghanistan, Finland, Romania. Maybe someone else forgot.
      1. Barmaleyka
        Barmaleyka 1 January 2020 16: 45 New
        +1
        is it humor or a hangover ?!
        you forgot to specify the third Reich
        1. D-ug
          D-ug 1 January 2020 16: 53 New
          -3
          Learn the story. The science is like that. Useful.
          1. Barmaleyka
            Barmaleyka 1 January 2020 17: 07 New
            +1
            Quote: D-ug
            Learn the story. The science is like that. Useful.

            clearly, the liberda looked, and when we attacked romania?!, by the way the same question about the Baltic states, Bulgaria and Iran
            1. D-ug
              D-ug 1 January 2020 17: 12 New
              -4
              To Romania in 1940
              To the Baltic states in 1940
              To Iran in 1941
              Learn the story. The science is like that. Useful.
              1. Barmaleyka
                Barmaleyka 1 January 2020 17: 29 New
                0
                dvoehchnik, study the LEGAL aspects of the introduction of troops on a burn from these countries there was no attack on Iran troops were introduced at all under an earlier agreement
                1. D-ug
                  D-ug 1 January 2020 17: 47 New
                  -3
                  Quote: Barmaleyka
                  LEGAL aspects of troop deployment

                  Yeah. Soon, with such clever quirks, you will go "to study the legal aspects of the introduction of Reich troops into the USSR on 22.06.1941/XNUMX/XNUMX."
                  Quote: Barmaleyka
                  attacks on Iran generally sent troops under an earlier treaty

                  Yeah. By agreement with Britain. Those. Iran occupied together. But this, of course, is not an attack or occupation.
                  1. Barmaleyka
                    Barmaleyka 1 January 2020 19: 29 New
                    +1
                    Quote: D-ug
                    Yeah. Soon you'll go with such cunning twists

                    what twists, you victim of democracy, learn history not from the magazine of light and not from the essays
                    Quote: D-ug
                    Yeah. By agreement with Britain. Those. Iran occupied together. But this, of course, is not an attack or occupation.

                    that is, the entry of Soviet troops into Berlin at 45 is also immoral and illegal ?!
                    1. D-ug
                      D-ug 1 January 2020 19: 54 New
                      -4
                      Quote: Barmaleyka
                      that is, the entry of Soviet troops into Berlin at 45 is also immoral and illegal ?!

                      According to your curve "logic" everything can be.
                    2. Barmaleyka
                      Barmaleyka 1 January 2020 21: 00 New
                      +1
                      Quote: D-ug
                      According to your curve "logic" everything can be.

                      Well, you have a curve, it’s you who think that we attacked everyone and everything, TV is not a relative of Akhedzhakova
                    3. D-ug
                      D-ug 1 January 2020 21: 04 New
                      -3
                      Quote: Barmaleyka
                      we attacked everyone and everything

                      How old are you, "striker"?
                      You open your passport and read what is written there. And if you didn’t understand the first time, read until you understand.
                      What do you have to do with the USSR? You are just an imposter. Chatterbox. Empty near place.
                    4. Barmaleyka
                      Barmaleyka 1 January 2020 21: 16 New
                      +1
                      Quote: D-ug
                      What do you have to do with the USSR?

                      unlike you, the most direct is my homeland
                    5. D-ug
                      D-ug 1 January 2020 21: 55 New
                      -3
                      Quote: Barmaleyka
                      this is my homeland

                      So do as honest people insist, renounce Russian citizenship.
                      And in general, if your homeland of the USSR, what for did you accept Russian citizenship? In advance, planned to grind it, like that mold, from the inside?
                    6. Barmaleyka
                      Barmaleyka 1 January 2020 22: 02 New
                      +1
                      go in your ear, there is the place for you
                      Quote: D-ug
                      In advance, planned to grind it, like that mold, from the inside?

                      Well, mold is more about you, since you approve of the murder of Russian people
                    7. D-ug
                      D-ug 1 January 2020 22: 04 New
                      -4
                      Especially for people like you, Russians fought in the Russian Volunteer Army.
                      The Russians did not fight in the Red Army.
                    8. Barmaleyka
                      Barmaleyka 1 January 2020 22: 33 New
                      +1
                      and who fought there ?!
                      Martians
                      it is you who Vasilyevsky or Budyonny deleted from the list of Russians, or maybe Shaposhnikov is not Russian
                      for me Krasnov Shkuro and the like are not on the lists of Russian people

                      read evolve victim of the exam https://fishki.net/2802211-carskie-oficery-na-sluzhbe-v-rkka.html
                    9. D-ug
                      D-ug 1 January 2020 22: 55 New
                      -3
                      Quote: Barmaleyka
                      and who fought there ?!
                      Martians

                      Various. But ALL are not Russian.
                      Quote: Barmaleyka
                      it is you who Vasilyevsky or Budyonny deleted from the list of Russians, or maybe Shaposhnikov is not Russian

                      All are not Russian.
                      Quote: Barmaleyka
                      for me not in the lists of Russian people

                      Your opinion is sixth. It does not interest anyone.
                      Teach political economy and social science. Maybe then you will understand who the Russians are and how they differed from the Great Russians.
                    10. Barmaleyka
                      Barmaleyka 1 January 2020 23: 01 New
                      +1
                      Quote: D-ug
                      Your opinion is sixth. It does not interest anyone.
                      Teach political economy and social science. Maybe then you will understand who the Russians are and how they differed from the Great Russians.
                      in general, according to the census of the Republic of Ingushetia, Russians are Belarusians Little Russians and Great Russians, so go to the garden
                      Quote: D-ug
                      Various. But ALL are not Russian.

                      mdaaa how old are you?
                    11. D-ug
                      D-ug 1 January 2020 23: 07 New
                      -5
                      Quote: Barmaleyka
                      in general, nothing Russian according to the census of RI

                      RI was a long time ago. There were no officially Russian Russians in the Republic of Ingushetia; the population of the Republic of Ingushetia consisted of Orthodox and foreigners. Among the Orthodox were Great Russians.
                      After RI was the Russian Republic. Here already Russians appeared officially. But almost all of them in the years of the so-called The civil war was massacred by the Bolsheviks and Red Army soldiers.
                      And those who were not cut out were squeezed abroad.
                      And who remained, those almost at the root were cut out later, already in the 20-30s.
                      So the Russians lost Russia. But time works for Russians. Since starting in the 90s, society has nevertheless been developing. And the development of society just generates Russians in Russia.
                      Learn social studies, unlearned. Everything is written there. And do not forget political economy.
                    12. Barmaleyka
                      Barmaleyka 1 January 2020 23: 26 New
                      +1
                      Quote: D-ug
                      RI was a long time ago. There were no Russians in RI, the population of RI consisted of Orthodox and foreigners.

                      клиника

                    13. D-ug
                      D-ug 1 January 2020 23: 33 New
                      -1
                      Show me your USSR passport with the inscription "Russian".
                      The term "Russian" in three different state entities (RI, RR, USSR) meant different things.
                      In your table, even an explanation is given, "Russian, these are the East Slavic peoples." Didn't you read it? Or did you read it and did not understand?
                    14. Barmaleyka
                      Barmaleyka 2 January 2020 08: 23 New
                      +1
                      it is interesting that Alexander III, Suvorov and others invested in this term
                    15. Mordvin 3
                      Mordvin 3 2 January 2020 08: 35 New
                      +1
                      Quote: Barmaleyka
                      it is interesting that Alexander III, Suvorov and others invested in this term

                      But nothing but pride.
                    16. D-ug
                      D-ug 2 January 2020 11: 36 New
                      -2
                      Quote: Barmaleyka
                      it is interesting that Alexander III, Suvorov and others invested in this term

                      No. They did not use the term "Russians" (it had a completely different meaning then, see your table). The words of Suvorov and others in those days about the Russians, this is a remake. Fake.
                      A synonym for the Soviet term "Russian" in tsarist times was the term "Great Russian".
                      And the later term "Eastern Slavs" was synonymous with the term "Russians" during the tsarist era. Those. the term "Russians" in tsarist times did not mean nationality.
                    17. Barmaleyka
                      Barmaleyka 2 January 2020 12: 46 New
                      +1
                      Quote: D-ug
                      The synonym for the Soviet term "Russian" in tsarist times was the term "Great Russian"

                      and that this suggests that he appeared during the Soviet Union, no, this suggests that he was artificially narrowed by throwing from him the Little Russians and Belarusians
                      Quote: D-ug
                      Those. the term "Russians" in tsarist times did not mean nationality.

                      damn it seems you have this natural, someone drew parallels Russian-nationality ?!
                    18. D-ug
                      D-ug 2 January 2020 12: 52 New
                      -2
                      Quote: Barmaleyka
                      he appeared during the USSR

                      You have forgotten the short (10 months) period of the Russian republic. Then the term "Russians" had another meaning.
                      Quote: Barmaleyka
                      someone drew parallels Russian-nationality ?!

                      Sure. Bolshevik communists carried out. They even had a "nationality" page in their passport. I had it written "Russian", if that.
                    19. Barmaleyka
                      Barmaleyka 2 January 2020 14: 27 New
                      0
                      again for binary, learn to understand what you read
                      tired of with simplicity
                    20. D-ug
                      D-ug 2 January 2020 15: 23 New
                      -3
                      Are you having prostate problems? Didn’t they go to the doctor?
                    21. Barmaleyka
                      Barmaleyka 2 January 2020 16: 16 New
                      +1
                      [/ thumb] [/ center] [quote = D-ug] Do you have prostate problems? Didn’t they go to the doctor?
                      fool
                    22. D-ug
                      D-ug 2 January 2020 16: 29 New
                      -3
                      You see. You even know what to do when there are problems with the prostate.
                      Well, the flag is in your hands then.
      2. gsev
        gsev 5 January 2020 13: 22 New
        0
        Quote: D-ug
        The term "Russian" in three different state entities (RI, RR, USSR) meant different things.

        But at all times, a real Russian considers your statements to be statements of an enemy of the Russian people. And all your attempts at science are not entirely clever CIA propaganda.
  • Sugar Honeyovich
    Sugar Honeyovich 2 January 2020 21: 10 New
    +1
    And whites claimed that the majority of Russians fought in the Red Army.
  • D-ug
    D-ug 2 January 2020 21: 36 New
    -1
    Quote: Sahar Medovich
    And whites claimed that the majority of Russians fought in the Red Army.

    The Russians did not know that they were white. Therefore, such nonsense could not be argued.
  • Sugar Honeyovich
    Sugar Honeyovich 3 January 2020 07: 07 New
    0
    They knew they were white. That is why they argued that "Russian" and "Bolshevik" are practically the same thing.
  • D-ug
    D-ug 3 January 2020 12: 09 New
    -1
    Acting on Goebbels' recommendations? After all, he recommended repeating the lie 100 times so that it seemed true.
    "Whites", as you call them, fought in the RUSSIAN Volunteer Army.
  • Sugar Honeyovich
    Sugar Honeyovich 3 January 2020 17: 51 New
    0
    On the contrary, I expose his followers. T.N. The "Russian" white army was not volunteer, but forced mobilization, like other armies. And more Russians served in the Red Army.
  • gsev
    gsev 5 January 2020 13: 17 New
    0
    Quote: D-ug
    Especially for people like you -

    In general, traitors to the Motherland fought in the White Army, and its patriots in the Red Army. For example, Krasnov. Already in the years 1918-1919 he publicly called himself a German prostitute who supplies German shells for the Volunteer Army. In the 1940s, he joined the SS. For which he was executed as a traitor.
  • Operator
    Operator 1 January 2020 13: 14 New
    +3
    In 1926, a coup d'etat took place in Poland (the overthrow of the elected president Wojciechowski, the dispersal of the Sejm and the government approved by it), and a military dictatorship was established in the country, led by Pilsudski - the so-called reorganization (improvement) or board of colonels.

    From 1935 to 1939 (after the death of Pilsudski and until the liquidation of the Polish state), Poland was ruled by a triumvirate composed of Rydz Smigly, Bek and Moscitsky. As a result, pre-war Poland became a Nazi state, whose domestic policy was aimed at the colonization of western Belarus and Ukraine and the reign of the local population, as well as the deportation of Polish Jews to Africa.

    The liquidation of one of the Nazi states in 1939 is a positive result for Europe, all who now advocate the continuity of the existing Polish state from Nazi Poland should be recognized as accomplices of the Nazis and held accountable in accordance with the decisions of the Nuremberg Tribunal.
  • Pavel57
    Pavel57 1 January 2020 17: 39 New
    +1
    The consent of the parties to existing borders, especially disputed ones, is based on a balance of forces. The balance is changing - the movement to revise the borders begins. Now in the conditions of the crisis of the world system, this process will go on in different parts of the world, primarily where economic and / or political contradictions have accumulated.
  • Charlie
    Charlie 1 January 2020 19: 06 New
    -2
    Quote: D-ug
    The Anglo-Saxons did not create any concentration camps in Russia. Their troops were introduced into the territory of Russia quite legitimately, according to the agreements of the Entente. They simply HAD to send troops into Russia and cleanse it of the Bolsheviks (and at the same time of the Germans and the Austrians). But they did not do this, did not fulfill their obligations under those agreements. It's a pity.

    Well yes. The Entente countries needed to return Russia to the front with Germany. After this massacre, called the First World War, ended, the so-called "interventionists" themselves got out of Russia. They didn't fucking need this civil war between the Russians
    1. D-ug
      D-ug 1 January 2020 19: 22 New
      -2
      Quote: Charlie
      After this massacre, called the First World War, ended, the so-called "interventionists" themselves got out of Russia.

      Their powers within the Entente were exhausted. So they dumped it.
      Quote: Charlie
      They didn’t need this civil war between Russians

      Between the Bolsheviks and everyone else. Among all the others were the Russians (Russian Volunteer Army). The Bolsheviks called the Russians "white" for conspiracy purposes.
    2. Pavel57
      Pavel57 1 January 2020 20: 46 New
      0
      The civil war in Russia is interesting to the West, because depending on the winner, their interests were respected differently.
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 2 January 2020 11: 14 New
    +3
    Quote: Den717
    Many researchers say that there was a complete mess in the spacecraft, which did not allow sending the Budyonny-Stalin army from near Lviv to Warsaw to help Tukhachevsky. Then, according to the recognition of the French advisers in the Polish army, Pilsudski would not have a chance to keep Warsaw behind him. So those defeats have many authors.

    These "researchers" are the same Tukhachevsky and his team. Army Budyonny at this time fought heavy battles near Lviv. Should she leave her front and hurry to Warsaw?
    With such a "strategist" as Tukhachevski, they could have lost Budyonny's army near Warsaw. I don't want to think about what could have happened in 1941 if the Red Army was commanded by Tukhachevsky.
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 2 January 2020 11: 27 New
    +2
    Quote: D-ug
    And in general, if your homeland of the USSR, what for did you accept Russian citizenship? In advance, planned to grind it, like that mold, from the inside?

    Russia (RF) announced that it is the heir not only of the RSFSR, but of the entire USSR. Or is that not true?
    Between the Bolsheviks and everyone else. Among all the others were the Russians (Russian Volunteer Army). The Bolsheviks called the Russians "white" for conspiracy purposes.

    In other words, the Bolsheviks defeated all together. If they managed to do this, it must be recognized that the Bolsheviks themselves are the greatest people in the world.
    1. D-ug
      D-ug 2 January 2020 21: 21 New
      0
      Quote: Kostadinov
      Russia (RF) announced that it is the heir not only of the RSFSR, but of the entire USSR. Or is that not true?

      Who knows what?
      Quote: Kostadinov
      In other words, the Bolsheviks defeated all together.

      All. Unfortunately.
      Quote: Kostadinov
      If they managed to do this, it must be recognized that the Bolsheviks themselves are the greatest people in the world.

      Not at all. They just exploited the base feelings of the population. And the population, unfortunately, was rotten.
      1. Sugar Honeyovich
        Sugar Honeyovich 3 January 2020 07: 18 New
        -1
        The Bolsheviks won because they put forward the idea of ​​justice, in particular, which figured among the Russian people (mainly among the peasants). Plus, they turned out to be the only defenders of Russia as a state, as a result of which many military and intelligentsia took their side. Plus the best, in comparison with opponents, organization, quickness.
        1. D-ug
          D-ug 3 January 2020 12: 20 New
          +1
          Quote: Sahar Medovich
          the Alsheviks won because they put forward the idea of ​​justice, in particular, which figured among the Russian people (mainly among the peasants).

          The peasants wanted to spit on justice.
          The Bolsheviks won because they called for "Plunder the loot". And the flock (you call it a people) enthusiastically began to rob and kill the former owners. The Russians (you call them whites) shot these robbers and killers. Reds, no. Therefore, the herd supported the Reds.
          But the Reds deceived them.
          Then they took all this away from reputable killer robbers (the Bolsheviks called such fists). In my favor, of course.
          I personally do not mind kulaks at all. And yes, justice did happen in their regard.
          Quote: Sahar Medovich
          Plus they turned out to be the only defenders of Russia as a state

          Yeah. Those. Brest peace, as a result of which Russia lost its vast territories, not the Bolsheviks concluded with the Germans already losing 1 MB?
          Quote: Sahar Medovich
          as a result, many military and intellectuals took their side.

          Only a handful of marginals took the side of the Bolsheviks. And they got military specialists by mobilization. Ie forced.
          1. Sugar Honeyovich
            Sugar Honeyovich 3 January 2020 20: 19 New
            0
            It is the peasant communes, i.e. most of the Russians, sought justice in their understanding. In a certain sense, the Bolsheviks did not carry them along, but adjusted to them.
            White - yes, treated the Russians as a herd, and therefore remained a bunch of marginal losers.
            The peace with Germany was demanded in the autumn of 1917 by the generals and officers of the Russian army, and not only the Bolsheviks made it in Brest. But it was the Bolsheviks who received the mass support of the Russians.
  • mirexes
    mirexes 6 January 2020 14: 18 New
    0
    Quote: D-ug
    I personally do not mind kulaks at all. And yes, justice did happen in their regard.

    For the sake of justice, I will write. My deceased grandmother told me when she was 8 years old, the Bolsheviks came to their house and said that they were fists, because they had HORSE ONE and for this they shot their parents, and 5 children were kicked out, the grandmother was the oldest among them. In early 2000, my grandmother was able to sue compensation for the horse, we all children and grandchildren scoured the archives. So what was justice? Although I am for the Bolsheviks, they very often went too far. And when I hear words like yours, one more fanatic thinks right away.
  • Whitesnow
    Whitesnow 6 January 2020 17: 24 New
    0
    Which regions of the RSFSR were attacked by the White Guard and Petliura gangs from Poland?
  • Timurleng
    Timurleng 23 January 2020 16: 25 New
    -6
    But the USSR did not have ambitions of the empire. Just then it was called differently. After all, the USSR did not leave Central Asia, after all, and occupied it))) so then everyone had imperial plans for the USSR, Germany, Japan, etc.
  • Anika
    Anika 14 March 2020 16: 03 New
    0
    I don’t understand one thing, with all the divisions of Poland, why are they only throwing presents against Russia !? Both Germany and Austria had their territories, Russia cut so much land for them, but they are not grateful, I don’t understand