Czechoslovakia-68. The failure of politicians: someone else's work for the tank army


“Army operation gives corpses ...” The film “In August of the 44th”


Healthy variety


As you know, for any job it would be nice to have the appropriate tool. Of course, you can build a hut using only an ax, but doing this is inconvenient and unproductive. For some reason, I recall the era of the Napoleonic Wars and all the lancers, cuirassiers, huntsmen, horse rangers, grenadiers, dragoons ... That is, the armies were very diverse in composition. And it was hardly anyone's whim.

That is, all these units with very different equipment and weapons were created to solve some of their tasks, and this did not surprise anyone. That is, in the most surprising way, the ground army was not simply divided into infantry, cavalry and artillery, as was later customary to think.

It is unlikely that the European monarchs of that era simply wanted to play with the soldiers (although not without it!). Obviously, the costs of creating and maintaining "unique" units paid off during wars and battles, otherwise no one would simply bother with this, they would create standard cavalry and infantry regiments. For some reason, in the modern era, from a certain moment, it became very popular tank troops, literally expected miracles from them, and the question arose periodically: did the tank become obsolete or not?

Later, some strange increased interest arose around special forces - as the name implies, units designed to solve very specific problems. You won’t win wars, as well as tanks alone. There is no such “magic” kind of troops that would help solve all problems. This does not happen.

It is clear that the world's most remarkable tank troops will not be able to solve all tasks on the battlefield, but it is even more erroneous to believe that they can be successfully applied to solve political problems.

Enter tanks?


Regarding Hungary-56, and especially Czechoslovakia-68, not to mention the GDR-52, serious questions arise specifically about the work of the Soviet special services, and not about whether or not to introduce tanks. Entering tanks is already from hopelessness. That is, when it all went down the drain. With the help of tanks and even paratroopers (who came to Prague much earlier and were much more useful), political problems are not solved.

It’s a rather strange situation when similar events happen “suddenly” in the country of internal affairs. Such events do not occur suddenly (usually). There had to be some kind of preparation, some kind of background. This is not a “sudden landing of Martians”, when half an hour ago there was nothing, and then all of a sudden ... And it is always better to extinguish a fire at the very beginning (any fireman will confirm this to you).

If we take the most interesting (and the most famous) example, Czechoslovakia-68, then one cannot help but be struck by this absolutely fake choice of the summer of the year 68, namely: to introduce tanks or not to introduce them. Quite a strange choice. In fact, tank troops were initially designed a little for other tasks. Something like that. What does the Czechoslovak event have to do with, it's hard to understand. If you think about it, it was just the tank forces that were most useless for solving the very questions that existed in Soviet-Czechoslovak relations.

Soviet tanks on the streets of Prague created a “good” picture for the Western media, but, apparently, solving political problems with their help was about the same as hammering screws, not even with a hammer, but with a sledgehammer. Sloppy somehow happened. Stupid and hopeless. In principle, this “dilemma” is already here: to enter / not to introduce tanks (plug) is already a sign that we have missed something. Moreover, it was not tank commanders who missed it, but politicians, diplomats and special services.

Actually, that was their task. Prevent, extinguish or launch events in some other direction. Generally do something. On the whole, there is a bad impression that by the summer of 68th we in Czechoslovakia had completely lost absolutely everything in the sphere of politics, diplomacy and special services, the situation is completely uncontrollable, and one thing remains - to introduce tanks. Bad decision.

Vile "fork"


In general, the situation is quite typical: if you are offered a choice of two obviously unacceptable solutions, bad and very bad (and then choose it yourself), then a logical question arises: how did it happen and why did we end up here? Here are some comrades who do not like this much. Say, what is there to brainstorm — to decide, in the sense of “shaking”, it is necessary, moreover, urgently.

But it’s just not clear, because Czechoslovakia was an ally, and work was inevitably carried out both on the party line and on the line of special services. And why did you get such a “wonderful” result, all of a sudden? What the heck? Everything was lost, everything was lost, we urgently need to put out everything with tanks. And, apparently, before that “happy” moment, did the guys drink Czech beer and write up correctly written memorandums that everything goes the way? So it turns out?

It is completely incomprehensible why exactly the situation arose that completely lost control over the situation, when there, in Prague, everyone unequivocally made a decision there ... That is, we did not see problems there, but a catastrophe. But this does not happen. Usually, problems increase little by little. You can do something, somehow fight them, take some steps. That is, a “fall”, even if it is inevitable, must be very time-stretched.

And (purely theoretically) there should have been a serious split in the Czechoslovak leadership - there is no other way. And among the Czechoslovak people, too. How else? But in some strange way, we already had a “ready” situation, when literally all organized forces were against us. This makes no sense.

Here it must be understood that, as in the case of Hungary and Yugoslavia, foreign interest was behind all this “happiness”. This did not work out by itself. And yes, why did they succeed in practically everything, but we have practically nothing? Who's guilty? One essential thing to understand here: these very “free Eastern Europeans” (who honestly fought for the Führer) love to chat about the fact that they should have been given some free choice where to join and with whom to be friends.

Yeah, or to the galactic council, or to the Martian confederation. In fact, in addition to the ATS, they could only and exclusively join NATO, which confirmed история after the 91st year, and deploy on its territory American military bases. No other way. The exit of Czechoslovakia from the eastern bloc "split" the police department in half. This would be a strategic catastrophe for the USSR, and this could not be allowed in any case.

The war begins "before the war"


It’s somehow customary for us to count the beginning of the Second World War precisely from June 22, which is somewhat erroneous. Military-diplomatic maneuvers in Eastern Europe, the adoption of new republics and territories into the USSR is also a war. It is quite difficult to name the exact date of its beginning. The “Ideal Coup” in Prague, which was sacked by Soviet politicians, diplomats and special services, is also from the category of war before the war.

If it is successful, the next steps (at least with regard to Czechoslovakia) are easy to predict: the tale of a “neutral”, friendly USSR state should not deceive anyone. Czechoslovakians had no options other than changing the flag. Or do you believe in a second Switzerland? The level of naivete of Prague politicians and the level of incompetence of Soviet diplomats are striking.

The exit of Czechoslovakia from the social. community inevitably radically changed the situation in Europe, put the USSR in an extremely difficult situation and, in principle, led to the drain of the Cold War. Too Czechoslovakia was “successfully” located. That is, some strange proposal: we are your friends, we are fundamentally changing the state policy, as a result of this, our country leaves the block you created, and you (possibly) lose the confrontation with the United States. Please shave.

That is, the “kindest state” in the place of the USSR could not have allowed such a step and would have been forced to fight for its survival. Only complete idiots could count on the fact that all this geopolitical nonsense was "going through". The exit of Czechoslovakia from the ATS is a split of the ATS into two parts and (in the future) NATO’s exit directly to the borders of the USSR. Are there, in Prague, full of cretins sitting? What were they counting on?

The loss of Vietnam did not nearly create the United States such geostrategic risks, but they fought there to the last. And somehow they were not very ready to give Vietnam to the Vietnamese. That is, in the era of the Cold War, to say that such a change of vector is a completely internal affair of Czechoslovakia, smacks of insanity.

Czechoslovakia-68 is a prosperous sovereign state ruled by the Czechs and Slovaks themselves. And somehow the Soviet troops were not there. Live as you want, do what you want! Yeah, and according to the results of the Czechoslovakia, they quickly fled from the eastern bloc. Why didn’t politicians in Prague understand the consequences of such a move and why did Soviet diplomats and party leaders not describe these consequences to them? Who was more incompetent?

There, still later arrested, Dubcek was very indignant, they say that I am your enemy? Rather, a very narrow-minded and incompetent head of state. Well, how could a professional politician not understand the consequences of such an escapade? Brezhnev intervened at a very late stage of the crisis, but if he had waited a little longer, then perhaps in the late 60s we would have had a military conflict between NATO and the ATS in Czechoslovakia. Was pan Dubcek doing this? Or what?

In the case of Chile and Allende, in spite of all the savagery and cruelty of the coup, the USSR was extremely difficult to intervene because of its geographic remoteness and “lack of presence” in this country. But here in Czechoslovakia, the Soviet Union was present, and very active. What prevented us from solving the problem politically? To push some politicians and push others? To control the situation and manage it? Do anything? Keep in touch with existing politicians and explain to them the consequences of their steps? Work?

And even if, for example, everything went wrong, then what prevented the active involvement of special services? They had to monitor the situation, track and suppress (initially), but at the time of the political crisis they should start their so-called “dirty games” with radical nationalist groups, with separate, “prepared” politicians in advance, and so on ... But neither the work of Soviet diplomats, nor the work of Soviet special services is imperceptible.

Good English


I once read a translated publication on the actions of British bombers during WWII. In the preface, our man mocked slightly naive British: they say that in the initial period of the war they had no organization and no planning - almost the crews of the bombers themselves chose their goals. Judging by the "memoir" - yes, there was a certain mess, but the attention was attracted by a completely different one.

There is a meeting "at the highest level", and there the Royal Air Force marshals report on possible targets for striking in Germany and the rest of Europe. The option of attacking Romania from the south is being considered ... and here a boring little civilian gets into the conversation. And he quite sincerely begins to wonder: why bomb Romania (even without German troops)? Why risk people and cars?

It turns out that this is a representative of the British special services, and he proposes ... to organize "popular unrest" in Romania, followed by the burning of oil rigs by "angry crowds." So, suddenly. The term of preparation is a month, well, a "small amount" in pounds for preparation. And the oil fields burn "by themselves." And if you add money and time, you can set fire to the Balkans a lot ... And, having drowned the barges with concrete slabs with the hands of the "rebels", block the navigation on the Danube ... Yes, there is a lot to offer. There is progress.

That is just a purely British approach: to intervene in the affairs of a foreign state so skillfully as to achieve the desired result and not leave traces. Without military incursions, occupation and economic obligations. What for? Correct the operation of the system subtly and accurately using relatively small amounts. Intelligence, diplomacy, influence groups, non-governmental organizations, business.

If you want to eat a serving of stew, you do not have to buy the whole restaurant. If you want to drink a glass of milk, it is not necessary to provide someone's cow with hay for the whole year. These are slightly different things. As it became widely known, back in WWI, the British special services, along with diplomats, worked very actively and successfully throughout Europe. Both in the Central Powers and in the Entente countries. In neutral countries, they also worked tirelessly.

And if the British army did not glorify itself with any special achievements during this war, then this can not be said about the British special services. They worked in Russia (successfully), and in Germany (no less successfully), and in Central Europe. And they worked in Italy: the neutral Rome’s performance on the Entente’s side was entirely due to British diplomats and special services. Thank them for that.

An equally well-known fact is that during World War II British intelligence worked successfully both in the Reich and ... in the USSR! There was nothing for German intelligence officers to catch from Stalin, but gentlemen took the level and old developments. And after WWII, British intelligence continued to work in the USSR, and continues to do so in Russia (recall at least the famous spy stone and mentally take off our hat before someone else's professionalism). And we have all the tanks to enter are torn ...

An example with the storming of Amin’s palace and not only


For some strange reason, this very example is constantly cited, and constantly this example is proud of beyond measure. This is strange ... Drawing into an armed conflict in a foreign country - what good could be in this? And it was impossible to eliminate Amin somehow otherwise? There are methods, and very different. Without a force assault by parts of the Soviet special forces. There, it seems, his cook worked for the KGB.

And did Amin really have no enemies in Afghanistan? This is the first question that a British politician / diplomat / secret service would ask himself. Is it possible to do this dirty business with the wrong hands, without attracting attention? Isn’t a "accident" possible with Amin? Can't he get seriously ill? Can he not have serious disagreements with his inner circle? Can't a random, unintentional shot happen at the moment of a sharp conflict in the political leadership? And was Amin himself an enemy of the USSR?

Forgive me, of course, but the author does not succeed in sincerely rejoicing over this very “assault on the forehead”. Well, you have special forces, but do you have special services? Do you always hammer screws with one hit? No other way?

I recall the mention of a senior Russian official about the aircraft of the US Vice President - there seems to be a whole command post for "special operations." And, they say, “we don’t work like that”, we are noble. And you, you mean, can only "enter tanks" or "do not enter tanks"?

Ukraine, bored by all, is the same example of a stupid fork: either enter or not enter. Excuse me, what did our diplomats and special services do until February 2014? Introducing tanks is a very controversial and controversial decision. Thus, Russia exposes itself as the unambiguous “aggressor” and “invader”. And where is the “profit"? At the same time, in Ukraine 2014 there was no close “pro-Russian” government that could be supported in extreme cases by caterpillars. Remember: the army does not know how to solve political problems, it is not for this purpose. Especially the tank army.

They say absolutely correctly about Afghanistan: the Soviet Army decided all set before her purely military tasks, but to solve the problems of "political settlement" is the task of politicians, diplomats and workers special services. Acting by a variety of methods. Not always “conventional,” alas. I do not like? Then go to the kindergarten as a tutor. And even an army officer does not have to play such “games”. Even in the course of the war - everything is clear there, on the one hand its own, on the other - alien.

Politicians, diplomats and special services so does not work. As a rule, they don’t have “clean hands”, nor a “clear conscience”. And what can you do, this work. Remember the “permissive letters of Cardinal Richelieu” justifying allWhat will make this or that subject the interests of the crown? But the French are still proud of him and consider him the greatest statesman. And the aircraft carriers are named after him. By the way, it was Richelieu who raised the French secret services from obscurity and made them the best in what was then Europe, providing organization and financing.

And it was he who categorically objected to France’s open entry into the Thirty Years War, preferring to fight purely with finances, special services and diplomats until the last possible moment (you’re a perdimonocle, not an army operation!). And all because the army is a very large sledgehammer (and very expensive), it does not fit the filigree political work, and God forbid the budget during the military campaign. And grabbing at this “sledgehammer” with or without it is not the smartest approach.

If you could not (politically) work in Ukraine when there were no Russian tanks, then why do you think that their presence would solve all the problems? Where from a confidence? From the point of view of normal politicians / special services, it is much more convenient to work in the country without the occupying forces there (which everyone hates and shoot at from every angle). Normal political work requires silence and calm, not a situation where everything is burning and exploding, and angry crowds are trying to burn your "magic" tanks.

Czechoslovakia-68. The failure of politicians: someone else's work for the tank army
Author:
Photos used:
img.youtube.com
Articles from this series:
When Russian tanks do not come
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

120 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. xomaNN 15 March 2020 15: 17 New
    • 27
    • 3
    +24
    Just from the list of Hungary 56, Czechoslovakia 68 ... analysts or leaders of the USSR did not learn to intelligently influence the allied countries. An example of Ukraine already under Putin? "Watching" h..m ... about zurab in Ukraine at those moments when Big politics is at stake ?! The strong internal Ukrainian pro-Russian force that has not been created. So Ukraine was profiled as an ally, but received as an enemy. And in it, initially, the majority of the people were quite Parorossiysk.
    1. Lannan Shi 15 March 2020 15: 24 New
      • 18
      • 3
      +15
      Quote: xomaNN
      That Ukraine profuca

      Actually, not only her. I’m not talking about allies that are simply loyal to the states of Russia, and there are practically none.
      1. Aerodrome 15 March 2020 15: 41 New
        • 22
        • 4
        +18
        The Russian Federation, entered the 21st century almost all alone, and we all blame the propaganda, except for ourselves, and we fell through ourselves, the countdown from the “tagged” went, and now Belarus is on a string. well done. Putin, not far gone in myopia from the "tagged".
        1. DMB 75 15 March 2020 15: 53 New
          • 16
          • 15
          +1
          But what, to buy allies with sweet candies? No. Or are you friends with us, or an enemy. There is no third, Dear Aerodromny ...
          1. Kronos 15 March 2020 18: 32 New
            • 9
            • 1
            +8
            With this approach, only enemies will remain around.
          2. Keyser soze 15 March 2020 19: 07 New
            • 10
            • 15
            -5
            Or you are friends with us, or the enemy. There is no third


            This is clearly a well-established approach. Decades have passed and you have not learned anything. Look under the sofa, maybe the enemies there nest ...
            1. Dog
              Dog 15 March 2020 23: 04 New
              • 9
              • 5
              +4
              Quote: Keyser Soze
              Decades have passed and you have not learned anything

              You, the Bulgarians, and centuries have not been taught anything. And now we, at least, know how easily you can betray
          3. certero 15 March 2020 23: 30 New
            • 11
            • 0
            +11
            painstaking work inside and the creation of agents of influence. Including sweet candies and education and education of children. Why do you think the British are so fond of educating kids of different politicians? Even just a person having learned the Russian language will already relate differently to Russia
        2. A.Lex 17 March 2020 11: 25 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Airfield, we have no propaganda, because no ideology. What can be promoted if you do not have an ideology? Advocate something that you yourself do not believe in or what you yourself do not know? Propaganda (from lat. Propaganda - to be distributed) what does it do? By the fact that it spreads its ideology. But there is no ideology ... This is heresy and bullshit!
          ... and yes -
          propaganda considers us all guilty
          it’s impossible to come up with more gibberish ...
    2. knn54 15 March 2020 15: 58 New
      • 18
      • 5
      +13
      What did our diplomats and special services do until February 2014?
      Chernomyrdin and then Zurabov were looking for suitable objects (on behalf of the Russian oligarchs) for a bargain, in eastern Ukraine. Where is LDN now.
      As for the British, the tradition is a great force. Their mentors were Venice (alas, not the Vatican), which had the strongest intelligence in Europe.
      And a couple of highlights:
      -British aristocrats (and not only) consider it an honor to serve in intelligence, in contrast to the elite of many countries.
      -NOBODY knows where the Mason ends and the British intelligence begins, and vice versa.
      After Stalin’s death, intelligence, including, was remade so that the British used to have a proverb — we have three residences in Moscow — in the embassy, ​​in the GRU and in the KGB ...
      Oleg, you are a big PLUS, it no longer works.
      For the topic raised is very relevant.
      1. Kisa 16 March 2020 02: 20 New
        • 4
        • 2
        +2
        in Novocherkassk, a popular revolt was shot a couple of years before here in the country under the nose - it’s hard for the author and you can be attributed to the Queen of England ...
      2. ammunition 16 March 2020 02: 25 New
        • 3
        • 2
        +1
        Quote: knn54
        As for the British, the tradition is a great force. Their mentors were Venice (alas, not the Vatican), which had the strongest intelligence in Europe.
        And a couple of highlights:
        -British aristocrats (and not only) consider it an honor to serve in intelligence, in contrast to the elite of many countries.
        -NOBODY knows where the Mason ends and the British intelligence begins, and vice versa.

        (+)
        Yes. A big plus for you. It is a tradition.
        In Russia, over 1000 years of history, tradition has forged a strong army. Strong .. even in times of turmoil and chaos. And we do not have the traditions of secret services, to dirty our enemies. There is intelligence. But there are no secret services (for work (for dirty tricks) abroad. And what is, it works clumsily and ineffectively. There is no tradition. Moreover, we don’t have any inclinations for such dirty tricks. We don’t have honor for all 1000 years old.
    3. ZAV69 15 March 2020 21: 03 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      Yes, it was necessary to beat someone in 91, for the ruin had already ended as an ally then.
    4. carstorm 11 15 March 2020 22: 45 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      When was Ukraine an ally? or forgot the slogans under which she left the USSR?
      1. Dog
        Dog 15 March 2020 23: 06 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        Quote: carstorm 11
        When was Ukraine an ally?

        Ukraine is not an ally, but our land. Obviously, those who are in power there must explain the opposite to the people by all means if they want to preserve their power.
        1. carstorm 11 15 March 2020 23: 18 New
          • 6
          • 2
          +4
          she is not ours for a long time. this state has been almost by itself for 30 years. phantom pains about ours and not ours will bring nothing good.
          1. Dog
            Dog 16 March 2020 01: 08 New
            • 4
            • 2
            +2
            Quote: carstorm 11
            she is not ours

            Our, ours.

            Quote: carstorm 11
            this state is already 30 years old

            There is no state there. This land is used as a colony by our "partners". But we will return it to ourselves. There were periods when our principalities fell out of the "cage" of the state for a longer period of time, but in the end everything returned to normal.
    5. Dog
      Dog 15 March 2020 22: 56 New
      • 7
      • 0
      +7
      Quote: xomaNN
      did not learn to intelligently influence allied countries. An example of Ukraine already under Putin?

      Unfortunately, the “progress” here does not stand still and there is already a more recent example - Belarus.
      How can one lose influence on a country whose population (with rare exceptions) considers itself to be one people with us, whose economy is completely dependent on ours, and whose leadership in the West is sanctioned and considered shaky ?! How can one screw up in such greenhouse conditions ?! But our managers are used to doing the impossible ...
      The thing, in my opinion, is that our elites are accustomed not to reckon with the people (traditionally, our people give a huge margin of trust to their powerful, which they begin to perceive as permissiveness), and therefore they do not think to reckon with the peoples of other countries. All bets are placed on individual rulers who either betray us in the end, or are overthrown by the people of their countries. The United States in this regard is doing everything much more efficiently - the ruler of the colony supplies, did what Poroshenko did with his hands, sent him to a landfill, now they are wielding Zelensky’s hands. The United States, in the end, gets what they want, and the people of Ukraine celebrate side-by-side side-by-side Gunpowder, victory! And everyone is happy.
      1. Pushkar 18 March 2020 17: 40 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: Dog
        The thing, in my opinion, is that our elites are used to not reckoning with the people

        Yes, never considered. The closest examples are the collapse of the agreement with OPEC and grater with Lukashenko. Both cases are the result of the actions of oil and gas oligarchs. No government policy is visible here.
        1. tech3030 20 March 2020 07: 53 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          It’s not the elite that rules us, but the Huckster, that's exactly the way with a capital letter. Today grab a piece and tomorrow .... do not care what will happen tomorrow. This is the principle of government.
  2. Honest Citizen 15 March 2020 15: 19 New
    • 7
    • 5
    +2
    The failures of politicians, their own, do not advertise. It is fraught.
    Failures of strangers - they tell, again within certain limits, and the fan attacks begin on one side and the other.
    Information war Russia is extremely inept.
  3. Marine engineer 15 March 2020 15: 24 New
    • 13
    • 3
    +10
    “And why did you get such a“ wonderful ”result, all of a sudden? What the heck?"

    But what: “Victory” N.S. Khrushchev in the fight against his "associates", the Twentieth Congress, the beginning of "de-Stalinization" in the USSR, which resulted in a split in the communist movement.
    1. tihonmarine 15 March 2020 15: 47 New
      • 9
      • 2
      +7
      Quote: Marine engineer
      "Victory" N.S. Khrushchev in the fight against his "associates", the Twentieth Congress, the beginning of "de-Stalinization" in the USSR, which resulted in a split in the communist movement.

      Trotskyist Nikita worked well, of course with the help of the West. And there was only to wait for December 1991.
    2. Reptiloid 15 March 2020 23: 04 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      De-Stalinization in the USSR caused in some countries not only de-Stalinization, but also unrest against the USSR. There were articles by Podymov.
      Quote: Marine engineer
      “And why did you get such a“ wonderful ”result, all of a sudden? What kind of business? ”But what:“ Victory ”N. S. Khrushchev in the fight against his "associates", the Twentieth Congress, the beginning of "de-Stalinization" in the USSR, which resulted in a split in the communist movement.
    3. Dog
      Dog 15 March 2020 23: 14 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Marine engineer
      "Victory" N.S. Khrushchev

      You forgot about Tito and Yugoslavia, for example. It all started earlier.
      1. Krasnodar 16 March 2020 09: 15 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Stalin quarreled with Tito
        1. Dog
          Dog 16 March 2020 09: 38 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Krasnodar
          Stalin quarreled with Tito

          Exactly
  4. nikvic46 15 March 2020 15: 26 New
    • 9
    • 2
    +7
    Misses of the special services were, are and will be. The rebellion in Hungary is best viewed with the help of film documents. There was no such cruel rebellion in the entire history of Hungary. It was crushed accordingly. Dubcek is an early Gorbachev. And at the same time during the Prague Spring and the West He didn’t doze off. We want to sort through the past. The coup in Greece and the arrival of the “black colonels” were only known from the press. But it’s impossible to draw conclusions that the special services weren’t worth anywhere. We need to weigh useful activities and mistakes. And I think I will outweigh the first.
    1. Alexey Sommer 15 March 2020 15: 41 New
      • 6
      • 2
      +4
      Quote: nikvic46
      It is necessary to weigh useful activities and mistakes. And I think I will outweigh the first.

      Not sure.
      In fact, today outweighs the second. And for all countries affected in the article.
      Unless of course you take into account the "cunning plan."
      1. Okolotochny 18 March 2020 13: 12 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        Do not create yourself an idol ... The article is mainly about the prom ... failures of Soviet policy, and you are all about the cunning Putin. Not tired? Let's talk about the failures of the USSR in politics?
        1. Alexey Sommer 18 March 2020 14: 21 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Okolotochny
          Let's talk about the failures of the USSR in politics?

          So you have to learn from failures in the past, otherwise, what can we say about them?
          And we do not want to study judging by Ukraine yet. That's why I'm talking about the "cunning plan."
    2. Dog
      Dog 15 March 2020 23: 09 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: nikvic46
      You must not weigh useful activities and mistakes. And I think I will outweigh the first.

      Result. The result is the result of weighing. And he is in front of us
    3. Pushkar 18 March 2020 17: 45 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: nikvic46
      to conclude that the special services were worthless, is also impossible. We must weigh the useful activities and mistakes.

      Those. intelligence services are great, but "I couldn’t, I couldn’t"?
  5. anakost 15 March 2020 15: 28 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Thanks, because I thought the same, I didn’t have the mind to formulate it. I fully support.
  6. Amateur 15 March 2020 15: 31 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    On the whole, however, there is a bad impression that by the summer of 68th we in Czechoslovakia had completely missed absolutely everything in the sphere of politics, diplomacy and special services, the situation is completely uncontrollable,

    Old anecdote:
    "Eustace - Alex:" The Communist Party of Czechoslovakia, led by 1 secretary Dubcek holds an anti-Soviet action called "Prague Spring". What to do?"
    Alex Eustace: "Plant an oak, leave a check, strengthen work."
  7. Anatole Klim 15 March 2020 15: 32 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    If you could not (politically) work in Ukraine when there were no Russian tanks, then why do you think that their presence would solve all the problems? Where such confidence? From the point of view of normal politicians / intelligence agents, it’s much more convenient to work in a country without occupying troops there (which everyone hates and shoot at from every angle). Normal political work requires silence and calm, not a situation where everything is burning and exploding, and angry crowds are trying to burn your "magic" tanks.

    There is no arguing with the Author, I completely agree. The Russian army is always ready to fulfill its tasks, but this should be the last argument. First, politicians, special services, agents of influence should work, and with this, we are not very successful with the example of Ukraine, and not so with Belarus. Where are the pro-Russian forces, politicians, parties, organizations? Again the same rake sad
  8. Sergej1972 15 March 2020 15: 38 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    Dubcek, it seems, was not going to withdraw Czechoslovakia from the police department.
  9. Jarserge 15 March 2020 15: 39 New
    • 7
    • 1
    +6
    Politicians, of course, yes, they got it. But the main ones that have gotten it wrong are “red book readers”, KGB officers. And in the GDR and in Hungary and in Czechoslovakia and Poland, all these events had a long and painstaking work of the enemy intelligence services, which the KGB, together with their "younger" colleagues, had been slurped up or simply not suspected of scale. Which, however, is one and the same. It is very instructive to read the details in Hungarian museums. So the heirs of Dzerzhinsky are true to themselves, just the same they pissed off the USSR. And the army has always been “extreme” and always “carried its tails”, which is with politicians and with other “arbiters of fate”
    1. Tamer 16 March 2020 09: 45 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      I’m not sure what the KGB officers slammed. I admit that the reports went to the top, and silence from above. Similarly, in 1999, before the invasion of Dagestan - the beginning of the Second Chechen campaign - no one knew anything either.
      1. Jarserge 16 March 2020 10: 47 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        Well, yes, the "king" is bad. Only here is once a case, twice suspicious and more than three systems .... Especially if you add miscalculations with Afghanistan and the collapse of the USSR. Yes, and I'm sorry state security and the state and not one from the internal enemy fell apart. KGB generals traitors the whole "bunch" and the "formidable" KGB was blown away like a pout
  10. Sergej1972 15 March 2020 15: 40 New
    • 4
    • 4
    0
    Amin really was not an enemy of the USSR. Babrak Karmal who replaced him was inferior to Amin in all respects. Amina, obviously, was not forgiven for the elimination of Taraki.
  11. Sergei 777 15 March 2020 15: 46 New
    • 12
    • 1
    +11
    When I recall Czechoslovakia in 1968, I inevitably ask myself a question! There are two political and economic systems: communist and capitalist. NATO and ATS. Our troops were everywhere in the police department except Czechoslovakia until 1968. Americans were also everywhere in western Europe. Question: why did riots happen in prosperous socialist countries, namely the GDR, Czechoslovakia, Hungary? But in the rotten capitalist Belgium and Holland, Germany and Italy, the people did not raise riots, didn’t throw Molotov cocktails into American tanks? Why?
    PS My question is not provocative, I myself am not a supporter of the Western world with its "missile democracy."
    1. Doliva63 15 March 2020 17: 44 New
      • 6
      • 2
      +4
      Quote: Sergey 777
      When I recall Czechoslovakia in 1968, I inevitably ask myself a question! There are two political and economic systems: communist and capitalist. NATO and ATS. Our troops were everywhere in the police department except Czechoslovakia until 1968. Americans were also everywhere in western Europe. Question: why did riots happen in prosperous socialist countries, namely the GDR, Czechoslovakia, Hungary? But in the rotten capitalist Belgium and Holland, Germany and Italy, the people did not raise riots, didn’t throw Molotov cocktails into American tanks? Why?
      PS My question is not provocative, I myself am not a supporter of the Western world with its "missile democracy."

      Because for some reason we began to “compete” with Khrushchev with the West, and the West continued to fight with us. At that time in the West the situation was such that we would have rocked that boat harder, the ATS unit would have grown by a couple of countries, but with Khrushchev the development of socialism in all directions stopped, alas.
      1. Reptiloid 15 March 2020 23: 16 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: Doliva63
        Quote: Sergey 777
        When I recall Czechoslovakia in 1968, I inevitably ask myself a question! ..... why did riots happen in the prosperous socialist countries, namely the GDR, Czechoslovakia, Hungary? But in the rotten capitalist Belgium and Holland, Germany and Italy, the people did not raise riots, didn’t throw Molotov cocktails into American tanks? Why?
        PS My question is not provocative, I myself am not a supporter of the Western world with its "missile democracy."

        At that time in the West the situation was such that we would have rocked that boat harder, the ATS unit would have grown by a couple of countries, but with Khrushchev the development of socialism in all directions stopped, alas.
        And you can recall that in 1968, a little earlier and later literally around the world, youth, student unrest took place. .. An expression appeared --- the Paris spring.
        For some reason, ours did not try to make contact with those protest organizations. At least in some countries could strengthen, form socialist organizations? After all, they supported our regimes in Africa. And the new European countries did not try to attract.
        1. Doliva63 16 March 2020 20: 00 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Quote: Reptiloid
          Quote: Doliva63
          Quote: Sergey 777
          When I recall Czechoslovakia in 1968, I inevitably ask myself a question! ..... why did riots happen in the prosperous socialist countries, namely the GDR, Czechoslovakia, Hungary? But in the rotten capitalist Belgium and Holland, Germany and Italy, the people did not raise riots, didn’t throw Molotov cocktails into American tanks? Why?
          PS My question is not provocative, I myself am not a supporter of the Western world with its "missile democracy."

          At that time in the West the situation was such that we would have rocked that boat harder, the ATS unit would have grown by a couple of countries, but with Khrushchev the development of socialism in all directions stopped, alas.
          And you can recall that in 1968, a little earlier and later literally around the world, youth, student unrest took place. .. An expression appeared --- the Paris spring.
          For some reason, ours did not try to make contact with those protest organizations. At least in some countries could strengthen, form socialist organizations? After all, they supported our regimes in Africa. And the new European countries did not try to attract.

          I’m about this. This was the beginning of “stagnation” in politics and economics, which inevitably was followed by the collapse of socialism. After all, capitalism is many hundreds of years old, while socialism was only 40 then.
          1. Reptiloid 16 March 2020 20: 44 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            I have repeatedly written about the events in Portugal, 1974 ((???)), in my opinion. When the socialists came to power through the legal path of elections. So what? Our help though? There are also protest movements in Latin American countries. Then. Ours did not agree with their original interpretation of Marxist theory, but at the same time they themselves had already gone very far ... That’s how the betrayal after Stalin’s death went.
            1. Doliva63 16 March 2020 20: 47 New
              • 1
              • 1
              0
              I agree 100%. Brezhnev stupidly was afraid to lose what was, did not dream of more.
              1. Reptiloid 16 March 2020 20: 54 New
                • 1
                • 2
                -1
                Brezhnev was the last of a generation of warring leaders. Who could be brave with the West. After him, everything changed
                1. Doliva63 18 March 2020 19: 46 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  Quote: Reptiloid
                  Brezhnev was the last of a generation of warring leaders. Who could be brave with the West. After him, everything changed

                  His "courage" was provided by the Soviet economy (albeit already killed) and the Soviet army. Plus ATS for half of Europe and various small but biting allies around the world. And after him they let it go in the wind.
  12. Alexey Sommer 15 March 2020 15: 48 New
    • 9
    • 0
    +9
    The article is of course very chaotic and poorly structured. But the essence is clear and I agree with her.
    In the case of the organization and suppression of coups, Russia cannot boast of anything.
    From the point of view of logic, this is inexplicable.
    That is, looking at what happened in Ukraine in 2014, it turns out that we are simply not able to learn from the lessons of Hungary 1953, GDR 1952 and Czechoslovakia 1968.
    Well, it’s clear that it was necessary to finish the Sochi Olympics ..
    And that intelligence did not report on what was being prepared there, or we were sleeping there ..
    If they were asleep, then who was responsible for this? ..
    But if we sleep in Ukraine, then who should blame that NATO is approaching us?
    And the most important thing since then, the situation for us in Ukraine in terms of people's mood has become worse, that is, nothing is being done now.
    1. Aviator_ 15 March 2020 18: 14 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Hungary was not in 1953, but in 1956. And it came to a lot of blood after the report of Khrushchev Kukuruzny at the Twentieth Congress and the withdrawal of our troops from Austria, from where weapons and subversive literature poured into Hungary. Czechoslovakia-1968 turned out to be quite bloodless compared to the Hungarian events. The introduction of troops, of course, is an extreme case. Other methods did not seem to work then.
      1. Alexey Sommer 15 March 2020 18: 44 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Quote: Aviator_
        Hungary was not in 1953, but in 1956. And it came to a lot of blood after the report

        It's not about blood and not about years.
        Meant that we always react to a situation with a delay, but not create it. Do you understand?
        1. Nikolay Ivanov_5 15 March 2020 20: 40 New
          • 3
          • 1
          +2
          Ours do not respond to signals in Belarus, Armenia and Kazakhstan, when there are already unpleasant experiences in both Georgia and Ukraine.
          1. Alexey Sommer 15 March 2020 20: 44 New
            • 3
            • 1
            +2
            Absolutely.
            And in Russia it is always like that. Until the thunder strikes, the man will not cross himself.
        2. Reptiloid 15 March 2020 23: 22 New
          • 2
          • 1
          +1
          Quote: Alexey Sommer
          ...... we always respond to the situation late, and not create it. Do you understand?

          It was precisely Stalin’s policy that the situations were created. Stalin did not ---- politics has changed. The reaction began late, and this is not always the case.
          1. Okolotochny 18 March 2020 13: 15 New
            • 3
            • 2
            +1
            It was precisely Stalin’s policy that the situations were created.

            And you ask a question - will the country's economy be pulled by “Creating Situations” in the world?
            1. Reptiloid 18 March 2020 15: 55 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: Okolotochny
              It was precisely Stalin’s policy that the situations were created.

              And you ask a question - will the country's economy be pulled by “Creating Situations” in the world?

              If you look around, you can see that even now the Russian Federation is trying to create situations, and the Soviet Union also tried. But --- or the priorities had to be different or according to the time of the problem.
              In general, the recent past is the most difficult and obscure topic.
              Take the events of Portugal mentioned by me. Older people, whom he asked, say that this was generally not known.
  13. mikh-korsakov 15 March 2020 15: 55 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    Everything is correct. It is better to be rich and healthy than poor and sick, which the author reasonably conveys to the reader, even I understood. Regarding Czechoslovakia. Anyone who is older is well aware that work with the Czechoslovak authorities was conducted at the level accessible to the public throughout the summer of 1968. The meeting between Brezhnev and Dubcek in Chiorna nad Tissa was remembered. As for the work of the “knights of the cloak and dagger", how does the author know that we did not carry out such work. Maybe the Western special services simply outplayed us - it happens, all the more so since working with the Czechs was much easier for Western bodies than for us, because the Czechs are much closer to a European beer-breeding civilization than ours. With Ukraine, a completely different story. The majority of Ukrainians understood that life in Europe is more satisfying and richer than in Russia. In these conditions, both the refrigerator and the TV were on the side of Europe. Calls for the brotherhood of nations, if they were held, were ineffective. with that. that even Yanukovych understood that the safety of his wealth and his life were in danger. But he could not do anything.
    1. Dur_mod2 15 March 2020 17: 21 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Therefore, when the USSR made a bet on ideology, trying to replace the slogans with real life and the real needs of people, the authorities probably hypnotized themselves, they were already unable to separate their imagination from reality. But people can’t be fooled, so the bet on ideology will not work now, and there is no ideology in Russia that most people understand. In Ukraine, the ideology is understandable, if you want to earn money or live a normal life, go west. Therefore, millions are frustrated, I also left to work, my daughter successfully learns three languages ​​and God grant her good luck and the little one will also know at least English and German until the end of the school. But Russia needs a standard of living and prices, at least as in Poland, only with a wealthy population will it be a magnet and a center of attraction for neighbors. How tsarist Russia was once a magnet for Europeans. The economy, and not politics, will become the force that can restore the greatness of Russia, but for this it is necessary to give something, not take it away.
      1. Freeman 15 March 2020 19: 49 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Dur_mod2 (Roman) Today, 17:21
        But Russia needs a standard of living and prices, at least in Poland, only with a wealthy population will it be a magnet and a center of attraction for neighbors. How tsarist Russia was once a magnet for Europeans.

        Tsarist Russia (under Catherine II), "became a magnet" for Europeans, not a "wealthy population", but the availability of free land after the annexation of New Russia - "Wild Field".
        A little later, the United States became such a "magnet" for Europeans, with the presence of a huge amount of "free lands" (which, however, in most cases had to be "liberated" from the local population).
      2. sevryuk 15 March 2020 20: 41 New
        • 0
        • 1
        -1
        "In Ukraine, the ideology is understandable, if you want to earn money or live a normal life, go west."

        Of course, where the USSR to such an ideology! Formed "free lands" for the United States.
    2. New Year day 15 March 2020 20: 02 New
      • 7
      • 1
      +6
      Quote: mikh-korsakov
      The majority of Ukrainians understood that life in Europe is more satisfying and richer than in Russia. In these conditions, both the refrigerator and the TV were on the side of Europe.

      not really. Until the 14th year, the majority of Ukrainians had a very positive attitude towards Russia as a fraternal state, but it was sharply negative about the prospect of Russian business in Ukraine. They asked the question- "why should we change our oligarchs to yours? After all, they are bastards, but ours." The West and part of Central Ukraine (closer to Kiev) were oriented to the West precisely because of the reasons you indicated. After 14 years, the alignment became different
      1. sevryuk 15 March 2020 20: 33 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        “For the majority of Ukrainians, it was clear that life in Europe is richer and richer than in Russia. Under these conditions, both the refrigerator and the TV were on the side of Europe.”

        But the "Ukrainians in their mass" did not understand that from joining the Euroassociation in the refrigerator, if anything changes, then for the worse?
      2. sevryuk 15 March 2020 20: 35 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        "They asked the question-" why do we need to change our oligarchs to yours? After all, they are scum, but their own. "

        C'mon, the oligarchs asked the “Ukrainians” such a question and suggested the desired answer.
      3. carstorm 11 15 March 2020 23: 11 New
        • 5
        • 0
        +5
        it is nonsense. why exactly the Russian oligarchs as you say they did not like? business does not tolerate and has no voids. they are always filled. not ours so european. not European so American but it will fill all that is .. that is the answer. they don’t care what was important not ours. and not only business, but in general everything. This is called stereotyping and deep trauma. but they went from the fact that everyone believed that in the Union of Ukraine the entire USSR fed the USSR. but in the end they ended up in one place and now they are all fed. and it will be the same in Belarus. everybody yells that the Russian business will buy everything up and therefore it will come and the time will come and everyone will buy it for nothing but others.
        1. New Year day 15 March 2020 23: 27 New
          • 7
          • 1
          +6
          Quote: carstorm 11
          it is nonsense

          Not at all. Do you deny national business?
          However, you can think whatever you want, but it was this factor that was one of the engines of the Maidan. Nobody will ever yield to anyone their place of profit.
          1. carstorm 11 15 March 2020 23: 49 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            Of course I do not deny) just a profitable place does not mean good business. you need to invest a lot in it so that it develops. if the national does not have funds for this, then he will either die or the money will come from outside. just not with ours but with the other. but the main thing is not with ours) this is the essence.
            1. Kisa 16 March 2020 02: 36 New
              • 1
              • 1
              0
              in principle, the majority of the population has such a mood there. They’ve gotten a little profound, but we won’t return to Muscovites ... and the TV and the refrigerator are empty ... but for another 10-20 years at that rate and there they will stop perceiving the Russian language .... of course, someone somehow it will survive but it will already be a completely alien country to us
  14. fyvaprold 15 March 2020 16: 25 New
    • 6
    • 16
    -10
    "Wonderful" article, it is immediately obvious that the author spent a lot of time reading liberal brochures from people with " ̶К̶а̶р̶т̶а̶в̶ы̶м̶и̶ ̶р̶о̶ж̶а̶м̶и̶ nice faces ™". Especially pleased with the" conclusion ":
    If you could not (politically) work in Ukraine, when there were no Russian tanks, then why do you think that their presence would solve all the problems? Where such confidence? From the point of view of normal politicians / representatives of special services, it is much more convenient to work in the country without the occupying forces there (which everyone hates and shoot at from every angle). Normal political work requires silence and tranquility, not a situation where everything is burning and exploding, and angry crowds are trying burn your "Magic" tanks.

    It is clear that the author, in a fit of "Svidomo", will not provide evidence of the presence of Russian tanks in Ukraine, because "everyone already knows ™"and ̶kh̶o̶kh̶l̶a̶m̶ gentlemen are taken to believe in the word. By the way, in the next opus you can touch on the topic of self-shelling, how juvenile separatists killed themselves from howitzers, in order to substitute" non-living Sumerians ", and" cotton wool "believed it. negative
  15. nikvic46 15 March 2020 16: 26 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Often, managers hear all the reports, but the adoption of the right decision does not always work.
  16. Ezekiel 25-17 15 March 2020 16: 35 New
    • 7
    • 1
    +6
    "... You can do anything with bayonets; you just can't sit on them ...": Napoleon.
  17. iouris 15 March 2020 17: 07 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    The conclusion from the text suggests itself: we have long been ruled by the British special services, but for some reason the author himself is embarrassed to say so.
    1. Pavel57 15 March 2020 17: 13 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Rather aliens.
  18. A.TOR 15 March 2020 17: 11 New
    • 7
    • 6
    +1
    Because the USSR could not offer Czechoslovakians anything but the expectation of distant communism. And people remembered that "before the war" they lived "almost like in Europe" - and were essentially Europe. In general, the USSR was not an attractive model for Europeans in mentality, and now modern Russia too. And there's nothing to be done.
    Either Russia recognizes itself as part of European culture (and, accordingly, lives by certain rules and laws), or - the second option.
    And do not, perhaps, about the dominance of homosexuals.
    And - yes, I think that Czechoslovakia would not have entered into any NATO. there would be a maximum of a second Austria.
    But in Nato, the Czechs and Slovaks separately went under the influence of memories of the 68th.
    and Finland, I am sure, on the side of Hitler with the USSR would not have fought, if not for the Winter War.
    1. iouris 15 March 2020 17: 17 New
      • 5
      • 2
      +3
      Quote: A.TOR
      The USSR could not offer the Czechs anything but the expectation of distant communism.

      ... as well as relatively cheap oil, gas, timber, televisions, access to the sea (yes, Karl!), markets.
      The Russians did not understand that two Skoda factories fought against them.
      1. A.TOR 15 March 2020 17: 21 New
        • 6
        • 5
        +1
        The Russians understood this from the very beginning. And what options did the Czechoslovakians actually occupied by the Reich have? Proud to fold your arms over your chest and go to concentration camps?
        Or just not working? With families die of hunger?
        As for resources, both the USSR and the Russian Federation sold and are selling them, well, it will be more expensive ... But the European market of the USSR, by no means, could replace it, just like Western goods.
        We look how the Czech Republic and Slovakia live now - what do we see? Highly affected by high world prices
        In Belarus, prices were much lower - so what? Better to live there than in the Czech Republic?
        1. Serwid 15 March 2020 17: 41 New
          • 4
          • 3
          +1
          Quote: A.TOR
          And what options did the Czechoslovakians actually occupied by the Reich have?

          And they did not try to fight. For some reason, people in the USSR went to partisans.
          1. A.TOR 15 March 2020 17: 59 New
            • 7
            • 8
            -1
            Well, you are a smart person! (?)
            In a small Central European country, without dense impassable Belarusian thickets, with a small and, frankly, a little combat-ready army ...
            Well, what, in FIG (excuse me), resistance? What partisans?
            EVERY people should be approached with their (his), and not generalized requirements.
            Well, the Germans would be killed, if they were angry, several million Czech-Slovaks in addition to the Jews, and so what? Would we recall them as heroes?
            Is it easier for them?
            Survived, now live in the middle of Europe, and live well, by the way

            Do not align the USSR-RUSSIA with other countries! Here, first of all, the geographical factor plays a role. Imagine for a moment that the USSR without Siberia to the Volga.
            Submitted?
            So how did the war end in this case?
            1. Serwid 15 March 2020 21: 15 New
              • 3
              • 1
              +2
              Quote: A.TOR
              with a small and, frankly, a little combat-ready army ...

              And how do you know that the Czechoslovak army was poorly combat-ready. These are just your assumptions. And how would the German attack on Czechoslovakia go, we will never know, the rest is just speculation. The Czechs preferred to surrender without a fight.
              1. A.TOR 16 March 2020 19: 35 New
                • 1
                • 4
                -3
                Yes, for the first time H / C could stop the Wehrmacht. Then he would have accumulated strength, trained in France, captured all of Europe and hit again - this time there would have been a complete rout, occupation in a harsh form and elements of genocide.
                1. Serwid 17 March 2020 06: 32 New
                  • 2
                  • 0
                  +2
                  If Germany had broken its teeth about Czechoslovakia, then most likely there would have been no capture of France and Europe. Although we definitely won’t know this, because the Czechs preferred to surrender without a fight. And do not justify someone else's cowardice.
                  1. A.TOR 17 March 2020 15: 47 New
                    • 1
                    • 4
                    -3
                    Once again, slowly and spelling: - Czechoslovakia thought of MYSELF and proceeded from OWN ideas about their capabilities and readiness.
                    Although we don’t know for sure
                    - so they didn’t know
              2. Pushkar 18 March 2020 18: 06 New
                • 1
                • 0
                +1
                Quote: Serwid
                The Czechs preferred to surrender without a fight.

                Yes, and tanks for the Reich "Skoda" riveted another May 10, 1945.
        2. iouris 15 March 2020 20: 39 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          Quote: A.TOR
          And what options did the Czechoslovakians actually occupied by the Reich have?

          Hitler could not defeat Czechoslovakia in 1938. Why are you so worried about them? It was only the Russians were obliged to fight Hitler?
          1. A.TOR 16 March 2020 19: 36 New
            • 1
            • 4
            -3
            Yes, the Russians were obliged - otherwise, the destruction of the nation. Czechs did not threaten
        3. carstorm 11 15 March 2020 23: 16 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          so that’s the difference. proudly she is or is or not. There is no third.
          1. A.TOR 16 March 2020 19: 36 New
            • 1
            • 5
            -4
            The proud are not proud, but survived and live well now, without millions of dead
        4. Bagatur 16 March 2020 10: 34 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Exactly! Czechoslovakia before the war in 10 developed countries Europe! They lived well under Hitler, since the economy worked for max. 1/3 tanks, 100% self-propelled guns, a million rifles, equipment for 40 divisions per year .... They went on strike at the Skoda factory for large salaries and Gaydrich gave them! And the Czechs in 68 compared life under the Germans to what was under the USSR ....
      2. Bagatur 16 March 2020 13: 39 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        You don’t want to understand! The USSR / Russia cannot offer any alternative to the West. Not money, oil and gas, but the prospect of the development of society! Autocracy let it be the autocracy of the kings, the dictatorship of the proletariat, if you want what you have now .... Well, excuse me so!
    2. Aviator_ 15 March 2020 18: 08 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      there would be at most a second Austria.

      A second Austria, as well as a “second Switzerland”, are in principle impossible. Austria already occupies an "ecological niche"; another country will not fit into this niche with the modern development of the economy.
      1. A.TOR 15 March 2020 18: 12 New
        • 4
        • 5
        -1
        Everything is possible.
        The almost instant collapse of a huge country is possible, the appearance of a monstrous abomination of education in the country of Goethe and Heine is possible.
        There are no "ecological niches" - remembering the 68th Czechs and Slovaks wanted guarantees not to be repeated.
        1. Aviator_ 15 March 2020 18: 23 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          The collapse of the vast country was not "almost instantaneous"; there was a creeping rejection of the socialist principles of economic development. The law "On Cooperation" of 1988 is the beginning of the collapse of the USSR economy, before that, for 3 years, Gorbi Mechenyi handed over everything that was possible. In the country of Goethe and Heine, in order for Nazism to arise, it took a mess of the Weimar Republic, which lasted 15 years. There is nothing instant, the prerequisites for abrupt transitions have been accumulating for years.
          1. A.TOR 15 March 2020 18: 33 New
            • 5
            • 5
            0
            Of course, there are prerequisites, but in different countries they lead to different results. There is also a factor of the case, alas (unless, of course, you see the machinations of “s” in everything).

            As for the "socialist principles of economic development" ..... I'm 60 years old, I would tell you how it looked in practice in the 80s ... but I do not want to spoil your good ideas.
            As for the "surrender" of "everything" by Gorbachev - well, let's not (imagine) withdrawing troops from countries that openly require this, let's "aggravate with our bare ass", introduce troops and repeat the 68th several times ... .
            In fact, we get increased economic pressure in the context of low oil prices with a sharp deterioration in the supply of the population with everything necessary.
            1. Aviator_ 15 March 2020 20: 32 New
              • 5
              • 1
              +4
              I also come from the USSR, I don’t need to tell about the 80s, all the insanity of the beginning and the betrayal of the end of the 80s passed before my eyes. There was no intelligible economic policy after the cessation of Khrushchev’s experiments, and the Kosygin-Liberman reform (1965) was the path to the restoration of capitalism. The main thing is that the party was reborn, for which foreign real estate became the goal of life. We have shown by our example what will happen to a country that does not know how to balance between the capitalist elements of the economy and the socialist. The Chinese can do this.
        2. iouris 15 March 2020 22: 33 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          Quote: A.TOR
          remembering the 68th Czechs and Slovaks wanted guarantees

          Only an insurance policy can give guarantees to a state that is not a superpower (a joke of humor, otherwise they will run to insure).
          In general, it is not clear what you wrote about. Czechoslovakia was part of a powerful military bloc. The fact that he was powerful proves that Czechoslovakia was occupied in a few hours. Occupied Germany - this is not a guarantee?
          Without the USSR, Czechoslovakia collapsed (along the Ural ridge).
          1. A.TOR 16 March 2020 22: 20 New
            • 1
            • 4
            -3
            They wanted guarantees that they would never again forcibly fall into this very "powerful military bloc" - they enter the blocs only voluntarily, otherwise it is called "occupation"
    3. Andobor 16 March 2020 11: 22 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: A.TOR
      "before the war," they lived "almost like in Europe" - and were essentially Europe.

      Before the war, “between the first and second”, according to the stories of the Czechs themselves, they lived better than anyone else in Europe, they did not suffer much from the first, they did not prepare for the second.
  19. Aviator_ 15 March 2020 18: 04 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    At the same time, in Ukraine 2014 there was no close “pro-Russian” government that could be supported in extreme cases by caterpillars.

    The government was, the legitimate president - Yanyk, was also, but turned out to be an ordinary fool. Recognition of the Ukrainian coup is Putin’s big foreign policy mistake.
  20. Operator 15 March 2020 18: 41 New
    • 4
    • 5
    -1
    Laughed at the large Soviet leadership - forgot on whose side the Czech Republic and Slovakia fought in WWII, relaxed under the lulling whispers of former German collaborators of the "Brothers Slavs" type and withdrawn parts of the SA from Czechoslovakia - so that later in 1968 they would be urgently introduced.
  21. IC
    IC 15 March 2020 18: 49 New
    • 7
    • 3
    +4
    In Czechoslovakia 1968, commentator A Tor is right. Can add. During the German occupation, the Czechs lived even better than the Germans. After the communist coup in 1948, the USSR received the expropriation of property, political repressions, rigged processes, etc.
    250 executed and 200 thousand prisoners. Nevertheless, good relations until the year 1968 with the peoples of the USSR.
    Not freely, people compared their lives with neutral Austria.
    In Ukraine, a complete political and diplomatic failure. One bet on Yanukovych, which is worth it. On, and then everything is clear.
    1. iouris 15 March 2020 22: 37 New
      • 2
      • 4
      -2
      Quote: IMS
      During the German occupation, the Czechs lived even better than the Germans.

      Only an accomplice of the Nazis could write this.
      My grandfather, stopping the Nazi offensive, died in Kursk in vain and the story is developing in the wrong direction?
      1. Andobor 16 March 2020 11: 32 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: iouris
        My grandfather stopping the Nazis offensive
        near Kursk, the Germans burned down in the Hetzer, and the Czech received a salary for Hetzer.
        1. Bagatur 16 March 2020 13: 43 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          “What is anti-fascism against the Czechoslovak people?” J. Stalin
        2. hohol95 16 March 2020 15: 03 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Near Kursk, “Hetzer” has not yet been observed ... Confused with “Marder III”
          But there were many other self-propelled guns there!
      2. A.TOR 16 March 2020 19: 38 New
        • 1
        • 4
        -3
        They really lived not bad, did not starve, what is the "aiding"?
    2. Pushkar 18 March 2020 18: 19 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: IMS
      During the German occupation, the Czechs lived even better than the Germans.

      Perfectly! The logic of all the policemen and accomplices of the Nazis, everything can be, if only to live "better than the Germans."
  22. Goldmitro 15 March 2020 19: 02 New
    • 8
    • 0
    +8
    Quote: knn54
    Chernomyrdin and then Zurabov were looking for suitable objects (on behalf of the Russian oligarchs) for a bargain, in eastern Ukraine. Where is LDN now.

    That heavyweight Chernomyrdin that monetarist Zurabov as politicians - absolute mediocrity! And the money allocated annually to the embassy to strengthen Russia's position in Ukraine went, it turns out, to receptions at the embassy of the Ukrainian pro-Western sales nomenclature, seized power, with toasts for the development of fraternal ties! To pursue a policy of constantly gifting brothers with preferential gas prices, loans, etc. without any conditions, at least, with the support of the Ukrainian authorities of pro-Russian circles, believing that this is enough - yes where will they get from us, with such and such connections! And a pin .... in the meantime, they climbed, not without the help of the authorities, into all spheres of life in Ukraine, took up and invested in the upbringing of the young generation of Ukrainians from Soros textbooks! AND today we already have generations of banderlogs brought up by them, for whom the main and deadly enemy are Russia, Russians!
    1. New Year day 15 March 2020 20: 04 New
      • 9
      • 0
      +9
      Quote: Goldmitro
      That heavyweight Chernomyrdin, that the monetarist Zurabov as politicians are absolute mediocrity!

      Just the trend was such + their personal business (Chernomyrdin and Zurabov) in Ukraine. Yeltsin: "Get up in the morning and think about what you have done for Ukraine."
      1. iouris 15 March 2020 22: 41 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Rather, their principle was this: "Get up in the morning and think about what else you could do yesterday for the USA and the FRG?"
    2. Freeman 15 March 2020 20: 11 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Quote: Goldmitro
      Quote: knn54
      Chernomyrdin and then Zurabov were looking for suitable objects (on behalf of the Russian oligarchs) for a bargain, in eastern Ukraine. Where is LDN now.

      That heavyweight Chernomyrdin that monetarist Zurabov as politicians - absolute mediocrity! And the money allocated annually to the embassy to strengthen Russia's position in Ukraine went, it turns out, to receptions at the embassy of the Ukrainian pro-Western sales nomenclature, seized power, with toasts for the development of fraternal ties! To pursue a policy of constantly gifting brothers with preferential gas prices, loans, etc. without any conditions, at least, with the support of the Ukrainian authorities of pro-Russian circles, believing that this is enough - yes where will they get from us, with such and such connections! And a pin .... in the meantime, they climbed, not without the help of the authorities, into all spheres of life in Ukraine, took up and invested in the upbringing of the young generation of Ukrainians from Soros textbooks! AND today we already have generations of banderlogs brought up by them, for whom the main and deadly enemy are Russia, Russians!


      That’s for sure - “where will they get from us?” "Purely in a patsansky", "Purely in concepts."

      - We did not understand in time that those who are "bought" in the modern world are controlled by those whose "bought" keep money received from those who "buy" them.
  23. Edward Vashchenko 15 March 2020 21: 11 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    That is, the army was very diverse in composition. And it was hardly anyone's whim.

    How to drink - is it harmful?
  24. hohol95 15 March 2020 23: 54 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Dear Oleg! Why not recall the occupation of the island of Grenada in 1983?
    Power operation. No tanks, but with lots of helicopters! Or the capture of Manuel Noriega in Panama in 1989?
  25. hohol95 16 March 2020 00: 03 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Yes, dear Oleg, you forgot the aggression of Great Britain, France and Israel against Egypt in 1956!
    Where were the politicians and special services of these countries if the troops had to conduct a military operation?
  26. Andrey VOV 16 March 2020 05: 43 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Pay attention as the author is deftly, among a lot of empty sentences, he gently hinted so that they say that the USSR intelligence sucks even during the war ... that they are so stupid every woodpecker .... back then we are all good, especially knowing what was , though not all, and a mile on a comfortable sofa
  27. Andrey VOV 16 March 2020 05: 45 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Quote: Keyser Soze
    Or you are friends with us, or the enemy. There is no third


    This is clearly a well-established approach. Decades have passed and you have not learned anything. Look under the sofa, maybe the enemies there nest ...

    Hey, let go of the Bulgarian, or go about your business, prevent from coronovirus
    1. Bagatur 16 March 2020 10: 41 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      And we do it! The crown will reach you, God forbid, without a loss. In the meantime, in your head, “Chicken is not a bird, Bulgaria is not abroad ...” They always considered us to be a patrimony, it should be rightfully assigned to you. Scold as much as you like, everything will pass. We do not have your resources and live no worse than yours! 300 Rosiyanp live with us, no one touches them. But I do not know a single Bulgarian who wants to live in Russia!
    2. A.TOR 16 March 2020 17: 18 New
      • 1
      • 4
      -3
      Many turn away from Russia / the USSR, including and because they hear your dismissive "lie b"
  28. Mikhail3 16 March 2020 12: 54 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    The main problem, as usual, is QUALITY guidance. The Soviet leadership community was rapidly degenerating. Under the gaze of aging leaders, allowing themselves not to grow, not to learn, not to go forward. "The teachings of Marx are omnipotent because they are true," remember?
    In general, we have here "the most advanced system in the world," and he will win. And on its own. You can not strain, do nothing, indulge in the modest joys of life, twist intrigues, thump finally ... And it is there somehow. Sounds wild, right? But it was just so EVERYTHING!
    And when the USSR began to crumble quite clearly, what conclusion was made by the leadership? Our people are bad! Unsuitable people, he does not value his precious bosses, is lazy, does not work as it should. And the conclusion was made - it is necessary to apply the whip. Let those who "did not fit into the market" die! And let the rest plow fiercely, spurred by hunger and driven by greed! In general, "everything will be regulated by the law of the market."
    Notice the similarities? Again! Again, everything will be adjusted on its own. Again, everything will happen by itself, as long as we don’t do anything here, we’ll go in for stuffing the cheek pouch, finally we will be able to physically eliminate our competitors (however, we will change our minds pretty quickly), and indulge in excesses and intrigues ... but it does. Again. We will not strain here, the law of the market will solve everything.
    Honestly, this tradition really got it. It is necessary? It'll be this way forever? Will our rulers always behave this way?
  29. NordUral 17 March 2020 20: 53 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    And what Czechoslovakia is for them, they were already preparing the 91st for us.
  30. svoit 18 March 2020 20: 07 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The main problem is that in authoritarian states (both in the USSR and present Russia) the staff is selected on the basis of personal loyalty to the supreme ruler, while professionalism is pushed into the background. It is not even state interests that dominate, but parts of the elite, the role of the supreme ruler is great, and his stupidity has too much influence.