Military Review

The last war of Stalin

141
The last war of Stalin
The wreckage of a B-29 that was shot down by an 9 on November 1950 by the Soviet MiG-15


Seventy years ago, the Korean War began. The last successful war of Stalin. It was a fair and positive war for Russia. In it, the Russians inflicted a serious defeat on America in the air war and buried the hopes of the US military-political elite for a successful air and nuclear war against Russia.

In the West and in the USA, they saw that in the land war with the Russians, the newly created NATO has no chance of victory. The Russians have an advantage in the ground forces and the air force (apart from the strategic aviation) During the atomic attack of the West, the Soviet armies will sweep out weak American forces in Western Europe with one blow, take strategic footholds in Asia and North Africa, destroying western military bases there. At the same time, the USSR, in extremely limited terms and on the limited resources of the country devastated after the Great Patriotic War, raised the economy from ruins in record time and created the most advanced nuclear, electronic and aviation-reactive industries. Deployed powerful tank army and air divisions. Soviet Russia after the terrible war committed a new military-economic miracle. The West, led by the United States, had to temporarily retreat.

Korean question


In the years 1910-1945. Korea was occupied by the Japanese. In August 1945, the Soviet Union defeated the Japanese Empire in the Far East. Soviet troops liberated Korea from the Japanese invaders. According to Japan's surrender, Korea was divided into the Soviet and American zones of occupation along the 38th parallel. In the northern part of the Korean Peninsula in February 1946, the Provisional People’s Committee of North Korea was formed, headed by Kim Il Sung. This was the interim government of North Korea.

By a decree of September 9, 1948, a new state was established in the Soviet zone of occupation - the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). The power in the DPRK belonged to the North Korean Labor Party (TPSK). TPSK introduced a planned economy, nationalized industry and trade, the land was redistributed in favor of small and medium-sized peasant farms. The first chairman of the Central Committee of the Labor Party was Kim Doo Bon. He held the positions of the head of the legislative branch and the formal head of state. The DPRK government was led by Kim Il Sung. In 1948, Soviet troops left the peninsula. In 1949, Kim Il Sung pushed Kim Doo Bon from power over the party. Pyongyang in its policy focused on the USSR and China.

In September 1945, the Americans landed in South Korea. They did not recognize the interim government created in Seoul, considering it too left-wing. The Americans established a military administration based on local officials (including at first the Japanese, then they were deported to Japan). The USA supported the local anti-communist movement. In 1948, its leader, Lee Seung Man, became president of the Republic of Korea, and American troops were withdrawn from the peninsula.

Lee Son Man studied and lived in the USA, in fact, he was trained for the role of the pro-Western leader of Korea. He immediately launched a campaign against the communists. Many leftist politicians and activists were thrown into jail and killed. In fact, an authoritarian regime was established in South Korea. South Korean security forces terrorized and repressed the left-wing communist movement in the south of the peninsula. Thousands of people were killed during the massacres and suppression of the uprisings. Lee Son Man’s regime sought to unify all of Korea under its rule.

“Campaign to the North” and “advance to the South”


Both Seoul and Pyongyang considered themselves the legitimate authority on the peninsula and prepared for a war for the unification of the country. South Korean politicians explicitly declared a "campaign to the North." Seoul claimed a "reunion strike" on North Korea. Pyongyang hoped for a quick victory over the South. First, the army of the North, which was armed with the USSR and China, was stronger than the South Korean. After the victory of communism in China, thousands of fighters who fought along with the Chinese comrades returned to Korea.

Secondly, the domestic political situation in the South seemed unstable. A partisan movement was expanding in South Korea against the regime of Lee Seung Man. Most of the population in the southern part of the country opposed the regime in Seoul, supported by the Americans. The case went to the collapse of the regime of Lee Son Man. After the parliamentary elections in May 1950, most deputies did not support the president. Pyongyang hoped that as soon as the DPRK army launched an offensive, a massive uprising would begin in the South. The war will be lightning fast.

Moscow pursued a balanced policy. Direct confrontation with the West could not be allowed. Therefore, the participation of the Soviet Army in the war in Korea was not planned. North Korea itself had to solve the problem of unifying the country. Only the help of a limited number of military advisers was allowed. It was also necessary to provide support for China. In early 1950, Kim Il Sung began to insistently ask Moscow to approve the plan of "attack on the South." In April 1950, the North Korean leader visited Moscow. Stalin supported Pyongyang's plans.

However, Moscow continued to exercise caution and put forward several preconditions: full confidence was needed that the United States would not intervene in the war; support for China is needed; urgent strengthening of the fighting ability of the North Korean forces, the war should be lightning fast, until the West intervened. On May 13-15, 1950, Kim Il Sung received the support of Mao Zedong during his visit to China. Only after that did Stalin give the go-ahead.

The West, led by the United States at that moment, was in a difficult situation. The former colonial system, allowing the West to parasitize on the human and material resources of the planet, collapsed. The main reason for the destruction of colonialism was the victory of the USSR in World War II, the existence of an alternative to the Western world order. In 1946, the Philippines became independent. In 1947, Britain lost control of India. In 1949, Holland recognized the independence of Indonesia. However, the West did not want to voluntarily give up power over a significant part of the planet. The colonies of England and France were still preserved, there was a people's liberation war.

The civil war in China in 1949 ended with the victory of the Communists. The People's Republic of China (PRC) was established. The Kuomintang and the Americans supporting it experienced a severe defeat. The “loss of China” came as a shock to Washington. Moscow immediately recognized the PRC and began to provide large-scale economic, scientific and technical assistance. In the United States, they were angered by this loss and sought at all costs to maintain and expand their position in the world. In Washington, in April 1950, they adopted the National Security Council Directive SNB-68 and intended to “contain communism” around the world. The USA followed the path of further militarization. And in this situation, on June 25, 1950, North Korea launched an offensive. The war began, which, in fact, has not been completed to this day, but only "frozen." The US military recognized in 1947 that South Korea did not have great strategic value, but Washington could not give in and took an active part in the war.

US provocation


Thus, Stalin did not need a big war on the Korean peninsula. One thing is quick operation and victory with the massive support of the people in the South. Another thing is a protracted war with the Western coalition, the threat of confrontation with the United States. The strategic importance of North Korea for the USSR: a defensive line on the path of possible US aggression. Moscow was also interested in the supply of rare-earth minerals. Therefore, there was no threat from the Russians to the West in Korea. As soon as they created the DPRK, Soviet troops immediately left the peninsula. The main task has been solved.

Washington needed a war. First, Lee Son Man’s regime was in danger of collapse. There was a threat of the unification of Korea under the rule of the Communists. The war made it possible to strengthen the regime of the American puppet with the support of the world community, the military power of the United States and emergency wartime laws.

Secondly, the United States needed to mobilize the "world community" against the "Russian (communist) threat." The attack by Stalin and Kim Il Sung provided an excellent information occasion for condemning the "aggressor" and rallying the ranks of the capitalist countries. In 1949, the North Atlantic Alliance was created. The war made it possible to test the work of NATO. The United States gained new leverage over Western Europe, drawing it into the long-term Cold War.

In fact, the Americans knew about the impending attack of Pyongyang. The intelligence had all the data on the military preparations of the North. However, the States needed this war. According to Secretary of State Dean Acheson on January 12, 1950, Washington expelled South Korea from its "perimeter of defense" in the Far East. That is, Kim Il Sung was given the "green light." The United States immediately adopted the SNB-68 Directive, which implied a tough response to any attempts to attack the communist bloc. Both sides were actively preparing for war. On June 17, 1950, the special envoy of US President Truman, future Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, visited the Korean Peninsula. He visited South Korean troops on the 38th parallel. Dulles told the South Koreans that if they lasted two weeks, then "everything will go smoothly." On June 19, Dulles made a speech at the South Korean National Assembly and endorsed all of Seoul’s military preparations. He promised US moral and material assistance to South Korea in the struggle against the communist North.

The last battle of the red emperor


The war began 70 years ago and actually did not end today. The Korean Peninsula is one of the "powder vaults" of the planet. However, the main thing is that Stalin won his last victory in this war. The United States had complete superiority in the outbreak of World War III, the Cold War. The Americans had enormous wealth; highly developed, indestructible and war-depleted industry (a quarter of all world production); monopoly on nuclear weapon (Moscow tested the atomic bomb only in 1949) and, most importantly, its carriers are the strategic air fleet. The Americans had powerful aircraft carrier groups of the Navy, a ring of military bases, covering the USSR from all sides. Washington had clear plans to undermine the Soviet forces in the arms race, to intimidate and dismember the threats of a nuclear air war.

However, this did not happen! Stalin won a new great victory in 1946-1953. In 1948, the Soviet leader stated that "he does not see the atomic bomb as a serious force, which some politicians tend to consider it." Nuclear weapons are designed to intimidate the faint of heart, but it does not decide the outcome of the war. The Red Emperor has found the best way to deter the American nuclear threat: building up ground and air forces. With atomic attacks on the USSR, Stalin’s armored armada with the support of the air armies could capture all of Europe, establish their control over Asia and North Africa. At the same time, Moscow is creating a foreign sabotage network to attack the most important US military installations in Western Europe.

Soviet Russia has made an incredible leap forward in these years! It seemed that the country was devastated and bloodless by war. Millions of her best sons and daughters lay in the ground. But then we had a great leader. The country in record time rises from the ruins. In the USSR, the branches of a superpower are created: atomic, electronic, aviation-jet and rocket. And the war in Korea showed that the United States cannot beat us from the air. What are we ready to answer. The US had to retreat, move to a strategy of long-term “cold” confrontation.
Author:
Photos used:
https://ru.wikipedia.org/
141 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. The comment was deleted.
  2. silberwolf88
    silberwolf88 26 June 2020 18: 22 New
    52
    We had a Great Leader ... and we had a great idea ... so we were invincible ...
    1. Svarog
      Svarog 26 June 2020 19: 18 New
      28
      Quote: silberwolf88
      We had a Great Leader ... and we had a great idea ... so we were invincible ...

      Yes, the patriot is at the helm and the idea can turn mountains. Now we really lack a strong leader and idea.
      1. Revolver
        Revolver 26 June 2020 21: 11 New
        29
        Quote: Svarog
        Now we really lack a strong leader and idea.

        And when was it enough? Look who was after Stalin. Are these the leaders ???
        Malenkov? The figure is formal, Beria rules. Beria, of course, was an outstanding leader, but he looked through the military coup of Zhukov-Khrushchov, for which he paid with his life and reputation.
        Khrushch? Well, here is one phrase from an anecdote: "Launched the satellite and the economy." Moreover, the satellite was launched on the groundwork of the Stalinist era, but the collapse of the economy of his mind (or rather the absence thereof) is a matter.
        Brezhnev? There were two of them very different, before and after a stroke. If the first one still somehow corresponded, then the second one deserved the hero of many anecdotes of the stagnant era.
        Andropov? He started correctly, but did not have enough time and health. If he had come to power, say, right after the Olympics, and lived 5 years more, the USSR might not have collapsed, but one can only guess about it.
        Chernenko? Finally no. What is a criminal act in his position.
        Mishanya Tagged? It’s better not to start about him, I’ll write such a letter that they will instantly be banned.
        Drunk ??? It is a pity that he died in his bed by his death, he should have been imprisoned for a Bialowieza conspiracy. Together with other high contracting parties. Most correct on the count. Kravchuk, by the way, is still alive, so it's not too late.
        So, against the background of these "leaders", Putin is a strong leader. Although, of course, Stalin is not even close.
        But the idea is difficult. The aforementioned "leaders" have so fouled the communist idea that they are unlikely to be accepted by the people, at least not by those generations who remember stagnation and perestroika. Do you have something to offer in return?
        1. NordUral
          NordUral 26 June 2020 22: 20 New
          13
          But the idea is difficult. The aforementioned "leaders" have so fouled the communist idea that they are unlikely to be accepted by the people, at least not by those generations who remember stagnation and perestroika. Do you have something to offer in return?

          It was not the idea that was to blame, but the leadership of the country, which did not at all correspond to the greatness of the tasks of continuing and developing the Stalinist backlog. But there was no such leader after Stalin.
          And socialism will have to return, because what these people do will lead the country to a final collapse. If we have the mind, the people will have enough.
          1. your1970
            your1970 27 June 2020 10: 30 New
            +4
            Quote: NordUral
            It's not an idea to blame, but country leadership, which did not correspond to the greatness of the tasks for the continuation and development of the Stalinist backlog. But there was no such leader after Stalin.

            Quote: NordUral
            And socialism will have to return, because what these people do will lead the country to a final collapse. If we have the mind, the people will have enough.
            Now the question is - where will you take the leader? EQUAL Stalin? At least one candidate name ....
            I am for socialism, but among all the well-known possible leaders, I see only the desire for power and grab, grab, grab ....
            1. NordUral
              NordUral 27 June 2020 12: 20 New
              0
              Sergei! The question is complex. But the leader will certainly appear at the historical moment of real changes in the country.
              In the meantime, I repeat - I am satisfied with the socialism of Grudinin and himself.
              But there are still candidates in my opinion.
              1. your1970
                your1970 27 June 2020 13: 37 New
                0
                Quote: NordUral
                But a leader is required will appear at the historical moment of real changes in the country
                yourself?
                Quote: NordUral
                Grudinin
                -we discussed with you ...
                Quote: NordUral
                But there are still candidates in my opinion.
                - Who?

                We, 2 people in total, did not agree on Grudinin. What makes you think that if a leader appears tomorrow, he will be accepted the bulk of the population?
                For example, now quite a lot of the population does not accept Putin, and this reduces his room for maneuver. The slightest mistake ...
                Let's say tomorrow a new leader Zyugrudplatosh (conditional!) Comes with his program.
                Some part of the population will accept it, some will not accept it (for example, you know my opinion on your candidate). Let us begin to build socialism.
                You can plant oligarchs (you can shoot, people support) - only from this job will not appear immediately. The leader will need at least 5 years according to my estimates ..

                And here an interesting thing arises in 1-1,5 years - the population (which will not support !!but it will !!) will say “And what? Where are the promised improvements in life? What joy is it that everyone was put up against the wall, if there was no work and there’s no?” And the population that will support will scratch their heads ...
                And the young people who do not want to go to the factory to the machine (which still need to be built, but this is not one year!)? !!
                And the village? What will entice the youth to be a new leader? Pay? Well, well ..
                And corruption? In China, they have been shooting for 25 years already ... Stalin, with the full approval of the people, did not succeed either before the war or after. And the current generation will say - "We need to tear more and more !!!" Look, those who do not pay taxes, the population podderzhivat- "Well done, the state shod !!"
                And even moral condemnation is not a panacea- in Islam 700 years for adultery stoned to death women beat? And? women stopped running to strangers peas? aha, schaz ...

                I just don't see whose candidate at least 15-20 million supported. Not the idea of ​​socialism - but a specific person. For whom the people would reach out and agree to suffer deprivation of 10-15 years

                Z.Y. and yes - after nationalization due to the fact that there was a lot of foreign capital- imports we will not see for a long time. The situation will be strictly analogous to the times of the USSR - currency will not be superfluous for goods of category "B", and no one will rush to trade especially. Here our only hope is in China - and he can start sharply twisting his tail using the right "Whoever eats a girl, then he will dances. "Well, the youth, having lost their gadgets, will greatly support such a leader ...
                1. NordUral
                  NordUral 27 June 2020 19: 12 New
                  0
                  For example, now quite a lot of the population does not accept Putin, and this reduces his room for maneuver. The slightest mistake ...

                  So turn to him, the path begins to act for the good of the country and people. It is time to start already, if such intentions exist.
                  1. your1970
                    your1970 28 June 2020 14: 28 New
                    0
                    Quote: NordUral
                    So turn to him, the path begins to act for the good of the country and people.
                    - why? you are still firmly convinced that he is bad ...
                    But at the same time his - good (!!!) and supported by at least 10-15-20 million(!!!) the population wasn’t called. Apparently modest ... and ???
                    Quote: your1970
                    I just don’t see a candidate who supported at least 15-20 million. Not the idea of ​​socialism - but a specific person. For whom the people would reach out and agree to suffer deprivation for 10-15 years
                    1. NordUral
                      NordUral 28 June 2020 15: 09 New
                      -1
                      I don’t know if Putin is bad. Bad is his domestic policy. Here Nicholas 11 was a good man, and what the country finished in February 17th. The leader is determined by the result, not intentions. But in the case of Putin, even intentions are not visible, except for negative
                      1. your1970
                        your1970 28 June 2020 19: 15 New
                        0
                        well let's see how good domestic politics will be NOT with him.
                        I'm for some reason I’m sure that he won’t go to the elections of 2024 ...
                        Too much power was taken from the president .... This just doesn’t surrender ... it’s very unlike him ...
                        Moreover - I bet on a couple of brandy ..

                        Z.Y. And a couple with you personally - that Grudinin will no longer be a candidate from any party ...
                      2. NordUral
                        NordUral 28 June 2020 20: 11 New
                        0
                        To argue, I still have to live, it’s not even 70 years. Yes, and I do not like to argue.
                        And even better it will not be fast with those for whom I would personally vote, and with those of those who are now in power. Only in the second it will be forever bad, to the end.
                      3. your1970
                        your1970 28 June 2020 20: 57 New
                        -1
                        Quote: NordUral
                        To argue, I still have to live, not even 70 years old.
                        - come on, dying to the delight of your enemies ... pampering ...
                      4. NordUral
                        NordUral 29 June 2020 11: 56 New
                        -1
                        I agree, Sergey, they won’t wait! But we walk all under the sky.
          2. Alexander I
            Alexander I 3 July 2020 10: 16 New
            0
            read you and realized Putin is not so bad
      2. cradle
        cradle 5 July 2020 02: 54 New
        0
        as if there were pockets in the coffin ...
  3. sniperino
    sniperino 27 June 2020 11: 58 New
    +2
    Quote: Nagan
    Putin is a strong leader. Although, of course, Stalin is not close.
    This can be judged with confidence after at least 5-10 years after his departure. What is a "strong leader"? In this case, these are not volitional qualities, and not even the ability to quickly analyze the situation and make the right decisions, although there are no good leaders without these qualities, but the presence of a concept and a project. Stalin admitted that he was acting almost blindly, since the basis of Marxism-Leninism, on which he relied as a leader, was clearly not enough to build socialism. Therefore, today the question lies in the compliance of the tasks set with the leader's conceptual and design base for their solution. It may be closer.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. sniperino
        sniperino 1 July 2020 21: 19 New
        0
        Quote: make
        about "strong" or not strong Putin, Alexander Pushkin said best of all
        Do you have Pushkin on a par with Wanga and Nostradamus? Or there’s nothing to say, I want to give my feces to the fan beautifully, so you drag Pushkin? Soros reigns over you now.
  4. ANB
    ANB 28 June 2020 05: 44 New
    -1
    . Most correct on the count.

    Two pluses to one comment is not put in any way. I would bet 100.
  • demo
    demo 26 June 2020 21: 54 New
    13
    What idea can lead people today?
    In our society, the cult of the consumer triumphs.
    New car, new home, new things, new travels, etc.
    Nobody cares about tomorrow.
    Except for German Gref with a gang of similar non-humans.
    Who wants to "kill the exams", "fool the population of the full herd instinct, remove diplomas, reduce the requirements for educational qualifications.

    What can push people to the path of sacrificial service to their homeland?
    Oddly enough, in the situation we are in, until the culprit of any troubles and upheavals is determined, which will cause an appropriate reaction of the population, no changes will occur.
    Until the "enemy" is identified, nothing will happen in society.
    There will be sluggish and self-contained conversations "for life."
    And nothing more.

    Today I watched the last issue of "Besogon".
    There was a very ambiguous impression.
    There was an opinion that Mikhalkov was "warned" very seriously.

    The phrase was spoken in the context of the Education Program 2030.
    And Mikhalkov, previously vehemently opposed by her approval of Putin, makes this retreat:
    "The President who signed the Program is a statesman who sees much more and understands more than an ordinary man in the street, that is, you and I. And not a fact (Mikhalkov's words), the adopted Program will be implemented."

    Well, etc.
    Although he himself, in the previous program, stated the opposite - if the Program is accepted, and the President signs it, then that's all, to us kapets.

    Particularly pleased with the statement by Nikita Sergeevich that the President bears full responsibility for all decisions made!
    I will continue his thought.
    There is no need to criticize anything, no need to resist anything, because in which case we (who are we?) Will ask him. In all severity of the law.
    Oops on!
    When will this happen?
    After the "nullified" God gives his soul?
    But isn’t it easier to prevent the disaster in the country?
    But Mikhailov offers to go and vote for the amendments.
    Nikita Sergeevich. Where did you get such infantile dualism?
    I said that softly. I did not want to talk about duplicity regarding you.

    So with such spiritual leaders, where will we go, and where will we come?
    Today the team is on the attack! And tomorrow - retreat!
    Yes. It has become difficult to live in our country.
    1. Malyuta
      Malyuta 26 June 2020 22: 14 New
      +9
      Quote: demo
      Until the "enemy" is identified, nothing will happen in society.

      Comrade, your life comment seems to have become painful ...
      "Enemies" are thrown to us every day, whoever gives litter -tv and an apeshechka for tomorrow, that will be, eat dill, you want Banderopolists, you can still attract Mongolochukhons, but they are not in trend now, but trumpersnenyash, Ilonmasks and the world behind the scenes are yes but the Jew kedmi into his snag, please note.
      Threat. Comrade, until the inhabitants understand that the enemy is those who direct them and manipulate their fragile consciousness, one should not expect good. hi
      1. demo
        demo 26 June 2020 22: 35 New
        +8
        Age, however, affects.
        A lot is seen and understood in a different way than 30-40 years ago.
        Sick ..... this is not the right word.
        After all, what is waiting for is clear, not just me, not even my children (although they also feel sorry for them, but they are already adults), but my grandchildren.
        These are meaningless.
        Which are 100% dependent on grandparents, dads and mothers.
        And to consider them as biomass, which tomorrow will be "used" by some Ascaris (I have such an opinion about a certain individual) is beyond my strength.
        I'm not very humble anyway. And then it really starts to roll up something somewhere.
        These are the things, brother.

        Well, the listed two-legged, galloping with pots on their heads, elevated to the rank of national heroes of subhumans, a multiple bankrupt who was selling real estate and everything else listed in the commentary - this is not enough for me.
        This is an annoying background.
        Do not look, do not listen, and it is the end.
        They do not have a decisive effect on me or on us.
        Our problems have a last name, first name, middle name and position.
        And it is precisely our problems that will soon become personify with this personality.
        With all that it implies.
        1. Malyuta
          Malyuta 26 June 2020 22: 45 New
          +6
          Quote: demo
          Our problems have a last name, first name, middle name and position.

          Comrade, in this case it is the president who firmly and steadily continues the Ebn's policy of destroying the USSR and its legacy, and at the same time they surpassed their "teacher" in cynicism, greed and lies.
          Know that you are not alone and this is the most important thing now, educate the children and grandchildren, they will have to restore everything!
          NO PASARAN!
          1. Revolver
            Revolver 27 June 2020 06: 32 New
            +6
            Quote: Malyuta
            NO PASARAN!

            since you decided to communicate in Spanish, then please:
            El pueblo unido, jamás será vencido

          2. Soho
            Soho 2 July 2020 11: 39 New
            +1
            Malyuta
            Quote: demo
            Our problems have a last name, first name, middle name and position.

            Comrade

            How tired you, dear flooder! All right, other headings, but you have already dirtied "History" with your whining about power. On the topic of the article, balabol, did you try to write something?
  • w70
    w70 26 June 2020 20: 16 New
    -34
    To muck and dirty Stalin was a master
    1. Bredovich705
      Bredovich705 26 June 2020 21: 20 New
      11
      And how did Stalin screw you up?
      1. w70
        w70 26 June 2020 21: 23 New
        -22
        Well, for example, Stalin, before his death, misled the Koreans
        1. Bredovich705
          Bredovich705 26 June 2020 21: 27 New
          11
          So are you Korean?
          1. Bredovich705
            Bredovich705 26 June 2020 21: 30 New
            +5
            I just don’t understand what screwed up, it’s better to see the Koreans! Nothing personal...
          2. w70
            w70 26 June 2020 21: 38 New
            -24
            No, I’m your compatriot, but I regret the Koreans, they are still fighting each other, thanks to Upyr Vissarionovich
            1. Revival
              Revival 26 June 2020 23: 35 New
              11
              The ghoul is rather you, and the same compatriot as the Vlasov, that is, no, to put it mildly
              1. w70
                w70 29 June 2020 21: 24 New
                -2
                Now you write that it will come to your mind, and under Stalin you would hesitate with the party line and be glad that you didn’t take you, but your comrade. And Solzhenitsyn and Gorbachev saved you from this. But you don’t thank them, but how do you grunt like a pig under an oak from Krylov’s fable
                Whenever you could lift up your snout,
                You would see,
                That these acorns are growing on me. "
                1. Revival
                  Revival 30 June 2020 01: 56 New
                  +1
                  Now, I think, they take it quite well, for what you write, for likes, for historical photos in historical articles, some of them suddenly find whole laboratories, though then with obs ... ohm, but ...
                2. Miron
                  Miron 24 August 2020 08: 52 New
                  0
                  My whole family was killed by those who caressed Solzhenitsyn.
                  Because when the Stalinist communists summoned them to the regional committee and warned that there was a genocide of Jews in Europe, they answered them the same thing that you are talking here now, that is, they quoted some people who told them this, as you Solzhenitsyn,
                  "We will never believe that the nation of Beethoven and Goethe is capable of such a thing. This is your Bolshevik nonsense that you came up with to embroil our peoples."
                  Only my family, unlike you, paid for these idiotic chants with their lives. And you, after all, are the necks of your own children and grandchildren, whitewashing the villain Gorbochov, and you are sending such western mercenaries as Solzhenitsyn to the slaughter.
                  After all, Sozhenitsyn's program did not end with simply the destruction of the USSR (from which he allegedly saved us). His program was Kuril Islands - Japan, Kaliningrad - Germany, Karelia - Finland, Taimyr - Balts and many other things that just haven't been published yet, but are waiting for their day. The destruction of the USSR for the hirelings of the West was never the ultimate goal. The destruction of the country, as such, is their goal, so that there is no state and people itself, in order to split the Russian people, and turn them from a single and integral people into enclaves that are always at war with each other.
                  Stalin is terrible for you because he used force wisely, not to split peoples into parts, but to gather like-minded people together, not in gangs and not to plunder others by war, but so that those who became a family build the future together.
                  Yes, without Mercedes and in chorus. Tease us with your salary, be a weasel.
  • Shuttle
    Shuttle 27 June 2020 06: 59 New
    +1
    Quote: silberwolf88
    We had a Great Leader ... and we had a great idea ... so we were invincible ...

    And, importantly, the leader himself was selflessly devoted to the people, to the idea, and to his great teacher.
    1. unknown
      unknown 28 June 2020 07: 01 New
      -1
      Which teacher was betrayed by the leader?
      On the surviving photo and film materials, the researchers identified EIGHT different Lenins.
      Similar but DIFFERENT.
      Until 1929, the country was ruled by the Comintern - a bunch of international crooks funded by the United States.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • fliger85
    fliger85 3 August 2020 20: 37 New
    0
    Stalin, yes, Khrushchev, who was Stalin's clown, a woodpecker, Brezhnev was the leader. Those who were six months after him, a trifle. Andropov ruled, but died quickly. I don't want to talk about Judas Humpbacked. The one who drank the USSR on drink, did only good by leaving Vladimir Putin in his place.
  • knn54
    knn54 26 June 2020 18: 34 New
    12
    In 1953, a truce was signed, but the peace treaty has not been concluded so far. That is, the war is formally considered unfinished. And the hostilities ended where they started - on the 38th parallel.
    In 1965, the United States will step on the rake again, but already in Vietnam.
    1. 210ox
      210ox 26 June 2020 18: 42 New
      16
      I agree with the author that the States are thoughtful about plans for a war against the USSR. Based on the results of the war in Korea.
      1. tihonmarine
        tihonmarine 26 June 2020 19: 05 New
        12
        Quote: 210ox
        I agree with the author that the States are thoughtful about plans for a war against the USSR. Based on the results of the war in Korea.

        I agree completely. The states thought that they had become the hegemon in the world, but JV Stalin showed that there is a force in the world that the states cannot handle.
      2. w70
        w70 26 June 2020 21: 42 New
        -12
        Listen, the USSR is not 30 years old, have you got out of the past?
      3. Octopus
        Octopus 27 June 2020 01: 50 New
        +4
        Quote: 210ox
        States pondered over plans for war against the USSR. Based on the results of the war in Korea.

        Unfortunately no.

        The states needed to lose Vietnam in order to understand that a superpower needed an army, not an armed collective farm. Only in the mid-80s did they solve this problem.
  • smaug78
    smaug78 26 June 2020 18: 37 New
    +1
    The last war of Stalin
    Samsonov is immediately visible. And his nonsense:
    The last successful war of Stalin. It was a fair and positive war for Russia. In it, the Russians inflicted a serious defeat on America in the air war and buried the hopes of the US military-political elite for a successful air and nuclear war against Russia.
    After the Korean War, did Stalin have unsuccessful wars? And what is the success if you did not achieve the goals stated before the start of the North Korean blitzkrieg? What the hell ... did Kim promise?
    Samsonov’s medicine is over again laughing
    1. polar fox
      polar fox 26 June 2020 18: 44 New
      -1
      Quote: smaug78
      Samsonov is immediately visible. And his nonsense:

      Samsonov’s medicine is over again
      I'm looking forward to a cool article from "Borisik" ... I'll wait, won't?
      1. tihonmarine
        tihonmarine 26 June 2020 19: 08 New
        +9
        Quote: polar fox
        Samsonov’s medicine is over again
        I'm looking forward to a cool article from "Borisik" ... I'll wait, won't?

        And I support the opinion of Samsonov, thank you, well done, competent article.
    2. Octopus
      Octopus 26 June 2020 19: 17 New
      12
      Quote: smaug78
      Samsonov is immediately visible. And his nonsense

      Somewhere in the comments of one of Samsonov's surprisingly calm works on the Western Front, I came across the hypothesis that "Samsonov" is a group of authors with different, so to speak, temperaments.

      Sounds like the truth.

      Apparently, the change of the evil clown again.
    3. pytar
      pytar 26 June 2020 21: 28 New
      +1
      And what is the success if you did not achieve the goals stated before the start of the North Korean blitzkrieg?

      And as I read the article, I ask this question! S. Korea attacked the South, as a result of a bloody war after 3 years, complete ruin and millions of victims, they returned from where they started! What is the victory then? It may be that now South Korea is one of the economic and technological leaders, and Sev. Does Korea look like a reserve of Stalinism?
      It was a fair and positive war for Russia. In it, the Russians inflicted a serious defeat on America ... against Russia.

      And Russia? After all, then there was the USSR .... request A completely different economic, political and even ethnic picture!
  • The comment was deleted.
  • tihonmarine
    tihonmarine 26 June 2020 19: 01 New
    +6
    What a shrewd person was I.V. Stalin, he foresaw that after WWII the West and the USA would not leave the country alone. He managed to create, together with the people, a nuclear and missile shield for posterity. The victory of the USSR led to the collapse of the colonial system, and the main task was completed, to prevent the US from invading and capturing China. The Soviet Union knocked out Japanese troops from China and helped create the PRC, led by the Communist Party. The Americans are still biting their elbows that they signed an agreement on the entry of the USSR into the war against Japan.
    1. Courier
      Courier 26 June 2020 19: 07 New
      -8
      So insightful that after 3 years he was mixed with crap at the 20th congress of the party he had built, his own comrades-in-arms, in his own country.
    2. w70
      w70 26 June 2020 21: 09 New
      -10
      None of us personally knew Stalin, but Leni said that Stalin was shit
      1. Far B
        Far B 27 June 2020 02: 00 New
        +5
        but Leni said that Stalin was shit
        Leni Riefenstahl? To you personally? Over a glass of tea? I envy the wide circle of your acquaintances. Although Leni is still a woman, therefore "she" and "spoke". Incidentally, she knew Hitlar well, but Stalin is still unlikely.
        Or are you talking about the so-called. Lenin's testament? So there, too, the word "shit" is missing. Pichalka.
        In short, you puzzled me.
    3. your1970
      your1970 27 June 2020 10: 34 New
      0
      Quote: tihonmarine
      the main task is completed, not to let the US invade and to seize China.
      -And the United States could ??? at least in theory ??? well, well ....
  • Courier
    Courier 26 June 2020 19: 03 New
    +7
    The Cold War ended with the victory of the United States.
    The GDP of South Korea is equal to the GDP of modern Russia.
    1. gsev
      gsev 27 June 2020 14: 59 New
      0
      Quote: Courier
      The GDP of South Korea is equal to the GDP of modern Russia.

      Nevertheless, without the permission of the United States, the president of the South Caucasus cannot organize a train trip from Seoul to the nearest border crossing of the DPRK. That is, the decisions of the president of South Korea can be canceled by the duty general of the US army. Southernerhood of Southerners is certainly a bit more than that of the hetman of Ukraine in 1918. Then the decisions of the hetman on the official letterhead and seal, any German lieutenant had the right to cancel by oral order. DPRK has been independent of China, the United States and Russia since at least 1953.
      1. unknown
        unknown 28 June 2020 07: 05 New
        +1
        North Korea is even funnier.
        The dollars that go to Asia are printed locally.
        In North Korea.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Courier
    Courier 26 June 2020 19: 10 New
    -8
    I propose to return Stalin, send people to the taiga, to wooden huts, build the Okhotsk-Baltic Canal, from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Finland.
    1. Sanya Terek
      Sanya Terek 26 June 2020 19: 56 New
      10
      Judging by the number of criminal cases recently initiated for embezzlement on a particularly large scale, convicts could also build a bridge to the moon. But we are trying not to offend thieves - the minimum fine, suspended sentence. But they would really be punished - there would not be enough space in the Gulag.
      1. tihonmarine
        tihonmarine 26 June 2020 21: 15 New
        +4
        Quote: Sanya Tersky
        But they would really be punished - there would not be enough space in the Gulag.

        Well, why, you can resume the necessary construction project "Transpolar highway" project 501-503. There is enough space for all.
        1. your1970
          your1970 27 June 2020 10: 36 New
          +2
          Quote: tihonmarine
          Quote: Sanya Tersky
          But they would really be punished - there would not be enough space in the Gulag.

          Well, why, you can resume the necessary construction project "Transpolar highway" project 501-503. There is enough space for all.
          -And remind me: why did they leave her so urgently - so even the locomotives and rolling stock (always needed on the farm !!!) were abandoned and did not overtake ?????
    2. Mordvin 3
      Mordvin 3 26 June 2020 20: 06 New
      13
      Quote: Courier
      I propose to return Stalin, send people to the taiga, to wooden huts, build the Okhotsk-Baltic Canal, from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Finland.

      It would be nice. Today, theater director Serebrennikov for theft of 128 million rubles was sentenced to three years probation. For this amount, in theory, he and his accomplices should dig more than one kilometer of the channel.
      1. tihonmarine
        tihonmarine 26 June 2020 21: 17 New
        +7
        Quote: Mordvin 3
        It would be nice. Today, theater director Serebrennikov for theft of 128 million rubles was sentenced to three years probation. For this amount, in theory, he and his accomplices should dig more than one kilometer of the channel.

        And according to the law of the USSR for the theft of more than 50 rubles, an exceptional measure of social protection.
      2. Svarog
        Svarog 26 June 2020 22: 02 New
        +4
        Today, theater director Serebrennikov for the theft of 128 million rubles was sentenced to three years probation

        1. Mordvin 3
          Mordvin 3 26 June 2020 22: 12 New
          +3
          The namesake, I read this work of Konstantinov before the release of the film. By the way, one of our enterprise owners was nicknamed Antibiotic, also Viktor Palych.
    3. w70
      w70 26 June 2020 21: 48 New
      -8
      Yeah, in 33, Stalin sent people with wheelbarrows and shovels to build the Belomorkanal, while in the United States such work was already done by excavators. And still our undergrowth considers Stalin a brilliant manager
      1. Mordvin 3
        Mordvin 3 26 June 2020 22: 17 New
        +6
        Quote: w70
        Yeah, in 33, Stalin sent people with wheelbarrows and shovels to build the Belomorkanal, while in the United States such work was already done by excavators.

        What do you want them to work on the "Stalinets" tractors?
      2. Far B
        Far B 27 June 2020 02: 06 New
        +5
        You really bite into the head of the Mesozoic mosquito. In those same years, in ShyShyA, for a bucks and a bowl of soup a day, millions of job loss people built thousands of kilometers of autobahn. Great depression, panimaish. Photo Documents - Full Internet. Enlighten!
        1. 2ez
          2ez 28 June 2020 12: 43 New
          0
          There was really hunger ... But they only remember our famine, trying to turn their attention to others. As well as the results of World War II! This is politics! True, now they have stepped on their own rake, demolished monuments, the descendants of slaves in a trend ... They did not smell the revolution? Let them sing their song now!
          1. Far B
            Far B 28 June 2020 12: 46 New
            0
            About real hunger, I did not write. They will not believe about open tombs. Well, okay.
            1. 2ez
              2ez 28 June 2020 12: 54 New
              +3
              They are really trying to hush up their story, trashing someone else's! There is a magnificent book by the scandalous Russian author Alexander Burovsky "The White's Burden". I recommend. He wrote about the riots of blacks there. This is not a racist book! It's just that such facts are cited there: at the time of the beginning of the Civil War in ShyShyA, more than 60% of slaves were freed in the South !!! And they did not leave the plantations anywhere! And often together with the former owners they fought off the bandits. And also the fact that the three largest tribes of Indians fought on the side of ... southerners !!! Something does not grow together in their history ... Now the revolutionary sentiments have begun ... And what will happen next? Even if everything settles down NOW, will they not get the problem anywhere? They will again fight for the rights of our small peoples ...
      3. Revival
        Revival 27 June 2020 03: 46 New
        +3
        Yeah, just at that time, you can tell Americans working for food on public works about excavators.
        They would listen to you, but not for long ...
      4. gsev
        gsev 28 June 2020 09: 21 New
        +3
        Quote: w70
        Yeah, in 33, Stalin sent people with wheelbarrows and shovels to build the Belomorkanal,

        It was impossible to build such a channel with wheelbarrows and shovels without excavators. Technique had to be purchased for gold in the United States, and it’s another matter that it was used inefficiently and was scarce during the construction of the White Sea Canal. Walking excavators simply drowned in the swamps. And during the construction of the Moscow Canal, most of the work was done using technology. As a child, I listened to the terrifying stories of the builder of this canal. I didn’t understand much, I forgot a lot, they didn’t tell me much. But then it was so different from the idea of ​​the rationality of socialism, that I thought that the narrator composed everything. A book by Dmitrovlag was published on the success of the construction of the Moscow-Volga Canal with a circulation of approximately 10 copies. According to the Moscow name channel, it was indicated there that a large volume was carried out in a mechanized way. There should have been a book on the construction of the White Sea Canal. The main trouble was not in wheelbarrows and shovels, but in the fact that the work on this construction did not justify the work expended and human lives due to the lack of thought in the project's economics.
  • smaug78
    smaug78 26 June 2020 19: 30 New
    0
    Quote: polar fox
    Quote: smaug78
    Samsonov is immediately visible. And his nonsense:

    Samsonov’s medicine is over again
    I'm looking forward to a cool article from "Borisik" ... I'll wait, won't?

    Can you say something on the topic or so, shake it with a bang, come in?
    1. polar fox
      polar fox 26 June 2020 20: 24 New
      +1
      Quote: smaug78
      Can you say something on the topic or so, shake it with a bang, come in?

      so what with the article then? read, discuss ... or just feces throw talent?
      1. smaug78
        smaug78 26 June 2020 21: 01 New
        0
        After the Korean War, did Stalin have unsuccessful wars? And what is the success if you did not achieve the goals stated before the start of the North Korean blitzkrieg? What the hell ... did Kim promise?

        In addition to waving ura-chuykoy, you also have disclexia ... Or is your memory short?
      2. tihonmarine
        tihonmarine 26 June 2020 21: 19 New
        0
        Quote: polar fox
        so what with the article then? read, discuss ... or just feces throw talent?

        Why discuss "feces droppings" do not need it, they throw them like coal into the furnace of a steamer.
  • iouris
    iouris 26 June 2020 19: 37 New
    -1
    The title has a very bad narrative, given that officially the Russian Federation is the legal successor of a state that is considered Stalinist. The statesmen of their state must be treated with respect. For example, the "Family" is still "respected", although they "get up from their knees."
    1. Aviator_
      Aviator_ 26 June 2020 20: 22 New
      +3
      officially, the Russian Federation is the assignee of a state that is considered to be Stalinist.

      How "Stalinist"? Rather, EBNovskiy.
      1. iouris
        iouris 26 June 2020 23: 25 New
        0
        And when did the anti-family revolution take place, did we miss something? More about this, please.
        1. Aviator_
          Aviator_ 26 June 2020 23: 27 New
          +2
          So I mean it, the Russian Federation is the heiress of EBN, Joseph the Terrible has nothing to do with it.
    2. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 26 June 2020 21: 24 New
      +4
      Quote: iouris
      The "family" is still "respected", although they "get up from their knees."

      The "family" is respected, the one that came after the collapse, but the statesmen of the USSR are treated as if they never existed and the state also did not exist, and there was no history either. Their palace darkens them, and the fear for their dollars in an English bank ..
  • w70
    w70 26 June 2020 20: 14 New
    -9
    Stalin, before his death, mischief to ordinary people, this time to Koreans
    1. bk0010
      bk0010 27 June 2020 00: 14 New
      +4
      Quote: w70
      Stalin, before his death, mischief to ordinary people, this time to Koreans
      How many mistakes you made in Truman!
    2. Far B
      Far B 27 June 2020 02: 09 New
      0
      Damn it. But the Koreans do not even know about it (you go there, tell them, the damned Stalin reached
      1. Revival
        Revival 27 June 2020 03: 53 New
        +2
        Good idea, right!
        w70 is so worried about the DPRK that he needs to go there faster and read an intelligible lecture to poor people about how bad Stalin is bad and how this war hurt them and how it was all wrong ..
        Good luck!
        PS
        Something tells me that they will immediately become grateful to him, that he will remain with them in love and care ...
  • Revolver
    Revolver 26 June 2020 20: 35 New
    +5
    I am not going to discuss the motives and the truth of all the parties involved. But here what I would like to understand is why Stalin did not prevent the intervention of the West, although he could do it with one radiogram.
    America formally did not participate in the war. The war was fought on behalf of and under the flag of the United Nations, and the United States only provided the United Nations with the forces and means, as well as many other Western and pro-Western countries. Without UN approval, virtually none of these countries would have climbed under their own flag. And in the USA there were opponents of this war, including congressmen and senators, and it would have been much harder for Truman to get money from the Congress for the war, and you won’t get much without money.
    The USSR had a veto power in the UN Security Council. When the Korean question was brought up for discussion, the delegation of the USSR defiantly left, slamming the door. Formally, because China was not represented by the mainland, but by the Taiwanese delegation. But this demarche could not take place without instructions from the very top, and accordingly the Ministry of Foreign Affairs could not help but get the consent of Stalin at least, but most likely acted on the direct instructions of Stalin, because the issue was too serious. If Stalin wanted to prevent or at least impede and delay the intervention of the West and specifically the USA, he would order the use of the veto, and the presence of the Taiwan delegation would not care.
    The only logical explanation is that Stalin considered it necessary to test equipment in real battles, but at the same time with minimal risk that a local war would develop into a world war. Well, see what a likely adversary is. But the pain was a primitive explanation, Stalin usually had multilevel plans, but here nothing is visible in the depths.
    But Kim failed. The blitzkrieg did not work, the South Koreans (or rather, the US troops) managed to linger in a small enclave in the very south until the landing of the "UN forces", and as a result, the war, several times going up and down almost all of Korea and smashing it to smithereens and in half, ended about the same place where it began, about 38th parallel.
    1. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 26 June 2020 21: 39 New
      -2
      Quote: Nagan
      And in the USA there were opponents of this war, including congressmen and senators, and it would have been much harder for Truman to get money from the Congress for the war, and you won’t get much without money.

      Because the United States needed this war, China left, they only had Japan, but Korea was next to the USSR, and they wanted to completely capture Korea, both South and North. But Stalin did not need a war, and he did cleverly leaving what exists now. And for the Russian Federation this is a great gift from Stalin.
      1. Revolver
        Revolver 26 June 2020 22: 20 New
        +2
        Quote: tihonmarine
        Because the US needed this war

        And is it that the American imperialists knocked out Kim to start a war?

        Quote: tihonmarine
        Stalin did not need war

        But still, why did not Stalin veto?
        1. Octopus
          Octopus 27 June 2020 01: 27 New
          +3
          Quote: Nagan
          why did not Stalin veto?

          These are widely known circumstances. At comrade Stalin at that moment was counter to the UN, his representative boycotted the Security Council meetings. After another American shame in Berlin 48, he somewhat overestimated the Americans sodacity.
        2. Kronos
          Kronos 27 June 2020 19: 29 New
          0
          Yes, they are South Koreans all the time staged provocations against the north
      2. Octopus
        Octopus 27 June 2020 01: 34 New
        +1
        Quote: tihonmarine
        Because the US needed this war, China left

        Paradoxically, you are partly right. Indeed, after Truman defrauded China and left Berlin the 48th without consequences, more questions were being raised in Congress about treason. Truman felt that he could no longer retreat in front of the Reds (for internal reasons, I emphasize), and climbed to fight, in general, because of nonsense.
        Quote: tihonmarine
        Stalin did not need war

        At comrade Stalin's war with his imperialist encirclement never ended. So when Kim started pouring into his ears that, they say, right now he will show Halder and Manstein how to conduct blitzkriegs, comrade. Stalin could not refuse him.

        It turned out that Comrade Blitzkrieg Kim so-so, did not really grow. Well, okay, it didn’t work and it didn’t work, the Korean women gave birth to new ones, especially the Chinese
      3. Mikhail Ya2
        Mikhail Ya2 27 June 2020 08: 10 New
        +1
        Only the United States left Korea, and if Kim had not started the war, then the United States would not have returned there. So what was the brilliant US plan?
        1. tihonmarine
          tihonmarine 27 June 2020 09: 35 New
          -2
          Quote: Mikhail Ya2
          Only the United States left Korea, and if Kim had not started the war, then the United States would not have returned there. So what was the brilliant US plan?

          There is nothing ingenious, and they left the South in the same way as they left Afghanistan and Iraq "the XNUMX and first US exit." Where the states have gone. they cannot be driven out of there. If you don’t believe, then in addition Germany with Japan and so on. The genius is simple - the seizure, then the cries of democracy, the statement of withdrawal, today a thousand were withdrawn, a thousand were brought in.
          Here is the last example, the withdrawal of troops from Germany (but the third part), but where? To Poland and the Baltic states, and what has changed, as many remain on the border with Russia, and more will be added. Time will pass from Poland to Germany.
      4. The comment was deleted.
    2. Octopus
      Octopus 27 June 2020 01: 45 New
      +1
      Quote: Nagan
      Without UN sanction, practically none of these countries would have climbed under their own flag

      )))
      The UN then, as now, was interested in 0 people. As for all these countries, only Britain and the United States had forces the size of a division or more; the rest simply ran to check in.
      Quote: Nagan
      And in the USA there were opponents of this war, including congressmen and senators,

      You somehow say that most of the opponents of the war in Korea urged not to engage in nonsense, but to gag already in the USSR. It is customary to associate these ideas exclusively with MacArthur and present them as a model of insanity, but such a position was quite respectable at that time.
  • Dr. Frankenstucker
    Dr. Frankenstucker 26 June 2020 20: 44 New
    +3
    What kind of success are we talking about? It was a mutual failure. The war, more precisely, the DB, ended where it began. Three years of futile carnage. The peninsula did not turn red or "democratic". The dull separation of a single nation has remained. "Successful" wars usually end in triumph. For the rest, “success” is invented by engaged “historians”.
    In the West and in the USA, they saw that in the land war with the Russians, the newly created NATO has no chance of victory.


    This pretentious remark was especially amusing. Was it the Chinese and Koreans who impressed NATO so much that it decided not to fight the Russians? Or does "land" mean an exclusively air war?
    1. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 26 June 2020 21: 53 New
      -3
      Quote: Dr. Frankenshtuzer
      What success are we talking about? It was a mutual failure. The war, or rather, the database, ended where it started

      This is a success for the USSR, what do you think that it was possible to wage a great war 5 years after WWII? There was a war, and it would still be, but it was local and with the approval of the USSR, but the main military force was not Soviet troops, but Chinese volunteers, but on the other hand, it was not America, but NATO. And NATO could not, despite its power, defeat North Korea. Well, not the North Koreans coped with NATO. So whose success has been here, think for yourself.
      1. Mikhail Ya2
        Mikhail Ya2 27 June 2020 08: 05 New
        +2
        So China defeated NATO?
      2. Dr. Frankenstucker
        Dr. Frankenstucker 27 June 2020 10: 51 New
        +1
        Quote: tihonmarine
        This is a success for the USSR

        obviously we have different notions of success.

        Quote: tihonmarine
        what do you think that it was possible to wage a great war 5 years after WWII

        and what in my comment led you to such an idea?
        Quote: tihonmarine
        but the main military force was not Soviet military, but Chinese volunteers,

        that's it. It was they who saved Kim's ass in October 1950 after his failed blitzkrieg.
        Quote: tihonmarine
        So whose success has been here, think for yourself.

        If you want to talk about success, then China first.
    2. Octopus
      Octopus 26 June 2020 23: 51 New
      +1
      Quote: Dr. Frankenshtuzer
      What success are we talking about? It was a mutual failure. The war, or rather, the database, ended where it started. Three years of useless slaughter

      Your opponents are right.

      Comrade Stalin exchanged about 50 thousand endlessly expensive American lives for not many interesting no-name free units there. Little disgust, but joy.

      Separate tsimes. At their defeat, the Americans had to learn something, but just elected President Eisenhower, who categorically refused to study. So until their next defeat, Vietnam, the Americans were left without pants, that is, without an army.
      1. gsev
        gsev 28 June 2020 09: 34 New
        0
        Quote: Octopus
        Eisenhower, who categorically refused to study.

        On the contrary, Eisenhower studied with the State Department, the Pentagon and the CIA. The United States did everything in its power to avoid a major war with the PRC. Johnson accidentally changing his elected but murdered president recklessly involved the United States in the escalation of the war with Vietnam.
        1. Octopus
          Octopus 28 June 2020 10: 14 New
          +1
          Quote: gsev
          Eisenhower studied with the State Department, the Pentagon and the CIA

          In China, it was too late to drink Borzh. And well-learned Eisenhower, together with the CIA and the State Department, built communism within 15 minutes of flying time from his own home.


          But it was not the war with China that was meant, but the bankruptcy of the militia-type army, which was more than obvious in Korea. However, Aiki remained an ardent supporter of this concept until the end of his reign. In WWII, it worked fine, why make a professional army?
      2. The comment was deleted.
        1. Octopus
          Octopus 1 July 2020 19: 54 New
          +1
          Quote: make
          in response, as compensation for salvation, from the 46th they began to bullish, and from the 50th they were already openly fighting against the amers.

          You are not right. The candy-bouquet period with the Americans passed quickly, at the beginning of the 45th the Americans were already surprised to write that their prisoners of war, exempted The USSR in Germany, in fact, receive a regime strengthening - the MKK is banned in the USSR.

          As for the war with the Americans, then everything is fine, nothing personal. Comrade All his life, Stalin struggled with the imperialist environment of the young republic of workers and peasants. Only in the late 30s this environment was represented by Finland, the Baltic states, Poland and Romania, so that he fought with them (mostly he fought), and in the mid-40s the USA became the main imperialists, they had to fight with the Yankees. It was also more than successful, by the 48th year the world socialist system was noticeably outperforming the capitalists, at least if it were counted on the head.
    3. Engineer
      Engineer 27 June 2020 09: 21 New
      -2
      The West suffered losses - economic, human, reputational.
      The United States showed everyone how they cannot win a "regular" war
      China has shown willingness to harness the struggle for the ideals of communism.
      On the part of the USSR, there are only one of them
      I think Comrade Stalin could be pleased.
      1. Octopus
        Octopus 27 June 2020 09: 41 New
        -3
        Quote: Engineer
        I think Comrade Stalin could be satisfied.

        Certainly.

        Comrade Stalin was exchanged for resources, while his people were free. So I always exchanged a plus. The only, perhaps, exception is Finland 39, and that is not a fact.

        The fact that Korea is another victory of Stalin and another defeat of the Americans is certain.
      2. tihonmarine
        tihonmarine 27 June 2020 10: 31 New
        0
        Quote: Engineer
        On the part of the USSR, there are only one of them
        I think Comrade Stalin could be pleased.

        The supply of weapons, ammunition and military specialists, including pilots, was supplied by the USSR. And most importantly, the "USSR-China-North Korea bloc" appeared and was tested in practice.
  • Undecim
    Undecim 26 June 2020 20: 48 New
    +4
    Previously, the audience was stuffed with delirium from Samsonov only in the morning, now even in the evening. The story, accessible to a hamster not burdened with intelligence, has been turned into a real dung heap with which all sorts of harassing Samsonovs come out with propaganda similar to today's opus about "an outstanding victory".
    Moreover, the delirium begins with the first paragraphs with the maxim "buried the hopes of the US military-political elite for a successful air and atomic war against Russia."
    In Korea, the United States used the extremely obsolete B-29s, although at that time they had the B-36s, and a year before the end of the Korean War, the B-52s took off. Not to mention the fact that in 1953 the United States had 1000 nuclear bombs that they could drop anywhere in the USSR, and the USSR had 35. And they could only be delivered to the United States theoretically on a copy of the same B-29.
    For enlightenment, it would be good to take Uryapatriot lemmings on an excursion to South Korea and the DPRK. To compare how "winners" and "losers" live.
    1. Revolver
      Revolver 26 June 2020 21: 53 New
      +1
      Quote: Undecim
      In Korea, the United States used the extremely obsolete B-29, although at that time they had the B-36.

      The B-36 was a huge, even larger than the B-29, slowly flying piston engine shed, and, accordingly, an even easier target for the MIG-15. Maybe you meant the B-47? He, of course, faster, but also from the MIG-15 would not have left. In general, in Korea, it turned out that heavy bombers in the era of jet fighters can only operate in clear skies, i.e. complete domination of their fighters in the air.
      1. Octopus
        Octopus 27 June 2020 00: 03 New
        +3
        Quote: Nagan
        a slowly flying shed with piston engines, and, accordingly, an even easier target for the MIG-15.

        In the real world, the MiG-15 could bring down the B-36 at a working altitude and speed only by accident.
        Quote: Nagan
        an even easier target for the MIG-15

        In Korea, the Americans were surprised to learn that if bombers were sent in small groups without fighter escort to bomb tactical targets, there would be a bo-bo. The old-timers, it seems, recalled the word "Schweinfurt", but what it is, where it is, why it is - no one knew for sure.
        Quote: Nagan
        generally in Korea, it turned out that heavy bombers in the era of fighter jets can only operate in clear skies, i.e. complete domination of their fighters in the air.

        Since the Americans had this domination, they bombed more or less everything they wanted.

        What was really unexpected for the Americans - it turned out that strategic aviation, + the atomic bomb, which is still not enough eggs to use, wars do not win. This was damn bad news for the head of the KNS, Bradley, who, along with Eisenhower, had by then optimized to the point that there was only one combat-capable division in the whole army, and even that defective, 82nd landing, without heavy weapons.
    2. tihonmarine
      tihonmarine 26 June 2020 22: 03 New
      +1
      Quote: Undecim
      Previously, the delirium from Samsonov was only fed the audience in the morning, now in the evening.

      But Samsonov touched upon the issue of the Korean War, which began on June 25, 1950. Why didn’t anyone touch on this issue? Many condemn him, but only he wrote about the Korean War, which has been going on for 70 years. You think about these numbers, because everyone here sitting on the site, think about how old we are 70 years old, and the war is still going on. And how many people know where Korea is, but I think a few of us who were in Korea. I don’t know, but I am one of those who have been once to North Korea, and four times to South.
      1. your1970
        your1970 27 June 2020 10: 44 New
        +1
        Quote: tihonmarine
        You think about these numbers, because everyone here sitting on the site, think about how old we are 70 years old, and the war is still going on.
        -formally our war with Japan has not ended, there is no peace treaty. 75 years already ...
    3. Serwid
      Serwid 26 June 2020 22: 11 New
      -3
      Quote: Undecim
      For enlightenment, it would be good to take Uryapatriot lemmings on an excursion to South Korea and the DPRK. To compare how "winners" and "losers" live.
      Reply

      Well, so what's the problem?
    4. AU Ivanov.
      AU Ivanov. 26 June 2020 22: 29 New
      +1
      The war was not going to do good to Koreans. The war was waged in order to provide a cordon sanitaire for the USSR. Now we are naked, but then we had a bulletproof vest in the form of "people's democracies"
    5. Octopus
      Octopus 26 June 2020 23: 44 New
      +2
      Quote: Undecim
      To compare how "winners" and "losers" live.

      Why to Korea? To do this, you can go to Germany, cheaper from central Russia.
  • DeKo
    DeKo 26 June 2020 22: 35 New
    -8
    We have an alternative to Putin. There is Navalny, there is Sobchak. There is Platoshkind, who promised, having become president, to give Crimea to Ukraine and surrender Novorossia. Oh, I forgot about Nemtsov. Not so long ago, his daughter showed diaries where it was clearly written that becoming the president of Russia, he was going to divide it into 4 parts, giving it to Japan, the USA, Germany and England. And the bowels of the earth in general I wanted to recognize as the property of mankind
    1. Mordvin 3
      Mordvin 3 26 June 2020 23: 13 New
      0
      Quote: DeKo
      Platoshkind, who promised, having become president, to give Crimea to Ukraine

      When did he promise this?
      1. DeKo
        DeKo 26 June 2020 23: 15 New
        -5
        Dear, since you answer me, it means that you have Tyrnet and Gogol Mughal. You will find everything there
        1. Mordvin 3
          Mordvin 3 26 June 2020 23: 19 New
          +1
          Quote: DeKo
          Dear, since you answer me, it means that you have Tyrnet and Gogol Mughal. You will find everything there

          Found quite the opposite of what you wrote.
          That is, you are [the annexation of Crimea to Russia - approx. Mixnews] don't you think it's a mistake? "- asked the presenter.
          “No, I don’t think this is a mistake. I think it’s a mistake that we did not recognize the results of the referendum in Donbass, which took place in May 2014. Look at the footage - there were tens of thousands of people.

          https://ok.ru/chestnyfor/topic/70493369554412
          1. DeKo
            DeKo 27 June 2020 07: 27 New
            -2
            That was later. Initially, he promised to return the Crimea. Like Sobchak
            1. Mordvin 3
              Mordvin 3 27 June 2020 09: 00 New
              0
              Quote: DeKo
              That was later. Initially, he promised to return the Crimea.

              I have not found anything like it. A reference, please.
              1. DeKo
                DeKo 28 June 2020 08: 03 New
                -1
                A weak look yourself?
                1. Mordvin 3
                  Mordvin 3 28 June 2020 08: 11 New
                  0
                  Quote: DeKo
                  A weak look yourself?

                  I was looking for. Not found. So either you lay out the confirmation of your words, or you are a chatterbox.
                  1. DeKo
                    DeKo 28 June 2020 08: 36 New
                    -1
                    Look out for the tongue. Yakshi? It was. A month ago. I would not be surprised if he himself deleted his interviews. By the way, he gave them along with a certain mummers Colonel Shendakov
        2. Revival
          Revival 27 June 2020 04: 03 New
          0
          Merged?
          Well no wonder
  • Pavel57
    Pavel57 27 June 2020 00: 39 New
    +2
    Somehow at the level of slogans. A failure at the UN, why did the leader allow it?
  • 2ez
    2ez 27 June 2020 02: 06 New
    +3
    But if you look with your eyes fixed, you can see that Russia, in its half-new, recent and super-latest history, had different outcomes of military conflicts.
    1. The Patriotic War of 1812 - victory over Napoleon. But how can I say ... Paris, of course, was taken, but all the laurels themselves were taken by the naglitsy by victory near Waterloo.
    2. The war of 1853-1855. The mere fact that it was conducted ONLY in Russia suggests that this is practically a defeat, despite the mass heroism of Russian soldiers.
    3. Bulgarian campaign. We stopped a couple of kilometers from Istanbul, after the statements of the Gayrop governments that they would immediately join the war. Bottom line - freed "brothers", and FUCK ???
    4. The Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905. Well, the mere fact that, following the results of this war, we were left without those very islands, suggests that Russia lost ...
    5. The First World War of 1914-1918. I won’t talk much, there are more knowledgeable people here. Just to remind you of one thing: Russia did not sign the Versailles peace. By that time, to put it mildly, it already existed ... And this war was waged for Russia, mainly on the territory of Russia itself ...
    6. Now, attention! It was a civil war, but also with the interventionists, of whom a great many gathered on the cold "corpse" of the Russian Empire. Dare EVERYONE! "From the taiga to the British seas!"
    7. Khalgin-Gol and Lake Khasan. There were border conflicts, after which the Japanese did not dare to open a "second front" in the east, although in 1941 the Germans were standing near Moscow ...
    8. Then there were: Finland, Bessarabia, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Belarus, Ukraine. The goals of all the campaigns were achieved, at what cost is another matter.
    9. The Great Patriotic War. Yes, the first stage of the war is a terrible tragedy for the country! BUT!!! We survived !!! And rolled the enemy back! And they drove a nail into the coffin lid !!! Winners !!! And this is undeniable !!!
    10. The Korean conflict of 1950-1953. Pilots, anti-aircraft gunners and other advisers fought. I think they completed their task. Both military and political.
    11. Cuba. Everything is clear here, we removed the missiles from Turkey.
    12. Vietnam, Angola, Mozambique and other hot spots. Local wars, but wars! And professionals were needed there. They were there ...
    13. Hungary, Czechoslovakia, 1956, 1968. Everyone here has their own opinion, but, from the point of view of military art, everything was done very competently.
    14. Afghanistan. The most incomprehensible war. On the one hand, perfectly organized operations. On the other hand, they left, it was not clear, having completed, or not, combat missions. But this is the time of tagging, but here the story is completely different.
    Results: Tsarist Russia, having a much more powerful economic and human potential (by its time), could not get a single positive result (with the possible exception of the Central Asian conquests of the middle of the XNUMXth century).
    The USSR, being ALL time surrounded by hostile forces, was able to receive positive dividends in almost all conflicts. This means that the military, and economic, and diplomatic components in these situations were correct.
  • tatra
    tatra 27 June 2020 04: 32 New
    -2
    The enemies of the Communists in the West, in Europe, on the territory of the USSR, libelously accuse the Communists of crimes, and they never admit guilt for their crimes.
    In 1950, the South Korean authorities massacred hundreds of thousands of "traitors"
    Grave after grave, South Korea begins to learn the truth about the cold-blooded destruction of hundreds of thousands of left-wing supporters and defenseless peasants in the summer of 1950.
    This happened at the beginning of the Korean War, when the troops of the northerners moved deep into the peninsula. On its territory, the southerners' army and police took all prisoners out of prisons and shot them. Then the corpses were dumped in trenches, hastily covering the ground in front of the new party. Dead bodies were also filled with corpses or thrown into the sea.
    Among those killed were women and children. Many of those held in prisons were illiterate peasants who were arrested on suspicion of "sympathizing" with the Communists. Most have not even been charged, let alone a trial.


    There are cases when army units surrounded and destroyed entire villages, again, on suspicion of leftist views, although the peasants did not even hear about communism.
    The mass executions were carried out with a "preventive" purpose: to prevent the southern left from uniting with the troops of the northerners. They only took a few weeks. Representatives from the United States were often present.
    1. Octopus
      Octopus 27 June 2020 06: 45 New
      +2
      Quote: tatra
      Grave after grave, South Korea begins to learn the truth about the cold-blooded destruction of hundreds of thousands of left-wing supporters and defenseless peasants in the summer of 1950.

      You are not quite right.

      The fact that Lee Sy Man and Park Jung-hee were those other bunnies is no secret to anyone in South Korea. Yes, there is a discussion about the specific number of left-wing suppressants by them, but no one has long denied the fact of repression. As well as the fact that any mass repression is carried out with a fair amount of search.

      Another thing is that Korean critics of right-wing excesses have one problem, unlike their brothers in reason in the West. Namely SevKorea. It’s quite difficult to expose the bloody regime when your compatriots, who are not covered by this regime, eat grass.

      In order to seriously make claims for the destruction of the left, you need to know nothing about the option of victory for the left. Korean good people have not succeeded so far.
  • Mikhail Ya2
    Mikhail Ya2 27 June 2020 07: 54 New
    +2
    It was as if he had visited Soviet political information.
    It’s hard to argue with the facts only: S. Korea was a clear aggressor, the United States introduced troops under the auspices of the UN.
    1. Octopus
      Octopus 27 June 2020 08: 12 New
      +1
      Quote: Mikhail Ya2
      It’s hard to argue with facts alone: ​​S. Korea was a clear aggressor

      ))
      This is not a fact. On both sides there were bloodthirsty war hamsters, who were trying to force their patrons to free the people of Korea from the neighboring anti-people occupation regime.

      Soviet fighting hamsters, one cannot but admit it, were much more convincing. As a matter of fact, the Americans in general and MacArthur in particular in the field of the creation of colonial armies were a negative value, so it is difficult to expect a different result.
    2. andrew42
      andrew42 30 June 2020 18: 53 New
      0
      C. Korea was waging an anti-colonial war, it was just that the Japanese colonizers were replaced by the Americans, and between them, "for legitimacy", the UN members emerged. In Vietnam, there was the same scheme: the French colonialists - the puppet regime of South Vietnam - the American aggressors. But the Vietnamese turned out to be more successful and more persistent, although in fact they were in less favorable conditions than S. Korea with the Chinese volunteers.
  • wow
    wow 27 June 2020 10: 33 New
    +1
    And so it was. History is a more precise science than physics and mathematics. It does not admit "if". AND IS as it WAS !!! Therefore, all modern "blah blah blah", and even more so all these computer versions of "alternative history" in shooters for those who are "15 -" are utter crap ....
  • dgonni
    dgonni 27 June 2020 15: 29 New
    -1
    Well, it is only Samsonov who can defeat, in the best case, a draw, call Stalin's victory!
    Stalin, unlike Samsonov, understood that the Second World War in fact ended in the defeat of the USSR! And the time of complete defeat is a matter of time. For the goal of capturing all of Europe has not been achieved. And the formed NATO bloc really surpassed the alliance in all respects and forced to spend colossal funds on defense. Therefore, by the way, under Stalin, they did not celebrate Victory Day!
    The situation in Korea is the same. The main goal of uniting Korea into one state under the banner of the revolution has failed. The USSR received another weak economy for its deprivation without having any positive surpluses. And yet, Stalin clearly imagined the power of the United States and therefore did not even think of getting into a fight directly. Although in Korea, the Seyeryan fought not with the states but with UN troops! And such an incident occurred due to the stupid position of the Soviet delegation to the UN.
    What did the war in Korea show? That at a small theater of operations with the massive use of infantry in the form of Chinese comrades and with the support of aviation in the form of the best aces of the USSR, you can play a draw. In cases of a great war, the coalition will even crush de nato with the quality and quantity of modern armed forces!
    Therefore, it was not a victory. And dada is not a draw.!
    1. Kronos
      Kronos 27 June 2020 19: 39 New
      0
      Stalin never set any goal of capturing the whole of Europe except agitation, of course, from madmen
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Signore Tomato
    Signore Tomato 27 June 2020 21: 35 New
    +1
    Stalin and his follower and ally Beria did the impossible - they tore the country from the plow and sent to outer space!
    However, the liberal clique to the owners of the planet Earth did not like it much and both hands were destroyed by the hands of a corn-beetle ...
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 29 June 2020 10: 05 New
    +2
    Quote: pytar
    And as I read the article, I ask this question! S. Korea attacked the South, as a result of a bloody war after 3 years, complete ruin and millions of victims, they returned from where they started! What is the victory then? It may be that now South Korea is one of the economic and technological leaders, and Sev. Does Korea look like a reserve of Stalinism?

    1. Did one Korea attack another? Even if this is true, then this is a civil war - an internal affair of Korea.
    2. The civil war in Korea ended in a few days with minimal loss and without destruction.
    3. Then the United States intervened in other people's internal affairs, and this is aggression in accordance with international law. A small backward state was attacked by a global nuclear superpower, destroyed the country and carried out genocide over its people. But the nuclear superpower was not able to defeat the small state and a measure was established. I have never seen such a world before.
    4. South Korea has never beaten and will never be any leader - this is the US protectorate and all of them have more or less successful copying of its tread. It is an example of unsustainable development, importing 150 million tons of oil annually. eq oil and gas. Without the United States, it will either find a new tread or disappear from the face of the world in less than a year.
    5. North Korea is a unique small state independent of great powers in the world. An example of sustainable development only by one's own forces in conditions of severe blockade. They have 6 times less cultivated land per person than in Bulgaria, they do not consume any gas and only 0,6 million tons of oil per year. With their children, they developed their own ICBMs and thermonuclear weapons, and in the first place in Asia they lived. area per person.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  • andrew42
    andrew42 30 June 2020 13: 11 New
    0
    And Stalin personally, in terms of the Korean War, is a young man! He was not frightened by the atomic bomb, and did not climb on the rampage, but quite accurately worked the new gendarme of the world Judecracy in the nose and in the teeth. By the way, a special thank you to the Chinese - but these were on the rise, what is called "passionary rise." The 70s can not be considered at all - on free technologies and loans from the United States it was still not possible to build such a thing. It is strange that the Tower of Babel was not built "to spite the communists".).
  • MIRA
    MIRA 2 August 2020 17: 41 New
    +1
    I read everything below. What rubbish in everyone's head. Putin, Goodilin, Stalin, Beria, Zhukov, Chernenko, etc. Don't want to list. There is only one opinion, which I support, that at the moment there is NO alternative to Putin. Put a saucepan on your head, like the Ukrainians, and jump across Red Square. NOTHING will change overnight. It takes time and not 2-3 years, but 10-15 years. previous "Politbury" completely destroyed the country. Putin has recreated the sovereignty and statehood of Russia. And only for that he needs to be thanked. And it took 20 years. How do you want? In two years to restore the economy, which was completely destroyed by Gorbachev and Yeltsin? This, unfortunately, does not happen!
    Domestic policy depends not only on the President, but also on you and me. But He is trying to do at least something, even if not everything succeeds, there is tremendous resistance from the liberals who have broken through to power. But He's on the right track. Or would you like to GO TO UKRAINE? This will be quickly ensured for us, we will not have time to look back, and we will all be an appendage of amers, sores and others like them. "Gays", pedophiles and other evil spirits - "their democracy" will walk the streets. The economy will be operated by both our thieves (they still exist) and "foreign guests".
    We need to educate young people, teach them to love Russia, since it is destined to be born in it, Teach the history of our country. To study international history in order to understand the processes that are taking place before our eyes. Only the REAL HISTORY, without embellishment and fiction. We must all rally together and work so that Russia becomes better than it is now, and not whine on the couch, throwing mud at Putin. It is not easy, but who said that it will be easy after the 80-90s, before the "zero" years. For 25-30 years we all together pissed them away together, sorry for the expression. Maybe it's time to get out of the toilet room and direct your energy to improve the country, to help, and not shit the President.
    All the best.
    1. Alexander Naydenov
      Alexander Naydenov 22 August 2020 21: 20 New
      0
      rightly said.
  • Alexander Naydenov
    Alexander Naydenov 22 August 2020 21: 18 New
    0
    moronic, deceitful name, because of this I did not even read the article - from the title the policy of the article is clear - to shit Stalin. the name should be this: an attempt by the West, represented by the United States, to unleash another war against the USSR, but this time a nuclear one, through the war in Korea.
  • misti1973
    misti1973 24 August 2020 13: 38 New
    0
    If Stalin had not captured half of Europe, then there would have been no problems with America. And I would not say that this is a pure victory. Now, if the entire Korean peninsula would become "red" ... And look how the South Korea and in what ... North :) "By the fruits of their knowledge" - this is to talk about "ideas" and "great leaders." Lukashenka is the same Stalin only of the 21st century. Well, so what? He looks pale somehow. The idea is always one "live yourself and let others live." Stalin never did that! He is an occupier, and wherever the USSR climbed, no special economic growth was observed. He also built the USSR by military methods, used people as a resource and was, by the way, very wasteful.
  • Lewww
    Lewww 21 September 2020 09: 25 New
    0
    The Korean War began seventy years ago. Stalin's last successful war.
    Calling it "Stalin's war" is completely ridiculous. Korea received assistance from military equipment and specialists. Army formations of the SA were not introduced into this country.
    In it, the Russians inflicted a serious defeat on America in an air war and buried the hopes of the US military-political elite for a successful air and atomic war against Russia.
    Nothing of the kind, the United States both nurtured the idea of ​​a nuclear strike on the USSR before the events in Korea, and continued preparations for war after the events.
    Simply, following the events in Korea, the strategy for delivering a nuclear strike was revised.