Military Review

Azerbaijan's Defense Ministry spoke about the logistics of providing Russian peacekeepers in Karabakh

48

On November 28, servicemen of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, as well as automobile and special equipment, arrived from Russia to Azerbaijan by rail in order to then be transferred to places of service. The Azerbaijani Defense Ministry spoke about the logistics of providing Russian peacekeepers in Karabakh.


Information about this appeared on the official page of the department on Facebook.

The provision of the Russian military contingent with everything necessary is carried out in accordance with the protocol signed between Moscow and Baku.

The personnel and equipment of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, crossing the border, went through border and customs procedures. The cargo intended for the peacekeepers was delivered to the Barda settlement by rail through Baku. Then the wagons were unloaded, and their contents were sent by cars along the Barda - Agdam - Stepanakert route.

People, equipment and cargo are part of the Russian peacekeeping contingent, which is entering Nagorno-Karabakh in accordance with a trilateral agreement signed by representatives of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia.

In the message of the Ministry of Defense of Azerbaijan, Stepanakert was named Khankendi, and the unrecognized Republic of Artsakh was named the Nagorno-Karabakh region of the Republic of Azerbaijan.

On November 9, the heads of Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia signed a trilateral agreement that ended the war in the region. This agreement is still actively discussed by both its supporters and critics.
Photos used:
Ministry of Defense of Russia
48 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Starover_Z
    Starover_Z 30 November 2020 11: 33
    +8
    On November 9, the heads of Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia signed a trilateral agreement that ended the war in the region. This agreement is still actively discussed by both its supporters and critics.

    Well, right! And then create groups following the example of the "Minsk agreements", so things will continue to be like "swan, crayfish and pike"!
  2. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 30 November 2020 11: 38
    +12
    The Azerbaijani side fully complies with the signed agreements and this is good. This means that in the future there will be no problems with the delivery of goods to the peacekeepers (I hope!).
  3. bessmertniy
    bessmertniy 30 November 2020 11: 41
    +5
    Well, God forbid, the peacekeepers will not create problems in the future - neither during transit, nor provocations.
  4. alexmach
    alexmach 30 November 2020 11: 54
    +1
    Still wondering, what about the Turks?
    1. Antifreeze
      Antifreeze 30 November 2020 12: 38
      +18
      As observers, according to the protocol.
    2. Polymer
      Polymer 1 December 2020 06: 28
      0
      Quote: alexmach
      Still wondering, what about the Turks?

      And the Turks, it seems, "gave a ride". It looks like this now. Erdogan is still going to send his troops to Azerbaijan, and Russia is already there, quietly moving through the territory. Maybe Aliyev is really much smarter than we thought before?
      1. alexmach
        alexmach 1 December 2020 11: 29
        +1
        Maybe Aliyev is really much smarter than we thought before?

        It seems to me that at that level there is absolutely no place for fools, and if they get there, they do not stay for a long time, but he is still a "ruler" in the second generation. But it is still a little too early to judge. We have to wait another week or two for complete clarity.
  5. Disant
    Disant 30 November 2020 12: 02
    +1
    the author, could have posted a photo not fifteen years ago from the exercises ..
    This is where the Ministry of Defense posted such photos? give me a reference
    1. seregatara1969
      seregatara1969 30 November 2020 14: 10
      0
      http://yandex.ru/clck/jsredir?from=yandex.ru%3Bimages%2Fsearch%3Bimages%3B%3B&text=&etext=9104.5MPqpkBq_nytpG1ibRYfkitQZcH6EpACeNFR1TwEg5Q.e411f363b37ab7e52173562db56f4aad82dc4d53&uuid=&state=iric5OQ0sS2054x1_o8yG9mmGMT8WeQxqpuwa4Ft4KVzd9aE_Y4Dfw,,&data=eEwyM2lDYU9Gd1VROE1ZMXhZYkJTUU52bGthWTVFUG1sdG5ySFFzel90Xy03OVdVVGV3MEYyYkpSaFlDdFVpNGhJUzc0UDU3MXNOTjVvNjFQUGxVaS1DTDBCRXlvd0lXREpPUUszTVBaRUZ5YlFFdmlIQXNodyws&sign=845f888aa6f57515fefc9da5c4bdd314&keyno=IMGS_0&b64e=2&l10n=ru
    2. Recon
      Recon 30 November 2020 19: 23
      +1
      Quote: Disant
      This is where the Ministry of Defense posted such photos?


      I would not post such photos in the place of the Moscow Region, just blood from my eyes.
    3. Kuzmitsky
      6 December 2020 19: 00
      0
      I accidentally came in today, and here they are asking for a link. I don’t mind, catch it: https://structure.mil.ru/mission/peacekeeping_operations.htm. I also loved picture books as a child. By the way, if you didn't know, the RF Ministry of Defense has its own website. There they have many different photographs.
  6. kotdavin4i
    kotdavin4i 30 November 2020 13: 26
    0
    Here's a video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsxFibIKUQI&feature=emb_logo
  7. Evil 55
    Evil 55 30 November 2020 13: 43
    +1
    That is why, due to the peculiarities of regional logistics, Nagorno-Karabakh was administratively transferred to Azerbaijan during the Soviet era ..
    1. Tatyana
      Tatyana 30 November 2020 14: 59
      -3
      Quote: Evil 55
      That is why, due to the peculiarities of regional logistics, Nagorno-Karabakh was administratively transferred to Azerbaijan during the Soviet era ..

      At the same time, when the USSR was formed, the Bolsheviks did not need to divide the territory of the former Republic of Ingushetia into the so-called titular national Soviet republics with an unspecified right of their secession from the USSR.

      By the way, this idea - the administrative division of the territory of Ingushetia along ethnic lines - belonged to the West and was introduced into absolutely all Russian political parties of that time in Russia. Wherein the implementation of this SEPARATIST idea in Russia was the MAIN condition of the West for financial support of each Russian party afloat and in its struggle for power in Ingushetia from abroad.
      This was done at the expense of infringing on the rights of the Russian people and its statehood and, in the end, served as a time bomb for the collapse of the country.
      1. Reviews
        Reviews 30 November 2020 17: 19
        +4
        Quote: Tatiana
        this idea - the administrative division of the territory of Ingushetia along ethnic lines - belonged to the West and was introduced into absolutely all Russian political parties of that time in Russia. Wherein the implementation of this SEPARATIST idea in Russia was the MAIN condition of the West to financially support each Russian party afloat

        Themselves invented this nonsense or suggested who?
        1. Tatyana
          Tatyana 30 November 2020 20: 19
          0
          If you don’t know something from the history of our country, it doesn’t mean that they are telling you nonsense!
          Find the PROGRAMS of the 10 leading Russian political parties of the February and October 1917 coups - and see for yourself!

          Study the history of our country in more detail from different angles - especially on the national question!
          1. Reviews
            Reviews 30 November 2020 20: 34
            0
            Quote: Tatiana
            If you don’t know something from the history of our country, it doesn’t mean that they are telling you nonsense!
            Find the PROGRAMS of the 10 leading Russian political parties of the February and October 1917 coups - and see for yourself!

            Study the history of our country in more detail from different angles - especially on the national question!

            It is clear that they themselves came up with nonsense and you yourself believe in it. It's funny, yes.
            1. Tatyana
              Tatyana 30 November 2020 21: 15
              0
              Everything is clear with you! The pursuit of historical and political knowledge is not your path.

              I found for you in my home library the book you need on this issue:
              Starikov N. Who finances the collapse of Russia? From Decembrists to Mujahideen. - SPb .: Peter, 2016 .-- 288 p .: ill.
              Chapter XI. Who wrote the programs of our parties. - See pp. 225-248.
              1. Polymer
                Polymer 1 December 2020 06: 20
                0
                Quote: Tatiana
                I found for you in my home library the book you need on this issue:

                Starikov, of course, is an interesting writer, but on this issue the authority from him is so-so. You would give a reference to Lenin's PSS ...
                Unification according to the national-territorial principle was not a "wishlist" of the Bolsheviks, but the only way to reassemble an ALREADY DECLINED empire. It was the nationalists in the future republics who were the most ardent opponents of unification. Thanks to the victory of the nationalists supported by the West, Poland and Finland did not enter the USSR. It was the West-sponsored nationalists who actively participated in the collapse of the Union.
                1. Tatyana
                  Tatyana 1 December 2020 11: 45
                  +1
                  We talked about the programs of 10 leading political parties in Russia at that time. N. Starikov cites (quotes) these programs of theirs in this chapter of his book and points to their common feature - namely, the fragmentation of the territory of Russia along ethnic lines, including the Bolsheviks.
                  This was the main condition for the West's support for these parties for these parties to come to power in Russia in their struggle for power. And the Bolsheviks were no exception !!!
                  You write yourself
                  Quote: Polymer
                  It was the nationalists in the future republics who were the most ardent opponents of unification. Thanks to the victory of the nationalists supported by the West, Poland and Finland did not enter the USSR. It was the West-sponsored nationalists who actively participated in the collapse of the Union.

                  And if you read Lenin's works when establishing Soviet power in relation to the Russian people, then your hair will stand on end because of his Russophobia, like mine when I read this. In a technical university, we, students, were not allowed to study these works, only in graduate school on the list of independent familiarization with Lenin's works on nat. questions for passing the candidate exam in m / l. philosophy.
                  As a result, thanks to Lenin and his struggle for power, the Russian question in Soviet Russia arose in all its "glory".
                  1. Arpad
                    Arpad 1 December 2020 11: 50
                    0
                    Quote: Tatiana
                    And if you read Lenin's works when establishing Soviet power in relation to the Russian people, then your hair will stand on end because of his Russophobia, like mine when I read this.

                    Tatyana, are you against Lenin?
                    you can't be half pregnant - tapa agrees with this, but not with that.
                    Why did the founder of scientific communism and the world's first socialist state not please you?
                    For disagreeing with the course of Lenin and the party during the reign of the father of nations, you would warm the felling in the Varkuta area with your hot breath, and this is at best.
                    So say thanks to the restructuring. otherwise, with their hair standing on end, they would still be promoting the ideas of Lenin and his brilliant course in the village clubs.
                    1. Tatyana
                      Tatyana 1 December 2020 12: 04
                      0
                      Quote: Arpad
                      So say thanks to the restructuring. otherwise, with their hair standing on end, they would still be promoting the ideas of Lenin and his brilliant course in the village clubs.

                      I passed my candidate exams in philosophy in graduate school just in Soviet times with an "EXCELLENT" grade - by the way, the only one out of 25 people being examined!
                      Of the 24 people being examined, the majority - almost all of them - have "produced" the works of the classics of the film industry just using explanatory dictionaries on political science and philosophy.
                      1. Vladimir247
                        Vladimir247 1 December 2020 13: 42
                        +1
                        There is only one question ... in the Second World War, our republics were the guarantee of our Victory, and it seems that the moment was more suitable than ever before - to leave the USSR. But come on ... no one came out. On the contrary, we rallied and survived. And Armenians and Azerbaijanis stood shoulder to shoulder.
                        The glorious "democratic" time has come ... and here you are ... belay republics are just the same should scatter. And the 91st referendum ... why remember about it. It's Lenin's fault ... he reached out, "damned", after 70 years ... laughing
                        Your reasoning is ridiculous, by God ...
                      2. Tatyana
                        Tatyana 1 December 2020 14: 20
                        +1
                        Quote: Vladimir247
                        Your reasoning is ridiculous, by God ...

                        This is ridiculous to someone who looks at our history logically from the position of a metaphysical philosophical method, and not a dialectical-materialistic method. Those. without delving into the internal political processes in the country and their causes and consequences.

                        Under Stalin, the party had iron discipline. Namely, members of the party were criminally responsible for failures in the work entrusted by the party to the communist to build socialism in the country.
                        If you want, a communist careerist, a high post in the country - be responsible for the performance of the work entrusted to you by the party with the HEAD - up to execution!
                        Chirchev this Stalinist canceled criminal liability of party leaders for their personal failures in work.
                        And this despite the fact that most of the true communists died on the fronts of the Second World War / WWII, and the party ranks, when their numbers were replenished, began to clog up not so much with ideological as with communist-minded careerists-opportunists.
                        If Stalin had not cleared the party ranks of Trotskyists in 1937-38, the USSR could have lost the hot WWII to the West back in 1941, and not after the Cold War in 1991.
                      3. Tatyana
                        Tatyana 1 December 2020 14: 47
                        0
                        Quote: Vladimir247
                        The glorious "democratic" time has come ... and here you are ... it turns out that the republics should just scatter. And the 91st referendum ... why remember about it. It's Lenin's fault ... he reached out, "damned", after 70 years ...

                        Development of SOVIET Russia, the world's first socialist state, had a double - contradictory - character.
                        On the one hand, Russian peoplewho believed in the communist idea of ​​the Bolshevik-Leninists, and, being the bearer of the sovereign mentality, he really created socialism on all fronts of social construction within the whole country as a whole of their multinational homeland. As a matter of fact, he had nothing else to do. But at the same time, on the other hand, in the former tsarist national outskirts, where feudal relations still prevailed and there was no own national proletariat, power from the Bolshevik-Leninists and under their control was given to the petty national bourgeoisie and former local feudal lords. The national industry was already being built by the hands of the Russian and Russian-speaking peoples. Wherein everything that was really created by the national during the years of Soviet power in the once backward tsarist national outskirts - national republics - it is only the local national party and Soviet bureaucracy, as well as the national creative intelligentsia serving it (social scientists, writers, artists, etc.). This national party and Soviet intelligentsia objectively retained the national bourgeois-feudal mentality not only in relation to their own working people, but also in relation to the Russians who came to “hunch on them” up to the time of the so-called Gorbachev “new thinking”.

                        Thus, national problems in the Soviet Union not only existed from the very beginning of Soviet power, but also bore a national-BOURGEOIS class character in relation to the Russian people.
                        The counterbourgeois coup of 1991 in the USSR as a whole only raised from the bottom to the surface the already existing national-bourgeois deformations during the construction of socialism in Russia, beginning in 1917, which the Soviet leadership tried not to publicize.
                      4. Vladimir247
                        Vladimir247 2 December 2020 00: 35
                        0
                        The impression is that you did not understand my question ... you write about the generic problems of the birth of the USSR, and I tell you that your "problems" were our salvation in the Second World War. So, the friendship of peoples, in the war, saved us, this is an indisputable fact and if you undertake to dispute this, then we have nothing to talk about. And now attention, question smile : How is it that you have such a great achievement, I'm not afraid of this phrase, suddenly it became a problem, do not explain?
                        And I constantly hear this from the screens ... in particular from Mr Putin ... laughing
                        With him, everything is clear, he has such a job ... and you?
                      5. Tatyana
                        Tatyana 2 December 2020 12: 14
                        0
                        Quote: Vladimir247
                        The impression is that you did not understand my question ... you write about the generic problems of the birth of the USSR, and I tell you that your "problems" were our salvation in the Second World War.

                        And I am answering your question: why did the USSR disintegrate along ethnic lines in 1991? What kind of time bomb was laid under Soviet Russia during its administrative-territorial division on the basis of i.e. "titular" nationality during the formation of the USSR, the explosion of which we are now unraveling in the territories of the former SSR.
                        So, the friendship of peoples, in the war, saved us, this is an indisputable fact and if you undertake to dispute this,
                        I just do not dispute this. However, let me remind you that during the Second World War, Germans from the Volga region, Tatars from the Crimea were deported into the interior of the country by trainloads ... Not everything was so clear during the Second World War, as you say.

                        So at the expense of what, who and why was the friendship of peoples in the USSR and suddenly it disappeared after its collapse? Understand this and answer this question for yourself! Since my explanation is beyond your power to understand and you ignore it.
                      6. Vladimir247
                        Vladimir247 2 December 2020 14: 28
                        0
                        You say mine. But she is a mine. And in 1941, and in 1979, and in 1991. Maybe the question is not a mine, but how it was stored and used? And was there a mine? When everything was on fire, it did not explode with you, and in 1991 suddenly here you are ... laughing
                        About the "mine", this is the last argument of the anti-Soviet, who made a lot of efforts to destroy the country. But why do you need this argument ... what
                      7. Tatyana
                        Tatyana 2 December 2020 15: 16
                        0
                        You have not yet understood that the territorial and administrative division of the territory of any state on a national basis is a political and ideological EXPORT on the part of the Western globalists of their bourgeois technologies with a long-term aim of destroying multinational states colonized by the West.
                        Not a single drop. power: the United States, Great Britain, Germany, etc. - within itself any administrative division of territories on a national basis - NEVER allows !!!
                        This is not there, just as it was not in Tsarist Russia.

                        And in Soviet Russia, the Bolsheviks - at the insistence of Lenin (!) At the instigation of the West - not just created in the backward tsarist nat. outskirts for nat. minorities their STATEHOOD with the right of their free exit from Soviet Russia, and also transferred under their rule (where the proletariat was not at all) primordially Russian territories along with the Russian population!
                        For example, the Kyrgyz have never had their own statehood in history. The Bolsheviks imposed it on the Kyrgyz!

                        Is that, in your opinion, true "PROLETARIAN INTERNATIONALISM"? !!! No way!
                        Yes, this is nothing more than a political DIVERSION of the West against our country - against Russia! And Lenin was her DUALISTIC guide!
                        That is, on the one hand, Lenin seemed to be building socialism, and on the other hand, he played along with the West.

                        The nationalists of the Soviet national minorities were pumped in their republics from central Russia through the exploitation of the Russian people and Russian-speaking people - and left the USSR free of charge.
                        And now in these countries - the former Soviet republics - an open policy of apartheid is being pursued against the Russian people!
                        Examples. Baltic countries, Ukraine, Georgia, Armenia, Kazakhstan ...

                        Take off your rose-colored glasses and descend from the clouds to the ground!
                      8. Vladimir247
                        Vladimir247 2 December 2020 15: 33
                        0
                        Why write so much? Here you write: the policy of apartheid. And who is conducting it? Is your "mine" from 1917? Or maybe mine detectors like you? One to one your position with the Kremlin ideologists coincided. And this, you know, is about something, yes it says. laughing

                        And by the way, about Kyrgyzstan. And at the same time about all the other Central Asian republics. People, overwhelmingly for the revival of the USSR. And what the media write ... and so you are the same. So what? How does this relate to reality?
                      9. Tatyana
                        Tatyana 2 December 2020 15: 50
                        0
                        A strange mess in your head! Either you are a dogmatic communist who is under-educated in Marxism-Leninism, or you are a non-Russian by nationality Russophobe-nationalist from the neighboring former Soviet republics, parasitizing on Leninist proletarian Bolshevism?
                        In any case, you do not know how to apply dialectical material in practice and think metaphysically, i.e. dogmatically unchanging Leninist categories.
                        Switch to the teachings of Stalin - it will be closer to the realities of life!
        2. Arpad
          Arpad 1 December 2020 16: 19
          +1
          Quote: Tatiana
          I passed my candidate exams in philosophy in graduate school just in Soviet times with an "EXCELLENT" grade - by the way, the only one out of 25 people being examined!

          it is strange that, having produced the primary sources, you were a zealous apologist for Lenin and Stalin
    2. Polymer
      Polymer 1 December 2020 14: 41
      +1
      Quote: Tatiana
      And if you read the works of Lenin in the establishment of Soviet power in relation to the Russian people, then - from his Russophobia - the Volossians will stand on end

      Lenin was not a Russophobe, but an internationalist. And Russian nationalists were opponents for him, like any others - either Polish, Uzbek or Russian. As for the collapse of the USSR, Russian nationalists played no less significant role here than, for example, Kazakh ones.
      In general, the idea for unification must be based on internationalism - any other is doomed to failure in advance. The details may vary - for example, which language will be common to all, but the basis should not change from this.
      1. Tatyana
        Tatyana 1 December 2020 15: 36
        0
        Quote: Polymer
        Lenin was not a Russophobe, but an internationalist.

        Lenin was precisely a Russophobe (read his work on the national question) and put the privileges of national minorities above the rights of the Russian people, and not on the same proletarian-international level, which should have been done by a proletarian-communist-internationalist.

        When the Bolsheviks-Trotskyists-Leninists, at the request of their Western curators, administratively divided in 1917 not just the territory of the former Republic of Ingushetia on the principle of the so-called. The “titular” nationality, but also the nation-state forming power in the country, was transferred to national minorities, categorically excluding all Great Russians from all government bodies, by the law of isomerism in sociology, the geopolitical inner essence of historical Russia itself also changed. Namely.

        Together with Vel. Oct social. revolution in 1917 year Russia from a historically established state of the primordially Russian people, which absorbed other small peoples under its patronage and protection, according to the law of isomerism in sociology, has turned into a state of national minorities. Those. in Russia there was a geopolitical nationalist coup, moreover, of the Zionist sense.
        At the same time, in fact, national title formations on the territory of Russia turned into colonial metropolises, to which the Zionist-Trotskyists transferred the Russian people into disempowerment as colonial people for exploitation.

        REFERENCE. According to the law of isomerism in chemistry, the same is true in its chem. the composition of a substance changes its physical properties if the atoms in the molecule are interchanged.
        1. Polymer
          Polymer 1 December 2020 16: 13
          +1
          Quote: Tatiana
          (read his work on the national issue)

          I read, studied and took notes. Perhaps a little later than you, but nevertheless. And I have a slightly different understanding of these works.
          Here's what I was thinking: all the same, Soviet education had a significant drawback, since he got a great many of such "cadres". Its purpose was to educate true adherents of communist ideas, builders of the Future, but the result was completely opposite. I just can't formulate why it happened, but I noticed this feature a long time ago.
      2. Vladimir247
        Vladimir247 2 December 2020 00: 40
        +1
        I agree 100%. Natsik they are in Africa Natsik. Our "liberals" of the late 80s admitted that they could not topple the Union without inciting nationalism.
  • Reviews
    Reviews 1 December 2020 07: 50
    -1
    Starikov

    Funny.
    Author of a number of books on modern and recent history, economics, and geopolitics, which have been critically assessed by specialized specialists


    Continue your clowning, I will. :)
  • Arpad
    Arpad 1 December 2020 11: 54
    -1
    Quote: Tatiana
    Find the PROGRAMS of the 10 leading Russian political parties of the February and October 1917 coups - and see for yourself!

    Tatyana, were you a member of the Communist Party?
    And what position did you hold? judging by the graduate school and the subject of work - well, obviously they did not study at the Institute of Light Industry.
    1. Tatyana
      Tatyana 1 December 2020 12: 42
      +1
      Not included! B / n. Basic higher education is technical. Second higher education - manager of financial, economic and administrative divisions for commercial and entrepreneurial activities.
      Quote: Arpad
      Well, obviously they did not study at the Institute of Light Industry.
      Soviet education was of very high quality - systemic and versatile (not narrow-profile) if students at the university really study for a profession in their specialty, and do not just come to hang out, like in a club.
      The teachers were strict. It was easy to fly out of the university. The country was full of those who wanted to study in place of those who flew out.
      When I entered the university, I passed the competition for my specialty with 35 people for 1 place. Groups of students at the university were recruited by 25 people.
      1. New Balance
        New Balance 1 December 2020 14: 51
        0
        Perhaps that is why Soviet citizens applied their body parts to the TV during sessions of would-be doctors, and in fact, swindlers and charlatans Kashpirovsky and Chumak? And where did the "very high-quality Soviet education" go?
        1. Tatyana
          Tatyana 1 December 2020 15: 04
          +1
          Quote: New Balance
          And where did the "very high-quality Soviet education" go?

          High-quality Soviet education at school began to disappear under Gorbachev in 1986 with the beginning of the reform program under the program of an allegedly "innocent" foreign philanthropist Soros, but in fact a foreign sponsor-saboteur.

          Soros invested a lot of money in organizing the reformatting of the Soviet state education system into a bourgeois-liberal one. Soros financed new school textbooks, grants for copyright programs in subjects for teachers in accordance with the bourgeois ideological orientation, the introduction of paid school education in secondary schools, etc., etc.
  • Ganja
    Ganja 6 December 2020 18: 26
    -1
    If the Bolsheviks did not do this in their time, that is, they would not form national republics 1) How then would the Soviet government differ from the tsarist one? 2) now there would be no RF at all. And the reason for the collapse of the USSR was completely different. No need to mix up different concepts
  • New Balance
    New Balance 1 December 2020 14: 37
    0
    This is not why it was not transferred, but LEFT. And this is the fundamental difference. By the decision of the Caucasian Bureau of the Central Committee of the RCP (b) of 1921. Find this document and read it carefully.
  • svoit
    svoit 30 November 2020 23: 48
    +1
    Quote: Avis
    Themselves invented this nonsense or suggested who?

    It can hardly be denied that the slogan about the "right of nations to self-determination" came to us precisely from the West. And here, if not strange, the bourgeoisie (which is understandable why) came together with the Bolsheviks, whom of course could be understood at the stage of the collapse of the Republic of Ingushetia, but it is difficult to explain such indulgence to the nationalists after the seizure of power.
    1. Vladimir247
      Vladimir247 1 December 2020 13: 47
      -1
      It is difficult to explain ...
      -------
      And you put yourself in the shoes of the Bolsheviks at that time ... maybe it will work out. The country was practically gone. And you suggest that nationalities should have been abolished? And with another artificially created hotbed of tension, to reflect the intervention of 16 countries?
      Clever ... laughing
  • svoit
    svoit 1 December 2020 14: 42
    0
    Quote: Vladimir247
    And you suggest that nationalities should have been abolished?

    Well, this is hardly possible at all, but lowering the level of decision-making regarding the language to the level of local, provincial, councils is not at all bad.
    1. Vladimir247
      Vladimir247 2 December 2020 00: 44
      0
      The moment was wrong. But the fact that it should have been done in the 50s - 60s, then yes, 100%. But ... then, unfortunately, Stalin was gone. There was no one else to do. And Khrushchev was busy laying the foundations for the destruction of the USSR.
  • Alexander Maltsev
    Alexander Maltsev 1 December 2020 21: 02
    0
    Who pays for everything?