"Winter Forest": rout and beating of partisans

In my partisan memoirs, I was always confused by one moment. Memories could be good and bad, but in them the partisans won victories over the Germans somehow very easily: they smashed the garrisons, destroyed the columns, exterminated them in hundreds and thousands. This is strange in light of the fact that the enemies surrounded the guerrillas from all sides and outnumbered them and outnumbered them. The most suspicious was the book of the former secretary of the Minsk underground regional committee of the CPSU (b), Hero of the Soviet Union R.N. Machulsky "Eternal Flame". He knew a lot and could tell about different things. However, most likely, the book was written for him. Maybe he said something or made corrections. There is such concentrated and unrestrained heroism, such beating of the Germans everywhere and everywhere, that one wonders why the Minsk partisans themselves did not defeat the entire Army Group Center?

It goes without saying that in stories guerrilla warfare was not only a success. But there were enough defeats and failures. Which is not surprising and completely inevitable due to the very position of the partisans in the enemy rear. However, for some reason, they did not want to tell us about the sad details.

As far as can be judged from the memoirs of I.G. Starinov, the question concerned the top party leaders. For example, L.Z. Mehlis. They ordered the use of such forms of partisan struggle, which, in essence, only made it easier for the Germans to defeat the partisans. And they led to huge losses. We are talking about the requirement, for example, that the partisans themselves select weapon and ammunition from the enemy. For all this was generously paid in blood. And after the war, they began to compose colorful and emotional stories, which now form the basis of the history of the partisan movement during the war.

German losses: mythical and real

Here's just one example. Operation "Winter Forest" (Waldwinter) from December 27, 1942 to January 25, 1943 in the triangle of railways between Vitebsk, Nevel and Polotsk.

Alexander Dyukov writes about this operation in his review, mentioning a number of punitive operations in Belarus ("Live Journal" of May 24, 2007):

“Merciless battles were fought along the Obol River near the villages of Lukhnachi, Ravenets, Shilino, beyond the villages of Katlyany, Tokarevo, Patera, Zakhody and others, where the partisans were able to inflict heavy losses on enemy motorized, armored and infantry units. After bloody battles, most of the partisan formations managed to break through the Polotsk-Nevel railway and lead thousands of local residents to the Rasson region. "

Moreover, one should not think that this is how Dyukov came up with it. On the site "I remember" there are memories of Yakov Fedorovich Menshikov (he was surrounded, then captured, fled, hid and in the summer of 1942 joined a partisan detachment), who fought as part of the 4th Belarusian partisan brigade, located in the liberated zone in this very the triangle of railways. That is, he was a direct participant in those very events. But he also writes about the battles of the 4th partisan brigade with German units on December 24, 1942 - January 3, 1943:

“This attack cost the Nazis dearly. In the battles from December 24, 1942 to January 3, 1943, they lost more than one hundred of their soldiers and officers.

Then his losses of the Germans increased to thousands:

“Thus, even this widely planned punitive expedition against the partisans did not bring the desired result to the German command, the Germans lost more than one thousand of their soldiers and officers in the battles. In some villages, the Nazis left the German police garrisons, but they were defeated by the partisans a week later.

Anyone can now refer to an eyewitness and participant. And to describe the most heartbreaking pictures about how the German operation failed, the Germans lost thousands and thousands of soldiers and officers, guns, Tanks, airplanes.

The fact is that we have a report from the commander of the security forces and the commander of the army rear of Army Group Center, Infantry General Max von Schenckendorff on the results of this operation, sent to the command of Army Group Center on January 31, 1943. It says (TsAMO RF, f. 500, op. 12454, d. 631, l. 43):

Own losses: 20 killed, 79 wounded.

Enemy losses: 670 killed in action, 957 shot after interrogation, 1627 in total.

A sheet from the operation report that lists losses and trophies

In response to the cry: "They were hiding losses!" I will answer that this is a secret report, for the accuracy of the information of which the compilers were responsible. There could be some inaccuracies, but clearly not (the discrepancy between the actual figures and those shown in the report) by orders of magnitude. Moreover, the underestimation of losses would inevitably be revealed. The operations went one after another, and if hundreds and thousands were killed in each of them, and the reports showed small losses, then soon the security forces of the rear of the army group would become incapable of combat and this would become obvious to the command. With ensuing disciplinary consequences. So, during the operation "Winter Forest" there were no hundreds, let alone thousands of killed German soldiers and officers.

Four were pricked with one bayonet

Thus, serious doubts arise about the accuracy and veracity of the partisan memoirs, especially regarding the German losses. If we are told here that they were filled with thousands, almost four were stabbed with one bayonet, and the report turned out to be only 20 killed in a whole month of the operation, then these stories should be classified as "hunting stories".

Dyukov also writes:

“During the operation, the invaders killed 1627 local residents, 2041 people were taken to hard labor in Germany, completely burned the villages of Arzhavukhovo, Beloe, Charbomysl with the majority of residents, captured 7468 head of cattle, 894 horses, about 1 birds, 4468 tons of grain, 145 tons of potatoes, 759 tons of flaxseeds and flaxstraws and much more. "

Pay attention to "killed 1627 local residents." It was not Dyukov who came up with that. He and other authors cite whoever wrote it first. And he, in turn, read the document and falsified it, giving the number of killed partisans for the number of civilians killed.

The German document is clear in meaning: "670 Banditen im Kampf gefallen" and "957 Banditen nach Verhör erschossen". Killed in battle - killed in a shootout or immediately after it, in pursuit. Those who were shot after interrogation - whoever was captured and confessed that he was in the detachment was shot. Or who was shown as a partisan. There is a passage in this report that allows us to judge that some part of the population of this territory supported the Germans:

Die meisten Siedlungen wurden so gut wie menschenleer angetroffen. Mit dem Fortschreiten des Angriffes änderten sich diese Verhältnisse aber, wenige Tage nach dem Durchzug der Truppen kehrten Teile der Bevölkerung aus dem Wäldern, in die sie geflüchtet waren, zurück "(TsAMO RF., File 500 l. 12454).

That is, the Germans found the villages empty, and a few days after the start of the operation, the population began to leave the forest. Among them there could be people who pointed out to the Germans who the partisans were.

It was a rout and a beating

Already from a comparison of the losses of the Germans and partisans during the operation "Winter Forest" it is clear that this was a complete defeat of the partisans. How many of them were in the triangle at the beginning of the operation is difficult to say. There is information that it had several partisan brigades: 3rd and 4th Belorussian, brigade "For Soviet Belarus", them. Korotkin (Sirotinskaya) and them. IN AND. Lenin.

General von Schenkendorf reported on the defeat of the brigades of Marchenko (3rd Belorussian brigade), Korotkin-Fomchenko (named after Korotkin) and Romanov (brigade "For Soviet Belarus"). The 4th Belorussian Brigade, apparently, really managed to break out of the ring.

It is also difficult to say how many partisans there were before the start of the operation. The brigades even in 1944 included 600-1000 soldiers. And Menshikov recalls that in the 4th Belarusian Brigade, in which he fought, in the fall of 1942 there were about 2000 people. It seems that there were about 4-5 thousand partisans in total.

The number of the 286th security division that opposed it (which included the 61st security, 122nd security regiments, a battalion of the 8th police regiment, a battalion of the 213rd artillery regiment and reinforcement units) can be estimated at about 10 thousand people.

In terms of numbers, the Germans had an advantage, but not overwhelming. Taking into account the fact that the partisans were located in the forests, which in themselves are a kind of fortification and impede the actions of the advancing forces.

However, the decisive reason for the defeat of the militia was that the guerrillas were very poorly armed.

Only a third of the partisans were armed

General von Schenckendorff's report lists the trophies: 10 mortars, 14 machine guns, 31 submachine guns, 2 anti-tank rifles, 114 rifles. A substantial number of hand-held small arms are also indicated. Apparently, they mean pistols. And also a large number of cartridges and explosives.

It is very sparse. Considering that 670 partisans died in battles alone. And taking into account that the report of the Germans says about the destruction of 62 partisan camps and 335 bunkers (apparently dugouts). That is, there were no weapons in the partisan warehouses either.

True, the report indicates that many weapons were hidden by the partisans or thrown into the snow. Which also speaks quite clearly about the defeat.

Offhand, including also pistols, about a third of the partisans who participated in the battles were armed.

Here it is, Mehlis's strategy, that the guerrillas must take away weapons from the enemy, in action. Such poorly armed units, of course, had no chance of fighting back.

Lieutenant General Johann-Georg Richert, commander of the 286th Security Division.

Partisan brigade commanders: (above) Pavel Minaevich Romanov, commander of the For Soviet Belarus brigade; (below) Arkady Yakovlevich Marchenko, commander of the 3rd Belarusian Partisan Brigade.

The second advantage of the Germans was that the commander of the 286th Security Division, Major General Johann-Georg Richert (the division was often called by his last name, including in this report) was an experienced commander. Member of the First World War, awarded the Iron Cross of both degrees. After the war he served in the Reichswehr and the Wehrmacht. In 1939 Oberst Richt was appointed commander of the 23rd Infantry Regiment of the 11th Infantry Division. He took part in the offensive against Novgorod and in the defensive battles on the Volkhov at the end of 1941. For these battles, he received a high award - the German Cross in gold and the rank of major general. In June 1942, he was appointed commander of the 286th Security Division. Apparently, he was considered a specialist in fighting in wooded areas and therefore appointed to command counter-partisan operations.

In addition, Richert commanded the German forces in Operation Winter Forest alone. And against him were five brigades and five commanders, who did not have a joint headquarters. This is probably what allowed him to defeat the best partisan units in battles in late December 1942 - early January 1943. And then move on to beating up the almost unarmed partisans scattered through the forests. The overall result of the operation: three partisan brigades were defeated and scattered, the entire territory was cleared.

And about the rest of the trophies of the 286th Security Division. The report indicates that the troops used captured food for most of the operation, and consumed 167,4 thousand portions of meat, 139,8 thousand portions of vegetables and 42,1 thousand portions of fodder from trophy reserves. There was still a significant amount of fodder and potatoes that were not exported. It is generally believed that these supplies were looted from villages. However, it is unlikely that several thousand partisans would have been able to spend the winter in the forest without food. So for the most part, the trophy food was taken, apparently, from partisan bases. There would be enough food for the security division for about two weeks, and forage for a week or so.

Also, 2014 people of the able-bodied population were captured, which was then sent to Dulag-125 in Polotsk, where they were subjected to propaganda processing. However, the report says that most of the male population left with the partisans. And the Germans knew nothing about their further fate. Part of the population (especially the disabled) remained in the villages. But how much there was - the report does not say. And it is unlikely that you will be able to find out more accurate data. In any case, in the devastated area (first feeding the partisans, and then plundered by the Germans), the inhabitants of the strong starved without food supplies.

Pay for carelessness

In fact, the partisans paid for their carelessness. For the unpreparedness of the area for defense, for the absence of a general command and staff, for an acute shortage of weapons and a clear underestimation of the enemy. At the same time, there were many attacks on the railways. The partisans apparently hoped that the Germans would not climb into the forest in winter and that they would be able to spend the winter relatively calmly. In general, we made mistakes.

German map of partisan activity at the end of 1942. At the top, this triangle Vitebsk-Nevel-Polotsk is visible. Red marks - guerrilla attacks on railways, indicating the number of attacks. The activity of the partisans in this area stood out even against the background of the environs of Minsk. It is not surprising that the Germans launched an operation against the partisans of this triangle. TsAMO RF, f. 500, op. 12454, d.631, l. 35

All these facts of the death of the partisans were carefully hidden. Instead, stories spread about the widespread massacre of the Germans, with many times exaggerated enemy losses.

Although, what is there to hide? There were plenty of failures and defeats in guerrilla warfare. But the corresponding conclusions were drawn from them. And subsequently, including on the basis of this experience, the partisans learned how to defend their liberated areas, raid, maneuver and get out of attacks. The people won the Great War.

Before lying and composing myths, as well as all sorts of "hunting stories", one must remember what the first President of Czechoslovakia Tomas Masaryk said:

"Great things cannot be false."

Lying is destructive in any case, no matter how it is justified.

Comments

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

In response to the cry: "They were hiding losses!" I will answer that this is a secret report, for the accuracy of the information of which the compilers were responsible.

1. The author once again came up with a "soap bubble" and refutes it!
The question is, what prevented the Germans from overstating the losses of the partisans? I hear the cry of the Author "their pedantry"!
There is nothing of the kind. The headquarters of the Wehrmacht, the numbers in the victorious realizations were corrected, no worse than the "tales on the hunt." For example, what prevented a German functionary from writing off five dozen for sanitary losses?
2. Did the German take into account the attached forces from policemen, legionnaires and other renegades. I'm afraid the secret report is unequivocal - no.
3. Conclusions. The losses of the partisans were exactly - how many personal (long-barreled) small arms were taken as trophies. The rest were either civilians, or they were not at all!
The rest is from the evil one!

[Korsar4]

Something, but with numbers, especially the enemy, you can do whatever you want.

Pedantry - pedantry. But this is not yet cast on his skin.

I think this applies to all civilizations.

We have a large slice of fiction.

Medvedev "Strong in spirit" - from the favorite in childhood. It is clear that this is just a glance. But the eye of an eyewitness.

And when the war the Fatherland Front is everywhere - even in their rear, even in ours.

[Catfish]

Hello, hello! The usual story: the enemy's losses are overestimated, their own is underestimated, everyone suffered from this. Judging by our reports on the number of destroyed tanks, by the end of 41 the Germans had no more of them at all, only Goth and Guderian did not know about it and continued to fight.
And as for the Germans, they even forged the logbooks of submarines, at least one such case is known for sure, this is the sinking of the U-30 of the Atenia liner.

[astra wild2]

I can assume that Richter was a little deceitful: he counted only the Fuhrer's soldiers, and he simply did not count the policemen.
In reality, their losses were in the aisles of up to 400 people.
Losses of partisans? The author did not name the number of partisans, possibly with civilians and will be about 5000.
Colleagues, forgive my skepticism, but I doubt that there were such large detachments in the winter of 1942. Everywhere it was written that the partisan movement developed in 1943

[Boris ⁣ Shaver]

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

what prevented the Germans from overstating the losses of the partisans?

Yes, stupidly destroyed civilians were recorded as partisans and that's it. But according to the author of this article, when our partisan says that so many civilians have died, he, a priori, is lying. And the German, who calls all the dead partisans (documents, what, did they find partisans?) - in the author's opinion, one should believe. Smells like a clinic. And Ukraine.

[ee2100]

Draw a parallel with the Varshavskiy Vosstanie - there are a lot of similarities with the article. There is desire, but no weapon, there is desire, but no experience. In Warsaw, with a numerical minority, the rear units of the Germans with the best weapons and combat experience easily coped with the position. And no one questions the numbers of losses.
At the end of 1942 and the beginning of 43, the Germans had no reason to “play” with numbers - the results of the war were not obvious.
The article contains links to German documents on this particular operation in the emotion comments.
The truth about the war should be like this, it helps to understand the full depth of the tragedy of the Soviet people.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: ee2100

At the end of 1942 and the beginning of 43, the Germans had no reason to “play” with numbers - the results of the war were not obvious.

There is always a sense to play with enemy losses.
Judge for yourself which result will look better when served up:
- "During the operation, 1500 partisans were killed", or
- "During the operation, 300 partisans and 1200 people of the local population were killed"?
In the first case, the ratio of losses allows you to report on a perfectly planned and executed operation and count on a reward. Well, at the same time cover up the flaws in the operation, if there were any - "see how strong the enemy was".
In the second case, an ordinary operation is obtained, in which, moreover, the number of forces involved is incomparable with the enemy's losses. And in general, the question arises - did the partisans escape from the attack? Plus, the administration of the Reichskommissariat on its own line will begin to ask questions: if this is how the local population is destroyed, then who will feed the Reich?

So the punishers had every reason to register the destroyed local population as partisans.

[ee2100]

You expressed your vision, and I expressed mine. That's all. I do not think that General Schenkendorf himself wrote the report or gave instructions on the interpretation of enemy losses. I read it, agreed with what was written and signed.
My mother-in-law with her brother and mother during a similar operation by the Germans were captured in a forest near Pskov. They were all sent to Germany to work, which were the men of their squad she did not know. In reality, they were all shot.

[Boris ⁣ Shaver]

Quote: ee2100

That's all

No, not all. The situation is pretty clear. Trying to give birth to her "vision" is to have malice towards our people.

[Boris ⁣ Shaver]

Quote: ee2100

at the end of 1942, at the beginning of 43, the Germans did not make sense to "play" with numbers - the results of the war were not obvious

It also made sense. Write in the "report" that 1600 civilians were killed while hunting for two dozen partisans - you admit that you are a military criminal. You never know who will get your piece of paper later.

[wehr]

Your version is simply surprisingly ridiculous. You, it turns out, assert that there were no partisans at all. Or almost none.
It's very hilarious to watch how, trying to save one ridiculous myth, you immediately erect another, even more ridiculous.

Meanwhile, from the German document follows:
1) The partisans were, and were assessed as a fairly serious force, since a whole security division was sent against them,
2) The partisans still fought, albeit unsuccessfully, and inflicted some losses on the Germans.

[Boris ⁣ Shaver]

Quote: wehr

The partisans were, and were assessed as a fairly serious force

Therefore, it was easier to "fight" with old people, women and children. And it's easier to get them.

Quote: wehr

The partisans still fought

"Fought" is your chances. Our partisans fought until complete victory over the invaders.
And this is another argument in favor of the fact that your Fritz was limited to fighting civilians, unable to do anything with the partisan movement itself.

[wehr]

That is, you want to say that the partisan brigades listed in this operation did not exist?

[Boris ⁣ Shaver]

Quote: wehr

Are you saying that the partisan brigades listed in this operation did not exist?

An extremely stupid question

[wehr]

Existed, then, in your opinion. Good.
Then, according to your own version, it turns out that they were extreme cowards: they saw that the Germans were shooting civilians, and at the same time fled without doing anything to protect the civilians.

Fork! Having declared that the Germans exterminated only civilians, you must either admit that there were no partisans in the area at all, or admit that the partisans were pitiful cowards.
What do you think is more patriotic?

[Boris ⁣ Shaver]

Quote: wehr

Fork!

Sawdust!
But strain them at least.

Quote: wehr

they were extreme cowards

Guerrillas, in your opinion, cowards because they hide in the woods and attack on the sly, without leaving the open field for a "fair fight" against the superior forces of the enemy? Do you even understand who the partisans are and what are their methods of struggle?

[wehr]

In your opinion, partisans should sit out in the woods, watching as the Germans destroy civilians?
And there is no need to slip into general reasoning. You said that the Germans killed civilians. Well, how is it more patriotic to lie: that there were no partisans or that the partisans were cowards?
Otherwise, behind Goebbels's propaganda, I missed the latest trends in hurray-patriotism.

Everything with you is clear to me, but there is a sports interest, to what abomination you are ready to reach.

[Boris ⁣ Shaver]

Quote: wehr

partisans must sit in the woods

They must covertly be in the territory occupied by the enemy, conducting sabotage and / or reconnaissance activities against him. You climbed to write "articles" about partisans, not understanding such simple things? I haven't seen anything more stupid on VO for a long time, the last couple of months for sure.
Although, everything is logical here. To cover up the Nazis, you have to have that slop in your head.

[wehr]

They should, but they shouldn't. These partisans created a liberated zone with Soviet power in the triangle. Having thus given the population a promise to protect them; but they could not fulfill it. What, in fact, is the article about.
What, in your opinion, the Polotsk-Lepetsk zone should not have been created? How come they didn't ask your recommendations ?!

[CommanderDIVA]

I have already written more than once, the author of the article should not argue with readers so much, let alone the facts of humiliation of site visitors, in my opinion, you chose from the context the unfortunate fact of the partisan movement in a separate area and fanned a storm in a glass of water, which is reminiscent of the Kolya from Urengoy , but in fact there were failures and failures in the partisan movement, but since 1941, this activity was led by the Central Headquarters of the partisan movement, which was in charge of the 4th department of the NKGB of the USSR under the leadership of Pavel Sudoplatov, he certainly cannot be called a shortsighted person

[Han Tengri]

Quote: wehr

In your opinion, partisans should sit out in the woods, watching as the Germans destroy civilians?

Exactly. And they MUST! Hate, grit your teeth, cry from powerlessness, but at any cost save yourself as a combat unit to complete the task.
It is a pity that your adolescent mind, which reflects on a "purely boy" level: if you didn’t do it, such simple things are not available.
But what to do ... The body, over time, matures in everyone, but, behold, the brain does not.

[Boris ⁣ Shaver]

Quote: HanTengri

Exactly. And it SHOULD

This guy is for the Nazis. He sleeps and sees how our partisans are not from the forests of the Germans nightmares, but in orderly rows to be shot in the field. I am ready to lay thousands of women and children, only to deprive the guerrillas of the advantages of secrecy. At least in his fevered imagination.

[210ox]

I wrote below about my parents. One incident that they told. Partisans near the village of Rzhavets destroyed a German train. The starving people from the village rushed to jerk the carts, slaughter the huge Percherons. There was one person in the detachment - he asked by God not to take anything from the carts .. A day later, the punishers came and began to turn everything around the huts. Those who found things from the convoy were shot. This village was never rebuilt after the war.

[Obliterator]

Quote: Boris ⁣Razor

It also made sense. Write in the "report" that 1600 civilians were killed while hunting for two dozen partisans - you admit that you are a military criminal. You never know who will get your piece of paper later.

It's funny. The German military clearly had no thoughts about possible accusations of war crimes on the eastern front at the beginning of 43.

[Boris ⁣ Shaver]

Quote: Obliterator

the German military clearly had no thoughts about possible accusations of war crimes on the eastern front at the beginning of 43g

You read each of them at that time, as I understand it?
This is really funny.

[Obliterator]

Quote: Boris ⁣ Shaver

Quote: Obliterator

the German military clearly had no thoughts about possible accusations of war crimes on the eastern front at the beginning of 43g

You read each of them at that time, as I understand it?
This is really funny.

Thoughts give rise to actions. The actions of the Nazis in Belarus are well known.

[Boris ⁣ Shaver]

Quote: Obliterator

The actions of the Nazis in Belarus are well known

In your picture of the world, a criminal basically commits a crime without even covering his tracks, but simply believing that he will not get anything for it. What can I say here? Your world plays with wonderful colors that are not found in boring reality.

[Obliterator]

Quote: Boris ⁣Razor

In your picture of the world, a criminal basically commits a crime without even covering his tracks, but simply believing that he will not get anything for it. What can I say here?

It is not necessary to transfer your peacetime psychology to wartime, when people are becoming worse than animals. Especially in this case, when terror against a peaceful person was not considered a crime.

Quote: Boris ⁣Razor

Your world plays with wonderful colors that are not found in boring reality.

Joke about drugs, you are our ironic.

[Boris ⁣ Shaver]

Quote: Obliterator

terror against a civilian was not considered a crime

Are you from the Ukrainian would-be Nazis or what?

[Obliterator]

Quote: Boris ⁣Razor

Are you from the Ukrainian would-be Nazis or what?

Nothing to say, so the transition of personality has begun? The drain is accepted.

[Boris ⁣ Shaver]

Quote: Obliterator

nothing to say

No reason

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Boris ⁣Razor

Write in the "report" that 1600 civilians were killed while hunting for two dozen partisans - you admit that you were a military criminal. You never know who will get your piece of paper later.

At the beginning of 1943, responsibility for war crimes hardly worried the German army. In addition, a lot of things hung on them, starting with the prisoner of war camps.
PMSM, they were more worried about the question - how to explain what two divisions (security and field training) were doing for a month. Writing that in a month of fighting these forces have reliably destroyed three companies of partisans is somehow inconvenient.

[Boris ⁣ Shaver]

Quote: Alexey RA

At the beginning of 1943, responsibility for war crimes hardly worried the German army

You are simply not very accustomed to official papers, probably. Composing and signing, even in peacetime, a sufficient amount of all kinds of waste paper, you yourself are surprised at how streamlined and verified, over time, your official "syllable" becomes. And although, it seems, these pieces of paper should not turn out to be anything bad, but realizing that they will be stored for decades in different places, you still try not to allow anything superfluous in them - who knows what can happen during this time and how Against you, these pieces of paper, perhaps, then they will want to use? And I'll tell you, precedents, even in my lifetime, have already been different. Fritz, who sprinkled reports like the one under discussion during the Great Patriotic War, hardly had more confidence in the paper than your reprobate servant - an absolutely civilian person who, in peacetime, compiles documents concerning much more peaceful issues.

[Petrik66]

Why was there no point in playing with numbers? And for their losses they will ask you, and for what they give the iron cross, and in general declare themselves as a cool soldier. And the author is simply not competent. In the forests, hundreds of people usually took refuge in camps, simply hiding from the Germans, there were women, children, and old people. They did not fight, they just tried to survive. The Germans immediately recorded them as bandits. hence the difference with weapons

[Artavazdych]

Here are the results of one battle and they are extrapolated to the entire guerrilla war.
And partisan war is not frontal attacks, tanks and airplanes, as the author tries to imagine. This is 99% sabotage. And it is numbered not by killed German soldiers, but by derailed trains.
I often visit the forests where partisan units were stationed. So, it is impossible to drive there even now. And in those days, I think, not a single German even thought of sticking there. Motorized parts ... don't be funny)
Bad article.

[Pilat2009]

Quote: Artavazdych

Motorized parts ... don't be funny)

What thread have you heard about the gamekeepers?

[Sofa batyr]

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

The headquarters of the Wehrmacht, the numbers in the victorious realizations were corrected, no worse than the "tales on the hunt."

In a comic "Song of a German tanker"there are lines about this

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Quote: Divan-batyr

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

The headquarters of the Wehrmacht, the numbers in the victorious realizations were corrected, no worse than the "tales on the hunt."

In a comic "Song of a German tanker"there are lines about this

If it's not difficult, can you give the lines?

[Sofa batyr]

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

If it's not difficult, can you give the lines?

You are welcome ! Just cut out one word that does not fit into the censorship of the Military Review.

Das ist Deutsche nationale song ...

The armor is strong and our tanks are fast,
Sehr gut mumbles a machine gun.
We are not Luftwaffe, but tankers,
Mein Liebe Hrüller calls for battle!
We are not Luftwaffe, but tankers,
Mein Liebe Hrüller calls for battle!

Me charash for shelling
The iron cross was hung -
I managed to get into the hut,
So much so that everyone was taken aback.

In the hut, I confess, it was
Feldwebel with a German zusammen,
But I LIED in the report,
What was there hunter partisan.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Thank you!

[not main]

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

The losses of the partisans were exactly - how many personal (long-barreled) small arms were taken as trophies. The rest were either civilians, or they were not at all!
The rest is from the evil one!

I completely agree! Especially when it is said that "a lot of small arms" and "type" pistols are given! Isn't it a rifle, a machine gun, a submachine gun, not small arms?

[Evil Booth]

Duc, if he briefly writes that 10% of all fascists hung on the partisans, then write about ch1m7 and it pours from place to place

[Krasnoyarsk]

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

1. The author once again came up with a "soap bubble" and refutes it!

Little of. The purpose of the article is not clear. What did the author want to say? Oh, what a bad Mehlis? Or that there is only one lie about the partisan movement?
I see one thing - throw a little dirt on the GREAT GUERRILLA MOVEMENT IN BELARUS. Pa feat of the Belarusian partisans.

[zenion]

This could have taken place, but after all, the defeat of one or two detachments did not mean the complete defeat of all partisans. After all, the smashing of the 6th German army at Stalingrad did not mean the death of the entire Wehrmacht, because they fought with the Germans for another two years. There was a teacher of German, French, English in our school, who somehow put it, it was not so easy to be a saboteur, or a military intelligence officer in the German rear. Field gendarmerie devils immediately discovered our guys. The partisan detachments helped the saboteurs to return to the rear and pull the scouts out of the mess. There were enough weapons, they were stored for the detachments during the time when the army was withdrawing. We also stockpiled supplies, the trouble was that those who did not undergo special training ran into ambushes and so on. Many were sent by the Germans to the detachments and they gave out the finding of the detachments. And more laziness. It was necessary to often change the place of deployment, if in the summer they did it, then in the winter they said - and so it will come down who will attack us through this snow. And finding gave out smoke, soot, tracks in the snow and much more. Flocks of wolves and birds gathered near the detachments.

[Trapperxnumx]

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

2. Did the German take into account the attached forces from policemen, legionnaires and other renegades. I'm afraid the secret report is unequivocal - no.

Also, this idea immediately came to mind after reading the article.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

... 1 pig.

Hard!

[svp67]

Quote: pmkemcity

what is propaganda processing?

[pmkemcity]

I am sorry! The Nazi editorial staff deleted my reply to the author of this libel!

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Thanks for the detailed answer to the Author!

General von Schenckendorff's report lists the trophies: 10 mortars, 14 machine guns, 31 submachine guns, 2 anti-tank rifles, 114 rifles. A solid number of hand-held small arms is also indicated.

We count. 14 machine guns (approximately 2 numbers), 2 anti-tank rifles - (2 numbers), 114 rifles and 31 submachine guns. A total of 177 weapons, taking into account that comrades took away the trunks of every second, if possible, we get losses in the region of 350 bayonets. But these are purely my insinuations. I think the Germans enrolled everyone in the partisans. According to the vaunted German pedantry, which was recorded exactly - "one piece"!
That is, on the area of ​​Russia in a thousand hectares there is only one "pig"! You believe? Me not!

[alpamys]

Quote: Kote Pan Kokhanka

Thanks for the detailed answer to the Author!

General von Schenckendorff's report lists the trophies: 10 mortars, 14 machine guns, 31 submachine guns, 2 anti-tank rifles, 114 rifles. A solid number of hand-held small arms is also indicated.

We count. 14 machine guns (approximately 2 numbers), 2 anti-tank rifles - (2 numbers), 114 rifles and 31 submachine guns. A total of 177 weapons, taking into account that comrades took away the trunks of every second, if possible, we get losses in the region of 350 bayonets. But these are purely my insinuations. I think the Germans enrolled everyone in the partisans. According to the vaunted German pedantry, which was recorded exactly - "one piece"!
That is, on the area of ​​Russia in a thousand hectares there is only one "pig"! You believe? Me not!

the document says that most of the weapons were hidden or thrown out by the Russians in deep snow.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Quote: alpamys

the document says that most of the weapons were hidden or thrown out by the Russians in deep snow.

I have already multiplied this indicator by two to please the Author!
Although, apparently, any suitable age from a 14-year-old boy to 60 - an old man, plus unwanted women from 20 to 45 were registered as “partisans”. The reason is gorgeous - the weapon was hidden or "thrown out by the Russians" in the snow!

[210ox]

My parents were under occupation in the Glinkovsky district of the Smolensk region. A couple of detachments operated there, attacking mainly the carts. By the summer of 43, they were largely defeated.

[vvvjak]

Quote: 210ox

By the summer of 43, they were largely defeated.

https://proliv.livejournal.com/70680.html
Somewhat pretentious (in the spirit of the Soviet era), but true.
"This was followed by a fierce attack on the positions of the partisan detachments of P.E. Matyushkov and L.F.Shilov" (C) "At the quiet Serebryanka". Here at P.E. Matyushkov in equestrian reconnaissance my grandfather served. And I know where (after this battle) 300-400 killed Germans are buried since childhood.
So it happened in different ways.

[tovarich-andrey.62goncharov]

I have a father-in-law from those places. He said that until 1942 no one had heard about the partisans. And the fact that they will defeat "aircraft and armored units" is on faith Kote like Makharadze ...

[210ox]

The beginning of an active partisan movement in the Smolensk region dates back to the early spring of the 42nd year. At the final stage of the Moscow battle, the Smolensk airborne operation was carried out in order to encircle the Nazis in the Vyazma area. Then it did not grow together, the army of Efremov died, Belov's horsemen were able to get out, and the paratroopers were thrown out in different places. They only succeeded in hitting Dorogobuzh. After that, some of the paratroopers died, some went into the forests and became the backbone of the partisans. After the retreat of Model's army from the Vyazma area in the spring of 43 to the Dukhovshchina-Spas-Deminsk line, the area of ​​action of the partisans was on the front line and, accordingly, was cleared. Part crossed the front line and took part in the operation "Suvorov" part went into the forests to the west. By the way, Hero of the Soviet Union M. Yegorov was originally a partisan, only in a slightly different area, by the way close to the areas mentioned in the article. In the fall of the 43rd detachment near Rudnya, where Yegorov fought, joined the ranks of the Red Army

[igordok]

In my partisan memoirs, I was always confused by one moment. Memories could be good and bad, but in them the partisans won victories over the Germans somehow very easily: they smashed the garrisons, destroyed the columns, exterminated them in hundreds and thousands.

The memories are left alive. Those who did not win - did not leave memories, as they were dead.

[Korsar4]

Similarly, statistics are collected about meetings with bears through a survey.

[Fitter65]

Quote from Korsar4

Similarly, statistics are collected about meetings with bears through a survey.

Well, I have probably met bears 20 times in 6 years, what does it give?

[Korsar4]

Those who had an unsuccessful meeting with them in the Asian part of the country did not share their impressions.

[Fitter65]

Quote from Korsar4

Those who had an unsuccessful meeting with them in the Asian part of the country did not share their impressions.

The Asian part of Russia starts from the Far East and ends in the Urals. I live in the Far East - the Asian part of the country ...

[Korsar4]

Sure. Usually divided into the European-Ural and Asian parts.

It is believed that oriental bears are less respectful of humans.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

It's scary to run into mammy - these wonderful creatures and a connecting rod. Otherwise, the brown bear leaves! Modest however !!!

[Korsar4]

Exactly. There may be exceptions, though.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

In summer and autumn, the brown bear is generally well-fed and careful. He does not have a pronounced sense of territoriality, Even with an accidental meeting in a raspberry tree, he basically leaves. But it can also scare you. But the bear will protect the "rotten remains of the animal", but not at any cost. Seeing a person, he will move away, snort walking around. Then he will definitely return.
The bear will break for the cubs. So a crank, hungry will do anything for the sake of protein, fats and carbohydrates. However, well-fed even in winter, will go to conflict in a rare case.

[Korsar4]

And in the story of S.M.Solovyov, there is a funny episode when a man was engaged in beekeeping. Stuck in a hollow with honey. Then he clung to the bear's skin. And he pulled him out.

The bear's reaction has not been reported.

[Boris ⁣ Shaver]

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

Even with an accidental meeting in a raspberry tree, it mostly leaves

Do not forget that the bear is a wild animal that does not care what experienced Internet Medvedev experts write about him on the Internet. He can completely out of the blue and suddenly decide that you pose a threat to him. And then to argue with him, explaining that he should not be aggressive, motivating it with links to articles from the Internet - so-so an idea. Here options are possible only depending on the presence / absence of the good old 12 gauge behind your shoulders.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

And how many of you walk on raspberries with a gun?

[Boris ⁣ Shaver]

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

How many of you walk on raspberries with a gun?

I buy raspberries in the store - why is there a gun?
And at one time he trampled forests on for a slightly different reason. Then he did not have a gun at all. For a couple / three months of such "trampling", far from any civilization, you get along with certain thoughts. And these are not thoughts that the bear is kind. Moreover, we had to "stomp" along the tundra, where along the coast, in general, there are white bears, which are not at all famous for their kindness. You just start to treat everything differently. My plan then was, in which case, try to ruin his skin with a knife as much as possible, so that the next person would no longer seem to him quite easy prey. This, objectively, is all I could do then if something happened. And the understanding of this fact (that the best plan, based on the available layouts, you have already thought of and there is no need to think on this topic further) gave peace of mind.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Quote: Boris ⁣Razor

I buy raspberries in the store - why is there a gun?
And he trampled forests in his time ...

Dear Boris, I am asking you about "warm", you are rolling me about "soft".
By the "berries" - guns are not taken. At least I don't know such people. But judging by the conversations, two-thirds of the meetings with bears take place in the raspberry-tree and in 99 cases out of 100 not with a brutal man with a 12-gauge gun, but women or even children. There are a lot of screeching from these meetings, bear poop and not only them, too, are not few, but basically, they diverge peacefully, each from his side !!!
I did not hear about cases that a summer or autumn bear lifted a person.
In other cases, the alignment is different. With a knife against the bear? Dead business !!! Not for a bear, naturally!

[Boris ⁣ Shaver]

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

I did not hear about cases that a summer or autumn bear lifted a person

And, unfortunately, I even saw the "consequences" somehow.

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

Dead business !!!

Where did I write otherwise? I’m just about not to seem, in the end, very easily obtained "game". You look, the next one after me, it will save his life.

[Fitter65]

Quote from Korsar4

It is believed that oriental bears are less respectful of humans.

Well, what do you want - Asia-s

[parusnik]

Again "black magic" and its exposure.

[svp67]

Own losses: 20 killed, 79 wounded.

And these are purely German or general losses, since I do not believe that they did not involve the "volunteer police" in this operation.
And the fact that the figure is large and the weapons are small is also due to the fact that among the partisans there were many "non-combatants" - members of their families, so something like that ...
In general, this is far from the only defeat of our partisans. In the winter of 41 and 42, it was almost completely destroyed and only active involvement in the organization of the NKVD was able to revive it.

[Cottodraton]

Come on, the time has come for "drop dead and true stories", of which there will be more and more over time ... just recently one "historian" generally considered that the Germans lost hardly half a hundred tanks on the Kursk Bulge!)

[Timofey Charuta]

QUOTE:
"Enemy losses: 670 killed in action, 957 shot after interrogation, 1627 in total ...
General von Schenckendorff's report lists the trophies: 10 mortars, 14 machine guns, 31 submachine guns, 2 anti-tank guns, 114 rifles. A substantial number of hand-held small arms are also indicated. Apparently, they mean pistols. And also a large number of cartridges and explosives ... "

It turns out:
For 670 partisans killed in battle - only 31 machine guns and a hundred rifles.
And the rest of the unarmed, why classify as partisans? What are the signs? Or maybe so - when the punishers appeared, many simply fled into the forest, where they were overtaken and killed. It's so easy to enroll ordinary civilians who have been killed as partisans.

By the way, the report does not indicate how many of the killed women, children, old people or all who are hiding in the forest are partisans? "Enemy losses".

Maybe that's why the punishers have such scanty losses of their own - an exciting safari for ordinary refugees.

Now about Mehlis and his unwillingness to arm the partisans. And how does it all look according to the documents? Judging by his biography and according to his track record, this bad man had nothing to do with the armament of the partisans. And it is not clear - why keep in the winter forest and feed the horde of unarmed people?

Somewhere like that ...

PS
In general, a tendency has recently emerged - a reverent attitude and touching confidence in the reports of German generals. It's only ours - nonsense on nonsense ...

[Timofey Charuta]

Since May 1942, the Central Headquarters of the Partisan Movement under the State Defense Committee was created and operated, and no Mekhlis ...

[dmmyak40]

If I am not mistaken, then even before the war (in the region of 1936-39), work was carried out to organize and train partisan detachments in the areas of the likely rear of the enemy. The organizational structures of the detachments of party and non-party citizens of the respective regions (mainly from the participants in the Civil War, that is, with experience) were approved, weapons, ammunition, explosives, uniforms, foodstuffs were laid in accordance with the number of units.
And then the leadership remembered, apparently, the Tambov region and destroyed all the already prepared organizational and material base. Together with the staff. It was there that Comrade Mekhlis "worked". The shootings were ...

[CommanderDIVA]

Tsshpd from October 1941, under the leadership of the 4th department of the NKGB of the USSR

[Aviator_]

Yes, it is completely incomprehensible what Mehlis has to do with it. And as they pray for the number of victories of Rudel, Hartman and Barkhorn, it is generally incomprehensible how we ended up in Berlin. Well, these are punctual Germans, how can they lie in documents?

[Thomas N.]

Quote: Aviator_

And as they pray for the number of victories of Rudel, Hartman and Barkhorn, it is generally not clear how we ended up in Berlin. Well, these are punctual Germans, how can they lie in documents?

When an infantry sniper, disguising himself well and shooting from a distance at which his victims have almost no opportunity to detect him in time, kills several hundred enemies for his service, does that surprise you? Do you think they are lying? The aforementioned Germans (except for the dive bomber Rudel - this one considered not victories, but combat missions) were engaged in exactly this in the air - free hunting, just like a sniper on the ground. Those. they did what they wanted - they attacked comfortably and relatively safely from a height from the sun's side, and if it didn't work out, then they didn't join the battle at all - in most cases they had no responsibilities to escort their bombers or cover the troops. Hence the number of downed aircraft.

[Aviator_]

Hence the number of downed aircraft.

Tactics matter, of course. But 352 Hartmann's planes are recorded only in his letters to his beloved Fraulein. The flight book contains about 150 entries. How they were obtained was repeatedly written by Yu.I. Mukhin in his newspaper "Duel" (until it was closed) and in his books about the Second World War. Very controversial "victories". Again, everyone is on the eastern front. As soon as the German "aces" got to the western front, for some reason their personal score dropped sharply. As for the snipers, how many of them, who had more than 100 killed enemies, survived until the end of the war? - very little, both from our side and from the German side.

[Thomas N.]

Quote: Aviator_

Tactics matter, of course. But 352 Hartmann's planes are recorded only in his letters to his beloved Fraulein. The flight book contains about 150 entries. How they were obtained was repeatedly written by Yu.I. Mukhin in his newspaper "Duel" (until it was closed) and in his books about the Second World War. Very controversial "victories".

Those. did he only deceive his future wife? And the command means afraid to deceive? Well, exactly "the cowardly knight of the Reich" But the court in the USSR sentenced him to 10 years after the war for war crimes and causing serious damage to the Soviet economy. Is it for 150 knocked down in the flight book or letters to the bride, too, filed to the case?

Quote: Aviator_

Again, everyone is on the eastern front. As soon as the German "aces" got to the western front, for some reason their personal score dropped sharply.

I wonder what prevented you from continuing to lie on the western front?

Quote: Aviator_

As for the snipers, how many of them, who had more than 100 killed enemies, survived until the end of the war? - very little, both from our side and from the German side.

No wonder, the losses on the ground and in the air are incomparable, the sniper could accidentally and under art. shelling and fall under the homeless, and not only in their firing position, but also in the near rear. Unlike the pilots, who even had field airfields much further from the front line. But the fact that snipers on the ground died more often than aces in the air does not change anything. If there is an opportunity to fight of your own free will, to choose from - where and then, where there is an advantage and escape from the blow, when it is not, then the personal result will always be many times higher. All the impressive successes of pilots, submariners, snipers, frontline reconnaissance, special forces and occasionally (very rarely) tankers in defense are based on this. But only victories in battle and, moreover, in war, this does not guarantee.
And Mukhin in his attempts to discredit and humiliate the defeated enemies, only belittles the feat of his own people, which turns out to have won, in his opinion, only "the cowardly and stupid knights of the Reich." Konstantin Simonov back in 1939 on Khalkhin-Gol at the end of the poem "Tank" showed an example of a dignified attitude towards the defeated enemies: "... Yes, we did not get the victory easily. Yes, the enemy was brave. The more our glory."

[Thomas N.]

Everything said above about pilots, snipers and the attitude towards the defeated enemy does not apply to the article about "Winter Forest" and partisans, the article leaves some vile impression - the author tries to refute the lies about the "successes" of the partisans with lies about the "successes" of the Germans. So nothing can be proved.

[Aviator_]

... Yes, it was not easy for us to win. Yes, the enemy was brave. The greater is our glory. "

Simonov's poems about the bravery of the enemy in no way apply to the aces of the Luftwaffe, you yourself write what tactics they adhere to, there is no courage there. In our conversation, we are not talking about the entire army of the Reich, but only about the aces promoted by the department of Goebbels. Mukhin scrupulously cites methods of counting victories, he is open to criticism, go ahead. The fact that Hartman received only 10 years from us only means that his score was fake. Read about the account on the western front in Mukhin, there it is very convincing. About snipers - their accidental deaths are very few, the standard method of dealing with them was a thorough treatment with mortar fire at their places of intended location (after signs of a sniper's action appeared). This is how we and the Germans acted.

[Thomas N.]

Quote: Aviator_

... Yes, it was not easy for us to win. Yes, the enemy was brave. The greater is our glory. "

Simonov's poems about the bravery of the enemy in no way apply to the aces of the Luftwaffe, you yourself write what tactics they adhere to, there is no courage there.

Do not take this poem so literally - since you say "brave", then you can no longer talk about professionalism? I see in this line of Simonov an example of recognizing a defeated enemy as a worthy enemy, the victory over which was difficult and required great sacrifices. And Mukhin, as I already said, is simply trying to humiliate the defeated, not noticing that by doing so he also humiliates the winners - if the enemy is cowardly or stupid, it turns out that the winner is not such a hero either. Yes, and Mukhin does it somehow strangely - humiliating some Germans, at the same time involuntarily praising others - well, the enemy "hero" will not have the surname Hartmann, but Grislavsky from Chapter 7 "The Cowardly Knight of the Reich" and how is that better? And Rudel, as presented by Mukhin, although stupid, but generally a brave fellow - seven landings in enemy territory to rescue their downed comrades are worthy of respect (if it was true).
In general, there is still a lot to say on this topic - about the professional achievements in World War II, real and invented by propaganda, but I will not. The topic of the article about "Winter Forest" is not suitable for this. I inadvertently got out of place with arguments about professionalism, courage and attitude towards the vanquished in a completely inappropriate discussion of the history of a punitive operation against partisans and civilians. I was hooked on your comment about the impossible number of victories of enemy pilots and did not notice that the history discussed here has nothing to do with this. Do not take it for a desire to leave the last word for yourself - I will definitely read your response comment, if any, but I will not answer.

[Mikhail3]

Memories could be good and bad, but in them the partisans won victories over the Germans somehow very easily: they smashed the garrisons, destroyed the columns, exterminated them in hundreds and thousands. This is strange in light of the fact that the enemies surrounded the guerrillas from all sides and outnumbered them and outnumbered them.

Well, if you don't know how to think, and only know how to be surprised, then "easy" victories will seem like a miracle to you. You will puff out your cheeks and doubt ...
Well, if you were taught to think, then it will turn out something like this. How do guerrilla operations differ from those of regular armies? First of all - a great freedom in choosing the battlefield. That is, if the enemy is strong, you just don't attack him! Strange, isn't it? Has nothing like this ever occurred to the author of the article?
The second difference is the abundance of intelligence. A local partisan, he has thousands of people, children, women, old people in his intelligence networks. The density of the flow of intelligence information is absolutely unattainable for a regular army, no matter how many reconnaissance groups are sent. So you can find out the time, volume and duration of a sneeze of any enemy garrison, not to mention its combat effectiveness.
Third. Greater mobility. The armies sit opposite each other, and if your battalion ended up right here, this is where you will have to fight, no matter how many people are opposing you with what weapon. The partisan detachment, which found itself among the combat-ready troops marching to the front, simply moves, often hundreds of kilometers, away from the enemy, which it cannot afford.
Since the rear is, suddenly, not a front, there are not many "superior forces" in it, paradoxically. All these forces are at the front, from which these forces are very difficult to withdraw. There are never too many soldiers at the front. But too little ... So, taking advantage of mobility and an abundance of intelligence, the guerrillas always found where and how to sensitively pinch the enemy, without meeting a serious rebuff.
And of course, when the enemy distracts large forces of well-trained fighters with good equipment to search for and destroy partisans, the partisans are getting bad. But even if the detachment was caught by the Jaeger regiment and destroyed, it is still a victory! Because at the front at that time that regiment was not, and even then our military leaders did not fail to use it.
The article is surprisingly senseless, despite the material presented, the conclusions, let's say, do not shine with intelligence. Strange ...

[BAI]

The father-in-law was in the partisans. 13 year old boy. The Germans pressed detachment 43 to the Berezina in November and destroyed almost the entire one. They tied him to a horse and, among the few, managed to swim across the icy river. So he was saved.

[Reinhard]

The losses of the Germans are indicated precisely by the Germans! And how many of them served all the local and foreign bastards? Many partisans only (according to stories) saw the Germans in captivity for the first time. and fought against the traitors and lackeys of the fascists. In Crimea. eg. only local policemen were allowed into the mountains! Nobody felt sorry for such material!

[Daniil Konovalenko]

An article from the series "German documents tell, but Soviet ones lie"

[Boris ⁣ Shaver]

Pay attention to "killed 1627 local residents." It was not Dyukov who came up with that. He and other authors cite whoever wrote it first. And he, in turn, read the document and falsified it, giving the number of killed partisans for the number of civilians killed.

This passage characterizes the author of this text especially well. Why did the Russian lie? Why could not the German lie, presenting in his report all civilians killed during the punitive operation as partisans? This is a very obvious point. Unless, of course, you are writing the article maliciously.

In my partisan memoirs, I was always confused by one moment. Memories could be good and bad, but somehow the partisans won victories over the Germans very easily.

When you choose the time and place of the attack, and the enemy does not know about it - why not? That's what partisan warfare is for.
About the memoirs - you either did not read them, or you are deliberately distorting them. During the "counter-partisan" operations, when the partisans were deprived of their advantage - surprise - many authors talk about our heavy losses. Lacking a number comparable to the Germans and comparable weapons and equipment, the partisans, obviously, in such clashes found themselves in unfavorable conditions. That did not prevent them from crushing the same Germans during their, let's say, sabotage operations.

Operations went on one after another, and if hundreds and thousands were killed in each of them, and the reports showed small losses, then soon the security forces of the rear of the army group would become incapacitated.

And about the cases of withdrawal of forces from the front to fight the partisans - you, by any chance, did not hear anything?

[akims]

The partisans were different. There were such as Kovpak, who developed his own raid tactics with the actions of small groups at a distance from the detachment. I spoke with the grandson of Demolition Commander Kovpak. Such a tactic, but among the common people: do not be a creep, where you eat, it bore fruit. Although the raids and campaigns were invented, of course, not by Sidor Artemyevich. After 1942, there were those who captured and held entire regions, in fact establishing Soviet power there (as a rule, partisan formations). And there were those who sat out, translating grubs. There were those who served the Germans, and when they smelled of fried, they went over to the partisans in whole detachments. And they were taken!

[Korsar4]

Typical behavior of a wolf in nature. Kovpak, of course, is a legendary person.

[Boris ⁣ Shaver]

Remove this shame from the site. It is better for this particular author to eat in the head and not bother it with anything else.
Arguments in the comments.
The number of our civilians killed by punishers on the next "safari" to pass off as defeated partisans (and in the losses of punishers, at the same time, "forget" any sympathetic bastard, like the same Bandera, taking into account only the Germans), illustrating this nonsense another "brilliant victory" civilized "Europeans - this is a stout blasphemy.

[Alexga]

Remove this shame from the site. It is better for this particular author to eat in the head and not bother it with anything else.

I fully support you. Belarusian partisans held their parade in liberated Minsk, which means they won!

[iouris]

The position of the author and editorial staff is stated in the title. Information war, however. Against who?

[Moskovit]

This feature, a small amount of captured or found weapons with large losses of partisans, has long been noted by most historians. And translated into Russian, civilians were enlisted as partisans.
Moreover, the battlefield remained with the Germans, that is, the partisans could not collect weapons and leave.
German generals also had to report to their superiors. Therefore, everyone was recorded.

[dgonni]

Translated into Russian, this meant that the partisan had time to throw off his weapons and tried to pass for a civilian! And it won't take long to get a trunk out of a river or a swamp, and in a couple of days or months nothing will be there.
And they determined who is who according to the testimony of those who collaborated with the Germans. They were also local and knew the whole story.

[Moskovit]

What are you talking about! Have you read how all these counter-guerrilla operations were conducted? Winter forests and winter magic? All villages were destroyed first. They were called partisan strongholds, the population was declared accomplices of the partisans or partisans proper. What kind of throwing off of weapons, do not confuse the monstrous war of extermination and the struggle of the modern police with the illegal circulation of weapons: I found this pistol and went to hand over to the department.
If you were caught in the woods, if you were an angel with wings, interrogation by the Gestapo and execution every other day. If you're lucky, they'll be hijacked to Germany.

[dgonni]

I kind of communicated with witnesses who experienced all this on the territory of Ukraine and Belarus. As civilians and partisans! Well, I read the boy, of course. Only what is written in the memoirs of the same Kolpak and Vershigora with Saburov hardly corresponds to real events.
My godfather's father was Naumov's chief of staff. Neighbor across the house, the commander of the machine-gun company at the Kolpak.
So there is an idea of ​​the partisans. And not by the laudatory odes of post-war memoirs

[Moskovit]

Everyone has a story like this. My grandmother told me that she lived in the occupied territory at the junction of the Kalinin and Novgorod regions, as in revenge for the attack of the partisans on the train, the Germans simply threw grenades at the windows of the huts, and then they burned the village altogether and she lived in a dugout. She and other young girls then hid in the ravines from the Germans. Therefore, she remained alive.
In general, this story is bloody, cruel and still largely unknown.

[Boris ⁣ Shaver]

Quote: dgonni

at the Kolpak

Not at Bandera?

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Moskovit

This feature, a small amount of captured or found weapons with large losses of partisans, has long been noted by most historians.

Dyukov wrote in his comments that

the number of partisans killed versus the number of weapons seized and the proportion of women and children killed even the German authorities were confused

[dust31]

Quote: Moskovit

This feature, a small amount of captured or found weapons with large losses of partisans, has long been noted by most historians. And translated into Russian, civilians were enlisted as partisans.
Moreover, the battlefield remained with the Germans, that is, the partisans could not collect weapons and leave.
German generals also had to report to their superiors. Therefore, everyone was recorded.

So what? The partisan, acting in the rear, exposes the civilian population under attack. Accordingly, he can be "punished". As a grandfather from the village said, some d.rak threw a grenade at the Germans, and his aunt was shot for this, although she was no sideways. Yes, the Germans were not even wounded.

[Mikhail3]

John, all of you gallant fighters of the US Cyber ​​Command are so fun to read! Don't stop, please! Where are you broadcasting from, from Wisconsin or from the Kharkiv region?

[dgonni]

In fact, the history of the partisan movement has not actually been studied and described by researchers even by 10%!
Near the same Minsk in the Rudensk region in 1943, partisans tried to take the village of Sergeevichi. The chief of staff of the partisans had a sent Cossack. Well, there all the partisans on the thin ice of the swamp and put right under the village. For machine guns in the village and mortars. During the union, no one acroming the locals even remembered this.
P.S. And even today, having the site Memory of the People, you will not find any award documents, namely, for what a particular partisan was presented for the award! And this applies not only to privates, but also to the highest command staff up to the commanders of formations!
For even now, writing the truth will not be very comme il faut.

[Sergey Oreshin]

This is where everyone argues about numbers, argues, discusses.
But the fact is (and the author notes this) that the partisans at times suffered heavy defeats, some German operations ended in the complete defeat of the partisan formations and large losses among the partisans for various reasons.
And now, instead of analyzing the reasons for the failures, to understand why the Germans emerged victorious in certain operations - our "couch patriots" raise a united cry: "Yes, you are telling the truth! But it cannot be like that! Yes, our enemies have always won, in all battles!"
This very stupid hat covering has cost us dearly in the past, don't forget about it

[Boris ⁣ Shaver]

Quote: Sergey Oreshin

everyone argues

Here, in fact, there is nothing to argue with. The low-quality Goebel propaganda that the author tried to sniff out does not stand up to criticism.
You have to be a frankly inhibited rogulya from the most terry Carpathian farm in order not to understand this.

[boris epstein]

About losses. The partisans of Medvedev's detachment were captured, taken to the detachment and interrogated by General von Ilgen, who was in command of the counter-guerrilla operation. They wanted to send him to Moscow, but the plane with Ilgen was shot down by anti-aircraft artillery when crossing the front line. His army had many so-called "Cossacks", that is, prisoners of war who had gone into the service of Hitler. Tatars. Reference. In 1941, 27 Crimean Tatars were drafted into the Red Army from the Crimea. Of these, 000 deserted and ended up in the service of Hitler. There was such a Lokot republic. It was organized by Kaminsky and Voskoboinik, and they also created the RONA-Russian "people's liberation" army, which was neither a liberation nor a national army. It also served Hitler. Tonka-machine-gunner (Antonina Makarova) served in RONA. On account of her more than 25 executed (not killed in action!). And most of them were civilians. The Crimean Tatar Legion (by the way, was listed in the SS forces) and RONA fought against the partisans. Bandera and Melnikovites fought against the partisans. The Germans were not interested in the losses of these units and they did not show them in their documents. And how many villages were burned in punitive operations by the Germans and their henchmen? Everyone knows about Katyn. But there were thousands of such katynas. And the mass shootings of hostages not only in villages, but also in cities? How many of them were the Richerts, Schenkendorfs and Ilgens enrolled as partisans?
Weapon. Yes, in 1941 and until the middle of 1942, the partisans had a hard time with weapons. But after the creation of the Central Headquarters of the partisan movement, aircraft began to deliver weapons, ammunition, explosives, magnetic mines from the mainland. fuses, fuses, fuses, radio stations and power supply to them, medicines, evacuate seriously wounded. Even in Schenkendorf's report it is said that submachine guns were taken as trophies. There are a lot of photos of partisans with PPSh. But the PPSh went into series only on the eve of the war.

[boris epstein]

I'm sorry, I confess: not Katyn, but Khatyn.

[polar fox]

Quote: Boris Epstein

But after the creation of the Central Headquarters of the partisan movement, aircraft began to deliver weapons, ammunition, explosives, magnetic mines from the mainland.

a long time ago, in the 70s, a partisan grandfather told how they were supplied with weapons ... he was especially impressed by the silencer on the Mosin carbine ... he told how they made ambushes and how they then shed into the forest ...

[Yuri Guliy]

It seems like everyone lies in war, but who lied more?
Personally, I was brought up on Soviet literature and domestic films, and here such a deadly publication ... there is something to think about

[Boris ⁣ Shaver]

"Murderous publication" - your comment looks like you are a bot of pure water on the support of this slag, which you call publication. Moreover, a bot, not burdened by reason. And this already allows us to assume in you the author of this opus.

[Freeman]

Comrades! Has anyone noticed the Fritz weapon in the foreground?
But he has a "real schmeisser" in his hands.
But I can't determine the model -
Roofing felts MR 18 with a box magazine, roofing felts MR 28?
And for some reason the store is not inserted ...

[wehr]

I think this is a staged photo.
It is unlikely that the Germans were rummaging through the forest with bayonets attached. Therefore, the store is not inserted.

[tank64rus]

"General von Schenckendorff's report lists the trophies: 10 mortars, 14 machine guns, 31 submachine guns, 2 anti-tank rifles, 114 rifles. A substantial number of small arms are also indicated. Apparently, they mean pistols. And also a large number of cartridges and explosives." ... Here the author begins to juggle. Pistols, well, no need to produce nonsense, because a rifle is also a hand-held small arms. Well, as for the losses and conclusions, it is better then to take the data of the Soviet archives and compare, otherwise they have been studying it from the memoirs of German generals since the late 80s. For example, in the battle on Prokhorovka some of the "historians" lost 356 tanks of the Germans 5, the authors of this historical opus also used the memoirs of German generals.

[wehr]

So in the document. The corresponding place is given in the photocopy.
It shows that the Germans were distinguished by rifles (Gewehre) and other firearms (sonstige Handfeuerwaffen). Since machine guns, submachine guns and rifles are listed separately, only pistols remain in the other firearms category.

Read the document before yelling about jerking.

[dmmyak40]

Author, can you justify the choice of the noun "beating" in the title of the article? And that painfully interesting semantics peeps out ...

[tank64rus]

And set it on fire too amiable and slingshot.

[hjvtp1966]

Quote: akims

The partisans were different. There were such as Kovpak, who developed his own raid tactics with the actions of small groups at a distance from the detachment. I spoke with the grandson of Demolition Commander Kovpak. Such a tactic, but among the common people: do not be a creep, where you eat, it bore fruit. Although the raids and campaigns were invented, of course, not by Sidor Artemyevich. After 1942, there were those who captured and held entire regions, in fact establishing Soviet power there (as a rule, partisan formations). And there were those who sat out, translating grubs. There were those who served the Germans, and when they smelled of fried, they went over to the partisans in whole detachments. And they were taken!

The last name of that commander, not the course? And then I was friends in childhood with the grandson of a Kovpak member named Kurs. My friend was very proud. There are several lines about his grandfather in Kovpak's book "From Putivl to the Carpathians" and he was the commander of the demolitions, died long before the liberation of Ukraine and Belarus.

[forester1971]

Already in the title of the article, "Winter Forest: Defeat and Beating of Partisans," the author's "benevolent" attitude towards Soviet partisans is evident. And I agree with many comments about the fact that now there are a lot of "unworthy" authors who believe that you cannot trust the memories of Soviet citizens and Soviet archives, but you can trust the fascists - they certainly won't lie (sarcasm).

[astra wild2]

"killed 1627 local residents" I always thought that partisans should be outsiders? The partisans have always enjoyed the support of local residents, and who should establish contacts with the local population: a stranger or their own?
"How many partisans there were before the start of the operation is also not easy to say"
I will help: instead of retelling Dyukov, looking in the archives for documents on the partisan brigade "For Soviet Belarus", there should be documents: who is the brigade commander, what detachments did the partisan brigade consist of? You can look for the reports of the commanders, where the numbers of losses are indicated, but this takes time, and it is easier to read Dyukov.
Colleagues, I once said that I am skeptical about today's historians, you will look at Vika, newly-minted historians: someone graduated from the Institute of Culture and CORRESPONDENCE, and what is the quality of education there? Remember the student humor of the past.
- What is the name of the item?
Silence.
-What is my name?.
Whisper
-What a nasty bastard.
I doubt the competence of historians, the Yeltsin period, then it was fashionable: to openly denigrate the SOVIET PERIOD. The current ones, when compared with those, directly, "crystal particular"

[EvilLion]

Well, actually, we don't care if the Foshists killed someone just like that, or partisan. In any case, the criminals are only Foshists, and the Soviet citizen had every right to kill them.

[alpamys]

here are also interesting documents on partisans and prisoners of war in the Crimea, some of the prisoners were not even disarmed by the Germans.
https://cont.ws/@Colonel-Cassad/1844099

[EvilLion]

A successful guerrilla war is possible only through active operations of regular troops, which do not allow the enemy to send significant forces against the partisans.

As for the losses, there is a suspicion about those who were shot that they just entered the village, gathered men from 16 years old, pointed a finger "at the partisan ist!" Or whatever-they-spanked, and shot. It is unlikely that they had many prisoners from the partisan detachments themselves.

Losses of policemen and other "self-defense", which the German divisional commander, or regiment commander was attached to, could also not be recorded as loss of connection. But for the operation as a whole, he still had to report on the people assigned to him.

But in general, the USSR in Afghanistan also suffered losses, as it were, 1:10, the mujahideen did not have a single success more significant than the defeat of the battalion in 1985, and could catch the maximum reconnaissance company in an ambush. A regular army with heavy weapons is a regular army, although the locals seem to be fighting non-stop there, and are at home.

We are talking about a requirement, for example, that the guerrillas themselves take away weapons and ammunition from the enemy.

Rave. Weapons had to be abandoned, and even made locally. Well, I'm generally silent about detonators for explosives, although it is much more profitable for the partisans to blow up a train than to fight with a company of Germans, kill and injure a dozen and retreat having spent ammunition, but having achieved nothing.

10 mortars, 14 machine guns, 31 submachine guns, 2 anti-tank guns, 114 rifles.

But 600+ people were killed in battle. So write, foshist, there were hundreds of 2-3 combatants, the rest were children and women who had hidden from the German "liberators". Well, then bring the cut off ears, according to American models from Vietnam, so who's there will figure out whose they are.

True, the report indicates that many weapons were hidden by the partisans or thrown into the snow. Which also speaks quite clearly about the defeat.

And this weapon is not considered a trophy?

And the scattering of partisan formations is not a victory. In this case, this regular unit is destroyed, and the partisans will simply gather in another place.

[Konstantin Shevchenko]

The losses of the Europeans in their own reports should be multiplied by 10. And this will be the closest data.

[Ham]

Yes Yes Yes! and they were also defeated not by the Soviet people and the Red Army - but by "General Frost" and the absence of a "decent road network"!
and after reading the memoirs of Rudel and "tigers in the mud" in the circus they don't laugh ...
read the memoirs of the partisan general Vershigora - "people with a clear conscience" where he writes in detail about both victories and losses ... and then refer to the reports of the beaten German soldiers

[dust31]

Quote: dgonni

So there is an idea of ​​the partisans. And not by the laudatory odes of post-war memoirs

our patriots have either all white or all black. They do not understand that the civilian population with children and old people will always try to survive, and not wage an irreconcilable struggle with the invaders, as they imagine. And for them the partisans, although their own, are to a large extent a risk factor for survival, and they will always at least be afraid of them, and not give up their last shirt. Maybe someone knows the topic from the propaganda books, they will not agree, who communicated with living witnesses, they will confirm. And actually, why should they fight, sacrificing the latter, if the army merged and fled hundreds of kilometers, having weapons, tanks and aircraft?

[Vanka Zhukov]

A lie to the rescue is propaganda. It's better than panic and apathy.

[skobars]

A very dubious article. A partisan is a person who deliberately went into the forest to conduct an armed struggle against an adversary. Judging by the article, unarmed men were mostly killed by the Nazis and recorded as partisans.

[Pamir]

Author Dmitry, this already looks like a persecution. The article is good. In the Second World War, in general, there are a lot of things that were hidden when it was not profitable for their own propaganda, and with what victims everything was forged. Recently I got acquainted with the works of Valery Zamulin, "Kurskiy Izlom" and "Secret Kursk Battle "so there, everything is not so unambiguous, as is customary in Russian historiography. And what our affairs actually turned out to be. The book is complex, when I read it, I used two maps at the same time, there are so many part numbers, for understanding, at least for the intellect of an army commander And the article, EXCELLENT, you need to know with what blood, everything was paid for, the Germans were not whipping boys, they knew how to fight and act too. Don't think about the other side with disdain.

[perm23]

And why can you believe what this author writes and not from whom he wrote earlier. What makes you think that he is true.

[Siegfried]

about 20 killed Germans, does the author himself believe in this figure? 20 people during the operation of a division of 10.000 not the youngest soldiers in the winter in the forest died or would have died without any enemy influence, just walking for a month in the forests ... it is obvious that the division commander with the "golden cross" did not want to show losses against poorly armed civilians. The number 20 just burns with lies like the sun over sugar. Another aspect is that on the side of the Germans in the anti-guerrilla war there were numerous auxiliary units of the Hungarians, Romanians, Balts, Ukrainians and all kinds of policemen and the like. All of them, too, perished from the bullets of the partisans, and the partisans undoubtedly read them out as killed by the Nazis.
The truth is somewhere in the middle ... I think if we take the losses of the partisans in 600 killed in battle as a fact, then the Germans should have had at least 100-150 killed. these battles were predominantly small arms firefights and in smaller artillery, aircraft and tanks, which usually multiplied losses in battle many times over. The level of training of the Germans and ours in partisan battles can be considered approximately equal. The partisans had many regular Red Army men who settled during the retreat 41, and the partisans also knew the area and the forest. The Germans were more organized, better armed, but not the most experienced soldiers were taken in the fight against the partisans. Often in anti-partisan raids, fresh, unfired units were involved for running-in before being used already at the front.
In general, yes, during operations against the partisans, where even the SS troops sometimes operated, the losses of the partisans were high. At the same time, the partisans also carried out successful operations, where sometimes entire battalions were slaughtered. And if we take the picture in general, then these are battles of small groups (companies) where the machine gun is the most formidable weapon on both sides and there the losses are approximately equal + -

[Igor Belovol]

How many weapons are captured, so many partisans. How to understand that two-thirds of the partisans "took part in unarmed battles"? Any civilian can be designated as an unarmed partisan, and any cellar as a partisan bunker.

[Darth Vader]

Suffice it to ask how the "victories" in the Luftwaffe were considered.
As an anecdote about "gentlemen take each other's word for it. And then I started getting lucky!"

[tolancop]

Some trashy stuff ... Did the guerrillas fight wrong? Well, as far as they could, they fought. Some are better, some are worse. But the fact that the partisans represented a serious splinter for the Germans in the rear is undoubtedly. Otherwise, there was no need to divert forces, which were not superfluous at the front, to eliminate them.
And this is the author's thought
"..As far as can be judged from the memoirs of IG Starinov, the question concerned the highest party leaders. For example, LZ Mekhlis. They ordered the use of such forms of partisan struggle, which, in essence, only made it easier for the Germans to defeat the partisans. And they led to huge losses. This is a requirement, for example, that the partisans themselves take away weapons and ammunition from the enemy .. "
don't even know how to comment. Apparently, according to the author, the partisans should not have taken away weapons and ammunition from the enemy ... Although further the same author writes about the insufficient armament of the partisans.
And who was supposed to supply the partisans with weapons and ammunition? And who was supposed to supply them with food and uniforms? The population already plundered by the Germans?
Kovpak repeatedly describes the conduct of "economic operations" (apparently the semi-official name that existed), aimed precisely at supplying at the expense of the enemy. Of course, the trophies were paid for with partisan blood, but there was nowhere else to take material resources. Yes, there was supply from the "mainland", but it was not always possible to get it, and on the "mainland" these resources were not at all superfluous, plus the cost of air travel.
Rotten, in general, material.

[lelik613]

Self-criticism masaryk very soulful. "and shed a tear" (c) Master

[vel1163]

How such freaks are allowed on the site.

[perm23]

The Germans in a matter of days and weeks defeated the best and well-armed armies of Europe and no one squeals about this. and to defeat the poorly organized and poorly trained and armed partisan units with superior forces. this is some kind of victory straight. And what about the losses of the Germans. so the nikkoy commander will not write the truth, so as not to suffer himself.

[zombirusrev]

The usual nonsense of the new "Kolya from Urengoy." (C) The Germans considered all civilians to be partisans and wrote down everything they could in their reports. Do not trust the losers of the war, unlucky hunters and fishermen, they will lie to you with three boxes. "There were only ten of us, and there were 10000000 Russians, and both were wearing felt boots" (c)
Read S. Kovpak "From Putivl to the Carpathians." ...