Military Review

1941: a disaster that never happened

260

Didn't you want to fight, weren't ready to fight back?



Let's go back to the beginning of the war. Kurt von Tippelskirch, author of “Stories World War II ", who held a prominent post in the German General Staff on the eve of the Eastern campaign, was sure that the Soviet leadership was taking urgent measures to protect the country:

"The Soviet Union prepared for an armed conflict to the best of its ability."

But our home-grown "catastrophists" cannot be understood by any facts and assessments. In extreme cases, they have a simple move in reserve: "Well, yes, they did something, but that means not enough, since the Germans took Minsk on the fifth day." It is useless to argue with this audience, today I want to say something else. Is there any sense in the very discussion about the "readiness / unpreparedness of the USSR for war"? And what lies behind this most notorious "readiness"?

First, let's ask ourselves the following question number 5... Is the state capable, in principle, of winning a war for which it is not ready?

With sound reasoning, the answer is obvious: in the realities of modern times, of course, no. The total nature of confrontation and the dynamism of hostilities test the strength of all the components of the state mechanism. And, if in a critical situation life support systems have demonstrated the ability to self-development, it means that for this they have an appropriate potential, the state of which determines this very readiness for war.

The clearest example of this is the evacuation of production facilities, their deployment in the east of the country and re-profiling for defense needs. No threats of reprisals or outbursts of enthusiasm were able to provide such amazing results: in the first four months of the war, 18 million people and 2,5 thousand enterprises were removed from the attack of the aggressor.


And don't just take it out.

But also to equip, to employ a lot of people, to launch the production process at the evacuated factories, and even to master the production of new equipment. A country that possesses such an organizational, personnel, transport, and industrial resource and is able to use it so effectively has shown the highest degree of preparation for war.

So if there is a reason to talk about the degree of readiness, then only in relation to the beginning of the war, which in itself means a significant localization of the problem.

But here comes another question - no. 6... And what kind of war was Russia or the USSR ready for? Finnish? First World War? Japanese? Crimean? Patriotic in 1812? North?

I think that the reader will agree - in all these cases it would be, at least, an exaggeration to speak of complete readiness. Perhaps the exception is the Russian-Turkish wars. But in these cases, the theater of operations was located on the outskirts of the empire, and besides, the most brilliant victories occurred in the second half of the XNUMXth century, when the Russian army was the strongest in the world.

Particularly indicative is the example of the First World War, which began in a situation that would seem to be directly opposite to the circumstances of the German invasion of 1941. First, there is no suddenness or impetuosity. On June 28, 1914, Serbian nationalists killed Archduke Ferdinand in Sarajevo, Germany declared war on Russia more than a month later - on August 1, and active hostilities began a couple of weeks later.

In the pre-war years, no one had brainwashed the Russian people about the "war with little blood and on foreign territory," although it began just on foreign territory, namely, in East Prussia.

Nobody in the Russian army carried out personnel purges and "bloody massacres" over command personnel. All the generals, the officer corps, all the dear to our hearts lieutenants Golitsyns and cornets Obolensky were available. Moreover, the command of the armed forces of the empire had time to take into account the lessons of the Russian-Japanese war of 1904, which was done as far as possible and resources. And, perhaps most importantly, imperial Russia did not have to wait three years for the opening of the Second Front: Germany and Austria-Hungary immediately had to fight in the west and east.

However, under much more favorable conditions, the Russian army did not manage to achieve positive results for itself: for three years it did not conduct a single major offensive operation against the Germans - I emphasize, it was against the German army. If the Red Army, three years after the start of the Great Patriotic War, recaptured most of the lost territory and began to liberate Belarus and the Baltic states, the Russian army from August 1914 to August 1917 only retreated inland. Moreover, if we compare the pace of this retreat with the microscopic changes in the front line in the European theater of operations, it could well be called rapid.

Perhaps the fact is that the ruthless Stalinist marshals paved the road to victory with corpses, without hesitation, sacrificing thousands of soldiers' lives? Did the noble tsarist generals-humanists value them in every possible way? They may have treasured it, and even regretted it, only in the "imperialist" one for every killed German, on average, there were seven dead Russian soldiers. And in some battles, the ratio of losses reached 1 to 15.

The aggressor starts and wins


Let's set question number 7. But, perhaps, these are the Russians, who are not always ready for war? Then who was ready for World War II?

Perhaps England, whose soldiers fled on fishing schooners from Dunkirk and retreated under Rommel's blows in North Africa? An eyewitness to the outbreak of war, squadron commander of the Royal Air Force Guy Penrose Gibson, in his diary entries, was categorical:

"England was not ready for war, no one doubted that."

And further:

“The state of the army was just awful - almost no tanks, modern weapons, no trained personnel ... "

Gibson was disheartened by the state of affairs of the French allies.

"It seems that the French government has had a hand as much as ours in the collapse of the country's defenses."

Gibson's pessimistic conclusions confirmed the course of the German invasion of France in May 1940, when in 40 days one of the largest armies in the world (110 divisions, 2560 tanks, 10 thousand guns and about 1400 aircraft plus five divisions of the British Expeditionary Force) was torn apart by the Hitlerite Wehrmacht, like Tuzik heating pad.

What about Uncle Sam?

Maybe the Americans became an exception and began to beat the enemy, especially since at first they would not have to deal with the Germans? The United States began preparations for war only after the invasion of France by the Third Reich, but started quite briskly.

From June 1940 to April 1941, the Americans built or expanded over 1600 military establishments. In September 1940, a law was passed on selective conscription and military training. But all these energetic preparations did not prevent the catastrophe that befell the US Navy on the morning of December 7, 1941 at the Pearl Harbor Hawaiian base.


Accident? An annoying episode?

By no means - in the first months of the war, the Americans suffered one defeat after another. By April 1942, the Japanese defeated the Yankees in the Philippines, and only in June 1942, after the Battle of Midway Atoll, there was a turning point in the Pacific theater of operations. That is, like the Soviet Union, the US's path from the failed start of hostilities to the first major victory took six months. But we do not see the Americans convict President Roosevelt of failing to prepare the country for war.

To summarize: all rivals of Germany and Japan began their campaigns with crushing defeats, and only the geographical factor predetermined the difference in the consequences. The Germans occupied France in 39 days, Poland in 27 days, Norway in 23 days, Greece in 21 days, Yugoslavia in 12 days, Denmark in 24 hours.

The armed forces of the countries that had common land borders with the aggressor were defeated, and only the Soviet Union continued to resist. For England and the United States, the opportunity to sit out behind water barriers contributed to the fact that the first sensitive defeats did not lead to catastrophic results and made it possible to engage in the development of defense capabilities - in the case of the United States, in almost ideal conditions.

The course of the Second World War testifies: at the initial stage of the war, the aggressor gains a decisive advantage over the enemy and forces the victim of the aggression to exert considerable forces to turn the tide of the struggle. If these forces were present.

Another interesting question - no. 8... Were the Germans ready for war with the USSR?

Not to a successful start, but to bring it to a victorious end? For example, is it possible to speak of such readiness if, when planning a campaign in the East, Berlin proceeded from distorted and sometimes fantastic ideas about the military and economic potential of the Soviet Union? As the German historian Klaus Reinhardt notes, the German command almost completely lacked data on the preparation of reserves, the supply of reinforcements and the supply of troops deep behind enemy lines, on new construction and industrial production in the USSR.

It is not surprising that the very first weeks of the war presented the politicians and military leaders of the Third Reich with a lot of unpleasant surprises. On July 21, Hitler admitted that if he had been informed in advance that the Russians had produced such a large amount of weapons, he would not have believed and decided that this was disinformation. On August 4, the Fuhrer again wonders: if he knew that the information about the production of tanks by the Soviets, which Guderian reported to him, was true, then it would be much more difficult for him to make a decision to attack the USSR.

Then, in August 41, Goebbels makes a startling confession:

“We seriously underestimated the Soviet combat capability, and mainly the armament of the Soviet army. We did not even have an approximate idea of ​​what the Bolsheviks had at their disposal. "

Even approximately!

So, the Germans purposefully and thoroughly prepared for an attack on the USSR, but ... they did not really prepare. I believe that the Kremlin did not expect that the German leadership would make incomprehensible miscalculations in assessing the prospects for a war against the USSR, and this, to a certain extent, disoriented Moscow. Hitler was mistaken, and Stalin could not calculate this mistake.

As the American historian Harold Deutsch observed,

"At that time, few people realized that all normal and reasonable arguments could not be applied to Hitler, who acted according to his own, unusual and often perverse logic, challenging all arguments of common sense."

1941: a disaster that never happened

Stalin was simply physically unprepared to reproduce the Fuhrer's paranoid line of thought. The Soviet leadership, obviously, experienced a cognitive dissonance generated by the incompatibility between the obvious signs of Germany being prepared for a war against the USSR and the deliberate senselessness of such a war for the Germans. Hence the unsuccessful attempts to find a rational explanation for this situation, and probing demarches like the TASS note of June 14. However, as we have already shown, all this did not prevent the Kremlin from conducting full-scale preparations for war.

Sun Tzu's formula - "we say Russia, we mean England"


Question number 9... Is there any reason to regard the events of the beginning of the war for the Soviet Union as a catastrophe?

It would seem that the answer lies on the surface. Isn't the loss in a short time of a huge territory with the corresponding population and economic potential an obvious sign of such a catastrophe? But let's remember that Kaiser's Germany was defeated in the First World War, without giving up an inch of its land; moreover, the Germans capitulated when they fought on enemy territory. The same can be said about the Habsburg Empire, with the amendment that Austria-Hungary lost only a small area southeast of Lvov as a result of hostilities. It turns out that control over foreign territory is not at all a guarantee of victory in the war.

But the complete defeat of many units, formations and entire fronts - isn't that proof of a catastrophe! The argument is weighty, but not at all "reinforced concrete", as it might seem to someone. Unfortunately, the sources cite very different data on the losses of the warring parties. However, with any calculation methodology, the combat losses of the Red Army (killed and wounded) in the summer and autumn of 41 turn out to be minimal in comparison with other periods of the war.

At the same time, the number of Soviet prisoners of war reaches its maximum value. According to the German General Staff, in the period from June 22 to December 1, 1941, over 3,8 million Red Army soldiers were captured on the Eastern Front - a staggering figure, although, most likely, greatly overestimated.

But even this circumstance cannot be assessed unambiguously. First, it is better to be captured than killed. Many managed to escape and pick up again weapon... On the other hand, the colossal number of prisoners for the economy of the Third Reich turned out to be more of a burden than a help. The resources spent on maintaining, even in inhuman conditions, hundreds of thousands of healthy men, it was difficult to compensate for the results of ineffective slave labor, coupled with cases of sabotage and sabotage.

But now the reader has the right to ask the author his own question number 10... And what, then, is the decisive guarantee of victory in the war?

Here we refer to the authority of the outstanding ancient Chinese military theorist Sun Tzu. The author of the famous treatise on military strategy, The Art of War, believed that

“The best war is to smash the enemy’s plans; in the next place - to break his alliances; in the next place - to defeat his troops. "

So, the actual defeat of the enemy's forces is far from the most important condition for victory in the war, but rather a natural consequence of other achievements. Let's look at the events of the beginning of the Great Patriotic War from this angle.


On July 31, 1940, Hitler formulated the goals and objectives of the war against the USSR as follows:

“We will not attack England, but we will break those illusions that give England the will to resist ... The hope of England is Russia and America. If hopes for Russia collapse, America will also fall away from England, since the defeat of Russia will result in an incredible strengthening of Japan in East Asia. "

As the German historian Hans-Adolph Jacobsen concludes,

“By no means“ living space in the East ”... served as the main activating moment; no, the main impetus was the Napoleonic idea to smash England by defeating Russia. "

To achieve the set goals, the campaign needed to be carried out as soon as possible. Blitzrieg is not a desired result, but a forced decision; the only possible way for Germany to defeat the Soviet Union and, in general, to achieve world domination.

"The operation makes sense only if we smash this state with one blow,"

- Hitler asserted and was absolutely right.

But it was this plan that was buried by the Red Army. She retreated, but did not crumble, like the French or Poles, resistance increased, and already on July 20, during the Battle of Smolensk, the Wehrmacht was forced to go on the defensive. Albeit temporarily and in a limited area, but forced.

The numerous "cauldrons" into which the Soviet units fell as a result of the rapid sweeping maneuvers of the Wehrmacht, becoming hotbeds of fierce resistance, diverted significant enemy forces. So they turned into a kind of "black holes", devouring the most valuable and necessary resource for Hitler's success - time. No matter how cynical it may sound, the Red Army, desperately defending itself, wasting renewable resources in the form of personnel and weapons, took away from the enemy what he could not receive or restore under any circumstances.

At the top of the Reich, there were hardly any doubts on this score. On November 29, 41, the Minister of Armaments Fritz Todt told the Fuehrer:

"Militarily and politically, the war is lost."

But the "X" hour for Berlin has not yet come. A week after Todt's statement, Soviet troops launched a counteroffensive near Moscow. Another week passed, and Germany had to declare war on the United States. That is, Hitler's plan for the war - to defeat the Soviets, thereby neutralizing the United States and untie the hands of Japan, in order, ultimately, to break the resistance of England - collapsed completely.


It turns out that by the end of 1941 the Soviet Union had fulfilled two of the three precepts of Sun Tzu, took two most important steps to victory: broke the enemy's plan and, if he did not break his alliances, then seriously reduced their effectiveness, which, in particular, was expressed in Japan's refusal to attack the USSR. Moreover, the Soviet Union received strategic allies in the form of Britain and the United States.

Ivan Sintsov's syndrome


Question number 11... Why was the beginning of the Great Patriotic War so firmly rooted in the national consciousness as the greatest national catastrophe?

First of all, this is the result of the inevitable reaction to these events of their contemporaries - the consequences of the deepest psychological shock that the Soviet people experienced after the crushing defeats of the Red Army and its rapid retreat inland.

Here is how Konstantin Simonov describes the state of the protagonist of the novel "The Living and the Dead" in June 41:

“Never afterwards did Sintsov experience such a debilitating fear: what will happen next? If it all began, what will happen to everything that he loves, among what he grew up, for what he lived, with the country, with the people, with the army, which he used to consider invincible, with communism, which these fascists vowed to exterminate, on the seventh day wars between Minsk and Borisov? He was not a coward, but like millions of people, he was not prepared for what happened. "

Mental confusion, bitterness of losses and failures, captured by eyewitnesses of those terrible events in dozens of talented and outstanding works of literature and cinema, continue to significantly influence the idea of ​​the Great Patriotic War among modern viewers and readers, and to this day, forming and updating the emotional image of "tragedy 41 years ”in the minds of generations who have not found the war.

This natural state of fear and confusion of the Soviet person in the face of the greatest threat began to be deliberately exploited in Khrushchev's times as illustrations serving the political goals of debunking the personality cult. Individuals, the army, and the people appeared to be victims of tragic circumstances, behind which, when prompted by official propaganda, one could guess if not Stalin's crimes, then his fatal mistakes. It was the wrong actions or the criminal inaction of the leader that were the reason for a serious test of the strength of ideals, confidence in the might of his country.

With the departure of Khrushchev, the relevance of this approach has faded. But by that time, the theme of the "catastrophe of the 41st" had turned into a kind of valor for the defiant liberals, which they tried to flaunt in every possible way, perceiving it as a rare opportunity to demonstrate their anti-Stalinism. What was previously a sincere and vivid artistic expression of several prominent writers and filmmakers became the lot of an ever-increasing number of artisans. And since perestroika, sprinkling ashes on heads and ripping clothes at every mention of the beginning of the war has become a ritual for anti-Soviet and Russophobes of all stripes.

Instead of an epilogue


We have already noted that the blitzkrieg was the only option in which the Third Reich could gain the upper hand in World War II. It has long been recognized that in 1941 the Red Army thwarted the blitzkrieg. But why then not bring this idea to its logical conclusion and not admit that it was in 1941 that the Red Army, with all the failures and flaws characteristic of it, predetermined the outcome of the war?

Or it is possible - and necessary - to put it more concretely: it was in 1941 that the Soviet Union defeated Germany.

But the recognition of this fact is hindered by circumstances that lie in the field of psychology. It is very difficult to "put" this conclusion in the mind, knowing that the war lasted three and a half years and what sacrifices our army and people had to bring before the Act of unconditional surrender was signed in Potsdam.

Finally, the last one for today question - no. 12... Why, despite the obvious outcome, the war lasted so long and required such an incredible effort?

The main reason is the unshakable position of the Nazi leader. Hitler believed in his lucky star, and in case of defeat, the Fuhrer had the following justification: if the German people lose the war, they are not worthy of their high calling. The German historian Berndt Bonwetsch points out:

“There was no way Germany could win this war. There was only the possibility of an agreement on certain conditions. But Hitler was Hitler, and towards the end of the war he behaved more and more insanely ... "

What could the Germans do after the failure of the Barbarossa plan?

Transfer the country's economy to a war footing. They coped with this task. And still, according to objective conditions, the military-industrial potential of the Third Reich and the countries conquered by it was significantly inferior to the capabilities of the allies.

The Germans could also wait for a gross error from the enemy. And in the spring of 42, they got such an opportunity after the failed Kharkov operation and the defeat of the Crimean Front, which Hitler took advantage of as effectively as possible, again seizing the strategic initiative. The military-political leadership of the USSR did not allow more such fatal miscalculations. But this was enough for the Red Army to find itself in a difficult situation again. Hardest, but not hopeless.


Germany still had to count on a miracle, and not only a metaphysical one, but also on a completely man-made character: for example, the conclusion of a separate peace or the creation of a "weapon of retaliation".

However, miracles did not happen.

As for the question of the duration of the war, the key factor here was the delay in opening the Second Front. Despite the entry into the war of the United States and the determination of England to continue the fight, until the landing of the allies in Normandy in June 44th, Hitler, led by continental Europe, in fact, continued to fight against one main rival in the person of the USSR, which to some extent compensated for the consequences of the failure blitzkrieg and allowed the Third Reich to campaign with the same intensity in the East.

As for the large-scale bombing of the Allied aviation territory of the Reich, they did not cause any noticeable damage to the German military-industrial complex, as wrote by the American economist John Gelbraith, who during the war led a group of analysts working for the US Air Force.

The invariable staunchness of the Russian soldier, the political genius of Stalin, the growing skill of the military leaders, the labor feat of the rear, the talent of engineers and designers inexorably led to the fact that the scales were tipping on the side of the Red Army.

And without opening the Second Front, the Soviet Union defeated Germany.

Only in this case, the end of the war would have happened not on May 45, but on a later date.
Author:
Photos used:
RGAKFD, fishki.net, wvnews.com
260 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Pessimist22
    Pessimist22 April 23 2021 05: 21
    -3
    What are the pitiful excuses, and who is to blame for the fact that in 6 months of fighting, 3 million prisoners and two million killed and wounded, a huge part of the country with industrial potential and population fell under occupation?
    1. Civil
      Civil April 23 2021 08: 11
      -5
      Quote: Pessimist22
      What are the pitiful excuses, and who is to blame for the fact that in 6 months of fighting, 3 million prisoners and two million killed and wounded, a huge part of the country with industrial potential and population fell under occupation?

      Reminiscent of ninesh propagandists, too, all their inventions are broken on the figures of the Federal State Statistics Service.
      1941 is already a common noun phrase. Symbol.
    2. Boris55
      Boris55 April 23 2021 08: 28
      -12%
      Quote: Pessimist22
      and who is to blame for the fact that in 6 months of fighting 3 million prisoners

      You forgot to point out that Western Ukraine and Western Belarus were only a part of the USSR for two years. The main prisoners were the construction battalion, equipping new lines of defense, the armament of which was a scrap, a pickaxe and a shovel ...

      Among other things, the solution within the party struggle with the help of external forces has been used for centuries. The desire of the Trotskyists to solve their party problems with the help of Hitler was no exception.

      1. Mordvin 3
        Mordvin 3 April 23 2021 10: 18
        +4
        Quote: Boris55
        The main prisoners were the construction battalion, equipping new lines of defense, the armament of which was a scrap, a pickaxe and a shovel ...

        And read the memoirs of Mayer Kurt.
      2. Zug
        Zug April 24 2021 11: 55
        +1
        So many construction battalions have lost, as many as the militia of hundreds of thousands began to collect. Oh, these construction battalions. In 4 months, because of them, the Germans ran about 2 thousand kilometers to Moscow. And if (only quietly, this is a secret!) There was no construction battalion, we would have a mighty blow yes with a "Bayonet and a Grenade" Yes, on foreign territory
    3. Pashhenko Nikolay
      Pashhenko Nikolay April 23 2021 09: 17
      -6
      Someone who really believed in the agreement with Ribbentrop, probably.
    4. Olgovich
      Olgovich April 23 2021 09: 26
      -16%
      Quote: Pessimist22
      Some pathetic excuse

      everything else - "borrowed" (word for word) from the article of 2015 by Valery https://masterok.livejournal.com/2406649.html:
      It is not surprising that the first weeks of the war in the East presented the politicians and military leaders of the Reich with a lot of unpleasant surprises. On July 21, Hitler confessed to his interlocutor: if he had been informed in advance that the Russians had produced such a large amount of weapons, he would not have believed it and decided that this was disinformation. On August 4, the Fuhrer is again surprised: if he knew that the information about the production of tanks by the Soviets, which Guderian reported to him, was true, then it would have been much more difficult for him to decide on an attack on the USSR. Then, in August 41, Goebbels makes a startling confession: “We seriously underestimated the Soviet combat capability, and, mainly, the armament of the Soviet army. We did not even have an approximate idea of ​​what the Bolsheviks had at their disposal. "

      Yeah...
      A country that possesses such an organizational, personnel, transport, and industrial resource and is able to use it so effectively has shown the highest degree of preparation for war.

      the author "forgot" only that the human resources, for example, the USSR had twice as much Germanic as above GDP.

      Germany successfully increased its GDP during the war years, but it was seven times less than the GDP of the allies.

      If the Red Army, three years after the start of the Great Patriotic War, recaptured most of the lost territory and began to liberate Belarus and the Baltic states, the Russian army from August 1914 to August 1917 only retreated inland.
      the author "forgot" that this line of retreat was almost on 2 thousand km west of the Volga and the end of the war was a foregone conclusion (see the economy of the Entente and its opponents).
      only in the "imperialist" one for every killed German, on average, there were seven dead Russian soldiers.

      Yeah, but Russia's losses in WWII amounted to 9% of the world, and in WWII, the losses of the USSR were 53% of the world (both without China).

      Nobody has written such nonsense about 1/7, yes ..

      about time: since 1939 the USSR had two years for observation and conclusions about modern war: about blitzkriegs, sweeps, boilers, tank wedges, tactics and strategy of the Nazis (everything was exactly the same in the USSR, as it was not two years old). Russia did not even have a trace of this.
      The Germans occupied France in 39 days,

      And for 39 days of the Second World War, the Germans occupied the territory in the USSR in the TWE of France. What conclusion should the author have?
      Question No. 9. Is there any reason to regard the events of the beginning of the war for the Soviet Union as a catastrophe?
      such a military catastrophe as in 1941-42 there has never been in the world,

      A member of the Politburo, Deputy Prime Minister of the USSR testifies to anyone's guilt A. Mikoyan, who writes that Stalin believed that
      Hitler would not attack us in the next year or two, although he and we knew that war with Germany, which had defeated almost all of Europe, was inevitable. Therefore, he extended defensive measures, not accelerated. If within a year or a year and a half after the start of the war, during the evacuation of the main centers of arms production from Leningrad, Ukrainian cities, especially Kharkov, as well as from Tula, Moscow, we managed to achieve good results, and a year later, by the time of the battles at the Kursk Bulge, a clear superiority in production of aircraft, tanks, anti-tank weapons, ammunition, the thought arises: But couldn't we have done this earlier, starting in the autumn of 1939, when the European war had already begun and we had almost two years at our disposal before the start of the war? We could, under more favorable conditions, implement these measures with lower costs and with greater effect, having more time, more resources. They could, if Stalin understood that the war was near.

      But we continued civil life, as if the war was far away, but it was necessary to do this to the detriment of civilian industry, in this case machine building, steam locomotive building, combine building, as it was done later, hastily, impromptu at the beginning of the war, relying on our talented people's commissars and scientific frames.

      Stalin, on the other hand, took care not to tease the Germans in any way, thinking that this you can postpone the war

      This is said by a close friend of Stalin.
      1. Lannan Shi
        Lannan Shi April 23 2021 10: 51
        +21
        Quote: Olgovich
        the author only "forgot" that the human, for example, resources of the USSR were twice as large as those of Germany, as well as their GDP.

        Enchanting illiteracy. Human resources were at the best, for the USSR, the case is comparable. For on the side of Germany fought Italy, Hungary, Romania, Finland. And even the most sparsely populated country of the listed, consisted by no means of a couple of farms. And if you recall such names as Viking, Wallonia, Langemark, Blue Division and so on, and the fact that the number of foreign volunteers in the Wehrmacht and the SS is estimated from 4.5 to 5.5 million, the question arises, but in general it was not by chance that Germany had an advantage in human resources. Well, to say that the GDP of the USSR was higher than that of half of Europe ... Hmm. Oh.
        Quote: Olgovich
        Yeah, but Russia's losses in WWII amounted to 9% of the world, and in WWII, the losses of the USSR were 53% of the world (both without China).

        Time dear? In case of losses of the USSR, you take the losses of the Armed Forces. In the case of RI, the loss of civilians. If we take the losses of the Armed Forces, even from the wiki, I will not discuss their veracity, then the losses of the USSR are about 40% of the world. RI has 33%. If the total human losses - in the USSR - about 35%, in the Republic of Ingushetia - 21-22% of the world. True, in the latter case, 3.5 million Russian prisoners remain behind the scenes, because how many of them died, how many great mysteries have returned. It seems to be true that the loss of RI is lower than that of the USSR. There are only two subtle points. RI during the war had against itself 1 / 2-2 / 3 of the AVI forces, and a quarter of the GI. THE USSR? All the forces of the former GI and AVI, plus Italy, plus Romania, plus Finland, plus a bunch of fighters from all over Europe. From spain to sweden to bulgaria. This time. And two ... If the Germans in WWII destroyed 2/3 of the prisoners, as in WWII, and a quarter of the civilian population of the same Belarus, as in WWII, then the losses of the Republic of Ingushetia would be much higher than the Soviet ones. Yeah. And to credit RI that Wilhelm was more humane than the cannibal adik? Hmm ....
        Summing up. The anti-Soviet attack is extremely vicious and extremely deceitful. Everything is as usual. yes
        1. Olgovich
          Olgovich April 23 2021 13: 35
          -9
          Quote: Lannan Shi
          Enchanting illiteracy. Human resources were at the best, for the USSR, the case is comparable. For on the side of Germany fought Italy, Hungary, Romania, Finland.

          yours blatant ignorance is simply amazing: she fought against Hitler United Kingdom (and long before the USSR), India (which was at that time a colony) participated in the Second World War on the side of the Allies, as part of Great Britain and others. Give counting sticks?

          such things could be known lol
          Quote: Lannan Shi
          the number of foreign volunteers in the Wehrmacht and SS is estimated from 4.5 to 5.5 million
          there is only one question - about the adequacy of the applicant like lol
          Quote: Lannan Shi
          Time dear? In case of losses of the USSR, you take the losses of the Armed Forces. In the case of RI, the loss of civilians.

          What is this ... nonsense, sweetest? belay

          data taken for losses in wars:

          - The USSR lost 27 million out of 55 million in the world. There are also big numbers.

          -Russia lost 2 million (see CSB USSR) out of 21 million world losses

          all without China, where there was a civil war and with Japan since 1933.
          Quote: Lannan Shi
          There are only two subtle points. RI during the war had against itself 1 / 2-2 / 3 of the AVI forces, and a quarter of the GI. THE USSR? All the forces of the former GI and AVI, plus Italy, plus Romania, plus Finland, plus a bunch of fighters from all over Europe. From spain to sweden to bulgaria. This time.

          Russia had enough Abilities direct primary the attack of the aggressor against Anglo-France, which became the main cannon fodder WWI, so much so that the French did not want to fight in WWII either.

          And for someone, such a skill was not enough, yes ...
          Quote: Lannan Shi
          And two ... If the Germans in WWII destroyed 2/3 of the prisoners, as in WWII, and a quarter of the civilian population of the same Belarus, as in WWII, then the losses of the Republic of Ingushetia would be much higher than the Soviet ones.


          1) There were more prisoners, deserters and deviators in the USSR than in Russia

          2. Do you know what would be worth? Not? Nothing.

          In PMV Russia just did not allowTo half population ended up in occupied territories like the USSR.

          And its front line was almost 2 thousand km west of the Volga, even in A-Hungary
          Quote: Lannan Shi
          Summing up. The anti-Soviet attack is extremely vicious and extremely deceitful.

          to sum up: spiteful but depressing agitation extremely ignorant and ridiculous. lol As usual with the disappeared ...
          1. Foul skeptic
            Foul skeptic April 23 2021 15: 03
            +4
            your blatant ignorance is simply amazing: Great Britain (and long before the USSR) fought against Hitler, India (which was at that time a colony) participated in World War II on the side of the allies, as part of Great Britain and others. Give counting sticks?

            1) Do you take this factor into account for the situation in PMA when you compare?
            The USSR lost 27 million out of 55 million in the world. There are also big numbers

            2) Are "big" numbers or reasonable numbers more important?
            3) 27 million are the losses of the armed forces?
            4) If the answer to question # 3 is "No", then why do you operate with this figure in your opponent's answer, if he makes it clear that he is comparing the losses of the armed forces?
            Russia had enough ABILITY to direct the main attack of the aggressor against Anglo-France, which became the main cannon fodder of WWII, so much so that the French did not want to fight in WWII either.

            5) Please name the actions that Russia took to "direct the main attack of the aggressor was against Anglo-France" and explain what exactly these actions directed the main attack of the aggressor against Anglo-France?
            6) Can this be called perfidy towards the allies?
            There were more prisoners, deserters and deviators in the USSR than in Russia

            7) What is the ratio of prisoners / killed in one and in the second case?
          2. Lannan Shi
            Lannan Shi April 23 2021 15: 20
            +9
            Quote: Olgovich
            Great Britain fought against Hitler

            Yeah. In France, 1940, for example, lost about 7 thousand soldiers. And with a loss ratio of 2 to 1, causing damage to the Germans in 3-3.5 thousand soldiers. laughing
            Quote: Olgovich
            -Russia lost 2 million (see CSB USSR) out of 21 million world losses

            Well then, in the Second World War, they lost 7 million, as announced in 1945. Honey, you either take the numbers from one source, or don't talk about them at all. And then ... How strange it comes out. You take the losses of the USSR from the place where they are announced to the maximum, the losses of the radioactive sources from where they are minimal. You can guess what this technique is called?
            Quote: Olgovich
            there is only one question - about the adequacy of the applicant like

            Don't like the numbers? Forward and with a song. Refute.
            Quote: Olgovich
            Russia had the SKILLS to direct the main blow of the aggressor against Anglo-France,

            Tin. RIA simply posed no threat to the GI. So they scored on her.
            Quote: Olgovich
            There were more prisoners, deserters and deviators in the USSR than in Russia

            More than 20% of the prisoners from the conscripts, almost 25 from the RIA, against 15-17% from the Red Army. No, I understand that you have a kind of logic, but when 15 is more than 20 ..... This is strong. laughing
            Quote: Olgovich
            Russia simply did not admit to PMV,

            In WWI, the GI had neither tanks nor noticeable quantities of trucks. Otherwise, the war would have ended in 1915. When only half of the army, the GI arranged for Russia to retreat, quite comparable in pace with 1941. And if it were not for the spring and autumn battles in Artois, and the battles under the Isonzo, where the AVI was forced to pull back up to 20 divisions, instead of throwing them into the offensive in the East ... Then RI would have blown away 2-2.5 years earlier than this actually happened.
            Quote: Olgovich
            To sum up: the spiteful but dull propaganda is extremely ignorant and ridiculous.

            What you were told immediately. yes
            1. Olgovich
              Olgovich April 23 2021 16: 09
              -2
              Quote: Lannan Shi
              Yeah. In France, 1940, for example, lost about 7 thousand soldiers. And with a loss ratio of 2 to 1, causing damage to the Germans in 3-3.5 thousand soldiers.

              for example, Great Britain fought not only in France, but also in Africa, where it took hundreds of thousands of prisoners: the battle for Britain, etc.: when did you go to school? lol
              Quote: Lannan Shi
              Well then, in the Second World War, they lost 7 million, as announced in 1945. Laponka, you either take numbers from one source, or don't talk about them at all. And then ... How strange it comes out. You take the losses of the USSR from the place where they are announced to the maximum, the losses of the radioactive sources from where they are minimal. You can guess what this technique is called?

              The data on losses for WWII (27 million) are generally recognized for 1990, which deceitful 7 million?

              LaNozhenka, the numbers are taken from one source -from the same wiki article https://ru.wikipedia.org- see. links in it.

              Quote: Lannan Shi
              Quote: Olgovich
              there is only one question - about the adequacy of the applicant like

              Don't like the numbers? Forward and with the song... Refute.

              lol
              Duc, you already sang it .. Funny sang, yeah
              Quote: Lannan Shi
              Tin-plate... RIA simply posed no threat to the GI. Here on it and scored.

              you talk like that with your feet, but people do not understand you. request

              And your "craftsmen" were enough only to load ON YOURSELF, alone, all the wild basic human losses. Unlike Russia
              Quote: Lannan Shi
              More than 20% of the prisoners from the conscripts, almost 25 from the RIA, against 15-17% from the Red Army. No, I understand that you have a kind of logic, but when 15 is more than 20 ..... This is strong.

              this is you about 50% of the army of June 41g (3,5 million), surrendered in 1941? About 710 thousand deserts 41 years old?

              And the total number of prisoners and deserters in the Second World War was 8,2 million versus 5,5 million in WWII (89 with just one population), i.e. , in the Second World War there were 1,5 more deserters and prisoners of war in the USSR than in Russia.

              Got it, no? No.

              Quote: Lannan Shi
              GI arranged a retreat for Russia, quite comparable in pace to 1941.

              belay fool lol What theooo. ??
              everything, foot, after this to talk to you, do not respect yourself.

              live in peace - with your 5 million volunteers - SS lol and with Kaiser Wilhelm near Moscow in 1914 lol
              1. Lannan Shi
                Lannan Shi April 23 2021 16: 56
                +11
                Quote: Olgovich
                for example, Great Britain fought not only in France, but also in Africa, where it took hundreds of thousands of prisoners:

                All the losses, of the entire African corps, during the entire war in the region of 180-185 thousand. This is with the wounded and drunken kumys. So what hundreds of thousands of prisoners you are lamenting about is a mystery.
                Quote: Olgovich
                numbers are taken from the same source - from the same wiki article

                If you are guided by the wiki, then the figure is indicated in it - 3.3 million RIA losses of deaths from all causes. Or 1/3 of the world's total.
                Quote: Olgovich
                And the total number of prisoners and deserters in the Second World War was 8,2 million

                The Red Army lost about 5-5.5 million people as prisoners. That is 15-16% of the 34.5 million recruited. RIA - conscripted 15-15,5 million and prisoners 3,2-4 million, or from 20 to 25%. Let's not write about deserters, for there are no exact numbers in nature. But let's say reports from the Tulskaya province, for February 1917, that of all the detainees, 4/5 are deserters, and only 1/5 are criminals, as they hint that in RI it was, oh, how wrong it was.
                Quote: Olgovich
                that's it, paw, after such a talk with you, do not respect yourself.

                Yes Yes. Understand. Excessive knowledge is harmful to you. For they are destroying your self-respect, they are killing a violent flight of fantasy.
                Py.Sy.
                Check it out for the general development of Kersnovsky. An ardent monarchist by the way. Helps to cure crispy baked goods. yes
                1. Olgovich
                  Olgovich April 24 2021 07: 03
                  -1
                  Quote: Lannan Shi
                  All the losses, of the entire African corps, during the entire war in the region of 180-185 thousand. This is with the wounded and drunken kumys. So what hundreds of thousands of prisoners you are lamenting about is a mystery.

                  Italians also fought there-count
                  Quote: Lannan Shi
                  If you are guided by the wiki, then the figure is indicated in it - 3.3 million RIA losses of deaths from all causes. Or 1/3 of the world's total.

                  in the same article, data from the Central Statistical Administration of the USSR and a decryption of 3,3 million, which in the original is 2,2 million
                  Quote: Lannan Shi
                  The Red Army lost about 5-5.5 million people as prisoners.

                  And Russia has lost almost two times less. and there are much fewer deserters:

                  from statistical data: only in the period from the beginning of the war in 1941, the NKVD was detained over 71 thousand draft evaders and over 710 deserters, source Degtev and M. Zefirov "Everything for the front" number
                  total deserters in WWII2.5 million.
                  June Polarmy - in captivity in 41 .. There was no such shame in Russia

                  And this is with the SAME population of the USSR in 1941 and RI 1914.

                  Count, how many times there were more prisoners and deserters in the USSR than in Ingushetia
                  Quote: Lannan Shi
                  Yes Yes. Understand. Excessive knowledge is harmful to you. ...

                  you just there is nothing harm. lol
                  I'm waiting, however, the development of your delirium about the GI arranged a retreat for Russia, quite comparable in pace with 1941.

                  at the same time, yes, find out finally, how many DAYS the Germans reached Riga in WWII and in how many YEARS they came to her in WWI.

                  At the same time, show the shameful cauldrons of the sample 41 in 1914-17, of which there are a huge number in the Second World War.

                  what, again not ... laughing can you lol
                  Quote: Lannan Shi
                  Check it out for the general development of Kersnovsky. An ardent monarchist by the way. Helps heal from crispy baked goods

                  what, have you been cured? Not? Not . And advise others. Ugly, not in a Bolshevik way ... lol
                  1. Lannan Shi
                    Lannan Shi April 24 2021 08: 39
                    +2
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    Italians also fought there

                    And the Italians have something to do with it? You yourself only consider the Germans. By the way. And there were few Italians in Africa. 3/4 of the Italian army there are colonial units. The fighting qualities of which .... Well, only if the British drive. yes But in armir there were 3 times more Italians than in Africa. And only at Stalingrad more of them were captured than there were, in all, on the African front. yes
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    in the same article-data of the Central Statistical Administration of the USSR and transcript

                    Laponka .... I repeat it for the third time. Either you refer to one source, and for the USSR and for the Republic of Ingushetia, without running through the links, or do not refer at all. So it comes down?
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    And Russia has lost almost two times less

                    So the results have achieved less. Twenty times. The USSR ended the war with a victory, the Republic of Ingushetia - with a collapsed front, and the damage inflicted on the enemy. Only on the Soviet front, only the Wehrmacht, only in the dead lost three times more than the GIA for the entire WWI on all fronts. Of which the share of the East is good if 1/4 accounted for. Total. The losses of the Red Army are 2 times higher than that of the RIA. Damage inflicted on the enemy every 10 times. Efficiency is 5 times higher. Something like this.
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    and there are much fewer deserters:

                    Laponka, take it easy on the fact that in WWI, as a result, the whole army deserted. Well, who was not killed or taken prisoner. 100% deserters. A brilliant result of the war. yes
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    about the GI arranged a retreat for Russia, quite comparable in pace with 1941.

                    The rate of onset of the summer of 1915 in the central direction (Warsaw - Minsk) averaged about 7,5 km per day. The average rate of advance from Brest to Maloyaroslavets in the summer of 1941 was about 9 km per day. At the same time, the GIA, unlike the Wehrmacht, did not have mobile connections.
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    And advise others.

                    So I advise only those whose crustiness has passed into a difficult stage. yes
                    1. Olgovich
                      Olgovich April 24 2021 10: 18
                      +2
                      Quote: Lannan Shi
                      And the Italians have something to do with it? You yourself only consider the Germans. By the way. And there were few Italians in Africa. 3/4 of the Italian army there are colonial units. The fighting qualities of which .... Well, only if the British drive. But in armir there were 3 times more Italians than in Africa. And only at Stalingrad they were captured more than there were, in total, on the African front.

                      Italy is mentioned by YOU as a powerful complement to Germany, have you forgotten? lol

                      Don't talk nonsense about non-Italians - only in North Africa there were two armies: the 5th Army, led by General Italo Gariboldi (eight Italian divisions and one Libyan) and the 10th Army, stationed in East Cyrenaica, led by General Guidi (one Libyan and four Italian divisions, of which two are Blackshirts). The total number of troops was: 236 thousand people.

                      And besides the north of Africa, the fighting took place in the tropical one. And the British and others took them prisoner there hundreds of thousands of people-compare with Stalingrad, yes (only with the Germans, Romanians, etc.). And they beat them from 1940tens of thousands of prisoners
                      Quote: Lannan Shi
                      Laponka .... I repeat it for the third time. Either you refer to one source, and for the USSR and for the Republic of Ingushetia, without running through the links, or do not refer at all. So it comes down?

                      the nipple is ONE and the same article on the wiki. Read / understand what you read, unable to? WHEN will it come?
                      Quote: Lannan Shi
                      So the results have achieved less. Once in twenty.

                      lol specifically the calculation is on the table, yes.
                      Quote: Lannan Shi
                      The USSR ended the war with a victory, the Republic of Ingushetia - with a collapsed front

                      the front was destroyed by the accomplices of the German invaders - before them, before the thief, the front stood - just hack this FACT on your forehead
                      Quote: Lannan Shi
                      ... Only on the Soviet front, only the Wehrmacht, only in the dead lost three times more than the GIA for the entire WWI on all fronts.

                      1.GV unleashed by thieves killed Russians 5 times more than PMV

                      2.I do not care about the damage of the enemy, I care about OUR damage and the PRICE paid for the Victory
                      Quote: Lannan Shi
                      Total. The losses of the Red Army are 2 times higher than that of the RIA. Damage inflicted on the enemy every 10 times. Effectiveness is 5 times higher. Something like this.

                      terrible, unthinkable losses of the country in WWII are 13 times higher than in WWII, and the gain in WWII ... microscopic Kaliningrad region и a bunch of spinebugsplanted on the neck of a devastated country by inept people hoping to receive wild gifts from "allies,
                      who just killed us.

                      Who spat betrayed in one moment. and all the gifts are ashes.

                      and the price of this, let me remind you, is 27 million victims, which amounted to 15% of the population. And in PMV-1,6%

                      Got it, no?
                      Quote: Lannan Shi
                      Laponka, take it easy on the fact that in WWI, as a result, the whole army deserted. Well, who was not killed or taken prisoner. 100% deserters. A brilliant result of the war.

                      little knife, you are caught in ignorance, ignorance and the fact that the USSR had 1,5 more mines of prisoners and deserters than Russia.

                      And the army was officially demobilized thieves - you don't even know that
                      Quote: Lannan Shi
                      The rate of onset of the summer of 1915 in the central direction (Warsaw - Minsk) averaged about 7,5 km per day.

                      to compare - comparable, little knife: the pace of the offensive in June 1941 in the central direction - to - Minsk averaged about 75 km per day. .

                      while the Wehrmacht had hundreds of thousands of horses, as well as in WWI. And the USSR has 4 times more mobile tanks than the Germans. And now Minsk for ... Day 5, Riga for ... Day 6. Mobile so, yeah
                      Quote: Lannan Shi
                      So I advise only those whose crustiness has passed into a difficult stage.

                      once again: nothing helped you. A-advise.

                      Not ashamed? lol

                      1. Lannan Shi
                        Lannan Shi April 24 2021 10: 51
                        0
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        Italy is mentioned by YOU as a powerful complement to Germany, have you forgotten?

                        So with the fact that the manpower reserves of Germany and others were no less than that of the USSR, you no longer argue? Good. yes
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        Don't talk nonsense about non-Italians-

                        "Aosta's forces in 1940 totaled 256, of whom 000 were indigenous (the Italians called them 'indigenous'; we will use the term 'colonial' in this book)."
                        F. Jouet is actually talking nonsense. Who knows better than you who fought against his compatriots. yes

                        And this is a photo of "purebred Italians" who drove the Britons across Africa laughing
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        WHEN will it come?

                        As soon as you stop lying. yes For in the article it is written in black in Russian - 3.3 million. However, if Russian is not native to you, and you hardly understand it ...
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        FACT

                        The fact is that RIA just fled. And accomplices and so on ... Yes, yes. I know. Laponka Nikki just got the wrong people. unable to understand his quivering nature.
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        terrible, unthinkable losses of the country in WWII are 13 times higher than in WWI,

                        3,3 million killed + 3.5 million prisoners = 6.8 million 9,5 million killed + 5 million prisoners = 14.5 million Sorry, generous. Roughly speaking, 2 times. And the destruction of the civilian population did not depend in any way on the leadership of our country.
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        the USSR had 1,5 more mines of prisoners and deserters than Russia.

                        About 9 million people deserted from the current RIA alone. I will not even count those who have not reached the front. Does the USSR have 13.5 million deserters? Um ... Strong statement. laughing
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        the rate of advance of June 1941 in the central direction - to - Minsk averaged about 75 km per day.

                        Those. by September 1941 the Germans crossed the Urals? It looks like you've come to us from an alternate universe. laughing
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        Not ashamed?

                        Not. Not a bit. I'm not your mom, and I'm not even your history teacher. Why should I be ashamed?
                      2. Olgovich
                        Olgovich April 24 2021 11: 39
                        0
                        Quote: Lannan Shi
                        So with the fact that the manpower reserves of Germany and others were no less than that of the USSR, you no longer argue? Good

                        Are you talking to yourself and convinced? lol

                        Human reserves - see (for the faint of heart) above - about India, VK, etc.

                        And Africa was mentioned (again for you I will remind you) due to the fact that they also fought against the Axis countries there, and long before the Second World War, and part of the Axis forces was there, and not against the USSR
                        Quote: Lannan Shi
                        "Aosta's forces in 1940 totaled 256, of whom 000 were indigenous (the Italians called them 'indigenous'; we will use the term 'colonial' in this book)."
                        F. Jouet is actually talking nonsense.

                        he says these numbers about EAST AFRICA: The Italian Empire in East Africa included Eritrea (since 1896), Ethiopia (since 1936) and Italian Somalia (since 1925).

                        And here is what he writes about the LIBYAN CAMPAIGN 1940-1941.

                        At the time of entry into the war, the Italians had large forces in North Africa: about 236 people
                        those. the same as I indicated above.

                        ,
                        Quote: Lannan Shi
                        As soon as you stop lying. For in the article it is written in black in Russian - 3.3 million.

                        in article to this figuree reference to the work of Krivosheev, and there is another figure.

                        in the same article, a link to the CSB of the USSR. Got it, didn't it?
                        Quote: Lannan Shi
                        The fact is that RIA just fled.

                        in the inflamed brains imb.
                        See the front line at the time of the VOR
                        Quote: Lannan Shi
                        Yes Yes. I know. nyat his quivering nature.

                        the people went to the wrong German servants -that is why they destroyed it in the GV and further-by exiles of a million children, millions of peasants, executions of hundreds of thousands per year, millions of starvation deaths, etc. maybe you will find WHERE else in the world was it? What, again, no? weakness in the knees?
                        Quote: Lannan Shi
                        3,3 million killed + 3.5 million prisoners = 6.8 million 9,5 million killed + 5 million prisoners = 14.5 million call me generously. Roughly 2 times
                        27/2 = 13,5:

                        for peaceful people, it was simply not necessary to give half of the country to the invaders, see. PMV
                        Quote: Lannan Shi
                        About 9 million people deserted from the current RIA alone.

                        fool lol 2 million and then, almost all after February.

                        In the USSR, only in the period from the beginning of the war in 1941, the NKVD was detained over 71 thousand dodgers and over 710 deserters, and deserters in total in WWII-2.5 million.
                        June Polarmy - in captivity in 41.... There was no such shame in Russia

                        .
                        Quote: Lannan Shi
                        Those. by September 1941 the Germans crossed the Urals? It looks like you have come to us from an alternate universe

                        They took Minsk-SAMI offered it and got it on the nose.

                        Once again, you have already learned how many DAYS did the Germans go to Riga in WWII and how many YEARS in WWII? Yes? Hack it on your forehead.

                        .
                        for you the Germans on the Volga and half of the country in the occupation is an outstanding "success" look .....
                        Quote: Lannan Shi
                        Not. Not a bit. I'm not your mom, and I'm not even your history teacher. Why should I be ashamed?

                        advise what you personally did not help. there is no shame, of course.
                      3. Lannan Shi
                        Lannan Shi April 24 2021 12: 46
                        +2
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        Human reserves - see (for the faint of heart) above - about India

                        Every post you have is a collection of anecdotes. Laponka ... And how does India relate to the mob potential of Russia or Germany?
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        he says these numbers about EAST AFRICA:

                        And chu? You are counting blacks from Somalia, in the count of the Italians prisoners? So I clarify that the painfully blackish Italians were captured by the Britons. lol
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        in the article to this figure, a link to the work of Krivosheev

                        I repeat for the fifth time. If you are linking to a wiki, then you are using the numbers from the wiki. If you refer to Krivosheev ... Then take the figures for the losses of the USSR from him. That is, 11.5 million killed and captured in total. Be so kind as to use the same author to compare the losses of the RIA and the Red Army. And to take RIA losses from the one who indicates them as minimal, and the Red Army from the one who winds them up to the maximum ... This approach can be described in many words. Here are just no censors there. yes
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        WHERE else in the world - it was?

                        In the blessed RI, for example. Where out of 6 million born in 1897, 1902 million 3-3 million children survived until 4 (if we are talking about the 20th century) who do not live up to the age of five. Annually. For lack of medicine, malnutrition and other things. Stalinist repressions, against this background ...
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        for peaceful people, it was simply not necessary to give half of the country to the invaders, see. PMV

                        One Polish kingdom, given to the Germans, is more than 10% of the population of Ingushetia in 1914. And a little less than a quarter of the country's industrial potential. And all were given the territory where up to a quarter of the population of the Republic of Ingushetia lived. Open the directory, and count the population of the surrendered provinces yourself. Less than the USSR, fact. That's just the Republic of Ingushetia fought against half of Germany, and not against half of Europe, like the USSR. And the fact that in 1915 the Kaiser was in power in Germany, and not the Nazis, there is definitely no merit of the pineapple nickname.
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        June Polarmy - in captivity in 41.

                        In total, 34 million people are drafted into the Red Army. Prisoners - 4 million. Or 12%. Laponka. You have very serious problems not only with history, but also with mathematics. yes
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        2 million and then, almost all after February.

                        killed and prisoners, if according to Krivosheev, about 5.5 million. 2 million deserters. Summoned 15.5 million. Where else 8 million have gone, a mystery ... Probably the Martians kidnapped. laughing
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        Taken Minsk-SAMI offered him

                        Laponka. You are presented with the figures for the average rate of the offensive following the summer campaigns of the GIA and the Wehrmacht. You are pulling data from an entire campaign in one day. Well, yes. Serious approach. If you use it ... Well, for example, in the Kursk operation, then according to the results of the first day of battles of 47 TC, one can come to the conclusion. that the Soviet troops, in 1.5 months, retreated 400-500 km. And if you pull 1-2 days out of the Ardennes, it turns out that the Germans threw their allies into the sea. Therefore, the average pace for the campaign is taken. And a purely pedestrian GIA, this very pace showed not much worse than a pretty well motorized Wehrmacht. Is it clear now?
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        there is no shame.

                        You? Not. I have not seen such a frank distortion of numbers for a long time. Fact. Only to me, in this regard, what are the questions?
                      4. Olgovich
                        Olgovich April 25 2021 11: 40
                        0
                        Quote: Lannan Shi

                        Every post you have is a collection of anecdotes. Laponka ... And how does India relate to the mob potential of Russia or Germany?

                        for the weak, I explain on my fingers: it was WORLDWIDE war, where the USSR was a participant in a series many and only two years after the start.

                        And the same British (including several divisions of the same Indians) back in 1940-41 years , long before the USSR entered the war, was taken prisoner in North Africa more than 130 thousand Italians (mainly Italians) and in East Africa captivated 60 thousand of their troops (there 60% of the native troops) and killed tens of thousands of Italians.
                        ... We are now looking at Stalingrad, where ours took less than 90 thousand.

                        And these dozens of divisions did not get to the Eastern Front.

                        Did it get there?
                        Quote: Lannan Shi
                        And chu? You write of Negro Somalia, in counting the Italians prisoners? So I clarify that the painfully blackish Italians were captured by the Britons.

                        and then what's in North Africaas you are poked about, there were two huge Italian armies of the Italians (and in them only two Libyan divisions). unlike East Avrica,

                        What you, due to the denseness, simply did not suspect.

                        East Africa and North Africa are different things, yes. lol
                        Quote: Lannan Shi
                        I repeat for the fifth time. If you are linking to a wiki, then you are using the numbers from the wiki.

                        the wiki refers (10) to Krivosheev, but instead of his figures are 2,2 million writes a figure ... 3,3 million. Or you look in a book, see ... her?
                        And Krivosheev himself refers to CSB data 1925-that's the truth.

                        And yes. so-called "demographers", politicians and "historians" believe - do not respect yourself - then the loss of 7 million, then 20 million, then already 27 million. There is already a report of 40 million.

                        And this despite the fact that the official Voznesenky commission calculated in 1945 the figure of 15,5 million. All 70 years of their power is one lie.
                        Quote: Lannan Shi
                        One Polish kingdom, given to the Germans, is more than 10%

                        lie
                        Quote: Lannan Shi
                        One Polish kingdom, given to the Germans, is more than 10% of the population of Ingushetia in 1914. And a little less than a quarter of the country's industrial potential. And in total, the territories were given where up to a quarter of the population of the Republic of Ingushetia lived. Open the directory and count the population of the surrendered provinces yourself.

                        counted, you lie recklessly, like your idols. HALF of the country's population fell into the occupation and tens of millions were forced to work for the occupiers.
                        Such
                        Quote: Lannan Shi
                        That's just the RI fought against halves

                        just someone didn’t have enough brains to fight with half: they hoped that France-Hitler would kill each other, but received a terrible blow alone. What is their "quality", yes ...
                        Quote: Lannan Shi
                        In total, 34 million people have been drafted into the Red Army. Prisoners - 4 million. Or 12%. Laponka. You have very serious problems not only with history, but also with mathematics.

                        in June 41 army 6 million, half of it-in captivity.

                        And there were 5,8 million Soviet prisoners. - and do not read conscientious newspapers.
                        Quote: Lannan Shi
                        The Martians must have kidnapped.

                        use the counting sticks and it will come.
                        Quote: Lannan Shi
                        Laponka. You are presented with the figures for the average rate of the offensive following the summer campaigns of the GIA and the Wehrmacht.

                        little scoop, you themselves chose this direction to Minsk-your the same nose at the pace towards him you and poked.Napkins, yes, ..
                        Have you already learned how many DAYS the Germans went to Riga in WWII and how many YEARS in WWII? Again, no? Why?. and the pace, yes. Ah, it's the same

                        And yes the 15 year campaign has begun in mae
                        Quote: Lannan Shi
                        the pace showed not much worse than the pretty well motorized Wehrmacht. Is it clear now?

                        as you can see, the enemy of the Wehrmacht was motorized in tanks 4, 5 times better than the Wehrmacht. Therefore, Vilno promptly passed not a year after the start of the war, as in WWI, but a DAY after its start (tempo-count, yes) It came, didn't it?
                        Quote: Lannan Shi
                        You?

                        learn what a "second" person in Russian is, so that no stupid questions arise.
                        Quote: Lannan Shi
                        I have not seen such a frank distortion of numbers for a long time. Fact.

                        Such a dense, blinkered, mossy ignorance, I saw a fact for a long time.
                        you have not fulfilled the covenant "U, U, U" of your Swiss dwarf ..... lol
          3. Alarmist79
            Alarmist79 April 24 2021 14: 26
            -2
            = RIA - 15-15,5 million were called up and prisoners 3,2-4 million. =
            This is a blatant lie your brothers in ideology. Germans / Austrians found 2,4 million.
            In this case,

            1.partially, it is possible to compare the numbers only to the point of mass understanding what awaits the prisoners in the camps-41 - and this is the very first months of the war... And here everything is bad, despite the fact that it is about staffing parts.
            And then I somewhat do not share your stormy enthusiasm about the fact that the Germans destroyed a lot of prisoners, reducing the intensity of the surrender.

            2. Precisely in part, because the treatment of the Germans with the wounded who would have been captured in 1914-17, is also known. I understand your historical sympathy for ordinary German proletarians from the MP-38, but ...

            3. And yes, the wise policy of Comrade. Stalin, thanks to which the theory "we are Tambov, the Germans will not reach us" became irrelevant - it also played a role. This is undoubted merit of the Leninists-Stalinists, hmm.


            = Let's not write about deserters, for there are no exact numbers in nature. =

            There is, the lack of delivery in parts is known, and this is a somewhat overestimated figure.
            In this case, comparable to the number of those mobilized in the RIA fled with downright plush practice of punishing deserters. How many would have fled from the Red Army with this approach?

            = But let's say reports from the province of Tulskaya, for February 1917, that of all those detained, 4/5 are deserters, and only 1/5 are criminals, as they hint that in RI it was oh, how wrong it was = \
            This kagbe hints that it was pretty bad with criminals in RI. Your source does not give real numbers, right? In order not to confuse believers.

            = Read, for the general development of Kersnovsky. An ardent monarchist by the way. Helps cure crispy baked goods. yes =

            Well, yes, in the USSR, such critics were sent it is known where. And then, in the midst of the propaganda successes, abysses a la Finland-1940 opened up. At the same time, you haven't read anything about Western enemies / allies and the Red Army from the chief chief, right? Because in comparison, Kersnovsky looks completely different.
        2. Sugar Honeyovich
          Sugar Honeyovich April 24 2021 05: 21
          +6
          Quote: Olgovich
          Africa, where she took hundreds of thousands of prisoners:

          After and as a result of the cheekbones near Stalingrad.

          Quote: Olgovich
          battle for britain

          In which it was more likely that a soldier in the army would receive a notice of the death of his family under German bombs than a family would receive a funeral for a soldier (Churchill).
          Quote: Olgovich
          total prisoners and deserters in WWII were 8,2 million versus 5,5 million in WWII 89 with just one population)

          Those. with 27 and 2 million dead: in WWII 4 prisoners / deserters for 13 killed, in WW1 - 11 prisoners / deserters for 4 killed? However, the quality. yes
          1. Olgovich
            Olgovich April 24 2021 07: 18
            -3
            Quote: Sahar Medovich
            After and as a result of the cheekbones near Stalingrad.

            nonsense-chmchiaite our VO-already in 1940 their losses were tens of thousands
            Quote: Sahar Medovich
            Those. with 27 and 2 million dead: in WWII 4 prisoners / deserters for 13 killed, in WW1 - 11 prisoners / deserters for 4 killed? However, the quality.

            a remarkable ratio of prisoners. Or are you proud of ... the number of corpses? fool
            1. Sugar Honeyovich
              Sugar Honeyovich April 24 2021 13: 45
              +1
              Quote: Olgovich
              already in 1940, their losses were tens of thousands

              Of which hundreds of thousands were prisoners?
              Quote: Olgovich
              excellent prisoner ratio

              Here I am about the same.
              Quote: Olgovich
              Or are you proud of ... the number of corpses?

              Not at all. I am making a comparison in terms of the resistance of one army at different times with different polit. tunings. Nothing personal.
              1. Olgovich
                Olgovich April 25 2021 12: 25
                +1
                Quote: Sahar Medovich
                Of which hundreds of thousands were prisoners?

                killed / wounded - tens of thousands, prisoners - hundreds of thousands: only in North Africa 130 thousand Italians captured in Stalingrad, ours took one and a half times less.
                Quote: Sahar Medovich

                Here I am about the same.

                and I'm talking about that, it's better to have more living than corpses, as with you ..
                Quote: Sahar Medovich
                Not at all. I am making a comparison in terms of the resistance of one army at different times with different polit. tunings. Nothing personal.

                "resilience" is expressed in the number of ... corpses? fool

                but there were more prisoners + deserters in the USSR than in Russia (with approximately one population) - only in 41m 710 thousand deserters were RETAINED (and how many were not?)

                PS The fact that your system, the victims in peacetime heaped up, like nowhere else in the world, is an undeniable fact.
                1. Sugar Honeyovich
                  Sugar Honeyovich April 25 2021 15: 47
                  -1
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  only in North Africa 130 thousand prisoners of Italians

                  Ah, the Italians ... Whom did the Greeks beat, not like the British? Then of course. But the conversation seemed to be about the Germans initially.
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  in Stalingrad ours took one and a half times less

                  Italians? No, many times less. But enemies in general, Germans, mainly, in the Battle of Stalingrad were captured 1,7 times more than these .. Italians in Africa. And how many of them were put in the ground - Africa never dreamed of this. Europe too.
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  resilience "is expressed by the number of ... corpses

                  Yes it is. But not in general, but in relation to prisoners and deserters. It is common knowledge.
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  but there were more prisoners + deserters in the USSR than in Russia (with approximately one population) - only in 41m 710 thousand deserters were RETAINED (and how many were not?)

                  The population is approximately equal, but the army is twice as large. More than that. In WW1, 365 thousand deserters were "identified," and how many were not? They call it 1865 thousand, but ...
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  The fact that your system made up its victims in peacetime like nowhere else in the world is an undeniable fact.

                  Definitely! That is why the demand for it has not fallen for 30 years. good
                2. Olgovich
                  Olgovich April 25 2021 16: 21
                  -1
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  Ah, the Italians ... Whom did the Greeks beat, not like the British? Then of course. But the conversation seemed to be about the Germans initially.

                  it was as if it was about the ratio of human resources and forces of both sides.

                  And these TENS divisions of italy did NOT get to the eastern front.

                  hundreds of thousands of losses of italy -proved-see. articles IN. And see the number of prisoners at Stalingrad, the difference is huge.
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  But enemies in general, Germans, mainly, in the Battle of Stalingrad were captured 1,7 times more than these .. Italians in Africa.

                  Even before the Second World War, the British captured 130 thousand Italians in North Africa and 60 thousand in East Africa, so do not be nonsense and compare with 90 you at Stalingrad
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  Yes it is. But not in general, but in relation to prisoners and deserters. It is common knowledge.

                  fool yes, yes, only in the year 08.37-08.38, yours were shot 640 thousand fellow citizens , in the USA -320 people. In general, we get a scanty camp in comparison with the United States (per corpse)

                  Your persistent, it turns out, in ...2000 times (Lavrov said everything about such bookkeepers))
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  The population is approximately equal, but the army is twice as large. More than that. In WW1, 365 thousand deserters were "identified," and how many were not? They call it 1865 thousand, but ...

                  think about it, only in the first year only 780 thousand deserters were caught / uk and 3,5 million in captivity is the whole population country
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  Definitely! That is why the demand for it has not fallen for 30 years.

                  we remember, we remember: not a single one stood up for him in 1991 (including you), - how cockroaches fled from the light ...
                  disgrace ... lol
                3. Sugar Honeyovich
                  Sugar Honeyovich April 25 2021 17: 19
                  0
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  since 90 you are near Stalingrad

                  There were more than 230 thousand at Stalingrad. Only prisoners. And the total - 1,5 million So compare.
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  Your persistent, it turns out, in ... 2000 times

                  If not more. The Germans confirm.
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  think about it, in the first year alone, 780 thousand deserters were caught / uk and 3,5 million in captivity

                  The numbers correspond to the scale of the war. Not only in our country. In WW1, too, the losses were unprecedented hitherto huge - incl. prisoners of war and deserters are also comparable to the population of many countries.
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  remember, remember: not one stood up for him in 1991

                  And I will remind you - in 1993 many stood up. And in 1995-96, the communists were elected in the GENERAL elections ... hi
                4. Olgovich
                  Olgovich April 26 2021 08: 49
                  +1
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  There were more than 230 thousand at Stalingrad. Only prisoners.

                  90 thous. so compare with hundreds of thousands in Africa
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  If not more.

                  they ran to the VOLGA.

                  And yes: the most "persistent", according to your logic, were those who killed in a senseless bayonet, for example, a division: a lot of corpses and few prisoners. fool
                  649 thousand of their fellow citizens shot in a year is "resilience", yes. fool
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  And I will remind you - in 1993 many stood up.

                  for the LAW and the Constitution of RUSSIA stood up. NOT for your regime.

                  and for him in 1991, Mr. NOBODY.
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  And in 1995-96, the communists were elected in the GENERAL elections ...

                  Yes?

                  And where is one? What, dumb? Dumb! lol
                5. Sugar Honeyovich
                  Sugar Honeyovich April 26 2021 15: 37
                  0
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  90 thous. so compare with hundreds of thousands in Africa

                  Over 230 thousand. Of the 1,5 million total. So compare with 115 thousand prisoners out of ... 118 thousand total. lol
                  .
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  they ran to the VOLGA.

                  They did not run, but retreated. Resisting. And again, the Italians fled from the Volga, "" There are no losses: they just run "(Shearer).
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  according to your logic

                  And according to your logic: to betray in time is not to betray, but to foresee. yes
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  for the LAW and the Constitution of RUSSIA stood up

                  For the law and constitution of Soviet power. And also against the life that replaced socialism.
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  And where is one?

                  Behind your back, which has not dried out for 30 years from mortal sweat on the basis of animal fear, that THEY are HERE, HERE ...
                6. Olgovich
                  Olgovich April 27 2021 07: 25
                  0
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  Over 230 thousand.

                  lie-90 thousand prisoners.

                  and how many prisoners in the Kiev cauldron, remind? And in the other dozens?

                  And in Africa still Before the Second World War, the British, took about two hundred thousand prisoners.
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  They did not run, but retreated. Resisting.

                  order 227 read
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  And according to your logic: to betray in time is not to betray, but to foresee.

                  show where it says.

                  And here is your nonsense about the yardstick of endurance in corpses-It is something

                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  For the law and constitution of Soviet power. And also against the life that replaced socialism.

                  what kind of beast is this, "the law of Soviet power"? lol

                  We stood up for the LAW in principle, according to the decision of the Constitutional Court of Russia.

                  But NOBODY stood up for your regime in 91 g, incl. and you

                  Shame ....
                7. Sugar Honeyovich
                  Sugar Honeyovich April 27 2021 15: 06
                  -1
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  lie-90 thousand prisoners.

                  Lies - over 230 thousand. You don't know the history.
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  and how many prisoners in the Kiev cauldron, remind? And in the other dozens?

                  For lack of a better thing, go for it. This will not affect the result in Stalingrad and in the war at all.
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  order 227 read

                  Was reading. And not only him. Therefore, the truth is mine.
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  show where it says.

                  Show first where
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  And here is your nonsense about the measure of stamina in corpses

                  Quote: Olgovich
                  We stood up for the LAW in principle

                  Those. for the current one. And which one then acted? That's it. And they also performed before - in May.
                8. Olgovich
                  Olgovich April 27 2021 20: 44
                  -1
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  Lies - over 230 thousand. You don't know the history.

                  you're lying stupid
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  For lack of a better thing, go for it. This will not affect the result in Stalingrad and in the war at all.

                  the PRICE of Victory was also influenced by the fact that Hitler was on the Volga
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  Was reading. And not only him. Therefore, the truth is mine.

                  false - your yes
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich

                  Show first where
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  And here is your nonsense about the measure of stamina in corpses

                  above
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich

                  Those. for the current one. And which one then acted? That's it. And they also performed before - in May.

                  the constitution was in effect, and there was nothing communist.
                9. Sugar Honeyovich
                  Sugar Honeyovich April 28 2021 04: 35
                  0
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  you're lying stupid

                  You. From ignorance.
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  the PRICE of Victory was also influenced by the fact that Hitler was on the Volga

                  Yes. And your lies on the result - no.
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  above

                  Nowhere.
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  the constitution was in effect

                  Soviet.
                10. Olgovich
                  Olgovich April 28 2021 07: 23
                  -1
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  You. From ignorance

                  stupid ignoramus
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  Yes. And your lies on the result - no.
                  you have been gone for 30 years
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  Nowhere.

                  but I agree, you don't lol
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich

                  Soviet.

                  Russian. There is nothing communist there.
                11. Sugar Honeyovich
                  Sugar Honeyovich April 28 2021 11: 52
                  0
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  stupid ignoramus

                  Those. you.
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  you have been gone for 30 years

                  But everything shakes you. yes
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  but I agree, you don't

                  In your unfulfilled dreams.
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  Soviet.
                  Russian.

                  Synonyms.
                12. Olgovich
                  Olgovich April 28 2021 13: 29
                  -1
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  Those. you.

                  about you
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  But everything shakes you.

                  laughing! lol laughing
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  In your unfulfilled dreams.

                  oo-oo-oo! Where? not under a bench, not under a broom ...
                  Ah ... not to be seen anywhere .. lol .
                  Quote: Sahar Medovich
                  Synonyms.

                  Russia is more than a thousand years old and it exists.
                  And your n-flashed and -n’t it.
                13. Sugar Honeyovich
                  Sugar Honeyovich April 28 2021 13: 53
                  0
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  Those. you.
                  about you

                  You - ignorant - about me - a connoisseur. hi
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  laughing!

                  Hysterical. On the verge of insanity with fear. yes
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  and under a bench, not under a broom ...
                  Ah ... nowhere to be seen

                  Get out first from under the broom, then from under the bench and unwind. To start. laughing
                  Quote: Olgovich
                  and -n’t it.

                  And your fear is ... No.
  • Alarmist79
    Alarmist79 April 24 2021 13: 39
    -3
    = Ie. with 27 and 2 million dead: =
    Those. you counted in the army losses the civilian population, surrendered to the Germans by the wise leadership and the Germans massacred?

    = However, quality. =
    Let's count honestly.
    1. What was the ratio of killed / prisoners before the Red Army learned that the surrender was not going to be a PMV prisoner? All 1941 1st 1,5 / XNUMX.

    2. I respect (no) your Urengoy faith in the neuinovat Germans, but in general, to surrender, you need a mutual desire to take him into it. A huge part of the PMA prisoners were taken prisoner wounded. The Germans in 1941 did not differ in such humanism, no matter what the Bolsheviks said.

    3. It is generally ridiculous to consider deserters. They fled en masse from the Red Army under real the threat of execution. The fiercest liberalism flourished in RIA. How many fellow citizens would give a fight from the front with such an attitude?
    1. Sugar Honeyovich
      Sugar Honeyovich April 24 2021 18: 02
      0
      Quote: Alarmist79
      We counted in the army losses the civilian population surrendered to the Germans by the wise leadership and the Germans massacred?

      Not me.
      Quote: Alarmist79
      before the Red Army learned that it was not a PMV captivity that was expected upon surrender?

      And how soon did you find out about it?
      Quote: Alarmist79
      I respect (no) your Urengoy faith in the neuinovat Germans,

      Not ours, but yours.
      Quote: Alarmist79
      A huge part of the PMV prisoners were captured wounded

      Ничего подобного.
      Quote: Alarmist79
      The Germans in 1941 did not differ in such humanism.

      The Germans were not distinguished by their humanism in WW1. In any case, in relation to the Russians. Although, of course, you cannot compare with 2 MB.
      Quote: Alarmist79
      The fiercest liberalism flourished in RIA.

      Namely? A reprimand before the formation?
      Quote: Alarmist79
      How many fellow citizens would give a fight from the front with such an attitude?

      And how much? As much as 1 MB? Or is it smaller?
      1. Alarmist79
        Alarmist79 April 24 2021 20: 24
        0
        = Not me. =
        And "not me" counted them in army losses? Or are we talking about common ones?

        = Not ours, but yours. =
        Those. Was it me unobtrusively promoting the idea that the Germans in 41 treated the wounded as in WWI? Come on, communists and Germans are brothers forever. Lenin and Vlasov will confirm.

        = And how soon did you hear about it? =
        They escaped from captivity in hundreds and up to generals, so it was pretty fast.

        = Nothing like that. =
        When does a communist lie? Right. Are you claiming that the Germans in WWI massacred the wounded and massacred the captured hospitals? Or is it just a wick-off process with obvious facts?
        "At the same time, it is overlooked that out of 2, approximately 417 were captured wounded (and in the Battle of Tannenberg, for example, at least 000 were captured wounded)."
        It was banal in PMA that there was not much point in evacuating the wounded from field hospitals at any cost, risking their lives. For example.

        = The Germans were not distinguished by their humanism even in WW1. In any case, in relation to the Russians. =
        Didn't differ. But the goal of destruction was not set directly.

        = Namely? A reprimand in front of the formation? =
        Well, this is too cruel. According to the legislation of the time, if a soldier disappeared for about a week after 6 months of service, he was not yet a deserter. And so only three days.

        = And how much? As much as 1 MB? Or is it smaller? =
        Do you seriously think that less than 200 thousand fled from the workers 'and peasants' ranks? (RIA until February). Wow the heat of faith

        “With the outbreak of World War II, desertion from the ranks of the Red Army acquired significant proportions. In the period from June 22 to the end of 1941 alone, the NKVD of the USSR detained over 710 thousand military deserters and more than 71 thousand evaders from mobilization [9]. July - September 1944, by order of Beria, the forces of the NKVD, NKGB, prosecutor's office and "Smersh" carried out a large-scale operation, as a result of which a total of 87 deserters and 923 dodgers were arrested throughout the country. "
        The number of mobilized is 1/2.
        How much would have been under the legislation arr. 1914 ?.
        1. Sugar Honeyovich
          Sugar Honeyovich April 25 2021 09: 20
          -1
          Quote: Alarmist79
          And "not me" counted them in the army losses? Or are we talking about common ones?

          I didn't count. And about whom we are talking - it is better to check with the interlocutor. Olgovich is his name. He used these figures.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          Those. Was it me unobtrusively promoting the idea that the Germans in 41 treated the wounded as in WWI?

          Well, not me! I didn't mention it at all.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          so pretty fast

          Or rather? How fast?
          Quote: Alarmist79
          = Namely? A reprimand in front of the formation? =
          Well, this is too cruel. According to the legislation of the time, if a soldier disappeared for about a week after 6 months of service, he was not yet a deserter. And so only three days.

          So when was an absent soldier considered a deserter - after three days or a week? Or more? And what consequences did this entail for him? Are they not: "His Majesty commands not to stop at any measures to establish strict discipline in the troops and in front of severe punishments in relation to those who have been absent (only those who have been absent! That is, self-willed, and not yet deserters! - SM) from their own parts of the ranks and in relation to robbers, marauders and arsonists.
          The goal indicated by the sovereign emperor must be achieved at all costs. On the railways and rear routes of the corps, especially along the highway, officers in the reserve should be sent with convoys to detain the defectors (also not yet deserters ... apparently - S.M.) from the units. These people should be punished quickly and severely as an example to others "(Alekseev).
          In practice, "quick and harsh punishment" looked like shootings, including mass executions, with the use of artillery, demonstrative hangings ... the result is ZERO.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          Do you seriously think that less than 200 thousand fled from the workers 'and peasants' ranks?

          Not yet. Because I know the numbers: in WW1, as of September 01.09.1917, 365, 1865 thousand deserters were "identified" plus 376,3 thousand "undetected". In the Second World War, 212,4 thousand were convicted of desertion and 710 thousand were not found. And even 1865 thousand - still not XNUMX.
          So
          Quote: Alarmist79
          How much would have been under the legislation arr. 1914 ?.
          hardly differently. It's not about the laws, but about the general mood.
        2. Alarmist79
          Alarmist79 April 25 2021 12: 48
          +1
          = I didn't count. =
          You lie, desertion and prisoners you counted from them.
          "That is, with 27 and 2 million dead: in WWII 4 prisoners / deserters for 13 killed, in WW1 - 11 prisoners / deserters for 4 killed? However, the quality. Yes."
          That is, they equated the civilian population of the occupied territories with the RIA.

          = Well, not me! I didn't mention this at all. =

          Well that's it. That is, they claimed that the wounded in 1941 were captured with the same frequency as in 1914-17.

          = Or rather? How fast? =
          In any case, much less than six months, according to which the ratio of prisoners-killed is already extremely bad. Solonin, citing documents, slanders that the number of recorded casualties in the wounded and killed for the 41st was 567 thousand. For all Solonin's love for sucking conclusions from a finger nobody is eager to refute this figure. Let there be double underestimation - the ratio is still 1 killed to 4 prisoners. Despite the fact that this is 1. with massively destroying the wounded Germans 2. cadre units, to a large extent, are analogous to 1914.

          = So when was an absent soldier considered a deserter - after three days or a week? =
          If served 6 months, then a week, if not, three.

          = In practice, "quick and severe punishment" looked like shootings, including massive ones, with the use of artillery, =
          As always, you are lying. The shootings and artillery are riots a la the notorious 14th Siberian (maximum 37 executed). Remind the scale of the shootings in the Red Army?
          Or that
          "The 46th Infantry Division, located in three villages, which refused to obey orders, did not succumb to any persuasion or admonition.
          The Ostrolensky regiment, from which the officers managed to leave, elected a new command staff and put forward a variety of demands, up to the conclusion of peace. "
          At the same time, the revolt of the 14th was fueled by the prospect of storming the local "Verdun" (Mitavskaya operation).

          = demonstrative hangings .. =
          Examples of such victims of tsarism. For desertion. And not "just stabbed a class enemy with children."

          = .result is ZERO. =
          As always, you are lying. 200 thousand deserters is five times less than from the Red Army over the same period, see below.

          = Not yet. Because I know the numbers: in WW1 as of 01.09.1917/365/XNUMX XNUMX thousand deserters were "revealed" =
          Those. against the background of "perestroika" 0.0 there were 165 thousand more. And? How's Perestroika 1.0. was with the loyalty of the army to the sovlast? In 1993, beat the heirs in the database?

          = plus 1865 thousand "undiscovered". =
          You are lying, the figure is stretched like this "2 million soldiers - this figure includes both deserters and deviators, and those soldiers of the rear garrisons who never went to the trenches." How did progressive historians consider them? Who knows.

          = In the Second World War, 376,3 thousand were convicted of desertion and 212,4 thousand were not found. =
          Those. in the case of the post-February RA, do we write as many garrisons as deserters, and in the case of the Red Army, do we not take into account the deserters sent back to the troops? When does a communist lie? Right.

          = And even 710 thousand is still not 1865. =
          This is only 41st.

          Detained for the second half of the 1941 of the year: 710 755 people
          Confessed: 6476 people
          Detained for 1942 year: 140 912 people
          for 1943 year: 197 912 people
          for 1944 year: 160 645 people

          In just three years of the war: 1 210 224 people

          September November 1944, XNUMX
          Deputy head of the department of the Department of the NKVD of the USSR for the fight against banditry. Captain L. Zaboev.
          Those. RIA before "perestroika-1917" 200 thousand, the Red Army for practically the same period (1941/43) more than 1 million. The ratio of the number of mobilized is less than 1/2. (September 1944 is not the whole war). Those. flight from the Red Army under a real threat of execution is 2,5 times higher than without.
        3. Sugar Honeyovich
          Sugar Honeyovich April 25 2021 16: 13
          -1
          Quote: Alarmist79
          You lie, desertion and prisoners you counted from them.

          Yes, you are lying. I did not count the total losses in the army, but did the calculation according to the numbers given not by me. Clear?
          Quote: Alarmist79
          That is, they claimed that the wounded in 1941 were captured with the same frequency as in 1914-17.

          And I didn't say that. You are lying.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          In any case, much less than half a year

          That is, by the fall? Taking into account the Vyazma and Bryansk losses or without? And if so, how can you explain the huge losses of prisoners in the spring of 1942?
          Quote: Alarmist79
          If served 6 months, then a week, if not, three.

          And if you run away from the collection point, does it not count at all? laughing What about the evidence?
          Quote: Alarmist79
          As always, you are lying. Shootings and artillery are riots

          Yes, you are lying as always. Because of powerlessness before the truth. Riots? Let's admit. If by riots we mean generally non-observance of orders or violation of discipline. They shot at retreating (fleeing), at those surrendering, at marauders, wandering in the rear, on suspicion of espionage, etc. etc. Read Wrangel and many others
          Quote: Alarmist79
          200 thousand deserters is five times less than from the Red Army over the same period

          200 is five times less than 1000, right. Just deserters for the "same period" really were 200 thousand, and not, for example, 1200 (Ignatiev) - it is far from a fact! Because with that mess, no one knew the exact numbers.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          this figure includes both deserters and deviators directly, and those soldiers of the rear garrisons who never went into the trenches

          You will not get bored with you! Maybe the wounded in hospitals were recorded as deserters? Or were they all taken prisoner, because "there was no point"? fool
          Quote: Alarmist79
          we write garrisons as deserters

          And what prevents you from writing the entire army as deserters? Moreover, in fact, it turned out to be like that. And there will be glory to you. Herostratus will die of envy ... again. bully
        4. Alarmist79
          Alarmist79 April 26 2021 11: 13
          +1
          = Yes, you are lying. I did not count the total losses in the army, but did the calculation according to the numbers given not by me. Is that clear? =

          Those. your civilian population could defect and surrender? You are lying.

          = And I didn't say that. You lie =

          Those. did you take into account the differences between 41 and 14 with regard to the wounded? You are lying.

          = Yes, you are lying as always. Because of powerlessness before the truth. =

          Those. you lied about the executions and the hanging of deserters.

          = Riots? Let's admit. If by riots we mean generally non-observance of orders or violation of discipline. =

          You are lying, you didn't shoot for a non-criminal violation of discipline.

          = They fired at retreating (fleeing), at those surrendering, at marauders, wandering in the rear, on suspicion of espionage, etc. etc. Read Wrangel and many others =

          About marauders and spies in general is excellent. Now let's look at the scale. According to red statements, less than 200 people were shot in RIA (130 thousand are attributed to the Ostroles regiment). 130 thousand were shot in the USSR. The difference is almost two orders of magnitude.

          = 200 is less than 1000 five times, right. Just deserters for the "same period" really were 200 thousand, and not, for example, 1200 (Ignatiev) - =

          Quote from Ignatiev. You can't help but lie, so ...

          = far from a fact! Because with that mess, no one knew the exact numbers. =

          You can prove it than that, my cheated opponent? In reality, the absenteeism was counted constantly, and did not disappear in the gigantic losses. But on the 41st there are BIG questions.

          = What about the evidence? =

          Easily.

          = The Russian military regulations on punishments were given in Art. 128 completely objective construction of absence, meaning by this act "unauthorized absence from the command or place of service" - in peacetime less than 6 days, in wartime - less than 3 days, and in view of the enemy - less than 1 day.

          For persons who have been in service for less than 6 months, the 1st term is extended to 15 days, and the 2nd - to 7 days. =

          = You won't get bored with you! Maybe the wounded in hospitals were recorded as deserters? Or were they all taken prisoner, because "there was no point"? =
          That is, your brothers in mind have written down the garrisons as deserters, and you will not miss me? Chutzpah Zhpg.
          "The scope of mass desertions after February and right up to October and Russia's withdrawal from the war gradually took on the character of self-demobilization of the Russian Armed Forces. 2 million soldiers - this figure includes both deserters and deviators, and those soldiers of the rear garrisons who never went to the trenches ".
          The link is half a page, so we hammer the quote into Google.

          And just don’t say that you didn’t know about it. The full version of the quote from which you pulled out a convenient number of Soviet deserters looks like this
          "According to various estimates, in 1941-1945 1,7-2,5 million people deserted from the ranks of the Red Army, including defectors to the enemy. (Defectors to the enemy's side made up 1,4-1,5% of the number of prisoners of war - about 40 people.) Military tribunals sentenced 000 people for desertion. 376 deserters who escaped from the active army were not found. About 300 thousand people called up for mobilization in the early days of the war went missing and did not appear in military units (212: Ch. 400). "

          = And what prevents you from writing the entire army as deserters? Moreover, in fact, it turned out to be like that. =

          Kolomoisky just died of envy. Disband the army ourselves, and then write it down as a deserter - this is for the real uninvolved Rafiks aka commissars in dusty helmets. Which must be "understood and forgiven."
        5. Sugar Honeyovich
          Sugar Honeyovich April 26 2021 17: 26
          -1
          Quote: Alarmist79
          Those. your civilian population could defect and surrender?

          Not with me. You are lying.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          Those. did you take into account the differences between 41 and 14 with regard to the wounded?

          Not. Although it followed - it is clear that the wounded were taken prisoner more in 1941, and not in 1914.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          Those. you lied about the executions and the hanging of deserters.

          Not. You are lying.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          they did not shoot for a non-criminal violation of discipline.

          You are lying. They shot on the spot for non-observance of an order, for example, for shelling - contrary to the prohibition - their own airplanes, traditionally mistaken for German ones. And General Gilchevsky personally shot a soldier who ignored his command to put the rifle in.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          According to red statements in RIA, less than 200 people were shot

          For what?
          Quote: Alarmist79
          Quote from Ignatiev.

          Please:
          “Tell me,” I ask almost in a whisper, “the French are chatting that we have a lot of deserters. Is it really true?
          - And how many do they have? - my high boss is trying to dismiss the question.
          “According to my information, there are also quite a few: something about fifty thousand, including those who“ evaded ”,” I quote the figures received shortly before this in secret from Gamelin.
          Belyaev, embarrassedly, straightens his pince-nez and, in an even quieter than usual voice, says with a sigh:
          “And we have up to one million two hundred thousand!” This is the summer of 1916.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          far from a fact! Because with that mess, no one knew the exact numbers. =
          You can prove it with something you can,

          Of course I can. You see: I have information from primary sources and logical arguments, you have lies and pathos.
          "The size of these losses can never be determined exactly. The Russian high command was not at all interested in the already used human meat. The General Sanitary Directorate was not interested in this either: there were no statistics of deaths from wounds in hospitals, which cannot but overwhelm the researcher.
          Calculations of losses were made during the war and after it by individuals using incomplete and unsystematic data. They were random in nature and led to completely different, often fantastic conclusions (suffice it to say that the number, for example, of prisoners was determined in the range from 1 to 300 people {000}). The Quartermasteries were counting "eaters". The Red Cross and the zemstvo-city unions registered, as best they could, and without any communication with each other, the wounded who passed through their hospitals and went into the depths of Russia (those who remained in the front-line zone did not get into any records) ...
          The rate was not at all interested in the question of the losses incurred. People who for three years in a row glorified millions of Russian officers and soldiers for slaughter, invented the "double bypass of the Masurian lakes", "the offensive in the heart of Germany", gave the bloodless armies frenzied directives "Not a step back!", Erected pyramids of skulls on Bzura, Naroch, near Kovel, these people never once in three years asked to find out what, at least approximately, costs Russia and the Russian army their strategic creativity.
          When, in July 1917, the French representative at the Headquarters, the shameful memory of General Janin (who later betrayed Kolchak), requested information about the losses incurred by Russia, the Headquarters was taken by surprise. After three months of fussy searches and appeals to the wrong authorities, the Stavka presented the first available figures to the French "(Kersnovsky).
          Quote: Alarmist79
          That is, your brothers in mind have written down the garrisons as deserters, and you will not miss me

          Yes, with you. Because you wrote it down. And your brothers in mind. Whereas the source says ONLY about deserters, both from the front and from the rear units. In both cases - from the army. If you don't know how to lie, don't make the audience laugh in the courtroom!
          Quote: Alarmist79
          “According to various estimates, in 1941-1945 1,7-2,5 million people deserted from the ranks of the Red Army, including defectors to the enemy.

          Let's say for a minute. Those. in both wars the number of deserters was essentially equal? And the number of armies was unequal: in WW1 it was 2,2 less than in WWII and ... the result of the war.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          Disband the army ourselves, and then write it down as a deserter

          This fact has not been recorded in history. You are lying ... as always.
        6. Alarmist79
          Alarmist79 April 27 2021 01: 54
          +1
          = Not with me. You are lying. =
          All God's dew, right? Who wrote this? You are a brazen liar.
          "That is, with 27 and 2 million dead: in WWII 4 prisoners / deserters for 13 killed, in WW1 - 11 prisoners / deserters for 4 killed? However, the quality"


          = No. =
          Yes, in the quote above is the same blatant lie. Well, below you, with your pro-fascist sympathies, have repeatedly uncovered your cover.

          = Although it followed - it is clear that more wounded were taken prisoner in 1941, and not in 1914 =

          Kolya from Urengoy re-login. Are you red or brown in general? However, gene. Vlasov was a big communist, yes.
          "Act. 1941, November 24 days, we, the undersigned, residents of the village of Glutno, Malo-Vishersky district, Yakovleva Maria Fedorovna, Antonov Alexei Matveyevich and Fedorov Pyotr Ivanovich, we testify that during the time the German invaders were in our village, the wounded were shot soldiers of the Red Army.
          On November 15, a German officer took 8 wounded soldiers out of Antonov's apartment, where they were (and were captured by the Germans), and shot them on the way to the headquarters.
          On November 14, in front of M.F. Yakovleva's apartment the wounded Red Army men who were captured were also shot. There were also noted the facts of mockery of the corpses of the killed soldiers: sticking a bayonet in the chest and throat.

          In what we subscribe:

          Signatures: Yakovleva, Antonov, Fedorov "

          = No. You are lying. =

          Your verbiage about deserters is higher. You are an arrogant and stubborn liar.


          = Please: =
          Those. do you refer to the Soviet edition? I told you that you can't help but lie.
          In reality, this problem has already been highlighted by Golovin.

          = Of course I can. You see: I have information from primary sources =
          You are a shameless liar.
          .
          "In Odessa, where in peacetime the Kersnovsky family lived on Marazlievskaya Street, Kersnovsky, being a 13-year-old high school student, went to the Volunteer Army," In fact, at 14 in 1919. In 1920 he emigrated.
          That is, the bikes are sucked from the finger, he did not see the archives in his eyes. The link (130) for 4,5 million goes to something about Pugachev.

          = (Kersnovsky). =
          That is, you have presented the result of finger sucking by a combat gymnasium student. At the same time, the quotation was cut off again - for there is terrible trash around. You are a brazen liar. So what did he pump ...

          = The Main Sanitary Directorate was not interested in this either: there were no statistics of deaths from wounds in hospitals, which cannot but overwhelm the researcher. =

          It is interesting what was then published by the Soviet CSO.

          = When, in July 1917, the French representative at the Headquarters, General Janin of the shameful memory (who later betrayed Kolchak), requested information about the losses incurred by Russia, the Headquarters was taken by surprise. =

          Really Janin demanded it
          “I received a request from France with a request to inform: 1) the available composition of the army by the day of mobilization, 2) the number of mobilized, 3) the available composition of the army after mobilization and people in spare parts within the country for successive periods of 6 months and 4) losses: a ) killed and missing, b) taken prisoner, c) dismissed for full service life, enrolled in the reserve, seriously wounded, d) dismissed before mandatory service life, e) exempt from conscription and f) returned to the factories "


          And what does he write a page above these terrible revelations?

          = our final losses - killed, died from wounds and diseases, disabled, missing and taken prisoner - were determined from the beginning of the war to December 1916 at 5 people. This number was obtained from a comparison of the total number of those called up - 500000 - with the same ones who were on allowances in the active army, in the navy, in rear units and on treatment - 14 people =

          In reality, 9 million were in the army.
          "In order to check the correctness of the quartermaster registration, by order of General Alekseev, a one-day census was made on April 20 / May 3, 1917. This census found out that the available number of those who were content in the army on that day from the Quartermasteries was calculated at 9 050 924."

          In another paragraph below, he buries all the rear parts.crediting them to losses.
          And do not blatantly lie that you are not aware of the biography of this cadet Bigler.

          = Let's say for a minute. Those. in both wars, the number of deserters was essentially equal? ​​=
          1. No, it wasn't. 2 million is a fantasy with garrisons.
          2. Even this required a post-February mess.
          3. Tsarism did not shoot 130 thousand.

          = Whereas the source says ONLY about deserters, both from the front and from the rear units. =

          You are a brazen liar. "this figure includes both directly deserters and deviators, and those soldiers of the rear garrisons who never went into the trenches. "
          God's dew, yes. That is, you lied about 2 million.

          = This fact has not been recorded in history. You are lying ... as always. =
          You are a brazen liar, the text of Trotsky's order is well known and I quoted it.
        7. Sugar Honeyovich
          Sugar Honeyovich April 27 2021 15: 43
          -1
          Quote: Alarmist79
          Who wrote this? You are a brazen liar.
          "That is, with 27 and 2 million dead: in WWII 4 prisoners / deserters for 13 killed, in WW1 - 11 prisoners / deserters for 4 killed? However, the quality"

          And who gave these figures in previous posts? If you don't know how to lie, don't make the audience laugh in the courtroom!
          Quote: Alarmist79
          the executions of the wounded soldiers of the Red Army were carried out.

          Quote: Alarmist79
          the wounded Red Army men who were captured were also shot.

          Those. I was right. Q.E.D.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          Those. do you refer to the Soviet edition?

          On the post-Soviet too. Do you have any more? And what are you, in fact, dissatisfied with - the emigrants, in your opinion, are completely liars. So ...
          Quote: Alarmist79
          Kersnovsky, being a 13-year-old high school student, joined the Volunteer Army, "In fact, at 14 in 1919.

          Does it change anything? laughing
          Quote: Alarmist79
          he didn’t see the archives

          The same as Golovin? Other?
          Quote: Alarmist79
          It is interesting what was then published by the Soviet CSO.

          What happened. What are they rich in ..
          .
          Quote: Alarmist79
          Really Janin demanded it
          “... and 4) losses:

          That is, with Kersnovsky - the pure truth. H and so on.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          In reality, 9 million were in the army.

          “Let us immediately note that this figure of 9 was listed on the list, while there was much less ... To the indicated 000“ final losses ”it would have been possible to attribute 000 - 5 already in December 500.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          This census found out that the available number of those who were content in the army in the field on that day from the Quartermaster was calculated at 9. "

          All the same - on paper, one thing, in reality ... This was very clearly manifested later - in the civilian: the contented ("mouths") - under a million, "bayonets" and "sabers" - several times less.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          In another paragraph below, he buries all the rear units., Crediting them to losses.

          The paragraph below is:
          "According to information officially reported to our Red Cross by the enemy, by the winter of 1916/17 there were 2 Russian prisoners of war in Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria and Turkey. This figure is quite reliable (the enemies, in any case, there was no downplay). " Where is the "buried rear," liar?
          Quote: Alarmist79
          2 million is a fantasy with garrisons

          Yours.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          it took a post-February mess

          "Needed" Mess is a CONSEQUENCE, not a reason. There would be no desertion and riots, there would be no mess. Only until February (specifically, before the desertion of one colonel) was the mess somehow restrained, and then ...
          Quote: Alarmist79
          You are a brazen liar. "This figure includes both deserters and deviators, as well as those soldiers of the rear garrisons who did not go to the trenches."

          You are a stupid liar. What is THIS figure? In "two million deserted soldiers of the front and rear garrisons", right? They deserted both from the front and from the rear! This is what we are talking about! Or are you really in Russian "nicht belme"? fool
          Quote: Alarmist79
          the text of Trotsky's order is well known

          And I talked about this even earlier - on paper they formalized what was happening in reality.
        8. Alarmist79
          Alarmist79 April 27 2021 21: 12
          +1
          = And who gave these figures in previous posts? =
          He cited them as losses of the Red Army, an arrogant liar? You didn’t go to school and didn’t know that 27 million is a loss with the civilian population? You are an arrogant and stubborn liar.

          = Ie. I was right. Which is what was required to prove. =
          When they zigged with shouts "it is clear that the wounded were taken prisoner more in 1941 than in 1914" ? Well, that's how they "got", before reaching the headquarters. Someone in your camp died after falling from a tower, tell me honestly?

          = Post-Soviet too. =
          Almost 40 years since the late Ignatiev had to rewrite the book?

          = Do you have any more? And what are you, in fact, dissatisfied with - the emigrants, in your opinion, are completely liars. So ... =
          Those. a book ending with Ignatiev standing at the mausoleum in 1937, was it written in exile? You are a brazen and shameless liar. The book was written in the Stalinist USSR.

          = Does this change anything? laughing =
          Well, for you, a source who does not know an elementary schoolboy, yes.

          = The same as Golovin? And others? =
          You are a brazen and shameless liar. Golovin worked with RIA documents to archives, sick.
          "From November 3, 1914 onwards - Quartermaster General of the Staff of the 9th Army. From October 24, 1915 - Chief of Staff of the 7th Army.
          After the February Revolution on April 17, 1917, Golovin was assigned to carry out the affairs of the chief of staff, assistant to the commander-in-chief of the armies of the Romanian front. On October 15, 1917, he was transferred to the order of the Minister-Chairman and Supreme Commander-in-Chief AF Kerensky. "

          = What happened. =
          Where did it come from? The "trustworthy" Kersnovsky claims that it was not.

          = That is, for Kersnovsky, it’s the truth. H and so on =
          You are a brazen and shameless liar.
          Shkolota broadcast this, and not about the requirements from a bunch of points, and taking into account all the garbage in the rear.
          "When, in July 1917, the French representative at Headquarters, General Janin (who later betrayed Kolchak), of shameful memory, requested information about the losses incurred by Russia, the Headquarters was taken by surprise."


          = "Let's note right away that this figure of 9 was listed on the list, while there was much less ... =
          What a stubborn liar you are. This is broadcast by a character who is sure that 9 million is list the composition of the entire army as a whole, and not just the current one.

          "The active army, in the navy, in the rear and in the recovery - 9 people, according to the General Office of the Intendant. We note immediately that this figure 9 was listed [b] on the list.

          = 5 - 500 could be attributed to the indicated 000 "final losses" already in December 1916. =
          God's dew? Are you the delirium of a character who confused the frontline strength of the army with the total, intend to repeat it all the way? This is because you are an arrogant and shameless liar.

          =. "Where are the" buried rear parts ", liar?
          God's dew, yeah. This is the beginning of Kersnovsky's finger-sucking, citing a schizoid tale about Poles who exhumed and destroyed 2,1 million bodies of those killed.
          On the second round.
          Kersnovsky in your own quote squeals that 9 million is list the number of everything, including the rear, the wounded and the fleet.
          Then he subtracts them from the difference in the number of those mobilized and receives phantom losses of 5,5 million. Then he subtracts the prisoners from them. Which are in your own paragraph, a liar. 2,4 million. Then the official losses.
          “Adding up these losses, we get 1 injured, dead and deserted people.
          The remaining 2 people did not fit any of the above categories ... Eternal memory to them! About 100 people - about a third of them have retained their names, the remaining 000 people are those unknown soldiers, about whom neither a stone nor a cross will speak, and whose remains were thrown out of their graves by a blasphemous Polish hand. "

          So, a little more than 2 million are the troops of the internal districts, etc.

          You posted garbage nonsense. You are a brazen and shameless liar.


          = Everything is the same - one thing on paper, in reality ... It was very clearly manifested later - in the civil one: the contented ("mouths") - under a million, "bayonets" and "sabers" - several times less. =

          What is the relation of the mores of the Shvonders, who fled even from the Poles with the Finns and Latvians, to RIA, sick? The fact that there was a fantastic mess in the Red Army is a fact. But this is a de facto bloated gang, mainly robbing the rear. RIA needed to fight the Germans, not.

          = You are a stupid liar. What is THIS figure? In "two million deserted soldiers of the front and rear garrisons", right? =
          No, you are a talentless liar.
          "this figure includes both deserters and deviators, and those soldiers of the rear garrisons who never went to the trenches "
          .

          = Deserted both from the front and from the rear! This is what we are talking about! Or are you really in Russian "nicht belme"? =
          We need to post this dialogue somewhere. Red is already in the pan and that's all.

          = And I talked about this even earlier - on paper, what was happening in reality was drawn up. =
          Those. have you just confessed that you lied, impudently and shamelessly?
        9. Sugar Honeyovich
          Sugar Honeyovich April 28 2021 13: 32
          0
          Quote: Alarmist79
          He cited them as losses of the Red Army

          That's right, you stupid liar. His descendant immediately poked his nose.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          Is 27 million civilian casualties?

          Yes it is. Moreover, not all of them are dead. But you don’t know such elementary stuff, and I have to teach you. Azam.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          "it is clear that more wounded were taken prisoner in 1941, and not in 1914" ? Well, that's how they "got", before reaching the headquarters.

          Those. You have nothing to argue? Ch.i.d.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          Those. a book ending with Ignatiev standing at the mausoleum in 1937, was it written in exile?

          Certainly not in exile. Therefore, according to your logic, it is completely true. good
          Quote: Alarmist79
          Golovin worked with RIA documents before archives

          Consequently, he did not see all the documents. It is not surprising that in his book he refers to Soviet data. Ch.i.d. You are a stupid liar. Read the grammar school student Kersnovsky - you absolutely need it.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          The "trustworthy" Kersnovsky claims that it was not.

          In and I about the same. And you didn’t believe it yet! fool
          Quote: Alarmist79
          This is broadcast by a character who is confident that 9 million is the payroll of the entire army as a whole, and not just the current one.

          But you must admit that he had good reasons to think so! "... the Minister of War received information from the Field Quartermaster about the number of people on allowances in the active army and in the theater of war, namely: ..... 8269000
          According to the information received from the fronts, by September 1, 1916, there were 6 people in the Army in the field.
          In view of this, the Minister of War asks for an explanation of the resulting difference between this information, reaching 2 lower ranks, with the establishment of which categories of lower ranks this difference was formed ...
          at a meeting on March 30, 1917 at Headquarters, the question arose again about the difference between the information provided by the Quartermaster and the information of the front headquarters on the number of troops. At this meeting it was recognized that the Quartermaster's information about the number of those on allowance "was largely based on theoretical calculations."
          In order to check the correctness of the quartermaster accounting by order of General Alekseev, a one-day census was made on April 20 / May 3, 1917. This census found out that the available number of those who were content in the Army in the field on that day from the Quartermanship was calculated at 9. This number was 050 higher than the number of the Army in the field, according to the estimates of the military headquarters. "
          The question is: what are the guarantees that these numbers are true, and not others? In that mess?
          An error by as much as a third is something!
          Quote: Alarmist79
          "This figure includes both deserters and deviators, as well as those soldiers of the rear garrisons who never went to the trenches."

          "Two million deserted soldiers of the front and rear garrisons" In this number of DEASTERS! (and deviators). Learn Russian and read all the words in the text, and not two to three.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          What is the relation of the mores of the Shvonders, who fled even from the Poles with the Finns and Latvians, to RIA, the sick one?

          The most direct. The Red Army, white and national armies consisted of RIA soldiers, officers and generals. Many of whom were revolutionaries, and even more - sympathizers.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          We need to post this dialogue somewhere

          I will do so. Vrieberal is not a belief, but a psychiatrist's diagnosis.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          lied, brazenly and shamelessly?

          You are. And it's also stupid. And they lied and lie.
  • Alarmist79
    Alarmist79 April 27 2021 03: 19
    +1
    “You are lying. You fired on the spot for not following an order, for example, for firing - contrary to the ban - on your own airplanes, traditionally mistaken for German ones. =

    Is shooting at friends just a violation of discipline? Wow principles at neocommies. The background of the order is as follows.
    “On September 9, 1914, near the village of Bengheim, the soldiers of the 288th Infantry Regiment shot down 4 airplanes of the Grodno Fortress Aviation Detachment. In the subsequent order No. 105 to the troops of the 1st Army of its commander, General of the Cavalry P.K. Rennenkampf, among other things, it was said:
    “With this criminal fire, testifying to the panic fear of Colonel Ratkov, our pilots were killed and seriously wounded. "

    And this is specifically the army of Rennenkampf, not.
    In general, you are lying as always.


    = And General Gilchevsky personally shot a soldier who ignored his command to put the rifle in. "

    And then he himself honestly admitted it, yeah. Right in the USSR, sitting and broadcasting in 1928, what a bloody executioner he was.

    = I demanded that the rifles be cleaned, oiled and delivered immediately. Some soldier closest to me deliberately did not carry out the order; then I drew my revolver and fired several shots at him. Everyone began to clean their rifles, but some of the soldiers, while unloading their rifles, deliberately fired several shots in my direction, allegedly by accident. Bullets flew past. I didn’t pay attention to it, and the shooting stopped immediately. ”

    That is, no "shot" no, you are an arrogant liar. The difference between "shot" and "hit" you prefer not to notice, right, liar? In context, he scared the soldier. And the downtrodden soldiers are his.
  • Sugar Honeyovich
    Sugar Honeyovich April 27 2021 15: 58
    -1
    Quote: Alarmist79
    Is shooting at friends just a violation of discipline?

    And in your opinion, this is a small oversight in the service? Very shitty.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    Moreover, this is specifically the army of Rennenkampf, and not

    And not what? And what difference does that make? There was a shooting on the spot. The most real.
    In general, you are lying as always. It’s unwise.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    And then he himself honestly admitted this

    Yes exactly. Judging by the description, such incidents were the most common occurrence and were not even counted as incidents.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    That is, there is no "shot",

    Yeah, "shot him several times," but only scared him. I believe I’m drunk and it’s not like that. Only in context, he killed the soldier (at best, wounded). And nothing else. That is why
    Quote: Alarmist79
    slaughtered soldiers
    reacted accordingly. An interesting paragraph below: "The soldiers in the regiments were generally revolutionary. Many of them were reluctant to take part in the battles." This is in the third month of the war! What is the reason for this?
    You are lying. stop
  • Alarmist79
    Alarmist79 April 28 2021 03: 45
    +1
    = Do you think this is a minor oversight in the service? Very shitty. =
    You are a brazen liar, in our opinion this is an attempted murder. And for the neocommies, it's just a violation of discipline, yes. Once you start shooting your own, it's hard to stop, right?

    = Not what? =
    And not the whole army, and August 1914, when our aviation still dominated.

    = And what difference does that make? There was a shooting on the spot. The most real. =
    For just a breach of discipline, yeah. In general, you are lying as always. It's unwise.

    = Yes, that's right. Judging by the description, such incidents were the most common occurrence and were not even considered incidents. =
    Consciousness as it is, yeah. We prove the murder by the fact that the murders were common - on the basis of precisely this unproven murder? Are you not related to People's Commissar Yezhov?
    Is there any other confirmation of the "usual" murders for an unclean rifle in RIA? Or are you just an arrogant liar?

    = responded accordingly. =
    And the general, who had just shot a soldier for an unclean rifle, did not react in any way.

    = Yeah, "shot him several times," but only scared him. I believe I’m drunk and it’s not like that. =
    Don't you understand "Russian"? “Shooting at” Russian-speakers understand how to “shoot”, not how to “kill”. Was Brezhnev tortured with you in 1969? "Viktor Ilyin is a junior lieutenant who shot at Brezhnev" ...
    Got it or not - these are further clarifications. They stubbornly do not take in the wipers, right?

    = Only in context, he killed the soldier (at best, wounded). And nothing else. =
    You are a brazen liar. What is the context? The book was written in the USSR, did he want to join the OGPU?

    = "The soldiers in the regiments were generally revolutionary. Many of them were reluctant to take part in the fighting." This is in the third month of the war! What is the reason for this? =
    With regard to the Red Army, ask this question. At the same time, in 1941, the same Kiev boiler and a huge part of the 3,8 million
    And here, a little lower, there is such revolutionary spirit
    “When, after a halt, I drove through the village of Vengrtse, I was met in the village by a non-commissioned officer of one of the regiments of the 83rd division. He told the details of the former night battle, about which nothing was known. He said that when the remnants of the brave companies, surrounded by significant enemy forces, who were shooting them from all sides with rifle, machine-gun and cannon fire all day, they could no longer fight, having used up all the cartridges, they, exhausted, placed their machine guns in the huts and fired at the enemy from the windows. Austrian artillery set fire to these huts, and all the defenders were burnt in them along with machine guns. We found the remains of machine guns in the fire. After lunch, several hundred still surviving fighters were forced to lay down their weapons. "

    In relation to 1941, such heroism is highlighted in every possible way without looking back at the many times large mass of those who surrendered and fled, here the general is dissatisfied with the average attitude of the division. That's the difference in level.
  • Sugar Honeyovich
    Sugar Honeyovich April 28 2021 12: 26
    -1
    Quote: Alarmist79
    Once you start shooting your own, it's hard to stop, right?

    You know better. You are constantly busy with this.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    in our opinion this is attempted murder

    Those. those soldiers deliberately shot their pilots? German spies, saboteurs and terrorists? You are a stupid liar.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    And not the whole army, and August 1914, when our aviation still dominated

    The order was dated 17.09.14/17.11/1916, and the incident itself was on XNUMX/XNUMX. And "that the troops continue to shoot their airplanes, completely unaware of our apparatus" was also noted in XNUMX. Our aviation never dominated that war. “Our aviation is still in its infancy. The General Staff did not pay any attention to aviation and did not care at all about using it in practical terms; and it is clear that when the war began, no one knew exactly what to do with it.
    No training, no program. They learned, of course, from the Germans, but in such a way that they still haven't learned anything. "
    Quote: Alarmist79
    Are you not related to People's Commissar Yezhov?

    Not. I am now talking with his relative. Spiritual. hi
    Quote: Alarmist79
    "Shooting" Russian-speakers understand how to "shoot", not how to "kill"

    This is true - you begin to understand! What does my school mean! Only, unlike Brezhnev and Gilchevsky himself, the fate of that soldier is unknown, so we have to assume the most likely option. Kaplan also "fired" at Lenin, but did not kill, right? But it’s not her fault.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    They stubbornly do not take in the wipers, right?

    Not. Instructed to prepare janitors. Intellectual and cultural. This is what I am doing here. repeat
    Quote: Alarmist79
    The book was written in the USSR, did he want to join the OGPU?

    He wanted a pension. Therefore, he wrote letters to the highest Soviet officials that were very unpleasant for them. You are a stupid liar.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    At the same time, in 1941, the same Kiev boiler and a huge part of the 3,8 million

    Only 1941 and 1914 are two big differences. You are lying.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    In relation to 1941, such heroism is highlighted in every possible way without looking back at the many times large mass of those who surrendered and fled, here the general is dissatisfied with the average attitude of the division. That's the difference in level.

    This is yes. The Germans in 1941-42 directly said that such stubborn resistance of the Russians NEVER met in WW1. They immediately felt the difference! hi
    You are all lying.
  • Alarmist79
    Alarmist79 April 30 2021 01: 29
    0
    = You know better. You are constantly busy with this =
    And dispossession, decossackization, great terror, etc. arranged by evil anti-communists, yes. Is Rafik innocent again?

    = Ie. those soldiers deliberately shot their pilots? German spies, saboteurs and terrorists? =
    Who would doubt that commies are on the side of any bastard. They deliberately fired at unidentified planes, in which their pilots could very likely be. For purely selfish reasons, and.
    You are a stupid liar.

    = The order was dated 17.09.14/17.11/XNUMX, and the incident itself was XNUMX/XNUMX. =
    And?
    = And "that the troops continue to shoot their airplanes, completely unaware of our vehicles" was also noted in 1916 =
    And they put a lot in the wall when the probability of falling over the Germans and their own at least equaled?

    = Our aviation never dominated that war. =
    You are a brazen liar with mumba-yumba complexes in front of a white master.
    The RI aviation in 1914 was larger and more modern than the German one and, at the same time, was not torn apart into two fronts. At the same time, the Austrians had seven plus times less aircraft and they can be neglected.
    Unsurprisingly, those duped by propaganda sold the empire for jeans and chewing gum.

    = Our aviation is still in its infancy. The General Staff did not pay any attention to aviation at all =
    Those. you referred to another illiterate yap, and even scribbled his opus in the RSFSR of 1920

    "Mikhail Konstantinovich Lemke (1872-1923), historian, journalist, publicist. His works on the history of the Russian revolutionary movement, social thought, censorship are widely known. From September 1915 to July 1916, Lemke served at the Headquarters of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief."
    Censor served. But as a vigorous cadet ...

    You are a brazen liar.

    = No. I am now talking with his relative. Spiritual. =
    What interesting friends you have.

    = Only, unlike Brezhnev and Gilchevsky himself, the fate of that soldier is unknown, so we have to assume the most likely option. =

    Why "most likely"? So there were many more cases of shooting for an unclean rifle, or, as usual, you blatantly lied?

    = No. Instructed to prepare the janitors. =
    Have you grown to a foreman? I doubt it.

    = He wanted a pension. Therefore, I wrote =
    How he shot a soldier in 1914. For an unclean rifle. Logic, yes.

    = Only 1941 and 1914 are two big differences. You are lying. =
    1. Ie. the fact that the sovvlast massively drove soldiers into the cauldrons - is this a fat plus of the Soviet government? But, indeed, here she successfully put an end to the birthmarks of tsarism.
    2.A 1917 after February and 1943/44 are the same. But no, "it's different, you need to understand."

    = Yes. The Germans in 1941-42 directly said that such stubborn resistance of the Russians NEVER met in WW1. They immediately felt the difference! You are all lying. =
    Give such a quote specifically for the 41st and from those who really dealt with Russians in WWI. Or a brazen liar.
  • Sugar Honeyovich
    Sugar Honeyovich April 30 2021 10: 26
    0
    Quote: Alarmist79
    And dispossession, decossackization, great terror, etc. arranged by evil anti-communists, yes.

    Including.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    For purely selfish reasons

    For example, what?
    Quote: Alarmist79
    And they put a lot in the wall

    Who counted them? You yourself know: they fired in passing. Without even putting it against the wall.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    when the probability of falling for the Germans and their own at least equaled?

    In what - and that was? I remember you said: "August 1914, when our aviation still dominated" - and after August 1914, who dominated?
    Quote: Alarmist79
    The RI aviation in 1914 was larger and more modern than the German one, and at the same time it was not torn apart into two fronts.

    Truth? It is strange that no one opened their eyes to this. They stubbornly kept repeating: “The assistance from our aviation in general, and from the guards in particular, was negligible.
    We were too noticeably inferior to the enemy in this area and competed with him sluggishly, to the extent of our beggarly forces and capabilities ... - to seriously avenge them with the same weapon. "
    "Still" - it was written in 1916. as in 1914. They are contemporaries - they would call you an illiterate yap. yes
    Quote: Alarmist79
    What interesting friends you have.

    Your relatives.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    I doubt it.

    Intelligence is not enough yet.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    How he shot a soldier in 1914. For an unclean rifle. Logic, yes.

    Yes, logic. Like, he served faithfully.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    Soviet power massively drove soldiers into boilers - is this a fat plus for Soviet power?

    But how! Stalingrad, Voronezh, Belarus, Moldova - how many have such advantages? And how much?
    Quote: Alarmist79
    And 1917 after February and 1943/44 are the same

    I should tell the Germans ... And the White emigres at the same time ... laughing
    Quote: Alarmist79
    Give such a quote specifically for the 41st and from those who really dealt with Russians in WWI

    "It was our soldiers who established that such an organized manifestation of perseverance was never met in the First World War."
    You are a stupid liar. fool
  • Sugar Honeyovich
    Sugar Honeyovich April 25 2021 10: 18
    -1
    Quote: Alarmist79
    At the same time, it is overlooked that out of 2, approximately 417 are captured wounded.

    "I climbed out of the trench, and my eyes were presented with an incredible picture: the companies on the right and left, having raised white flags, surrender to the Germans. Something incredible! From another regiment sitting next to us, 8 companies were also captured."
    “Our losses are enormous .... Almost one third of them surrendered. There is an intensified shelling of machine guns, many people were killed. Suddenly some scoundrel shouts:“ Well, guys, they brought us here for slaughter, or what? Let's surrender! " And instantly almost a whole battalion planted kerchiefs on bayonets and put them up from behind the parapet "
    "From the reports I have received, I see too many of the missing lower ranks, of which most, undoubtedly, were taken prisoner."
    “Unfortunately, cases of voluntary surrender among the lower ranks have been and still are, and not only in parties, as you report, but even in whole companies ... Although after the measures taken, the number of cases of voluntary surrender has significantly decreased, and there were even examples, when those who tried to surrender were shot in the back by their own people, but nevertheless these cases will be repeated in the future, until the main reason for them is eliminated - the lack of officer supervision, which is a consequence of the extreme lack of officers "
    "But the French gave only 250 people prisoner, and they speak of the 000 we surrendered as a phenomenon in which only one command is to blame" (Lemke)
    The last item is as of January 1916.
    "The people of the 1915 term easily surrendered to captivity - the complete absence of military education" (Sandetsky)
    Most of the wounded, yeah. Morally wounded!
    Quote: Alarmist79
    It was banal in WWI there was not much point in evacuating the wounded from field hospitals at any cost, risking their lives.

    Was there any point in leaving them to the enemy? But...
  • Alarmist79
    Alarmist79 April 25 2021 13: 14
    +1
    = "" I climbed out of the trench, =
    Do you sketch examples of mass surrender to the Red Army? Can you confirm the fact of mass extermination of the wounded by the Germans in WWI? Not.

    = "But the French gave only 250 prisoners. =
    You are lying, half a million with the number of mobilized almost half the size (7,9 / 14).
    Moreover, the bulk is clearly in 1914, when the Anglo-French avoided surrender and wounded draped. Further positioning.
    But a neo-Bolshevik cannot help but kiss the white bwana's pen.

    =, and they speak of the 2 we surrendered as a phenomenon in which only one command is to blame "(Lemke) =
    Those. the fact that during the shell famine of 1915 the Germans moved east, and not against the French, and the RIA did not run fast enough, is the command to blame? Well, in a sense, yes, Austria-Hungary was tortured badly.

    = Most wounded, yeah. Morally wounded! =
    What then can you say about the RKKA-41? See above for the ratio of killed / prisoners.

    = Was there any point in leaving them to the enemy? However ... =
    Is it normal practice for a real communist to carry heavy people with mass mortality, so that they are not captured and the enemy does not puff up? Who would doubt that.
    In the era of imputed wars without massacre, leaving non-walking wounded to the enemy was the norm, suddenly
    . The Anglo-Boer “... We left the seriously wounded to the British, who picked them up. For all the cruelty of the British, who burned farms and drove away civilians, it should be said in their defense that their soldiers and officers have always acted extremely humanely with the wounded. "
  • Sugar Honeyovich
    Sugar Honeyovich April 25 2021 16: 39
    -1
    Quote: Alarmist79
    Do you sketch examples of mass surrender to the Red Army?

    Sketch. Let's see what you get. In particular, find (if you can!) An example similar to Novogeorgievsk.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    Can you confirm the fact of mass extermination of the wounded by the Germans in WWI?

    I can not. But, as you will see, it has zero value.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    You lie, half a million

    You lie twice. Half a million - for the whole war, and not for the first 1,5 years, and the numbers were named not by me, but by a contemporary - a participant in the events.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    obviously

    Those. did you come up with it yourself? laughing
    Quote: Alarmist79
    Those. the fact that during the shell famine of 1915 the Germans moved east, and not against the French, and the RIA did not run fast enough, is the command to blame?

    Or who? The fact that the Germans moved east in 1941 blame our command for some reason, but this does not apply to 1915? And who is to blame for the shell hunger? And who is to blame that the French had this:
    “Each completed battle is immediately analyzed with the participation of chiefs of units and staffs, the battle technique, mistakes, successful decisions, enemy tactics - in a word, everything that can give indications for tomorrow is clarified.
    Each boss feels his responsibility to the country in the person of parliament, which will require an account. Errors that are the result of criminal ignorance, inability, etc., are severely punished ...
    They do not go into battle there without a long, persistent and faithful preparation of his artillery. There, the soldier is so educated that if he sees the senselessness of an order to go into an attack unprepared due to a misunderstanding of the chief, he refuses, meanwhile the discipline is much stricter than ours. There they do not cut the wire with scissors under the bullets of the enemy; there it is flogged with grenades. They don't send people to slaughter with a bang ... "
    And we have this:
    “Ermolaev briefly reported on all this to the chief of staff. He listened to him, listened and, when they reached the end, asked if the colonel considered it possible to attack the German fortified positions.
    - No, your Excellency; it is necessary to prepare with artillery in a way that we do not do and do not know how to do.
    “Well, and the privilege of our army is fighting with the chest,” Alekseev replied in such a tone that one could see the whole depth of the tragedy he was experiencing internally at that moment in the consciousness that the army's training was completely perverted in peacetime. "

    Quote: Alarmist79
    What then can you say about the RKKA-41? See above for the ratio of killed / prisoners.

    What about all of Europe 1939-40? About France and even Belgium? What can you say about Germany? The number of prisoners both in absolute numbers and as a percentage of losses to all of them is a colossal contrast with 1 MB!
    Quote: Alarmist79
    Is it normal practice for a real communist to carry heavy people with mass mortality, so that they are not captured and the enemy does not puff up?

    Normal practice for normal people, which are the real communists.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    For all the cruelty of the British, who burned farms and drove away civilians, it should be said in their defense that their soldiers and officers have always acted extremely humanely with the wounded. "

    And how humanely? Fed up with broth, and then sent to the civilian population? To concentration camps? However ... humanism! fool
  • Alarmist79
    Alarmist79 April 26 2021 12: 08
    +1
    = Sketch. Let's see what you get.

    "On August 22, 1941, the 436th Infantry Regiment of the 155th Infantry Division of the 13th Army of the Bryansk Front went to the Germans almost in full force."
    Yet?

    = In particular, find (if you can!) An example similar to Novogeorgievsk. =

    Why a similar one, if it can be two orders of magnitude worse. We take almost all the leadership of the ROA and personally Vlasov. The communists are like that, yes.
    And a similar one is Ponedelin's 12th army, for example.

    = I can't. But, as you can see, it has zero value. =
    How? The wounded were supposed to vigorously evacuate to the rear? You are lying.

    = You lie twice. =
    Mirror.

    = Half a million - for the whole war, =

    = and not for the first 1,5 years, =
    You're lying, 2,4 million for the whole.

    = and the numbers were named not by me, but by a contemporary - a participant in the events. =
    Is relaying a deliberate lie for neocommies not a lie? Who would doubt that.

    = Ie. did you come up with it yourself? =
    Can you suggest other periods? Well that's it.

    = Or who? The fact that the Germans moved east in 1941 blame our command for some reason, but this does not apply to 1915? =
    By June 22, Stalin was crushing Mussolini, or what are you trying to say?

    = And who is to blame for shell hunger? =
    In PMV, curves represent your precious French, thoughtlessly relayed by bwang and kargokult lovers like you. And in the Great Patriotic War - Comrade. Stalin or something else?

    = And who is to blame that the French had this: = \
    In reality, your white bwans had the Nivelle massacre, the Somme, 1914 drape, etc. shydevry. Until 1918, moreover.
    But you are brazenly lying, citing only criticism of the Russian shortcomings and a leafy description of the French ones. Given that, where, as well-grounded internal criticism, those were, to put it mildly, rich. But you still have a leg, kiss a leg

    = And what about the whole of Europe 1939-40? About France and even Belgium? What can you say about Germany? The number of prisoners both in absolute numbers and as a percentage of losses to all of them is a colossal contrast with 1 MV! =

    You are brazenly lying, in the case of the same French 2 million were taken prisoner after surrender. Approximately t.c. Germany. Did the USSR capitulate?

    = Normal practice for normal people, which are real communists. =

    Ie, in fact, to kill a bunch of seriously wounded, so as NOT to create problems for the enemy, is this the practice of normal people? This practice is not only sadists, but also idiots.

    = And how humanely? Fed up with broth, and then sent to the civilian population? To concentration camps? However ... humanism! fool =

    Military to civilians? You're a real uh ... a communist. And the British got to do with it?
  • Sugar Honeyovich
    Sugar Honeyovich April 26 2021 16: 06
    -1
    Quote: Alarmist79
    "On August 22, 1941, the 436th Infantry Regiment of the 155th Infantry Division of the 13th Army of the Bryansk Front went to the Germans almost in full force."

    The keyword is "almost." "... a group of servicemen went over to the side of the Germans, including Kononov and the deputy regiment commander for political affairs, Commissar D. Panchenko"; ".. Regarding the transition itself, the versions, as usual, differ. From" I passed with the whole regiment and the banner "to" I ran over with 2-3 officers. "Wishful thinking?
    Quote: Alarmist79
    Yet?

    The first attempt failed - let's get the second one!
    Quote: Alarmist79
    Why similar, if it is possible two orders of magnitude worse

    It is possible, but still it is not that. In that war, this was generally worse in the world than in the 1st. Times, customs.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    similar is Ponedelin's 12th army,

    Not the same at all. Bad, though. Those. there are no analogues? Do you at least?
    Quote: Alarmist79
    The wounded were supposed to vigorously evacuate to the rear?

    You are lying. And the fact that the wounded had to self-evacuate and the fact that they were the majority among the prisoners. For 2 mV with its fast deep breakthroughs and encirclements, this is typical, but in the positional 1 mV this could not be purely technical.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    You're lying, 2,4 million for the whole.

    Already 2,4 million? It was just 0,5! Carries you swiftly!
    Quote: Alarmist79
    deliberate lie

    Tsarist generals lied to each other? Prove and disprove. Otherwise, you are a liar and a slanderer!
    Quote: Alarmist79
    what are you trying to say?

    I'm trying to extract logic from your lies. Expose lies is after.

    Quote: Alarmist79
    = And who is to blame for shell hunger? =
    In PMV, the curves represent your precious French, thoughtlessly relayed by bwang and Kargokult lovers like you

    a) What language is it? b) So who is to blame for the shell hunger?
    Quote: Alarmist79
    In reality, your white bwans had the Nivelle massacre, the Somme, 1914 drape, etc. shydevry. Until 1918, moreover.

    But unlike Russia and the Central ones, they did not have the decomposition of the army and the revolution ...
    Quote: Alarmist79
    You are brazenly lying, in the case of the same French 2 million were taken prisoner after surrender.

    You lie insolently and ineptly. And why did the surrender take place? And after and as a result of what? By the way, in 1914 the French did not surrender. She was not with them.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    Did the USSR capitulate?

    That's right, NO!
    Quote: Alarmist79
    Ie, in fact, to kill a bunch of seriously wounded, so as NOT to create problems for the enemy, is this the practice of normal people?

    Do not judge others by yourself.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    = And how humanely? Fed up with broth, and then sent to the civilian population? To concentration camps? However ... humanism! fool =
    Military to civilians? You're a real uh ... a communist. And the British got to do with it?

    You haven't answered the question, however. Moreover, the British used concentration camps en masse. This is the kind of humanism they have.
  • Alarmist79
    Alarmist79 April 26 2021 20: 54
    +1
    = The keyword is "almost". "... a group of servicemen went over to the side of the Germans, including Kononov and the deputy regiment commander for political affairs, Commissar D. Panchenko"; ".. Regarding the transition itself, the versions, as usual, differ. =

    Well, yes, sometimes they are cut down to the battalion. It's still a masterpiece.

    = "ran across with 2-3 officers". =
    You are lying. There are no such versions in b / m sane sources.

    = First attempt failed - let's do the second! =
    OK. More than half a million Kiev cauldron for how long did it raise its hands in its bulk? 11 days?
    Where did the remaining 3,8 million come from in 1941?

    = It is possible, but still it is not that. =
    This is the other aha.
    That is, a crowd of real communist generals and officers - fighting on the side of the Germans and this is unaccountable, but Novogeorgievsk is not usable? This is some kind of masterpiece of chutzpanautics.

    = Not the same at all. Although bad. =
    Is that something else? And why?

    = You are lying. And the fact that the wounded had to self-evacuate and the fact that they were the majority among the prisoners. For 2 mV with its fast deep breakthroughs and encirclements, yes, it is typical, but in a positional 1 mV this could not be purely technical. =

    1. Ie. the wounded teleported from the battlefield left for the enemy in WWI? You lie absurdly and brazenly.
    2. the first stage of WWII is maneuverable on both fronts, the eastern front is mobile and in 1915-16.

    = Already 2,4 million? It was just 0,5! Carries you swiftly! =
    You are lying, we are talking about Russian prisoners.

    = Did the tsar's generals lie to each other? Prove and disprove. Otherwise, you are a liar and a slanderer! =
    Sure. Reference yap - Krasnov. Greatly like you by the way. The same fan

    = I'm trying to extract logic from your lies =
    Since our lying, Stalin tortured Mussolini in 41? Time again?

    = a) What language is it? b) =
    In Russian. You need to know the "Russian language". Then they will take them to the wipers.

    = So who is to blame for the shell hunger? =
    Don't you understand Russian? If in WWI, then your bwans wisely believed that the war would be short. As a result, they themselves had to shoot trash, finishing off the cannons and artillerymen. If you talk about the shell famine of 1941/42 - brilliant Soviet managers, of course.

    = But unlike Russia and Central, they did not have the decomposition of the army =
    You still have a leg for them, kiss the leg. It was. Just according to the results of the wise command in 1917.

    = and revolutions ... =
    Well, they stupidly killed the outspoken commissars like Zhores.

    = You are lying insolently and ineptly. =
    You have arrogantly lied to. Who carried this?
    "The number of prisoners both in absolute numbers and as a percentage of losses to all of them is a colossal contrast with 1 MV!"

    = And why did the surrender take place? And after and as a result of what? =
    As a result of the monumental defeat.

    = By the way - in 1914 the French did not surrender. She was not with them. =
    So what?

    = That's right, NO! =
    Is it because Moscow is on a French scale in the Corsica region?
    Well, anyway. Drawing analogies with France, you blatantly lied.

    = Don't judge others by yourself. =
    You are lying, you offered to ditch the seriously wounded in order to save the enemy from expenses, it was you.
    "Is it normal practice for a real communist to drag heavy heavy people with mass mortality, so that they do not get captured and the enemy does not puff up?"

    -Normal practice for normal people, which are the real communists. "

    = You did not answer the question, however. Moreover, the British used concentration camps en masse. This is the kind of humanism they have. =
    You were told that to shove a potentially highly problematic contingent into a camp for non-combatants is a mediated member of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation.
  • Sugar Honeyovich
    Sugar Honeyovich April 27 2021 16: 30
    -1
    Quote: Alarmist79
    There are no such versions in b / m sane sources.

    There is. A lot. Because nobody knows the truth. The most insane: "crossed with the whole regiment and the banner" and even "with music."
    Quote: Alarmist79
    It's all the same shydevr

    Against the background of the same World War I - so, a speck. Gray.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    More than half a million Kiev cauldron for how long did it raise its hands in its bulk? 11 days?

    Yeah, after 2,5 months of bitter resistance. I ask you - were there any examples in WWII when the commander of a large armed garrison of a powerful fortress (and not a bloodless army in a cauldron) REMOVED to the enemy, FROM THERE ordered to surrender and the garrison FULFILLED this order? You never named it! Ponedelin with his army is absolutely different. Even with the worst version.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    the wounded teleported from the battlefield left for the enemy into WWI

    And in that war there were so many of these fields that the wounded made up the majority of the prisoners, who (if you believe someone) were many times more than the killed? Without powerful, deep breakthroughs to the rear, encirclements with cutting off the path of retreat? If you don't know how to lie, don't make the audience laugh in the courtroom!
    Quote: Alarmist79
    the first stage of the WWII is maneuverable on both fronts,

    And how long was this first stage so as not to have time to evacuate so many wounded? If this is true, then the losses only at the first stage should be an order of magnitude greater than is commonly believed. Not to mention the whole war ...
    Quote: Alarmist79
    Don't you understand Russian?

    I understand Russian - he is my own. Yours is not. We even have janitors from Middle Asia speak more literately and more intelligently.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    If in WWI, then your bwans wisely believed that the war would be short. As a result, they themselves had to shoot trash, finishing off the cannons and artillerymen.

    Simply put, the command is to blame. I'm right again.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    Since our lie, Stalin tortured Mussolini in the 41st

    Just like Hitler, he is ignorant. It was not in vain that his minister, Hitler, had already reported to him in November that Germany had in fact lost the war.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    Well, they stupidly killed the outspoken commissars like Zhores.

    Ha! Was that enough? But in other countries, revolutions took place without communists. So it’s not about them?
    Quote: Alarmist79
    So what?

    The fact that in this war they fought differently from that one. For some reason.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    Is it because Moscow is on a French scale in the Corsica region?

    Guess. With three tries.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    offered to ditch the seriously wounded in order to save the enemy from expenses it was you

    You are lying, you are suggesting not to save them, but to give them to the enemy for torment and death.
    Quote: Alarmist79
    to shove a potentially very problematic contingent into a camp for non-combatants - this is a mediated member of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation you have to be

    The British in the 19th century. - members of the Communist Party? Honored? However ... keep going! But still answer - what did the English "humanism" look like in that war? Take courage at least once - tell the truth! bully
  • Khibiny Plastun
    Khibiny Plastun April 23 2021 15: 28
    +1
    In general, the losses of Russia in the PM war are 855000 killed, dead from wounds, missing (without regard to) civilians. This data of the Central Statistical Administration of the USSR was given several times. Golovnin in emigration, taking the numbers from the ceiling, estimated the losses of Russia in the PM, 1. And only with the corn-grower, the losses of Russia, somehow, began to grow. This, as now some, like Sokolov draw over 200 million. In my opinion, you need to know not only about victories, but also about failure.
  • Sugar Honeyovich
    Sugar Honeyovich April 24 2021 05: 04
    +1
    Quote: Olgovich
    Russia had enough ABILITY to direct the main blow of the aggressor against Anglo-France, which became the main cannon fodder of WWI

    And in the 1860s and 70s, one must think, Russia directed the attacks of the aggressors to the west and north and south - just not to the east! And she didn't lose a single person! That was a skill, right? And then it gets thinner and thinner ... negative
    Quote: Olgovich
    In WWI, Russia simply did not allow half of the population to end up in occupied territories like the USSR.

    Unfortunately, she did. And unlike the 1940s, when the Germans washed themselves in blood at every step, then they seized territories simply by going to the necessary railways. stations ... stop
    1. Alarmist79
      Alarmist79 April 24 2021 18: 24
      +1
      = Unfortunately, I did. And unlike the 1940s, when the Germans washed themselves in blood at every step, then they seized territories simply by going to the necessary railways. stations ... stop =

      As I say, there is a lie, a blatant lie, and what the neo-communists say. In 1918, the Bolsheviks themselves demobilized the army before that. At the same time, breaking up the army before coming to power, breaking up and reducing after coming to powershooting those who refused to organize fraternization with the Germans (Dukhonin).

      “We are getting out of the war. We inform all peoples and their governments about this. We give the order for the complete demobilization of our armies ... At the same time, we declare that the conditions offered to us by the governments of Germany and Austria-Hungary fundamentally contradict the interests of all peoples. "
      On the same day, Trotsky sent a telegram to Commander-in-Chief Krylenko, in which he demanded to immediately issue an order on the army in the field to end the state of war with the powers of the German bloc and to demobilize the army; Krylenko issued this order the next morning.
      1. Sugar Honeyovich
        Sugar Honeyovich April 25 2021 09: 36
        -1
        Quote: Alarmist79
        there is a lie, a blatant lie and what the neo-communists say.

        That is: a lie, a blatant lie, and the truth? I think you are right. Just add: there is a lie "vrieberal-crap" - that is, it’s stupid. At the level of delirium.
        Quote: Alarmist79
        In 1918, the Bolsheviks themselves demobilized the army before that. At the same time, breaking up the army before coming to power, breaking up and reducing after coming to power, shooting those who refused to organize fraternization with the Germans (Dukhonin).

        "General voice:" We have no infantry "...
        I will say more: We have no army. And it is necessary to create it immediately, by all means.
        The new laws of the government, leading the army on a proper path, have not yet penetrated its thickness, and it is difficult to say, therefore, what impression they made. It is clear, however, that repression alone will not be able to bring the army out of the impasse it has fallen into.
        When they repeat at every step that the Bolsheviks were the cause of the collapse of the army, I protest. This is not true. The army was destroyed by others, and the Bolsheviks were just filthy worms that wound up in the abscesses of the army.
        The military legislation of the last 4 months has destroyed the army "(Denikin, July 1917)
        "In my lifetime, I have read a lot of historical research and memoirs about the First World War, about the patriotism of soldiers in the first months after the revolution, about the evil agitation of the Bolsheviks for peace, which allegedly led the soldiers astray, but I can say, as an eyewitness, that the first and most important the reaction of the soldier masses to the news of the revolution was a multimillion-dollar sigh of relief at the front and in the rear: "Thank God, peace! There is no more need to go on the attack, break through the barbed wire in order to be crippled, to be left without arms, legs, eyes! Glory! God, it's all over! Now we will live, and live our own way! The bosses are gone! " (Flight).
        Those. the Bolsheviks legally formalized what had actually happened since the spring of 1917. And immediately they began to create a new army to protect against the Germans. "We are defencists now, since October 25, 1917, we are for the defense of the fatherland." Yes.
        1. Alarmist79
          Alarmist79 April 25 2021 11: 27
          0
          = That is: lie, blatant lie and truth =
          And the small-town chutzpah from the neo-Bolsheviks. So, regarding the fact that the Bolsheviks demobilized the army themselves, there are no objections? Because Trotsky wisely decided that the Germans could not attack, but not.

          "Upon his return to Petrograd, Trotsky spoke at a meeting of the Petrograd Soviet. He pointed out that Germany most likely will not be able to" send troops against the socialist republic. 90 chances out of 100 for the fact that the offensive will not succeed and only 10 chances for the offensive. But I am sure that there will be no offensive "[6]. “It was the only correct way out,” commented Zinoviev. - [...] We, despite all the [...] cries of despair of the “rightists”, are deeply convinced that there can be no offensive by the German imperialists at the moment ”[7]”.

          And then your gurus watched the Germans disembarking at the stations.
          Those. you lied grossly.
          At the same time, the Bolsheviks had time to restore order. Instead they consciously intensified the chaos.

          Well, now for the details.
          We have no infantry "...
          = I will say more: We have no army. And it is necessary to create it immediately, by all means. =
          You are a real communist. Who lies when? Right. It's about that the army on the offensive does not go. What does the Lenin-Vlasov circus of 1918 have to do with it?
          = But when the time came to fulfill his duty, when the order was given to take the starting position for the offensive, then the selfish instinct spoke, and the picture of the collapse was revealed.
          Up to ten divisions did not return to their starting position. It took a lot of work from chiefs of all levels, requests, persuasion, persuasion ... Part of the divisions, however, carried out the combat order. =

          = The military legislation of the last 4 months has destroyed the army "=
          To which the Temporary relationship itself did not have. He had the Petrosovet, which wrote out Order No. 1 under pressure from the Bolshevik soldiers, which was circulated by Comrade. Bonch-Bruevich. What they boasted for 70 years in a row. Now your memory is urgently lost?
          1. At the same time, no one except the Bolsheviks used the feuds of February for openly Vlasov propaganda.
          2. Denikin did not observe the activity of the "worms" close and on a scale, see what and when he commanded. However

          “Bolshevism spoke most definitely of all. As we know, he came to the army with a direct invitation - to refuse to obey the commanders and to end the war, finding fertile ground in the spontaneous sense of self-preservation that gripped the soldiers' masses. Delegates sent from all fronts to the Petrograd Soviet with inquiries , with requests, demands, threats, we sometimes heard there from a few representatives of the defencist bloc reproaches and requests to be patient, but found full sympathy in the Bolshevik faction of the Soviet. "

          = Now we will live and live our own way! The bosses are gone! " (Flight). =
          This "eyewitness" at that time studied at Kiev University, and fiercely hated being cut. There were no others, right?
          At the same time, the above are fake pictures of general jubilation and just stupid lies.
          "So already in 1915-1916 about 2 million people deserted from the army."
          At the same time, he is the author of a rezunoid work with such a shielding of brother Willie that he did not look even under the USSR. But neo-Bolsheviks and elementary disgust are two incompatible things.

          Moreover, what did the Bolsheviks do after the coup? Well, apart from organizing fraternization with the Germans?
          "Breakdown of the old army" (c) Lenin. Those. the introduction of elective command, the destruction of ranks and reduction.
          On November 8, 1917, the revised text of the Declaration was published in the Gazette of the Provisional Workers 'and Peasants' Government. The first paragraph of the Declaration read: “The government of workers and peasants believes that no one better than the soldiers themselves will be able to assess the dignity of individuals for occupying a command post, and believes that in their midst soldiers will always find such people who can be given command without fear, and therefore fate, both the revolution and his own. Only the whole army, from top to bottom, built on the elective beginning, will present a force powerful in its inner unity. "
          And with this approach, someone else remained at the front.
          1. Sugar Honeyovich
            Sugar Honeyovich April 25 2021 16: 57
            -1
            Quote: Alarmist79
            So, there are no objections to the fact that the Bolsheviks demobilized the army themselves?

            There is a clarification: she demobilized herself.
            Quote: Alarmist79
            At the same time, the Bolsheviks had time to restore order.

            Did not have. No time, no opportunity. The Provisional Government had time, but yes, it constantly intensified the chaos.
            Quote: Alarmist79
            It's about the fact that the army does not go on the offensive

            Why doesn't it? Yes, because it simply does not exist. And there is a multimillion-dollar anarchist crowd with weapons.
            Quote: Alarmist79
            The military legislation of the last 4 months has destroyed the army "=
            To which the Temporary relationship itself did not have

            To which the Temporary was directly related. Worse, the main attitude.
            Quote: Alarmist79
            Petrosovet, which scribbled order number 1

            In which the Mensheviks were in the main and the "non-factional" Sokolov - the author of the order.
            Quote: Alarmist79
            At the same time, no one except the Bolsheviks used the feuds of February for openly Vlasov propaganda.

            Everyone took advantage of the liberties to the maximum. But the Bolsheviks came to court.
            Quote: Alarmist79
            Denikin did not observe the activity of the "worms" close and on a scale, see what and when he commanded.

            We know what: the headquarters at the commander-in-chief, then the main front. Therefore, he knew the situation in the army not well, but very well. Unlike some civilians ... of that and our time.
            Quote: Alarmist79
            This "eyewitness" at that time studied at the Kiev University, and fiercely hated being cut. There were no others, right?

            Not fiercer than the whole country. And there are many others. But they say about the same. It's right.
            Quote: Alarmist79
            what did the bolsheviks do after the coup

            It is known for what - they fought for peace and social justice, promoted science and culture, and generally worked for the happiness of people. Well this is a well-known fact! Otherwise, why would so many people support them?
            1. Alarmist79
              Alarmist79 April 27 2021 00: 40
              +1
              = There is a clarification: she demobilized herself. =
              You are a liar, there is an order from Trotsky. Did he turn to the demobilized army?

              = It was not. No time, no opportunity. =
              You are a liar, 3 months is enough to at least partially tighten the nuts. Instead, they pulled it apart as best they could.

              = Why not? Yes, because it simply does not exist =

              You are a liar. You have just declared the French army of 1917 non-existent.

              . = And there is a multimillion-dollar anarchist crowd with weapons. =

              You are a liar, this "anarchist crowd" held the front for almost a year.

              = The Provisional Government had time, but yes, it constantly intensified the chaos. =

              You are a liar. The VP, for example, already on July 12 returned the death penalty at the front, prevented the formation of new committees, etc.

              = To which the Temporal was directly related. Worse, the main attitude. =
              You are a brazen liar, order number 1 was issued by the Petrograd Soviet, the VP tried to cancel it
              "AI Guchkov, who headed the military commission on March 1 (14) and unsuccessfully tried to get the Petrograd Soviet to cancel Order No. 1, or at least extend its effect only to the rear units!

              = In which the Mensheviks were in the main and the "non-factional" Sokolov - the author of the order. =
              You are an arrogant liar, the Bolsheviks described its function as purely technical.

              = Everyone took advantage of the liberties to the maximum. =
              You are a liar, no one else conducted Vlasov's propaganda.

              = But the Bolsheviks came to court. =
              Because they were arrogant liars. Even before his arrival in Russia, Lenin publicly explained that heresy about the "democratic peace", which he was going to carry to the Great Russian Unterme ... chauvinists, yes, stoned nonsense.

              = It is known what: the headquarters under the commander-in-chief, =
              Ага.
              = then the main front. =
              1.He led the Western Front at the very end of May, at the beginning of July the Bolsheviks were already being driven out.
              2. The real revelry of worms was closer to the capital.
              3. Then he was on the south / west front, where the agitators did not reach even by October, then under arrest.

              = Not fiercer than the whole country. =
              You are a brazen liar. Alekseev on the moods of the army, exhausted from Nicholas, in a reference for the interim government.
              "On the Northern Front: the change that took place and the sovereign's abdication from the throne were accepted with restraint and calm. Many reacted to the abdication of Emperor Nicholas II and the renunciation of the throne of Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich with sadness and regret. According to some data, one can judge that many soldiers had manifestos are incomprehensible, and they have not yet had time to understand the events that have come.In the 2nd Siberian Corps of the 12th Army: a number of questions were raised about the consequences that could occur.There were some voices that it was impossible to do without a tsar and it was necessary to elect a sovereign as soon as possible ... of the Siberian Cossack Division of the Consolidated Corps, the manifestos made a depressing impression. Some expressed the hope that the Tsar would not leave his people and return to them. For some of the soldiers, this impression was softened by the fact that Emperor Nicholas II appointed Grand Duke Mikhail Alexandrovich to be his successor, that Russia was not yet the republic about which they spoke negatively.
              On the Romanian front, the changes that had taken place were met calmly by the troops. The abdication of Emperor Nicholas II made a painful impression on the officers of the 9th Army. In the 4th Army, the majority bows to the lofty patriotism and self-sacrifice of the Tsar, expressed in the act of abdication.

              = And there are many others. But they say about the same =.
              You are a brazen liar.

              = It is known what - they fought for peace and social justice, =
              That is, they destroyed the army

              = promoted science and culture and generally worked for the happiness of people. Well this is a well-known fact! Otherwise, why would so many people support them? =
              And what did they support Hitler and Pol Pot for? Moreover, Aloizych was supported more in the elections.
              1. Sugar Honeyovich
                Sugar Honeyovich April 27 2021 17: 02
                -1
                Quote: Alarmist79
                He addressed the demobilized army

                Partly yes. And partly - to nonexistent in fact.
                Quote: Alarmist79
                3 months is enough to tighten the nuts at least partially

                Sometimes three days are enough. If ... the furnishings correspond. You are lying.
                Quote: Alarmist79
                The VP, for example, already on July 12 returned the death penalty at the front, prevented the formation of new committees

                And also changed and arrested on charges of treason of the commanders-in-chief and their subordinates. The result is that the collapse progressed. Democrats, sir ... Liberals, sir ... Not Bolsheviks!
                Quote: Alarmist79
                You have just declared the French army of 1917 non-existent.

                You are lying. I never said that.
                Quote: Alarmist79
                this "anarchotolpa" held the front for almost a year

                And it is known HOW she held. “Before the Kornilov performance, the army had already reached the limit of collapse and was held by inertia on the shoulders of the officers, and now this last support has also been knocked out.
                We must confess that the physical end of the war has come, no one will fight the Germans anymore, there is no such force that would force the soldiers to go to death and die. For what? .. For whom? ..
                It is necessary to force the allies to put up, while we are still listed as an army with so many corps, the further, the worse it will be "On the proposal of the Minister of War A.I. Verkhovsky to conclude a separate peace with Germany:" Of course, Verkhovsky, in many respects, betrayed the Russian army because of a career, and secretly concluding peace is despicable and stupid, but I am of the opinion that a separate peace should be concluded as soon as possible and having announced this in advance to the allies. If the allies do not want to conclude peace, then do not care about them ... Immediately a separate peace with the Germans and the fight against the Bolsheviks. And it is enough to conclude peace, and the main trump card of the Bolsheviks is knocked out from under their feet. "
                Quote: Alarmist79
                order number 1 was issued by the Petrograd Soviet, the VP tried to cancel it
                "AI Guchkov, who headed the military commission on March 1 (14) and unsuccessfully tried to get the Petrograd Soviet to cancel Order No. 1, or at least extend its effect only to the rear units!

                Well yes. They caught themselves when it exploded. "On March 2, Sokolov appeared with his text, which had already been published in the morning edition of Izvestia of the Petrograd Soviet," before the newly formed Provisional Government. One of its members, V. N. Lvov, spoke about this in his memoir, published soon, in 1918: “... ND Sokolov comes up to our table with quick steps and asks us to get acquainted with the contents of the paper he brought ... This was the famous order number one ... After reading it, Guchkov (Minister of War - V.K.) immediately declared that the order ... was unthinkable, and left the room.Miliukov (Minister of Foreign Affairs - V.K.) began to convince Sokolov of the complete impossibility of publishing this order (he did not know that the newspaper with its text have already begun to distribute. - V.K.) ... Finally, Miliukov, exhausted, got up and walked away from the table ... I (that is, V.N. Lvov, Chief Prosecutor of the Synod. - V.K. ) jumped up from his chair and, with my usual fervor, shouted to Sokolov that this paper, brought by him, was a crimebefore the homeland ... Kerensky (then - Minister of Justice, from May 5 - military, and from July 8 - head of government. - V.K.) ran up to me and shouted: "Vladimir Nikolaevich, be silent, be silent!", Then grabbed Sokolov by the hand, took him quickly to another room and locked the door behind him ... ".
                And after becoming Minister of War on May 5, Kerensky, just four days later, issued his "Order for the Army and Navy," very close in content to Sokolovsky; it became known as the "declaration of the rights of the soldier." Subsequently, General AI Denikin wrote that "this 'declaration of rights' ... finally undermined all the foundations of the army."
                Quote: Alarmist79
                the Bolsheviks described its function as purely technical

                Thus, he played a major role in the collapse. You are lying.
                Quote: Alarmist79
                no one else conducted Vlasov propaganda

                Nobody conducted Vlasov's propaganda. You are lying. And the most different were led by everyone. You are lying.
                Quote: Alarmist79
                Because they were arrogant liars

                But more truthful than all others.
                Quote: Alarmist79
                He led the Western Front at the very end of May, at the beginning of July the Bolsheviks were already being driven out.
                2. The real revelry of worms was closer to the capital.
                3. Then he was on the south / west front, where the agitators did not reach even by October, then under arrest.

                All this did not prevent the collapse of the army and the state in the least. Denikin spoke the truth.
                Quote: Alarmist79
                about the moods of the army exhausted from Nicholas through and through

                “So, in July 1915, a rumor appeared in the Vyatka province that“ the emperor sold Przemysl to the enemy for 13 million rubles and for this the supreme commander-in-chief Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolayevich demoted the sovereign to rank-and-file soldiers. ”At the same time, the peasants of the Tobolsk province said:“ We must pray for the soldiers and for the Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich.
                And when in August 1915 Nicholas II replaced the Grand Duke as the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, many peasants began to predict the defeat of Russia in the war ... "
                So, in the protocols drawn up on the facts of insulting His Majesty, there were often cases of comparing the appearance of the emperor with the insane and drunkards familiar to the peasants. “Our sovereign is the emperor, and his face, if you look at it, is so similar to the Elka of Abramovsky (- drunkard - VA). "He does not understand anything, he cannot rule this matter in the war, our sovereign, Akimikha (mentally retarded peasant woman. - VA)"
                And after February 1917: "" And I involuntarily recalled the feeling of nihilism and anarchism that swept out in Russia at the beginning of the revolution, when in the barracks of the 140th Reserve Regiment in Penza soldiers (people, peasants!) Tore portraits of the tsar and tsarina from the walls and in some wild (wildest!) frenzy and frenzy they trampled on them with their boots until not a scrap remained.
                I have never been a “notorious monarchist”. The spirit of democracy and reformism lived in our family, but the nihilistic and anarchic hatred of the monarchy that had burst out (among the whole people!) Was opposite to me, it shocked me.
                Along with hatred, with the trampling of portraits, hatred burst forth to any "respect for the rank".
                In this nationwide nihilism and anarchism, I sensed a “nationwide danger”.
                Of course, this was primarily the fault of the three-hundred-year-old dynasty itself, which failed to instill in the people neither trust, nor love, nor tradition. "
                You're lying.
                Quote: Alarmist79
                And what did they support Hitler and Pol Pot for? Moreover, Aloizych was supported more in the elections.

                Because of the same. Because of the mess. Liberal.
                You're lying. laughing
  • Alarmist79
    Alarmist79 April 23 2021 17: 01
    -1
    = For italy, hungary, romania, finland fought on the side of germany. =
    See allies. And then Germany's costs of air and naval warfare in the west + rather big in terms of material costs campaigns on the periphery.

    = And even the most sparsely populated country of the above, consisted by no means of a couple of farms. And if you recall such names as Viking, Wallonia, Langemark, Blue Division and so on, =
    Then it turns out that the number of these figures cannot be compared with the number of the occupation forces.

    = the number of foreign volunteers in the Wehrmacht and SS is estimated from 4.5 to 5.5 million, =
    Who is evaluating?

    = Well, and to say that the GDP of the USSR was higher than that of half of Europe ... Hmm. Already =
    And if you also open a school textbook, you can find that 1) the occupied industry was in a deep fuel crisis 2) the Germans themselves opened a second front against themselves in 1941-42, maintaining the level of mobilization of industry twice lower than the Soviet one.

    = If we take the losses of the aircraft, even from the wiki, I will not discuss their veracity =
    And why? Because there is another figment of red wiki vandalism? Even across Urlanis?

    = True, in the latter case, 3.5 million Russian prisoners remain behind the scenes, =

    Which were not there. Really 2,4 million

    = All the forces of the former GI and AVI, plus Italy, plus Romania, plus Finland, =
    Minus is then huge Turkey. In Finland, someone is his own Pinocchio, twice.

    = If the Germans in WWII destroyed 2/3 of the prisoners, as in WWII, =
    1. They technically couldn't do it. RIA is not the Red Army and began shock capture of prisoners back in 1914.
    2. If the Germans tried to commit atrocities, they would have simply ceased to surrender. At the same time, there was no apocalyptic encirclement of 1941 in 1914.

    = then the losses of the Republic of Ingushetia would have been much higher than the Soviet ones. =
    Arithmetic, grade 5. 1,3 million + even if 1,6 prisoners = 2,9 million. The losses of the Red Army, even according to Krivosheev, are three times more, according to current data 1/4

    = Yep. And to credit RI that Wilhelm was more humane than the cannibal adik? Hmm .... =
    1. Of course put. Willie was not more humane with "Untermenschs" not a penny, see China and Africa. It’s just that in 1914, nothing led Willie to think of absolute impunity.
    2. And to give credit to Comrade. Stalin that the Red Army could not even catch the Romanians ... hmm.
  • Nazar
    Nazar April 25 2021 03: 42
    -1
    Lannan Shi - "This" is useless to explain something, these are the Vlasovites. "These" are those who erect monuments to such kam as Krasnov. For "them" to spit in Soviet history is the meaning of life.
    Until now, they cannot forgive the USSR for the victory over their idol - Hitler, "a fighter against Bolshevism."
    These scumbags are not worth the time you spend on them here.
  • Operator
    Operator April 23 2021 10: 59
    -8
    I fully share your criticism of the position of the author of the article (which is essentially pulling an owl on the globe), but Mikoyan (the People's Commissar of the Food Industry - Stalin's entrusted) never had a great understanding of economics and military affairs, but was a political intrigue

    Since 1939, Stalin actively rebuilt the army (transfer from the territorial police system, a multiple increase in number) and industry (the serial development of new types of weapons), and at the limit of Soviet capabilities. If during this period he also started relocating the main enterprises to the east of the country, the USSR would have been even worse prepared for war.

    Stalin's pre-war miscalculation was highly specialized - he imagined himself to be a brilliant military commander and moved the line of defense of the Red Army as close as possible to the Soviet-German border in order to fight on foreign territory. Stalin's obstinacy with the non-recognition of the fact of the concentration of the majority of Wehrmacht divisions on this border (according to Soviet intelligence) and the ban on the withdrawal of the Covering Army to combat positions, starting in May 1941 (against the backdrop of Hitler's sharp rejection of all Soviet foreign policy initiatives) also added fuel to the military catastrophe of 1941 of the year.

    Stalin lost his self-confidence about his military genius only in 1942 after the Kharkov, Crimean and North Caucasian disasters of the Red Army.
  • EvilLion
    EvilLion April 23 2021 11: 08
    +13
    And you can ask a tricky question, how did it happen that the USSR had to put children at the machines, and why did Germany not do this? So I will answer, because your beloved Tsar-Batiushka brought the country to such a level that despite the fantastic rates of urbanization and the rise in the level of the educated urban population, it was still much inferior to Germany in terms of the number of workers, and it had no choice but to send to the front of a worker, after all, tanks need to be repaired, sending several illiterate peasants who can be trained to shoot from a three-line or PPSh, and to work at a factory find an urban 6th grader who has already passed the sinuses, and somehow he will be standing on a box there will be shells grind.

    Germany, with its initially higher level of education, and the presence of a large number of workers from prisoners of war and citizens of occupied countries, such horrors were never dreamed of in a nightmare.

    So fairy tales about any economic superiority of the USSR over Germany are for kids.

    About the enchanting nonsense that the USSR was not preparing for war, it’s simple for a psychiatrist, a monstrous number of factories were built, including dual-purpose ones, about which it is better to read from engineers, especially Western ones, who were very interested in why Russians overpay for things that conventional production of civil tractors is not needed.
    1. Alarmist79
      Alarmist79 April 23 2021 13: 24
      -2
      = So I will answer, because your beloved Tsar-Father has brought the country to such a level that despite the fantastic rates of urbanization and the rise in the level of the educated urban population, it is still far behind Germany in terms of the number of workers =

      belay Those. industrial production in the USSR and Germany is comparable, labor productivity in the USSR is lowerand fewer workers? Of course, there will be no links.

      = parcels of several semi-literate peasants, =
      And where does one come from in the country after 24 years of the most progressive system, and even at a draft age? In the age cohort of 20-24 years (born 1896-1900) among men in the European part of Russia, according to 1920, literacy is 80+%. Who is the evil Pinocchio to the Bolsheviks?
      1. Foul skeptic
        Foul skeptic April 23 2021 15: 47
        +3
        In the age cohort 20-24 years old (born 1896-1900) among men in the European part of Russia, according to 1920 data, literacy is 80+%

        Do you have grandchildren, maybe children of "near school" age? Here they (if you have them) the same "literacy" as 80 +% of men in 1896-1900. birth. Would you risk entrusting them with the technique?
        1. Alarmist79
          Alarmist79 April 23 2021 16: 16
          -3
          = Do you have grandchildren, maybe children of "near school" age? Here they (if you have them) the same "literacy" as 80 +% of men in 1896-1900. birth. =
          According to the 1937 census, it is exactly the same, which is typical. In fact, in 1917 RI had a quite decent initial level of literacy, despite the fact that according to the 1897 census, about which the Bolsheviks talk so much, everything is really very bad.
          Attention to the question. What prevented the progressive labor government from maintaining at least the pace of backward tsarism in the next 24 years? Instead, even a special contingent of fighters for the red idea admits that the population for the most part, as semi-literate, has remained.
          1. Foul skeptic
            Foul skeptic April 23 2021 16: 35
            +2
            what is typical

            What is characteristic is that you have chosen a cohort, the birth of some of the members of which falls on the period when it was unlikely to receive initial literacy due to GW.
            The answer to your question.
            Because they stopped expanding the education system already in the mid-20s "in breadth", but began to expand it "in depth", just look at the structure of schools.
            the population for the most part was both semi-literate and remained

            All those adults who did not receive an education in childhood had to tell their children - you can not eat for 7 years, did your folder decide to make up for lost time? I don’t understand why this should be surprising. Even in the 80s, there were not 100% of people who received primary education.
            1. Alarmist79
              Alarmist79 April 23 2021 17: 39
              -4
              = What is characteristic is that you have chosen a cohort, the birth of some of the members of which falls on the period when it was unlikely to get the initial literacy due to HS. =

              1. Cohort 1911-1913? And I "take" it? Incidentally, this is not even the main contingent of conscripts - 28-30 years old in 1941.
              2. Has the civilian blown? And the Reds chasing the bourgeoisie and officers with an ax, plus surrendering Ukraine to the Germans and legalizing the black redistribution, after which they had to rob the peasants, had absolutely nothing to do with it, did I understand everything correctly?

              = All those adults who did not receive an education in childhood had to tell their children - you can not eat for 7 years, did your folder decide to make up for lost time? I don’t understand why this should be surprising. Even in the 80s, there were not 100% of people who received primary education. =

              Was the USSR inhabited exclusively by people born in 1911-13? H'm.
              1. Foul skeptic
                Foul skeptic April 26 2021 11: 08
                -1
                1. Cohort 1911-1913? And I "take" it? Incidentally, this is not even the main contingent of conscripts - 28-30 years old in 1941.

                1. I think you should know better what you take
                2. Cohort 1913-1917 Or do you get other numbers when you subtract (20-24) from 1937?
                3. Not to mention the fact that in your last message I did not touch upon the moment that "80 +% of men born in 1896-1900. ... According to the 1937 census, it is exactly the same, which is characteristic" does not correspond to reality ... I thought that in this way I would cut off further correspondence, but I was mistaken.
                2. Has the civilian blown? And the red ones ... have absolutely nothing to do with it, did I understand everything correctly?

                4) No, you misunderstood. Your imagination has run wild, since you could see this in my messages.
                Was the USSR inhabited exclusively by people born in 1911-13? H'm.

                5) No. It seems to me that you are competing with yourself over which question to ask even more incoherent.
                1. Alarmist79
                  Alarmist79 April 26 2021 12: 31
                  +1
                  =. Cohort 1913-1917 Or do you get other numbers when you subtract (20-24) from 1937? =
                  It's about the 1920 census.

                  = According to the 1937 census, it is exactly the same, which characteristically "does not correspond to reality. =
                  That is, the coincidence of literacy based on the materials of the two censuses is proof of unreliability for you? "Logical", yes. Or did you seriously take the preliminary reports on the educational program belay ?

                  = I’m starting to feel as though you’re competing with yourself in which question to ask even more incoherent. =
                  Those. you can't counter argument.
                  1. Foul skeptic
                    Foul skeptic April 26 2021 12: 52
                    -1
                    Speech on the 1920 census

                    which you began to compare with the 1937 census regarding a certain specific value - literacy among men aged 20-24. Therefore, we can no longer talk only about the 1920 census.
                    That is, the coincidence of literacy based on the materials of the two censuses is proof of unreliability for you?

                    that is, the coincidence of literacy based on the materials of the two censuses is a figment of your imagination. Even with regard to a particular case - literacy among men 20-24 years old.
                    Those. you can't counter argument.

                    I can't get into rambling questions.
                  2. Alarmist79
                    Alarmist79 April 26 2021 19: 08
                    +1
                    = which you began to compare with the 1937 census =
                    Those. you knew nothing about the 1920 census.

                    And yes, you can in rambling answers. There is a fact of a fairly high basic literacy in RI, there is a fact of SEMI-literacy in 23 years of "progressorship". To put it in essence, as I understand it, you have nothing.
                  3. Foul skeptic
                    Foul skeptic April 27 2021 08: 30
                    -1
                    Those. you knew nothing about the 1920 census.

                    Those. you again convince yourself of those conclusions that cannot be drawn from my messages.
                    And yes you can into rambling answers

                    As you wish.
                    There is a fact of a fairly high basic literacy in RI, there is a fact of SEMI-literacy in 23 years of "progressorship"

                    There is a fact that you do not understand the confusion of two different criteria in one assessment.
                    To put it in essence, as I understand it, you have nothing.

                    Didn't you get the answers? A simple example of a question from you:
                    Was the USSR inhabited exclusively by people born in 1911-13?

                    The answer to it
                    No.

                    Do you have a complaint about the answer? Does he not answer your question?
                    PS In essence, it has already been written to you - the coincidence of literacy based on the materials of the two censuses, the fruit of your imagination. Even in relation to a particular manipulative case - literacy among men 20-24 years old.
                  4. Alarmist79
                    Alarmist79 April 27 2021 10: 32
                    +1
                    = There is a fact that you do not understand the confusion of two different criteria in one assessment. =
                    Those. you deny the fact of 80+ literacy in the age cohort, which was 17-21 in 1917 and a fair amount of illiteracy in the USSR?

                    = In essence, it was already written to you - the coincidence of literacy based on the materials of the two censuses, the fruit of your imagination =

                    Sorry, but she's the fruit of your very strange way of expressing thoughts.

                    = Not to mention the fact that in your last message I did not touch upon the moment that "80 +% of men born in 1896-1900. ... According to the 1937 census, it is exactly the same, which is characteristic" does not correspond to reality. =

                    And there can be no literal coincidence there, geographically the coverage is different.


                    = Even in relation to a particular manipulative case - literacy among men 20-24 years old. =

                    And what is his manipulativeness? In 1917, they were 17-21, the completion of education for the overwhelming majority. At the same time, while maintaining tsarism, it could only grow further - adult education (army, evening schools, including at enterprises) in RI was in full bloom. The USSR did not come up with anything new here. Well, except to hang with red flags, hold a flash mob (then it was called differently), sleep puppet ... international, with pathos to highlight any little thing. In other words, to waste time and money on meaningless movement.
                  5. Foul skeptic
                    Foul skeptic April 27 2021 15: 00
                    -1
                    Those. you deny the fact of 80+ literacy in the age cohort, which was 17-21 in 1917 and a fair amount of illiteracy in the USSR?

                    I deny combining two statements in one sentence, leading to overgeneralization, amphibole, sophistic separation, and selection bias.
                    And there can be no literal coincidence there, geographically the coverage is different.

                    Why do you then use non-identical values? And how, on the basis of comparison of not identical values, do you draw conclusions?
                    Then maybe your chosen comparative characteristic "exactly the same" was chosen unsuccessfully? The question is not only that the identity of the compared figures has not been observed, but also that even if we close our eyes to this, then 81,8% and 91% cannot be called "exactly the same." And if it is NOT "exactly the same", then what about your initial conclusions, which were built around this postulate?
                    And what is his manipulativeness?

                    Explain separately? Or will the answers above nudge you in the right direction for reflection?
                    adult education (army, evening schools, including those at enterprises) in Ingushetia was in full bloom.

                    Everything that you listed was not included in the MNE education system. Moreover, the evening form of education was not welcomed by the government, since it was a completely private shop, and therefore needed state control in terms of suppressing dissent. Because evening schools were opening, just as a platform for the socialists.
                  6. Alarmist79
                    Alarmist79 April 27 2021 19: 04
                    +1
                    = leading to overgeneralization, amphibole, sophistic separation and selection bias. =
                    Those. there is essentially nothing to say.

                    = Why are you using non-identical values ​​then? =
                    Then, that the European part of the RSFSR 1. Nothing better than the current Belarus and Ukraine 2. This is 83% of the population of Ingushetia in 1913 without the fallen off Finland and Poland. In the USSR, the share is even greater (loss of the Baltics, western Belarus and Ukraine).
                    At the same time, she is the main source of recruits and labor, Turkestan and the Caucasus did not become "equal" in this sense until the end of the USSR.
                    If the Bolsheviks decided (and they decided) to conquer illiteracy (in parallel with expensive indigenization) on the outskirts, neglecting the core, then who is Pinocchio to them, except for their own Russophobia.

                    = Then maybe your chosen comparative "exactly the same" was chosen unsuccessfully? =
                    You chose her, meaning something of your own, deeply personal.

                    = a and in the fact that even if we close our eyes to it, then 81,8% and 91% =
                    For 24 years of the most progressive government? In fact, we have the cry of the red Yaroslavs / Yaroslavn that the illiterate people are not the same ... and in relation to the core, where plus or minus is such it was there until 1917.
                    At the same time, finishing off one and a half dozen percent of illiterate people at 80 +% and plus the same 15% at a starting 40% occupations are extremely different in terms of labor intensity.

                    = Explain separately? Or will the answers above nudge you in the right direction for comprehension? =
                    Explain separately, you did not write anything meaningful above.

                    = Everything that you listed was not included in the MNE education system. =
                    AND? In addition to being financed by the state not only by the MNP (suddenly), no one forced the Bolsheviks to disperse private and church schools. Who are they to themselves?

                    = Moreover, the evening form of education was not welcomed by the government, since it was a completely private shop, and therefore needed state control in terms of suppressing dissent. Because evening schools were opening, just as a platform for the socialists. =

                    Is it okay that Sunday evening schools were in a huge part of the church and such an office as the Guardianship of Popular Sobriety? The fact that the cover in isolated cases tried to use the Maydauns and were chased away does not mean a systematic struggle.
                  7. Foul skeptic
                    Foul skeptic April 29 2021 13: 29
                    0
                    Those. there is essentially nothing to say.

                    You see, what is the situation, patent offices of a number of countries do not accept their designs from the inventors of perpetual motion machines, not because in the patent office these inventors have nothing to say. But because until the first and second principles of thermodynamics are refuted, this makes no sense. It is the same with you. While there are logical errors in your question, there is no point in considering it either - a statement that contradicts the laws of logic cannot be true, just as a device that contradicts the first and second laws of thermodynamics cannot be a perpetual motion machine. The type of errors has been indicated to you, what else do you want? So that I can eliminate them for you?
                    Then, that the European part of the RSFSR 1. Nothing better than the current Belarus and Ukraine 2. This is 83% of the population of Ingushetia in 1913 without the fallen off Finland and Poland. In the USSR, the share is even greater (loss of the Baltics, western Belarus and Ukraine).

                    And what has changed from your explanation? They are still not identical to each other.
                    PS in logic, mathematics, statistics, they do not operate with the concepts of "nothing better".
                    At the same time, she is the main source of recruits and labor, Turkestan and the Caucasus never became

                    This is impossible when there is an order of magnitude difference in population size, even other things being equal.
                    If the Bolsheviks decided (and they decided) to conquer illiteracy (in parallel with expensive indigenization) on the outskirts, neglecting the core, then who is the evil Pinocchio to them?

                    1) It remains to present the arguments of "neglect" of the kernel.
                    2) Even if we do not consider the fight against illiteracy in the regions from the point of view of a democratic state, but simply look from general positions or pragmatism, then the elimination of weaknesses is no less important than the development of the strong. This is the wisdom of the people - where it is subtle, there it breaks.
                    except for your own Russophobia

                    Are Russian Russophobes not akin to dry water?
                    You chose her, meaning something of your own, deeply personal.

                    Sorry, but this is already beyond the scope and is an argument to consider this conversation unpromising.
                    According to the 1937 census she is exactly the samethat is characteristic.

                    Was it me or did you write it?
                    For 24 years of the most progressive government?

                    And what (I don’t remind you that in relation to 91% there is no identical 81,8%)?
                    In fact, we have the cry of the reds ... that the illiterate people are not the same

                    This is how you interpret this message of one of the commentators of this article.
                    parcels of several illiterate peasants

                    ?
                    At the same time, finishing off one and a half dozen percent of illiterate people at 80 +% and plus the same 15% at a starting 40% occupations are extremely different in terms of labor intensity.

                    Is it? ))) And why? Do you live in a world where the degree of current literacy in a country affects whether newly born people will be literate right away in the same proportion? It's just that in the world where I live, all babies are initially illiterate. Next, will you figure it out yourself?
                    Explain separately, you did not write anything meaningful above.

                    Have you spent time thinking about it? Or did they immediately decide that there was nothing meaningful?
                    no one forced the Bolsheviks to disperse private and church schools

                    There are N private schools. They change the form of ownership from private to state. The question is - how many schools are there after that? N?
                    Is it okay that Sunday evening schools were in a huge part of the church and such an office as the Guardianship of Popular Sobriety? What a cover-up

                    Nothing. Just replace the phrase "evening schools opened, just as a playground for the socialists." on "evening schools were used, just as a platform for the socialists."
  • EvilLion
    EvilLion April 23 2021 11: 19
    +11
    Yeah, but Russia's losses in WWII amounted to 9% of the world, and in WWII, the losses of the USSR were 53% of the world (both without China).


    You would be silent, because in WWI Russia without Vaseline was fucked with large-caliber guns. And it was so fucked up that even France, which bore the brunt of WWI, and not Rasea, which had been a less significant front all the time, lost incomparably less.

    Had it happened in the 41st year in 1914, when Russia is 1 on 1 with Germany, then an instant catastrophe due to low mobility of troops would not have happened, but 3-4 months after the exhaustion of the mob. stocks war for Russia would go badly. A year later, when the Germans would have increased the prom. production, and they did it better than the king, the situation would become difficult. After which there would have been a major German offensive somewhere, after which the Russian soldiers would have run to the Urals ahead of their own screeching.

    And so the Red Army is the direct heir to the tsarist army, created from its remnants. And the retreats of 41 are largely the consequences of 1914-1917. But according to the logic of the tsar-readers, when the Russian army blew the PMA in greenhouse conditions, it does not count when what was created from the remnants of this army managed to reach Berlin, in harsh conditions, it was like they fought badly. Well, there was no need to lose the PMA.
    1. Alarmist79
      Alarmist79 April 23 2021 14: 06
      -7
      = You would be silent, because in WWI Russia without Vaseline was fucked with large-caliber guns. And so fucked up, =
      If 4,5 months of retreat was "fucked up", then what is 41/42? Because of the same shell hunger, and to an enormous extent.

      = that even France, which bore the brunt of WWI, and not Rasea, which had always been a less significant front, lost incomparably less. =

      The losses of France killed about 1 million (1, 150) just. England 744. Plus the US and dominions under 200. Russia without pulling an owl on the globe - 1,3 (Golovin)
      In 1915, of course, the eastern front was the main front.

      = Happened in the 41st year in 1914, when Russia is 1 on 1 with Germany =
      To begin with, this would have had to be done long and hard.

      =, then an instant catastrophe due to low mobility of troops would not have happened, =
      If the command would have been at the level of the Red Army-1941, it would have happened only on the way. There was no epic leap in the mobility of the bulk of the troops. 1. The mega-cauldrons of 2-1941 are 42% merit of the wise command, in WWI this led to the cauldrons in the same way.

      = A year later, when the Germans would have increased the prom. production, and they did it better than the king, the situation would become difficult =
      1. In terms of rifles and shells, they did it worse than the king
      2. The fact that in WWII, on the basis of dizziness from success, they attended to the mobilization of industry after Stalingrad, is also a personal merit of Comrade. Stalin?

      = After which there would have been a major German offensive somewhere, after which the Russian soldiers would have run to the Urals ahead of their own screeching. =
      In 1915, with a fierce preponderance of the Germans, for some reason they did not run. Unlike.

      = And so the Red Army is the direct heir to the tsarist army, created from its remnants. And the retreats of 41 are largely the consequences of 1914-1917. =
      So I imagine RIA defeating the Finns near St. Petersburg in the 1940 regime.
    2. Olgovich
      Olgovich April 23 2021 14: 25
      -9
      Quote: EvilLion
      You would be silent too, because in WWI [Russia without petroleum jelly was fucked with large kiber guns.

      fucked always ignorant:

      -Losses of Anglo-Franks / Russians in PMV 1: 1

      Losses of Anglo-Franks / Russians in WWII 1: 30

      Got it, no? No.
      Quote: EvilLion
      Had it happened in the 41st year in 1914, when Russia is 1 on 1 with Germany, then an instant catastrophe due to low mobility of troops would not have happened, but 3-4 months after the exhaustion of the mob. stocks war for Russia would go badly. A year later, when the Germans would have increased the prom. making your own screech.

      what are .. "WOULD" you know, not? So much idle chatter ...

      mriy Russophobe-learn history of Russia: where did all these Franks, Germans, Poles and other trash come, find themselves, for many centuries of wars.
      Quote: EvilLion
      And so the Red Army is the direct heir to the tsarist army, created from its remnants.

      learn the story: the Russian army was fully demobilized, even the guard.
      Quote: EvilLion
      managed to reach Berlin, in harsh conditions, it's like they fought badly.

      managed to reach Russia, as well as TWICE before the thief did it, when it didn’t smell like rsdrpst, but with such terrible losses, who were only with them always-and in war and in peacetime
      Quote: EvilLion
      there was no need to lose the PMA.

      Learn the history of your country: WWI was only lost by thieves (no one ever elected anywhere) - servants of the German invaders, and no one else recognized these B. "mir" except for them and the invaders.
  • EvilLion
    EvilLion April 23 2021 10: 57
    +3
    And you can ask how it could have been fundamentally different? Not without reasoning that "if Vlasov had not betrayed," the front in Belarus would have held out longer and maybe the Germans would have been stopped somewhere along the Dnieper, or 50 km further from Moscow, namely, to prevent serious territorial losses in general in conditions of high-quality superiority of the enemy, who just took out the strongest army in Europe in a month, and the impossibility of acting proactively in a specific political situation?
  • Silhouette
    Silhouette April 23 2021 11: 32
    -5
    Complete nonsense. Russia has always fought well with militarily secondary countries (Turkey, Persia, Sweden) and not very successfully with primary ones (England, France, Germany). All our offensives in the Italian (near Stalingrad) and Romanian (in the south) areas were successful. Even in comparison with WWI, 41 is a disaster. And no reasoning can refute this. Facts are stubborn things.
    1. boris epstein
      boris epstein April 23 2021 17: 41
      +7
      Battle of Kursk (Guderian in his book "Memories of a Soldier" wrote that the Russians broke the ridge of the Panzerwaffe near Kursk), Operation Bagration (Army Group Center was swept out cleanly, at one gate), Yassko-Kishinevskaya, Korsun-Shevchenkovskaya, Balatonskaya ( the defeat of the 6th SS Panzer Army), the Vistula-Oder, Pomeranian, Berlin, Prague operations were specifically against the Germans, and all were successful.
  • ivan2022
    ivan2022 April 28 2021 18: 49
    -1
    Quote: Pessimist22
    What are these pathetic excuses, and who is to blame for


    Who is to blame that in fact the war was against the entire European Union?
    Grandfather Lenin is to blame for building a state independent of the West. He wrote back in 1915 that he would have to do this. INDEPENDENCE IS EXPENSIVE!
    Therefore, our blessed people thought, thought, and decided that it would be better for them to become "a part of world civilization." Then there will be no war. The main thing is that there is no war. And he supported Boris Yeltsin. Then the efforts of the nation are not needed, and we always don’t do a damn thing, BUT everything
    have.
    And here are the results. No "part of civilization", no order ....... Churchill also warned, "if you choose between shame and war, then those who choose shame will receive shame and war."

    I foresee a snide question; "the people are not correct?" But for example, the ancient Jews, who "during it" betrayed everything that was possible and impossible, and after a little over 30 years received such kicks from Rome that they were scattered - were they the right people?
    And the Germans themselves were the right people under Hitler? So, gentlemen, no need to lie, the people may turn out to be a herd of bad and bad ones, and not just "not correct".
  • Far B
    Far B April 23 2021 05: 28
    +10
    Actually, as for me, the author is bravo. "With the loss of Moscow, Russia is not lost" - even the old man Kutuzov saw at the root. Only the incredibly high number of captured Red Army men is terrifying and, probably, was the biggest surprise for the Soviet leadership. But in war, everything is terrifying, if you look at it. And even more so in that war. Especially inhuman behavior of the Nazis in the occupied territories. But in general, IMHO, the analysis is correct.
    1. ivan2022
      ivan2022 April 28 2021 22: 59
      -2
      Quote: Dalny V
      Only the incredibly high number of captured Red Army men is terrifying and, probably, was the biggest surprise for the Soviet leadership.


      Your confidence is terrifying that you have been laid out on a silver platter with the Truth in a world where lies reign, and information is a sausage for sale! Especially, heh ... heh ... Your awareness of the innermost thoughts of the Soviet leadership 80 years ago ....... It is necessary to somehow compare ...... According to various sources, the number of Soviet prisoners in Germany is 4-5 million, and the number of German prisoners in the USSR is 3-4 million.
      Let's compare with the data on the draft age; in Germany until 1943 from 20 years, after 1943 to 1945 from 17 years, from 1945 from 15-16 years.
      In the USSR, from 1941 to 1945, conscription. army to the front - strictly from the age of 18.
      Moreover, from 1942 to 1944 the population in the occupied territories was about 60-70 million. And for whom did they work?

      Don't you think that then, given the "horrific losses and an incredible number of Red Army prisoners" in the USSR, there would simply be no one to fight and work? Indeed, in fact, the confrontation was between the USSR and the entire European Union, no one had the opportunity to stand aside and smoke.
  • Uncle lee
    Uncle lee April 23 2021 05: 39
    +1
    The invariable resilience of the Russian soldier, the political genius of Stalin, the growing skill of military leaders, the labor feat of the rear, the talent of engineers and designers

    And it was at the beginning, I can’t lie,
    The tugboats were silent on the other side.
    On that bank, on that bank
    On the shore where we were ...
    And we left our cities
    And in them remained the soul forever ...
    And yet, and yet,
    And yet we won

    Earflaps blackened on crimson snow,
    And his lips went numb on the other side.
    On that shore, on that shore
    On the shore where we were ...
    Behind each back was its Stalingrad
    And in frozen trenches - not a step back
    And yet, and yet,
    And yet we won

    And the salt faded from the soldiers' shirts.
    That salt of return is like honey on my lips
    On that shore, on that shore
    On the shore where we were ...
    And no matter how many of us are alive,
    Alive the voice of dead friends fighting!
    And yet, and yet,
    And yet we won
    And yet, and yet,
    And yet we won!
    1. Pessimist22
      Pessimist22 April 23 2021 05: 48
      -12%
      Stalin's genius is probably in the fact that he fully believed that Hitler would not attack?
      1. Far B
        Far B April 23 2021 06: 06
        +16
        Stalin's genius is probably in the fact that he fully believed that Hitler would not attack?
        Yeah, I did. That is why he pushed huge funds into the industry in general and the defense industry in particular. And also tripled the size of the armed forces in the pre-war years. Probably, he just had nowhere to put money.
        1. EvilLion
          EvilLion April 23 2021 11: 20
          +10
          This is Olegovich, he is excited by Nicolas the Bloody and other losers who brought RI to the zugunder.
          1. Alarmist79
            Alarmist79 April 23 2021 12: 58
            -8
            = This is Olegovich, he is excited by Nicolas the Bloody and other losers who brought RI to a zugunder. =
            That zugunder for some reason cost almost three times cheaper than 27 million. And this despite all the efforts of the Bolsheviks to organize the massacre and death.
      2. Boris55
        Boris55 April 23 2021 08: 33
        -1
        Quote: Pessimist22
        Stalin's genius is probably in the fact that he fully believed that Hitler would not attack?

        In politics, there are no such concepts as I do not believe. Politicians look not at words, but at actions. As an example. We pulled up troops to Voronezh and right there:

        ... I am now engaged in wrestling and boxing.
        I have no more doubts about my own account,
        Everyone suddenly became very polite to me, and - coach ...
      3. VS
        VS April 23 2021 09: 04
        +3
        Quote: Pessimist22
        Stalin's genius is probably in the fact that he fully believed that Hitler would not attack?

        funny nonsense do not repeat)) although their avatar ultimately voiced in principle)))
  • Lech from Android.
    Lech from Android. April 23 2021 06: 08
    -11%
    It seems that the author justifies the defeat of the Red Army in the first months of the war ... in order to defeat the plans of the enemy, heavy losses must be incurred ... a bad idea.
    The garrison of the Bret fortress could delay the enemy for many months if it met the German offensive in all weapons even at the stage of crossing the Bug.
    But alas, the sudden attacks of German artillery and aviation on the barracks and warehouses reduced the time of the garrison's resistance to one month.
    And so along the entire border of the USSR.
    To meet the enemy in full combat readiness, the Red Army could stop the Germans even on the distant approaches to Moscow.
    But alas, yes ah, we wave our fists after the fight.
    1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
      Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 07: 44
      +11
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      The garrison of the Bret fortress could delay the enemy for many months if it met the German offensive in all weapons even at the stage of crossing the Bug.

      Are you serious, damn it? Would the Wehrmacht bluntly pound its forehead against the 'impregnable fortress' for 'long months'? That is, the 19th century fortification would have stopped the GA Center and ruined Barbarossa?
      1. vadim.simackov2012
        vadim.simackov2012 April 23 2021 07: 47
        -2
        The Wehrmacht stupidly pounded into the BKr Citadel from 14 to 18 September 1939 without the slightest success with minimal losses for the Polish garrison.
        1. EvilLion
          EvilLion April 23 2021 11: 23
          +1
          Because in figs she did not surrender to the Wehrmacht. What's in the 39th, what's in the 41st. We left some strength to block and went on.
      2. Lech from Android.
        Lech from Android. April 23 2021 07: 58
        -15%
        The Wehrmacht would have had to send more than one division to take the fortress, would have had to spend much more time on the destruction of the garrison ... it's so obvious.
        The calculation of the surprise strike by the officers of the 45th division of the Wehrmacht worked partly, instead of the planned hours and day, the Germans had to spend much more time to capture the fortress.
        1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
          Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 08: 34
          +9
          Quote: Lech from Android.
          The Wehrmacht would have had to send more than one division to take the fortress

          Why would the Wehrmacht take this fortress? What is the point in modern mobile warfare to besiege useless fortification with "more than one division"? You at least give some reasons.
          Quote: Lech from Android.
          instead of the planned hours and day, the Germans had to spend much more time to capture the fortress.

          On the second day, the fortress was no obstacle for GA Center. They took, did not take - there was no difference in the pace of the offensive.
        2. Seba
          Seba April 23 2021 09: 52
          +5
          Quote: Lech from Android.
          The Wehrmacht would have had to send more than one division to take the fortress, would have had to spend much more time on the destruction of the garrison ... it's so obvious.
          The calculation of the surprise strike by the officers of the 45th division of the Wehrmacht worked partly, instead of the planned hours and day, the Germans had to spend much more time to capture the fortress.

          It was not necessary, the fortress by 1941 was just a military town. The high concentration of troops in it was due to the huge shortage of the barracks fund. The defense was not intended from the word at all. The relatively long resistance of the garrison is a manifestation of the heroism of the soldiers and officers of the Red Army. It would be criminal to prepare the fortress for long-term battles.
          1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
            Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 11: 01
            +2
            Quote: seba
            The relatively long resistance of the garrison is a manifestation of the heroism of the soldiers and officers of the Red Army.

            And the NKVD, I will note.
            Quote: seba
            It would be criminal to prepare the fortress for long-term battles.

            This was not done even in 1915.
        3. EvilLion
          EvilLion April 23 2021 11: 24
          0
          And for Pavlov's house to put more troops than for the whole of Paris. Which, however, no one stormed. So even 1> 0.
      3. Aviator_
        Aviator_ April 23 2021 08: 34
        +1
        The point is not that "the fortress would have stopped the Germans." The fact is that through the efforts of Pavlov, the division was compactly located in the fortress, and even in a dormant state, whose place was on the defensive lines.
        1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
          Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 08: 49
          0
          Quote: Aviator_
          The point is not that "the fortress would have stopped the Germans." The fact is that through the efforts of Pavlov, the division was compactly located in the fortress, and even in a dormant state, whose place was on the defensive lines.

          That's what I'm talking about. The Germans locked up 8-9 thousand people in the citadel, most of whom, according to Schlieper's report (45pd), were taken prisoner - 100 officers and 7000 Red Army men, emnip. The Germans lost 400 golds in the "assault". But this is not a disaster, if you follow the author's logic. The Soviet command, you see, just made a little mistake - it happens, they say, it's okay. And, as usual, sternly frowned eyebrows - "learned to fight. Sometimes on their mistakes." In Soviet times, for the unconditional heroism of the defenders and the "treachery" of the Germans, they hid outright bossy idiotism.
          1. EvilLion
            EvilLion April 23 2021 11: 31
            +5
            458 EMNIP losses of the Germans. From a strategic point of view, this is not a disaster. This is a single tactical unfortunate episode, whatever its cause. But if the USSR were left without industry, it would be a disaster. We just go and give up. And we are not creating a new army, as it was in real life. There were no ways to avoid military defeats of the 41st. However, the Germans manage to greatly underestimate their losses.
            1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
              Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 11: 47
              -1
              Quote: EvilLion
              458 EMNIP losses of the Germans. From a strategic point of view, this is not a disaster.

              This is 500 killed - the most tangible losses of the Wehrmacht in the first days of the invasion. What was accused of Schliper.
          2. Aviator_
            Aviator_ April 23 2021 19: 39
            +3
            Yes, I know these figures, about 400 killed Germans (I don’t know about the number of wounded), but about the 7000 prisoners of the Red Army, it’s obvious propaganda nonsense. Rather, these are civilians who were urgently recorded as prisoners of war, and the bulk of the Red Army soldiers (probably several thousand) were killed in the barracks during artillery preparation.
        2. EvilLion
          EvilLion April 23 2021 11: 26
          +2
          Yes, 2 battalions should have remained, and not 10-11 thousand people. of which then 7 thousand simply surrendered, since there is no sense in sitting without water and food, but we will not remember them, as well as the disgrace with a sudden attack because of Pavlov, who did not bring the orders, we will remember Gavrilov, who sat in the catacombs.
      4. Boris55
        Boris55 April 23 2021 08: 39
        -3
        Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
        Would the Wehrmacht bluntly pound its forehead against the 'impregnable fortress' for 'long months'?

        The Brest Fortress pinned down significant parts of the Nazis for a month. Eternal memory to the heroes who have fulfilled their military duty to the end.
        1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
          Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 09: 07
          -2
          Quote: Boris55
          The Brest Fortress pinned down significant parts of the Nazis for a month.

          Stop repeating this nonsense. 45pd was transported with the fortress for only a week, on June 29 it was already marching to Pinsk.
          1. Lech from Android.
            Lech from Android. April 23 2021 09: 15
            -7
            And it was planned to take in a day, a maximum of two ... the Germans did everything according to plan, on schedule.
            So consider that the 45th Infantry Division of the Wehrmacht, somewhere, could not advance deep into the USSR, losing precious time to clean up the BC ... such delays to the Germans then cost dearly near Moscow.
            1. Avior
              Avior April 23 2021 11: 03
              0
              There was no need for the Germans to take it - already on the first day of the war at lunchtime, it did not interfere with the movement of the Germans.
              Around 13-50, the division commander, who was in the 135th Infantry Regiment (northern island), was personally convinced that close (hand-to-hand) combat would not take the fortress and decided about 14-30 to withdraw his troops so that the fortress was surrounded from all sides ..... This decision was quite definitely approved by the commander-in-chief of the 18th Army at 30-4. He did not want unnecessary losses, because the movement of German troops on the road and railways has already become possible; The enemy's influence on them could not be allowed, but otherwise the Russians should have been starved out ...
              45th Infantry Division, Battle report on the capture of Brest-Litovsk.
          2. Mordvin 3
            Mordvin 3 April 23 2021 10: 29
            +1
            Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
            45pd was carried out with the fortress for only a week,

            Yeah, I was busy ... But Hitler and Mussolini for some reason already drove to Brest in August.
            1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
              Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 10: 37
              -1
              Quote: Mordvin 3
              And for some reason Hitler and Mussolini drove to Brest in August.

              That is, on this basis, you conclude that the fortress until August "fettered" the Wehrmacht? Seriously?
              1. Mordvin 3
                Mordvin 3 April 23 2021 13: 41
                +1
                Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                Seriously?

                No, damn it, jokingly. In August, the dungeons were burned with flamethrowers.
                1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                  Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 14: 48
                  -2
                  Quote: Mordvin 3
                  In August, the dungeons were burned with flamethrowers.

                  And what have the marching units of the Wehrmacht and specifically 45 infantry divisions? Police units were engaged in cleaning. Sporadic firefights with patrols cannot even be called "defense". All these tales about "shackling the Wehrmacht" that allegedly 45 and 162 infantry divisions stuck out in Brest for more than a month - this is fiction.
                  1. Mordvin 3
                    Mordvin 3 April 23 2021 14: 53
                    +1
                    Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                    And what has the marching units of the Wehrmacht and specifically 45 infantry divisions to do with it?

                    And nothing to do with it. They have nothing to do with it. The 4th Austrian division has nothing to do with it either.
                    1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                      Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 15: 05
                      -1
                      Quote: Mordvin 3
                      And nothing to do with it. They have nothing to do with it. The 4th Austrian division has nothing to do with it either.

                      and this is not the same division ??
                      1. Mordvin 3
                        Mordvin 3 April 23 2021 15: 07
                        +1
                        Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                        and this is not the same division ??

                        Exactly, that one and the same. Austrian women, Hitler's countrymen.
                      2. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                        Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 15: 08
                        -1
                        Quote: Mordvin 3
                        Exactly, that one and the same. Austrian women, Hitler's countrymen.

                        So what? What is this for you?
                      3. Mordvin 3
                        Mordvin 3 April 23 2021 15: 11
                        0
                        Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                        So what? What is this for you?

                        Yes, to nothing. Study the history deeper, and not so, drank and chat.
                      4. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                        Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 15: 13
                        -2
                        Quote: Mordvin 3
                        Yes, to nothing.

                        Clear.
                        Quote: Mordvin 3
                        Explore history deeper

                        Good advice. Have you tried to use it?
                      5. Mordvin 3
                        Mordvin 3 April 23 2021 15: 26
                        0
                        Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                        Have you tried to use it?

                        No, that's enough for me. I’ll make history drunk on you.
                      6. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                        Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 15: 31
                        -1
                        Quote: Mordvin 3
                        I’ll make history drunk on you.

                        laughing
                        No doubt. A drunken historian is power.
                      7. Mordvin 3
                        Mordvin 3 April 23 2021 15: 37
                        0
                        Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                        A drunken historian is power.

                        I'm drunk now. And if you are sober, I’ll rinse out all your brains. Yeah.
                      8. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                        Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 15: 39
                        -2
                        Quote: Mordvin 3
                        I'm drunk now. And if you are sober, I’ll rinse out all your brains. Yeah.

                        Ah, then I'm calm about my brains. Because you don't seem to come in here sober. laughing
                        However, all this does not apply to the topic under discussion.
                      9. Mordvin 3
                        Mordvin 3 April 23 2021 15: 41
                        -1
                        Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                        Ah, then I'm calm about my brains.

                        Knock on the wall.
                        Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                        you don't come here sober.

                        I even go in, but it's more fun to get drunk.
                        Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                        all this does not apply to the topic under discussion.

                        Ага.
  • vadim.simackov2012
    vadim.simackov2012 April 23 2021 07: 52
    +2
    "It seems that the author justifies the defeat of the Red Army in the first months of the war" - precisely so. Excellent article - true, only true, but ... not the whole truth. The STATE was ready for war - the Red Army was not ready for war, above all its mediocre leadership from the armies and above. This explains the disaster of the ARMY in 1941.
    1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
      Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 11: 07
      -1
      Quote: vadim.simackov2012
      This explains the disaster of the ARMY in 1941.

      According to the author, there was no disaster, therefore, there is nothing to explain. Iron logic.
  • VS
    VS April 23 2021 09: 06
    +2
    Quote: Lech from Android.
    It seems that the author justifies the defeat of the Red Army in the first months of the war ... in order to defeat the plans of the enemy, heavy losses must be incurred ... a bad idea.
    The garrison of the Bret fortress could delay the enemy for many months if it met the German offensive in all weapons even at the stage of crossing the Bug.
    But alas, the sudden attacks of German artillery and aviation on the barracks and warehouses reduced the time of the garrison's resistance to one month.
    And so along the entire border of the USSR.
    To meet the enemy in full combat readiness, the Red Army could stop the Germans even on the distant approaches to Moscow.
    But alas, yes ah, we wave our fists after the fight.

    you repeated the myth from the marshals of victory - that Stalin forbade the military troops in b.g. lead) But if he listened to the military, then they would show everyone))) Does not roll)))
  • qQQQ
    qQQQ April 23 2021 09: 21
    +4
    Quote: Lech from Android.
    But alas, yes ah, we wave our fists after the fight.

    There would be no other way. The German army showed a completely different level, the technology of warfare. Nobody in the world was ready for him, all previous conquests of Hitler showed this. Our generals learned to fight for several years, the price of this training is a sea of ​​blood. It could have been different, probably theoretically yes, but it turned out how it happened, the main thing is to always remember this lesson and keep track of all foreign experience in waging wars, as a rule, unfortunately, we are always in the role of catch-up.
  • EvilLion
    EvilLion April 23 2021 11: 22
    +2
    In order to break the plans of the enemy, it is necessary to prevent him from fulfilling the tasks facing him, the USSR did it. Good or bad, that's another question, but it could hardly have been much better. About the mistakes of the owls. It is useless to talk about the leadership, because the Germans inevitably had them too, and the Germans could also perform better.
    1. Mordvin 3
      Mordvin 3 April 23 2021 14: 12
      -1
      Quote: EvilLion
      and the Germans could have done better too.

      In what sense?
  • boris epstein
    boris epstein April 23 2021 18: 12
    +3
    The garrison of the Brest Fortress began to withdraw from it to Belovezhskaya Pushcha as early as June 15, 1941. And before the war, not all parts of these divisions were in the fortress. Some units were in Zhabinka and Kobrin. Of the 26 battalions of the 6th Oryol and 42 rifle divisions in the fortress on June 22, only 8 battalions remained, moreover, from scattered units. The general command in the fortress was organized only after order number one of June 24, 1941. The commanders who remained in the fortress were captain Zubachev, senior lieutenant Semenenko and regimental commissar Fomin. The garrison of the Eastern Fort, commanded by Major Gavrilov, fought separately from the main group. The Germans deployed the army corps of General Schroth-31st and 45th infantry divisions against the garrison of the fortress. Full-blooded. After the capture of the fortress, the corps was withdrawn for reorganization. According to the German regulations, this is done if the Vomno unit has lost 20% or more of its personnel. Here and count-2 divisions of 16 people = 000. 32% is 000 people disabled, killed, wounded, missing. about 20 people remained in the fortress. In 6400 there were 3500 surviving defenders of the fortress. So, in fact, each defender disabled two. And each of them, each destroyed tank, each shot down plane was not enough for Hitler near Moscow, while in addition to the Brest Fortress there were defenses of Odessa, Sevastopol, Kiev, Leningrad, Smolensk. So the quantity and quality of weapons do not always decide the outcome of the battle.
    1. RVAPatriot
      RVAPatriot April 24 2021 04: 53
      -1
      Blunt copying ...
  • RVAPatriot
    RVAPatriot April 24 2021 04: 51
    -1
    The Brest Fortress already detained the enemy (pointwise), but this is like a pillbox, and you can bypass it, which the Germans did ... the border is too wide ...
  • Cartalon
    Cartalon April 23 2021 06: 10
    +10
    It was up to me to read journalistic articles on history.
    Good luck to everyone, I'll go look for a normal historical resource
  • nikvic46
    nikvic46 April 23 2021 06: 45
    +4
    I am convinced that time itself gives rise to great personalities. And this is not only about Stalin. Look at the colorful figures among our allies. Writers, generals, analysts, soldiers, and they all see the war in their own way. For striving to understand such a difficult topic, the author is five (score)
  • ee2100
    ee2100 April 23 2021 07: 16
    +10
    The title of the article "1941: a catastrophe that never happened" is surprising, that is, it was not a catastrophe - the loss of almost the entire European part of the USSR, 4 million prisoners, etc. According to the author, does it turn out as planned?
    I was surprised by point 11, from the author's thoughts.
    "First of all, this is the result of the inevitable reaction to these events of their contemporaries - the consequences of the deepest psychological shock that the Soviet people experienced after the crushing defeats of the Red Army and its rapid retreat inland." (C)
    That is, the frightened people are to blame for everything? And all the problems due to the fact that the people were fearful and ran so far for this? And then Khrushchev's henchmen replicated this fear in works of art, thereby justifying the catastrophe of the first days of the war?
    From point 11, we can conclude that now a modern Russian has a very high moral and strong-willed spirit and if tomorrow is a war, then no, no retreat. Oh well.
    1. place
      place April 29 2021 17: 11
      -1
      Quote: ee2100
      The title of the article "1941: a catastrophe that never happened" is surprising, that is, it was not a catastrophe - the loss of almost the entire European part of the USSR .... 4 million prisoners


      TO THE URAL? Are you good lord - are you in your mind? And in 1812, when Napoleon burned Moscow, there was no catastrophe and the loss of the "European part"? Only hussars, hussars .... and cries of Hurray!
      During the entire War there were 4 million prisoners. And there are about the same number of German prisoners.
      You need to know when to stop, otherwise you walk widely, talking about millions.

      In 1941, the USSR did not have an advantage in human resources over the enemy, since in fact the entire European Union was its enemy. Moreover, about 50-70 million people remained in the territories occupied by the Germans ... and for whom did they work in 1942-1943? And you did not ask yourself a question, in such conditions, in general, Who remained in the USSR? Who worked and fought "after the disaster"?
      I would rather side with the Author. If there were a catastrophe, they would have lost the war.

      THERE WAS NOT A CATASTROPHE, BUT THAT WHAT WAS INEVITABLE AND OBJECTIVELY SHOULD BE. The first phase of the war - until the end of 1941 - is a blow to the enormous and prepared in advance technical might of the West. The second phase of the war is a protracted one, when the main factors of success are their own cheap natural resources and a centralized system of economic management. No market markups

      Have you ever wondered why the Germans had so many new inventions and hopes for "super weapons"? Why did they pump huge amounts of money into this? Yes, because they understood that they could not produce a gigantic number of conventional guns, tanks, aircraft. Guderian wrote about this in his book of memoirs - "Memories of a Soldier".
      For example, the Germans created an excellent Tiger tank, but managed to produce only 1400 units during the war. Why? Because it's expensive. 1 million Reichsmarks apiece (about 250 thousand dollars at the then exchange rate)
  • Shiden
    Shiden April 23 2021 07: 41
    +7
    Again, grief journalists-historians rewrite history under the current situation. And most importantly, more and more such articles are published, when the country cannot boast of the successes of today, it recalls the victories of past years, where the victory was won collectively but the allies are not remembered.
  • Avior
    Avior April 23 2021 07: 57
    +1
    The author turns it over so that it takes your breath away.
    Were not ready for the First World War?
    Couldn't deal with the allies before the war and did they sign a treaty of friendship with Germany after the start of the war? Did the Germans reach Tsaritsyn?
    No, it’s like they didn’t move from the western borders. And even this was not considered normal so much that it led to the fact that the power turned over two times - first the tsar was removed, and then those who removed the tsar. And according to the author, the retreat to Stalingrad, but nothing special. They destroyed their own industry with their own hands in the most densely populated part of the Union - according to the author, it’s nothing like that, but part of it was taken out. Well, that the Dnieper hydroelectric power station was blown up and a lot of things with it, the author did not see anything like that in this, a common thing.
    1. chenia
      chenia April 23 2021 16: 15
      +1
      Quote: Avior
      Were not ready for the First World War?


      The author was right, they were not ready. Or you have a different opinion.

      Quote: Avior
      Couldn't deal with the allies before the war and concluded a treaty of friendship with Germany after the start of the war?


      Well soyuznichki (in the future), even those bugs. And to knock out. At least some obligations on occasion. did not work in any way. The desire to remove the heat with someone else's hands was punished (here we must remember Churchill, who justified Stalin for the pact.)

      Quote: Avior
      Did the Germans reach Tsaritsyn?


      Stalingrad. this is an accident (as a result of the terrible losses in 1941)

      Quote: Avior
      With their own hands, their own industry in the most densely populated part of the Union was destroyed -


      And at the same time, practically without LL, they were able to break the ridge of the Wehrmacht (well, in your opinion, with the destroyed industry). Strange-NOT?
      But the king (in WWI) was not even destroyed. could not even come close to the German one.
      1. Avior
        Avior April 23 2021 17: 21
        -3
        ... Stalingrad. it is an accident

        Uh-huh. The tsar, therefore, cost half of the country for accidents ...
        1. chenia
          chenia April 23 2021 19: 58
          0
          Quote: Avior
          The tsar, it means, cost half the country by chance ...


          No, he has a pattern - the Ipatiev House and the Civil War.
          And I will repeat. If the German would then have TG (tank groups), then the RI would begin behind the Urals.
          1. Avior
            Avior April 23 2021 20: 47
            0
            ... No, he has a pattern - the Ipatiev House and the Civil War. And I will repeat. If the German would have then ...

            And if my grandmother had bells, she would be a grandfather.
            And why not equip the Kaiser with nuclear weapons, and the rest with bows and arrows, with your approaches to analysis?
            I wish the Germans would rush forward ...
            But this is so, out of your fantasies.
            In reality, the Germans in the First World War were stopped at the border, let's go back to reality.
            1. chenia
              chenia April 23 2021 21: 13
              +3
              Quote: Avior
              And if my grandmother had bells, she would be a grandfather


              Believe it or not, any analysis consists of considering various options and given states.
              Otherwise. in real life we ​​won. This means that we are stronger, bolder and smarter than the Germans. It's primitive. but you boil down to that.

              Quote: Avior
              In reality, the Germans in the First World War were stopped at the border, let's go back to reality.


              Comparing the actions of the tsarist generals (who, in four years of war, could not do anything with a smaller part of the German troops, surrendered the tsar and brought the country to revolution), with the Soviet ones, who rolled out the Wehrmacht and entered Berlin.
              These are the realities.
              And everything else
              Quote: Avior
              of your fantasies.
              1. Avior
                Avior April 23 2021 21: 39
                0
                ... Otherwise. in real life we ​​won. This means that we are stronger, bolder and smarter than the Germans. It's primitive. but you boil down to that.

                Otherwise, in fact, you have nothing to write.
                hi
                And I will tell you a secret - in the first world war, too, won, as well as in the second.
                In both cases, as part of a coalition with allies.
                1. chenia
                  chenia April 24 2021 09: 40
                  +1
                  Quote: Avior
                  Otherwise, in fact, you have nothing to write.

                  If about the reasons.
                  The correct conclusion that the Germans in 1941 were not ready for war with the USSR led to the adoption of decisions that thwarted the BP and led to organizational chaos. We decided to first create the structures, and then start to "grind" them, and in principle it is correct (if there is time).
                  But he was not there. and the Germans caught us at the moment of "dressing".
                  I can be more deployed. but for now, digest it.
                  And you. what do you think?
                  Quote: Avior
                  in the First World War, too, won, as in the Second.


                  I believe you (almost). But the results are different. Feel the difference.
                  1. Avior
                    Avior April 24 2021 10: 46
                    0
                    Different results, but who can argue.
                    In one case, there were 17 million civilians, in the other 1 million.
                    1. chenia
                      chenia April 24 2021 21: 44
                      -1
                      Quote: Avior
                      Different results, but who can argue.


                      In one case, the collapse of the empire.
                      In another, the creation of a self-sufficient superpower with control of half of Europe with strong positions in Asia, China (well, before Khrushchev). India, Indochina, Indonesia. (though later profukal) Middle East in Africa., Central and South America, and so on and so on.
                      1. Avior
                        Avior April 25 2021 01: 37
                        +1
                        And what does the readiness for 1941 have to do with it?
                      2. chenia
                        chenia April 25 2021 07: 28
                        +1
                        Quote: Avior
                        And what does the readiness for 1941 have to do with it?


                        I answered your question.
                        I answered about the main cause of the disaster.
                        But you didn’t give out anything ..
  • place
    place April 29 2021 17: 37
    0
    Quote: Avior
    the second is so overturning that it takes your breath away.
    Were not ready for the First World War?


    As they say, "and this is from which side to look." This is shown in the Soviet film "Chapaev"; "it depends on what the battle will be ..." - that's what the old soldier said.
    They were not ready for war from 1914 to 1918. As events showed. We were quite ready for a war lasting a year.

    QUESTION: Can we now say that a country in which even the production of its own ball bearings began only in 1916 at a joint venture with the Swedes was ready for a long war against technically advanced Germany? I suppose you can't. Why did the tsarist government get involved in WWI? Because it relied on the allies, the import of equipment.

    In 1941, they were not ready to defend against the blow of all the technical might of western continental Europe. And they couldn't be ready. Therefore, our ancestors had a hard time. But for a protracted war, in which the main factor of success - their own cheap raw materials in unlimited quantities and a planned centralized economy - were ready. And Germany was not ready for this, as events showed.
  • A. Privalov
    A. Privalov April 23 2021 08: 02
    +5
    "Kurt von Tippelskirch, author of The History of World War II, who held a prominent post in the German General Staff on the eve of the Eastern Campaign," wrote his subjective German version of those events in 1954. Over the past 67 years, neither the version from the USSR, nor the version from the Russian Federation has come out. Alas...

    Articles of this kind, with pulled from different sources and far-fetched quotes, a place in the "Opinions" section, maximum.
    For today's young people who do not even recognize Lenin, Khrushchev, Gorbachev in the pictures, tomorrow, seeing the title of the "History" section, she will take such revisionist opuses at face value and be sure that nothing special happened in 1941. They say, yes, they did not prepare a bit (and who and when did they prepare at all?), But they quickly organized, something and someone was taken somewhere and everything, hurray, was in perfect order.
    This is the distortion and rewriting of History. And, mind you, the author is not some kind of liberal and Russophobic enemy. He wrote with the best intentions! Well, how can you not remember the bruised forehead as a result of overly zealous prayers.
    1. Undecim
      Undecim April 23 2021 08: 44
      +10
      This is the distortion and rewriting of History.

      Moreover, recently on the site this process has been put on stream and a whole team is working on it.
      1. A. Privalov
        A. Privalov April 23 2021 08: 57
        +4
        Quote: Undecim
        Moreover, recently on the site this process has been put on stream and a whole team is working on it.

        There is probably no specific "team". However, I agree that the tilt of the editorial policy towards such articles has become quite noticeable. hi
        1. Undecim
          Undecim April 23 2021 08: 59
          +7
          Obviously, they are trying to raise clickbait in this way, without thinking about the consequences at all.
    2. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
      Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 10: 28
      0
      Quote: A. Privalov
      seeing the title of the "History" section, she will take such revisionist opuses at face value and be sure that nothing special happened in 1941. They say, yes, they did not prepare a bit (and who and when did they prepare at all?), But they quickly organized, something and someone was taken somewhere and everything, hurray, was in perfect order.

      I agree.
    3. RVAPatriot
      RVAPatriot April 24 2021 04: 59
      +2
      Minsk. I took the 10-11th grade to the Great Patriotic War Museum last year. Shown in the photo "Hitler in Brest". no one answered correctly ... they are far from it all
      1. place
        place April 29 2021 17: 57
        0
        Quote: RVAPatriot
        They are far from it all


        And where are "they"? They only hatched recently. They are what the descendants of half-fools who profiled their country in peacetime should be should be.
    4. place
      place April 29 2021 17: 53
      0
      Quote: A. Privalov
      They say, yes, they did not prepare a bit (and who and when did they prepare at all?), But they quickly organized, something and someone was taken somewhere and everything, hurray, was in perfect order.


      Did the Author write this? Didn't you confuse anything? Will it not crack? Is it possible to win a war without being ready for it? The war was won precisely because the USSR had the advantage of waging a long war, relying on its cheap natural resources. The USSR has been preparing for this for a long time. The planned economy of the USSR was geared towards precisely this.
      Germany was only ready for a blitzkrieg. They were not going to initially fight for 4 years against the USSR. They did not intend to plan such a nonsense in advance, importing raw materials even from South America across the Atlantic. Insult, the Germans have never been idiots.
  • Woodman
    Woodman April 23 2021 08: 04
    +3
    Surprisingly not a serious article on a serious topic ...
  • samosad
    samosad April 23 2021 08: 14
    +3
    Well, well, the blitzkrieg of the USSR was thwarted, I agree. But what about the year 42, when it was not for nothing that Order 227 was issued? After all, all the participants in the Second World War say that this period was the most terrible and most dangerous of the entire war! If the Germans had broken through to the Caucasian oil, if they had cut the Volga, that would have been the end! Maybe they would not have defeated everyone, but the Germans would not have advanced further than the Volga ... So that the scales could tilt in their direction ... if not for the heroism of our soldiers.
  • parusnik
    parusnik April 23 2021 08: 30
    +7
    Well, yes, there was a disaster, but the Barborossa plan was thwarted. If there was a catastrophe, how was it thwarted?
  • prior
    prior April 23 2021 08: 41
    +3
    If the death of millions of Soviet people is not a catastrophe for the author, then that he ? fool am
  • VS
    VS April 23 2021 09: 03
    +1
    Avtar writes - "" The Kremlin did not expect that the German leadership would make incomprehensible miscalculations in assessing the prospects of a war against the USSR, and this, to a certain extent, disoriented Moscow. Hitler was mistaken, and Stalin could not calculate this mistake. .... Stalin was simply physically not ready to reproduce the Fuhrer's paranoid line of thought. The Soviet leadership, obviously, experienced a cognitive dissonance generated by the incompatibility between the obvious signs of Germany being prepared for a war against the USSR and the deliberate senselessness of such a war for the Germans. ""))

    Complete nonsense))) And Hitler was not an idiot and Stalin did not bother with the topic - what is there in Hitler's head - they were waiting for the war and were preparing for the war)))

    "" Hence the unsuccessful attempts to find a rational explanation for this situation, and probing demarches like the TASS note of June 14th. However, as we have already shown, all this did not prevent the Kremlin from conducting full-scale preparations for the war. ""))

    1st - stupidity) Avtar has no idea HOW it appeared and why this TASS message - dated June 13))
    2nd - maladets))

    but the reasons for our defeats at the beginning of the Second World War, the avtar never showed)))
    1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
      Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 12: 22
      -2
      Quote: V.S.
      but the reasons for our defeats at the beginning of the Second World War, the avtar never showed)))

      of course, because this would refute his own thesis that the Red Army practically defeated the Wehrmacht in 1941. To paraphrase Churchill's well-known aphorism about Dunkirk, wars cannot be won from the cauldrons. Spirit-lifting amateur pulp, nothing more.
  • VS
    VS April 23 2021 09: 07
    +1
    Quote: vadim.simackov2012
    "It seems that the author justifies the defeat of the Red Army in the first months of the war" - precisely so. Excellent article - true, only true, but ... not the whole truth. The STATE was ready for war - the Red Army was not ready for war, above all its mediocre leadership from the armies and above. This explains the disaster of the ARMY in 1941.

    maladets)))
  • VS
    VS April 23 2021 09: 09
    -1
    Quote: Avior
    The author turns it over so that it takes your breath away.
    Were not ready for the First World War?
    Couldn't deal with the allies before the war and did they sign a treaty of friendship with Germany after the start of the war? Did the Germans reach Tsaritsyn?
    No, it’s like they didn’t move from the western borders. And even this was not considered normal so much that it led to the fact that the power turned over two times - first the tsar was removed, and then those who removed the tsar. And according to the author, the retreat to Stalingrad, but nothing special. They destroyed their own industry with their own hands in the most densely populated part of the Union - according to the author, it’s nothing like that, but part of it was taken out. Well, that the Dnieper hydroelectric power station was blown up and a lot of things with it, the author did not see anything like that in this, a common thing.

    did the Germans in 1914 have a plan of Barbaros? What do you think the wise guy, and if there was, WHERE would the Kaiser stop - in the Urals?))
    1. Alarmist79
      Alarmist79 April 23 2021 11: 23
      -1
      = did the Germans in 1914 have the Barbaros plan? =
      The Kaiser was quite planning to "have breakfast in Paris and dine in St. Petersburg." And his thesis is exactly the prototype of Barbarossa.
      But, for starters, the Kaiser's problem was that H2 did not sit out before the war with Germany one on one. And then the fact that the RIA as a little resembled the Red Army-1941


      = What do you think the wise guy, and if there was, WHERE would the Kaiser stop - in the Urals?)) =
      In reality, the Kaiser stalled in Belarus and did not look to the east anymore. But what would have happened to the Red Army if Hitler had not been dizzy with success and he had not delayed the mobilization of industry, then a separate question.
      1. Mordvin 3
        Mordvin 3 April 23 2021 14: 19
        +1
        Quote: Alarmist79
        and do not hesitate to mobilize industry, then a separate question

        I.e? Is it that he did not mobilize?
        1. Alarmist79
          Alarmist79 April 23 2021 14: 41
          -1
          The question is that it mobilized. And the mobilization was "mighty"

          "In accordance with the order" On the military economy "of September 1, 1939, only military surcharges were introduced to some taxes, wages and prices were frozen, and the rest was declared to" ensure the continued conduct of a regulated economic life. " on Economics Funk in Vienna on October 14, 1939: “During the war, much develops differently than envisaged, but in this war it happens especially on a large scale, and in a very favorable direction for Germany. Therefore, the previously outlined plans must now be significantly changed proceeding from the fact that economic life does not need such a big restructuring, as it was envisaged by the mobilization plans ”[5].

          Intoxicated by the initial military successes, the leaders of Germany considered that it was unnecessary to speed up military production, hoping to do without a significant exertion of forces. It is noteworthy that the leading German economic journal of the time, Der Deutsche Volkswirt [5], wrote about "Germany's war economy as being extremely similar to the economy of peacetime." Industrial production in Germany in 1941 increased by ... 2%.

          The share of military production in 1941 - 19% (USSR 35%), 1942 - 26% (USSR - 52%). At the same time, they reached the "Soviet" level of 50 in 1944.

          If the local partaigennosse were a little less unfinished, the disaster would have been even worse.
  • VS
    VS April 23 2021 09: 10
    -1
    Quote: Undecim
    This is the distortion and rewriting of History.

    Moreover, recently on the site this process has been put on stream and a whole team is working on it.

    and if you offer something else, they will tell you that these are not relevant articles or something else they will come up with)))
  • VS
    VS April 23 2021 09: 11
    +1
    Quote: samosad
    Well, well, the blitzkrieg of the USSR was thwarted, I agree. But what about the year 42, when it was not for nothing that Order 227 was issued? After all, all the participants in the Second World War say that this period was the most terrible and most dangerous of the entire war! If the Germans had broken through to the Caucasian oil, if they had cut the Volga, that would have been the end! Maybe they would not have defeated everyone, but the Germans would not have advanced further than the Volga ... So that the scales could tilt in their direction ... if not for the heroism of our soldiers.

    after the 41st there was a long loosening ...
  • Al_lexx
    Al_lexx April 23 2021 10: 16
    -3
    In general, the article is competent. I would focus on another aspect that is not often taken into account ..
    Most believe that we suffered a crushing defeat in the period June-November 1941, right up to our counter-offensive near Moscow. Like de ... they gave up almost the entire European part, lost a huge number of prisoners, etc. etc. But there are two points here. Firstly, we really were not ready for a blitzkrieg, for a number of technical and organizational reasons (there was a reform in the army), as well as because the middle and senior commanders, often completely eradicated the initiative (repression of the late 30s, with you can't dump the accounts, although they had objective reasons). And of course there were communication problems in the first months of the war. This is all true, but this is not the main thing. The main thing is the understanding that the Germans really had the only opportunity to defeat us, only in the format of a blitzkrieg war. But already in the first weeks, Stalin, the General Staff and other responsible persons realized that it was impossible to play with the Germans according to their rules and it was necessary to disrupt the blitz-krieg itself, which the Red Army successfully carried out. At the same time, she knocked out a significant part of the Wehrmacht personnel who had passed the experience of the war in Europe. In fact, in the first two months, the Wehrmacht lost more soldiers in the USSR than in the entire European company. There is a bunch of documents in support of this.
    But that's not all. Since it quickly became clear that we could only defeat the Germans in a protracted war for survival, Stalin essentially exchanged troops for industry. Those. Its main task was precisely the evacuation of production facilities beyond the Urals and exhausting the enemy, which, again, was done brilliantly (there are no analogues of such a large-scale transfer of production facilities thousands of kilometers away in history). And in the occupied territory, the invaders had almost nothing left that could support them at the industrial level, although Hitler really hoped for the same Donbass. And as soon as by the second half of 1942 the factories exported to the Urals reached their full capacity, it was safe to say that we won the war with Germany strategically.
    Undoubtedly, in the first two years of the war, we made many mistakes, for which we paid in great blood. But there were also many correct decisions that predetermined the outcome of the war. Another question is that mistakes are more often discussed, in the format "they threw soldiers' bones". But this, in my opinion, is an extremely one-sided judgment of illiterate or engaged amateurs who refuse or are unable to see the big picture. War is not only attacks, etc., war is primarily a competition between industry, resources and, of course, the will of the people (both at the front and in the rear). Which, by the way, was perfectly demonstrated by the Americans in the Pacific Ocean, riveting dozens of aircraft carriers and battleships, in just a couple of years, while the Japanese did not have such an opportunity.
  • kalibr
    kalibr April 23 2021 10: 19
    -2
    "Only in this case, the end of the war would have happened not on May 45, but on a later date."
    A touching "only". That's just for each of this "only" life of our people. Many lives ... very ...
    1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
      Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 12: 32
      -3
      Quote: kalibr
      "Only in this case, the end of the war would have happened not on May 45, but on a later date."
      A touching "only". That's just for each of this "only" life of our people.

      It's just opportunistic chas, nothing more. To take seriously this spirit-lifting rattling with clamps is rather stupid. Yes, this, I suppose, is not done by anyone here. But I agree with the camedenshaft - all this amateurish extravaganza performed by the Frolovs, Samsonovs, Fedorovs, etc. evokes a feeling of disgust.
      1. chenia
        chenia April 23 2021 15: 55
        +3
        Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
        But I agree with the camedenshaft - all this amateurish extravaganza performed by the Frolovs, Samsonovs, Fedorovs, etc. evokes a feeling of disgust.


        It is very interesting to know the opinion of a true expert and professional on this matter. Well, at least in general terms, what is the cause of the disaster?
        1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
          Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 15: 58
          -3
          Quote: chenia
          Well, at least in general terms, so what is the cause of the disaster?

          Which was not there?
          1. chenia
            chenia April 23 2021 18: 53
            +3
            Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.

            Which was not there?


            Feels like a professional. Detailed and complete answer. Or is it still the question of where and to whom?
            Original you, but still predictable.
            The question is simpler - the causes of global climate change.
            1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
              Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 19: 25
              -3
              Quote: chenia
              The question is simpler - the causes of global climate change.

              Political? I believe it's a Judeo-Masonic conspiracy. Or a multi-pass of the world behind the scenes. Want to talk about it? Friday started? laughing
              1. chenia
                chenia April 23 2021 19: 51
                +2
                Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                I believe it's a Judeo-Masonic conspiracy.


                Well, not without it. "... if there is no water in the tap .... but in Israel there is already an abundance of it. And the melting of ice at the poles is clearly their business.
                Well, we came to an agreement with that.

                What about the previous question?
                1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                  Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 20: 04
                  -2
                  Quote: chenia
                  What about the previous question?

                  about the causes of the catastrophe of 1941?
                  Do you think you can answer by telegraph? Okay -
                  organizational failure point
                  1. chenia
                    chenia April 23 2021 20: 54
                    +2
                    Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                    Good -
                    organizational failure point

                    The answer is accepted. By the way, absolutely right. Yes, organizational chaos and BP disruption is the main cause of the disaster.
                    But all the measures were carried out with the assumption that there would be no war. And the Germans were really not ready for war in 1941.
                    And our people believed that they would have time to polish all the structures by 1942 (the main thing is to create them and make them larger - it is always easier to reduce them).
                    Did not make it.
                    1. smaug78
                      smaug78 April 24 2021 11: 01
                      +1
                      There is an even simpler answer - deployment preemption. The rest of the problems are secondary to him.
                      1. chenia
                        chenia April 24 2021 14: 04
                        -1
                        Quote: smaug78
                        an even simpler answer is deployment preemption


                        The permanent readiness troops were not combat-ready, and therefore could not detain the enemy and gain time for deployment, combat coordination and the creation of a combat team. This is the result of organizational events, which I wrote about above.
                      2. smaug78
                        smaug78 April 26 2021 12: 16
                        0
                        Learn materiel dear ... And do not write nonsense ...
                      3. chenia
                        chenia April 26 2021 12: 53
                        +1
                        The corporal of the colonel is teaching. funny though.
                      4. smaug78
                        smaug78 April 26 2021 15: 31
                        0
                        Another manager. warehouse laughing Well, enlighten your jacket, how will the absence of vehicles and armor-piercing shells help combat coordination? Well, tell us about the BUS, Colonel. And also about the timing of the mobilization of the USSR and Germanylaughing laughing laughing Well, about your term "warehouse manager"
                        Constant readiness troops
                        ...
                      5. chenia
                        chenia April 26 2021 16: 16
                        0
                        Quote: smaug78
                        Another manager. warehouse

                        Well, I understand 78 is the year of birth. I was already a young man as a battery commander (1,5 years after school). Well for a jacket. it's like a rack manager.
                        Quote: smaug78
                        Well enlighten the jacket,


                        I'll try (though there are some especially gifted ones). First, a couple of questions - how long do you need to deploy? 15, 30, 45 days?

                        Quote: smaug78
                        How will the lack of vehicles and armor-piercing shells help combat coordination?

                        Yes, it does not bother him. Before the vocational school, transport is not particularly needed (well, for material support, what is it to bring to the area. I remember when deploying. From 5-6 days I only began to work out the OP, and before that the sunset manually - the soldiers have to get used to the iron.). , and even armor-piercing and for vocational schools fucking are not needed (however, we learn practical or HE.). And this is artillery. And for the infantry (especially at that time), vehicles caused allergies.
                        But for any question, it is somehow obliquely posed (the logic of the jacket is too heavy).

                        And say-
                        Quote: smaug78
                        proactive in deployment.

                        Yes, but in the 80s we had more than 4 million armed forces, while the permanent readiness troops (and the first strategic one) were not only supposed to halt the enemy's offensive, but also to knock out all their professionals).
                        If in a couple of years we make 25 out of 300 divisions (and 60 tank divisions - in my time - 50 with 11 TA), then I can imagine what was going on there.
                      6. smaug78
                        smaug78 April 26 2021 16: 20
                        0
                        Colonel, you are delusional laughing laughing laughing Read documents, ZhBD, etc. In the meantime, you are an ordinary ignoramus with puffy cheeks laughing Head level warehouse and rushing ...
                      7. chenia
                        chenia April 26 2021 16: 31
                        +1
                        Quote: smaug78
                        Head level warehouse and rushing.


                        Well, you put emoticons a wizard, insult too. Now strain yourself and give out some kind of thought. Just don't overdo it, or you'll spoil the air again.
                      8. smaug78
                        smaug78 April 26 2021 16: 41
                        0
                        And at the same moment, the creature in love, turning on the afterburner, rushed off on a date laughing Colonel, it's not difficult for me to repeat - Well, enlighten your jacket, how can the absence of vehicles and armor-piercing shells help combat coordination? Well, tell us about the BUS, Colonel. And also about the timing of the mobilization of the USSR and Germany? Your nonsense about mobilization in the late USSR does not count.
                      9. chenia
                        chenia April 26 2021 17: 08
                        0
                        Quote: smaug78
                        Well, enlighten your jacket, how will the absence of vehicles and armor-piercing shells help combat coordination?


                        And I already answered - no way. But again you continue to spoil the air, and the reception is to ask questions and not answer with a sign. No, now you give out something intelligible. And we will appreciate.
                        Otherwise, just a troll. Then ignore. Well?
  • Alarmist79
    Alarmist79 April 23 2021 11: 14
    -5
    = then the Russian army from August 1914 to August 1917 only retreated inland. =

    There are lies, blatant lies and what the neo-communists write. The whole great retreat of 1915 took 4,5 months, and the attempt of the Germans to attack Minsk bravo failed. At the same time, the scale of the peremog was such that the Germans did not plan a large-scale offensive either in 1916, or already against the background of the post-February collapse of 1917.
    1914 and 1916 are the offensive actions of the Republic of Ingushetia. The Brusilovskys are well known, but the reason for the turn to the east in 1915.
    "But the final decision to make Poland the theater of the main operations was caused by too strong pressure, which at the end of the winter of 1915 made the southwestern front on Austria in the Carpathians, and which, in connection with the upcoming Italian action, threatened to destroy Austria-Hungary."

    The author, apparently, is used to broadcasting in fenced red blazers, where the flock is undemanding or banned.

    = Moreover, if we compare the pace of this retreat with the microscopic changes in the front line in the European theater of operations, it could well be called rapid. =
    Who, I wonder, is this meant for? In the course of what "microscopic changes in the front" the Germans ended up on the Marne, I would like to know.

    = for three years it has not carried out a single major offensive operation against the Germans - I emphasize, precisely against the German army. =

    I am listening carefully about the successes of the allies on the western front.

    = If the Red Army, three years after the start of the Great Patriotic War, recaptured most of the lost territory and proceeded to liberate Belarus and the Baltic states, =

    That is, it did not even come close to the configuration of the PMA front.
    I understand correctly that if bloody tsarism retreated to Moscow, Tsaritsyn and Petersburg, and then, losing 1,5-2,5 times more per year than tsarism for the entire PMV, beat it off, would that be a sign of Nikolai's undoubted genius? Or is it something else?
    At the same time, the price of the successes of the Red Army 1941-43 is extremely entertaining. For the tsarism up to 25 thousand killed and missing near Naroch, this is a disaster and a reason to stop the unsuccessful offensive. Now let's look at Rzhev and lesser-known variations on the theme.
    1. chenia
      chenia April 23 2021 19: 00
      +3
      Quote: Alarmist79
      moreover, the attempt of the Germans to attack Minsk bravo failed


      And what about Poland?
      Quote: Alarmist79
      that the Germans did not plan a large-scale offensive either in 1916, or already against the backdrop of the post-February collapse of 1917.

      Have the Germans been intimidated? Or did they have other problems?

      Quote: Alarmist79
      I understand correctly that if bloody tsarism retreated to Moscow, Tsaritsyn and Petersburg, and then, losing 1,5-2,5 times more per year than tsarism for the entire WWI, it would beat it off,

      You understand correctly. If then there were TG (tank groups) at the German, then the bloody tsarism would fly away for the Urals.
      1. Alarmist79
        Alarmist79 April 23 2021 19: 56
        -2
        = And what about Poland? =
        And the Kingdom of Poland is slightly more than half of Belarus (128 thousand km / 207 thousand).

        = Did you intimidate the Germans? Or did they have other problems?. =
        The Germans had such problems in 1916 that they planned to withdraw France from the war. It is clear that the brilliant Soviet strategists would have lured the Germans to Petersburg and they would not have had such thoughts. But Nikolai was a loser, yes.

        = You understand correctly. If then there were TG (tank groups) at the German, then the bloody tsarism would fly away for the Urals. =
        Even the Red Army did not reach the Urals, what tsarism. TGs weren't the ultimate weapon. For 1941 to happen, the Red Army needed
        1.In the process of ingenious management, to continue the anti-tank defense because of the garbage quality and the lack of armor-piercing shells.
        2. Strongest to yield to the Wehrmacht in mobility due to a deranged organizational structure, a shortage of spare parts with an inflated number of tank troops, etc.
        3. Establish a command of politically literate ensigns and joyfully enter countless cauldrons.
        3. 1. The pronounced ones got into the boilers and into the PMV. Nobody would interfere with Comrade. Budyonny began to hammer near Warsaw in 1914, it was he somewhere there that barely took his feet from the Polish cauldron in 1920. Without any TG. From the German would not have carried away.
        Likewise, no one would have forced the damned gold-hunters to climb into the same Kiev cauldron. The tsarist generals could be caught in the cauldron even on the "Polish balcony". At the same time, somehow one could almost be surrounded by ... the Germans. What are Kiev / Kharkov, etc. RI was able to produce decent quality products, in contrast to.
        1. chenia
          chenia April 23 2021 20: 40
          +1
          Quote: Alarmist79
          But Nikolai was a loser, yes.


          Yes. Absolutely right.

          Quote: Alarmist79
          TGs weren't the ultimate weapon.


          Yes, they were not. But with an unstable defense, they cut everything. what they saw. In WWII Without TG we got bogged down in France, and in WWII we passed three weeks and did not notice.
          At the same time, nuance
          first France and Britain had 8 months to solve all the problems.
          second. One strategic direction was covered.

          And .. three weeks (then the Germans caught the one who signed the surrender).
          Compare with PMV. Then France was in a more disadvantageous position.
          And the blow to the USSR was the entire machine of the Wehrmacht with the allies (and we are without).
          And we were able to break the German, to substantial help from the allies (both military and material - the Kursk Bulge).

          Quote: Alarmist79
          due to garbage quality and lack of armor-piercing shells


          Most of the Wehrmacht tanks (at that time -1941) could be penetrated by the PTR. If only they shot.
          That is not the reason.
          Quote: Alarmist79
          to yield to the Wehrmacht in mobility due to a deranged organizational structure, a shortage of spare parts with an inflated number of tank troops, etc.


          Here it is already closer. The German in 1941 was really not ready for a war with the USSR. And all the intelligence was talking about it (it was only in May that our people began to suspect that something serious was brewing). And if so, the military lobby began to satisfy its caste interest (increased attention and flow of funds to the People's Commissariat of Defense). We went into an organizational rage. Tear off as much as possible, and then we'll figure it out - there is time (but it was not). As a result, the armored vehicles were gouged, and the BP in the army was disrupted. All measures to debug structures, combat coordination were planned for the autumn of 1941.

          Well...
          Quote: Alarmist79
          3. Establish a command of politically literate ensigns and joyfully enter countless cauldrons.


          These ensigns began to beat the advanced German commanders - a fact.
          By the way, how are the honored combat marshals (Pathen and S)? And the British (Dunkirk, Dieppe, Crete, and in Africa fought four German divisions for two years).

          Quote: Alarmist79
          The tsarist generals were able to be caught in the cauldron even on the Polish balcony.


          And what could they do in four years (against the German)?
          Here are Soviet ensigns drove to Berlin.
          Not?
          1. Alarmist79
            Alarmist79 April 23 2021 22: 45
            -2
            = Yes. Absolutely true. =

            Didn't he give birth to a cunning plan of retreat before Tsarsyn? Well, comrade. Stalin, this was also not a cunning plan. He just could.

            = Yes, they weren't. But with an unstable defense, they cut everything. what they saw. In WWII Without TG we got bogged down in France, and in WWII we passed three weeks and did not notice. =

            Grade 7 is too much, yes. At Paris, the Germans were almost perfect at the same time as in WWI. At the same time, the French were quite on the verge of losing to the Marne.
            It was not the absence of the TG that saved the frogs in 1914, but the presence of the eastern front.

            = At the same time, nuance is the first France and Britain had 8 months to solve all problems. =

            1. But the opinion prevailed that the crooked-handed Arabs ... but, no, the Poles - this does not count. That on the forehead, that on the forehead.
            2. Comrade Stalin was almost two years old, a year without non-kosher Poles.


            = second. One strategic direction was covered. =

            In terms of, The Ardennes? The French and brought to the Zugunder the opinion about the cover of the direction of the German attack. However, in WWI it was the same.

            = Compare with PMV. Then France was in a more disadvantageous position. =

            Something like this. But what does TG have to do with it?

            = And the blow to the USSR was the entire machine of the Wehrmacht with the allies (and we did not). =

            Is this a joke? The USSR in 41/42 was hit by less than a third / half of the German potential, see the level of industrial mobilization. In 41-42 Hitler was on his own western front. That is, PMV 2.0.
            At the same time, see the number of tanks at Rommel, there are many of them. According to the Germans, the second el-Alamein is half of Stalingrad, and the same number of Italians.

            = And we were able to break the German, to the substantial help of the allies (both military and material - the Kursk Bulge). =

            Already in 1943, the losses of the Luftwaffe in the VF were less than half. And the level of mobilization of industry is 2/3 of the Soviet one.

            = Most of the Wehrmacht tanks (at that time -1941) could be penetrated by the PTR. If only they shot. =

            But in the PTR of the USSR, he also could not in time. At the same time, there is still little use against medium tanks ... as well as from Soviet anti-tank vehicles / tanks

            = This is not the reason. =

            This is more than enough reason to lose in 41st in itself. Once again, there was essentially nothing to fight against tank breakthroughs.

            = The German in 1941 was really not ready for a war with the USSR. =
            But even in an unprepared state ...

            = These ensigns began to beat the advanced German commanders - fact. =

            In reality, the ensign in the person of Budyonny / Voroshilov / Timoshenko began to command the Tashkent fronts. Vasilevsky is quite a staff, and even from the exploiting class, Rokossovsky is an elementary gentry. Such are the proletarians.

            = By the way, how are the honored battle marshals (Pathen and S)? =
            For some reason, Paris was not passed on the fifth day. How do you imagine the scale of France? There will be Moscow in the Corsica region.
            At the same time, they did not have a clear defeat of the USSR in front of their noses.

            = And the British (Dunkirk, Dieppe, Crete, =
            See above. Google about the German capture of Moozund?

            = and in Africa they fought for two years with four German divisions). =
            In 1943, only 100 Germans surrendered in Tunisia. And you take a look at the number of tanks in those "four divisions".

            = And what could they do in four years (against the German)? =

            What four years? Until February 2,5. 1. To be where the Red Army reached in 1944. with much lower losses. 2. To bring the Germans and especially the Austrians to the Zugunder. In 1917, the Germans, according to their own words, in the event of effective pressure from both sides, would have nothing to fight back. Even Kerensky's offensive developed successfully at first.

            = Here are Soviet ensigns drove to Berlin. =
            For 4 Germans, they broke even in WWI even without RI.
            1. chenia
              chenia April 24 2021 08: 48
              0
              Quote: Alarmist79
              Didn't give birth to a cunning plan


              He could not give birth to anything. Even to restore elementary order in governing the country during the war. For which the generals and pushed him. FACT.

              Quote: Alarmist79
              It was not the absence of the TG that saved the frogs in 1914, but the presence of the eastern front.

              In WWI, the frogs did not have eight months to prepare for war. Indeed, the WF helped buy time. And then trench warfare. Do you feel the difference?


              Quote: Alarmist79
              2. Comrade Stalin was almost two years old, a year without non-kosher Poles.

              That the Germans declared war in 1939?
              Quote: Alarmist79
              The USSR in 41/42 was hit by less than a third / half of the German potential,

              In, This proves. that our intelligence at the time sensibly assumed that in 1941 the Germans were not ready for war. Therefore, we began to carry out activities with this in mind. and this is organizational chaos and BP failure.
              And with total war and the mobilization of all the forces of Germany (1943), there was a PSHIK (Kursk Bulge, 36 km on the southern face - and that's it, the strategic offensive ended). And there is no need to sing about Italy.


              Quote: Alarmist79
              But in the PTR of the USSR, he also could not in time. At the same time, there is still little use against medium tanks ... as well as from Soviet anti-tank vehicles / tanks


              Yes, we didn’t create a normal anti-tank gun during the war (let me remind you that BS-3 is a field gun, the D-44 was released for testing only in May 1945). And nevertheless, two offensives in Kursk and near Budapest crushed the tanks.

              Quote: Alarmist79
              In 1943, only 100 Germans surrendered in Tunisia.

              Not so
              There were four German divisions until November 1942. When the Americans appeared in Morocco
              added and half of the SS division GG, well, combat units. and parts of combat and logistics support.
              And the allies defeated the German Italians with a fourfold superiority, who did not even have a normal supply. And half of the troops were in the infirmaries with dysentery.


              And in Italy they took Rome for a year (and how much of that Italy?).

              Quote: Alarmist79
              How do you imagine the scale of France?

              Not so you need to measure. Ours were giving away space, gaining time. In five and a half months. have already begun to drive the Germans. The Britons and Franks had eight months to do this.

              Quote: Alarmist79
              What are four years?


              Mistaken three. Well, consider Kerensky too, the same generals.
              1. Alarmist79
                Alarmist79 April 24 2021 12: 51
                -2
                He could not give birth to anything. Even to restore elementary order in governing the country during the war. =
                Either that industrial production increased during the war by 20 +%

                = For which the generals pushed him aside. FACT. =
                Wild red fantasies. In 1915, no one wanted to push it away. They pushed him down just when order was restored, victory seemed very close and ... the oppositionist loomed a sickening prospect of getting a hard-to-defeat victorious tsar and a reputation as degenerates who almost worked for the Germans. The alternative is the position of the victors and saviors of the fatherland.
                Well, what kind of "order" was brought by Comrade Stalin, see below.

                = In WWI, the frogs did not have eight months to prepare for war. =
                In WWI, the frogs had 43 years to prepare for war. In 1940, they had only 8 months to adapt to a fundamentally new tactics of the enemy (remember, after WWI they managed to almost eradicate the traditional mobile units aka cavalry). Do you feel the difference?

                = And really WF helped buy time. =
                Yes.

                = And then trench warfare. Do you feel the difference? =
                It is there, but not on the scale you think. With the density of troops "remotely PMV" and a greater sensitivity to losses than that of the USSR, the fronts crawled rather slowly. See Italian Allied Operation. and ... Kursk Bulge.

                = That the Germans declared war in 1939? =
                To the Poles, yes. Practically comrade. Stalin observed two blitzkriegs, and in 1940 against non-Poles. There are almost no results. The same evacuation of industry, or at least a correction of its development plans, did not have to start in 41. Fortunately, the experience of 1918 was in front of my eyes too.


                = And with total war and the mobilization of all the forces of Germany (1943) =
                1. There was no mobilization of all the forces of Germany in the first half of 43. ALL 1943, this is a 38% share of military production. At the same time, it is not enough to produce weapons - it is necessary to train and form new units (especially pilots / tankers / artillerymen, etc.)
                2. Mobilization had almost no effect on the WF.

                = PSHIK happened (Kursk Bulge, on the southern face 36 km - and that's it, the strategic offensive ended). And there is no need to sing about Italy. =
                You should sing in general, yes. In 1943, the Germans increased the production of aircraft by 1,7 times. At the same time, in the WF, the number is stable or slowly declining.
                At the same time, the losses of the Luftwaffe in the VF are less than a third and are comparable ... with the Mediterranean, yeah.
                What would 1943 look like with the total domination of the Luftwaffe in the air?
                As for Italy itself. There, in general, the strategic reserves of the Wehrmacht were sent, intended for the development of the offensive or would be useful for parrying the counter-offensive of the Red Army, and in general, the share of Axis troops in the VF decreased from 80 to 63% (more than 1/5).
                Those. the allies completely gobbled up all Germany's mobilizations in the air force. With ground troops it is much more difficult, but "over the heads" they stopped the growth of the number of the group on the VF.

                = Yes, we did not create a normal AT gun during the war =
                They haven’t created a good, normal is already quite. Again, the point is only in the guns, but also in the ammunition.
                Those. the same 45 at first had massively defective shells, from August 41, trivially bad ones began to arrive, and only in 42 was it possible to compensate for this by lengthening the barrel. At the same time, n / s increased above the threshold level for German armor steel and armor penetration increased abruptly. Normal 76 mm armor-piercing ammunition went. Anti-tank crews have learned to read manuals between the lines.
                At the same time, the explanation of trash for half a war is as simple as a felt boot - according to a typical Soviet habit, the same 45 was not really tested at first, perhaps drawing armor penetration according to Marr's formula, then they tested, but the results fell silent, while in the instructions they wrote wishes to "cheer up the anti-tank crews" ...

                = There were four German divisions until November 1942. =
                Those. about 100 thousand Germans and a horde of Italians. At the same time, Rommel's mega successes happened against the backdrop of pulling back troops to protect Britain, and then dire problems with logistics.
                .
                = And the allies defeated the German Italians with a fourfold superiority =,
                Those. We do not consider Italians, but Americans with zero combat experience at all levels below the general - with might and main? And then there, with an honest count of 1 to 1,5. Not fat for a successful offensive.

                = which did not even have a normal supply. =
                And at the VF, the Germans were doing fine with supplies. Especially near Moscow and Stalingrad. 1941. The losses of Army Group Center for December amounted to 103600 people, with the incoming replenishment - 40800 people; the ratio of losses and replenishment in the following months is as follows: January - 144900/19100; February - 108700/69700

                = And half of the troops were in the infirmaries with dysentery. =
                Didn't lie. And I understood correctly that only the Germans suffered from dysentery, and to remember frostbite, etc. on the eastern front bad manners?


                = And in Italy they took Rome for a year (and how much of that Italy?). =
                From Rome to the toe of the boot, there are almost 700 km of roads. How many of that blockade of Leningrad is there? Well, Rzhev. This is without mountains and other interesting options.

                = You need to measure it differently. Ours were giving away space, gaining time. In five and a half months. have already begun to drive the Germans. =
                The Anglo-French did not halve the number of tanks in the Wehrmacht during the strange war, a surprise.
                Those. losses of Germans, hellish logistics, experience of direct interaction and winter, yes, you are actively brackeing.

                = The Britons and Francs had eight months to do this. =
                Comrade Stalin has been with him for almost two years. Consider this method - you can go far.
                And yes, all these 8 months. they stubbornly prepared for another war, even purely geographically. The strike through the Ardennes was a high-speed operation.
                1. chenia
                  chenia April 24 2021 15: 25
                  -1
                  Quote: Alarmist79
                  opposition group


                  Wow! This should be given out. In 1915, no one really wanted to throw it off. but in 1917 the victor tsar was kicked out thanks to the generals. By the way, do you have Brusilov?

                  Quote: Alarmist79
                  Well, what kind of "order" was brought by Comrade Stalin, see below.


                  The country is a military camp, everyone is either fighting or working to win.
                  Here is the will, our cause is right. We will win.

                  Quote: Alarmist79
                  In 1940, they had only 8 months to adapt to the fundamentally new tactics of the enemy.


                  Yes, these are not red ensigns who understood the importance of large tank formations. Well, the French generals did not develop military affairs (well, this is not a lordly business). And Saint-Cyr cooked pizza delivery men.
                  Are the British amphibians? Resources half the world and not Shmogli?
                  So let's write it down.

                  Quote: Alarmist79
                  ... Practically comrade. Stalin observed two blitzkriegs, and in 1940 against non-Poles. Almost no results

                  Well, this is your pale fantasies.
                  Weapon production, creation of new formations. Even the mechanized corps (slightly licked by the Germans), we have built more correctly (but here the subtlety of the Tbr in the TD was deliberately cut in half by the Germans in order to double the number of TD). And so it was necessary to have three battalions in the TP, and three tanks in platoons.
                  And if it were not for caste egoism and lobbying, they would not be in a hurry to create such huge clumsy MK and replicate them (up to 30). Well, this is the fault of the military.


                  Quote: Alarmist79
                  The same evacuation of industry or at least a correction of its development plans did not have to start in 41


                  What are you? Who thought to retreat so quickly. But what they could. this is another plus for the system.

                  Quote: Alarmist79
                  And at the VF, the Germans were doing fine with supplies. Especially near Moscow and Stalingrad. 1941

                  What are the problems? It was necessary to throw 4 TGs from the north, thrown over, and quickly enough.
                  And feel the difference; divisions in Africa and three TGs of 3-4 AK and MK, and in each corps 3-4 divisions. well, plus two PA and a third in the wings near Moscow.
                  And all this is planned. And there is no need to read the memoirs of German generals and field marshals who blamed Hitler for driving them to Moscow for slaughter. He bent Guderian (the latter was headlong headlong toward Moscow). when he returned to deal with the flanks. So Fedya Bok already saw himself as the conqueror of the Russian capital and persuaded Hitler. to focus all forces only on the Moscow direction. There was an operational pause of 10-15 days.
                  So. that all the moves were calculated. And the entire military machine of the Wehrmacht worked for this.

                  Quote: Alarmist79
                  Comrade Stalin has been with him for almost two years.


                  You are far from some concepts of War, full BG, military danger, increased BG and constant BG. Each degree assumes a certain scale of activities.
                  For example, a complete BG can be declared by the district commander, and the district does not become a front. The troops are deployed and occupy a combat formation in accordance with cover plans or in designated areas. This is not a war yet.
                  And the set of measures when war is declared (especially with a serious adversary) is already somewhat different.
                  By the way, the Northern Fleet war is more of an armed conflict, well, something like an event on Khalkhin Gol.
                  1. Alarmist79
                    Alarmist79 April 24 2021 19: 34
                    0
                    = Wow! This should be given out. =
                    Anything to object? In 1917, the Germans were planned to be truncated, and things were going towards that. H2 should have been removed before summer or ...

                    = but in 1917 the victor tsar was kicked out thanks to the generals. By the way, do you have Brusilov? =
                    Brusilov weather vane
                    “Before the revolution, Brusilov always emphasized his loyalty to the tsar, and often did it in a form that was already considered outdated, archaic, for example, kissing his hand.” Chel did not limit himself in his career efforts.

                    = The country is a battle camp, everyone is either fighting or working to win. =
                    (ruffled) That is, they drive the marriage, are engaged in postscripts, falsify tests, lie to the mustache in the eyes, overestimate the performance of the Germans not at times, as usual, but minimum by an order of magnitude, etc. There is a mess, and there is a symbolic Soviet Mess with a capital letter.

                    = Yes, these are not red ensigns who understood the importance of large tank formations. =
                    Lol
                    “At the same time, it was decided that the largest formation in ABTV would be the motorized divisions, which began to be created in May 1940. But already in July 1940, based on information received from France, mechanized corps were re-created ",
                    At the same time, wanting a little, you have to be able to. And the arms were very, very crooked.


                    = Well, the French generals did not develop military affairs =
                    But he fought off the Germans many times more successfully than progressive ensigns. In how many days would they have surrendered the capital if it were in the Minsk region?
                    Despite the fact that the French really had fun with their political checker.

                    = Are the British amphibians? Resources half the world and not Shmogli?
                    So we will write. =
                    So we will write down that the Britons have been in the mode of deaf economy and corral since the late 1920s. The main efforts went to the aviation and navy.
                    The result is more than. Comrade Stalin was Royal Navy and normal aviation? No, Comrade Stalin had something decent against the general graceless background only in the ground units. And the result is still Dunkirk for two years.

                    = What are you doing? Who thought to retreat so quickly. =
                    Stop, Nikolai, from the red point of view, should have thought that the war would drag on, despite the fact that there were no examples of this.
                    And the leader, having TWO blitzkriegs in front of his eyes, shouldn't think about anything?

                    = What are the problems? It was necessary to throw 4 TGs from the north, they threw it, and quickly enough =
                    Won the dynamo of replenishment in the GAR "Center", repeat?

                    = And feel the difference; divisions in Africa and three TGs of 3-4 AK and MK, and in each corps 3-4 divisions. =

                    What's the difference? In logistical difficulties? Well, yes, I did.

                    = So. that all the moves were calculated. =
                    The numbers are higher.

                    = You are far from some concepts War full of BG, =
                    That is, the official declaration of war at once gives 1500 experience and organization? You, in my opinion, are too close to fantasy. So for the Anglo-French 8 months passively stand at the border of 3,3 million, for Comrade Stalin it is comparable to 2 years, but "is this different?"

                    = By the way, the SF is a war, it is more of an armed conflict, =

                    By the way about. 760 thousand involved from the Soviet side and 126 thousand losses. The Polish campaign of the Wehrmacht is only twice as many soldiers, three times + less time and seven times the number of casualties. In fact, by 1940, the USSR was a much more belligerent country than the Anglo-French.
                    1. chenia
                      chenia April 24 2021 20: 53
                      -1
                      Quote: Alarmist79
                      H2 should have been removed before summer or ..


                      The tsar managed to get tired of both Ylite, and not Ylite, and the generals, and the court, and the people, and most importantly the allies. It is necessary to have such a talent to get everyone so. And by the way, the commies have nothing to do with it.

                      Quote: Alarmist79
                      Brusilov weather vane


                      Well, that's understandable, not Kuropatkin. All his breakthroughs are in fact royal initiations.
                      Then it was the case and the grand dukes hung red bows.

                      Quote: Alarmist79
                      That is, they drive the marriage, are engaged in postscripting, falsify tests, lie to the mustachioed person, and overestimate the performance of the Germans not at times, as usual.


                      Exactly, and to the Kursk Bulge with practically no LL, on defective equipment, the Wehrmacht was fully equipped. And yet not a total war, not new (almost without defects, the Germans cannot have the same) technology, and a bunch of assembled troops did not help.

                      Quote: Alarmist79
                      But he fought off the Germans many times more successfully than progressive ensigns

                      We are in the know. and all the same. Against their background, the Poles are superheroes.

                      Quote: Alarmist79
                      mechanized corps were re-created ",


                      MK (TC) sample 1932,1936,1940. 1942 completely different formations. And they have only the word corpus in common. And if MK (TC) 1936 and 1942 are at least somehow similar, then MK 40 is a completely different formation. And it is copied from the German MK and it must enter the TG (we have it UA). Sketched with brute force (while they give it is necessary to take, we will polish the time - but there was no time). And MK (TC) 36 and TC 42 are in fact TD 40 (even less)
                      The fact that MK 40 was clumsy was understandable from the beginning, but army lobbyism prevailed (polishing and fitting was planned for the fall of 1941)
                      By the way, there wasn't much to change there.
                      And the question is, what's wrong? Well, as a critic, you are clearly aware, I think so.


                      .
                      Quote: Alarmist79
                      What's the difference? In logistical difficulties? Well, yes, I did.

                      Clear.
                      Quote: Alarmist79
                      That is, the official declaration of war at once gives


                      It gives a lot. You are simply far from it, and you are too lazy to explain. And remove the newspaper cocked hat and leg from the drum (baby). you are our couch strategist. There are things that are clear by default, you don't get them.
                      I have earned a place on the couch; in the closet, my harness and boots have been gathering dust for decades.

                      Quote: Alarmist79
                      In fact, by 1940, the USSR was a much more belligerent country than the Anglo-French.

                      And who says no? The causes of the disaster are related to the decision-making on the reorganization of the army, taking into account the fact that there will be no war in 1941 (the Germans are not ready, and this is absolutely true).
                      1. Alarmist79
                        Alarmist79 April 25 2021 01: 41
                        0
                        = The Tsar managed to get tired of both Ylite, and not Ylite, and the generals, and the court, and the people, and most importantly the allies. =

                        Especially to the people outside the hefty advanced capital, yes. Therefore, the coup had to be turned strictly in private.
                        As for everyone else, and especially allies, do you seriously think that they were disinterestedly concerned with the mess? Ylita and Co were concerned about the exact opposite, i.e. its elimination. Ashes of money A.N. Putilov, who was deprived of the plant for the sorrowful deeds, knocked on the heart, etc.
                        The allies reasonably viewed the opposition as a horde of corrupt idiots with whom it would be much easier to negotiate than with a bloody cut, etc.


                        = You need to have such a talent to get everyone like that =

                        You are now seriously referring to the invaluable opinion of London and the Februaryist philanthropists, who broke through the bottom in six months, right?

                        = And by the way, the commies have nothing to do with =

                        And by the way about the commies. How did Comrade Stalin's inner circle at the XX Congress love it? Is it smaller? Generals - comrade. Zhukov, for example? And dear allies? The highest level of popularity, not like some.
                        Report Zhukov to Khrushch, where he demands to expose the cult of personality to the utmost, bring?

                        = Well, that's understandable, not Kuropatkin. =
                        The strategy in the RYaV assumed a retreat to the Chinese Eastern Railway with a parallel accumulation of forces from the very beginning. Hyperactivity from there.

                        = All his breakthroughs are, in fact, royal initiations. =
                        1. What does general leadership generally have to do with patriotism, morality and especially disinterestedness?

                        2. In general, the "brilliant" blow with "spread fingers" without reserves at all stages of the offensive, which Brusilov thought of and the absolutely correct skepticism about which he was "unforgivable" to Nikolai, took place only with the strongest advantage in the same artillery. And the real merit there is not Brusilov at all.

                        = Exactly, and to the Kursk Bulge with practically no LL, on defective equipment, the Wehrmacht was fully equipped. =
                        Remind the ratio of non-return for that technique? Yes, I am aware of the mythical best maintainability of the tanks of the USSR and the ingenious savings on auxiliary equipment. Well ... Then you yourself raised a very uncomfortable question

                        = And yet not a total war, not a new one (almost without defects, the Germans cannot have the same) equipment, and a bunch of assembled troops did not help. =

                        A bunch of troops is approach in the strongest minority? The advantage of the Red Army in defense is 2/3, 66%... B / m equality there only in aviation and then according to Soviet data.
                        If the USSR had not received accurate data on the Citadel, there would have been another summer breakthrough for the Germans.
                        Well, "little things". 1. By the end of 1943, the Germans did not smell of any total war, in the middle of the year the effect of the mobilization of industry was still near-zero.
                        2. The new technology of the Germans in terms of fragility is approximately equal to the serial Red Army, by the way. Despite the fact that the serial production of the T-34 was 3 years old at that time. This is a reversal, yes.

                        = And it was copied from the German MK and it should enter the TG (we have it UA). Over-sketched =
                        No, people with the Martian method of thinking. Those who did not understand anything about the German connections at all.

                        = And the question is, what's wrong? =

                        I'll just give you the composition
                        1031 tank.
                        36 anti-aircraft guns (4 - 76 mm, 32 - 37 mm)
                        36 anti-tank
                        100 field guns.
                        Hell, they're addicts. Only a blind person could miss the role of the same "Stuks" in the blitzkrieg, for example. PTA is a separate song. Well, etc.

                        = Gives a lot. =

                        A virtuoso ability to play football with the Germans?

                        = You are just far from this, and you are too lazy to explain. And remove the newspaper cocked hat and leg from the drum (baby). you are our couch strategist. There are things that are clear by default, you don't get them.
                        I have earned a place on the couch, in the closet the harness and boots have been gathering dust for decades. =

                        That is, there is zero real experience, there are sphero-conical representations in a vacuum. Let's not talk here about the sacred knowledge of a garrison officer (at best). It will be funny.

                        = Who says no? The causes of the catastrophe are associated with the decision-making on the reorganization of the army, taking into account the fact that there will be no war in 1941 =

                        And without the reorganization of the Red Army, would it have fought off the Germans more successfully? Just like in Finland, huh? The Red Army was the bottom with or without reorganization. That's all the explanation.

                        = (Germans are not ready, and this is absolutely true). =

                        And this "not ready" was enough for 1941/42.
                      2. chenia
                        chenia April 25 2021 08: 43
                        -1
                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        Especially to the people outside the hefty advanced capital

                        In general, I think the monarchy is not the worst system of government. But how lucky? Nikolashka is not Alexander III. If the king really had a will, it could be different. And Ylita always needs to be kept in black knots, and publicly arrange executions (people love it), otherwise as in Poland, the gentry is all about ... la. Yes, and it happened with us.

                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        How did Comrade Stalin's inner circle at the XX Congress love it? Is it smaller? Generals - comrade. Zhukov, for example?

                        To get oneself out of the control of the punitive organs is the dream of any Ylita.
                        There was Zhukov, there was also Rokossovsky. But on the whole (in the absolute majority) in the army, Stalin was loved and respected.

                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        And the real merit there is not Brusilov at all.

                        Not anymore? Is he not involved at all? Obviously, this is Colonel Romanov's plan.

                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        Remind the ratio of non-return for that technique?


                        Yes, I already know (from your sources) near Prokhorovka, we lost 500 tanks, Germans 3. And they knocked out all our BT equipment on Kursk. And so everywhere.

                        But as a professional it is somewhat unclear to me how, as a result of a strategic offensive (this is also a nuance, which by default assumes a certain state of the grouping of troops), without losses (only we suffered losses, well, according to you) the Germans in four months ended up in 550 km to the west.
                        they did not keep what they had achieved.
                        they did not keep the original
                        they did not keep the intermediate
                        they did not hold such a line as the Dnieper
                        they did not hold their position beyond the Dnieper.
                        Well, the truth is, at the end of our offensive, Zhitomir was recaptured.
                        And all this without armored vehicles on carts and scooters.
                        By the way, Kluge and Model quickly understood. that they would rake off and stop the offensive, than siogli to save themselves from defeat and subsequently detain ours. True, in a year (under Bush) they will have their full).

                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        I'll just give you the composition

                        The question was not answered. Organizationally, what is the link in the structure?
                        and what's in the box?
                        Once you criticize, then you know how to do it.


                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        about the sacred knowledge of a garrison officer (at best). It will be funny.


                        With two higher ones. Well, let's laugh.

                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        And without the reorganization of the Red Army, would it have fought off the Germans more successfully?

                        Again, you do not grasp the nuances. Reorganization of the Red Army, taking into account that there will be NO war in 1941.
                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        And this "not ready" was enough for 1941/42.

                        They are very lucky.
                      3. Alarmist79
                        Alarmist79 April 25 2021 18: 25
                        0
                        If the king really had a will, it could be different. And Ylita should always be kept in black knots, and publicly arrange executions (people love it), otherwise as in Poland - the gentry is all about ... la. =

                        1. It remains to find how many supporters of this position among the loyalists, and not the repulsed revolutionaries. For the same mutiny on "Potemkin" with murders hanged 2 (in words - two) person. The notorious Stolypin tie is 1102 sentenced and 683 executed innocent Rafik during rampant terrorism and riots.

                        2. To accept the fact that it will make an absolutely hellish impression abroad with well-predictable consequences.

                        3. That is, the costs were obvious, but there was no afterthought. At the same time, the precedents of the overthrow of the monarch after the victorious year of the war (1916) are generally difficult to remember. The Russian yylita was trivially frostbitten, for it was not frightened. In Europe, it was the same 1848, but the first Russian was suppressed too successfully.

                        = But on the whole (in the absolute majority), Stalin was loved and respected in the army. =
                        1. In practice, when trying to pinch the presumptuous Zhukov, Stalin faced the opposition of the marshals already in 1946.
                        2. Well, while a coup was being carried out at headquarters in 1917, the troops were completely moving towards Petrograd.

                        = Not already? Is he not involved at all? Obviously, this is Colonel Romanov's plan. =

                        The colonel provided the guns and shells, how to handle them - also not Brusilov at all. Brusilov, after the initial success, provided jambs already at the planning stage and THIS, for which he was actively driven around the table before canonization.
                        “So, General A. A. Brusilov did not dare to go over to an independent operation, although the Headquarters gave him carte blanche for this (at least in relation to three armies, with the exception of the 8th, which fettered the enemy near Kovel). the same was repeated by his subordinate, commander-11, General AA Sakharov. And therefore, "the main idea of ​​the command of the Southwestern Front - not to be the front that inflicts the main blow, was stubbornly carried out, despite the colossal success of the offensive ...
                        And, naturally, Nikolai was to blame for all Brusilov's numerous projections and the disrupted development of the offensive. Especially Brusilov turned out to be, of course.

                        = Yes, I already know (from your sources) near Prokhorovka, we lost 500 tanks, Germans 3. =
                        Our non-return is 183. In general, along the arc 1 to 4

                        = And they kicked out all our BT equipment at Kurskaya. And so everywhere. =

                        Do we attribute our own fantasies to our opponent, then angrily refute them?

                        = But as a professional, it is somewhat unclear to me how, as a result of a strategic offensive (this is also a nuance, which by default assumes a certain state of the grouping of forces), without losses (only we suffered losses, well, according to you)=

                        See above. And in what field are you a professional? Political instructor?

                        = the Germans were 550 km to the west in four months =

                        1. The same battle for the Dnieper is one of the bloodiest, 400+ thousand, officially Krivosheevsky, 1/10 to the official German.
                        2. There was progress. 1/4 of tanks for the Red Army is very cool.
                        3. Plus (and not mainly kagby) you forgot about Lend-Lease and the threat to the Germans from the west + Air Force losses in the same place.
                        We're watching.
                        Aircraft. The allies stabilized the size of the aviation group in the VF and, at the same time, by the middle of the 43rd set modern fighters in 3/4 of this grouping.
                        Own production of airplanes in 43 increased by almost one and a half times, and 56% of aluminum was imported.
                        Those. Benedict dances of backlash are over. Actually, this is already enough for a huge shift, allowing you to attack in the battle mode near Moscow in the summer.
                        Tanks.
                        1. Exchange of tanks 1 to 4 is an achievement and a fierce reward. In 41st it was 1 to 7, 42nd 1 to 6.
                        2. Production of tanks some has grown. Symmetrically with about 20% increase in steel production due to imports of equipment.
                        3. The production of tanks in Germany for the 43rd increased by 1,5 times (ie, the priority was aviation). However, a) the mighty 1/4 b) quite a lot went to Italy and to guard the coast to France.

                        = The question was not answered. =

                        The question was about the disadvantages. Fiercely cut air defense is already above the roof. Lack of infantry, artillery, PTA trucks - too.

                        = Organizationally, what is the link in the structure? If you criticize, then you know how to do it. =

                        The very minimum - we take and really lick from the Wehrmacht. Given the fact that air defense is formally in the Luftwaffe.

                        = With two higher ones. Well, let's laugh. =
                        And how does this relate to football in 1940?

                        = Again, you do not grasp the nuances. Reorganization of the Red Army, taking into account that there will be NO war in 1941. =
                        AND? RKKA 1940, the bottom is worse than the 41st.

                        = They are very lucky. =

                        They were very unlucky. The same Finnish one added shapkozakidatelstva to the Wehrmacht, while the ideas about the economic geography of the USSR by the 41st were phantom (the total predominance of Donbass in heavy industry). It is unlikely that these cockroaches would have lingered until the 42nd.
                        from. In 1942, the Wehrmacht's tank fleet would have had a noticeably different composition, etc.
                        At the same time, without the Finnish lessons, we would have lost the winter campaign of the 41st.
                      4. chenia
                        chenia April 25 2021 20: 48
                        0
                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        1. It remains to find how many supporters of such a position among the loyalists,


                        There was a war going on, and all the liberals could be pissed off under this. This is exactly what the military demanded.

                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        1. In practice, when trying to pinch the presumptuous Zhukov, Stalin faced the opposition of the marshals already in 1946.

                        There was no strong opposition, but the military was needed, a new stage of confrontation with the West began. Therefore, they fumbled Zhukov (and deservedly so) in the secondary districts and returned.

                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        Nikolai was to blame for all Brusilov's numerous projections and the disrupted development of the offensive.

                        Well yes! but at least there was success there. But the failures in the Polar Division to whom we will blame.

                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        In total along the arc 1 to 4


                        Vo.v. with such losses and why did they flew over the Dnieper. But Kluge and Model were able to hold back the offensive of our three fronts (by suspending the offensive on the northern face).
                        Why? Not interested?
                        The Germans have a bucket of nuts and bolts left from the tank, then the tank is not lost.
                        In Hungary, 6 TA SS also reported the loss of 40 tanks. Ours began to attack and found 400 broken-down tanks (which they did not manage to throw into the open-hearth furnaces of the Reich). that you can not really believe them.

                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        Fiercely cut air defense is already above the roof. Lack of infantry, artillery, PTA trucks - too.


                        Clear. And how much noise. Nichrome you did not understand. We didn’t have much air defense afterwards.
                        The main thing here is to cover the columns on the march. And it was necessary to have machine guns from 14,5 to 57 mm, but all this will be after the war.

                        Lack of infantry? What are you drinking. MK 40 must have an MSD or MD. And in the TD there is one SME (small business or at least a joint venture) And no more is needed. The Germans do not have a TD just a tank.
                        Artillery - Not so important when the tanks themselves have guns. ADN appeared in TP only in the early 80s.
                        PTA- generally laughing off-screen. We still do not have a PT subdivision (IPTADN) in the TD, but PT batteries in the TP. And fuck it unnecessary.
                        Well, trucks from the national economy.
                        But that's not the point. fuck you do not understand this. And don't be puffed up. The further you go, the funnier you look.
                        The bottom line is. that they did not understand that there is MK. This is the formation of the development of success, and the Germans performed the role of breakthrough formations and shock functions (hence their infantry and artillery), and had to develop success.
                        While the defense was unstable, everything was going with a bang (France), they halved the more correct organization of the TD with the TBR on two tank regiments (and it was already rolling) and the TD turned into more mechanized ..
                        In our country (though later) the TA performed these functions on rare occasions. And so basically, in the operational subordination of the front, they were already introduced into the breakthrough. This is what I mean. that MK is just right for this (it was necessary to correct it a little at the conservatory - the question was about this)
                        The main principle is more wheels, barrels and fewer mouths.
                        And on the issue of help, there was no controllability, one link interfered. And look at the state of the modern TP (well, at least the Soviet one).

                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        And in what field are you a professional? Political instructor?

                        You're out of luck - the team faculty (although you yourself could understand)
                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        They were very unlucky.

                        They were lucky. You did not understand here either. They attacked in the midst of an organizational leapfrog, the creation of huge formations, the redeployment of units and formations, confusion with personnel, a complete mess with the OShS, and the absence of BP.
                        And as a result, our troops of constant readiness were unable to suspend the enemy's offensive and gain time for deployment, combat coordination and the creation of combat teams of troops of reduced strength and newly formed for mobilization ..
                      5. Alarmist79
                        Alarmist79 April 28 2021 13: 47
                        0
                        = There was a war, and under this it was possible to pry on all the liberals. =
                        The public liberals were holier than the Pope, demanding war to the bitter end. Accusing the environment of H2 ("the German queen", etc.)

                        = This is exactly what the military demanded. =
                        Somewhat massively after February.

                        = There was no strong opposition, but the military was needed, a new stage of confrontation with the West began. Therefore, they fumbled Zhukov (and deservedly so) in secondary districts and returned. =

                        And comrade. Stalin wanted more. Moreover, the case was after the won Comrade. Stalin's war. And then Comrade Zhyukov shot Lavrenty, brought Khrushchev to power and fought against the cult, which is typical. General secretary-rag was, in general, Comrade. Stalin.

                        = Well yes! but at least there was success there. But the failures in the Polar Division, to whom we will blame. =

                        Mostly the Germans. The Germans built an echeloned defense, the Austrians did not. Well, plus the frostbitten Kaiser Germans - not Schweiks at all.

                        = Vo.vo with such losses and why did they fly over the Dnieper. =

                        They were already 1,66 times less at the start of their own offensive, have you forgotten? Then the loss was 10%, with the wounded all 30%.

                        = But Kluge and Model were able to hold back the offensive of our three fronts (by suspending the offensive on the northern face). Why? Not interested? =

                        No, I already know that. Among other things, the main blow of the Red Army was in the south. Etc.

                        = For the Germans, if a bucket of nuts and bolts is left of the tank, then the tank is not lost. =
                        In this reality, they managed to restore some of the tanks already recorded in non-return ... at the front. "In the period from 3 to the morning of August 23, she irrevocably lost 20 tanks, of which: Pz.II - 4, Pz.III - 11, Pz.IV - 3, Pz.Kfz.265-1, Pz.Kfz.266– 268-1, but at the same time 3 heavily damaged Pz.I tanks were restored, which were considered irretrievably lost. " Etc.

                        = In Hungary, 6 TA SS also reported the loss of 40 tanks. Ours began to attack and found 400 broken-down tanks =

                        belay Actually 986. But there is one little nuance In this area, from November 1944 to March 1945, the battles were actually going on. There were only three German offensives.

                        = (which did not have time to throw in the open-hearth furnaces of the Reich). =

                        With what joy "in open-hearth furnaces". Do not pass off your fantasies as reality.

                        = So. that you can not really believe them. =
                        Ours regarding German losses? Of course not. As well as the Germans in relation to ours.

                        = I see. And how much noise. Nichrome you did not understand. We didn’t have much air defense afterwards.
                        The main thing here is to cover the columns on the march. And it was necessary to have machine guns from 14,5 to 57 mm, but all this will be after the war. =

                        Those. the worse the air defense is, the less anti-aircraft guns are needed? And not on the march you don't need cover? Well, in principle, everyone knows what the plans for the SA offensive to the English Channel cost.

                        = Lack of infantry? What are you drinking. =
                        Arithmetic textbook

                        = The MK 40 must have an MSD or MD. And in the TD there is one SME (small business or at least a joint venture) And no more is needed .. =
                        Well, from this approach, and Grozny. Taking into account the fact that the first line is about half, this is for separating the fir into the tank. Further in the offensive, the squad is halved - the fir is gentle and sensitive - and the tanks are burning in the depths of the defense. As in reality it was.

                        = Artillery -Not so important when the tanks themselves have guns. =

                        Howitzers? And this is the key.

                        = PTA- generally laughing off-screen =

                        Well, how do you know that in defense they are more effective than tanks, and the main losses from them.

                        = But that's not the point. fuck you do not understand this. And don't be puffed up.
                        =
                        You are generally at the level of a fifth grader, which is typical.

                        = The bottom line is. that they did not understand that there is MK. This is the formation of the development of success, =
                        Under the bombs and before the first counterattack or the entrenched fir? Well, that's how it happened.

                        = You're out of luck - the team faculty (although you yourself could understand) =

                        Fortunately, I know what you were taught there, so I will not remember the head of the warehouse. Soviet officers, in principle, are cheap disposable, but we have gone too far with this.

                        = And as a result, our troops of constant readiness were unable to stop the enemy offensive =
                        Would they have been able to do it in 1940? Finnish and Polish march on the face. At the same time, no one forced the same mechanized corps in those quantities of Soviet leaders to rivet, and the swing was such that they would not have figured it out by the 42nd.
                      6. chenia
                        chenia April 28 2021 14: 31
                        -1
                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        General secretary-rag was, in general, Comrade. Stalin.


                        Well yes. Even now, at the mention of his name, a certain part of our society is cheated.

                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        And comrade. Stalin wanted more.

                        If I wanted to, I would.
                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        but at the same time 3 heavily damaged Pz.I tanks were restored, which were considered irretrievably lost. "Etc.

                        I almost believe it. Well, to fly 550 km and not hold the Dnieper (in October 1943 we had a couple of dozen bridgeheads, where the army could be located), that was how many troops to lose. They kept Rzhev in a semi-encirclement for a year, and did not retreat as a result of the offensive. And if they had prepared a defensive operation, so many forces and resources would not have been needed. And where did they go?


                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        In this area, from November 1944 to March 1945, battles were actually going on.


                        Two tank armies and two field armies attacked 3 UV (partly 2 UV). Not the strongest front without a tank army (given already during the offensive on Vienna). 400 tanks is the loss of 6 TA SS. (This is the one that made the Allies in the Ardennes). But here the Germans have superiority in all components (except for artillery), and the tanks are not T-1, T-2, T-3 and early T-4, but mostly a menagerie. And ... (30) km, and the lads disappeared.
                        PT systems are mainly M-42, ZIS-2, ZIS-3, sometimes BS-3. The truth and self-propelled vehicles attracted.

                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        And don't you need cover not on the march?

                        If in the initial areas, then they are dispersed and disguised, and in defense too. And if we attack, then such superiority in forces and means is created ... as Comrade Zhukov said, they do not report on the enemy.

                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        Further in the offensive, the squad is halved - the fir is tender and sensitive - and the tanks are burning deep in the defense.

                        What are you talking about?
                        After the regiment passed 1,5 km (this was then, now twice as much) into the depth of the enemy's defense, almost all the dowries are taken from him and then the task of the division is pulled by the next regiment, and he weaves on the catch (scientifically helps to ensure the completion of the task of the day divisions). Then this happens to the division (then it is 5-6 km.)
                        What did you think from the line of attack to Berlin in one regiment?
                      7. chenia
                        chenia April 28 2021 15: 44
                        +1
                        Quote: chenia
                        Howitzers? And this is the key


                        Are you the gunner? It's funny though. Yes, I do not mind. But (will be below).
                        Quote: Alarmist79

                        Well, how do you know that in defense they are more effective than tanks?

                        Well, how do I know? Tank in the trench 1 to 10-12 as a fire support helicopter. PT artillery 1 to 4 (and even then this is T-12 for tanks of the M-60 type). This is not me, these are standards.

                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        Under the bombs and before the first counterattack or the entrenched fir? Well, that's how it happened.


                        In the offensive, after entering the breakthrough (at high rates, and not like the Germans near Kursk, when we had time to transfer the anti-tank defense and sapper regiments to the prepared lines), the TA meet only focal resistance (I repeat at high rates) or pushing army (or remnants of corps ) reserves.
                        Already at the planning stage, superiority in forces and means is laid.
                        So, no echeloned defense (which must be torn apart with a mass of artillery - howitzers.

                        Again, you do not fucking understand. The German TDs are essentially breakthrough divisions, and the formations performed shock functions. And here it is divided.
                        Therefore, we tore (subsequently) a strong, persistent and experienced Wehrmacht.
                        And they have nothing after the Kursk.

                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        cheap disposable, but we have gone too far with that.

                        Well, this is from civilian universities. took a course at the military department, and they think that they have grasped the essence of military affairs. And then they powder their brains with their fantasies. Heard the ringing, not knowing where he was. And here they really overdid it.


                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        At the same time, no one forced the same mechanized corps in those quantities of Soviet leaders to rivet, and the swing was such that they would not have figured it out by the 42nd.

                        I agree with this. The guys went into a rage. GIVE and A LOT. This is how many general positions. An army of 25 divisions, 300. Yes, at least the MK was driven out and the reason for its complete lack of control was found. Everything is on the surface. And not the number of posts will decrease. let them give, and then we'll figure it out.
                        Zhukov (Meretskov managed a little) to press out.
                      8. Alarmist79
                        Alarmist79 April 30 2021 12: 47
                        0
                        = AT artillery 1 to 4 (and even then this is T-12 for tanks of the M-60 type). This is not me, these are standards. =

                        But the mechanized corps still needs PT artillery, yeah.

                        = On the offensive, after entering the breakout (at high rates) =

                        Where the mechanized corps will start bombing everything that flies. Moreover, for a convoy with fuel, etc. any maize grower is dangerous.

                        = TA meet only focal resistance =

                        The enemy is "well, stupid" and has no reserves. Or there is.

                        = Again, you fucking misunderstood. =

                        And the Headquarters didn't understand anything until the 45th, yeah. And only the proud owner of two higher ...

                        = Therefore, we tore (subsequently) a strong, persistent and experienced Wehrmacht. =

                        Tore what? Mechanized corps arr 1941? Schaz.
                        "At the end of the war, a three-corps tank army in the state had over 50 thousand personnel, 850-920 tanks and self-propelled guns, about 800 guns and mortars, more than 5 thousand vehicles. "

                        Those. the number of l / s per tank is up to two times higher.

                        = Well, this is from civilian universities. took a course at the military department, and they think that they have grasped the essence of military affairs. And then they powder their brains with their fantasies. =

                        Well, the personnel also trained cheaply and poorly, see above.
                      9. chenia
                        chenia April 30 2021 14: 29
                        0
                        Quote: Alarmist79

                        But the mechanized corps still needs PT artillery, yeah.

                        Quote: Alarmist79

                        Where the mechanized corps will start bombing everything that flies

                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        The enemy is "well, stupid" and has no reserves. Or there is.


                        I repeat
                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        = Again, you fucking misunderstood. =


                        And as you understand, you are an amazing shot, instead. to thank for the training. still trying to be rude.

                        In MK Two TD and one MSD (MD) (or SD). And each AP has two TPs and one MRP (MP). MSD (MD) has one TP and two MRP (MP).
                        In total, there are five TPs and four infantry regiments in MK.
                        In my time, in general, it changed in favor of tank forces at the TD for three tank regiments, one motorized rifle (although an SMB appeared in the TP).

                        about artillery tanks - only for infantry at SMRs (this applies to a tank division). There was no divisional PT in the TD artillery (and still is).
                        No one will bomb easily (this is an offensive, and if the event (preparation) was carried out with due secrecy, the offensive itself was at a high pace, then a significant superiority in forces and means is created in this sector of the front and air cover is provided in an overwhelming amount.

                        Again if
                        "... was carried out with due secrecy, the offensive itself was at a high pace ..",
                        then the formation of the development of success may clash with army or front-line (army groups for the Wehrmacht) reserves. And rarely with corps.
                        All of them were late (if the specified conditions are met), the density of defense there drops sharply. And if they do, it is a focal and hastily occupied defense (for artillery, the consumption is three times less than for a pre-occupied one).

                        You did not understand the main thing
                        Understand the differences between breakout formations and success development (at the frontline level).
                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        Tore what? Mechanized corps arr 1941? Schaz.


                        I asked you to identify the weak link in MK 40. And they knew about it then, but so far the more the better. And then it's always easier to do less out of more. Did not make it.
                        And this is not artillery (which was enough), and not infantry, well, especially not anti-tank weapons.
                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        Well, personnel also trained cheaply and badly.


                        In which regiment did you serve ....?
                      10. Alarmist79
                        Alarmist79 1 May 2021 01: 58
                        0
                        = And as I understand you are an amazing shot, instead of. to thank for the training. still trying to be rude. =

                        A Soviet officer trying to teach someone is ridiculous in itself. That a junior officer is an analogue of a western non-commissioned officer, and a senior, accordingly, is a common place in some kind of involved get-together, accept it. Hence the ultra-rigid vertical and full-fledged planning only from the division level.

                        = In total, there are five TP and four infantry regiments in MK. =

                        Those. compartment for the tank. Which, of course, turned out to be complete schizophrenia and the structure was revised.

                        = about PT artillery - only for infantry at SMR (this applies to a tank division). There was no divisional tank destroyer in the TD artillery (and still is).

                        It is generally not clear how to comment. "Divisional PT" is a fierce ersatz to begin with.
                        The late Soviet tank crews just had a normal PTA, including a self-propelled one. Moreover, from the 43rd, even only towed was increased radically.

                        = No one will bomb easily (this is an offensive, and if the event (preparation) was carried out with due secrecy, the offensive itself was at a high pace, then a significant superiority in forces and means is created in this sector of the front and air cover is provided in an overwhelming amount. =

                        Those. a giant army air defense after the war - is it a whim? So in this reality, and not in the country of Soviet ponies, even in the ideal case with radars and an equivalent quality of the Air Force, the reaction time of fighter aircraft is quite LONG. At the same time, we did not have a qualitatively equivalent Air Force in the 80s. Plywood of 1941 was generally not an enemy for backlashes, but food.

                        = I asked you to identify the weak link in MK 40. =
                        All the links are weak there.

                        = In which regiment did you serve ....? =
                        Relatives served. Specifically, in the Red Army - even from the civilian. And before the Second World War, by the way, too.
                      11. chenia
                        chenia 1 May 2021 07: 41
                        0
                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        A Soviet officer trying to teach someone is ridiculous in itself

                        They did not serve in the army .. as there, I didn’t read. but I condemn ..
                        Where does the information come from, from the manuals, or have heard enough anecdotes.

                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        "Divisional PT" is a fierce ersatz to begin with.

                        The term shows the subordination of the formation, a simple thing is time to know.
                        The TD does not have a PT division (but the MSD does). TP (this is a regimental TP) does not have a TP battery (but an SME does), and this is a modern structure.
                        There is a chance to improve, quickly run to the General Staff with a proposal. The order will not be given, but a kick is possible.

                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        All the links are weak there.

                        Complete misunderstanding.
                        Tank regiment MK40 four battalions, and 5 tanks (4 in heavy) in platoons. -Extremely difficult to control from a platoon (especially without a radio).
                        We bring to the structure of TA 42 (it was still being polished there) and we get a three battalion regiment in the TK in the TBR (the early TBR in the TP-two battalions).
                        If you do not pay attention to the ranks, it almost corresponds to the modern OShS .. We reached this point in blood during the war (we would have reached it by holding a full-scale MK 40 exercise (which was planned for the fall of 1941).
                        And this means three tanks in platoons, and three battalions in a regiment.
                        TP would have 94 tanks (as it is now), and MK would have 480 main tanks and about a hundred in combat support units. That is, the MK could have up to 600 (not more than a thousand) tanks. And they saw it even then. But they did not have time.

                        And you're drooling here.
                      12. Alarmist79
                        Alarmist79 1 May 2021 14: 50
                        0
                        = Where does the information come from, from the manuals, or have heard enough anecdotes. =
                        I will repeat myself. Relatives either served in the army, or developed military transport aviation, and the "or" clearly shows what niche the owners of such and such bad heredity usually occupied.

                        = The term shows the subordination of the formation, a simple thing is time to know. =
                        Those. don't you even know that the term has two meanings? And I didn't understand the logic - do you deny that the number of PTAs has grown sharply since 1943 with fewer tanks?

                        = There is no AT division in the TD (but there is in the MSD). TP (this is a regimental TP) does not have a TP battery (but the MRP does). And this is a modern structure. =
                        And what does the current situation, when anti-tank artillery exist mainly due to poverty, have to do with 1941?

                        = There is a chance to improve, quickly run to the General Staff with a proposal. =
                        He'll figure it out himself. Current structure under local wars with the Papuans, under "Abrasha" will have to be revised.

                        = Reducing to structure =
                        And, of course, we get trash, incapable of independent action at all. The loss of the USSR in tanks aka the rate of their "consumption" even in 43/44 remind? This is not counting the shortage of qualified command personnel.
                        You don't see that in the mirror, do you?


                        = And you're drooling here. =
                        What other invaluable ideas do you have, ponies?
                      13. chenia
                        chenia 1 May 2021 16: 42
                        0
                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        Those. don't you even know that the term has two meanings?

                        Divisional PT artillery (as I submitted, now it is PT res. Division) and PT artillery of a division are different things. Just like divisional artillery and divisional artillery.
                        I repeat this is not the same thing. (this is both private and general).
                        And more PT units in tank troops was not and now is not. Only in MSP TD there is an ATGM battery (as it should be for SMEs) and that's it.

                        And in the war, the AT means developed (in the companies of the AT, the battalions of M-42, and that's all!) (and this is already from 1941), and to the rifle regiments completely. BP training and tactics at the unit level (in a subunit with a unit of another type of troops, it is always flawed) is polished exclusively. So we burned their tanks after Kursk.

                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        And, of course, we get trash, completely incapable of independent actions.

                        Implementation in TA worked out. Or you have other information.

                        Quote: Alarmist79
                        Relatives either served in the army

                        I just understand that not everyone graduated from VU, and even more so from VA. And that's why I'm trying to explain some elementary things that any officer picks up by default. For example, if a war is (declared), a different level of combat training of troops is launched than even with a full battlefield (which the district commander can also declare). The frame on the branch asked me everything about the BUS, but this event was aimed not so much for the BP, but more for the improvement of the newly formed structures.
                        Then it is more important to look at the state of constant readiness troops and 6-thousand divisions (divisions of reduced strength M-15). Which should have bought time to deploy connections with other mob. Terms.
          2. Alarmist79
            Alarmist79 April 30 2021 12: 22
            0
            = Well, yes. Even now, at the mention of his name, a certain part of our society cheats. =

            A certain part of society simply does not know very well that the survival strategy for comrade. Stalin - to systematically lie, while not slipping into obvious Manilovism.

            = If I wanted to, I would. =
            Actually, the accusations were about the formation of a group of disgruntled military men by Zhukov. And this was by no means a demotion. So, don't be such a rag for the secretary general ...

            = I almost believe. Well, to fly 550 km and not hold the Dnieper (in October 1943 we had a couple of dozen bridgeheads, where the army could be located), it was necessary how many troops to lose. =

            This will be a revelation for you, but for a quick retreat there is no need to incur heavy losses at all. Enough that there was nothing to plug the holes in the front. With a strong enemy superiority, the army either rolls back or is surrounded.
            Now one more time, slowly and letter by letter. The Red Army was initially 1,66 times superior to the Wehrmacht.
            At the same time, 70 thousand, together with the wounded in the offensive part of the Battle of Kursk, is already a third of the advancing group.


            = They kept Rzhev in a semi-encirclement for a year, and they did not retreat as a result of an offensive. =

            Well, Rzhev is not even Chinese volunteers in Korea. This is a combination of the absence of, for the most part, any noticeable artillery support with blockhead tactics, which the Chinese who were skilled in tactics did not suffer from.

            = Two tank armies and two field armies attacked 3 UV (partly 2 UV). =
            And this is the third offensive.

            = Not the strongest front without a tank army (given already during the attack on Vienna). 400 tanks is a loss of 6 TA SS. =

            And according to its official reports, destroyed 42, damaged 396, the battlefield for the USSR. What does this have to do with the verbiage about the underestimation of irrecoverable losses in the internal documents of the Wehrmacht? And even more so to the "open-hearth"? There are a bunch of almost whole, or even abandoned, equipment in the photographs.


            = (this is the one that made allies in the Ardennes) =
            As it is doubtful "did".

            = If in the initial areas, then they are dispersed and disguised, and in defense too. And if we attack, then such superiority in forces and means is created ... as Comrade Zhukov said, they do not report on the enemy. =


            What a formidable pony. And if you need to quickly launch a counterstrike and repulse something? Cover yourself with a white sheet and crawl to the cemetery, right?

            = What are you talking about?
            After the regiment =
            Are you 1031 tanks gathered to support the regiment? Half an infantryman per tank (approximately 1/2 is the second line)? I repeat, to detach to the tank, you need to use the entire furry of the mechanized corps minus the "servants" and co.

            = passed 1,5 km (this was then, now twice as much) into the depth of the enemy's defense, =
            Pink ponies wpg. The infantry "by squad per vehicle" will be halved when the first line of defense is broken through, even with losses of one killed per squad and a half.

            = and then the task of the division is pulled by the next regiment, =
            But you do not have the next regiment. And the dancers are harnessing on the second or third line.
          3. chenia
            chenia April 30 2021 14: 58
            0
            No need for Stalin. Russia, thanks to his legacy, still exists.

            Quote: Alarmist79
            but for a swift retreat there is no need at all to suffer great losses. Enough that there was nothing to plug the holes in the front.


            This has been true since the summer of 1944, two strategic operations (in the main direction) and we are near Berlin. Third and red flag over the Reichstag.
            Therefore, the Fuhrer ordered the creation of fortress cities. And then Schultz surrender unkilled, and the Fuhrer and cyanide take a control in the head.

            Quote: Alarmist79
            There are a bunch of almost whole, or even abandoned, equipment in the photographs.

            And even the SS did not want to fight. But 6 TA was noted in the Ardennes (the superiority of the allies is 2,5 times in all components). Breakthrough 100 km and then (a month later) the Germans retreated to the original.
            Quote: Alarmist79
            You 1031 tank regiment gathered to support


            About the organization of MK 40 was higher (there are four infantry regiments, five tank regiments). this time.
            The second I talked about the breakthrough division regiment, not the infantry unit of the MK, (they have similar actions, but different tasks).

            Quote: Alarmist79
            And the dancers are harnessing on the second or third line.

            There is no third line, there is an accelerated DRAP. (I have already said two strategic operations and we are from Belarus already near Berlin (and count the time of operations, not preparation.)

            But I'm tired. There will be questions and problems with understanding. open the sergeant's textbook.
          4. Alarmist79
            Alarmist79 1 May 2021 00: 45
            0
            = Don't talk about Stalin. Russia, thanks to his legacy, still exists. =
            True, he turned into a critically important character precisely due to the fact that by 1929, through the efforts of who knows who, everything looked extremely sour.

            = This has been true since the summer of 1944, two strategic operations (in the main direction) and we are near Berlin. Third and red flag over the Reichstag.
            Therefore, the Fuhrer ordered the creation of fortress cities. =

            The idea of ​​festungs is the spring of 1944, just following the results of 1943.

            = And even the SS did not want to fight. =

            Everything is much simpler. As if the Hungarian Pashta is a completely natural steppe with black soil, spring is spring, and Balaton is an omadjar Slavic "swamp. In other words, mud and mud all around."

            = About the organization of MK 40 was higher (there are four infantry regiments, five tank regiments). this time. =

            And this is a very specific compartment for a tank. See further above.

            = Second, I talked about the regiment of the breakthrough division, not the infantry unit of the MK, (they have similar actions, but different tasks). =
            A breakthrough division in WWII is a big pile of guns, basically. What does she have to do with it?

            = There is no third line, there is an accelerated DRAP. =
            Oh, those ponies.

            = (I have already said two strategic operations and we are from Belarus already near Berlin (and count the time of operations, not preparation.) =

            Vistula - Oder - it takes twenty days, in the process of trenches only the very lazy will not dig up. Moreover, in addition to the open ones.
            "The enemy prepared seven defensive lines between the Vistula and the Oder, echeloned at 300-500 km ... The first, the Vistula defensive line, consisted of four zones with a total depth of 30 to 70 km. Subsequent defensive lines consisted of one or two lines of trenches and separate support lines. points ".

            = There will be questions and problems with understanding. open the sergeant's textbook. =
            Judging by the contemptuous tone, are there problems with the sergeant's functionality?
          5. chenia
            chenia 1 May 2021 07: 56
            0
            Quote: Alarmist79
            Hungarian Pashta is a completely natural steppe


            Believe it or not, I lived there (Szekesfehervar, Fertod) and the roads are beautiful there.
            by the way, and when the TA was thrown to Tolbukhin, the weather did not interfere with the attack on Vienna ?.
            Quote: Alarmist79
            Oh, those ponies.

            You have no idea at the tactical level (when did you see an advancing company in battle formation?) About the battalion, or the regiment is generally silent.
            And you are pulling on the operational one.
            Calm down, drink a laxative, and delusional thoughts will pass by themselves (you will think of only one thing, how to make it happen.
            And keep it simple.
            It did not work to enlighten at least somehow.
          6. Alarmist79
            Alarmist79 1 May 2021 13: 47
            0
            = Believe it or not, I lived there (Szekesfehervar, Fertod) and the roads are beautiful there. =
            (triple facepalm) One of the key problems of the German offensive is precisely that tanks could only move normally on roads. There are plenty of photos with a sea of ​​mud around.




            Such fun, with a sharp decrease in the mobility of tanks, greatly facilitates the defense (you can overlap a rather narrow area) and sharply increase the loss of advancing armor (the movement of targets in columns is a dream of artillery, aviation and anti-tank defense).
            In principle, the Germans fell for the same near Moscow.


            = by the way, and when the TA was thrown to Tolbukhin, the weather did not interfere with the attack on Vienna?. =
            I was still in the way
            "The sudden and powerful artillery fire stunned the enemy so that in some areas he initially did not offer resistance. However, soon, regaining command of the troops and using the favorable conditions of the area, the German command was able to organize resistance at intermediate defensive positions and stop the advance of Soviet troops. "
            A month crawled about 200 km. At the same time, the cross-country ability of Soviet technology is still somewhat better.

            = You have no idea of ​​the tactical level (when did you see an advancing company in battle formation?) =
            Was this question seriously asked? Brilliant. Only the blind did not see her in our harsh time of universal television.
            In essence, there is nothing to say, of course.
            Calm down and drink a laxative. You can't do elementary tactics either - see above - just live with it.
          7. chenia
            chenia 1 May 2021 17: 27
            0
            Quote: Alarmist79
            Only the blind did not see her in our harsh time of universal television.

            On TV, well, convincingly.

            And for example artillery fire from the PDO - Fire Strike (one hundred shots for the battery) and how many times does the command "Fire" sound at the OP?
            Answer Options
            1.not once
            2.One time
            3. every time the gun is fired.
  • Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
    Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 11: 18
    0
    Or it is possible - and necessary - to put it more concretely: it was in 1941 that the Soviet Union defeated Germany.

    "I asked myself - is he a fool? .." (c)


    As far as I understand, following the author's logic, Britain defeated the Reich in Dunkirk ...
  • The comment was deleted.
  • EvilLion
    EvilLion April 23 2021 11: 34
    +2
    In fact, this idea was voiced by Elena Prudnikova, who was not too lazy to investigate what the Red Army was like before the Second World War, and she has one question there, not why the 41st happened, it could not fail to happen, but how we won the war.
  • Foul skeptic
    Foul skeptic April 23 2021 11: 39
    +3
    All are strong in hindsight ... And I also wonder where to find partners in chess, when here, on the forum, a strategist drives a strategist to a strategist. God would be thanked that they were not in the place of those people who had to make decisions at that time. Interestingly, there are generally many people among the "battle-fighters of both ideological fronts" who have or had to lead something?
  • dgonni
    dgonni April 23 2021 14: 38
    -2
    That is, the author considers 1941-1942 victorious years?
    3.8 million according to Deutsche data. Stalin in his speech in 45 spoke of the losses of 3.6 million prisoners.
    Well, the phrase said by Stalin in the same speech! We won with steel!
    This is just about the industry in the Urals and beyond!
    Only if someone thinks that the evacuation went off with a bang? And like everything was evacuated?
    It was partially evacuated and placed on the sites planned for new plants.
    Machine-tool equipment was partially removed. But a machine without equipment is a piece of scrap metal.
    And in fact, the basis of machine parks such as waxed factories was made up of supplies of machine tools looking for the same states!
    The same applies to the rolling stock of railways.
    And so it was not a disaster but a complete apocalypse!
  • NF68
    NF68 April 23 2021 15: 59
    0
    If this was not a disaster, then what, according to the author, was it at all?
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov April 23 2021 16: 20
    +3
    Quote: Pessimist22
    What are the pitiful excuses, and who is to blame for the fact that in 6 months of fighting, 3 million prisoners and two million killed and wounded, a huge part of the country with industrial potential and population fell under occupation?

    Where do you see the excuses? The one who unconditionally surrendered is looking for excuses, not winners.
    And who is to blame for the fact that the USSR did not have time to completely overcome the centuries-old lag of Tsarist Russia in 13 years?
    1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
      Paragraph Epitafievich Y. April 23 2021 17: 09
      -1
      Quote: Kostadinov
      And who is to blame for the fact that the USSR did not have time to completely overcome the centuries-old lag of Tsarist Russia in 13 years?

      1941 - 13 = 1928.
      Can you tell us more about the "secular lag"? Let's say the share of RI in world exports in 1913 was 4.2%. In 2016 - 1.8%. Is this still damned legacy of the tsarist regime affecting?
  • Eroma
    Eroma April 23 2021 22: 59
    -2
    In 41, there was a real military disaster! crying and not what successes with the evacuation and future victories do not cancel this fact! The reason is not the lack of carelessness of the command of the USSR, as described by many who want to denigrate Stalin in the first place. Of course, there was also a clear incompetence of some generals, but this is normal for an army that entered the war, because in peacetime, there are still slightly different requirements for military leaders, so non-combat generals can make a career. The country was really preparing for war and was ready for war, here I agree with the author. It was thanks to this preparation that the USSR was able to survive the catastrophic defeat at the beginning of the war and, to a large extent, the steadfastness and fearlessness of Soviet soldiers and the indomitable will of the people! Many peoples, after such a defeat, would capitulate, and we just fight until VICTORY! And the help of the allies should not be written off either, the bombing of the 3rd Reich kept 2/3 of the Luftwaffe forces in the west! And Lend-Lease also gave strength not sickly. The reason for the defeat: this is a military innovation invented by Germany: "Blitzkrieg", a mobile tank war, not many countries own the art of waging such a war even today! Luckily, we were able to master this art in 41-42.
  • Chack wessel
    Chack wessel April 24 2021 05: 11
    +2
    Quote: Olgovich
    the author only "forgot" that the human, for example, resources of the USSR were twice as large as those of Germany, as well as their GDP.

    34 million people passed through the Red Army (according to other sources, 31 million). One million Red Army bayonets on the border with Japan and on the border with Turkey, troops in Iran from 34 million are not deducted. Through the Wehrmacht (allies, all kinds of "auxiliary" services, such as RAD, NSAK, etc. we do not count, we don’t count ROA, etc.), according to some data, 21 million people passed, according to others, 24 million people ... We take a larger number for the Red Army, and a smaller one for the Wehrmacht, we divide one by the other. We get 34: 21 = 1.61 ... What system do you have? :)
    .... By resources, we take statistics on the smelting of iron, steel, aluminum in the USSR and in the All-European Reich. We compare tsifiri and cry. In terms of labor resources, at the same time, qualified, the number of machines, the density of railways, the presence of railroad transport, the Reich wings of the USSR are like a bull to a sheep.
  • Chack wessel
    Chack wessel April 24 2021 05: 15
    +3
    Quote: Lannan Shi
    The Red Army lost about 5-5.5 million people as prisoners.

    There is a slight clarification - 5.5 million are not prisoners of the Red Army, or rather, not only prisoners, but also men of draft age, whom the Germans rowed to avoid, so to speak.
  • icant007
    icant007 April 24 2021 09: 04
    -2
    One of the main reasons for the tragedy of 1941, I think, is the absence of any systematic personnel policy in the selection of leaders at the army and district levels.
    With a few exceptions (including those killed and taken prisoner), none of them subsequently took place as a military leader.
    Take, for example, Sobennikov, Golubev, Kuznetsov (com. PribOVO). I am already silent about Ponedelin, who surrendered at Uman.
    Most of the posts in the border districts were simply not the right people. It was a complete failure of the personnel policy in the army.
    And until the Rokossovskys, Malinovskys, Eremenki came to the fore, the Red Army could not win.
  • Alecsandr
    Alecsandr April 24 2021 11: 30
    +1
    My grandfather fought in the 902 rifle regiment. This regiment was formed three times. I read everything about the actions of the regiment on the Internet, even reports and summaries from the German side. My grandfather was taken prisoner and still fought until Victory. The more I read and learned, the more horrified I went through what terrible trials I went through. Our ancestors. We had equipment at the beginning of the war, but we suffered failures in tactics, control and organization of troops. At the beginning of the war, the fascist troops outnumbered our troops in this. But by the end of the war, they learned to thresh the enemy as it should be and firmly. Also, the territory helped us a lot, it was where to compress like a spring and then turn around in the opposite order.
  • Dmitry Berestov
    Dmitry Berestov April 24 2021 21: 17
    0
    1. Russia has never faced anything like the June 1941 invasion in its history. Neither the quantity nor the quality of the invading armies, nor the geography of the invasion. Not by surprise (the current treaty of friendship and cooperation with Germany).
    The Soviet leadership was expecting provocations or demands from Germany, but there were none either.
    And the Red Army of 1941 had to face this.
    2. In the comments again began to compare the WWII and WWII. Loss and stuff.
    I consider this pointless, since the goals of the war for Germany were absolutely different. In WWII, Hitler's goal was to destroy most of the peoples of the USSR, a war of complete destruction.
    Without observing any laws of war, written and unwritten.
    In WWI, the Russian-German front is purely secondary, since RI was an ally of France.
    3. The German headquarters in 1941 had a detailed and extended plan for the transfer of troops to the Soviet border. Infantry units arrived in small parties, the main part for a long time grouped on the line of the Vistula River, far from the border.
    Panzer groups arrived at the border just a few days before the attack.
    This is to the question "why the intelligence has missed."
    All Soviet intelligence data have been published. And there is a complete mess, which had almost nothing to do with reality.
    4. There are a lot of questions about the thesis about the combat capability of the Red Army in June 1941. There was a lot of chaos in the army.
    Nevertheless, the documents and actions indicate that the country's top leadership understood the seriousness of the situation. In the border districts, orders were issued and the movements of units of the second echelon (in them there were two echelons: the first at the border itself and the second in the depths) to the border to consolidate the defense began. The movement of troops from the internal districts approximately to the line of the Dnieper River was also begun (this is in all memoirs, by the way).
    But due to the low mechanization of the troops (the bulk of the cars and tractors relied on mobilization into the army from the national economy in the event of the outbreak of war), the large distances and low throughput of the railways, these troops did not have time to reach the border.
    The Wehrmacht was able to beat them in parts. Basics of tactics.
  • Andrey Mansurov
    Andrey Mansurov April 24 2021 23: 45
    0
    There were mistakes, there was betrayal. But the country survived. Blitzkrieg is that? Taking Moscow and Leningrad? They took Moscow and the Poles and the French before that. Well? Has the country ceased to exist? And these did not take either Moscow, or Leningrad, or Stalingrad, or Ordzhonikidze. And we took Berlin for the third time.
  • Alexander Koshkin
    Alexander Koshkin April 25 2021 00: 44
    0
    A funny vinigrette made of pewter soddatikovi, out of place for pulled quotes and absurd conjectures ...
  • sergium
    sergium April 26 2021 13: 28
    +1
    Tried to read the whole discussion about the article but couldn't. Opponents began "in good health", that is, with more or less reasonable argumentation, and ended up "for repose," that is, on mutual insults. In general, it is quite typical for "discussions" on Internet resources.

    Now about the article. I would not like to look impolite, but this is the most complete delirium of the notorious gray mare, excuse me. But what other proofs are needed that everything that happened in the summer and autumn of 1941 can and should be called a catastrophe, a hecatomb, which has never been seen in one war ?!
    If this is not a catastrophe, then what a catastrophe in general!

    As for the preparedness for the war, it seems that both Stalin and Hitler were engaged in something like a "fool" game. What Stalin did is well known. Hitler is also good with his "barbarossa" - they say, bliykrignem, until October we will go to the line Arkhangelsk - Astrakhan, so winter uniforms and winter fuels and lubricants don't give a fuck. Well, imagine that you came out (by the way, not much before that was not enough) - and then what? Between this line and Kamchatka and Vladivostok, there are huge spaces with inexhaustible natural resources, and mobilization resources are also not weak. Moreover, Stalin could force women and children dying of hunger, disease and the weakening of women and children to work in inhuman conditions, which Hitler clearly could not afford.

    In general, from Hitler's side, the situation resembled a scene from a rather stupid American action movie about three amigos (I have no idea under what title it was shown in the USSR / Russia, or whether it was shown at all.
    "" The first part of the plan - we penetrate into the castle. Okay, you're already in the castle, what's next, what's the second part? Hmmm ... we didn't believe that the first one would work, so we didn't think about the second one ""

    There is nothing to add, just bow to the memory of the victims of the show-off of both "leaders" ...
    1. place
      place April 26 2021 16: 12
      0
      Quote: sergium
      Yes, what other proofs are needed that everything that happened in the summer and autumn of 1941 can and should be called a catastrophe ...?!
      If this is not a catastrophe, then what a catastrophe in general!


      For example, what Kutuzov is praised for to the skies. The French in 1812, with the level of technology of the early 19th century, found themselves under the walls of Moscow faster than Hitler in 1941. Already in September, starting the war on June 12. Moscow burned down - and this was another proof of our art of warfare ...

      Quote: sergium
      What Stalin did is well known. Hitler is also good with his "barbarossa"


      But where are there any fools and weaklings to be equal to the great "sergium" himself!

      And as for the fact that the discourse on the sites sometimes strongly resembles a retelling of Chekhov's "ward No. 6" - I agree ..... For any people, any war is a catastrophe of its pre-military life. And for ours, there may also be the only way to get rid of the nerds who are bored in a peaceful life.
      1. sergium
        sergium April 26 2021 17: 23
        0
        I don’t discuss with such people, I apologize.
    2. sergium
      sergium April 27 2021 19: 47
      0
      Perhaps I'll add something, after all ...
      There is no doubt that the Second World War was for all mankind the most terrible catastrophe of all known to this day.
      The other side of the coin (or medal, if you like) is that this horrifying catastrophe saved humanity from an even much worse one - IF STALIN AND HITLER HAVE AGREED!
      I am very bitter to draw such conclusions, but they are unambiguous ...
  • Givi Jalagoniya
    Givi Jalagoniya April 26 2021 15: 59
    0
    Let's imagine that a raped schoolgirl writes an article - 23-30: Rape that never happened.
    After all, she squealed and bit, and ultimately did not marry the rapist.
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov April 27 2021 11: 41
    0
    Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
    Quote: Kostadinov
    And who is to blame for the fact that the USSR did not have time to completely overcome the centuries-old lag of Tsarist Russia in 13 years?

    1941 - 13 = 1928.
    Can you tell us more about the "secular lag"? Let's say the share of RI in world exports in 1913 was 4.2%. In 2016 - 1.8%. Is this still damned legacy of the tsarist regime affecting?

    1. 1928 is the year when the USSR restored the industry to the best 1913 of tsarist Russia.
    2. More space is not enough, but if it's shorter:
    - compare the ratio of the military production of Russia and Germany in the First World War and the USSR and Germany in the Second World War
    - compare the irrecoverable military losses of Russia and Germany in WWII and the USSR and Germany in WWII.
  • Tagil1
    Tagil1 April 29 2021 15: 13
    0
    And if there are objections to this topic, is it realistic to prosecute dissent? What if you inadvertently offend another "veteran"?
  • kig
    kig 1 May 2021 02: 49
    0
    The loss of vast territories, defeated armies, a huge number of prisoners, disorganized industry - of course, this is not a catastrophe. This can be called preparation for victory. And what's wrong, Russia was never ready for war, the whole history proves it, so there is no need to poke your fingers.

    Something to me is our today's reports about the fight against covid reminds. Judging by the press, he has already helped oil and gas workers, aviators, athletes, and recently read that everyone else too, because salaries have increased.

    It is desirable for the author to continue the topic and tell us about other victories. For example, about dispossession, about the repressions of the 30s, about the fight against cosmopolitans and the pseudo-science of cybernetics. Yes, and do not forget about the sanctions that make us stronger and contribute to import substitution.
  • lelik613
    lelik613 3 May 2021 18: 51
    0
    “You, professor, your will, have invented something awkward! It may be smart, but it is painfully incomprehensible. They will make fun of you "(c) well-known